Will this end up being the pandemic that cried wolf?

[RamblingMad]

All of the age stuff makes me shake my head. It boils down to you’ll be alright if you’re not old. Otherwise you’re screwed, and some people don’t care.

 

[godisney14]

Is that accurate? According to the WH site, they want a "downward trajectory". I don't know that they require 14 consecutive days of lower cases.

Personally, I would consider this a "downward trajectory" (US numbers) since April 4.:
View attachment 489716

Had some spare time, so I just did the exercise in Excel. Instead of assuming or presuming or pretending to know data, I'd figure I do the exercise to make it certain since so many here like "data."

As I expected, the slope is extremely small, just -148 since beginning of April. The 7-day MA is still ~29,000. 14-day MA is ~30,000.

Assuming the status quo, where NOTHING changes: testing, social distancing, strict restrictions, shutdown orders, etc.
At the current rate from the time that the chart above started leveling off, we can get to ~14,000 new cases/day (half of today's rate and the same rate as back in March when things started to take off) by August 18.

Obviously, things can change daily and I'm not modeling any variables. This is just based on simple math from data we have in April.

 

[godisney14]

All of the age stuff makes me shake my head. It boils down to you’ll be alright if you’re not old. Otherwise you’re screwed, and some people don’t care.

Definitely. My point was trying to understand what may be considered "old" as you say. Without any more info as the other poster noted, it's a toss up. I'll leave the data analysis at that and not belabor the point.

And that's one variable. As you know, any pre-existing condition regardless of age, also plays as big a role.

So, it's not black or white as old or not old.

 

[RamblingMad]

Definitely. My point was trying to understand what may be considered "old" as you say. Without any more info as the other poster noted, it's a toss up. I'll leave the data analysis at that and not belabor the point.

And that's one variable. As you know, any pre-existing condition regardless of age, also plays as big a role.

So, it's not black or white as old or not old.

But the media has really been pushing the age card. I find it rather crude.

 

[sam_gordon]

Had some spare time, so I just did the exercise in Excel. Instead of assuming or presuming or pretending to know data, I'd figure I do the exercise to make it certain since so many here like "data."

As I expected, the slope is extremely small, just -148 since beginning of April. The 7-day MA is still ~29,000. 14-day MA is ~30,000.

Assuming the status quo, where NOTHING changes: testing, social distancing, strict restrictions, shutdown orders, etc.
At the current rate from the time that the chart above started leveling off, we can get to ~14,000 new cases/day (half of today's rate and the same rate as back in March when things started to take off) by August 18.

Obviously, things can change daily and I'm not modeling any variables. This is just based on simple math from data we have in April.

You gotta start somewhere.

 

[BuckeyeBama]

But the media has really been pushing the age card. I find it rather crude.

Crude, but realistic - and it mitigates this in the minds of most.

The harsh reality which we discussed weeks ago - Americans are willing to sacrifice the elderly. If these were children or even people in their 20s-30s dying at this rate, no one would be talking about going back to work.

 

[TLSnell1981]

Crude, but realistic - and it mitigates this in the minds of most.

The harsh reality which we discussed weeks ago - Americans are willing to sacrifice the elderly. If these were children or even people in their 20s-30s dying at this rate, no one would be talking about going back to work.

The harsh reality is somebody has to pay the bills and care for the sick, old, young, and vulnerable, plus all those in between.

 

[BuckeyeBama]

The harsh reality is somebody has to pay the bills and care for the sick, old, young, and vulnerable, plus all those in between.

Deflection - If these were children or people in their 20s-30s dying, we would accept whatever economic impact came with the shutdown. It would lead to tragic consequences, but we would not just discard so many young lives.

 

[DeniseJH]

Because you can be contagious with the flu prior to flu symptoms appearing. That does put other people's health at risk. We just don't tend to think about that.
The point being made is you don't know in the flu season anymore than you do with COVID-19.

Thats not true. We DO know that Covid-19 is out there. We DO know that it is more virulent than "regular " flu. We KNOW these things right now.

 

[RamblingMad]

Crude, but realistic - and it mitigates this in the minds of most.

The harsh reality which we discussed weeks ago - Americans are willing to sacrifice the elderly. If these were children or even people in their 20s-30s dying at this rate, no one would be talking about going back to work.

The take away is to give all of your money to charity.

 

[Notrealname]

Definitely. My point was trying to understand what may be considered "old" as you say. Without any more info as the other poster noted, it's a toss up. I'll leave the data analysis at that and not belabor the point.

And that's one variable. As you know, any pre-existing condition regardless of age, also plays as big a role.

So, it's not black or white as old or not old.

And some day others will share the understanding that data is not information.

 

[jamescanuck2001]

But the media has really been pushing the age card. I find it rather crude.

What media is that? I don't see it in the media i follow.

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

Thats not true. We DO know that Covid-19 is out there. We DO know that it is more virulent than "regular " flu. We KNOW these things right now.

Yeah you're not understanding my point and you're even twisting what I'm saying because I haven't said that coronavirus isn't out there so heaven's to besty don't know where you're getting that from. No worries. If you don't get it by what has already been said I'm not sure I can explain it even more.

Let's move on though shall we

 

[BuckeyeBama]

The take away is to give all of your money to charity.

So, you like pie, too?

 

[Moliphino]

I responded the way I did because you have been commenting on "data" with a bias that can mislead a reader.

Let's take the specific chart that you referenced. It can be interpreted many different ways, and none are opinions because it's based on data. Unless the data is garbage, then GIGO.
Let's take two analyses:
1. The average age of death from COVID-19 is 81 years old.
2. 69% of COVID-19 deaths occurred in those under 80 years old.
Just stating number 1 above paints a completely different picture, one that you are clearly biased towards in your opinion of the situation. The website shows the whole picture, you showed just one small part of the picture.

Uhh, no. 63% of Covid deaths are people 80 and older.

 

[xuxa777]

Uhh, no. 63% of Covid deaths are people 80 and older.

Pretty much why it was pointless to discuss more.

 

[RamblingMad]

So, you like pie, too?

Nah. Let them eat cake

 

[DeniseJH]

Yeah you're not understanding my point and you're even twisting what I'm saying because I haven't said that coronavirus isn't out there so heaven's to besty don't know where you're getting that from. No worries. If you don't get it by what has already been said I'm not sure I can explain it even more.

Let's move on though shall we

Passive/Aggressive doesn't work with me. You said you were only speaking of the logic and so was I. No, I guess I'm not getting what your saying, and I never implied that you don't believe the coronavirus exists - what I am saying is that people make decisions based on what they know, and enough is known about this virus for the average thinking person to realize that taking the risk of getting it and spreading it is wrong.

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

Passive/Aggressive doesn't work with me. You said you were only speaking of the logic and so was I. No, I guess I'm not getting what your saying, and I never implied that you don't believe the coronavirus exists - what I am saying is that people make decisions based on what they know, and enough is known about this virus for the average thinking person to realize that taking the risk of getting it and spreading it is wrong.

Let's just move on shall we

 

[DeniseJH]

Let's just move on shall we

You are most welcome to move on.