13 votes

This isn’t the flattened curve we were promised

12 comments

  1. [9]
    envy
    Link
    It will supposedly take about a year or two to come up with a vaccine. USA has about 330,000 spare hospital beds, and is further constrained by medical resources, so at an optimistic 2.3%...

    It will supposedly take about a year or two to come up with a vaccine.

    USA has about 330,000 spare hospital beds, and is further constrained by medical resources, so at an optimistic 2.3% hospitalization rate, and a one week convalescence duration, it would take one to two years of flattening the curve to avoid unnecessary deaths due to overloading the current American medical system. Even with increased medical capacity, reduced convalescence duration and smarter testing & tracking, the economic cost is staggering, and given the slow rate of testing expansion we are unlikely to increase medical capacity enough to build enough immunity before a vaccine is available.

    The other option is to overload the medical system and suffer the mortality rate, which is somewhere around 1-3% depending on how flat the curve stays. A number of economists are warning that this also has significant economic cost in addition to the cost to humanity.

    Everyone is seriously optimistic about how soon or how cleanly we can get out of this mess.

    15 votes
    1. [3]
      vektor
      Link Parent
      Keep in mind that a unconstrained curve might well infect more than the equilibrium of 60%. At 60-70% recovered, the disease will die. But if 30% are infected and 30% are recovered, the rest has...

      Keep in mind that a unconstrained curve might well infect more than the equilibrium of 60%. At 60-70% recovered, the disease will die. But if 30% are infected and 30% are recovered, the rest has very little chance of avoiding the disease. This is because herd immunity is about having recovered, not having been infected, so there's inertia in there.

      Natural Herd immunity never was an option.

      The disease must be pushed back to where containment is possible, until we have better treatment and prevention options. Reopening before that is the case is dangerous and should be done slowly, deliberately and under intense observation.

      13 votes
      1. [3]
        Comment deleted by author
        Link Parent
        1. vektor
          (edited )
          Link Parent
          Even if we are underreporting by a big margin, which I'm not convinced of, we're still not nearly there. New York City could be sitting at an incidence of what, 3%? You're going to have to keep...

          Even if we are underreporting by a big margin, which I'm not convinced of, we're still not nearly there. New York City could be sitting at an incidence of what, 3%? You're going to have to keep those refrigerated trucks around for a while to get to 30.

          It's going to be a while to normalcy, even if we get further good news. As I said, best option is to go hard and then regain control.

          4 votes
        2. envy
          Link Parent
          The numbers are all over the map from 0-4x on that one.

          The numbers are all over the map from 0-4x on that one.

          1 vote
    2. [2]
      FinnG
      Link Parent
      Interesting, I've not heard/read/thought much about this. Do you have any specific articles/economists in mind?

      A number of economists are warning that this also has significant economic cost in addition to the cost to humanity.

      Interesting, I've not heard/read/thought much about this. Do you have any specific articles/economists in mind?

      3 votes
      1. envy
        Link Parent
        Sorry, i am just repeating what I have read in articles. I did find this, but it isn't that great.

        Sorry, i am just repeating what I have read in articles.

        I did find this, but it isn't that great.

        1 vote
    3. [2]
      skybrian
      Link Parent
      Another possibility is that someone finds a treatment other than a vaccine to avoid most hospitalization. Maybe that's optimistic too, but a lot of people are working on it.

      Another possibility is that someone finds a treatment other than a vaccine to avoid most hospitalization. Maybe that's optimistic too, but a lot of people are working on it.

      3 votes
      1. envy
        Link Parent
        Yup, we could be saved by vaccine, treatment, surprisingly high antibodies results, highly efficient test/trace (go asiapac!), everyone wearing masks and gloves, summer.... Or we could end up in a...

        Yup, we could be saved by vaccine, treatment, surprisingly high antibodies results, highly efficient test/trace (go asiapac!), everyone wearing masks and gloves, summer....

        Or we could end up in a situation where those with immunity are conscripted into the front lines of healthcare and food delivery...

        2 votes
    4. Gaywallet
      Link Parent
      We've already seen a sharp uptick of testing availability in areas which have not been hit as hard because they started shelter in place orders early. I expect testing demand will continue to...

      given the slow rate of testing expansion we are unlikely to increase medical capacity enough to build enough immunity before a vaccine is available.

      We've already seen a sharp uptick of testing availability in areas which have not been hit as hard because they started shelter in place orders early. I expect testing demand will continue to drive production and we will reach reasonable testing capacity across the US within the next 6 months. It's possible that this plus a combination of a much larger herd immunity due to many areas taking risky moves such as re-opening beaches and other communal gathering areas may change the nature of how we control the spread of this virus.

      2 votes
  2. [2]
    jzimbel
    Link
    I’d encourage people to check out the mathematical models on this, since pure math is harder to bullshit and relatively simple to understand. The SIR model for example has shown this asymmetrical,...

    I’d encourage people to check out the mathematical models on this, since pure math is harder to bullshit and relatively simple to understand. The SIR model for example has shown this asymmetrical, slow-falling infection curve since the beginning.

    Here are a few nice videos:

    5 votes
    1. skybrian
      Link Parent
      It depends on the model. Some do assume symmetry and have been criticized for that. Here's an explanation. I found it useful but someone else I shared it with couldn't follow it. So, I think this...

      It depends on the model. Some do assume symmetry and have been criticized for that. Here's an explanation.

      I found it useful but someone else I shared it with couldn't follow it. So, I think this article, which just points out the lack of symmetry, is still useful.

      4 votes
  3. skybrian
    Link
    From the opinion piece: [...] [...]

    From the opinion piece:

    “Flatten the curve” has become the mantra of the global effort to contain the coronavirus pandemic. It’s a powerful and immensely valuable image, helping people understand why their sacrifices are necessary to save lives.

    It’s also wrong in a crucial way: The dying won’t be over nearly as soon as it suggests.

    Consider the typical charts comparing the “bad” and “flattened” curves of Covid-19 cases. They’re all symmetrical, indicating that once a population has reached the peak, the disease will taper away just as quickly as it grew.

    [...]

    Is this really happening? Let’s look at Italy and Spain, which entered the curve about two weeks ahead of the U.S. 1 They both had uncontrolled outbreaks and turned to lockdowns too late, leading to overburdened hospitals.

    [...]

    There’s no U.S. data yet on what the right side of the curve will look like, but the best available evidence from other countries suggests that the descent will be slow. New York Governor Andrew Cuomo has said “the worst is over” and “we’ve reached the peak.” He should have followed with “now comes the long wait.”

    3 votes