Coronavirus COVID-19

[93henfan]

Sounds like somebody is spewing some bullshit. I can tell you from having two kids in school myself, our current system is not set up for distance learning to be effective.

The internet providers here offer $5 or $10 per month high speed internet access if you have kids in school, plus the school systems in my area were handing out Chromebooks to kids who didn't have a computer they could use at home. Sounds like you have a shitty school system there.

I do not have wired broadband to my home. I live down a long rural lane and Comcast is willing to dig the cable in if I'm willing to pay them $20,000.

Not happening.

So, we don't do streaming here.

And the school district isn't shitty, thanks.

[Ibanez]

Sounds like somebody is spewing some bullshit. I can tell you from having two kids in school myself, our current system is not set up for distance learning to be effective.

The internet providers here offer $5 or $10 per month high speed internet access if you have kids in school, plus the school systems in my area were handing out Chromebooks to kids who didn't have a computer they could use at home. Sounds like you have a shitty school system there.

The ISP here is giving free access. I've read that SC schools have started to hit the sweet spot in distance learning.

[Ibanez]

Sounds like somebody is spewing some bullshit. I can tell you from having two kids in school myself, our current system is not set up for distance learning to be effective.

Every district is different. I've been impressed with my kid's district, and I have one kid at each level (one in high school, one in middle school, and one in elementary school). Heck, I've told my oldest that his chemistry class he's taking right now is almost set up the same way my organic chem class at Delawarewas set up (didn't realize back then I was being hosed on tuition via that manner! That darn Dr. Burmeister!). But overall, it's been pretty well done. They're even introducing Microsoft Teams this week so they're going to be able to do live teaching.

Of course, this sucks for poor kids who don't have the internet access or even the home environment to succeed in this new digital age, but I'm sure we'll deal with the inequality that results from all of this someday in the future. Remember, we're all in this together.

See my previous post. I know of the ISP in my area and a few others that are giving free access to students.


Also, Zoom has done wonders. My 13 yr old nephew has arranged for me and 2 others to do an interview with this class tomorrow via Zoom. The South is adapting. We're going to learn that we can probably modify the school year and the way we teach when this is all over.

[kalm]

The internet providers here offer $5 or $10 per month high speed internet access if you have kids in school, plus the school systems in my area were handing out Chromebooks to kids who didn't have a computer they could use at home. Sounds like you have a shitty school system there.

The ISP here is giving free access. I've read that SC schools have started to hit the sweet spot in distance learning.

Cheney SD is offering free chrome book rentals to kids who need one as well. Not sure on the service end.

But yes, I can forseee a shortening of the at school week in the future. That would also provide employment for potentially millions from a broadband build out, software, and maintenance standpoint.

But it’s not for everyone. As much as my youngest hates school it turns out Me and the internet are shitty math teachers for him compared to face to face.

[93henfan]

With the reduced carbon emissions in the last five weeks, Sarah Palin is reporting that she can now see Japan from her house.

[89Hen]

With the reduced carbon emissions in the last five weeks, Sarah Palin is reporting that she can now see Japan from her house.

Some pretty amazing photos from around the world on pollution.





https://www.insider.com/before-after-ph ... r-getty-20

[JohnStOnge]

Media are making a mistake in reporting on this:

https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/21/health/h ... index.html

Study finds no benefit, higher death rate in patients taking hydroxychloroquine for Covid-19

It's an observational study. One obvious possible reason why the subjects taking the drug died at a higher rate is that people who were in more serious condition may have been more likely to have received the drug.

Let's all just wait for completion of clinical trials. Don't get ahead of yourselves, media, with a "SEE IT DOESN"T WORK" narrative.

[JohnStOnge]

But we know the numbers aren't to be trusted - which is the crux of the argument as to why IHME is "garbage."

I just don't get you guys thinking that IHME model is garbage. If you use the model even when they released the first output on March 25 the national projection was for a point estimate of 44,781 cases as of yesterday, April 21 with an uncertainty interval of 25,791 through 82,412. The actual CDC death count as of yesterday was 44,575.

For South Carolina the first run on March 25 point estimate of deaths in that State as of April 21 was 172 and the uncertainty interval was 66 through 312.

Both projections were very good. If the true value is within the uncertainty interval, the projection was a success. And in both cases the point estimates were in the ball park.

[JohnStOnge]

BTW the IHME model run of March 25 projected the US peak deaths number at 2,341 on April 14. I don't immediately see info on which day the CDC says had the highest death rate. However, according to the Worldometers site, the highest US death count was 2,804 and that was yesterday, April 21. The April 14 number was 2,553; which is the 3rd highest 1 day death total so far.

So the March 25 Model run was not exactly dead on. But I think it's absurd to expect that it would be. It was saying it would peak around this time. Now, if it turns out that it's distinctly higher in mid June then they will have been way off on the peak thing. But right now they are not.

[Gil Dobie]

BTW the IHME model run of March 25 projected the US peak deaths number at 2,341 on April 14. I don't immediately see info on which day the CDC says had the highest death rate. However, according to the Worldometers site, the highest US death count was 2,804 and that was yesterday, April 21. The April 14 number was 2,553; which is the 3rd highest 1 day death total so far.

So the March 25 Model run was not exactly dead on. But I think it's absurd to expect that it would be. It was saying it would peak around this time. Now, if it turns out that it's distinctly higher in mid June then they will have been way off on the peak thing. But right now they are not.

The models are close enough for this wave of COVID-19. Just wondering when the second wave will hit. You mentioned the virus being airborne, and I just read yesterday where the CDC posted a study of a restaurant with AC running. Person A came into the restaurant not having any symptoms. Later that day he starts feeling the flu-like symptoms. After 2 weeks, 9 people at from that lunch at the restaurant were tested positive, from 3 different tables. That is something that needs to be looked at.

[HI54UNI]

The ISP here is giving free access. I've read that SC schools have started to hit the sweet spot in distance learning.

Cheney SD is offering free chrome book rentals to kids who need one as well. Not sure on the service end.

But yes, I can forseee a shortening of the at school week in the future. That would also provide employment for potentially millions from a broadband build out, software, and maintenance standpoint.

But it’s not for everyone. As much as my youngest hates school it turns out Me and the internet are shitty math teachers for him compared to face to face.

Our school district has been providing Chromebooks for every kid from 2-12 grades for at least 7 years. We have Wifi on our school buses and have been parking them in some of our rural communities for those that don't have internet access. Kids can't get on the bus but they can sit near it, either outside, or in parent's car to get access if they need it.

School week will not be shortened unless the work week for parents is also shortened. To many daycare issues.

[SDHornet]

They’re showing #s that have already happened. If the #s are going downward, then the peak is obvious. Not a prediction, but showing the score.

But we know the numbers aren't to be trusted - which is the crux of the argument as to why IHME is "garbage." The data is skewed. So we really don't know when the peak is/will be.

CA just did autopsies and found 2 people that died in February from the 'Rona. New deaths/info is coming in daily. I would also go to say that the locals on the ground, seeing the numbers in real time, MIGHT have more of a clue than modelers who haven't stepped foot in Meck County and probably don't have Real Time data.

It's their models that are garbage, doesn't mean the data is also garbage (although it could be). I would hope they are getting their data from the same places that state health departments are getting them, if not from those health departments themselves.

[SDHornet]

California is awesome.

Local government pours sand in skate park to stop skaters. Dirt bikers show up.

I saw this. I lol'd. Also had some dirt bikers hitting up our local park as it is deserted, noticed it while I was tearing down the caution tape on the playground so the little one could use the swings and slides.

[AZGrizFan]

But we know the numbers aren't to be trusted - which is the crux of the argument as to why IHME is "garbage."

I just don't get you guys thinking that IHME model is garbage. If you use the model even when they released the first output on March 25 the national projection was for a point estimate of 44,781 cases as of yesterday, April 21 with an uncertainty interval of 25,791 through 82,412. The actual CDC death count as of yesterday was 44,575.

For South Carolina the first run on March 25 point estimate of deaths in that State as of April 21 was 172 and the uncertainty interval was 66 through 312.

Both projections were very good. If the true value is within the uncertainty interval, the projection was a success. And in both cases the point estimates were in the ball park.

and on April 1st they projected Tennessee and Alabama would be stacking bodies like cordwood by now because they hadn’t implemented social distancing early or strict enough. “Hundreds of deaths a day by April 14th”....guess how many they each have? Less than 200 TOTAL.

So, you wanna start cherry picking data points, bro?

[CAA Flagship]

Media are making a mistake in reporting on this:

https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/21/health/h ... index.html

Study finds no benefit, higher death rate in patients taking hydroxychloroquine for Covid-19

It's an observational study. One obvious possible reason why the subjects taking the drug died at a higher rate is that people who were in more serious condition may have been more likely to have received the drug.

Let's all just wait for completion of clinical trials. Don't get ahead of yourselves, media, with a "SEE IT DOESN"T WORK" narrative.

I read somewhere that they may have given too high a dose to some. The drug is generally safe at lower doses. But then again, underlying conditions can play a factor too as is the timing.

The thing to remember about these drugs is that they won't likely kill the virus. Your body will kill the virus. The drugs will just help with symptoms like inflammation or will slow the replication to give your body a fighting chance.

[SDHornet]

But we know the numbers aren't to be trusted - which is the crux of the argument as to why IHME is "garbage."

I just don't get you guys thinking that IHME model is garbage. If you use the model even when they released the first output on March 25 the national projection was for a point estimate of 44,781 cases as of yesterday, April 21 with an uncertainty interval of 25,791 through 82,412. The actual CDC death count as of yesterday was 44,575.

For South Carolina the first run on March 25 point estimate of deaths in that State as of April 21 was 172 and the uncertainty interval was 66 through 312.

Both projections were very good. If the true value is within the uncertainty interval, the projection was a success. And in both cases the point estimates were in the ball park.

Because they are off by anywhere from 200-600%. Maybe they finally got on top of their modeling, but I gave up on them already.

[JohnStOnge]

I just don't get you guys thinking that IHME model is garbage. If you use the model even when they released the first output on March 25 the national projection was for a point estimate of 44,781 cases as of yesterday, April 21 with an uncertainty interval of 25,791 through 82,412. The actual CDC death count as of yesterday was 44,575.

For South Carolina the first run on March 25 point estimate of deaths in that State as of April 21 was 172 and the uncertainty interval was 66 through 312.

Both projections were very good. If the true value is within the uncertainty interval, the projection was a success. And in both cases the point estimates were in the ball park.

Because they are off by anywhere from 200-600%. Maybe they finally got on top of their modeling, but I gave up on them already.

They are not off by 200 to 600% for the situations I referenced. I will look at the April 1 projections somebody else mentioned. But in both of the scenarios I mentioned (nationally and for South Carolina), the death totals were reasonably close to the point estimates and also well within the uncertainty intervals.

[kalm]

BTW the IHME model run of March 25 projected the US peak deaths number at 2,341 on April 14. I don't immediately see info on which day the CDC says had the highest death rate. However, according to the Worldometers site, the highest US death count was 2,804 and that was yesterday, April 21. The April 14 number was 2,553; which is the 3rd highest 1 day death total so far.

So the March 25 Model run was not exactly dead on. But I think it's absurd to expect that it would be. It was saying it would peak around this time. Now, if it turns out that it's distinctly higher in mid June then they will have been way off on the peak thing. But right now they are not.

Why models can be misleading in both directions depending of course on how and what they’re used for.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/202 ... odels.html

[Pwns]

Here's the smoking gun that corona has been in the US longer than the experts realize.

[SDHornet]

Here's the smoking gun that corona has been in the US longer than the experts realize.

I posted this like 2 pages ago.

[SDHornet]

Because they are off by anywhere from 200-600%. Maybe they finally got on top of their modeling, but I gave up on them already.

They are not off by 200 to 600% for the situations I referenced. I will look at the April 1 projections somebody else mentioned. But in both of the scenarios I mentioned (nationally and for South Carolina), the death totals were reasonably close to the point estimates and also well within the uncertainty intervals.

I'l take your word for it. I stopped reading your post after the first sentence.

[SDHornet]

LONDON (Reuters) - The fallout from the coronavirus spread that has killed more than 83,000 people and wreaked havoc on economies around the world could push around half a billion people into poverty, Oxfam said on Thursday.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-heal ... SKCN21R0E7

But at least we saved a few thousand old people from dying a few years sooner.

[Winterborn]

With the reduced carbon emissions in the last five weeks, Sarah Palin is reporting that she can now see Japan from her house.

[JohnStOnge]

I just don't get you guys thinking that IHME model is garbage. If you use the model even when they released the first output on March 25 the national projection was for a point estimate of 44,781 cases as of yesterday, April 21 with an uncertainty interval of 25,791 through 82,412. The actual CDC death count as of yesterday was 44,575.

For South Carolina the first run on March 25 point estimate of deaths in that State as of April 21 was 172 and the uncertainty interval was 66 through 312.

Both projections were very good. If the true value is within the uncertainty interval, the projection was a success. And in both cases the point estimates were in the ball park.

and on April 1st they projected Tennessee and Alabama would be stacking bodies like cordwood by now because they hadn’t implemented social distancing early or strict enough. “Hundreds of deaths a day by April 14th”....guess how many they each have? Less than 200 TOTAL.

So, you wanna start cherry picking data points, bro?

No, I am not cherry picking data points. I looked at South Carolina because it appeared that South Carolina was under discussion. And I used the first run of the model because it reasonably would be considered to be the one most subject to error at this point.

The April 1 run of the model did miss on Alabama and Tennessee in terms of cumulative cases at this point. It did not miss on the national number. I am not going to go through all 50 States to see how it did in terms of number of States within the uncertainty intervals and number of States outside of it. However, bear in mind that if the uncertainty intervals are like 95% confidence intervals the expectation is that the true value will be outside of the 95% confidence interval in 1 in each 20 instances over the long term.

What would you suggest as an alternative for trying to anticipate impacts?

[Winterborn]

Very cool Nature article.

The coronavirus pandemic has brought chaos to lives and economies around the world. But efforts to curb the spread of the virus might mean that the planet itself is moving a little less. Researchers who study Earth’s movement are reporting a drop in seismic noise — the hum of vibrations in the planet’s crust — that could be the result of transport networks and other human activities being shut down. They say this could allow detectors to spot smaller earthquakes and boost efforts to monitor volcanic activity and other seismic events.

A noise reduction of this magnitude is usually only experienced briefly around Christmas, says Thomas Lecocq, a seismologist the Royal Observatory of Belgium in Brussels, where the drop has been observed.

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-00965-x