Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire How many will be enough?

Most reasonable response.

Have to consider that an estimated 40% that get it don't know or it isn't serious enough to report. 20% wont ever get it

So that 3% death rate is of basically mostly serious cases. so that 3% is really 1%

Here is how i heard it explained by Faucci on TV.

80% of cases wont be serious. 20% will be serious. 10% will require hospitalization,, 5 % to icu 5 % to a ventilator of the 5% on a ventilator half will die 2.5% (of the 20%).

But the trick is if we overwhelm the medical system 80% of those requiring hospitalization die.

Infested serious Hospital icu dead
1 Million 200K 20,000 10,000 5,000
2 million 400K 40,000 20,000 10,000 where we are currently
3 million 600K 60,000 30,000 15,000 close to here we run out of ICU
4 mllion 800K 80,000 40,000 25,000 NO ICU OR HOSPITAL BEDS
5 million 1M 100,000 50,000 80,000 80% or more requiring hospital die
10MILLION 2m 200,000 100,000 160,000
20 MILLION 4m 400,000 200,000 320,000
50 million 10M 2,000,000 1,000,000 800,000

this is what they fear.

where the truth is i don't know

My guess is US deaths will run around 30 thousand, for this year anyway. Ought to be a vaccine by next year.

Conrad, just joking some, but according to some here..................



there is no "morality" to rate in the US of A anymore.

And your correct, those of us infected with a bit of morality don't show symptoms of it. Just a normal life for us..


Geno

More words of wisdom...... I have come to terms with my morality .... and it is not improving.... damn, do they have a pill for that?

I am firmly in both camps.
It is bad, really bad and we should do everything THAT HAS A REASONABLE CHANCE of slowing the spread and reducing the number of deaths.
That being said, about half of the stuff we are being told is complete BS, and will have NO positive affect on the number of sick or dead. Some of this stuff is just draconian government control. Closing boat ramps and outlawing fishing ? Hunting season ? Really ?

On the other hand, the level of fear mongering and vast exaggeration in the MSM is way out of proportion. Watch CNN for a few hours and you will learn that 80% of the world’s population will be dead in a few weeks. NYC might as well drink the koolaid now. The entire economy is going to collapse and we are all going to be living in the stone age.

This thing is changing, day by day, hour by hour. Anybody who claims to know the end results is full of it.

That does tend to be a problem.

How about, It did not get nearly as bad as it could have. Thank God we took actions to attenuate the devastation which would have happened.

The recession/depression/economic slow down was inevitable no matter the course.

The plummeting stock market began before the virus made any impact on America. That was a result of an economic stop in China rippling across the globe. Yes, our reaction to the virus hastened and deepened the fall of the Dow.

Without attenuation of viral contagion, that same fall would have happened as hundreds of thousands or millions died across the US from C-19. Panic???? Then you would have seen panic!

As the resident 'fire stats nerd....

1. The real infection rate is unknown and unknowable. Many cases are undiagnosed and unreported. My personal SWAG is somewhere around 20% actually get reported, maybe less. Two, possibly three members of my extended family (one being a physician) probably had it, and just toughed it out.

2. Until you know the infection rate, you can't calculate mortality rate. If my SWAG (above) is somewhere near correct, then published mortality rates are inflated 5X. IOW, not good news, but also not as bad as reported.

3. Based on practical experience, intricate forecasting models frequently fail. The IHME model that the government is following is intricate.

4. It's not a terrible assumption to say that the health care system captures a fairly constant percentage of cases. So the number of newly diagnosed cases is probably a decent indicator of true new cases. If you want to accept those assumptions, it's interesting to note that my state, Utah, has been on a linear up-ramp since March 13. The linear trend "broke" yesterday, with a statistically detectable improvement in the number of new cases. The curve may have turned, or maybe it was just Sunday, and numbers didn't get fully reported.

5. The Utah data give no indication of the exponential growth assumed in the IHME model.

6. Without divine revelation, we don't know the future, so we have to make the best estimate we can. All statistical models are estimates. Almost all estimates are wrong. However, some are close enough to be useful. When this episode is over, we might have a better idea of how close the estimates were. But by then, they won't any longer be useful for planning purposes.

Wonder if the computer models for this virus done by the same company that made em for predicting Hillary's win?

This is a gross oversimplification. You’re inability to escape a world view comprised of strictly polarized contrast sets, severely limits your participation.

Denton, How do you interpret the rise in the national death toll since Feb 29 and the doubling rate of four days?

Which may have perceptibly slowed as the four day projection from 6000 on Apr 2 would lead to 12,000 as of today. Worldometer still shows less than 11,000 deaths for today. I hope that number stands.

Indeed.

Its said that there was a 47% false negative rate. Don't if or when that was corrected.

agreed. I just would be surprised if the expected-by-some 500,000 dead is close to what we will end up with.

When you consider how bad this disease could be shutting down is worth it. What we do to stop it’s spread will reduce the number of people who die so we will have no proof of what would have happened without these measures.

Idaho Shooter....

Here's a little bit of a stab at an answer on the death rate:

From the CDC web site,


So it looks like we are winning, right? Well, no.

Look at the Total Deaths column. Are we to believe that total deaths have also declined? Doesn't meet the smell test. The explanation is in the footnote, which many hastily skip.



So recent weeks will always be under-reported, just as we see in the Total Deaths column. If you scale the 04/04/20 data, the final number might be closer to 2500 than the 415 reported.

The data we have are not of high quality, and there is an insufficient number of data to make any kind of precise estimate of growth rate.

News organizations are in the business of selling audiences to advertisers. Bigger audience, more revenue from advertising. The more spectacular the claims they make, the bigger their audience will be. So there is a built in bias toward spectacular claims.

Personally, I would not stake my reputation on a national statement any more specific than "People are dying from COVID19."

Thank you very much Denton.

Garbage in, garbage out. Can't believe the numbers if you don't know how many are infected.

I tried to make it simple so you could understand. I guess I'll have to try harder next time.