One morning, a year ago today…

 

I clicked on a link that a friend had sent me a couple days earlier, recommending I read it right away. I might never have clicked on it at all, but I have respect for this person's judgment, so I did. It was a long article with lots of charts, but I ended up spending at least a couple hours on it, trying to make sure I understood its meaning. I did this because it seemed to be saying we were in for a lot of trouble – much more than I’d suspected (or most other people suspected) up to this point. Even though my state (Illinois) had just closed all schools the previous day (we were one of the first states to do so), the magnitude of the problem hadn’t registered on me – until I read the article.

And the meaning was all too clear to me: Unless drastic action was taken on national, state and local levels immediately, there could be a huge number of deaths due to the novel coronavirus in the US. For every day of delay in doing this, there would be 20,000 additional cases. I didn’t forecast how many deaths this would translate into, but using the 5% case fatality rate mentioned in the article, this would translate into 1,000 extra deaths for every additional day of delay – starting the next day (of course that ended up being an underestimate. It seems the extra week we took to lock down cost more than 20,000 lives). The article concludes with these two paragraphs:

This is an exponential threat. Every day counts. When you’re delaying by a single day a decision, you’re not contributing to a few cases maybe. There are probably hundreds or thousands of cases in your community already. Every day that there isn’t social distancing, these cases grow exponentially.

This is probably the one time in the last decade that sharing an article might save lives. They need to understand this to avert a catastrophe. The moment to act is now.

I wanted to get the word out about this, so I decided to write a post on my cybersecurity blog, where it would be seen (and hopefully read) by over 1,000 people. I just reread it, and I think I did a good job of summarizing the article, although it’s also quite interesting to look at the article itself. It had had as I recall around 10 million hits already (it was a little more than a week old) when I read it, and less than two weeks later it had 40 million. I know a few weeks after that it was over 100 million, but they don’t seem to be tracking hits on it anymore.

I thought this might be a one-time post, but the next day I began to read more, and felt compelled to write more posts – in fact, I wrote one a day for at least 3-4 months, and maybe longer than that. In a couple of weeks I set up this Pandemic Blog, where I continue to post, although I’ve really cut back the frequency because of being busy in my day job. I’m going to try to post at least once a week from now on and update my numbers then (I’m going to update them tomorrow, and every seven days thereafter).

I’d like to put some of these posts from the last year into a book, along with some comments on them. I went through quite a trajectory over this past year - at first thinking that the only thing that was required was to call people’s attention to the problem. The government would respond appropriately and contain the virus. Unfortunately, it didn’t quite work out that way, as we have just passed the 30 million case mark, and we’re about to pass 550,000 deaths.

The good news is the vaccine rollout is going much better than I imagined it could – given the terrible start it had in December (in fact, I just got my first shot last week, being in the senior category). But the bad news (which I want to write about soon) is that the new Brazil variant is ravaging that country and seems to infect people who have already been infected. What will we do if it infects people who have already been infected with the current strains, or more importantly have already been vaccinated? We’ll soon find out whether it does, since it’s already in the US.

In fact, the situation with the Brazil variant is a lot like the novel coronavirus was a year ago. Fortunately, our government’s response to it won’t be the unmitigated disaster that it was last year.

I would love to hear any comments or questions you have on this post. Drop me an email at tom@tomalrich.com.

 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The tragedy in India

For a great account of what’s going on in India, read this WaPo article. And read this Atlantic article for a good commentary on how India’s wealthier class ignored the lessons of the 1984 Bhopal disaster and let the health care system stagnate, leaving the country unable to handle this sudden surge in the virus. Although it's wrong to say the system stagnated. For the wealthy, it became (and remains) world-class. Does this remind you of another health care system that, at least in the early days of the pandemic, was overwhelmed?  Both articles call attention to the Modi government’s failures, but they both try to spread the blame around. Yes, others are responsible, but the fact that – after a terrible response to the first wave of the virus – the government got lulled into thinking they’d beaten it, so they could open up completely (including holding big political rallies and allowing the annual Kumbh Mela to take place – this year in Haridwar, which I’ve visited and can ...
Read more

The Indian variant

The numbers keep improving every week. Both new cases and deaths grew at the same 0.7% rate in the past week, vs. 0.9% for both cases and deaths the previous week. And average daily deaths in the past week were 573. For perspective, the last time deaths were this low was March 31, 2020. But given that daily deaths hadn’t gone above 10 until March 15, the fact that they’d accelerated to 468 on March 31 was a bad sign (at the time, my big concern was that total deaths would end up in the low tens of thousands. In fact, they passed 600,000 last week). This morning, WaPo ran a story on the new Indian variant’s arrival in Britain, where it passed 2,000 cases recently. It seems to be at least 50% more transmissible than what we used to call the UK variant, but which is now the dominant variant in both the US and Britain. And that variant in turn easily displaced what had been the previous dominant variant in both countries, since the beginning of the pandemic (in fact, I remember a lot o...
Read more

Deaths and Recoveries

I’m not bothering with my usual Numbers section today, since the 1-day and 7-day rates of increase in deaths and cases haven’t changed at all, and the ratio of deaths to closed cases remains at 17%. The projected deaths numbers are close to what they were yesterday. I haven’t discussed the ratio of deaths to closed cases for a while, although I’ve been reporting it. To refresh your memory, this is the ratio of total Covid-19 deaths so far to “closed cases”; closed cases is the sum of deaths so far and “recoveries” so far. The fact that the US rate is 17% means that, of all closed cases so far in the pandemic, 17% of them have resulted in death. This is down substantially from the initial value of 41%, in late March, when Worldometers started reporting recoveries. But it is still quite high – it seems to mean that, if you’re determined to have a “case” of Covid-19, the odds are close to 1 in 5 that you will die. I’ve been periodically comparing the US performance in this ar...
Read more