tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-373157980388343224.post5088456705475243523..comments2024-03-28T07:15:19.227-04:00Comments on <a href="http://debrajray.blogspot.com/2013/07/just-what-is-chhota-peg.html">Chhota Pegs</a>: The Micro and the Macro of Covid-19Debraj Rayhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00400718958282805538noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-373157980388343224.post-43017611552358019022020-06-07T17:19:13.867-04:002020-06-07T17:19:13.867-04:00That said, I don't think --- even with the ben...That said, I don't think --- even with the benefit of hindsight --- that those early calculations were way off the wall, and I am still "voting" for a rate way below 1%. Could be 0.5%. But I don't think it is as low as 0.1% (which was my lower bound).Debraj Rayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00400718958282805538noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-373157980388343224.post-88717749594098763112020-06-07T17:16:24.374-04:002020-06-07T17:16:24.374-04:00Hi I didn’t see this. I am so sorry. Yes I agree i...Hi I didn’t see this. I am so sorry. Yes I agree it would be significantly higher. Just how much I don’t know. Once again my apologies for not replying earlier. Debraj Rayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00400718958282805538noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-373157980388343224.post-51025436288206863772020-04-18T02:17:07.038-04:002020-04-18T02:17:07.038-04:00Hello Raj. Thanks for the reply. I posted a respon...Hello Raj. Thanks for the reply. I posted a response over at my blog: https://douglaslcampbell.blogspot.com/2020/04/debate-over-covid-fatality.html<br /><br />FYI -- the death rate in NYC, assuming the entire population is infected, and no one left the city, is already .1%, roughly. Given a 60% negative test rate of those with severe symptoms, that gives us a lower bound for the death rate much higher than flu. Wouldn't you agree? Doug Campbell https://www.blogger.com/profile/11028049845008665877noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-373157980388343224.post-22343658494124096962020-04-04T18:55:31.328-04:002020-04-04T18:55:31.328-04:00Hi Doug, thanks. I wish we knew the truth behind f...Hi Doug, thanks. I wish we knew the truth behind fatality rates. You are right that it could be as high as 0.4%. My post is not written with a sense of dramatic certainty. That said (1) could you give me references to the Vo fatality rate? (2) I don't know what you mean by trusting the "Chinese data" --- the data has to do with airlifts out of Wuhan where everyone was tested, (3) the flu rate is for a particular distribution of ages (say, the US distribution), and we need to correct for that age distribution when studying regions with a high proportion of elderly, and (4) please read carefully before commenting on my interpretation. My post is perfectly consistent with OVERALL deaths being higher by a factor of 3 or more. I don't know what you want to include under the term "freaking out," but I am not including the terrible sense of sorrow that people feel for losing their loved ones. I simply refer to one's *own* fear of being fatally sick. Thanks.Debraj Rayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00400718958282805538noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-373157980388343224.post-41453022488948716462020-04-01T05:23:59.111-04:002020-04-01T05:23:59.111-04:00Hello Debraj. Thought provoking post. I see some p...Hello Debraj. Thought provoking post. I see some potential problems in your logic, however. Why are you ignoring the growth in deaths (or lack thereof) in New York before March 14th? If it's true that there were no deaths before then, then why wouldn't it follow that cases before then were scarce? Of course, likely there were few deaths before March 14th because there was little testing -- if you die of flu symptoms with no test for Covid available, it's likely you are not marked as dying of coronavirus. To the extent this is true, the growth rate of deaths is slower that what you have merely assumed. And, if it turns out that the rate of growth doubles every four days, then that would imply that either New York had it's first case before Wuhan did, or the death rate is even higher than 1%. <br /><br />Lastly, Bhattarchaya's stuff has already been debunked. The death rate in Vo was 1%. The Chinese data should not be taken at face value. The NBA is not a random sample of the US. The Stanford couple mention .01% as a plausible death rate. But, some Italian provinces have death rates already as high as .065%, and that is assuming a 100% infection rate, which can't be right, as these provinces are still recording masses of new cases despite a draconian quarantine. In other Italian towns, already .1% of the population has died, and many people have also tested negative. <br /><br />After all this, I should mention that I'm actually in agreement that the death rate could well be much less than 1%. .4-.6% seems plausible to me, but spreads easier since there is no vaccine. On the other hand, .1% seems ruled out by what we know already. This could explain why Italian hospitals were overwhelmed so early, why they are not by the flu. <br /><br />Also, you write that people have freaked out too much. Have you paid any attention, at all, to what has happened in Italy? The freak out there has not prevented ICU units to become completely overwhelmed. They are essentially letting people over the age of 65 die for lack of ventilators. You really think this mass "freaking out" in Italy makes no sense? <br /><br />Very Respectfully Submitted,<br />Doug Campbell Doug Campbell https://www.blogger.com/profile/11028049845008665877noreply@blogger.com