Recent Posts

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 10
11
Corona Virus Disease 2019 / Re: Visualizing COVID-19
« Last post by The Latinist on Today at 12:28:07 PM »
Furthermore, I suspect that the number of new infections per day would be a fairly constant multiple of the number of confirmed cases per day
Why would that be the case if testing is sporadic and inconsistent? If people who don't need prompt medical care are told to go home and self-isolate without a test?

Because I think that fraction would tend to be constant.

On what grounds do you think that?  State health departments and the CDC have tightened eligibility requirements for testing due to a lack of tests and supplies. Here in Connecticut the number of tests is increasing nowhere near as fast as the case incidence(it plateaued for three days, too, before increasing slightly again today), and the positive rate among those tested is increasing every day.  Over the last couple of days the nationwide positive rate on coronatracker.com has crept from 2.4% to 2.9%.

If they are tightening eligibility requirements for testing, then they are primarily excluding low-risk individuals.  The fact that the proportion of positives among those tested has increased is consistent with that.  So the tightening of the eligibility requirements for testing may not have much effect on the proportion of infected individuals that are diagnosed.
The low-risk individuals they're not testing aren't just people they deem unlikely to be infected, they are also people deemed unlikely to need hospitalization. They're told to self-isolate and come in if they have trouble breathing. They're acknowledged as quite possibly being infected but are not officially confirmed as such anywhere.


That's a good point, if in fact there is a significant trend.  Any evidence good that there is?  I've been hearing for a couple weeks that people at low-risk for hospitalization have been told just to stay home and self-isolate

No, I don't think we have evidence. If we knew what the exactly the effect was, we might be able to account for it. Instead, we know that there is a significant undercount, we know there is are limits to the total number who can be tested regardless of hospitalizations or infections, and we have no evidence that the undercount is consistent over time. I would point out, though, that the tailing off of growth in the incidence rate that you've started to notice in the last few days coincides quite nicely with when the CDC issued its new stricter guidelines and with the range in which my own state state's testing started to plateau.

This is why I prefer to stick to the mortality data.  Even though it will not catch trends as early, it is, in my opinion, much less likely to show false trends based on selection bias.  I think nearly all coronavirus deaths are being reported, but I think that the testing data contains multiple selection biases.
12
Corona Virus Disease 2019 / Re: Visualizing COVID-19
« Last post by CarbShark on Today at 12:15:11 PM »
Furthermore, I suspect that the number of new infections per day would be a fairly constant multiple of the number of confirmed cases per day
Why would that be the case if testing is sporadic and inconsistent? If people who don't need prompt medical care are told to go home and self-isolate without a test?

Because I think that fraction would tend to be constant.

On what grounds do you think that?  State health departments and the CDC have tightened eligibility requirements for testing due to a lack of tests and supplies. Here in Connecticut the number of tests is increasing nowhere near as fast as the case incidence(it plateaued for three days, too, before increasing slightly again today), and the positive rate among those tested is increasing every day.  Over the last couple of days the nationwide positive rate on coronatracker.com has crept from 2.4% to 2.9%.

If they are tightening eligibility requirements for testing, then they are primarily excluding low-risk individuals.  The fact that the proportion of positives among those tested has increased is consistent with that.  So the tightening of the eligibility requirements for testing may not have much effect on the proportion of infected individuals that are diagnosed.
The low-risk individuals they're not testing aren't just people they deem unlikely to be infected, they are also people deemed unlikely to need hospitalization. They're told to self-isolate and come in if they have trouble breathing. They're acknowledged as quite possibly being infected but are not officially confirmed as such anywhere.


That's a good point, if in fact there is a significant trend.  Any evidence good that there is?  I've been hearing for a couple weeks that people at low-risk for hospitalization have been told just to stay home and self-isolate
The problem is that testing policy is not consistent from state to state or within the same state. There is a different policy in San Francisco than LA; and in New York and New Jersey.

In some places you get a note from your doctor and you drive to a parking lot and get tested in your car. In others you have to go into a clinic and meet criteria to get tested.

Death is the most reliable statistic.

At this point I’m not even sure we can accurately estimate the total number of infected from the number of deaths because the data is so incomplete.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
13
Podcasts / Re: Opening Arguments #TTTBE
« Last post by The Latinist on Today at 12:13:47 PM »
My understanding of "gone to seed" is that it refers to the period when the plant switches from leaf and flower production to the production of seeds.  For some non-grain crops, that means that it is past time to harvest (once certain herbs go to seed, the weed is useless); for grain crops, though, that means that it will soon be time to harvest. I do not think that for grain crops "go to seed" means be past the time of harvest. At least that was my experience growing up in Vermont.
14
Corona Virus Disease 2019 / Re: Economic Impact of Corona Virus
« Last post by CarbShark on Today at 12:03:21 PM »
Maybe we could start a special thread for CarbShark and John Albert to bitch at each other in?
Don’t we have enough of those already?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
15
Podcasts / Re: Opening Arguments #TTTBE
« Last post by CarbShark on Today at 12:02:01 PM »

Spoiler

If the contract had said as soon as it's ripe, then yes. But it just said when it's ripe, and that could mean anytime after it's first ripe and before it goes to seed.
[close]



Emphasis mine. "Going to seed" is what you want the wheat crop to do, since it's the seeds that you harvest. You cannot harvest the wheat before it goes to seed, unless you're just harvesting the grass (wheat is a grass) for hay. I've never heard of anyone harvesting wheat for hay.

Not exactly. When a crop has gone to seed that means the grains are dropping from the plant to be seeds.

Nope. That's not what it means. Some plants are harvested for their leaves or stalks, which are not usable or are not desirable after the plant begins to produce seeds. Going to seed means that the plant has begun that process.
First definition from google: ”gone to seed" refers to the stage in gardening in which the flowers are not blooming and the leaves have fallen off the trees, like during the winter.”

In Colorado where I worked on farms and ranches, gone to seed meant the crop had stood too long. Seeds were literally falling to the ground.

But, even if the term gone to seed isn’t correct for North Dakota wheat, the point is to harvest while it is still harvestable. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
16
Lets not kid ourselves.
Hundreds of thousands of people are going to be made unemployed by this crisis. There is no way around that and flinching from the blow will only make the death toll worse.

If governments need to restructure as they did after WW2 to support the population affected and get them back on their feet then thats what needs to happen.
If that means harsh government instruction and oversight to industry for the public good then thats what it means.
Some people believe in conscripting individuals to prevent a different flag flying in their capital but they fail the gut check of taking a hard line with industries run by billionaires or small business lobbies.
We are talking about millions of lives here.

Millions of people are going to be made unemployed by the slow progressive lockdown of the ‘flatten the curve’ strategy.

It would be better to go early and aggressive, and have a short aggressive general lockdown of several weeks or 1-2 months, with the economy in hibernation mode.  Everyone with a job is still in employment, even if the business is closed, and not paying wages to its workers.  All financial obligations during the lockdown cease.  No rent, no interest payments on mortgages, no insurance premium payments, no utilities charges (gas, electricity, telecommunications, etc).  People without an income get money from the government to pay for food.

And then when the epidemic is eradicated in a region, the economy comes out of hibernation.  People return to their previous jobs, start receiving their wages, and financial obligations restart, without their having to pay for those missed during the lockdown.

The lockdown will stop at different times in different regions, so it’s important to maintain travel restrictions.

The lockdown must be aggressive to get the reinfection rate well below one to eradicate the infection, instead of just reducing it to something above one, for example 1.5 (typical for seasonal ‘flu), which will guarantee more deaths and prolonged economic damage.

China is a test-case of this right now, we will see how it pans out. Numbers from China are also not always reliable, so they have to be taken with a massive bag of salt.
17
Lets not kid ourselves.
Hundreds of thousands of people are going to be made unemployed by this crisis. There is no way around that and flinching from the blow will only make the death toll worse.

We will see what happens. If there is a lockdown, and then a second wave once the lockdown ends, then the death toll will be massive too.

Again, I am not necessarily saying that the strategy employed here is the best one. But I notice that the government here seems to outsource the decision-making to experts and technocrats, which from what I understand is not the case in all other places. But also countries are different, so different measures might be appropriate for different countries.

If governments need to restructure as they did after WW2 to support the population affected and get them back on their feet then thats what needs to happen.
If that means harsh government instruction and oversight to industry for the public good then thats what it means.
Some people believe in conscripting individuals to prevent a different flag flying in their capital but they fail the gut check of taking a hard line with industries run by billionaires or small business lobbies.

Not really a thread for discussing conscription here, but I find that comment a little off, and very insensitive by its implications. If for example China annexes Taiwan (let's face it, Taiwan is a de facto independent country, even if it not recognized as such), it's not just "a different flag", it is the end of democracy and civil liberties as far as Taiwan is concerned. And if I remember correctly from another thread, you don't approve of that the flag flying in Northern Ireland is not the green-white-orange tricolor.

Why did Finland resist Soviet attempts at annexation? Just a different flag flying in Helsinki, who cares about such unimportant things like democracy? Why did the Poles even bother to resist the German-Soviet invasion, it was just a different flag flying in the capital, right? And what would be the problem with a Russian flag flying from the government buildings in Tallinn or Riga? ::)

As for industry, lots of industries are going on their knees, so I don't really understand your comment there. The measures taken here, while more lax than in other countries, and more reliant on recommendations, are unprecedented in peacetime.

We are talking about millions of lives here.

Indeed it is, and I am glad I am not the one making the decisions, being responsible for the lives and health of millions of people.
18
Podcasts / Re: Opening Arguments #TTTBE
« Last post by daniel1948 on Today at 11:51:19 AM »

Spoiler

If the contract had said as soon as it's ripe, then yes. But it just said when it's ripe, and that could mean anytime after it's first ripe and before it goes to seed.
[close]



Emphasis mine. "Going to seed" is what you want the wheat crop to do, since it's the seeds that you harvest. You cannot harvest the wheat before it goes to seed, unless you're just harvesting the grass (wheat is a grass) for hay. I've never heard of anyone harvesting wheat for hay.

Not exactly. When a crop has gone to seed that means the grains are dropping from the plant to be seeds.

Nope. That's not what it means. Some plants are harvested for their leaves or stalks, which are not usable or are not desirable after the plant begins to produce seeds. Going to seed means that the plant has begun that process.
19
Corona Virus Disease 2019 / Re: Economic Impact of Corona Virus
« Last post by daniel1948 on Today at 11:39:34 AM »
Maybe we could start a special thread for CarbShark and John Albert to bitch at each other in?

;D

Sorry to derail the thread with coronavirus news but I thought this was nice.

The US city of Philadelphia will be giving away food to residents.

Quote
About the food sites:
  • Sites are open Mondays and Thursdays from 10 a.m. – 12 p.m.
  • Residents can pick up one box per household. Supplies will last up to five days.
  • Residents do not need to present an ID or proof of income for eligibility.
  • Food sites are supported by the City, Share Food Program, and Philabundance.
Quote
About the student meal sites:
  • 49 School District schools are open from 9 a.m – noon on Mondays and Thursdays. Each child will receive six meals.
  • Six Philadelphia Housing Authority community centers are open from 9 a.m. – noon every weekday. Each child will receive breakfast and lunch.
  • Several charter schools are also distributing meals. Times and days vary.
  • Any child is eligible at any site. No ID is required.
https://www.phila.gov/2020-03-28-where-to-find-free-nutritious-food-during-covid-19/

No hoops or means-testing.   You just show up and you're good. 

This was how we operated at the homeless shelter I worked at back in North Dakota: Every evening from 7:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m. we gave out food baskets (actually paper bags if anyone wants to be pedantic). Due to high demand and limited availability, we limited people to once a month. We did not ask any questions except their name (which we did not verify) and we kept a card file with the names and checked that to "enforce" the once-a-month rule. We didn't believe in means testing. We felt that if they asked, they needed the help. We also served breakfast and supper seven days a week to anybody who showed up, no questions asked and you could come every day if you wanted. But that would probably not work now, with the bans on restaurants, since a soup kitchen is basically a free restaurant.

I wonder what's happening now with the homeless people who are dependent for meals on soup kitchens. We were the smallest of five homeless shelters in the combined towns of Fargo-Moorhead and one time when I was washing the dishes I counted 70 plates. Normally we served maybe 25 to 40 people at supper. There must have been several hundred meals served at all the shelters combined on an average day and more on extreme days. That was in a small city. In a big city there must be thousands of people dependent for food on soup kitchens. Some of those people were not homeless, just out of food. Others had neither food nor any place to prepare food.
20
Forum Games / Re: Visual Counting
« Last post by DevoutCatalyst on Today at 11:35:10 AM »
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 10