D
I'd say find a new source for your numbers.
Dude, they're posted all over this thread.
What numbers are you saying are off?
D
Deleted member 1
Guest
In one cohort of 4500 cases under the age of 30 there were 8 deaths.
Mortality is 2% in china.
Nejm put out an average around 1.4% yesterday. This drops to 1% with more testing and in modern systems like S Korea.
Infectious rate claims are skewed due to poor control early in Wuhan. Still coronavirus and other cold virus are typically more contagious than seasonal flu...about the same as historic pandemic flus.
You realize this makes no sense, yeah.
With THE BEST possible prevention measures, the infection rate would be .0000000000001%.
With the worst measures, the rate would be 99.9999999%.
We have to go with what we got.
DESPITE poor measures, but measures nonetheless, the contagious rate is still high.
And we're still 2 months in, not 2 years, when mortality rates are stabilized and accurate.
Corona being 20x deadlier than the flu.
2.3 = 23
.1 = 1
This would change if we had normal numbers, but China is China, Vietnam is Vietnam, and Iran is crazy high.
Initially we were between 2.3(low) & 6-7(high).
D
Deleted member 1
Guest
Complexity of the Basic Reproduction Number (R0)
Yes it does.
It's a modeled number that you can't apply to the world without covering up details and the number is currently dropping as the model evolves with new cases, new systems, and new testing.
Wuhan is already seeing lowering of contagious models and lowering fatality rates. Including the early cases where no one even knew there was a new disease with current models is bad math.
D
Deleted member 1
Guest
1.4 in China through end of January and getting better
https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2002032
D
Deleted member 1
Guest
The Report of the WHO-China Joint Mission published on Feb. 28 by WHO [12] is based on 55,924 laboratory confirmed cases. The report notes that "The Joint Mission acknowledges the known challenges and biases of reporting crude CFR early in an epidemic" (see also our discussion on: How to calculate the mortality rate during an outbreak). Here are its findings on Case Fatality Ratio, or CFR (the mortality rate):
"As of 20 February, 2,114 of the 55,924 laboratory confirmed cases have died (crude fatality ratio [CFR: 3.8%) (note: at least some of whom were identified using a case definition that included pulmonary disease).
The overall CFR varies by location and intensity of transmission (i.e. 5.8% in Wuhan vs. 0.7% in other areas in China).
In China, the overall CFR was higher in the early stages of the outbreak (17.3% for cases with symptom onset from 1-10 January) and has reduced over time to 0.7% for patients with symptom onset after 1 February. " [12]
The Joint Mission noted that the standard of care has evolved over the course of the outbreak.
Again note the rapidly changing outcomes. Do not hold onto early Wuhan numbers as predictors which are outliers even in china itself.
"As of 20 February, 2,114 of the 55,924 laboratory confirmed cases have died (crude fatality ratio [CFR: 3.8%) (note: at least some of whom were identified using a case definition that included pulmonary disease).
The overall CFR varies by location and intensity of transmission (i.e. 5.8% in Wuhan vs. 0.7% in other areas in China).
In China, the overall CFR was higher in the early stages of the outbreak (17.3% for cases with symptom onset from 1-10 January) and has reduced over time to 0.7% for patients with symptom onset after 1 February. " [12]
The Joint Mission noted that the standard of care has evolved over the course of the outbreak.
Again note the rapidly changing outcomes. Do not hold onto early Wuhan numbers as predictors which are outliers even in china itself.
Hopefully this continues to get better in China.
As testing is finally occurring here, the reality that COVID19 has caused deaths attributed to the flu will become evident.
We started testing yesterday.
We have the first U.S. death in less than 24 hours.
This tells me what I already knew.
T
The Big Guy
Guest
Amen.Cant this thread go back to what it was?@sparkuri posting videos of coronavirus info instead of political bullshit and arguing over whether people should prepare/panic
I wanna see more videos of the situation on the ground in italy, s korea, china and iran.
Cant we all just get along...
I I don't necessarily like qualifying every position I'm taking, I'm just actually watching and listening to everything I post.
And sharing that with who I care about.
Props to @Bones Nose For sharing peak prosperity, which I hadn't listened to in months.
& @innoc fot Making the thread.
T
The Big Guy
Guest
Keep the info coming. If people dont like it they can fuck off
Coronavirus Math:
There are ~7.7B people in the world with
~1.4B in China, which leaves ~6.3B everywhere else. There are 4,691 cases outside of China (according to WHO). So you have a 0.000074% chance of getting it. And the chance of getting it AND dying from it would be even lower. But go ahead and stock-up on those masks and buy into the panic that the media wants you to buy into. ♂ Chance of dying from it in China 3.5% (78,961 cases and 2,791 deaths); outside of China is 1.4% (4,691 cases and 67 deaths). I think it’s time to start showing the Chicken Little cartoon again - “the sky is falling!!”
There are ~7.7B people in the world with
~1.4B in China, which leaves ~6.3B everywhere else. There are 4,691 cases outside of China (according to WHO). So you have a 0.000074% chance of getting it. And the chance of getting it AND dying from it would be even lower. But go ahead and stock-up on those masks and buy into the panic that the media wants you to buy into. ♂ Chance of dying from it in China 3.5% (78,961 cases and 2,791 deaths); outside of China is 1.4% (4,691 cases and 67 deaths). I think it’s time to start showing the Chicken Little cartoon again - “the sky is falling!!”
D
Deleted member 1
Guest
Yeah nobody better say anything against the black and white facts this thread is primarily composed of...
T
The Big Guy
Guest
Your a pharmaceutical shill. @conor mcgregor nut hugger told me your voice quivered when he mentioned my nameYeah nobody better say anything against the black and white facts this thread is primarily composed of...
T
The Big Guy
Guest
We will die together brother. Holding eachother under a white sheet
D
Deleted member 1
Guest
Counterpoint, a large portion of the China improvement is testing and realizing how many of the cases were mild. Tight testing criteria only found severe cases and deaths. Initial numbers represent counting deaths very well and not counting mild disease.
The more you test, the more you'll find disease and enlarge your denominator. S Korea is doing a bangup job at this.
Likewise we have pretty tight criteria right now in the US. We have a limited number of kits (And I understand there's arguments on all the reasons we should or shouldn't have that limited number of kids at this point, but it's still the reality) and they are being spent on high pretest probability.
Simply put, our current testing strategy is going to result in a higher mortality rate because you're only testing people with more severe disease already if they haven't traveled to China.
D
Deleted member 1
Guest
Probably the best epidemiologic model for us is to look at places like South Korea that have fairly robust medical systems and are testing a lot. they have population dynamics that are pretty close to a lot of the rest of the West.
We are in the early days of spread so you can't really compare numerator and denominator using cases and total world population. The cases haven't spread to the world, but it might be coming.
If you're in small town iran you're probably screwed if you're over the age of 50. That place is going to have a huge mortality rate. But there's lots of unique things there about group religious gatherings, insular country, limited health care, geopolitics limiting input and output for data. But then Iran itself is also a very young population country and you can't apply it's outcomes to somewhere like Japan. Japan will be interesting. Lots of old people who will be dying quickly but then again they are also a very clean focus society and a bit xenophobic. They arent hyper focus on freedoms and will lock people down. they already have all kinds of social institutions like wearing mask if you're sick and hyper focus on washing hands and cleaning public spaces.
Also wearing a mask while you're well is kind of silly. But not while you're sick.
If you look back at the Spanish flu, we made interesting political decisions to win the war. There's a case of this parade in Philadelphia that scientists urged politicians to stop but they refused for morale reasons. Newspapers weren't allowed to report because they didn't want to cause a panic. But then gatherings in Philadelphia led to these dramatically higher rates of infection versus sister cities like St Louis.
D
Deleted member 1
Guest
Live: 1 King County man dead due to novel coronavirus infection, 2 other people test positive from Kirkland health facility
Bad population to get sick.
- Two people connected to a Kirkland long-term care facility have tested positive, officials said Saturday afternoon. A resident in her 70s is in serious condition, and a health employee in her 40s is stable. The long-term facility in Kirkland has 108 residents and 180 employees, according to the CDC.
- At the Kirkland facility, 27 residents and 25 employees have symptoms.
Bad population to get sick.