Slitherine

quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

... I gave a talk in Colombia in the late 1990s...

Was your talk at about the same time as Ross's (crsutton's) chat with the Chilean prostitute?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

The Daily Mail posted this startling, misleading graph. It tells the truth but not the whole truth. A percentage of the population (certainly Forumites) understand the utility and weaknesses of this graph, but the media presents it without context (without "the whole truth" so often key to comprehension). The casual reader - the layman - doesn't have context, takes a look, and shudders. He knows that Italy has been ground zero for weeks and concludes that the US is in far worse shape. He doesn't have time to do the quick calculation needed to understand this is raw numbers rather than per capita, that the graph has a seriously distorted y axis, etc.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ian R

quote:

ORIGINAL: obvert

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ian R

But perhaps Niall should stick to history, and not dabble in mathematics.

quote:

Professor Niall Ferguson from Imperial College in London agrees that one death corresponds to at least 1,000 cases in the community, assuming a death rate of about 1 per cent.

In above link.

Ahhh, the joys of choosing soundbites out of context. I'm pretty sure basic maths is in his sphere of knowledge.

The nicest thing I've Heard said about Niall was by Sir Antony Beevor (during questions at the end of a a talk) - something to the effect -

'I prefer to leave the counter factuals to Niall Ferguson and Andrew Roberts"

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sammy5IsAlive

Assuming I'm not being whooshed by a joke here - I think this is a sub-editing error. There is a Neil Ferguson at Imperial College who is an epidemiologist who I assume is the person who is actually being quoted.

https://www.imperial.ac.uk/people/neil.ferguson

Correct. Niall is an economist and historian, not an epidemiologist.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

... I gave a talk in Colombia in the late 1990s...

Was your talk at about the same time as Ross's (crsutton's) chat with the Chilean prostitute?

Different country. Different audience.

BTW, shouldn't that be "Ross' " chat instead of "Ross's " chat? Just wanted to do my part to make sure we still have grammatical standards around these here parts.

quote:

ORIGINAL: obvert

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sammy5IsAlive
I would not be surprised if a combination of travel restrictions, proactive testing and contact tracing and the simple dispersion of rural populations leads to some US states having very different, much more positive, outcomes and experiences than what has been seen elsewhere in the world.

I agree. Our country is quite heterogenous in its population distribution. Big cities on the East coast, West coast and a few in the Midwest and South. With lots of smaller communities in between. New York City's epidemiologic curve will likely wind up looking very different than Ames, Iowa or Houston, Texas.

I mentioned earlier that the differences in this big sprawling country could cause both difficulties and advantages at local levels depending on how the State and county leadership deal with this.

The difficult factor to deal with is movement of people. As the virus hits hard someplace it could lead to an exodus, bringing it elsewhere in force as has occurred in Iran, Italy and other locations.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

quote:

ORIGINAL: obvert

This is the cases chart with the relatively new multi-country charts below. Very interesting comparisons, and some countries that are starting to have worrying trajectories, like Turkey, Pakistan and Ecuador.

Any charts that correct for per capita cases, obvert? The United States is the third most populous country in the world. Comparing raw case numbers for the trajectory compared to a place like Switzerland with less than 10% of our population seems spurious.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ian R

Back in Oz, we now have 8 deaths and just over 2000 cases.

Interestingly, the majority of the increase is straight from a series of returning cruise ships including the Ruby Princess.

quote:

ORIGINAL: alanschu

Unfortunate about Italy though based on say, China, I suspect that part of the flattening will involve an actual plateau, as opposed to a sudden decline.

It's funny how anxious I am for their results hahaha.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

quote:

ORIGINAL: obvert

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sammy5IsAlive
I would not be surprised if a combination of travel restrictions, proactive testing and contact tracing and the simple dispersion of rural populations leads to some US states having very different, much more positive, outcomes and experiences than what has been seen elsewhere in the world.

I agree. Our country is quite heterogenous in its population distribution. Big cities on the East coast, West coast and a few in the Midwest and South. With lots of smaller communities in between. New York City's epidemiologic curve will likely wind up looking very different than Ames, Iowa or Houston, Texas.

I mentioned earlier that the differences in this big sprawling country could cause both difficulties and advantages at local levels depending on how the State and county leadership deal with this.

The difficult factor to deal with is movement of people. As the virus hits hard someplace it could lead to an exodus, bringing it elsewhere in force as has occurred in Iran, Italy and other locations.

When you mention a 'this big sprawling country' were you referring to the UK or the US? I just don't see that happening here-an exodus of people uniformly fleeing one area en masse. Apart from some New Yorkers heading to the Hamptons rather than the heart of the city per se, I've really not heard much about that panicked flight response.

quote:

ORIGINAL: obvert

Any charts that correct for per capita cases, obvert? The United States is the third most populous country in the world. Comparing raw case numbers for the trajectory compared to a place like Switzerland with less than 10% of our population seems spurious.

quote:


Why spurious? China and India are here too.

The interest for me, and this may just be for me, is to see the doubling rate, which is not different depending on population , right?

It's all spurious since we don't know anything about "real numbers" but if this does show evidence of the curves, the trajectories, the successes and more difficult areas, then it's useful as a comparative tool.

It's more useful when you have some knowledge of testing programs and other factors as we do on this thread. So I see it as one of the tools, not a comprehensive one. Maybe one could be designed with every interesting factor, but I think it could become more difficult to read quickly.

So as the US stays above the doubling every three day curve we know that is because to the recent surge in testing, and when it dips under that it'll be likely that it's heading toward the peak of the curve.

quote:

ORIGINAL: obvert

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

quote:

ORIGINAL: obvert

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sammy5IsAlive
I would not be surprised if a combination of travel restrictions, proactive testing and contact tracing and the simple dispersion of rural populations leads to some US states having very different, much more positive, outcomes and experiences than what has been seen elsewhere in the world.

I agree. Our country is quite heterogenous in its population distribution. Big cities on the East coast, West coast and a few in the Midwest and South. With lots of smaller communities in between. New York City's epidemiologic curve will likely wind up looking very different than Ames, Iowa or Houston, Texas.

I mentioned earlier that the differences in this big sprawling country could cause both difficulties and advantages at local levels depending on how the State and county leadership deal with this.

The difficult factor to deal with is movement of people. As the virus hits hard someplace it could lead to an exodus, bringing it elsewhere in force as has occurred in Iran, Italy and other locations.

When you mention a 'this big sprawling country' were you referring to the UK or the US? I just don't see that happening here-an exodus of people uniformly fleeing one area en masse. Apart from some New Yorkers heading to the Hamptons rather than the heart of the city per se, I've really not heard much about that panicked flight response.

The UK is not sprawling, and it doesn't have states.

In Italy one of the reasons this has been hard to contain is that every time a lockdown occurred it was either weak or the info leaked and people left to go other areas where they had family, friends, holiday homes, etc. This carried the virus and made it hard to contain.

I don't think basic human instinct is too different anywhere. If you can move and you have a place to go, like mom and dad's, or uncle's beach house, or grandpa's mountain cabin, or just a camping ground or RV park, you might just think about getting out while you can.

This has interestingly been happening here, and has led to restrictions tightening. National Parks are having to close due to overwhelming visitation. I've heard of this in the States as well. I'll try to find a link.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

quote:

ORIGINAL: obvert

This is the cases chart with the relatively new multi-country charts below. Very interesting comparisons, and some countries that are starting to have worrying trajectories, like Turkey, Pakistan and Ecuador.

Any charts that correct for per capita cases, obvert? The United States is the third most populous country in the world. Comparing raw case numbers for the trajectory compared to a place like Switzerland with less than 10% of our population seems spurious.

quote:

ORIGINAL: obvert

....
This has interestingly been happening here, and has led to restrictions tightening. National Parks are having to close due to overwhelming visitation. I've heard of this in the States as well. I'll try to find a link.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy
Third most populace? China and India are one and two, and isn't Russia number three?

quote:

ORIGINAL: ITAKLinus


In some countries there are weird ways of assessing the death cause (your Kaposi's sarcoma example and mine regarding lung cancer in Ukraine) and Germany is definitely counting the people died OF coronavirus, instead of died WITH it as we do in Italy.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

quote:

ORIGINAL: obvert

Any charts that correct for per capita cases, obvert? The United States is the third most populous country in the world. Comparing raw case numbers for the trajectory compared to a place like Switzerland with less than 10% of our population seems spurious.

quote:


Why spurious? China and India are here too.

The interest for me, and this may just be for me, is to see the doubling rate, which is not different depending on population , right?

It's all spurious since we don't know anything about "real numbers" but if this does show evidence of the curves, the trajectories, the successes and more difficult areas, then it's useful as a comparative tool.

It's more useful when you have some knowledge of testing programs and other factors as we do on this thread. So I see it as one of the tools, not a comprehensive one. Maybe one could be designed with every interesting factor, but I think it could become more difficult to read quickly.

So as the US stays above the doubling every three day curve we know that is because to the recent surge in testing, and when it dips under that it'll be likely that it's heading toward the peak of the curve.

I'd rather see raw case numbers per capita to account for larger populations and avoid the extrapolation from small sample sizes/small population countries. By looking at 'cumulative numbers of confirmed cases' on the X axis and 'number of days since 100th case' on the Y, it gives a picture that-without accounting for vastly different populations-is misleading.

If you replaced the raw numbers X axis with a per capita numbers, the US curve would look very different (lower) than Spain, France, Germany or most of the other countries sandwiched into that upper graph major band. Of course, China's curve would be significantly lower too. Italy and Spain would remain standouts.

quote:

ORIGINAL: obvert

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

quote:

ORIGINAL: obvert

This is the cases chart with the relatively new multi-country charts below. Very interesting comparisons, and some countries that are starting to have worrying trajectories, like Turkey, Pakistan and Ecuador.

Any charts that correct for per capita cases, obvert? The United States is the third most populous country in the world. Comparing raw case numbers for the trajectory compared to a place like Switzerland with less than 10% of our population seems spurious.

Why spurious? China and India are here too.

The interest for me, and this may just be for me, is to see the doubling rate, which is not different depending on population , right?

It's all spurious since we don't know anything about "real numbers" but if this does show evidence of the curves, the trajectories, the successes and more difficult areas, then it's useful as a comparative tool.

It's more useful when you have some knowledge of testing programs and other factors as we do on this thread. So I see it as one of the tools, not a comprehensive one. Maybe one could be designed with every interesting factor, but I think it could become more difficult to read quickly.

So as the US stays above the doubling every three day curve we know that is because to the recent surge in testing, and when it dips under that it'll be likely that it's heading toward the peak of the curve.

quote:

ORIGINAL: obvert

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

quote:

ORIGINAL: obvert

Any charts that correct for per capita cases, obvert? The United States is the third most populous country in the world. Comparing raw case numbers for the trajectory compared to a place like Switzerland with less than 10% of our population seems spurious.

quote:


Why spurious? China and India are here too.

The interest for me, and this may just be for me, is to see the doubling rate, which is not different depending on population , right?

It's all spurious since we don't know anything about "real numbers" but if this does show evidence of the curves, the trajectories, the successes and more difficult areas, then it's useful as a comparative tool.

It's more useful when you have some knowledge of testing programs and other factors as we do on this thread. So I see it as one of the tools, not a comprehensive one. Maybe one could be designed with every interesting factor, but I think it could become more difficult to read quickly.

So as the US stays above the doubling every three day curve we know that is because to the recent surge in testing, and when it dips under that it'll be likely that it's heading toward the peak of the curve.

I'd rather see raw case numbers per capita to account for larger populations and avoid the extrapolation from small sample sizes/small population countries. By looking at 'cumulative numbers of confirmed cases' on the X axis and 'number of days since 100th case' on the Y, it gives a picture that-without accounting for vastly different populations-is misleading.

If you replaced the raw numbers X axis with a per capita numbers, the US curve would look very different (lower) than Spain, France, Germany or most of the other countries sandwiched into that upper graph major band. Of course, China's curve would be significantly lower too. Italy and Spain would remain standouts.

I think you miss the point. The curve in relation to the total population is not what this is trying to show. that is some other visual I've not seen. interesting, sure, but this is about doubling speed of the virus cases. So comparing countries without population totals is actually just fine for that.

quote:

ORIGINAL: obvert

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

quote:

ORIGINAL: obvert

Any charts that correct for per capita cases, obvert? The United States is the third most populous country in the world. Comparing raw case numbers for the trajectory compared to a place like Switzerland with less than 10% of our population seems spurious.

quote:


Why spurious? China and India are here too.

The interest for me, and this may just be for me, is to see the doubling rate, which is not different depending on population , right?

It's all spurious since we don't know anything about "real numbers" but if this does show evidence of the curves, the trajectories, the successes and more difficult areas, then it's useful as a comparative tool.

It's more useful when you have some knowledge of testing programs and other factors as we do on this thread. So I see it as one of the tools, not a comprehensive one. Maybe one could be designed with every interesting factor, but I think it could become more difficult to read quickly.

So as the US stays above the doubling every three day curve we know that is because to the recent surge in testing, and when it dips under that it'll be likely that it's heading toward the peak of the curve.

I'd rather see raw case numbers per capita to account for larger populations and avoid the extrapolation from small sample sizes/small population countries. By looking at 'cumulative numbers of confirmed cases' on the X axis and 'number of days since 100th case' on the Y, it gives a picture that-without accounting for vastly different populations-is misleading.

If you replaced the raw numbers X axis with a per capita numbers, the US curve would look very different (lower) than Spain, France, Germany or most of the other countries sandwiched into that upper graph major band. Of course, China's curve would be significantly lower too. Italy and Spain would remain standouts.

I think you miss the point. The curve in relation to the total population is not what this is trying to show. that is some other visual I've not seen. interesting, sure, but this is about doubling speed of the virus cases. So comparing countries without population totals is actually just fine for that.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy
Third most populace? China and India are one and two, and isn't Russia number three?

Not even close, Comrade.

https://www.worldometers.info/world-population/population-by-country/

quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy
Third most populace? China and India are one and two, and isn't Russia number three?

Not even close, Comrade.

https://www.worldometers.info/world-population/population-by-country/

I am beginning to wonder about the provenance of Worldometer figures. There were questions here about the COVID-19 figures and graphs. On Russia, I remember seeing a population figure of around 350 million - that was after the Soviet Union broke up too.
Worldometer also shows a larger land area for US than Canada when other references I have seen for many years say Canada is larger in area.

So the question is - who sponsors Worldometer, what is its expertise and sources of information and what fact-checking is done before they put stuff up? This could be a couple of guys publishing any old thing to get the advertising revenue rather than provide a solid source.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy
Third most populace? China and India are one and two, and isn't Russia number three?

Not even close, Comrade.

https://www.worldometers.info/world-population/population-by-country/

I am beginning to wonder about the provenance of Worldometer figures. There were questions here about the COVID-19 figures and graphs. On Russia, I remember seeing a population figure of around 350 million - that was after the Soviet Union broke up too.
Worldometer also shows a larger land area for US than Canada when other references I have seen for many years say Canada is larger in area.

So the question is - who sponsors Worldometer, what is its expertise and sources of information and what fact-checking is done before they put stuff up? This could be a couple of guys publishing any old thing to get the advertising revenue rather than provide a solid source.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy
Third most populace? China and India are one and two, and isn't Russia number three?

Not even close, Comrade.

https://www.worldometers.info/world-population/population-by-country/

I am beginning to wonder about the provenance of Worldometer figures. There were questions here about the COVID-19 figures and graphs. On Russia, I remember seeing a population figure of around 350 million - that was after the Soviet Union broke up too.
Worldometer also shows a larger land area for US than Canada when other references I have seen for many years say Canada is larger in area.

So the question is - who sponsors Worldometer, what is its expertise and sources of information and what fact-checking is done before they put stuff up? This could be a couple of guys publishing any old thing to get the advertising revenue rather than provide a solid source.

Why use anything but Wikipedia for these sorts of things?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy
Third most populace? China and India are one and two, and isn't Russia number three?

Not even close, Comrade.

https://www.worldometers.info/world-population/population-by-country/

I am beginning to wonder about the provenance of Worldometer figures. There were questions here about the COVID-19 figures and graphs. On Russia, I remember seeing a population figure of around 350 million - that was after the Soviet Union broke up too.
Worldometer also shows a larger land area for US than Canada when other references I have seen for many years say Canada is larger in area.

So the question is - who sponsors Worldometer, what is its expertise and sources of information and what fact-checking is done before they put stuff up? This could be a couple of guys publishing any old thing to get the advertising revenue rather than provide a solid source.

Why use anything but Wikipedia for these sorts of things?

quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy
Third most populace? China and India are one and two, and isn't Russia number three?

Not even close, Comrade.

I am beginning to wonder about the provenance of Worldometer figures. There were questions here about the COVID-19 figures and graphs. On Russia, I remember seeing a population figure of around 350 million - that was after the Soviet Union broke up too.
Worldometer also shows a larger land area for US than Canada when other references I have seen for many years say Canada is larger in area.

So the question is - who sponsors Worldometer, what is its expertise and sources of information and what fact-checking is done before they put stuff up? This could be a couple of guys publishing any old thing to get the advertising revenue rather than provide a solid source.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy
Third most populace? China and India are one and two, and isn't Russia number three?

Not even close, Comrade.

https://www.worldometers.info/world-population/population-by-country/

I am beginning to wonder about the provenance of Worldometer figures. There were questions here about the COVID-19 figures and graphs. On Russia, I remember seeing a population figure of around 350 million - that was after the Soviet Union broke up too.
Worldometer also shows a larger land area for US than Canada when other references I have seen for many years say Canada is larger in area.

So the question is - who sponsors Worldometer, what is its expertise and sources of information and what fact-checking is done before they put stuff up? This could be a couple of guys publishing any old thing to get the advertising revenue rather than provide a solid source.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

Dude. Your chart is of area (land mass) of countries ranked. Russia is really big. But I was referring to population sizes, not land mass.