Subtle, but rate of confirmed cases creeping upward. And they want to open it all up now?

[NRaleighLiberal]

I've been tracking the multiplier each day since we had around 13,000 confirmed cases (seems so quaint and long ago). The data of course is terribly imprecise because of our poor amount of testing in the US.

But even given that - for awhile, to get the next day's total, you multiply today by 1.5. That rate slowly dropped daily, and three days ago was down to a multiplier of 1.046. But that's either leveled off or started creeping upward - we are already at 1.05 (seems trivial, but it is the trend).

And then there is the staggering realization we've gone from 13,000 when I started watching the numbers closely on March 19, to where we currently stand on April 16 - slightly less than a month - 677,600 confirmed cases as of 9 PM EST.

And, of course, these are the ones we know about - the ones confirmed by testing - and the likely loads more asymptomatic carriers are not being tested.

Looking at this - the only conclusion is that trump is insane. His cult is insane. His enablers are insane.

If anyone really wants to see where I've been tracking the percent, I've been editing an OP I made with updates each day - here.

(yes, I'm a bit of a data wonk) https://www.democraticunderground.com/100213132124

[nitpicker]

1. We must consider both daily percent increase and daily absolute number increase.

If there are 10000 cases:

500 new cases is 5% daily increase.

If one kept adding 500 cases a day for days, at 20000 total cases 500 new a day is 2.5% increase.

Great, right?

BUT It's the same number daily infected, roughly the same number (as a fraction of that same number) seeking advanced medical care a day. etc.

If the absolute daily increase increases, "the frog gets boiled" no matter how slowly, absent miracles.

[Igel]

2. Any change in the # of tests or the population tested?

Because both affect what you are taking as an absolute metric for the infection rate.

It's less than imprecise. Beginning a week or so ago there was a dip in the number of tests administered by private labs. That would result in a downward trend in the infection rate.

Hospitalizations are better, but they become self-limiting. Have 20% of the hospital full and they're admit relatively mild cases. At 80% or 90%, only severe cases get admitted and those mild cases that would have been counted weeks before now aren't.

New York screwed up using # of dead as a gauge--for what purpose, I don't actually know, since we still don't know the numbers and if only NY is doing clinical diagnoses it'll make it impossible to compare NY's data with other states' data. (In other words, the numbers sound like something convincing to a politician and light skimmer of news. Not because the # of dead each day was an incredibly sound metric, but because it gave a reading as to how many people *should* have been admitted. Make the assumption that the % of those who went to the hospital didn't change and it's a proxy for the actual number--the actual curve would just be some percent higher, mostly right across the plot.

[uponit7771]

3. Could a drop in testing rate affect multiplier? thx in advance

[NRaleighLiberal]

4. sure it could - but it is odd how fairly consistent it has been despite all of the likely issues

What it tells me is that this country should get a grip and let this thing run some before they get themselves in harms way again....

[uponit7771]

5. +1, yep ... the docs who think our situational awareness is good enough scare the crap out of me. We

... should have a par sample rate to open also.

If test show 20% of sample have CV19 then it should go to 10 and 100,000 test ... or something.

No data triggers just a discription of "adequate testing" which doesn't mean crap.

Yeah, Cluckerville will open

[tclambert]

6. Nah, it's not insanity. It's a matter of values. What do you value more, money or lives?

[PCIntern]

7. Yes. I knew this would happen and

predicted it weeks ago here.

AND... they’re lying about the numbers. If they cheat in elections they cheat at death tolls. It’s worse than they’re saying.

Of course they’re lying.

[Scruffy1]

8. All these numbers are a joke.

We know the number of actual cases is much larger than the reported cases by looking at the mortality rate. Recent antibody testing in Santa Clara county suggests ift could be as large as 80 times the reported amounts. Their is simply no way to have meaningful data withoput massive testing. It is impossible to tell if the rate is increasing or decreasing from the numbers we now have. It could be that the numbers or going up because of more testing, but we don't know.https://www.livescience.com/coronavirus-antibodies-widespread-in-santa-clara.html

[ProfessorGAC]

11. Your Cite Has Criticism Of The Number You Quoted

There's an expert from Cal suggesting they are overstating that value.
And, it's clear they are comparing to a grotesquely under tested population. They say 80x, but the center of their range is still 1 in 30 infected.
Not sure this study means much, stand alone.
I wouldn't use it as evidence of anything beyond needing more testing.

[Baclava]

9. The Dimwit in Chief has been foot dragging on testing from the start, makes his "numbers" look bad

The fact is the death rate has been kept down because the preventive health measures are WORKING! Distancing and self isolation are WORKING!

The ignorant idiots that are pushing to end them are complete morons, this includes all the rightwing media and his brownshirt blind followers.

RESIST the ignorance, stay home! Its not over.

[uponit7771]

10. +1, Democrats need to be out front on this issue hard before Trump scapegoats governors

[Locrian]

12. number

they look at the rate going "down" not the base number - it's more "dangerous" now than ever due to the shear number of infections