Yes anecdotally 20-25% seems impossible, even if everyone under 18 wasn’t susceptible (which isn’t true).
COVID-19 Pandemic: Transmissions, Deaths, Treatments, Vaccines, Interventions and More...
- Thread starter RU848789
- Start date
- Status
175 Biogen execs were exposed for two full days, how many tested positive? Not how many cases resulted from it, as each exec went home and spread to family, coworkers and friends.
His term "dark matter" is only used as an analogy meaning we see that some are immune but we have not figured out yet why?
Yeh ok 125k are dead in the U.S. precisely because of Trump.....what a moronic statement. Show your work Mika.
Geez I'm looking at AZ dashboard and they are still adjusting daily hospitalization counts three weeks back. Makes me wonder how effective having the testing as planned in late Jan/Feb would have been. No doubt it was needed and would have helped, but even that data would be materially outdated by the time decision-makers had it in determining appropriate actions.
23 - if interested, take a look through my two posts from this weekend on this and a third, which has the source to the initial work on this - been talking for a couple of months now about the potential for "cross-reactivity" in the population, i.e., people having some level of immunity to disease A (coronavirus) due to exposure to some other virus (other coronaviruses for example) in the past. Probably 50% of unexposed people have T-cell activity against CV2, despite not having measurable antibodies, based on experiments with small groups of subjects. It's unknown whether this confers none, a little or a lot of immunity for these people, but if it's a lot, that's huge and could provide the scientific underpinnings to the probabilistic modeling Friston has done, which has some holes, as per my 2nd post, linked below. He could be right, but it's far from a given.
This is the link to the article that wisr (one really should cite sources for long quotations, both to help the reader and to protect the site) quotes in his post: https://unherd.com/2020/06/karl-friston-up-to-80-not-even-susceptible-to-covid-19/
https://rutgers.forums.rivals.com/t...entions-and-more.191275/page-215#post-4620781
https://rutgers.forums.rivals.com/t...entions-and-more.191275/page-216#post-4620885
https://rutgers.forums.rivals.com/t...entions-and-more.191275/page-116#post-4563258
Cases are up slightly and tied to reopening bars...
https://www.minnpost.com/health/202...ased-new-cases-some-cases-tied-to-bar-visits/
I have doubts about Friston's speculation of 20%, but from looking at the spread in locations that were hard and early I would not be surprised if that number was between 30 and 50%. London has reopened schools and some shops for the month of June. So although it is not business as usual, it is not locked down. They have just under 600 total cases in London between 6/5 and today...averaging around 20-25 per day. That is in a city of 9million.
Fascinating, thank you so much, and to wisr as well.
As I said back in May, when cross-reactivity was discovered, answering the question of what it means at a population scale for potential immunity (either not getting infected or at worst having mild cases) and who might and might not get infected is possibly the biggest scientific question we have right now, since if only 20-25% will ever be impacted vs. 55-80% (if the herd immunity estimates most believe in are correct), that's a ginormous difference in potential deaths/serious illnesses. At 20%, we're talking 330-660K US deaths, eventually, assuming an infection fatality rate of 0.5-1.0% (which is a pretty solid number now that we have antibody-population testing), while at 60% infected, it's 990-1980K US deaths eventually (assuming no interventions to reduce spread or any cure/vaccine/virus weakening - which are all unrealistic, but we're talking potential worst case). It's just huge. I wish I knew the answer.
Hope not--this thread is very informative for the most part, sometimes it's iron sharpening iron :Sly:... but not out-of-control. Ignorant political cheap shots like 4real's are relatively far and few between, but no reason to be ignored if the mods allow them in the first place.
Morons say moronic things.
Whoever said I have on ignore, which nutjob I wonder.
Ah, G4 , right in time before the election.
How convenient, no wonder why CNN and the NYT are pushing this.
How convenient, no wonder why CNN and the NYT are pushing this.
I didn't miss what he was trying to suggest. I'm just not a believer of it.I think you missed the whole point of what Friston's model suggests. We will use London as an example. London has slowly begun reopening since last month. Effective June 1st schools opened and some shops, etc. I understand it has been a partial reopening but happening nonetheless. Antibody testing has shown that 17% of Londoners have had the disease by May 22nd. Friston's model suggests that roughly 20-25% of people are actually susceptible meaning that they are approaching herd immunity in the susceptible population.
What have we seen as they slowly reopen?
Either you want to believe that they are incredible at social distancing/mask wearing and have avoided a spike or you can be open to the POSSIBILITY that there susceptible population has been reduced to the point where the virus is struggling to spread. I guess time will tell.
When I first read his thoughts and suggestions based on his model, I thought yeah right. But the data we have seen in London, NYC, NJ, etc seem to agree. If we reopen and things spike like Florida then he is wrong. But if not and he is right then we are not handling things correctly in areas already burned up by the virus.
I'm a much bigger believer in masks and outdoor activities. Moreso the former.
I suspect scenes like we saw from the outdoor bars in NJ will cause a jump. Maybe the outdoor aspect keeps the #'s down but If we open indoor bars prior to a vaccine, I would certainly expect a jump.
The curves are now showing what many figured would be the case. Cases go up, hospitalizations follow soon after, and deaths follow soon after that.
So that debate should be settled.
What to look for now is, can the hospital systems, thanks to new treatments, and thanks to catching cases earlier,(and maybe the weakening of the virus or the lowering of viral load) stand up to the growing case #'s? And can they keep the death #'s to an acceptable level?
So that debate should be settled.
What to look for now is, can the hospital systems, thanks to new treatments, and thanks to catching cases earlier,(and maybe the weakening of the virus or the lowering of viral load) stand up to the growing case #'s? And can they keep the death #'s to an acceptable level?
I would guess that asking anyone if they rioted or protested would be considered politically incorrect re: tracing, and I have my doubts a person would volunteer that information. So yeh, agreed this news report should be taken with a grain of salt.
Don't know if this has been mentioned already or not but talking about NYC infection rates etc....from Scott Gottlieb on CNBC.
From the article:
About 25% of New York City-area residents have probably been infected with the coronavirus by now, former Food and Drug Administration Commissioner Dr. Scott Gottlieb told CNBC on Tuesday.
Researchers at the Mount Sinai Health System in New York City published a study Monday, which suggested that 19.3% of people in the city had already been exposed to the virus through April 19.
Even if that many people have Covid-19 antibodies in New York City, the initial epicenter of the U.S. outbreak, the researchers noted that would still be well below the estimated 67% needed to achieve herd immunity — which is necessary to give the general public broad protection from the virus. The study has not yet been peer-reviewed nor accepted by an official medical journal for publication.
Based on their findings, the researchers concluded that about 0.7% of everyone infected with the virus in New York City died due to Covid-19.
However, Gottlieb said the infection-fatality rate, which factors in asymptomatic patients who never develop symptoms, has likely risen since mid-April.
The infection-fatality rate is likely lower than the case-fatality rate, which looks at the percent of people who have symptoms and end up dying. Gottlieb said the case-fatality rate might be closer to 1.1% or 1.2%.
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/06/30/rou...-with-coronavirus-dr-scott-gottlieb-says.html
From the article:
About 25% of New York City-area residents have probably been infected with the coronavirus by now, former Food and Drug Administration Commissioner Dr. Scott Gottlieb told CNBC on Tuesday.
Researchers at the Mount Sinai Health System in New York City published a study Monday, which suggested that 19.3% of people in the city had already been exposed to the virus through April 19.
Even if that many people have Covid-19 antibodies in New York City, the initial epicenter of the U.S. outbreak, the researchers noted that would still be well below the estimated 67% needed to achieve herd immunity — which is necessary to give the general public broad protection from the virus. The study has not yet been peer-reviewed nor accepted by an official medical journal for publication.
Based on their findings, the researchers concluded that about 0.7% of everyone infected with the virus in New York City died due to Covid-19.
However, Gottlieb said the infection-fatality rate, which factors in asymptomatic patients who never develop symptoms, has likely risen since mid-April.
The infection-fatality rate is likely lower than the case-fatality rate, which looks at the percent of people who have symptoms and end up dying. Gottlieb said the case-fatality rate might be closer to 1.1% or 1.2%.
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/06/30/rou...-with-coronavirus-dr-scott-gottlieb-says.html
Can anyone tell me how Rt can be rising if our daily cases have been consistently fluctuating between 300 and 400 for the past two weeks? According to 91-Divoc which sources data from Johns Hopkins, NJ's 7 day moving average of cases has declined from 404 17 days ago to 265 yesterday. How can we be reducing daily cases if Rt is rising?
My supposition is that daily positive cases will decline until Rt is =1, so if the trends of increasing Rt and decreasing daily cases continue, we will bottom out around 200-225 daily positive cases, and then start to increase again if we rise above Rt=1? If that's the case, then do I understand it that Rt is a rate of change, and it's a slowing of the decrease that is visibly manifest?
My supposition is that daily positive cases will decline until Rt is =1, so if the trends of increasing Rt and decreasing daily cases continue, we will bottom out around 200-225 daily positive cases, and then start to increase again if we rise above Rt=1? If that's the case, then do I understand it that Rt is a rate of change, and it's a slowing of the decrease that is visibly manifest?
Yes, good paper. I actually communicated with one of the authors about how it was good to see alignment with the NYDOH data from back in late April (when the Mt. Sinai study was done). I also suggested that they might want to consider mentioning the ~4000 presumptive NYC deaths at that time (4/19, when there were 11,413 "official" deaths), as that would move the infection fatality rate to about 1% (as of 4/19), as most of those presumptive died in the hospital and were obvious COVID patients, but had no test - in part, because they knew they had COVID and taking the swabs actually endangers the nurses unnecessarily. They also only listed the stay at home order as being on 3/22, but I pointed out that NYC was effectively shut by 3/16 (schools/bars/restaurants and many commuting jobs). He said he'd likely put those comments in the final version.
I also think Gottleib may have been misquoted in saying the CFR might be closer to 1.1-1.2% (think he meant IFR). The CFR right now in NY is 7.6% (Worldometers), 8.1% (JHU) or 6.0% (NYDOH), with the variability being due mostly to the now ~6000 presumptive deaths, which WM/JHU "count" while the NYDOH does not (but they track it). Regardless, all of those are a far cry from 1.1-1.2%, which is what the actual NY State IFR is, counting in the 6000 presumptives. Also, Gottleib's guess of 25% currently infected in NYC could also be a bit high, as the antibody testing from 6/13 by the NYDOH, was only 21.6% (and the DOH/Mt. Sinai #'s were close on 4/19).
Wanted to update this - @RU23 @wisr01 @rutgersguy1 - thought you'd be interested, so here goes. I mentioned some apparently clear exceptions to the 20-25% susceptible to being infected number Friston has been postulating (the Bronx and some small populations like in Lombardy with 40-50% with antibodies). Think I also mentioned prisons/meatpacking plants in some other post, but wanted to get back to that here.
It turns out that the Marion Ohio prison would be very hard to explain via Friston's model. Back in late April it was reported that 2000 of 2500 inmates (80%) tested positive for the coronavirus via viral PCR testing in the largest outbreak anywhere in the US. This clearly says 80% were infected, not 20-25%, although the asymptomatic fraction was 95%, which is very high, perhaps implying some native immunity.
However, here's the bottom line for me: out of those 2000, 13 died (12 inmates and one guard) for an infection fatality ratio of 0.65%, which is square in the middle of the 0.5-1.0% IFR range I've been predicting, as have many others. And itg's 0.65% of 80% infected, not of 20% infected. As per my post above, if only 20% are susceptible to infection (Friston's model) and the IFR is 0.5-1.0%, which is where it is now in NY, based on antibody testing, then 330-660K US deaths could occur eventually, whereas if 80% are susceptible (as appears the case at Marion) and the IFR is still 0.5-1.0% (as it was in Marion), then the US deaths could eventually be 1.32-2.64MM.
Huge difference. Is there something unique about Marion with regard to susceptibility (doubtful, other than R0 is going to be very high in a prison) or death rates (maybe - it's 100% male, 50% black, but the average age is 40 years old - also have no idea which people died - if I were an epidemiologist, I'd want to do a case study on this- could be a factor of 2-3X though, which could bring that IFR down to 0.2-0.3%) that would explain the data or is Friston's model simply wrong and the 55-80% getting infected, based on estimated herd immunity correct? As an aside, it would be interesting to follow these prisoners to see if they have immunity now and to check their antibodies over time. Food for thought, at least.
https://www.propublica.org/article/...00-inmates-it-had-over-2000-coronavirus-cases
https://www.themarshallproject.org/...-outbreaks-could-teach-us-about-herd-immunity
http://ciic.state.oh.us/docs/Marion Correctional Institution 2015.pdf
Last edited:
20% being susceptible really sounds like fairy tale stuff to my ears.
Why did spread stop in NYC? Because they locked it down. Because of masks. Simple as that.
Would this theory apply to the Flu? Or a cold? Or any other virus?
I remember being sick when I was young, but not sure if I ever had the flu. Then through 20 years of adult hood I never had the flu. Did this mean I had dark matter which kept me from getting the flu? Given I did eventually get the flu, obviously not.
That theory makes no sense to me.
Why did spread stop in NYC? Because they locked it down. Because of masks. Simple as that.
Would this theory apply to the Flu? Or a cold? Or any other virus?
I remember being sick when I was young, but not sure if I ever had the flu. Then through 20 years of adult hood I never had the flu. Did this mean I had dark matter which kept me from getting the flu? Given I did eventually get the flu, obviously not.
That theory makes no sense to me.
The "dark matter" is just a term, since Friston didn't have a scientific explanation - cross-reactivity is a possible scientific explanation for a good sized portion of people having native immunity. It's why we truly, truly need a scientific answer to this, but I've read it could take months and until then we'll all be wondering and bickering. I struggle with believing the 20-25% number based moreso on parts of the Bronx having 40+% infected, as that wasn't some "experiment" in the very close quarters of a prison.
We don’t know what dark matter is. We know it’s there because galaxies would not be held together without it. Like a “singularity”, a word that says we don’t know what it is.
So according to the CDC you can have a positive antibody if you had the common cold? How inaccurate is that. I had a cold in the last few months so I may test positive. Seems nobody has a clue about this yet.
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/testing/serology-overview.html
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/testing/serology-overview.html
what about deaths...our daily deaths continue to go down although some keep waiting for them to go up dramatically
also with the spikes i am seeing on the worldometer in certain states, no one can tell me that protests are not part of that. There I said and the media should be saying it too. If we are going to slam red state openings we cannot ignore protests that started a month ago and have had varying levels....there were gay pride rallies across the country over the past weekend that had plenty of pictures of maskless attendees
gov Murphy tweeted about if the measures save just one life then its worth it but omg how can he say that while encouraging those protests which of course there had to be spread, that is common sense, mask or no mask...and I am not making this poltical. Its about hypocrisy..
another thing i wonder about are college athletes who are able to work in gyms while the average person cannot..why...why are college athletes given a special privilege to do this and I am assuming professional athletes are able to use gyms in prep for upcoming seasons
gov Murphy tweeted about if the measures save just one life then its worth it but omg how can he say that while encouraging those protests which of course there had to be spread, that is common sense, mask or no mask...and I am not making this poltical. Its about hypocrisy..
another thing i wonder about are college athletes who are able to work in gyms while the average person cannot..why...why are college athletes given a special privilege to do this and I am assuming professional athletes are able to use gyms in prep for upcoming seasons
What?? That is not true for most antibody tests which are looking for a very specific antibody related to Covid 19. We all have antibodies of something.So according to the CDC you can have a positive antibody if you had the common cold? How inaccurate is that. I had a cold in the last few months so I may test positive. Seems nobody has a clue about this yet.
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/testing/serology-overview.html
The overall fatality trends in the country have come down because the states that were hit hard early have seen there deaths decrease significantly from untenable numbers, but that should not be seen as a sign that current case increases will not lead to an increase in deaths.
Check the deaths of states that have had recent spikes in cases, they are trending upward.
- Status
Similar threads
