You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
So.....I know I am thick but....the graph seems to say that new cases = existing cases. The logarithm scales on both axis are the same and to my eyes not offset. So the 45 degree line crosses the 10k on the x is 10k on the y, approximately. What am I missing, what are they really plotting. Are they somehow subtracting out those cases of people who have gotten better from the total who ever had the virus, if so how are they doing this? Another thing, if they have managed to get a the number of tested active cases and it equals the new cases is this R=1 and not exponential? Where have I gone wrong? Other than my lack of understanding it looked like someone was trying to apply some meaningful statistics rather than headlines which is always good!
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Hi @alexfordham. I'll try to answer your questions to the best of my abilities.
First of, the graph plots the number of new confimed cases in the past week (i.e. the difference between the current number of existing cases and the number of existing cases from 7 days ago) in relation to the total number of cases. The graph also develops in time, which is represented by the animation of the countries.
The 45 deg. dashed line is representing the path a country or location would take if every two days the total number of cases doubled, which, to my knowledge, is what would happen if there were no prevention measures put in place to stop the spread.
So.....I know I am thick but....the graph seems to say that new cases = existing cases. The logarithm scales on both axis are the same and to my eyes not offset. So the 45 degree line crosses the 10k on the x is 10k on the y, approximately. What am I missing, what are they really plotting. Are they somehow subtracting out those cases of people who have gotten better from the total who ever had the virus, if so how are they doing this? Another thing, if they have managed to get a the number of tested active cases and it equals the new cases is this R=1 and not exponential? Where have I gone wrong? Other than my lack of understanding it looked like someone was trying to apply some meaningful statistics rather than headlines which is always good!
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: