More Good News from 2 Additional Stanford Professors

4,478 Views | 75 Replies | Last: 2 days ago by HollywoodBQ
Gap
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Dr. Eran Bendavid and Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, professors of medicine at Stanford, conclude the current estimates about the Covid-19 fatality rate may be too high by orders of magnitude. They point to the significant "denominator problem" often discussed here by those who are familiar with advanced modeling.

Highlights below:

Quote:

If it's true that the novel coronavirus would kill millions without shelter-in-place orders and quarantines, then the extraordinary measures being carried out in cities and states around the country are surely justified. But there's little evidence to confirm that premiseand projections of the death toll could plausibly be orders of magnitude too high.

Fear of Covid-19 is based on its high estimated case fatality rate2% to 4% of people with confirmed Covid-19 have died, according to the World Health Organization and others. So if 100 million Americans ultimately get the disease, two million to four million could die. We believe that estimate is deeply flawed. The true fatality rate is the portion of those infected who die, not the deaths from identified positive cases.

Quote:

Population samples from China, Italy, Iceland and the U.S. provide relevant evidence. On or around Jan. 31, countries sent planes to evacuate citizens from Wuhan, China. When those planes landed, the passengers were tested for Covid-19 and quarantined. After 14 days, the percentage who tested positive was 0.9%. If this was the prevalence in the greater Wuhan area on Jan. 31, then, with a population of about 20 million, greater Wuhan had 178,000 infections, about 30-fold more than the number of reported cases. The fatality rate, then, would be at least 10-fold lower than estimates based on reported cases.

Quote:

Next, the northeastern Italian town of V, near the provincial capital of Padua. On March 6, all 3,300 people of V were tested, and 90 were positive, a prevalence of 2.7%. Applying that prevalence to the whole province (population 955,000), which had 198 reported cases, suggests there were actually 26,000 infections at that time. That's more than 130-fold the number of actual reported cases. Since Italy's case fatality rate of 8% is estimated using the confirmed cases, the real fatality rate could in fact be closer to 0.06%.

Quote:

The epidemic started in China sometime in November or December. The first confirmed U.S. cases included a person who traveled from Wuhan on Jan. 15, and it is likely that the virus entered before that: Tens of thousands of people traveled from Wuhan to the U.S. in December. Existing evidence suggests that the virus is highly transmissible and that the number of infections doubles roughly every three days. An epidemic seed on Jan. 1 implies that by March 9 about six million people in the U.S. would have been infected. As of March 23, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, there were 499 Covid-19 deaths in the U.S. If our surmise of six million cases is accurate, that's a mortality rate of 0.01%, assuming a two week lag between infection and death. This is one-tenth of the flu mortality rate of 0.1%. Such a low death rate would be cause for optimism.
Quote:

A universal quarantine may not be worth the costs it imposes on the economy, community and individual mental and physical health. We should undertake immediate steps to evaluate the empirical basis of the current lockdowns.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/is-the-coronavirus-as-deadly-as-they-say-11585088464?redirect=amp#click=https://t.co/Gdo9sg67Pp
dBoy99
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
What's a "denominator"? Please explain for those of us who don't understand simple math.


nevermind....
Get Off My Lawn
How long do you want to ignore this user?
panamamyers00
How long do you want to ignore this user?
If 5 people die out of 100 that have the disease. That's a 5% death rate because you are dividing the 5 by 100 and using that to find the percentage.. The 100 is the denominator. But if in reality, when you think there are 100 people with this disease, there are actually 1,000. Then your denominator when you divide would be 1,000 so it would be .5% death rate. And so on.
tysker
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I'll believe them when they get their Dr tag
PaulC_80
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Basically they are saying that the original estimates are leaving out lots and lots of unreported cases in the math. Unreported cases are generally so mild they are mistaken for a mild cold or not even noticed at all. If unreported cases are correctly put into the math then mortality rate drops hugely.
JP_Losman
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
How does it compare to influenza death rate? Influenza is deaths/positive right? So you are comparing apples to apples
THE_CHOSEN_ONE
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Quote:

If our surmise of six million cases is accurate, that's a mortality rate of 0.01%, assuming a two week lag between infection and death. This is one-tenth of the flu mortality rate of 0.1%. Such a low death rate would be cause for optimism.
NASAg03
How long do you want to ignore this user?
That's four Stanford professors, specializing in medicine and public health, questioning mortality rates and response measures.

For all those people screaming "better safe than sorry," perhaps you should read about the boy who cried wolf.

Next pandemic that is serious, people won't take action. And that's a huge problem.
Mike Shaw - Class of '03
NASAg03
How long do you want to ignore this user?
panamamyers00 said:

If 5 people die out of 100 that have the disease. That's a 5% death rate because you are dividing the 5 by 100 and using that to find the percentage.. The 100 is the denominator. But if in reality, when you think there are 100 people with this disease, there are actually 1,000. Then your denominator when you divide would be 1,000 so it would be .5% death rate. And so on.


I think he was being sarcastic. Either way, yeah you find what you're looking for. We have only been testing people that show extreme symptoms, and the symptoms have to be a 100% match. So the cases are artificially low, and the mortality is high.
Mike Shaw - Class of '03
mazag08
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
That's great and all.

But do they understand exponents? And simple math?
Gap
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
JP_Losman said:

How does it compare to influenza death rate? Influenza is deaths/positive right? So you are comparing apples to apples
Heck no. It is deaths / estimated positives.

As of about a week ago, this flu season had 222,000 positive and confirmed specimens but we estimated from that that we have had 36 million cases of the flu.

The flu mortality rate is based on the 36 million estimated.
oneeyedag
How long do you want to ignore this user?
tysker said:

I'll believe them when they get their Dr tag


Nah it means we have an influx of swiss refugees!
Gap
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
And now the Imperial College model authors are in agreement with Stanford that the Imperial College model constantly cited by media was off by orders of magnitude.
barnyard1996
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Gap said:

And now the Imperial College model authors are in agreement with Stanford that the Imperial College model constantly cited by media was off by orders of magnitude.
so many people out their changing their predictions. The media and the Dem's quivers are running out of arrows so now they need to move on.

This doomsday crap will be over soon.
DallasAg 94
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Gap said:

And now the Imperial College model authors are in agreement with Stanford that the Imperial College model constantly cited by media was off by orders of magnitude.
3 of the 9 Endorser of this Pandemic are from Stanford:


Robert Siegel: Professor (Teaching) of Microbiology and Immunology

Joe Nation, PhD: Professor of the Practice of Stanford University Public Policy Program
Kennedy-Grossman Fellow in Human Biology

Nirav Shah, MD, MPH: Senior Scholar, Stanford University Clinical Excellence Research Center
Former Commissioner, New York State Department of Health

Georgetown well represented, as well:

https://covidactnow.org/about

  • Professor Rebecca Katz, Ph.D., MPH Director of the Center for Global Health Science and Security, Georgetown University
  • Ellie Graeden, Ph.D. CEO of Talus Analytics; Fmr Epidemiological modeling faculty, Georgetown University





    Beat the Hell
    How long do you want to ignore this user?
    AG
    So, its a way more contagious and slightly deadlier flu?
    FrioAg 00
    How long do you want to ignore this user?
    AG
    If, and it's still a big IF this positive but untested factor is anywhere near 7x, 10x or higher...

    Then we need to track down all the alarmists, fear mongers and self-serving epidemiologists and tattoo on their forehead "Zero. Credibility. Ever."

    May seem harsh, but we have to protect ourselves from ever letting them make decisions or influence society decisions again. They are actually getting off light, because we could try to make them pay restitution to 3.2m unemployed Americans this week.
    riverrataggie
    How long do you want to ignore this user?
    AG
    FrioAg 00 said:

    If, and it's still a big IF this positive but untested factor is anywhere near 7x, 10x or higher...

    Then we need to track down all the alarmists, fear mongers and self-serving epidemiologists and tattoo on their forehead "Zero. Credibility. Ever."

    May seem harsh, but we have to protect ourselves from ever letting them make decisions or influence society decisions again. They are actually getting off light, because we could try to make them pay restitution to 3.2m unemployed Americans this week.


    I've said it before. The hysteria was more harmful than the virus.
    FrioAg 00
    How long do you want to ignore this user?
    AG
    I wouldn't mind seeing us stick China with the bill either - maybe cancel $2 Trillion worth of payments for US Treasuries held by them
    riverrataggie
    How long do you want to ignore this user?
    AG
    FrioAg 00 said:

    I wouldn't mind seeing us stick China with the bill either - maybe cancel $2 Trillion worth of payments for US Treasuries held by them


    I think some of the modelers need to get a bill as well.
    FrioAg 00
    How long do you want to ignore this user?
    AG
    Beat the Hell said:

    So, its a way more contagious and slightly deadlier flu?


    And it will only be more contagious once, the first time folks get it. Once you're red blood cells and antibodies recognize it, they'll fight it far more effectively every time it's introduced in the future
    Gap
    How long do you want to ignore this user?
    AG
    Relevance? The output of the Imperial College model has now been reduced by a factor of 25.
    agforlife97
    How long do you want to ignore this user?
    AG
    Beat the Hell said:

    So, its a way more contagious and slightly deadlier flu?
    Death rate of the flu is like 0.1%. If the Wuhan virus has an actual death rate of .06%, that's a lower death rate, though it spreads faster than the flu. But if 10% of the US population gets it, you're talking 20,000 dead, most of whom would have less than 5 years of life expectancy anyway.

    Jobs report today is pure murder and it's also just tip of the iceberg. Suicides may end up outnumbering deaths from covid. But hey, that would be fine since it wouldn't overwhelm the medical system.
    aggiepanic95
    How long do you want to ignore this user?
    AG
    Great, can we all get back to work now please?!
    Social Distanced
    How long do you want to ignore this user?
    AG
    There are plenty on this board. Think Brandon can make a special badge for them?
    riverrataggie
    How long do you want to ignore this user?
    AG
    Social Distanced said:

    There are plenty on this board. Think Brandon can make a special badge for them?


    Just make it a poop emoji
    Ag with kids
    How long do you want to ignore this user?
    AG
    Gap said:

    Relevance? The output of the Imperial College model has now been reduced by a factor of 25.
    Explain?
    Keller6Ag91
    How long do you want to ignore this user?
    AG
    Beat the Hell said:

    So, its a way more contagious and slightly deadlier flu?
    If I read the their conclusions correctly, it's a much more contagious and significantly less deadlier flu.
    Gig'Em and God Bless,

    JB'91
    k2aggie07
    How long do you want to ignore this user?
    AG
    Explanation: He's completely misunderstood recent testimony given by Ferguson to Parliament because he read a dailywire.com article that used a NYT reporter twitter as its source.
    Social Distanced
    How long do you want to ignore this user?
    AG
    I believe there have been a number of experts saying that the modeling was off. Dr. Birx (and pretty much the only one I care to listen to) comes to mind.
    Gap
    How long do you want to ignore this user?
    AG
    k2aggie07 said:

    Explanation: He's completely misunderstood recent testimony given by Ferguson to Parliament because he read a dailywire.com article that used a NYT reporter twitter as its source.
    Simple questions:

    What does Ferguson expect for number of dead in the U.K. now? (Previous estimate was 500K)

    When taking out those expected to die this year already because of their weak and frail condition, what are marginal deaths from coronavirus?
    Charlie Kelley
    How long do you want to ignore this user?
    No ****, normal people like myself have been saying this is no big deal for months
    Ellis Wyatt
    How long do you want to ignore this user?
    riverrataggie said:

    FrioAg 00 said:

    I wouldn't mind seeing us stick China with the bill either - maybe cancel $2 Trillion worth of payments for US Treasuries held by them


    I think some of the modelers need to get a bill as well.
    I wonder what Clay Jenkins thinks about this. The Mayor of Richardson?
    Ag87H2O
    How long do you want to ignore this user?
    AG
    Gap said:

    And now the Imperial College model authors are in agreement with Stanford that the Imperial College model constantly cited by media was off by orders of magnitude.
    Some on this site might even call it exponentially wrong.
    Ag87H2O
    Page 1 of 3
     
    ×
    Verify your student status
    See Subscription Benefits
    Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.