The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
Miami-Dade: 6% Infection Rate, 0.17% Infection Fatality Rate (So Far)
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

From the Miami Herald:

Miami-Dade has tens of thousands of missed coronavirus infections, UM survey finds
BY BEN CONARCK AND DANIEL CHANG

APRIL 24, 2020

About 6 percent of Miami-Dade’s population — about 165,000 residents — have antibodies indicating a past infection by the novel coronavirus, dwarfing the state health department’s tally of about 10,600 cases, according to preliminary study results announced by University of Miami researchers Friday.

Miami-Dade county is up to 287 deaths in total today, giving a crude Infection Fatality Rate of 0.17% so far, much lower than the 0.9% seen in New York City in yesterday’s new serological results, but more in line with California results.

One way to explain the bafflingly heterogeneous results we are constantly being confronted with is to posit Viral BioDiversity: there could be different strains in different places. For example, VBD could potentially account for why there are so many more deaths per person with antibodies in New York City than in Miami: it could be that there’s a New York City variant that is more lethal than the variant prevalent in Miami.

One problem with this explanation is that it’s unfalsifiable. You can use it to explain away any anomaly, which might lead you to overlook something that you could do something about. For example, maybe New York City is doing something wrong that Miami is doing right, which would be useful to figure out.

The study, spurred by Miami-Dade County officials, will be an ongoing weekly survey based on antibody testing — randomly selecting county residents to volunteer pinpricks of their blood to be screened for signs of a past COVID-19 infection, whether they had tested positive for the virus in the past or not. …

Friday’s results, based on two weeks of countywide antibody testing and about 1,400 participants, found that about half of the people who tested positive for antibodies reported no symptoms in the 14-17 days before being tested. …

Gimenez said the UM survey of Miami-Dade reflects a national trend showing African Americans are disproportionately impacted by the novel coronavirus. “African Americans are more than twice as likely to be infected with COVID-19 than other racial groups,” he said.

The survey findings also indicate that Miami-Dade is far from the 60% or higher infection rate needed to reach herd immunity, when enough people are infected to stop the spread of the virus by slowing transmission. …

UM researchers used statistical methods to account for the limitations of the antibody test, which is known to generate some false positive results. The researchers say they are 95% certain that the true amount of infection lies between 4.4% and 7.9% of the population, with 6% representing the best estimate.

The results are similar but not identical to other serological surveys in California, but indicate far less infections than a recent survey in New York, which found a nearly 14% infection rate statewide and upwards of 20% in New York City. …

UM researchers say their findings are more robust than most because they used Florida Power & Light to generate phone numbers in targeted demographic areas, leading to a more randomized selection of participants.

On the other hand, scientists are only now starting to get a good handle on how many false positives and false negatives are generated by antibody tests. From the NYT today:

Coronavirus Antibody Tests: Can You Trust the Results?

A team of scientists worked around the clock to evaluate 14 antibody tests. A few worked as advertised. Most did not.

By Apoorva Mandavilli
April 24, 2020

… For the past few weeks, more than 50 scientists have been working diligently to do something that the Food and Drug Administration mostly has not: Verifying that 14 coronavirus antibody tests now on the market actually deliver accurate results.

Here’s the organization’s website and draft preprint.

These tests are crucial to reopening the economy, but public health experts have raised urgent concerns about their quality. The new research, completed just days ago and posted online Friday, confirmed some of those fears: Of the 14 tests, only three delivered consistently reliable results. Even the best had some flaws. …

In the new research, researchers found that only one of the tests never delivered a so-called false positive — that is, it never mistakenly signaled antibodies in people who did not have them.

Two other tests did not deliver false-positive results 99 percent of the time.

But the converse was not true. Even these three tests detected antibodies in infected people only 90 percent of the time, at best.

The false-positive metric is particularly important. The result may lead people to believe themselves immune to the virus when they are not, and to put themselves in danger by abandoning social distancing and other protective measures.

False positives are important when infection rates are in the single digits. Last week’s Stanford test found about 50 positives among 3300 tested individuals, or a raw percentage of 1.5%. On the other hand, the New York City 21% finding is less likely to be highly inflated by false positives.

… Other scientists were less sanguine than Dr. Marson. Four of the tests produced false-positive rates ranging from 11 percent to 16 percent; many of the rest hovered around 5 percent.

“Those numbers are just unacceptable,” said Scott Hensley, a microbiologist at the University of Pennsylvania. “The tone of the paper is, ‘Look how good the tests are.’ But I look at these data, and I don’t really see that.”

The proportion of people in the United States who have been exposed to the coronavirus is likely to be 5 percent or less, Dr. Hensley said. “If your kit has a 3 percent false-positive, how do you interpret that? It’s basically impossible,” he said. “If your kit has 14 percent false positive, it’s useless.” …

New tests also usually compete with an established gold standard. Lacking such a standard, the team instead compared all the tests in a “head-to-head bake-off to see who’s the winner,” Dr. Hsu said.

Each test was evaluated with the same set of blood samples: from 80 people known to be infected with the coronavirus, at different points after infection; 108 samples donated before the pandemic; and 52 samples from people who were positive for other viral infections but had tested negative for SARS-CoV-2.

Tests made by Sure Biotech and Wondfo Biotech, along with an in-house Elisa test, produced the fewest false positives.

A test made by Bioperfectus detected antibodies in 100 percent of the infected samples, but only after three weeks of infection. None of the tests did better than 80 percent until that time period, which was longer than expected, Dr. Hsu said.

The lesson is that the tests are less likely to produce false negatives the longer ago the initial infection occurred, he said.

The tests were particularly variable when looking for a transient antibody that comes up soon after infection, called IgM, and more consistent in identifying a subsequent antibody, called IgG, that may signal longer-term immunity.

“You can see that antibody levels rise at different points for every patient,” Dr. Hsu said. The tests performed best when the researchers assessed both types of antibodies together. None of the tests could say whether the presence of these antibodies means a person is protected from reinfection, however.

The results overall are promising, Dr. Marson added. “There are multiple tests that have specificities greater than 95 percent.” …

Dr. Krammer said false positives are less of an issue for assessing how widely the virus has spread in the population. If a test has a known false-positive rate, scientists can factor that into their calculations, he said.

Assuming you know the false positive and false negative rates.

But false positives become dangerous when making policy and personal decisions about who can go back to work. “You don’t want anybody back to work who has a false positive — that’s the last thing you want to do,” Dr. Krammer said.

Unfortunately, this article doesn’t mention which tests were used in the various results we are now getting in from around the world.

 
Hide 346 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. It looks like you shit your pants over this along with the entire establishment (so far). What a strange position to be in, for you.

    What is the point of being a contrarian on everything just to fall in line with the conventional wisdom when something important comes up?

    • Replies: @Alexander Turok
    When thinking for yourself is a foreign concept to you, when you base your beliefs either on "I want to agree with [tribe] or "I want to disagree with [tribe]," the behavior of those who do will appear strange and irrational.
    , @Lugash
    The point isn't to be a contrarian, the point is to know the truth and speak it. And to be reasonably prudent. We've had a Vietnam's worth of deaths up to this point with the harsh restrictions. What do you think it would be like without the restrictions? My guesstimate is a Civil War's worth.

    Sometimes the conventional wisdom is correct. Sometimes you share it with Rachel Maddow and Andrew Cuomo. That doesn't mean you always share it, or don't keep re-evaluating it... for example, I'm keeping the idea that NYC has a different strain than the rest of the country and that their infection rates won't transfer to the rest of the country due to lifestyle factors, so Cuomo and Maddow are falsely projecting their experience onto the rest of us.
    , @scrivener3
    I would say objectively that our host is consumed by this subject.

    It is not unexpected. Dostoevsky, when sentenced to death by the Czar and believing his life would soon end, said of his experience: that to have a six inch ledge on the side of a mountain and to have to live eternity on that six inch ledge, would be preferable to death.
    , @Mehen
    Word
    , @Anonymous
    It sounds like you know as little about Steve Sailer, the least contrarian writer on this website, as you do about coronavirus.
    , @Tlotsi
    This virus is boomer remover, and Sailer is a boomer. Like Nero, he can't imagine that the world can get along without him.
    , @Yancey Ward
    Here is the thing- if the data shows Sailer that he was wrong, then I fully expect him to admit it- I don't expect that from most intellectuals. This is why I read him every day, though I rarely comment here.
  2. I would guess people in California and Miami dade have better vitaminD levels in the late winter then New Yorkers.

    • Replies: @The Alarmist
    So Ron Desantis was a hero, not an evil creep, for dragging his feet on a lockdown and then supporting re-opening of the beaches. Has anyone on CNN or MSNBC mentioned Miami yet?
    , @Bill Jones
    Well since we know that all viruses are created equal, the superior performance of the New York virus must be due to Magic Dirt.

    The only alternative is the Anti-Asian bias of the xenophobic Miami natives refusing to have anything to do with the WuFlu.
  3. anon[286] • Disclaimer says:

    How reliable are those antibody tests? I’ve seen claims regarding the Heinsberg study in Germany and, iirc, also the Santa Clara study in California that many of those tests might give false results, because they also might show results for previous infections with other Coronaviruses which merely cause common colds.
    0,17 IFR? No way in hell I believe that.

    • Agree: Je Suis Omar Mateen
    • Replies: @GalenMD
    For antibody tests, they control for false positives using frozen blood that was drawn long before the outbreak began. The fatality numbers published in journals from the serological tests are conservative upper limits of the fatality rate. The scientists often make very soft conclusions so as not to shock the media/public/scientific community that we shut down the country over a nothing virus.

    Watch the numbers continue to drop to less than 0,1% in the coming weeks to months, especially in regions where they didn't label virtually every death as suspected COVID-19. Eventually, the IFR will converge to that of the seasonal flu, or perhaps even less than the flu (because flu kills a lot of healthy children every year whereas COVID spares the young and healthy -- and we often do not test for flu / put on death certificate because it does not change the management of the patient).

    , @Hypnotoad666
    It would be interesting to know something about the mechanisms that cause false positives.

    For example, is it just a quality control problem in individual test kits? Or is there some characteristic of certain patients' blood that is consistently measured incorrectly as an antibody?

    If it's the first problem you could just give multiple tests to people who get a positive result, and measure the consistency of the outcome.

    If it's the second problem, you could figure out what percentage of people have the particular blood characteristic that incorrectly measures as antibody positive. In either case, you could statistically account for the phenomenon.

    The other "problem" not discussed is the number of people that were able to fight off the virus without even needing to generate antibodies. I guess you'd have to expose a random sample of healthy people to the virus and measure the response to figure out how often that happens. Are researchers even allowed to do that kind of experiment with volunteers?
  4. 38,000 new infections today. If that’s the best we can do with a total lockdown what is the point? Let’s stipulate that only 80% of the population is strictly adhering to distancing guidelines. Even with that, shouldn’t there be a reduction in the new cases per day after 5 weeks? I get it, there’s more testing, but as far as I know the testing is for people who are symptomatic and not those who are healthy. What we are doing is postponing the enviable while destroying our economy. If the trade off was one for another, it might justified. Instead, we are destroying our way of life for a short postponement.

    • Replies: @hhsiii
    I like that. Never postpone the enviable.
  5. Anonymous[179] • Disclaimer says:

    I doubt very much such a low infection fatality rate. The number of dead is now 200,000. At that fatality rate, there should be over 120 million infected people Worlwide. That is a dozen times more than the reported infection rate.

    The preliminary tests that were done in Wuhan by the Chinese government, the most thorough so far, indicate a fatality rate for young healthy people without respiratory ilnesses like asthma and bronchitis of 0.5% and as high as 10% for men over age 80. The overall death rate from infection from this virus appears to be 2-4%. I would say that the overall mortality rate for this virus is definitely lower than 5% but probably higher than 1%

    • Troll: Manfred Arcane
    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    Hopefully, our medical care systems are doing better at treating this in late April than Wuhan did in January.
    , @Deckin
    Well an antibody + rate 15x the case rate is exactly what's been found already in Florida, San Francisco, New York, Delaware... It would seem that working backwards from what is collected evidence to then come up with a number one doesn't like because it sounds too high is maybe not the best procedure.

    Now take this 5-6% number and run it through Sweden's numbers so far (1500 or so dead) and then say they were either stupid or crazy or inhumanely cruel. It's hard to see how Miami could have a higher exposure/antibody rate than Sweden where, as of today, people are still eating in restaurants. Could Swedes be that natively more cold and distant than freaked out Floridians?
    , @ben tillman

    I doubt very much such a low infection fatality rate. The number of dead is now 200,000. At that fatality rate, there should be over 120 million infected people Worlwide. That is a dozen times more than the reported infection rate.
     
    It is absurd to think there are only 10 million infections worldwide.
  6. @Lowe
    It looks like you shit your pants over this along with the entire establishment (so far). What a strange position to be in, for you.

    What is the point of being a contrarian on everything just to fall in line with the conventional wisdom when something important comes up?

    When thinking for yourself is a foreign concept to you, when you base your beliefs either on “I want to agree with [tribe] or “I want to disagree with [tribe],” the behavior of those who do will appear strange and irrational.

    • Troll: Manfred Arcane
    • Replies: @Lowe
    "You should try thinking for yourself," says the guy whose opinion matches the consensus of goodthinkers and Model UN types everywhere.

    Isn't it strange how the more data comes out about this, the more wrong that consensus seems to be?
  7. Yeah, it’ll come out that we shit holed our economy for an epidemic that is less lethal than either the opiod or annual flu epidemic. I don’t get why SS joined the team on this one. There is a lot of statistical analysis required that is interesting. Maybe there is an opportunity to cash in on this if you can show you are a team player and can do math. Can’t blame him for that.

    • Replies: @Alden
    Everybody on UNZ joined the we’re all gonna dieeee. the sky is falling idiots. Endless graph and octuple exponent creative math commenters as well as the writers.

    At first, I just followed my simple rule. If it’s on CNN MSNBC NBC NYSLIMES LASLIMES WAPO and the rest of the lying liberal anti White media it’s just not true. And the opposite is true.

    After a few weeks I looked at the statistics. What’s the latest? 200,000 in a population of about 7 billion?
    , @Servant of Gla'aki

    I don’t get why SS joined the team on this one.
     
    It's almost as if it wasn't immediately obvious what the correct response should've been in this situation (and Steve, being rational, wanted to err on the side of caution).

    It does seem our society overreacted (and yet a lot more people would probably be dead, had we not done so). Ingrates upset that Steve isn't infallible, seem rather silly.
  8. @Lowe
    It looks like you shit your pants over this along with the entire establishment (so far). What a strange position to be in, for you.

    What is the point of being a contrarian on everything just to fall in line with the conventional wisdom when something important comes up?

    The point isn’t to be a contrarian, the point is to know the truth and speak it. And to be reasonably prudent. We’ve had a Vietnam’s worth of deaths up to this point with the harsh restrictions. What do you think it would be like without the restrictions? My guesstimate is a Civil War’s worth.

    Sometimes the conventional wisdom is correct. Sometimes you share it with Rachel Maddow and Andrew Cuomo. That doesn’t mean you always share it, or don’t keep re-evaluating it… for example, I’m keeping the idea that NYC has a different strain than the rest of the country and that their infection rates won’t transfer to the rest of the country due to lifestyle factors, so Cuomo and Maddow are falsely projecting their experience onto the rest of us.

    • Replies: @Unladen Swallow
    Thomas Friedman as well, who thinks the rest of country has wall to wall mass transit and a lot of non-poor people who take the bus to and from work every day just like NYC.
    , @Lowe
    Way to go for the semantic jugular. Steve's entire schtick is that he is an independent thinker and he don't take no guff.

    Sure, the conventional wisdom is right sometimes This definitely is not one of those times. The conventional wisdom has people wearing masks and cowering in their apartments right now, and it has Steve making posts about optimal seating arrangements in movie theaters.

    It was important for us to get it right on this issue. The shutdown has put millions of mostly poor people out of work, and it will cause many shattered dreams and premature deaths all on its own. The more data comes out, the more this looks like a terrible mistake. There have been people expressing skepticism about the narrative on this for sometime, but Sailer isn't one of them.
    , @Mr. Anon

    We’ve had a Vietnam’s worth of deaths up to this point with the harsh restrictions.
     
    We don't how many deaths have actually been caused by coronavirus infection.

    What do you think it would be like without the restrictions? My guesstimate is a Civil War’s worth.
     
    My guesstimate is.........no difference without the restrictions.
    , @JimB

    I’m keeping the idea that NYC has a different strain than the rest of the country and that their infection rates won’t transfer to the rest of the country due to lifestyle factors, so Cuomo and Maddow are falsely projecting their experience onto the rest of us.
     
    I think it’s perhaps the same cv strain in a unique environment for spreading. NYC is the worst case scenario while SF is perhaps one of the best. Trump acted with an abundance of caution, perhaps because his gut instinct is that NYC is prototypical, not atypical. However, he let every governor do his own thing when locking down local economies. So really, he has made the best decisions under the circumstances in timeliest possible way given the fake news from China amplified by the W.H.O.
    , @Ryan Andrews
    Let's say we do have "a Civil War's worth" of deaths. Assuming zero overlap between those deaths and the deaths that are already baked-into-the-cake, we would be looking at the annual national death going from it's usual tic under 1% to 1.2%. And given the fact that throughout the Western World between a quarter and half of the all the deaths are in nursing homes, where the median, um, length of residence is four months in the US, it is safe to assume that there would be quite a bit of overlap between those totals.

    To me, numbers like that speak for themselves. Yes, it is a big deal in the sense that the CDC and NIH ought to be dedicating a large bulk of their time and resources toward battling the problem. But it is not a big deal in the sense that the general public should spend much time worrying about it, let alone having our lives indefinitely put-on-hold by it.

    Through all this madness, I have never heard anyone put forward any set of standards to justify this unprecedented disruption of life. Should we do this every time a virus coming along that threatens to rise the national death rate from 1% to 1.1%? I would think hope that everyone agrees that is ridiculous, but so where would the hysterics draw-their-line? 2%? 3%. I shutter to think how the public, aided by the contemptible press, will respond if an actually serious virus, something that threatens to kill ten percent of the population comes along. I suppose we'll all be forced to ride-it-out in induced comas.
    , @Kratoklastes

    What do you think it would be like without the restrictions? My guesstimate is a Civil War’s worth.
     
    Your guesstimate based on what?

    The best evidence we have is that the 'restrictions' were imposed far too late to make a difference, if the start date (globally) is earlier than January 15th 2020 and the initial R[0] is anywhere above 2.0

    As I have said from the get-go: everyone discovered the word 'exponential' in February (or re-discovered it, if they did year 9 maths), but fuck-all people [re-]discovered the logistic function.

    Logistic functions look a lot like ZOMFG!! EXPERNENSHUL!! functions, until they hit their second 'knee' - at which point they flatten (sometimes rather abruptly)... endogenously (including as a result of people making individual decisions in response to perceived risk).

    None of this is rocket surgery.

    All the logistic curves flattened well before endemicity, and the flattening coincided with increases in average daytime temperatures in the Wrong (Northern) Hemisphere. There was the odd 'blip' (e.g., N'Awlins; some funeral in Jaw-ja etc) where some other shit happened.

    In other news: irony finally laid its deathly-cold finger on my shoulder.

    I have coronavirus.

    Turns out it's not "the" coronavirus.

    I have a cold - which as we all know is caused by a coronavirus.

    Still... in a day or so I will be able to bray about being a 'coronavirus survivor'.

    I might write a riveting, first-person testimony, giving great details of my personal triumph over seemingly-insurmountable odds.

    Would it be 'stolen valour' to walk the streets dressed in scrubs bought off eBay?

    KEK

    , @neprof
    How about total viral load, i.e. multiple exposures over a short period of time? A NYC resident who commutes on the subway could be exposed several times and reach a point where the body cannot clear enough of the virus.

    Think of the doctor in Wuhan, the one the broke the news about the extent of the virus. He was a healthy man in his 30s but he died from virus. Did he reach a point where he was exposed too many times and his body could not handle the total viral load?

    Perhaps a little exposure, esp. in when ample sun (Vit. D) is available, is a good way to develop antibodies w/o having symptoms.
    , @HA
    "The point isn’t to be a contrarian, the point is to know the truth and speak it."

    You're wasting bandwidth trying to talk sense into Lowe. Back a while ago I observed that the commentator RichardTaylor can't seem to shut up about how everyone else is getting coronavirus wrong even though he was previously telling us that even 5,000 dead was a ridiculously high death toll, as in "nothing like that is likely to happen."

    I think we were already at 10,000 dead by that point (i.e., just a few weeks later), but even so, Lowe decided it was smart to pipe up and tell us that RichardTaylor's comments didn't " seem that unreasonable".

    They don't care about facts and numbers and being correct. Ideological purity is far more important than trivial matters like what 2+2 really amounts to. Like Wittkowski (who predicted 10,000 would die from this, by the way), they just keep doubling down, and then claim "see, I was right all along" any time and any cherry-picked point at which the predictions fall under the median, which they invariably do. I.e., the stopped watch approach to telling the time.

    I've never denied that coronavirus might, in the final tally, prove to be a lot less lethal than initially feared, but if that proves to be the case, a big reason for why the panic took hold is that the truther crowd were such feckless lying idiots, displaying nothing more than basic TV weather-forecaster logic. Bury all the failed predictions, and trumpet the good ones.

    And don't try to tell me that 5,000 or 10,000 dead was a "reasonable" prediction. At least have the honesty and integrity to shut up about that. Likewise, don't tell me that any country containing NY will ever regard Sweden's approach as the better road not taken. The economist Richard Epstein made a stupid prediction (he initially predicted 500 dead, but after correcting a math error, he upped it to 5,000) but hey, few of us haven't made a stupid mistake now and then. At least he had the good grace to stop digging.

    , @AnotherDad


    The point isn’t to be a contrarian, the point is to know the truth and speak it. And to be reasonably prudent. We’ve had a Vietnam’s worth of deaths up to this point with the harsh restrictions. What do you think it would be like without the restrictions? My guesstimate is a Civil War’s worth.
     
    Lugash, i'm with you on trying "to know the truth and speak it". But i find your war comparisons deeply misleading and a bit hysteric.

    I think there's (at least) three different issues.

    1) Actual death rate.
    Here's the "it's just the flu, bro" guys are just wrong (in some cases "nuts"). They are showing themselves to be data averse and unable to build simple models.

    In these towns in northern Italy which have been hard hit and show high infection rates, they've racked up well over a typical year's deaths in a couple of months. Even if you assume that they'll be no more deaths and assume that everyone has been infected, you end up with an IFR several times 0.1%--an upper bound on anything from "the flu". Excess deaths already locked in are 0.3-0.7% an order of magnitude about "just the flu"--and that's the floor.

    For the Diamond Princess we've got 14 deaths out of 712 infected--2%. Age adjust this super-aggressively at say 4x--you're at 0.5%. (And note cruising oldsters are healthier than normal population for their age, not the folks confined in a care home because they're on death's door.) But even if you take the entire ship of 3700 (mostly uninfected) and that 14 deaths--you're at .4%. And age adjust the heck out of it, you'll still be above 0.1%--worse than any flu in my life--as an absolute (and really ridiculous) floor.

    This "just a bad flu year" stuff is not data driven. It's a religion. Not an evil genocidal one like minoritarian globalism--"nation of immigrants" or "our diversity is our greatest strength". But likewise data averse and silly.


    2) Who is dying.
    From the beginning--not right at the start with poor data from China, but quickly--it's been clear that this thing is skewing heavily to killing the old and weak. Skewed even more dramatically than a typical flu. You have the odd cases here and there, but the average "years lost" of the deaths is going to be <10 years. Probably around five.

    When i figured this out ... i felt deeply relieved. My dad (90s, already lived his life) gets it, good chance he's dead. Me (60s, done with productive labor and child raising) small chance of death. My kids (20s; the future of my family and the nation) close to zero chance of dying. A car accident is more likely to kill them this year. In other words ... the natural order. I sent my kids email--"you're going to be fine".

    Lugash, this is why the war deaths thing is hysteric and offensive. The Civil War killed off something like 700,000 young men--maybe a 1/6 or 1/7 of a generation--who should have gone on to lead productive lives, knock up their future wives and raise families to populate America's future. It was a true epic--epically stupid--tragedy for our nation. In contrast to that, the China-virus is literally nothing--*nothing*--a speed bump.


    3) The reaction.
    Finally there's the reaction--the hysteria, the flat out lying (ex. masks), the tyrannical power grabbing by politicians and the overall question of cost-benefit. Some of the reaction--closing up activities like golf and hiking--where people are naturally apart--and just shutting rather than sensible regulation of parks and beaches--just reek of stupid tyrannical bullying.

    People will be all over the map on questions of cost-benefit. But all the hysteria, lying and bullying deserve all the mocking, abuse and denunciation they get.
    , @obwandiyag
    You have it exactly right. The conventional wisdom is true.

    I at first was skeptical. But then my information changed, and so I altered my conclusions.

    What do you do, sir?
    , @Hail

    We’ve had a Vietnam’s worth of deaths up to this point
     
    This is irrational thinking. The exact same could be said of any flu virus.

    What do you think it would be like without the restrictions?
     
    Sweden has now decisively and totally proved this theory wrong.

    https://hailtoyou.files.wordpress.com/2020/04/imperial-college-corona-hoax-estimates-for-sweden-vs-reality.png

    Sweden’s coronavirus-positive deaths peaked April 5 to 16, at over 80/day (on three days within that range reaching over 100/day), and have been steadily downhill since then. As of April 21, the final/total new-deaths figure are all looking like <50 day based on preliminary figures. Their hospitals have plenty of spare capacity, and the recent studies suggest a very large % of the population has had contact with the virus, meaning the epidemic is already all-but-over in Sweden and Sweden’s approach is vindicated completely.

    The Imperial College paper was so laughably far off as to either have been prepared by a team of dunces whose normal judgment was further impaired by various substances in their systems, or a hoax meant deliberately to incite panic and empower the “Corona Coup d’Etat” faction.

    The paper predicts hundreds of deaths per day by early May, and is set to be completely wrong; they wildly overhyped this virus, as the anti-Panic side has been trying to warn all along. If Sweden is not seeing a thousand deaths a day in the first two weeks of May, that is the final nail in the coffin for the Imperial College paper and its extremist advocates.
     
    (From Against the Corona Panic, Pt. III: “Just the Flu” Vindicated by the Data; Or, Why to End the Shutdowns Now, April 19; updated for Sweden April 24.)
    , @Bill Jones
    "We’ve had a Vietnam’s worth of deaths up to this point "

    Really?

    I thought that the US slaughtered 3 million in Vietnam?
  9. There are dozens of various antibody tests, each has different levels of accuracy.
    In New York they specifically used a test which would would have more false negatives. Dr. Howard A. Zucker, the NY state health commissioner, said the lab had set a high bar for determining positive results.

    After weeks of tweaking their own ELISA assay, Columbia researchers say they’ve managed to bring its sensitivity to 85% — higher than the 50% to 60% they achieved with a commercial assay, according to Steven Spitalnik, MD, director of clinical laboratories at Columbia University Irving Medical Center and NewYork-Presbyterian. https://www.medpagetoday.com/infectiousdisease/covid19/86084

    New York State developed their own antibody test. Is the NY test as accurate as the one used by Columbia University ? Is the antibody test developed by Stanford better ? Which test was used in Florida ? Different tests will have very different results.

    In NY their test found 21% of New Yorkers with antibodies , the true number of New Yorkers who have recovered from CV may be closer to 25%, since the test was designed to have a “high bar” for positive results. Thus many with antibodies will be missed and some COVID 19 patients never develop antibodies.

  10. @Anonymous
    I doubt very much such a low infection fatality rate. The number of dead is now 200,000. At that fatality rate, there should be over 120 million infected people Worlwide. That is a dozen times more than the reported infection rate.

    The preliminary tests that were done in Wuhan by the Chinese government, the most thorough so far, indicate a fatality rate for young healthy people without respiratory ilnesses like asthma and bronchitis of 0.5% and as high as 10% for men over age 80. The overall death rate from infection from this virus appears to be 2-4%. I would say that the overall mortality rate for this virus is definitely lower than 5% but probably higher than 1%

    Hopefully, our medical care systems are doing better at treating this in late April than Wuhan did in January.

    • Replies: @vhrm
    There is also the possibility that IFR genuinely varies from place to place e.g. because of the humidity factor that DanHusseinMD (?) has championed around here. Italy and New York (and Sweden) were definitely using indoor heating (and thus had quite low humidity for most people) in February and March (and probably still now).

    California, Louisiana and Florida... much less.
  11. @Anonymous
    I doubt very much such a low infection fatality rate. The number of dead is now 200,000. At that fatality rate, there should be over 120 million infected people Worlwide. That is a dozen times more than the reported infection rate.

    The preliminary tests that were done in Wuhan by the Chinese government, the most thorough so far, indicate a fatality rate for young healthy people without respiratory ilnesses like asthma and bronchitis of 0.5% and as high as 10% for men over age 80. The overall death rate from infection from this virus appears to be 2-4%. I would say that the overall mortality rate for this virus is definitely lower than 5% but probably higher than 1%

    Well an antibody + rate 15x the case rate is exactly what’s been found already in Florida, San Francisco, New York, Delaware… It would seem that working backwards from what is collected evidence to then come up with a number one doesn’t like because it sounds too high is maybe not the best procedure.

    Now take this 5-6% number and run it through Sweden’s numbers so far (1500 or so dead) and then say they were either stupid or crazy or inhumanely cruel. It’s hard to see how Miami could have a higher exposure/antibody rate than Sweden where, as of today, people are still eating in restaurants. Could Swedes be that natively more cold and distant than freaked out Floridians?

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    Could Swedes be that natively more cold and distant than freaked out Floridians?

    Yes.

    , @mousey
    Clearly, never met a Swede...
    , @Jonathan Mason
    The Swedes are Scandinavians whereas the people who live in Miami-Dade are predominantly spanish-speaking Hispanic people so quite a lot of cultural differences. The latitude and climate are quite different too.
    , @danand

    “It’s hard to see how Miami could have a higher exposure/antibody rate than Sweden where, as of today, people are still eating in restaurants. Could Swedes be that natively more cold and distant than freaked out Floridians?”
     
    Sweden’s SARS-CoV-2 linked deaths at last count is 2192. Roughly similar per capita infection/death rates as those of San Francisco.

    “Apr 25: Sweden's Deputy Prime Minister Isabella Lövin.

    Q: What is the biggest misconception you have seen about the Swedish strategy? I'm speaking in general, because there have been a lot of articles written about Sweden in foreign media lately.

    Deputy Prime Minister: The biggest myth and misconception is that life goes on as normal in Sweden. It absolutely does not. We have seen Easter travel decrease by 90 percent, we have businesses going bankrupt, a record number of temporary layoffs, and a lot of unemployed people.

    That's because people follow those recommendations we issue. The tourism industry has been hit incredibly hard. A lot of small businesses are on their knees because production is down or has decreased a lot. It is not business as usual in Sweden but the opposite, things are very, very tough.

    No, we have not had a complete lockdown in Sweden, but if you look at people's behaviour it is a very big difference compared to a normal situation: a lot of people are working from home, a lot of people have called in sick with minor symptoms to limit the spread. You don't see your elderly relatives, you don't travel any more, and that comes as a result of people obeying the recommendations our government agencies have issued. Even if the majority follow recommendations, there are some who don't.


    Prime Minister Stefan Löfven's tone was noticeably sharper at the latest government press conference this week. It felt rather like the final warning before tougher rules are imposed. Are there ongoing discussions within the government about introducing stricter measures and what form would they then take?

    We are constantly prepared to take stronger measures if it is necessary to curb the spread of infection, and if the situation deteriorates we will look at further measures. Exactly what kind of measures depend on where we see that there may be big problems ahead. We are now issuing very strong calls not to travel, not to have parties at Walpurgis and definitely not demonstrations on May 1st.”

     

  12. @Deckin
    Well an antibody + rate 15x the case rate is exactly what's been found already in Florida, San Francisco, New York, Delaware... It would seem that working backwards from what is collected evidence to then come up with a number one doesn't like because it sounds too high is maybe not the best procedure.

    Now take this 5-6% number and run it through Sweden's numbers so far (1500 or so dead) and then say they were either stupid or crazy or inhumanely cruel. It's hard to see how Miami could have a higher exposure/antibody rate than Sweden where, as of today, people are still eating in restaurants. Could Swedes be that natively more cold and distant than freaked out Floridians?

    Could Swedes be that natively more cold and distant than freaked out Floridians?

    Yes.

    • LOL: trelane
    • Replies: @Mr McKenna
    In between Sweden and Florida, we have Oxford.

    An Oxford University women’s studies professor has lamented that if the college’s scientists produce a successful Covid-19 vaccine, the “white savior” narrative will be unstoppable.

    Cousens fears that if the vaccine is developed by “white, male and Oxford-educated” scientists, her country’s stock will rise above female-led countries, such as Germany and New Zealand, whose epidemic responses have been, according to a Forbes op-ed, “most widely praised.”

    https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/coronavirus-vaccine_uk_5ea067f2c5b6b2e5b83ba372
     

    NB: I don't click on HP links so no telling what else you'll find there.
  13. This herd immunity idea is not yet medically proven. We have no proof immunity lasts and some evidence it doesn’t. One might have assumed medieval people would have developed herd immunity to the plague. As far as I know we never developed herd immunity to polio or much else so how real is the concept?

    Deer and other animals have periodic outbreaks of disease so my guess is viruses overcome herd immunity if it exists because they have to to survive.

  14. @Deckin
    Well an antibody + rate 15x the case rate is exactly what's been found already in Florida, San Francisco, New York, Delaware... It would seem that working backwards from what is collected evidence to then come up with a number one doesn't like because it sounds too high is maybe not the best procedure.

    Now take this 5-6% number and run it through Sweden's numbers so far (1500 or so dead) and then say they were either stupid or crazy or inhumanely cruel. It's hard to see how Miami could have a higher exposure/antibody rate than Sweden where, as of today, people are still eating in restaurants. Could Swedes be that natively more cold and distant than freaked out Floridians?

    Clearly, never met a Swede…

  15. @Steve Sailer
    Hopefully, our medical care systems are doing better at treating this in late April than Wuhan did in January.

    There is also the possibility that IFR genuinely varies from place to place e.g. because of the humidity factor that DanHusseinMD (?) has championed around here. Italy and New York (and Sweden) were definitely using indoor heating (and thus had quite low humidity for most people) in February and March (and probably still now).

    California, Louisiana and Florida… much less.

  16. @Lugash
    The point isn't to be a contrarian, the point is to know the truth and speak it. And to be reasonably prudent. We've had a Vietnam's worth of deaths up to this point with the harsh restrictions. What do you think it would be like without the restrictions? My guesstimate is a Civil War's worth.

    Sometimes the conventional wisdom is correct. Sometimes you share it with Rachel Maddow and Andrew Cuomo. That doesn't mean you always share it, or don't keep re-evaluating it... for example, I'm keeping the idea that NYC has a different strain than the rest of the country and that their infection rates won't transfer to the rest of the country due to lifestyle factors, so Cuomo and Maddow are falsely projecting their experience onto the rest of us.

    Thomas Friedman as well, who thinks the rest of country has wall to wall mass transit and a lot of non-poor people who take the bus to and from work every day just like NYC.

  17. @Lowe
    It looks like you shit your pants over this along with the entire establishment (so far). What a strange position to be in, for you.

    What is the point of being a contrarian on everything just to fall in line with the conventional wisdom when something important comes up?

    I would say objectively that our host is consumed by this subject.

    It is not unexpected. Dostoevsky, when sentenced to death by the Czar and believing his life would soon end, said of his experience: that to have a six inch ledge on the side of a mountain and to have to live eternity on that six inch ledge, would be preferable to death.

    • Agree: BB753
    • Replies: @BenKenobi
    • Intredasting: BenKenobi
    , @BB753
    For far too many scientists and commenters, people older than 65 or with a chronic disease or poor health, covid-19 is a personal matter which blind them to the facts. Of course the facts themselves are pretty confusing at this stage.

    Personally, I like this sober assessment by a retired Swedish epidemiologist, now a consultant with the Swedish government. Sweden seems to be doing fine without mandatory lockdown. 0% BS guaranteed. Worth listening: there's a brief summary a the bottom in the description for the lazy or those in a hurry.

    https://youtu.be/bfN2JWifLCY

  18. @Steve Sailer
    Could Swedes be that natively more cold and distant than freaked out Floridians?

    Yes.

    In between Sweden and Florida, we have Oxford.

    An Oxford University women’s studies professor has lamented that if the college’s scientists produce a successful Covid-19 vaccine, the “white savior” narrative will be unstoppable.

    Cousens fears that if the vaccine is developed by “white, male and Oxford-educated” scientists, her country’s stock will rise above female-led countries, such as Germany and New Zealand, whose epidemic responses have been, according to a Forbes op-ed, “most widely praised.”

    https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/coronavirus-vaccine_uk_5ea067f2c5b6b2e5b83ba372

    NB: I don’t click on HP links so no telling what else you’ll find there.

    • Replies: @UK
    She hates a potential vaccine because she feels her ego being mutilated through what she perceives as the relative diminishment of one aspect of how she identifies.

    I am genuinely impressed by her level of narcissism!

    No wonder she has fallen into a polticial worldview which venerates almost completely unreal stereotypes of boundary free victims.

    Such a rampant egotist will be irresistibly drawn to anything onto which she can project the suppressed aspects of her personality.

    In her case, those being the bits that actually listen to others, and see them as ends in themselves, rather than this absurdly cartoonish example of a viciously solipsistic five year old girl who never actually grew up but instead just learned fancier words.

    Or she's just a very accurate internet satire of a specific archetype, and a happenstance and personally useful reminder of the type of woman that I need to remember to avoid.
    , @Alden
    I’m often ashamed to be a woman. Too bad she never met up with any of the Muslim migrant rape gangs that throve in Oxford as the academics scorned the proles who objected to being raped by life long benefit Muslims

    Why can’t these witches just be glad they have those affirmative action jobs for communist lesbians?
    , @Pericles
    "Dr Emily Cousens researches vulnerability and gender and teaches at Oxford and LSE."

    Looks like typical toxic white woman from the byline. I'm sure she will thus leach venom throughout both Oxford and LSE for a long time to come. Lol done, academaniacs!
    , @Hebrew National
    I'm sure Elizabeth Holmes would have had an at-home finger-stick Covid test by now, if The Man hadn't held her back.
    , @Prester John
    Amidst all the turmoil, The Narrative remains alive and well.
    , @Semperluctor
    She is mainly employed by Oxford Brookes. That’s not Oxford. The rest of what she does is to teach grievance studies. If she could just focus on bleating harmlessly, that would be fine. But obsessing about what sex or race will save us is nuts. The contrarian in me hopes that a drunken Russian scientist in far off Siberia will come up first with a vaccine. That will drive the progressive nut jobs crazy, it will take them ages to formulate their collective groupthink responses, and in between, there will be much comedy and merriment. Of course, a old, white male Christian from Nebraska would provide just as much comedy. The talking heads with TSD on cable would explode.
  19. @Lugash
    The point isn't to be a contrarian, the point is to know the truth and speak it. And to be reasonably prudent. We've had a Vietnam's worth of deaths up to this point with the harsh restrictions. What do you think it would be like without the restrictions? My guesstimate is a Civil War's worth.

    Sometimes the conventional wisdom is correct. Sometimes you share it with Rachel Maddow and Andrew Cuomo. That doesn't mean you always share it, or don't keep re-evaluating it... for example, I'm keeping the idea that NYC has a different strain than the rest of the country and that their infection rates won't transfer to the rest of the country due to lifestyle factors, so Cuomo and Maddow are falsely projecting their experience onto the rest of us.

    Way to go for the semantic jugular. Steve’s entire schtick is that he is an independent thinker and he don’t take no guff.

    Sure, the conventional wisdom is right sometimes This definitely is not one of those times. The conventional wisdom has people wearing masks and cowering in their apartments right now, and it has Steve making posts about optimal seating arrangements in movie theaters.

    It was important for us to get it right on this issue. The shutdown has put millions of mostly poor people out of work, and it will cause many shattered dreams and premature deaths all on its own. The more data comes out, the more this looks like a terrible mistake. There have been people expressing skepticism about the narrative on this for sometime, but Sailer isn’t one of them.

    • Agree: Je Suis Omar Mateen
    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    Sure, the conventional wisdom is right sometimes This definitely is not one of those times.
     
    There is conventional wisdom this time? The advice given by the various "experts" is all over the map.
    , @Ron Unz

    Sure, the conventional wisdom is right sometimes This definitely is not one of those times...The shutdown has put millions of mostly poor people out of work, and it will cause many shattered dreams and premature deaths all on its own. The more data comes out, the more this looks like a terrible mistake.
     
    Well, courtesy of MoA here's a nice Financial Times chart of total weekly deaths in Britain for almost the last 50(!) years. I've already linked it in a couple of other places, but I might as well do so again:

    https://www.moonofalabama.org/images10/britainexessdeath2.jpg

    Does this look like a disease with Flu-type fatality rates of around 0.1%?

    Given the horrific situation in Lombardy and now NYC/NJ, I just can't understand the thinking of the hordes of Flu Hoaxers who hang around here.
    , @ben tillman

    The conventional wisdom has people wearing masks and cowering in their apartments right now . . . .
     
    No one is cowering in an apartment anywhere. Where do you come up with this stuff?
    , @Alexander Turok

    it will cause many shattered dreams and premature deaths all on its own.
     
    First world poverty does not cause premature deaths. Anyway, thanks to our moron government, many of the unemployed will be getting MORE money:

    https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/04/23/business/economy/unemployment-benefits-stimulus-coronavirus.html
    , @Hail
    Thank you for your posts, Lowe, you are 100% right. This was a sad, and shocking, case of mass-hysteria and even mass-delusion.

    As someone may have once said, "There is a thin line between civilization and madness."
  20. @Lowe
    It looks like you shit your pants over this along with the entire establishment (so far). What a strange position to be in, for you.

    What is the point of being a contrarian on everything just to fall in line with the conventional wisdom when something important comes up?

    Word

  21. Anonymous[279] • Disclaimer says:
    @Lowe
    It looks like you shit your pants over this along with the entire establishment (so far). What a strange position to be in, for you.

    What is the point of being a contrarian on everything just to fall in line with the conventional wisdom when something important comes up?

    It sounds like you know as little about Steve Sailer, the least contrarian writer on this website, as you do about coronavirus.

    • Replies: @Lowe
    Saying Steve Sailer is not a contrarian after you compared him with Israel Shamir or Ron Unz is bizarro-level thinking. Is King Kong also not a monster because he's not as big as Godzilla?

    Maybe I don't know much about coronavirus, and I admit I'm no genius with numbers. But even I can see that the more data we get, the more the CFR goes down... this has been going on for weeks now. It's just become totally damning with the recent antibody tests.

    I can name a few people on the right, who may even be reading this now, who have shown almost no humility in the face of uncertainty, and in the light of our apparent decision to impoverish and endanger many, many poor people.

    Sailer has not been as bad as that, for sure.
    But he hasn't exactly covered himself in glory with posts about pointless hygiene rituals, when the real story is how wrong we are going to turn out to have been, and how bad the economic consequences are.
  22. @Alexander Turok
    When thinking for yourself is a foreign concept to you, when you base your beliefs either on "I want to agree with [tribe] or "I want to disagree with [tribe]," the behavior of those who do will appear strange and irrational.

    “You should try thinking for yourself,” says the guy whose opinion matches the consensus of goodthinkers and Model UN types everywhere.

    Isn’t it strange how the more data comes out about this, the more wrong that consensus seems to be?

    • Agree: Alden, Manfred Arcane
    • Replies: @Alexander Turok

    matches the consensus of goodthinkers and Model UN types everywhere
     
    We also agree on this "round Earth" theory.
    , @Odin

    Isn’t it strange how the more data comes out about this, the more wrong that consensus seems to be?
     
    to elaborate: ...the more data comes out, the more wrong that consensus seems to you. this is not at all strange if you apply Odin's Law:

    "No matter how much data comes out, everyone on all sides remains convinced he has been right all along."

    This seems to hold for all issues over all time periods. Although it must have been said before, I don't know who to credit.

    , @Anonymous
    COVID-19 is plausibly the result of an internal attempt at Wuhan's Level 4 facility to investigate self-propagating vaccines. Whoever assembled it put in at least 3 HIV RNA sequences and one SARS RNA sequence. I've seen mention of reports that other RNA sequences were added.

    The resulting organism is something from outside evolution. It is also outside human genetic engineering. I do not believe that it was designed to do what it is demonstrably doing -- knowledge of the human genome and cell biochemistry is simply too rudimentary, on the level of statistical correlation between assemblages of hundreds of genes with functional effects such as height, or on the correlation between on mutated gene and a genetic disease. To design specific effects, one would need a causal chain described in terms of physical chemical intermediate steps from gene to result. That chain isn't known, it's just too complex to understand now.

    When people do not know what to do, they do what they know. That rule applies to COVID-19 responses so far. Even foolish responses have been implemented, apparently just to present the appearance of control. The idea of local lockdown, for example, is plausible when 2/3 of new cases are from asymptomatic carriers. Prohibition of travel from disease hotspots seems to be a good action. However, it was a reflex action that will likely destroy the global trade network, destroy much of the national trade networks, and cause severe casualties to countries that depend on foreign exchange for food.

    All of the above was a panic response of people who were facing a completely unknown RNA virus; they essentially imitated China's actions for want of any other precedent to follow. It's difficult to say what else could have been done, considering the nature of the threat.


    Even today, we don't know what to do. A simple one digit precision calculation shows that an increase from 5% infection to 80% infection (the 80% is probably low) will multiply cumulative death rates from present values to bout 16 times their present value. Anybody here want to say "do that" and be criticized and sued for it later on? The establishment everywhere appears to be ignoring the death increase and hoping that nobody will notice (https://aebrain.blogspot.com/2003/10/and-perhaps-horse-will-learn-to-sing.html).

    COVID-19 appears likely to destroy what's left of government legitimacy and initiate world wide starvation, but it is also true that everybody involved has acted as humans have always acted. In a way, all that has happened is just the final end of the WW II engendered myth of a world of human omniscient ability to manage reality. And it's about time.
  23. Miami-Dade county is up to 287 deaths in total today

    JFC!!!

    Tuberculosis claimed 1.5 MILLION lives in 2018.

    Steve, are you familiar with the term “self-own”?

  24. By Apoorva Mandavilli

    What is that shiny growth on Apoorva’s nose?

    • Replies: @Thoughts
    It's a 'I'm not a Basic Bitch' denier.

    It's the thing girls who are totally Average in Every Respect wear in order to try to be un-average.

    She's average looking, average thinking, average love-life, there's nothing about her that Stands Out.

    It's better to be a bit Ugly than to be the Ultimate in Average.

    Yes, it's better to be fat, with a fat husband wearing all black outside a chicken shop happily snogging than the be Totally Average.

    So she gets the shiny nose pimple booger.
  25. @Lugash
    The point isn't to be a contrarian, the point is to know the truth and speak it. And to be reasonably prudent. We've had a Vietnam's worth of deaths up to this point with the harsh restrictions. What do you think it would be like without the restrictions? My guesstimate is a Civil War's worth.

    Sometimes the conventional wisdom is correct. Sometimes you share it with Rachel Maddow and Andrew Cuomo. That doesn't mean you always share it, or don't keep re-evaluating it... for example, I'm keeping the idea that NYC has a different strain than the rest of the country and that their infection rates won't transfer to the rest of the country due to lifestyle factors, so Cuomo and Maddow are falsely projecting their experience onto the rest of us.

    We’ve had a Vietnam’s worth of deaths up to this point with the harsh restrictions.

    We don’t how many deaths have actually been caused by coronavirus infection.

    What do you think it would be like without the restrictions? My guesstimate is a Civil War’s worth.

    My guesstimate is………no difference without the restrictions.

    • Replies: @CAL2
    I think if they had worked on getting people to do the normal actions you do to avoid the flu, then in general it would have been fine. They did need to lock down the nursing homes. Add it creating a few units of doctors and nurses to head where there were major outbreaks and it would have been about the same number.

    Also, we absolutely have no idea of how many people have been infected because the tests, in general, are crap.

    , @res

    My guesstimate is………no difference without the restrictions.
     
    I think that is a hard argument to justify. A sample plot from
    https://www.kinsahealth.co/your-sacrifices-are-saving-lives-social-distancing-is-working/

    https://www.kinsahealth.co/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/Santa-Clara-and-Miami-Dade-County-Share-of-Population-with-Flu-Like-Illness-1.png

    Whether or not the restrictions (and which particular restrictions!) were/are worth it is a more complicated and nuanced discussion which does not seem possible to have here.
  26. HUMIDITY? And yet Albany, Georgia was a hot spot for this virus. hahaha. These people can’t even cover their lies, people. That is the thing about lying, you always have to remember what it is you lied about, whereas when you tell the truth….. Oh well, the MANUFACTURED virus is real, but the only nightmare is the one inside your heads for believing this shit. South Georgia is more humid than Florida.

  27. If one takes 0.17% Infection Fatality Rate and apply to 328 million, half million more sacrifices are needed to please Covid god.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    But what about the 0.9% IFR in NYC?

    How do we know what it is?

    , @Kratoklastes
    You're assuming that the natural end-point is that 100% of people are infected.

    That's happened precisely never in the history of epidemiology, despite their constant braying about the End is Nigh.

    Consider just one player - Neil Ferguson. He is a serial offender.

    2001 - he claimed that 130,000 people would develop variant Kreutzfeld-Yakob disease (vCJD). Since that time, there have been a total of 128 deaths globally.

    2005 - he claimed that H5N1 (avian flu) was going to rival the 1918 flu (in fairness, he wasn't - and isn't - alone):

    "Around 40 million people died in 1918 Spanish flu outbreak," said Prof Ferguson. "There are six times more people on the planet now so you could scale it up to around 200 million people probably."
     
    Actual toll - globally - in the following 15 years: 455


    2009 - he claimed that H1N1 ('swine flu') could
     • infect a third of the world's population;
     • had an IFR of 0.4-1.4%;
     • be in line with the 1957 pandemic that killed about 3.5 million people (he caveated that immediately, by claiming that health care was better now).

    Actual toll: 18,036
  28. As vhrm noted, I have been hammering on about how low humidity disables the respiratory immune system. Shame on me for not being high-energy enough to push the message through.

    In cold, dry air, the respiratory immune system is very disabled, while in the warm, humid air of Miami (and India and Myanmar and Vietnam, etc.) the respiratory immune system works really well.

    Yale researchers showed last year, that low ambient humidity hurts the ability of the immune system to fight respiratory viral infection in animal hosts.
    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6561219/

    The Yale group found that at 50% humidity, about half their animal hosts survived a viral respiratory challenge of the flu. At 20% humidity, 100% of the animal hosts died.

    The mechanism is that in very dry air (the 20% humidity of hospitals), the mucosal layer in the respiratory system dries out and organelles called cilia which should clear out viruses are immobilized. The above paper and figure 4 of this one explain the mechanism.
    https://www.annualreviews.org/doi/pdf/10.1146/annurev-virology-012420-022445

    It has been really depressing to watch as the world utterly loses its mind while ignoring the blindingly obvious (to me, and every intelligent person 75 years ago) fact that humidity **dramatically** reduces the fatality rate of respiratory infections among those who are exposed.

    Amid all the sturm und drang about this or that marginally helpful solution, everyone ignores the big, easy and safe answer.

    Steve, I really appreciate that you believed me enough to go buy three humidifiers when I first reported the value of humidity a couple of months ago. But I think it is worthwhile to re-up the humidity thing as a blog post again. There really aren’t any controlled studies on the effect of humidity on Covid-19 survival at this time, and there really need to be. Meanwhile there are at least 32 studies going on hydroxychloroquine. The geographic data on warm, humid air being protective against the new coronavirus is stronger than any data I’ve seen on any other remedies.

    I noted a little earlier this month, “There are zero nations whose capital is south of 30 north latitude with more than 20 deaths per million people. There are 25 nations whose capital is north of 30 north latitude with more than 20 deaths per million. The United States right now is at 65 deaths per million. South of the equator, zero nations exceed 7 deaths per million. Ten countries exceed 100 deaths from Coronavirus per million and every single one of them has a capital north of 40 latitude.”

    Those numbers are a little stale, so I will run those correlations again this weekend, but simple humidity shows more promise than anything I’ve seen, from ventilators to HCQ to any of the fancy antivirals under consideration. Given that cold climes are likely to face this again for a whole long winter season starting in late fall, the value of humidification really needs to become common knowledge by then. People in temperate climes aren’t doing the one thing that could dramatically help them and panicky people in tropical climes are collapsing their economies for no good reason.

    Masks are the answer to stop transmission but once someone gets it the virus, humidity will dramatically increase the odds that they will come through okay.

    • Replies: @Anonymous

    Steve, I really appreciate that you believed me enough to go buy three humidifiers when I first reported the value of humidity a couple of months ago. But I think it is worthwhile to re-up the humidity thing as a blog post again.
     
    Can you recommend a make and model?
    , @Steve Sailer
    But how is the weather in Guayquil? Hot and humid, right?
    , @adreadline

    South of the equator, zero nations exceed 7 deaths per million.
     

    Those numbers are a little stale, so I will run those correlations again this weekend
     
    You better. Here in Brazil, the second most populous country (after Indonesia) with its capital South of the Equator (and between the tropics), we are already approaching 20 deaths per million and -- a little prediction here -- may be on our way to be the country with the most cases and deaths later in the year (absolute and per capita). There is also Ecuador. I think you're damn wrong, but it's important to keep a gardez-votre-sang-froid mentality.
  29. You can take your “Your comment is awaiting moderation” and STUFF IT

    https://mobile.twitter.com/AlexBerenson/status/1253790453721444352

    • Replies: @DanHessinMD
    Cuisinart? Calphalon?

    Seriously, a large pot of water kept on low boil in northern climes is the main thing people need to save their life.

    We have this in our bedroom, which is where our baby sleeps:
    https://www.amazon.com/dp/B00E3OQ88M/ref=twister_B081PCF1CN?_encoding=UTF8&psc=1


    The best place is the room where one sleeps.
  30. Anon[104] • Disclaimer says:

    Classic TDS: Michigan Democrats to censure Michigan lawmaker who said Trump’s boosting of hydroxychloroquine ‘saved my life’

    https://www.foxnews.com/politics/dems-censure-michigan-lawmaker-hydroxychloroquine?utm_source=wnd&utm_medium=wnd&utm_campaign=syndicated

    It’s not the business of lawmakers what one of their colleagues takes for medicine. Censure should be saved for crimes, not complaining about someone else’s medical treatments.

  31. @Lugash
    The point isn't to be a contrarian, the point is to know the truth and speak it. And to be reasonably prudent. We've had a Vietnam's worth of deaths up to this point with the harsh restrictions. What do you think it would be like without the restrictions? My guesstimate is a Civil War's worth.

    Sometimes the conventional wisdom is correct. Sometimes you share it with Rachel Maddow and Andrew Cuomo. That doesn't mean you always share it, or don't keep re-evaluating it... for example, I'm keeping the idea that NYC has a different strain than the rest of the country and that their infection rates won't transfer to the rest of the country due to lifestyle factors, so Cuomo and Maddow are falsely projecting their experience onto the rest of us.

    I’m keeping the idea that NYC has a different strain than the rest of the country and that their infection rates won’t transfer to the rest of the country due to lifestyle factors, so Cuomo and Maddow are falsely projecting their experience onto the rest of us.

    I think it’s perhaps the same cv strain in a unique environment for spreading. NYC is the worst case scenario while SF is perhaps one of the best. Trump acted with an abundance of caution, perhaps because his gut instinct is that NYC is prototypical, not atypical. However, he let every governor do his own thing when locking down local economies. So really, he has made the best decisions under the circumstances in timeliest possible way given the fake news from China amplified by the W.H.O.

  32. Another point (which is obvious to me, but probably needs to be explicitly stated anyway) — if everyone is going to eventually be exposed then the safest time to be exposed is during the humid summer months.

    I will also repeat a comment I made earlier: very low humidity (20% at the University of Maryland Medical Center according to a doctor I know who practices there) is common in hospitals to produce an odorless sensation of sterility, but is debilitating for respiratory immunity. Hospital HVAC systems are very likely increasing the infection fatality rate rather dramatically.

    • Replies: @Mehen

    I will also repeat a comment I made earlier: very low humidity (20% at the University of Maryland Medical Center according to a doctor I know who practices there) is common in hospitals to produce an odorless sensation of sterility,
     
    Yep. I have been told that if the AC and humidity levels of most hospitals were raised to more comfortable levels, there would be a stench that would drive all but the most desperate away.
    , @Anonymous

    Hospital HVAC systems are very likely increasing the infection fatality rate rather dramatically.
     
    HVAC “systems” don’t de-humidify the air.
    , @LondonBob
    Yes the it is better to let it rip during the summer months than in the winter wisdom seems to have been forgotten. I fear Eastern Europe and the Nordics, except for Sweden, are setting themselves up for disaster next winter.

    Should we start considering the young, say everyone under the age of twenty five, plus women up to the age of thirty five, as effectively immune already? This would have a dramatic impact on herd immunity requirements and might well explain why the virus seemingly starts to die out of its own accord.
    , @res

    Another point (which is obvious to me, but probably needs to be explicitly stated anyway) — if everyone is going to eventually be exposed then the safest time to be exposed is during the humid summer months.
     
    Yes. It seems sensible to open the restrictions and let the virus progress through the relatively younger and healthier population to build up herd immunity while the infections face the headwind of summer. Our "experts" and politicians seem to be doing their best to set us up for a more severe second wave this fall and winter.

    Controlled burns for wildfire prevention make a good analogy here. You do the burns when weather conditions are such that even if something goes wrong the risk is limited.
    http://factsheets.okstate.edu/e1010/sections/prescribed-fire-weather/

    I will also repeat a comment I made earlier: very low humidity (20% at the University of Maryland Medical Center according to a doctor I know who practices there) is common in hospitals to produce an odorless sensation of sterility, but is debilitating for respiratory immunity. Hospital HVAC systems are very likely increasing the infection fatality rate rather dramatically.
     
    Thank you for following up on that. What a pathetic reason. Again, I will note if that 20% is outside the OR then they are violating the typical recommendation of 40-60% relative humidity for hospitals.

    This link has much more about humidity control in hospitals. Including a discussion of dehumidification (for commenters who think that is not part of hospital HVAC equipment). And notice the one exception I see in all of this. They recommend burn units have humidity < 30%.
    https://fisair.com/controlling-humidity-in-hospitals/

    P.S. A link to our earlier conversation about this.
    https://www.unz.com/isteve/infection-fatality-rates-under-different-scenarios/#comment-3849649
    , @utu
    "... then the safest time to be exposed is during the humid summer months..." - Do we really know that the outcome for the very vulnerable depends on humidity once they get infected? I do not think so.
  33. @epebble
    If one takes 0.17% Infection Fatality Rate and apply to 328 million, half million more sacrifices are needed to please Covid god.

    But what about the 0.9% IFR in NYC?

    How do we know what it is?

    • Replies: @epebble
    The factor of 5 makes NYC area a huge outlier; so we can't apply NYC to all of U.S. Miami-Dade seems to mimic a typical metro area and hence can be used to replicate probably 75% of the nation. Is there any reason to suspect Miami-Dade is very atypical, besides being filled with mostly Latinos and Spanish speaking? If any, it's warmer and humid weather may understate the infection (in the rest of the U.S.) somewhat. All, put together, half million seems like a lower bound. And that is so shocking as it seems to mimic losses due to WW2 or Civil War. What seems incontrovertible is Covid is likely going to be a once in a century event, both in terms of human life and economy.
    , @Tlotsi
    Apparently, the Jews could survive six million dead, but American can't survive 2.5 million.
  34. OK we don’t have to rehash everything but our actions in March were a kind of life insurance bought at high cost because we were late in buying it. As we acquire more data we can re evaluate, it’s stupid to stay committed to a flawed action.

    It is becoming obvious that we overreacted. Let’s thank our lucky stars and move on. Then shoot everyone at the CDC of course and put severe controls to travel to/from China so this doesn’t happen again.

    • Replies: @anon

    put severe controls to travel to/from China so this doesn’t happen again.
     
    This needs to be repeated over and over.
    Until china sorts out their wet-market and virus lab shit, they shouldn't be allowed in western countries.
  35. Anon[104] • Disclaimer says:

    Bozo Michigan Gov getting in the act, and has been sending nasty texts to lawmaker who had the nerve to get well with quinine. Bozo Gov doesn’t like looking bad after trying to ban quinine.

    https://townhall.com/tipsheet/bronsonstocking/2020/04/24/gov-whitmer-sends-unpleasant-text-messages-to-dem-lawmaker-who-thanked-trump-for-her-coronavirus-recovery-n2567606

    She’s looking less likely as a Biden pick. Even Biden knows he doesn’t want a veep who gets into petty fights.

  36. @DanHessinMD
    Another point (which is obvious to me, but probably needs to be explicitly stated anyway) -- if everyone is going to eventually be exposed then the safest time to be exposed is during the humid summer months.

    I will also repeat a comment I made earlier: very low humidity (20% at the University of Maryland Medical Center according to a doctor I know who practices there) is common in hospitals to produce an odorless sensation of sterility, but is debilitating for respiratory immunity. Hospital HVAC systems are very likely increasing the infection fatality rate rather dramatically.

    I will also repeat a comment I made earlier: very low humidity (20% at the University of Maryland Medical Center according to a doctor I know who practices there) is common in hospitals to produce an odorless sensation of sterility,

    Yep. I have been told that if the AC and humidity levels of most hospitals were raised to more comfortable levels, there would be a stench that would drive all but the most desperate away.

  37. @Lowe
    "You should try thinking for yourself," says the guy whose opinion matches the consensus of goodthinkers and Model UN types everywhere.

    Isn't it strange how the more data comes out about this, the more wrong that consensus seems to be?

    matches the consensus of goodthinkers and Model UN types everywhere

    We also agree on this “round Earth” theory.

    • LOL: Paleo Liberal
    • Replies: @Lowe
    Nice. Maybe you will never have to address that every day this goes on has made you look more wrong.
    , @Anon242
    “We also agree on this “round Earth” theory”

    Eventually, but only after better data and understanding became available resulting in changing opinions. There are still, even now, those who cling to the original flat earth consensus.

  38. UK says:
    @Mr McKenna
    In between Sweden and Florida, we have Oxford.

    An Oxford University women’s studies professor has lamented that if the college’s scientists produce a successful Covid-19 vaccine, the “white savior” narrative will be unstoppable.

    Cousens fears that if the vaccine is developed by “white, male and Oxford-educated” scientists, her country’s stock will rise above female-led countries, such as Germany and New Zealand, whose epidemic responses have been, according to a Forbes op-ed, “most widely praised.”

    https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/coronavirus-vaccine_uk_5ea067f2c5b6b2e5b83ba372
     

    NB: I don't click on HP links so no telling what else you'll find there.

    She hates a potential vaccine because she feels her ego being mutilated through what she perceives as the relative diminishment of one aspect of how she identifies.

    I am genuinely impressed by her level of narcissism!

    No wonder she has fallen into a polticial worldview which venerates almost completely unreal stereotypes of boundary free victims.

    Such a rampant egotist will be irresistibly drawn to anything onto which she can project the suppressed aspects of her personality.

    In her case, those being the bits that actually listen to others, and see them as ends in themselves, rather than this absurdly cartoonish example of a viciously solipsistic five year old girl who never actually grew up but instead just learned fancier words.

    Or she’s just a very accurate internet satire of a specific archetype, and a happenstance and personally useful reminder of the type of woman that I need to remember to avoid.

    • Replies: @Je Suis Omar Mateen
    "She hates a potential vaccine because she feels her ego being mutilated through what she perceives as the relative diminishment of one aspect of how she identifies."

    She ought to spend her energies hating something else, something that might actually exist one day, because there will never be a kungfluey vaccine.

    Though HIV is planet Earth's most sanctified and holy coronavirus, there is no vaccine after nearly four decades of research.

    I fume every time I hear science illiterates blithely refer to a kungflu vaccine - no such animal, unobtainium.
  39. Z1. The Covid-19 virus is quite real (viz not a hoax), it is different from the ordinary flu in important ways, and it is very dangerous to certain populations, and not so dangerous to other populations.

    2. Had Donald Trump not been president, the publicly-organized and -enforced response to a real but not cataclysmic public health threat would have been rational, orderly, efficient, most likely effective, with a sound feedback loop for adjustment and a sane, gardez-votre-sang-froid mentality as seen in pandemics past.

    2a. Examples of rational and orderly responses would have included: early and very strict curtailment of all travel to and from China, and from East Asia generally, with strict quarantines and contact monitoring for returning US citizens; stiff quarantine procedures for the elderly, other at-risk populations, and identifiable “super-spreader” entities; and stern but rational recommendations for everyone else. Life goes on, economy stays normal, a slightly-larger but not catastrophic number of older and infirm people die, Wheel of Life, listen to some Jacques Brel and then move on.

    2b. Importantly, a major feature of a rational public-health response would have been a unified, non-politicized, clearly explained stance from the entire government, speaking in a single calm, agreed-upon voice. Not the Speaker of the House tearing up the President’s speech at the State of the UNION address.

    3. But Donald Trump is the President, and therefore here we are, stuck in chaos, economic free-fall, mass hysteria and morbid sentimentality instead of clear thinking.

    3a. This course of action was deliberately, willfully and maliciously chosen, in virtual unanimity, by our leading classes: government, media, academia, judicial and so on. The clear purpose of this choice was to launch yet another coup attempt against the presidency of Donald Trump. The previous two coup attempts had failed, but this was a ripe poison apple that fell right into their laps.

    4. To be clear: the virus itself and the outbreak were real, non-engineered events. But the specific response to the outbreak was malicious and deliberate with respect to the wellbeing of the American people.

    5. The Powers That Be hate Donald Trump, and by extension the White, Christian, heritage-American electorate for whom he spoke, with such a deadly fury that they were willing to seize on a recurring, seasonal disease outbreak with known protocols of response, and malignant lay use it to destroy the American economy (Trump’s main selling point) in order to bring down a president when their previous open coup attempts had failed.

    • Agree: Mark G., jim jones
    • Replies: @FPD72
    If Trump were not president, HRC would have been. Since she is a quintessential globalist and the Clinton Foundation is the recipient of hundreds of thousands of dollars from Chinese sources, what makes you think she would have ordered the stopping of flights from China any sooner than Trump? Can you name any credible Democratic voices that didn’t criticize Trump for the travel restrictions he imposed?

    As to the other measures, the US would be even further behind on testing. The permanent bureaucracy at the CDC and FDA cranked out tainted tests and forbade any other testing sources. It was Trump who cut through the red tape and turned the private sector loose in the development and production of testing.

    What about HRC makes you think that her performance in any of the critical decisions would have been superior to Trump’s? Trump wasn’t running against an infinite selection of opponents; he ran and won against HRC.
    , @Je Suis Omar Mateen
    Put a gold box round this comment and a gold star beside Germ Theory's alias. A perfect comment.
    , @adreadline
    I didn't finish reading your comment and don't mind the rest of it. The next time I find myself in conversation with anyone, the first thing I'll say is that it's important to keep a gardez-votre-sang-froid mentality.
    , @Eagle Eye

    Importantly, a major feature of a rational public-health response would have been a unified, non-politicized, clearly explained stance from the entire government, speaking in a single calm, agreed-upon voice. Not the Speaker of the House tearing up the President’s speech at the State of the UNION address.
     
    Maybe you didn't pay attention when they explained the idea of Constitutional government. Simply put:

    (1) "The entire government, speaking in a single calm, agreed-upon voice" - this is the very DEFINITION OF A TOTALITARIAN DICTATORSHIP. The government of North Korea is very good at speaking in "a single calm, agreed-upon voice" which citizens had better heed or be sent to concentration camps.

    (2) Health policy is a state matter. States are plenty big and wealthy enough to administer their own health care, stock up on masks, antibody test kits, etc., and otherwise supplement the capabilities of the private sector.

    As we all know, public sector employees in every states have done and continue to do a sterling job laying in emergency supplies in times of plenty. That's why you can now just walk into your local Walgreens or CVS to pick up all the face masks, PCR and antibody test kits, hydroxychloroquine, azithromycine, and toilet paper that your heart desires.

    We can do perfectly well without a few mutually-credentialed panjandrums in Atlanta and DC.

    (3) As a minor excption, the Federal Government is properly involved in regulating international and interstate travel, within reasonable constitutional bounds.

    (4) The Democrats are the party of unlimited open borders and were as late as March the ostentatious "hug an Asian" party. (Asians are OK without receiving hugs from hacking strangers.)

    (5) Whatever its origins, the COVID-19 epidemic (panic-mongers prefer to say PANdemIC) was a huge boon to the Deep State and the billionaire elite - trillion-dollar bailouts, mostly entirely unrelated to the virus with only crumbs for those truly affected, further massively increased and more insidious surveillance (loudly advocated by both parties and bought "experts"), wholesale destruction of the obnoxious middle and working classes in a matter of weeks.

    What's not to like if you are a billionaire and/or Deep Stater, or one of their boot-licking minions in the administration, media, and "education"?

    , @DR Smith
    If one is going to except the virus is real, and that the global elite/cabal/deep state are using this as a third attempt to get rid of POTUS, then it should not be hard to believe this may have Beena planned, man made event all along.

    Everyone needs to remember this come November- and send s message by turning the house RED.
  40. @Anonymous
    It sounds like you know as little about Steve Sailer, the least contrarian writer on this website, as you do about coronavirus.

    Saying Steve Sailer is not a contrarian after you compared him with Israel Shamir or Ron Unz is bizarro-level thinking. Is King Kong also not a monster because he’s not as big as Godzilla?

    Maybe I don’t know much about coronavirus, and I admit I’m no genius with numbers. But even I can see that the more data we get, the more the CFR goes down… this has been going on for weeks now. It’s just become totally damning with the recent antibody tests.

    I can name a few people on the right, who may even be reading this now, who have shown almost no humility in the face of uncertainty, and in the light of our apparent decision to impoverish and endanger many, many poor people.

    Sailer has not been as bad as that, for sure.
    But he hasn’t exactly covered himself in glory with posts about pointless hygiene rituals, when the real story is how wrong we are going to turn out to have been, and how bad the economic consequences are.

    • Replies: @Corvinus
    "when the real story is how wrong we are going to turn out to have been, and how bad the economic consequences are."

    Because we generally associate a virus to massive spread and deaths. So when that phenomenon does not occur, then the policies and procedures to limit its transmission and keep people safe are called into question. "See, it's not that bad, let's go about our normal business". In the end, it's not about #DyingForTheDow.
  41. Like I said, numerous times here, once the sun comes out in the Nordic countries and Siberia, flu/bacteria gets killed off by UV rays and warmer weather. Saunas, hot springs, help, year around. Sauna and heat allowed Arctic people to actually, survive. Saunas Save Lives, hahhahahaa I think I need to sell this for Icelandair, SAS, Finnair for this very weird summer season!

  42. @Lugash
    The point isn't to be a contrarian, the point is to know the truth and speak it. And to be reasonably prudent. We've had a Vietnam's worth of deaths up to this point with the harsh restrictions. What do you think it would be like without the restrictions? My guesstimate is a Civil War's worth.

    Sometimes the conventional wisdom is correct. Sometimes you share it with Rachel Maddow and Andrew Cuomo. That doesn't mean you always share it, or don't keep re-evaluating it... for example, I'm keeping the idea that NYC has a different strain than the rest of the country and that their infection rates won't transfer to the rest of the country due to lifestyle factors, so Cuomo and Maddow are falsely projecting their experience onto the rest of us.

    Let’s say we do have “a Civil War’s worth” of deaths. Assuming zero overlap between those deaths and the deaths that are already baked-into-the-cake, we would be looking at the annual national death going from it’s usual tic under 1% to 1.2%. And given the fact that throughout the Western World between a quarter and half of the all the deaths are in nursing homes, where the median, um, length of residence is four months in the US, it is safe to assume that there would be quite a bit of overlap between those totals.

    To me, numbers like that speak for themselves. Yes, it is a big deal in the sense that the CDC and NIH ought to be dedicating a large bulk of their time and resources toward battling the problem. But it is not a big deal in the sense that the general public should spend much time worrying about it, let alone having our lives indefinitely put-on-hold by it.

    Through all this madness, I have never heard anyone put forward any set of standards to justify this unprecedented disruption of life. Should we do this every time a virus coming along that threatens to rise the national death rate from 1% to 1.1%? I would think hope that everyone agrees that is ridiculous, but so where would the hysterics draw-their-line? 2%? 3%. I shutter to think how the public, aided by the contemptible press, will respond if an actually serious virus, something that threatens to kill ten percent of the population comes along. I suppose we’ll all be forced to ride-it-out in induced comas.

    • Agree: DanHessinMD
    • Replies: @Kratoklastes
    If anything, this covid19-related shutdown of the global economy should be seen in the context of the famous (and totally, irretrievably retarded) Trolley Problem.

    Faced with a path on which a demographically-small number of very ill, very old people were going to die, the political class veered the trolley and slammed it into the entire global economy - guaranteeing an increase in misery (and suicides) that will have a much higher cost than the alternative... i.e., the death of some very ill septuagenarians.
    , @jbwilson24
    "Through all this madness, I have never heard anyone put forward any set of standards to justify this unprecedented disruption of life. Should we do this every time a virus coming along that threatens to rise the national death rate from 1% to 1.1%? I would think hope that everyone agrees that is ridiculous, but so where would the hysterics draw-their-line? 2%? 3%. "

    The morons forming policy never bothered to ask these questions.

    No hospital administrator would survive very long if they were unable to prioritize resource allocation and say 'no' to some cases. You don't spend half your budget to keep 102-year-olds alive while 3-year-olds die of cancer, for instance.

    Yet the elites like Dr Fauci seem unable to summon up the skills that any nurse with a Masters in hospital administration possesses. There's a price on a life, and the price on older lives is lower than on younger ones.

    Given that a virus like this could come along every 2 years, this is a recipe for permanent lockdown.

    We have a UN representative warning of major disruptions in the food supply that could kill millions, a professor at King's College pointing out that a lack of cancer screening is going to cost tens of thousands of lives, etc etc. None of this seems to stick in the heads of the weaklings who kvetch about this great plague of death.

    A funny presentation by a couple of US doctors is going around the internet, in which they argue that this thing is totally overblown. Most of the people who die have serious comorbidities.

    Let nature take its course and weed out the sickly, the weak, the elderly. If a few healthy people are caught along the way, then so be it. I wonder how these effeminate losers can watch a Nature documentary without screaming in terror.

  43. @Steve Sailer
    But what about the 0.9% IFR in NYC?

    How do we know what it is?

    The factor of 5 makes NYC area a huge outlier; so we can’t apply NYC to all of U.S. Miami-Dade seems to mimic a typical metro area and hence can be used to replicate probably 75% of the nation. Is there any reason to suspect Miami-Dade is very atypical, besides being filled with mostly Latinos and Spanish speaking? If any, it’s warmer and humid weather may understate the infection (in the rest of the U.S.) somewhat. All, put together, half million seems like a lower bound. And that is so shocking as it seems to mimic losses due to WW2 or Civil War. What seems incontrovertible is Covid is likely going to be a once in a century event, both in terms of human life and economy.

  44. @mousey
    Yeah, it'll come out that we shit holed our economy for an epidemic that is less lethal than either the opiod or annual flu epidemic. I don't get why SS joined the team on this one. There is a lot of statistical analysis required that is interesting. Maybe there is an opportunity to cash in on this if you can show you are a team player and can do math. Can't blame him for that.

    Everybody on UNZ joined the we’re all gonna dieeee. the sky is falling idiots. Endless graph and octuple exponent creative math commenters as well as the writers.

    At first, I just followed my simple rule. If it’s on CNN MSNBC NBC NYSLIMES LASLIMES WAPO and the rest of the lying liberal anti White media it’s just not true. And the opposite is true.

    After a few weeks I looked at the statistics. What’s the latest? 200,000 in a population of about 7 billion?

  45. @Mr McKenna
    In between Sweden and Florida, we have Oxford.

    An Oxford University women’s studies professor has lamented that if the college’s scientists produce a successful Covid-19 vaccine, the “white savior” narrative will be unstoppable.

    Cousens fears that if the vaccine is developed by “white, male and Oxford-educated” scientists, her country’s stock will rise above female-led countries, such as Germany and New Zealand, whose epidemic responses have been, according to a Forbes op-ed, “most widely praised.”

    https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/coronavirus-vaccine_uk_5ea067f2c5b6b2e5b83ba372
     

    NB: I don't click on HP links so no telling what else you'll find there.

    I’m often ashamed to be a woman. Too bad she never met up with any of the Muslim migrant rape gangs that throve in Oxford as the academics scorned the proles who objected to being raped by life long benefit Muslims

    Why can’t these witches just be glad they have those affirmative action jobs for communist lesbians?

  46. @anon
    How reliable are those antibody tests? I've seen claims regarding the Heinsberg study in Germany and, iirc, also the Santa Clara study in California that many of those tests might give false results, because they also might show results for previous infections with other Coronaviruses which merely cause common colds.
    0,17 IFR? No way in hell I believe that.

    For antibody tests, they control for false positives using frozen blood that was drawn long before the outbreak began. The fatality numbers published in journals from the serological tests are conservative upper limits of the fatality rate. The scientists often make very soft conclusions so as not to shock the media/public/scientific community that we shut down the country over a nothing virus.

    Watch the numbers continue to drop to less than 0,1% in the coming weeks to months, especially in regions where they didn’t label virtually every death as suspected COVID-19. Eventually, the IFR will converge to that of the seasonal flu, or perhaps even less than the flu (because flu kills a lot of healthy children every year whereas COVID spares the young and healthy — and we often do not test for flu / put on death certificate because it does not change the management of the patient).

    • Replies: @Anonymous

    Watch the numbers continue to drop to less than 0,1% in the coming weeks to months, especially in regions where they didn’t label virtually every death as suspected COVID-19. Eventually, the IFR will converge to that of the seasonal flu, or perhaps even less than the flu (because flu kills a lot of healthy children every year whereas COVID spares the young and healthy — and we often do not test for flu / put on death certificate because it does not change the management of the patient).
     
    Are you a practicing medical doctor?
  47. @Tarnanas
    OK we don't have to rehash everything but our actions in March were a kind of life insurance bought at high cost because we were late in buying it. As we acquire more data we can re evaluate, it's stupid to stay committed to a flawed action.

    It is becoming obvious that we overreacted. Let's thank our lucky stars and move on. Then shoot everyone at the CDC of course and put severe controls to travel to/from China so this doesn't happen again.

    put severe controls to travel to/from China so this doesn’t happen again.

    This needs to be repeated over and over.
    Until china sorts out their wet-market and virus lab shit, they shouldn’t be allowed in western countries.

    • Agree: Meretricious
    • Replies: @Tor597
    Maybe you should start with New York City first.

    https://youtu.be/5_t83cF30XU
  48. Anonymous[720] • Disclaimer says:

    Lugash said: We’ve had a Vietnam’s worth of deaths up to this point with the harsh restrictions…

    WTF is this. NYC slave chatter?

    Real numbers not even close. Get informed.

    Can’t believe there are such gullible people on this blog of all blogs. You’d think long time isteve commenters would be fucking hard boiled about government data claims.

    50k covid deaths in America? Gov Cuomo has some ventilators he’d like to sell you.

    You weren’t paying attention but the CDC initially set relaxed guidelines for coding covid deaths and then relaxed them further to meaninglessness mid April.

    Scarf queen Birx admitted the policy at a Trump presser weeks ago.

    Hospital reimbursement follies are worse than ever. There is guaranteed $$$ in each coded covid death. So we have two highly motivated parties on each end of the transaction and the result is lots and lots of covid death toe tags.

    Wake the hell up. We are months into this sham. No excuses.

    • Agree: Kratoklastes
    • Troll: Corvinus
  49. @Lowe
    Way to go for the semantic jugular. Steve's entire schtick is that he is an independent thinker and he don't take no guff.

    Sure, the conventional wisdom is right sometimes This definitely is not one of those times. The conventional wisdom has people wearing masks and cowering in their apartments right now, and it has Steve making posts about optimal seating arrangements in movie theaters.

    It was important for us to get it right on this issue. The shutdown has put millions of mostly poor people out of work, and it will cause many shattered dreams and premature deaths all on its own. The more data comes out, the more this looks like a terrible mistake. There have been people expressing skepticism about the narrative on this for sometime, but Sailer isn't one of them.

    Sure, the conventional wisdom is right sometimes This definitely is not one of those times.

    There is conventional wisdom this time? The advice given by the various “experts” is all over the map.

    • Agree: ben tillman
    • Replies: @Paleo Liberal
    And this is the crux of it.

    The data are all over the map. Some data show the Coronavirus being as dangerous as the Spanish Flu. Other data show the Coronavirus as being “only” about as dangerous as the Hong Kong Flu (which was by far the nastiest epidemic in my lifetime).

    So Steve, instead of cherry-picking his data like a good True Believer, shows all the data and tries to figure out what it all means. That includes the possibility that ALL the data are suspect.
  50. Re: Steve’s tweet about firemen not having much to do most of the time, I wonder if setting up something along-those-lines might be actually a good fit for the medical industry. I’m just Trump-style spit-balling here, but it seems like it could be a good idea to require that every medical professional right down to dental hygienists have basic nursing skills, and that every medical doctor of any kind (dentists, optometrists, all of them) be trained in basic tending to virus patients (not that I have a clue what that entails). Would that be feasible? I guess we could say they have to train one weekend-a-month or so like the national guard, so then when the next pandemic hits, maybe we won’t have to shut down the world over it.

    A friend of mine mentioned this idea a few weeks back (he explicitly compared it to the fireman model), and it impressed me, but I’m pretty ignorant of these things.

  51. Yeah, they don’t get any cash payment for those. Maybe they can declare them Covids retroactively?

  52. Anonymous[367] • Disclaimer says:
    @DanHessinMD
    As vhrm noted, I have been hammering on about how low humidity disables the respiratory immune system. Shame on me for not being high-energy enough to push the message through.

    In cold, dry air, the respiratory immune system is very disabled, while in the warm, humid air of Miami (and India and Myanmar and Vietnam, etc.) the respiratory immune system works really well.

    Yale researchers showed last year, that low ambient humidity hurts the ability of the immune system to fight respiratory viral infection in animal hosts.
    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6561219/

    The Yale group found that at 50% humidity, about half their animal hosts survived a viral respiratory challenge of the flu. At 20% humidity, 100% of the animal hosts died.

    The mechanism is that in very dry air (the 20% humidity of hospitals), the mucosal layer in the respiratory system dries out and organelles called cilia which should clear out viruses are immobilized. The above paper and figure 4 of this one explain the mechanism.
    https://www.annualreviews.org/doi/pdf/10.1146/annurev-virology-012420-022445

    It has been really depressing to watch as the world utterly loses its mind while ignoring the blindingly obvious (to me, and every intelligent person 75 years ago) fact that humidity **dramatically** reduces the fatality rate of respiratory infections among those who are exposed.

    Amid all the sturm und drang about this or that marginally helpful solution, everyone ignores the big, easy and safe answer.

    Steve, I really appreciate that you believed me enough to go buy three humidifiers when I first reported the value of humidity a couple of months ago. But I think it is worthwhile to re-up the humidity thing as a blog post again. There really aren't any controlled studies on the effect of humidity on Covid-19 survival at this time, and there really need to be. Meanwhile there are at least 32 studies going on hydroxychloroquine. The geographic data on warm, humid air being protective against the new coronavirus is stronger than any data I've seen on any other remedies.

    I noted a little earlier this month, "There are zero nations whose capital is south of 30 north latitude with more than 20 deaths per million people. There are 25 nations whose capital is north of 30 north latitude with more than 20 deaths per million. The United States right now is at 65 deaths per million. South of the equator, zero nations exceed 7 deaths per million. Ten countries exceed 100 deaths from Coronavirus per million and every single one of them has a capital north of 40 latitude."

    Those numbers are a little stale, so I will run those correlations again this weekend, but simple humidity shows more promise than anything I've seen, from ventilators to HCQ to any of the fancy antivirals under consideration. Given that cold climes are likely to face this again for a whole long winter season starting in late fall, the value of humidification really needs to become common knowledge by then. People in temperate climes aren't doing the one thing that could dramatically help them and panicky people in tropical climes are collapsing their economies for no good reason.

    Masks are the answer to stop transmission but once someone gets it the virus, humidity will dramatically increase the odds that they will come through okay.

    Steve, I really appreciate that you believed me enough to go buy three humidifiers when I first reported the value of humidity a couple of months ago. But I think it is worthwhile to re-up the humidity thing as a blog post again.

    Can you recommend a make and model?

    • Replies: @ic1000
    > Can you recommend a [humidifier] make and model?

    For whole-house humidification of homes with forced-air heating, see this March 16 exchange between me and Jack D.

    Although that may not be what you are looking for, since we're moving into the summer.
  53. Anonymous[367] • Disclaimer says:
    @DanHessinMD
    Another point (which is obvious to me, but probably needs to be explicitly stated anyway) -- if everyone is going to eventually be exposed then the safest time to be exposed is during the humid summer months.

    I will also repeat a comment I made earlier: very low humidity (20% at the University of Maryland Medical Center according to a doctor I know who practices there) is common in hospitals to produce an odorless sensation of sterility, but is debilitating for respiratory immunity. Hospital HVAC systems are very likely increasing the infection fatality rate rather dramatically.

    Hospital HVAC systems are very likely increasing the infection fatality rate rather dramatically.

    HVAC “systems” don’t de-humidify the air.

  54. @DanHessinMD
    Another point (which is obvious to me, but probably needs to be explicitly stated anyway) -- if everyone is going to eventually be exposed then the safest time to be exposed is during the humid summer months.

    I will also repeat a comment I made earlier: very low humidity (20% at the University of Maryland Medical Center according to a doctor I know who practices there) is common in hospitals to produce an odorless sensation of sterility, but is debilitating for respiratory immunity. Hospital HVAC systems are very likely increasing the infection fatality rate rather dramatically.

    Yes the it is better to let it rip during the summer months than in the winter wisdom seems to have been forgotten. I fear Eastern Europe and the Nordics, except for Sweden, are setting themselves up for disaster next winter.

    Should we start considering the young, say everyone under the age of twenty five, plus women up to the age of thirty five, as effectively immune already? This would have a dramatic impact on herd immunity requirements and might well explain why the virus seemingly starts to die out of its own accord.

  55. @Lugash
    The point isn't to be a contrarian, the point is to know the truth and speak it. And to be reasonably prudent. We've had a Vietnam's worth of deaths up to this point with the harsh restrictions. What do you think it would be like without the restrictions? My guesstimate is a Civil War's worth.

    Sometimes the conventional wisdom is correct. Sometimes you share it with Rachel Maddow and Andrew Cuomo. That doesn't mean you always share it, or don't keep re-evaluating it... for example, I'm keeping the idea that NYC has a different strain than the rest of the country and that their infection rates won't transfer to the rest of the country due to lifestyle factors, so Cuomo and Maddow are falsely projecting their experience onto the rest of us.

    What do you think it would be like without the restrictions? My guesstimate is a Civil War’s worth.

    Your guesstimate based on what?

    The best evidence we have is that the ‘restrictions’ were imposed far too late to make a difference, if the start date (globally) is earlier than January 15th 2020 and the initial R[0] is anywhere above 2.0

    As I have said from the get-go: everyone discovered the word ‘exponential‘ in February (or re-discovered it, if they did year 9 maths), but fuck-all people [re-]discovered the logistic function.

    Logistic functions look a lot like ZOMFG!! EXPERNENSHUL!! functions, until they hit their second ‘knee’ – at which point they flatten (sometimes rather abruptly)… endogenously (including as a result of people making individual decisions in response to perceived risk).

    None of this is rocket surgery.

    All the logistic curves flattened well before endemicity, and the flattening coincided with increases in average daytime temperatures in the Wrong (Northern) Hemisphere. There was the odd ‘blip’ (e.g., N’Awlins; some funeral in Jaw-ja etc) where some other shit happened.

    In other news: irony finally laid its deathly-cold finger on my shoulder.

    I have coronavirus.

    [MORE]

    Turns out it’s not “the” coronavirus.

    I have a cold – which as we all know is caused by a coronavirus.

    Still… in a day or so I will be able to bray about being a ‘coronavirus survivor‘.

    I might write a riveting, first-person testimony, giving great details of my personal triumph over seemingly-insurmountable odds.

    Would it be ‘stolen valour’ to walk the streets dressed in scrubs bought off eBay?

    KEK

    • Replies: @ic1000
    > Logistic functions look a lot like [exponential] functions, until they hit their second ‘knee’ – at which point they flatten (sometimes rather abruptly)… endogenously (including as a result of people making individual decisions in response to perceived risk).

    This.

    Every wannabe public intellectual should reflect on the curves that chart the progress of the infection/disease on a semi-log plot. I refer to the ones at 91-DIVOC, but there are plenty of others.

    The shapes of the curves for ~95% of jurisdictions are the same. They aren't linear, or exponential, or logistic. But they're about the same as each other, irrespective of lockdown status or timing. Per Kratoklastes, this is important.

    I'm listening to CBS This Morning as I type, and it's a bit depressing. The reporters and the people they interview... aren't deep thinkers.
    , @Anonymous

    The best evidence we have is that the ‘restrictions’ were imposed far too late to make a difference, if the start date (globally) is earlier than January 15th 2020 and the initial R[0] is anywhere above 2.0
     
    How could the massive unprecedented “social distancing” not be making a difference?

    Sheesh.
    , @FPD72
    How do you know that you have “Coronavirus?” Only about 15% of colds are caused by corona viruses. Have you been tested or are you just making a WAG for rhetorical purposes?
    , @Peterike
    “ I might write a riveting, first-person testimony, giving great details of my personal triumph over seemingly-insurmountable odds.”

    Make sure you say you were “literally shaking” when you found out! And blame Trump.
    , @leterip
    I am sorry you have Covid. I hope it is not severe. All the best.
  56. @epebble
    If one takes 0.17% Infection Fatality Rate and apply to 328 million, half million more sacrifices are needed to please Covid god.

    You’re assuming that the natural end-point is that 100% of people are infected.

    That’s happened precisely never in the history of epidemiology, despite their constant braying about the End is Nigh.

    Consider just one player – Neil Ferguson. He is a serial offender.

    2001 – he claimed that 130,000 people would develop variant Kreutzfeld-Yakob disease (vCJD). Since that time, there have been a total of 128 deaths globally.

    2005 – he claimed that H5N1 (avian flu) was going to rival the 1918 flu (in fairness, he wasn’t – and isn’t – alone):

    Around 40 million people died in 1918 Spanish flu outbreak,” said Prof Ferguson. “There are six times more people on the planet now so you could scale it up to around 200 million people probably.”

    Actual toll – globally – in the following 15 years: 455

    2009 – he claimed that H1N1 (‘swine flu’) could
     • infect a third of the world’s population;
     • had an IFR of 0.4-1.4%;
     • be in line with the 1957 pandemic that killed about 3.5 million people (he caveated that immediately, by claiming that health care was better now).

    Actual toll: 18,036

    • Thanks: epebble
    • Replies: @epebble
    But Covid-19 appears to be far more contagious and deadlier than vCJD, H5N1 or H1N1. It has already claimed 200,000 globally with no evidence of slowdown anywhere outside of East Asia; Even there, we don't know what may happen if they return to any kind of normalcy.

    Then there is this: There is currently no evidence that people who have recovered from COVID-19 and have antibodies are protected from a second infection.

    https://www.who.int/news-room/commentaries/detail/immunity-passports-in-the-context-of-covid-19
    , @ben tillman

    “Around 40 million people died in 1918 Spanish flu outbreak,” said Prof Ferguson. “There are six times more people on the planet now so you could scale it up to around 200 million people probably.”
     
    It's hard to take seriously the predictions of anyone who is so ignorant of present or past facts. If the world's population was 1.8 billion in 1918, he must have thought it was 12.6 billion in 2005.
  57. The validity of the test used in Miami is low:

    As mentioned in your post, this can be adjusted for, and the article says they do this, but how well this was done is impossible to assess given that we have no details about the adjustment process.

  58. @scrivener3
    I would say objectively that our host is consumed by this subject.

    It is not unexpected. Dostoevsky, when sentenced to death by the Czar and believing his life would soon end, said of his experience: that to have a six inch ledge on the side of a mountain and to have to live eternity on that six inch ledge, would be preferable to death.

    • Intredasting: BenKenobi

  59. @Ryan Andrews
    Let's say we do have "a Civil War's worth" of deaths. Assuming zero overlap between those deaths and the deaths that are already baked-into-the-cake, we would be looking at the annual national death going from it's usual tic under 1% to 1.2%. And given the fact that throughout the Western World between a quarter and half of the all the deaths are in nursing homes, where the median, um, length of residence is four months in the US, it is safe to assume that there would be quite a bit of overlap between those totals.

    To me, numbers like that speak for themselves. Yes, it is a big deal in the sense that the CDC and NIH ought to be dedicating a large bulk of their time and resources toward battling the problem. But it is not a big deal in the sense that the general public should spend much time worrying about it, let alone having our lives indefinitely put-on-hold by it.

    Through all this madness, I have never heard anyone put forward any set of standards to justify this unprecedented disruption of life. Should we do this every time a virus coming along that threatens to rise the national death rate from 1% to 1.1%? I would think hope that everyone agrees that is ridiculous, but so where would the hysterics draw-their-line? 2%? 3%. I shutter to think how the public, aided by the contemptible press, will respond if an actually serious virus, something that threatens to kill ten percent of the population comes along. I suppose we'll all be forced to ride-it-out in induced comas.

    If anything, this covid19-related shutdown of the global economy should be seen in the context of the famous (and totally, irretrievably retarded) Trolley Problem.

    Faced with a path on which a demographically-small number of very ill, very old people were going to die, the political class veered the trolley and slammed it into the entire global economy – guaranteeing an increase in misery (and suicides) that will have a much higher cost than the alternative… i.e., the death of some very ill septuagenarians.

    • Replies: @Hypnotoad666
    I forgot about the good old Trolley car morality metaphor!

    But it's true. Once the political default was "do something," it meant that any casualties would be blamed on any politician who allowed people to keep their freedom. He'd be accused of "having blood on his hands."

    Remember, it was the Chinese who were getting so much praise for their super-aggressive lock down of Wuhan before it started hitting the west. They helped set the tone what was to follow.
  60. anonymous[304] • Disclaimer says:

    Does anyone else remember the peace and tranquility of the West Coast beaches?

  61. False positives and negatives only give half the story, what you really need is the F1 score for the test: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/F1_score

  62. @Mr McKenna
    In between Sweden and Florida, we have Oxford.

    An Oxford University women’s studies professor has lamented that if the college’s scientists produce a successful Covid-19 vaccine, the “white savior” narrative will be unstoppable.

    Cousens fears that if the vaccine is developed by “white, male and Oxford-educated” scientists, her country’s stock will rise above female-led countries, such as Germany and New Zealand, whose epidemic responses have been, according to a Forbes op-ed, “most widely praised.”

    https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/coronavirus-vaccine_uk_5ea067f2c5b6b2e5b83ba372
     

    NB: I don't click on HP links so no telling what else you'll find there.

    “Dr Emily Cousens researches vulnerability and gender and teaches at Oxford and LSE.”

    Looks like typical toxic white woman from the byline. I’m sure she will thus leach venom throughout both Oxford and LSE for a long time to come. Lol done, academaniacs!

    • Replies: @Ancient Briton
    BTW It's Oxford Brookes University (former polytechnic) not the ancient one.
  63. There is a Swiss study out that explains how Covid-19 can lead to multiple organ failure and sheds more light on the co-morbidity factor.

    Varga, Zsuzsanna, Flammer, Andreas J., Steiger, Peter, Haberecker, Martina, Andermatt, Rea, Zinkernagel, Annelies S., Mehra, Mandeep R., Schuepbach, Reto, Ruschitzka, Frank & Moch, Holger (2020). Endothelial Cell Infection and Endotheliitis in COVID-19. Lancet.

    (The proponents of heroic ignorance will, of course, not be impressed. Those people can consider themselves lucky to have a president who, though often ignorant himself, is still much better than both the alternative and than they are.)

    • Replies: @Anon
    Oh the irony of calling others ignorant, when you are clearly full of hatred towards your fellow man for having a slightly different viewpoint. That is what used to be considered ignorant. Now, anyone who doesn't goose step along with the WHO's edicts is considered ignorant. This is the path that demonic atheistic science worship is leading us down.
  64. Singapore, population ~5.7M, has reported just 12 SARS-CoV-2 related deaths. Unfortunately, infection numbers are starting to take off:

    “A pivot in Singapore’s strategy could come as it grapples with a surge in cases among low-wage migrant workers living in cramped dormitories, who have long been essential in the city-state’s service and construction sectors.

    It reported a fourth straight day of virus cases going above 1,000 on Thursday, and confirmed cases now number more than 11,000.

    Almost 900 cases were reported Friday, with Singaporeans or permanent residents making up 13 cases.”

    • Replies: @prosa123
    Guess the leaders of Singapore are learning that reliance on quasi-slave labor has it downsides.
  65. @Bernard
    38,000 new infections today. If that’s the best we can do with a total lockdown what is the point? Let’s stipulate that only 80% of the population is strictly adhering to distancing guidelines. Even with that, shouldn’t there be a reduction in the new cases per day after 5 weeks? I get it, there’s more testing, but as far as I know the testing is for people who are symptomatic and not those who are healthy. What we are doing is postponing the enviable while destroying our economy. If the trade off was one for another, it might justified. Instead, we are destroying our way of life for a short postponement.

    I like that. Never postpone the enviable.

  66. @Revenuesource
    I would guess people in California and Miami dade have better vitaminD levels in the late winter then New Yorkers.

    So Ron Desantis was a hero, not an evil creep, for dragging his feet on a lockdown and then supporting re-opening of the beaches. Has anyone on CNN or MSNBC mentioned Miami yet?

    • Replies: @J.Ross
    Which part of New York City is Miami in? That like Jamaica?
  67. @Reg Cæsar

    Sure, the conventional wisdom is right sometimes This definitely is not one of those times.
     
    There is conventional wisdom this time? The advice given by the various "experts" is all over the map.

    And this is the crux of it.

    The data are all over the map. Some data show the Coronavirus being as dangerous as the Spanish Flu. Other data show the Coronavirus as being “only” about as dangerous as the Hong Kong Flu (which was by far the nastiest epidemic in my lifetime).

    So Steve, instead of cherry-picking his data like a good True Believer, shows all the data and tries to figure out what it all means. That includes the possibility that ALL the data are suspect.

  68. “Reality is that which when you stop believing in it, it doesn’t go away.” Philip K. Dick

    If I stop believing in the fact that every antibody test indicates a death rate closer to .2%, I don’t think it’s going to go away.

    Conversely, if Covid-mongers stop believing in the notion that Covid will kill all but the most vulnerable, it will go away. Just sayin’.

  69. Woke corporate defeats the left with the left’s weapons: Amazon Whole Food docs record that diversity immunizes against unionization

    https://archive.fo/1khJw

    Store-risk metrics include average store compensation, average total store sales, and a “diversity index” that represents the racial and ethnic diversity of every store. Stores at higher risk of unionizing have lower diversity and lower employee compensation, as well as higher total store sales and higher rates of workers’ compensation claims, according to the documents.

    http://www.informationliberation.com/?id=61403

    This has been something Steve has been observing for a while.

  70. @The Alarmist
    So Ron Desantis was a hero, not an evil creep, for dragging his feet on a lockdown and then supporting re-opening of the beaches. Has anyone on CNN or MSNBC mentioned Miami yet?

    Which part of New York City is Miami in? That like Jamaica?

    • Replies: @The Alarmist
    Hmmm ... I thought it was part of Lon Guyland.
  71. I think the only thing Steve did wrong in his thinking was taking New York Statistics as being 100% Truthful.

    1) New York is either lying for political purposes
    2) Purposefully killing people for political purposes
    3) Or, as a previous commentator talked about the hospitals like the Queens Elmwood or whatever are REALLY BAD…not even worth being called ‘hospital’

    The reason why Steve took New York stats as truth was because of Northern Italy, London, and a refusal to go ((there)).

    London, I put in the same category of New York, too much politics to take anything seriously. Plus, anyone who has lived in London knows you get sick every 3 months with the London Tube Disease. Coronavirus doesn’t even have to exist for people to get sick and die in London…pneumonia is good enough.

    I suspect Italy was the media scaremongering because they knew it would take a while for data to be published, and they knew no one could fly to Italy and actually Check.

    Especially when one of the scaremongers in Northern Italy was an Israeli Doctor who looked suspiciously like a young Weinstein…and he said that over 60s were being denied ventilators.

    Basically….

    We got had. But it’s now time to get Un-Had…and Call the liars out.

    • Agree: Je Suis Omar Mateen
    • Troll: moshe
  72. @Reg Cæsar

    By Apoorva Mandavilli
     
    What is that shiny growth on Apoorva's nose?


    https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/1068662541516189696/h_ap-Sg_.jpg

    It’s a ‘I’m not a Basic Bitch’ denier.

    It’s the thing girls who are totally Average in Every Respect wear in order to try to be un-average.

    She’s average looking, average thinking, average love-life, there’s nothing about her that Stands Out.

    It’s better to be a bit Ugly than to be the Ultimate in Average.

    Yes, it’s better to be fat, with a fat husband wearing all black outside a chicken shop happily snogging than the be Totally Average.

    So she gets the shiny nose pimple booger.

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    It’s the thing girls who are totally Average in Every Respect wear in order to try to be un-average.
     
    So it's the opposite of a beauty mark?


    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beauty_mark#Artificial_beauty_mark



    https://www.orlandomicroblade.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/mark-marilyn-monrow.jpg
  73. The problem with Covid is that…

    No one is comparing it to anything. You are looking at these studies…Covid Causes Multiple Organ Failure…Covid Causes death Via Hypoxia

    But…

    Don’t all the other nasty little bugs do the exact same thing?

    H1N1 would attack the lymphatic system and lower your body temperature so that it could replicate better…that’s why so many people would feel better for a day or two and then get sicker

    Flus lead to Cytokine Storms which is your Body Eating Itself Whole

    Pneumonia is you drowning in your lungs! (?)

    You get the idea…when you look at Covid Studies in a Vacuum it looks Frighteningly Awful

    Until you realize…

    Oh all the other bugs do the same thing

    • Disagree: Peter Frost
    • Replies: @CJ
    All the other bugs don’t kill the numbers of on the job workers that Covid-19 does. I posted on this previously, but I’m not going to redo all the links because it’s all easily searchable: hundreds of medical personnel, particularly in Italy, Britain and France, dozens of active duty NYPD, 68 NYC MTA transit workers. You just do not get numbers like this dead of flus and colds in a couple of months. This is neither an Andromeda Strain Black Plague nor just another flu.
  74. @Kratoklastes

    What do you think it would be like without the restrictions? My guesstimate is a Civil War’s worth.
     
    Your guesstimate based on what?

    The best evidence we have is that the 'restrictions' were imposed far too late to make a difference, if the start date (globally) is earlier than January 15th 2020 and the initial R[0] is anywhere above 2.0

    As I have said from the get-go: everyone discovered the word 'exponential' in February (or re-discovered it, if they did year 9 maths), but fuck-all people [re-]discovered the logistic function.

    Logistic functions look a lot like ZOMFG!! EXPERNENSHUL!! functions, until they hit their second 'knee' - at which point they flatten (sometimes rather abruptly)... endogenously (including as a result of people making individual decisions in response to perceived risk).

    None of this is rocket surgery.

    All the logistic curves flattened well before endemicity, and the flattening coincided with increases in average daytime temperatures in the Wrong (Northern) Hemisphere. There was the odd 'blip' (e.g., N'Awlins; some funeral in Jaw-ja etc) where some other shit happened.

    In other news: irony finally laid its deathly-cold finger on my shoulder.

    I have coronavirus.

    Turns out it's not "the" coronavirus.

    I have a cold - which as we all know is caused by a coronavirus.

    Still... in a day or so I will be able to bray about being a 'coronavirus survivor'.

    I might write a riveting, first-person testimony, giving great details of my personal triumph over seemingly-insurmountable odds.

    Would it be 'stolen valour' to walk the streets dressed in scrubs bought off eBay?

    KEK

    > Logistic functions look a lot like [exponential] functions, until they hit their second ‘knee’ – at which point they flatten (sometimes rather abruptly)… endogenously (including as a result of people making individual decisions in response to perceived risk).

    This.

    Every wannabe public intellectual should reflect on the curves that chart the progress of the infection/disease on a semi-log plot. I refer to the ones at 91-DIVOC, but there are plenty of others.

    The shapes of the curves for ~95% of jurisdictions are the same. They aren’t linear, or exponential, or logistic. But they’re about the same as each other, irrespective of lockdown status or timing. Per Kratoklastes, this is important.

    I’m listening to CBS This Morning as I type, and it’s a bit depressing. The reporters and the people they interview… aren’t deep thinkers.

  75. @Revenuesource
    I would guess people in California and Miami dade have better vitaminD levels in the late winter then New Yorkers.

    Well since we know that all viruses are created equal, the superior performance of the New York virus must be due to Magic Dirt.

    The only alternative is the Anti-Asian bias of the xenophobic Miami natives refusing to have anything to do with the WuFlu.

  76. @Deckin
    Well an antibody + rate 15x the case rate is exactly what's been found already in Florida, San Francisco, New York, Delaware... It would seem that working backwards from what is collected evidence to then come up with a number one doesn't like because it sounds too high is maybe not the best procedure.

    Now take this 5-6% number and run it through Sweden's numbers so far (1500 or so dead) and then say they were either stupid or crazy or inhumanely cruel. It's hard to see how Miami could have a higher exposure/antibody rate than Sweden where, as of today, people are still eating in restaurants. Could Swedes be that natively more cold and distant than freaked out Floridians?

    The Swedes are Scandinavians whereas the people who live in Miami-Dade are predominantly spanish-speaking Hispanic people so quite a lot of cultural differences. The latitude and climate are quite different too.

  77. When it comes to these statistics so much depends on factors that are not fully understood. For example Florida looked as if it had topped the curve and was going down and then suddenly yesterday there was a massive spike in New Corona virus infections or people testing positive.

    Possibly this was due to a huge batch of tests from a prison or something like that being processed on a single day but we simply don’t know all the information about why these numbers have shot up and generally newspaper and TV reporters don’t know either.

  78. @Mr. Anon

    We’ve had a Vietnam’s worth of deaths up to this point with the harsh restrictions.
     
    We don't how many deaths have actually been caused by coronavirus infection.

    What do you think it would be like without the restrictions? My guesstimate is a Civil War’s worth.
     
    My guesstimate is.........no difference without the restrictions.

    I think if they had worked on getting people to do the normal actions you do to avoid the flu, then in general it would have been fine. They did need to lock down the nursing homes. Add it creating a few units of doctors and nurses to head where there were major outbreaks and it would have been about the same number.

    Also, we absolutely have no idea of how many people have been infected because the tests, in general, are crap.

  79. @Lowe
    Way to go for the semantic jugular. Steve's entire schtick is that he is an independent thinker and he don't take no guff.

    Sure, the conventional wisdom is right sometimes This definitely is not one of those times. The conventional wisdom has people wearing masks and cowering in their apartments right now, and it has Steve making posts about optimal seating arrangements in movie theaters.

    It was important for us to get it right on this issue. The shutdown has put millions of mostly poor people out of work, and it will cause many shattered dreams and premature deaths all on its own. The more data comes out, the more this looks like a terrible mistake. There have been people expressing skepticism about the narrative on this for sometime, but Sailer isn't one of them.

    Sure, the conventional wisdom is right sometimes This definitely is not one of those times…The shutdown has put millions of mostly poor people out of work, and it will cause many shattered dreams and premature deaths all on its own. The more data comes out, the more this looks like a terrible mistake.

    Well, courtesy of MoA here’s a nice Financial Times chart of total weekly deaths in Britain for almost the last 50(!) years. I’ve already linked it in a couple of other places, but I might as well do so again:

    Does this look like a disease with Flu-type fatality rates of around 0.1%?

    Given the horrific situation in Lombardy and now NYC/NJ, I just can’t understand the thinking of the hordes of Flu Hoaxers who hang around here.

    • Replies: @MikeatMikedotMike
    Hey Ron,

    Are you flying the helicopter and Sailer is on the bullhorn? Or is it the other way around?

    https://twitter.com/MattWalshBlog/status/1253000648318226434
    , @Deckin
    Either my screen has gunk on it, but it looks like three other data points from earlier weeks and two from later weeks in the year and it looks less than one really high spike in the first or second week. So what were those? Are all viral outbreaks at or below average? We really do live in Lake Wobegon.
    , @kpkinsunnyphiladelphia

    Given the horrific situation in Lombardy and now NYC/NJ, I just can’t understand the thinking of the hordes of Flu Hoaxers who hang around here.
     

    Apples and oranges.

    Lombardy is full of old people, a huge Chinese ex pat population, the air is bad, and the health care system is atrocious.

    In NYC, thousands of Chinese fly into the city on regular basis, poor people are obese, in terrible health, pack themselves into crowded subways two or three times a day, and nursing home personnel who change the bedpans have IQs in the 90s. Northern NJ might as well be NY given it's population density and demographics.

    We need to understand each place AS IT IS.

    That's not to say Corona-Chan isn't bad -- it is.

    What we shouldn't do is take perfectly healthy people under 60 with no co-morbidities -- really, most of the population in most places that aren't Lombardy or NYC -- and put them under effective house arrest in the mistaken belief that such actions will somehow save all the 80 year olds with COPD.

    Of course, the lockdown has super-duper benefits for mediocrities like Whitmer, Cuomo, Murphy, and Pritzker. It gives them an unending hard on -- yes, for Whitmer too -- since they can let their authoritarian freak flag fly, while destroying their economies for which they can blame Donald Trump because he didn't shut down the country on February 1st.

    You need to get straight about who the really dangerous hoaxers are.

    , @Mr. Anon
    No, but it might look like a sudden spike in mortality from a lot of old people dying in their own homes from neglect, people dying from heart-attacks at home, people dying of DVT because they've been sitting in their homes drinking for the last four weeks, people dying because they were put on a ventillator for something that would have been better treated elsewise, and people dying from COVID-19 because we decided to quarantine everyone instead of quaranting specifically those who are at risk.
    , @Mr. Anon
    Actually, now that you mention it, that red curve is not out of line with some of the data displayed for December/January.
    , @Mr. Anon
    Here is England & Wales all-cause mortality displayed back to 1993:

    https://swprs.files.wordpress.com/2020/04/inproportion2_chart5.png?w=736&h=363

    Source: http://inproportion2.talkigy.com/

    Note that it only goes out to April 10th, the latest date available when the data was reported on April 21, so that right-most spike will have some additional width to it.

    Does COVID-19 look like a disease with Flu-type fatality rates?

    It does to me, yes.

    , @Lars Porsena
    The text at the top of the graph says "unprecedented".

    That graph shows the current tally in a bold red line, and I presume, the tally from previous years as faint blue dots.

    It shows a spike in the bold red line, and the spike is shown for a duration of 2 weeks.

    The text also says it's for "death registrations".

    If you connected all the blue dots with a bold red line, would the red spike in that graph continue to stand out, apart from being a bit late in the year for a spike? There are 3 blue dots on that graph above the highest part of the red peak ( weeks 50 and 1, rather than 15 or so), and about 6-8 in the range of that 2 week spike (weeks 1, 2, 8, and 49-52).

    If the spike hangs in the air like that for 10 weeks, that would be extremely unprecedented in the last 50 years and unlike anything previously observed.

    But in a 2 week duration, if it were to go down for a 3rd week, it looks like the graph shows at least a few precedents in the past 50 years but shows them in a different color. It certainly doesn't make it look like nothing, it looks like it's competing with the 2 or 3 worst spikes in death registrations in the last 50 years.

    I have no idea what was causing those previous spikes. I notice they do all occur in what I would think of as flu season and not in the middle of summer. They may not be diseases, perhaps terrorist IRA bombings or train derailments or something? It presents itself as death registrations. The period of the graph does not cover the London Blitz or the Spanish Flu.

    I think part of the problem with the flu debate is most people don't define what they mean by 'flu'. You did. 0.1%.

    I think we could possibly benefit from defining it like we define floods. Yearly flus, decadal flus, semi-centennial flus, centennial flus, etc. I would guess 0.1% would be a yearly flu. I might agree to call it decadal but no more than that.

    That spike looks nothing like a yearly flu, easily worse than a decadal flu. It doesn't necessarily seem out of the ballpark for a bi-decadal or semi-centennial flu, and is still quite easily imaginable for a centennial flu. Just as a 'cause of death' generically, that graph covering 50 years makes it look like a bi-decadal to semi-centennial cause of death.
    , @Guest 234
    As Deckin notes, and unless Deckin and I are reading this chart of weekly UK death registrations incorrectly, it appears that the number of death registrations in a given week in the UK has exceeded the 2020 level on at least three occasions since 1970.

    The chart doesn't indicate which years those were or what the causes were, but if one assumes that the spikes were caused by some kind of flu, because they are all concentrated in peak flu-season weeks, then COVID-19 does indeed look like just a bad flu, perhaps the fourth worst since 1970. (Note: it's also possible that the other weeks when flu deaths exceeded COVID-19 deaths all occurred in one year, so it's possible that COVID-19 is the second or third worst flu since 1970, in terms of weekly death registrations, at least in the UK.)

    If the UK has had three weeks since 1970 when weekly flu deaths exceeded weekly COVID-19 deaths, then I don't think it's unreasonable to equate COVID-19 with a bad flu. And I don't recall the UK's economy (or any other economy) being shut down in any other year since 1970 to deal a bad flu.

    , @utu
    The red line spike is defined by two points: Week 14 and Week 15 if I am reading it correctly. They are about 5,500 and 7,500 above the red baseline, respectively. Weekly CoV deaths for UK can be obtained from the worldometers.info data by summing up the daily deaths:

    Week 14 ending April 5: 3,708
    Week 15 ending April 12: 5,678
    Week 16 ending April 19: 5,448

    The CoV weekly deaths are 2,000 lower weekly totals than excess mortality totals from Financial Times graph. So either CoV deaths (Week 14+15) are undercounted by 40% (13/9.2-1) or there is a second killer in UK that kills at 60% lower rate than CoV.
    , @DanHessinMD
    When future archeologists pronounce it safe enter the empty territory of Sweden in the summer of 2021, I move that our gracious host should get first dibs on the land.
  80. Anonymous[333] • Disclaimer says:
    @GalenMD
    For antibody tests, they control for false positives using frozen blood that was drawn long before the outbreak began. The fatality numbers published in journals from the serological tests are conservative upper limits of the fatality rate. The scientists often make very soft conclusions so as not to shock the media/public/scientific community that we shut down the country over a nothing virus.

    Watch the numbers continue to drop to less than 0,1% in the coming weeks to months, especially in regions where they didn't label virtually every death as suspected COVID-19. Eventually, the IFR will converge to that of the seasonal flu, or perhaps even less than the flu (because flu kills a lot of healthy children every year whereas COVID spares the young and healthy -- and we often do not test for flu / put on death certificate because it does not change the management of the patient).

    Watch the numbers continue to drop to less than 0,1% in the coming weeks to months, especially in regions where they didn’t label virtually every death as suspected COVID-19. Eventually, the IFR will converge to that of the seasonal flu, or perhaps even less than the flu (because flu kills a lot of healthy children every year whereas COVID spares the young and healthy — and we often do not test for flu / put on death certificate because it does not change the management of the patient).

    Are you a practicing medical doctor?

  81. Anonymous[333] • Disclaimer says:
    @Kratoklastes

    What do you think it would be like without the restrictions? My guesstimate is a Civil War’s worth.
     
    Your guesstimate based on what?

    The best evidence we have is that the 'restrictions' were imposed far too late to make a difference, if the start date (globally) is earlier than January 15th 2020 and the initial R[0] is anywhere above 2.0

    As I have said from the get-go: everyone discovered the word 'exponential' in February (or re-discovered it, if they did year 9 maths), but fuck-all people [re-]discovered the logistic function.

    Logistic functions look a lot like ZOMFG!! EXPERNENSHUL!! functions, until they hit their second 'knee' - at which point they flatten (sometimes rather abruptly)... endogenously (including as a result of people making individual decisions in response to perceived risk).

    None of this is rocket surgery.

    All the logistic curves flattened well before endemicity, and the flattening coincided with increases in average daytime temperatures in the Wrong (Northern) Hemisphere. There was the odd 'blip' (e.g., N'Awlins; some funeral in Jaw-ja etc) where some other shit happened.

    In other news: irony finally laid its deathly-cold finger on my shoulder.

    I have coronavirus.

    Turns out it's not "the" coronavirus.

    I have a cold - which as we all know is caused by a coronavirus.

    Still... in a day or so I will be able to bray about being a 'coronavirus survivor'.

    I might write a riveting, first-person testimony, giving great details of my personal triumph over seemingly-insurmountable odds.

    Would it be 'stolen valour' to walk the streets dressed in scrubs bought off eBay?

    KEK

    The best evidence we have is that the ‘restrictions’ were imposed far too late to make a difference, if the start date (globally) is earlier than January 15th 2020 and the initial R[0] is anywhere above 2.0

    How could the massive unprecedented “social distancing” not be making a difference?

    Sheesh.

    • Replies: @vhrm

    How could the massive unprecedented “social distancing” not be making a difference?

    Sheesh.
     
    "social distancing" is an umbrella term for many specific interventions.

    It's not clear how much impact each of them has but the principle of diminishing returns is likely at play.

    A specific point of argument is that the most onerous and costly interventions: shelter-in-place and closing businesses and stores were unnecessary because the curve of the pandemic had already been bent by the time they were put in place.


    (there are also some arguments that some measures were downright counterproductive e.g. sending college kids home probably sent Corona home with some of them. )
    , @Kratoklastes



    The best evidence we have is that the ‘restrictions’ were imposed far too late to make a difference, if the start date (globally) is earlier than January 15th 2020 and the initial R[0] is anywhere above 2.0
     
    How could the massive unprecedented “social distancing” not be making a difference?

     

    Simple, really.

    If the pathogen had a starting R[0] above 2 and had been running unchecked in a population for 3 months - assuming that the first cohort[1] of infected arrived in the the US in December [2]- then it's actually very likely that the (logistic) process was already past its second knee and the reproductive rate was already declining.

    There's plenty of evidence of this - the other day another commenter (Hail) posted a chart of reproductive rate in Germany, showing that it was below 1 before the political spike was driven into the brain of the economy, and killing the economy did not materially change the number.

    A ban on large groups (groups > 1000) was implemented on the 9th, but nothing else until March 23rd. Dunno why anyone would think that the ban on groups of 1000 would be meaningful: how many 1000-person groups is a normal person involved in, over the course of a month?

    https://hailtoyou.files.wordpress.com/2020/04/coronavirus-r0-in-germany-march-6-to-april-9.png


    [1] I take pains to say "the first cohort of infected" because the process did not start with one individual (it's beyond retarded to think that).

    [2] The 'canonical' first infected person in America happened on January 19th 2020, and was[3] a symptomatic 35-year-old male non-smoker with no chronic disease who required hospitalisation (he was also given supplementary oxygen, but not in an ICU context).

    He was an import - caught it in China, and was asymptomatic when get got on the plane on January 15th; by Jan 18th he had symptoms and was hospitalised.

    So out of the tens of thousands of people who arrived from China between mid-December and January 15th, he's the one guy?

    Given what we know about this disease, that profile is extremely unlikely (< 1% of cases): it's overwhelmingly more likely that the initial 'seed' in the US was from a group of asymptomatic infectees.


    [3] I say 'was' because he's not still infected: he didn't die - a thing he has in common with the vast bulk of infectees under 70, most of whom have such low symptoms that the disease is over before they recognise that they might be ill.
  82. One other factor to consider in these surprising Miami-Dade results is the typical time between infection and death…

    Most estimates I’d seen had generally assumed 2-3 weeks, but there was a recent study claiming the mean-period is actually 4 weeks, and I’m starting to believe that may be correct.

    For example, California has had a very successful early lockdown, so we’ve had relatively few deaths, and I’d been starting to think we would probably come in well under 1500. But in the last week or so, our deaths have actually spiked, coming roughly a month after the lockdown. Maybe it’s just due to a few nursing homes getting infected, or other such statistical artifacts. But I think the lag might be considerably longer than 3 weeks.

    So maybe we should wait another week or two for the current FL deaths to correspond to the measured infections and give us a better IFR.

    • Replies: @Anonymous

    One other factor to consider in these surprising Miami-Dade results is the typical time between infection and death…
     
    Why do you consider them to be surprising?
    , @Kyle
    To me New York results are surprising and the Miami results are what I expected. New York is the only real city in America. New York makes every other American city look like a small town in comparison. What’s different about New York that caused the infection to be so deadly there?
  83. The different variants explanation is not unfalsifiable. The genomes of New York and Miami viruses can be sequenced and compared. Indeed, some COVID-19 viruses have already been sequenced. Of course, then you have to see if any differences you find are meaningful.

    Watching For Mutations in the Coronavirus

  84. @scrivener3
    I would say objectively that our host is consumed by this subject.

    It is not unexpected. Dostoevsky, when sentenced to death by the Czar and believing his life would soon end, said of his experience: that to have a six inch ledge on the side of a mountain and to have to live eternity on that six inch ledge, would be preferable to death.

    For far too many scientists and commenters, people older than 65 or with a chronic disease or poor health, covid-19 is a personal matter which blind them to the facts. Of course the facts themselves are pretty confusing at this stage.

    Personally, I like this sober assessment by a retired Swedish epidemiologist, now a consultant with the Swedish government. Sweden seems to be doing fine without mandatory lockdown. 0% BS guaranteed. Worth listening: there’s a brief summary a the bottom in the description for the lazy or those in a hurry.

    • Thanks: Jonathan Mason
  85. @Ron Unz

    Sure, the conventional wisdom is right sometimes This definitely is not one of those times...The shutdown has put millions of mostly poor people out of work, and it will cause many shattered dreams and premature deaths all on its own. The more data comes out, the more this looks like a terrible mistake.
     
    Well, courtesy of MoA here's a nice Financial Times chart of total weekly deaths in Britain for almost the last 50(!) years. I've already linked it in a couple of other places, but I might as well do so again:

    https://www.moonofalabama.org/images10/britainexessdeath2.jpg

    Does this look like a disease with Flu-type fatality rates of around 0.1%?

    Given the horrific situation in Lombardy and now NYC/NJ, I just can't understand the thinking of the hordes of Flu Hoaxers who hang around here.

    Hey Ron,

    Are you flying the helicopter and Sailer is on the bullhorn? Or is it the other way around?

    • Agree: Mehen
  86. @Lowe
    Saying Steve Sailer is not a contrarian after you compared him with Israel Shamir or Ron Unz is bizarro-level thinking. Is King Kong also not a monster because he's not as big as Godzilla?

    Maybe I don't know much about coronavirus, and I admit I'm no genius with numbers. But even I can see that the more data we get, the more the CFR goes down... this has been going on for weeks now. It's just become totally damning with the recent antibody tests.

    I can name a few people on the right, who may even be reading this now, who have shown almost no humility in the face of uncertainty, and in the light of our apparent decision to impoverish and endanger many, many poor people.

    Sailer has not been as bad as that, for sure.
    But he hasn't exactly covered himself in glory with posts about pointless hygiene rituals, when the real story is how wrong we are going to turn out to have been, and how bad the economic consequences are.

    “when the real story is how wrong we are going to turn out to have been, and how bad the economic consequences are.”

    Because we generally associate a virus to massive spread and deaths. So when that phenomenon does not occur, then the policies and procedures to limit its transmission and keep people safe are called into question. “See, it’s not that bad, let’s go about our normal business”. In the end, it’s not about #DyingForTheDow.

    • Agree: Peter Frost
    • Troll: Manfred Arcane
    • Replies: @Lowe
    The numbers don't support this. There is a huge distance between the truth and what was put forward to justify the shutdown.

    The current infection rate is at least 10x higher than originally thought. I say at least b/c there is a delay with the studies. Being real about it, it's likely 20x.

    From the beginning of this, worldwide death numbers looked like a bad flu season, not a terrible, world-beating disease. Bad patches from North Italy were cherrypicked as examples to support what has turned out to be the wrong policy.

    That policy put a stop on countless people's life aspirations, and endangered the physical and social welfare of many poor people. Did you forget these people exist? You seem to be the one too focused on the Dow.
    , @BIG DUCK
    Except you have absolutely no evidence your measures did anything beyond destroying small business. This is serious superstitious native thinking along with failed prediction behavior. "Oh my prediction failed? That's not because its a bad prediction, it because we made the Gods happy with our virgin sacrifice". Grow up and live with the cognitive dissonance rather than acting like ufo or end of the world cult.

    And anyone that thinks destroying people's economic livelihood and the food supply chain is just an amusement to fight the system and Dow Jones, never worked a day in their lives.

  87. @Lugash
    The point isn't to be a contrarian, the point is to know the truth and speak it. And to be reasonably prudent. We've had a Vietnam's worth of deaths up to this point with the harsh restrictions. What do you think it would be like without the restrictions? My guesstimate is a Civil War's worth.

    Sometimes the conventional wisdom is correct. Sometimes you share it with Rachel Maddow and Andrew Cuomo. That doesn't mean you always share it, or don't keep re-evaluating it... for example, I'm keeping the idea that NYC has a different strain than the rest of the country and that their infection rates won't transfer to the rest of the country due to lifestyle factors, so Cuomo and Maddow are falsely projecting their experience onto the rest of us.

    How about total viral load, i.e. multiple exposures over a short period of time? A NYC resident who commutes on the subway could be exposed several times and reach a point where the body cannot clear enough of the virus.

    Think of the doctor in Wuhan, the one the broke the news about the extent of the virus. He was a healthy man in his 30s but he died from virus. Did he reach a point where he was exposed too many times and his body could not handle the total viral load?

    Perhaps a little exposure, esp. in when ample sun (Vit. D) is available, is a good way to develop antibodies w/o having symptoms.

    • Replies: @Black-hole creator

    Perhaps a little exposure, esp. in when ample sun (Vit. D) is available, is a good way to develop antibodies w/o having symptoms.
     
    The WHO has just announced that there is no proven immunity from having antibodies in your blood. The plot thickens. If I were a conspiracy theorist, I'd say this is a perfect tool to thin the herd from the old and already sick. The rest will just have to live with the virus, pretty much how most people live with the incurable herpes-1 virus. Unfortunately, I am neither young nor particularly healthy, so I am not too happy with this conspiracy.
  88. Gimenez said the UM survey of Miami-Dade reflects a national trend showing African Americans are disproportionately impacted by the novel coronavirus. “African Americans are more than twice as likely to be infected with COVID-19 than other racial groups,” he said.

    Of course, that makes sense, doesn’t it?

    Blacks are more likely to

    –have uncontrolled hypertension.
    –be anemic or asthmatic
    –have diabetes
    –be obese
    –do lots of touching and hugging
    –be unaware of the nature this disease

    That’s why you’re starting to see the theme of Wuhan as another “civil rights issue.” Fauci, being the exemplar of a politically correct deep stater, fell right in line.

    As sure as night follows day, the Dimms will use this disease vector as a political one, riling up the black community against Trump because blacks died at a greater rate.

    • Replies: @Hippopotamusdrome
    Blacks are more likely to

    --live in cities controlled by Democrats who want the economy to tank to hurt Trump's reelection, and need inflated death figures to drive support for more lockdown duration.
  89. @anon
    How reliable are those antibody tests? I've seen claims regarding the Heinsberg study in Germany and, iirc, also the Santa Clara study in California that many of those tests might give false results, because they also might show results for previous infections with other Coronaviruses which merely cause common colds.
    0,17 IFR? No way in hell I believe that.

    It would be interesting to know something about the mechanisms that cause false positives.

    For example, is it just a quality control problem in individual test kits? Or is there some characteristic of certain patients’ blood that is consistently measured incorrectly as an antibody?

    If it’s the first problem you could just give multiple tests to people who get a positive result, and measure the consistency of the outcome.

    If it’s the second problem, you could figure out what percentage of people have the particular blood characteristic that incorrectly measures as antibody positive. In either case, you could statistically account for the phenomenon.

    The other “problem” not discussed is the number of people that were able to fight off the virus without even needing to generate antibodies. I guess you’d have to expose a random sample of healthy people to the virus and measure the response to figure out how often that happens. Are researchers even allowed to do that kind of experiment with volunteers?

    • Replies: @ic1000
    Good points, Mr. Toad. One concept that addresses part of your comment is the distinction between "analytical validity" and "clinical validity."

    Analytical validity is "in narrow terms, did the assay perform the way it was supposed to?"
    Clinical validity is "were the assay's results correct with respect to the condition it is diagnosing?"

    Analytical validity is more cut and dried, clinical validity is more subject to "what, exactly, is the question you are asking." Obviously, clinical validity is what's most important to... clinicians.

    (Written on the fly, I'm sure the usual sources have better descriptions.)
  90. Humidity might help.

    In Miami you could just turn off the air conditioning. Elsewhere, maybe retrofit humidifiers.

    This might play havoc with electronics.

  91. The President of Africa wants debt forgiveness because of corona.

  92. @Corvinus
    "when the real story is how wrong we are going to turn out to have been, and how bad the economic consequences are."

    Because we generally associate a virus to massive spread and deaths. So when that phenomenon does not occur, then the policies and procedures to limit its transmission and keep people safe are called into question. "See, it's not that bad, let's go about our normal business". In the end, it's not about #DyingForTheDow.

    The numbers don’t support this. There is a huge distance between the truth and what was put forward to justify the shutdown.

    The current infection rate is at least 10x higher than originally thought. I say at least b/c there is a delay with the studies. Being real about it, it’s likely 20x.

    From the beginning of this, worldwide death numbers looked like a bad flu season, not a terrible, world-beating disease. Bad patches from North Italy were cherrypicked as examples to support what has turned out to be the wrong policy.

    That policy put a stop on countless people’s life aspirations, and endangered the physical and social welfare of many poor people. Did you forget these people exist? You seem to be the one too focused on the Dow.

  93. @Anonymous

    Steve, I really appreciate that you believed me enough to go buy three humidifiers when I first reported the value of humidity a couple of months ago. But I think it is worthwhile to re-up the humidity thing as a blog post again.
     
    Can you recommend a make and model?

    > Can you recommend a [humidifier] make and model?

    For whole-house humidification of homes with forced-air heating, see this March 16 exchange between me and Jack D.

    Although that may not be what you are looking for, since we’re moving into the summer.

  94. Nutball unz is now concerned with methodological rigor and data after writing a bizarre evidence free screed repeating Chinese propganda and blaming the United States military for cornavirus. Contemplate that for a second.

    • Agree: moshe
    • Troll: Eagle Eye
  95. I volunteer to be tested for the coronavirus and to be used as a guinea pig under the conditions that I receive a 100 million dollars COD that I can will off to family and friends in the event that I die during the testing.

  96. @Alexander Turok

    matches the consensus of goodthinkers and Model UN types everywhere
     
    We also agree on this "round Earth" theory.

    Nice. Maybe you will never have to address that every day this goes on has made you look more wrong.

  97. Random thought. Some here have mentioned a Vietnam or Civil War level death toll. I have a more comparable situation.

    On February 19th, 1945 US Marines invaded Iwo Jima. By the 26th of March the island had been taken. Some 6000 Marines were killed and almost ALL of the 22,000 Japanese soldiers were dead. Those numbers pretty much match what the death toll has been in New Jersey and New York from the Chinese coronavirus over a comparable period of time.

    I think anyone who suggested the battle of Iwo Jima was just a skirmish or not a serious affair in 1945 would probably be looking for some new teeth.

  98. @Hypnotoad666
    It would be interesting to know something about the mechanisms that cause false positives.

    For example, is it just a quality control problem in individual test kits? Or is there some characteristic of certain patients' blood that is consistently measured incorrectly as an antibody?

    If it's the first problem you could just give multiple tests to people who get a positive result, and measure the consistency of the outcome.

    If it's the second problem, you could figure out what percentage of people have the particular blood characteristic that incorrectly measures as antibody positive. In either case, you could statistically account for the phenomenon.

    The other "problem" not discussed is the number of people that were able to fight off the virus without even needing to generate antibodies. I guess you'd have to expose a random sample of healthy people to the virus and measure the response to figure out how often that happens. Are researchers even allowed to do that kind of experiment with volunteers?

    Good points, Mr. Toad. One concept that addresses part of your comment is the distinction between “analytical validity” and “clinical validity.”

    Analytical validity is “in narrow terms, did the assay perform the way it was supposed to?”
    Clinical validity is “were the assay’s results correct with respect to the condition it is diagnosing?”

    Analytical validity is more cut and dried, clinical validity is more subject to “what, exactly, is the question you are asking.” Obviously, clinical validity is what’s most important to… clinicians.

    (Written on the fly, I’m sure the usual sources have better descriptions.)

    • Replies: @Anonymous

    Analytical validity is “in narrow terms, did the assay perform the way it was supposed to?”
    Clinical validity is “were the assay’s results correct with respect to the condition it is diagnosing?”
     
    What does it even mean for an assay’s “results” to be “correct” with respect to a “condition”?
  99. @The Germ Theory of Disease
    Z1. The Covid-19 virus is quite real (viz not a hoax), it is different from the ordinary flu in important ways, and it is very dangerous to certain populations, and not so dangerous to other populations.

    2. Had Donald Trump not been president, the publicly-organized and -enforced response to a real but not cataclysmic public health threat would have been rational, orderly, efficient, most likely effective, with a sound feedback loop for adjustment and a sane, gardez-votre-sang-froid mentality as seen in pandemics past.

    2a. Examples of rational and orderly responses would have included: early and very strict curtailment of all travel to and from China, and from East Asia generally, with strict quarantines and contact monitoring for returning US citizens; stiff quarantine procedures for the elderly, other at-risk populations, and identifiable "super-spreader" entities; and stern but rational recommendations for everyone else. Life goes on, economy stays normal, a slightly-larger but not catastrophic number of older and infirm people die, Wheel of Life, listen to some Jacques Brel and then move on.

    2b. Importantly, a major feature of a rational public-health response would have been a unified, non-politicized, clearly explained stance from the entire government, speaking in a single calm, agreed-upon voice. Not the Speaker of the House tearing up the President's speech at the State of the UNION address.

    3. But Donald Trump is the President, and therefore here we are, stuck in chaos, economic free-fall, mass hysteria and morbid sentimentality instead of clear thinking.

    3a. This course of action was deliberately, willfully and maliciously chosen, in virtual unanimity, by our leading classes: government, media, academia, judicial and so on. The clear purpose of this choice was to launch yet another coup attempt against the presidency of Donald Trump. The previous two coup attempts had failed, but this was a ripe poison apple that fell right into their laps.

    4. To be clear: the virus itself and the outbreak were real, non-engineered events. But the specific response to the outbreak was malicious and deliberate with respect to the wellbeing of the American people.

    5. The Powers That Be hate Donald Trump, and by extension the White, Christian, heritage-American electorate for whom he spoke, with such a deadly fury that they were willing to seize on a recurring, seasonal disease outbreak with known protocols of response, and malignant lay use it to destroy the American economy (Trump's main selling point) in order to bring down a president when their previous open coup attempts had failed.

    If Trump were not president, HRC would have been. Since she is a quintessential globalist and the Clinton Foundation is the recipient of hundreds of thousands of dollars from Chinese sources, what makes you think she would have ordered the stopping of flights from China any sooner than Trump? Can you name any credible Democratic voices that didn’t criticize Trump for the travel restrictions he imposed?

    As to the other measures, the US would be even further behind on testing. The permanent bureaucracy at the CDC and FDA cranked out tainted tests and forbade any other testing sources. It was Trump who cut through the red tape and turned the private sector loose in the development and production of testing.

    What about HRC makes you think that her performance in any of the critical decisions would have been superior to Trump’s? Trump wasn’t running against an infinite selection of opponents; he ran and won against HRC.

    • Replies: @Eagle Eye

    the Clinton Foundation is the recipient of hundreds of thousands of dollars from Chinese sources,
     
    Try hundreds of millions received from Chinese sources in various forms. In return, the Chinese received U.S. rocket technology, wholesale transfer of industrial capacity to China, and no doubt countless other little favors that we haven't even heard about yet.

    Only a small proportion of China's total bribe would have been paid officially to the Clinton Slush Foundation by China and its cutouts. Remember Charlie Trie? Malaysian Chinese billionaire Lapseng Ng?

    A sovereign nation of China's size, history and sophistication has countless discreet methods for rewarding people who may benefit China or favored interests within or outside China, or just be a thorn in the side of China's adversaries.

    Non-cash incentive methods including sexual services, sexual blackmail, elimination of rivals etc. will also be well developed and readily available as they are to all major (and not so major) powers.

  100. @danand
    Singapore, population ~5.7M, has reported just 12 SARS-CoV-2 related deaths. Unfortunately, infection numbers are starting to take off:

    “A pivot in Singapore’s strategy could come as it grapples with a surge in cases among low-wage migrant workers living in cramped dormitories, who have long been essential in the city-state’s service and construction sectors.

    It reported a fourth straight day of virus cases going above 1,000 on Thursday, and confirmed cases now number more than 11,000.

    Almost 900 cases were reported Friday, with Singaporeans or permanent residents making up 13 cases.”
     

    Guess the leaders of Singapore are learning that reliance on quasi-slave labor has it downsides.

    • Agree: Polynikes
  101. Anonymous[333] • Disclaimer says:
    @Ron Unz
    One other factor to consider in these surprising Miami-Dade results is the typical time between infection and death...

    Most estimates I'd seen had generally assumed 2-3 weeks, but there was a recent study claiming the mean-period is actually 4 weeks, and I'm starting to believe that may be correct.

    For example, California has had a very successful early lockdown, so we've had relatively few deaths, and I'd been starting to think we would probably come in well under 1500. But in the last week or so, our deaths have actually spiked, coming roughly a month after the lockdown. Maybe it's just due to a few nursing homes getting infected, or other such statistical artifacts. But I think the lag might be considerably longer than 3 weeks.

    So maybe we should wait another week or two for the current FL deaths to correspond to the measured infections and give us a better IFR.

    One other factor to consider in these surprising Miami-Dade results is the typical time between infection and death…

    Why do you consider them to be surprising?

    • Replies: @Mehen


    Ron Unz: One other factor to consider in these surprising Miami-Dade results is the typical time between infection and death…
     
    Why do you consider them to be surprising?
     
    Good question.
    , @Ron Unz


    One other factor to consider in these surprising Miami-Dade results is the typical time between infection and death…
     
    Why do you consider them to be surprising?
     
    Well, the Santa Clara County and LA infection studies were basically garbage, due to non-random sampling.

    The NYC infection numbers seem the largest and most solid dataset, and they seem to imply an IFC of over 1%.

    So it's strange that the IFC in Miami-Dade would appear to be so much lower.
    , @Known Fact
    Writers toss around "surprising" and "unexpectedly" like Baskin-Robbins tosses around nuts and sprinkles
  102. Anonymous[333] • Disclaimer says:
    @ic1000
    Good points, Mr. Toad. One concept that addresses part of your comment is the distinction between "analytical validity" and "clinical validity."

    Analytical validity is "in narrow terms, did the assay perform the way it was supposed to?"
    Clinical validity is "were the assay's results correct with respect to the condition it is diagnosing?"

    Analytical validity is more cut and dried, clinical validity is more subject to "what, exactly, is the question you are asking." Obviously, clinical validity is what's most important to... clinicians.

    (Written on the fly, I'm sure the usual sources have better descriptions.)

    Analytical validity is “in narrow terms, did the assay perform the way it was supposed to?”
    Clinical validity is “were the assay’s results correct with respect to the condition it is diagnosing?”

    What does it even mean for an assay’s “results” to be “correct” with respect to a “condition”?

    • Replies: @ic1000
    > Clinical validity is “were the assay’s results correct with respect to the condition it is diagnosing?”

    > What does it even mean for an assay’s “results” to be “correct” with respect to a “condition”?

    This issue is playing out with RT-PCR tests of SARS-CoV-2 infection. A ~30% false negative rate is quoted -- in other words, 30% of people already known to be infected with the virus are declared "uninfected" by the test.

    If the virus is actually present in quantities that should be detected, but the result is nevertheless "negative," that would be an analytical failing.

    However, it turns out that some people who are infected shed very little virus into the respiratory tract, at some points in the course of the disease. In other words, the test is reporting the absence of virus from the sample, because virus is indeed absent. This would be an issue of clinical validity (assuming the test is being used to diagnose viral infection, which it is).
  103. Not a science girl, but genuinely curious to why is it so hard to come up with an accurate test? Is it because this bug has multiple strains? Or does it just test elevate white blood cell count, which could come from something simple like a sinus infection or infected cut? Or could it simply be a crony profiteering problem? I do know this testing issue doesn’t make me have much confidence in any future vaccine.

  104. @Ron Unz

    Sure, the conventional wisdom is right sometimes This definitely is not one of those times...The shutdown has put millions of mostly poor people out of work, and it will cause many shattered dreams and premature deaths all on its own. The more data comes out, the more this looks like a terrible mistake.
     
    Well, courtesy of MoA here's a nice Financial Times chart of total weekly deaths in Britain for almost the last 50(!) years. I've already linked it in a couple of other places, but I might as well do so again:

    https://www.moonofalabama.org/images10/britainexessdeath2.jpg

    Does this look like a disease with Flu-type fatality rates of around 0.1%?

    Given the horrific situation in Lombardy and now NYC/NJ, I just can't understand the thinking of the hordes of Flu Hoaxers who hang around here.

    Either my screen has gunk on it, but it looks like three other data points from earlier weeks and two from later weeks in the year and it looks less than one really high spike in the first or second week. So what were those? Are all viral outbreaks at or below average? We really do live in Lake Wobegon.

    • Agree: Polynikes
    • Replies: @vhrm
    The blue dots are each a datapoint for the past 50 years. So there are 50 dots at each week. one for the deaths in that week in each year.

    As you mentioned there have been a few weeks with higher deaths but they were in January and December. So it's "unprecedented" for this time of year. (and pretty close to the highest ever but not there yet in that graph)
    , @Ron Unz

    Either my screen has gunk on it, but it looks like three other data points from earlier weeks and two from later weeks in the year and it looks less than one really high spike in the first or second week. So what were those? Are all viral outbreaks at or below average? We really do live in Lake Wobegon.
     
    Sure. The weekly mortality data goes back almost 50 years, so we're talking about almost 2,600 weekly death datapoints. And across that huge time period, you can find a handful of examples in which the death-rates were about as high as the last two weeks. Presumably, it was the Hong Kong Flu or something like that.

    But don't forget that these current large death-spikes are coming *despite* the Britain government having implemented the most extreme quarantine/lockdown measures in its national history. Meanwhile, nothing like that was every done about the Hong Kong Flu or previous waves. And the current wave is still going strong. And if you end the lockdown without effective control measures, you'll probably see a really huge death-spike as the disease goes exponential again.
  105. @Kratoklastes
    You're assuming that the natural end-point is that 100% of people are infected.

    That's happened precisely never in the history of epidemiology, despite their constant braying about the End is Nigh.

    Consider just one player - Neil Ferguson. He is a serial offender.

    2001 - he claimed that 130,000 people would develop variant Kreutzfeld-Yakob disease (vCJD). Since that time, there have been a total of 128 deaths globally.

    2005 - he claimed that H5N1 (avian flu) was going to rival the 1918 flu (in fairness, he wasn't - and isn't - alone):

    "Around 40 million people died in 1918 Spanish flu outbreak," said Prof Ferguson. "There are six times more people on the planet now so you could scale it up to around 200 million people probably."
     
    Actual toll - globally - in the following 15 years: 455


    2009 - he claimed that H1N1 ('swine flu') could
     • infect a third of the world's population;
     • had an IFR of 0.4-1.4%;
     • be in line with the 1957 pandemic that killed about 3.5 million people (he caveated that immediately, by claiming that health care was better now).

    Actual toll: 18,036

    But Covid-19 appears to be far more contagious and deadlier than vCJD, H5N1 or H1N1. It has already claimed 200,000 globally with no evidence of slowdown anywhere outside of East Asia; Even there, we don’t know what may happen if they return to any kind of normalcy.

    Then there is this: There is currently no evidence that people who have recovered from COVID-19 and have antibodies are protected from a second infection.

    https://www.who.int/news-room/commentaries/detail/immunity-passports-in-the-context-of-covid-19

    • Replies: @Tlotsi
    Ooh, 200, 000 out of 8 Billion. However will the human race survive?
  106. @Kratoklastes

    What do you think it would be like without the restrictions? My guesstimate is a Civil War’s worth.
     
    Your guesstimate based on what?

    The best evidence we have is that the 'restrictions' were imposed far too late to make a difference, if the start date (globally) is earlier than January 15th 2020 and the initial R[0] is anywhere above 2.0

    As I have said from the get-go: everyone discovered the word 'exponential' in February (or re-discovered it, if they did year 9 maths), but fuck-all people [re-]discovered the logistic function.

    Logistic functions look a lot like ZOMFG!! EXPERNENSHUL!! functions, until they hit their second 'knee' - at which point they flatten (sometimes rather abruptly)... endogenously (including as a result of people making individual decisions in response to perceived risk).

    None of this is rocket surgery.

    All the logistic curves flattened well before endemicity, and the flattening coincided with increases in average daytime temperatures in the Wrong (Northern) Hemisphere. There was the odd 'blip' (e.g., N'Awlins; some funeral in Jaw-ja etc) where some other shit happened.

    In other news: irony finally laid its deathly-cold finger on my shoulder.

    I have coronavirus.

    Turns out it's not "the" coronavirus.

    I have a cold - which as we all know is caused by a coronavirus.

    Still... in a day or so I will be able to bray about being a 'coronavirus survivor'.

    I might write a riveting, first-person testimony, giving great details of my personal triumph over seemingly-insurmountable odds.

    Would it be 'stolen valour' to walk the streets dressed in scrubs bought off eBay?

    KEK

    How do you know that you have “Coronavirus?” Only about 15% of colds are caused by corona viruses. Have you been tested or are you just making a WAG for rhetorical purposes?

  107. @Kratoklastes

    What do you think it would be like without the restrictions? My guesstimate is a Civil War’s worth.
     
    Your guesstimate based on what?

    The best evidence we have is that the 'restrictions' were imposed far too late to make a difference, if the start date (globally) is earlier than January 15th 2020 and the initial R[0] is anywhere above 2.0

    As I have said from the get-go: everyone discovered the word 'exponential' in February (or re-discovered it, if they did year 9 maths), but fuck-all people [re-]discovered the logistic function.

    Logistic functions look a lot like ZOMFG!! EXPERNENSHUL!! functions, until they hit their second 'knee' - at which point they flatten (sometimes rather abruptly)... endogenously (including as a result of people making individual decisions in response to perceived risk).

    None of this is rocket surgery.

    All the logistic curves flattened well before endemicity, and the flattening coincided with increases in average daytime temperatures in the Wrong (Northern) Hemisphere. There was the odd 'blip' (e.g., N'Awlins; some funeral in Jaw-ja etc) where some other shit happened.

    In other news: irony finally laid its deathly-cold finger on my shoulder.

    I have coronavirus.

    Turns out it's not "the" coronavirus.

    I have a cold - which as we all know is caused by a coronavirus.

    Still... in a day or so I will be able to bray about being a 'coronavirus survivor'.

    I might write a riveting, first-person testimony, giving great details of my personal triumph over seemingly-insurmountable odds.

    Would it be 'stolen valour' to walk the streets dressed in scrubs bought off eBay?

    KEK

    “ I might write a riveting, first-person testimony, giving great details of my personal triumph over seemingly-insurmountable odds.”

    Make sure you say you were “literally shaking” when you found out! And blame Trump.

  108. WHO : no reason to believe people who had Covid have gained immunity

    —-> no reason to believe that there will be a vaccine ever. That’s a it’s not a flue big statement.

  109. Each test was evaluated with the same set of blood samples: from 80 people known to be infected with the coronavirus . . . .

    How could this be known before any test is certified as infallible? This seems to beg the question.

    • Replies: @vhrm

    How could this be known before any test is certified as infallible? This seems to beg the question.
     
    It's a different kind of test. The tests for presence of the virus are generally good. So you can verify that sick people have it while they're sick.
    Those are the kinds of people the 80 samples came from.

    The new tests will identify people who had been sick even if they're free of virus now. Something that the rna tests can't do.
  110. No explanation is required for why one area might well have a CFR of .2 and another .7. That variation is expected even if cases and deaths are randomly distributed.

    However, the virus has been around earlier than we thought. NYC probably has had it longer and because of density it spread faster. The more generations a highly mutable virus spreads in humans, the less deadly it is likely to become because a less deadly strain will spread more efficiently.

  111. @Mr. Anon

    We’ve had a Vietnam’s worth of deaths up to this point with the harsh restrictions.
     
    We don't how many deaths have actually been caused by coronavirus infection.

    What do you think it would be like without the restrictions? My guesstimate is a Civil War’s worth.
     
    My guesstimate is.........no difference without the restrictions.

    My guesstimate is………no difference without the restrictions.

    I think that is a hard argument to justify. A sample plot from
    https://www.kinsahealth.co/your-sacrifices-are-saving-lives-social-distancing-is-working/

    Whether or not the restrictions (and which particular restrictions!) were/are worth it is a more complicated and nuanced discussion which does not seem possible to have here.

    • Agree: ben tillman, Ron Unz
    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
    That data not especially meaningful without further context.

    How do they define "flu-like illness"? Based on what? Self diagnosis? A doctor's diagnosis? Testing? Sure a lot of people with flu symptoms now stay home. And people who do show up at a hospital are instantly suspected of having CoV.

    Bear in mind that this is from a company that has a vested interest in the panic.

    , @Anonymous

    Whether or not the restrictions (and which particular restrictions!) were/are worth it
     
    An important point.
  112. @DanHessinMD
    Another point (which is obvious to me, but probably needs to be explicitly stated anyway) -- if everyone is going to eventually be exposed then the safest time to be exposed is during the humid summer months.

    I will also repeat a comment I made earlier: very low humidity (20% at the University of Maryland Medical Center according to a doctor I know who practices there) is common in hospitals to produce an odorless sensation of sterility, but is debilitating for respiratory immunity. Hospital HVAC systems are very likely increasing the infection fatality rate rather dramatically.

    Another point (which is obvious to me, but probably needs to be explicitly stated anyway) — if everyone is going to eventually be exposed then the safest time to be exposed is during the humid summer months.

    Yes. It seems sensible to open the restrictions and let the virus progress through the relatively younger and healthier population to build up herd immunity while the infections face the headwind of summer. Our “experts” and politicians seem to be doing their best to set us up for a more severe second wave this fall and winter.

    Controlled burns for wildfire prevention make a good analogy here. You do the burns when weather conditions are such that even if something goes wrong the risk is limited.
    http://factsheets.okstate.edu/e1010/sections/prescribed-fire-weather/

    I will also repeat a comment I made earlier: very low humidity (20% at the University of Maryland Medical Center according to a doctor I know who practices there) is common in hospitals to produce an odorless sensation of sterility, but is debilitating for respiratory immunity. Hospital HVAC systems are very likely increasing the infection fatality rate rather dramatically.

    Thank you for following up on that. What a pathetic reason. Again, I will note if that 20% is outside the OR then they are violating the typical recommendation of 40-60% relative humidity for hospitals.

    This link has much more about humidity control in hospitals. Including a discussion of dehumidification (for commenters who think that is not part of hospital HVAC equipment). And notice the one exception I see in all of this. They recommend burn units have humidity < 30%.
    https://fisair.com/controlling-humidity-in-hospitals/

    P.S. A link to our earlier conversation about this.
    https://www.unz.com/isteve/infection-fatality-rates-under-different-scenarios/#comment-3849649

    • Thanks: ic1000
  113. @Ron Unz

    Sure, the conventional wisdom is right sometimes This definitely is not one of those times...The shutdown has put millions of mostly poor people out of work, and it will cause many shattered dreams and premature deaths all on its own. The more data comes out, the more this looks like a terrible mistake.
     
    Well, courtesy of MoA here's a nice Financial Times chart of total weekly deaths in Britain for almost the last 50(!) years. I've already linked it in a couple of other places, but I might as well do so again:

    https://www.moonofalabama.org/images10/britainexessdeath2.jpg

    Does this look like a disease with Flu-type fatality rates of around 0.1%?

    Given the horrific situation in Lombardy and now NYC/NJ, I just can't understand the thinking of the hordes of Flu Hoaxers who hang around here.

    Given the horrific situation in Lombardy and now NYC/NJ, I just can’t understand the thinking of the hordes of Flu Hoaxers who hang around here.

    Apples and oranges.

    Lombardy is full of old people, a huge Chinese ex pat population, the air is bad, and the health care system is atrocious.

    In NYC, thousands of Chinese fly into the city on regular basis, poor people are obese, in terrible health, pack themselves into crowded subways two or three times a day, and nursing home personnel who change the bedpans have IQs in the 90s. Northern NJ might as well be NY given it’s population density and demographics.

    We need to understand each place AS IT IS.

    That’s not to say Corona-Chan isn’t bad — it is.

    What we shouldn’t do is take perfectly healthy people under 60 with no co-morbidities — really, most of the population in most places that aren’t Lombardy or NYC — and put them under effective house arrest in the mistaken belief that such actions will somehow save all the 80 year olds with COPD.

    Of course, the lockdown has super-duper benefits for mediocrities like Whitmer, Cuomo, Murphy, and Pritzker. It gives them an unending hard on — yes, for Whitmer too — since they can let their authoritarian freak flag fly, while destroying their economies for which they can blame Donald Trump because he didn’t shut down the country on February 1st.

    You need to get straight about who the really dangerous hoaxers are.

    • Agree: Hail, Mr. Anon
    • Thanks: Achmed E. Newman
  114. @Anonymous
    I doubt very much such a low infection fatality rate. The number of dead is now 200,000. At that fatality rate, there should be over 120 million infected people Worlwide. That is a dozen times more than the reported infection rate.

    The preliminary tests that were done in Wuhan by the Chinese government, the most thorough so far, indicate a fatality rate for young healthy people without respiratory ilnesses like asthma and bronchitis of 0.5% and as high as 10% for men over age 80. The overall death rate from infection from this virus appears to be 2-4%. I would say that the overall mortality rate for this virus is definitely lower than 5% but probably higher than 1%

    I doubt very much such a low infection fatality rate. The number of dead is now 200,000. At that fatality rate, there should be over 120 million infected people Worlwide. That is a dozen times more than the reported infection rate.

    It is absurd to think there are only 10 million infections worldwide.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    It is even more absurd to assume that there are 150 million infected people Worldwide, considering that the entire World went on lockdown less than a week after people started dropping dead. With an incubation period of only 5 days(on average) there is no way the virus could have infected over 120 million people in that short space of time. Remember that exponental progression numbers only start to pick up speed after a !0 x doubling. Starting with 1 infected people at an RO of 2.0, it takes a chain ot ten consecutive infections for the number to reach even 1,000 infected people. It is obvious that the mortality rate of this virus is over 1%, although it is certainly lower than 5%, which is what the death rate of officially infected people show.
    , @Anonymous

    It is absurd to think there are only 10 million infections worldwide.
     
    China, the epicenter, has very low numbers.
  115. @UK
    She hates a potential vaccine because she feels her ego being mutilated through what she perceives as the relative diminishment of one aspect of how she identifies.

    I am genuinely impressed by her level of narcissism!

    No wonder she has fallen into a polticial worldview which venerates almost completely unreal stereotypes of boundary free victims.

    Such a rampant egotist will be irresistibly drawn to anything onto which she can project the suppressed aspects of her personality.

    In her case, those being the bits that actually listen to others, and see them as ends in themselves, rather than this absurdly cartoonish example of a viciously solipsistic five year old girl who never actually grew up but instead just learned fancier words.

    Or she's just a very accurate internet satire of a specific archetype, and a happenstance and personally useful reminder of the type of woman that I need to remember to avoid.

    “She hates a potential vaccine because she feels her ego being mutilated through what she perceives as the relative diminishment of one aspect of how she identifies.”

    She ought to spend her energies hating something else, something that might actually exist one day, because there will never be a kungfluey vaccine.

    Though HIV is planet Earth’s most sanctified and holy coronavirus, there is no vaccine after nearly four decades of research.

    I fume every time I hear science illiterates blithely refer to a kungflu vaccine – no such animal, unobtainium.

  116. @res

    My guesstimate is………no difference without the restrictions.
     
    I think that is a hard argument to justify. A sample plot from
    https://www.kinsahealth.co/your-sacrifices-are-saving-lives-social-distancing-is-working/

    https://www.kinsahealth.co/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/Santa-Clara-and-Miami-Dade-County-Share-of-Population-with-Flu-Like-Illness-1.png

    Whether or not the restrictions (and which particular restrictions!) were/are worth it is a more complicated and nuanced discussion which does not seem possible to have here.

    That data not especially meaningful without further context.

    How do they define “flu-like illness”? Based on what? Self diagnosis? A doctor’s diagnosis? Testing? Sure a lot of people with flu symptoms now stay home. And people who do show up at a hospital are instantly suspected of having CoV.

    Bear in mind that this is from a company that has a vested interest in the panic.

    • Replies: @res

    That data not especially meaningful without further context.
     
    There is a reason I include so many links in my comments. Feel free to follow the link in that one (and more from there if you like) then come back and have a real conversation about this.

    How do they define “flu-like illness”? Based on what? Self diagnosis? A doctor’s diagnosis? Testing? Sure a lot of people with flu symptoms now stay home. And people who do show up at a hospital are instantly suspected of having CoV.
     
    The TLDR version of following the links is they have a model which fits the historical temperature data from their smart thermometers to the CDC flu reports. Then they use their current data to estimate the "flu-like illness" for each area.

    Bear in mind that this is from a company that has a vested interest in the panic.
     
    That's a point worth remembering. One thing I find really interesting is that the Kinsa data is currently showing almost no illness in the entire country. And they have not made a blog post since 4/9 after having 10 from 3/23 to 4/9.

    How do we reconcile that (also see PS) with continuing new cases of COVID-19? I would expect deaths to keep coming given the lag involved, but where are the new cases coming from?

    P.S. For anyone interested, CDC flu surveillance:
    https://www.cdc.gov/flu/weekly/fluactivitysurv.htm
  117. @The Germ Theory of Disease
    Z1. The Covid-19 virus is quite real (viz not a hoax), it is different from the ordinary flu in important ways, and it is very dangerous to certain populations, and not so dangerous to other populations.

    2. Had Donald Trump not been president, the publicly-organized and -enforced response to a real but not cataclysmic public health threat would have been rational, orderly, efficient, most likely effective, with a sound feedback loop for adjustment and a sane, gardez-votre-sang-froid mentality as seen in pandemics past.

    2a. Examples of rational and orderly responses would have included: early and very strict curtailment of all travel to and from China, and from East Asia generally, with strict quarantines and contact monitoring for returning US citizens; stiff quarantine procedures for the elderly, other at-risk populations, and identifiable "super-spreader" entities; and stern but rational recommendations for everyone else. Life goes on, economy stays normal, a slightly-larger but not catastrophic number of older and infirm people die, Wheel of Life, listen to some Jacques Brel and then move on.

    2b. Importantly, a major feature of a rational public-health response would have been a unified, non-politicized, clearly explained stance from the entire government, speaking in a single calm, agreed-upon voice. Not the Speaker of the House tearing up the President's speech at the State of the UNION address.

    3. But Donald Trump is the President, and therefore here we are, stuck in chaos, economic free-fall, mass hysteria and morbid sentimentality instead of clear thinking.

    3a. This course of action was deliberately, willfully and maliciously chosen, in virtual unanimity, by our leading classes: government, media, academia, judicial and so on. The clear purpose of this choice was to launch yet another coup attempt against the presidency of Donald Trump. The previous two coup attempts had failed, but this was a ripe poison apple that fell right into their laps.

    4. To be clear: the virus itself and the outbreak were real, non-engineered events. But the specific response to the outbreak was malicious and deliberate with respect to the wellbeing of the American people.

    5. The Powers That Be hate Donald Trump, and by extension the White, Christian, heritage-American electorate for whom he spoke, with such a deadly fury that they were willing to seize on a recurring, seasonal disease outbreak with known protocols of response, and malignant lay use it to destroy the American economy (Trump's main selling point) in order to bring down a president when their previous open coup attempts had failed.

    Put a gold box round this comment and a gold star beside Germ Theory’s alias. A perfect comment.

  118. @Lowe
    Way to go for the semantic jugular. Steve's entire schtick is that he is an independent thinker and he don't take no guff.

    Sure, the conventional wisdom is right sometimes This definitely is not one of those times. The conventional wisdom has people wearing masks and cowering in their apartments right now, and it has Steve making posts about optimal seating arrangements in movie theaters.

    It was important for us to get it right on this issue. The shutdown has put millions of mostly poor people out of work, and it will cause many shattered dreams and premature deaths all on its own. The more data comes out, the more this looks like a terrible mistake. There have been people expressing skepticism about the narrative on this for sometime, but Sailer isn't one of them.

    The conventional wisdom has people wearing masks and cowering in their apartments right now . . . .

    No one is cowering in an apartment anywhere. Where do you come up with this stuff?

    • Replies: @Tlotsi
    They are certainly cowering on Unz Review.
  119. @Ron Unz

    Sure, the conventional wisdom is right sometimes This definitely is not one of those times...The shutdown has put millions of mostly poor people out of work, and it will cause many shattered dreams and premature deaths all on its own. The more data comes out, the more this looks like a terrible mistake.
     
    Well, courtesy of MoA here's a nice Financial Times chart of total weekly deaths in Britain for almost the last 50(!) years. I've already linked it in a couple of other places, but I might as well do so again:

    https://www.moonofalabama.org/images10/britainexessdeath2.jpg

    Does this look like a disease with Flu-type fatality rates of around 0.1%?

    Given the horrific situation in Lombardy and now NYC/NJ, I just can't understand the thinking of the hordes of Flu Hoaxers who hang around here.

    No, but it might look like a sudden spike in mortality from a lot of old people dying in their own homes from neglect, people dying from heart-attacks at home, people dying of DVT because they’ve been sitting in their homes drinking for the last four weeks, people dying because they were put on a ventillator for something that would have been better treated elsewise, and people dying from COVID-19 because we decided to quarantine everyone instead of quaranting specifically those who are at risk.

  120. @Mr McKenna
    In between Sweden and Florida, we have Oxford.

    An Oxford University women’s studies professor has lamented that if the college’s scientists produce a successful Covid-19 vaccine, the “white savior” narrative will be unstoppable.

    Cousens fears that if the vaccine is developed by “white, male and Oxford-educated” scientists, her country’s stock will rise above female-led countries, such as Germany and New Zealand, whose epidemic responses have been, according to a Forbes op-ed, “most widely praised.”

    https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/coronavirus-vaccine_uk_5ea067f2c5b6b2e5b83ba372
     

    NB: I don't click on HP links so no telling what else you'll find there.

    I’m sure Elizabeth Holmes would have had an at-home finger-stick Covid test by now, if The Man hadn’t held her back.

  121. HA says:
    @Lugash
    The point isn't to be a contrarian, the point is to know the truth and speak it. And to be reasonably prudent. We've had a Vietnam's worth of deaths up to this point with the harsh restrictions. What do you think it would be like without the restrictions? My guesstimate is a Civil War's worth.

    Sometimes the conventional wisdom is correct. Sometimes you share it with Rachel Maddow and Andrew Cuomo. That doesn't mean you always share it, or don't keep re-evaluating it... for example, I'm keeping the idea that NYC has a different strain than the rest of the country and that their infection rates won't transfer to the rest of the country due to lifestyle factors, so Cuomo and Maddow are falsely projecting their experience onto the rest of us.

    “The point isn’t to be a contrarian, the point is to know the truth and speak it.”

    You’re wasting bandwidth trying to talk sense into Lowe. Back a while ago I observed that the commentator RichardTaylor can’t seem to shut up about how everyone else is getting coronavirus wrong even though he was previously telling us that even 5,000 dead was a ridiculously high death toll, as in “nothing like that is likely to happen.”

    I think we were already at 10,000 dead by that point (i.e., just a few weeks later), but even so, Lowe decided it was smart to pipe up and tell us that RichardTaylor’s comments didn’t ” seem that unreasonable”.

    They don’t care about facts and numbers and being correct. Ideological purity is far more important than trivial matters like what 2+2 really amounts to. Like Wittkowski (who predicted 10,000 would die from this, by the way), they just keep doubling down, and then claim “see, I was right all along” any time and any cherry-picked point at which the predictions fall under the median, which they invariably do. I.e., the stopped watch approach to telling the time.

    I’ve never denied that coronavirus might, in the final tally, prove to be a lot less lethal than initially feared, but if that proves to be the case, a big reason for why the panic took hold is that the truther crowd were such feckless lying idiots, displaying nothing more than basic TV weather-forecaster logic. Bury all the failed predictions, and trumpet the good ones.

    And don’t try to tell me that 5,000 or 10,000 dead was a “reasonable” prediction. At least have the honesty and integrity to shut up about that. Likewise, don’t tell me that any country containing NY will ever regard Sweden’s approach as the better road not taken. The economist Richard Epstein made a stupid prediction (he initially predicted 500 dead, but after correcting a math error, he upped it to 5,000) but hey, few of us haven’t made a stupid mistake now and then. At least he had the good grace to stop digging.

    • Agree: Bill
    • Replies: @kpkinsunnyphiladelphia
    "How many will die?" is an important question to ask, predict, and adjust, but it's just as important to ask,

    "WHO is in fact dying?"

    The jury is still out on question #1.

    Question #2 is pretty much answered. Old people. People who are already sick. People who have conditions that make them vulnerable.

    What if it turns out that 20% of the final death toll is from nursing homes?

    https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2020/04/1-5-coronavirus-deaths-could-have-been-prevented-daniel-greenfield/#disqus_thread

    Take away the co-morbid and nursing home patients, and what is the IFR now? It ain't Spanish flu level, that's for sure.

    But no, we have to close every greasy spoon and nail salon in the nation in a frenzied panic, have normal healthy people wear more or less useless masks amongst other healthy people while they are all scrambling for toilet paper, and just generally destroy our economy, rather than calmly tell old and sick people to stay inside, and have the authorities descend upon nursing homes and make sure their shit is order.

    When all this is said and done, we will rue the day we acted so stupidly.

  122. @Kratoklastes
    You're assuming that the natural end-point is that 100% of people are infected.

    That's happened precisely never in the history of epidemiology, despite their constant braying about the End is Nigh.

    Consider just one player - Neil Ferguson. He is a serial offender.

    2001 - he claimed that 130,000 people would develop variant Kreutzfeld-Yakob disease (vCJD). Since that time, there have been a total of 128 deaths globally.

    2005 - he claimed that H5N1 (avian flu) was going to rival the 1918 flu (in fairness, he wasn't - and isn't - alone):

    "Around 40 million people died in 1918 Spanish flu outbreak," said Prof Ferguson. "There are six times more people on the planet now so you could scale it up to around 200 million people probably."
     
    Actual toll - globally - in the following 15 years: 455


    2009 - he claimed that H1N1 ('swine flu') could
     • infect a third of the world's population;
     • had an IFR of 0.4-1.4%;
     • be in line with the 1957 pandemic that killed about 3.5 million people (he caveated that immediately, by claiming that health care was better now).

    Actual toll: 18,036

    “Around 40 million people died in 1918 Spanish flu outbreak,” said Prof Ferguson. “There are six times more people on the planet now so you could scale it up to around 200 million people probably.”

    It’s hard to take seriously the predictions of anyone who is so ignorant of present or past facts. If the world’s population was 1.8 billion in 1918, he must have thought it was 12.6 billion in 2005.

  123. Here we go…My suspicions are slowly being confirmed…

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8256469/Brooklyn-nursing-home-ravaged-coronavirus-tried-send-sick-patients-USNS-Comfort.html

    Basically New York Officials were TRYING to get the death rate as high as possible in order to scream ‘Orange Man Bad’

    I bet the death rate at the top hospitals in NYC is under .1…because those are the people in charge and who matter….everyone else is more valuable as a death statistic than alive

    • Replies: @Mehen

    Here we go…My suspicions are slowly being confirmed…

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8256469/Brooklyn-nursing-home-ravaged-coronavirus-tried-send-sick-patients-USNS-Comfort.html

    Basically New York Officials were TRYING to get the death rate as high as possible in order to scream ‘Orange Man Bad’

    I bet the death rate at the top hospitals in NYC is under .1…because those are the people in charge and who matter….everyone else is more valuable as a death statistic than alive
     
    Absolutely evil, if true. Which it probably is.
  124. @Ron Unz

    Sure, the conventional wisdom is right sometimes This definitely is not one of those times...The shutdown has put millions of mostly poor people out of work, and it will cause many shattered dreams and premature deaths all on its own. The more data comes out, the more this looks like a terrible mistake.
     
    Well, courtesy of MoA here's a nice Financial Times chart of total weekly deaths in Britain for almost the last 50(!) years. I've already linked it in a couple of other places, but I might as well do so again:

    https://www.moonofalabama.org/images10/britainexessdeath2.jpg

    Does this look like a disease with Flu-type fatality rates of around 0.1%?

    Given the horrific situation in Lombardy and now NYC/NJ, I just can't understand the thinking of the hordes of Flu Hoaxers who hang around here.

    Actually, now that you mention it, that red curve is not out of line with some of the data displayed for December/January.

  125. Anon[368] • Disclaimer says:
    @TheUmpteenthGermanOnHere
    There is a Swiss study out that explains how Covid-19 can lead to multiple organ failure and sheds more light on the co-morbidity factor.

    Varga, Zsuzsanna, Flammer, Andreas J., Steiger, Peter, Haberecker, Martina, Andermatt, Rea, Zinkernagel, Annelies S., Mehra, Mandeep R., Schuepbach, Reto, Ruschitzka, Frank & Moch, Holger (2020). Endothelial Cell Infection and Endotheliitis in COVID-19. Lancet.

    (The proponents of heroic ignorance will, of course, not be impressed. Those people can consider themselves lucky to have a president who, though often ignorant himself, is still much better than both the alternative and than they are.)

    Oh the irony of calling others ignorant, when you are clearly full of hatred towards your fellow man for having a slightly different viewpoint. That is what used to be considered ignorant. Now, anyone who doesn’t goose step along with the WHO’s edicts is considered ignorant. This is the path that demonic atheistic science worship is leading us down.

  126. 1. The Miami-Dade population is, on average, healthier than NYC population.
    2. Miami-Dade population has a smaller portion of morbidly obese people.
    3. Miami-Dade population has a smaller portion of malfunctional people who ignore all rules.
    4. The same factors, density, subways, etc., that increase the infected portion of NYC population also increase the average initial viral load of infected New Yorkers, initial viral load being one of the major determinants of your prospects for surviving.

    4. means, generally, there is probably going to be a correlation between the infected portion of population and the IFR for that population.

    • Replies: @DanHessinMD
    Climate is the biggest variable.

    China has a new outbreak and lo and behold it is in Harbin, the northernmost major city in China, capital of China's northernmost province and far north of North Korea.

    Humidity indoors in Harbin right now is still very low.
  127. Anonymous[628] • Disclaimer says:
    @ben tillman

    I doubt very much such a low infection fatality rate. The number of dead is now 200,000. At that fatality rate, there should be over 120 million infected people Worlwide. That is a dozen times more than the reported infection rate.
     
    It is absurd to think there are only 10 million infections worldwide.

    It is even more absurd to assume that there are 150 million infected people Worldwide, considering that the entire World went on lockdown less than a week after people started dropping dead. With an incubation period of only 5 days(on average) there is no way the virus could have infected over 120 million people in that short space of time. Remember that exponental progression numbers only start to pick up speed after a !0 x doubling. Starting with 1 infected people at an RO of 2.0, it takes a chain ot ten consecutive infections for the number to reach even 1,000 infected people. It is obvious that the mortality rate of this virus is over 1%, although it is certainly lower than 5%, which is what the death rate of officially infected people show.

  128. @Mehen
    You can take your “Your comment is awaiting moderation” and STUFF IT

    https://mobile.twitter.com/AlexBerenson/status/1253790453721444352

    Cuisinart? Calphalon?

    Seriously, a large pot of water kept on low boil in northern climes is the main thing people need to save their life.

    We have this in our bedroom, which is where our baby sleeps:

    The best place is the room where one sleeps.

  129. @Henry Canaday
    1. The Miami-Dade population is, on average, healthier than NYC population.
    2. Miami-Dade population has a smaller portion of morbidly obese people.
    3. Miami-Dade population has a smaller portion of malfunctional people who ignore all rules.
    4. The same factors, density, subways, etc., that increase the infected portion of NYC population also increase the average initial viral load of infected New Yorkers, initial viral load being one of the major determinants of your prospects for surviving.

    4. means, generally, there is probably going to be a correlation between the infected portion of population and the IFR for that population.

    Climate is the biggest variable.

    China has a new outbreak and lo and behold it is in Harbin, the northernmost major city in China, capital of China’s northernmost province and far north of North Korea.

    Humidity indoors in Harbin right now is still very low.

    • Replies: @Henry Canaday
    Dan:

    Would climate increase both the portion of the population infected and the average initial viral load of those infected, and thus IFR?

    Henry
  130. @Lowe
    It looks like you shit your pants over this along with the entire establishment (so far). What a strange position to be in, for you.

    What is the point of being a contrarian on everything just to fall in line with the conventional wisdom when something important comes up?

    This virus is boomer remover, and Sailer is a boomer. Like Nero, he can’t imagine that the world can get along without him.

  131. @Lowe
    Way to go for the semantic jugular. Steve's entire schtick is that he is an independent thinker and he don't take no guff.

    Sure, the conventional wisdom is right sometimes This definitely is not one of those times. The conventional wisdom has people wearing masks and cowering in their apartments right now, and it has Steve making posts about optimal seating arrangements in movie theaters.

    It was important for us to get it right on this issue. The shutdown has put millions of mostly poor people out of work, and it will cause many shattered dreams and premature deaths all on its own. The more data comes out, the more this looks like a terrible mistake. There have been people expressing skepticism about the narrative on this for sometime, but Sailer isn't one of them.

    it will cause many shattered dreams and premature deaths all on its own.

    First world poverty does not cause premature deaths. Anyway, thanks to our moron government, many of the unemployed will be getting MORE money:

    https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/04/23/business/economy/unemployment-benefits-stimulus-coronavirus.html

  132. @ben tillman

    The conventional wisdom has people wearing masks and cowering in their apartments right now . . . .
     
    No one is cowering in an apartment anywhere. Where do you come up with this stuff?

    They are certainly cowering on Unz Review.

  133. @Lowe
    "You should try thinking for yourself," says the guy whose opinion matches the consensus of goodthinkers and Model UN types everywhere.

    Isn't it strange how the more data comes out about this, the more wrong that consensus seems to be?

    Isn’t it strange how the more data comes out about this, the more wrong that consensus seems to be?

    to elaborate: …the more data comes out, the more wrong that consensus seems to you. this is not at all strange if you apply Odin’s Law:

    “No matter how much data comes out, everyone on all sides remains convinced he has been right all along.”

    This seems to hold for all issues over all time periods. Although it must have been said before, I don’t know who to credit.

    • Replies: @res

    This seems to hold for all issues over all time periods. Although it must have been said before, I don’t know who to credit.
     
    "Odin's Law" works since the observation goes back to mythological times. Plus, you would not want to name it after the actual discoverer. That would mean you violated Stigler's law of eponymy.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stigler%27s_law_of_eponymy
  134. @Lugash
    The point isn't to be a contrarian, the point is to know the truth and speak it. And to be reasonably prudent. We've had a Vietnam's worth of deaths up to this point with the harsh restrictions. What do you think it would be like without the restrictions? My guesstimate is a Civil War's worth.

    Sometimes the conventional wisdom is correct. Sometimes you share it with Rachel Maddow and Andrew Cuomo. That doesn't mean you always share it, or don't keep re-evaluating it... for example, I'm keeping the idea that NYC has a different strain than the rest of the country and that their infection rates won't transfer to the rest of the country due to lifestyle factors, so Cuomo and Maddow are falsely projecting their experience onto the rest of us.

    The point isn’t to be a contrarian, the point is to know the truth and speak it. And to be reasonably prudent. We’ve had a Vietnam’s worth of deaths up to this point with the harsh restrictions. What do you think it would be like without the restrictions? My guesstimate is a Civil War’s worth.

    Lugash, i’m with you on trying “to know the truth and speak it”. But i find your war comparisons deeply misleading and a bit hysteric.

    I think there’s (at least) three different issues.

    1) Actual death rate.
    Here’s the “it’s just the flu, bro” guys are just wrong (in some cases “nuts”). They are showing themselves to be data averse and unable to build simple models.

    In these towns in northern Italy which have been hard hit and show high infection rates, they’ve racked up well over a typical year’s deaths in a couple of months. Even if you assume that they’ll be no more deaths and assume that everyone has been infected, you end up with an IFR several times 0.1%–an upper bound on anything from “the flu”. Excess deaths already locked in are 0.3-0.7% an order of magnitude about “just the flu”–and that’s the floor.

    For the Diamond Princess we’ve got 14 deaths out of 712 infected–2%. Age adjust this super-aggressively at say 4x–you’re at 0.5%. (And note cruising oldsters are healthier than normal population for their age, not the folks confined in a care home because they’re on death’s door.) But even if you take the entire ship of 3700 (mostly uninfected) and that 14 deaths–you’re at .4%. And age adjust the heck out of it, you’ll still be above 0.1%–worse than any flu in my life–as an absolute (and really ridiculous) floor.

    This “just a bad flu year” stuff is not data driven. It’s a religion. Not an evil genocidal one like minoritarian globalism–“nation of immigrants” or “our diversity is our greatest strength”. But likewise data averse and silly.

    2) Who is dying.
    From the beginning–not right at the start with poor data from China, but quickly–it’s been clear that this thing is skewing heavily to killing the old and weak. Skewed even more dramatically than a typical flu. You have the odd cases here and there, but the average “years lost” of the deaths is going to be <10 years. Probably around five.

    When i figured this out … i felt deeply relieved. My dad (90s, already lived his life) gets it, good chance he's dead. Me (60s, done with productive labor and child raising) small chance of death. My kids (20s; the future of my family and the nation) close to zero chance of dying. A car accident is more likely to kill them this year. In other words … the natural order. I sent my kids email–"you're going to be fine".

    Lugash, this is why the war deaths thing is hysteric and offensive. The Civil War killed off something like 700,000 young men–maybe a 1/6 or 1/7 of a generation–who should have gone on to lead productive lives, knock up their future wives and raise families to populate America's future. It was a true epic–epically stupid–tragedy for our nation. In contrast to that, the China-virus is literally nothing–*nothing*–a speed bump.

    3) The reaction.
    Finally there’s the reaction–the hysteria, the flat out lying (ex. masks), the tyrannical power grabbing by politicians and the overall question of cost-benefit. Some of the reaction–closing up activities like golf and hiking–where people are naturally apart–and just shutting rather than sensible regulation of parks and beaches–just reek of stupid tyrannical bullying.

    People will be all over the map on questions of cost-benefit. But all the hysteria, lying and bullying deserve all the mocking, abuse and denunciation they get.

    • Agree: Desiderius, Meretricious
    • Replies: @Desiderius
    The problem you've got on (1) is the uneven impact geographically combined with the one-size-fits-all lockdown.

    When your hospitals are empty you're not inclined to be much impressed with people making fun of you for some skepticism about the whole kit and kaboodle no matter how many hockey sticks the usual suspects are running out again.
  135. @Steve Sailer
    But what about the 0.9% IFR in NYC?

    How do we know what it is?

    Apparently, the Jews could survive six million dead, but American can’t survive 2.5 million.

  136. @HA
    "The point isn’t to be a contrarian, the point is to know the truth and speak it."

    You're wasting bandwidth trying to talk sense into Lowe. Back a while ago I observed that the commentator RichardTaylor can't seem to shut up about how everyone else is getting coronavirus wrong even though he was previously telling us that even 5,000 dead was a ridiculously high death toll, as in "nothing like that is likely to happen."

    I think we were already at 10,000 dead by that point (i.e., just a few weeks later), but even so, Lowe decided it was smart to pipe up and tell us that RichardTaylor's comments didn't " seem that unreasonable".

    They don't care about facts and numbers and being correct. Ideological purity is far more important than trivial matters like what 2+2 really amounts to. Like Wittkowski (who predicted 10,000 would die from this, by the way), they just keep doubling down, and then claim "see, I was right all along" any time and any cherry-picked point at which the predictions fall under the median, which they invariably do. I.e., the stopped watch approach to telling the time.

    I've never denied that coronavirus might, in the final tally, prove to be a lot less lethal than initially feared, but if that proves to be the case, a big reason for why the panic took hold is that the truther crowd were such feckless lying idiots, displaying nothing more than basic TV weather-forecaster logic. Bury all the failed predictions, and trumpet the good ones.

    And don't try to tell me that 5,000 or 10,000 dead was a "reasonable" prediction. At least have the honesty and integrity to shut up about that. Likewise, don't tell me that any country containing NY will ever regard Sweden's approach as the better road not taken. The economist Richard Epstein made a stupid prediction (he initially predicted 500 dead, but after correcting a math error, he upped it to 5,000) but hey, few of us haven't made a stupid mistake now and then. At least he had the good grace to stop digging.

    “How many will die?” is an important question to ask, predict, and adjust, but it’s just as important to ask,

    “WHO is in fact dying?”

    The jury is still out on question #1.

    Question #2 is pretty much answered. Old people. People who are already sick. People who have conditions that make them vulnerable.

    What if it turns out that 20% of the final death toll is from nursing homes?

    https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2020/04/1-5-coronavirus-deaths-could-have-been-prevented-daniel-greenfield/#disqus_thread

    Take away the co-morbid and nursing home patients, and what is the IFR now? It ain’t Spanish flu level, that’s for sure.

    But no, we have to close every greasy spoon and nail salon in the nation in a frenzied panic, have normal healthy people wear more or less useless masks amongst other healthy people while they are all scrambling for toilet paper, and just generally destroy our economy, rather than calmly tell old and sick people to stay inside, and have the authorities descend upon nursing homes and make sure their shit is order.

    When all this is said and done, we will rue the day we acted so stupidly.

    • Agree: Hail
    • Replies: @HA
    "When all this is said and done, we will rue the day we acted so stupidly."

    Who's this "we" you refer to? To be sure, armchair back-forecasters applying their keen 20/20 hindsight to cherry-picked outcomes and then claiming they were right all along will always be among us. And innumeracy is currently far more widespread in our world than coronavirus. That means mathematical illiterates who pretend that they know more than the experts and could have done all this better will never be in short supply. (And when the models are especially difficult, they'll frequently be right, sadly.)

    However, I repeat: no sane person who believes that New York City is a real location -- as opposed to a troupe of crisis actors -- will ever believe that even Sweden's approach was the "right" one (and even theirs is a far cry from the "let 'er rip" attitude that many here are still advocating, because, if 200,000 in a world of 7 billion means nothing, then why do anything about a million or two million dead? What answer can anyone provide for such people except to breathe a sign of relief that they're kooks?)

    I get it -- you want to ignore what doesn't suit your worldview and pretend it was only the let's-do-something crowd that acted stupidly. I'm telling you, if you're really interested in being honest, there was -- as far as I can tell -- as much or more stupidity from the let's-do-nothing contingent. If you want to claim otherwise, then I will tell you it's not just the CDC that should be suspected of retconning the history and fudging the numbers.

    Even as someone who suspects the final numbers may be closer to your prediction than some of theirs, I hope I can at least be honest enough to also admit that.

    , @Prester John
    "It ain’t Spanish flu level, that’s for sure."

    At current population levels in the US (+/- 330 million), that level would be close to 2 million. We're only about 3 months into this thing and between 40 and 50 thousand have died so far. We're still in round one, with round two possibly scheduled for latter 2020 through early 2021. Though the likelihood of this even approaching the Spanish flu is remote--not impossible, only remote--still, we're talking about a lot of people who'll be checking out over the next 9-12 months.
  137. @anon

    put severe controls to travel to/from China so this doesn’t happen again.
     
    This needs to be repeated over and over.
    Until china sorts out their wet-market and virus lab shit, they shouldn't be allowed in western countries.

    Maybe you should start with New York City first.

  138. @AnotherDad


    The point isn’t to be a contrarian, the point is to know the truth and speak it. And to be reasonably prudent. We’ve had a Vietnam’s worth of deaths up to this point with the harsh restrictions. What do you think it would be like without the restrictions? My guesstimate is a Civil War’s worth.
     
    Lugash, i'm with you on trying "to know the truth and speak it". But i find your war comparisons deeply misleading and a bit hysteric.

    I think there's (at least) three different issues.

    1) Actual death rate.
    Here's the "it's just the flu, bro" guys are just wrong (in some cases "nuts"). They are showing themselves to be data averse and unable to build simple models.

    In these towns in northern Italy which have been hard hit and show high infection rates, they've racked up well over a typical year's deaths in a couple of months. Even if you assume that they'll be no more deaths and assume that everyone has been infected, you end up with an IFR several times 0.1%--an upper bound on anything from "the flu". Excess deaths already locked in are 0.3-0.7% an order of magnitude about "just the flu"--and that's the floor.

    For the Diamond Princess we've got 14 deaths out of 712 infected--2%. Age adjust this super-aggressively at say 4x--you're at 0.5%. (And note cruising oldsters are healthier than normal population for their age, not the folks confined in a care home because they're on death's door.) But even if you take the entire ship of 3700 (mostly uninfected) and that 14 deaths--you're at .4%. And age adjust the heck out of it, you'll still be above 0.1%--worse than any flu in my life--as an absolute (and really ridiculous) floor.

    This "just a bad flu year" stuff is not data driven. It's a religion. Not an evil genocidal one like minoritarian globalism--"nation of immigrants" or "our diversity is our greatest strength". But likewise data averse and silly.


    2) Who is dying.
    From the beginning--not right at the start with poor data from China, but quickly--it's been clear that this thing is skewing heavily to killing the old and weak. Skewed even more dramatically than a typical flu. You have the odd cases here and there, but the average "years lost" of the deaths is going to be <10 years. Probably around five.

    When i figured this out ... i felt deeply relieved. My dad (90s, already lived his life) gets it, good chance he's dead. Me (60s, done with productive labor and child raising) small chance of death. My kids (20s; the future of my family and the nation) close to zero chance of dying. A car accident is more likely to kill them this year. In other words ... the natural order. I sent my kids email--"you're going to be fine".

    Lugash, this is why the war deaths thing is hysteric and offensive. The Civil War killed off something like 700,000 young men--maybe a 1/6 or 1/7 of a generation--who should have gone on to lead productive lives, knock up their future wives and raise families to populate America's future. It was a true epic--epically stupid--tragedy for our nation. In contrast to that, the China-virus is literally nothing--*nothing*--a speed bump.


    3) The reaction.
    Finally there's the reaction--the hysteria, the flat out lying (ex. masks), the tyrannical power grabbing by politicians and the overall question of cost-benefit. Some of the reaction--closing up activities like golf and hiking--where people are naturally apart--and just shutting rather than sensible regulation of parks and beaches--just reek of stupid tyrannical bullying.

    People will be all over the map on questions of cost-benefit. But all the hysteria, lying and bullying deserve all the mocking, abuse and denunciation they get.

    The problem you’ve got on (1) is the uneven impact geographically combined with the one-size-fits-all lockdown.

    When your hospitals are empty you’re not inclined to be much impressed with people making fun of you for some skepticism about the whole kit and kaboodle no matter how many hockey sticks the usual suspects are running out again.

  139. All y’all need to check your epistemology and stop swinging your dick around and beclowning yourselves repeatedly. Once again our illustrious host sets a great example. We’d do well to follow.

    I lucked out and had a mouth full of humble pie* when this thing hit so was on self-imposed sabbatical. My sense is that we’ve dodged a bullet due to an outstanding, mostly decentralized, response and a decent amount of luck. But pretty much still too early to tell.

    * – proclaiming Biden toast less than a week before he wrapped up the nomination by uniting the two wings of the Democratic Party, black women and white women.

    • Replies: @Meretricious

    All y’all need to check your epistemology and stop swinging your dick around and beclowning yourselves repeatedly.
     
    That needs saving...
  140. @Lugash
    The point isn't to be a contrarian, the point is to know the truth and speak it. And to be reasonably prudent. We've had a Vietnam's worth of deaths up to this point with the harsh restrictions. What do you think it would be like without the restrictions? My guesstimate is a Civil War's worth.

    Sometimes the conventional wisdom is correct. Sometimes you share it with Rachel Maddow and Andrew Cuomo. That doesn't mean you always share it, or don't keep re-evaluating it... for example, I'm keeping the idea that NYC has a different strain than the rest of the country and that their infection rates won't transfer to the rest of the country due to lifestyle factors, so Cuomo and Maddow are falsely projecting their experience onto the rest of us.

    You have it exactly right. The conventional wisdom is true.

    I at first was skeptical. But then my information changed, and so I altered my conclusions.

    What do you do, sir?

  141. @Ron Unz

    Sure, the conventional wisdom is right sometimes This definitely is not one of those times...The shutdown has put millions of mostly poor people out of work, and it will cause many shattered dreams and premature deaths all on its own. The more data comes out, the more this looks like a terrible mistake.
     
    Well, courtesy of MoA here's a nice Financial Times chart of total weekly deaths in Britain for almost the last 50(!) years. I've already linked it in a couple of other places, but I might as well do so again:

    https://www.moonofalabama.org/images10/britainexessdeath2.jpg

    Does this look like a disease with Flu-type fatality rates of around 0.1%?

    Given the horrific situation in Lombardy and now NYC/NJ, I just can't understand the thinking of the hordes of Flu Hoaxers who hang around here.

    Here is England & Wales all-cause mortality displayed back to 1993:

    Source: http://inproportion2.talkigy.com/

    Note that it only goes out to April 10th, the latest date available when the data was reported on April 21, so that right-most spike will have some additional width to it.

    Does COVID-19 look like a disease with Flu-type fatality rates?

    It does to me, yes.

    • Replies: @Hail

    Does COVID-19 look like a disease with Flu-type fatality rates?
     
    Yes.

    And we've known it since late March, at the latest, with good indications of it by early March or earlier. The CoronaPanic and CoronaParanoia became self-driving forces.

    Corona defined: [fluff] + [hype] + [self-fulfilling prophecies] + [unremarkable flu virus].

    _______________

    Here is another surprising feature of the UK data:

    A comparison of the 2017-18 flu season with 2019-20. The exact same period, the exact same number of days, the same weeks of the year, constituting the entirety of the usual flu season for both periods.

    Don't look necessarily at the eye-catching "spikes," though they may be some interest. Look at time-span periods.Here are the exact numbers of interest:

    [2017 Week 44, thru 2018 Week 15]
    (UK Deaths occurring 12:01am Oct. 28, 2017 to 11:59pm April 13, 2018)
    282,486 total deaths, all causes

    [2019 Week 44, thru 2020 Week 15]
    (UK Deaths occurring 12:01am Oct. 26, 2019 to 11:59pm April 10, 2020)
    279,330 total deaths, all causes

    As you can see, 2017-18 had more deaths (3,150) than 2019-20 so far, despite the alleged major catastrophe of coronavirus ongoing in 2020 for weeks.

    We will know Week 16 2020's total deaths in a few days when the data for deaths through April 17 is released. We know 2018 Week 16 had 11,223 total deaths. Going on the current trajectory, UK Week 16 2020 will probably have 13,000 to 16,000 total deaths, which means the UK finally "caught up" in total deaths with 2017-18 by the third week of April 2020. And this includes the many thousands of corona-negative excess deaths in March and April 2020, few-to-none of which would have occurred if we had ignored the virus or taken the Swedish approach.

    Given the level of coronavirus coverage and so on, the CoronaPanic, this is an incredible fact that deserves wider attention, but of course no one pays attention to it. The coronavirus epidemic in the UK in 2020 shows no signs of being much worse than even the 2017-18 flu epidemic, which was unnamed and triggered no hysteria, no recession, no coup d'etat.

    I invite anyone who wants to confirm these UK total-mortality numbers to do so. They are not hidden.

  142. Anonymous[333] • Disclaimer says:
    @res

    My guesstimate is………no difference without the restrictions.
     
    I think that is a hard argument to justify. A sample plot from
    https://www.kinsahealth.co/your-sacrifices-are-saving-lives-social-distancing-is-working/

    https://www.kinsahealth.co/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/Santa-Clara-and-Miami-Dade-County-Share-of-Population-with-Flu-Like-Illness-1.png

    Whether or not the restrictions (and which particular restrictions!) were/are worth it is a more complicated and nuanced discussion which does not seem possible to have here.

    Whether or not the restrictions (and which particular restrictions!) were/are worth it

    An important point.

  143. @Ron Unz

    Sure, the conventional wisdom is right sometimes This definitely is not one of those times...The shutdown has put millions of mostly poor people out of work, and it will cause many shattered dreams and premature deaths all on its own. The more data comes out, the more this looks like a terrible mistake.
     
    Well, courtesy of MoA here's a nice Financial Times chart of total weekly deaths in Britain for almost the last 50(!) years. I've already linked it in a couple of other places, but I might as well do so again:

    https://www.moonofalabama.org/images10/britainexessdeath2.jpg

    Does this look like a disease with Flu-type fatality rates of around 0.1%?

    Given the horrific situation in Lombardy and now NYC/NJ, I just can't understand the thinking of the hordes of Flu Hoaxers who hang around here.

    The text at the top of the graph says “unprecedented”.

    That graph shows the current tally in a bold red line, and I presume, the tally from previous years as faint blue dots.

    It shows a spike in the bold red line, and the spike is shown for a duration of 2 weeks.

    The text also says it’s for “death registrations”.

    If you connected all the blue dots with a bold red line, would the red spike in that graph continue to stand out, apart from being a bit late in the year for a spike? There are 3 blue dots on that graph above the highest part of the red peak ( weeks 50 and 1, rather than 15 or so), and about 6-8 in the range of that 2 week spike (weeks 1, 2, 8, and 49-52).

    If the spike hangs in the air like that for 10 weeks, that would be extremely unprecedented in the last 50 years and unlike anything previously observed.

    But in a 2 week duration, if it were to go down for a 3rd week, it looks like the graph shows at least a few precedents in the past 50 years but shows them in a different color. It certainly doesn’t make it look like nothing, it looks like it’s competing with the 2 or 3 worst spikes in death registrations in the last 50 years.

    I have no idea what was causing those previous spikes. I notice they do all occur in what I would think of as flu season and not in the middle of summer. They may not be diseases, perhaps terrorist IRA bombings or train derailments or something? It presents itself as death registrations. The period of the graph does not cover the London Blitz or the Spanish Flu.

    I think part of the problem with the flu debate is most people don’t define what they mean by ‘flu’. You did. 0.1%.

    I think we could possibly benefit from defining it like we define floods. Yearly flus, decadal flus, semi-centennial flus, centennial flus, etc. I would guess 0.1% would be a yearly flu. I might agree to call it decadal but no more than that.

    That spike looks nothing like a yearly flu, easily worse than a decadal flu. It doesn’t necessarily seem out of the ballpark for a bi-decadal or semi-centennial flu, and is still quite easily imaginable for a centennial flu. Just as a ’cause of death’ generically, that graph covering 50 years makes it look like a bi-decadal to semi-centennial cause of death.

    • Agree: Polynikes
  144. Anonymous[333] • Disclaimer says:
    @ben tillman

    I doubt very much such a low infection fatality rate. The number of dead is now 200,000. At that fatality rate, there should be over 120 million infected people Worlwide. That is a dozen times more than the reported infection rate.
     
    It is absurd to think there are only 10 million infections worldwide.

    It is absurd to think there are only 10 million infections worldwide.

    China, the epicenter, has very low numbers.

  145. @DanHessinMD
    Another point (which is obvious to me, but probably needs to be explicitly stated anyway) -- if everyone is going to eventually be exposed then the safest time to be exposed is during the humid summer months.

    I will also repeat a comment I made earlier: very low humidity (20% at the University of Maryland Medical Center according to a doctor I know who practices there) is common in hospitals to produce an odorless sensation of sterility, but is debilitating for respiratory immunity. Hospital HVAC systems are very likely increasing the infection fatality rate rather dramatically.

    “… then the safest time to be exposed is during the humid summer months…” – Do we really know that the outcome for the very vulnerable depends on humidity once they get infected? I do not think so.

    • Replies: @DanHessinMD
    utu wrote:

    "Do we really know that the outcome for the very vulnerable depends on humidity once they get infected? I do not think so."

    utu -- I find no argument here. You haven't said anything at all. You have presented no science one way other the other.

    Here are a bunch of data points. You don't happen to work for the World Health Organization do you, because you seem be dismissive of all useful knowledge on this.

    (1) The fatality rates in hot, humid countries are coming in very, very low. By contrast, the fatality rates in cold, dry climates are coming in orders of magnitude higher.

    (2)

    In 2019, a research team at Yale University Medical School published a groundbreaking study (Kudo et al., National Academy of Sciences, 2019) which showed how low ambient humidity hurts the ability of the immune system to fight respiratory viral infection in animal hosts. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6561219/ .

    It is unfortunate that no controlled studies have been done on humidity as it relates to COVID-19 yet.

    (3)

    Respiratory immunity is very dependent on humidity.

    https://www.annualreviews.org/doi/pdf/10.1146/annurev-virology-012420-022445

    Read through the 130 citations in the above document, as I have, and then get back to me. Please do some work before dismissing things out of hand.

    (4) Humidifiers have been sold to improve respiratory health in winter throughout America and the world for at least the last 100 years.

    (5) More citations on how higher humidity improves immunity against respiratory viruses. Admittedly much of this is for flu, but respiratory immunity clearly functions far better in higher humidity.

    1. Kudo et al. Low ambient humidity impairs barrier function and innate resistance against influenza infection. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 2019.

    2. Makinen et al. Cold temperature and low humidity are associated with increased occurrence of respiratory tract infections. Respiratory Medicine, Volume 103, Issue 3, March 2009, Pages 456-462

    3. Eccles R (2002) An explanation for the seasonality of acute upper respiratory tract viral infections. Acta Otolaryngol 122:183–191.

    4. Iwasaki A, Pillai PS (2014) Innate immunity to influenza virus infection. Nat Rev Immunol 14:315–328.

    5. Chen X, et al. (2018) Host immune response to influenza a virus infection. Front Immunol 9:320.

    6. Taubenberger JK, Morens DM (2008) The pathology of influenza virus infections. Annu Rev Pathol 3:499–522.

    7. Bustamante-Marin XM, Ostrowski LE (2017) Cilia and mucociliary clearance. Cold Spring Harb Perspect Biol 9:a028241.

    8. Oozawa H, et al. (2012) Effect of prehydration on nasal mucociliary clearance in low relative humidity. Auris Nasus Larynx 39:48–52.

    9. Kudo E, et al. (2019) Low ambient humidity impairs barrier function, innate resistance against influenza infection. NCBI BioProject. Available at https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/ bioproject/PRJNA528197. Deposited March 20, 2019.

    , @Anon
    https://m.youtube.com/watch?feature=youtu.be&v=HgIfusTARPg

    A well respected doctor in Madrid. Broad scope: the week’s lessons, personalized treatment according to 3 patient “profiles”, home tests limitations, public policy options weighed against economic costs. Broad rather than in depth, tho. Message: take more precautions than your obliged to.

    Word of mouth: hcq + ivermectin + azit + xeralto + arcoxia. They’re bombing patients, but this one worked. Anecdotal, I know.
  146. ” it could be that there’s a New York City variant that is more lethal than the variant prevalent in Miami.”

    I have no expertise but I thought they could sequence the RNA and determine if the NYC and FLA versions are similar.

  147. @Kratoklastes
    If anything, this covid19-related shutdown of the global economy should be seen in the context of the famous (and totally, irretrievably retarded) Trolley Problem.

    Faced with a path on which a demographically-small number of very ill, very old people were going to die, the political class veered the trolley and slammed it into the entire global economy - guaranteeing an increase in misery (and suicides) that will have a much higher cost than the alternative... i.e., the death of some very ill septuagenarians.

    I forgot about the good old Trolley car morality metaphor!

    But it’s true. Once the political default was “do something,” it meant that any casualties would be blamed on any politician who allowed people to keep their freedom. He’d be accused of “having blood on his hands.”

    Remember, it was the Chinese who were getting so much praise for their super-aggressive lock down of Wuhan before it started hitting the west. They helped set the tone what was to follow.

    • Replies: @Anonymous

    But it’s true. Once the political default was “do something,” it meant that any casualties would be blamed on any politician who allowed people to keep their freedom. He’d be accused of “having blood on his hands.”
     
    “It’s true”? That is not what K wrote.

    Remember, it was the Chinese who were getting so much praise for their super-aggressive lock down of Wuhan before it started hitting the west.
     
    They were?
  148. “…there could be different strains in different places.”

    I have been suspecting as such for a while. How to explain to which the data varies from place to place.

    This little bastard, at least in it’s current, or”novel”, state, has really only been known to exist for the last several months. We are still on a learning curve. I mean, the TONNAGE of what the “experts” don’t know yet would sink the entire US Navy fleet ten times over.

  149. HA says:
    @kpkinsunnyphiladelphia
    "How many will die?" is an important question to ask, predict, and adjust, but it's just as important to ask,

    "WHO is in fact dying?"

    The jury is still out on question #1.

    Question #2 is pretty much answered. Old people. People who are already sick. People who have conditions that make them vulnerable.

    What if it turns out that 20% of the final death toll is from nursing homes?

    https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2020/04/1-5-coronavirus-deaths-could-have-been-prevented-daniel-greenfield/#disqus_thread

    Take away the co-morbid and nursing home patients, and what is the IFR now? It ain't Spanish flu level, that's for sure.

    But no, we have to close every greasy spoon and nail salon in the nation in a frenzied panic, have normal healthy people wear more or less useless masks amongst other healthy people while they are all scrambling for toilet paper, and just generally destroy our economy, rather than calmly tell old and sick people to stay inside, and have the authorities descend upon nursing homes and make sure their shit is order.

    When all this is said and done, we will rue the day we acted so stupidly.

    “When all this is said and done, we will rue the day we acted so stupidly.”

    Who’s this “we” you refer to? To be sure, armchair back-forecasters applying their keen 20/20 hindsight to cherry-picked outcomes and then claiming they were right all along will always be among us. And innumeracy is currently far more widespread in our world than coronavirus. That means mathematical illiterates who pretend that they know more than the experts and could have done all this better will never be in short supply. (And when the models are especially difficult, they’ll frequently be right, sadly.)

    However, I repeat: no sane person who believes that New York City is a real location — as opposed to a troupe of crisis actors — will ever believe that even Sweden’s approach was the “right” one (and even theirs is a far cry from the “let ‘er rip” attitude that many here are still advocating, because, if 200,000 in a world of 7 billion means nothing, then why do anything about a million or two million dead? What answer can anyone provide for such people except to breathe a sign of relief that they’re kooks?)

    I get it — you want to ignore what doesn’t suit your worldview and pretend it was only the let’s-do-something crowd that acted stupidly. I’m telling you, if you’re really interested in being honest, there was — as far as I can tell — as much or more stupidity from the let’s-do-nothing contingent. If you want to claim otherwise, then I will tell you it’s not just the CDC that should be suspected of retconning the history and fudging the numbers.

    Even as someone who suspects the final numbers may be closer to your prediction than some of theirs, I hope I can at least be honest enough to also admit that.

    • Replies: @kpkinsunnyphiladelphia
    We have simply not been smart about this, and we are continuing to be stupid.

    As if we didn't know BEFORE about who was going to suffer most, we do know now.

    We have to stop this draconian bullshit RIGHT NOW, today, this minute, except in certain places.
    , @UK
    Millions die every single year if diseases that are much easier to prevent than this. Your weekly Starbucks could save multiple lives in poor countries, yet you choose your overpriced coffee. This is the harsh reality of your own choices, and everyone else's too.

    You can pretend that you're all about saving lives and therefore give huge inflated context-free numbers, but I very much doubt that any of your actions, in areas that don't allow you to play the satisfying role of internet scold, actually show that you do.

    Talk is cheap. Ordering other people to have their lives ruined is cheap. I simply don't believe you and your stated motivations. Your actions belie your words.
    , @leterip
    I am not sure anyone here advocated doing absolutely nothing. Advising hand washing,advising avoiding big groups, etc would always have made sense and will probably turn out to have been enough. But it is very likely that doing nothing, policy wise, would have been preferable to where we are now. Even with no government intervention people would have increased social distancing and hand washing.
    For me, suppression made no sense as soon I understood that there was no plausible, reasonably quick, exit strategy especially for a western country. That is what attracted me to Swedish approach which is modified let er rip approach. It actually had an exit strategy. They conceived this approach very early on with the same data as everyone else's experts. For us non experts, it is naturally a bit of monday morning quarterbacking. But the fact the most countries experts, who have been studying pandemics for years and years, could not have at least offered the Swedish approach as an option is quite disappointing. This will be a historically bad policy failure - and yes, this should have been foreseen.
    , @Mehen
    The main error in your screed is that, as far as I’m aware, no one on this site has advocated a “let’s do nothing” approach. Just that the official response has been way out of proportion to the actual danger. Now, they may be right or they may be wrong, but at least characterize their position fairly, eh?
    , @Kratoklastes
    If you actually believed any of the nonsense in that comment, you would have spent your Woke life agitating for the global banning of cigarettes, alcohol, motor cars and the US military - all of which have direct, predictable, annual, global death tolls significantly higher than your current Doomer infatuation.

    I'll go out on a limb and predict that you have not spent your entire adult life campaigning for the global Prohibition of alcohol, tobacco, motor vehicles and the US military. (And nor should you - except for the last one).

    You're also ignoring a bunch of obvious tings:
     •  faced with a threat, individuals adjust their behaviour without being ordered to do so;
     • that imposing economy-destroying constraints on people's lives has predictable consequences that dwarf the predictable costs of "inaction".

    Given how humans over-react to minuscule (and non-existent) threats, it makes no sense to assume that people would simply go about their normal lives if they were informed that there was a life-threatening pathogen doing the rounds.

    Your mental model of the world seems to include an assumption of no-endogenous-adaptation: that if there were lepers walking the streets, people would shake their hands unless you ordered them not to. (This is a meta-argument, since it appears that leprosy is not transmissible by contact: you should still be able to grasp that it is certain that people would not shake their hands).
    , @moshe
    Nah.

    What should have been done was nothing.

    NuFlu is dangerous to people with less than 2 years to live but The Panic is more dangerous.

    Worse yet, it causes MORE people to get NuFlu.

    [Before I explain that let me explain why I'm calling this NuFlu. Because unlike the traditional flu that has huge numbers of people immunized (from the shot, previous cases, non-weeded out in past years, evolution) and therefore they AND the herd are largely protected, this "new flu" lacks that obstacle, hence the need for a new sort of vaccine. Okay, going on...]

    The Panic made many people WITH NuFlu run from their locations (Wuhan, Lombardy...) as soon as it was announced that the area had an infection.

    Take away The international Panic caused by a species evolved to fear and seek out dangers that don't exist anymore, a media horny to exploit it, and politicians looking for a raison d'etre and NuFlu would not have spread this fast, meaning what happened in February would only be happening now as Flu Season traditionally ends, or not at all. It's questionable whether it would even continue to exist next year at all, and if so, whether it would again, remain local. At least for long enough for a vaccine to be developed.

    I have more to explain but history has shown me that nobody reads my longer comments so I'll leave you with simple notes that some will br able to work though on their own and some not.

    -----

    ^ Nursing home deaths (which are 1 in 5) were often infections that were Panic caused. As were many others. See Semmelweis. (Give birth at home instead of a hospital and survive.)

    ^ Furthermore The Panic misplaced attention from nursing homes (which would have beeb incredibly easy to quarantine) by focusing on everyone.

    ^ More explanations for Panic Deaths

    ^ I don't oppose The Quarantine for other reasons

    ^ Some Panic was inevitablely arriving (mankind rethinks itself every jubilee, see 1970, 1920 etc.) and we Pinkered it without War....

    Much more to explain if there's enough interest. Happy to do a Q and A on whatsapp or whatever if there's enough interest. I know that sohnds presumptuous but it's not. Hit the hyperlink to see my earlier comments and you'll see that (aside for plainly obvious sarcasm or needs to genralize for The Slow) I understood this thing correctly from the very very start. [Fair warning, For many people reading my comments will increase their blood pressure. Be advised.]
  150. @DanHessinMD
    Climate is the biggest variable.

    China has a new outbreak and lo and behold it is in Harbin, the northernmost major city in China, capital of China's northernmost province and far north of North Korea.

    Humidity indoors in Harbin right now is still very low.

    Dan:

    Would climate increase both the portion of the population infected and the average initial viral load of those infected, and thus IFR?

    Henry

    • Replies: @DanHessinMD
    "Would climate increase both the portion of the population infected and the average initial viral load of those infected, and thus IFR?"

    I don't know the answer, but it is an interesting question. Certainly if the respiratory cilia are immobilized by dry conditions, they will dispose of fewer virus particles, and so more the particles that you are exposed to can multiply.

    Viruses live much longer in cold, dry air **AND** dry air is bad for respiratory immunity once you are exposed.

    What's below is mostly about virus survival in the air for influenza, but your basic virions (virus particles) have a lot in common no matter the type.

    1. Noti et al. (2013) High Humidity Leads to Loss of Infectious Influenza Virus from Simulated Coughs. PLoS One. 2013; 8(2): e57485.

    2. Tamerius JD, et al. (2013) Environmental predictors of seasonal influenza epidemics across temperate and tropical climates. PLoS Pathog 9:e1003194, and erratum 2013 Nov;9(11).

    3. Shaman J, Pitzer VE, Viboud C, Grenfell BT, Lipsitch M (2010) Absolute humidity and the seasonal onset of influenza in the continental United States. PLoS Biol 8(2): e1000316.

    4. Shaman J, Goldstein E, Lipsitch M (2011) Absolute humidity and pandemic versus epidemic influenza. Am J Epidemiol 173: 127–135


    5. Lowen AC, Mubareka S, Steel J, Palese P (2007) Influenza virus transmission is dependent on relative humidity and temperature. PLoS Pathog 3(10): 1470–1476.

    6. Schaffer FL, Soergel ME, Straube DC (1976) Survival of airborne influenza virus: effects of propagating host, relative humidity, and composition of spray fluids, Arch Virol. 51: 263–273.

    7. Hanley BP, Borup B (2010) Aerosol influenza transmission risk contours: A study of humid tropics versus winter temperate zone. Virol J 7: 98.

    8. Yang W, Marr LC (2011) Dynamics of airborne influenza A viruses indoors and dependence on humidity. PloS One 6(6): e21481.

    9. Shaman and Kohn (2009) Absolute humidity modulates influenza survival, transmission, and seasonality. PNAS March 3, 2009 106 (9) 3243-3248
  151. @Mr McKenna
    In between Sweden and Florida, we have Oxford.

    An Oxford University women’s studies professor has lamented that if the college’s scientists produce a successful Covid-19 vaccine, the “white savior” narrative will be unstoppable.

    Cousens fears that if the vaccine is developed by “white, male and Oxford-educated” scientists, her country’s stock will rise above female-led countries, such as Germany and New Zealand, whose epidemic responses have been, according to a Forbes op-ed, “most widely praised.”

    https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/coronavirus-vaccine_uk_5ea067f2c5b6b2e5b83ba372
     

    NB: I don't click on HP links so no telling what else you'll find there.

    Amidst all the turmoil, The Narrative remains alive and well.

  152. The Miami study looks to have somewhat decent methodology, though from what I can tell, it still requires the randomly-chosen individuals to consent – meaning that the people who are least likely to get infected – that is, the people who refuse all or most social contact – are not included in the sample.

    Other studies have been much worse about this. For instance, one of them tested supermarket shoppers. Even a moment’s thought about this methodology should tell you that it’s probably biased upward, and it’s impossible to estimate by how much. That puts it squarely in the category of “hmm, interesting I guess” and that’s about it.

    I think it’s very good that they’re doing these studies. However, they are still working out some methodological problems (as well as test problems) which is why they are coming up with these unrealistic IFR figures. People want to believe what they want to believe, so they look at these very early non-replicating studies that are all over the map, and assume that the truth must be the average of all of them, or the upper or lower bound. But the studies may have high variance and bias, we just don’t know at this point.

    It’s quaint how these topics have resulted in a flood of trolls who never had anything to say before but are now suddenly smart and informed enough to tell Steve how to write his blog. Imagine that friend everyone has who just took up a new hobby two weeks ago – let’s say wine tasting – and now won’t shut up about it and talks as if he’s an expert with 10 years of experience. That’s what I’m seeing with so many “dissident right” people on Corona. It’s really highlighted the stark difference between people who pursue topics like HBD and evopsych out of a desire for knowledge and truth, and those who are simply in service to yet another lame tribe based on political ideology.

    I’m transitioning from social distancing for physical health to social distancing for mental health. Turns out that many of the people I was hanging out with were just as stupid and obnoxious as the progs and pinkos, it just didn’t come out until they encountered unknown territory.

  153. @utu
    "... then the safest time to be exposed is during the humid summer months..." - Do we really know that the outcome for the very vulnerable depends on humidity once they get infected? I do not think so.

    utu wrote:

    “Do we really know that the outcome for the very vulnerable depends on humidity once they get infected? I do not think so.”

    utu — I find no argument here. You haven’t said anything at all. You have presented no science one way other the other.

    Here are a bunch of data points. You don’t happen to work for the World Health Organization do you, because you seem be dismissive of all useful knowledge on this.

    (1) The fatality rates in hot, humid countries are coming in very, very low. By contrast, the fatality rates in cold, dry climates are coming in orders of magnitude higher.

    (2)

    In 2019, a research team at Yale University Medical School published a groundbreaking study (Kudo et al., National Academy of Sciences, 2019) which showed how low ambient humidity hurts the ability of the immune system to fight respiratory viral infection in animal hosts. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6561219/ .

    It is unfortunate that no controlled studies have been done on humidity as it relates to COVID-19 yet.

    (3)

    Respiratory immunity is very dependent on humidity.

    https://www.annualreviews.org/doi/pdf/10.1146/annurev-virology-012420-022445

    Read through the 130 citations in the above document, as I have, and then get back to me. Please do some work before dismissing things out of hand.

    (4) Humidifiers have been sold to improve respiratory health in winter throughout America and the world for at least the last 100 years.

    (5) More citations on how higher humidity improves immunity against respiratory viruses. Admittedly much of this is for flu, but respiratory immunity clearly functions far better in higher humidity.

    1. Kudo et al. Low ambient humidity impairs barrier function and innate resistance against influenza infection. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 2019.

    2. Makinen et al. Cold temperature and low humidity are associated with increased occurrence of respiratory tract infections. Respiratory Medicine, Volume 103, Issue 3, March 2009, Pages 456-462

    3. Eccles R (2002) An explanation for the seasonality of acute upper respiratory tract viral infections. Acta Otolaryngol 122:183–191.

    4. Iwasaki A, Pillai PS (2014) Innate immunity to influenza virus infection. Nat Rev Immunol 14:315–328.

    5. Chen X, et al. (2018) Host immune response to influenza a virus infection. Front Immunol 9:320.

    6. Taubenberger JK, Morens DM (2008) The pathology of influenza virus infections. Annu Rev Pathol 3:499–522.

    7. Bustamante-Marin XM, Ostrowski LE (2017) Cilia and mucociliary clearance. Cold Spring Harb Perspect Biol 9:a028241.

    8. Oozawa H, et al. (2012) Effect of prehydration on nasal mucociliary clearance in low relative humidity. Auris Nasus Larynx 39:48–52.

    9. Kudo E, et al. (2019) Low ambient humidity impairs barrier function, innate resistance against influenza infection. NCBI BioProject. Available at https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/ bioproject/PRJNA528197. Deposited March 20, 2019.

    • Replies: @utu
    "Respiratory immunity is very dependent on humidity." - Yes, for TB high humidity is bad.
  154. @Ron Unz

    Sure, the conventional wisdom is right sometimes This definitely is not one of those times...The shutdown has put millions of mostly poor people out of work, and it will cause many shattered dreams and premature deaths all on its own. The more data comes out, the more this looks like a terrible mistake.
     
    Well, courtesy of MoA here's a nice Financial Times chart of total weekly deaths in Britain for almost the last 50(!) years. I've already linked it in a couple of other places, but I might as well do so again:

    https://www.moonofalabama.org/images10/britainexessdeath2.jpg

    Does this look like a disease with Flu-type fatality rates of around 0.1%?

    Given the horrific situation in Lombardy and now NYC/NJ, I just can't understand the thinking of the hordes of Flu Hoaxers who hang around here.

    As Deckin notes, and unless Deckin and I are reading this chart of weekly UK death registrations incorrectly, it appears that the number of death registrations in a given week in the UK has exceeded the 2020 level on at least three occasions since 1970.

    The chart doesn’t indicate which years those were or what the causes were, but if one assumes that the spikes were caused by some kind of flu, because they are all concentrated in peak flu-season weeks, then COVID-19 does indeed look like just a bad flu, perhaps the fourth worst since 1970. (Note: it’s also possible that the other weeks when flu deaths exceeded COVID-19 deaths all occurred in one year, so it’s possible that COVID-19 is the second or third worst flu since 1970, in terms of weekly death registrations, at least in the UK.)

    If the UK has had three weeks since 1970 when weekly flu deaths exceeded weekly COVID-19 deaths, then I don’t think it’s unreasonable to equate COVID-19 with a bad flu. And I don’t recall the UK’s economy (or any other economy) being shut down in any other year since 1970 to deal a bad flu.

  155. @kpkinsunnyphiladelphia
    "How many will die?" is an important question to ask, predict, and adjust, but it's just as important to ask,

    "WHO is in fact dying?"

    The jury is still out on question #1.

    Question #2 is pretty much answered. Old people. People who are already sick. People who have conditions that make them vulnerable.

    What if it turns out that 20% of the final death toll is from nursing homes?

    https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2020/04/1-5-coronavirus-deaths-could-have-been-prevented-daniel-greenfield/#disqus_thread

    Take away the co-morbid and nursing home patients, and what is the IFR now? It ain't Spanish flu level, that's for sure.

    But no, we have to close every greasy spoon and nail salon in the nation in a frenzied panic, have normal healthy people wear more or less useless masks amongst other healthy people while they are all scrambling for toilet paper, and just generally destroy our economy, rather than calmly tell old and sick people to stay inside, and have the authorities descend upon nursing homes and make sure their shit is order.

    When all this is said and done, we will rue the day we acted so stupidly.

    “It ain’t Spanish flu level, that’s for sure.”

    At current population levels in the US (+/- 330 million), that level would be close to 2 million. We’re only about 3 months into this thing and between 40 and 50 thousand have died so far. We’re still in round one, with round two possibly scheduled for latter 2020 through early 2021. Though the likelihood of this even approaching the Spanish flu is remote–not impossible, only remote–still, we’re talking about a lot of people who’ll be checking out over the next 9-12 months.

    • Replies: @Polynikes

    still, we’re talking about a lot of people who’ll be checking out over the next 9-12 months.
     
    You guys claim this but the excess morbidity doesn’t seem to be there (yet). In all likelihood we’re talking about a very similar number of people “checking out” this year as in years past. Maybe a touch higher, which would certainly be expected.
  156. @J.Ross
    Which part of New York City is Miami in? That like Jamaica?

    Hmmm … I thought it was part of Lon Guyland.

  157. @Henry Canaday
    Dan:

    Would climate increase both the portion of the population infected and the average initial viral load of those infected, and thus IFR?

    Henry

    “Would climate increase both the portion of the population infected and the average initial viral load of those infected, and thus IFR?”

    I don’t know the answer, but it is an interesting question. Certainly if the respiratory cilia are immobilized by dry conditions, they will dispose of fewer virus particles, and so more the particles that you are exposed to can multiply.

    Viruses live much longer in cold, dry air **AND** dry air is bad for respiratory immunity once you are exposed.

    What’s below is mostly about virus survival in the air for influenza, but your basic virions (virus particles) have a lot in common no matter the type.

    1. Noti et al. (2013) High Humidity Leads to Loss of Infectious Influenza Virus from Simulated Coughs. PLoS One. 2013; 8(2): e57485.

    2. Tamerius JD, et al. (2013) Environmental predictors of seasonal influenza epidemics across temperate and tropical climates. PLoS Pathog 9:e1003194, and erratum 2013 Nov;9(11).

    3. Shaman J, Pitzer VE, Viboud C, Grenfell BT, Lipsitch M (2010) Absolute humidity and the seasonal onset of influenza in the continental United States. PLoS Biol 8(2): e1000316.

    4. Shaman J, Goldstein E, Lipsitch M (2011) Absolute humidity and pandemic versus epidemic influenza. Am J Epidemiol 173: 127–135

    5. Lowen AC, Mubareka S, Steel J, Palese P (2007) Influenza virus transmission is dependent on relative humidity and temperature. PLoS Pathog 3(10): 1470–1476.

    6. Schaffer FL, Soergel ME, Straube DC (1976) Survival of airborne influenza virus: effects of propagating host, relative humidity, and composition of spray fluids, Arch Virol. 51: 263–273.

    7. Hanley BP, Borup B (2010) Aerosol influenza transmission risk contours: A study of humid tropics versus winter temperate zone. Virol J 7: 98.

    8. Yang W, Marr LC (2011) Dynamics of airborne influenza A viruses indoors and dependence on humidity. PloS One 6(6): e21481.

    9. Shaman and Kohn (2009) Absolute humidity modulates influenza survival, transmission, and seasonality. PNAS March 3, 2009 106 (9) 3243-3248

  158. @neprof
    How about total viral load, i.e. multiple exposures over a short period of time? A NYC resident who commutes on the subway could be exposed several times and reach a point where the body cannot clear enough of the virus.

    Think of the doctor in Wuhan, the one the broke the news about the extent of the virus. He was a healthy man in his 30s but he died from virus. Did he reach a point where he was exposed too many times and his body could not handle the total viral load?

    Perhaps a little exposure, esp. in when ample sun (Vit. D) is available, is a good way to develop antibodies w/o having symptoms.

    Perhaps a little exposure, esp. in when ample sun (Vit. D) is available, is a good way to develop antibodies w/o having symptoms.

    The WHO has just announced that there is no proven immunity from having antibodies in your blood. The plot thickens. If I were a conspiracy theorist, I’d say this is a perfect tool to thin the herd from the old and already sick. The rest will just have to live with the virus, pretty much how most people live with the incurable herpes-1 virus. Unfortunately, I am neither young nor particularly healthy, so I am not too happy with this conspiracy.

    • Replies: @Elli
    WHO says no evidence of immunity. That is not the same as evidence of no immunity.

    People get better; their immune systems did the job. How long does it last? Studies needed.
    , @Anonymous

    The WHO has just announced that there is no proven immunity from having antibodies in your blood.
     
    The absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
    , @Bill Jones
    "The WHO has just announced that there is no proven immunity from having antibodies in your blood. "

    If the WHO announced that the sun rises in the East I'd be looking West for the next dawn.
  159. @Pericles
    "Dr Emily Cousens researches vulnerability and gender and teaches at Oxford and LSE."

    Looks like typical toxic white woman from the byline. I'm sure she will thus leach venom throughout both Oxford and LSE for a long time to come. Lol done, academaniacs!

    BTW It’s Oxford Brookes University (former polytechnic) not the ancient one.

    • Replies: @Pericles


    BTW It’s Oxford Brookes University (former polytechnic) not the ancient one.

     

    Now that is extra funny.

    By the way, the byline now reads


    Dr Emily Cousens researches vulnerability and gender at Oxford Brookes university and teaches on the women’s studies masters course at University of Oxford.

     

    Seems like someone else noticed too. How embarrassing.
  160. Unprecedented isn’t when you have 5 other datapoints on the chart at the same level or higher.

    Unprecedented is this:

    https://mashable.com/video/unemployment-graph-coronavirus-gamecube/

    • LOL: vhrm
    • Replies: @vhrm
    that video merits an embed.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M5FGuBatbTg

    (and worth noting it was just the first week. The next one was the same and the subsequent 2 also in the millions)
  161. @Ron Unz

    Sure, the conventional wisdom is right sometimes This definitely is not one of those times...The shutdown has put millions of mostly poor people out of work, and it will cause many shattered dreams and premature deaths all on its own. The more data comes out, the more this looks like a terrible mistake.
     
    Well, courtesy of MoA here's a nice Financial Times chart of total weekly deaths in Britain for almost the last 50(!) years. I've already linked it in a couple of other places, but I might as well do so again:

    https://www.moonofalabama.org/images10/britainexessdeath2.jpg

    Does this look like a disease with Flu-type fatality rates of around 0.1%?

    Given the horrific situation in Lombardy and now NYC/NJ, I just can't understand the thinking of the hordes of Flu Hoaxers who hang around here.

    The red line spike is defined by two points: Week 14 and Week 15 if I am reading it correctly. They are about 5,500 and 7,500 above the red baseline, respectively. Weekly CoV deaths for UK can be obtained from the worldometers.info data by summing up the daily deaths:

    Week 14 ending April 5: 3,708
    Week 15 ending April 12: 5,678
    Week 16 ending April 19: 5,448

    The CoV weekly deaths are 2,000 lower weekly totals than excess mortality totals from Financial Times graph. So either CoV deaths (Week 14+15) are undercounted by 40% (13/9.2-1) or there is a second killer in UK that kills at 60% lower rate than CoV.

    • Replies: @Ron Unz

    The CoV weekly deaths are 2,000 lower weekly totals than excess mortality totals from Financial Times graph. So either CoV deaths (Week 14+15) are undercounted by 40%
     
    Exactly. Lombardy, NYC, and other hotspots all have this same under-counting problem because they often don't bother testing corpses for the virus. There was a big article in the NYT about the situation in NYC.

    There are obviously both over-counting and under-counting problems, with the Flu Hoaxers regularly claiming that lots of the victims died "with Coronavirus" rather than because of it.

    That's why these sorts of total-death charts from the FT and the NYT are so helpful. They largely address that complaint.
  162. A. Everyone posting here (and elsewhere) knows much more about the Wuhan flu than they did in early January, if they knew anything back then at all.

    B. This flu is far more contagious than recent flues have been. At least an order of magnitude.

    C. The dormancy or asymptomatic periods of someone having it and transmitting it are highly unusual and lengthy. That explains much of B.

    E. While some (younger, healthier) here scoff at concern, salivating about how older, fragile others will die (not them!) this is far from reassuring even to these people. Large numbers of younger and even very young people, otherwise healthy, have died. Some recovered sick have long term effects.

    F. Fear of the unknown, and early “knowns” like ease of transmission have driven the government mandates. Fear is a great driver for authoritarian behavior and acceptance. In a democracy more or less, panic drives quick and hard. As we now know, most of these measures may be unneeded. This isn’t any reason for bragging about “defying conventional wisdom” since boasts of personal bravery are worthless at best. No “hoaxer” I’ve ever read talks about volunteering to help the sick. Zero.

    G. Even basic scientific facts about COVID-19 are slow to emerge, verified and uncontested.

    H. Yes, time for panic is over. Time for normalcy to return is sooner rather than later.

    I. A basic human trait about risk is that when it is seen as controllable (driving a car) versus uncontrollable (flying in a plane) the risk tolerances are much higher. Hence dangerous car travel is preferred to safe flying by most. Likewise, low pandemic risk is perceived as riskier than normal seasonal flu death (vaccines). Now that risk perceptions are changing, mandates and dictates no longer have much popular appeal. House arrest and depression economics are both bad.

    J. Steve Sailor here and Ron Unz do a tremendous service for providing a forum to all. Don’t abuse them just because you disagree. That’s why we cherish them, because they allow open dissent.

    • Replies: @Jonathan Mason

    B. This flu is far more contagious than recent flues have been. At least an order of magnitude.

    C. The dormancy or asymptomatic periods of someone having it and transmitting it are highly unusual and lengthy. That explains much of B.
     
    Yes, but usually there are vaccines for flu season. The first “high-dose” influenza vaccine targeting those over age 65 years (Medicare patients) was approved by the FDA in 2009 and became available in the U.S. for the 2010-2011 flu season. It contains four times the amount of antigen in other flu vaccines.

    In 2012, the FDA approved the first quadrivalent influenza vaccine, containing two type A and two type B influenza viruses for the 2013-2014 flu season, and there have been newer, supposedly more potent flu vaccines since that time.

    The fact that no one has been vaccinated for COVID-19 obviously makes it more contagious than seasonal flus for which there exist vaccinations.
  163. @Mr. Anon
    That data not especially meaningful without further context.

    How do they define "flu-like illness"? Based on what? Self diagnosis? A doctor's diagnosis? Testing? Sure a lot of people with flu symptoms now stay home. And people who do show up at a hospital are instantly suspected of having CoV.

    Bear in mind that this is from a company that has a vested interest in the panic.

    That data not especially meaningful without further context.

    There is a reason I include so many links in my comments. Feel free to follow the link in that one (and more from there if you like) then come back and have a real conversation about this.

    How do they define “flu-like illness”? Based on what? Self diagnosis? A doctor’s diagnosis? Testing? Sure a lot of people with flu symptoms now stay home. And people who do show up at a hospital are instantly suspected of having CoV.

    The TLDR version of following the links is they have a model which fits the historical temperature data from their smart thermometers to the CDC flu reports. Then they use their current data to estimate the “flu-like illness” for each area.

    Bear in mind that this is from a company that has a vested interest in the panic.

    That’s a point worth remembering. One thing I find really interesting is that the Kinsa data is currently showing almost no illness in the entire country. And they have not made a blog post since 4/9 after having 10 from 3/23 to 4/9.

    How do we reconcile that (also see PS) with continuing new cases of COVID-19? I would expect deaths to keep coming given the lag involved, but where are the new cases coming from?

    P.S. For anyone interested, CDC flu surveillance:
    https://www.cdc.gov/flu/weekly/fluactivitysurv.htm

    • Replies: @anon
    One thing I find really interesting is that the Kinsa data is currently showing almost no illness in the entire country. And they have not made a blog post since 4/9 after having 10 from 3/23 to 4/9.

    How common are Kinsa thermometers in the general population?
    For example, how many elderly black people in Detroit or parts of Georgia have one?
    Ditto how many Native Americans have one? Or working class whites in Mississippi?
    These questions should be obvious just by eyeballing the data, because Kinsa is far from universal as a home health device.

    This is a data subset and has its own peculiarities. If their data can be partitioned down to the county level, or better still the zip code level, I wager that some parts of Maryland or Michigan would show a lot of users, other parts would show few or no users.

    How do we reconcile that (also see PS) with continuing new cases of COVID-19? I would expect deaths to keep coming given the lag involved, but where are the new cases coming from?

    New cases mostly among people who don't own a Kinsa device? Just a guess.
    Data subsets that are non-random can have problems.
    , @Mr. Anon

    There is a reason I include so many links in my comments. Feel free to follow the link in that one (and more from there if you like) then come back and have a real conversation about this.
     
    I did. And they don't define what they mean. How do you define "flu-like illness" from remote temperature readings? That's all the data they have. I don't know. And they don't say. You seem to be the one not having a serious conversation.
  164. @Odin

    Isn’t it strange how the more data comes out about this, the more wrong that consensus seems to be?
     
    to elaborate: ...the more data comes out, the more wrong that consensus seems to you. this is not at all strange if you apply Odin's Law:

    "No matter how much data comes out, everyone on all sides remains convinced he has been right all along."

    This seems to hold for all issues over all time periods. Although it must have been said before, I don't know who to credit.

    This seems to hold for all issues over all time periods. Although it must have been said before, I don’t know who to credit.

    “Odin’s Law” works since the observation goes back to mythological times. Plus, you would not want to name it after the actual discoverer. That would mean you violated Stigler’s law of eponymy.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stigler%27s_law_of_eponymy

    • LOL: niceland
    • Replies: @Odin


    Odin’s Law: “No matter how much data comes out, everyone on all sides remains convinced he has been right all along.”
     
    "Odin's law" works since the observation goes back to mythological times.
     
    Yes, but when I used it in mythological times, nobody knew what "data" was.
  165. @Mr McKenna
    In between Sweden and Florida, we have Oxford.

    An Oxford University women’s studies professor has lamented that if the college’s scientists produce a successful Covid-19 vaccine, the “white savior” narrative will be unstoppable.

    Cousens fears that if the vaccine is developed by “white, male and Oxford-educated” scientists, her country’s stock will rise above female-led countries, such as Germany and New Zealand, whose epidemic responses have been, according to a Forbes op-ed, “most widely praised.”

    https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/coronavirus-vaccine_uk_5ea067f2c5b6b2e5b83ba372
     

    NB: I don't click on HP links so no telling what else you'll find there.

    She is mainly employed by Oxford Brookes. That’s not Oxford. The rest of what she does is to teach grievance studies. If she could just focus on bleating harmlessly, that would be fine. But obsessing about what sex or race will save us is nuts. The contrarian in me hopes that a drunken Russian scientist in far off Siberia will come up first with a vaccine. That will drive the progressive nut jobs crazy, it will take them ages to formulate their collective groupthink responses, and in between, there will be much comedy and merriment. Of course, a old, white male Christian from Nebraska would provide just as much comedy. The talking heads with TSD on cable would explode.

  166. Hail says: • Website
    @Lugash
    The point isn't to be a contrarian, the point is to know the truth and speak it. And to be reasonably prudent. We've had a Vietnam's worth of deaths up to this point with the harsh restrictions. What do you think it would be like without the restrictions? My guesstimate is a Civil War's worth.

    Sometimes the conventional wisdom is correct. Sometimes you share it with Rachel Maddow and Andrew Cuomo. That doesn't mean you always share it, or don't keep re-evaluating it... for example, I'm keeping the idea that NYC has a different strain than the rest of the country and that their infection rates won't transfer to the rest of the country due to lifestyle factors, so Cuomo and Maddow are falsely projecting their experience onto the rest of us.

    We’ve had a Vietnam’s worth of deaths up to this point

    This is irrational thinking. The exact same could be said of any flu virus.

    What do you think it would be like without the restrictions?

    Sweden has now decisively and totally proved this theory wrong.

    Sweden’s coronavirus-positive deaths peaked April 5 to 16, at over 80/day (on three days within that range reaching over 100/day), and have been steadily downhill since then. As of April 21, the final/total new-deaths figure are all looking like <50 day based on preliminary figures. Their hospitals have plenty of spare capacity, and the recent studies suggest a very large % of the population has had contact with the virus, meaning the epidemic is already all-but-over in Sweden and Sweden’s approach is vindicated completely.

    The Imperial College paper was so laughably far off as to either have been prepared by a team of dunces whose normal judgment was further impaired by various substances in their systems, or a hoax meant deliberately to incite panic and empower the “Corona Coup d’Etat” faction.

    The paper predicts hundreds of deaths per day by early May, and is set to be completely wrong; they wildly overhyped this virus, as the anti-Panic side has been trying to warn all along. If Sweden is not seeing a thousand deaths a day in the first two weeks of May, that is the final nail in the coffin for the Imperial College paper and its extremist advocates.

    (From Against the Corona Panic, Pt. III: “Just the Flu” Vindicated by the Data; Or, Why to End the Shutdowns Now, April 19; updated for Sweden April 24.)

    • Thanks: Manfred Arcane
    • Replies: @utu

    Sweden’s coronavirus-positive deaths peaked April 5 to 16, at over 80/day (on three days within that range reaching over 100/day), and have been steadily downhill since then.
     
    Not really. Not really at all.

    https://i.ibb.co/P6HKqLr/graph7.png

    Clearly lower and upper envelopes over the data points keep increasing at least as fast as linear meaning that the totals increase at least as fast as a quadratic function. That we do not see an exponential growth in data anymore is because Sweden despite of their official pronouncements to the outer world in fact practices social distancing (see Steve Sailer movie theatre attendance graph as an example). Deaths are lagging infections by 3-4 weeks so one may expect that the growth will continue as daily infections in Sweden official data keep growing. In last four days daily growth of new infections was 10% per day.

    The strong periodic (7 day period) signal in data suggests that data are being managed, that death certificates are processed in clusters and possibly a strict filtering is applied between "with virus" and "from virus" death categories. Sweden's reputation and that of their chief epidemiologist Anders Tegnell are on the line so the pressure on them to "cook the data" might be irresistible.

    Anders Tegnell promised that he will push the death rate to lower than seasonal flu. He said that he will cut the number of death by four fifths (meaning a factor of five). How was he planning to do it? With a miracle drug nobody else had? Certainly not with isolation and special social countermeasures. The only thing he could do is to keep counting deaths sums by adjusting the line dividing "death of virus" and "death with virus" categories.
  167. @Lowe
    Way to go for the semantic jugular. Steve's entire schtick is that he is an independent thinker and he don't take no guff.

    Sure, the conventional wisdom is right sometimes This definitely is not one of those times. The conventional wisdom has people wearing masks and cowering in their apartments right now, and it has Steve making posts about optimal seating arrangements in movie theaters.

    It was important for us to get it right on this issue. The shutdown has put millions of mostly poor people out of work, and it will cause many shattered dreams and premature deaths all on its own. The more data comes out, the more this looks like a terrible mistake. There have been people expressing skepticism about the narrative on this for sometime, but Sailer isn't one of them.

    Thank you for your posts, Lowe, you are 100% right. This was a sad, and shocking, case of mass-hysteria and even mass-delusion.

    As someone may have once said, “There is a thin line between civilization and madness.”

  168. Anon[543] • Disclaimer says:

    OT: About a week and a half ago, Kim Jong-Un did some more missile launches. Does anyone think the timing of this has anything to do with the fact that he’s supposedly in the hospital brain-dead right now?

    It looks suspiciously like someone got tired of Fatboy’s antics in the middle of the Covid-19 crisis and assassinated him for his termerity in trying to make trouble right now. His death in the middle of a pandemic would be convenient. It’s a case, however, in which there are too many suspects.

  169. Another piece of evidence

    Woman forced to rescue 82 year old father from Queens Nursing Home

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8256699/Woman-rescue-dad-82-Queens-nursing-home-dead-night-ProPublica.html

    • Replies: @vhrm
    The story, as ProPublica tends to do, focuses on the evils of management. Management is no doubt culpable in part, but so are those who created and feed the Fear.

    But the following night, Roland said, a worker she was friendly with finally told her the truth: Many of the aides who helped people like her dad were petrified. They'd all but stopped going into the rooms of residents. Instead, they came to work and locked themselves in an office all day. Food trays were simply left outside in the hall.

    'She was like, 'Girl, I don't want to lose my job, but look, you need to get your father out of here,' Roland said the worker told her.

    Then, she said, the worker began to cry, saying she was scared to be at work herself but needed to earn money for her family — whom she'd quarantined herself away from.
     
    (Again, ProPublic does like to dramatize, but they're factual fact checking type journalists, afaik.)

    How many excess deaths are being caused by vulnerable elderly not getting food and medicine because the employees of care homes have been scared out of their wits by the government and the media?

    This isn't the first story to come out about semi abandoned care homes.
  170. Hail says: • Website
    @Mr. Anon
    Here is England & Wales all-cause mortality displayed back to 1993:

    https://swprs.files.wordpress.com/2020/04/inproportion2_chart5.png?w=736&h=363

    Source: http://inproportion2.talkigy.com/

    Note that it only goes out to April 10th, the latest date available when the data was reported on April 21, so that right-most spike will have some additional width to it.

    Does COVID-19 look like a disease with Flu-type fatality rates?

    It does to me, yes.

    Does COVID-19 look like a disease with Flu-type fatality rates?

    Yes.

    And we’ve known it since late March, at the latest, with good indications of it by early March or earlier. The CoronaPanic and CoronaParanoia became self-driving forces.

    Corona defined: [fluff] + [hype] + [self-fulfilling prophecies] + [unremarkable flu virus].

    _______________

    Here is another surprising feature of the UK data:

    A comparison of the 2017-18 flu season with 2019-20. The exact same period, the exact same number of days, the same weeks of the year, constituting the entirety of the usual flu season for both periods.

    Don’t look necessarily at the eye-catching “spikes,” though they may be some interest. Look at time-span periods.Here are the exact numbers of interest:

    [2017 Week 44, thru 2018 Week 15]
    (UK Deaths occurring 12:01am Oct. 28, 2017 to 11:59pm April 13, 2018)
    282,486 total deaths, all causes

    [2019 Week 44, thru 2020 Week 15]
    (UK Deaths occurring 12:01am Oct. 26, 2019 to 11:59pm April 10, 2020)
    279,330 total deaths, all causes

    As you can see, 2017-18 had more deaths (3,150) than 2019-20 so far, despite the alleged major catastrophe of coronavirus ongoing in 2020 for weeks.

    We will know Week 16 2020’s total deaths in a few days when the data for deaths through April 17 is released. We know 2018 Week 16 had 11,223 total deaths. Going on the current trajectory, UK Week 16 2020 will probably have 13,000 to 16,000 total deaths, which means the UK finally “caught up” in total deaths with 2017-18 by the third week of April 2020. And this includes the many thousands of corona-negative excess deaths in March and April 2020, few-to-none of which would have occurred if we had ignored the virus or taken the Swedish approach.

    Given the level of coronavirus coverage and so on, the CoronaPanic, this is an incredible fact that deserves wider attention, but of course no one pays attention to it. The coronavirus epidemic in the UK in 2020 shows no signs of being much worse than even the 2017-18 flu epidemic, which was unnamed and triggered no hysteria, no recession, no coup d’etat.

    I invite anyone who wants to confirm these UK total-mortality numbers to do so. They are not hidden.

  171. @HA
    "When all this is said and done, we will rue the day we acted so stupidly."

    Who's this "we" you refer to? To be sure, armchair back-forecasters applying their keen 20/20 hindsight to cherry-picked outcomes and then claiming they were right all along will always be among us. And innumeracy is currently far more widespread in our world than coronavirus. That means mathematical illiterates who pretend that they know more than the experts and could have done all this better will never be in short supply. (And when the models are especially difficult, they'll frequently be right, sadly.)

    However, I repeat: no sane person who believes that New York City is a real location -- as opposed to a troupe of crisis actors -- will ever believe that even Sweden's approach was the "right" one (and even theirs is a far cry from the "let 'er rip" attitude that many here are still advocating, because, if 200,000 in a world of 7 billion means nothing, then why do anything about a million or two million dead? What answer can anyone provide for such people except to breathe a sign of relief that they're kooks?)

    I get it -- you want to ignore what doesn't suit your worldview and pretend it was only the let's-do-something crowd that acted stupidly. I'm telling you, if you're really interested in being honest, there was -- as far as I can tell -- as much or more stupidity from the let's-do-nothing contingent. If you want to claim otherwise, then I will tell you it's not just the CDC that should be suspected of retconning the history and fudging the numbers.

    Even as someone who suspects the final numbers may be closer to your prediction than some of theirs, I hope I can at least be honest enough to also admit that.

    We have simply not been smart about this, and we are continuing to be stupid.

    As if we didn’t know BEFORE about who was going to suffer most, we do know now.

    We have to stop this draconian bullshit RIGHT NOW, today, this minute, except in certain places.

    • Agree: Hail
    • Replies: @HA
    "We have simply not been smart about this, and we are continuing to be stupid."

    Those are empty platitudes devoid of any substance. For one thing, governments will always continue to be stupid, whether they choose to do too much or too little. That's just how they roll. Same goes for the media. So whining about that is a red herring.

    Before you or anyone else comes here to stamp your feet and wag your finger about how Steve (who blogged not just about Imperial College predictions, but also about Ionnadis's worries that we might be doing too much based on too little data) has not been smart, point to some actual substantive model or approach that you have been consistently endorsing from the get-go and demonstrate that it was the right one, and then we'll talk. Then we'll all be able to admit that you're the appropriate judge as to what constitutes a smarter model -- as opposed to one more tiresome Monday morning quarterback which is what you sound like.

    Simply spouting "I knew we should have done SOMETHING different" doesn't count. Nor does doing what your agreeer Hail did, which was to start off claiming "this thing is causing no excess deaths whatsoever and I have graphs to prove it" and then later pivoting to some modified position and claiming "no, I was never a hoaxer, I just wanted a smarter approach" after those same graphs blew up in his face. That's sleazy "Oceania has always been at war with Eastasia" retconning and I've seen far too much of it here. Don't wait until after all the data come in and then use your 20/20 hindsight to cherry-pick the one lucky guess out of a pool of millions and pretend it is some kind of A-ha moment, as in "Didn't I tell you that there was a better approach?"

    No, you show me a model that, based on what we knew at the time, was clearly a "smarter approach" -- not just for Sweden or Miami, but also NYC and Bergamo and then we'll talk.

  172. UK says:
    @HA
    "When all this is said and done, we will rue the day we acted so stupidly."

    Who's this "we" you refer to? To be sure, armchair back-forecasters applying their keen 20/20 hindsight to cherry-picked outcomes and then claiming they were right all along will always be among us. And innumeracy is currently far more widespread in our world than coronavirus. That means mathematical illiterates who pretend that they know more than the experts and could have done all this better will never be in short supply. (And when the models are especially difficult, they'll frequently be right, sadly.)

    However, I repeat: no sane person who believes that New York City is a real location -- as opposed to a troupe of crisis actors -- will ever believe that even Sweden's approach was the "right" one (and even theirs is a far cry from the "let 'er rip" attitude that many here are still advocating, because, if 200,000 in a world of 7 billion means nothing, then why do anything about a million or two million dead? What answer can anyone provide for such people except to breathe a sign of relief that they're kooks?)

    I get it -- you want to ignore what doesn't suit your worldview and pretend it was only the let's-do-something crowd that acted stupidly. I'm telling you, if you're really interested in being honest, there was -- as far as I can tell -- as much or more stupidity from the let's-do-nothing contingent. If you want to claim otherwise, then I will tell you it's not just the CDC that should be suspected of retconning the history and fudging the numbers.

    Even as someone who suspects the final numbers may be closer to your prediction than some of theirs, I hope I can at least be honest enough to also admit that.

    Millions die every single year if diseases that are much easier to prevent than this. Your weekly Starbucks could save multiple lives in poor countries, yet you choose your overpriced coffee. This is the harsh reality of your own choices, and everyone else’s too.

    You can pretend that you’re all about saving lives and therefore give huge inflated context-free numbers, but I very much doubt that any of your actions, in areas that don’t allow you to play the satisfying role of internet scold, actually show that you do.

    Talk is cheap. Ordering other people to have their lives ruined is cheap. I simply don’t believe you and your stated motivations. Your actions belie your words.

    • Replies: @HA
    "Millions die every single year if diseases that are much easier to prevent than this. Your weekly Starbucks could save multiple lives in poor countries..."

    1) whataboutism is never a good way to salvage a losing argument.

    2) While, I do recall buying a grossly overpriced piece of fruit a few years ago when there was nothing else around, and I was really hungry, that's about all I've provided for their bottom line. Starbucks would have gone out of business years ago if they had to rely on people like me for business.

    If the rest of your coronahoax output is as gaffe-ridden as your comment was, then you need not wonder why the rest of the world never took that side of the argument very seriously.

    That being said, if you ever do come across an opportunity to save millions of lives, be it in the developing world or elsewhere, consider seizing it.

  173. @The Germ Theory of Disease
    Z1. The Covid-19 virus is quite real (viz not a hoax), it is different from the ordinary flu in important ways, and it is very dangerous to certain populations, and not so dangerous to other populations.

    2. Had Donald Trump not been president, the publicly-organized and -enforced response to a real but not cataclysmic public health threat would have been rational, orderly, efficient, most likely effective, with a sound feedback loop for adjustment and a sane, gardez-votre-sang-froid mentality as seen in pandemics past.

    2a. Examples of rational and orderly responses would have included: early and very strict curtailment of all travel to and from China, and from East Asia generally, with strict quarantines and contact monitoring for returning US citizens; stiff quarantine procedures for the elderly, other at-risk populations, and identifiable "super-spreader" entities; and stern but rational recommendations for everyone else. Life goes on, economy stays normal, a slightly-larger but not catastrophic number of older and infirm people die, Wheel of Life, listen to some Jacques Brel and then move on.

    2b. Importantly, a major feature of a rational public-health response would have been a unified, non-politicized, clearly explained stance from the entire government, speaking in a single calm, agreed-upon voice. Not the Speaker of the House tearing up the President's speech at the State of the UNION address.

    3. But Donald Trump is the President, and therefore here we are, stuck in chaos, economic free-fall, mass hysteria and morbid sentimentality instead of clear thinking.

    3a. This course of action was deliberately, willfully and maliciously chosen, in virtual unanimity, by our leading classes: government, media, academia, judicial and so on. The clear purpose of this choice was to launch yet another coup attempt against the presidency of Donald Trump. The previous two coup attempts had failed, but this was a ripe poison apple that fell right into their laps.

    4. To be clear: the virus itself and the outbreak were real, non-engineered events. But the specific response to the outbreak was malicious and deliberate with respect to the wellbeing of the American people.

    5. The Powers That Be hate Donald Trump, and by extension the White, Christian, heritage-American electorate for whom he spoke, with such a deadly fury that they were willing to seize on a recurring, seasonal disease outbreak with known protocols of response, and malignant lay use it to destroy the American economy (Trump's main selling point) in order to bring down a president when their previous open coup attempts had failed.

    I didn’t finish reading your comment and don’t mind the rest of it. The next time I find myself in conversation with anyone, the first thing I’ll say is that it’s important to keep a gardez-votre-sang-froid mentality.

  174. @FPD72
    If Trump were not president, HRC would have been. Since she is a quintessential globalist and the Clinton Foundation is the recipient of hundreds of thousands of dollars from Chinese sources, what makes you think she would have ordered the stopping of flights from China any sooner than Trump? Can you name any credible Democratic voices that didn’t criticize Trump for the travel restrictions he imposed?

    As to the other measures, the US would be even further behind on testing. The permanent bureaucracy at the CDC and FDA cranked out tainted tests and forbade any other testing sources. It was Trump who cut through the red tape and turned the private sector loose in the development and production of testing.

    What about HRC makes you think that her performance in any of the critical decisions would have been superior to Trump’s? Trump wasn’t running against an infinite selection of opponents; he ran and won against HRC.

    the Clinton Foundation is the recipient of hundreds of thousands of dollars from Chinese sources,

    Try hundreds of millions received from Chinese sources in various forms. In return, the Chinese received U.S. rocket technology, wholesale transfer of industrial capacity to China, and no doubt countless other little favors that we haven’t even heard about yet.

    Only a small proportion of China’s total bribe would have been paid officially to the Clinton Slush Foundation by China and its cutouts. Remember Charlie Trie? Malaysian Chinese billionaire Lapseng Ng?

    A sovereign nation of China’s size, history and sophistication has countless discreet methods for rewarding people who may benefit China or favored interests within or outside China, or just be a thorn in the side of China’s adversaries.

    Non-cash incentive methods including sexual services, sexual blackmail, elimination of rivals etc. will also be well developed and readily available as they are to all major (and not so major) powers.

  175. @Hail

    We’ve had a Vietnam’s worth of deaths up to this point
     
    This is irrational thinking. The exact same could be said of any flu virus.

    What do you think it would be like without the restrictions?
     
    Sweden has now decisively and totally proved this theory wrong.

    https://hailtoyou.files.wordpress.com/2020/04/imperial-college-corona-hoax-estimates-for-sweden-vs-reality.png

    Sweden’s coronavirus-positive deaths peaked April 5 to 16, at over 80/day (on three days within that range reaching over 100/day), and have been steadily downhill since then. As of April 21, the final/total new-deaths figure are all looking like <50 day based on preliminary figures. Their hospitals have plenty of spare capacity, and the recent studies suggest a very large % of the population has had contact with the virus, meaning the epidemic is already all-but-over in Sweden and Sweden’s approach is vindicated completely.

    The Imperial College paper was so laughably far off as to either have been prepared by a team of dunces whose normal judgment was further impaired by various substances in their systems, or a hoax meant deliberately to incite panic and empower the “Corona Coup d’Etat” faction.

    The paper predicts hundreds of deaths per day by early May, and is set to be completely wrong; they wildly overhyped this virus, as the anti-Panic side has been trying to warn all along. If Sweden is not seeing a thousand deaths a day in the first two weeks of May, that is the final nail in the coffin for the Imperial College paper and its extremist advocates.
     
    (From Against the Corona Panic, Pt. III: “Just the Flu” Vindicated by the Data; Or, Why to End the Shutdowns Now, April 19; updated for Sweden April 24.)

    Sweden’s coronavirus-positive deaths peaked April 5 to 16, at over 80/day (on three days within that range reaching over 100/day), and have been steadily downhill since then.

    Not really. Not really at all.

    Clearly lower and upper envelopes over the data points keep increasing at least as fast as linear meaning that the totals increase at least as fast as a quadratic function. That we do not see an exponential growth in data anymore is because Sweden despite of their official pronouncements to the outer world in fact practices social distancing (see Steve Sailer movie theatre attendance graph as an example). Deaths are lagging infections by 3-4 weeks so one may expect that the growth will continue as daily infections in Sweden official data keep growing. In last four days daily growth of new infections was 10% per day.

    The strong periodic (7 day period) signal in data suggests that data are being managed, that death certificates are processed in clusters and possibly a strict filtering is applied between “with virus” and “from virus” death categories. Sweden’s reputation and that of their chief epidemiologist Anders Tegnell are on the line so the pressure on them to “cook the data” might be irresistible.

    Anders Tegnell promised that he will push the death rate to lower than seasonal flu. He said that he will cut the number of death by four fifths (meaning a factor of five). How was he planning to do it? With a miracle drug nobody else had? Certainly not with isolation and special social countermeasures. The only thing he could do is to keep counting deaths sums by adjusting the line dividing “death of virus” and “death with virus” categories.

    • Replies: @Hail
    That graph you posted, which is not sourced, contradicts the Swedish public health authority, which has deaths from 85 to 105 range between April 4/5 and April 15 (see below). From April 16 to April 22, there is a downward trend with almost each day lower than the last, and the average for the period April 16 to April 22 is less than half the peak period (April 4 to 15).

    The graph you post is also immediately suspicious because data seldom looks like that, with such dramatic spikes. There should be a smoother curve for something like this. I wonder what source whoever made that was using. I can take a guess about why a sudden "crash" shows up around April 12: Easter weekend. No, the hospitalized corona-patients didn't take the weekend off from dying, but recording authorities in charge of compiling the deaths probably did.

    Here is the graph from the Swedish Public Health Agency (via Folkhalsomyndigheten.se) of coronavirus deaths by day, pegged to the day the death occurred, which afaict is complete info through April 22, partial for April 23, and not yet released for April 24 and April 25 (current local time as of the time this graph was displayed on their website: early AM April 26):

    https://hailtoyou.files.wordpress.com/2020/04/corona-virus-deaths-per-day-in-sweden-thru-april-23.png
  176. @Corvinus
    "when the real story is how wrong we are going to turn out to have been, and how bad the economic consequences are."

    Because we generally associate a virus to massive spread and deaths. So when that phenomenon does not occur, then the policies and procedures to limit its transmission and keep people safe are called into question. "See, it's not that bad, let's go about our normal business". In the end, it's not about #DyingForTheDow.

    Except you have absolutely no evidence your measures did anything beyond destroying small business. This is serious superstitious native thinking along with failed prediction behavior. “Oh my prediction failed? That’s not because its a bad prediction, it because we made the Gods happy with our virgin sacrifice”. Grow up and live with the cognitive dissonance rather than acting like ufo or end of the world cult.

    And anyone that thinks destroying people’s economic livelihood and the food supply chain is just an amusement to fight the system and Dow Jones, never worked a day in their lives.

  177. @HA
    "When all this is said and done, we will rue the day we acted so stupidly."

    Who's this "we" you refer to? To be sure, armchair back-forecasters applying their keen 20/20 hindsight to cherry-picked outcomes and then claiming they were right all along will always be among us. And innumeracy is currently far more widespread in our world than coronavirus. That means mathematical illiterates who pretend that they know more than the experts and could have done all this better will never be in short supply. (And when the models are especially difficult, they'll frequently be right, sadly.)

    However, I repeat: no sane person who believes that New York City is a real location -- as opposed to a troupe of crisis actors -- will ever believe that even Sweden's approach was the "right" one (and even theirs is a far cry from the "let 'er rip" attitude that many here are still advocating, because, if 200,000 in a world of 7 billion means nothing, then why do anything about a million or two million dead? What answer can anyone provide for such people except to breathe a sign of relief that they're kooks?)

    I get it -- you want to ignore what doesn't suit your worldview and pretend it was only the let's-do-something crowd that acted stupidly. I'm telling you, if you're really interested in being honest, there was -- as far as I can tell -- as much or more stupidity from the let's-do-nothing contingent. If you want to claim otherwise, then I will tell you it's not just the CDC that should be suspected of retconning the history and fudging the numbers.

    Even as someone who suspects the final numbers may be closer to your prediction than some of theirs, I hope I can at least be honest enough to also admit that.

    I am not sure anyone here advocated doing absolutely nothing. Advising hand washing,advising avoiding big groups, etc would always have made sense and will probably turn out to have been enough. But it is very likely that doing nothing, policy wise, would have been preferable to where we are now. Even with no government intervention people would have increased social distancing and hand washing.
    For me, suppression made no sense as soon I understood that there was no plausible, reasonably quick, exit strategy especially for a western country. That is what attracted me to Swedish approach which is modified let er rip approach. It actually had an exit strategy. They conceived this approach very early on with the same data as everyone else’s experts. For us non experts, it is naturally a bit of monday morning quarterbacking. But the fact the most countries experts, who have been studying pandemics for years and years, could not have at least offered the Swedish approach as an option is quite disappointing. This will be a historically bad policy failure – and yes, this should have been foreseen.

    • Agree: Kratoklastes
    • Replies: @HA
    "But it is very likely that doing nothing, policy wise, would have been preferable to where we are now."

    So, let that be a final refutation for anyone thick enough to claim that no one here is actually in favor of doing nothing.

    "That is what attracted me to Swedish approach which is modified let er rip approach."

    No, it is, according to their own government officials their policy is very different from a "let 'er rip" approach (search for the phrase "biggest misconception" and I see someone else has already cut-and-pasted from that article without giving a link).

    Now, it's true if you're part of the Somali community in Sweden, then yes, the Swedish policy might as well be let' er rip since they're ignoring the "recommendations". But they've been brutally hit by this virus. That being the case, you can't have it both ways, though I'm guessing that won't stop you.

  178. From Harvards Roadmap to Pandemic Resilience that recommend 30 million tests per day and associated army of contact tracers.

    “COVID-19 IS A PROFOUND THREAT TO OUR DEMOCRACY, COMPARABLE TO THE GREAT DEPRESSION AND WORLD WAR II. As ever, the greatest bulwark of democracy is us. What we do together—for one another and, even more, with one another—to fight this terrible disease, protect human life, secure our institutions, and prevent the destruction of our economy will determine whether free societies will prove resilient in the face of existential emergency.”

    Wow, our best of the best people still thinking Covid is an “existential emergency”.

  179. @Deckin
    Well an antibody + rate 15x the case rate is exactly what's been found already in Florida, San Francisco, New York, Delaware... It would seem that working backwards from what is collected evidence to then come up with a number one doesn't like because it sounds too high is maybe not the best procedure.

    Now take this 5-6% number and run it through Sweden's numbers so far (1500 or so dead) and then say they were either stupid or crazy or inhumanely cruel. It's hard to see how Miami could have a higher exposure/antibody rate than Sweden where, as of today, people are still eating in restaurants. Could Swedes be that natively more cold and distant than freaked out Floridians?

    “It’s hard to see how Miami could have a higher exposure/antibody rate than Sweden where, as of today, people are still eating in restaurants. Could Swedes be that natively more cold and distant than freaked out Floridians?”

    Sweden’s SARS-CoV-2 linked deaths at last count is 2192. Roughly similar per capita infection/death rates as those of San Francisco.

    “Apr 25: Sweden’s Deputy Prime Minister Isabella Lövin.

    Q: What is the biggest misconception you have seen about the Swedish strategy? I’m speaking in general, because there have been a lot of articles written about Sweden in foreign media lately.

    Deputy Prime Minister: The biggest myth and misconception is that life goes on as normal in Sweden. It absolutely does not. We have seen Easter travel decrease by 90 percent, we have businesses going bankrupt, a record number of temporary layoffs, and a lot of unemployed people.

    That’s because people follow those recommendations we issue. The tourism industry has been hit incredibly hard. A lot of small businesses are on their knees because production is down or has decreased a lot. It is not business as usual in Sweden but the opposite, things are very, very tough.

    No, we have not had a complete lockdown in Sweden, but if you look at people’s behaviour it is a very big difference compared to a normal situation: a lot of people are working from home, a lot of people have called in sick with minor symptoms to limit the spread. You don’t see your elderly relatives, you don’t travel any more, and that comes as a result of people obeying the recommendations our government agencies have issued. Even if the majority follow recommendations, there are some who don’t.

    Prime Minister Stefan Löfven’s tone was noticeably sharper at the latest government press conference this week. It felt rather like the final warning before tougher rules are imposed. Are there ongoing discussions within the government about introducing stricter measures and what form would they then take?

    We are constantly prepared to take stronger measures if it is necessary to curb the spread of infection, and if the situation deteriorates we will look at further measures. Exactly what kind of measures depend on where we see that there may be big problems ahead. We are now issuing very strong calls not to travel, not to have parties at Walpurgis and definitely not demonstrations on May 1st.”

    • Replies: @danand

    “Sweden’s SARS-CoV-2 linked deaths at last count is 2192. Roughly similar per capita infection/death rates as those of San Francisco.”
     
    Oops, I should have written Sweden’s death rate is ~10X that of SF’s per capita.
  180. anon[342] • Disclaimer says:
    @res

    That data not especially meaningful without further context.
     
    There is a reason I include so many links in my comments. Feel free to follow the link in that one (and more from there if you like) then come back and have a real conversation about this.

    How do they define “flu-like illness”? Based on what? Self diagnosis? A doctor’s diagnosis? Testing? Sure a lot of people with flu symptoms now stay home. And people who do show up at a hospital are instantly suspected of having CoV.
     
    The TLDR version of following the links is they have a model which fits the historical temperature data from their smart thermometers to the CDC flu reports. Then they use their current data to estimate the "flu-like illness" for each area.

    Bear in mind that this is from a company that has a vested interest in the panic.
     
    That's a point worth remembering. One thing I find really interesting is that the Kinsa data is currently showing almost no illness in the entire country. And they have not made a blog post since 4/9 after having 10 from 3/23 to 4/9.

    How do we reconcile that (also see PS) with continuing new cases of COVID-19? I would expect deaths to keep coming given the lag involved, but where are the new cases coming from?

    P.S. For anyone interested, CDC flu surveillance:
    https://www.cdc.gov/flu/weekly/fluactivitysurv.htm

    One thing I find really interesting is that the Kinsa data is currently showing almost no illness in the entire country. And they have not made a blog post since 4/9 after having 10 from 3/23 to 4/9.

    How common are Kinsa thermometers in the general population?
    For example, how many elderly black people in Detroit or parts of Georgia have one?
    Ditto how many Native Americans have one? Or working class whites in Mississippi?
    These questions should be obvious just by eyeballing the data, because Kinsa is far from universal as a home health device.

    This is a data subset and has its own peculiarities. If their data can be partitioned down to the county level, or better still the zip code level, I wager that some parts of Maryland or Michigan would show a lot of users, other parts would show few or no users.

    How do we reconcile that (also see PS) with continuing new cases of COVID-19? I would expect deaths to keep coming given the lag involved, but where are the new cases coming from?

    New cases mostly among people who don’t own a Kinsa device? Just a guess.
    Data subsets that are non-random can have problems.

    • Replies: @res

    How common are Kinsa thermometers in the general population?
     
    Information on that here:
    https://www.kinsahealth.co/the-demographics-behind-kinsa-insights-and-the-us-health-weather-map/

    Their demographics are not as unrepresentative as I would have expected. Part of that is probably due to: "One in every 5 Kinsa thermometers in the US has been distributed to a family in a Title 1 school participating in FLUency. "

    This is a data subset and has its own peculiarities.
     
    Yes. And it would be good to better understand those.

    If their data can be partitioned down to the county level, or better still the zip code level, I wager that some parts of Maryland or Michigan would show a lot of users, other parts would show few or no users.
     
    They do their maps at the county level so it is clear they have that. This graphic is a pretty good luck at their county representation. As I said, better than I expected.

    https://www.kinsahealth.co/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/Kinsa-Users-Compared-to-Rural-and-Urban-Populations-1024x633.png

    New cases mostly among people who don’t own a Kinsa device? Just a guess.
    Data subsets that are non-random can have problems.
     
    I could see that biasing the data, but I don't see it consistent with their data going to ZERO almost everywhere.

    Elsewhere I have speculated that it is a combination of:
    - Most Kinsa users have either recovered from the virus or are more likely to be isolating themselves.
    - New cases are under care so not using their Kinsa thermometers.
  181. @Anonymous

    One other factor to consider in these surprising Miami-Dade results is the typical time between infection and death…
     
    Why do you consider them to be surprising?

    Ron Unz: One other factor to consider in these surprising Miami-Dade results is the typical time between infection and death…

    Why do you consider them to be surprising?

    Good question.

  182. @Anonymous

    The best evidence we have is that the ‘restrictions’ were imposed far too late to make a difference, if the start date (globally) is earlier than January 15th 2020 and the initial R[0] is anywhere above 2.0
     
    How could the massive unprecedented “social distancing” not be making a difference?

    Sheesh.

    How could the massive unprecedented “social distancing” not be making a difference?

    Sheesh.

    “social distancing” is an umbrella term for many specific interventions.

    It’s not clear how much impact each of them has but the principle of diminishing returns is likely at play.

    A specific point of argument is that the most onerous and costly interventions: shelter-in-place and closing businesses and stores were unnecessary because the curve of the pandemic had already been bent by the time they were put in place.

    (there are also some arguments that some measures were downright counterproductive e.g. sending college kids home probably sent Corona home with some of them. )

  183. @Thoughts
    Here we go...My suspicions are slowly being confirmed...

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8256469/Brooklyn-nursing-home-ravaged-coronavirus-tried-send-sick-patients-USNS-Comfort.html

    Basically New York Officials were TRYING to get the death rate as high as possible in order to scream 'Orange Man Bad'

    I bet the death rate at the top hospitals in NYC is under .1...because those are the people in charge and who matter....everyone else is more valuable as a death statistic than alive

    Here we go…My suspicions are slowly being confirmed…

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8256469/Brooklyn-nursing-home-ravaged-coronavirus-tried-send-sick-patients-USNS-Comfort.html

    Basically New York Officials were TRYING to get the death rate as high as possible in order to scream ‘Orange Man Bad’

    I bet the death rate at the top hospitals in NYC is under .1…because those are the people in charge and who matter….everyone else is more valuable as a death statistic than alive

    Absolutely evil, if true. Which it probably is.

  184. @DanHessinMD
    utu wrote:

    "Do we really know that the outcome for the very vulnerable depends on humidity once they get infected? I do not think so."

    utu -- I find no argument here. You haven't said anything at all. You have presented no science one way other the other.

    Here are a bunch of data points. You don't happen to work for the World Health Organization do you, because you seem be dismissive of all useful knowledge on this.

    (1) The fatality rates in hot, humid countries are coming in very, very low. By contrast, the fatality rates in cold, dry climates are coming in orders of magnitude higher.

    (2)

    In 2019, a research team at Yale University Medical School published a groundbreaking study (Kudo et al., National Academy of Sciences, 2019) which showed how low ambient humidity hurts the ability of the immune system to fight respiratory viral infection in animal hosts. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6561219/ .

    It is unfortunate that no controlled studies have been done on humidity as it relates to COVID-19 yet.

    (3)

    Respiratory immunity is very dependent on humidity.

    https://www.annualreviews.org/doi/pdf/10.1146/annurev-virology-012420-022445

    Read through the 130 citations in the above document, as I have, and then get back to me. Please do some work before dismissing things out of hand.

    (4) Humidifiers have been sold to improve respiratory health in winter throughout America and the world for at least the last 100 years.

    (5) More citations on how higher humidity improves immunity against respiratory viruses. Admittedly much of this is for flu, but respiratory immunity clearly functions far better in higher humidity.

    1. Kudo et al. Low ambient humidity impairs barrier function and innate resistance against influenza infection. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 2019.

    2. Makinen et al. Cold temperature and low humidity are associated with increased occurrence of respiratory tract infections. Respiratory Medicine, Volume 103, Issue 3, March 2009, Pages 456-462

    3. Eccles R (2002) An explanation for the seasonality of acute upper respiratory tract viral infections. Acta Otolaryngol 122:183–191.

    4. Iwasaki A, Pillai PS (2014) Innate immunity to influenza virus infection. Nat Rev Immunol 14:315–328.

    5. Chen X, et al. (2018) Host immune response to influenza a virus infection. Front Immunol 9:320.

    6. Taubenberger JK, Morens DM (2008) The pathology of influenza virus infections. Annu Rev Pathol 3:499–522.

    7. Bustamante-Marin XM, Ostrowski LE (2017) Cilia and mucociliary clearance. Cold Spring Harb Perspect Biol 9:a028241.

    8. Oozawa H, et al. (2012) Effect of prehydration on nasal mucociliary clearance in low relative humidity. Auris Nasus Larynx 39:48–52.

    9. Kudo E, et al. (2019) Low ambient humidity impairs barrier function, innate resistance against influenza infection. NCBI BioProject. Available at https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/ bioproject/PRJNA528197. Deposited March 20, 2019.

    “Respiratory immunity is very dependent on humidity.” – Yes, for TB high humidity is bad.

    • Replies: @DanHessinMD
    utu -- wrote: " Yes, for TB high humidity is bad."

    Again the literature disagrees. Please, if you are going to make authoritative statements, include citations.

    In the past the beliefs TB and air were all over the map. Dry air, sea air, even cave air. Three different sites for TB sanitariums.

    Now the literature mainly says that dry air worsens TB.

    The first study I find on the topic says that TB is worst under conditions of low humidity.
    https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-019-49135-8

    The next one says the same. Low humidity is associated with higher incidence, with a lag.
    https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-018-28426-6.

    It should be noted that bacteria (TB) are totally different from viruses. Bacteria are orders of magnitude larger than viruses and they are a totally different category of life. Hence bacteria infections research should not be our focus in treating viral infections.

  185. Even the superspreader events…like the funeral story in Chicago…are meaningless if you don’t also look at superspreader events during H1N1 or the seasonal flu

    It sounds bad when you look at it in a vaccuum…but then when you stop and think…doesn’t the same thing happen with the flu?

  186. We just got back from some shell hunting on the beach at Cupsogue State Park in Westhampton Dunes, NY. That’s correct, right here in the “epicenter” where everyone is cowering troglodyte-style indoors. Well, not everyone. I won’t say that the beach was crowded, but it was way busier than I ever would have managed. Many families out enjoying the reasonably warm weather. On the road leading to the beach, lined with $1M+ vacation houses, there were almost too many bicyclists and runners to count and traffic on all the main roads getting to the area was not light by any stretch of the imagination.
    Reality was not at all like the stories one hears. The government wants everyone to hide indoors, the people have other plans.

  187. @kpkinsunnyphiladelphia

    Gimenez said the UM survey of Miami-Dade reflects a national trend showing African Americans are disproportionately impacted by the novel coronavirus. “African Americans are more than twice as likely to be infected with COVID-19 than other racial groups,” he said.
     
    Of course, that makes sense, doesn't it?

    Blacks are more likely to

    --have uncontrolled hypertension.
    --be anemic or asthmatic
    --have diabetes
    --be obese
    --do lots of touching and hugging
    --be unaware of the nature this disease

    That's why you're starting to see the theme of Wuhan as another "civil rights issue." Fauci, being the exemplar of a politically correct deep stater, fell right in line.

    As sure as night follows day, the Dimms will use this disease vector as a political one, riling up the black community against Trump because blacks died at a greater rate.

    Blacks are more likely to

    –live in cities controlled by Democrats who want the economy to tank to hurt Trump’s reelection, and need inflated death figures to drive support for more lockdown duration.

  188. @Anonymous

    The best evidence we have is that the ‘restrictions’ were imposed far too late to make a difference, if the start date (globally) is earlier than January 15th 2020 and the initial R[0] is anywhere above 2.0
     
    How could the massive unprecedented “social distancing” not be making a difference?

    Sheesh.

    The best evidence we have is that the ‘restrictions’ were imposed far too late to make a difference, if the start date (globally) is earlier than January 15th 2020 and the initial R[0] is anywhere above 2.0

    How could the massive unprecedented “social distancing” not be making a difference?

    Simple, really.

    If the pathogen had a starting R[0] above 2 and had been running unchecked in a population for 3 months – assuming that the first cohort[1] of infected arrived in the the US in December [2]- then it’s actually very likely that the (logistic) process was already past its second knee and the reproductive rate was already declining.

    There’s plenty of evidence of this – the other day another commenter (Hail) posted a chart of reproductive rate in Germany, showing that it was below 1 before the political spike was driven into the brain of the economy, and killing the economy did not materially change the number.

    A ban on large groups (groups > 1000) was implemented on the 9th, but nothing else until March 23rd. Dunno why anyone would think that the ban on groups of 1000 would be meaningful: how many 1000-person groups is a normal person involved in, over the course of a month?

    [1] I take pains to say “the first cohort of infected” because the process did not start with one individual (it’s beyond retarded to think that).

    [2] The ‘canonical’ first infected person in America happened on January 19th 2020, and was[3] a symptomatic 35-year-old male non-smoker with no chronic disease who required hospitalisation (he was also given supplementary oxygen, but not in an ICU context).

    He was an import – caught it in China, and was asymptomatic when get got on the plane on January 15th; by Jan 18th he had symptoms and was hospitalised.

    So out of the tens of thousands of people who arrived from China between mid-December and January 15th, he’s the one guy?

    Given what we know about this disease, that profile is extremely unlikely (< 1% of cases): it's overwhelmingly more likely that the initial 'seed' in the US was from a group of asymptomatic infectees.

    [3] I say ‘was’ because he’s not still infected: he didn’t die – a thing he has in common with the vast bulk of infectees under 70, most of whom have such low symptoms that the disease is over before they recognise that they might be ill.

    • Agree: leterip
    • Replies: @res
    But notice how the downtrend started a few days after the ban on events with more than 1000 people. And presumably people started taking their own countermeasures around then.

    It is important that we try to understand which measures helped. Especially for the relatively low impact measures.

    Just because the lockdowns have been excessive does not mean we should have done NOTHING.

    P.S. And notice that the y axis is effective reproduction number (not cases or deaths). In that graph a flat line above 2 would have been bad.
  189. @HA
    "When all this is said and done, we will rue the day we acted so stupidly."

    Who's this "we" you refer to? To be sure, armchair back-forecasters applying their keen 20/20 hindsight to cherry-picked outcomes and then claiming they were right all along will always be among us. And innumeracy is currently far more widespread in our world than coronavirus. That means mathematical illiterates who pretend that they know more than the experts and could have done all this better will never be in short supply. (And when the models are especially difficult, they'll frequently be right, sadly.)

    However, I repeat: no sane person who believes that New York City is a real location -- as opposed to a troupe of crisis actors -- will ever believe that even Sweden's approach was the "right" one (and even theirs is a far cry from the "let 'er rip" attitude that many here are still advocating, because, if 200,000 in a world of 7 billion means nothing, then why do anything about a million or two million dead? What answer can anyone provide for such people except to breathe a sign of relief that they're kooks?)

    I get it -- you want to ignore what doesn't suit your worldview and pretend it was only the let's-do-something crowd that acted stupidly. I'm telling you, if you're really interested in being honest, there was -- as far as I can tell -- as much or more stupidity from the let's-do-nothing contingent. If you want to claim otherwise, then I will tell you it's not just the CDC that should be suspected of retconning the history and fudging the numbers.

    Even as someone who suspects the final numbers may be closer to your prediction than some of theirs, I hope I can at least be honest enough to also admit that.

    The main error in your screed is that, as far as I’m aware, no one on this site has advocated a “let’s do nothing” approach. Just that the official response has been way out of proportion to the actual danger. Now, they may be right or they may be wrong, but at least characterize their position fairly, eh?

    • Replies: @HA
    "The main error in your screed is that, as far as I’m aware, no one on this site has advocated a “let’s do nothing” approach."

    Then you are very unaware. I provided links to Richard Taylor's comments, and his tireless efforts to remind us of past epidemics where no one apparently did anything and the world kept turning. I made reference to the "only 200,000 dead out of a population of 7 billion people on this very thread. If 200,000 dead is nothing but a roundoff error, then what exactly do we need to do in the first place? If anything that MSNBC tells us to do is by definition part a media-driven panic we should disobey, then what does it matter what those do-something policies are? It would still be too much, according to the truthers. Do I really need to spell that out for you?

    Sure, plenty of the coronahoaxers pivoted into claiming they were never hoaxers, but were only interested in a "more senisble" approach -- especially after those MOMO graphs they previously touted for having no bump whatsover blew up in their faces. They also play tricks like pretending that anyone who thinks it's time to start restarting (e.g. Tucker Carlson) is now on their side, even if those people take pains to point out they're not. But even now, every once in a while they'll slip and say "Lukashenko was right". The latter is not strictly a do-nothing advocate -- he does advocate drinking vodka and going to saunas to prevent the disease, but that being the case, do-nothing is close enough.
    , @Kyle
    For the record I’m pretty sure I did advocate a do-nothing approach.
  190. @Black-hole creator

    Perhaps a little exposure, esp. in when ample sun (Vit. D) is available, is a good way to develop antibodies w/o having symptoms.
     
    The WHO has just announced that there is no proven immunity from having antibodies in your blood. The plot thickens. If I were a conspiracy theorist, I'd say this is a perfect tool to thin the herd from the old and already sick. The rest will just have to live with the virus, pretty much how most people live with the incurable herpes-1 virus. Unfortunately, I am neither young nor particularly healthy, so I am not too happy with this conspiracy.

    WHO says no evidence of immunity. That is not the same as evidence of no immunity.

    People get better; their immune systems did the job. How long does it last? Studies needed.

  191. @Deckin
    Either my screen has gunk on it, but it looks like three other data points from earlier weeks and two from later weeks in the year and it looks less than one really high spike in the first or second week. So what were those? Are all viral outbreaks at or below average? We really do live in Lake Wobegon.

    The blue dots are each a datapoint for the past 50 years. So there are 50 dots at each week. one for the deaths in that week in each year.

    As you mentioned there have been a few weeks with higher deaths but they were in January and December. So it’s “unprecedented” for this time of year. (and pretty close to the highest ever but not there yet in that graph)

  192. @DanHessinMD
    As vhrm noted, I have been hammering on about how low humidity disables the respiratory immune system. Shame on me for not being high-energy enough to push the message through.

    In cold, dry air, the respiratory immune system is very disabled, while in the warm, humid air of Miami (and India and Myanmar and Vietnam, etc.) the respiratory immune system works really well.

    Yale researchers showed last year, that low ambient humidity hurts the ability of the immune system to fight respiratory viral infection in animal hosts.
    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6561219/

    The Yale group found that at 50% humidity, about half their animal hosts survived a viral respiratory challenge of the flu. At 20% humidity, 100% of the animal hosts died.

    The mechanism is that in very dry air (the 20% humidity of hospitals), the mucosal layer in the respiratory system dries out and organelles called cilia which should clear out viruses are immobilized. The above paper and figure 4 of this one explain the mechanism.
    https://www.annualreviews.org/doi/pdf/10.1146/annurev-virology-012420-022445

    It has been really depressing to watch as the world utterly loses its mind while ignoring the blindingly obvious (to me, and every intelligent person 75 years ago) fact that humidity **dramatically** reduces the fatality rate of respiratory infections among those who are exposed.

    Amid all the sturm und drang about this or that marginally helpful solution, everyone ignores the big, easy and safe answer.

    Steve, I really appreciate that you believed me enough to go buy three humidifiers when I first reported the value of humidity a couple of months ago. But I think it is worthwhile to re-up the humidity thing as a blog post again. There really aren't any controlled studies on the effect of humidity on Covid-19 survival at this time, and there really need to be. Meanwhile there are at least 32 studies going on hydroxychloroquine. The geographic data on warm, humid air being protective against the new coronavirus is stronger than any data I've seen on any other remedies.

    I noted a little earlier this month, "There are zero nations whose capital is south of 30 north latitude with more than 20 deaths per million people. There are 25 nations whose capital is north of 30 north latitude with more than 20 deaths per million. The United States right now is at 65 deaths per million. South of the equator, zero nations exceed 7 deaths per million. Ten countries exceed 100 deaths from Coronavirus per million and every single one of them has a capital north of 40 latitude."

    Those numbers are a little stale, so I will run those correlations again this weekend, but simple humidity shows more promise than anything I've seen, from ventilators to HCQ to any of the fancy antivirals under consideration. Given that cold climes are likely to face this again for a whole long winter season starting in late fall, the value of humidification really needs to become common knowledge by then. People in temperate climes aren't doing the one thing that could dramatically help them and panicky people in tropical climes are collapsing their economies for no good reason.

    Masks are the answer to stop transmission but once someone gets it the virus, humidity will dramatically increase the odds that they will come through okay.

    But how is the weather in Guayquil? Hot and humid, right?

    • Replies: @DanHessinMD
    "But how is the weather in Guayquil? Hot and humid, right?"

    Yup.

    Congratulations, Steve Sailer. You picked out the most extreme tropical datapoint and it really isn't that bad.

    The thing is, I was very frustrated with the data out of Miami-Dade too, until the recent study showed extraordinarily high seroprevalence, leading to an infection fatality rate of 0.17 as you note.

    I think there is reason to believe Guayaquil has really high prevalence of COVID-19. This article
    https://www.arkansasonline.com/news/2020/mar/29/virus-hits-hard-in-ecuador-city-2020032/

    says the mayor and four other heads of suburbs have all tested positive. That isn't even seropositivity but direct cases. And that was way back in March. That says to me that it's really widespread there and Guayquil is very dense, maybe more than New York. In Ecuador more than 40% of tests wound up positive, a lot higher than New York's 29%.

    Ecuador, where Guayquil is the largest city, lists 33 deaths per million. On a scatter plot I made of deaths per million versus latitude, this barely registers in a world where badly hit countries (i.e. the UK) have 10 times as many deaths per million.

    New York state by contrast has 1117 deaths per million. So New York, with its first world medicine and very high wealth is seeing a death rate from COVID that is 34 times as high as Equador.

    If the deaths from a contagious respiratory virus must be zero or else team panic wins, then this is a rigged game because mortality is the human condition. Respiratory failure is how a large share of old people die everywhere.

    Humidity is terribly protective, as evidenced by the fact that the very worst datapoint Steve Sailer can find anywhere in the tropics is getting toward herd immunity with only 3% of the rate of dying of temperate New York City.

    Numbers have to be put into perspective. Steve of all people should know that.

    The argument isn't that humidity is a vaccine. The argument is that you are a lot better of with humidity than without.

    The tragedy is that all useful knowledge is tossed out in the panic. Just like how WHO rejected masks and every possible medicine because they aren't perfect.

  193. @Anonymous

    Analytical validity is “in narrow terms, did the assay perform the way it was supposed to?”
    Clinical validity is “were the assay’s results correct with respect to the condition it is diagnosing?”
     
    What does it even mean for an assay’s “results” to be “correct” with respect to a “condition”?

    > Clinical validity is “were the assay’s results correct with respect to the condition it is diagnosing?”

    > What does it even mean for an assay’s “results” to be “correct” with respect to a “condition”?

    This issue is playing out with RT-PCR tests of SARS-CoV-2 infection. A ~30% false negative rate is quoted — in other words, 30% of people already known to be infected with the virus are declared “uninfected” by the test.

    If the virus is actually present in quantities that should be detected, but the result is nevertheless “negative,” that would be an analytical failing.

    However, it turns out that some people who are infected shed very little virus into the respiratory tract, at some points in the course of the disease. In other words, the test is reporting the absence of virus from the sample, because virus is indeed absent. This would be an issue of clinical validity (assuming the test is being used to diagnose viral infection, which it is).

  194. @danand

    “It’s hard to see how Miami could have a higher exposure/antibody rate than Sweden where, as of today, people are still eating in restaurants. Could Swedes be that natively more cold and distant than freaked out Floridians?”
     
    Sweden’s SARS-CoV-2 linked deaths at last count is 2192. Roughly similar per capita infection/death rates as those of San Francisco.

    “Apr 25: Sweden's Deputy Prime Minister Isabella Lövin.

    Q: What is the biggest misconception you have seen about the Swedish strategy? I'm speaking in general, because there have been a lot of articles written about Sweden in foreign media lately.

    Deputy Prime Minister: The biggest myth and misconception is that life goes on as normal in Sweden. It absolutely does not. We have seen Easter travel decrease by 90 percent, we have businesses going bankrupt, a record number of temporary layoffs, and a lot of unemployed people.

    That's because people follow those recommendations we issue. The tourism industry has been hit incredibly hard. A lot of small businesses are on their knees because production is down or has decreased a lot. It is not business as usual in Sweden but the opposite, things are very, very tough.

    No, we have not had a complete lockdown in Sweden, but if you look at people's behaviour it is a very big difference compared to a normal situation: a lot of people are working from home, a lot of people have called in sick with minor symptoms to limit the spread. You don't see your elderly relatives, you don't travel any more, and that comes as a result of people obeying the recommendations our government agencies have issued. Even if the majority follow recommendations, there are some who don't.


    Prime Minister Stefan Löfven's tone was noticeably sharper at the latest government press conference this week. It felt rather like the final warning before tougher rules are imposed. Are there ongoing discussions within the government about introducing stricter measures and what form would they then take?

    We are constantly prepared to take stronger measures if it is necessary to curb the spread of infection, and if the situation deteriorates we will look at further measures. Exactly what kind of measures depend on where we see that there may be big problems ahead. We are now issuing very strong calls not to travel, not to have parties at Walpurgis and definitely not demonstrations on May 1st.”

     

    “Sweden’s SARS-CoV-2 linked deaths at last count is 2192. Roughly similar per capita infection/death rates as those of San Francisco.”

    Oops, I should have written Sweden’s death rate is ~10X that of SF’s per capita.

  195. I assume they’re sequencing the virus. Media reports have said it’s Type B. If, say, the Italian Type C appeared, that would probably make the news.

  196. @ben tillman

    Each test was evaluated with the same set of blood samples: from 80 people known to be infected with the coronavirus . . . .
     
    How could this be known before any test is certified as infallible? This seems to beg the question.

    How could this be known before any test is certified as infallible? This seems to beg the question.

    It’s a different kind of test. The tests for presence of the virus are generally good. So you can verify that sick people have it while they’re sick.
    Those are the kinds of people the 80 samples came from.

    The new tests will identify people who had been sick even if they’re free of virus now. Something that the rna tests can’t do.

  197. Mister Sailer, we are still waiting for the THOUSANDS of spring breakers here in Miami and Fort Lauderdale a month ago to drop dead ANY minute now… no? or at least their grandmas? because lest we forget, all college dorms are closed, and many students are either homeless or being “adult children” at their elders’ mortgaged Mchouses. so where’s the thousands of parents of college students with a strong cough? are we REALLY going to blame different strains? couldn’t we have thought of that a couple MONTHS ago?? maybe getting some sun and fresh air HELPS??!

    so please stop the panic. you beloved Boomers will live… mostly. at the very least, think of the golf courts and baseball fields not being tended to!

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    It's almost as if going to the beach in Florida is less dangerous than riding the subway in New York. Who couldda guessed?
  198. @HA
    "When all this is said and done, we will rue the day we acted so stupidly."

    Who's this "we" you refer to? To be sure, armchair back-forecasters applying their keen 20/20 hindsight to cherry-picked outcomes and then claiming they were right all along will always be among us. And innumeracy is currently far more widespread in our world than coronavirus. That means mathematical illiterates who pretend that they know more than the experts and could have done all this better will never be in short supply. (And when the models are especially difficult, they'll frequently be right, sadly.)

    However, I repeat: no sane person who believes that New York City is a real location -- as opposed to a troupe of crisis actors -- will ever believe that even Sweden's approach was the "right" one (and even theirs is a far cry from the "let 'er rip" attitude that many here are still advocating, because, if 200,000 in a world of 7 billion means nothing, then why do anything about a million or two million dead? What answer can anyone provide for such people except to breathe a sign of relief that they're kooks?)

    I get it -- you want to ignore what doesn't suit your worldview and pretend it was only the let's-do-something crowd that acted stupidly. I'm telling you, if you're really interested in being honest, there was -- as far as I can tell -- as much or more stupidity from the let's-do-nothing contingent. If you want to claim otherwise, then I will tell you it's not just the CDC that should be suspected of retconning the history and fudging the numbers.

    Even as someone who suspects the final numbers may be closer to your prediction than some of theirs, I hope I can at least be honest enough to also admit that.

    If you actually believed any of the nonsense in that comment, you would have spent your Woke life agitating for the global banning of cigarettes, alcohol, motor cars and the US military – all of which have direct, predictable, annual, global death tolls significantly higher than your current Doomer infatuation.

    I’ll go out on a limb and predict that you have not spent your entire adult life campaigning for the global Prohibition of alcohol, tobacco, motor vehicles and the US military. (And nor should you – except for the last one).

    You’re also ignoring a bunch of obvious tings:
     •  faced with a threat, individuals adjust their behaviour without being ordered to do so;
     • that imposing economy-destroying constraints on people’s lives has predictable consequences that dwarf the predictable costs of “inaction”.

    Given how humans over-react to minuscule (and non-existent) threats, it makes no sense to assume that people would simply go about their normal lives if they were informed that there was a life-threatening pathogen doing the rounds.

    Your mental model of the world seems to include an assumption of no-endogenous-adaptation: that if there were lepers walking the streets, people would shake their hands unless you ordered them not to. (This is a meta-argument, since it appears that leprosy is not transmissible by contact: you should still be able to grasp that it is certain that people would not shake their hands).

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    You’re also ignoring a bunch of obvious tings:
     •  faced with a threat, individuals adjust their behaviour without being ordered to do so;
     • that imposing economy-destroying constraints on people’s lives has predictable consequences that dwarf the predictable costs of “inaction”.

    But how does laissez-faire Sweden's box office dropping only 98% due to private choices while dictatorial Denmark's box office drops 100% due to government diktat matter all that much in economic effect?

    , @utu

    "...faced with a threat, individuals adjust their behaviour without being ordered to do so;..."
     
    Some need government because they are unable to make good judgments, life this guy:

    https://www.unz.com/isteve/kaiser-permanente-data-on-hospitalizations/#comment-3846616
    "Going outside without a mask is what I do now. It’s what I have done all my life. It’s what I will continue to do."
     
    who apparently is a sociopath unconcerned about people he lives among.
    , @HA
    "If you actually believed any of the nonsense in that comment, you would have spent your Woke life agitating for the global banning of cigarettes, alcohol, motor cars and the US military – all of which have direct, predictable, annual, global death tolls significantly higher than your current Doomer infatuation."

    If I wanted to swear off driving the way I've already lost interest in cigarettes and alcohol (I've never been a military enthusiast -- or oxy, in case you were thinking of bringing that up, and I'm certainly no advocate of Wokeness), I can choose to do so. Alcohol vapors emanating from the wino on the street next to me do not multiply exponentially the way a virus can. So no, I'm not going to be agitating for the global banning of cigarettes or alcohol, or any other such red herring you choose to name.

    That being said, I do confess to driving or taking a cab when no alternative presents itself. But I will note that the death rates associated with cars were hashed out roughly a century ago when millions were already collectively dying from a wide range of factors ranging from smallpox to Nazis, and probably for that reason, the high tolerance for those dead has been subsequently grandfathered into an age when we've collectively become more "K" and less "r" with regard to mass casualties. But if we were to try and correct that hypocrisy by saying "yes, we need to do more to prevent those, too", I suspect you wouldn't be in favor of that, either.

    Moreover, note that if Toyota were to come out with a malfunctioning gas pedal that killed only a few dozen people, even their sleaziest lawyers are not going to be dumb enough to try the "this is a small blip compared to all the other car deaths" defense. No, they'd still be expected to recall the item, no excuses. Same goes for scrapping seat belts, or air bags or any of the many other ways we've tried to put a dent in our high tolerance for highway deaths. So that's a lame argument, too.

    "Given how humans over-react to minuscule (and non-existent) threats, it makes no sense to assume that people would simply go about their normal lives if they were informed that there was a life-threatening pathogen doing the rounds."

    Plenty of people do plenty of things that "make no sense", and that includes plans to keep on keeping on with respect to their normal lives, virus or not. That apparently goes for Swedish Somali (40% of the Stockholm covid cases), Orthodox Jew (60% of the Israeli cases, though only 12% of the population), as well as those Evangelicals biting at the bit to return to their megachurches. If you doubt me, you should probably try to get to know some of those people better. As it is, I suspect the ideological bubble in which you shelter yourself is far more restrictive than any stay-at-home order. Ironic, but it would explain a lot.

  199. @d. deacon
    Mister Sailer, we are still waiting for the THOUSANDS of spring breakers here in Miami and Fort Lauderdale a month ago to drop dead ANY minute now... no? or at least their grandmas? because lest we forget, all college dorms are closed, and many students are either homeless or being "adult children" at their elders' mortgaged Mchouses. so where's the thousands of parents of college students with a strong cough? are we REALLY going to blame different strains? couldn't we have thought of that a couple MONTHS ago?? maybe getting some sun and fresh air HELPS??!

    so please stop the panic. you beloved Boomers will live... mostly. at the very least, think of the golf courts and baseball fields not being tended to!

    It’s almost as if going to the beach in Florida is less dangerous than riding the subway in New York. Who couldda guessed?

  200. @Kratoklastes
    If you actually believed any of the nonsense in that comment, you would have spent your Woke life agitating for the global banning of cigarettes, alcohol, motor cars and the US military - all of which have direct, predictable, annual, global death tolls significantly higher than your current Doomer infatuation.

    I'll go out on a limb and predict that you have not spent your entire adult life campaigning for the global Prohibition of alcohol, tobacco, motor vehicles and the US military. (And nor should you - except for the last one).

    You're also ignoring a bunch of obvious tings:
     •  faced with a threat, individuals adjust their behaviour without being ordered to do so;
     • that imposing economy-destroying constraints on people's lives has predictable consequences that dwarf the predictable costs of "inaction".

    Given how humans over-react to minuscule (and non-existent) threats, it makes no sense to assume that people would simply go about their normal lives if they were informed that there was a life-threatening pathogen doing the rounds.

    Your mental model of the world seems to include an assumption of no-endogenous-adaptation: that if there were lepers walking the streets, people would shake their hands unless you ordered them not to. (This is a meta-argument, since it appears that leprosy is not transmissible by contact: you should still be able to grasp that it is certain that people would not shake their hands).

    You’re also ignoring a bunch of obvious tings:
     •  faced with a threat, individuals adjust their behaviour without being ordered to do so;
     • that imposing economy-destroying constraints on people’s lives has predictable consequences that dwarf the predictable costs of “inaction”.

    But how does laissez-faire Sweden’s box office dropping only 98% due to private choices while dictatorial Denmark’s box office drops 100% due to government diktat matter all that much in economic effect?

    • Replies: @leterip
    Steve, You are cherry picking one aspect of the lockdown - movie theaters. Let say movie theaters would be screwed either way, due to laissez-faire or draconian approaches. Are you are making the argument that the economic damage to the USA would be nearly as bad even if the government had not intervened and forced closures???
    , @vhrm

    But how does laissez-faire Sweden’s box office dropping only 98% due to private choices while dictatorial Denmark’s box office drops 100% due to government diktat matter all that much in economic effect?

     

    For theatres it wouldn't matter much, although, voluntary compliance in the US would likely be somewhat less robust for better or worse.

    But for restaurants and stores it would matter a good deal even if their business were down 50%

    There would still be a recession and bailout but it would probably be a small fraction of what it is.

    But even if economically it was practically the same, I'd feel better about it if the government hadn't gone police state.

    People vs Nature makes me feel good.
    but in March they made it
    Government vs People... and i hate it.
  201. @Lugash
    The point isn't to be a contrarian, the point is to know the truth and speak it. And to be reasonably prudent. We've had a Vietnam's worth of deaths up to this point with the harsh restrictions. What do you think it would be like without the restrictions? My guesstimate is a Civil War's worth.

    Sometimes the conventional wisdom is correct. Sometimes you share it with Rachel Maddow and Andrew Cuomo. That doesn't mean you always share it, or don't keep re-evaluating it... for example, I'm keeping the idea that NYC has a different strain than the rest of the country and that their infection rates won't transfer to the rest of the country due to lifestyle factors, so Cuomo and Maddow are falsely projecting their experience onto the rest of us.

    “We’ve had a Vietnam’s worth of deaths up to this point ”

    Really?

    I thought that the US slaughtered 3 million in Vietnam?

  202. @DanHessinMD
    As vhrm noted, I have been hammering on about how low humidity disables the respiratory immune system. Shame on me for not being high-energy enough to push the message through.

    In cold, dry air, the respiratory immune system is very disabled, while in the warm, humid air of Miami (and India and Myanmar and Vietnam, etc.) the respiratory immune system works really well.

    Yale researchers showed last year, that low ambient humidity hurts the ability of the immune system to fight respiratory viral infection in animal hosts.
    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6561219/

    The Yale group found that at 50% humidity, about half their animal hosts survived a viral respiratory challenge of the flu. At 20% humidity, 100% of the animal hosts died.

    The mechanism is that in very dry air (the 20% humidity of hospitals), the mucosal layer in the respiratory system dries out and organelles called cilia which should clear out viruses are immobilized. The above paper and figure 4 of this one explain the mechanism.
    https://www.annualreviews.org/doi/pdf/10.1146/annurev-virology-012420-022445

    It has been really depressing to watch as the world utterly loses its mind while ignoring the blindingly obvious (to me, and every intelligent person 75 years ago) fact that humidity **dramatically** reduces the fatality rate of respiratory infections among those who are exposed.

    Amid all the sturm und drang about this or that marginally helpful solution, everyone ignores the big, easy and safe answer.

    Steve, I really appreciate that you believed me enough to go buy three humidifiers when I first reported the value of humidity a couple of months ago. But I think it is worthwhile to re-up the humidity thing as a blog post again. There really aren't any controlled studies on the effect of humidity on Covid-19 survival at this time, and there really need to be. Meanwhile there are at least 32 studies going on hydroxychloroquine. The geographic data on warm, humid air being protective against the new coronavirus is stronger than any data I've seen on any other remedies.

    I noted a little earlier this month, "There are zero nations whose capital is south of 30 north latitude with more than 20 deaths per million people. There are 25 nations whose capital is north of 30 north latitude with more than 20 deaths per million. The United States right now is at 65 deaths per million. South of the equator, zero nations exceed 7 deaths per million. Ten countries exceed 100 deaths from Coronavirus per million and every single one of them has a capital north of 40 latitude."

    Those numbers are a little stale, so I will run those correlations again this weekend, but simple humidity shows more promise than anything I've seen, from ventilators to HCQ to any of the fancy antivirals under consideration. Given that cold climes are likely to face this again for a whole long winter season starting in late fall, the value of humidification really needs to become common knowledge by then. People in temperate climes aren't doing the one thing that could dramatically help them and panicky people in tropical climes are collapsing their economies for no good reason.

    Masks are the answer to stop transmission but once someone gets it the virus, humidity will dramatically increase the odds that they will come through okay.

    South of the equator, zero nations exceed 7 deaths per million.

    Those numbers are a little stale, so I will run those correlations again this weekend

    You better. Here in Brazil, the second most populous country (after Indonesia) with its capital South of the Equator (and between the tropics), we are already approaching 20 deaths per million and — a little prediction here — may be on our way to be the country with the most cases and deaths later in the year (absolute and per capita). There is also Ecuador. I think you’re damn wrong, but it’s important to keep a gardez-votre-sang-froid mentality.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    I thought Guayaquil, a port in Ecuador, might have surprisingly cool weather like Lima, Peru does, but the average high temperature in March-April is 90 F and it rains 20 inches on average over those 61 days.
  203. @Mehen
    The main error in your screed is that, as far as I’m aware, no one on this site has advocated a “let’s do nothing” approach. Just that the official response has been way out of proportion to the actual danger. Now, they may be right or they may be wrong, but at least characterize their position fairly, eh?

    “The main error in your screed is that, as far as I’m aware, no one on this site has advocated a “let’s do nothing” approach.”

    Then you are very unaware. I provided links to Richard Taylor’s comments, and his tireless efforts to remind us of past epidemics where no one apparently did anything and the world kept turning. I made reference to the “only 200,000 dead out of a population of 7 billion people on this very thread. If 200,000 dead is nothing but a roundoff error, then what exactly do we need to do in the first place? If anything that MSNBC tells us to do is by definition part a media-driven panic we should disobey, then what does it matter what those do-something policies are? It would still be too much, according to the truthers. Do I really need to spell that out for you?

    Sure, plenty of the coronahoaxers pivoted into claiming they were never hoaxers, but were only interested in a “more senisble” approach — especially after those MOMO graphs they previously touted for having no bump whatsover blew up in their faces. They also play tricks like pretending that anyone who thinks it’s time to start restarting (e.g. Tucker Carlson) is now on their side, even if those people take pains to point out they’re not. But even now, every once in a while they’ll slip and say “Lukashenko was right”. The latter is not strictly a do-nothing advocate — he does advocate drinking vodka and going to saunas to prevent the disease, but that being the case, do-nothing is close enough.

  204. @UK
    Millions die every single year if diseases that are much easier to prevent than this. Your weekly Starbucks could save multiple lives in poor countries, yet you choose your overpriced coffee. This is the harsh reality of your own choices, and everyone else's too.

    You can pretend that you're all about saving lives and therefore give huge inflated context-free numbers, but I very much doubt that any of your actions, in areas that don't allow you to play the satisfying role of internet scold, actually show that you do.

    Talk is cheap. Ordering other people to have their lives ruined is cheap. I simply don't believe you and your stated motivations. Your actions belie your words.

    “Millions die every single year if diseases that are much easier to prevent than this. Your weekly Starbucks could save multiple lives in poor countries…”

    1) whataboutism is never a good way to salvage a losing argument.

    2) While, I do recall buying a grossly overpriced piece of fruit a few years ago when there was nothing else around, and I was really hungry, that’s about all I’ve provided for their bottom line. Starbucks would have gone out of business years ago if they had to rely on people like me for business.

    If the rest of your coronahoax output is as gaffe-ridden as your comment was, then you need not wonder why the rest of the world never took that side of the argument very seriously.

    That being said, if you ever do come across an opportunity to save millions of lives, be it in the developing world or elsewhere, consider seizing it.

    • Replies: @UK
    Opportunity cost and being aware of the context is not whataboutism. It is just bringing some perspective to your monomania.
  205. @DanHessinMD
    Unprecedented isn't when you have 5 other datapoints on the chart at the same level or higher.

    Unprecedented is this:

    https://mashable.com/video/unemployment-graph-coronavirus-gamecube/

    that video merits an embed.

    (and worth noting it was just the first week. The next one was the same and the subsequent 2 also in the millions)

  206. @leterip
    I am not sure anyone here advocated doing absolutely nothing. Advising hand washing,advising avoiding big groups, etc would always have made sense and will probably turn out to have been enough. But it is very likely that doing nothing, policy wise, would have been preferable to where we are now. Even with no government intervention people would have increased social distancing and hand washing.
    For me, suppression made no sense as soon I understood that there was no plausible, reasonably quick, exit strategy especially for a western country. That is what attracted me to Swedish approach which is modified let er rip approach. It actually had an exit strategy. They conceived this approach very early on with the same data as everyone else's experts. For us non experts, it is naturally a bit of monday morning quarterbacking. But the fact the most countries experts, who have been studying pandemics for years and years, could not have at least offered the Swedish approach as an option is quite disappointing. This will be a historically bad policy failure - and yes, this should have been foreseen.

    “But it is very likely that doing nothing, policy wise, would have been preferable to where we are now.”

    So, let that be a final refutation for anyone thick enough to claim that no one here is actually in favor of doing nothing.

    “That is what attracted me to Swedish approach which is modified let er rip approach.”

    No, it is, according to their own government officials their policy is very different from a “let ‘er rip” approach (search for the phrase “biggest misconception” and I see someone else has already cut-and-pasted from that article without giving a link).

    Now, it’s true if you’re part of the Somali community in Sweden, then yes, the Swedish policy might as well be let’ er rip since they’re ignoring the “recommendations”. But they’ve been brutally hit by this virus. That being the case, you can’t have it both ways, though I’m guessing that won’t stop you.

    • Replies: @Mehen


    “But it is very likely that doing nothing, policy wise, would have been preferable to where we are now.”

     

    So, let that be a final refutation for anyone thick enough to claim that no one here is actually in favor of doing nothing.
     
    I gave you the benefit of the doubt in my first reply to you, but this comment makes it clear you are a disingenuous zealot. You left out the first part of your selectively edited quote:

    I am not sure anyone here advocated doing absolutely nothing. Advising hand washing,advising avoiding big groups, etc would always have made sense and will probably turn out to have been enough.
     

    It was clear the poster was educating you regarding your “””confusion””” and then making the additional point that even without a middle-way compromise that the do-nothing approach would STILL be preferable to the unprecedented and historic actions we see. He was not making a PRESCRIPTIVE statement but rather a DESCRIPTIVE one. And the evidence is growing clearer day by day that he is correct (which even you tacity admit with your parenthetical bet-hedging comments) the truth of which should be obvious to anyone who doesn’t have shit for brains.

    It’s clear you aren’t stupid, which is why I am more convinced than ever of my gut feeling when reading your comments that you are something worse.

    , @leterip
    In the context of the most of the peoples discussions on this blog, the "let er rip" approach simply means allowing most people to be infected as soon as practical (while trying not to overwhelm hospitals, etc). Therefore, immunity would result from the infection rather than a vaccine. I think most "let er rip" people on this blog assumed that people, with minimal coercion, would generally take reasonable precautions and flatten the curve to some extent. I don't think most of us here were thinking that people would not take any protective actions whatsoever.

    The other alternative, now being pursued by most countries, is trying to minimize infections for several years , by periodic lockdowns, massive testing, and contact tracing. The goal in the common approach is to minimize infections until a vaccine or super drug is available and then we can all go back to normal. The immunity comes from a vaccine, with uncertain availability, is this standard approach vs infection in the let er rip approach.

    I think it is becoming increasingly obvious, to us lay people, how idiotic the common approach is. It is true that we are using hindsight to some degree. However, someone who has studied pandemics for many years should figured this out with the information available they had early on in this pandemic. As proof of that, the Swede's did figure it out.

    They are allowing people to be infected ASAP (let er rip) vs waiting on a vaccine or super drug like most of the rest of world is.

    Finally I stand by the statement you highlighted “But it is very likely that doing nothing, policy wise, would have been preferable to where we are now.”
  207. @adreadline

    South of the equator, zero nations exceed 7 deaths per million.
     

    Those numbers are a little stale, so I will run those correlations again this weekend
     
    You better. Here in Brazil, the second most populous country (after Indonesia) with its capital South of the Equator (and between the tropics), we are already approaching 20 deaths per million and -- a little prediction here -- may be on our way to be the country with the most cases and deaths later in the year (absolute and per capita). There is also Ecuador. I think you're damn wrong, but it's important to keep a gardez-votre-sang-froid mentality.

    I thought Guayaquil, a port in Ecuador, might have surprisingly cool weather like Lima, Peru does, but the average high temperature in March-April is 90 F and it rains 20 inches on average over those 61 days.

    • Replies: @utu
    Manaus, Brazil, April 23.2°C min - 30.7°C max, RH 87%

    https://www.npr.org/sections/coronavirus-live-updates/2020/04/23/842802500/living-through-a-nightmare-brazil-s-manaus-digs-a-mass-grave-as-deaths-mount
    The mayor's office confirmed to NPR that there have been 340 burials just in the past three days. In most cases, the cause of death was listed as unknown, said a city hall spokeswoman.

    City authorities are in little doubt that COVID-19 victims account for most of the spike. This means the virus is taking a far deadlier toll on Manaus than the official count of 172 virus-related deaths suggests.

     

  208. @Hypnotoad666
    I forgot about the good old Trolley car morality metaphor!

    But it's true. Once the political default was "do something," it meant that any casualties would be blamed on any politician who allowed people to keep their freedom. He'd be accused of "having blood on his hands."

    Remember, it was the Chinese who were getting so much praise for their super-aggressive lock down of Wuhan before it started hitting the west. They helped set the tone what was to follow.

    But it’s true. Once the political default was “do something,” it meant that any casualties would be blamed on any politician who allowed people to keep their freedom. He’d be accused of “having blood on his hands.”

    “It’s true”? That is not what K wrote.

    Remember, it was the Chinese who were getting so much praise for their super-aggressive lock down of Wuhan before it started hitting the west.

    They were?

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    The Washington Post, which is kind of the company newsletter of the US Deep State, was heavily criticizing the Chinese government's extreme response in Wuhan after January 23 for perhaps the next 4 weeks.
  209. @HA
    "Millions die every single year if diseases that are much easier to prevent than this. Your weekly Starbucks could save multiple lives in poor countries..."

    1) whataboutism is never a good way to salvage a losing argument.

    2) While, I do recall buying a grossly overpriced piece of fruit a few years ago when there was nothing else around, and I was really hungry, that's about all I've provided for their bottom line. Starbucks would have gone out of business years ago if they had to rely on people like me for business.

    If the rest of your coronahoax output is as gaffe-ridden as your comment was, then you need not wonder why the rest of the world never took that side of the argument very seriously.

    That being said, if you ever do come across an opportunity to save millions of lives, be it in the developing world or elsewhere, consider seizing it.

    Opportunity cost and being aware of the context is not whataboutism. It is just bringing some perspective to your monomania.

    • Replies: @HA
    "Opportunity cost and being aware of the context is not whataboutism."

    You say tomato, I say to-mah-to.
  210. @Steve Sailer
    You’re also ignoring a bunch of obvious tings:
     •  faced with a threat, individuals adjust their behaviour without being ordered to do so;
     • that imposing economy-destroying constraints on people’s lives has predictable consequences that dwarf the predictable costs of “inaction”.

    But how does laissez-faire Sweden's box office dropping only 98% due to private choices while dictatorial Denmark's box office drops 100% due to government diktat matter all that much in economic effect?

    Steve, You are cherry picking one aspect of the lockdown – movie theaters. Let say movie theaters would be screwed either way, due to laissez-faire or draconian approaches. Are you are making the argument that the economic damage to the USA would be nearly as bad even if the government had not intervened and forced closures???

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    I have a stock set of examples I've been using for many weeks of different businesses to show how different businesses fare: for example, golf courses are my go-to example of a business that will do well if the heavy hand of government hadn't stomped on them in some places and will come back strong when government lifts stupid bans. Movie theaters, in contrast, are less likely to come back strong as soon as local government allows them to.

    Optometrists are likely in better position than dentists.

    And so forth and so on.

  211. @Anonymous

    But it’s true. Once the political default was “do something,” it meant that any casualties would be blamed on any politician who allowed people to keep their freedom. He’d be accused of “having blood on his hands.”
     
    “It’s true”? That is not what K wrote.

    Remember, it was the Chinese who were getting so much praise for their super-aggressive lock down of Wuhan before it started hitting the west.
     
    They were?

    The Washington Post, which is kind of the company newsletter of the US Deep State, was heavily criticizing the Chinese government’s extreme response in Wuhan after January 23 for perhaps the next 4 weeks.

    • Agree: Eagle Eye
    • Replies: @utu
    Somebody should write analysis of our media response to CoV.
    , @Anonymous

    The Washington Post, which is kind of the company newsletter of the US Deep State, was heavily criticizing the Chinese government’s extreme response in Wuhan after January 23 for perhaps the next 4 weeks.
     
    Interesting. That is consistent with my general impression of attitudes of the US media and the America public, but it is surprising that the Washington Post would have persisted.

    Any thoughts as to why?
  212. @The Germ Theory of Disease
    Z1. The Covid-19 virus is quite real (viz not a hoax), it is different from the ordinary flu in important ways, and it is very dangerous to certain populations, and not so dangerous to other populations.

    2. Had Donald Trump not been president, the publicly-organized and -enforced response to a real but not cataclysmic public health threat would have been rational, orderly, efficient, most likely effective, with a sound feedback loop for adjustment and a sane, gardez-votre-sang-froid mentality as seen in pandemics past.

    2a. Examples of rational and orderly responses would have included: early and very strict curtailment of all travel to and from China, and from East Asia generally, with strict quarantines and contact monitoring for returning US citizens; stiff quarantine procedures for the elderly, other at-risk populations, and identifiable "super-spreader" entities; and stern but rational recommendations for everyone else. Life goes on, economy stays normal, a slightly-larger but not catastrophic number of older and infirm people die, Wheel of Life, listen to some Jacques Brel and then move on.

    2b. Importantly, a major feature of a rational public-health response would have been a unified, non-politicized, clearly explained stance from the entire government, speaking in a single calm, agreed-upon voice. Not the Speaker of the House tearing up the President's speech at the State of the UNION address.

    3. But Donald Trump is the President, and therefore here we are, stuck in chaos, economic free-fall, mass hysteria and morbid sentimentality instead of clear thinking.

    3a. This course of action was deliberately, willfully and maliciously chosen, in virtual unanimity, by our leading classes: government, media, academia, judicial and so on. The clear purpose of this choice was to launch yet another coup attempt against the presidency of Donald Trump. The previous two coup attempts had failed, but this was a ripe poison apple that fell right into their laps.

    4. To be clear: the virus itself and the outbreak were real, non-engineered events. But the specific response to the outbreak was malicious and deliberate with respect to the wellbeing of the American people.

    5. The Powers That Be hate Donald Trump, and by extension the White, Christian, heritage-American electorate for whom he spoke, with such a deadly fury that they were willing to seize on a recurring, seasonal disease outbreak with known protocols of response, and malignant lay use it to destroy the American economy (Trump's main selling point) in order to bring down a president when their previous open coup attempts had failed.

    Importantly, a major feature of a rational public-health response would have been a unified, non-politicized, clearly explained stance from the entire government, speaking in a single calm, agreed-upon voice. Not the Speaker of the House tearing up the President’s speech at the State of the UNION address.

    Maybe you didn’t pay attention when they explained the idea of Constitutional government. Simply put:

    (1) “The entire government, speaking in a single calm, agreed-upon voice” – this is the very DEFINITION OF A TOTALITARIAN DICTATORSHIP. The government of North Korea is very good at speaking in “a single calm, agreed-upon voice” which citizens had better heed or be sent to concentration camps.

    (2) Health policy is a state matter. States are plenty big and wealthy enough to administer their own health care, stock up on masks, antibody test kits, etc., and otherwise supplement the capabilities of the private sector.

    As we all know, public sector employees in every states have done and continue to do a sterling job laying in emergency supplies in times of plenty. That’s why you can now just walk into your local Walgreens or CVS to pick up all the face masks, PCR and antibody test kits, hydroxychloroquine, azithromycine, and toilet paper that your heart desires.

    We can do perfectly well without a few mutually-credentialed panjandrums in Atlanta and DC.

    (3) As a minor excption, the Federal Government is properly involved in regulating international and interstate travel, within reasonable constitutional bounds.

    (4) The Democrats are the party of unlimited open borders and were as late as March the ostentatious “hug an Asian” party. (Asians are OK without receiving hugs from hacking strangers.)

    (5) Whatever its origins, the COVID-19 epidemic (panic-mongers prefer to say PANdemIC) was a huge boon to the Deep State and the billionaire elite – trillion-dollar bailouts, mostly entirely unrelated to the virus with only crumbs for those truly affected, further massively increased and more insidious surveillance (loudly advocated by both parties and bought “experts”), wholesale destruction of the obnoxious middle and working classes in a matter of weeks.

    What’s not to like if you are a billionaire and/or Deep Stater, or one of their boot-licking minions in the administration, media, and “education”?

  213. @Black-hole creator

    Perhaps a little exposure, esp. in when ample sun (Vit. D) is available, is a good way to develop antibodies w/o having symptoms.
     
    The WHO has just announced that there is no proven immunity from having antibodies in your blood. The plot thickens. If I were a conspiracy theorist, I'd say this is a perfect tool to thin the herd from the old and already sick. The rest will just have to live with the virus, pretty much how most people live with the incurable herpes-1 virus. Unfortunately, I am neither young nor particularly healthy, so I am not too happy with this conspiracy.

    The WHO has just announced that there is no proven immunity from having antibodies in your blood.

    The absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

    • Replies: @Black-hole creator
    The virus has been available for research for 3+ months, establishing immunity if relatively simple but that still has not been done. However, there have been multiple reports of "reinfections". So far the evidence I see is that if the virus does not kill you, it just stays "hidden" in your body and can potentially flare up when your immune system stops working well for any reason. Pretty much like herpes-1.

    Now, there might be multiple strains competing with each other - again not well established. But if this is true, getting a weaker strain might protect you from the killer strain. This can be potentially a good strategy, kind of like what they did at the end of 1700s with smallpox. But again, too many questions with no answers. If this is not a Manhattan project situation, I do not know what is. There should be a massive task made of brightest scientists not only from medicine but from physics, data analysis, etc. with unlimited resources to figure this out. Not some wild flailing and confusion.

  214. @Kratoklastes
    If you actually believed any of the nonsense in that comment, you would have spent your Woke life agitating for the global banning of cigarettes, alcohol, motor cars and the US military - all of which have direct, predictable, annual, global death tolls significantly higher than your current Doomer infatuation.

    I'll go out on a limb and predict that you have not spent your entire adult life campaigning for the global Prohibition of alcohol, tobacco, motor vehicles and the US military. (And nor should you - except for the last one).

    You're also ignoring a bunch of obvious tings:
     •  faced with a threat, individuals adjust their behaviour without being ordered to do so;
     • that imposing economy-destroying constraints on people's lives has predictable consequences that dwarf the predictable costs of "inaction".

    Given how humans over-react to minuscule (and non-existent) threats, it makes no sense to assume that people would simply go about their normal lives if they were informed that there was a life-threatening pathogen doing the rounds.

    Your mental model of the world seems to include an assumption of no-endogenous-adaptation: that if there were lepers walking the streets, people would shake their hands unless you ordered them not to. (This is a meta-argument, since it appears that leprosy is not transmissible by contact: you should still be able to grasp that it is certain that people would not shake their hands).

    “…faced with a threat, individuals adjust their behaviour without being ordered to do so;…”

    Some need government because they are unable to make good judgments, life this guy:

    https://www.unz.com/isteve/kaiser-permanente-data-on-hospitalizations/#comment-3846616
    “Going outside without a mask is what I do now. It’s what I have done all my life. It’s what I will continue to do.”

    who apparently is a sociopath unconcerned about people he lives among.

  215. @Thoughts
    Another piece of evidence

    Woman forced to rescue 82 year old father from Queens Nursing Home

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8256699/Woman-rescue-dad-82-Queens-nursing-home-dead-night-ProPublica.html

    The story, as ProPublica tends to do, focuses on the evils of management. Management is no doubt culpable in part, but so are those who created and feed the Fear.

    But the following night, Roland said, a worker she was friendly with finally told her the truth: Many of the aides who helped people like her dad were petrified. They’d all but stopped going into the rooms of residents. Instead, they came to work and locked themselves in an office all day. Food trays were simply left outside in the hall.

    ‘She was like, ‘Girl, I don’t want to lose my job, but look, you need to get your father out of here,’ Roland said the worker told her.

    Then, she said, the worker began to cry, saying she was scared to be at work herself but needed to earn money for her family — whom she’d quarantined herself away from.

    (Again, ProPublic does like to dramatize, but they’re factual fact checking type journalists, afaik.)

    How many excess deaths are being caused by vulnerable elderly not getting food and medicine because the employees of care homes have been scared out of their wits by the government and the media?

    This isn’t the first story to come out about semi abandoned care homes.

  216. @Muggles
    A. Everyone posting here (and elsewhere) knows much more about the Wuhan flu than they did in early January, if they knew anything back then at all.

    B. This flu is far more contagious than recent flues have been. At least an order of magnitude.

    C. The dormancy or asymptomatic periods of someone having it and transmitting it are highly unusual and lengthy. That explains much of B.

    E. While some (younger, healthier) here scoff at concern, salivating about how older, fragile others will die (not them!) this is far from reassuring even to these people. Large numbers of younger and even very young people, otherwise healthy, have died. Some recovered sick have long term effects.

    F. Fear of the unknown, and early "knowns" like ease of transmission have driven the government mandates. Fear is a great driver for authoritarian behavior and acceptance. In a democracy more or less, panic drives quick and hard. As we now know, most of these measures may be unneeded. This isn't any reason for bragging about "defying conventional wisdom" since boasts of personal bravery are worthless at best. No "hoaxer" I've ever read talks about volunteering to help the sick. Zero.

    G. Even basic scientific facts about COVID-19 are slow to emerge, verified and uncontested.

    H. Yes, time for panic is over. Time for normalcy to return is sooner rather than later.

    I. A basic human trait about risk is that when it is seen as controllable (driving a car) versus uncontrollable (flying in a plane) the risk tolerances are much higher. Hence dangerous car travel is preferred to safe flying by most. Likewise, low pandemic risk is perceived as riskier than normal seasonal flu death (vaccines). Now that risk perceptions are changing, mandates and dictates no longer have much popular appeal. House arrest and depression economics are both bad.

    J. Steve Sailor here and Ron Unz do a tremendous service for providing a forum to all. Don't abuse them just because you disagree. That's why we cherish them, because they allow open dissent.

    B. This flu is far more contagious than recent flues have been. At least an order of magnitude.

    C. The dormancy or asymptomatic periods of someone having it and transmitting it are highly unusual and lengthy. That explains much of B.

    Yes, but usually there are vaccines for flu season. The first “high-dose” influenza vaccine targeting those over age 65 years (Medicare patients) was approved by the FDA in 2009 and became available in the U.S. for the 2010-2011 flu season. It contains four times the amount of antigen in other flu vaccines.

    In 2012, the FDA approved the first quadrivalent influenza vaccine, containing two type A and two type B influenza viruses for the 2013-2014 flu season, and there have been newer, supposedly more potent flu vaccines since that time.

    The fact that no one has been vaccinated for COVID-19 obviously makes it more contagious than seasonal flus for which there exist vaccinations.

  217. @leterip
    Steve, You are cherry picking one aspect of the lockdown - movie theaters. Let say movie theaters would be screwed either way, due to laissez-faire or draconian approaches. Are you are making the argument that the economic damage to the USA would be nearly as bad even if the government had not intervened and forced closures???

    I have a stock set of examples I’ve been using for many weeks of different businesses to show how different businesses fare: for example, golf courses are my go-to example of a business that will do well if the heavy hand of government hadn’t stomped on them in some places and will come back strong when government lifts stupid bans. Movie theaters, in contrast, are less likely to come back strong as soon as local government allows them to.

    Optometrists are likely in better position than dentists.

    And so forth and so on.

    • Replies: @prosa123
    I am sure that the Las Vegas gambling casinos will be jammed the microsecond they're allowed to reopen.
  218. @Alexander Turok

    matches the consensus of goodthinkers and Model UN types everywhere
     
    We also agree on this "round Earth" theory.

    “We also agree on this “round Earth” theory”

    Eventually, but only after better data and understanding became available resulting in changing opinions. There are still, even now, those who cling to the original flat earth consensus.

  219. @HA
    "But it is very likely that doing nothing, policy wise, would have been preferable to where we are now."

    So, let that be a final refutation for anyone thick enough to claim that no one here is actually in favor of doing nothing.

    "That is what attracted me to Swedish approach which is modified let er rip approach."

    No, it is, according to their own government officials their policy is very different from a "let 'er rip" approach (search for the phrase "biggest misconception" and I see someone else has already cut-and-pasted from that article without giving a link).

    Now, it's true if you're part of the Somali community in Sweden, then yes, the Swedish policy might as well be let' er rip since they're ignoring the "recommendations". But they've been brutally hit by this virus. That being the case, you can't have it both ways, though I'm guessing that won't stop you.

    “But it is very likely that doing nothing, policy wise, would have been preferable to where we are now.”

    So, let that be a final refutation for anyone thick enough to claim that no one here is actually in favor of doing nothing.

    I gave you the benefit of the doubt in my first reply to you, but this comment makes it clear you are a disingenuous zealot. You left out the first part of your selectively edited quote:

    I am not sure anyone here advocated doing absolutely nothing. Advising hand washing,advising avoiding big groups, etc would always have made sense and will probably turn out to have been enough.

    It was clear the poster was educating you regarding your “””confusion””” and then making the additional point that even without a middle-way compromise that the do-nothing approach would STILL be preferable to the unprecedented and historic actions we see. He was not making a PRESCRIPTIVE statement but rather a DESCRIPTIVE one. And the evidence is growing clearer day by day that he is correct (which even you tacity admit with your parenthetical bet-hedging comments) the truth of which should be obvious to anyone who doesn’t have shit for brains.

    It’s clear you aren’t stupid, which is why I am more convinced than ever of my gut feeling when reading your comments that you are something worse.

    • Replies: @HA
    "I gave you the benefit of the doubt in my first reply to you, but this comment makes it clear you are a disingenuous zealot. ...It was clear the poster was educating you regarding your “””confusion””” and then making the additional point that even without a middle-way compromise that the do-nothing approach would STILL be preferable to the unprecedented and historic actions we see."

    Yeah, that highlighted portion -- which is what I cited -- gets the point across well. I don't know why you thought the part I omitted obscured anything vital. I'm not denying there's a middle ground between do-nothing and do-something, but to the extent you favor the former, I'm going to include you in the do-nothing category. Call it "rounding to the nearest integer". I don't know why that makes me a disingenuous zealot. Consider the alternate possibility that your response makes you a hair-splitting ninny.

    And sure enough, in the time that it took to reply, yet another long-time commentator has subsequently piped up to assure us that "Nah. What should have been done was nothing." So, once you're finished wiping the egg off your face, feel free to fly into some more Red Queen conniptions over what that really means, but I think it's pretty clear.

  220. Not sure how can determine false positive rate,etc.
    What is actually true positive?
    Not sure this is clearly defined at all.
    What is the gold standard for this disease?
    Usually would involve pathology.
    We don’t have that whatsoever.

  221. @Prester John
    "It ain’t Spanish flu level, that’s for sure."

    At current population levels in the US (+/- 330 million), that level would be close to 2 million. We're only about 3 months into this thing and between 40 and 50 thousand have died so far. We're still in round one, with round two possibly scheduled for latter 2020 through early 2021. Though the likelihood of this even approaching the Spanish flu is remote--not impossible, only remote--still, we're talking about a lot of people who'll be checking out over the next 9-12 months.

    still, we’re talking about a lot of people who’ll be checking out over the next 9-12 months.

    You guys claim this but the excess morbidity doesn’t seem to be there (yet). In all likelihood we’re talking about a very similar number of people “checking out” this year as in years past. Maybe a touch higher, which would certainly be expected.

  222. @Steve Sailer
    You’re also ignoring a bunch of obvious tings:
     •  faced with a threat, individuals adjust their behaviour without being ordered to do so;
     • that imposing economy-destroying constraints on people’s lives has predictable consequences that dwarf the predictable costs of “inaction”.

    But how does laissez-faire Sweden's box office dropping only 98% due to private choices while dictatorial Denmark's box office drops 100% due to government diktat matter all that much in economic effect?

    But how does laissez-faire Sweden’s box office dropping only 98% due to private choices while dictatorial Denmark’s box office drops 100% due to government diktat matter all that much in economic effect?

    For theatres it wouldn’t matter much, although, voluntary compliance in the US would likely be somewhat less robust for better or worse.

    But for restaurants and stores it would matter a good deal even if their business were down 50%

    There would still be a recession and bailout but it would probably be a small fraction of what it is.

    But even if economically it was practically the same, I’d feel better about it if the government hadn’t gone police state.

    People vs Nature makes me feel good.
    but in March they made it
    Government vs People… and i hate it.

  223. @HA
    "But it is very likely that doing nothing, policy wise, would have been preferable to where we are now."

    So, let that be a final refutation for anyone thick enough to claim that no one here is actually in favor of doing nothing.

    "That is what attracted me to Swedish approach which is modified let er rip approach."

    No, it is, according to their own government officials their policy is very different from a "let 'er rip" approach (search for the phrase "biggest misconception" and I see someone else has already cut-and-pasted from that article without giving a link).

    Now, it's true if you're part of the Somali community in Sweden, then yes, the Swedish policy might as well be let' er rip since they're ignoring the "recommendations". But they've been brutally hit by this virus. That being the case, you can't have it both ways, though I'm guessing that won't stop you.

    In the context of the most of the peoples discussions on this blog, the “let er rip” approach simply means allowing most people to be infected as soon as practical (while trying not to overwhelm hospitals, etc). Therefore, immunity would result from the infection rather than a vaccine. I think most “let er rip” people on this blog assumed that people, with minimal coercion, would generally take reasonable precautions and flatten the curve to some extent. I don’t think most of us here were thinking that people would not take any protective actions whatsoever.

    The other alternative, now being pursued by most countries, is trying to minimize infections for several years , by periodic lockdowns, massive testing, and contact tracing. The goal in the common approach is to minimize infections until a vaccine or super drug is available and then we can all go back to normal. The immunity comes from a vaccine, with uncertain availability, is this standard approach vs infection in the let er rip approach.

    I think it is becoming increasingly obvious, to us lay people, how idiotic the common approach is. It is true that we are using hindsight to some degree. However, someone who has studied pandemics for many years should figured this out with the information available they had early on in this pandemic. As proof of that, the Swede’s did figure it out.

    They are allowing people to be infected ASAP (let er rip) vs waiting on a vaccine or super drug like most of the rest of world is.

    Finally I stand by the statement you highlighted “But it is very likely that doing nothing, policy wise, would have been preferable to where we are now.”

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    the “let er rip” approach simply means allowing most people to be infected as soon as practical (while trying not to overwhelm hospitals, etc).

    How does that work?

  224. @HA
    "When all this is said and done, we will rue the day we acted so stupidly."

    Who's this "we" you refer to? To be sure, armchair back-forecasters applying their keen 20/20 hindsight to cherry-picked outcomes and then claiming they were right all along will always be among us. And innumeracy is currently far more widespread in our world than coronavirus. That means mathematical illiterates who pretend that they know more than the experts and could have done all this better will never be in short supply. (And when the models are especially difficult, they'll frequently be right, sadly.)

    However, I repeat: no sane person who believes that New York City is a real location -- as opposed to a troupe of crisis actors -- will ever believe that even Sweden's approach was the "right" one (and even theirs is a far cry from the "let 'er rip" attitude that many here are still advocating, because, if 200,000 in a world of 7 billion means nothing, then why do anything about a million or two million dead? What answer can anyone provide for such people except to breathe a sign of relief that they're kooks?)

    I get it -- you want to ignore what doesn't suit your worldview and pretend it was only the let's-do-something crowd that acted stupidly. I'm telling you, if you're really interested in being honest, there was -- as far as I can tell -- as much or more stupidity from the let's-do-nothing contingent. If you want to claim otherwise, then I will tell you it's not just the CDC that should be suspected of retconning the history and fudging the numbers.

    Even as someone who suspects the final numbers may be closer to your prediction than some of theirs, I hope I can at least be honest enough to also admit that.

    Nah.

    What should have been done was nothing.

    NuFlu is dangerous to people with less than 2 years to live but The Panic is more dangerous.

    Worse yet, it causes MORE people to get NuFlu.

    [Before I explain that let me explain why I’m calling this NuFlu. Because unlike the traditional flu that has huge numbers of people immunized (from the shot, previous cases, non-weeded out in past years, evolution) and therefore they AND the herd are largely protected, this “new flu” lacks that obstacle, hence the need for a new sort of vaccine. Okay, going on…]

    The Panic made many people WITH NuFlu run from their locations (Wuhan, Lombardy…) as soon as it was announced that the area had an infection.

    Take away The international Panic caused by a species evolved to fear and seek out dangers that don’t exist anymore, a media horny to exploit it, and politicians looking for a raison d’etre and NuFlu would not have spread this fast, meaning what happened in February would only be happening now as Flu Season traditionally ends, or not at all. It’s questionable whether it would even continue to exist next year at all, and if so, whether it would again, remain local. At least for long enough for a vaccine to be developed.

    I have more to explain but history has shown me that nobody reads my longer comments so I’ll leave you with simple notes that some will br able to work though on their own and some not.

    —–

    ^ Nursing home deaths (which are 1 in 5) were often infections that were Panic caused. As were many others. See Semmelweis. (Give birth at home instead of a hospital and survive.)

    ^ Furthermore The Panic misplaced attention from nursing homes (which would have beeb incredibly easy to quarantine) by focusing on everyone.

    ^ More explanations for Panic Deaths

    ^ I don’t oppose The Quarantine for other reasons

    ^ Some Panic was inevitablely arriving (mankind rethinks itself every jubilee, see 1970, 1920 etc.) and we Pinkered it without War….

    Much more to explain if there’s enough interest. Happy to do a Q and A on whatsapp or whatever if there’s enough interest. I know that sohnds presumptuous but it’s not. Hit the hyperlink to see my earlier comments and you’ll see that (aside for plainly obvious sarcasm or needs to genralize for The Slow) I understood this thing correctly from the very very start. [Fair warning, For many people reading my comments will increase their blood pressure. Be advised.]

    • Replies: @Anonymous

    Take away The international Panic caused by a species evolved to fear and seek out dangers that don’t exist anymore
     
    What dangers does the species seek out?

    What dangers that don’t exist anymore are we evolved to fear?
  225. @Steve Sailer
    The Washington Post, which is kind of the company newsletter of the US Deep State, was heavily criticizing the Chinese government's extreme response in Wuhan after January 23 for perhaps the next 4 weeks.

    Somebody should write analysis of our media response to CoV.

  226. Anonymous[333] • Disclaimer says:
    @Steve Sailer
    The Washington Post, which is kind of the company newsletter of the US Deep State, was heavily criticizing the Chinese government's extreme response in Wuhan after January 23 for perhaps the next 4 weeks.

    The Washington Post, which is kind of the company newsletter of the US Deep State, was heavily criticizing the Chinese government’s extreme response in Wuhan after January 23 for perhaps the next 4 weeks.

    Interesting. That is consistent with my general impression of attitudes of the US media and the America public, but it is surprising that the Washington Post would have persisted.

    Any thoughts as to why?

  227. @moshe
    Nah.

    What should have been done was nothing.

    NuFlu is dangerous to people with less than 2 years to live but The Panic is more dangerous.

    Worse yet, it causes MORE people to get NuFlu.

    [Before I explain that let me explain why I'm calling this NuFlu. Because unlike the traditional flu that has huge numbers of people immunized (from the shot, previous cases, non-weeded out in past years, evolution) and therefore they AND the herd are largely protected, this "new flu" lacks that obstacle, hence the need for a new sort of vaccine. Okay, going on...]

    The Panic made many people WITH NuFlu run from their locations (Wuhan, Lombardy...) as soon as it was announced that the area had an infection.

    Take away The international Panic caused by a species evolved to fear and seek out dangers that don't exist anymore, a media horny to exploit it, and politicians looking for a raison d'etre and NuFlu would not have spread this fast, meaning what happened in February would only be happening now as Flu Season traditionally ends, or not at all. It's questionable whether it would even continue to exist next year at all, and if so, whether it would again, remain local. At least for long enough for a vaccine to be developed.

    I have more to explain but history has shown me that nobody reads my longer comments so I'll leave you with simple notes that some will br able to work though on their own and some not.

    -----

    ^ Nursing home deaths (which are 1 in 5) were often infections that were Panic caused. As were many others. See Semmelweis. (Give birth at home instead of a hospital and survive.)

    ^ Furthermore The Panic misplaced attention from nursing homes (which would have beeb incredibly easy to quarantine) by focusing on everyone.

    ^ More explanations for Panic Deaths

    ^ I don't oppose The Quarantine for other reasons

    ^ Some Panic was inevitablely arriving (mankind rethinks itself every jubilee, see 1970, 1920 etc.) and we Pinkered it without War....

    Much more to explain if there's enough interest. Happy to do a Q and A on whatsapp or whatever if there's enough interest. I know that sohnds presumptuous but it's not. Hit the hyperlink to see my earlier comments and you'll see that (aside for plainly obvious sarcasm or needs to genralize for The Slow) I understood this thing correctly from the very very start. [Fair warning, For many people reading my comments will increase their blood pressure. Be advised.]

    Take away The international Panic caused by a species evolved to fear and seek out dangers that don’t exist anymore

    What dangers does the species seek out?

    What dangers that don’t exist anymore are we evolved to fear?

  228. @Thoughts
    It's a 'I'm not a Basic Bitch' denier.

    It's the thing girls who are totally Average in Every Respect wear in order to try to be un-average.

    She's average looking, average thinking, average love-life, there's nothing about her that Stands Out.

    It's better to be a bit Ugly than to be the Ultimate in Average.

    Yes, it's better to be fat, with a fat husband wearing all black outside a chicken shop happily snogging than the be Totally Average.

    So she gets the shiny nose pimple booger.

    It’s the thing girls who are totally Average in Every Respect wear in order to try to be un-average.

    So it’s the opposite of a beauty mark?

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beauty_mark#Artificial_beauty_mark

  229. @Lowe
    It looks like you shit your pants over this along with the entire establishment (so far). What a strange position to be in, for you.

    What is the point of being a contrarian on everything just to fall in line with the conventional wisdom when something important comes up?

    Here is the thing- if the data shows Sailer that he was wrong, then I fully expect him to admit it- I don’t expect that from most intellectuals. This is why I read him every day, though I rarely comment here.

  230. Hail says: • Website
    @utu

    Sweden’s coronavirus-positive deaths peaked April 5 to 16, at over 80/day (on three days within that range reaching over 100/day), and have been steadily downhill since then.
     
    Not really. Not really at all.

    https://i.ibb.co/P6HKqLr/graph7.png

    Clearly lower and upper envelopes over the data points keep increasing at least as fast as linear meaning that the totals increase at least as fast as a quadratic function. That we do not see an exponential growth in data anymore is because Sweden despite of their official pronouncements to the outer world in fact practices social distancing (see Steve Sailer movie theatre attendance graph as an example). Deaths are lagging infections by 3-4 weeks so one may expect that the growth will continue as daily infections in Sweden official data keep growing. In last four days daily growth of new infections was 10% per day.

    The strong periodic (7 day period) signal in data suggests that data are being managed, that death certificates are processed in clusters and possibly a strict filtering is applied between "with virus" and "from virus" death categories. Sweden's reputation and that of their chief epidemiologist Anders Tegnell are on the line so the pressure on them to "cook the data" might be irresistible.

    Anders Tegnell promised that he will push the death rate to lower than seasonal flu. He said that he will cut the number of death by four fifths (meaning a factor of five). How was he planning to do it? With a miracle drug nobody else had? Certainly not with isolation and special social countermeasures. The only thing he could do is to keep counting deaths sums by adjusting the line dividing "death of virus" and "death with virus" categories.

    That graph you posted, which is not sourced, contradicts the Swedish public health authority, which has deaths from 85 to 105 range between April 4/5 and April 15 (see below). From April 16 to April 22, there is a downward trend with almost each day lower than the last, and the average for the period April 16 to April 22 is less than half the peak period (April 4 to 15).

    The graph you post is also immediately suspicious because data seldom looks like that, with such dramatic spikes. There should be a smoother curve for something like this. I wonder what source whoever made that was using. I can take a guess about why a sudden “crash” shows up around April 12: Easter weekend. No, the hospitalized corona-patients didn’t take the weekend off from dying, but recording authorities in charge of compiling the deaths probably did.

    Here is the graph from the Swedish Public Health Agency (via Folkhalsomyndigheten.se) of coronavirus deaths by day, pegged to the day the death occurred, which afaict is complete info through April 22, partial for April 23, and not yet released for April 24 and April 25 (current local time as of the time this graph was displayed on their website: early AM April 26):

    • Replies: @utu
    Source: www.worldometers.info
  231. HA says:
    @Kratoklastes
    If you actually believed any of the nonsense in that comment, you would have spent your Woke life agitating for the global banning of cigarettes, alcohol, motor cars and the US military - all of which have direct, predictable, annual, global death tolls significantly higher than your current Doomer infatuation.

    I'll go out on a limb and predict that you have not spent your entire adult life campaigning for the global Prohibition of alcohol, tobacco, motor vehicles and the US military. (And nor should you - except for the last one).

    You're also ignoring a bunch of obvious tings:
     •  faced with a threat, individuals adjust their behaviour without being ordered to do so;
     • that imposing economy-destroying constraints on people's lives has predictable consequences that dwarf the predictable costs of "inaction".

    Given how humans over-react to minuscule (and non-existent) threats, it makes no sense to assume that people would simply go about their normal lives if they were informed that there was a life-threatening pathogen doing the rounds.

    Your mental model of the world seems to include an assumption of no-endogenous-adaptation: that if there were lepers walking the streets, people would shake their hands unless you ordered them not to. (This is a meta-argument, since it appears that leprosy is not transmissible by contact: you should still be able to grasp that it is certain that people would not shake their hands).

    “If you actually believed any of the nonsense in that comment, you would have spent your Woke life agitating for the global banning of cigarettes, alcohol, motor cars and the US military – all of which have direct, predictable, annual, global death tolls significantly higher than your current Doomer infatuation.”

    If I wanted to swear off driving the way I’ve already lost interest in cigarettes and alcohol (I’ve never been a military enthusiast — or oxy, in case you were thinking of bringing that up, and I’m certainly no advocate of Wokeness), I can choose to do so. Alcohol vapors emanating from the wino on the street next to me do not multiply exponentially the way a virus can. So no, I’m not going to be agitating for the global banning of cigarettes or alcohol, or any other such red herring you choose to name.

    That being said, I do confess to driving or taking a cab when no alternative presents itself. But I will note that the death rates associated with cars were hashed out roughly a century ago when millions were already collectively dying from a wide range of factors ranging from smallpox to Nazis, and probably for that reason, the high tolerance for those dead has been subsequently grandfathered into an age when we’ve collectively become more “K” and less “r” with regard to mass casualties. But if we were to try and correct that hypocrisy by saying “yes, we need to do more to prevent those, too”, I suspect you wouldn’t be in favor of that, either.

    Moreover, note that if Toyota were to come out with a malfunctioning gas pedal that killed only a few dozen people, even their sleaziest lawyers are not going to be dumb enough to try the “this is a small blip compared to all the other car deaths” defense. No, they’d still be expected to recall the item, no excuses. Same goes for scrapping seat belts, or air bags or any of the many other ways we’ve tried to put a dent in our high tolerance for highway deaths. So that’s a lame argument, too.

    “Given how humans over-react to minuscule (and non-existent) threats, it makes no sense to assume that people would simply go about their normal lives if they were informed that there was a life-threatening pathogen doing the rounds.”

    Plenty of people do plenty of things that “make no sense”, and that includes plans to keep on keeping on with respect to their normal lives, virus or not. That apparently goes for Swedish Somali (40% of the Stockholm covid cases), Orthodox Jew (60% of the Israeli cases, though only 12% of the population), as well as those Evangelicals biting at the bit to return to their megachurches. If you doubt me, you should probably try to get to know some of those people better. As it is, I suspect the ideological bubble in which you shelter yourself is far more restrictive than any stay-at-home order. Ironic, but it would explain a lot.

    • Replies: @Mehen

    I’ve already lost interest in cigarettes and alcohol (I’ve never been a military enthusiast — or oxy, in case you were thinking of bringing that up, and I’m certainly no advocate of Wokeness), I can choose to do so. Alcohol vapors emanating from the wino on the street next to me do not multiply exponentially the way a virus can. So no, I’m not going to be agitating for the global banning of cigarettes or alcohol, or any other such red herring you choose to name.
     
    Fair enough. Are you also as sanguine about tuberculosis which kills over a million per year? If so, why?
  232. @utu
    "Respiratory immunity is very dependent on humidity." - Yes, for TB high humidity is bad.

    utu — wrote: ” Yes, for TB high humidity is bad.”

    Again the literature disagrees. Please, if you are going to make authoritative statements, include citations.

    In the past the beliefs TB and air were all over the map. Dry air, sea air, even cave air. Three different sites for TB sanitariums.

    Now the literature mainly says that dry air worsens TB.

    The first study I find on the topic says that TB is worst under conditions of low humidity.
    https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-019-49135-8

    The next one says the same. Low humidity is associated with higher incidence, with a lag.
    https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-018-28426-6.

    It should be noted that bacteria (TB) are totally different from viruses. Bacteria are orders of magnitude larger than viruses and they are a totally different category of life. Hence bacteria infections research should not be our focus in treating viral infections.

  233. @anon
    One thing I find really interesting is that the Kinsa data is currently showing almost no illness in the entire country. And they have not made a blog post since 4/9 after having 10 from 3/23 to 4/9.

    How common are Kinsa thermometers in the general population?
    For example, how many elderly black people in Detroit or parts of Georgia have one?
    Ditto how many Native Americans have one? Or working class whites in Mississippi?
    These questions should be obvious just by eyeballing the data, because Kinsa is far from universal as a home health device.

    This is a data subset and has its own peculiarities. If their data can be partitioned down to the county level, or better still the zip code level, I wager that some parts of Maryland or Michigan would show a lot of users, other parts would show few or no users.

    How do we reconcile that (also see PS) with continuing new cases of COVID-19? I would expect deaths to keep coming given the lag involved, but where are the new cases coming from?

    New cases mostly among people who don't own a Kinsa device? Just a guess.
    Data subsets that are non-random can have problems.

    How common are Kinsa thermometers in the general population?

    Information on that here:
    https://www.kinsahealth.co/the-demographics-behind-kinsa-insights-and-the-us-health-weather-map/

    Their demographics are not as unrepresentative as I would have expected. Part of that is probably due to: “One in every 5 Kinsa thermometers in the US has been distributed to a family in a Title 1 school participating in FLUency. ”

    This is a data subset and has its own peculiarities.

    Yes. And it would be good to better understand those.

    If their data can be partitioned down to the county level, or better still the zip code level, I wager that some parts of Maryland or Michigan would show a lot of users, other parts would show few or no users.

    They do their maps at the county level so it is clear they have that. This graphic is a pretty good luck at their county representation. As I said, better than I expected.

    New cases mostly among people who don’t own a Kinsa device? Just a guess.
    Data subsets that are non-random can have problems.

    I could see that biasing the data, but I don’t see it consistent with their data going to ZERO almost everywhere.

    Elsewhere I have speculated that it is a combination of:
    – Most Kinsa users have either recovered from the virus or are more likely to be isolating themselves.
    – New cases are under care so not using their Kinsa thermometers.

    • Replies: @anon
    – Most Kinsa users have either recovered from the virus or are more likely to be isolating themselves.
    – New cases are under care so not using their Kinsa thermometers.


    - The Doomers are right, and all the Kinsa users have perished along with everyone at Kinsa involved in data collection! AAAAAAaaaaaaaaah! Run away!

    Occam's butterknife for the win.
  234. HA says:
    @Mehen


    “But it is very likely that doing nothing, policy wise, would have been preferable to where we are now.”

     

    So, let that be a final refutation for anyone thick enough to claim that no one here is actually in favor of doing nothing.
     
    I gave you the benefit of the doubt in my first reply to you, but this comment makes it clear you are a disingenuous zealot. You left out the first part of your selectively edited quote:

    I am not sure anyone here advocated doing absolutely nothing. Advising hand washing,advising avoiding big groups, etc would always have made sense and will probably turn out to have been enough.
     

    It was clear the poster was educating you regarding your “””confusion””” and then making the additional point that even without a middle-way compromise that the do-nothing approach would STILL be preferable to the unprecedented and historic actions we see. He was not making a PRESCRIPTIVE statement but rather a DESCRIPTIVE one. And the evidence is growing clearer day by day that he is correct (which even you tacity admit with your parenthetical bet-hedging comments) the truth of which should be obvious to anyone who doesn’t have shit for brains.

    It’s clear you aren’t stupid, which is why I am more convinced than ever of my gut feeling when reading your comments that you are something worse.

    “I gave you the benefit of the doubt in my first reply to you, but this comment makes it clear you are a disingenuous zealot. …It was clear the poster was educating you regarding your “””confusion””” and then making the additional point that even without a middle-way compromise that the do-nothing approach would STILL be preferable to the unprecedented and historic actions we see.

    Yeah, that highlighted portion — which is what I cited — gets the point across well. I don’t know why you thought the part I omitted obscured anything vital. I’m not denying there’s a middle ground between do-nothing and do-something, but to the extent you favor the former, I’m going to include you in the do-nothing category. Call it “rounding to the nearest integer”. I don’t know why that makes me a disingenuous zealot. Consider the alternate possibility that your response makes you a hair-splitting ninny.

    And sure enough, in the time that it took to reply, yet another long-time commentator has subsequently piped up to assure us that “Nah. What should have been done was nothing.” So, once you’re finished wiping the egg off your face, feel free to fly into some more Red Queen conniptions over what that really means, but I think it’s pretty clear.

  235. @Kratoklastes



    The best evidence we have is that the ‘restrictions’ were imposed far too late to make a difference, if the start date (globally) is earlier than January 15th 2020 and the initial R[0] is anywhere above 2.0
     
    How could the massive unprecedented “social distancing” not be making a difference?

     

    Simple, really.

    If the pathogen had a starting R[0] above 2 and had been running unchecked in a population for 3 months - assuming that the first cohort[1] of infected arrived in the the US in December [2]- then it's actually very likely that the (logistic) process was already past its second knee and the reproductive rate was already declining.

    There's plenty of evidence of this - the other day another commenter (Hail) posted a chart of reproductive rate in Germany, showing that it was below 1 before the political spike was driven into the brain of the economy, and killing the economy did not materially change the number.

    A ban on large groups (groups > 1000) was implemented on the 9th, but nothing else until March 23rd. Dunno why anyone would think that the ban on groups of 1000 would be meaningful: how many 1000-person groups is a normal person involved in, over the course of a month?

    https://hailtoyou.files.wordpress.com/2020/04/coronavirus-r0-in-germany-march-6-to-april-9.png


    [1] I take pains to say "the first cohort of infected" because the process did not start with one individual (it's beyond retarded to think that).

    [2] The 'canonical' first infected person in America happened on January 19th 2020, and was[3] a symptomatic 35-year-old male non-smoker with no chronic disease who required hospitalisation (he was also given supplementary oxygen, but not in an ICU context).

    He was an import - caught it in China, and was asymptomatic when get got on the plane on January 15th; by Jan 18th he had symptoms and was hospitalised.

    So out of the tens of thousands of people who arrived from China between mid-December and January 15th, he's the one guy?

    Given what we know about this disease, that profile is extremely unlikely (< 1% of cases): it's overwhelmingly more likely that the initial 'seed' in the US was from a group of asymptomatic infectees.


    [3] I say 'was' because he's not still infected: he didn't die - a thing he has in common with the vast bulk of infectees under 70, most of whom have such low symptoms that the disease is over before they recognise that they might be ill.

    But notice how the downtrend started a few days after the ban on events with more than 1000 people. And presumably people started taking their own countermeasures around then.

    It is important that we try to understand which measures helped. Especially for the relatively low impact measures.

    Just because the lockdowns have been excessive does not mean we should have done NOTHING.

    P.S. And notice that the y axis is effective reproduction number (not cases or deaths). In that graph a flat line above 2 would have been bad.

  236. @leterip
    In the context of the most of the peoples discussions on this blog, the "let er rip" approach simply means allowing most people to be infected as soon as practical (while trying not to overwhelm hospitals, etc). Therefore, immunity would result from the infection rather than a vaccine. I think most "let er rip" people on this blog assumed that people, with minimal coercion, would generally take reasonable precautions and flatten the curve to some extent. I don't think most of us here were thinking that people would not take any protective actions whatsoever.

    The other alternative, now being pursued by most countries, is trying to minimize infections for several years , by periodic lockdowns, massive testing, and contact tracing. The goal in the common approach is to minimize infections until a vaccine or super drug is available and then we can all go back to normal. The immunity comes from a vaccine, with uncertain availability, is this standard approach vs infection in the let er rip approach.

    I think it is becoming increasingly obvious, to us lay people, how idiotic the common approach is. It is true that we are using hindsight to some degree. However, someone who has studied pandemics for many years should figured this out with the information available they had early on in this pandemic. As proof of that, the Swede's did figure it out.

    They are allowing people to be infected ASAP (let er rip) vs waiting on a vaccine or super drug like most of the rest of world is.

    Finally I stand by the statement you highlighted “But it is very likely that doing nothing, policy wise, would have been preferable to where we are now.”

    the “let er rip” approach simply means allowing most people to be infected as soon as practical (while trying not to overwhelm hospitals, etc).

    How does that work?

    • Replies: @leterip
    Not sure this what you were asking but ....

    What Sweden did to implement this approach included the following that I am aware of:

    -Triple Covid treatment capacity
    -Protect nursing homes (although they state they screwed up a bit here) and encourage other vulnerable to self-isolate
    -Implement or recommend sustainable curve lowering measures such as hand washing, avoid big crowds, close schools at HS and older, etc.
    -They say they are willing to tighten things if needed but they appear to have not needed to do anything extra.

    Their end point is to achieve immunity by infecting sufficient people in a semi-controlled way vs vs. waiting for a vaccine or super drug. It seems they are a few weeks away from this occurring in Stockholm and a few months away in the rest of Sweden. They have not yet overloaded their hospitals but they are pretty full.

    There is much I not aware of though. Like it would be very interesting to understand how they selected various curve reducing options and how much uncertainty they had.
  237. @UK
    Opportunity cost and being aware of the context is not whataboutism. It is just bringing some perspective to your monomania.

    “Opportunity cost and being aware of the context is not whataboutism.”

    You say tomato, I say to-mah-to.

  238. @HA
    "If you actually believed any of the nonsense in that comment, you would have spent your Woke life agitating for the global banning of cigarettes, alcohol, motor cars and the US military – all of which have direct, predictable, annual, global death tolls significantly higher than your current Doomer infatuation."

    If I wanted to swear off driving the way I've already lost interest in cigarettes and alcohol (I've never been a military enthusiast -- or oxy, in case you were thinking of bringing that up, and I'm certainly no advocate of Wokeness), I can choose to do so. Alcohol vapors emanating from the wino on the street next to me do not multiply exponentially the way a virus can. So no, I'm not going to be agitating for the global banning of cigarettes or alcohol, or any other such red herring you choose to name.

    That being said, I do confess to driving or taking a cab when no alternative presents itself. But I will note that the death rates associated with cars were hashed out roughly a century ago when millions were already collectively dying from a wide range of factors ranging from smallpox to Nazis, and probably for that reason, the high tolerance for those dead has been subsequently grandfathered into an age when we've collectively become more "K" and less "r" with regard to mass casualties. But if we were to try and correct that hypocrisy by saying "yes, we need to do more to prevent those, too", I suspect you wouldn't be in favor of that, either.

    Moreover, note that if Toyota were to come out with a malfunctioning gas pedal that killed only a few dozen people, even their sleaziest lawyers are not going to be dumb enough to try the "this is a small blip compared to all the other car deaths" defense. No, they'd still be expected to recall the item, no excuses. Same goes for scrapping seat belts, or air bags or any of the many other ways we've tried to put a dent in our high tolerance for highway deaths. So that's a lame argument, too.

    "Given how humans over-react to minuscule (and non-existent) threats, it makes no sense to assume that people would simply go about their normal lives if they were informed that there was a life-threatening pathogen doing the rounds."

    Plenty of people do plenty of things that "make no sense", and that includes plans to keep on keeping on with respect to their normal lives, virus or not. That apparently goes for Swedish Somali (40% of the Stockholm covid cases), Orthodox Jew (60% of the Israeli cases, though only 12% of the population), as well as those Evangelicals biting at the bit to return to their megachurches. If you doubt me, you should probably try to get to know some of those people better. As it is, I suspect the ideological bubble in which you shelter yourself is far more restrictive than any stay-at-home order. Ironic, but it would explain a lot.

    I’ve already lost interest in cigarettes and alcohol (I’ve never been a military enthusiast — or oxy, in case you were thinking of bringing that up, and I’m certainly no advocate of Wokeness), I can choose to do so. Alcohol vapors emanating from the wino on the street next to me do not multiply exponentially the way a virus can. So no, I’m not going to be agitating for the global banning of cigarettes or alcohol, or any other such red herring you choose to name.

    Fair enough. Are you also as sanguine about tuberculosis which kills over a million per year? If so, why?

    • Replies: @HA
    "If so, why?"

    There's a vaccine for TB. And apparently, it's harder to catch, if treated properly:


    Although tuberculosis is contagious, it's not easy to catch. You're much more likely to get tuberculosis from someone you live with or work with than from a stranger. Most people with active TB who've had appropriate drug treatment for at least two weeks are no longer contagious.
     
    Again, I will stress that I do not dispute that the most likely outcome of this disease is significantly less than initially feared (once the final counts are tallied, perhaps several years from now), especially if the data is averaged in the right way. I just think that's not really relevant. In statistical parlance, it's not the mode of the distribution that worries me nearly as much as what is in that worst-case tail. I mean, a round of Russian roulette is overwhelmingly safe and the most likely outcome by far is "no harm done". But it's still a stupid game to play simply because of that tail risk. The same goes for immigration, by the way -- even if it could be proven to me that a bunch of immigrants are unlikely to cause mass social disruption that would ultimately harm both old-stock and newcomers, the dire state of affairs in some of those unlikely outcomes is far too alarming to simply be shrugged off, the way that the "do nothing to prevent" contingent would have us do.
  239. anon[697] • Disclaimer says:
    @res

    How common are Kinsa thermometers in the general population?
     
    Information on that here:
    https://www.kinsahealth.co/the-demographics-behind-kinsa-insights-and-the-us-health-weather-map/

    Their demographics are not as unrepresentative as I would have expected. Part of that is probably due to: "One in every 5 Kinsa thermometers in the US has been distributed to a family in a Title 1 school participating in FLUency. "

    This is a data subset and has its own peculiarities.
     
    Yes. And it would be good to better understand those.

    If their data can be partitioned down to the county level, or better still the zip code level, I wager that some parts of Maryland or Michigan would show a lot of users, other parts would show few or no users.
     
    They do their maps at the county level so it is clear they have that. This graphic is a pretty good luck at their county representation. As I said, better than I expected.

    https://www.kinsahealth.co/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/Kinsa-Users-Compared-to-Rural-and-Urban-Populations-1024x633.png

    New cases mostly among people who don’t own a Kinsa device? Just a guess.
    Data subsets that are non-random can have problems.
     
    I could see that biasing the data, but I don't see it consistent with their data going to ZERO almost everywhere.

    Elsewhere I have speculated that it is a combination of:
    - Most Kinsa users have either recovered from the virus or are more likely to be isolating themselves.
    - New cases are under care so not using their Kinsa thermometers.

    – Most Kinsa users have either recovered from the virus or are more likely to be isolating themselves.
    – New cases are under care so not using their Kinsa thermometers.

    – The Doomers are right, and all the Kinsa users have perished along with everyone at Kinsa involved in data collection! AAAAAAaaaaaaaaah! Run away!

    Occam’s butterknife for the win.

  240. @res

    That data not especially meaningful without further context.
     
    There is a reason I include so many links in my comments. Feel free to follow the link in that one (and more from there if you like) then come back and have a real conversation about this.

    How do they define “flu-like illness”? Based on what? Self diagnosis? A doctor’s diagnosis? Testing? Sure a lot of people with flu symptoms now stay home. And people who do show up at a hospital are instantly suspected of having CoV.
     
    The TLDR version of following the links is they have a model which fits the historical temperature data from their smart thermometers to the CDC flu reports. Then they use their current data to estimate the "flu-like illness" for each area.

    Bear in mind that this is from a company that has a vested interest in the panic.
     
    That's a point worth remembering. One thing I find really interesting is that the Kinsa data is currently showing almost no illness in the entire country. And they have not made a blog post since 4/9 after having 10 from 3/23 to 4/9.

    How do we reconcile that (also see PS) with continuing new cases of COVID-19? I would expect deaths to keep coming given the lag involved, but where are the new cases coming from?

    P.S. For anyone interested, CDC flu surveillance:
    https://www.cdc.gov/flu/weekly/fluactivitysurv.htm

    There is a reason I include so many links in my comments. Feel free to follow the link in that one (and more from there if you like) then come back and have a real conversation about this.

    I did. And they don’t define what they mean. How do you define “flu-like illness” from remote temperature readings? That’s all the data they have. I don’t know. And they don’t say. You seem to be the one not having a serious conversation.

    • Replies: @res
    I gave you the TLDR version in that comment. Here it is again.

    The TLDR version of following the links is they have a model which fits the historical temperature data from their smart thermometers to the CDC flu reports. Then they use their current data to estimate the “flu-like illness” for each area.
     
    Was that not clear enough? If not, here is a longer version with more links which I wrote last week.
    https://www.unz.com/isteve/what-is-australia-doing-right/#comment-3844483

    You seem to be the one not having a serious conversation.
     
    The link in my original comment above had a single link in its text. To
    https://www.healthweather.us/?mode=Atypical
    If you had gone to that page (i.e. followed the links, as I suggested) you would have seen an "Overview and Methods" section. That contains multiple links, but it seems pretty obvious that the one you would want is:

    For details about our approach to determining typical and atypical illness levels, please review our technical approach document.
     
    That link contains a detailed explanation and references to three scientific papers if you want even more detail.

    Do you want me to pre-chew your food for you too?

    TLDR: Go read https://content.kinsahealth.com/covid-detection-technical-approach
    then come back with your thoughts on that if you want to have a serious conversation.
  241. @Hail
    That graph you posted, which is not sourced, contradicts the Swedish public health authority, which has deaths from 85 to 105 range between April 4/5 and April 15 (see below). From April 16 to April 22, there is a downward trend with almost each day lower than the last, and the average for the period April 16 to April 22 is less than half the peak period (April 4 to 15).

    The graph you post is also immediately suspicious because data seldom looks like that, with such dramatic spikes. There should be a smoother curve for something like this. I wonder what source whoever made that was using. I can take a guess about why a sudden "crash" shows up around April 12: Easter weekend. No, the hospitalized corona-patients didn't take the weekend off from dying, but recording authorities in charge of compiling the deaths probably did.

    Here is the graph from the Swedish Public Health Agency (via Folkhalsomyndigheten.se) of coronavirus deaths by day, pegged to the day the death occurred, which afaict is complete info through April 22, partial for April 23, and not yet released for April 24 and April 25 (current local time as of the time this graph was displayed on their website: early AM April 26):

    https://hailtoyou.files.wordpress.com/2020/04/corona-virus-deaths-per-day-in-sweden-thru-april-23.png
  242. @Steve Sailer
    But how is the weather in Guayquil? Hot and humid, right?

    “But how is the weather in Guayquil? Hot and humid, right?”

    Yup.

    Congratulations, Steve Sailer. You picked out the most extreme tropical datapoint and it really isn’t that bad.

    The thing is, I was very frustrated with the data out of Miami-Dade too, until the recent study showed extraordinarily high seroprevalence, leading to an infection fatality rate of 0.17 as you note.

    I think there is reason to believe Guayaquil has really high prevalence of COVID-19. This article
    https://www.arkansasonline.com/news/2020/mar/29/virus-hits-hard-in-ecuador-city-2020032/

    says the mayor and four other heads of suburbs have all tested positive. That isn’t even seropositivity but direct cases. And that was way back in March. That says to me that it’s really widespread there and Guayquil is very dense, maybe more than New York. In Ecuador more than 40% of tests wound up positive, a lot higher than New York’s 29%.

    Ecuador, where Guayquil is the largest city, lists 33 deaths per million. On a scatter plot I made of deaths per million versus latitude, this barely registers in a world where badly hit countries (i.e. the UK) have 10 times as many deaths per million.

    New York state by contrast has 1117 deaths per million. So New York, with its first world medicine and very high wealth is seeing a death rate from COVID that is 34 times as high as Equador.

    If the deaths from a contagious respiratory virus must be zero or else team panic wins, then this is a rigged game because mortality is the human condition. Respiratory failure is how a large share of old people die everywhere.

    Humidity is terribly protective, as evidenced by the fact that the very worst datapoint Steve Sailer can find anywhere in the tropics is getting toward herd immunity with only 3% of the rate of dying of temperate New York City.

    Numbers have to be put into perspective. Steve of all people should know that.

    The argument isn’t that humidity is a vaccine. The argument is that you are a lot better of with humidity than without.

    The tragedy is that all useful knowledge is tossed out in the panic. Just like how WHO rejected masks and every possible medicine because they aren’t perfect.

    • LOL: utu
    • Replies: @Mehen
    Agreed.

    Two statements come to mind:

    “The Perfect should not be the enemy of the Good”

    And regarding the hysterical CoronaPanickers’ desire to make everyone as afraid and isolated as them:

    “Misery loves company”
    , @Anonymous

    Humidity is terribly protective, as evidenced by the fact that the very worst datapoint Steve Sailer can find anywhere in the tropics is getting toward herd immunity with only 3% of the rate of dying of temperate New York City.
     
    Is humidity protective against tuberculosis?
    , @Steve Sailer
    "In Guayaquil, fatalities during the first two weeks of April were eight times higher than usual, the data indicates — a far greater rise than that of New York City, where fatalities were four times higher in recent weeks."

    https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/23/world/americas/ecuador-deaths-coronavirus.html

  243. I’m so old I remember when mask-wearing was going to make us just like Japan an South Korea.

    Remember this ‘masks vs no masks’ tweet? Clearly, the mass adoption of mask wearing, even if only partially adopted and semi-effectively worn, was going to be a critical moment in subduing the virus, right?

    CDC issued it’s ‘wear face coverings’ edict on April 3.

    OK, so now look at this website by Kevin Systrom that purports to calculate the rate of infection propagation (R0):

    https://rt.live/

    Move the slider on any state to April 3.

    If face masks were making a difference, one would think that the R(0) would have taken a noticeable step down sometime shortly thereafter. In more cases than not, it seems like early April marks the actual best readings of this value, and they’ve only gotten worse. California is an obvious example. Overall, IMO, there’s no evidence to be found that mask wearing, eg., at the grocery store or Walmart makes any measurable difference. What appears to have mattered is lockdowns and maybe social distancing. Mask wearing doesn’t seem to have incrementally added much.

    Maybe mask-wearing hasn’t been as widely adopted across the country as had been hoped, but I can say that here in San Diego, at least where I live, mask-wearing really picked up, and is now mandatory to get into the grocery store.

    Maybe the rt.live website is wrong about R(0) values, but show me some other source that has infections declining after the April 3 edict.

    In California, and here in San Diego County, hospitalizations basically flat to down a tiny bit in the last three weeks.

    What’s the explanation here?

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    How valid are Systrom's R0 estimates?
    , @utu
    "What’s the explanation here?" - Kevin Systrom' Ro's are mathematical phantasy constructs.
  244. @mousey
    Yeah, it'll come out that we shit holed our economy for an epidemic that is less lethal than either the opiod or annual flu epidemic. I don't get why SS joined the team on this one. There is a lot of statistical analysis required that is interesting. Maybe there is an opportunity to cash in on this if you can show you are a team player and can do math. Can't blame him for that.

    I don’t get why SS joined the team on this one.

    It’s almost as if it wasn’t immediately obvious what the correct response should’ve been in this situation (and Steve, being rational, wanted to err on the side of caution).

    It does seem our society overreacted (and yet a lot more people would probably be dead, had we not done so). Ingrates upset that Steve isn’t infallible, seem rather silly.

  245. @utu
    The red line spike is defined by two points: Week 14 and Week 15 if I am reading it correctly. They are about 5,500 and 7,500 above the red baseline, respectively. Weekly CoV deaths for UK can be obtained from the worldometers.info data by summing up the daily deaths:

    Week 14 ending April 5: 3,708
    Week 15 ending April 12: 5,678
    Week 16 ending April 19: 5,448

    The CoV weekly deaths are 2,000 lower weekly totals than excess mortality totals from Financial Times graph. So either CoV deaths (Week 14+15) are undercounted by 40% (13/9.2-1) or there is a second killer in UK that kills at 60% lower rate than CoV.

    The CoV weekly deaths are 2,000 lower weekly totals than excess mortality totals from Financial Times graph. So either CoV deaths (Week 14+15) are undercounted by 40%

    Exactly. Lombardy, NYC, and other hotspots all have this same under-counting problem because they often don’t bother testing corpses for the virus. There was a big article in the NYT about the situation in NYC.

    There are obviously both over-counting and under-counting problems, with the Flu Hoaxers regularly claiming that lots of the victims died “with Coronavirus” rather than because of it.

    That’s why these sorts of total-death charts from the FT and the NYT are so helpful. They largely address that complaint.

    • Agree: ben tillman
    • Replies: @DanHessinMD
    Hospitals haven't been overwhelmed almost anywhere in America. In fact hospitals are underutilized almost everywhere. If the projections of team hysteria had been anything close to accurate, hospitals would not be underutilized almost everywhere in America.
    , @Hail

    Flu Hoaxers regularly claiming that lots of the victims died “with Coronavirus” rather than because of it
     
    Are the European public health authorities who have been separating "deaths with" from "deaths from" part of the Flu Hoaxer Conspiracy? What about all the independent, highly-credentialed, decades-of-expertise independent experts who have been warning of the same problem?

    Logically, if a flu virus is reaching peak spread in a population during a given x-week period, isn't it only logical that y percent of those who would die anyway would be positive for the virus at death? This is not some wacko, alien-abduction-style belief.

    0.07% to 0.1% of the living die in any given month in the OECD, slightly more during peak-flu activity periods that occasionally occur; what if half are positive for the virus during peak periods of the virus' epidemic-curve?
    , @utu
    The treatment was unnecessary because I feel better fallacy used by the flu hoaxers.

    Deaths toll is not that hight => Lockdowns are unnecessary

    Death toll is high but it's been bad or worse before => Lockdowns are unnecessary

    The fact that w/o the countermeasures the death tolls would be much higher is omitted in the argument.

    An example from Russia Today


    Yes, the UK’s weekly death toll during Covid-19 is high. But it’s been worse in the past and we didn’t shut down the economy then
    https://www.rt.com/op-ed/486859-uk-coronavirus-deaths-economy/
     
    This article also throw in the collateral deaths issue:

    "The second explanation is the missing deaths have been indirectly caused by the lockdown in some way. Right now we can only speculate as to how the lockdown may be killing people"

  246. @DanHessinMD
    "But how is the weather in Guayquil? Hot and humid, right?"

    Yup.

    Congratulations, Steve Sailer. You picked out the most extreme tropical datapoint and it really isn't that bad.

    The thing is, I was very frustrated with the data out of Miami-Dade too, until the recent study showed extraordinarily high seroprevalence, leading to an infection fatality rate of 0.17 as you note.

    I think there is reason to believe Guayaquil has really high prevalence of COVID-19. This article
    https://www.arkansasonline.com/news/2020/mar/29/virus-hits-hard-in-ecuador-city-2020032/

    says the mayor and four other heads of suburbs have all tested positive. That isn't even seropositivity but direct cases. And that was way back in March. That says to me that it's really widespread there and Guayquil is very dense, maybe more than New York. In Ecuador more than 40% of tests wound up positive, a lot higher than New York's 29%.

    Ecuador, where Guayquil is the largest city, lists 33 deaths per million. On a scatter plot I made of deaths per million versus latitude, this barely registers in a world where badly hit countries (i.e. the UK) have 10 times as many deaths per million.

    New York state by contrast has 1117 deaths per million. So New York, with its first world medicine and very high wealth is seeing a death rate from COVID that is 34 times as high as Equador.

    If the deaths from a contagious respiratory virus must be zero or else team panic wins, then this is a rigged game because mortality is the human condition. Respiratory failure is how a large share of old people die everywhere.

    Humidity is terribly protective, as evidenced by the fact that the very worst datapoint Steve Sailer can find anywhere in the tropics is getting toward herd immunity with only 3% of the rate of dying of temperate New York City.

    Numbers have to be put into perspective. Steve of all people should know that.

    The argument isn't that humidity is a vaccine. The argument is that you are a lot better of with humidity than without.

    The tragedy is that all useful knowledge is tossed out in the panic. Just like how WHO rejected masks and every possible medicine because they aren't perfect.

    Agreed.

    Two statements come to mind:

    “The Perfect should not be the enemy of the Good”

    And regarding the hysterical CoronaPanickers’ desire to make everyone as afraid and isolated as them:

    “Misery loves company”

    • Replies: @DanHessinMD
    Mehen -- Yes, the perfect should not be the enemy of the good.

    AIDS was incredibly difficult but doctors didn't reject partial solutions because they were imperfect. The solution is now a cocktail of drugs, each one of which is partially effective, such that the combined effect is enormous.

    Humidity is very clearly one part of the puzzle. The correlations between climate and outcomes are large but that isn't the only part of the puzzle. Early HCQ may be one part. Azithromycin may be one part, especially for opportunistic concurrent bacterial infections. Nutrition clearly matters. Convalescent plasma looks promising.

    With AIDS, we didn't reject partial answers but embraced them as the progress that they were. In the end, a bunch of partial solutions taken together works for nearly everyone.

  247. @Anonymous

    The WHO has just announced that there is no proven immunity from having antibodies in your blood.
     
    The absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

    The virus has been available for research for 3+ months, establishing immunity if relatively simple but that still has not been done. However, there have been multiple reports of “reinfections”. So far the evidence I see is that if the virus does not kill you, it just stays “hidden” in your body and can potentially flare up when your immune system stops working well for any reason. Pretty much like herpes-1.

    Now, there might be multiple strains competing with each other – again not well established. But if this is true, getting a weaker strain might protect you from the killer strain. This can be potentially a good strategy, kind of like what they did at the end of 1700s with smallpox. But again, too many questions with no answers. If this is not a Manhattan project situation, I do not know what is. There should be a massive task made of brightest scientists not only from medicine but from physics, data analysis, etc. with unlimited resources to figure this out. Not some wild flailing and confusion.

    • Replies: @Anonymous

    The virus has been available for research for 3+ months, establishing immunity if relatively simple but that still has not been done.
     
    No, proving immunity is not simple and 3 months is not a very long time.

    However, there have been multiple reports of “reinfections”.
     
    That is extremely vague.

    It stands to reason that if you have antibodies, you should have some immunity. There’s been a promising recent experiment with macaques toward a vaccine.
  248. @Ryan Andrews
    Let's say we do have "a Civil War's worth" of deaths. Assuming zero overlap between those deaths and the deaths that are already baked-into-the-cake, we would be looking at the annual national death going from it's usual tic under 1% to 1.2%. And given the fact that throughout the Western World between a quarter and half of the all the deaths are in nursing homes, where the median, um, length of residence is four months in the US, it is safe to assume that there would be quite a bit of overlap between those totals.

    To me, numbers like that speak for themselves. Yes, it is a big deal in the sense that the CDC and NIH ought to be dedicating a large bulk of their time and resources toward battling the problem. But it is not a big deal in the sense that the general public should spend much time worrying about it, let alone having our lives indefinitely put-on-hold by it.

    Through all this madness, I have never heard anyone put forward any set of standards to justify this unprecedented disruption of life. Should we do this every time a virus coming along that threatens to rise the national death rate from 1% to 1.1%? I would think hope that everyone agrees that is ridiculous, but so where would the hysterics draw-their-line? 2%? 3%. I shutter to think how the public, aided by the contemptible press, will respond if an actually serious virus, something that threatens to kill ten percent of the population comes along. I suppose we'll all be forced to ride-it-out in induced comas.

    “Through all this madness, I have never heard anyone put forward any set of standards to justify this unprecedented disruption of life. Should we do this every time a virus coming along that threatens to rise the national death rate from 1% to 1.1%? I would think hope that everyone agrees that is ridiculous, but so where would the hysterics draw-their-line? 2%? 3%. ”

    The morons forming policy never bothered to ask these questions.

    No hospital administrator would survive very long if they were unable to prioritize resource allocation and say ‘no’ to some cases. You don’t spend half your budget to keep 102-year-olds alive while 3-year-olds die of cancer, for instance.

    Yet the elites like Dr Fauci seem unable to summon up the skills that any nurse with a Masters in hospital administration possesses. There’s a price on a life, and the price on older lives is lower than on younger ones.

    Given that a virus like this could come along every 2 years, this is a recipe for permanent lockdown.

    We have a UN representative warning of major disruptions in the food supply that could kill millions, a professor at King’s College pointing out that a lack of cancer screening is going to cost tens of thousands of lives, etc etc. None of this seems to stick in the heads of the weaklings who kvetch about this great plague of death.

    A funny presentation by a couple of US doctors is going around the internet, in which they argue that this thing is totally overblown. Most of the people who die have serious comorbidities.

    Let nature take its course and weed out the sickly, the weak, the elderly. If a few healthy people are caught along the way, then so be it. I wonder how these effeminate losers can watch a Nature documentary without screaming in terror.

    • Replies: @Lugash

    Let nature take its course and weed out the sickly, the weak, the elderly. If a few healthy people are caught along the way, then so be it. I wonder how these effeminate losers can watch a Nature documentary without screaming in terror.
     
    So a 50 year old ER doctor with diabetes or 40 nurse who has a weakened immune system from cancer treatment can get fucked. Or the 65 year old overweight convenience store worked who's trying to make it to retirement.

    The 'left' is certainly over-emoting during this, but there's this tough guy 'Let'em Die, save ARE ECONOMY' eugenics attitude that is far more revolting.
  249. Anonymous[333] • Disclaimer says:
    @DanHessinMD
    "But how is the weather in Guayquil? Hot and humid, right?"

    Yup.

    Congratulations, Steve Sailer. You picked out the most extreme tropical datapoint and it really isn't that bad.

    The thing is, I was very frustrated with the data out of Miami-Dade too, until the recent study showed extraordinarily high seroprevalence, leading to an infection fatality rate of 0.17 as you note.

    I think there is reason to believe Guayaquil has really high prevalence of COVID-19. This article
    https://www.arkansasonline.com/news/2020/mar/29/virus-hits-hard-in-ecuador-city-2020032/

    says the mayor and four other heads of suburbs have all tested positive. That isn't even seropositivity but direct cases. And that was way back in March. That says to me that it's really widespread there and Guayquil is very dense, maybe more than New York. In Ecuador more than 40% of tests wound up positive, a lot higher than New York's 29%.

    Ecuador, where Guayquil is the largest city, lists 33 deaths per million. On a scatter plot I made of deaths per million versus latitude, this barely registers in a world where badly hit countries (i.e. the UK) have 10 times as many deaths per million.

    New York state by contrast has 1117 deaths per million. So New York, with its first world medicine and very high wealth is seeing a death rate from COVID that is 34 times as high as Equador.

    If the deaths from a contagious respiratory virus must be zero or else team panic wins, then this is a rigged game because mortality is the human condition. Respiratory failure is how a large share of old people die everywhere.

    Humidity is terribly protective, as evidenced by the fact that the very worst datapoint Steve Sailer can find anywhere in the tropics is getting toward herd immunity with only 3% of the rate of dying of temperate New York City.

    Numbers have to be put into perspective. Steve of all people should know that.

    The argument isn't that humidity is a vaccine. The argument is that you are a lot better of with humidity than without.

    The tragedy is that all useful knowledge is tossed out in the panic. Just like how WHO rejected masks and every possible medicine because they aren't perfect.

    Humidity is terribly protective, as evidenced by the fact that the very worst datapoint Steve Sailer can find anywhere in the tropics is getting toward herd immunity with only 3% of the rate of dying of temperate New York City.

    Is humidity protective against tuberculosis?

  250. Anon[355] • Disclaimer says:
    @utu
    "... then the safest time to be exposed is during the humid summer months..." - Do we really know that the outcome for the very vulnerable depends on humidity once they get infected? I do not think so.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=youtu.be&v=HgIfusTARPg

    A well respected doctor in Madrid. Broad scope: the week’s lessons, personalized treatment according to 3 patient “profiles”, home tests limitations, public policy options weighed against economic costs. Broad rather than in depth, tho. Message: take more precautions than your obliged to.

    Word of mouth: hcq + ivermectin + azit + xeralto + arcoxia. They’re bombing patients, but this one worked. Anecdotal, I know.

    • Replies: @Anonymous

    Message: take more precautions than your obliged to.
     
    Did he say why?
  251. @Deckin
    Either my screen has gunk on it, but it looks like three other data points from earlier weeks and two from later weeks in the year and it looks less than one really high spike in the first or second week. So what were those? Are all viral outbreaks at or below average? We really do live in Lake Wobegon.

    Either my screen has gunk on it, but it looks like three other data points from earlier weeks and two from later weeks in the year and it looks less than one really high spike in the first or second week. So what were those? Are all viral outbreaks at or below average? We really do live in Lake Wobegon.

    Sure. The weekly mortality data goes back almost 50 years, so we’re talking about almost 2,600 weekly death datapoints. And across that huge time period, you can find a handful of examples in which the death-rates were about as high as the last two weeks. Presumably, it was the Hong Kong Flu or something like that.

    But don’t forget that these current large death-spikes are coming *despite* the Britain government having implemented the most extreme quarantine/lockdown measures in its national history. Meanwhile, nothing like that was every done about the Hong Kong Flu or previous waves. And the current wave is still going strong. And if you end the lockdown without effective control measures, you’ll probably see a really huge death-spike as the disease goes exponential again.

    • Replies: @Kyle
    Even with the lockdowns people are still leaving their homes to get groceries 2 or 3 times a week. How effective can that be? It’s not like the government is delivering food to people’s homes.
    , @Mr. Anon

    But don’t forget that these current large death-spikes are coming *despite* the Britain government having implemented the most extreme quarantine/lockdown measures in its national history.
     
    They didn't have all those Tik-Tok Nurse dance routines back then either.

    Maybe that's what's saving us.

    Do you not realize that your position - and the position of virtually every government around the World - is completely unfalsifiable? If we don't have a million deaths, it's because of the Lockdown. Who will find out if that is true or not? The CDC? Do you imagine that the CDC will fund a study that might reveal that they plunged the nation into a depression? Would any government ever do that?

    Do you not recognize that this "lockdown" - a term taken from prison administration - is a massive assault on our civil-liberties and that officialdom is already talking about making a lot of this more-or-less permanent? Do you not care about that? Not even a little?
  252. @Len
    I'm so old I remember when mask-wearing was going to make us just like Japan an South Korea.

    Remember this 'masks vs no masks' tweet? Clearly, the mass adoption of mask wearing, even if only partially adopted and semi-effectively worn, was going to be a critical moment in subduing the virus, right?

    https://twitter.com/jperla/status/1253095276161585152

    CDC issued it's 'wear face coverings' edict on April 3.

    OK, so now look at this website by Kevin Systrom that purports to calculate the rate of infection propagation (R0):

    https://rt.live/

    Move the slider on any state to April 3.

    If face masks were making a difference, one would think that the R(0) would have taken a noticeable step down sometime shortly thereafter. In more cases than not, it seems like early April marks the actual best readings of this value, and they've only gotten worse. California is an obvious example. Overall, IMO, there's no evidence to be found that mask wearing, eg., at the grocery store or Walmart makes any measurable difference. What appears to have mattered is lockdowns and maybe social distancing. Mask wearing doesn't seem to have incrementally added much.

    Maybe mask-wearing hasn't been as widely adopted across the country as had been hoped, but I can say that here in San Diego, at least where I live, mask-wearing really picked up, and is now mandatory to get into the grocery store.

    Maybe the rt.live website is wrong about R(0) values, but show me some other source that has infections declining after the April 3 edict.

    In California, and here in San Diego County, hospitalizations basically flat to down a tiny bit in the last three weeks.

    What's the explanation here?

    How valid are Systrom’s R0 estimates?

    • Replies: @Len
    I have no idea, but if they are, would you agree with my assertion?

    Here's another, different model he points to for sanity check. It also shows all the gains happening before masks were widely adopted.

    https://epiforecasts.io/covid/posts/national/united-states/

    SD County daily confirmed cases, and confirmed cases as % of total tests.

    The spike in early April was at least partially due to clearing a backlog. The spike in the last couple days is due to more testing.

    https://public.tableau.com/profile/len.glassner#!/vizhome/SanDiegoCountyCOVID-191DailyPositiveTestsand2OfDailyTestswithPositiveResult/Sheet12


    Daily hospital admissions in SD County:

    https://public.tableau.com/profile/len.glassner#!/vizhome/SanDiegoCountyCOVID-19DailyNewHospitalizationsandICUPatients/Sheet5

    San Diego County and California stats for Hospitalizations:

    https://public.tableau.com/profile/len.glassner#!/vizhome/SanDiegoCountyCaliforniaHospitalBedUtilization/Dashboard3


    If mask wearing in SD County or California has made a noteworthy difference overall, I don't see it.

    (Fervently hope it's helping in nursing homes. An outrageous disaster than never should have happened given what was known from the cruise ships and Wuhan about the age distribution of fatalities.)
  253. @Anonymous

    One other factor to consider in these surprising Miami-Dade results is the typical time between infection and death…
     
    Why do you consider them to be surprising?

    One other factor to consider in these surprising Miami-Dade results is the typical time between infection and death…

    Why do you consider them to be surprising?

    Well, the Santa Clara County and LA infection studies were basically garbage, due to non-random sampling.

    The NYC infection numbers seem the largest and most solid dataset, and they seem to imply an IFC of over 1%.

    So it’s strange that the IFC in Miami-Dade would appear to be so much lower.

  254. @DanHessinMD
    "But how is the weather in Guayquil? Hot and humid, right?"

    Yup.

    Congratulations, Steve Sailer. You picked out the most extreme tropical datapoint and it really isn't that bad.

    The thing is, I was very frustrated with the data out of Miami-Dade too, until the recent study showed extraordinarily high seroprevalence, leading to an infection fatality rate of 0.17 as you note.

    I think there is reason to believe Guayaquil has really high prevalence of COVID-19. This article
    https://www.arkansasonline.com/news/2020/mar/29/virus-hits-hard-in-ecuador-city-2020032/

    says the mayor and four other heads of suburbs have all tested positive. That isn't even seropositivity but direct cases. And that was way back in March. That says to me that it's really widespread there and Guayquil is very dense, maybe more than New York. In Ecuador more than 40% of tests wound up positive, a lot higher than New York's 29%.

    Ecuador, where Guayquil is the largest city, lists 33 deaths per million. On a scatter plot I made of deaths per million versus latitude, this barely registers in a world where badly hit countries (i.e. the UK) have 10 times as many deaths per million.

    New York state by contrast has 1117 deaths per million. So New York, with its first world medicine and very high wealth is seeing a death rate from COVID that is 34 times as high as Equador.

    If the deaths from a contagious respiratory virus must be zero or else team panic wins, then this is a rigged game because mortality is the human condition. Respiratory failure is how a large share of old people die everywhere.

    Humidity is terribly protective, as evidenced by the fact that the very worst datapoint Steve Sailer can find anywhere in the tropics is getting toward herd immunity with only 3% of the rate of dying of temperate New York City.

    Numbers have to be put into perspective. Steve of all people should know that.

    The argument isn't that humidity is a vaccine. The argument is that you are a lot better of with humidity than without.

    The tragedy is that all useful knowledge is tossed out in the panic. Just like how WHO rejected masks and every possible medicine because they aren't perfect.

    “In Guayaquil, fatalities during the first two weeks of April were eight times higher than usual, the data indicates — a far greater rise than that of New York City, where fatalities were four times higher in recent weeks.”

    https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/23/world/americas/ecuador-deaths-coronavirus.html

    • Replies: @Mehen
    Are you aware that Ecuador/Guayaquil have substandard hospital facilities which are in no way comparable to first world countries?

    Or that the videos of “bodies being burned” were really videos of TIRES being burned!

    Or that the “mass graves” cemetery video was an old clip from another country which the insurgent political party used to discredit the incumbent political party?

    Consult Worldometers and you will see Ecuador’s stats are actually quite modest compared to Bergamo or NYC

    , @Anon
    So back when Guayaquil videos started appearing, I asked casually to a little group, why Guayaquil and not Quito? The prompt answer was that though people arrived to both cities from Spain, in Guayaquil they had weddings. Super spreader events.

    Though number-crunching is useful and necessary, we are in one of those instances where word-of-mouth is particularly useful. Coronavirus is new and data unreliable (tests/death tallies), politicized (SANOFI vs Gilead) or incomplete (autopsies).

    I find it interesting that doctors are doing Zoom conferences to exchange covid info.
    , @DanHessinMD
    "In another city hospital, the Teodoro Maldonado Carbo, a doctor who did not want to give his name because he has been asked not to speak to the media, described what he said were scenes out of a horror film.

    There were corpses in wheelchairs, in stretchers and on the floor in the emergency area, he said. The smell was such that the staff refused to enter."

    Astonishing! That would really be an amazing photo. It would be the most viral picture in the world, really. And everyone has a smartphone.

    “The reek was insufferable,” he said. “The morgue was packed, as were the corridors — they were very long, and filled with corpses. The waiting room was filled with corpses.”

    That is quite the story.

    "Official figures show 128 died on April 15 in Guayas, the province that includes Guayaquil. That’s down from 614 on April 1."

    So suddenly western media shows up and its all so much better...

    "The wave of deaths is all the more disturbing for being impossible to explain. There is no obvious reason for Ecuador to be devastated far more than other countries. Its population is relatively young, and most people live in rural areas, both factors that should reduce the risk, said Jenny Garcia, a demographer who studies Latin America at the Institut National d’Études Démographiques in France."

    Yeah, this case does seem to stand all by its lonesome in comparison to the thousands of major cities and large towns across the entire tropical world.

    "“We will never know what the real number is, because there are no tests,” Ms. Viteri said."

    No tests? The list of diseases that can have breakouts in Ecuador is really really long.

    Also the president is named after the original communist. That seems to relevant. There are a lot of reasons why this would be a useful story, including international aid.

    Steve, are there any other examples like this? It looks really shaky. Brazil had the virus lurking for a long time and has people stacked in filthy crowded favalas, with worse crowding than in New York. It's fatality rate is meanwhile only 1/50th that of New York State.

    If the amazing benefit of humidity in this pandemic shown across the vast majority of data is to be ignored because of one counterexample, it might be good to take a look at that counterexample.

    This is what most of the other data show:
    https://www.marketwatch.com/story/this-stunning-chart-shows-the-coronavirus-spreading-slowly-in-tropical-countries-2020-03-17

  255. Anonymous[333] • Disclaimer says:
    @Black-hole creator
    The virus has been available for research for 3+ months, establishing immunity if relatively simple but that still has not been done. However, there have been multiple reports of "reinfections". So far the evidence I see is that if the virus does not kill you, it just stays "hidden" in your body and can potentially flare up when your immune system stops working well for any reason. Pretty much like herpes-1.

    Now, there might be multiple strains competing with each other - again not well established. But if this is true, getting a weaker strain might protect you from the killer strain. This can be potentially a good strategy, kind of like what they did at the end of 1700s with smallpox. But again, too many questions with no answers. If this is not a Manhattan project situation, I do not know what is. There should be a massive task made of brightest scientists not only from medicine but from physics, data analysis, etc. with unlimited resources to figure this out. Not some wild flailing and confusion.

    The virus has been available for research for 3+ months, establishing immunity if relatively simple but that still has not been done.

    No, proving immunity is not simple and 3 months is not a very long time.

    However, there have been multiple reports of “reinfections”.

    That is extremely vague.

    It stands to reason that if you have antibodies, you should have some immunity. There’s been a promising recent experiment with macaques toward a vaccine.

    • Replies: @Black-hole creator

    There’s been a promising recent experiment with macaques toward a vaccine.
     
    There have been promising experiments with HIV vaccines for monkeys for the past 10+ years. Where is that vaccine ?

    Had they simply commissioned MIT+Caltech with access to all available data, a lot more progress would have been made at least in understanding of what is going on. Not some wild rumors and "promising" experiments. The problem is that there is no"they" to get a coherent effort going.

    Strike that, there are plenty of "theys" to go around lately, just not the right kind of they.

  256. @Steve Sailer
    "In Guayaquil, fatalities during the first two weeks of April were eight times higher than usual, the data indicates — a far greater rise than that of New York City, where fatalities were four times higher in recent weeks."

    https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/23/world/americas/ecuador-deaths-coronavirus.html

    Are you aware that Ecuador/Guayaquil have substandard hospital facilities which are in no way comparable to first world countries?

    Or that the videos of “bodies being burned” were really videos of TIRES being burned!

    Or that the “mass graves” cemetery video was an old clip from another country which the insurgent political party used to discredit the incumbent political party?

    Consult Worldometers and you will see Ecuador’s stats are actually quite modest compared to Bergamo or NYC

    • Replies: @The one
    First time I've seen Steve Sailer using New York Times as his primary source. I knew something was up when people started posting videos of people collapsing in the street in Guayaquil (like in Wuhan)...
  257. @Ron Unz
    One other factor to consider in these surprising Miami-Dade results is the typical time between infection and death...

    Most estimates I'd seen had generally assumed 2-3 weeks, but there was a recent study claiming the mean-period is actually 4 weeks, and I'm starting to believe that may be correct.

    For example, California has had a very successful early lockdown, so we've had relatively few deaths, and I'd been starting to think we would probably come in well under 1500. But in the last week or so, our deaths have actually spiked, coming roughly a month after the lockdown. Maybe it's just due to a few nursing homes getting infected, or other such statistical artifacts. But I think the lag might be considerably longer than 3 weeks.

    So maybe we should wait another week or two for the current FL deaths to correspond to the measured infections and give us a better IFR.

    To me New York results are surprising and the Miami results are what I expected. New York is the only real city in America. New York makes every other American city look like a small town in comparison. What’s different about New York that caused the infection to be so deadly there?

    • Replies: @Anonymous

    New York is the only real city in America.
     
    NYC isn't even IN America as far as I am concerned. It's a metastatic growth of an European/Middle Eastern/Asian city that somehow broke off and got transplanted.

    The UN should be kicked out and sent to a neutral nation like Switzerland and the financial industry forcibly dispersed across the country and Manhattan real estate taxed to where Bill Gates couldn't pay that kind of money. Or hell, let it become its own country, much less city, and move the capital to the geographic center of the US. Let DC become a state-as long as we can get a couple more right leaning states too. The top of California has been wanting statehood for eighty years.
  258. @Len
    I'm so old I remember when mask-wearing was going to make us just like Japan an South Korea.

    Remember this 'masks vs no masks' tweet? Clearly, the mass adoption of mask wearing, even if only partially adopted and semi-effectively worn, was going to be a critical moment in subduing the virus, right?

    https://twitter.com/jperla/status/1253095276161585152

    CDC issued it's 'wear face coverings' edict on April 3.

    OK, so now look at this website by Kevin Systrom that purports to calculate the rate of infection propagation (R0):

    https://rt.live/

    Move the slider on any state to April 3.

    If face masks were making a difference, one would think that the R(0) would have taken a noticeable step down sometime shortly thereafter. In more cases than not, it seems like early April marks the actual best readings of this value, and they've only gotten worse. California is an obvious example. Overall, IMO, there's no evidence to be found that mask wearing, eg., at the grocery store or Walmart makes any measurable difference. What appears to have mattered is lockdowns and maybe social distancing. Mask wearing doesn't seem to have incrementally added much.

    Maybe mask-wearing hasn't been as widely adopted across the country as had been hoped, but I can say that here in San Diego, at least where I live, mask-wearing really picked up, and is now mandatory to get into the grocery store.

    Maybe the rt.live website is wrong about R(0) values, but show me some other source that has infections declining after the April 3 edict.

    In California, and here in San Diego County, hospitalizations basically flat to down a tiny bit in the last three weeks.

    What's the explanation here?

    “What’s the explanation here?” – Kevin Systrom’ Ro’s are mathematical phantasy constructs.

  259. @Ron Unz

    Either my screen has gunk on it, but it looks like three other data points from earlier weeks and two from later weeks in the year and it looks less than one really high spike in the first or second week. So what were those? Are all viral outbreaks at or below average? We really do live in Lake Wobegon.
     
    Sure. The weekly mortality data goes back almost 50 years, so we're talking about almost 2,600 weekly death datapoints. And across that huge time period, you can find a handful of examples in which the death-rates were about as high as the last two weeks. Presumably, it was the Hong Kong Flu or something like that.

    But don't forget that these current large death-spikes are coming *despite* the Britain government having implemented the most extreme quarantine/lockdown measures in its national history. Meanwhile, nothing like that was every done about the Hong Kong Flu or previous waves. And the current wave is still going strong. And if you end the lockdown without effective control measures, you'll probably see a really huge death-spike as the disease goes exponential again.

    Even with the lockdowns people are still leaving their homes to get groceries 2 or 3 times a week. How effective can that be? It’s not like the government is delivering food to people’s homes.

  260. @Steve Sailer
    How valid are Systrom's R0 estimates?

    I have no idea, but if they are, would you agree with my assertion?

    Here’s another, different model he points to for sanity check. It also shows all the gains happening before masks were widely adopted.

    https://epiforecasts.io/covid/posts/national/united-states/

    SD County daily confirmed cases, and confirmed cases as % of total tests.

    The spike in early April was at least partially due to clearing a backlog. The spike in the last couple days is due to more testing.

    https://public.tableau.com/profile/len.glassner#!/vizhome/SanDiegoCountyCOVID-191DailyPositiveTestsand2OfDailyTestswithPositiveResult/Sheet12

    Daily hospital admissions in SD County:

    https://public.tableau.com/profile/len.glassner#!/vizhome/SanDiegoCountyCOVID-19DailyNewHospitalizationsandICUPatients/Sheet5

    San Diego County and California stats for Hospitalizations:

    https://public.tableau.com/profile/len.glassner#!/vizhome/SanDiegoCountyCaliforniaHospitalBedUtilization/Dashboard3

    If mask wearing in SD County or California has made a noteworthy difference overall, I don’t see it.

    (Fervently hope it’s helping in nursing homes. An outrageous disaster than never should have happened given what was known from the cruise ships and Wuhan about the age distribution of fatalities.)

    • Replies: @Len
    Looking at the relative flat-lining (maybe slight downward bias) of hospitalization and ICU usage, it seems that the California hospitalization->ICU->death pipeline is largely intact. This even with nursing homes in stringent (no visitors, only staff) lockdown. If nursing homes are under control, how is CA maintaining the current levels of ICU occupancy?

    The bell curve IHME model seems to be dead.
    , @leterip
    Does it seem that these Ro's just around 1.0 in these two forecasts are in "no man's land"?

    Too high for our current approach that requires quickly reducing infection rates to the point where they can be controlled by massive testing and tracing. Wuhan, if I remember correctly got to R0=.35 and it still took them over 2 months to reduce the infections enough to begin opening up and controlling with testing, tracking and surveillance.

    Too low to be optimal for the Swedish approach of allowing as many infection as soon as practical with out swamping the healthcare system.
    , @Len
    Maybe this shows evidence of mask impact.

    CDC 'face-covering' guidance changed 4/3. They also issued new nursing home guidelines at the same time.

    USA daily confirmed case plot from JHU CSSE: Cases seemed to have plateaued after change in guidance. Coincidence or cause?

    https://twitter.com/len5742/status/1254983067459923968
  261. CJ says:
    @Thoughts
    The problem with Covid is that...

    No one is comparing it to anything. You are looking at these studies...Covid Causes Multiple Organ Failure...Covid Causes death Via Hypoxia

    But...

    Don't all the other nasty little bugs do the exact same thing?

    H1N1 would attack the lymphatic system and lower your body temperature so that it could replicate better...that's why so many people would feel better for a day or two and then get sicker

    Flus lead to Cytokine Storms which is your Body Eating Itself Whole

    Pneumonia is you drowning in your lungs! (?)

    You get the idea...when you look at Covid Studies in a Vacuum it looks Frighteningly Awful

    Until you realize...

    Oh all the other bugs do the same thing

    All the other bugs don’t kill the numbers of on the job workers that Covid-19 does. I posted on this previously, but I’m not going to redo all the links because it’s all easily searchable: hundreds of medical personnel, particularly in Italy, Britain and France, dozens of active duty NYPD, 68 NYC MTA transit workers. You just do not get numbers like this dead of flus and colds in a couple of months. This is neither an Andromeda Strain Black Plague nor just another flu.

    • Agree: Black-hole creator
    • Replies: @Thoughts
    Unless nyc transit workers were killed by purposefully bad medical care
  262. HA says:
    @Mehen

    I’ve already lost interest in cigarettes and alcohol (I’ve never been a military enthusiast — or oxy, in case you were thinking of bringing that up, and I’m certainly no advocate of Wokeness), I can choose to do so. Alcohol vapors emanating from the wino on the street next to me do not multiply exponentially the way a virus can. So no, I’m not going to be agitating for the global banning of cigarettes or alcohol, or any other such red herring you choose to name.
     
    Fair enough. Are you also as sanguine about tuberculosis which kills over a million per year? If so, why?

    “If so, why?”

    There’s a vaccine for TB. And apparently, it’s harder to catch, if treated properly:

    Although tuberculosis is contagious, it’s not easy to catch. You’re much more likely to get tuberculosis from someone you live with or work with than from a stranger. Most people with active TB who’ve had appropriate drug treatment for at least two weeks are no longer contagious.

    Again, I will stress that I do not dispute that the most likely outcome of this disease is significantly less than initially feared (once the final counts are tallied, perhaps several years from now), especially if the data is averaged in the right way. I just think that’s not really relevant. In statistical parlance, it’s not the mode of the distribution that worries me nearly as much as what is in that worst-case tail. I mean, a round of Russian roulette is overwhelmingly safe and the most likely outcome by far is “no harm done”. But it’s still a stupid game to play simply because of that tail risk. The same goes for immigration, by the way — even if it could be proven to me that a bunch of immigrants are unlikely to cause mass social disruption that would ultimately harm both old-stock and newcomers, the dire state of affairs in some of those unlikely outcomes is far too alarming to simply be shrugged off, the way that the “do nothing to prevent” contingent would have us do.

    • Replies: @Mehen

    “If so, why?”

    There’s a vaccine for TB. And apparently, it’s harder to catch, if treated properly:
     

    I’m afraid you miss the point.

    TB is an infectious disease, highly transmissible, requiring negative-pressure rooms in hospitals. And it kills far more than this new Coronavirus.

    Why do we not shut down the economy for TB in order to save those precious souls?

    Are we really so heartless?

    Or is the hysteria over Covid19 the result of...other...non-medical concerns?

  263. @Anonymous

    The virus has been available for research for 3+ months, establishing immunity if relatively simple but that still has not been done.
     
    No, proving immunity is not simple and 3 months is not a very long time.

    However, there have been multiple reports of “reinfections”.
     
    That is extremely vague.

    It stands to reason that if you have antibodies, you should have some immunity. There’s been a promising recent experiment with macaques toward a vaccine.

    There’s been a promising recent experiment with macaques toward a vaccine.

    There have been promising experiments with HIV vaccines for monkeys for the past 10+ years. Where is that vaccine ?

    Had they simply commissioned MIT+Caltech with access to all available data, a lot more progress would have been made at least in understanding of what is going on. Not some wild rumors and “promising” experiments. The problem is that there is no”they” to get a coherent effort going.

    Strike that, there are plenty of “theys” to go around lately, just not the right kind of they.

  264. @Mr. Anon

    There is a reason I include so many links in my comments. Feel free to follow the link in that one (and more from there if you like) then come back and have a real conversation about this.
     
    I did. And they don't define what they mean. How do you define "flu-like illness" from remote temperature readings? That's all the data they have. I don't know. And they don't say. You seem to be the one not having a serious conversation.

    I gave you the TLDR version in that comment. Here it is again.

    The TLDR version of following the links is they have a model which fits the historical temperature data from their smart thermometers to the CDC flu reports. Then they use their current data to estimate the “flu-like illness” for each area.

    Was that not clear enough? If not, here is a longer version with more links which I wrote last week.
    https://www.unz.com/isteve/what-is-australia-doing-right/#comment-3844483

    You seem to be the one not having a serious conversation.

    The link in my original comment above had a single link in its text. To
    https://www.healthweather.us/?mode=Atypical
    If you had gone to that page (i.e. followed the links, as I suggested) you would have seen an “Overview and Methods” section. That contains multiple links, but it seems pretty obvious that the one you would want is:

    For details about our approach to determining typical and atypical illness levels, please review our technical approach document.

    That link contains a detailed explanation and references to three scientific papers if you want even more detail.

    Do you want me to pre-chew your food for you too?

    TLDR: Go read https://content.kinsahealth.com/covid-detection-technical-approach
    then come back with your thoughts on that if you want to have a serious conversation.

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
    We know you are one of this sites preferred little pets. Gold star for you, little Fauntleroy!
    , @Mr. Anon
    And COVID-19 is a "Flu-like" illness, is it not? So now every Flu-like illness gets prestidigitated into COVID-19. Which isn't to say there are no actual COVID-19 cases. There are. But we have no real idea how many, your protestations to the contrary.

    Hey - given that you are now an "official source" - gold-star and all - are you part of the "American Pravda"?
    , @ic1000
    > Do you want me to pre-chew your food for you too?

    res, please delete that part of your comment.

    iSteve is generating longer threads, which is good (higher number of thoughtful comments) and bad (more dumb comments).

    I'm generally okay with the "let 'er rip" contingent, because the better ones are stress-testing the "very concerned" narrative(s).

    But the noise level is heading higher. I already have to skip lots of remarks, if the trend continues then this source will become more trouble than it's worth.

    Most people here aren't Bayesians, and they aren't looking for a Road to Damascus experience.
  265. @Len
    I have no idea, but if they are, would you agree with my assertion?

    Here's another, different model he points to for sanity check. It also shows all the gains happening before masks were widely adopted.

    https://epiforecasts.io/covid/posts/national/united-states/

    SD County daily confirmed cases, and confirmed cases as % of total tests.

    The spike in early April was at least partially due to clearing a backlog. The spike in the last couple days is due to more testing.

    https://public.tableau.com/profile/len.glassner#!/vizhome/SanDiegoCountyCOVID-191DailyPositiveTestsand2OfDailyTestswithPositiveResult/Sheet12


    Daily hospital admissions in SD County:

    https://public.tableau.com/profile/len.glassner#!/vizhome/SanDiegoCountyCOVID-19DailyNewHospitalizationsandICUPatients/Sheet5

    San Diego County and California stats for Hospitalizations:

    https://public.tableau.com/profile/len.glassner#!/vizhome/SanDiegoCountyCaliforniaHospitalBedUtilization/Dashboard3


    If mask wearing in SD County or California has made a noteworthy difference overall, I don't see it.

    (Fervently hope it's helping in nursing homes. An outrageous disaster than never should have happened given what was known from the cruise ships and Wuhan about the age distribution of fatalities.)

    Looking at the relative flat-lining (maybe slight downward bias) of hospitalization and ICU usage, it seems that the California hospitalization->ICU->death pipeline is largely intact. This even with nursing homes in stringent (no visitors, only staff) lockdown. If nursing homes are under control, how is CA maintaining the current levels of ICU occupancy?

    The bell curve IHME model seems to be dead.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    Right, the IHME just made up a rule that in their model the rates would decline as fast as they grow.

    Outside of the dubious Wuhan statistics, this often doesn't happen: e.g., Italy cases and deaths are declining, but not very fast.

  266. Anonymous[427] • Disclaimer says:
    @Kyle
    To me New York results are surprising and the Miami results are what I expected. New York is the only real city in America. New York makes every other American city look like a small town in comparison. What’s different about New York that caused the infection to be so deadly there?

    New York is the only real city in America.

    NYC isn’t even IN America as far as I am concerned. It’s a metastatic growth of an European/Middle Eastern/Asian city that somehow broke off and got transplanted.

    The UN should be kicked out and sent to a neutral nation like Switzerland and the financial industry forcibly dispersed across the country and Manhattan real estate taxed to where Bill Gates couldn’t pay that kind of money. Or hell, let it become its own country, much less city, and move the capital to the geographic center of the US. Let DC become a state-as long as we can get a couple more right leaning states too. The top of California has been wanting statehood for eighty years.

  267. @HA
    "If so, why?"

    There's a vaccine for TB. And apparently, it's harder to catch, if treated properly:


    Although tuberculosis is contagious, it's not easy to catch. You're much more likely to get tuberculosis from someone you live with or work with than from a stranger. Most people with active TB who've had appropriate drug treatment for at least two weeks are no longer contagious.
     
    Again, I will stress that I do not dispute that the most likely outcome of this disease is significantly less than initially feared (once the final counts are tallied, perhaps several years from now), especially if the data is averaged in the right way. I just think that's not really relevant. In statistical parlance, it's not the mode of the distribution that worries me nearly as much as what is in that worst-case tail. I mean, a round of Russian roulette is overwhelmingly safe and the most likely outcome by far is "no harm done". But it's still a stupid game to play simply because of that tail risk. The same goes for immigration, by the way -- even if it could be proven to me that a bunch of immigrants are unlikely to cause mass social disruption that would ultimately harm both old-stock and newcomers, the dire state of affairs in some of those unlikely outcomes is far too alarming to simply be shrugged off, the way that the "do nothing to prevent" contingent would have us do.

    “If so, why?”

    There’s a vaccine for TB. And apparently, it’s harder to catch, if treated properly:

    I’m afraid you miss the point.

    TB is an infectious disease, highly transmissible, requiring negative-pressure rooms in hospitals. And it kills far more than this new Coronavirus.

    Why do we not shut down the economy for TB in order to save those precious souls?

    Are we really so heartless?

    Or is the hysteria over Covid19 the result of…other…non-medical concerns?

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    515 TB deaths in US in 2017:

    https://www.cdc.gov/tb/publications/factsheets/statistics/tbtrends.htm

    , @epebble

    highly transmissible
     
    Tuberculosis is not highly transmissible. In fact, on a scale of infectious respiratory diseases, it ranks as the least infectious; the most infectious being measles. That is why there is always a great concern when somebody gets measles (usually by international travel or by contact with one), even though measles is not a deadly disease (for most people). Covid is more towards measles than Tuberculosis.

    Another factor: There are some powerful medications against tuberculosis since it is a Bacterial disease. (though it is true that there is a worrying trend in multi drug resistant tuberculosis cases, mostly due to not completing a course of treatment allowing drug resistance to develop ). In contrast, Covid is a RNA viral disease and our record with RNA virus is weak in terms of vaccine. There is no vaccine for Common Cold or HIV/AIDS. Vaccines against influenza are a crapshoot every year.
  268. @Mehen

    “If so, why?”

    There’s a vaccine for TB. And apparently, it’s harder to catch, if treated properly:
     

    I’m afraid you miss the point.

    TB is an infectious disease, highly transmissible, requiring negative-pressure rooms in hospitals. And it kills far more than this new Coronavirus.

    Why do we not shut down the economy for TB in order to save those precious souls?

    Are we really so heartless?

    Or is the hysteria over Covid19 the result of...other...non-medical concerns?

  269. @Len
    Looking at the relative flat-lining (maybe slight downward bias) of hospitalization and ICU usage, it seems that the California hospitalization->ICU->death pipeline is largely intact. This even with nursing homes in stringent (no visitors, only staff) lockdown. If nursing homes are under control, how is CA maintaining the current levels of ICU occupancy?

    The bell curve IHME model seems to be dead.

    Right, the IHME just made up a rule that in their model the rates would decline as fast as they grow.

    Outside of the dubious Wuhan statistics, this often doesn’t happen: e.g., Italy cases and deaths are declining, but not very fast.

    • Agree: ic1000
  270. @res
    I gave you the TLDR version in that comment. Here it is again.

    The TLDR version of following the links is they have a model which fits the historical temperature data from their smart thermometers to the CDC flu reports. Then they use their current data to estimate the “flu-like illness” for each area.
     
    Was that not clear enough? If not, here is a longer version with more links which I wrote last week.
    https://www.unz.com/isteve/what-is-australia-doing-right/#comment-3844483

    You seem to be the one not having a serious conversation.
     
    The link in my original comment above had a single link in its text. To
    https://www.healthweather.us/?mode=Atypical
    If you had gone to that page (i.e. followed the links, as I suggested) you would have seen an "Overview and Methods" section. That contains multiple links, but it seems pretty obvious that the one you would want is:

    For details about our approach to determining typical and atypical illness levels, please review our technical approach document.
     
    That link contains a detailed explanation and references to three scientific papers if you want even more detail.

    Do you want me to pre-chew your food for you too?

    TLDR: Go read https://content.kinsahealth.com/covid-detection-technical-approach
    then come back with your thoughts on that if you want to have a serious conversation.

    We know you are one of this sites preferred little pets. Gold star for you, little Fauntleroy!

    • Replies: @res
    So much for you wanting a serious conversation.

    P.S. The insults people choose tend to be very educational.
  271. @Steve Sailer
    I have a stock set of examples I've been using for many weeks of different businesses to show how different businesses fare: for example, golf courses are my go-to example of a business that will do well if the heavy hand of government hadn't stomped on them in some places and will come back strong when government lifts stupid bans. Movie theaters, in contrast, are less likely to come back strong as soon as local government allows them to.

    Optometrists are likely in better position than dentists.

    And so forth and so on.

    I am sure that the Las Vegas gambling casinos will be jammed the microsecond they’re allowed to reopen.

    • Replies: @Travis
    True and since most Gamblers seem to smoke they may have some protection from contracting coronavirus. Smokers are 70-80 percent less likely to test positive for COVID-19. Studies in China, France and the U.S. have documented a low proportion of smokers among COVID-19 patients (6% of patients in Wuhan, and 1% of patients in the U.S.) Taken together with the rest of the evidence, the association between current smoking and lower COVID-19 risk is starting to look statistically and clinically meaningful. There are now two big questions.Trials underway in France should help us answer that. https://medicalxpress.com/news/2020-04-france-nicotine-coronavirus.html
  272. @res
    I gave you the TLDR version in that comment. Here it is again.

    The TLDR version of following the links is they have a model which fits the historical temperature data from their smart thermometers to the CDC flu reports. Then they use their current data to estimate the “flu-like illness” for each area.
     
    Was that not clear enough? If not, here is a longer version with more links which I wrote last week.
    https://www.unz.com/isteve/what-is-australia-doing-right/#comment-3844483

    You seem to be the one not having a serious conversation.
     
    The link in my original comment above had a single link in its text. To
    https://www.healthweather.us/?mode=Atypical
    If you had gone to that page (i.e. followed the links, as I suggested) you would have seen an "Overview and Methods" section. That contains multiple links, but it seems pretty obvious that the one you would want is:

    For details about our approach to determining typical and atypical illness levels, please review our technical approach document.
     
    That link contains a detailed explanation and references to three scientific papers if you want even more detail.

    Do you want me to pre-chew your food for you too?

    TLDR: Go read https://content.kinsahealth.com/covid-detection-technical-approach
    then come back with your thoughts on that if you want to have a serious conversation.

    And COVID-19 is a “Flu-like” illness, is it not? So now every Flu-like illness gets prestidigitated into COVID-19. Which isn’t to say there are no actual COVID-19 cases. There are. But we have no real idea how many, your protestations to the contrary.

    Hey – given that you are now an “official source” – gold-star and all – are you part of the “American Pravda”?

    • Replies: @res

    And COVID-19 is a “Flu-like” illness, is it not? So now every Flu-like illness gets prestidigitated into COVID-19. Which isn’t to say there are no actual COVID-19 cases. There are. But we have no real idea how many, your protestations to the contrary.
     
    That is a weakness of their statistic. In the early phases of the epidemic it worked pretty well to assume COVID-19 caused the excess cases (i.e. departures from trend). But as the shutdowns progressed all infections decreased enough so it is hard to distinguish COVID-19 from flu (FWIW, my theory is that once the shutdowns started most of the cases were COVID-19 since it has a higher starting R0).

    They talk about this at the links I gave. At the final link in my comment search for "Application to COVID-19 Detection" Thanks for making it clear you never even bothered to follow them. You are just looking to vent and annoyed that I interrupted your venting.

    Hey – given that you are now an “official source” – gold-star and all – are you part of the “American Pravda”?
     
    Exactly the kind of comeback people use when they know they are wrong, but have to say SOMETHING.

    FWIW the gold star does not make me an official source. Just an indicator that Ron thought my comments were worth highlighting. If you had been paying attention you would have noticed that Ron and I have some differences in our views on COVID-19. Also some agreement, of course.
  273. @Mehen

    “If so, why?”

    There’s a vaccine for TB. And apparently, it’s harder to catch, if treated properly:
     

    I’m afraid you miss the point.

    TB is an infectious disease, highly transmissible, requiring negative-pressure rooms in hospitals. And it kills far more than this new Coronavirus.

    Why do we not shut down the economy for TB in order to save those precious souls?

    Are we really so heartless?

    Or is the hysteria over Covid19 the result of...other...non-medical concerns?

    highly transmissible

    Tuberculosis is not highly transmissible. In fact, on a scale of infectious respiratory diseases, it ranks as the least infectious; the most infectious being measles. That is why there is always a great concern when somebody gets measles (usually by international travel or by contact with one), even though measles is not a deadly disease (for most people). Covid is more towards measles than Tuberculosis.

    Another factor: There are some powerful medications against tuberculosis since it is a Bacterial disease. (though it is true that there is a worrying trend in multi drug resistant tuberculosis cases, mostly due to not completing a course of treatment allowing drug resistance to develop ). In contrast, Covid is a RNA viral disease and our record with RNA virus is weak in terms of vaccine. There is no vaccine for Common Cold or HIV/AIDS. Vaccines against influenza are a crapshoot every year.

  274. @Ron Unz

    Either my screen has gunk on it, but it looks like three other data points from earlier weeks and two from later weeks in the year and it looks less than one really high spike in the first or second week. So what were those? Are all viral outbreaks at or below average? We really do live in Lake Wobegon.
     
    Sure. The weekly mortality data goes back almost 50 years, so we're talking about almost 2,600 weekly death datapoints. And across that huge time period, you can find a handful of examples in which the death-rates were about as high as the last two weeks. Presumably, it was the Hong Kong Flu or something like that.

    But don't forget that these current large death-spikes are coming *despite* the Britain government having implemented the most extreme quarantine/lockdown measures in its national history. Meanwhile, nothing like that was every done about the Hong Kong Flu or previous waves. And the current wave is still going strong. And if you end the lockdown without effective control measures, you'll probably see a really huge death-spike as the disease goes exponential again.

    But don’t forget that these current large death-spikes are coming *despite* the Britain government having implemented the most extreme quarantine/lockdown measures in its national history.

    They didn’t have all those Tik-Tok Nurse dance routines back then either.

    Maybe that’s what’s saving us.

    Do you not realize that your position – and the position of virtually every government around the World – is completely unfalsifiable? If we don’t have a million deaths, it’s because of the Lockdown. Who will find out if that is true or not? The CDC? Do you imagine that the CDC will fund a study that might reveal that they plunged the nation into a depression? Would any government ever do that?

    Do you not recognize that this “lockdown” – a term taken from prison administration – is a massive assault on our civil-liberties and that officialdom is already talking about making a lot of this more-or-less permanent? Do you not care about that? Not even a little?

    • Agree: Manfred Arcane
    • Replies: @anon

    Do you not care about that? Not even a little?
     
    Ron's high functioning/autistic. His life is math, so don't expect too much.
    , @Tlotsi
    One should also consider that Mr Unz is independently wealthy, and Steve Sailer is a guy who sits around inside and writes columns for his daily crust. Is it really surprising that two guys who don't have to go out and work for a living are not all that concerned about that being curtailed?
    I suspect that most of the hysterical commenters are in similar circumstances, either retired, on disability, or in some other way insulated from the working world.
  275. Do truly vibrant societies invest scare resources in the young or the infirm? Discuss

    • Replies: @The Germ Theory of Disease
    It's a trick question: "truly vibrant societies," if they are /truly/ vibrant, do not invest at all. They just barge into White people's countries, and start complaining about slabery.
  276. @Len
    I have no idea, but if they are, would you agree with my assertion?

    Here's another, different model he points to for sanity check. It also shows all the gains happening before masks were widely adopted.

    https://epiforecasts.io/covid/posts/national/united-states/

    SD County daily confirmed cases, and confirmed cases as % of total tests.

    The spike in early April was at least partially due to clearing a backlog. The spike in the last couple days is due to more testing.

    https://public.tableau.com/profile/len.glassner#!/vizhome/SanDiegoCountyCOVID-191DailyPositiveTestsand2OfDailyTestswithPositiveResult/Sheet12


    Daily hospital admissions in SD County:

    https://public.tableau.com/profile/len.glassner#!/vizhome/SanDiegoCountyCOVID-19DailyNewHospitalizationsandICUPatients/Sheet5

    San Diego County and California stats for Hospitalizations:

    https://public.tableau.com/profile/len.glassner#!/vizhome/SanDiegoCountyCaliforniaHospitalBedUtilization/Dashboard3


    If mask wearing in SD County or California has made a noteworthy difference overall, I don't see it.

    (Fervently hope it's helping in nursing homes. An outrageous disaster than never should have happened given what was known from the cruise ships and Wuhan about the age distribution of fatalities.)

    Does it seem that these Ro’s just around 1.0 in these two forecasts are in “no man’s land”?

    Too high for our current approach that requires quickly reducing infection rates to the point where they can be controlled by massive testing and tracing. Wuhan, if I remember correctly got to R0=.35 and it still took them over 2 months to reduce the infections enough to begin opening up and controlling with testing, tracking and surveillance.

    Too low to be optimal for the Swedish approach of allowing as many infection as soon as practical with out swamping the healthcare system.

    • Agree: Len
  277. @Mehen
    The main error in your screed is that, as far as I’m aware, no one on this site has advocated a “let’s do nothing” approach. Just that the official response has been way out of proportion to the actual danger. Now, they may be right or they may be wrong, but at least characterize their position fairly, eh?

    For the record I’m pretty sure I did advocate a do-nothing approach.

  278. @Steve Sailer
    the “let er rip” approach simply means allowing most people to be infected as soon as practical (while trying not to overwhelm hospitals, etc).

    How does that work?

    Not sure this what you were asking but ….

    What Sweden did to implement this approach included the following that I am aware of:

    -Triple Covid treatment capacity
    -Protect nursing homes (although they state they screwed up a bit here) and encourage other vulnerable to self-isolate
    -Implement or recommend sustainable curve lowering measures such as hand washing, avoid big crowds, close schools at HS and older, etc.
    -They say they are willing to tighten things if needed but they appear to have not needed to do anything extra.

    Their end point is to achieve immunity by infecting sufficient people in a semi-controlled way vs vs. waiting for a vaccine or super drug. It seems they are a few weeks away from this occurring in Stockholm and a few months away in the rest of Sweden. They have not yet overloaded their hospitals but they are pretty full.

    There is much I not aware of though. Like it would be very interesting to understand how they selected various curve reducing options and how much uncertainty they had.

  279. @Kratoklastes

    What do you think it would be like without the restrictions? My guesstimate is a Civil War’s worth.
     
    Your guesstimate based on what?

    The best evidence we have is that the 'restrictions' were imposed far too late to make a difference, if the start date (globally) is earlier than January 15th 2020 and the initial R[0] is anywhere above 2.0

    As I have said from the get-go: everyone discovered the word 'exponential' in February (or re-discovered it, if they did year 9 maths), but fuck-all people [re-]discovered the logistic function.

    Logistic functions look a lot like ZOMFG!! EXPERNENSHUL!! functions, until they hit their second 'knee' - at which point they flatten (sometimes rather abruptly)... endogenously (including as a result of people making individual decisions in response to perceived risk).

    None of this is rocket surgery.

    All the logistic curves flattened well before endemicity, and the flattening coincided with increases in average daytime temperatures in the Wrong (Northern) Hemisphere. There was the odd 'blip' (e.g., N'Awlins; some funeral in Jaw-ja etc) where some other shit happened.

    In other news: irony finally laid its deathly-cold finger on my shoulder.

    I have coronavirus.

    Turns out it's not "the" coronavirus.

    I have a cold - which as we all know is caused by a coronavirus.

    Still... in a day or so I will be able to bray about being a 'coronavirus survivor'.

    I might write a riveting, first-person testimony, giving great details of my personal triumph over seemingly-insurmountable odds.

    Would it be 'stolen valour' to walk the streets dressed in scrubs bought off eBay?

    KEK

    I am sorry you have Covid. I hope it is not severe. All the best.

  280. @Mr. Anon

    But don’t forget that these current large death-spikes are coming *despite* the Britain government having implemented the most extreme quarantine/lockdown measures in its national history.
     
    They didn't have all those Tik-Tok Nurse dance routines back then either.

    Maybe that's what's saving us.

    Do you not realize that your position - and the position of virtually every government around the World - is completely unfalsifiable? If we don't have a million deaths, it's because of the Lockdown. Who will find out if that is true or not? The CDC? Do you imagine that the CDC will fund a study that might reveal that they plunged the nation into a depression? Would any government ever do that?

    Do you not recognize that this "lockdown" - a term taken from prison administration - is a massive assault on our civil-liberties and that officialdom is already talking about making a lot of this more-or-less permanent? Do you not care about that? Not even a little?

    Do you not care about that? Not even a little?

    Ron’s high functioning/autistic. His life is math, so don’t expect too much.

  281. @Mehen
    Are you aware that Ecuador/Guayaquil have substandard hospital facilities which are in no way comparable to first world countries?

    Or that the videos of “bodies being burned” were really videos of TIRES being burned!

    Or that the “mass graves” cemetery video was an old clip from another country which the insurgent political party used to discredit the incumbent political party?

    Consult Worldometers and you will see Ecuador’s stats are actually quite modest compared to Bergamo or NYC

    First time I’ve seen Steve Sailer using New York Times as his primary source. I knew something was up when people started posting videos of people collapsing in the street in Guayaquil (like in Wuhan)…

  282. Anonymous[365] • Disclaimer says:
    @Lowe
    "You should try thinking for yourself," says the guy whose opinion matches the consensus of goodthinkers and Model UN types everywhere.

    Isn't it strange how the more data comes out about this, the more wrong that consensus seems to be?

    COVID-19 is plausibly the result of an internal attempt at Wuhan’s Level 4 facility to investigate self-propagating vaccines. Whoever assembled it put in at least 3 HIV RNA sequences and one SARS RNA sequence. I’ve seen mention of reports that other RNA sequences were added.

    The resulting organism is something from outside evolution. It is also outside human genetic engineering. I do not believe that it was designed to do what it is demonstrably doing — knowledge of the human genome and cell biochemistry is simply too rudimentary, on the level of statistical correlation between assemblages of hundreds of genes with functional effects such as height, or on the correlation between on mutated gene and a genetic disease. To design specific effects, one would need a causal chain described in terms of physical chemical intermediate steps from gene to result. That chain isn’t known, it’s just too complex to understand now.

    When people do not know what to do, they do what they know. That rule applies to COVID-19 responses so far. Even foolish responses have been implemented, apparently just to present the appearance of control. The idea of local lockdown, for example, is plausible when 2/3 of new cases are from asymptomatic carriers. Prohibition of travel from disease hotspots seems to be a good action. However, it was a reflex action that will likely destroy the global trade network, destroy much of the national trade networks, and cause severe casualties to countries that depend on foreign exchange for food.

    All of the above was a panic response of people who were facing a completely unknown RNA virus; they essentially imitated China’s actions for want of any other precedent to follow. It’s difficult to say what else could have been done, considering the nature of the threat.

    Even today, we don’t know what to do. A simple one digit precision calculation shows that an increase from 5% infection to 80% infection (the 80% is probably low) will multiply cumulative death rates from present values to bout 16 times their present value. Anybody here want to say “do that” and be criticized and sued for it later on? The establishment everywhere appears to be ignoring the death increase and hoping that nobody will notice (https://aebrain.blogspot.com/2003/10/and-perhaps-horse-will-learn-to-sing.html).

    COVID-19 appears likely to destroy what’s left of government legitimacy and initiate world wide starvation, but it is also true that everybody involved has acted as humans have always acted. In a way, all that has happened is just the final end of the WW II engendered myth of a world of human omniscient ability to manage reality. And it’s about time.

    • Replies: @Black-hole creator

    COVID-19 is plausibly the result of an internal attempt at Wuhan’s Level 4 facility to investigate self-propagating vaccines. Whoever assembled it put in at least 3 HIV RNA sequences and one SARS RNA sequence. I’ve seen mention of reports that other RNA sequences were added.
     
    Funny how the virus genome and its origins in general have not been a focal point of the official narrative. I, for one, would be very interested in understanding what makes this version of corona so strange and different.

    I think, I saw an early report from India about its similarities to the HIV virus. Trump has also let slip a few hints because he has no filter between brain and mouth. But that's that. Either nobody really knows or smart to figure this out, or they are keeping a lid on this. I also saw reports that the Chinese habit of eating strange creatures from Mars and the now infamous exotic market are likely not to blame, but again this is not a focal point of the narrative.
  283. @Steve Sailer
    I thought Guayaquil, a port in Ecuador, might have surprisingly cool weather like Lima, Peru does, but the average high temperature in March-April is 90 F and it rains 20 inches on average over those 61 days.

    Manaus, Brazil, April 23.2°C min – 30.7°C max, RH 87%

    https://www.npr.org/sections/coronavirus-live-updates/2020/04/23/842802500/living-through-a-nightmare-brazil-s-manaus-digs-a-mass-grave-as-deaths-mount
    The mayor’s office confirmed to NPR that there have been 340 burials just in the past three days. In most cases, the cause of death was listed as unknown, said a city hall spokeswoman.

    City authorities are in little doubt that COVID-19 victims account for most of the spike. This means the virus is taking a far deadlier toll on Manaus than the official count of 172 virus-related deaths suggests.

    • Replies: @DanHessinMD
    This is a city of 2 million people. The article says there are 100 deaths a day instead of the average of 30, and this in this is in the middle of a pandemic. There is a global search for the worst scenarios and none are very apocalyptic. A bad plague day would have featured deaths at 1000 times the normal rate.
  284. @res
    I gave you the TLDR version in that comment. Here it is again.

    The TLDR version of following the links is they have a model which fits the historical temperature data from their smart thermometers to the CDC flu reports. Then they use their current data to estimate the “flu-like illness” for each area.
     
    Was that not clear enough? If not, here is a longer version with more links which I wrote last week.
    https://www.unz.com/isteve/what-is-australia-doing-right/#comment-3844483

    You seem to be the one not having a serious conversation.
     
    The link in my original comment above had a single link in its text. To
    https://www.healthweather.us/?mode=Atypical
    If you had gone to that page (i.e. followed the links, as I suggested) you would have seen an "Overview and Methods" section. That contains multiple links, but it seems pretty obvious that the one you would want is:

    For details about our approach to determining typical and atypical illness levels, please review our technical approach document.
     
    That link contains a detailed explanation and references to three scientific papers if you want even more detail.

    Do you want me to pre-chew your food for you too?

    TLDR: Go read https://content.kinsahealth.com/covid-detection-technical-approach
    then come back with your thoughts on that if you want to have a serious conversation.

    > Do you want me to pre-chew your food for you too?

    res, please delete that part of your comment.

    iSteve is generating longer threads, which is good (higher number of thoughtful comments) and bad (more dumb comments).

    I’m generally okay with the “let ‘er rip” contingent, because the better ones are stress-testing the “very concerned” narrative(s).

    But the noise level is heading higher. I already have to skip lots of remarks, if the trend continues then this source will become more trouble than it’s worth.

    Most people here aren’t Bayesians, and they aren’t looking for a Road to Damascus experience.

    • Replies: @res

    res, please delete that part of your comment.
     
    The edit window is long past. Agreed it was a bit much. I just get really tired of people who make assertions without providing evidence, then don't even look at the evidence I give them, then accuse me of not being serious. Plus the insults. Do you disagree that my analogy was apt? I considered the insulting aspect of it an appropriate return of the "favor."

    But the noise level is heading higher. I already have to skip lots of remarks, if the trend continues then this source will become more trouble than it’s worth.
     
    Also agreed about this. But please compare the signal to noise ratio in Mr. Anon's comments with that in mine then explain why you are talking to me and not him.

    Most people here aren’t Bayesians, and they aren’t looking for a Road to Damascus experience.
     
    Also agreed. I think we are the worse for your first sentence being as true as it is. As for your second sentence, most people here just seem to be interesting in venting. I think it much better to try to evaluate the available evidence in a Bayesian fashion to try to determine what should be done rather than just venting. So again, why are you criticizing me in preference to the real noise generators here?

    You are a thoughtful enough commenter that those are sincere questions. One thing that frustrates me in life is people seeming to want to hold me to a higher standard than others around me. That seems to be happening here.
    , @Mr. Anon
    He's a Gold Star Boy. I guess that's like a Gold Star Family. They're above criticism.
  285. @The one
    Do truly vibrant societies invest scare resources in the young or the infirm? Discuss

    It’s a trick question: “truly vibrant societies,” if they are /truly/ vibrant, do not invest at all. They just barge into White people’s countries, and start complaining about slabery.

  286. @Ancient Briton
    BTW It's Oxford Brookes University (former polytechnic) not the ancient one.

    BTW It’s Oxford Brookes University (former polytechnic) not the ancient one.

    Now that is extra funny.

    By the way, the byline now reads

    Dr Emily Cousens researches vulnerability and gender at Oxford Brookes university and teaches on the women’s studies masters course at University of Oxford.

    Seems like someone else noticed too. How embarrassing.

  287. Anon[409] • Disclaimer says:
    @Steve Sailer
    "In Guayaquil, fatalities during the first two weeks of April were eight times higher than usual, the data indicates — a far greater rise than that of New York City, where fatalities were four times higher in recent weeks."

    https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/23/world/americas/ecuador-deaths-coronavirus.html

    So back when Guayaquil videos started appearing, I asked casually to a little group, why Guayaquil and not Quito? The prompt answer was that though people arrived to both cities from Spain, in Guayaquil they had weddings. Super spreader events.

    Though number-crunching is useful and necessary, we are in one of those instances where word-of-mouth is particularly useful. Coronavirus is new and data unreliable (tests/death tallies), politicized (SANOFI vs Gilead) or incomplete (autopsies).

    I find it interesting that doctors are doing Zoom conferences to exchange covid info.

  288. @Ron Unz

    The CoV weekly deaths are 2,000 lower weekly totals than excess mortality totals from Financial Times graph. So either CoV deaths (Week 14+15) are undercounted by 40%
     
    Exactly. Lombardy, NYC, and other hotspots all have this same under-counting problem because they often don't bother testing corpses for the virus. There was a big article in the NYT about the situation in NYC.

    There are obviously both over-counting and under-counting problems, with the Flu Hoaxers regularly claiming that lots of the victims died "with Coronavirus" rather than because of it.

    That's why these sorts of total-death charts from the FT and the NYT are so helpful. They largely address that complaint.

    Hospitals haven’t been overwhelmed almost anywhere in America. In fact hospitals are underutilized almost everywhere. If the projections of team hysteria had been anything close to accurate, hospitals would not be underutilized almost everywhere in America.

    • Agree: Manfred Arcane
  289. @utu
    Manaus, Brazil, April 23.2°C min - 30.7°C max, RH 87%

    https://www.npr.org/sections/coronavirus-live-updates/2020/04/23/842802500/living-through-a-nightmare-brazil-s-manaus-digs-a-mass-grave-as-deaths-mount
    The mayor's office confirmed to NPR that there have been 340 burials just in the past three days. In most cases, the cause of death was listed as unknown, said a city hall spokeswoman.

    City authorities are in little doubt that COVID-19 victims account for most of the spike. This means the virus is taking a far deadlier toll on Manaus than the official count of 172 virus-related deaths suggests.

     

    This is a city of 2 million people. The article says there are 100 deaths a day instead of the average of 30, and this in this is in the middle of a pandemic. There is a global search for the worst scenarios and none are very apocalyptic. A bad plague day would have featured deaths at 1000 times the normal rate.

    • Replies: @adreadline

    This is a city of 2 million people. The article says there are 100 deaths a day instead of the average of 30, and this in this is in the middle of a pandemic. There is a global search for the worst scenarios and none are very apocalyptic. A bad plague day would have featured deaths at 1000 times the normal rate.
     
    "People are dying at several times the normal rate! We had over a hundred deaths today! Help us!''
    "It can't be that bad, ma'am. If it were really that bad, we'd have 30,000 deaths a day''
    "You sure? Isn't that an absurd number?''
    "No, it isn't. Trust me, I'm a doctor. It's important to keep a gardez-votre-sang-froid mentality''
    , @utu
    You do not know they are in the middle of pandemic. The daily death rate may keep growing until they indeed get to the middle of a pandemic. 1000 times the normal rate is hyperbole, right? It would not be sustainable, would would run pout of people pretty soon. I did not look for the worst scenarios but just bad enough and in tropics to question your humidity uber alles spiel.
  290. @Anonymous

    One other factor to consider in these surprising Miami-Dade results is the typical time between infection and death…
     
    Why do you consider them to be surprising?

    Writers toss around “surprising” and “unexpectedly” like Baskin-Robbins tosses around nuts and sprinkles

  291. @Mehen
    Agreed.

    Two statements come to mind:

    “The Perfect should not be the enemy of the Good”

    And regarding the hysterical CoronaPanickers’ desire to make everyone as afraid and isolated as them:

    “Misery loves company”

    Mehen — Yes, the perfect should not be the enemy of the good.

    AIDS was incredibly difficult but doctors didn’t reject partial solutions because they were imperfect. The solution is now a cocktail of drugs, each one of which is partially effective, such that the combined effect is enormous.

    Humidity is very clearly one part of the puzzle. The correlations between climate and outcomes are large but that isn’t the only part of the puzzle. Early HCQ may be one part. Azithromycin may be one part, especially for opportunistic concurrent bacterial infections. Nutrition clearly matters. Convalescent plasma looks promising.

    With AIDS, we didn’t reject partial answers but embraced them as the progress that they were. In the end, a bunch of partial solutions taken together works for nearly everyone.

  292. @Anonymous
    COVID-19 is plausibly the result of an internal attempt at Wuhan's Level 4 facility to investigate self-propagating vaccines. Whoever assembled it put in at least 3 HIV RNA sequences and one SARS RNA sequence. I've seen mention of reports that other RNA sequences were added.

    The resulting organism is something from outside evolution. It is also outside human genetic engineering. I do not believe that it was designed to do what it is demonstrably doing -- knowledge of the human genome and cell biochemistry is simply too rudimentary, on the level of statistical correlation between assemblages of hundreds of genes with functional effects such as height, or on the correlation between on mutated gene and a genetic disease. To design specific effects, one would need a causal chain described in terms of physical chemical intermediate steps from gene to result. That chain isn't known, it's just too complex to understand now.

    When people do not know what to do, they do what they know. That rule applies to COVID-19 responses so far. Even foolish responses have been implemented, apparently just to present the appearance of control. The idea of local lockdown, for example, is plausible when 2/3 of new cases are from asymptomatic carriers. Prohibition of travel from disease hotspots seems to be a good action. However, it was a reflex action that will likely destroy the global trade network, destroy much of the national trade networks, and cause severe casualties to countries that depend on foreign exchange for food.

    All of the above was a panic response of people who were facing a completely unknown RNA virus; they essentially imitated China's actions for want of any other precedent to follow. It's difficult to say what else could have been done, considering the nature of the threat.


    Even today, we don't know what to do. A simple one digit precision calculation shows that an increase from 5% infection to 80% infection (the 80% is probably low) will multiply cumulative death rates from present values to bout 16 times their present value. Anybody here want to say "do that" and be criticized and sued for it later on? The establishment everywhere appears to be ignoring the death increase and hoping that nobody will notice (https://aebrain.blogspot.com/2003/10/and-perhaps-horse-will-learn-to-sing.html).

    COVID-19 appears likely to destroy what's left of government legitimacy and initiate world wide starvation, but it is also true that everybody involved has acted as humans have always acted. In a way, all that has happened is just the final end of the WW II engendered myth of a world of human omniscient ability to manage reality. And it's about time.

    COVID-19 is plausibly the result of an internal attempt at Wuhan’s Level 4 facility to investigate self-propagating vaccines. Whoever assembled it put in at least 3 HIV RNA sequences and one SARS RNA sequence. I’ve seen mention of reports that other RNA sequences were added.

    Funny how the virus genome and its origins in general have not been a focal point of the official narrative. I, for one, would be very interested in understanding what makes this version of corona so strange and different.

    I think, I saw an early report from India about its similarities to the HIV virus. Trump has also let slip a few hints because he has no filter between brain and mouth. But that’s that. Either nobody really knows or smart to figure this out, or they are keeping a lid on this. I also saw reports that the Chinese habit of eating strange creatures from Mars and the now infamous exotic market are likely not to blame, but again this is not a focal point of the narrative.

  293. @res

    This seems to hold for all issues over all time periods. Although it must have been said before, I don’t know who to credit.
     
    "Odin's Law" works since the observation goes back to mythological times. Plus, you would not want to name it after the actual discoverer. That would mean you violated Stigler's law of eponymy.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stigler%27s_law_of_eponymy

    Odin’s Law: “No matter how much data comes out, everyone on all sides remains convinced he has been right all along.”

    “Odin’s law” works since the observation goes back to mythological times.

    Yes, but when I used it in mythological times, nobody knew what “data” was.

  294. @CJ
    All the other bugs don’t kill the numbers of on the job workers that Covid-19 does. I posted on this previously, but I’m not going to redo all the links because it’s all easily searchable: hundreds of medical personnel, particularly in Italy, Britain and France, dozens of active duty NYPD, 68 NYC MTA transit workers. You just do not get numbers like this dead of flus and colds in a couple of months. This is neither an Andromeda Strain Black Plague nor just another flu.

    Unless nyc transit workers were killed by purposefully bad medical care

  295. @The Germ Theory of Disease
    Z1. The Covid-19 virus is quite real (viz not a hoax), it is different from the ordinary flu in important ways, and it is very dangerous to certain populations, and not so dangerous to other populations.

    2. Had Donald Trump not been president, the publicly-organized and -enforced response to a real but not cataclysmic public health threat would have been rational, orderly, efficient, most likely effective, with a sound feedback loop for adjustment and a sane, gardez-votre-sang-froid mentality as seen in pandemics past.

    2a. Examples of rational and orderly responses would have included: early and very strict curtailment of all travel to and from China, and from East Asia generally, with strict quarantines and contact monitoring for returning US citizens; stiff quarantine procedures for the elderly, other at-risk populations, and identifiable "super-spreader" entities; and stern but rational recommendations for everyone else. Life goes on, economy stays normal, a slightly-larger but not catastrophic number of older and infirm people die, Wheel of Life, listen to some Jacques Brel and then move on.

    2b. Importantly, a major feature of a rational public-health response would have been a unified, non-politicized, clearly explained stance from the entire government, speaking in a single calm, agreed-upon voice. Not the Speaker of the House tearing up the President's speech at the State of the UNION address.

    3. But Donald Trump is the President, and therefore here we are, stuck in chaos, economic free-fall, mass hysteria and morbid sentimentality instead of clear thinking.

    3a. This course of action was deliberately, willfully and maliciously chosen, in virtual unanimity, by our leading classes: government, media, academia, judicial and so on. The clear purpose of this choice was to launch yet another coup attempt against the presidency of Donald Trump. The previous two coup attempts had failed, but this was a ripe poison apple that fell right into their laps.

    4. To be clear: the virus itself and the outbreak were real, non-engineered events. But the specific response to the outbreak was malicious and deliberate with respect to the wellbeing of the American people.

    5. The Powers That Be hate Donald Trump, and by extension the White, Christian, heritage-American electorate for whom he spoke, with such a deadly fury that they were willing to seize on a recurring, seasonal disease outbreak with known protocols of response, and malignant lay use it to destroy the American economy (Trump's main selling point) in order to bring down a president when their previous open coup attempts had failed.

    If one is going to except the virus is real, and that the global elite/cabal/deep state are using this as a third attempt to get rid of POTUS, then it should not be hard to believe this may have Beena planned, man made event all along.

    Everyone needs to remember this come November- and send s message by turning the house RED.

  296. @Mr. Anon
    We know you are one of this sites preferred little pets. Gold star for you, little Fauntleroy!

    So much for you wanting a serious conversation.

    P.S. The insults people choose tend to be very educational.

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
    So what does the insult "do you want me to pre-chew your food for you" say about you?

    Or dismissing somebody's arguments with that "serious conversation" crap.

    I insulted you because you insulted me.

    Go to Hell, teacher's pet.

  297. @Mr. Anon
    And COVID-19 is a "Flu-like" illness, is it not? So now every Flu-like illness gets prestidigitated into COVID-19. Which isn't to say there are no actual COVID-19 cases. There are. But we have no real idea how many, your protestations to the contrary.

    Hey - given that you are now an "official source" - gold-star and all - are you part of the "American Pravda"?

    And COVID-19 is a “Flu-like” illness, is it not? So now every Flu-like illness gets prestidigitated into COVID-19. Which isn’t to say there are no actual COVID-19 cases. There are. But we have no real idea how many, your protestations to the contrary.

    That is a weakness of their statistic. In the early phases of the epidemic it worked pretty well to assume COVID-19 caused the excess cases (i.e. departures from trend). But as the shutdowns progressed all infections decreased enough so it is hard to distinguish COVID-19 from flu (FWIW, my theory is that once the shutdowns started most of the cases were COVID-19 since it has a higher starting R0).

    They talk about this at the links I gave. At the final link in my comment search for “Application to COVID-19 Detection” Thanks for making it clear you never even bothered to follow them. You are just looking to vent and annoyed that I interrupted your venting.

    Hey – given that you are now an “official source” – gold-star and all – are you part of the “American Pravda”?

    Exactly the kind of comeback people use when they know they are wrong, but have to say SOMETHING.

    FWIW the gold star does not make me an official source. Just an indicator that Ron thought my comments were worth highlighting. If you had been paying attention you would have noticed that Ron and I have some differences in our views on COVID-19. Also some agreement, of course.

  298. @ic1000
    > Do you want me to pre-chew your food for you too?

    res, please delete that part of your comment.

    iSteve is generating longer threads, which is good (higher number of thoughtful comments) and bad (more dumb comments).

    I'm generally okay with the "let 'er rip" contingent, because the better ones are stress-testing the "very concerned" narrative(s).

    But the noise level is heading higher. I already have to skip lots of remarks, if the trend continues then this source will become more trouble than it's worth.

    Most people here aren't Bayesians, and they aren't looking for a Road to Damascus experience.

    res, please delete that part of your comment.

    The edit window is long past. Agreed it was a bit much. I just get really tired of people who make assertions without providing evidence, then don’t even look at the evidence I give them, then accuse me of not being serious. Plus the insults. Do you disagree that my analogy was apt? I considered the insulting aspect of it an appropriate return of the “favor.”

    But the noise level is heading higher. I already have to skip lots of remarks, if the trend continues then this source will become more trouble than it’s worth.

    Also agreed about this. But please compare the signal to noise ratio in Mr. Anon’s comments with that in mine then explain why you are talking to me and not him.

    Most people here aren’t Bayesians, and they aren’t looking for a Road to Damascus experience.

    Also agreed. I think we are the worse for your first sentence being as true as it is. As for your second sentence, most people here just seem to be interesting in venting. I think it much better to try to evaluate the available evidence in a Bayesian fashion to try to determine what should be done rather than just venting. So again, why are you criticizing me in preference to the real noise generators here?

    You are a thoughtful enough commenter that those are sincere questions. One thing that frustrates me in life is people seeming to want to hold me to a higher standard than others around me. That seems to be happening here.

  299. @jbwilson24
    "Through all this madness, I have never heard anyone put forward any set of standards to justify this unprecedented disruption of life. Should we do this every time a virus coming along that threatens to rise the national death rate from 1% to 1.1%? I would think hope that everyone agrees that is ridiculous, but so where would the hysterics draw-their-line? 2%? 3%. "

    The morons forming policy never bothered to ask these questions.

    No hospital administrator would survive very long if they were unable to prioritize resource allocation and say 'no' to some cases. You don't spend half your budget to keep 102-year-olds alive while 3-year-olds die of cancer, for instance.

    Yet the elites like Dr Fauci seem unable to summon up the skills that any nurse with a Masters in hospital administration possesses. There's a price on a life, and the price on older lives is lower than on younger ones.

    Given that a virus like this could come along every 2 years, this is a recipe for permanent lockdown.

    We have a UN representative warning of major disruptions in the food supply that could kill millions, a professor at King's College pointing out that a lack of cancer screening is going to cost tens of thousands of lives, etc etc. None of this seems to stick in the heads of the weaklings who kvetch about this great plague of death.

    A funny presentation by a couple of US doctors is going around the internet, in which they argue that this thing is totally overblown. Most of the people who die have serious comorbidities.

    Let nature take its course and weed out the sickly, the weak, the elderly. If a few healthy people are caught along the way, then so be it. I wonder how these effeminate losers can watch a Nature documentary without screaming in terror.

    Let nature take its course and weed out the sickly, the weak, the elderly. If a few healthy people are caught along the way, then so be it. I wonder how these effeminate losers can watch a Nature documentary without screaming in terror.

    So a 50 year old ER doctor with diabetes or 40 nurse who has a weakened immune system from cancer treatment can get fucked. Or the 65 year old overweight convenience store worked who’s trying to make it to retirement.

    The ‘left’ is certainly over-emoting during this, but there’s this tough guy ‘Let’em Die, save ARE ECONOMY’ eugenics attitude that is far more revolting.

  300. @Black-hole creator

    Perhaps a little exposure, esp. in when ample sun (Vit. D) is available, is a good way to develop antibodies w/o having symptoms.
     
    The WHO has just announced that there is no proven immunity from having antibodies in your blood. The plot thickens. If I were a conspiracy theorist, I'd say this is a perfect tool to thin the herd from the old and already sick. The rest will just have to live with the virus, pretty much how most people live with the incurable herpes-1 virus. Unfortunately, I am neither young nor particularly healthy, so I am not too happy with this conspiracy.

    “The WHO has just announced that there is no proven immunity from having antibodies in your blood. ”

    If the WHO announced that the sun rises in the East I’d be looking West for the next dawn.

  301. > why are you criticizing me in preference to the real noise generators here?

    It was meant as a lament, more than as a criticism. As to why: because I read your comments carefully, even to the extent of following links from time to time. I don’t (can’t) do that for everyone’s.

  302. @res
    So much for you wanting a serious conversation.

    P.S. The insults people choose tend to be very educational.

    So what does the insult “do you want me to pre-chew your food for you” say about you?

    Or dismissing somebody’s arguments with that “serious conversation” crap.

    I insulted you because you insulted me.

    Go to Hell, teacher’s pet.

    • Replies: @res

    So what does the insult “do you want me to pre-chew your food for you” say about you?
     
    That's up to you to figure out for yourself. My take is it means I have little patience with having my attempts to present evidence being repaid with insults, having my evidence ignored, followed by more requests for evidence.

    In case it wasn't obvious, the analogy I was drawing was with you being unwilling to take the trouble of following the links as I requested. Which would have told you what you wanted to know.

    Or dismissing somebody’s arguments with that “serious conversation” crap.
     
    Your idea of an "argument" seems to be you asserting something without any support then responding "nu-uh" when someone presents contrary evidence.

    My idea of an argument is two people discussing the relative merits of the evidence they have provided supporting their points. That is what I mean by "serious conversation."

    I insulted you because you insulted me.
     
    Fair enough. A good sign of how impatient I have become with idiocy like: "My guesstimate is………no difference without the restrictions."

    Go to Hell, teacher’s pet.
     
    If that's the worst you have to offer, then I must be a pretty terrific person. ; )
    , @vhrm
    dude, idk what your deal is here, but let it go.

    afaict you misunderstood what res was saying about Kinsa and got pissed off. As he explained more you just started accusing him without understanding what he was saying.

    Nobody is claiming that Kinsa's "flu like illnesses" is all Covid-19. Covid-19 is just one of them. And all of them will likely be affected in similar ways by distancing and shutdown measures.

    We've been discussing the Kinsa stuff now for a month. Probably in 10s of threads. Their graphs are being treated mostly as upper bounds on sick people in an area at a given time.

    Their data show "fever causing things" were going up above seasonal in early March in many places and then they quickly dropped to well below seasonal by mid-April (some places sooner than others).

    So _something_ was giving fevers in early March to a lot more people than usual around the country, and it was probably Covid-19.

    When people started taking extra precautions against transmittable diseases, the number of all fever causing things just dropped through the floor.

    Also, he and Unz are on different sides of the shutdown issue anyway. That line of insults doesn't even make sense.

  303. @ic1000
    > Do you want me to pre-chew your food for you too?

    res, please delete that part of your comment.

    iSteve is generating longer threads, which is good (higher number of thoughtful comments) and bad (more dumb comments).

    I'm generally okay with the "let 'er rip" contingent, because the better ones are stress-testing the "very concerned" narrative(s).

    But the noise level is heading higher. I already have to skip lots of remarks, if the trend continues then this source will become more trouble than it's worth.

    Most people here aren't Bayesians, and they aren't looking for a Road to Damascus experience.

    He’s a Gold Star Boy. I guess that’s like a Gold Star Family. They’re above criticism.

    • Replies: @res

    He’s a Gold Star Boy. I guess that’s like a Gold Star Family. They’re above criticism.
     
    That gold star really bothers you. I have somewhat mixed feelings about the gold star, but that effect definitely goes into the positive column.

    As far as being above criticism, that is not my issue. What is my issue is being incredibly impatient with ankle-biters who make stupid statements like "My guesstimate is………no difference without the restrictions" and when called on it with evidence just snipe at that evidence without actually taking the trouble to understand it. And offer no evidence themselves while doing so.

    I actually appreciate criticism presented with good arguments and evidence. And don't mind receiving the occasional insult if that is the price of getting the good part. For me it is all about signal to noise ratio. And as far as I can tell, you are pretty much all noise with little signal.
  304. @epebble
    But Covid-19 appears to be far more contagious and deadlier than vCJD, H5N1 or H1N1. It has already claimed 200,000 globally with no evidence of slowdown anywhere outside of East Asia; Even there, we don't know what may happen if they return to any kind of normalcy.

    Then there is this: There is currently no evidence that people who have recovered from COVID-19 and have antibodies are protected from a second infection.

    https://www.who.int/news-room/commentaries/detail/immunity-passports-in-the-context-of-covid-19

    Ooh, 200, 000 out of 8 Billion. However will the human race survive?

  305. HA says:
    @kpkinsunnyphiladelphia
    We have simply not been smart about this, and we are continuing to be stupid.

    As if we didn't know BEFORE about who was going to suffer most, we do know now.

    We have to stop this draconian bullshit RIGHT NOW, today, this minute, except in certain places.

    “We have simply not been smart about this, and we are continuing to be stupid.”

    Those are empty platitudes devoid of any substance. For one thing, governments will always continue to be stupid, whether they choose to do too much or too little. That’s just how they roll. Same goes for the media. So whining about that is a red herring.

    Before you or anyone else comes here to stamp your feet and wag your finger about how Steve (who blogged not just about Imperial College predictions, but also about Ionnadis’s worries that we might be doing too much based on too little data) has not been smart, point to some actual substantive model or approach that you have been consistently endorsing from the get-go and demonstrate that it was the right one, and then we’ll talk. Then we’ll all be able to admit that you’re the appropriate judge as to what constitutes a smarter model — as opposed to one more tiresome Monday morning quarterback which is what you sound like.

    Simply spouting “I knew we should have done SOMETHING different” doesn’t count. Nor does doing what your agreeer Hail did, which was to start off claiming “this thing is causing no excess deaths whatsoever and I have graphs to prove it” and then later pivoting to some modified position and claiming “no, I was never a hoaxer, I just wanted a smarter approach” after those same graphs blew up in his face. That’s sleazy “Oceania has always been at war with Eastasia” retconning and I’ve seen far too much of it here. Don’t wait until after all the data come in and then use your 20/20 hindsight to cherry-pick the one lucky guess out of a pool of millions and pretend it is some kind of A-ha moment, as in “Didn’t I tell you that there was a better approach?”

    No, you show me a model that, based on what we knew at the time, was clearly a “smarter approach” — not just for Sweden or Miami, but also NYC and Bergamo and then we’ll talk.

    • Agree: res
  306. @Mr. Anon

    But don’t forget that these current large death-spikes are coming *despite* the Britain government having implemented the most extreme quarantine/lockdown measures in its national history.
     
    They didn't have all those Tik-Tok Nurse dance routines back then either.

    Maybe that's what's saving us.

    Do you not realize that your position - and the position of virtually every government around the World - is completely unfalsifiable? If we don't have a million deaths, it's because of the Lockdown. Who will find out if that is true or not? The CDC? Do you imagine that the CDC will fund a study that might reveal that they plunged the nation into a depression? Would any government ever do that?

    Do you not recognize that this "lockdown" - a term taken from prison administration - is a massive assault on our civil-liberties and that officialdom is already talking about making a lot of this more-or-less permanent? Do you not care about that? Not even a little?

    One should also consider that Mr Unz is independently wealthy, and Steve Sailer is a guy who sits around inside and writes columns for his daily crust. Is it really surprising that two guys who don’t have to go out and work for a living are not all that concerned about that being curtailed?
    I suspect that most of the hysterical commenters are in similar circumstances, either retired, on disability, or in some other way insulated from the working world.

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
    I have noticed that enthusiasm for the lockdown seems to correlate highly with being 1.) in the right demographic to be a WuFlu victim and/or 2.) getting a regular check every two weeks even during the lockdown. Retirees, rentiers, people who can work from home (many of whom have the kind of modern post-industrial bullshit jobs that could be done anywhere, as they aren't really important anyway). It's hard to take their opinions as being neutral and disinterested when they would appear to depend heavily upon their personal circumstances.
  307. @Mr. Anon
    So what does the insult "do you want me to pre-chew your food for you" say about you?

    Or dismissing somebody's arguments with that "serious conversation" crap.

    I insulted you because you insulted me.

    Go to Hell, teacher's pet.

    So what does the insult “do you want me to pre-chew your food for you” say about you?

    That’s up to you to figure out for yourself. My take is it means I have little patience with having my attempts to present evidence being repaid with insults, having my evidence ignored, followed by more requests for evidence.

    In case it wasn’t obvious, the analogy I was drawing was with you being unwilling to take the trouble of following the links as I requested. Which would have told you what you wanted to know.

    Or dismissing somebody’s arguments with that “serious conversation” crap.

    Your idea of an “argument” seems to be you asserting something without any support then responding “nu-uh” when someone presents contrary evidence.

    My idea of an argument is two people discussing the relative merits of the evidence they have provided supporting their points. That is what I mean by “serious conversation.”

    I insulted you because you insulted me.

    Fair enough. A good sign of how impatient I have become with idiocy like: “My guesstimate is………no difference without the restrictions.”

    Go to Hell, teacher’s pet.

    If that’s the worst you have to offer, then I must be a pretty terrific person. ; )

  308. @Mr. Anon
    He's a Gold Star Boy. I guess that's like a Gold Star Family. They're above criticism.

    He’s a Gold Star Boy. I guess that’s like a Gold Star Family. They’re above criticism.

    That gold star really bothers you. I have somewhat mixed feelings about the gold star, but that effect definitely goes into the positive column.

    As far as being above criticism, that is not my issue. What is my issue is being incredibly impatient with ankle-biters who make stupid statements like “My guesstimate is………no difference without the restrictions” and when called on it with evidence just snipe at that evidence without actually taking the trouble to understand it. And offer no evidence themselves while doing so.

    I actually appreciate criticism presented with good arguments and evidence. And don’t mind receiving the occasional insult if that is the price of getting the good part. For me it is all about signal to noise ratio. And as far as I can tell, you are pretty much all noise with little signal.

    • Replies: @Anonymous

    That gold star really bothers you. I have somewhat mixed feelings about the gold star
     
    I like the gold star on you!

    Did you ever get a chance to look into some of the early reports on asymptomatic transmission?
  309. @Tlotsi
    One should also consider that Mr Unz is independently wealthy, and Steve Sailer is a guy who sits around inside and writes columns for his daily crust. Is it really surprising that two guys who don't have to go out and work for a living are not all that concerned about that being curtailed?
    I suspect that most of the hysterical commenters are in similar circumstances, either retired, on disability, or in some other way insulated from the working world.

    I have noticed that enthusiasm for the lockdown seems to correlate highly with being 1.) in the right demographic to be a WuFlu victim and/or 2.) getting a regular check every two weeks even during the lockdown. Retirees, rentiers, people who can work from home (many of whom have the kind of modern post-industrial bullshit jobs that could be done anywhere, as they aren’t really important anyway). It’s hard to take their opinions as being neutral and disinterested when they would appear to depend heavily upon their personal circumstances.

    • Agree: Mehen
    • Replies: @Anonymous Jew
    To reiterate some of my previous posts: I live in White-yuppie Seattle and all of my work-from-home/tech-worker friends and neighbors have taken “crush the curve” as religious gospel and integrated it into their other leftist religious tenets. Across the street there’s a Google worker (our sons are friends) and she is the worst. These people are completely blind to the huge numbers of Americans whose lives are being turned upside down. Techy autism probably doesn’t help either.
  310. @Mr. Anon
    So what does the insult "do you want me to pre-chew your food for you" say about you?

    Or dismissing somebody's arguments with that "serious conversation" crap.

    I insulted you because you insulted me.

    Go to Hell, teacher's pet.

    dude, idk what your deal is here, but let it go.

    afaict you misunderstood what res was saying about Kinsa and got pissed off. As he explained more you just started accusing him without understanding what he was saying.

    Nobody is claiming that Kinsa’s “flu like illnesses” is all Covid-19. Covid-19 is just one of them. And all of them will likely be affected in similar ways by distancing and shutdown measures.

    We’ve been discussing the Kinsa stuff now for a month. Probably in 10s of threads. Their graphs are being treated mostly as upper bounds on sick people in an area at a given time.

    Their data show “fever causing things” were going up above seasonal in early March in many places and then they quickly dropped to well below seasonal by mid-April (some places sooner than others).

    So _something_ was giving fevers in early March to a lot more people than usual around the country, and it was probably Covid-19.

    When people started taking extra precautions against transmittable diseases, the number of all fever causing things just dropped through the floor.

    Also, he and Unz are on different sides of the shutdown issue anyway. That line of insults doesn’t even make sense.

    • Agree: ic1000
    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
    I don't take kindly to people insulting me. Do you? I'm guessing not.

    Has it ever occured to any of you that Kinsa might be deliberately cooking their data?
  311. @Ron Unz

    Sure, the conventional wisdom is right sometimes This definitely is not one of those times...The shutdown has put millions of mostly poor people out of work, and it will cause many shattered dreams and premature deaths all on its own. The more data comes out, the more this looks like a terrible mistake.
     
    Well, courtesy of MoA here's a nice Financial Times chart of total weekly deaths in Britain for almost the last 50(!) years. I've already linked it in a couple of other places, but I might as well do so again:

    https://www.moonofalabama.org/images10/britainexessdeath2.jpg

    Does this look like a disease with Flu-type fatality rates of around 0.1%?

    Given the horrific situation in Lombardy and now NYC/NJ, I just can't understand the thinking of the hordes of Flu Hoaxers who hang around here.

    When future archeologists pronounce it safe enter the empty territory of Sweden in the summer of 2021, I move that our gracious host should get first dibs on the land.

    • Replies: @DanHessinMD
    Steve can I strike my 7:20 pm GMT comment? I don't want to pile on!
  312. Anonymous[161] • Disclaimer says:
    @Anon
    https://m.youtube.com/watch?feature=youtu.be&v=HgIfusTARPg

    A well respected doctor in Madrid. Broad scope: the week’s lessons, personalized treatment according to 3 patient “profiles”, home tests limitations, public policy options weighed against economic costs. Broad rather than in depth, tho. Message: take more precautions than your obliged to.

    Word of mouth: hcq + ivermectin + azit + xeralto + arcoxia. They’re bombing patients, but this one worked. Anecdotal, I know.

    Message: take more precautions than your obliged to.

    Did he say why?

  313. Anonymous[161] • Disclaimer says:
    @res

    He’s a Gold Star Boy. I guess that’s like a Gold Star Family. They’re above criticism.
     
    That gold star really bothers you. I have somewhat mixed feelings about the gold star, but that effect definitely goes into the positive column.

    As far as being above criticism, that is not my issue. What is my issue is being incredibly impatient with ankle-biters who make stupid statements like "My guesstimate is………no difference without the restrictions" and when called on it with evidence just snipe at that evidence without actually taking the trouble to understand it. And offer no evidence themselves while doing so.

    I actually appreciate criticism presented with good arguments and evidence. And don't mind receiving the occasional insult if that is the price of getting the good part. For me it is all about signal to noise ratio. And as far as I can tell, you are pretty much all noise with little signal.

    That gold star really bothers you. I have somewhat mixed feelings about the gold star

    I like the gold star on you!

    Did you ever get a chance to look into some of the early reports on asymptomatic transmission?

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    res puts in a lot of work on comments.
    , @res

    Did you ever get a chance to look into some of the early reports on asymptomatic transmission?
     
    Only briefly. Without much success. I just looked again, and this from two days ago looks interesting.
    Asymptomatic Transmission, the Achilles’ Heel of Current Strategies to Control Covid-19
    https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMe2009758

    Symptoms were classified into typical (fever, cough, and shortness of breath), atypical, and none. Among 76 residents in the point-prevalence surveys, 48 (63%) had positive rRT-PCR results, with 27 (56%) essentially asymptomatic, although symptoms subsequently developed in 24 of these residents (within a median of 4 days) and they were reclassified as presymptomatic. Quantitative SARS-CoV-2 viral loads were similarly high in the four symptom groups (residents with typical symptoms, those with atypical symptoms, those who were presymptomatic, and those who remained asymptomatic). It is notable that 17 of 24 specimens (71%) from presymptomatic persons had viable virus by culture 1 to 6 days before the development of symptoms. Finally, the mortality from Covid-19 in this facility was high; of 57 residents who tested positive, 15 (26%) died.
     
    Reference 5 (basis of that excerpt) is another paper from two days ago:
    Presymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 Infections and Transmission in a Skilled Nursing Facility
    https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2008457

    An important counterpoint is that symptoms (especially the cough) probably increase the transmissibility.

  314. @DanHessinMD
    When future archeologists pronounce it safe enter the empty territory of Sweden in the summer of 2021, I move that our gracious host should get first dibs on the land.

    Steve can I strike my 7:20 pm GMT comment? I don’t want to pile on!

  315. @DanHessinMD
    This is a city of 2 million people. The article says there are 100 deaths a day instead of the average of 30, and this in this is in the middle of a pandemic. There is a global search for the worst scenarios and none are very apocalyptic. A bad plague day would have featured deaths at 1000 times the normal rate.

    This is a city of 2 million people. The article says there are 100 deaths a day instead of the average of 30, and this in this is in the middle of a pandemic. There is a global search for the worst scenarios and none are very apocalyptic. A bad plague day would have featured deaths at 1000 times the normal rate.

    “People are dying at several times the normal rate! We had over a hundred deaths today! Help us!”
    “It can’t be that bad, ma’am. If it were really that bad, we’d have 30,000 deaths a day”
    “You sure? Isn’t that an absurd number?”
    “No, it isn’t. Trust me, I’m a doctor. It’s important to keep a gardez-votre-sang-froid mentality”

  316. @vhrm
    dude, idk what your deal is here, but let it go.

    afaict you misunderstood what res was saying about Kinsa and got pissed off. As he explained more you just started accusing him without understanding what he was saying.

    Nobody is claiming that Kinsa's "flu like illnesses" is all Covid-19. Covid-19 is just one of them. And all of them will likely be affected in similar ways by distancing and shutdown measures.

    We've been discussing the Kinsa stuff now for a month. Probably in 10s of threads. Their graphs are being treated mostly as upper bounds on sick people in an area at a given time.

    Their data show "fever causing things" were going up above seasonal in early March in many places and then they quickly dropped to well below seasonal by mid-April (some places sooner than others).

    So _something_ was giving fevers in early March to a lot more people than usual around the country, and it was probably Covid-19.

    When people started taking extra precautions against transmittable diseases, the number of all fever causing things just dropped through the floor.

    Also, he and Unz are on different sides of the shutdown issue anyway. That line of insults doesn't even make sense.

    I don’t take kindly to people insulting me. Do you? I’m guessing not.

    Has it ever occured to any of you that Kinsa might be deliberately cooking their data?

    • Replies: @vhrm

    Has it ever occured to any of you that Kinsa might be deliberately cooking their data?
     
    It's not something I've given much thought to, tbh. It's possible, but i don't think too likely.

    As is they have an article pushing the "early distancing/lockdown was critical" line but their own data undermines at least that lockdown piece of that. If they were coooking the data they'd had made it fit their story better.

    Besides, they don't really care about covid-19 per se. They just want people, companies, and governments to buy more of their thermometers.

  317. Hail says: • Website
    @Ron Unz

    The CoV weekly deaths are 2,000 lower weekly totals than excess mortality totals from Financial Times graph. So either CoV deaths (Week 14+15) are undercounted by 40%
     
    Exactly. Lombardy, NYC, and other hotspots all have this same under-counting problem because they often don't bother testing corpses for the virus. There was a big article in the NYT about the situation in NYC.

    There are obviously both over-counting and under-counting problems, with the Flu Hoaxers regularly claiming that lots of the victims died "with Coronavirus" rather than because of it.

    That's why these sorts of total-death charts from the FT and the NYT are so helpful. They largely address that complaint.

    Flu Hoaxers regularly claiming that lots of the victims died “with Coronavirus” rather than because of it

    Are the European public health authorities who have been separating “deaths with” from “deaths from” part of the Flu Hoaxer Conspiracy? What about all the independent, highly-credentialed, decades-of-expertise independent experts who have been warning of the same problem?

    Logically, if a flu virus is reaching peak spread in a population during a given x-week period, isn’t it only logical that y percent of those who would die anyway would be positive for the virus at death? This is not some wacko, alien-abduction-style belief.

    0.07% to 0.1% of the living die in any given month in the OECD, slightly more during peak-flu activity periods that occasionally occur; what if half are positive for the virus during peak periods of the virus’ epidemic-curve?

  318. @Anonymous

    That gold star really bothers you. I have somewhat mixed feelings about the gold star
     
    I like the gold star on you!

    Did you ever get a chance to look into some of the early reports on asymptomatic transmission?

    res puts in a lot of work on comments.

    • Thanks: res
  319. For whatever it’s worth, I live in Miami-Dade County, and I don’t know a single person with coronavirus.

    I do know a guy who just had to close a business that he started in 1984. Another guy is barely hanging on after 39 years in the same location.

  320. @DanHessinMD
    This is a city of 2 million people. The article says there are 100 deaths a day instead of the average of 30, and this in this is in the middle of a pandemic. There is a global search for the worst scenarios and none are very apocalyptic. A bad plague day would have featured deaths at 1000 times the normal rate.

    You do not know they are in the middle of pandemic. The daily death rate may keep growing until they indeed get to the middle of a pandemic. 1000 times the normal rate is hyperbole, right? It would not be sustainable, would would run pout of people pretty soon. I did not look for the worst scenarios but just bad enough and in tropics to question your humidity uber alles spiel.

  321. @Mr. Anon
    I don't take kindly to people insulting me. Do you? I'm guessing not.

    Has it ever occured to any of you that Kinsa might be deliberately cooking their data?

    Has it ever occured to any of you that Kinsa might be deliberately cooking their data?

    It’s not something I’ve given much thought to, tbh. It’s possible, but i don’t think too likely.

    As is they have an article pushing the “early distancing/lockdown was critical” line but their own data undermines at least that lockdown piece of that. If they were coooking the data they’d had made it fit their story better.

    Besides, they don’t really care about covid-19 per se. They just want people, companies, and governments to buy more of their thermometers.

    • Replies: @res
    The current decline to zero while COVID-19 cases are still incoming has me wondering.

    One possibility is that they are somehow relying on the current CDC flu survey down (which is also down to zero). It is quite possible that unusual circumstances would break their model. That is a common problem with models IMHO.

    P.S. To be clear, they use the CDC flu survey historical data to train their models, but it is unclear to me if they incorporate the current CDC flu data to generate their model output.

    P.P.S. Any thoughts on why their blog has gone silent since April 9th?
  322. @Ron Unz

    The CoV weekly deaths are 2,000 lower weekly totals than excess mortality totals from Financial Times graph. So either CoV deaths (Week 14+15) are undercounted by 40%
     
    Exactly. Lombardy, NYC, and other hotspots all have this same under-counting problem because they often don't bother testing corpses for the virus. There was a big article in the NYT about the situation in NYC.

    There are obviously both over-counting and under-counting problems, with the Flu Hoaxers regularly claiming that lots of the victims died "with Coronavirus" rather than because of it.

    That's why these sorts of total-death charts from the FT and the NYT are so helpful. They largely address that complaint.

    The treatment was unnecessary because I feel better fallacy used by the flu hoaxers.

    Deaths toll is not that hight => Lockdowns are unnecessary

    Death toll is high but it’s been bad or worse before => Lockdowns are unnecessary

    The fact that w/o the countermeasures the death tolls would be much higher is omitted in the argument.

    An example from Russia Today

    Yes, the UK’s weekly death toll during Covid-19 is high. But it’s been worse in the past and we didn’t shut down the economy then
    https://www.rt.com/op-ed/486859-uk-coronavirus-deaths-economy/

    This article also throw in the collateral deaths issue:

    “The second explanation is the missing deaths have been indirectly caused by the lockdown in some way. Right now we can only speculate as to how the lockdown may be killing people”

    • Replies: @utu
    Prevention Paradox, another name for "The treatment was unnecessary because I feel better fallacy" for the interview with Christian Drosten, Germany’s leading coronavirus expert:

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/26/virologist-christian-drosten-germany-coronavirus-expert-interview
    In Germany, people see that the hospitals are not overwhelmed, and they don’t understand why their shops have to shut. They only look at what’s happening here, not at the situation in, say, New York or Spain. This is the prevention paradox, and for many Germans I’m the evil guy who is crippling the economy.
     
    About research:

    Q: Is all the science being done around this coronavirus good science?
    A: No! Early on, in February, there were many interesting preprints [scientific papers that have not yet been peer-reviewed] around. Now you can read through 50 before you find something that’s actually solid and interesting. A lot of research resources are being wasted.
     
    Meaning that everybody and his uncle jumps onto the coronavirus bandwagon and try to publish something related to Covid-19.
  323. @prosa123
    I am sure that the Las Vegas gambling casinos will be jammed the microsecond they're allowed to reopen.

    True and since most Gamblers seem to smoke they may have some protection from contracting coronavirus. Smokers are 70-80 percent less likely to test positive for COVID-19. Studies in China, France and the U.S. have documented a low proportion of smokers among COVID-19 patients (6% of patients in Wuhan, and 1% of patients in the U.S.) Taken together with the rest of the evidence, the association between current smoking and lower COVID-19 risk is starting to look statistically and clinically meaningful. There are now two big questions.Trials underway in France should help us answer that. https://medicalxpress.com/news/2020-04-france-nicotine-coronavirus.html

  324. @Anonymous

    That gold star really bothers you. I have somewhat mixed feelings about the gold star
     
    I like the gold star on you!

    Did you ever get a chance to look into some of the early reports on asymptomatic transmission?

    Did you ever get a chance to look into some of the early reports on asymptomatic transmission?

    Only briefly. Without much success. I just looked again, and this from two days ago looks interesting.
    Asymptomatic Transmission, the Achilles’ Heel of Current Strategies to Control Covid-19
    https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMe2009758

    Symptoms were classified into typical (fever, cough, and shortness of breath), atypical, and none. Among 76 residents in the point-prevalence surveys, 48 (63%) had positive rRT-PCR results, with 27 (56%) essentially asymptomatic, although symptoms subsequently developed in 24 of these residents (within a median of 4 days) and they were reclassified as presymptomatic. Quantitative SARS-CoV-2 viral loads were similarly high in the four symptom groups (residents with typical symptoms, those with atypical symptoms, those who were presymptomatic, and those who remained asymptomatic). It is notable that 17 of 24 specimens (71%) from presymptomatic persons had viable virus by culture 1 to 6 days before the development of symptoms. Finally, the mortality from Covid-19 in this facility was high; of 57 residents who tested positive, 15 (26%) died.

    Reference 5 (basis of that excerpt) is another paper from two days ago:
    Presymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 Infections and Transmission in a Skilled Nursing Facility
    https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2008457

    An important counterpoint is that symptoms (especially the cough) probably increase the transmissibility.

  325. @vhrm

    Has it ever occured to any of you that Kinsa might be deliberately cooking their data?
     
    It's not something I've given much thought to, tbh. It's possible, but i don't think too likely.

    As is they have an article pushing the "early distancing/lockdown was critical" line but their own data undermines at least that lockdown piece of that. If they were coooking the data they'd had made it fit their story better.

    Besides, they don't really care about covid-19 per se. They just want people, companies, and governments to buy more of their thermometers.

    The current decline to zero while COVID-19 cases are still incoming has me wondering.

    One possibility is that they are somehow relying on the current CDC flu survey down (which is also down to zero). It is quite possible that unusual circumstances would break their model. That is a common problem with models IMHO.

    P.S. To be clear, they use the CDC flu survey historical data to train their models, but it is unclear to me if they incorporate the current CDC flu data to generate their model output.

    P.P.S. Any thoughts on why their blog has gone silent since April 9th?

    • Replies: @vhrm
    Your guess is at least as good as mine on an all of these.

    Their current site doesn't appear to be so up for regular bloging so maybe they ran out of ideas.

    Or maybe they don't want to say that their data says the curve is crushed until they judge the political winds to be more favorable for such a statement. If the main point is to sell thermometers, there's no point in causing controversy.

    They seem to have an inactive blog at
    https://www.kinsahealth.com/blog
    that hasn't been updated since about a year ago. Maybe the company isn't doing great or they therew up the new site to try to to capitalize on this opportunity or ???
  326. @Mr. Anon
    I have noticed that enthusiasm for the lockdown seems to correlate highly with being 1.) in the right demographic to be a WuFlu victim and/or 2.) getting a regular check every two weeks even during the lockdown. Retirees, rentiers, people who can work from home (many of whom have the kind of modern post-industrial bullshit jobs that could be done anywhere, as they aren't really important anyway). It's hard to take their opinions as being neutral and disinterested when they would appear to depend heavily upon their personal circumstances.

    To reiterate some of my previous posts: I live in White-yuppie Seattle and all of my work-from-home/tech-worker friends and neighbors have taken “crush the curve” as religious gospel and integrated it into their other leftist religious tenets. Across the street there’s a Google worker (our sons are friends) and she is the worst. These people are completely blind to the huge numbers of Americans whose lives are being turned upside down. Techy autism probably doesn’t help either.

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
    It is indeed remarkable to see. It gives soccer moms entirely new avenues for righteous indignation. The lockdown has created a whole new axis of division within societies. My extended family (all liberals by the way) have bought into it, and think I'm a nut for thinking otherwise. I can't even talk to them anymore. They don't want to hear anything that runs counter to the narrative.
  327. @Anonymous Jew
    To reiterate some of my previous posts: I live in White-yuppie Seattle and all of my work-from-home/tech-worker friends and neighbors have taken “crush the curve” as religious gospel and integrated it into their other leftist religious tenets. Across the street there’s a Google worker (our sons are friends) and she is the worst. These people are completely blind to the huge numbers of Americans whose lives are being turned upside down. Techy autism probably doesn’t help either.

    It is indeed remarkable to see. It gives soccer moms entirely new avenues for righteous indignation. The lockdown has created a whole new axis of division within societies. My extended family (all liberals by the way) have bought into it, and think I’m a nut for thinking otherwise. I can’t even talk to them anymore. They don’t want to hear anything that runs counter to the narrative.

    • Replies: @DanHessinMD
    Liberals view themselves as such great thinkers and this is the most frustrating thing to me because what they are good at is echoing one another in perfect unison. The left shows its imagined superiority by being able to mouth the narrative in perfect synchrony. To see America lectured at by these middle class ladies who never read a scientific paper in their life is maddening.

    Folks hiding in their homes imagine how smart and advanced they are but that is a middle ages solution, standard 700 years ago when there was no disease knowledge.

    These leftists (which include a fair number on the putative right) are intellectually worthless. Say something we haven't heard 10,000 times. They can't. They have a lot of raw intellectual material to work with but all of it goes to running more and more laps on the same track. There are tons of interesting questions right now both about this disease and economic and social side effects but leftists explore almost none of it unless it is part of the narrative, in which case they run roughshod over the same small patch of intellectual space until no grass grows, expending most of their intellectual effort policing its tiny boundaries, making sure nobody they know says anything interesting.

    What works against this disease? Tell us something useful. These folks turned the panic up to 11 and went to total lockdown mode without coming up with any useful things. While supposedly obsessing about the disease, they couldn't say anything useful such as
    - how the disease spreads
    - what nutrition helps
    - what drug helps
    - what particular behaviors transmit
    - what environmental conditions are better, or worse

    I would rather be a master of my circumstances.

    The curiosity level on the left is just nonexistent. For two solid months, they preached the brilliance of handwashing as if this is a disease of the hands, while the blindingly obvious solution of masks could not be arrived at (or was actually disparaged) by these millions of self-appointed thought leaders.

    Does UV light piped into the lungs work? I don't know, and it seems hokey but at least its a new thought. Trump was just idly speculating but the visceral reaction of the left to the very upsetting nonconformity of the idea was most interesting.

    I didn't understand how Communism could happen, or how it could be the smarties leading it, but now it is clear. Marxist doctrine is all BS but it is a narrative that you can learn and get better at, a patch of intellectual territory that you can become more and more proficient at reciting and policing the boundaries of.

  328. @utu
    The treatment was unnecessary because I feel better fallacy used by the flu hoaxers.

    Deaths toll is not that hight => Lockdowns are unnecessary

    Death toll is high but it's been bad or worse before => Lockdowns are unnecessary

    The fact that w/o the countermeasures the death tolls would be much higher is omitted in the argument.

    An example from Russia Today


    Yes, the UK’s weekly death toll during Covid-19 is high. But it’s been worse in the past and we didn’t shut down the economy then
    https://www.rt.com/op-ed/486859-uk-coronavirus-deaths-economy/
     
    This article also throw in the collateral deaths issue:

    "The second explanation is the missing deaths have been indirectly caused by the lockdown in some way. Right now we can only speculate as to how the lockdown may be killing people"

    Prevention Paradox, another name for “The treatment was unnecessary because I feel better fallacy” for the interview with Christian Drosten, Germany’s leading coronavirus expert:

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/26/virologist-christian-drosten-germany-coronavirus-expert-interview
    In Germany, people see that the hospitals are not overwhelmed, and they don’t understand why their shops have to shut. They only look at what’s happening here, not at the situation in, say, New York or Spain. This is the prevention paradox, and for many Germans I’m the evil guy who is crippling the economy.

    About research:

    Q: Is all the science being done around this coronavirus good science?
    A: No! Early on, in February, there were many interesting preprints [scientific papers that have not yet been peer-reviewed] around. Now you can read through 50 before you find something that’s actually solid and interesting. A lot of research resources are being wasted.

    Meaning that everybody and his uncle jumps onto the coronavirus bandwagon and try to publish something related to Covid-19.

    • Replies: @Mehen

    Prevention Paradox, another name for “The treatment was unnecessary because I feel better fallacy” for the interview with Christian Drosten, Germany’s leading coronavirus expert:
     
    I’ll see your Prevention Paradox and raise you a post hoc ergo prompter hoc.
  329. @res
    The current decline to zero while COVID-19 cases are still incoming has me wondering.

    One possibility is that they are somehow relying on the current CDC flu survey down (which is also down to zero). It is quite possible that unusual circumstances would break their model. That is a common problem with models IMHO.

    P.S. To be clear, they use the CDC flu survey historical data to train their models, but it is unclear to me if they incorporate the current CDC flu data to generate their model output.

    P.P.S. Any thoughts on why their blog has gone silent since April 9th?

    Your guess is at least as good as mine on an all of these.

    Their current site doesn’t appear to be so up for regular bloging so maybe they ran out of ideas.

    Or maybe they don’t want to say that their data says the curve is crushed until they judge the political winds to be more favorable for such a statement. If the main point is to sell thermometers, there’s no point in causing controversy.

    They seem to have an inactive blog at
    https://www.kinsahealth.com/blog
    that hasn’t been updated since about a year ago. Maybe the company isn’t doing great or they therew up the new site to try to to capitalize on this opportunity or ???

  330. @Mr. Anon
    It is indeed remarkable to see. It gives soccer moms entirely new avenues for righteous indignation. The lockdown has created a whole new axis of division within societies. My extended family (all liberals by the way) have bought into it, and think I'm a nut for thinking otherwise. I can't even talk to them anymore. They don't want to hear anything that runs counter to the narrative.

    Liberals view themselves as such great thinkers and this is the most frustrating thing to me because what they are good at is echoing one another in perfect unison. The left shows its imagined superiority by being able to mouth the narrative in perfect synchrony. To see America lectured at by these middle class ladies who never read a scientific paper in their life is maddening.

    Folks hiding in their homes imagine how smart and advanced they are but that is a middle ages solution, standard 700 years ago when there was no disease knowledge.

    These leftists (which include a fair number on the putative right) are intellectually worthless. Say something we haven’t heard 10,000 times. They can’t. They have a lot of raw intellectual material to work with but all of it goes to running more and more laps on the same track. There are tons of interesting questions right now both about this disease and economic and social side effects but leftists explore almost none of it unless it is part of the narrative, in which case they run roughshod over the same small patch of intellectual space until no grass grows, expending most of their intellectual effort policing its tiny boundaries, making sure nobody they know says anything interesting.

    What works against this disease? Tell us something useful. These folks turned the panic up to 11 and went to total lockdown mode without coming up with any useful things. While supposedly obsessing about the disease, they couldn’t say anything useful such as
    – how the disease spreads
    – what nutrition helps
    – what drug helps
    – what particular behaviors transmit
    – what environmental conditions are better, or worse

    I would rather be a master of my circumstances.

    The curiosity level on the left is just nonexistent. For two solid months, they preached the brilliance of handwashing as if this is a disease of the hands, while the blindingly obvious solution of masks could not be arrived at (or was actually disparaged) by these millions of self-appointed thought leaders.

    Does UV light piped into the lungs work? I don’t know, and it seems hokey but at least its a new thought. Trump was just idly speculating but the visceral reaction of the left to the very upsetting nonconformity of the idea was most interesting.

    I didn’t understand how Communism could happen, or how it could be the smarties leading it, but now it is clear. Marxist doctrine is all BS but it is a narrative that you can learn and get better at, a patch of intellectual territory that you can become more and more proficient at reciting and policing the boundaries of.

    • Agree: Travis
    • Replies: @Jonathan Mason

    Does UV light piped into the lungs work? I don’t know, and it seems hokey but at least its a new thought. Trump was just idly speculating but the visceral reaction of the left to the very upsetting nonconformity of the idea was most interesting.
     
    It is not a new thought at all.

    Years ago they used to put TB patients outside, often at altitude, to be exposed to the UV rays of the sun, and apparently it was often quite effective, so this is really a very old treatment modality, not a new idea at all.

    http://www.weirduniverse.net/blog/comments/treating_tuberculosis_with_sunlight

    Radiation treatment for cancerous tumours is a well known field of medicine, and a huge amount of study goes into how to irradiate a tumour without killing healthy tissue. For example you triangulate the location of the tumour and then radiate it from several different directions.

    But the idea of eradicating a virus which infects the whole of the lungs with ultra violet radiation is ridiculous outside of some movie fantasy like Black Panther, because you could not achieve that effect without destroying the lung tissue.

    Children being treated for TB with sunlight.

    http://www.weirduniverse.net/images/2016/sunlight001.jpg

  331. @Steve Sailer
    "In Guayaquil, fatalities during the first two weeks of April were eight times higher than usual, the data indicates — a far greater rise than that of New York City, where fatalities were four times higher in recent weeks."

    https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/23/world/americas/ecuador-deaths-coronavirus.html

    “In another city hospital, the Teodoro Maldonado Carbo, a doctor who did not want to give his name because he has been asked not to speak to the media, described what he said were scenes out of a horror film.

    There were corpses in wheelchairs, in stretchers and on the floor in the emergency area, he said. The smell was such that the staff refused to enter.”

    Astonishing! That would really be an amazing photo. It would be the most viral picture in the world, really. And everyone has a smartphone.

    “The reek was insufferable,” he said. “The morgue was packed, as were the corridors — they were very long, and filled with corpses. The waiting room was filled with corpses.”

    That is quite the story.

    “Official figures show 128 died on April 15 in Guayas, the province that includes Guayaquil. That’s down from 614 on April 1.”

    So suddenly western media shows up and its all so much better…

    “The wave of deaths is all the more disturbing for being impossible to explain. There is no obvious reason for Ecuador to be devastated far more than other countries. Its population is relatively young, and most people live in rural areas, both factors that should reduce the risk, said Jenny Garcia, a demographer who studies Latin America at the Institut National d’Études Démographiques in France.”

    Yeah, this case does seem to stand all by its lonesome in comparison to the thousands of major cities and large towns across the entire tropical world.

    ““We will never know what the real number is, because there are no tests,” Ms. Viteri said.”

    No tests? The list of diseases that can have breakouts in Ecuador is really really long.

    Also the president is named after the original communist. That seems to relevant. There are a lot of reasons why this would be a useful story, including international aid.

    Steve, are there any other examples like this? It looks really shaky. Brazil had the virus lurking for a long time and has people stacked in filthy crowded favalas, with worse crowding than in New York. It’s fatality rate is meanwhile only 1/50th that of New York State.

    If the amazing benefit of humidity in this pandemic shown across the vast majority of data is to be ignored because of one counterexample, it might be good to take a look at that counterexample.

    This is what most of the other data show:
    https://www.marketwatch.com/story/this-stunning-chart-shows-the-coronavirus-spreading-slowly-in-tropical-countries-2020-03-17

  332. @utu
    Prevention Paradox, another name for "The treatment was unnecessary because I feel better fallacy" for the interview with Christian Drosten, Germany’s leading coronavirus expert:

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/26/virologist-christian-drosten-germany-coronavirus-expert-interview
    In Germany, people see that the hospitals are not overwhelmed, and they don’t understand why their shops have to shut. They only look at what’s happening here, not at the situation in, say, New York or Spain. This is the prevention paradox, and for many Germans I’m the evil guy who is crippling the economy.
     
    About research:

    Q: Is all the science being done around this coronavirus good science?
    A: No! Early on, in February, there were many interesting preprints [scientific papers that have not yet been peer-reviewed] around. Now you can read through 50 before you find something that’s actually solid and interesting. A lot of research resources are being wasted.
     
    Meaning that everybody and his uncle jumps onto the coronavirus bandwagon and try to publish something related to Covid-19.

    Prevention Paradox, another name for “The treatment was unnecessary because I feel better fallacy” for the interview with Christian Drosten, Germany’s leading coronavirus expert:

    I’ll see your Prevention Paradox and raise you a post hoc ergo prompter hoc.

  333. Steve, how do you explain how tropical Singapore, whose data is objectively much more reliable than Singapore, has recorded only 12 COVID deaths among 14,423 cases?

    • Replies: @DanHessinMD
    Correction:

    Steve, how do you explain how tropical Singapore, whose data is objectively much more reliable than **Ecuador's**, has recorded only 12 COVID deaths among 14,423 cases?
  334. @DanHessinMD
    Steve, how do you explain how tropical Singapore, whose data is objectively much more reliable than Singapore, has recorded only 12 COVID deaths among 14,423 cases?

    Correction:

    Steve, how do you explain how tropical Singapore, whose data is objectively much more reliable than **Ecuador’s**, has recorded only 12 COVID deaths among 14,423 cases?

  335. @DanHessinMD
    Liberals view themselves as such great thinkers and this is the most frustrating thing to me because what they are good at is echoing one another in perfect unison. The left shows its imagined superiority by being able to mouth the narrative in perfect synchrony. To see America lectured at by these middle class ladies who never read a scientific paper in their life is maddening.

    Folks hiding in their homes imagine how smart and advanced they are but that is a middle ages solution, standard 700 years ago when there was no disease knowledge.

    These leftists (which include a fair number on the putative right) are intellectually worthless. Say something we haven't heard 10,000 times. They can't. They have a lot of raw intellectual material to work with but all of it goes to running more and more laps on the same track. There are tons of interesting questions right now both about this disease and economic and social side effects but leftists explore almost none of it unless it is part of the narrative, in which case they run roughshod over the same small patch of intellectual space until no grass grows, expending most of their intellectual effort policing its tiny boundaries, making sure nobody they know says anything interesting.

    What works against this disease? Tell us something useful. These folks turned the panic up to 11 and went to total lockdown mode without coming up with any useful things. While supposedly obsessing about the disease, they couldn't say anything useful such as
    - how the disease spreads
    - what nutrition helps
    - what drug helps
    - what particular behaviors transmit
    - what environmental conditions are better, or worse

    I would rather be a master of my circumstances.

    The curiosity level on the left is just nonexistent. For two solid months, they preached the brilliance of handwashing as if this is a disease of the hands, while the blindingly obvious solution of masks could not be arrived at (or was actually disparaged) by these millions of self-appointed thought leaders.

    Does UV light piped into the lungs work? I don't know, and it seems hokey but at least its a new thought. Trump was just idly speculating but the visceral reaction of the left to the very upsetting nonconformity of the idea was most interesting.

    I didn't understand how Communism could happen, or how it could be the smarties leading it, but now it is clear. Marxist doctrine is all BS but it is a narrative that you can learn and get better at, a patch of intellectual territory that you can become more and more proficient at reciting and policing the boundaries of.

    Does UV light piped into the lungs work? I don’t know, and it seems hokey but at least its a new thought. Trump was just idly speculating but the visceral reaction of the left to the very upsetting nonconformity of the idea was most interesting.

    It is not a new thought at all.

    Years ago they used to put TB patients outside, often at altitude, to be exposed to the UV rays of the sun, and apparently it was often quite effective, so this is really a very old treatment modality, not a new idea at all.

    http://www.weirduniverse.net/blog/comments/treating_tuberculosis_with_sunlight

    Radiation treatment for cancerous tumours is a well known field of medicine, and a huge amount of study goes into how to irradiate a tumour without killing healthy tissue. For example you triangulate the location of the tumour and then radiate it from several different directions.

    But the idea of eradicating a virus which infects the whole of the lungs with ultra violet radiation is ridiculous outside of some movie fantasy like Black Panther, because you could not achieve that effect without destroying the lung tissue.

    Children being treated for TB with sunlight.

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
    Not long ago, somebody provided a link on this site to an article about a company that is doing this very thing - developing a treatment method in which the interior of the lungs, or at least part of the respiratory tract, is exposed to UV.

    I have to admit, it doesn't sound like a very promising idea to me. If even a bad case of sunburn can cause skin cancer to develop years later, exposing raw mucousal tissue to hard UV would seem to be inviting trouble.
  336. @Jonathan Mason

    Does UV light piped into the lungs work? I don’t know, and it seems hokey but at least its a new thought. Trump was just idly speculating but the visceral reaction of the left to the very upsetting nonconformity of the idea was most interesting.
     
    It is not a new thought at all.

    Years ago they used to put TB patients outside, often at altitude, to be exposed to the UV rays of the sun, and apparently it was often quite effective, so this is really a very old treatment modality, not a new idea at all.

    http://www.weirduniverse.net/blog/comments/treating_tuberculosis_with_sunlight

    Radiation treatment for cancerous tumours is a well known field of medicine, and a huge amount of study goes into how to irradiate a tumour without killing healthy tissue. For example you triangulate the location of the tumour and then radiate it from several different directions.

    But the idea of eradicating a virus which infects the whole of the lungs with ultra violet radiation is ridiculous outside of some movie fantasy like Black Panther, because you could not achieve that effect without destroying the lung tissue.

    Children being treated for TB with sunlight.

    http://www.weirduniverse.net/images/2016/sunlight001.jpg

    Not long ago, somebody provided a link on this site to an article about a company that is doing this very thing – developing a treatment method in which the interior of the lungs, or at least part of the respiratory tract, is exposed to UV.

    I have to admit, it doesn’t sound like a very promising idea to me. If even a bad case of sunburn can cause skin cancer to develop years later, exposing raw mucousal tissue to hard UV would seem to be inviting trouble.

  337. @Len
    I have no idea, but if they are, would you agree with my assertion?

    Here's another, different model he points to for sanity check. It also shows all the gains happening before masks were widely adopted.

    https://epiforecasts.io/covid/posts/national/united-states/

    SD County daily confirmed cases, and confirmed cases as % of total tests.

    The spike in early April was at least partially due to clearing a backlog. The spike in the last couple days is due to more testing.

    https://public.tableau.com/profile/len.glassner#!/vizhome/SanDiegoCountyCOVID-191DailyPositiveTestsand2OfDailyTestswithPositiveResult/Sheet12


    Daily hospital admissions in SD County:

    https://public.tableau.com/profile/len.glassner#!/vizhome/SanDiegoCountyCOVID-19DailyNewHospitalizationsandICUPatients/Sheet5

    San Diego County and California stats for Hospitalizations:

    https://public.tableau.com/profile/len.glassner#!/vizhome/SanDiegoCountyCaliforniaHospitalBedUtilization/Dashboard3


    If mask wearing in SD County or California has made a noteworthy difference overall, I don't see it.

    (Fervently hope it's helping in nursing homes. An outrageous disaster than never should have happened given what was known from the cruise ships and Wuhan about the age distribution of fatalities.)

    Maybe this shows evidence of mask impact.

    CDC ‘face-covering’ guidance changed 4/3. They also issued new nursing home guidelines at the same time.

    USA daily confirmed case plot from JHU CSSE: Cases seemed to have plateaued after change in guidance. Coincidence or cause?

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    Thanks.
    , @res
    Interesting thought. There is only a 2 day lag until the change in trend (drop on 4/5). The incubation period (infection to symptoms time) is commonly estimated as 5 days though so the change in new cases does not quite line up with the mask recommendation change date.

    You can see this a bit better on the daily new cases chart at
    https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/us/

    P.S. 4/5 was a Sunday though so it is possible the case trend did not really change until 4/6 because of data lag.

  338. @Len
    Maybe this shows evidence of mask impact.

    CDC 'face-covering' guidance changed 4/3. They also issued new nursing home guidelines at the same time.

    USA daily confirmed case plot from JHU CSSE: Cases seemed to have plateaued after change in guidance. Coincidence or cause?

    https://twitter.com/len5742/status/1254983067459923968

    Thanks.

  339. @Len
    Maybe this shows evidence of mask impact.

    CDC 'face-covering' guidance changed 4/3. They also issued new nursing home guidelines at the same time.

    USA daily confirmed case plot from JHU CSSE: Cases seemed to have plateaued after change in guidance. Coincidence or cause?

    https://twitter.com/len5742/status/1254983067459923968

    Interesting thought. There is only a 2 day lag until the change in trend (drop on 4/5). The incubation period (infection to symptoms time) is commonly estimated as 5 days though so the change in new cases does not quite line up with the mask recommendation change date.

    You can see this a bit better on the daily new cases chart at
    https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/us/

    P.S. 4/5 was a Sunday though so it is possible the case trend did not really change until 4/6 because of data lag.