When will the pandemic be over?

KingsFourMan · Post by **KingsFourMan** » Apr 8th, '20, 19:31

Post by **SkiDork** » Apr 8th, '20, 19:36

AndyZee option of course

Pedro · Post by **Pedro** » Apr 8th, '20, 19:40

SkiDork wrote:AndyZee option of course

Respect

Post by **Bubba** » Apr 8th, '20, 19:44

Define “over”.

Whatever...the correct response is Andy Zee.

ANGUS · Post by **ANGUS** » Apr 8th, '20, 20:33

Alex. I'll take who is AndyZee for 1000.

Captain Hafski · Post by **Captain Hafski** » Apr 8th, '20, 21:54

Not until we find a cure [antidote, vaccine].

Highway Star · Post by **Highway Star** » Apr 8th, '20, 22:23

Quite a while.

They let things get to the point of critical mass on the east coast before ordering partial shut downs (stay at home) on March 20ish and not mandatory shelter in place. "Slow the spread" is not "stop the spread". Now we've had approximately 2 weeks or so of 10% to 50% case growth, NYC is massively under testing, while the cases mature and we can finally see the effects of the shut down.

The "peak" or "wave" or "surge" they keep referring to is definitely not a higher rate of cases, it's just the cases that were started at highest numerical infection rate 2-3 weeks ago prior to the shutdown and thus the largest number to mature yet. Hopefully shutdowns did have an effect and there will be very apparent decrease in the rate of cases (percent new per day) in the next week or so.

The problem is the forecasts show a plot of active cases peaking and then actually decreasing. I don't believe it.

It takes about 2-4 weeks from infection to death in a fatal case, 5-6 weeks from infection to cured in a serious case, and 2-3 weeks in a light case. Plus the asymptomatic cases. There are tons of people still out and working in the NYC region spreading it. I don't believe the measures in place will result in enough of a drop off in new case rate to readily decrease the number of active cases any time soon. It's going to plateau for quite a while as it burns though the population of most dense urban areas with poor movement control. The critical mass of cases will continue to put a large strain on the medical system.

New York state has about 22K resolved cases, 6K deaths and 16K cured. 151K reported cases.

They had 22K reported cases on March 23rd and very few resolved cases. Granted not all of those are resolved now, but good enough for a wild ass guess. Across that 16 day span, +5% new cases per day would have been a high enough rate of replacement to keep the number of active cases right about the same 23K active cases. Right now they are adding cases at 10% (reported, actual is higher) while resolving about 1% per day. With nearly 130K active cases (under reported), that's a BAD critical mass to be dealing with if you're looking to bring the new case rate lower than the resolution rate, when they are so far apart right now.

Calling out a slight blunting of the growth rate as a victory right now is like spiking the ball at the 50 yard line.

NYC's official population is 8.5Mish, they are definitely down a couple million people right now and they are reporting nearly 82K cases. Since they are only testing hospital patients and critical workers in NYC since around March 20th, there are definitely 2x to 5x more mature cases out there, and plenty more immature cases. As many as 5% to 10% or more of NYC current residents could be infected RIGHT NOW.

Over 5% of uniformed NYPD have tested positive for it and 19.3% are out sick.

hillbangin · Post by **hillbangin** » Apr 9th, '20, 07:21

Highway Star wrote:Quite a while.

They let things get to the point of critical mass on the east coast before ordering partial shut downs (stay at home) on March 20ish and not mandatory shelter in place. "Slow the spread" is not "stop the spread". Now we've had approximately 2 weeks or so of 10% to 50% case growth, NYC is massively under testing, while the cases mature and we can finally see the effects of the shut down.

The "peak" or "wave" or "surge" they keep referring to is definitely not a higher rate of cases, it's just the cases that were started at highest numerical infection rate 2-3 weeks ago prior to the shutdown and thus the largest number to mature yet. Hopefully shutdowns did have an effect and there will be very apparent decrease in the rate of cases (percent new per day) in the next week or so.

The problem is the forecasts show a plot of active cases peaking and then actually decreasing. I don't believe it.

It takes about 2-4 weeks from infection to death in a fatal case, 5-6 weeks from infection to cured in a serious case, and 2-3 weeks in a light case. Plus the asymptomatic cases. There are tons of people still out and working in the NYC region spreading it. I don't believe the measures in place will result in enough of a drop off in new case rate to readily decrease the number of active cases any time soon. It's going to plateau for quite a while as it burns though the population of most dense urban areas with poor movement control. The critical mass of cases will continue to put a large strain on the medical system.

New York state has about 22K resolved cases, 6K deaths and 16K cured. 151K reported cases.

They had 22K reported cases on March 23rd and very few resolved cases. Granted not all of those are resolved now, but good enough for a wild ass guess. Across that 16 day span, +5% new cases per day would have been a high enough rate of replacement to keep the number of active cases right about the same 23K active cases. Right now they are adding cases at 10% (reported, actual is higher) while resolving about 1% per day. With nearly 130K active cases (under reported), that's a BAD critical mass to be dealing with if you're looking to bring the new case rate lower than the resolution rate, when they are so far apart right now.

Calling out a slight blunting of the growth rate as a victory right now is like spiking the ball at the 50 yard line.

NYC's official population is 8.5Mish, they are definitely down a couple million people right now and they are reporting nearly 82K cases. Since they are only testing hospital patients and critical workers in NYC since around March 20th, there are definitely 2x to 5x more mature cases out there, and plenty more immature cases. As many as 5% to 10% or more of NYC current residents could be infected RIGHT NOW.

Over 5% of uniformed NYPD have tested positive for it and 19.3% are out sick.

NY is screwed.

Open the rest of the country.

daytripper · Post by **daytripper** » Apr 9th, '20, 07:51

This countries economy would not survive without NY.

Highway Star · Post by **Highway Star** » Apr 9th, '20, 08:35

Few other points to make -

- NYPD is an interesting indicator because they have a closely monitored population with normal health criteria that can only achieve minimal social distancing. Closely watch their numbers and draw your own conclusions.

- Boston / MA is in much better shape because they are over testing by 4x-10x depending on the day, can achieve better distancing, have a much lower cases per population and better medical resources. They could conceivably plateau active cases at about 20K, with 4K hospitalized, which seems like a sustainable number. But again you have to keep the new case growth rate at +5% daily or under. Assuming MA is getting good resolution numbers, they've resolved 744 cases. They had about that in detected cases on march 22/23, so you could call it 17.5 days from detection to resolution vs. 16 days for NY. NYC is only testing bad cases and critical cases, so they are going to have many more people dying quickly after testing.

- NYC's GMP (GDP) is about 1.5-2T or just shy of 10% of national GDP. The people who make the large majority of that are GONE. They're either working from home and rigorously social distancing, or they've fled to their vacation homes. They are not getting infected at nearly the rate of everyone else who is active in the city. If the virus persists strongly in the city for months, with 200K+ active cases at any given point, there is no way you're going to get anyone to go back to their offices until 2021.

Post by **SkiDork** » Apr 9th, '20, 08:57

For those who arrived here in the last few years, AndyZee was a frequent poster who took a lot of crap from people but hung in there on the forum. He died about 5 years ago. Underneath it all he was a sweet guy. Back then all polls (in order to be official) had to have the AndyZee option at the end.

RustyK · Post by **RustyK** » Apr 9th, '20, 09:00

SkiDork wrote:For those who arrived here in the last few years, AndyZee was a frequent poster who took a lot of crap from people but hung in there on the forum. He died about 5 years ago. Underneath it all he was a sweet guy. Back then all polls (in order to be official) had to have the AndyZee option at the end.

madhatter · Post by **madhatter** » Apr 9th, '20, 09:04

daytripper wrote:This countries economy would not survive without NY.

virtually everything that happens in NYC could take place elsewhere...regardless NYC isn't going away...

Mistergiff · Post by **Mistergiff** » Apr 9th, '20, 09:21

madhatter wrote:
daytripper wrote:This countries economy would not survive without NY.
virtually everything that happens in NYC could take place elsewhere...regardless NYC isn't going away...

There's a huge number of these folks here in the Berkshires. The number of high end cars with NY or NJ plates driving around the region feels like July. Wouldn't surprise me to see a sizable number stay and transition to work from home. Something similar happened after 9/11. I'd imagine this would be a noticeably larger.

KingsFourMan · Post by **KingsFourMan** » Apr 9th, '20, 09:27

SkiDork wrote:For those who arrived here in the last few years, AndyZee was a frequent poster who took a lot of crap from people but hung in there on the forum. He died about 5 years ago. Underneath it all he was a sweet guy. Back then all polls (in order to be official) had to have the AndyZee option at the end.

Yup, and Andy Zee never once lost a poll.

KillingtonZone.com