So far......this Model appears to be......
- Thread starter bornaneer
- Start date
Interesting but I will allow the professionals analyze and explain the data. One thing I don't understand on the third graph, it shows deaths basically stopping in the middle of May and no more deaths. I don't buy that at all. Yes, it will plateau at some point but without a vaccine, deaths will continue albeit at a lower rate, hopefully.
If you move your mouse along the line, you'll notice an increase in death, albeit very slowing, up through June.
Seeing that PPE shortages were news to you, your media intake leaves much to be desired.
This is what I've been using as well. For those that don't know, you can use the dropdown menu to select individual states as well.
I get that. Not my first experience with a graph. You don't know what I do for a living, do you? But doesn't matter, I'm a fraud.
Regardless and just an opinion comment, you see the death rate to slow that quickly without any vaccine or a legitimate drug that can be administered by mid-May?
This is my opinion...they are projecting the # of deaths based on the demographics of the area (patients with co-morbid conditions such as COPD and diabetes) and then applying to the curve. They also can look at admissions and project the next 10-14 days based on a specific disease state. EMR (Electronic Medical Records) which is still not perfect, is being tracked by Insurance carriers and CMS...this is how they set the reimbursement rates for physicians and pharmaceuticals. They know more than they are letting on about this curve.
They are not taking the total population and applying a % of death to the general population.
Well according to these Washington Post headlines.....nothing was needed.
- "Get a grippe, America. The flu is a much bigger threat than coronavirus, for now,” read a Post story from Feb. 1, written by a Post staffer
- “How our brains make coronavirus seem scarier than it is,” read another Post story, from Jan. 31, written by a guest commenter from Harvard University.
- “Why we should be wary of an aggressive government response to coronavirus,” read the third headline, from a Feb. 3 Post article co-authored by two academics from Northwestern University.
Last edited:
Based on your tendancy to run your mouth the most with the least amount of actual information I had you pegged as a hair stylist.