- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: IHMA HealthData Projections Plummet for Louisiana COVID-19 Cases and Deaths
Posted on 4/6/20 at 7:33 am to NOLAGT
Posted on 4/6/20 at 7:33 am to NOLAGT
quote:Again, to get anything remotely close to a 90% reduction would require a pretty damn near impossible level of compliance.
Just to throw it out there for some reaction. Maybe the numbers are dropping because of what has been done so far to stop it.
That is weld you in your home for weeks level of compliance.
2
Posted on 4/6/20 at 7:38 am to Scruffy
quote:
That is weld you in your home for weeks level of compliance.
Like China did
I’m sure the reduction is overblown as well. It’s probably not the easiest thing to do calculating this event.
I’m sure it could have been worse if nothing was done, and it would have been better if the welding rods were busted out.
I’m just ready for it to be behind us and not a seasonal event.
Posted on 4/6/20 at 7:42 am to TigersSEC2010
Hell yea
Posted on 4/6/20 at 7:52 am to Strannix
quote:
And after huge overblown apocalyptic scare projections the government will take credit for saving us
They can't lose
If things get worse they'll just say we didn't lock down hard enough.
Posted on 4/6/20 at 8:03 am to Scruffy
quote:
Was there a similar reduction of 90% with any other states?
I don't know. I seriously doubt it because the U.S. overall did not have a serious reduction.
Louisiana's new model is within the range of the old model but narrowed towards the bottom - which is a good thing.
Posted on 4/6/20 at 8:15 am to Antonio Moss
quote:
Models change has new information is reported. Alabama's initial model was made prior to most social restrictions and based on extremely limited data. With new data, the model narrows.
It’s really easy for you to sit here everyday and be able to parrot the same “models change with new data” lines while conveniently ignoring the fact that draconian, long-term decisions and policies are constantly being made based on the extremely limited data you keep mentioning that is proving time and time again to be overblown and incorrect, isn’t it?
quote:
It’s like none of you have ever lived through a changing Hurricane cone of impact.
Actually no, it’s like you never have. Because while the rest of us understand that the initial cone of impact is imperfect, will change, and make decisions later when there is more accurate information available, your posts here indicate you would support a mandatory evacuation order for all coastal regions everytime a depression forms in the Atlantic. Just because they were acting on the best information available at the time.
Posted on 4/6/20 at 8:18 am to TigersSEC2010
Whoever was the little bitch responsible for closing my gym down needs to be held down and coughed on
I lost a whole month of gains in a weak attempt to save some fat people
I lost a whole month of gains in a weak attempt to save some fat people
Posted on 4/6/20 at 8:19 am to Open Your Eyes
quote:
It’s really easy for you to sit here everyday and be able to parrot the same “models change with new data” lines while conveniently ignoring the fact that draconian, long-term decisions and policies are constantly being made based on the extremely limited data you keep mentioning that is proving time and time again to be overblown and incorrect, isn’t it?
Louisiana hasn't enacted "long-term" policy and the policies enacted by Louisiana have successfully reduced the transmission rate of the disease - which was the goal.
There is a range in projections. Louisiana's numbers have fallen within the range - luckily towards the bottom. People, unfortunately, only look at the median or upper range when forming their opinions.
quote:
Actually no, it’s like you never have. Because while the rest of us understand that the initial cone of impact is imperfect, will change, and make decisions later when there is more accurate information available, your posts here indicate you would support a mandatory evacuation order for all coastal regions everytime a depression forms in the Atlantic. Just because they were acting on the best information available at the time.
That's such an absurd analogy that it fails to garner a response.
Posted on 4/6/20 at 8:30 am to TigersSEC2010
the model also pushed the entire USA peak forward to April 15th
It was May 1st
This is huge, if true
although I'm not sure JBE is using this model...
It was May 1st
This is huge, if true
although I'm not sure JBE is using this model...
Posted on 4/6/20 at 8:37 am to Scruffy
(1) This new model run looks awesome for Louisiana/New Orleans. Even better news that it'll be pretty easy to see if we in line with the predicted decline in the coming weeks. Hopefully this isn't that stray GFS run where the track moves 200 miles to the east for some reason just to bounce back to the Euro on the next run.
(2) The tailing off at 'zero' at the end would require a complete eradication, which I don't think is likely?
(3) 90% reduction doesn't seems too off to me. If you assume that you are contagious 5 days after exposure, a 30 day period would be 6 cycles of the disease. Math below:
If the initial prediction was the measures taken reduced the R0 to 1.2 -> 100 cases on April 1st would be 298 cases on April 30th
If the "revised" prediction was that the precautions actually dropped the R0 to 0.8 -> 100 cases on April 1st would be 26 cases on April 30th (a 90% reduction for a 33% revision in R0).
That seems to be the key from this update - it's saying that our actions now have achieved the sub-1 R0 needed to snuff this thing out, which is phenomenal if it pans out that way.
(2) The tailing off at 'zero' at the end would require a complete eradication, which I don't think is likely?
(3) 90% reduction doesn't seems too off to me. If you assume that you are contagious 5 days after exposure, a 30 day period would be 6 cycles of the disease. Math below:
If the initial prediction was the measures taken reduced the R0 to 1.2 -> 100 cases on April 1st would be 298 cases on April 30th
If the "revised" prediction was that the precautions actually dropped the R0 to 0.8 -> 100 cases on April 1st would be 26 cases on April 30th (a 90% reduction for a 33% revision in R0).
That seems to be the key from this update - it's saying that our actions now have achieved the sub-1 R0 needed to snuff this thing out, which is phenomenal if it pans out that way.
Posted on 4/6/20 at 8:39 am to Antonio Moss
quote:
Louisiana hasn't enacted "long-term" policy and the policies enacted by Louisiana have successfully reduced the transmission rate of the disease - which was the goal. There is a range in projections. Louisiana's numbers have fallen within the range - luckily towards the bottom.
I know this may be difficult to believe or understand, but there is more to this world than Louisiana.
quote:
People, unfortunately, only look at the median or upper range when forming their opinions.
It’s nice that you can brush this off like it’s no big deal, attempting to ignore the fact that “people” includes politicians and decision makers. And the Karen’s on Facebook and twitter have a larger voice than ever before to influence those politicians and decision makers.
quote:
That's such an absurd analogy that it fails to garner a response.
Right. Because comparing the current happenings to hurricane predictions is only not absurd when you do it.
‘Well shucks, the model is only as good as the data available at the time.’
‘Well shucks, can’t do anything about people basing their reactions on the high end of the model’
‘Nah uh, only I can compare this to hurricanes’
As mentioned, it’s very convenient to be you.
Posted on 4/6/20 at 8:43 am to Open Your Eyes
quote:
I know this may be difficult to believe or understand, but there is more to this world than Louisiana.
Ok, would you like to breakdown the data sets for the entire U.S.?
quote:
It’s nice that you can brush this off like it’s no big deal, attempting to ignore the fact that “people” includes politicians and decision makers. And the Karen’s on Facebook and twitter have a larger voice than ever before to influence those politicians and decision makers.
Never said it wasn't a big deal. It's a huge deal. Early data showed a wide range of possibilities. Steps were taken to reduce the worst of those outcomes, models narrow towards the bottom following the precautionary steps. People now complain that the steps weren't necessary.
It's sad but not surprising.
Posted on 4/6/20 at 8:43 am to I Bleed Garnet
Right the link you posted has the same death rate and total death from the swine flu that every credible site has had for years. Deaths in the 12,000 range in the US with a death rate below 0.05 percent
Posted on 4/6/20 at 9:28 am to Keys Open Doors
Yea, i was just providing you with the link of the numbers
Posted on 4/6/20 at 9:29 am to TheCaterpillar
quote:Today's numbers look great.
I have screenshots from yesterday I can post to compare tomorrow. I’ve been waiting for this release, knew it would be better.
The only thing I'd caution, as I have an Excel spreadsheet going tracking a few things, is that sometimes this is just a result of data not coming in timely for whatever reason, then the next day all that added day is dumped.
Hopefully that's not what happened here. I know there's been a few days I've gotten a little excited only to see a huge spike the next day, presumably due to what I mentioned above.
I've gotten a bit conservative and would like to see 3-5 days of improved numbers before I really trust the trend.
Posted on 4/6/20 at 9:37 am to Salmon
quote:
the model also pushed the entire USA peak forward to April 15th
It was May 1st
This is huge, if true
I never understood the "peak will come in 3-4 weeks" thing, which always seemed to rely on massive amounts of transmissions taking place in like the 3rd or 4th week of significant stay-at-home measures.
Maybe it's just because of where I'm at, but other than people jogging and whatnot, most people are following the orders. It just never made sense to have that many new cases occur while measures were in place.
Posted on 4/6/20 at 9:39 am to BRIllini07
quote:
(1) This new model run looks awesome for Louisiana/New Orleans. Even better news that it'll be pretty easy to see if we in line with the predicted decline in the coming weeks. Hopefully this isn't that stray GFS run where the track moves 200 miles to the east for some reason just to bounce back to the Euro on the next run.
This is peak South Louisiana-based message boarding here
Posted on 4/6/20 at 9:41 am to Scruffy
quote:
Yes, there would be a reduction, but this change is a sign that the initial number was overestimated by a lot.
A big problem with this website is it was dinging alabama for not having an "official" stay at home order.
we have had an unofficial stay at home "request" for weeks, mee maw just made it official because she was tired of hearing people bitch.
they updated the site and saw we were following the very lower bound of their original 95% CI. that may account for the giant discrepancy.
Posted on 4/6/20 at 9:45 am to TigersSEC2010
An additional take away is that it won't matter to JBE; lockdown until Dec is(or will be) the order of the day.
Posted on 4/6/20 at 9:51 am to TigersSEC2010
One thing folks should understand about this model is that it does not address what happens when we stop distancing. I doubt it will be a very big deal, but it's not zero.
Page 3 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News