COVID-19: Chapter 5 - BACK TO SCHOOL

Steven Millman update:

September 10th COVID Update Hypothetical: How many Americans would have died of COVID-19 by now had we followed the path of European national responses?

SHORT VERSION: 77,305 meaning we have seen more than 113,000 unnecessary deaths SO FAR with more every day. Take this estimate with a grain of salt, because error margins are wide, but there’s no doubt the death toll could have been far lower than the current 190,000.

tl;dr as though I even need to say that anymore

Given the news of the day, a question I’ve not been generally interested in answering has come up so often that I’ve finally decided to run it. That question is, How many Americans would have died of COVID-19 by now had the government and the population reacted to the pandemic in much the same way as other developed nations which were initially hit hard? This is pure conjecture, and please take it as such. I’ll do my best to spell out the assumptions clearly.

To make a reasonable comparison, I’ve modeled the answer to this question based on countries which (1) took a heavy toll before reacting effectively, (3) eventually reacted effectively – looking at YOU Sweden, (3) are Western democracies with well-developed individual freedom, and (4) have modern medical care systems. For this thought experiment, I therefore selected Spain, France, Italy, and the United Kingdom. These four countries managed to get the virus under control (more or less) after disastrous early death tolls.

On average, these countries reached their peak death rate as defined by their highest seven day average in about 32 days from the date of the first death (range: 27-37) at which point they were averaging 886 deaths per day (range: 760-975). After this sharp increase, deaths began to decline quickly, albeit at a slower rate than they rose. On average, these countries dropped to ½ of their peak death rate on 22 days later on day 54 (range: 16-27), to ¼ of their peak 18 days after on day 72 that (range 12-22) and reached an equilibrium state of just under 10 deaths per day (range 2.5-19) on about day 130.

To build a more or less similar curve, I assumed that had we responded like our European counterparts we would also have peaked on day 32 and used our actual death count on that date as the starting point for the models. I then assumed we would have dropped to ½ of that rate on day 54, ¼ of that rate on day 72, and reached equilibrium on day 130. Because of the simplicity of this approach the attached figure has a sharp peak rather than a rounded one, but it effects the estimated death count with only marginally. The attached images show the US actual 7-day average death rates as well as Italy, Spain, France and the UK along side the simplistic model of the US death rates following European models. The best fit model created an asymptote (leveling off) at about 40 deaths per day in the US. That’s much higher than the other countries, but then again, the US is a much larger country as well.

The current death toll from COVID-19 today – day 189 – in the US based on Johns Hopkins data is 190,862. The total death estimated death toll for the US on day 189 based on the European model is 77,305. Based on these assumptions, the US has allowed itself 113,557 unnecessary deaths SO FAR.

Making matters worse, we are currently averaging about 1,000 deaths each day in the US, not 40. This means that the number of unnecessary deaths is increasing by almost 1,000 Americans each and every day. My current published model for the US has us reaching equilibrium at 574 deaths per day, so when we do eventually level off (before rising again in all likelihood) we will be adding 534 unnecessary deaths per day.

REMEMBER: There are a LOT of assumptions in here to generate a best fit model estimate for the US based on the experiences in Europe. I don’t have tons of faith in the EXACT 77,305 estimate and neither should you. It is, however, quite reasonable to believe based on the data that the real unknowable answer to this hypothetical is between 50,000 and 100,000 deaths had we reacted more forcefully as a nation. No matter how you slice it, it’s a LOT lower than the results of our half-hearted and occasionally outright oppositional response to the pandemic.

So how do we get out of this literal and figurative death spiral? Simple. Do the things you already know you need to do. Avoid crowds, especially indoors. Wear a mask when around others and wash your hands frequently. Social distance. As I’ve said many, many times, we have never been much more than one month from getting the virus under control and having our normal(ish) lives back if we all collectively did these things. We can do it – all of our peers have. Please?

I understand the news of the day and that virtually everyone reading this will want to toss political blame, but honestly, I don’t find that particularly helpful. Just follow the science, encourage people to do the same. It makes no difference at this point which political tribe you follow, just do the obvious stuff and then we can get back to gleefully arguing about regular things like tax cuts, budget deficits, and judicial appointments. That sounds a lot better to me than doing these damnably depressing models.

Data are drawn from Johns Hopkins University’s COVID tracking project. As always, don’t forget I’m not a medical professional or epidemiologist. I’m a professional statistician with too much on my mind.

image

2 Likes

@Inso0,

If Trump is President people in Milwaukee are going to continue protesting the shit out of everything. If Biden wins, most of them go back to staying home. Notice how police shooting protests during Obama’s Presidency would be isolated and last a few days and during Trump’s they go national, if not global, with some becoming nearly permanent fixtures.

Vote Biden so you can have Law and Order.

8 Likes

It’s September 10th and Trump still doesn’t have a testing regime in place.

This is not mmqb, this is an utter failure that continues.

2 Likes

These masturbatory thought experiments are nice, but America is not Europe, as most of the regs here will be happy to explain to you on any number of topics.

President Clinton wouldn’t have wanted to tank an economy any more than Trump did.

Lol if you don’t think Democrats do the exact same thing in exactly the same magnitude. This is such a known certainty I don’t even have to offer any evidence of my claim. My hearty sneer is more than sufficient.

2 Likes

Wrong account. ;)

Don’t negotiate with terrorists, right?

It’s been getting testy around here, probably a good thing ins0 is back

7 Likes

This will be short because I am visiting my brother in Devil country and we are over two days without power, but I’ve got something even crazier than Cuse poker drama.

I am legit considering going to Vegas next week to play poker.

3 Likes

Hey Ins0, thanks for sharing, now fuck off buddy

12 Likes

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/03/27/what-exactly-has-trump-done-or-not-done-receive-such-harsh-criticism-his-coronavirus-response/

https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2020-04-10/the-coronavirus-mistakes-trump-made-that-we-can-never-make-again

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-02277-6

Inso: lalalala i’m not listening how do i read i dunno i forgot

10 Likes

I generally try to practice some empathy before passing judgment, but in this case my perspective-taking just leads me to believe that you are a legit smug moron. Idgaf if your environment made you this way. Stop it. Start reading science journals instead of Tucker Carlson talking points and make the world a better place. We need you. Others’ suffering does not make your life better.

10 Likes

That’s not a negotiation with the protesters/terrorists, it’s just strategy and it’s really a strategy to subvert them. Seems like you just want to vote for Trump.

3 Likes

Having the most powerful person in the world think that he could defeat the virus by simply denying its existence and effects did not make an iota of difference… I am very smart.

5 Likes

She would have known that either you shut down to stop the pandemic or the pandemic shuts you down. The economy was going to be hurt either way. The pandemic didn’t have to be this bad, and countries that handled it well have lower unemployment, less severe recessions, and less severe pandemics.

2 Likes

Oh, don’t get me wrong, I don’t think I’m going to convince you of shit. I know you’re deranged and unfixable and immune to any fact you find inconvenient. This is for literally anyone else but you.

That said, it’s not Monday morning quarterbacking to say we would have had scientists on the ground in Wuhan. We did. It’s a fact. They may not directly report to Trump, but they are part of the executive branch, and he deliberately destroyed that operation.

It’s not Monday morning quarterbacking to say that we had a pandemic response team and a pandemic response plan. We did. It’s a fact. Trump deliberately destroyed both.

It’s not Monday morning quarterbacking to say that Trump knew the virus was not merely transmitted by droplets but instead was truly airborne in January. Trump confessed to this on tape. Anyone who knows what “airborne” as an epidemiological term of art means, which means literally everyone who Trump should have talked to about the implications of this, including the person who would have been briefing him on this, would know that we’d need to ramp up PPE production immediately. Not in late March, and not with some incompetent product of nepotism alone at the helm. It’s incredibly obvious stuff, and not doing this is so incompetent as to be gross negligence: negligence to the point that it’s indistinguishable from deliberate sabotage.

It’s not Monday morning quarterbacking to say that the first CDC test failed, and there was a test from the WHO that worked and was available to us. It’s not Monday morning quarterbacking to say that the Trump administration actively tried to shut down the first operational covid-19 testing operation. Those are all well-documented facts. The first thing that any epidemiology undergrad would tell you at the outset of a disease outbreak is that we need testing to track and control the disease, and without testing we are sunk. Literally every country that tried ramped up their testing operation faster than we did. Trump is on the record on multiple occasions opposing testing and working to reduce the amount that is done. It’s incredibly obvious stuff that a random Joe off the street could understand and would want to make happen, but Trump refused it.

23 Likes

I know someone who has done it. He said the lists are long, the wait can be 1-2 hours, and you can only really play like 4-6 hours max because you can’t eat at the table and you can only be gone I think 15 mins before they pick you up.

He says the games are good, though. He has played maybe 4-5 times.

I think it’s a bad idea, but obviously I’m considering something similar although 7 people vs who knows how many in a poker room.

If I was under 30 with no health risks, I might think differently about it. It would depend a lot on my financial situation.

Not objectively, but @Inso0 lives for the sensation of feeling superior to the people that rent apartments in the buildings that are owned by the people that own him.

5 Likes

Have you considered finding some kind of side hustle to poker, or are you committed to pro poker player for life?

Obviously you’re a smart guy who could do a ton of things. If you are really sure playing poker is all you ever want to do, then I guess you need to. But if you’ve ever thought about something else - now might be the best time.

4 Likes

My financial situation is not as healthy as yours. I would start out mid-week at the Orleans. I’ve got a couple of nights of free rooms. It’s possible to go from parking to hotel room to poker room mostly avoiding the casino floor.

I play all the games, so I can take whichever game has the shortest list and go from there.

1 Like