Today, I took data for the number of new cases since June 9 (shown in red on the daily new cases graph), shifted the values, and overlayed that data on the historical data from the beginning of the pandemic. That shifted data is labeled as "June 9 shifted" in the graph and is shown in green. Surprise!!! The rise in cases since June 9 looks almost exactly like the rise at the start of the pandemic!
We really are right back where we started. Or are we? At the end of March, lockdowns were already well underway and the result was that the curve did start to flatten by early April. For example, our office encouraged remote working on March 12 and less than a week later we shut the office down except for essential personnel. That's not what's going on now. Where we are now is roughly equivalent to where we were at the end of March, but rather than being in a process of increasing restrictions we are in an environment of loosening restrictions. At least some of the state Governors got the memo and are requiring masks. It seems unlikely that the curve is going to flatten anytime soon under these conditions. I think we are in a far worse place: Groundhog day on, I don't know, PCP?
I've had a few questions about why deaths are not rising in concert with the new cases. I've addressed that here and there, but I'll drop my hypotheses in the form of an abbreviated list for clarity:
1) Demographic shift in infections. The morbidity probabilities are heavily skewed to the elderly. The initial pandemic hit the elderly populations hard, especially in nursing homes. The current rise in infections is heavily skewed to the younger population who are less likely to die. (Note: that doesn't mean the young are immune. Plenty of healthy, young people with no obvious risk factors are finding themselves dead or injured for life). I expect this to start to change as young people bring their new viral friends home.
2) Better treatments. Through trial and error, treatments have improved at least a little. This can't account for all the difference, but I'm going to guess it has some impact.
3) Increased testing. Part of the rise in infection rates is due to increased testing. If we had the same pathetic level of testing now that we had early on, the rate of increase would likely be different. (Note: this has implications for whether we really are in a Groundhog Day scenario). The increased testing cannot however explain all of the increase in new cases. Not by a long shot.
4) Virus evolution. There is evidence that the virus has mutated, particularly in the spike protein that binds to the ACE-2 receptor of the human cell. There is no evidence that this makes it any more or less lethal, but it does, apparently, make it more infectious. There have been other mutations, but based on my limited understanding (and I want to emphasize LIMITED. I AM NOT AN EXPERT and will defer to those that are if I say something that is inaccurate. Experts: let me know!), there is no strong evidence that the virulence has been altered.
5) Other reasons. There are almost certainly other influences that I've left off.
No comments:
Post a Comment