Coronavirus Pandemic (COVID-19)

[SamKellner]

Self sufficiency ... Enough to last a family of four an entire year.

Aha!!!

So YOU'RE THE ONE buying out all the toilet paper!!

Panic_at_Walmart.png

[Bill Cummings]

But really if one works off of a robust reserve,
replenishing as they pull from the reserve, and
many do this, it will reduce the panic buying at
the next Quarantine. Social Distancing made
possible to a greater extent by adding this
shock absorber between demand and supply.

[Bob Kuczewski]

... if one works off of a robust reserve ... shock absorber between demand and supply.

Actually you're right. These distributed reserves are very important.   

I've heard news stories about "price gouging", and how there are laws against such "gouging". However, it's those kinds of laws that help cause the shortages we're seeing. What should happen is that the prices should rise as the panic buying begins. That puts a damper on anyone hoarding. At $10 per roll, there would be plenty available.

   - People with a large stockpile wouldn't buy more at that price.
   - People who just needed a roll or two could find them.
   - Producers would quickly ramp up production to reap that profit.

That's the simple law of supply and demand. Any laws against "gouging" (remember Nixon's "wage and price controls"?) suppress the normal market forces and create shortages. Remember the long gas lines under the "gas shortages" of the 70's?

By the way ... I took those pictures of the empty shelves myself. When the panic buying started, I was down to about 1 roll. I didn't think too much of it until I went shopping. I would have paid $5 or $10 for a roll, but there were no rolls on the shelves. I haven't been able to buy a single roll since. Fortunately, I happened to have 4 rolls of paper towels in the closet.   

It's good to hear from you Sam!! You've been a rock solid member of the Hawks from the beginning. I really appreciate it, and I hope all is well with you.  
 

[brianscharp]

https://www.vox.com/2020/3/30/21199586/ ... 0-good-job
Trump says 200,000 Americans could die from coronavirus, because he’s done “a very good job”




Best case scenario 100,000 to 200,000 deaths, worst case 1.6-2.2 million deaths. We are not doing things perfectly.

[Bill Cummings]

START AT 2:05
Myth-Busting Coronavirus (COVID-19) with Dr. Fauci - Give Back #WithMe
https://youtu.be/F2YKKba6ps0

[Bob Kuczewski]

Thanks for the video Bill. Dr. Fauci was pretty good natured to do that.   

Brian, your chart can be misleading because it's not normalized by population. It's easy, for example, to look at it and draw the conclusion that we'd be better off living in Spain:

EUYkI9gX0AI4kUp.jpg (75.97 KiB) Viewed 2441 times

But that would be a faulty conclusion because the deaths per million people is 165 in Spain and only 10 in the United States. That means you'd be 16.5 times as likely to be dead of COVID19 in Spain than in the United States. But that is not the impression given by your chart. I don't know if it's intentionally misleading with the purpose of bashing Trump or emptying our grocery store shelves. But whatever the purpose, it is misleading just the same.

Here's a table that shows deaths per million which is a better basis of comparison:

COVID19_20200331_00.png (153.51 KiB) Viewed 2441 times

         Data from: https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus

[Bob Kuczewski]

It looks like Italy is recovering:

Italy_new_cases_20200331_04.png (68.77 KiB) Viewed 2435 times

         Data from: https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/italy/

The U.S. is also showing the peak of the curve approaching:

US_new_cases_20200331_04.png (77.01 KiB) Viewed 2434 times

         Data from: https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/us/

[brianscharp]

But that would be a faulty conclusion because the deaths per million people is 165 in Spain and only 10 in the United States. That means you'd be 16.5 times as likely to be dead of COVID19 in Spain than in the United States. But that is not the impression given by your chart. I don't know if it's intentionally misleading with the purpose of bashing Trump or emptying our grocery store shelves. But whatever the purpose, it is misleading just the same.

Here's a table that shows deaths per million which is a better basis of comparison:

Cases are confirmed by testing. If you do zero testing, that does not mean you actually have zero cases, no matter how many people are convinced that is true. Confirmed deaths also rely on testing and will grow as some active cases (used as the denominator, decrease) don't recover and the ones that died without being treated are added (which also requires testing (postmortem)). Our place on that graph, with our record of testing, is alarming to me, but not unexpected.

Many of the graphs are misleading if you assume equal testing.

https://ourworldindata.org/coronavirus
Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19) – Statistics and Research

Summary
Even the best existing research and data is preliminary and will be revised as the pandemic progresses.
We reviewed existing global data sources and decided to rely on the global statistics published by the European Center for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC).


Deaths
During a disease outbreak it is the growth rate that deserves attention. We present a table that lists how fast the number of deaths is doubling.
In interactive charts we present the data on confirmed deaths in all countries in the world.


Testing
Without widespread testing for COVID-19 we can neither know how the pandemic is spreading nor appropriately respond to it.


Cases
The total number of COVID-19 cases is not known. It is however certain that the total number of COVID-19 cases is higher than the number of known confirmed cases. This is mainly due to limited testing.
Just as we do for deaths, we focus on the growth rate of confirmed cases. We present a sortable table that lists how fast the number of confirmed cases is doubling.
In interactive charts we present the data on confirmed cases over time in all countries in the world.


Mortality
The case fatality rate (CFR) – the ratio between confirmed deaths and cases – is widely discussed, but during the outbreak of a pandemic with large unknowns it is important to know what can and cannot be said based on currently available statistics.

[brianscharp]

https://twitter.com/i/status/1244761657114591234

CBS News obtained audio of a call Monday between Pres. Trump and rural state governors about coronavirus. After Montana Gov. Steve Bullock discusses difficulty getting testing equipment, Trump says, "I haven't heard anything about testing being a problem"

[Bob Kuczewski]

Many of the graphs are misleading if you assume equal testing.

Any graph or chart has 2 components:

• Data
• Presentation

I am primarily pointing out that presentations of cases and/or deaths that do not account for population can be misleading.

As for testing and reporting of data, that is going to vary due to a number a number of factors. I tend to think that statistics based on deaths will be more reliable than statistics based on "cases" for several reasons:

1. Deaths usually receive greater medical scrutiny because they are the more serious cases.
2. Deaths generally require more stringent accountability (death certificates, disposal, etc).
3. Death counts are less likely to be contaminated with less deadly cold or flu cases.

For all those reasons (and more), I think "cases" should not appear in either the numerator or denominator of statistics that are used to compare the response effectiveness between countries and/or leaders (which seems to be your primary purpose). The measure of deaths/population is a much more reliable (and ultimately more important) metric for those comparisons.

Certainly we have to grapple with issues of testing and reporting. Different countries have different procedures, definitions, skills, budgets, and credibility. All of those factors cloud the data. Comparing that data without reference to population can cloud the situation further.