Why aren't we all infected yet?

Not enough information.
You might want to read this.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exponential_growth

 

Quantity of exposure matters. Most likely you inhaled the virus. But it might've just been one. Ur immune system will kill one viral body before it can replicate and infect you. Someone that inhales 100 Billion viral bodies will have their immune system overwhelmed by it, get sick and become infected/infectious. We all fall somewhere between those two extremes, and we all have different immune systems that are more or less effective at combatting it. This is why hand washing, masks, isolation and general health/nutrition decrease chances of infection. Not because you won't encounter the virus, but because you hopefully don't encounter more than your immune system can quickly defeat.

 

Well that's been exactly my point.

 

You see then correct? Unless you can quantify time, you are not really giving out much information.

 

It's amazing that everyone seems to miss the exact same point.

That's what I've been trying to say, "not enough information."

 

There wasn’t enough information in your question. It’s like saying
“If today we have 32,580 known cases, and those cases are increasing linearly, how many cases will we have 7 days from now?”
You can’t answer that accurately without more information.
But all the numbers and graphs I’ve seen of the infection rate seem to show exponential growth.
If you’re arguing that it ISN’T exponential, provide your figures.

 

When it comes to this disease, exponential growth in the number of infected is bad. I'm not sure why this is confusing.

It's hard to know because of the lack of test kits. We do know it's doubling every 2-3 days. That's huge.

 

You continue to miss my point. Maybe you haven't read my posts from the start of this thread and just sort of jumped in half cocked.

OF COURSE I didn't supply enough information in my example! That was exactly the point, the irrelevance of media reports declaring the growth "exponential" with no relation to the time period involved. I've already discussed this in this thread so feel free and go back and review if you still find yourself confused.

 

So please clarify - what is your point? Are you saying that the growth is NOT exponential?

 

That 1.4 million number is an extremely hopeful number and assumes that we completely quarantine the country soon. Unfortunately over the last few days, the disease grew faster than expected and shows no sign of a decreasing rate. So I recalculated and the new number is 9.5 million. A lot of this depends on how aggressively we test and quarantine. South Korea was really aggressive and their active cases peaked at last 7.5 thousand. If we don't quarantine then tens of millions in the US will become infected.

Covid is also a lot more contageous than the flu, there is no vaccine, and nobody had immunity so we will get a lot more than 30 million infected if we fail to quarantine properly. If 100 million are infected and there is a 1% death rate, that is 1 million dead. But we don't know what the real death rate, it could be between .1% and 1.5%. What I do know for certain is that our healthcare system is going to get overloaded, and the question is how much.

 

If nobody has immunity, then why were only 20% of the passengers on that cruise infected, and 80% were not? All were touching the same handrails, elevator buttons, pulling out the same chairs, etc. Plus, they were living in very close quarters, crammed up against one another (it gets crowded at the Lido at lunchtime, believe me!), and the vast majority of people don't live like that under ordinary circumstances.

Also, you are using ridiculously high numbers. 100 million infected? Why try to send the American population into a panic, crashing the economy, throwing tens of millions out of work, and having an even worse problem: The Great Depression. Poverty kills, too, and kills a lot. All this doomsday scenario talk is doing a lot more harm than good.

 

Only 20% were infected because the infected were quarantined before any more could get infected. Simply touching a surface an infected person touched won't necessarily infect you. They need to cough, sneeze, or have some bodily fluid on their hands. And if you watch your hands before touching your face, you should be ok.

Given that 30 million get the flu every year, it is less infectious than covid, has a vaccine that most people take, and many people already have an immunity, 100 million for covid is reasonable, maybe even 200 million. I don't think those numbers will be reached because of our efforts to quarantine the country, but how many infected will depend on how much we do. South Korea did a lot early on and they peaked at 7,500 cases. Its already too late for us.

 

v

Exponential is bad. The doctors on the front lines are pleading with us to stay home. The hospitals are full and this thing is just getting started.

Exponential:

1000
2000
4000
8000
16000
32000


That's what exponential looks like. So far, the numbers are doubling every 2-3 days, but we don't have a ton of data, yet.

People get rushed to the hospital all the time for various reasons: accidents, heart attacks, strokes, babies with high fevers, broken limbs.... on and on.

If all the doctors can't even keep up with the COVID patients, a ton of people are going to die from things other than this virus.

 

So you're saying that the infected on the cruise were quarantined, and that controlled it? That was only after they were showing signs, and the cruise line knew it had a problem on its hands. For days before that, the asymptomatic infected were mingling with the others at the Lido, the dining room, sitting next to them at the shows - and yet still 80% didn't catch it. Considering that, it shows that it really isn't as easy to catch as we are being led to believe.

And now you're up to 200 million infected? You mean two-thirds of the country, even though we are hunkering down? (I took a drive today, just to get out of the house, and the streets were like a ghost town. And I'm NOT in one of the hotspots.) Now compare that to Italy. Last I heard they had 60,000 cases (which, granted, they can't manage) out of a country of 60 MILLION. And indications are that they are starting to level off. So extrapolating that, our 340 million country would mean 340,000 cases - a BIG difference from 200 million. And if there is a 1% mortality rate, that means 34,000 dead. Awful, but still - we're on track for 50,000 dead from the season flu this year. When all is said and done, I fully expect that this coronavirus will have killed far fewer than our ordinary flu.

 

Simply being in contact with an infected person doesn't mean you will be infected. Thats not how any virus works. Also, viruses don't just spread to 100% of the population in just a few days on a cruise ship. It follows an exponential growth curve. The infected population grows at like 30% per day, and if 1 person is initially infected, it takes a long time to get everyone on the ship infected. The fact that 20% of the cruise ship, a few hundred people, were infected over several days is actually very impressive for a virus. If they had delayed any more then the next day it would have been 26%, then 35%, then 45%, then 60%, then 80%. The only reason it didn't reach higher numbers was because everyone was separated and tested days before that was allowed to happen.

 

It is doubling every 2.5 days or so. This is exponential. Here's what it looks like. Tell me what class of equations define that curve.

 

I won't be surprised if this disease gets worse. That will include those who are tired of being confined at home.

 

Sigh...



...no.

What I've been saying that the term is useless in getting an idea of how quickly the growth is without the time component.

 

I see you have dates! Well done!

Why was this so difficult for anyone else to understand?

 

More important than time is the growth rate.

You might want to inform yourself by reading - actually reading - the “Tracking” thread.
The OP’s latest post says that for the last several days, the number of confirmed cases is growing at 10% per day. That’s exponential. Scary.

 

It's been mentioned numerous times that it's doubling every 2-3 days.

 

I've mentioned that in this thread.

What I'm saying is...aw forget it.

 

So the growth rate is more important that time? So a doubling every two days and a doubling every month are...what about the same to you?

 

The growth RATE includes time as a component.
If I tell you it grows by 10% today you can predict what tomorrow will look like, if you know today’s numbers. You don’t need to know how many days in we are (but you could extrapolate backwards).

If I tell you it is day 12, or that we are in the third cycle, you can’t predict tomorrow’s numbers.

I really don’t know what you’re complaining about. You seem to accept the growth is exponential.

 

The total number of infected patients N goes approximately as N = N0 x e^ at


"N0" and "a" are constants. "t" is time. "e" is the natural log. You have three variables to determine so it require three points on the graph linked. Pick any three points that are representative of the curve, solve for N0, and a, and you have your exponential equation.