Here we go; will certainly reach 100,000 in the US today

[captain queeg]

I figure we’ll be at a million by April 5. Maybe by then some of the lock downs will have some effect, if not things will be pretty bad by Easter Sunday. Trump is just dying to have a Nazi rally. I suspect that’s behind his desire to rate different areas of the country by how infected they are. If he can find an area that doesn’t have too many infections, or more importantly, where the local government denies the problem, then he’ll have a rally. And 2 weeks later we’ll have a new epicenter.

[jimfields33]

1. The more tests the better

Recovery is pretty high so pointing to people having the virus can give immediate treatment. Plus the death rate goes down as well.

[lark]

5. They really really don't want us tested.

Test kits are in extreme shortage and since drumpf is part owner in the only co. approved by the CDC to ship their tests throughout the USA, and since it's a tiny co., there will always be an extreme shortage of tests, even with Labcorp and some hospitals using their own versions. That's why they don't want testing, he doesn't want us to know we waiting 11 weeks for testing to begin so he could make a profit. He also thinks he can hide the real #;s this way.

[Mosby]

2. A good tracker

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/us/

[USALiberal]

3. Cases per million in population is still lower than many countries.

[Ms. Toad]

7. All that really means is tests per million in population is still lower than many countries. n/t

[Blue_true]

14. Sure seems that way. nt

[NickB79]

8. Without adequate testing, we can't say that for certain

Germany is running 500,000 tests per week. The US hasn't even run 500,000 tests TOTAL since this pandemic began.

[gibraltar72]

4. Were Las Vegas open wonder what the odds would be.

I'm sure somewhere they are betting on this.

[Ms. Toad]

6. My formula - which was 152 off from the actual total yesterday

puts us at 105,404 (on worldometers).

[captain queeg]

9. When are you projecting a million cases?

[Ms. Toad]

12. April 11.

But the formula is most accurate 1-2 days out - until the distancing measures start pulling the curve down predictions a couple of days out should be accurate, and longer term estimates should be accurate within a day or two. April 11 is pushing it, since we should start to see the impact of social distancing.

On 3/23 I predicted 90,000 by the end of the day today. With the adjustments I made on 3/25, 90,000 was early in the day today (85,000-ish by end of day yesterday).

My forumula implicitly takes into account the historical changes in test availability, but uses the current slope of new cases. Daily adjustments keep it pretty accurate in the very short term, and generally predictive beyond a couple of days. (Minor changes on a daily basis make a tremendous change a few days out because of the nature of exponential growth)

[USALiberal]

13. Times 1.3? nt

[Ms. Toad]

17. More complex than than.

I'm running two - pure exponential: Based on yesterday's data 27.275 x e^(.2787 x # days since 2/26) This one fits with r^2 = .9961)

The second is a 5th degree polynomial: Based on yesterday's data (where D=#days since 2/26):

.0047 x D^5 + .2765 x D^4 - 14.151 x D^3 + 194.28 * D^2 -887.63 x D + 1082.5. This one fits with R^2 = .9996


Both are pretty good fits (and coming closer together in the short term). Both are derived using Excel's best fit algorithm for a trendline. The poynomial has been a better fit while the growth was faster than exponential (I suspect due to the availability of testing). The exponential is likely to become the better fit as the tests catch up to reality.

I tweak both when I add the nightly total to my dataset, add a new trendline, with a slightly altered formula, and look to see where the next day might be.

I used the multplier when I was working with China. That was nice, since it gave a more intuitive feel for when the rate of growth started to slow down.

Currently the daily multiplier is 1.24 (based on a 2-day average to take into account reports that got lumped into the wrong day). It's been on a slow decline since March 19 (1.46).

Glad you asked the question, since I had the sense the rate of growtn was slowing slightly - but I hadn't run the calculation to confirm it.

[USALiberal]

18. Great info, thanks! Nt

[Ms. Toad]

19. The increase in growth slowed again today -

my formula was off (high) today (by 1278).

Looking at averages, I'm seeing a slight slow down in growth - the kind of change I saw in China as the exponential growth started to level off.

[USALiberal]

21. Good news! Nt

[Ms. Toad]

22. I went back and looked again -

It was only 2/3 days it slowed down - but I'm pretty sure the average growth over 3 days is less than the three preceding days.

[Brother Mythos]

10. So much winning.

[EllieBC]

11. Are they actually testing? Because up here not so much.

I’m back in BC, in self isolation. My 3 kids have been pretty sick. My husband has called 811. Then I did too. We were both told that at this point they are NOT testing anyone not hospitalized or not a healthcare worker.

So I’m very wary of countries with low numbers.

[Amishman]

15. I don't think we hit a million

Lockdowns will work in time if we let them.

Just don't ask me for timrframes

[not_the_one]

16. We're Number 1!!! USA USA USA

We're Number 1!!! USA USA USA

We're Number 1!!! USA USA USA

We're Number 1!!! USA USA USA

I am so fucking proud of all this winning!!!

for the sarc impaired

[Marrah_Goodman]

20. At 11pm est we have 104, 463 positive tests and 1,702 dead according to John Hopkins tracker n/t

[Hermit-The-Prog]

23. plus those hidden by deliberate withholding of test kits