There was less testing in the sprint peak, so comparing cases doesn't tell much.   I don't think the death rates are near those in the spring, but an increase in deaths will always lag behind an increase in cases.

midtskogen wrote:

Source of the post There was less testing in the sprint peak, so comparing cases doesn't tell much. I don't think the death rates are near those in the spring, but an increase in deaths will always lag behind an increase in cases.

Exactly. Testing has expanded, so it's not very useful to compare the magnitude of new cases, but the trends can be telling, as are the deaths. 



Worldwide the official death rate is approaching that of the peak in spring, and if deaths are always proportional to infections but with a lag then that implies the number of new infections now may be close to it was then. But other factors are that many deaths were not officially attributed to COVID-19 in spring and summer (cf. deaths above normal), especially in the southern hemisphere, and the mortality rate has likely declined a little through better treatments. So it wouldn't surprise me if the rate of infection in the northern hemisphere now is as high as it has ever been.

The things to compare are not infection rates, but hospitalizations and deaths.  One new death is being reported every 100 seconds or so in the US.

Been reading that public health isn't taken as seriously in the West as it is in Asia, where these kind of infections seem to occur more often.  The infection rates of Vietnam, South Korea and China are all still very low.

The US is recording over 2000 COVID-19 deaths per day again... a rate we have not seen since spring.



Considering the roughly 2-week lag between new cases and deaths, our case fatality rate is now about 1.5%, so our current rate of about 170,000 new cases a day implies deaths may continue to rise toward 2500 per day for two more weeks, even if new cases were to level off right now. But with the Thanksgiving holiday travel season coming up... that could end up being an accelerant.


How does the situation currently look geographically? Like a garbage fire. We have also just passed 10% positivity on tests nationally.

Another analysis from the New York Times. The headline/conclusion is completely unsurprising, but the data and animated graphics demonstrating it are very nicely done. 

States That Imposed Few Restrictions Now Have the Worst Outbreaks

Bad news coming out of Canada, since their Thanksgiving is in October we can look to see what kind of effect the holiday has on rates....and it seems to indicate we may be seeing a 2x to 3x increase in rates after Thanksgiving.

In the spring the spread seemed to correlate highly with population density.  Now sparsely populated areas seem worst, or possibly cold areas where people now spend most of their time indoors?

So, let's check NY Times' "deaths above normal" again:

Many countries now go through the second wave with infection numbers higher than in spring and with fewer restrictions.  Yet, death rates are mostly lower.  Check the UK, for instance, nothing special about the death rates recently, yet almost ten times as many daily positive tests compared to spring. But death rates lag behind and it may be too early, and a lot more people get tested this time. 

Thats a good point, in the US the highest rates seem to be from sparsely populated areas that are very cold like North Dakota (astonishing 56% positivity rate).  Many of these states aren't too into wearing masks either.

midtskogen wrote:

Source of the post But death rates lag behind and it may be too early, and a lot more people get tested this time. 

Yeah, I think it's still a little too early. The page was last updated October 30th. New cases in the northern hemisphere were surging then, and deaths are still catching up in many places. The data for the US seems to end right at the low point between 2nd and 3rd 'waves', and we know the 3rd is much more severe. Belgium's deaths appear to have peaked around November 12th, and on October 30th the death rate was about half of the peak.

Until more of these deaths above normal data come in, a good way to estimate the true impact in closer to real time may be to compare the trends in new cases, positivity rate, and case fatality rate (comparing rate of new cases with the rate of deaths lagging it by about 2 weeks, though the lag varies a bit by country.) Most countries are testing much more now, which along with better treatments is driving the CFRs down. We are clearly catching more true cases and handling them better, at least for as long as hospitals aren't overwhelmed. But the surge is still so significant that we are seeing rapid filling of hospitals in the US, and several states are having to move patients elsewhere. Getting overwhelmed is a real threat right now.

Didn't the 1918 pandemic also have three waves?

Some of our more rural states dont have many ICU so they will reach capacity far more quickly than we will here in NY.

A-L-E-X wrote:

Source of the post Didn't the 1918 pandemic also have three waves?

COVID-19 thus far seems to have a seasonal cycle just like 1918's H1N1, which is not terribly surprising. But it's also important to recognize that these waves are not simply due to factors outside of our control, but rather a combination of factors which include and influence human behavior. Colder weather brings more people indoors where airborne transmission becomes more significant, but the effect of different mitigation efforts is also important and can be seen when we take a more nuanced approach and compare different locations over time, which is true both in 1918 and today.

A-L-E-X wrote:

Source of the post Many of these states aren't too into wearing masks either.

Maybe, but it's not the reason.  It's more failure to avoid situations where masks might make a difference.  It's now 06:20 Saturday morning, and I'm about to go to the grocery store to do the shopping for at least a week.  That's way more effective than a masks.

Watsisname wrote:

Source of the post Belgium's deaths appear to have peaked around November 12th

Still early to tell.  Belgium's reported cases have been very high recently.

Mass vaccinations seem to be just a couple of months away, which raises some new questions.  Who should get it first, and how many?

Things appear to be somewhat different now compared to the swine flu a decade ago.  If I recall correctly, the swine flu was a bit scary because many young people got seriously ill.  Covid-19 is different.  For young, healthy people it's generally a milder disease, but for old people it's dangerous.  Does it mean that people under, say, 50 should not bother, unless they work in healthcare or have special medical conditions?  Authorities need to plan for this right now.

midtskogen wrote:

Source of the post Who should get it first, and how many?

In the US the plan (as I've seen it presented thus far) appears to be:

Phase 1: Emergency responders and health care workers
Phase 2a: Those with multiple high risk factors
Phase 2b: The elderly (65 and up)
Phase 3: The young (30 and under)
Phase 4: Everyone else