Skip to main content

How many more must die for the throne? or How to combat FUD! - Part 3 (Update 1 - At Bottom of Post)

 +
JMJ

 

 Smith made the following statement::

Simple. On Dec. 27, 2020, I took the official world COVID death numbers from worldometers.com, divided it by the world population of 7.8 billion, moved the resulting number's decimal point two places to the right to get a percentage and a total population mortality rate. That TPMR was 0.023%. In contrast, taking an average of the estimates that have been made for total deaths from Spanish flu, and dividing it by the estimated world population at that time, etc. you get a TPMR for Spanish flu of 2.33%

 Smith and I have been exchanging emails about this stat and a few other things.

First, what is the TPMR for the Spanish Flu and what does it mean?

Total Population Mortality rate.

I understand that there is some variation in the estimates of the population of the World in 1918. This is understandable on a number of levels.

I've seen census notations from that era., so the USA had a working census system.

So this is probably a more reliable population for assessing the TPMR.

As I noted in part 2 of this series, we can reliably calculate the impact that Spanish Influenza had on the population in 1918 as well as today.

  1.  H1N1 (USA)  Deaths 675k / Population (1918)  105,000,000 = 0.0064  (0.64%)
  2. SARS-CoV-2 (USA) Deaths 589,207   / Population (2021) 332,606,157 =  0.0018 (0.18%)     

While the US  SARS-CoV-2  outbreak is still going on, to reach the same level of impact as the Spanish Influenza an additional 1,539,472 people would have to die from that pathogen. Even if the seven day average of 722 deaths per day were to continue the pandemic would have to last an additional  5.8years. 

That appears to be unlikely given that a third wave does not appear to be manifesting and the death rate is declining.

As I noted in How Many More ..., it does indeed look like the USA is on the edge of herd immunity due to infection and its immunization plan.

It also looks like, as Smith was trying to point out, that it won't be as bad as 1918.  The death toll from H1N1 was 3.6 times worse than those that have died so far.  Barring a 3rd wave, we will probably see only between another 50k to 120k more deaths in the USA.

The pandemic isn't over yet ... but from the data I have been able to access, none of the variants have mutated to such a degree as to escape the immunizing effects of either exposure or the current vaccines.

With an estimated IFR of 0.5%, we can estimate that it could have been much worse if measures had not been taken. 

But what people will be asking for a while is ... was it worth it?  Most cite the economic impacts.

I take a different perspective, was it not a matter of duty to do what could be done to protect life over money. 

Of course this pales in comparison to the continue and deliberate murder of babies, but that is an pandemic of another sort.

P^3


Update 1 - At what point does herd immunity impact the progression of a pathogen like SARS-CoV-2?

So I woke up this morning thinking about how a pathogen passes through a population and ... at what point does it reach herd immunity?  I went back to the Wiki page and found the formula.



 

 So the current Ro for SARS-CoV-2 is 2.  So herd immunity threshold is about 50%. Here's the graph that I found


So - once you get to 50% the outbreak should peter out. So what does that mean for this pandemic? 

I'll stick with the states since I'm on that theme and they seem to be heading towards herd immunity. 

A 50% herd immunity in the states is 166,303,078 people.  So, assuming that half the population needs to be infected, no vaccine is available, and an IFR of 0.005 we arrive at a theoretical fatality of 831,515 people. 

So there have been 33,044,872 cases in the states.  The ratio cited at the beginning was that cases represent about 20% of infections.  So that means that Cases = 0.2 * Infections and ergo infections = Cased / 0.2 = 165,224,360 or ... about half the population. 

 Vaccinations in the states have reached  about 24%.

So yep, the USA is (in my opinion) in the herd immunity zone.  Although re-infections could affect this outcome.

The next few months will show whether I'm right or wrong.

P^3

P.S. So what about Canada?
 
Key points
  • Population: 38,015,263
  • Herd Immunity Threshold: 19,007,631
  • Cases:1,211,083
  • Est Infections: 6,055,415
  • Infection %:16%
  • Immunizations: 24% (not fully but at least full dose) 
  • Immune Level: 40%

So Canada is getting close.

Also, in Canada the third wave has a different profile with case over 60y dropping from 30% to 19.7%. However the fatality rate has only dropped by a percent to 95.5%.

This graphic tells the story better:

In Canada, COVID-19 is now moving through the younger population.
 
P^3
 
 

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Episcopal Consecrations of 1988, 1991 and 2015 - Some Perspectives

+ JMJ In defense of the recent consecration of Fr. Faure by Bishop Williamson, some have argued that the 1991 consecration of Bishop Rangel (RIP) by the Bishops of the SSPX present an equivalent standard of action and principles.  From this they conclude that the SSPX's condemnation of Bishop Williamson's action is flawed as the principles of the 1991 consecration and that of 2015 are equivalent.

SSPX and the Resistance - A Comparison Of Ecclesiology

Shining the light of Church Teaching on the doctrinal positions of the SSPX and the Resistance. Principles are guides used to aid in decision making.  It stands to reason that bad principles will lead to bad decisions. The recent interactions between Rome and the SSPX has challenged a number of closely held cultural assumptions of people in both sides of the disagreement. This has resulted in cultural skirmishes in both Rome and the SSPX. Since it is the smaller of the two, the skirmishes have been more evident within the SSPX.  The cultural fault-line that Bishop Fellay crossed appears to be linked to two points of Catholic Doctrine: Ecclesiology and Obedience.  The cultural difference of view points is strong enough that it has resulted in the expulsion of a number of members.  It should also be noted that some other priests expelled since the beginning of the latest interactions (starting in 2000) held the same view points and have joined with the l...

America Magazine: Why liturgy is not a space for self-expression

 + JMJ Introduction I subscribed to Jesuit Review America Magazine in order to improve my perspective on the crisis of the Church. At first, I found that I had a hard time reading through the articles that caught my attention.  Actually, at best, I didn't get further than a few sentences.  Mostly due to demands on what time I have left on this Good Earth. Then a title caught my eye in a latest article ... someone is saying that the Liturgy is not a space for self-expression.  Then there's the Performative Piety?  What does this mean? What is Performative Piety? I had a sense that "Performative Piety" is the practice of making external acts of piety to be seen by others and Matthew 6:1 (link) confirms this thought. Let's break down the Knox translation: Be sure you do not perform your acts of piety before men ,  for them to watch ;  if you do that,  you have no title to a reward from your Father who is in heaven. If you stopped after the first ph...

SSPXasia Timeline

+ JMJ The SSPXasia website has an excellent compilation of documents.  One day I may try to fuse it with my own chronicle project. P^3 https://sspxasia.com/Documents/Archbishop-Lefebvre/Archbishop_Lefebvre_and_the_Vatican/Part_I/ (1987) June 29: Ordination Sermon of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre July 8: Letter of Archbishop Lefebvre to Cardinal Ratzinger July 28: Letter of Cardinal Ratzinger to Archbishop Lefebvre October 1: Letter of Archbishop Lefebvre to Cardinal Ratzinger October ...

Canonical Mission and State of Emergency - A Response to Mr. John Salza - Part B

 +  JMJ  I was trying to think of a way to map out the time course I discussed in Part A of this article.  Early this morning it came to me that this is more about obedience and duty than canon law.  As is my wont, I mapped out my thoughts (see image) to draw linkages between the core concepts. My conclusion is that, at least subjectively, Archbishop Lefebvre had sufficient information to make good decisions concerning whether or not he was obliged to obey.  I know that the Jesuits, some Sedevacantists and the priests that left over the years will not agree with my thoughts. So be it.  The core pieces of information include: Attacks against the SSPX were launched because they kept the Tridentine Mass and the pre-conciliar understanding of the Truths of the Faith. The authorities in the Church were willing to go against the laws of the Church. The same authorities encouraged the various dangers to the Faith embedded in popular interpretations of ambiguo...