- 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 3/30/20 at 9:48 am to Chromdome35
Posted on 3/30/20 at 9:48 am to Chromdome35
quote:
Janky, The numbers yesterday were abnormally low compared to the trending. Is that because it was Sunday and reporting was delayed or is it a true decline, We'll find out today.
I guess what I am thinking is if the numbers are a little higher today then it may be due to rollover and not a reversal of the trend. At least that is what I am telling myself.
Anyway, thanks again for doing this.
This post was edited on 3/30/20 at 9:51 am
Posted on 3/30/20 at 9:48 am to the808bass
Testing has been ramping up, so good news if the new cases begin to level off or, hopefully, decrease. But given that deaths lag cases, can we assume that we will still be seeing triple-digit death numbers on a daily basis for the next two or so weeks?
Posted on 3/30/20 at 9:50 am to the808bass
The true rate likely won’t be known for months. In my opinion, this number should be looked at as more of a gauge to measure how things are currently going/trending.
Posted on 3/30/20 at 9:51 am to Damone
quote:
But given that deaths lag cases, can we assume that we will still be seeing triple-digit death numbers on a daily basis for the next two or so weeks?
Unfortunately yes.
Posted on 3/30/20 at 9:57 am to LSURussian
quote:
The whole point of our social distancing is NOT to prevent deaths.
Wrong. It’s to prevent hospitals from getting overwhelmed and keep people from dying that otherwise would have lived had they had proper care. Educate yourself before commenting
Posted on 3/30/20 at 10:00 am to the808bass
“If”. Just hope the deaths balance out soon
Posted on 3/30/20 at 10:03 am to Tiguar
He’s mostly right. The estimate of deaths didn’t take into account extra deaths from overwhelming the system. Those were fixed numbers for the Imperial paper.
Posted on 3/30/20 at 10:05 am to the808bass
The imperial paper was garbage to begin with, I don’t know of anyone who took it seriously.
ETA: at least personally know them
ETA: at least personally know them
This post was edited on 3/30/20 at 10:06 am
Posted on 3/30/20 at 10:07 am to Tiguar
In ten years it will be the #1 case presented in public policy, influencing, and negotiations classes when the concept of anchoring is taught.
Posted on 3/30/20 at 10:10 am to TideCPA
quote:
What's astonishing to me is the media's take on both of these. Germany is largely praised as the paragon of COVID response, largely due to their testing volume. But their citizens are dying at the same clip as the US, whose response is considered a colossal failure by the same people.
You may be conflating two different points here, but I'm only guessing because I don't know Germany's vs our data.
German testing may be able to identify and isolate cases to avoid catastrophic spread. That doesn't change the rate that people die who contract it, it just lowers the amount of people who contract the disease to begin with.
A 2% of 100 infections is 2 deaths vs 2% of 1000 infections is 20 deaths.
Again, I have no idea if that is reality or not.
This post was edited on 3/30/20 at 10:11 am
Posted on 3/30/20 at 10:13 am to Janky
Ya, if yesterday was weekend numbers being artificially low, the hope would be today's number would be between yesterday's and Friday's or whatever.
Of course, if we beat Sunday's numbers we will all take that.
Of course, if we beat Sunday's numbers we will all take that.
Posted on 3/30/20 at 10:14 am to Tiguar
quote:
The imperial paper was garbage to begin with, I don’t know of anyone who took it seriously.
Lots of people did. Neil Ferguson is the go-to guy for modeling epidemics and pandemics. It’s impossible to dance around that study driving a lot of Western countries’ decision making.
Posted on 3/30/20 at 10:22 am to Tiguar
quote:You're wrong. I'm right. GFY.
Educate yourself before commenting
Posted on 3/30/20 at 10:23 am to TideCPA
I feel like the numbers are just under reported. We are already up to 116 deaths today.
Today's number could have a good amount that should have been reported yesterday.
Today's number could have a good amount that should have been reported yesterday.
Posted on 3/30/20 at 10:26 am to Vood
quote:
We are already up to 116 deaths today. Today's number could have a good amount that should have been reported yesterday.
That’s normal. We’ve “started” some days with 50 deaths in the stats when the report rolls over.
Posted on 3/30/20 at 10:27 am to the808bass
(no message)
This post was edited on 3/30/20 at 4:31 pm
Posted on 3/30/20 at 10:31 am to cahoots
Yes and no. We know his was wrong. We don’t know what’s right. And we don’t know what’s right for the US. Seeing the broad differences in other country’s results would make me want to have good data for how our system and culture responds to the virus.
Posted on 3/30/20 at 10:33 am to LSURussian
quote:
Where are you seeing that? I just refreshed "WorldoMeter.com" which is where the OP has said he gets his numbers and it's showing 23 deaths for today so far.
Maybe comparing the total deaths in the link to the chart in the original post? Yesterday ended up with more total than what is represented here.
Posted on 3/30/20 at 10:34 am to LSURussian
It looks like WoM updated their Sunday numbers, I've updated mine to mirror theirs.
I'm showing 24 new deaths today now.
Yesterday's deaths went up to 371.
I'm showing 24 new deaths today now.
Yesterday's deaths went up to 371.
This post was edited on 3/30/20 at 10:37 am
Popular
Back to top


1







