Maps, science, data & statistics tracking of COVID-19

[scowie]

What we see in the chart is panic... control and lockdown. Then, reopening... then, Memorial day holiday (surge), then 4th of July (big surge)... then 'zomg look at the numbers' (lower trend), then labor day (surge) plus schools start to open and here we are. If we didn't wear masks and social distance it would be exponentially worse and healthcare systems overrun (akin to NYC in the early days) Masks work. Social distancing works. Its science... even Zod believes.

Actually, the science says that masks don't work, even in the surgery: https://principia-scientific.com/unmasked-revealing-a-shocking-medical-truth/

 

[HTC]

Actually, the science says that masks don't work, even in the surgery: https://principia-scientific.com/unmasked-revealing-a-shocking-medical-truth/

I'd like to see studies where the doctors / nurses in the operating room had "the standard flu" and were NOT using masks, to see if those results still applied: pretty sure they would not.

Never heard of the studies of that link but it is non the less interesting to know.

 

[the54thvoid]

Marked LQ post (not deleted). The quoted article doesn't dicuss respiratory viral transmission - which doesn't help this debate at all. I may as well suggest nurses are prone to covid by being nurses, as opposed to the fact they are in contact with the virus. The site also has a claimed aim of attempting to consistently prove a negative hypothesis which means it is prone to err on a false assumption even where evidence tallies against the negative hypothesis. In other words, its a vehicle for one mans ego. Notably it has a conspiracy leaning agenda.

Principia Scientific International (PSI) - Bias and Credibility

CONSPIRACY-PSEUDOSCIENCE Sources in the Conspiracy-Pseudoscience category may publish unverifiable information that is not always supported by evidence.

mediabiasfactcheck.com

 

[lexluthermiester]

What? The USA has reached an all-time COVID daily-count high just this past week, at +80,000 cases / day.

The Third Wave of COVID-19 in the U.S. Is Officially Worse Than the First Two

As of Oct. 23, there was a weekly average of 21.2 infections per 100,000 residents in the U.S.

time.com

Not according to Johns Hopkins. Please review;

ArcGIS Dashboards

ArcGIS Dashboards

gisanddata.maps.arcgis.com

I trust them far more than most sources, including Time.

 

[Vayra86]

Lets look at the data when we didnt wear masks and what happened...there is one dataset... the start of the pandemic and where it was trending. The problem now isn't so much community spread as it is the small gatherings where people eschew use. Sturgis... blatant disregard was a part of the surge in recent weeks. Schools went back...all a part of it. You simply cannot disregard the FACT that masks work glossing over other reasons for the surge. It isnt the people in retail and in grocery stores where (in ohio) masks are mandatory. But unmasked situations, indoor eating, for one small example is a part of it.

But yeah... the problem is any health care system not being able to cope with a "f it all" no masks and THAT surge. Its that mentality that takes it from manageable to overwhelmed health systems and unnecessary deaths. Im certainly not condoning lockouts... we at least need to get these 'f all' anti maskers, herd immunity, college/youth to takes things a bit more seriously.

The data when we didn't wear masks isn't different from today at all. We're just better at determining what it means. Globally the numbers still go up, and they only went down when we locked down - not when we started using masks. Its really that simple. They help... and by doing so... they also do not, because they drag out a curve longer giving is an illusion somehow growth won't be exponential 'this time'... but it really still is. The R number drops a little bit, but it is still above 1 and we're still letting it slide.

"We need" is a BS approach that got us where we are now: nowhere. "We need" to lock down to be able to manage it and we're way past that point already, but still not in lockdown. You can wear twenty masks over your face, it won't stop any spread whatsoever, as the data shows. What we do have: rampant growth and uncontrollable policy of 'test and trace' that has never really worked... we used our summer time to sit back, go on holiday (many vital groups did and found themselves stuck in a hard place coming back, most notably the gov. testing facility medical staff, and school teachers) and not bring the curve and testing under complete control. So what happened next: Minister-President telling us 'we need to do better'... lmao. Just last week the King and family went on holiday to Greece... only to return a few days later because the shitstorm got out of control, obviously. People generally don't give a shit, because everyone really does care most about him/herself.

The new data we will get now, with the second wave, is going to be influenced by general fatigue among the masses: we're sick and tired of measures, healthcare personell is sick and tired (literally or mentally) of running the long shift in high stress environments, teachers are just simply not showing up to schools, and overall people start looking at each other '(note your own comment 'we need' - which is nothing other than a veiled 'you need to listen to me') to point the finger and tell them they're to blame for their prolonged misery. The next thought is 'Why would I still do it right?'

Thát is what will mark this winter season, mark my words and masks and all those other nonsensical half-measures are a big part of it. There wasn't a single virologist of name that recommended this prior to this crisis, but governments were still keen to ignore three quarters of all the other recommendations that scientists in the know díd give them. And they still ignore it, they still act on it way too slowly and they still cause the prolonged misery we're going into now.

I find myself repeating what I've said since the whole thing began: mass psychology is our greatest threat here.

I mean... : Mask
Yeah that's definitely not going wrong and that peak is definitely not sharper than it was when the crisis began... ?! Who are we fooling?

Not according to Johns Hopkins. Please review;

ArcGIS Dashboards

ArcGIS Dashboards

gisanddata.maps.arcgis.com

I trust them far more than most sources, including Time.

Please do review that... seems pretty accurate?

 

[lexluthermiester]

Please do review that... seems pretty accurate?

That depends on the stat you look at. For example;

Looking at the numbers from this perspective, the more accurate way of viewing such, it looks like it is holding steady. Information can be spin doctored a number of ways. But when we view the raw data in a form that excludes bias, we get a view of the real picture.

 

[EarthDog]

Do tell where there is bias in these values...

...and why that chart (Log) is more accurate than daily cases...and infection rates.

If cases are holding steady, why are hospital/icu cases going up? It's contrary to our government's current message...

 

[the54thvoid]

You've highlighted a logarithmic graph. I think you're pointing out the rate is not as steep, but if you look at the numbers on the Y Axis:

The scale in each box jumps from 1 to100 to 10,000 to 1,000,000

That next box is ten million. The whole purpose of a logarithmic scale is to deal with huge numbers. That is why the curve flattens out because the 'Y-axis' increases by one digit each time. What you've actually demonstrated is a massive jump in cases.

Here are the numbers based around each month. I've started in May to bring in the increased testing.

May - 1,141,000
June - 1,877,000 (64% monthly increase)
July - 2,789,000 (48% monthly increase)
August - 4,798,000 (72% monthly increase - OMG)
September - 6,293,000 (31% monthly increase - Phew!)

If Octobers numbers drop below 31%, you can hope there's a slowing. I think the August increase put the frighteners on a few states and some measures were taken?

However, let's not spin this any other way, the US isn't doing great at all. 225,000 deaths isn't a success. And FTR, this isn't about saying boo-sucks to the US, most countries are having a torrid time with Covid. Even in little old Scotland, our (relatively smaller) numbers are still climbing far too fast with a rise in hospital admissions and deaths.

 

[Vayra86]

Do tell where there is bias in these values...

...and why that chart (Log) is more accurate than daily cases...and infection rates.

If cases are holding steady, why are hospital/icu cases going up? It's contrary to our government's current message...

Hey, you need some true science to put your head in the sand indefinitely... Its just another example of what people the world over are truly doing. Twist the numbers a bit to make it look like all is well. We all do it, really... because we want to believe and hope tomorrow's going to get better.

But hope won't fix an R number below 1, and it won't fix numerous other global issues.

As I said...this is psychology at work.

 

[lexluthermiester]

You've highlighted a logarithmic graph. I think you're pointing out the rate is not as steep, but if you look at the numbers on the Y Axis:

View attachment 173374

The scale in each box jumps from 1 to100 to 10,000 to 1,000,000

That next box is ten million. The whole purpose of a logarithmic scale is to deal with huge numbers. That is why the curve flattens out because the 'Y-axis' increases by one digit each time. What you've actually demonstrated is a massive jump in cases.

Here are the numbers based around each month. I've started in May to bring in the increased testing.

May - 1,141,000
June - 1,877,000 (64% monthly increase)
July - 2,789,000 (48% monthly increase)
August - 4,798,000 (72% monthly increase - OMG)
September - 6,293,000 (31% monthly increase - Phew!)

If Octobers numbers drop below 31%, you can hope there's a slowing. I think the August increase put the frighteners on a few states and some measures were taken?

True, it's a logarithmic scale and such a scale shows orders of magnitude. That's my point, the big picture shows this is propagating as expected. I would expect the next unit of measure is 100million, not ten million.

There is nothing we can do but sit back and watch things unfold. The shutdowns and preventions didn't and are not working as much as was wished for. @Vayra86 pointed out above, masks are not as effective as some have suggested(though I disagree that they are useless).

However, let's not spin this any other way, the US isn't doing great at all. 225,000 deaths isn't a success. And FTR, this isn't about saying boo-sucks to the US, most countries are having a torrid time with Covid. Even in little old Scotland, our (relatively smaller) numbers are still climbing far too fast with a rise in hospital admissions and deaths.

Nor is this a competition. There is no success or failure in this pandemic, only the results and information about survival as well how the virus is spreading. At this time, we are in the same place humanity was in 1914: adapting to it's existence. There is no defeating this virus quickly. Even if a miracle vaccine came out tomorrow, it will still take years to administer it to everyone and even then the mutations/derivitives of the Covid19 virus will continue to afflict us. Regardless of how we look at the numbers on display from various sources the picture is clear, it is here to stay and we need to accept it, adapt to it and get on with life.

 

[Vayra86]

True it a logarithmic scale and such a scale shows orders of magnitude. That's my point, the big picture shows this is propagating as expected.I would expect the next unit of measure is 100million, not ten million.

There is nothing we can do but sit back and watch things unfold. The shutdowns and preventions didn't and are not working as much as was wished for. @Vayra86 pointed out above, masks are not as effective as some have suggested(though I disagree that they are useless).


Nor is this a competition. There is no success or failure in this pandemic, only the results and information about survival as well how the virus is spreading. At this time, we are in the same place humanity was in 1914: adapting to it's existence. There is no defeating this virus quickly. Even if a miracle vaccine came out tomorrow, it will still take years to administer it to everyone and even then the mutations/derivitives of the Covid19 virus will continue to afflict us. Regardless of how we look at the numbers on display from various sources the picture is clear, it is here to stay and we need to accept it, adapt to it and get on with life.

The summer months (June-July-Aug) actually did show a decline and that was the post-lockdown period. What's lost in the global numbers is how lockdowns were not effective everywhere at the same time and the moment one area flares up, another went down because Summer time isn't during the same period of the year everywhere either. Basically, if you see a net growth globally of near zero, that means your measures are effective, because you're also countering the increase of cases elsewhere then. The lockdowns also 'flattened the curve' which is effectively the same thing if you take a global number. The curve was flattened even globally.

This is the local / national effect of lockdowns:

Blue line is initiation of lockdown in the Netherlands. Graph shows number of people in hospital with COVID.

I think its pretty clear the Hammer works.

True it a logarithmic scale and such a scale shows orders of magnitude. That's my point, the big picture shows this is propagating as expected.I would expect the next unit of measure is 100million, not ten million.

There is nothing we can do but sit back and watch things unfold. The shutdowns and preventions didn't and are not working as much as was wished for. @Vayra86 pointed out above, masks are not as effective as some have suggested(though I disagree that they are useless).


Nor is this a competition. There is no success or failure in this pandemic, only the results and information about survival as well how the virus is spreading. At this time, we are in the same place humanity was in 1914: adapting to it's existence. There is no defeating this virus quickly. Even if a miracle vaccine came out tomorrow, it will still take years to administer it to everyone and even then the mutations/derivitives of the Covid19 virus will continue to afflict us. Regardless of how we look at the numbers on display from various sources the picture is clear, it is here to stay and we need to accept it, adapt to it and get on with life.

I can really only agree with part of your conclusion - the one where we concede you can't stop this at all. Running its course however... that is simply not an option. Society will grind to a halt as all sorts of vital services fall apart, and the resulting damage will be far greater than COVID spread and damage alone. The current experiment however isn't working out very well either, its taking too long to keep up the status quo. That's why I advocate using those hammers from time to time - and use them very early in the onset of a new curve. its easier to keep up, even if it damages economy in the short term. Short term is irrelevant, we can fix that - all we need for that fix is political will.

Note that what I'm saying about this is no different than what's the overwhelming consensus among virologists and epidemiologists. Its just not the noise you hear in the media too much, because numerous filters are applied on that harsh reality. Its not what people want to hear, and more importantly what governments and commerce wants to hear. They want to hear its going to be business as usual, for as much as possible, so they can sit back and not make hard choices. And that's what we generally prefer to hear as well, obviously. We like good news.

People can't deal with uncertainty and if they do, it leads to a massive trust issue. Lockdowns are clear and simple: don't go out for X weeks. Time is defined clearly instead of 'potentially indefinite'.

 

[lexluthermiester]

The summer months (June-July-Aug) actually did show a decline and that was the post-lockdown period. What's lost in the global numbers is how lockdowns were not effective everywhere at the same time and the moment one area flares up, another went down because Summer time isn't during the same period of the year everywhere either. Basically, if you see a net growth globally of near zero, that means your measures are effective, because you're also countering the increase of cases elsewhere then. The lockdowns also 'flattened the curve' which is effectively the same thing if you take a global number. The curve was flattened even globally.

This is the local / national effect of lockdowns:

View attachment 173377
Blue line is initiation of lockdown in the Netherlands. Graph shows number of people in hospital with COVID.

This is the problem with all the numbers being declared everywhere, there is so much valid context that seems to be contradictive when it is valid as an isolated metric. Compiling it all together is very difficult as the compiler has to use bias to select what is and is not a contributing factor to the overall resulting viewpoint.

 

[EarthDog]

True it a logarithmic scale and such a scale shows orders of magnitude. That's my point, the big picture shows this is propagating as expected.I would expect the next unit of measure is 100million, not ten million.

There is nothing we can do but sit back and watch things unfold. The shutdowns and preventions didn't and are not working as much as was wished for. @Vayra86 pointed out above, masks are not as effective as some have suggested(though I disagree that they are useless).


Nor is this a competition. There is no success or failure in this pandemic, only the results and information about survival as well how the virus is spreading. At this time, we are in the same place humanity was in 1914: adapting to it's existence. There is no defeating this virus quickly. Even if a miracle vaccine came out tomorrow, it will still take years to administer it to everyone and even then the mutations/derivitives of the Covid19 virus will continue to afflict us. Regardless of how we look at the numbers on display from various sources the picture is clear, it is here to stay and we need to accept it, adapt to it and get on with life.

What about the bias you mention in these values? Can you explain how a log isn't bias but the actual numbers are? Before you answer, do know that both charts are based on the same data (ArcGIS you linked). So if there is bias in one chart, it would have to be in the log too, right? I wouldn't call it bias...I would say the interpretation (by users) is bias spinning data into their narrative (like the log chart for flattening the curve when it seems obvious why that is - see 54th's post).

There is success and failure in the handling of this virus. It's all around you in the data. Most any metric we've failed as a country in our response. To say otherwise is shocking to me considering the information available to us.

This is the problem with all the numbers being declared everywhere, there is so much valid context that seems to be contradictive when it is valid as an isolated metric. Compiling it all together is very difficult as the compiler has to use bias to select what is and is not a contributing factor to the overall resulting viewpoint.

Such as.......? What values are bias and what aren't? I don't get what you are saying here... data is data. We need a lot of it to form the most accurate big picture we can. I see bias(or lack of knowledge) in personal interpretation, not the data.

 

[lexluthermiester]

Before you answer, do know that both charts are based on the same data.

Really? Do you think so? That never occurred to me....

There is success and failure in the handling of this virus.

That would assume intent. A virus has no intelligence and therefore can not have intent. As such, there is no success or defeat. There is only survival and death. Let us not confuse those concepts.

Most any metric we've failed as a country in our response. To say otherwise is shocking to me considering the information available to us.

The "success" or "failure" of how we humans handle the virus is extremely subjective. You suggest that we as a nation should have been prepared for something we've never before encountered on such a massive scale. You suggest to hold accountability where none can exist. The whole world was caught off guard by this virus and we all have reacted the same way: the best we could given the information we had at each moment along the way. For a declaration of "Success" or "Failure" one must play the blame game, we need none of that here.

 

[EarthDog]

Really? Do you think so? That never occurred to me....

Judging by your sarcasm(?), seems like it did. So... how is one chart showing bias while the other using the same data isn't? Are you able and willing to answer this question (3rd time I've asked). Show us the light if we're missing it. Just dropping a bang snap of a 'this is bias' and walking won't cut it. Tired if this MO of rarely answering direct questions.

That would assume intent. A virus has no intelligence and therefore can not have intent. As such, there is no success or defeat. There is only survival and death. Let us not confuse those concepts.

The "success" or "failure" of how we humans handle the virus is extremely subjective. You suggest that we as a nation should have been prepared for something we've never before encountered on such a massive scale. You suggest to hold accountability where none can exist. The whole world was caught off guard by this virus and we all have reacted the same way: the best we could given the information we had at each moment along the way. For a declaration of "Success" or "Failure" one must play the blame game, we need none of that here.

Assumes intent? Intent for what?
Accountability? What?
While the measure of success is subjective It is quite clear that some countries handled this/is handling better than others. Blame has nothing to do with it. I couldn't care less who was in charge... the response is the response and it is (lol, should be) apolitical.

Success or failure is dependent on the result, not whodunit/blame. Going by most available metrics, few would call the US response a success or positive. In fact, only the current government is saying such a thing (most of them, there is some dissention, more as time goes on).

Hey, you need some true science to put your head in the sand indefinitely... Its just another example of what people the world over are truly doing. Twist the numbers a bit to make it look like all is well. We all do it, really... because we want to believe and hope tomorrow's going to get better.

But hope won't fix an R number below 1, and it won't fix numerous other global issues.

As I said...this is psychology at work.

That's the problem, isn't it.. Look at what is going on here...

In the case of this thread someone is telling us that the data is good for their chart, but charts based on the same data isn't. If that isn't putting your head in the sand, I don't know what is.

 

[Vayra86]

Judging by your sarcasm(?), seems like it did. So... how is one chart showing bias while the other using the same data isn't? Are you able and willing to answer this question (3rd time I've asked). Show us the light if we're missing it. Just dropping a bang snap of a 'this is bias' and walking won't cut it. Tired if this MO of rarely answering direct questions.
Assumes intent? Intent for what?
Accountability? What?
While the measure of success is subjective It is quite clear that some countries handled this/is handling better than others. Blame has nothing to do with it. I couldn't care less who was in charge... the response is the response and it is (lol, should be) apolitical.

Success or failure is dependent on the result, not whodunit/blame. Going by most available metrics, few would call the US response a success or positive. In fact, only the current government is saying such a thing (most of them, there is some dissention, more as time goes on).

In lex's defense... what I'm getting out of it is that he acknowledges (correctly, IMO) that you can't stop this thing no matter what you do. That all the different measures have 'some' impact but it won't stop the general tide of growth, and that for him is 'business as usual' when it comes to the virus. A log scale showing growth is 'expected'. And I agree on that part, really, as should everyone. We need to stop believing in fairy tales. Success has only been local, and temporary., so far. In the long run, it really does remain to be seen what was more successful than something else.

Locking down for example also has its side effects and those will only show up in the long run, we don't have that data yet. In five years time we might draw a different conclusion on what consitutes 'success'.

 

[the54thvoid]

This is getting a bit circular. Does someone have a picture of a cat in a medical smock to lighten the mood?

 

[Vayra86]

This is getting a bit circular. Does someone have a picture of a cat in a medical smock to lighten the mood?

Of course and you're right, I think we've managed to get our ideas across.

meow

@lexluthermiester that poor cat. At least I left the animal cruelty out of it

 

[EarthDog]

In lex's defense... what I'm getting out of it is that he acknowledges (correctly, IMO) that you can't stop this thing no matter what you do.

That's a point..........nobody contended. Can we turn the kicker around to face the right goal?

I want to interpret the data right too. But it's hard when the opposing viewpoint doesn't answer the questions asked. I asked how the chart is good for the goose but not the gander? How is it bias? That hasn't remotely been answered.

This is getting a bit circular.

I digress...

 

[lexluthermiester]

Tired if this MO of rarely answering direct questions.

Hmm..

Going by most available metrics, few would call the US response a success or positive.

Then by the same metric, no one in the world can claim any level of success.

In lex's defense... what I'm getting out of it is that he acknowledges (correctly, IMO) that you can't stop this thing no matter what you do. That all the different measures have 'some' impact but it won't stop the general tide of growth, and that for him is 'business as usual' when it comes to the virus. A log scale showing growth is 'expected'. And I agree on that part, really, as should everyone. We need to stop believing in fairy tales. Success has only been local, and temporary., so far. In the long run, it really does remain to be seen what was more successful than something else.

Locking down for example also has its side effects and those will only show up in the long run, we don't have that data yet. In five years time we might draw a different conclusion on what constitutes 'success'.

Exactly.

This is getting a bit circular. Does someone have a picture of a cat in a medical smock to lighten the mood?

Wish granted!

 

[EarthDog]

Still doesn't answer the bias question...posts pics of cats instead? Yikes.

Then by the same metric, no one in the world can claim any level of success.

You're kidding, right? Wow.

 

[lexluthermiester]

Still doesn't answer the bias question...posts pics of cats instead? Yikes.

You're kidding, right? Wow.

No, not kidding. I'm not answering your challenge for two main reasons, the first is that I don't wish to spend the next 3 hours typing out a dissertation that(second) you will likely do nothing but nitpick it apart for the sake of argument alone, which is what I have come to expect from you. You can either work out the logic and reason of what I said on your own or you can continue on your merry... Your choice. Nothing personal of course, just not an effort I'm willing to make.

 

[Vayra86]

Success or failure is dependent on the result, not whodunit/blame. Going by most available metrics, few would call the US response a success or positive. In fact, only the current government is saying such a thing (most of them, there is some dissention, more as time goes on).

That's the problem, isn't it.. Look at what is going on here...

In the case of this thread someone is telling us that the data is good for their chart, but charts based on the same data isn't. If that isn't putting your head in the sand, I don't know what is.

Can we say with certainty that we have a complete view on the results of current measures then? Are the actual effectiveness ratings of masks, distancing, and lockdowns measured, and are they measured correctly and honestly? Doubtful. We look at big numbers and we get trends out of it, at the very best. Some trends are very visible (such as post-lockdown R value decline and how that data trails measures by several weeks)

The only questionable thing about what he said in my view is the acknowledgment that it needs run its course and that somehow current measures still have some sort of effect. Those are countering one another really. If the measures are effective... why not use them, and if they make a dent, why isn't that success in our 'current' idea of what that should be?

Anyway. Circles, cat pictures... yep. I'm past worrying about how other people's brains work You can't ever win that.

 

[EarthDog]

No, not kidding. I'm not answering your challenge for two main reasons, the first is that I don't wish to spend the next 3 hours typing out a dissertation that(second) you will likely do nothing but nitpick it apart for the sake of argument alone, which is what I have come to expect from you. You can either work out the logic and reason of what I said on your own or you can continue on your merry... Your choice. Nothing personal of course, just not an effort I'm willing to make.

The turn of this to being personal is disappointing. While I understand this isn't the 'discussion' thread (and will leave it at this, staff), I can't do anything but SMFH at the lack of an explanation... with the reason not to even worse.

I'm not looking at how a brain works, just if someone says, "no that chart is hooey, this one is the real deal"... they should be able to and WILLING to support the assertion. Here it's just some words without merit... and all because he's afraid to have a discussion (calls it nitpicking). Another disappointment.

The only questionable thing about what he said in my view is the acknowledgment that it needs run its course and that somehow current measures still have some sort of effect. Those are countering one another really. If the measures are effective... why not use them, and if they make a dent, why isn't that success in our 'current' idea of what that should be?

This was explained already in one of my posts.

 

[lexluthermiester]

The turn of this to being personal is disappointing.

See PM.