Am I Reading This Right? The IHME Model Is ***NOT*** Factoring Testing/infection Rate ?!

[uponit7771]

Last edited Thu Apr 9, 2020, 03:06 AM - Edit history (1)

Am I Reading This Right? The IHME Model Is ***NOT*** Factoring Testing Rate ?!

The IHME models is the one Red Don's administration Dr Birx is claiming they are basing their models after. It looks like the IHME is replacing death rate for testing/infection rate with the assumption the deaths would be tested for CV19?

We ... KNOW ... the US is not even testing 1% of its population per municipality and all the people dying of CV19 symptoms are not are being tested for CV19.

Earlier there was a thread of a mortician being refused tests for CV19 symptomatic deaths.

Either way, the IMHE model doesn't have anything getting back to normal till July

TESTING

Are these models accounting for the low levels of testing in different states? Would more confirmed cases mean we’d predict more deaths?

These models are based on observed death rates, and so are not influenced by differences in testing. This means that changes in death rates would alter the model, but changes in the number of observed cases, or in how states are testing, would not. We believe that in settings where testing is in relatively short supply, the sick and the very sick are getting tested; this is why we utilize deaths, as those patients are more likely to have been tested.

There is empirical and anecdotal evidence that the sick or symptomatic can ... NOT ... get tested nationwide.

Just somethings not right about the IHME models Birx is basing the gov models off of

Your take?

tia

EDIT: Ah, someone was ahead of me in NY

Death Count Expected To Soar As NYC Says It Will Begin Reporting Probable COVID Deaths In Addition To Confirmed Ones


https://gothamist.com/news/death-count-expected-soar-nyc-says-it-will-begin-reporting-suspected-covid-deaths-addition-confirmed-ones

[Pachamama]

1. I fully believe that they are deliberately not having enough testing and especially the morticians

I am certain that the deaths are much much higher than the official numbers - by at least double or more.

It’s disgusting

[uponit7771]

2. +1, right now nationwide your lungs have to be laying outside of your boy in some places to get test

[SunSeeker]

10. A NY EMT on Rachel said they're getting 10 TIMES the normal number of calls for cardiac arrest.

But he said they're not heart attacks. Based on what the dead person's family says, it appears they were all exhibiting Covid-19 symptoms before they stopped breathing, which results in your heart stopping (cardiac arrest). And those dead folks are not being tested for Covid-19. They're just sent to the morgue with the cause of death listed simply as cardiac arrest, which is meaningless. That's like saying they died because they died. I'm sure that undercounting of Covid-19 victims is happening all over the country.

[Buckeye_Democrat]

3. That's one of several problems for that model.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/2020/04/06/americas-most-influential-coronavirus-model-just-revised-its-estimates-downward-not-every-model-agrees/

Some state leaders have also grown increasingly about how the federal government is using IHME’s lower estimates to deny states’ increasingly desperate requests for equipment and help in preparations. The stark differences between the IHME model and dozens of others being created by states exposes the glaring lack of national models provided publicly by the White House or agencies such as the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention for local leaders to use in planning or preparation.

This is how starkly models can differ.
Local leaders in the District said on Friday that their model estimates the outbreak in the nation’s capital will peak June 28. The IHME model predicts the peak is coming in just days, on April 16. The District’s model predicts hospitals will need 1,453 ventilators at the peak. IHME predicts a need for only 107. The District is using the IHME model as a best-case scenario and the more dire model to prepare for a likely surge.

Funded by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, the IHME model embraces an entirely different statistical approach, taking the trending curve of deaths from China, and “fitting” that curve to emerging death data from U.S. cities and counties to predict what might come next.
For that reason, many experts saw IHME as overly optimistic when it was launched March 26. Few U.S. states or cities are taking action as drastic as what was adopted in Wuhan, China — the birthplace of the coronavirus pandemic — or even Northern Italy in locking down residents.

[uponit7771]

4. +1, we're not locking down or testing at Wuhan rate.

[Buckeye_Democrat]

6. Yep, I think the IMHE model is ridiculous.

We’re not taking the outbreak nearly as serious in this country.

[Loki Liesmith]

5. The IHME model assumes several things

Most importantly that we are under total lockdown till summer.

It’s a fine model. Just be careful about it’s assumptions.

[Ms. Toad]

7. I don't know how they are determining observed deaths.

As Dr. Acton explained it, once there are deaths in a nursing home (for example) other deaths in that setting with similar symptoms will be presumptively treated as COVID 19 deths.

There are also new diagnostic criteria as of 4/9. I don't know how those will play into what is reported to the CDC, since I can't find the announcement (aside from Dr. Acton's mention of it today).

Obviously the testing is pitiful.

BUT - what do your eyes and ears in the medical profession tell you. The reports I've seen talk about how horrible these deaths are, how much need there is, but the hospitalizations of things that act like COVID (tested or not) are still on the rise - with peaks expected this week or next. Under the original mathematical models, the peak and the Italy-like horror stories would already have happened. The folks I'm talking with are gearing up, not on the downside of the peak.

[Buckeye_Democrat]

8. I'm pleased that DeWine has mostly deferred to experts...

... in Ohio.

I’m surprised by that behavior from a Republican these days!

I think there’s still too many businesses that are open, finding loopholes in the definition of “essential”, but there’s likely not enough government manpower to investigate and shut down more of them. “Public” businesses like restaurants are easier to monitor.

Not pleased that religious services were given so much leeway either.

[uponit7771]

9. +1, what will be Rep excuses for the death rate skyrocketing in their states cause they allowed

... these church gathering or put tons of loop holes in the stay at home orders?

[Aussie105]

11. It's political.

China has stopped counting deaths, or more likely keeping the numbers secret.

Russia is writing up deaths as SARS related.

America is chalking them us as heart attacks.

Looks better that way. Less embarrassing for those countries that weren't ready.

[gab13by13]

12. I have been harping about lack of testing,

Trump brags about testing 1.8 million people which amounts to 0.8% of our population. Trump cut off a journalist who was going to ask him that question at the last virus rally. Trump doesn't want testing because it keeps both the number of infected and the number of deaths low. This strategy has to backfire in the long run, it is going to give a false sense of security, and Trump is itching to get people back to work to get the stock market back up. I fear this strategy will cause a rather speedy 2nd wave of infections and death.

[genxlib]

13. This x1000

We are going to get the bactrian curve when everyone has been told to look out for the dromedary.

*Reference to camels

[Tanuki]

14. Love your Bactrian vs. dromedary analogy!