Football this fall? No way

[ponyboy]

.1 is a good IFR number for the seasonal flu in developed nations.

I think when all is said and done that weΓÇÖll have an effective IFR for COVID-19 that is materially lower than the flu. But a much larger percentage of the population will get corona. The end result will be that mortalities will be like a particularly bad flu year. It does have to be acknowledged that there do seem to be some nasty permanent side effects from corona.

[malonish]

.1 is a good IFR number for the seasonal flu in developed nations.

I think when all is said and done that weΓÇÖll have an effective IFR for COVID-19 that is materially lower than the flu. But a much larger percentage of the population will get corona. The end result will be that mortalities will be like a particularly bad flu year. It does have to be acknowledged that there do seem to be some nasty permanent side effects from corona.

Deaths are already beyond 2x what 2018 or 19 had though? Seems worse than a "bad flu year"

[Insane_Pony_Posse]

Deaths are already beyond 2x what 2018 or 19 had though? Seems worse than a "bad flu year"

In Texas?

Texas Flu Deaths in 2017-2018 Flu Season = Nearly 10,000
https://www.chron.com/local/prognosis/a ... 025291.php

Texas Covid Deaths = Less than 4500 thus far

[JasonB]

.1 is a good IFR number for the seasonal flu in developed nations.

I think when all is said and done that weΓÇÖll have an effective IFR for COVID-19 that is materially lower than the flu. But a much larger percentage of the population will get corona. The end result will be that mortalities will be like a particularly bad flu year. It does have to be acknowledged that there do seem to be some nasty permanent side effects from corona.

The .1 number comes from the CDC.

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-nc ... arios.html

That is where I get the IFR for Covid. It is the right source to use for calculating IFR if you care going to compare it with the 0.1 number, because they use similar mechanisms for calculating the people who don't get tested for Flu. It is apples to apples.

It isn't going to be any different in Texas. They have already adjusted for the NYC disaster where it ran through senior facilities like wildfire.

In Texas, we are at 4K deaths. And we just now passed the 100 deaths per day threshold.

For what it is worth, where is the 10K deaths coming from? I see a bunch of articles reporting it, but when I look at the CDC and the official stats, I get this:
https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/pressroom/sosm ... umonia.htm

I can't find actual reports that indicate that Texas was at 10K deaths for that season. 10K out of the 60K deaths that season in a single state seems like a lot, and if I download the spreadsheet from the CDC it adds up to around 60K with 3K or so deaths in Texas...

[malonish]

Deaths are already beyond 2x what 2018 or 19 had though? Seems worse than a "bad flu year"

In Texas?

Texas Flu Deaths in 2017-2018 Flu Season = Nearly 10,000
https://www.chron.com/local/prognosis/a ... 025291.php

Texas Covid Deaths = Less than 4500 thus far

Nationwide deaths Flu Vs Covid are multiple times more for Covid. The TX version of "Eff you we're fine so we're not gonna change our ways" is not acceptable and not saying you're doing anything on purpose but cherry picking only the TX data is not the whole picture.

[gostangs]

Speaking of data, according to Stanford dashboard Texas confirmed cases are down by 50% over the last 4 days. Guess we wont get blazing headlines on that information, will we?

[gostangs]

Deaths are already beyond 2x what 2018 or 19 had though? Seems worse than a "bad flu year"

In Texas?

Texas Flu Deaths in 2017-2018 Flu Season = Nearly 10,000
https://www.chron.com/local/prognosis/a ... 025291.php

Texas Covid Deaths = Less than 4500 thus far

Nationwide deaths Flu Vs Covid are multiple times more for Covid. The TX version of "Eff you we're fine so we're not gonna change our ways" is not acceptable and not saying you're doing anything on purpose but cherry picking only the TX data is not the whole picture.

Might be because the gov's in the NE put infected oldsters back in senior living homes driving the death rate up considerably. Our currented infected in Texas are younger on average so death rate will be quite a bit lower.

[ponyboy]

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-nc ... arios.html

That is where I get the IFR for Covid. It is the right source to use for calculating IFR if you care going to compare it with the 0.1 number, because they use similar mechanisms for calculating the people who don't get tested for Flu. It is apples to apples.

Jason, as I called out in the Around the Hilltop thread, the .5 to .65 IFR for COVID-19 is not an accurate number of what's happening in Texas. International data is highly suspect and these figures should not be thrown around as if they mean anything.

Look, I can understand your tendency to want to rely on "official CDC figures" rather than some schmo with Excel. But do the math yourself -- it's not rocket science. The only plug variable is the rate of those who catch corona and don't get an official test. I go with the CDC number on that: 10 untested for every 1 confirmed test.

All this tends to make one feel ok about a .24% IFR in Texas right now, especially when the CDC themselves (back in late May) estimated nationwide IFR at .26% These are not numbers that I'm pulling out of my rear end.

[Topper]

Speaking of data, according to Stanford dashboard Texas confirmed cases are down by 50% over the last 4 days. Guess we wont get blazing headlines on that information, will we?

If you are talking about daily new reported cases hat information is not even close the same as the information on the Texas Health and Human Services Commission daily graph which shows no such decline. Are you talking about fatalities rather than new infections? Daily fatality numbers have risen over the past 4 days. Also,according HHSC the number of cumulative total cases has risen rather than fallen over the past 4 days

[malonish]

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-nc ... arios.html

That is where I get the IFR for Covid. It is the right source to use for calculating IFR if you care going to compare it with the 0.1 number, because they use similar mechanisms for calculating the people who don't get tested for Flu. It is apples to apples.

Jason, as I called out in the Around the Hilltop thread, the .5 to .65 IFR for COVID-19 is not an accurate number of what's happening in Texas. International data is highly suspect and these figures should not be thrown around as if they mean anything.

Look, I can understand your tendency to want to rely on "official CDC figures" rather than some schmo with Excel. But do the math yourself -- it's not rocket science.

It's likely that it was the national number. Taking only Texas numbers is not as useful as one might think. Think bigger to realize the full scope of the problem.

[ponyboy]

I could expand to include more states, for sure. But Texas data is solid and the set is sufficiently large. And if I start doing more of this COVID-19 data analysis, my wife is going to slit my throat as I sleep.

[mrydel]

I could expand to include more states, for sure. But Texas data is solid and the set is sufficiently large. And if I start doing more of this COVID-19 data analysis, my wife is going to slit my throat as I sleep.

And that will qualify it as a Covid death.

[gostangs]

Speaking of data, according to Stanford dashboard Texas confirmed cases are down by 50% over the last 4 days. Guess we wont get blazing headlines on that information, will we?

If you are talking about daily new reported cases hat information is not even close the same as the information on the Texas Health and Human Services Commission daily graph which shows no such decline. Are you talking about fatalities rather than new infections? Daily fatality numbers have risen over the past 4 days. Also,according HHSC the number of cumulative total cases has risen rather than fallen over the past 4 days

https://med.stanford.edu/covid19/dashboard.html

Pretty good site for tracking. Death rate has been basically flat in D/FW and very low statistically.

https://public.tableau.com/profile/city ... ionalCases

This is another good site - shows new cases in DFW as a slow trend downward.

[ponyboy]

I could expand to include more states, for sure. But Texas data is solid and the set is sufficiently large. And if I start doing more of this COVID-19 data analysis, my wife is going to slit my throat as I sleep.

And that will qualify it as a Covid death.

Haha, yes

[malonish]

I could expand to include more states, for sure. But Texas data is solid and the set is sufficiently large. And if I start doing more of this COVID-19 data analysis, my wife is going to slit my throat as I sleep.

Don't invest too much time on it. Just don't do like I said before with the "eff you got mine" and ignore that just because TX is ok now, other places are blowing up and it could get crazy here if people don't do their part. Using local data to target a larger data set is a cherry pick even if TX Cherries are juicy.