Trump Warns Big Death Toll Is Coming

Mish

The focus is on the next two weeks. Projections are ugly.

Trump warns of a bad two to three weeks as the White House Projects 100,000 to 240,000 U.S. Coronavirus Deaths.

“This could be a hell of a bad two weeks,” Mr. Trump said during a briefing at the White House on Tuesday afternoon, then quickly expanded upon his own dire assessment: “This is going to be three weeks like we’ve never seen before.”

That's an excellent video by Dr. Deborah Birx and Dr. Anthony Fauci.

Please play it.

The focus is on the next two to three weeks.

No Magic Bullet

"No magic bullet. No magic vaccine or therapy. It's just behavior," says Dr. Birx.

"This is tough. People are dying. It's inconvenient from a societal standpoint, from an economic standpoint. But this is going to be the answer to our problems. So let's all pull together and make sure as we look forward to the next 30 days , that we do it with all the intensity and force that we can," said Dr. Fauci.

Mike "Mish" Shedlock

Comments (112)
No. 1-15
RayLopez
RayLopez

The SuperForecasters site says 76% chance of up to 350k US deaths due to C-19 within a year, see here: https://goodjudgment.io/covid/dashboard/

See the below that one 'optimal' lockdown for the entire USA would be 34 weeks, that's 8 months cooped up with your loved ones...

RL

The optimal duration of lockdown - by Tyler Cowen March 31, 2020 at 7:05 pm in Current Affairs Law Medicine - Here is a new AEI paper by Anna Scherbina. I have not read it and am not endorsing (or criticizing) its conclusions, here goes:
We investigate the optimal duration of the COVID-19 suppression policy. We find that absent extensive suppression measures, the economic cost of the virus will total over $9 trillion, which represents 43% of annual GDP. The optimal duration of the suppression policy crucially depends on the policy’s effectiveness in reducing the rate of the virus transmission. We use three different assumptions for the suppression policy effectiveness, measured by the R0 that it can achieve (R0 indicates the number of people an infected person infects on average at the start of the outbreak). Using the assumption that the suppression policy can achieve R0 = 1, we assess that it should be kept in place between 30 and 34 weeks. If suppression can achieve a lower R0 = 0.7, the policy should be in place between 11 and 12 weeks. Finally, for the most optimistic assumption that the suppression policy can achieve an even lower R0 of 0.5, we estimate that it should last between seven and eight weeks. We further show that stopping the suppression policy before six weeks does not produce any meaningful improvements in the pandemic outcome.

JonSellers
JonSellers

In the meantime, here in Florida, our super governor Ron DeSantis is setting us up for the worst of both worlds: no stay at home order coupled with a complete collapse of the economy anyway. He's a short-term hero for the Fox News crowd, but will go down in history as the idiot who finally destroyed the Republican Party in Florida.

Think about it. Suppose the virus is effected by hot weather. DeSantis could order a complete shelter in place order, let the warm weather do its work, watch the virus melt away and claim to be a powerful and visionary leader. He'd be reelected in a heartbeat. But no, he is allowing thousands of people out on the weekends to go shopping in nice, cool air conditioned environments to spread the virus with all the joy of typical unmitigated fools.

Duncan Burns
Duncan Burns

Really have to question a lot of things since there is zero random sampling, supposedly due to lack of tests. Of those tested (in MA) 46,935 - 6620 tested positive and 89 died. That's 14% infected, and a .2% death rate, only one was under 60 and had other issues, and only one (in their 90's) had no underlying issues.

We're charting test trajectory rates, not what the virus is actually doing. Of the data we do have, as weak as it is, it's slightly worse than the flu. So we shut state and national economies down on crap data, and the data we do have, doesn't justify shutting everything down.

George Phillies
George Phillies

89 of 6620 is over 1%, not 0.2%, of those with the disease.

njbr
njbr

Still those with 'it's nothing different than the flu".

Yeah sure, the overwhelming of medical resources happens every year at this time.

Just listened on the radio to an ER nurse at North Memorial Hospital (Minnesota !!) say that they were instructed that if someone codes out at the hospital, they are told to not start chest compression and to let it go--which the nurse said it goes against everything they have been taught.

MiTurn
MiTurn

The epidemic is not spreading uniformly across the country. Where we live in northern Idaho, we are a couple weeks behind, say Seattle, in western Washington, viz. "the curve." Effectively, we've had lead time to prepare and settle in for an extended stay-at-home quarantine, which just recently was mandated by the governor. The first cases have just hit our county and it is from community transmission. Forewarned can mean being better prepared. Yet many people around here think that they're going to somehow miss the epidemic because there have been no cases (or just recently in the past day or two). So, they haven't prepared.

RonJ
RonJ

First Squawk (@FirstSquawk)
NY DOCTORS SAYS SUCCESSFULLY TREATED 400 PATIENTS WITH CORONAVIRUS INFECTION USING A COCKTAIL OF HYDROXYCHLOROQUINE, AZITHROMYCIN, AND ZINC SULFATE WITH ZERO DEATHS AND SIDE EFFECTS

Montana33
Montana33

Many people in this country understand little or nothing about data. I see comments here and elsewhere where people think they can calculate the death rate this way: (current completed deaths)/(current active cases). Wrong! From anecdotal evidence, a person can have the virus for 4 or 6 or more weeks before the die. So... to accurately calculate the death rate you need a population of people who caught the virus on the same day. This is the formula: (people who contracted virus on Feb 1st and then died) / (all people who contracted the virus on Feb 1st). The virus spread accelerates geometrically each day, so the worst thing you can do is compare number of deaths for people who contracted the virus in say early February to active cases in March. A lot of people who contracted the virus in early March will be dying in the next month or so. Those infected in late March will be dying in May or possibly June. If we had no new cases starting today, we would know the death rate maybe in about 8 weeks as the virus finished killing people who contracted it through yesterday, assuming we knew how many people had the virus. So... please tell me what genius thinks they can calculate a death rate from this? We have no data on the day each person contracted the virus hence there is no controlled population we can use to calculate the death rate. Also, the lack of testing and even the lack of properly counting people who died from the virus make this calculation absurdly impossible. What do we know? The death rate is far higher than the flu, and it was obvious in Feb from the China data that we were going to be obliterated by this.

Carl_R
Carl_R

The death toll can not be held to 200k, nor can the shutdown end by the end of April. For that to happen, people would have to actually follow the guidelines, but there in a free country, people will always resist that. You will have young people who think that what they do won't matter, and they will go out and get infected, and will go out and spread it, so cases will continue. You'll also have people holding super-spreader events, such as this:

Sadly, the fact that not everyone will follow the lockdown will mean that the lockdown can't end, and it will have to continue in some form for the full 18 months until there is a vaccine. It also means that the death toll will be in the millions, not in the hundreds of thousands, and that the economy will be destroyed, and that the economic future of the country is mortgaged for years to come. It would be much simpler if we could just all be good for 6-10 weeks, but it won't happen.

bradw2k
bradw2k

I have read that Fauci is leaning on the IHME projections -- which are based on some "best case" assumptions (such as ceaseless strong and effective social distancing measures) in contrast to the Imperial College work.

The more I read, the more I get the sense that epidemiologists are making educated guesses about anything beyond two weeks in the future. There is just too little data to project robustly how the pandemic plays out in May and June.

Jojo
Jojo

Lockdown, what lockdown? Sweden's unusual response to coronavirus
By Maddy Savage Stockholm
29 March 2020

While swathes of Europe's population endure lockdown conditions in the face of the coronavirus outbreak, one country stands almost alone in allowing life to go on much closer to normal.

Jojo
Jojo

Only 4,516 CV19 deaths so far. 95k to go to hit the lower rung of this latest prediction.

btw: how many times has the Trump WH been correct in general predictions/projections? Not very many.

Realist
Realist

Replying to a couple of earlier comments here:

A vaccine for SARS and MERS was worked on, but never completed, as both virus outbreaks were contained before the vaccine was completed. At which point, the vaccine work was terminated because no one was willing to fund the completion, and no private firm was willing to continue as there was no profit in it.

Covid19 is more virulent than SARS and MERS and is so widespread that it will be very difficult to achieve containment now. Therefore, the development of treatments, and eventually, a vaccine will be required. In the meantime look at the countries that are managing this well for lessons on best practices. China, S Korea, Japan, Singapore, Taiwan, Germany are all doing some things right.

Lessons will also be learned from countries that are struggling; Italy, Spain, France, UK, US etc.

And there are still some who comment here who promote unproven cures, and dismiss the seriousness of this virus. (RonJ, Jojo)

RayLopez
RayLopez

What would be worse if Trump said the US will have a "bigly" death toll and then said "April Fool's!". But our president is not that crass...yet.

Hdan
Hdan

I worry that the predictions are all wrong. Already we have gone from 2 million US deaths to 200,000. I'd bet the true number is a quarter of that. Why destroy the economy based on BS data?


Global Economics

FEATURED
COMMUNITY