Collapsing Confidence in Public Health/Macroeconomic Management

Consumer sentiment declines; economic policy uncertainty on the rise; real interest rates declining. It’s all in the graph below.

Figure 1: University of Michigan consumer sentiment (top), Economic Policy Uncertainty Index (middle), TIPS 10 year constant maturity yield, % (bottom). U Mich sentiment is preliminary for July, EPU in July is thru 7/25/2020, TIPS in July is thru 7/24/2020. Source: University of Michigan and Treasury via FRED, policyuncertainty.com. 

71 thoughts on “Collapsing Confidence in Public Health/Macroeconomic Management

    1. Moses Herzog

      Like the fool I am, I was trying to “get”/find the specific thing Wolfers said you were making reference to. Failed in my hunt, but found this wonderful Twitter thread in my failure:
      https://twitter.com/kjhealy/status/1286843409911644161

      He also had an interesting tweet on a baseball manager/umpire argument. Let you find that on your own. And another one on statistics distributions. If twitter didn’t blackmail/force me to provide my phone number to keep my account, I would definitely be following Wolfer’s twitter thread. I guess I can sporadically check it anyway.

      Reply
    1. macroduck

      Quiggen argues that the return on capital is negative – indicating the end of capitalism – based on a negative risk-free rate (ignoring duration risk). Left at that, he’d have missed an important distinction. In his final paragraph, Quiggen promises to address equity returns in a coming post, so maybe the conceptual gap will be closed.

      S&P total return so far this year (https://www.slickcharts.com/sp500/returns) is 1.36%, which exceeds the rate of inflation (positive real return) and the long-term average of around 0.43%. So at least until Quiggen’s next post, capitalism (as we have known it) lives.

      Reply
      1. Moses Herzog

        @macroduck
        Funny. Like how you wrote that snippet. Can I steal your punchline and say “Or…… at least until the next scheduled date of the Federal Reserve’s purchases of corporate bonds” ??

        Quiggin is a pretty good writer. I was going to jokingly say “Quiggin is a pretty good writer considering his country’s educational system”, but those playful pokes to Not Trumpis’s ribs don’t seem to be going over very well lately.

        Reply
  1. Barkley Rosser

    The stunner here for me at least, which I have not seen reported on elsewhere, is the apparently now highly negative TIPS yield. I note that the Fed has so far strongly resisted going into negative interest rate territory, certainly on any sustained basis. But this looks to be a major break with that general policy approach, with the TIPs rate something they are not able to control easily.

    Reply
    1. The Rage

      Negative rates is a disaster. I would ignore rates due to the pandemic. I smell a surge and issues developing when it ends.

      Reply
      1. baffling

        interest rates have been falling for 40 years. negative rates may be more normal than you think. you have 40 years of inertia to fight.

        Reply
        1. spencer

          The only negative rate before recently is CH in the 1970s where they had a tax on foreign deposits that generated negative yields for foreign capital in CH. But the main attraction of CH back than was the return of capital not the return on capital.

          Reply
          1. baffling

            we have seen negative rates around the world for several years now. i am not sure why the usa should be considered immune? as i said, the last 40 years has been a consistent downward trend in nominal rates. i am not commenting on real rates here. i am not a fan of negative rates. but i have yet to see convincing arguments that we cannot have them in the usa.

  2. Moses Herzog

    Was just reading this in an old hardcopy of WSJ from January 13.
    https://www.wsj.com/articles/japan-offers-a-lesson-on-inflation-for-the-fed-11578837600 <<—probably a paywall
    No one (in their right mind) expects inflation to rise right now. And it makes it impossible to raise rates when inflation maybe is at 0.5% or lower. I also think the extreme stubbornness in raising minimum wages, labor being squeezed to death by management/owners due to the death of labor unions,
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=56TTAOp_qdg. <<–These nurses are intelligent enough not to voluntarily be crapped on by hospital administrators. When will nurses in "right to work" states like Oklahoma learn they don't have to be crapped on when there's a "shortage" of nurses.
    —– (continuing from before the link) the encouragement and incentivizing of private debt, and the Fed repurchasing of bonds, that benefits mostly banks and the upper class. It never seems to "register" with central bankers (rather conveniently doesn't "register" for them) that bond purchases by the Federal Reserve often don't make it to benefitting Main Street in any way, shape, or form. Not only that, banks get fees off of the PPP loans:
    https://www.wsj.com/articles/banks-could-get-24-billion-in-fees-from-ppp-loans-11594134444

    Reply
    1. baffling

      “When will nurses in “right to work” states like Oklahoma learn they don’t have to be crapped on when there’s a “shortage” of nurses.”
      nurses suffer much of the same fate as teachers. most of them are female. therefore, they are not afforded their full value in the workplace by much of society. everybody understands they are necessary and needed for a successful society. but school boards and hospital administrators take advantage of the idea that these people are answering a “calling” rather than a job or profession. as an example, the trump virus has shown very clearly that probably the 2 most important professions in the nation right now are educators (who provide education AND daycare to our children, allowing others to “work”) and nurses (who are the true front line workers in the pandemic). and yet the administration is promoting policies that place the burden of the trump virus squarely on those shoulders. without even so much as a thank you, may i have another , acknowledgement.

      Reply
  3. Alan Goldhammer

    To quote Nobel Laureate and all around wise man, Bob Dylan, “…something is happening but you don’t know what it is…” IMO, investing has never been more challenging than it is today. “Safe” investments, e.g., US treasuries, offer no return; insured bank deposits don’t either. It is difficult to define what a “safe” corporate bond is and municipals may be plagued by poor state and local finance situation brought about by the pandemic. Perhaps a successful vaccine helps out as this seems to be factored in stock market returns but major banks have already sent warning flares up in earnings reports. Gold is hitting all time highs.

    Weird times we live in.

    Reply
    1. baffling

      have to agree. every night i think this is the weirdest market i have ever played in. stocks keep going up as news gets worse and worse. it makes very little sense. p/e multiples are waaaaay out of wack. how can amazon and tesla hold these levels in the current economic environment. they have risen to all time highs throughout the pandemic. right now i think it is a momentum play. new day traders are technology junkies, and dumping money into what they know best-tech. but they have only seen a world where the market rises. how will they fare on a major pullback? i know i should sell all my major tech and take the overheated profits now-but i can’t avoid the momentum play, either. this will not end well.

      Reply
  4. Willie

    I do not think there are too many people outside the administration and its tribal adherents who have any confidence in the US response so far. What I am fascinated by, provided I get to see it, is what kinds of economic changes come out of the pandemic. Things will continue in their polarized political way for a while, and US demographics will continue to change. But economic power, and the resulting political influence may change in unpredictable ways. It makes things even more interesting than the usual trajectory. I really do not have any idea what might happen.

    Reply
    1. baffling

      you want to change the political trajectory, improve our voting mechanism. get rid of in person voting. move to mail in, or even better and safer, an app based voting system. this ensures everybody gets to vote, without needing to take time off of work and other hardships. this will increase our electorates participation in the voting process by at least 30%. we should strive for an actively participating electorate. this is how a democracy should operate.

      Reply
      1. Willie

        I am skeptical of app voting. Cell phones are common but not universal. And they an be hacked one a wholesale basis in a way mailed in paper ballots cannot be.

        Reply
        1. baffling

          you can also make apps very secure. you can make a voting app as secure as a financial app. not perfect, but probably effective enough. it is also easier to monitor for fraud. importantly, it permits MORE people to possibly vote, rather than invoke roadblocks as many current systems do. i am in the all of the above camp, looking for all possible ways to improve voter access. that is a democracy. we currently have a party that is interested in restricted voter access, for their own political lifeline. it is also damaging our democracy and way of life. time for a change. it is 2020, not 1820.

          Reply
      1. Bruce Hall

        Okay, Dr. pgl, we’ll have to believe your opinions because you are, well, pgl.

        On the other hand:
        Here are some interesting studies about opening schools, children, and “super-spreaders”
        https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/11646897/primary-school-kids-not-coronavirus-super-spreaders-major-study/
        https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-06-23/school-children-don-t-spread-coronavirus-french-study-shows
        https://www.cnbc.com/2020/07/14/schools-coronavirus-infection-rate-low-german-study-finds.html
        https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-sweden-schools-idUSKCN24G2IS
        Politics get in the way of facts in the United States.

        Then, of course, there are all of those school-age children who are dying of Covid-19. So many more than from other causes.
        https://data.cdc.gov/NCHS/Provisional-COVID-19-Death-Counts-by-Sex-Age-and-S/9bhg-hcku

        But I agree with pgl; after all, who can trust the government?

        Reply
        1. pgl

          Any time you begin with your usual childish rants like that one, I’m just skipping the rest of your incessant BS. I would suggest you grow up but then that is something else you are incapable at.

          Reply
        2. pgl

          Did you forget to actually READ your own links AGAIN? Come on Bruce – you make this mistake more than anyone else know of. What they noted was elementary kids may not be super spreaders. Of course there are teachers and other adults going to elementary school. I guess when you were in elementary school you were so out of it that you never noticed that.

          Of course teenagers are super spreaders. Oh wait – you never made it out of the 6th grade so you would not know what high school looked like.

          Reply
          1. Bruce Hall

            Of course teenagers are super spreaders. Oh wait – you never made it out of the 6th grade so you would not know what high school looked like.

            Of course… except, of course, that’s not what the conclusions were. But I’ll just disregard your dyslexia and picking phrases out of context.

            The Sun:

            Dr Soumya Swaminathan, the World Health Organisation’s Chief Scientist, also said on Sunday that “there have not been big outbreaks in schools” and the early results of studies are “very reassuring”.

            She said that “the risks to children are extremely low with this infection, and there have not been many cases described of children transmitting it to others, particularly within school settings”.</blockquote?
            Bloomberg:

            The study confirms that children appear to show fewer telltale symptoms than adults and be less contagious, providing a justification for school reopenings in countries from Denmark to Switzerland. The researchers found that 61% of the parents of infected kids had the coronavirus, compared with about 7% of parents of healthy ones, suggesting it was the parents who had infected their offspring rather than the other way around.

            CNBC:

            The results showed that “the dynamics of virus spreading have been overestimated,” the universities said, adding that the study suggested that schools did not become the coronavirus “hotspot” after reopening, as had been feared.

            Reuters:

            STOCKHOLM (Reuters) – Sweden’s decision to keep schools open during the pandemic resulted in no higher rate of infection among its schoolchildren than in neighbouring Finland, where schools did temporarily close, their public health agencies said in a joint report.

            “In conclusion, (the) closure or not of schools had no measurable direct impact on the number of laboratory confirmed cases in school-aged children in Finland or Sweden,” the agencies said in the report, published last week.

            Hopefully, pgl, you’ll be able to work your way through these in less than a couple of hours.

          2. pgl

            Brucie actually read his own links. Of course this liar cherry picked quotes and did not note some crucial details. Let’s take the first link which of course talked about primary school kids (the headline Bruce forgot to read) and not high schoolers:

            “The researchers looked at 18 coronavirus cases (nine students and nine staff) from 15 schools. And the report’s preliminary findings were that only one primary school student and one high school student “may have contracted Covid-19 from the initial cases at their schools”.

            Preliminary findings based on a very small sample size. Of course Bruce Hall would tout this as conclusive evidence since it supports the MAGA view point. Yes – his own links and he cherry picks and misrepresents as usual.

    1. 2slugbaits

      Bruce Hall Very small number of observations in that non-peer reviewed study. A very much larger study (65,000 kids) in South Korea found that children under the age of 10 tended not to spread the virus, but children age 10 and above spread the virus at the same rate as adults. Opening up schools is going to be tricky. There’s clearly a significant cost in not opening up schools. All the more reason why we should have clamped down much harder during the summer months instead of letting adults go to bars and restaurants. The best compromise might be to let children through 2nd or 3rd grade return to school, but children above that age distance learn.

      Another sign this is a very weird year. I cannot remember another year in which every baseball team had at least one loss after only having played three games. Every MLB team was either 2-1 or 1-2.

      Reply
      1. Bruce Hall

        baffling,

        I provided a link to a video interview of an ER doctor/lawyer (yes, unusual) who felt the risks to the health of children from not going to school far exceeded the risk of children going to school. Either it disappeared into the ether or Menzie chose to delete it. Her name was Simone Gold and I’m sure it will be a simple effort to find it. Part of her assessment was based on an Irish study that failed to identify an asymptomatic super-spreaded among a small group of children who had over 1,000 contacts traced with no infections. That may have been an accurate assessment or not, but she seems confident that children are not the source of new C-19 cases.

        Whatever the case, if children are not allowed to return to school, there will be a very difficult fall and winter and there will be states where the governors are accused of creating an unsafe environment for children by keeping them out of schools. This will impact low-income children the most. The people will point to states where schools have been reopened and they won’t blame the federal government for keeping their schools closed. As people begin to realize that the dramatic increase in “cases” … positive C-19 test results … are due increasingly to the inclusion of asymptomatic or mildly symptomatic people who were not included in the April testing, they will question the validity of the restrictions placed by the state. https://data.cdc.gov/NCHS/Provisional-COVID-19-Death-Counts-by-Sex-Age-and-S/9bhg-hcku

        As Dr. Gold pointed out, there is no “no risk” situation; there are only choices between actions based on risk assessment and keeping schools closed creates a high-risk situation for many children while C-19 is very low risk.

        As Dr. Gold pointed out, the risk to children from influenza is greater than C-19 and yet no one would propose to shut down all schools because of the flu.

        Reply
        1. Menzie Chinn Post author

          Bruce Hall: If you post a YouTube or other video link, assume posting will be delayed because it requires me to screen for profanity/racial epithets/misogyny. Moses Herzog knows this; you should too.

          In other words, if you want your views approved quickly, DON’T post links to videos.

          (My mood will be better if you hew to this rule, too.)

          Reply
          1. Bruce Hall

            Thanks. I won’t post post profanity/racial epithets/misogyny. Didn’t realize you watched all of the videos fully, but now I understand the delay.

          2. Menzie Chinn Post author

            Bruce Hall: I don’t watch fully, but I try to scan. And if I decide not to watch a particularly long video, it never gets posted…(pretty sure this does not apply to you).

        2. 2slugbaits

          Bruce Hall Once again, you’ve fallen for a quack. This supposed “doctor” is a fraud. In May she was claiming that COVID-19 was nothing to be concerned about. She’s just some attention seeking personality that’s been all over the right-wing internet and nutjob media outlets. This isn’t the first time that you’ve been suckered. A few months ago you posted something about hydroxychloroquine from a “doctor” who was on Laura Ingraham’s show. Turns out the guy runs one of those fraudulent cancer clinics and is in all kinds of trouble with the law. Another time you linked to a “study” that was endorsed by some official sounding physicians organization. Again, they were all crackpots and quacks. How else to describe “doctors” who claimed that gay sex causes cancer along with a lot of other totally bogus claims.

          Kids going back to school is a serious and difficult issue. As such, you should try putting the commensurate the time and effort into researching and thinking about the issue. Referring to the rants of QAnon inspired crackpots like this “Dr. Simone Gold” is not my idea of advancing the discussion. There’s already way too much of that stuff floating around. Just last night Trump went on a tweetstorm and linked to a quack doctor. Both Facebook and Twitter had to take down the accounts for the quack. Like a lot of old white guys, you’re too proud to admit that you’ve been played. Vladimir Putin is a lot smarter than you are. He knows an easy mark when he sees one.

          Reply
          1. pgl

            “Once again, you’ve fallen for a quack. This supposed “doctor” is a fraud.”

            It me all of two minutes to find Shelton’s blog and her Facebook page both of which showed how incredibly bizarro she really is. Bruce Hall once again utterly fails to do any background research as he hypes some one well known to be a total crackpot as if she were some sort of expert.

            Then again – this is clearly Bruce’s forte!

        3. baffling

          bruce hall, if you want to open schools so bad, then have your society behave in a way that reduces the amount of virus circulating in the community to begin with. wear masks. shut down bars and other known super spreader environments. people are not against reopening schools. people are against reopening schools while the virus is prevalent in the community. the trump administration has done a very poor job at encouraging the communities into a position to reopen schools.
          “As Dr. Gold pointed out, the risk to children from influenza is greater than C-19 and yet no one would propose to shut down all schools because of the flu.”
          the teachers are at risk. the bus drivers. the crossing guards. the food cooks. the janitors. what do you propose to do about them? many of them are older and at risk. i guess they don’t count in this discussion.

          Reply
          1. pgl

            “the teachers are at risk. the bus drivers. the crossing guards. the food cooks. the janitors.”

            Hey these little ones are really bright. They can cook their own food and drive the bus. And who needs teachers. Well maybe they are not that bright yet but trust me on this one. The little ones are a lot brighter than Bruce Hall.

          2. Ulenspiegel

            “As Dr. Gold pointed out, the risk to children from influenza is greater than C-19 and yet no one would propose to shut down all schools because of the flu.”

            It is not mainly about the risc to children but about the risc children pose for others, the virus load in children is not very different from adults, that children often do not have symptoms does not prevent infections.

            The difference to flu is that against flu adults have usually antibodies, children not, therefore, children have a 1000fold higher virus load and they become extremly efficient spreaders. In case of a real flu epedemic closing schools is indeed the way to go, see US data for the flu in 1918, cities with shut down schools were in better shape.

            For cov19 the kids are not more dangerous than adults, therefore, closing schools is not comvincing when at the same time adults go to pubs and restaurants, even some entertainment events…

          1. 2slugbaits

            And then there’s that other nutcase in the video (“Dr” Stella Immanuel) who not only says masks aren’t necessary, but tells us that certain gynecological problems like cysts are caused by women having sex dreams with demons and witches. And in true QAnon fashion, she has learned that deep state secret: the government is run by aliens and reptilians.
            https://www.thedailybeast.com/stella-immanuel-trumps-new-covid-doctor-believes-in-alien-dna-demon-sperm-and-hydroxychloroquine
            I’m imagining that Star Trek Gorn (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gorn) is probably behind the Deep State. The sad thing is that low information voters like sammy and Bruce Hall and 94,000-sealed-indictments-Hambone are all too willing to believe this junk. Putin has to be scratching his head wondering how the USSR ever lost the Cold War to a country with voters as braindead stupid as ours.

    2. Barkley Rosser

      Bruce,

      Says they can reopen “once the virus is suppressed,” but in much of the US that is not the case.

      The ongoing effort by so many to turn Sweden into a role model on all this is just hilarious.

      Reply
      1. Bruce Hall

        Barkley,

        Just presenting information; if you choose to see it as turning “Sweden into a role model”, that’s on you.

        Reply
        1. pgl

          Just presenting whatever alternative facts that Kelly Anne Conway ordered you to present. But a nut job like Simone Gold? Lord – you are batshit insane.

          Reply
        2. baffling

          bruce, your commentary is not “just presenting information”. don’t be a coward. you linked to an article with a very telling comment, mmmmmmm. now you beg innocence? have a spine and stand up for your conviction. creepy behavior on your part bruce.

          Reply
  5. pgl

    Bruce Hall’s latest nut job aka Dr. Simone Gold has her own blog as well as a Facebook page where you can read more of his bat shit insanity. After all – she argues we have a Constitutional right to be endanger other people’s lives. And to her – that is a factual based analysis. And we thought Bruce Hall had gone bonkers!

    Reply
  6. pgl

    Bruce Hall is pushing a dishonest line straight from the MAGA hat wearers in the White House with his new nut job Dr. Simone Gold:

    https://thegoldopinion.com/blog-1/f/we-do-not-consent

    “The scientific usefulness of a mask has been so aggressively overstated … It is a con of massive proportion to assert that now, having escaped those environs, a bandana will magically do the trick … Of course, by knowledge or common sense observation, most Americans already know that masking everyone is superstition.”

    Her little oped is so much bull shit but don’t take my word for it as buried in all the comments from people stupid enough to think this hack has any integrity was this comment:

    “I am not being antagonistic, or pretending to be an expert in answering this, but when I’ve looked into this, the recommendations tend to say that masks are a tool as part of an arsenal of tools we can use to mitigate the spread of the virus. So the more people who wear them in public, the better the mitigation. A key goal of this is to prevent hospitals from getting over-run with covid patients, in the areas where the virus is spreading/spiking.”

    Masks are not the silver bullet but one part of the arsenal. We need to do a lot of other things to. Such as social distancing and test and tracing. Of course, the dangerous dimwits like Bruce Hall as well as Donald Trump did not want us social distancing either. And they have totally botched test and tracing. So wearing masks alone is not going to solve this problem. Now if you dangerous dimwits like Bruce Hall would just shut up – the rest of us might get people to join in with a coherent and effective response.

    Reply
  7. Bruce Hall

    This is the latest weekly update of Covid-19 deaths, daily cases, and weekly hospitalizations by age group. There has been only a slight uptick in C-19 deaths despite a trend upward in daily cases beginning mid-June. Deaths are still well below the April peak and probably reflects that fewer people over 65-years old are being hospitalized as out-patient treatments have improved significantly. Those younger than 65-years old are more likely to recover even if hospitalized.

    All data from the CDC. https://www.dropbox.com/s/u0skjkrgryd2ky4/Covid-19%20Deaths%2C%20Cases%2C%20and%20Hospitalizations%20-%207-28-20.pdf?dl=0. Latest data are subject to revision; death counts by week generally stabilize after six weeks and hospitalization counts may be modified up to 2 weeks. Cases as currently reported are not comparable to those reported in April because current counts include IgG results which indicate a previous or late stages of an infection (antibodies present) and probably indicate some degree of immunity.

    What is IgG?
    IgG is another type of antibody produced by white blood cells and are found in all body fluids. It is the most abundant antibody found in the immune system (80%) and the smallest antibody. IgGs are produced at the later stages of the infection and remain in the body to fight against repeated infections. IgG antibodies are able to cross the placenta of a pregnant mother and protect the fetus from infections due to its small size. IgGs exist as monomers with two antigen binding sites in each antibody.

    Reply
    1. pgl

      Slight uptick? You told us at first were declining. And how your own dropbox course (dropbox – seriously) shows you were wrong. But dismiss the fact that deaths are going up as deaths are a slight little problem. Maybe you get find some bizarre ratio to disguise the fact the deaths per capita in the US are among the highest in the world.

      BTW – good luck getting a date with your nutcase Dr. Simone Gold. But wear a mask that covers your eyes as she is seriously ugly.

      Reply
      1. Bruce Hall

        pgl, are you really Jim Acosta, the famous “take words out of context” guy from CNN?

        “Slightly” in the context as written clearly refers to the relative change as compare with the April peak.” I’m sorry, I should have spelled it out in great detail just for you. Perhaps you like to show a statistical analysis that shows the CDC’s count of deaths was up “significantly”.

        Let’s see…
        4/4/20 9,937
        4/11/20 16,079
        4/18/20 16,969
        4/25/20 15,310
        5/2/20 13,027
        5/9/20 11,031
        5/16/20 9,023

        and then…
        6/13/20 4,051
        6/20/20 3,588
        6/27/20 3,395 ….l
        7/4/20 3,714 l
        7/11/20 3,896 ….l
        … slightly.

        But you already knew that.

        Reply
        1. pgl

          You write all sorts of BS. And when called on it – you whine like a little spoiled brat. Hey if you insist on writing BS – you are going to be held accountable. I would say grow up – but we know you will not.

          Reply
    2. pgl

      Check the last line in Brucie boy’s dropbox. Why is it picking on Florida for reporting deaths there? Oh yea – the governor of Florida followed Brucie boy’s advise and now his state is totally screwed. Take a bow Brucie!

      Reply
    3. Ulenspiegel

      “There has been only a slight uptick in C-19 deaths despite a trend upward in daily cases beginning mid-June. Deaths are still well below the April peak and probably reflects that fewer people over 65-years old are being hospitalized as out-patient treatments have improved significantly.”

      Deaths are trailing infections by around 3-4 weeks, therefore, we have observe an elevated number of deaths for the the last three weeks as result of more infections in mid-June and will observe most likely a further increase.

      The comparison with April is BS, your conclusions, too, as the testing numbers are much higher now. Nobody claims that 60.000 daily cases now will cause 7500 deaths per day. However, using the 700 deaths per day of three weeks ago (60% testing level of today) as reference point we will very likely see 800-1000 more deaths per day in three weeks, i.e. I expect something around 1500 deaths per day mid-August, caused by the additional 30000 daily cases.

      Reply
      1. Bruce Hall

        Ulenspiegel,

        I agree with “Deaths are trailing infections by around 3-4 weeks, therefore, we have observe an elevated number of deaths for the the last three weeks as result of more infections in mid-June and will observe most likely a further increase” and the footnote on the graphic (from Dropbox) that I provide says that essentially: “Weekly death counts stabilize at ~ 6-weeks”

        It is important to compare deaths with cases because the definition and measurement of “cases” has changed since April when, for nearly all tests, symptoms were necessary to get a test and not IgG tests were taken. Thus, the relationship between “cases” and deaths has changed dramatically. If you looked at the .pdf file provided in Dropbox, you would have seen that the relationship between “cases” and hospitalizations also has changed with the greatest decline in hospitalizations in the age groups most likely to die from C-19. This should strongly infer that “cases” cannot be a strong predictor of deaths using pre-Memorial Day relationships.

        It may take a few weeks to see exactly how this new definition of “cases” translates into C-19 related deaths. It all depends on how many IgG results are included in the “cases” count since those represent people who have either had a strong antibody response or those who have recovered and who have the antibodies present (immunity).

        Unfortunately, the media does not try to illuminate the public with these subtle changes and the real level of threat from C-19. Rather, it is to the benefit of the media to keep the hyperbole and fear as high as possible to sell more viewing (advertising) and to support a particular political alignment.

        You’ll note that nowhere have I discounted the seriousness of the disease for the population segment that comprise the 42% of the deaths occurring in nursing homes or to the total of those over 64-years old who comprise 80% of the official death count. I did say that the threat of death to those under 15-years old was very minimal as the comprise only 0.02% of the C-19 related deaths and so far since 2/1/20 have had only 36% of the number of deaths attributed to influenza… and provided information that strongly suggests keeping schools closed is misguided at best and deleterious at worst.

        I know there is great antipathy toward Donald Trump at this site, but that seems to be coloring responses to data.

        Reply
        1. 2slugbaits

          Bruce Hall This should strongly infer that “cases” cannot be a strong predictor of deaths using pre-Memorial Day relationships.

          You’re arguing with a strawman. No one is saying that the relationship between infections and deaths is the same as pre-Memorial Day.

          I did say that the threat of death to those under 15-years old was very minimal

          Again, who is saying otherwise? No one. The problem is that 15-year old kids don’t ordinarily live alone. They usually have older parents and grandparents. And they associate with older teachers.

          provided information that strongly suggests keeping schools closed is misguided at best and deleterious at worst.

          You provided non-peer reviewed anecdotal evidence from a very small set of observations. The best evidence we have is that the risk of COVID spread from children under 10 is relatively low. You can make a good case that children under 10 could and perhaps should return to school. But that same evidence tells us that children 10 and older do spread the virus at the same rate as adults. The issue with sending older kids back to school is not that they will suffer adversely from COVID-19, but that their teachers and parents will. Let me repeat that. The risk of older kids dying from COVID-19 is relatively low, but unlike children under 10, their risk of spreading the virus is comparable to adults. So even though the risk of older children dying from COVID is relatively low, the risks to those older parents and grandparents and teachers is high. The evidence suggests that we might want to send children under 10 back to school but limit classroom time for children 10 and older. And if you were really concerned about kids going back to school, then you shouldn’t have been complaining about Democratic governors mandating masks and wanting to keep bars and restaurants closed.

          great antipathy toward Donald Trump at this site, but that seems to be coloring responses to data.

          I suspect it’s your crush on Donald Trump that is coloring your ability to understand the data.

          Reply
        2. Ulenspiegel

          “It may take a few weeks to see exactly how this new definition of “cases” translates into C-19 related deaths.”

          The last three weeks there were only ~30% increase of tests, therefore, I used the mid-June point as starting point, multiplied 50.000 cases with 0.6 (= additional 30000 new cases) and concluded that I expect 1500 daily deaths in two or three weeks. That is my best case scenario.

          The major issue is that the US government has wasted 2 months at least, and there is now the real possibility that you go into the next flu season with a too high number of daily cases. Extrapolationg from German studies by economists and virologists: The USA has to bring the number of daily cases down by at least one order of magnitude.

          Reply
          1. baffling

            “The major issue is that the US government has wasted 2 months at least, and there is now the real possibility that you go into the next flu season with a too high number of daily cases.”
            this is what gets overlooked. we continue to waste time and resources bringing the trump virus down. and when we move into the fall flu season, it will be another disaster. unfortunately, we won’t have a chance to fix the problem until january 2021. it will run unfettered through the fall. time is one of our most valuable assets, and has been squandered by trump from the very beginning. every policy he commits to only makes it harder to fix this virus down the line. his entire response is predicated on a vaccine by august, so that he is not forced to actually deal with the virus and all of the negative steps that would entail.

          2. pgl

            “I expect 1500 daily deaths in two or three weeks. That is my best case scenario.

            We were already up to 1300 new deaths just yesterday. Of course the Trump sycophant Bruce Hall calls this a “slight uptick”.

          3. Ulenspiegel

            pgl wrote: “We were already up to 1300 new deaths just yesterday. Of course the Trump sycophant Bruce Hall calls this a “slight uptick”.”

            The daily cases reached 60000 three weeks ago, therefore, we observe now the additional contributions to the deaths numbers.
            The sad aspect is that we will see these high numbers for three or four weeks at least.

        3. pgl

          “It may take a few weeks to see exactly how this new definition of “cases” translates into C-19 related deaths.”

          This is from the troll who has already declared victory over this virus. You remind me of the dog chasing its own tail.

          Reply
    4. Barkley Rosser

      Meanwhile every other high income nation has both new cases and deaths way down, even lagging Sweden is getting there after falling on its fact like the US for awhile. One has to go to poorer nations like Brazil to find ones where both cases and deaths are rising, with Brazil’s president being one of the few world leaders to actually be more insane than out POTUS regarding pandemic policy, to the point of being almost proud to have tested positive for the virus.

      Reply
    5. 2slugbaits

      Bruce Hall According to the COVID Tracking website, the 7 day moving average for deaths bottomed out on 6 July at ~478 deaths. The latest 7 day moving average is ~1004. That’s a 110% increase in a little over three weeks. Is that your idea of a “slight uptick”? You really need to do the country a favor and not vote this fall.

      Reply
      1. Bruce Hall

        2slug, I use the CDC numbers for tracking cases, hospitalizations, and deaths. These use verified information. I’m sure other sources can provide good estimates, but rather than mix and match sources, I have simply gone to the government. Is that “ironic” for a conservative?

        As to the death counts, I use this CDC report: https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid19/index.htm

        I include these footnotes to the summary graphic I prepare (Dropbox file):
        1 The number of deaths each week may be adjusted as new death certificates are processed.
        2 Most states had significant reopening of businesses and BLM protest marches began near Memorial Day. If reports of new cases are accurate, deaths should begin trending up within weeks. Assumes 14-day incubation period.
        3 6/13/20 – 7-day average of new known cases began trending up
        4 Weekly death counts stabilize at ~ 6-weeks (Note that through the week of June 20 the death counts at six weeks after the initial report date were still declining, but I highlighted the data from the week of 7/4 and 7/11 showing the “slight” uptick. Those number will probably increase for the next 3-4 weeks of reporting as death certificates are processed)

        I’ve responded to pgl in a comment above with regard to the context of “slight” and the data which forms the context. I’ve attempted to be unbiased in the data reporting although there seems to be a great amount of bias in the interpretation showing up as rejection of the CDC data I’m using. That’s why I’ve included both “cases” and the explanation of the definition changes to “cases”, plus weekly hospitalizations by age group which shows that the 65+ population rates have fallen to about 1/2 of what they were in April, further reinforcing the shifting relationships between cases, hospitalizations, and deaths. Unfortunately, “cases” cannot be “normalized” for a common definition because the data does not seem to be that granular.

        Reply
        1. 2slugbaits

          Bruce Hall Your explanation to pgl and me about your use of the word “slightly” simply doesn’t hold water. You said:
          “Slightly” in the context as written clearly refers to the relative change as compare with the April peak.”

          What pgl and I are complaining about is your reference to the latest numbers being a “slight uptick.” Trying to say that you were referring to April numbers is ridiculous because the latest numbers are below the April numbers. In other words, there is no uptick relative to April. The only way your comment about a “slight uptick” makes any sense is with respect to numbers over the last month. A 110% increase in a little over three weeks is not my idea of a “slight uptick.”

          Reply
      2. pgl

        Bruce Hall has just declared that your observation is not statistically significant. Me thinks he has no clue what any of these terms even mean.

        Reply
  8. pgl

    The US death count passes 150 thousand which of course Bruce Hall calls a “slight uptick”. What was Trump tweeting?

    https://www.ibtimes.com/trump-hydroxychloroquine-tweet-goes-viral-social-media-pulls-it-false-information-3018116

    ‘President Trump, along with his son, Donald Trump Jr., retweeted a viral video Monday supporting the use of hydroxychloroquine as a cure for COVID-19, which was later pulled from Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube for promoting “false information about cures and treatments” for the virus, CNN reported. The video clip, which was first posted by Breitbart, featured four individuals that call themselves America’s Frontline Doctors, speaking in front of the Supreme Court building in Washington, D.C. In the video, the individuals said, “you don’t need masks” to prevent the spread of COVID-19. They also denounced studies of hydroxychloroquine that say it is ineffective for the treatment of COVID-19, calling them “fake science” and sponsored by “fake pharma companies.” “This virus has a cure, it’s called hydroxychloroquine, zinc, and Zithromax. You don’t need masks, there is a cure,” a woman in the video goes on to say.’

    You don’t need masks since we have hydroxychloroquine? My God – Trump is beyond bonkers. Of course now that Trump to selling this snake oil again, we can fully expect Bruce Hall to be trolling us with more claims that hydroxychloroquine is the magical cure. Brucie is like the loyal puppy this way. Good boy Brucie!

    Reply
    1. Bruce Hall

      From 2005:
      “Conclusion
      Chloroquine, a relatively safe, effective and cheap drug used for treating many human diseases including malaria, amoebiosis and human immunodeficiency virus is effective in inhibiting the infection and spread of SARS CoV in cell culture. The fact that the drug has significant inhibitory antiviral effect when the susceptible cells were treated either prior to or after infection suggests a possible prophylactic and therapeutic use.”

      https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1232869/

      From 2020:
      In a large-scale retrospective analysis of 2,541 patients hospitalized between March 10 and May 2, 2020 across the system’s six hospitals, the study found 13% of those treated with hydroxychloroquine alone died compared to 26.4% not treated with hydroxychloroquine. None of the patients had documented serious heart abnormalities; however, patients were monitored for a heart condition routinely pointed to as a reason to avoid the drug as a treatment for COVID-19.
      https://www.henryford.com/news/2020/07/hydro-treatment-study

      Are there studies that show different results? Certainly.

      This was the protocol used by HFHS:
      Patients treated with hydroxychloroquine at Henry Ford met specific protocol criteria as outlined by the hospital system’s Division of Infectious Diseases. The vast majority received the drug soon after admission; 82% within 24 hours and 91% within 48 hours of admission. All patients in the study were 18 or over with a median age of 64 years; 51% were men and 56% African American.

      “We attribute our findings that differ from other studies to early treatment, and part of a combination of interventions that were done in supportive care of patients, including careful cardiac monitoring. Our dosing also differed from other studies not showing a benefit of the drug. And other studies are either not peer reviewed, have limited numbers of patients, different patient populations or other differences from our patients.”

      Overall, hospital system patients in the study experienced an 18.1% in-hospital mortality rate. Regardless of treatment, mortality was highest in:

      Patients older than 65,
      Patients who identified as Caucasian,
      Patients admitted with reduced oxygen levels,
      Patients who required ICU admission.

      Patients who died commonly had serious underlying diseases, including chronic kidney and lung disease, with 88% dying from respiratory failure.

      Reply
      1. 2slugbaits

        Bruce Hall What part of a combination of interventions that were done in supportive care of patients, including careful cardiac monitoring do you not understand?

        Reply
  9. baffling

    https://www.cnn.com/2020/07/28/health/covid-heart-damage-two-studies/index.html
    as we have been stating for months, there are many issues facing those who “recover” from the coronavirus. evidence continues to mount on the cardio impact. many survivors, even of “mild” coronavirus infections, are suffering from heart damage. this will impact society and health costs for years to come. this is why hydroxychloroquine cannot be viewed through the lens of “what have you go to lose”. it appears, we have a lot to lose when taking a drug that can also damage the cardiovascular system.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.