There's a huge selection bias going on right now, because the only people who get tested--by and large--are the ones who get sick enough to warrant going to the doctor/hospital. That means the ones getting tested are already developing severe symptoms. The ones who don't get that sick just stay home until they recover and then assume they just got a cold or a case of the regular flu.
The deadliness of the virus is absolutely lower than is being reported. It's just a question of how much lower.
Lethality to the host is by definition a bad trait for a virus to develop or have, as the deadlier it is the chance of getting spread from host to host is lower.
It's not what the article says. They're estimating ranges of actual mortality vs. case mortality rate.
The mortality rate in Italy is now 10%. Based on their reasoning, if the actual mortality rate was 0.01% that means you have to divide deaths by the 0.01% number:
Deaths as of today are 7500. 7500 / 0.01% = 7500 / 0.0001 = 75 million.
Italy's entire population is 60 million. This means for the 0.01% mortality rate to be true, every person in Italy must be infected, plus 15 million residents or tourists.
Obviously that's not true. Italy does not have 100%+ spread.
“ Since Italy’s case fatality rate of 8% is estimated using the confirmed cases, the real fatality rate could in fact be closer to 0.06%.”
That would imply 12.5M infections with 7500 deaths and a marginal infection rate of 1667 per death.
I think they missed one aspect in their reasoning. Not only is there a denominator problem by not knowing the correct number of cases, but there is a numerator problem as well for deaths in Dec, Jan, and Feb for people dying of flu/pneumonia/ARDS that were chalked up to those causes because we did not have a test. (in the U.S)
I am sure the true number is lower than the current estimates, but not as low as they may think it to be. The paper definitely poses some questions we should be asking.
We need to do random sampling to get an accurate picture.
There is no test yet widely available for the antibodies.
Coronavirus infects about 10% of the people who get flu-like symptoms each year. This year doesn't seem much different. Here in Washington State, about 10% of those who get tested test positive.
Folks, the article simply states that the number of actual infections is much higher, so the death rate is lower. They claim that possibly 9 million people were infected on March 9 in the US, making the death rate .001. That seems very fake.
We literally don’t know what the death rate is at this point because we have no way of knowing the total number of people that have the disease. Because of that, we need to treat it as if it has a 90% death rate until we can develop a solution to fight it.
No, we need to treat it as "unknown", like the 99 other viruses that show up each and every year.
Once we get some evidence that it is really bad, then we can start taking pre-emptive action. Until then, quarantine the sick, isolate the weak, and let everyone else wash their hands and keep on living.
And the entire country is shutting down during an election year over this. I wonder why that could be 🤔
If it is, I sure fucking hope Trump finds evidence and let's the cat out of the bag.
A scenario like this will shake the entire country to it's core, but will also get rid of these currupt actors playing in the background.
Welcome to the realization that a DeepState exists and they have turned on America.
And Cuomo is throwing a tantrum for 40,000 ventilators.
This is the correct answer. If this was nothing, why is there a ventilator shortage?
...because they used them all for SARS, which no one paid any attention to because Barry O was president and the press took 8 years off?
Oh. So how many corona patients are on ventilators?
There's a huge selection bias going on right now, because the only people who get tested--by and large--are the ones who get sick enough to warrant going to the doctor/hospital. That means the ones getting tested are already developing severe symptoms. The ones who don't get that sick just stay home until they recover and then assume they just got a cold or a case of the regular flu.
The deadliness of the virus is absolutely lower than is being reported. It's just a question of how much lower.
If you watch the numbers, the virus is either very deadly or it's very contagious, but it's not both.
Lethality to the host is by definition a bad trait for a virus to develop or have, as the deadlier it is the chance of getting spread from host to host is lower.
It's not what the article says. They're estimating ranges of actual mortality vs. case mortality rate.
The mortality rate in Italy is now 10%. Based on their reasoning, if the actual mortality rate was 0.01% that means you have to divide deaths by the 0.01% number:
Deaths as of today are 7500. 7500 / 0.01% = 7500 / 0.0001 = 75 million.
Italy's entire population is 60 million. This means for the 0.01% mortality rate to be true, every person in Italy must be infected, plus 15 million residents or tourists.
Obviously that's not true. Italy does not have 100%+ spread.
“ Since Italy’s case fatality rate of 8% is estimated using the confirmed cases, the real fatality rate could in fact be closer to 0.06%.”
That would imply 12.5M infections with 7500 deaths and a marginal infection rate of 1667 per death.
I think they missed one aspect in their reasoning. Not only is there a denominator problem by not knowing the correct number of cases, but there is a numerator problem as well for deaths in Dec, Jan, and Feb for people dying of flu/pneumonia/ARDS that were chalked up to those causes because we did not have a test. (in the U.S)
I am sure the true number is lower than the current estimates, but not as low as they may think it to be. The paper definitely poses some questions we should be asking.
And 0.06% times 12% = 0.0072%. https://web.archive.org/web/20200324065122/https://www.telegraph.co.uk/global-health/science-and-disease/have-many-coronavirus-patients-died-italy/
Only 12% of the Italian deaths had no pre-morbidity. They count their dead differently so their numbers look exaggerated.
Source: https://web.archive.org/web/20200324065122/https://www.telegraph.co.uk/global-health/science-and-disease/have-many-coronavirus-patients-died-italy/
BTW, they removed the original article and replaced it with another. INTERESTING.
Too many people here are eating up the hysteria.
LOL at all the internet “experts” commenting to everyone how the methodology is flawed and the Doctors are wrong.
And what is the INFECTION rate ?
Exponential growth projections are easy to prove false
After 10 days, New York's mortality rate is still between 0.6% and 0.7%, while the WHO rate which justified the whole corona panic was 3.4%.
The data collected is not reliable and tainted by selection bias : https://www.statnews.com/2020/03/17/a-fiasco-in-the-making-as-the-coronavirus-pandemic-takes-hold-we-are-making-decisions-without-reliable-data/
Absurdly high. Far higher than the flu.
BZZT. WRONG.
We have no idea what the infection rate is.
Coronavirus infects about 10% of the people who get flu-like symptoms each year. This year doesn't seem much different. Here in Washington State, about 10% of those who get tested test positive.
Colleges of science and technology, even at these leftist shitholes, are generally OK. Just not Environmental Studies.
Oh ok let's ignore data because it came from a leftist college. Wtf
How can we possibly trust the information on deaths coming from China? Commie dictatorships are reliable sources of data now?
Folks, the article simply states that the number of actual infections is much higher, so the death rate is lower. They claim that possibly 9 million people were infected on March 9 in the US, making the death rate .001. That seems very fake.
I've ventured down the rabbit hole following Tommy G on Twitter and how this all plays into the global pedophiles going down. Thoughts?
Gosh.
I’m sorry, but they can’t do math.
We literally don’t know what the death rate is at this point because we have no way of knowing the total number of people that have the disease. Because of that, we need to treat it as if it has a 90% death rate until we can develop a solution to fight it.
No, we need to treat it as "unknown", like the 99 other viruses that show up each and every year.
Once we get some evidence that it is really bad, then we can start taking pre-emptive action. Until then, quarantine the sick, isolate the weak, and let everyone else wash their hands and keep on living.
We know the death rate in confirmed cases and it is no where near 90%. Calm yourself.