Chuck D

You do realize the US is barely testing and really didn't even scratch the surface with tests for months (and STILL not testing asymptomatic people), so we are also by default underreporting and have been throughout. The testing is probably 99% of the reason why Germany and S. Korea have been a great deal further ahead of their problem.

paulcg77

I do realize that, but with respect, what does that have to do with China intentionally underreporting? Are you saying the US has intentionally avoided testing and/or is under reporting for the purpose of misleading the public/world similar to the US intelligence community's allegations of China?

The US was behind the curve on testing, no doubt. I've been saying since January that we need to take this more seriously in every way, including producing test kits, testing the population, repurposing industrial capacity to produce medical supplies, etc... But there's a difference between underreporting as a result of under testing because you don't take the threat seriously or don't have the infrastructure to test, versus intentionally withholding reporting statistics in order to save face and not enrage the domestic populace that your power and legitimacy are predicated upon. Apples to oranges in my mind.

Chuck D

I think willful incompetence and intentional action cover a lot of the same ground. The rhetoric for literally months from the top was not helpful, did not reflect reality and cost a tremendous amount of time and therefore lives plus dragged out economic cost. At some point it doesn't really matter what China is lying or not lying about as we are fully involved with our own problem here. Their data is a moot point in most ways now. There's zero question that we could have done far better initially. That ship has sailed though and I just wish we could hit the point asap where "spot testing" of people with or without symptoms could be done quickly and repeatedly as it could lead to a heck of a more effective quarantine and distancing process while we figure out vaccines and keep people alive who have the worst cases.

Chuck D

one more add relative to intentional or unintentional inaccuracy... - an excerpt from the WSJ today about underreporting in Northern Italy simply due to them flat-out lacking the resources to address it effectively: "Nowhere in Italy has been harder hit than Bergamo, a city of about 120,000 people. In March 2019, 125 people died in the city. This March, 553 people died. Of these, 201 deaths were officially attributed to the virus. This leaves 352 further deaths for the period, far higher than normal."

You test to get accurate numbers as best you can. You fill in the gaps with real science, statistics, data, data and more data. You test some more. You build policy based on those early numbers and adjust, tweak and improve as you go based on current data and new models. This is how the actual world works. This is how big businesses operate and how we do complex things. In the case of Covid-19 it's how we estimate how deadly it's likely to be and what measures we should take to beat it.

Instead of looking at reality and formulating a plan, we've had "it'll go away like a miracle", "we're at 15 and soon zero", "the dems have a new hoax", "churches open by Easter", finger pointing, and "Cuomo doesn't need 30,000 respirators". Now he wants a medal, a statue and a parade if we keep it to just 200k or so... but I suspect that number will shift as well.

I guess I'd rather that we had overreacted in lots of effective ways early and maybe just grumbled about that, then went about our business like normal, only with extra hand washing and a strange new reverence for toilet paper in a few months.

BMEP100

Our numbers have to be all wrong. Without testing everyone, we cannot know the true mortality rate, but it must be lower than is being reported.
For example; today Manny Chrico, CEO of Calvin Klein parent company said in an interview that he has the virus, but only learned he had it because he is on the board of a hospital in the Bronx and all employees had to be tested. He said “I was shocked, I had no idea, I am Asymptomatic “ He is in his mid 60’s.

How many others like him.

Here is the interview listens @ 4:45.
https://www.cnbc.com/video/2020/04/0...-closures.html

Airhoss

So just to put something in perspective about ventilator use. A good friend of mine is a long time pulmonary critical care doctor. In regards to patients who require mechanical ventilation can expect about a 70% mortality rate. Add in comorbidities and that number goes up. If you are sick enough to need a ventilator your odds are not good.

So the answer to how fatal is this virus? It depends, it’s 100% fatal to some young or old, healthy or sick and mild for others. I don’t think we will know what the butcher’s bill is until months from now.

paulcg77

Today (April 1st) the US surpassed Italy and Spain to officially record the most daily deaths of any country in the world: 1,049 people died in the United States today from COVID-19 (source: https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/). Unless a literal "miracle" happens, we're forecast to lose a few thousand Americans per day for the next few months (source: https://covid19.healthdata.org/projections). At its height, we're projected to lose 2,500-3,000 people per day to this in the USA, about as much as 9/11 or Pearl Harbor. Every day. For a few months. So YES, I would say COVID-19 really is "that" deadly. The name of this thread is a joke.

sourdough44

I see about 2 million 800 thousand deaths a year in the USA.

I had an elderly Aunt, died at 80+, longtime smoker. Her cause was listed as ‘heart failure’. I think it was more her physical body was plum worn out. Had she caught Covid, no doubt it would be listed as the reason for passing.

We had 12,400+ deaths in 2009 in the USA from the ‘swine flu’. Yes, we may surpass that with Covid-19.

DustoffVT

With all due respect, your source does not show that at all. It projects 2000+ deaths a day for about a two week period this month then tapering off rapidly. Obviously tragic, but not "a few months".

We fly accurate ref speeds for a reason, the same reason that matters here. The large ranges also show the huge amount of uncertainty in the projections.

What is not uncertain is the financial impact of all this.

GoneMissed

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/04/02/week...ss-claims.html

This is getting worse by the week. And will continue for at least 4 weeks. I see a significant portion of these jobs coming back but a lot won’t.

I was cautiously optimistic as of last week. I am no longer....again I hope I am 100% off and we see a quick V shaped recovery.