Covid-19 pandemic

[San Bernardhinault]

I keep reading that we should disregard population-adjusted figures but haven't seen it clearly expressed why.

If growth is exponential with the same infection rate, it should be the same growth in numbers from the initial start point. If the start point is 20 deaths in the US and 20 deaths in the UK, the exponential growth would be the same regardless of total population (until you hit the saturation point).

The UK and US should hit 200, 2,000, 20,000, and 200,000 at the same point after 20 deaths if the growth is always 20% extra per day.

[Satchmo Distel]

Rudy thinks Obama was still President in 2017:

[URL="https://twitter.com/atrupar/status/1254526220022267904/photo/1"]https://twitter.com/atrupar/status/1...267904/photo/1[/URL]

[Ray de Galles]

So will population-adjusted numbers have some relevance when we look at comparative final total deaths figures?

[San Bernardhinault]

So will population-adjusted numbers have some relevance when we look at comparative final total deaths figures?

Yes. But in terms of the "progression of the pandemic", or the "flattening of the curve", population-adjusted numbers are theoretically irrelevant.

Once the curve is flat, then you can say who did a less shitty job (or got lucky).

[Janik]

Ischgl is known as the "Ibiza of the Alps" and loads of people would have been rammed into Après-ski bars in the evenings.

Or rammed into lifts and the queues to get on them.

[ursus arctos]

Which are "outdoors" (as are portions of the bars and clubs)

[Ray de Galles]

Yes. But in terms of the "progression of the pandemic", or the "flattening of the curve", population-adjusted numbers are theoretically irrelevant.

Once the curve is flat, then you can say who did a less shitty job (or got lucky).

Great, thanks SB. That makes a lot of sense.

[Janik]

Gondolas are not, both on the lift and generally the last bit of the queue. There is a choice of three of these by the looks of it to start the day in Ischgl. And no 'outdoor' alternatives such as a chairlift to get started. Also there is no way to change your mind if you get in one and then work out 30 seconds into the ride that a fellow passenger is coughing away. Your will be breathing in their germs for the next ten minutes.

The lifts will also provide a more random mixing element than the bars and clubs - people will be in close proximity to a much wider selection of strangers on the lifts through a day.

[anton pulisov]

If growth is exponential with the same infection rate, it should be the same growth in numbers from the initial start point. If the start point is 20 deaths in the US and 20 deaths in the UK, the exponential growth would be the same regardless of total population (until you hit the saturation point).

The UK and US should hit 200, 2,000, 20,000, and 200,000 at the same point after 20 deaths if the growth is always 20% extra per day.

...

Yes. But in terms of the "progression of the pandemic", or the "flattening of the curve", population-adjusted numbers are theoretically irrelevant.

Once the curve is flat, then you can say who did a less shitty job (or got lucky).

Well what population adjusted numbers do allow us to do, as demonstrated by the two graphs on the previous page (the non-population adjusted one and the population adjusted one) is compare the shape of the curves of the different countries on the same graph. The shape of the curve, as you say, gives us clues as to how things are progressing.

On the first graph it would appear that the US curve is stratospherically steep, but that's just because it is shown on a graph with unsuitable axis values, due to the other countries being on there. This causes the US curve to be squashed and appear steeper than it is.

On the population adjusted graph, this squashing effect is not present, and we can see that the US curve is starting to flatten. That's not to say it won't unflatten if there is a big outbreak in one of the USA's many states.

In any case, the curve plotted in raw numbers or population adjusted will look exactly the same. Plotting them population adjusted just allows multiple countries to be compared on the same graph. (Which the New Scientist doesn't seem to get)

[Cal Alamein]

Very rural McKinley County in NM has 720 positive cases and a population of 71,000.

My county, Bernalillo, has 688 positive cases and a population of 680,000.

[The Awesome Berbaslug!!!]

This needs to be studied more but I think this may be overstating the case.

I'm thinking particularly of Ischgl and the Atalanta-Valencia match. The apparent volume of those cases would indicate that outdoor transmission is possible. That said, there seems to be very little evidence for "transmission during active outdoor activity", which is what you are talking about. Passing someone on a trail is very different than sitting across from them at an outdoor bar in Ischgl.

The atalanta valencia match was basically 40,000 people hugging, kissing and basically all trying to be the one giant communal person, as they watched their team feed valencia feet first into a footballing wood chipper in an incandescent display of sheer glory. It probably made cheltenham look like a clean room manufacturing facility by contrast.

[Satchmo Distel]

You can't just go on population because some countries have greater proportions of elderly, e.g. Italy.

Meanwhile:

[URL="https://twitter.com/savannahpeace/status/1254520899245502464"]https://twitter.com/savannahpeace/st...20899245502464[/URL]

[Etienne]

Thats a fake Trump tweet. But I agree with Eichenwald.

[San Bernardhinault]

152 new cases reported today, which is the most of any day I've had a record of. 634 hospital, 213 ICU, 100 deaths. There doesn't seem to be a trendline. Just a random splatter of wildly varying data points

This looks like the last day I did a San Diego update. We've had triple digit rises in confirmed cases for the last 4 days now. It looks like California is finally catching up with the national average on testing numbers, so my guess is that this is a feature of more testing rather than more sickness, although who really knows.

696 hospitalisations, 227 ICUisations, 111 deaths look more in line with previous numbers and not like there's an extra spike.

[San Bernardhinault]

Going back to the subject of "exponential growth". There has been some suggestion that there isn't real exponential growth in cases. In an unchecked virus, the exponent comes down anyway fairly quickly. That is, for a few days it's 1.3 times the previous number, over and over again. But it can't sustain that because there isn't completely random movement in society. You usually interact with the same group of people, and they also largely interact with your group of people. Groups are relatively contained. People at one church don't go to other churches; people at one office don't go to other offices. One person doesn't travel randomly, but instead largely sees the same people they work, live and commute with one the second day that they saw on the first day. So that really frightening early multiplier of 1.3 per day may fall naturally without any additional social distancing measures.

I've not seen any recent analysis of whether this theory holds up. But I thought it might be worth mentioning in the context of arithmetic/exponential growth.

[S. aureus]

Does the growth factor take that into account?
For example, I have the virus, go to work and rapidly infect a bunch of people there - in that phase the infection rate is high. Then I've infected everyone I am commonly in contact with, and there's a slowdown, but my groups aren't totally isolated from other groups, so at some point the infection is passed to another group and there's another rapid expansion within the next group. Is the growth the average of these two distinct phases, or just the first one? And I can't really see a good reason why it wouldn't still be exponential, assuming that the population of potential hosts is much greater than the number of current hosts.
You can see the same thing with countries - the rate of increase within countries is greater than the rate of transmission between countries, but the latter still happens.

Edit: Actually, I suppose that it's not quite exponential as the population isn't infinite.

[San Bernardhinault]

I honestly don’t know. I think the idea is that the transmission from group to group is relatively slow - it’s a sort of innate, inherent social distancing that we do without any outside guidance.

[ad hoc]

I did have two people sarcastically point at my open face suggesting I need a facemask as I cycle. They are wrong, of course. And also shouldn't be trying to nag people into useless gestures.

Is that true though? I've seen articles that argue that because of the way that cycling works, the 2 metre danger zone in front of someone becomes a comet trail of germs spreading further than 2 metres behind them (especially if you are breathing hard, which of course if you;re exercising you are). The arguments against cycling with other people in a kind of mini-peloton seem pretty strong at least. And a mask (while uncomfortable) would be of benefit surely, at least in this case (given that masks protect others rather than the maskwearer him or her self)

[Billy Casper]

Didn't Billy Casper spend some time around Calgary?

Sixteen years all spent in BC.

[Balderdasha]

3 million cases worldwide.

[Antepli Ejderha]

Has Johnson just made a sensible decision? It's too early to ease the lockdown because of the effects of a second wave to paraphrase him.

[Paul S]

Yes I think so. We screwed up the beginning of the pandemic but there is no reason why we can't get the end right. Or not as bad as other countries.

[ad hoc]

Yes I think so. We screwed up the beginning of the pandemic but there is no reason why we can't get the end right. Or not as bad as other countries.

Nice of you to blame yourself Paul, but i really think that the "we" is misplaced here. The government screwed this up. Not you, not anyone else. The government. Don;t let them blame anyone else for the unnecessary mass deaths.

[DCI Harry Batt]

I wish I had enjoyed the time without Johnson properly. I've just been reminded once again how much I hate the bloke.

[Arturo]

Yes, he's already being greeted like a returning saviour by some. Laura K will be loving it.