jkcerda on 20/3/2020 at 15:53
I watch the walking dead, so I can picture it :p
lowenz on 20/3/2020 at 16:00
Quote Posted by zombe
Detected case count != real infection count. Especially early. Detection can only asymptotically approach the real count. Excessive testing will get it closer and closer but never actually reaching the true value.
You just had a lot of infected walking around without knowing they are infected.
Which is why i asked for testing stats for US a few moments ago. Without that, the case count stats etc are quite useless.
Question: what if what we call "asymptotics" are in reality the CHRONICALLY affected ones by the subclinical expression of the infection?
zombe on 20/3/2020 at 16:04
Quote Posted by lowenz
Question: what if what we call "asymptotics" are in reality the CHRONICALLY affected ones by the subclinic expression of the infection?
Sorry, my English fails there, i do not understand the question.
lowenz on 20/3/2020 at 16:13
Quote Posted by zombe
Sorry, my English fails there, i do not understand the question.
Pardon, a typo.
This scenario:
"Asymptomatics patients" = "Chronically affected patients with the subclinical expression of the infection"
Gryzemuis on 20/3/2020 at 16:14
Just for reference, these are the numbers from the overviews (of Lombardia, 10M people) that Lowenz posts here regularly:
Date: March 2 versus March 19 (17 days difference)
Infected: 1254 -> 19884 (15.9x)
Recovered: 139 -> 3778 (27.2x)
Dead: 38 -> 2168 (57x)
Hospitalized: 478 -> 7387 (15.5x)
Hospitalized in ICU: 127 -> 1006 (7.9x)
At home, in quarantine: 472 -> 5545 (11.7x)
Currently infected: 1077 -> 13938 (12.9x)
Total number of tests done: 7925 -> 52244 (6.6x)
zombe on 20/3/2020 at 16:24
Quote Posted by Gryzemuis
That's why I think 25M out of 40M infected in 8 weeks is not unrealistic. (When you start at 1000).
I got curious and did some maths.
Input: starting at 1000 infected. unchanging spread ratio of 1.25 (ie. your government and people completely refuse to do anything to stop it at every stage of the crisis - completely absurd, but lets go with it) - that number seems to hold true everywhere that has stable numbers to give and matches my own calculations (note: 1.25^3 ~= 2, ie. doubling every 3 days). population 40M. average sick time of ~10 days. cannot infect who is already infected, dead or recovered - exceptions assumed to be negligent.
Result: 25M can never be reached. not in 8 weeks, nor in 800 years. It caps at 20.4M in the middle of the last week out of 8 and starts to wane quickly after that.
All that is just what (my potentially broken) math says - the country would unfortunately collapse before that. In short, 1.25 is terrible from math only (which is unlikely to correctly translate to real world).
edit: oh, wait - i am referencing the wrong cell ... recalculating ...
Harvester on 20/3/2020 at 16:41
:mad: :eek: This type of crisis brings out the best in some people and simultaneously the worst in others.
zombe on 20/3/2020 at 17:15
Quote Posted by zombe
edit: oh, wait - i am referencing the wrong cell ... recalculating ...
And open office crashed - apparently pasting sheets is some kind of dangerous black magic. Was about to abandon it, but the backup was just barely fresh enough to try again ...
Wrong cell was: i was using current total case count instead of active cases for spread proxy. Ie, i was overestimating (won't make a difference early on, but obviously makes a big difference later).
New numbers for the insane scenario: the peak would be 17.4M sick in the middle of week 9.
