almagest

What does "Crush the virus" mean to you? To me that means (and I assumed you meant) "completely eliminate". The only country at that point to my knowledge is NZ. Regardless of the number of countries under complete lockdown with next to no cases and no major infection explosions, we'll still need to watch their economic health for a long time after this because other places will have levels of immunity and they won't. They'll constantly be at risk of infection until this virus completely burns out in the rest of the world. To me this means potentially years of lockdown measures for them. I don't know when the narrative shifted from "sensible measures to prevent hospitals from being overwhelmed" to "complete eradication of this virus" but that's been really concerning to me. One makes sense, the other is complete fantasy. The EU's recent numbers are encouraging but A) total cases and deaths may no longer correlate the same way they did earlier in the infection spread due to the different risk groups being affected and B) They got absolutely hammered in Spain and Italy in the same at-risk populations we did and Europe as a whole was ahead of our infection explosion so I would expect them to have less cases overall at this point.

If they're not taking COVID patients it's not only because they have insurance that won't pay out sufficiently to care for these patients (and honestly that's a whole other can of words), it's also because they know that they can't adequately protect their residents. That's a good thing. Introducing an incentive to take them will have the opposite effect you'd want - see the poorly run homes referenced in the article. Also, why weren't the field hospitals used for these patients? They were pretty universally underutilized and were largely shut down because of it. We also know what happens with any infectious virus in closed ecosystems so isolating the most at-risk group somewhere makes sense.

This link isn't talking about a diagnosis, this is for taking infected patients into their nursing homes.

Like New Zealand? Jury is still out there - they rely heavily on tourism for their economy. It's also a tiny isolated island country compared to us.

I think we should absolutely be holding these states accountable for these actions - Cuomo placing all the blame on the federal government for "not telling us the virus was coming from Europe" is absolutely disgusting. Hopefully once the dust settles we can take stock of exactly what happened, how to improve, and who is at fault for what. I don't think we can crush the virus in the general population without completely destroying the world economy or placing onerous and potentially long-lasting restrictions on individual liberties. I'm also optimistic that an increase in total cases won't correlate to an increase in deaths.

I think that is a valid concern. Hopefully those facilities are smarter about PPE and quarantine procedures, and hopefully their governments have learned their lesson about placing symptomatic people back among the population. If not they should be in deep trouble. Do you have a source on that? What I find is that nursing homes are still compensated for taking in COVID patients (as of 6/4): https://www.politico.com/news/2020/06/04/states-nursing-homes-coronavirus-302134

Yes, it's spreading among other populations, as a reaping effect has already happened in nursing homes. The 87% drop in death rate I posted yesterday correlates highly. Also getting those first few infected highly symptomatic residents back into that closed ecosystem was the killer event. It became impossible to contain after that point.

880 is in line with the previous wave, if you check the graph. But you're right, let's see how the next couple weeks shake out. I'm optimistic given a number of the factors I've mentioned. It is morbidly cavalier to be speaking about any number of deaths as just a number. I wholeheartedly agree. It's the only way I can think about what's happening right now without getting seriously sad, though.

Primarily elderly people sick with COVID being put back into them. Example: https://townhall.com/columnists/michaelbarone/2020/05/15/who-sent-covid19-positive-patients-into-nursing-homes-n2568837

What were the tallies in the week leading up? Did it just explode on Wednesday out of nowhere? Why hasn't the death rate also been increasing as the number of confirmed cases increased?

The trend shows a slight bump back up is likely so I'd agree on 500-750 short-term, but the overall trend means 1000/day is very unlikely. There's nothing going on that would indicate a return to these numbers. We just had giant outdoor protests with people smushed together a few weeks ago and the death rate didn't climb., plus the infected population is moving away from the elderly and at-risk and to younger, healthier people as the lockdowns lift. Unfortunately, yes. State and local governments did a TERRIBLE job protecting at-risk populations. Absolutely criminal - for example Minnesota had 81% of their deaths in nursing homes. New Jersey 45%.

US coronavirus deaths down 87% from high in April - 2693 on April 21 to 363 on June 22 per Worldometers:

So 16 teams in the playoffs means 8 per league - 2 at the top of each division (East, Central, West) and the next 2 best teams record-wise are the 7 and 8 seeds. Based on last years standings that would be: Yankees Tampa Minnesota Cleveland Houston Oakland Boston (84-78) Texas (78-84) Atlanta Washington St Louis Milwaukee LA Dodgers Arizona Mets (86-76) Cubs (84-78) Only one team below .500. Could do NBA style 1 vs 8 2 vs 7 etc but that's boring. I'd like to see the WC teams play each other still in a 1 game elimination, give the top seed in each league a bye, then do 2 vs Wild Card, 3 vs 6, 4 vs 5.

There's a definite trend where spikes are lower and shorter, and yesterday was the lowest number of cases since May 2nd. We'll see if today continues that trend but they seem to have turned a corner. And yes this whole thing is pretty damn stupid, because it's not like their actual results show any huge spike or anything. It's like they thought they weren't winning enough. Completely baffling.

Google still shows a downward trend. I don't think this is that big of a deal. Stupid, yes. https://www.google.com/search?q=covid+stats+georgia&oq=cov&aqs=chrome.3.69i59l4j69i57j69i61l3.4968j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

Some good news: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-usa/no-spike-in-coronavirus-in-places-reopening-us-health-secretary-says-idUSKBN22T0HN We'll see if it holds.

https://www.governor.ny.gov/news/amid-ongoing-covid-19-pandemic-governor-cuomo-announces-phase-ii-results-antibody-testing-study If 14.9% of people have antibodies for COVID-19 that means almost 3 million people in NY state have been infected. Also according to this 24.7% of people in NYC tested positive. If these numbers are accurate around 2.07 million NYC residents have had COVID-19, a 1196% increase from the official 160K confirmed cases figure. There is improved specificity on these tests as well.

I'm just thinking of how much better the Bulls reputation would be if you could say "you can come here and play with + learn from Michael Jordan" to prospective free agents.

Man, that makes me sad.

Yup. That was me. There is some concern about how accurate antibody tests are (pointed out by @Balta1701), so I'd take all these results with a grain of salt, but we do seem to be converging on a large disparity between known infections and actual infections. Hopefully that holds because it means this is A) less deadly than we thought and B) we may be closer to herd immunity than we realize.

Got it. Appreciate the depth. The appropriate response here seems to be skepticism of these results, barring a response to the known quality concerns with antibody tests.

That doesn't make sense. If 5% of positives are false then I would expect the actual % of positives to be something like 2.85%. Unless you mean that up TO 5% of the total number of positives are false, meaning anything below 5% are likely all false? Either way, do you have a source on the 5% false positives? And if this false-positive rate is well known, why wouldn't these sorts of models have those projections built in already (either by direct result adjustment or multiple tests to confirm results)?

https://nltimes.nl/2020/04/16/3-dutch-blood-donors-covid-19-antibodies Netherlands has 29k reported cases. If the true infection rate is 3% of the population, that's actually 518k cases.

KBO would be great. So would NPB. I want easy access to every pro baseball league!