I love to see these kinds of "charts" posted on Facebook and elsewhere:
So let's take a look in detail.
First off, "Denver" never has had 7,000,000 plus people (that's 70 x 100,000).
April 2020 there's around 700,000 in the actual city, 2,700,000 in the metro area.
In 1918 perhaps 256,000 according to https://www.biggestuscities.com/city/denver-colorado.
Good thing the people at the cited "Washington Post" are good reporters...
But no matter.
On to the next point...
So clearly the "Effect of first interventions" set things in motion to save a lot of people, right?
That's what this picture shows, right. What would have happened to save everyone if the "interventions" were left in place.
We would expect this had the "interventions removed" not happened:
The blue line shows things end quickly...
Right?
But they don't.
Why not?
Because the disease progresses regardless of where it starts (as shown after the "interventions removed" removed point). The virus replicates from even one single host, or a single disease carrying reservoir.
It only case about possible hosts who can allow it reproduce.
Artificially delay it's spread and those hosts remain available to the disease.
After all the chart shows it starts with the "first case" - so we know what happens once it shows up in once person. And this will just happen again and again until the supply of acceptable hosts either die or become immune.
Social distancing merely delays the inevitable (clearly documented by scientists here: https://lwgat.blogspot.com/2020/04/coronavirus-no-benefit-to-delaying.html).
IT DOES NOT REMOVE THE AVAILABLE HOSTS.
So unless everyone is quarantined to the point where no more carriers exist (everyone that could be a carrier dies), we will get the giant mountain of disease again, and again, and again.
Sure, you can say - look social distancing has saved our hospitals - but now no one is there because they are afraid and so the hospital will go out of business.
(We don't know what we are doing.)
So while we could apply "interventions" and things might settle down they will always, suddenly, shoot up again killing more people.
Now imagine instead that nothing is done:
Things rise to the same, natural limit as occurred after the "interventions removed" and then taper of as history shows (green line).
Notice, though, cases end sooner and the large yellow block of "disease" never happens.
Impossible you say.
But the post "interventions removed" shows exactly what the disease does when stalled before running its course, it doesn't do not what you think it would do or what this stupid chart pretends to show.
It's like water, it finds its level regardless as long as there are potential hosts.
It doesn't care if you are sick or not.
(Nothing in reality can stop something on the scale of a virus, even an N95 mask lets 5% through.)
We don't have to guess what it will do.
So a diagram like the one at the top is very misleading.
It reflects what we want to believe and hope for, not what is actually going to happen.
More people die if we "intervene" and don't keep everyone in quarantine until there is no more possible sources.
(Can we protect people, sure, for a while, but all we really do is delay things.)
Since we live in a global world someone, somewhere will show up sick and kill everyone.
So, indeed, you are ignorant and this image at the top is ignorant of science.
Yes, it seems counter-intuitive, but it's science and if you understood it you wouldn't believe in the fairytale of the initial picture.
Next we say "those bumps in the numbers of infections" reflect the protests yesterday or the day before. See how stupid those protestors are...
There is at least five days of incubation before symptoms appear (see https://annals.org/aim/fullarticle/2762808/incubation-period-coronavirus-disease-2019-covid-19-from-publicly-reported). These won't show up for some time, and then only if the people involved get tested.
You are seeing other artifacts such as the states manipulating death counts.
So indeed, you are ignorant.
You are misleading others.
The "death" rate is the dead divided by the reported cases: 1,000 "confirmed" cases, 100 death, a 10% death rate...
Right?
Wrong. We need to understand the total number of cases to calculate a "death rate." We don't know this and we are finding out more every day (see https://www.cnbc.com/2020/04/20/coronavirus-antibody-testing-shows-la-county-outbreak-is-up-to-55-times-bigger-than-reported-cases.html).
What you call the "death rate" is the number of serious cases that actually die.
This is always large, even for influenza.
But it also includes other factors such as treatment in a hospital (remember, doctors kill about 700 people in the US per day).
If 4% of LA county has this disease the death rate is not 1% or 5%. It's more like .1% or the same as a bad flu.
We we only now have a test for the general population. If there are this many in LA how many asymptomatic cases exist in the Northeast?
So indeed, you are ignorant.
Finally, if 4% of LA county has this flu you will get it.
Why?
Because it's pervasive in the US. These people in LA, even if that's the only place it was, will spread it all over. It's already on trucks, in stores, shipped to amazon, on planes.
Tens of thousands have it. They drive, they travel, it's spreading...
It's too late.
This cat is out of the bag and it's not going back in.
It will spread and you will get it eventually.
All this "distancing" is simply delaying the inevitable.
Your ignorance will kill you and others.
It will make others believe in fairytales that won't come true.
So let's take a look in detail.
First off, "Denver" never has had 7,000,000 plus people (that's 70 x 100,000).
April 2020 there's around 700,000 in the actual city, 2,700,000 in the metro area.
In 1918 perhaps 256,000 according to https://www.biggestuscities.com/city/denver-colorado.
Good thing the people at the cited "Washington Post" are good reporters...
But no matter.
On to the next point...
So clearly the "Effect of first interventions" set things in motion to save a lot of people, right?
That's what this picture shows, right. What would have happened to save everyone if the "interventions" were left in place.
We would expect this had the "interventions removed" not happened:
The blue line shows things end quickly...
Right?
But they don't.
Why not?
Because the disease progresses regardless of where it starts (as shown after the "interventions removed" removed point). The virus replicates from even one single host, or a single disease carrying reservoir.
It only case about possible hosts who can allow it reproduce.
Artificially delay it's spread and those hosts remain available to the disease.
After all the chart shows it starts with the "first case" - so we know what happens once it shows up in once person. And this will just happen again and again until the supply of acceptable hosts either die or become immune.
Social distancing merely delays the inevitable (clearly documented by scientists here: https://lwgat.blogspot.com/2020/04/coronavirus-no-benefit-to-delaying.html).
IT DOES NOT REMOVE THE AVAILABLE HOSTS.
So unless everyone is quarantined to the point where no more carriers exist (everyone that could be a carrier dies), we will get the giant mountain of disease again, and again, and again.
Sure, you can say - look social distancing has saved our hospitals - but now no one is there because they are afraid and so the hospital will go out of business.
(We don't know what we are doing.)
So while we could apply "interventions" and things might settle down they will always, suddenly, shoot up again killing more people.
Now imagine instead that nothing is done:
Things rise to the same, natural limit as occurred after the "interventions removed" and then taper of as history shows (green line).
Notice, though, cases end sooner and the large yellow block of "disease" never happens.
Impossible you say.
But the post "interventions removed" shows exactly what the disease does when stalled before running its course, it doesn't do not what you think it would do or what this stupid chart pretends to show.
It's like water, it finds its level regardless as long as there are potential hosts.
It doesn't care if you are sick or not.
(Nothing in reality can stop something on the scale of a virus, even an N95 mask lets 5% through.)
We don't have to guess what it will do.
So a diagram like the one at the top is very misleading.
It reflects what we want to believe and hope for, not what is actually going to happen.
More people die if we "intervene" and don't keep everyone in quarantine until there is no more possible sources.
(Can we protect people, sure, for a while, but all we really do is delay things.)
Since we live in a global world someone, somewhere will show up sick and kill everyone.
So, indeed, you are ignorant and this image at the top is ignorant of science.
Yes, it seems counter-intuitive, but it's science and if you understood it you wouldn't believe in the fairytale of the initial picture.
Next we say "those bumps in the numbers of infections" reflect the protests yesterday or the day before. See how stupid those protestors are...
There is at least five days of incubation before symptoms appear (see https://annals.org/aim/fullarticle/2762808/incubation-period-coronavirus-disease-2019-covid-19-from-publicly-reported). These won't show up for some time, and then only if the people involved get tested.
You are seeing other artifacts such as the states manipulating death counts.
So indeed, you are ignorant.
You are misleading others.
The "death" rate is the dead divided by the reported cases: 1,000 "confirmed" cases, 100 death, a 10% death rate...
Right?
Wrong. We need to understand the total number of cases to calculate a "death rate." We don't know this and we are finding out more every day (see https://www.cnbc.com/2020/04/20/coronavirus-antibody-testing-shows-la-county-outbreak-is-up-to-55-times-bigger-than-reported-cases.html).
What you call the "death rate" is the number of serious cases that actually die.
This is always large, even for influenza.
But it also includes other factors such as treatment in a hospital (remember, doctors kill about 700 people in the US per day).
If 4% of LA county has this disease the death rate is not 1% or 5%. It's more like .1% or the same as a bad flu.
We we only now have a test for the general population. If there are this many in LA how many asymptomatic cases exist in the Northeast?
So indeed, you are ignorant.
Finally, if 4% of LA county has this flu you will get it.
Why?
Because it's pervasive in the US. These people in LA, even if that's the only place it was, will spread it all over. It's already on trucks, in stores, shipped to amazon, on planes.
Tens of thousands have it. They drive, they travel, it's spreading...
It's too late.
This cat is out of the bag and it's not going back in.
It will spread and you will get it eventually.
All this "distancing" is simply delaying the inevitable.
Your ignorance will kill you and others.
It will make others believe in fairytales that won't come true.
No comments:
Post a Comment