Chronology Current Month Current Thread Current Date
[Year List] [Month List (current year)] [Date Index] [Thread Index] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Prev] [Date Next]

Re: [Phys-L] covid modeling





On 2020/Mar/31, at 00:41, John Denker via Phys-l <phys-l@mail.phys-l.org> wrote:


HOWEVER, the data on /deaths/ is more meaningful.


Yup, unless there’s some serious fraud, it’s valid. vide Russia. (many deaths are cloaked as pneumonia; lost reference, sorry)


WHO, as I’ve pointed out, caused a large jump when it included symptomatic in addition to tested data. No jump in deaths, duh!

Unfortunately, I’ve not found any WHO data for country subdivisions except China's, which is of much less interest.


There are reports of Twerp like behavior, e.g. Facebook “takes down” Bolsonaro posts as harmful.

https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-52106321


bc will now read JD. And thinks covid response is paradigmatic of political behaviour.

On 2020/Mar/31, at 00:41, John Denker via Phys-l <phys-l@mail.phys-l.org> wrote:

I put up some of my models of the covid outbreak:
https://www.av8n.com/pandemic/model-discussion.html

Perhaps the most interesting point I'd like to make is
that the data on "confirmed" cases is limited by the
availability of testing or the lack thereof. You can
analyze it all you want and it will just tell you about
the testing, not about the actual disease.

HOWEVER, the data on /deaths/ is more meaningful. You
can work backwards from that, making some assumptions
about the latency and the case fatality rate, and then
infer the /actual/ number of cases. It exceeds the
number of "confirmed" cases by more than an order of
magnitude.

It's too late to prevent some seriously bad things
from happening.

https://www.av8n.com/pandemic/model-discussion.html
_______________________________________________
Forum for Physics Educators
Phys-l@mail.phys-l.org
http://www.phys-l.org/mailman/listinfo/phys-l