- 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: Daily COVID Updated as of 11/2/20 8:00 PM
Posted on 4/9/20 at 9:21 am to buckeye_vol
Posted on 4/9/20 at 9:21 am to buckeye_vol
quote:
kurtosis
It's been really hard for me to stay in kurtosis during this unprecedented time of novel virus pandemic.
0
Posted on 4/9/20 at 9:27 am to Chromdome35
I don't think you can say that when the testing parameters are so rigid.
If we were testing everyone I would agree, but when you're just testing the sickest, what does it really show?
If we were testing everyone I would agree, but when you're just testing the sickest, what does it really show?
Posted on 4/9/20 at 9:36 am to TigerCruise
That is not a bad point.
One thing that has become painfully clear as we move through this is that the data is terribly inconsistent and that is partially a result of the testing parameters. It is also being caused by reporting and classification differences from one healthcare system to the next.
The COVID Tracking project (the site where I'm pulling testing, Hospitalization, ICU, Vent Numbers) has this blurb on their page about the inconsistent data:
States are currently reporting two fundamentally unlike statistics: current hospital/ICU admissions and cumulative hospitalizations/ICU admissions. Across the country, this reporting is also sparse. In short: it is impossible to assemble anything resembling the real statistics for hospitalizations, ICU admissions, or ventilator usage across the United States. As a result, we will no longer provide national-level summary hospitalizations, ICU admissions, or ventilator usage statistics on our site.
One thing that has become painfully clear as we move through this is that the data is terribly inconsistent and that is partially a result of the testing parameters. It is also being caused by reporting and classification differences from one healthcare system to the next.
The COVID Tracking project (the site where I'm pulling testing, Hospitalization, ICU, Vent Numbers) has this blurb on their page about the inconsistent data:
States are currently reporting two fundamentally unlike statistics: current hospital/ICU admissions and cumulative hospitalizations/ICU admissions. Across the country, this reporting is also sparse. In short: it is impossible to assemble anything resembling the real statistics for hospitalizations, ICU admissions, or ventilator usage across the United States. As a result, we will no longer provide national-level summary hospitalizations, ICU admissions, or ventilator usage statistics on our site.
Posted on 4/9/20 at 9:40 am to Chromdome35
quote:
If you look at the percentage of positive cases, its been growing but shows signs of leveling. If the number of tests is steady and the % of positive results is increasing, then that seems to me to signal an increasing # of infected people. Some of that could be due to false-positive/negatives, but not all of it.
Too bad there's no good way to track total testing. I've seen the chart below, but they admit only so many states report how many tests the perform, so it's an under representation.
Posted on 4/9/20 at 9:43 am to buckeye_vol
quote:
I’ve noticed that the observed distribution of nations who are ahead of us on the curve, often have a flatter peak and their decrease is less rapid than their decrease.
This is probably ideal compared to alternatives.
The fear has always been that the hospitals get overwhelmed and folks who would normally be savable with intervention die because they're queued up.
America (like the reaction or not) said, "Not on our watch." And, frankly, the "models" VASTLY overestimated our hospitalization rates because of highly faulty assumptions about our experience.
I don't blame anyone (other than Red China) for anything. The world was flying blind into this. Because of Red China's opaqueness about the entire thing. And the WHO provided top cover for them, so we can blame them too.
Posted on 4/9/20 at 9:48 am to Ace Midnight
quote:
I don't blame anyone (other than Red China) for anything. The world was flying blind into this. Because of Red China's opaqueness about the entire thing. And the WHO provided top cover for them, so we can blame them too.
Preach!
Posted on 4/9/20 at 9:49 am to nerd guy
That outlier on Saturday 4/4/20 is really strange, it is not like the previous days show an understatement.
I wonder what caused it.
I wonder what caused it.
Posted on 4/9/20 at 9:54 am to buckeye_vol
Have you (or any of you scientific types) seen this?
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-8204255/There-THREE-separate-types-coronavirus.html
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-8204255/There-THREE-separate-types-coronavirus.html
quote:
There are three main types of the novel coronavirus infecting people, and the strains may be mutating to conquer the immune systems of populations around the world.
The genetic history of the coronavirus was mapped from December 24 to March 4, revealing three distinct, but closely related, variants.
Researchers from the University of Cambridge found the virus now seen in Wuhan, China and East Asia — ground-zero for the outbreak — is not the original variety.
Instead, this strain (known as type B) is derived from the original SARS-CoV-2 virus which jumped into humans from bats via pangolins (type A).
Type A is the version now most prevalent in America and Australia.
Another variation, called type C, descended from Wuhan's type B, and spread to Europe via Singapore.
Scientists believe the virus may be constantly mutating to overcome differing levels of immune system resistance in different populations.
Posted on 4/9/20 at 10:05 am to Chromdome35
quote:California dumped a ton of results.
I wonder what caused it.
LINK (this thread 4/4)
LINK (twitter)
Posted on 4/9/20 at 10:11 am to Chromdome35
quote:
Scientists believe the virus may be constantly mutating to overcome differing levels of immune system resistance in different populations
So its just another flu strain at this point.
Posted on 4/9/20 at 10:13 am to Taxing Authority
Somehow I missed that, thank you!
Posted on 4/9/20 at 10:24 am to nerd guy
quote:
only so many states report how many tests the perform
that's great news to me.
Posted on 4/9/20 at 10:32 am to Chromdome35
I have a real hard time believing this as they presented it.
They assert:
1. Type A is the one that originally jumped to humans from bats
2. Type A is the one in America
Our first patient zero is postulated to have come from Europe. Why would our most prevalent type be the one that originally made the jump from bats? Why would our most prevalent type be the least mutated of all the viruses? Why would ours be less mutated than the European one when they have had cases there longer than we have and our cases supposedly came from there?
They assert:
1. Type A is the one that originally jumped to humans from bats
2. Type A is the one in America
Our first patient zero is postulated to have come from Europe. Why would our most prevalent type be the one that originally made the jump from bats? Why would our most prevalent type be the least mutated of all the viruses? Why would ours be less mutated than the European one when they have had cases there longer than we have and our cases supposedly came from there?
This post was edited on 4/9/20 at 10:33 am
Posted on 4/9/20 at 10:59 am to Tiguar
We are likely to see fewer new confirmed cases today. Hopefully, I am right and we once again see another positive trend in this virus slowing. So far I am been spot on with saying we have reached out peak and it would show this week.
Posted on 4/9/20 at 11:13 am to Tiguar
quote:
I have a real hard time believing this as they presented it.
They assert:
1. Type A is the one that originally jumped to humans from bats
2. Type A is the one in America
Our first patient zero is postulated to have come from Europe. Why would our most prevalent type be the one that originally made the jump from bats? Why would our most prevalent type be the least mutated of all the viruses? Why would ours be less mutated than the European one when they have had cases there longer than we have and our cases supposedly came from there?
Early and small seeding events that were more directly from the source (say, just 5 - 8 generations from Wuhan), right?
If the disease bounced Wuhan - Wuhan - Shanghai - Milan - New York - New York - New York - New Jersey - New York, then the phylogenetics would look a hell of a lot different than if it went Wuhan - Wuhan - Wuhan - Wuhan - Wuhan - Milan - Venice - Milan, no?
Posted on 4/9/20 at 11:48 am to AbuTheMonkey
the only way I can figure this makes sense is if every outbreak has all 3 strains, but over time, the normal progression of an epidemic selects for certain strains over others
eg strains A B and C are all in a population. Strain A is more severe and causes dry hacking cough, fever, and possible death. It is more likely to kill its hosts and be noticed, therefore discouraging spread.
Strains B&C are more mild, possibly even asymptomatic. Over time, they will become the dominant strains as they are less likely to be noticed by the host.
eg strains A B and C are all in a population. Strain A is more severe and causes dry hacking cough, fever, and possible death. It is more likely to kill its hosts and be noticed, therefore discouraging spread.
Strains B&C are more mild, possibly even asymptomatic. Over time, they will become the dominant strains as they are less likely to be noticed by the host.
This post was edited on 4/9/20 at 11:49 am
Posted on 4/9/20 at 12:19 pm to Tiguar
Louisiana today:
1253 new cases
50 deaths (up to 702, down from 70 on the prior 2 days)
31 more in hospital
17 less vents in use
1253 new cases
50 deaths (up to 702, down from 70 on the prior 2 days)
31 more in hospital
17 less vents in use
Posted on 4/9/20 at 12:42 pm to tiger91
Seems like LA is slowly but surely getting on its feet
Posted on 4/9/20 at 12:54 pm to uppermidwestbama
The IHME model currently says that the peak will be 2 days from now on 4/11/20 with 2,212 deaths.
We could possibly see that amount of deaths today if today's growth rate matches yesterday.
It will be interesting to see how accurate that model is since it's the one everyone is pointing to.
We'll know in the next few days...
We could possibly see that amount of deaths today if today's growth rate matches yesterday.
It will be interesting to see how accurate that model is since it's the one everyone is pointing to.
We'll know in the next few days...
Posted on 4/9/20 at 1:01 pm to Chromdome35
The bad thing is that their projected peak is on a Saturday, and we are about to enter that 3 day black hole where the reported numbers have not been very accurate. If there’s another huge spike on Tuesday/Wednesday of next week due to weekend report Iags, won’t that make it hard to tell if there was a peak?
Page 155 of 331
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News