Coronavirus

@BillRM,

Quote:

Go to the cdc website as last year flu as it is all there and a so call normal flu season can match coronavirus death totals.

I think I see the problem. And I will repeat the important question. What evidence will you need in order to change your mind about this virus?

What you aren't understanding is that the current projections say that with social distancing we will see hundreds of thousands of US deaths from this. Without social distancing we would see millions of US deaths. This is far worse than the normal flu.

If in two weeks (that would be April 16th) the number of deaths (now at 5,000) is greater than 57,000 and still rising... will you then change your mind?

Right now we have had consistent exponential growth in the number of deaths for 3 weeks. If this continues, we will have far more than US 57,000 deaths by April 16th.

0 Replies

@engineer,

engineer wrote:

Given that the flu is less contagious and people get immunized for it, would you accept that 100 million cases is reasonable for covid19 if the flu does 41 million?

The fatality rate is over 1% (sometimes 3-4%) in just about every state that has over 1000 cases (NC is just under) so a 1% fatality rate seems conservative to me. Do you agree?

1% of 100 million is 1 million deaths. Just 1% of the flu exposure is over 400K deaths.

Here are the numbers (compiled by CNN) for number of cases and fatality rate by state. (I only pulled the hardest hit states, the percentages look similar for the other states.)

Code:

State_____		Cases	Deaths	% Fatal

New York		84,046	2,220	2.6%

New Jersey		22,255	355	1.6%

California		9,907	216	2.2%

Michigan		9,315	335	3.6%

Florida___		7,773	101	1.3%

Massachusetts		7,738	122	1.6%

Illinois		6,980	146	2.1%

Louisiana		6,424	273	4.2%

Pennsylvania		6,063	74	1.2%

Washington		5,984	254	4.2%

Georgia___		4,748	154	3.2%

Texas______		4,607	68	1.5%

Connecticut		3,557	85	2.4%

Colorado		3,342	79	2.4%

1 Reply

@engineer,

The latest figures from Johns Hopkins University have become the pacesetter for many political decisions worldwide. But the figures have their pitfalls. For example, it takes about ten days for a newly infected person to even appear in the statistics.

This is due to the incubation period of five days, the waiting time for the test and the laboratory result and the subsequent delay in reporting. In the worst case, the infected person dies about ten days later. So between reporting an infection and death, about ten days pass by.

Quote:

Country / infected / deaths / deaths per infected

The problems with the common infection statistics could be avoided, for example, by testing large samples. Or if public health authorities were stricter in selecting the people to be tested - i.e. excluding people with a low chance of infection from testing. And instead concentrate on the people with the highest risk, for example those with particularly close contact to infected persons.
However, if doctors suddenly apply stricter criteria when selecting the people to be tested, it could also happen that the number of infected people suddenly starts to rise faster again, although in reality the growth has already decreased.

2 Replies

@Walter Hinteler,

That Spain number looks pretty suspect. One in three die? They must be only testing critical cases.

2 Replies

The number of deaths is the most reliable statistic. The other statistics have much more uncertainty. It is possible that the cause of death may be in doubt, but even with an error rate it is a much more reliable count than anything else.

No one has any idea what the actual infection rate is.

The number of deaths in the US is increasing exponentially with a pretty consistent growth rate (doubling every 3 days), and it has been doing that for weeks. There is no sign yet that the "curve is being flattened".

That alone is horrifying.

2 Replies

@engineer,

One in three - taken the ten days from the published infection. (Otherwise, it's about one in nine)

0 Replies

@maxdancona,

Horrifying will increase.
Was reading a WP article. Up in Erie County (New York, includes Buffalo) testing is sadly lacking. Lack of testing kids being a part of the problem.

Added to this, many people there, are still not getting into the new fad of distancing and self isolation.

What may work in favor of Buffalo (Pittsburgh and Cleveland too) is less density of people and a much smaller transit system.

Stay safe, wash your hands hourly (more if handling money, trash, mail, food...).

After the numbers of NYC from Tuesday night (when we topped 1000 deaths), I have gone sort of numb. Don't want to read the news it is too depressing. Yet, I rally and keep checking updates. Today the unemployment numbers were given and it got even tougher to deal with the day.

And remember, wash your hands regularly... Don't let your hands get near your eyes (except when washing your face every half hour).

2 Replies

@Walter Hinteler,

Quote:

However, if doctors suddenly apply stricter criteria when selecting the people to be tested, it could also happen that the number of infected people suddenly starts to rise faster again, although in reality the growth has already decreased

In the past week, the number of new cases in the US has clearly "flattened" (it is growing at a rate significantly less than exponential). However, the number of deaths has not "flattened". The number of deaths in the US keeps rising exponentially.

This is what you would expect if the testing became less prevalent (as Walter suggests). It doesn't suggest that the growth has actually decreased.

0 Replies

@Sturgis,

Quote:

Added to this, many people there, are still not getting into the new fad of distancing and self isolation.

I would support this as a law:

Anyone who went to Spring Break this year or a "Corona party" doesn't get a ventilator. Period.

1 Reply

@maxdancona,

maxdancona wrote:

Quote:
Added to this, many people there, are still not getting into the new fad of distancing and self isolation.

I would support this as a law:

Anyone who went to Spring Break this year or a "Corona party" doesn't get a ventilator. Period.

Hell given the age groups that go to spring break few will need a ventilator in any case.

1 Reply

Okay everyone, listen up!
Try to avoid going into cardiac arrest in NYC and on LongIsland.
The The new rules given to EMS, says if the person cannot be saved "in the field" don't bring them to a hospital. Just let them fully expire.

Do not administer CPR! Doing so forces possibly Covid-19 infected air out of the lungs which would spread the virus further.

www.6abc.com/health/new-guidelines-for-ems-in-nyc-show-grim-reality-covid-19-crisis/6070758/

1 Reply

@maxdancona,

Even the number of deaths is only offering useful trend data within one country but hard to compare across countries, due to differences in methodology. It's an estimate a minima in most cases, based on hospital data, ie some deaths don't get counted.

0 Replies

@BillRM,

BillRM wrote:

Hell given the age groups that go to spring break few will need a ventilator in any case.

young people, children and infants have died of Covid19

there is no age exemption.

1 Reply

@Sturgis,

Sturgis wrote:

Stay safe, wash your hands hourly (more if handling money, trash, mail, food...).

Canada Post has asked people to wash their mailboxes.

0 Replies

@engineer,

I think all of the numbers are whack. Every jurisdiction is testing/reporting so very differently. Here, Quebec reports every presumed case (testing or not) as a confirmed case. Ontario reports only confirmed by testing cases but ... it's hard to get testing done. Apparently they've got tests but not enough testing staff. Want to focus staff on treatment. fair enough. but we have absolutely no idea what the infection rate is.

0 Replies

@Sturgis,

Sturgis wrote:

The new rules given to EMS, says if the person cannot be saved "in the field" don't bring them to a hospital. Just let them fully expire.

Wow!

0 Replies

@ehBeth,

ehBeth wrote:

BillRM wrote:
Hell given the age groups that go to spring break few will need a ventilator in any case.

young people, children and infants have died of Covid19

there is no age exemption.

You are not aware that young people and children rarely rarely died or even get seriously ill from this virus???????????

Or do you indeed know this fact and you are just not wishing to admitted that this virus is not at all that deadly for those who are young and do not have a pre-existing conditions?

This over board concerns of this virus might however end up killing me by not being given treatments I might need for a heart attack however

1 Reply

Just read that the worldwide deaths total from this virus had just reach 50,000 roughly 30,000 below last year flu death totals.

1 Reply

@BillRM,

Do you understand exponential growth at all?

In a week there will be over 100,000 deaths. and in 2 weeks there will be 200,000 deaths.

At what point do you change your mind and start taking this seriously?

1 Reply

@maxdancona,

maxdancona wrote:

Do you understand exponential growth at all?

In a week there will be over 100,000 deaths. and in 2 weeks there will be 200,000 deaths.

At what point do you change your mind and start taking this seriously?

Sure it will be exponential with no break points an every man woman and children on the planet will have the virus in a week. Hell you can see such curves with the damn common flu virus.

Come on I have an engineering degree so my math background is more the enough to know that shouting exponential growth does not mean that such growth will go on for more then a small repeat small section of such a curve.

Amazing how many things show such growth for some part of it function an if this was not true every person on earth would have the virus by now.

After the virus have inflect a large percent of the small percent of the population with the most weaken immune systems the curve will no longer be exponential.

1 Reply

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know