|
|
Post by bernythedolt on Feb 12, 2020 10:36:11 GMT
There's a discussion here on the various methods being used to calculate the Coronavirus mortality rate, with comments on their weaknesses. I think the statement "A precise estimate of the case fatality rate is therefore impossible at present" sums it up pretty well. Thanks, that's the link I posted two days ago on this thread. It calls agent69's calculation "naive and misleading". He ought to read it, then compare how they calculated SARS mortality rate differently. Certainly a better use of his time than hurling insults around.
|
|
cb25
Posts: 3,528 
Likes: 2,668
|
Post by cb25 on Feb 12, 2020 10:42:01 GMT
There's a discussion here on the various methods being used to calculate the Coronavirus mortality rate, with comments on their weaknesses. I think the statement "A precise estimate of the case fatality rate is therefore impossible at present" sums it up pretty well. . It calls agent69 's calculation "naive and misleading". He ought to read it, then compare how they calculated SARS mortality rate differently. Certainly a better use of his time than hurling insults around. Apologies, I hadn't spotted your previous link, thought I'd come across a new article.
|
|
|
|
Post by bernythedolt on Feb 12, 2020 10:44:01 GMT
No problem... been there, done that, reposting links that others have posted!  |
|
agent69
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,042
Likes: 4,437
|
Post by agent69 on Feb 12, 2020 11:57:36 GMT
There's a discussion here on the various methods being used to calculate the Coronavirus mortality rate, with comments on their weaknesses. I think the statement "A precise estimate of the case fatality rate is therefore impossible at present" sums it up pretty well. Thanks, that's the link I posted two days ago on this thread. It calls agent69 's calculation "naive and misleading". He ought to read it, then compare how they calculated SARS mortality rate differently. Certainly a better use of his time than hurling insults around. Apologies if you are thin skined and took exception to any of my comments. The linked article appears to support my suggestion that mortality rate is calculated as deaths divided by number of cases. However, the difficult bit is working out how many people have been affected given that 82% of cases are mild (according to the article) and many of these probably didn't make it onto the official figures.
There are other factors that could also be affecting the 'current' rate, for example early contractors of the virus did not understnand the potential severity, so didn't bother seeking medical help until they felt realy ill, by which time the chances of recovery were greatly reduced.
|
|
|
|
Post by mrclondon on Feb 12, 2020 13:54:25 GMT
This Q&A with Professor of Epidemiology at Harvard is worth a read through (dated yesterday 11th Feb)
|
|
michaelc
Member of DD Central
Say No To T.D.S.
Posts: 5,703
Likes: 2,981
|
Post by michaelc on Feb 12, 2020 14:02:17 GMT
Thanks, that's the link I posted two days ago on this thread. It calls agent69 's calculation "naive and misleading". He ought to read it, then compare how they calculated SARS mortality rate differently. Certainly a better use of his time than hurling insults around. Apologies if you are thin skined and took exception to any of my comments. The linked article appears to support my suggestion that mortality rate is calculated as deaths divided by number of cases. However, the difficult bit is working out how many people have been affected given that 82% of cases are mild (according to the article) and many of these probably didn't make it onto the official figures.
There are other factors that could also be affecting the 'current' rate, for example early contractors of the virus did not understnand the potential severity, so didn't bother seeking medical help until they felt realy ill, by which time the chances of recovery were greatly reduced.
Surely the difficult bit is twofold. How many people have the virus that haven't reported it but also how many have the virus and sadly don't make it. Perhaps some of that is about being careful about dates when you process the data. Either way, suggest we all dial down the frustration on this thread else our learned and noble mods might lock it ! Its not as if any of us have caught this (as far as I know!)
|
|
|
|
Post by bernythedolt on Feb 12, 2020 16:40:49 GMT
Thanks, that's the link I posted two days ago on this thread. It calls agent69 's calculation "naive and misleading". He ought to read it, then compare how they calculated SARS mortality rate differently. Certainly a better use of his time than hurling insults around. Apologies if you are thin skined and took exception to any of my comments. The linked article appears to support my suggestion that mortality rate is calculated as deaths divided by number of cases. However, the difficult bit is working out how many people have been affected given that 82% of cases are mild (according to the article) and many of these probably didn't make it onto the official figures.
There are other factors that could also be affecting the 'current' rate, for example early contractors of the virus did not understnand the potential severity, so didn't bother seeking medical help until they felt realy ill, by which time the chances of recovery were greatly reduced.
It doesn't. It says that's the formula once an epidemic has ended. Until then, it calls the formula naïve and misleading, and offers much better methodologies. PS. Careful - you are in danger of becoming one of those armchair experts you despise... 🤣 Edit: PPS - I'm not really thin skinned and certainly no offence taken!
|
|
keitha
Member of DD Central
2024, hopefully the year I get out of P2P
Posts: 4,587
Likes: 2,622
|
Post by keitha on Feb 12, 2020 16:45:47 GMT
I've just heard a report on CNBC that there has been a spike in the U.S. in Google searches for "Beer Virus" and there has been a drop in the sales of a well known Mexican beveridge...........Yes you guessed it CORONA!!!!! This is not a joke  so lets call the next one Coors just to pee the Americans off Officially its "covid" which is similar to trumps famous "covee" tweet so maybe he was patient zero
|
|
|
|
Post by bernythedolt on Feb 12, 2020 16:55:09 GMT
This Q&A with Professor of Epidemiology at Harvard is worth a read through (dated yesterday 11th Feb)
" Over the last few days, it appears that the rate of increase in new cases in China has slowed relative to the exponential growth we saw before" - Prof Lipsitch. I'm glad I got something right at least! 😉
|
|
benaj
Member of DD Central
N/A
Posts: 5,608
Likes: 1,738
|
Post by benaj on Feb 12, 2020 17:17:31 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by bernythedolt on Feb 12, 2020 17:27:26 GMT
New resource just arrived here " The peak should come in middle or late February, followed by a plateau and decrease, basing the forecast on mathematical modelling..." - Prof. Nanshan Zhong Leading epidemiologist, first to describe SARS coronovirus . Feb. 11, 2020 My prediction was to peak on 21st Feb. I'm on a roll now... 😂🤣 |
|
|
|
Post by mrclondon on Feb 12, 2020 17:45:41 GMT
Another worthwhile read is this twitter thread from a Professor of Economics at University of Helsinki on possible effects on Eurozone banks and some high level thoughts on the health of the Chinese economy before the outbreak started.
www.twitter.com/mtmalinen/status/1227609757629980672
|
|
registerme
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,624
Likes: 6,436
|
Post by registerme on Feb 12, 2020 17:57:11 GMT
Interesting. I'm not sure if it was here, or on another forum, that somebody took the mickey out of me for saying "sunlight is the best disinfectant" (can't remember exactly what it was in relation to). Well, there's two aspects to that comment. One is that sunlight provides visibility. The other is that the UV in sunlight does a great job damaging viral DNA / RNA, inhibiting reproduction (replication?) and playing a large part in why, for instance, flu is less common in the summer.... So, whoever it was, wherever it was, "ya boo sucks"  . EDIT: Given the circumstances I guess I should learn how to spell "flu" correctly!
|
|
hazellend
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,363
Likes: 2,180
|
Post by hazellend on Feb 12, 2020 21:21:18 GMT
Another worthwhile read is this twitter thread from a Professor of Economics at University of Helsinki on possible effects on Eurozone banks and some high level thoughts on the health of the Chinese economy before the outbreak started.
www.twitter.com/mtmalinen/status/1227609757629980672But how is this professor’s opinion “actionable”? My view is that the stock market is priced efficiently and has access to all known information. So let’s say there is a 5 - 10% chance of the coronavirus being the next Spanish flu, those odds are priced in. Think about it: These economics professors are extremely intelligent with deep understanding of past, current and future economic data. If this information was of much use they would all be stock market milionaires. Now, I haven’t looked into all the celebrity economists personal net worth but my anecdotal experience is that occasionally they make a correct call, enjoy their moment of fame, then sound like a broken record permanently after. I think you have made a behavioural finance error with such a big switch in your asset allocation. You do seem wealthy enough that it probably doesn’t matter. Also, selling at a market high (as you have done) is far preferable to panic selling in a crash . This is my advice. Think about your need, willingness and ability to take “risk” with equities. Assuming that equities can drawdown ~ 50% in a big crash. Now if you can handle a 50% drop then go 100% equities (broad, cheap index tracker). If you can handle a 10% drop then go 20% equities and the rest in gov bonds/cash. Once you have decided your allocation, get back in straight away then stay the course.
|
|
|
|
Post by mrclondon on Feb 12, 2020 21:42:15 GMT
Another worthwhile read is this twitter thread from a Professor of Economics at University of Helsinki on possible effects on Eurozone banks and some high level thoughts on the health of the Chinese economy before the outbreak started.
www.twitter.com/mtmalinen/status/1227609757629980672But how is this professor’s opinion “actionable”? As a starting point for your own research / due dilligence / anaysis / sector allocations etc
In general terms I don't subscribe to the view that markets are accurately pricing in probabilities of various events. There is simply too much fake news floating around (in general terms not specifically this virus ... think brexit as a better example) that is accepted as "fact" (at least to the extent of being more likely to be correct than not).
In terms of this particular analysis, coupled with everything we've known about the slowdown in EU manufacturing output and the major polictical difficulties the ruling parties in Germany and France are experiencing, when I re-enter the markets in the weeks or months ahead I'm likely to reduce my exposure to EU markets vs the exposure % I had determined a couple of years back.
I've been an active investor in various asset classes, making my own investment decisions for close to 40 years. Very occaisonally I make the wrong call, but I've no regrets at all about any of my decisions - they were the right decision at the time for me in my circumstances.
|
|
.