Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Ms. Toad

(38,718 posts)
11. The curve I'm working with is the national curve
Thu Apr 9, 2020, 03:17 AM
Apr 2020

The more data, the more likely it is that it will be reasonably accurate. But you are correct that on a state-by-state basis states will reach their peak on different days - based on when the virus was seeded there, whether/when they implemented social distancing rules, whether they tend to have a lot of international travelers, how dense their population centers, etc.

I don't know how accurate - their modeling is significantlty more sophisticated then mine. I'm just plotting the data I have on a graph and fitting a curve to it. It has been pretty accurate for teh nest 1-3 days, and generally accurate for predicting big events, like the peak - for example my national peak has consistently matched the predicted national peak predicted by most models.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

good news Demovictory9 Apr 2020 #1
I wish it was still declining - Ms. Toad Apr 2020 #2
We still don't have enough testing to know who's infected. It's a disgrace! ffr Apr 2020 #3
You appear to be misunderstanding what I have posted. Ms. Toad Apr 2020 #5
Would a sub par per capita testing rate of symptomatic effect the multiplier any? Thx in advance uponit7771 Apr 2020 #6
Impossible to be absolutely certain without a lot more number crunching. Ms. Toad Apr 2020 #8
Could an infinite supply of test affect the smoothness of the curve also? My understanding is uponit7771 Apr 2020 #9
The challenge with local focus is that the data set Ms. Toad Apr 2020 #13
I agree, Analyst are not trying to hold numbers down but Trump is ... NO DOUBT ... holding numbers uponit7771 Apr 2020 #18
Fauci doesn't dictate what local states do, Ms. Toad Apr 2020 #20
It Doesn't Here In Illinois ProfessorGAC Apr 2020 #22
Agreed. Ms. Toad Apr 2020 #25
100% ... didn't think about this, Red Don can say all clear but it'll be local areas that give the uponit7771 Apr 2020 #35
Maybe a dumb question. Midnightwalk Apr 2020 #10
The curve I'm working with is the national curve Ms. Toad Apr 2020 #11
They should, imo, be not only testing more SheltieLover Apr 2020 #15
Agree. ananda Apr 2020 #16
Their preventing mass testing to hide the real numbers duforsure Apr 2020 #17
Texas test per million is a disgrace; Ohio is on the lower-end tests per million*, but not too bad greenjar_01 Apr 2020 #30
Yeah, but we are not testing much. Ohio ranks 40th for tests per capita krawhitham Apr 2020 #4
This isn't Ohio data - Ms. Toad Apr 2020 #7
Compared to national testing numbers FreeState Apr 2020 #12
I'll have to play with that. Ms. Toad Apr 2020 #14
Great info. It took a week to double. Much better than the 3 days it was Squinch Apr 2020 #32
The first step in proper data analysis is proper data collection. Yavin4 Apr 2020 #19
Absolutely - but there is nothing I can do about that Ms. Toad Apr 2020 #21
We're dealing with a president that only believes in narratives not saving lives. Yavin4 Apr 2020 #23
Fortunately, since local restrictions on movement are local decisions Ms. Toad Apr 2020 #27
We hardly test anyone, and therefore have NO IDEA how many Americans are infected... ElementaryPenguin Apr 2020 #24
BUT, is it safe to think that the fraction tested is relatively stable? Squinch Apr 2020 #28
When the first derivative is zero DBoon Apr 2020 #26
Yes. n/t Ms. Toad Apr 2020 #29
Look at the number of tests gibraltar72 Apr 2020 #31
Agreed. n/t Ms. Toad Apr 2020 #34
I'm having a difficult time wrapping my head around the numbers. NoMoreRepugs Apr 2020 #33
In terms of absolute numbers of infected - the lack of testing means the data Ms. Toad Apr 2020 #36
Appreciate your insight. Once there is a better handle on all the deaths both at home and in NoMoreRepugs Apr 2020 #41
Agreed - the toll will be staggering. Ms. Toad Apr 2020 #42
This is good but we really don't know for sure what the numbers are captain queeg Apr 2020 #37
Absolute numbers, no. Ms. Toad Apr 2020 #38
have to think the number stagnating te last 4 days...... Takket Apr 2020 #39
That's possible - Ms. Toad Apr 2020 #40
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Growth rate for new cases...»Reply #11