6356 stories
·
83 followers

@28delayslater @thirdrowtesla Exactly. Moreover, all hospitals were given exact specifications of Resmed & Philips ventilators before delivery & all confirmed they would be critical.

1 Share

@28delayslater @thirdrowtesla Exactly. Moreover, all hospitals were given exact specifications of Resmed & Philips ventilators before delivery & all confirmed they would be critical.




1878 likes, 148 retweets
Read the whole story
skorgu
2 hours ago
reply
Share this story
Delete

Best-Case And Worst-Case Coronavirus Forecasts Are Very Far Apart

1 Comment

Building a model to forecast the COVID-19 outbreak is really freaking hard. That’s one reason we’ve been following a weekly survey of infectious disease researchers from institutions around the United States.

This week’s survey, taken on March 30 and 31, shows that experts expect an average of 263,000 COVID-19-related deaths in 2020, but anywhere between 71,000 and 1.7 million deaths is a reasonable estimate. The researchers believe that only about 12 percent of all COVID-19 infections in the U.S. have been reported, and they don’t expect that the daily number of reported cases in New York state — which was most recently 7,917 — will drop below 1,000 until around the end of April.

The survey collects each expert’s best estimate for each question, as well as their best-case and worst-case estimates. From those individual responses, the survey organizers — Thomas McAndrew and Nicholas Reich of the University of Massachusetts Amherst — build a probabilistic consensus forecast, which is a tool that combines all of the responses to project the most likely future scenario as well as the range of possible outcomes.

Each expert’s answers contribute to the consensus forecast equally. This week, McAndrew and Reich explored the possibility of weighting experts based on their accuracy in past surveys, but they decided against it. “The performance of individual experts has varied from week to week, and we haven’t found a benefit to using different weights for each expert to build more accurate consensus distributions,” they said.

Here’s what the researchers said this past week.

What is the smallest, most likely and largest number of total cases that The COVID Tracking Project will report on April 5?

When the survey was sent out on March 30, The COVID Tracking Project was reporting about 141,000 COVID-19 cases in the U.S. The survey asked how many total cases will be reported on April 5, and even just a week out, there was a great deal of uncertainty in many of the experts’ forecasts.

Mary Bushman, a postdoctoral researcher at Harvard University’s Center for Communicable Disease Dynamics, said much of the uncertainty in case counts is related to the availability of testing. “It’s hard to know whether testing capacity will continue to increase and keep pace with increasing numbers of infections.”

The expert consensus suggests that about 387,000 cases will be reported on April 5, with a 90 percent chance of between 256,000 and 643,000 cases being reported. Last week, the consensus forecast predicted around 117,000 cases as of Sunday, March 29, and there turned out to be about 139,000.

How many people will die in the U.S. due to COVID-19 this year?

On Tuesday, Drs. Anthony Fauci and Deborah Birx — members of the White House Coronavirus Task Force — estimated that COVID-19 could kill 100,000 to 240,000 Americans even if all federal guidelines are followed closely. But the surveyed experts aren’t assuming those guidelines will be followed, which helps explain their higher consensus forecast of 263,000 deaths and their high-end estimate of 1.7 million deaths.

“I think we can be reasonably confident that most of the U.S. will remain under some social or physical distancing directives for at least the next few weeks,” Bushman said. “But there is significant uncertainty over how well people will comply with these directives and how much they actually reduce transmission, considering all of the activities that are exempted as essential.”

In the three weeks we’ve been tracking the survey, the number of forecasted deaths has increased from 200,000 to 263,000.

How many total COVID-19 infections were actually in the U.S. on March 30?

Although the The COVID Tracking Project reported about 141,000 total U.S. cases on Monday, the experts think the number of infections — symptomatic or asymptomatic — in the U.S. was much higher.

They believe there were between 289,000 and 12.8 million infections, with 1.1 million being the consensus estimate, implying that the experts think that only about 12 percent of all infections have been reported. This is in line with what they’ve reported for the past three weeks, when the share of reported infections has ranged between 9 percent and 12 percent.

When will New York state report fewer than 1,000 new daily cases of COVID-19?

On April 1, 7,917 new cases were reported in New York state, and that daily number has been increasing steadily for weeks.

The experts were asked when they thought the number of daily reported cases would drop below 1,000, assuming that work from home restrictions remain in place. The majority think it will happen sometime in April, but some experts think it’s possible that won’t happen until July.

The consensus forecast is that the number of new cases in New York state will drop below 1,000 around April 28, but any date between April 9 and June 9 is a reasonable estimate.

This week, the survey also asked each expert to report the proportion of their responses that comes from experience and intuition rather than from hard models built by themselves or other researchers. On average, 68 percent of each expert’s responses are coming from experience and intuition, with the other 32 percent coming from models.

That a group of expert infectious disease modelers is relying more on their experience and intuition than on hard models is yet more evidence that building a COVID-19 model is a huge, huge challenge.

Read the whole story
skorgu
3 hours ago
reply
Oy.
Share this story
Delete

Does the Atlantic Ocean Have Water In It? Views Differ

2 Shares

Hoo boy, I guess we’re going to keep doing this:

At least the authors in question are willing to engage in good faith with substantive criticism!

As we’ve said before, if there isn’t widespread testing available free, then society cannot go back to anything remotely resembling normal without a staggering death rate. This is not a matter of any dispute. Pretending that it is — in an A1 headline yet — is doing propaganda, not journalism.

…Read the whole Gonsalves thread here.

Read the whole story
skorgu
1 day ago
reply
fxer
1 day ago
reply
Bend, Oregon
Share this story
Delete

RT @katy_milkman: Overconfidence is a pernicious bias, even in experts. It's astounding how few experts' confidence intervals included the…

1 Share

Overconfidence is a pernicious bias, even in experts. It's astounding how few experts' confidence intervals included the correct estimate of #COVID19 infections in the US by 3/29 when forecasting for just two weeks in the future. (of course, non-expert estimates are even worse) pic.twitter.com/pa6oMDp2wV



Retweeted by ESYudkowsky on Tuesday, March 31st, 2020 12:27pm


744 likes, 343 retweets
Read the whole story
skorgu
2 days ago
reply
mxm23
56 minutes ago
Experts may have still thought that proper precautions would be put in place -- that proper messaging would go out and be heeded.
Share this story
Delete

Firmly believe that as your seniority increases, so does your responsibility. If someone under your guidance does something unwise or does something that gets heat, your role to stand in and take the blast. And companies need people who can survive in that role for the long haul.

1 Share

Firmly believe that as your seniority increases, so does your responsibility. If someone under your guidance does something unwise or does something that gets heat, your role to stand in and take the blast. And companies need people who can survive in that role for the long haul.




182 likes, 26 retweets
Read the whole story
skorgu
2 days ago
reply
Share this story
Delete

Astrophysicist gets magnets stuck up nose while inventing coronavirus device | Australia news

1 Comment and 2 Shares

An Australian astrophysicist has been admitted to hospital after getting four magnets stuck up his nose in an attempt to invent a device that stops people touching their faces during the coronavirus outbreak.

Dr Daniel Reardon, a research fellow at a Melbourne university, was building a necklace that sounds an alarm on facial contact, when the mishap occurred on Thursday night.

The 27 year-old astrophysicist, who studies pulsars and gravitational waves, said he was trying to liven up the boredom of self-isolation with the four powerful neodymium magnets.

“I have some electronic equipment but really no experience or expertise in building circuits or things,” he told Guardian Australia.

“I had a part that detects magnetic fields. I thought that if I built a circuit that could detect the magnetic field, and we wore magnets on our wrists, then it could set off an alarm if you brought it too close to your face. A bit of boredom in isolation made me think of that.”

However, the academic realised the electronic part he had did the opposite – and would only complete a circuit when there was no magnetic field present.

“I accidentally invented a necklace that buzzes continuously unless you move your hand close to your face,” he said.

“After scrapping that idea, I was still a bit bored, playing with the magnets. It’s the same logic as clipping pegs to your ears – I clipped them to my earlobes and then clipped them to my nostril and things went downhill pretty quickly when I clipped the magnets to my other nostril.”

Reardon said he placed two magnets inside his nostrils, and two on the outside. When he removed the magnets from the outside of his nose, the two inside stuck together. Unfortunately, the researcher then attempted to use his remaining magnets to remove them.

“At this point, my partner who works at a hospital was laughing at me,” he said. “I was trying to pull them out but there is a ridge at the bottom of my nose you can’t get past.

“After struggling for 20 minutes, I decided to Google the problem and found an article about an 11-year-old boy who had the same problem. The solution in that was more magnets. To put on the outside to offset the pull from the ones inside.

“As I was pulling downwards to try and remove the magnets, they clipped on to each other and I lost my grip. And those two magnets ended up in my left nostril while the other one was in my right. At this point I ran out of magnets.”

Before attending the hospital, Reardon attempted to use pliers to pull them out, but they became magnetised by the magnets inside his nose.

“Every time I brought the pliers close to my nose, my entire nose would shift towards the pliers and then the pliers would stick to the magnet,” he said. “It was a little bit painful at this point.

“My partner took me to the hospital that she works in because she wanted all her colleagues to laugh at me. The doctors thought it was quite funny, making comments like ‘This is an injury due to self-isolation and boredom.’”

At the hospital, a team of two doctors applied an anaesthetic spray and manually removed the magnets from Reardon’s nose.

“When they got the three out from the left nostril, the last one fell down my throat,” he said. “That could have been a bit of a problem if I swallowed or breathed it in, but I was thankfully able to lean forward and cough it out … Needless to say I am not going to play with the magnets any more.”

Medical records from the emergency department said that Reardon did not have difficulty breathing, and denied the presence of further magnets up his nose.

The astrophysicist told Guardian Australia he had ruled out further experiments with the magnets and face-touching, and would find other ways to pass the time while at home.

“I’m actually getting a lot of work done,” he said. “Working remotely is not that bad. We are also renovating our house, so I am building shelves, making furniture and doing some tiling.”

... in the coming year, and the results will define the country for a generation. These are perilous times. Over the last three years, much of what the Guardian holds dear has been threatened – democracy, civility, truth. This administration has cleared out science and scientists across all departments. Anger and cruelty disfigure public discourse and lying is commonplace. Truth is being chased away. But with your help we can continue to put it center stage.

Rampant disinformation, partisan news sources and social media's tsunami of fake news is no basis on which to inform the American public in 2020. The need for a robust, independent press has never been greater, and with your support we can continue to provide fact-based reporting that offers public scrutiny and oversight. Our journalism is free and open for all, but it's made possible thanks to the support we receive from readers like you across America in all 50 states.

Our journalism relies on our readers’ generosity – your financial support has meant we can keep investigating, disentangling and interrogating. It has protected our independence, which has never been so critical. We are so grateful.

We hope you will consider supporting us today. We need your support to keep delivering quality journalism that’s open and independent. Every reader contribution, however big or small, is so valuable. Support the Guardian from as little as $1 – and it only takes a minute. Thank you.

Accepted payment methods: Visa, Mastercard, American Express  Paypal, Diners Club and Discover
Read the whole story
skorgu
3 days ago
reply
"denies further magnets"
mareino
3 days ago
reply
Washington, District of Columbia
Share this story
Delete
Next Page of Stories