ADVERTISEMENT

Corona model for PA just significantly improved

The numbers keep improving because of the social distancing. Had we not aggressively pursued that the numbers would be different.
FWIW, social distancing is a part and has been a part of these projections.

From the FAQ for the IMHE model:

How are social distancing measures used in the model?

The model uses the time from implementation of social distancing measures to the peak of deaths in locations where this peak has already been reached or passed in order to model this relationship for locations where daily deaths have not yet reached their maximum.

Initially, only Wuhan city had progressed far enough through its outbreak for this to be used in our model. An additional 7 locations have since reached or passed the peak of daily deaths (see updates April 5th) – many in less time than was observed for Wuhan city – and this broader evidence base is now used to forecast the date of the peak in daily deaths for each US state and countries in the EEA. The model includes the effects of social distancing measures implemented at the “first administrative level” (in the US this generally means the state level). We classified social distancing measures using the New Zealand Government alert system Level 4 and then assumed that locations that have instituted fewer than three of these measures will enact the remaining measures within seven days. With each model update, the assumption of full implementation of social distancing measures is reset; any delay will be reflected in the number of deaths, the timing of the peak of daily deaths, and thus the burden on hospital systems that the model estimates. The model does not yet explicitly address when or whether social distancing measures could be lifted.
 
U of W model was updated this morning.

COVID-19 projections assuming full social distancing through May 2020
Last updated April 8, 2020 (Pacific Time).

Numbers dropped significantly again.

https://covid19.healthdata.org/united-states-of-america

Total deaths
60,415 COVID-19 deaths
projected by August 4, 2020

https://covid19.healthdata.org/united-states-of-america/pennsylvania

Projected PA deaths also with a dramatic drop.

Total deaths
969 COVID-19 deaths
projected by August 4, 2020
It’s actually worse for PA with today’s updates. After the Sunday update PA was at 782 deaths. Big spike in deaths yesterday blew out the projection so let’s see how it goes today.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mn78psu83
It’s actually worse for PA with today’s updates. After the Sunday update PA was at 782 deaths. Big spike in deaths yesterday blew out the projection so let’s see how it goes today.
Yes, I was still thinking back to the first time I looked at it when it was much higher.
 
I'm just glad the WHO who we provide the lions share of the funding for did their jobs and got accurate and timely information from China and when they weren't sure put the Chinese feet to the fire and didn't just act as a mouthpiece for the regime. o_O
 
I have no expertise in virology but it's fun to watch other people who also mostly have no such expertise arguing as if they do. Virus deniers originally said there's nothing to worry about. "It's in China, not here. Look at the projections!!" Then when it got to the US and a few places were hit hard, they said, "It's here but it's not that bad. Don't pay attention to the projections!!" Now that some models are predicting fewer fatalities it's back to, "Look at the projections!!" It works both ways so flip it around for the chicken littles. That's how it is in 2020. Confirmation bias rules the day.

I wish I was in the MRE business. No doubt there was some money to be made there.

LOL. +100
 
Models are only as good as the data you construct them with. The underlying data here is, to be kind, terrible. The models are probably pretty good, but the data is changing very rapidly, which is why the projections are changing as well.
Correct. I'd also add that each model's algorithm should be scrutinized as well. None of us know what's under the hood of these models. If the algorithms don't make sense, then even with good data, the results will be inaccurate.
 
Not sure why that's so hard to understand. The whole point of social distancing and stay at home orders was to "flatten the curve" as much as possible which seems to be exactly what's happening.

Took the words out of mouth! Hey keep away from me!
 
Correct. I'd also add that each model's algorithm should be scrutinized as well. None of us know what's under the hood of these models. If the algorithms don't make sense, then even with good data, the results will be inaccurate.

Agreed. However, the people doing the scrutinizing should actually understand modelling. I would hate to see every person that can write or read a blog suddenly become modelling experts.
 
Agreed. However, the people doing the scrutinizing should actually understand modelling. I would hate to see every person that can write or read a blog suddenly become modelling experts.

I think a lot of people are thrown simply by use of the term "model." Somehow they see that as more concrete than if they heard something like "current projection." A neighbor used it in a discussion with me the other day - "well, the model says..." - as though that ended all possible argument.
 
  • Like
Reactions: eidolon21
Should we thank Pitt fans for demonstrating social distancing?

DHP_0937.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: harbest
Models are as accurate as a forecast 10 days out. scary they can be this far off. Cuomo needed 100k beds and he’s using 13k for the corona and 23 k total. And he wanted 40k ventilators. What are we gonna do with 200k ventilators.
 
Correct. I'd also add that each model's algorithm should be scrutinized as well. None of us know what's under the hood of these models. If the algorithms don't make sense, then even with good data, the results will be inaccurate.
Actually we know exactly what is under the hood of the UW model. You can read their publications on their website and even seen the underlying code on GitHub.

https://github.com/ihmeuw-msca/CurveFit
 
I'm just glad the WHO who we provide the lions share of the funding for did their jobs and got accurate and timely information from China and when they weren't sure put the Chinese feet to the fire and didn't just act as a mouthpiece for the regime. o_O
the WHO produced a more robust and readily deployed screening test (see S Korea) that we (USA) rejected in lieu of the award, ungainly and highly inefficient CDC test. So there is that........
 
the WHO produced a more robust and readily deployed screening test (see S Korea) that we (USA) rejected in lieu of the award, ungainly and highly inefficient CDC test. So there is that........

You are so FOS, Steve-O. Go back to your hole.
 
The models have changed because the rules have changed. The early models predicted much worse results because nobody was on stay at home restrictions. And even when those rules were established, nobody could predict how us freedom loving Americans would behave. Since we’ve mostly been pretty well behaved, the new predictions are much more favorable.

Anybody arguing that the current projections are proof we didn’t need to go on lockdown is an idiot. Current projections are better because we locked down.
 
The only good models are the ones after its over. Other then that is Garbage in Garbage out. Its just the nature of the beast
 
It seems like Ned was a lot closer to being correct than the assholes who were berating him for not believing the world was ending.

This is ridiculous. 136 people died today from pneumonia, 166 from the flu. We are at 51 total for COVID and at peak I do not think we will come close to those daily numbers.

Above is the initial post from that thread. Please tell us how close he was. And no, I never thought the sky was falling but I wasn't buying to company line either.
 
It seems like Ned was a lot closer to being correct than the assholes who were berating him for not believing the world was ending.
50 million had the flu, 50k died. Dont think even half of society got a flu shot. Even many who did get one got sick. Could some of those cases actually have been cv-19, sure. So take those numbers for what they are but then also that throws off all of these numbers. Some point herd immunity is going to take over just like it has for multiple other diseases.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GangBangGuy
the WHO produced a more robust and readily deployed screening test (see S Korea) that we (USA) rejected in lieu of the award, ungainly and highly inefficient CDC test. So there is that........

South Koreas success had little to do with testing and much to do with their ability to monitor their people in ways that the US cant because of the constitution. The US says quarantine yourself at home and ask anyone you have been in contact with to do the same. South korea used cell phone gps data and forcefully locked everyone up that got near those who tested positive. If spring breakers in the US had tried that is South Korea, they wouldnt have caught Covid 19, they would be floating in the ocean full of holes.
 
Has there been any evidence that a large number of those spring breakers have tested positive?
 
Not necessary. I already know the projections have been BS, so I strongly suspect bad data and a bad model.
I don't think you understand anything about models (you can have a well parameterized model with bad input data, which is the case here), but stay safe and enjoy your day.
 
South Koreas success had little to do with testing and much to do with their ability to monitor their people in ways that the US cant because of the constitution. The US says quarantine yourself at home and ask anyone you have been in contact with to do the same. South korea used cell phone gps data and forcefully locked everyone up that got near those who tested positive. If spring breakers in the US had tried that is South Korea, they wouldnt have caught Covid 19, they would be floating in the ocean full of holes.
This. Head of household could go out grocery shopping on designated day. You buy everything with your phone and if the icon was green you were ok. If red, you got a fine

thread yesterday had a guy go to 4 stores to find stuff. Our leader, Tom, admitted to going to three stores to find what he needed. Not allowed in South Korea. One store. Buy what they have. Too bad if they don’t have pineapple sauce for your Easter ham. We have lots that don’t “get” the social distancing requirement and would never adhere to Korea or China rules. 3-4 stores a day when you are supposed to be in a lock down? I have no issues with that , but that is no different than congregating at the beach or in Central Park. Probably worse
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: bison13
I ordered groceries for pick up. Ordered stuff for my parents and my in laws on my order. (My order was almost $300, I got about $175 of it). I got home, unpacked and wiped everything. Loaded up for delivery to parents and in laws. Made a single stop at the Giant near my parent’s house to grab a few items I needed but they didn’t have at the store where I got my order. Wore a mask. Almost everyone in the store wore a mask. The store had carts being disinfected to hand out. Checkout was a single file line and employees directed the next in line to the next available register. Very organized.

My neighbors went to Costco and got steaks for us. I got a ton of food today and only made one stop in a store for less than 20 minutes. It’s not difficult with some planning and some cooperation with others.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CentexLion
Can any New Jersey members explain what’s going on there? I got to talk to an employee at the grocery store in Lancaster where I placed my pick up order. She said we (in Lancaster) aren’t getting the usual amount of trucks for restocking shelves because a lot are being diverted to New Jersey. Why does New Jersey need more than the usual amount? I get that working from home means more meals at home and less from restaurants. But that’s the case in PA too. It seems silly that things haven’t balanced out there yet.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT