Nobel Prize winner: the U.S. epidemic turning point will come earlier than expected

category:Finance
 Nobel Prize winner: the U.S. epidemic turning point will come earlier than expected


Like China, the U.S. and other countries will get through the worst outbreak faster than many experts expect, but not quickly, but gradually, says Levitt.

What a familiar scene!

In early February, after studying a large number of data, Levitt concluded that, contrary to the generally pessimistic prediction at that time, the virus would soon end! In the coming week, the number of new deaths will decrease rapidly. On February 21, he predicted that 80000 people would eventually be diagnosed with infection and 3250 people would die. In the end, these predictions are almost the same as the facts.

In Professor Levitts view, the U.S. epidemic will be similar to Chinas. But there is also an important premise to achieve this: Americans need to maintain social distance and take protective measures as Chinese do.

Big data: turning point looming

The warning from many epidemiologists is striking. They predict that the United States may be under the shadow of the virus for months or even years, and millions of people will die.

Even though the U.S. has not implemented the extremely severe epidemic prevention measures of national blockade, Levitt found that many regions have shown signs of improvement after analyzing the data of 78 regions with more than 50 new cases per day.

There are still some murmurs in the data, but there are clear signs of slowing growth.

In the process of analysis, Levitt focuses not on the panoramic total number of confirmed cases in the United States, but on the daily new data, especially the changes of new cases in some regions.

In South Korea, although there are still new cases per day, the growth has slowed down significantly in recent weeks, below 200 in a row. Leavitt believes that this shows that the epidemic in South Korea may be gradually subsided.

So is Iran. Daily new cases have been relatively stable in the past week, 1053 on Monday and 1028 on Sunday. Although the daily average increase is more than 1000 people, but no further increase means that the epidemic has passed half-time.

Lets take a look at Italy. The situation still looks bad, with daily new cases increasing in the vast majority of last week.

These scattered signs are very similar to the Chinese data he studied at the beginning. In his view, the slow increase in new cases is more telling than the new confirmed data itself - an early sign of a change in the trajectory of the epidemic.

Its like a car on the highway is still running, but the acceleration is getting smaller.

Even though these data are not complete, Levitt is still confident in his conclusions. As long as these inaccurate case data can maintain the current trend of stabilization, it is useful to focus on the daily new data.

Levitt believes that segregation works, and other factors are at work. In the relatively confined space of the diamond princess, the infection rate has not exceeded 20%. This may be because some people are naturally immune to the virus, Levitt said.

He estimates that exposure to new coronaviruses will double a persons risk of death in the next two months. Most people have a very low risk of dying within two months.

However, this does not mean that the risk of infection is low. It has been proved that the virus is highly infectious.

Its not the time to go out drinking with friends. What we need to do is control the panic. Things will get better.

For Levitts findings, Nicholas Reich, a biostatistician at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst, said:

Time will tell if Professor Levitts prediction is correct. I think it will be helpful for decision makers to make decisions in the coming weeks and months to show a diverse perspective.

Although he did not find a cure or cure for the new coronavirus, but did his best numerical calculation, this did not prevent Levitt from gaining fame all over the world, even more than he won the Nobel prize that year.

All of this comes from an unintentional interest in research - Levitts wife, shoshan brosh, is very fond of Chinese art, and they have many friends in China. At the beginning of the outbreak, Levitt decided to study Chinas data to help friends.

The reason why Professor Levitt is good at big data analysis is closely related to his academic career.

In the 1960s, young Levitt studied applied mathematics at the University of Pretoria in South Africa. This is where he was born.

At the age of 15, Levitt moved with his Jewish family to live in England. After finishing his mathematics studies, he went to Kings College in London and received the first-class honourable degree in physics in 1967. Later, Levitt received his Ph.D. in computational biology from Peter house college, Cambridge. During his study in Cambridge, Levitt developed a computer program to study molecular conformation, which laid the foundation for many of his later work, including the Nobel Prize in chemistry in 2013 for developing multi-scale models of complex chemical systems. In this way, Levitts life seems to have many unexpected surprises, as he once commented to himself in a surging news interview: I won the Nobel Prize in chemistry, but I know nothing about chemistry. I have studied physics and mathematics, but I have never studied chemistry and biology. Source: Wall Street editor in charge: Wang Xiaowu NF

At the age of 15, Levitt moved with his Jewish family to live in England. After finishing his mathematics studies, he went to Kings College in London and received the first-class honourable degree in physics in 1967. Later, Levitt received his Ph.D. in computational biology from Peter house college, Cambridge.

During his study in Cambridge, Levitt developed a computer program to study molecular conformation, which laid the foundation for many of his later work, including the Nobel Prize in chemistry in 2013 for developing multi-scale models of complex chemical systems.

In this way, Levitts life seems to have many unexpected surprises, as he once commented to himself in a surging news interview: I won the Nobel Prize in chemistry, but I know nothing about chemistry. I have studied physics and mathematics, but I have never studied chemistry and biology.