03-12-2020, 01:57 AM
It's an interesting analysis and a good way to normalize the data per capita to make comparisons.
Couple thoughts:
I think only South Korea's data can be fully counted on currently as there are plenty of confirmations on their accuracy and transparency. They also appear to be reaching their peak of infection. Also they are far enough along in the epidemic to have an okay (but not great) number of resolved cases to calculate mortality with. As we know they have really set the standard for NPIs, I would see their 16 cases per 100K people as a best case scenario when proactive, smart, & targeted efforts are made.
As the U.S. has not adopted SK's approach, I think it is overly optimistic to use their results as guidance to predict ours. Then again, with the lack of testing we won't know what the numbers ever really are or were (much like Iran whose mass graves being made can be seen from space). The head of CDC had to admit that some "flu" deaths in the past months in the U.S. were undiagnosed COVID-19.
(grain of salt - haven't checked the uncut video but states are testing samples from flu deaths back several weeks and finding COVID-19
https://twitter.com/globaltimesnews/stat...9999062016)
Italy's data unfortunately is too new to rely on statistically IMHO. Given their delay in taking action, and their overrun hospitals, I would expect their cases to continue to climb above 16 per 100K.
Either way, I agree that this helps makes clear how outlandish the China data appears to be. While China did take extraordinary measures, the idea that they were 14x better at containment than SK at similar point in time is highly suspect.
ETA: It looks like China is at 5.6/100K currently (~3x better than SK with latest numbers) so this data seems to highlight the differences in reaching the inflection point in the curve as soon as possible. Actions now have LARGE benefits in the outcome!
Interesting stuff! Please continue to share (if Rob allows)
Couple thoughts:
I think only South Korea's data can be fully counted on currently as there are plenty of confirmations on their accuracy and transparency. They also appear to be reaching their peak of infection. Also they are far enough along in the epidemic to have an okay (but not great) number of resolved cases to calculate mortality with. As we know they have really set the standard for NPIs, I would see their 16 cases per 100K people as a best case scenario when proactive, smart, & targeted efforts are made.
As the U.S. has not adopted SK's approach, I think it is overly optimistic to use their results as guidance to predict ours. Then again, with the lack of testing we won't know what the numbers ever really are or were (much like Iran whose mass graves being made can be seen from space). The head of CDC had to admit that some "flu" deaths in the past months in the U.S. were undiagnosed COVID-19.
(grain of salt - haven't checked the uncut video but states are testing samples from flu deaths back several weeks and finding COVID-19
https://twitter.com/globaltimesnews/stat...9999062016)
Italy's data unfortunately is too new to rely on statistically IMHO. Given their delay in taking action, and their overrun hospitals, I would expect their cases to continue to climb above 16 per 100K.
Either way, I agree that this helps makes clear how outlandish the China data appears to be. While China did take extraordinary measures, the idea that they were 14x better at containment than SK at similar point in time is highly suspect.
ETA: It looks like China is at 5.6/100K currently (~3x better than SK with latest numbers) so this data seems to highlight the differences in reaching the inflection point in the curve as soon as possible. Actions now have LARGE benefits in the outcome!
Interesting stuff! Please continue to share (if Rob allows)