Coronavirus Thread: Worldwide Pandemic

KillbertArenas

Superstar
Joined
May 1, 2012
Messages
7,425
Reputation
-350
Daps
14,424
Reppin
PG - Maryland
you said an earlier peak (30 days) is better than a later peak (90 days) but most of the research concludes that earlier peaks lead to more deaths. are you using a metric other than deaths to determine what "better" is?

Death is inevitable as its a extremely deadly virus. However, Im speaking on the amount of exposures and deaths of individuals that actually develop it.

So naturally if peaks in 30 days, there will less be people that contact it and die. Again - you and the other poster are ignoring the crazy trajectory that is about to be discovered when testing becomes widespread.
 

F K

All Star
Joined
Jan 13, 2017
Messages
3,204
Reputation
480
Daps
10,121
Death is inevitable as its a extremely deadly virus. However, Im speaking on the amount of exposures and deaths of individuals that actually develop it.

So naturally if peaks in 30 days, there will less be people that contact it and die. Again - you and the other poster are ignoring the crazy trajectory that is about to be discovered when testing becomes widespread.
how do you know that fewer people will contact it if it peaks in 30 days? You might be right, but the two concepts are not correlated.
Think about a group of 20 people monday to sunday.
scenario a: one person infected every day except Friday where 3 ppl get infected: total infection 9, peak date Friday
scenario b:4 people infected on Monday, 5 people infected on Tuesday, 1 person on Wednesday, zero people rest of the week: total infection 10, peak date tuesday.

The date of the peak is important but so is the size of the peak. Epidemiology is more complex than what is the date of the peak and while you might be right, I'm going to rock with the people who do this for a living until proven otherwise.
 
Top