Coronavirus Coronavirus: In-Iowa General Discussion (Not Limited)
- Thread starter Jer
- Start date
- Status
The type of response we've had is the main reason why we may be able to keep this thing under 100,000 deaths this year. That was the point.
We're past 60k already and haven't peaked yet. We are probably going to pass 100k this month.
I'd disagree with that assertion but even if you are correct the peak just means we hit the max, not that it is over. We still have to go down the other side. There's no way at this point that the death count is going to end up just being five figures.
What do you disagree with? If you look at the reported deaths per day from Covid 19 in the US it has been trending down since mid April. April 15th to be exact. This isn't an opinion, it's a statement of fact.
https://covid19.healthdata.org/united-states-of-america
Nationally that is true. But if you remove NY it's not as clear. If you remove NY, CT and NJ it's clear the rest of the country hasn't peaked.
The point being that at the state level, or even sub-state (regional) level, each locale will peak at a different time - which will likely elongate the national numbers into a very slow decline with periodic plateaus. This is also a by-product of social distancing measures which spread the cases out over a longer period of time, including through the re-opening phase.
The problem is that we are looking at it nationally, but we're trying to avoid local hospitals from being overwhelmed.
Do you find that 10x as many people losing their job, homes, and food funny? Because that is the other option. I think that's a lot less funny.
Even if it has peaked isn't the assumption that the experts have been saying is just as many people die on the way down? So 100k seems pretty plausible.
Liberate Menards!
I might go just to get a mask for $1 and leave.
Guess I can go to the local hardware stores now. They will be happy.
There's almost no data that shows all these lock downs have done anything and there is data to show otherwise. Like Sweden for example. They've done just a little social distancing and their death rate are right in the middle of the pack.
NYC was the epicenter in April and they've peaked. Elsewhere it is still moving up. Especially since it takes 1-2 weeks to show symptoms and the people who end up dieing aren't doing so for several weeks after they first show symptoms, so the death total lags the number of positive tests which lags the number of actual infections. Look at just Iowa, the number of people on ventilators has been moving up every day recently and those are the late stage people most likely to be on their way out.
It's May 1st and if someone who eventually gets added to the deceased list caught it today they wouldn't show up as a confirmed case until mid-month and would pass until early June. Given that the number of cases continues to rise it would follow that the number of deaths will as well, with a lag of a couple of weeks.
According to you there is conflicting data about whether the CDC is a government organization so why should anyone think you have a clue about anything else?
You seriously don't think that deaths wouldn't have been 2 or 3 times higher in places like NYC, Chicago, LA, etc if these measures weren't taken?
I recognize that different parts of the US are at different stages of the curve and my comments were not in any way related to the situation in Iowa. However the data indicates that many states outside of the northeast have peaked in terms of reported deaths, especially some of the most populous states. You may feel there is going to be a second wave, but that is your analysis of the situation.
- Status
