new coronavirus outbreak China, Korea, USA - mod warnings in OP (updated 24/02/20)

ZX7R

Mic 1972 wrote: »

2% mortality means that out of 100 people, 2 people die and 98 live
This is not the case with covid-19
So far out of 100 people, 2 people died, 13 lived and 85 are still sick
the mortality rate will be 2% only if all 85 live, why is it so difficult to understand?

Because until we know what happens to the other 85% , the stats really don't make much of a difference

wakka12

Mic 1972 wrote: »

2% mortality means that out of 100 people, 2 people die and 98 live
This is not the case with covid-19
So far out of 100 people, 2 people died, 13 lived and 85 are still sick
the mortality rate will be 2% only if all 85 live, why is it so difficult to understand?

Because it is likely the 85% will live, seeing as that is what happened with earlier samples. The death rate is remaining constant, rather than going up, meaning about 2 in every 100 are dying in every sample of that size

BloodBath

bb12 wrote: »

accepted flu mortality rate is .01%, so even if coronus rate was 0.4% it would still be 40 times more deadlier, not 4

It's 0.1% aka 1 in 1000.

bb12 wrote: »

.01 is 1/100
0.4 is 40/100

1% is 1/100
0.1% is 1/1,000
0.01% is 1/10,000

0.4% is 4/1,000 or 1/250

Mic 1972

Mic 1972 wrote: »

2% mortality means that out of 100 people, 2 people die and 98 live
This is not the case with covid-19
So far out of 100 people, 2 people died, 13 lived and 85 are still sick
the mortality rate will be 2% only if all 85 live, why is it so difficult to understand?

You are unbelievably stupid.

igCorcaigh

wakka12 wrote: »

Is seasonal flu really just 0.01%? Hm maybe I can see why governments are reacting so dramatically then

What was the cfr of the 1918 Spanish flu?
Around 2.5%, similar to COVID19?

Difficult to determine the 1918 cfr though, I think it varied a lot.

And it was the second wave a year later that caused a lot of fatalities.

SeaBreezes

Deleted User wrote: »

You are unbelievably stupid.

No, he's quoting the only ACTUAL stats we have...
People here are saying there LOADs at home getting mild doses and not being recorded! Really? With neighbours paid to report anyone who coughs?
There are crematorium workers and nurses recorded saying the majority of deaths are not reported as Coronavirus. We have front line workers jailed for not toeing the party line. But all this isheresay and not verifiable.

We have 2 people in the western world who tested positive without symptoms. Just 2. (Open to correction if there are more?)

The ONLY facts we have are reported on worldometer. Everything else is speculation. Both for better, and for worse.
So, looking at the ACTUAL stats to hand, how is that stupid?

Mic 1972

Deleted User wrote: »

You are unbelievably stupid.

excuse me?

bb12

BloodBath wrote: »

It's 0.1% aka 1 in 1000.



1% is 1/100
0.1% is 1/1,000
0.01% is 1/10,000

0.4% is 4/1,000 or 1/250

what are you on about?
i was explaining to the previous poster that 0.4 was 40 times more than 0.01 when he thought it was only 4 times greater

i wasn't talking about infection or mortality rate

SeaBreezes

SeaBreezes wrote: »

No, he's quoting the only ACTUAL stats we have...
People here are saying there LOADs at home getting mild doses and not being recorded! Really? With neighbours paid to report anyone who coughs?
There are crematorium workers and nurses recorded saying the majority of deaths are not reported as Coronavirus. We have front line workers jailed for not toeing the party line. But all this isheresay and not verifiable.

We have 2 people in the western world who tested positive without symptoms. Just 2. (Open to correction if there are more?)

The ONLY facts we have are reported on worldometer. Everything else is speculation. Both for better, and for worse.
So, looking at the ACTUAL stats to hand, how is that stupid?

Because it's stupid.

I posted earlier stating that with his logic, influenza kills 9% of the people it infects. We don't need fearmongerers during a crisis like this.

SeaBreezes

Deleted User wrote: »

Because it's stupid.

I posted earlier stating that with his logic, influenza kills 9% of the people it infects. We don't need fearmongerers during a crisis like this.

We need ostriches even less :-)

SeaBreezes

SeaBreezes wrote: »

No, he's quoting the only ACTUAL stats we have...
People here are saying there LOADs at home getting mild doses and not being recorded! Really? With neighbours paid to report anyone who coughs?
There are crematorium workers and nurses recorded saying the majority of deaths are not reported as Coronavirus. We have front line workers jailed for not toeing the party line. But all this isheresay and not verifiable.

We have 2 people in the western world who tested positive without symptoms. Just 2. (Open to correction if there are more?)

The ONLY facts we have are reported on worldometer. Everything else is speculation. Both for better, and for worse.
So, looking at the ACTUAL stats to hand, how is that stupid?

I always go to worldometer for my stats instead of peer reviewed sources. God speed.

On a serious note. There isn't enough stats available to be robustly reliable.

BloodBath

bb12 wrote: »

what are you on about?
i was explaining to the previous poster that 0.4 was 40 times more than 0.01 when he thought it was only 4 times greater

i wasn't talking about infection or mortality rate

I'm correcting your calculations which I linked.

Do I need to link it again?

bb12 wrote: »

.01 is 1/100
0.4 is 40/100

I corrected you by saying

1% is 1/100
0.1% is 1/1000
0.01% is 1/10000

Also Flu mortality is 0.1% not 0.01%

Mic 1972

wakka12 wrote: »

Because it is likely the 85% will live, seeing as that is what happened with earlier samples. The death rate is remaining constant, rather than going up, meaning about 2 in every 100 are dying in every sample of that size

all 85% will live? not a chance
there are about 100 new deaths every day that should be counted against that total

Mic 1972

Deleted User wrote: »

Because it's stupid.

I posted earlier stating that with his logic, influenza kills 9% of the people it infects. We don't need fearmongerers during a crisis like this.

We need people who understand maths also, you clearly dont

Mic 1972

Mic 1972 wrote: »

We need people who understand maths also, you clearly dont

You clearly don't understand rationality.

SeaBreezes

Deleted User wrote: »

I always go to worldometer for my stats instead of peer reviewed sources. God speed.

You will note their sources at the end of the page. They link to all both peer reviewed, WHO and actual official stats.

None of the stats from Wuhan and Hubei are peer reviewed.. please do educate me, where are the peer reviewed daily stats on actual cases, mortality and cases in process? Source please?

God speed.

SeaBreezes

SeaBreezes wrote: »

You will note their sources at the end of the page. They link to all both peer reviewed, WHO and actual official stats.

None of the stats from Wuhan and Hubei are peer reviewed.. please do educate me, where are the peer reviewed daily stats on actual cases, mortality and cases in process? Source please?

God speed.

Up-to-date, UKMI,

Mic 1972

Deleted User wrote: »

You clearly don't understand rationality.

I do mate, i also work as business analyst, i understand how these metrics work very well, but hey.. everybody is free to chose the number that makes them sleep better at night

SeaBreezes

Deleted User wrote: »

Up-to-date.

??? Still waiting for the peer reviewed literature for the stats please
God speed. :-)

Mic 1972

Mic 1972 wrote: »

I do mate, i also work as business analyst, i understand how these metrics work very well, but hey.. everybody is free to chose the number that makes them sleep better at night

So as a master in business analysis, do you think 9% is the true figure? Wouldn't want to invest in your company.

SeaBreezes

SeaBreezes wrote: »

??? Still waiting for the peer reviewed literature for the stats please
God speed. :-)

Everything on up-to-date is peer reviewed. It's one of the most trusted sources in healthcare. Are you actually for real?

Mic 1972

Deleted User wrote: »

So as a master in business analysis, do you think 9% is the true figure? Wouldn't want to invest in your company.

can you point to the post where i say 9%, otherwise stop making up stuff

Mic 1972

Mic 1972 wrote: »

can you point to the post where i say 9%, otherwise stop making up stuff

It's actually higher.

Mic 1972 wrote: »

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/

Closed cases have a Death rate of 15%
Open cases have a Critical/Serious rate of 19%

Can't believe reports are still throwing around the 2% death rate bull****

fr336

fr336 wrote: »

Sad to see comments here and elsewhere discarding older people getting this - as long as everyone else is fine, no problem. Do you not have parents or grandparents? I'm not worried about myself - I'm only just in my 30s - but am worried about relatives. Of course there are always risks for older people, but a pandemic is a bloody unlucky way to go.

Absolutely!!

My mother died aged 89 of hospital acquired pneumonia, and indeed indeed she was extremely reluctant to go into hospital when she had a vertebra fracture. Wanted to ride it out at home, but I was at work and couldn’t really take the several weeks off to stay at home and nurse her. She had enjoyed her birthday in Vienna, a weekend in Switzerland, and was just after coming home from a week touring with me in Derry & Donegal, and the following month we were due to go to Cyprus for two weeks. She absolutely delighted in these trips, and would have been all ears open about this Corona virus and getting me to order in masks, disinfectant etc. In the hospital she kept her daily diary with remarks about her blood pressure (always good), and various things she had been told. She also documented other patients conditions! One of them was “severely ill obese woman arrived in room having been taken off ventilator, I hear she has pneumonia and possibly a case of the Swine flu. I need to get discharged before I catch what she has and end up out in the box.” Two days later I saw her writing had deteriorated and could hear her breath was bubbly. Drew attention to the staff. Died two weeks later, peacefully, of ARDS lung failure.

Our elderly deserve to be protected, they too have lives to get on with.

SeaBreezes

Deleted User wrote: »

Everything on up-to-date is peer reviewed. It's one of the most trusted sources in healthcare. Are you actually for real?

So, your telling me that worldometer, who base their stats DAILY on the report from National Health Commission (NHC) of the People’s Republic of China, WHO, and the CDC (all linked in sources section) are not as up to date on current case diagnosis, and deaths than UKMI?

Riiigghttt..
God speed ..

Mic 1972

Deleted User wrote: »

It's actually higher.

The stats i quoted are taken straight from the link i posted, did you even click on it and read what they are? Metrics must understood before making a quick comment on a board for the sake of attracting attention

read again

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/

Closed cases have a Death rate of 15%
Open cases have a Critical/Serious rate of 19%

igCorcaigh

https://twitter.com/SkyNewsBreak/status/1228778246772269056?s=19

SeaBreezes

Deleted User wrote: »

Absolutely!!

My mother died aged 89 of hospital acquired pneumonia, and indeed indeed she was extremely reluctant to go into hospital when she had a vertebra fracture. Wanted to ride it out at home, but I was at work and couldn’t really take the several weeks off to stay at home and nurse her. She had enjoyed her birthday in Vienna, a weekend in Switzerland, and was just after coming home from a week touring with me in Derry & Donegal, and the following month we were due to go to Cyprus for two weeks. She absolutely delighted in these trips, and would have been all ears open about this Corona virus and getting me to order in masks, disinfectant etc. In the hospital she kept her daily diary with remarks about her blood pressure (always good), and various things she had been told. She also documented other patients conditions! One of them was “severely ill obese woman arrived in room having been taken off ventilator, I hear she has pneumonia and possibly a case of the Swine flu. I need to get discharged before I catch what she has and end up out in the box.” Two days later I saw her writing had deteriorated and could hear her breath was bubbly. Drew attention to the staff. Died two weeks later, peacefully, of ARDS lung failure.

Our elderly deserve to be protected, they too have lives to get on with.

I'm so sorry

Annascaul

igCorcaigh wrote: »

What was the cfr of the 1918 Spanish flu?
Around 2.5%, similar to COVID19?

Difficult to determine the 1918 cfr though, I think it varied a lot.

And it was the second wave a year later that caused a lot of fatalities.

The only real two concerns I have is:

1) The media blowing this out of proportion.
2) Christine Lagarde finding this another reason to lower the value of the already low Euro, in believe she might stimulate the economy because of the weakness in China...

These two threats are bigger to me than COVID19 itself.

Mic 1972

Mic 1972 wrote: »

The stats i quoted are taken straight from the link i posted, did you even click on it and read what they are? Metrics must understood before making a quick comment on a board for the sake of attracting attention

read again

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/

Closed cases have a Death rate of 15%
Open cases have a Critical/Serious rate of 19%

Around what percentage of people die from getting the virus?

SeaBreezes

SeaBreezes wrote: »

So, your telling me that worldometer, who base their stats DAILY on the report from National Health Commission (NHC) of the People’s Republic of China, WHO, and the CDC (all linked in sources section) are not as up to date on current case diagnosis, and deaths than UKMI?

Riiigghttt..
God speed ..

Yes. I can believe that. Would it not make sense that people who actually work in healthcare have better resources available? worldometer is saying 19% of people affected are critical. This is absolute lunacy (and bollocks).

Mic 1972

Mic 1972 wrote: »

The stats i quoted are taken straight from the link i posted, did you even click on it and read what they are? Metrics must understood before making a quick comment on a board for the sake of attracting attention

read again

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/

Closed cases have a Death rate of 15%
Open cases have a Critical/Serious rate of 19%

You might as well be linking from Breitbart.

Deleted User

Deleted User wrote: »

Absolutely!!

My mother died aged 89 of hospital acquired pneumonia, and indeed indeed she was extremely reluctant to go into hospital when she had a vertebra fracture. Wanted to ride it out at home, but I was at work and couldn’t really take the several weeks off to stay at home and nurse her. She had enjoyed her birthday in Vienna, a weekend in Switzerland, and was just after coming home from a week touring with me in Derry & Donegal, and the following month we were due to go to Cyprus for two weeks. She absolutely delighted in these trips, and would have been all ears open about this Corona virus and getting me to order in masks, disinfectant etc. In the hospital she kept her daily diary with remarks about her blood pressure (always good), and various things she had been told. She also documented other patients conditions! One of them was “severely ill obese woman arrived in room having been taken off ventilator, I hear she has pneumonia and possibly a case of the Swine flu. I need to get discharged before I catch what she has and end up out in the box.” Two days later I saw her writing had deteriorated and could hear her breath was bubbly. Drew attention to the staff. Died two weeks later, peacefully, of ARDS lung failure.

Our elderly deserve to be protected, they too have lives to get on with.

It's one of the hazards of hospital. I'm so sorry for your loss. HAP is a horrible thing.

gozunda

[Deleted User] wrote: »

But children are at less risk of serious symptoms. And when someone mentioned that you just had to reply with a sarcastic comment about a child. Off topic and pretty messed up. Get a life.

Oh give over. He made a comment about children and the coronavirus - and a throwaway about the angry 'child' who is 17 btw and on public record for blaming all the adults for ruining everything or wtte. And It's not like the kid is feking sacred or something. Jeez messed up is right.

pc7

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Our elderly deserve to be protected, they too have lives to get on with.

I think everyone would agree with that and wasn’t discounting elderly on the thread.

I know I posted about it being good news that hopefully smallies aren’t being badly affected because that was something that was worrying me for my two. I do have parents and grandparents (luckily still with us in their 90’s) and of course I’d worry for them but my little ones would be and are my priority.

Sorry about your mam Cat, that’s rough.

Mic 1972

Deleted User wrote: »

Around what percentage of people die from getting the virus?

It all depend on what you want to calculate
If you are concerned about your chances to survive if you get infect this is your calculation

Chances of Survive = Deaths / Death + Recoveries

however this calculation can be done only when all cases in the sample have an outcome (Death or Survival). This data isn't being released at the moment
But it's by logic higher than 2%

neonsofa

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Absolutely!!

....

Our elderly deserve to be protected, they too have lives to get on with.

So sorry for your loss. Sounds like your mam had a fantastic time travelling. Hopefully your recent trip with her gives you some lovely memories.

Mic 1972

Mic 1972 wrote: »

It all depend on what you want to calculate
If you are concerned about your chances to survive if you get infect this is your calculation

Chances of Survive = Deaths / Death + Recoveries

however this calculation can be done only when all cases in the sample have an outcome (Death or Survival). This data isn't being released at the moment
But it's by logic higher than 2%

No. It's not. Maybe that's "business analyst" logic but things are different in healthcare. It's only 2.23% because it's endemic in one highly populated area.

TomSweeney

Mic 1972

Deleted User wrote: »

No. It's not. Maybe that's "business analyst" logic but things are different in healthcare.

explain your "healthcare" logic then
I know where the 2% comes from and it does not not represent your chances of survival were you unfortunate enough to get the virus

Mic 1972

Mic 1972 wrote: »

explain your "healthcare" logic then
I know where the 2% comes from and it does not not represent your chances of survival were you unfortunate enough to get the virus

You are basing that 2% off total confirmed cases/deaths. The majority of cases will be self isolating/mild so won't be confirmed. You usually only end up in hospital if you have complications. Think of that 2% as a maximum and also take into fact that the Wuhan region is overwhelmed at the moment.

SeaBreezes

TomSweeney wrote: »

God love her, she will disappear next. Though I was thinking the people will never forgive the CCP for this.

Mic 1972

Deleted User wrote: »

You are basing that 2% off total confirmed cases/deaths. The majority of cases will be self isolating/mild so won't be confirmed. You usually only end up in hospital if you have complications. Think of that 2% as a maximum and also take into fact that the Wuhan region is overwhelmed at the moment.

That's not how stats work. A figure is the result of a specific calculation
"the majority of cases.." is an assumption

You could also assume that a lot of people with complications didn't go to hospital, equally random and unusable for calculation prurpose

igCorcaigh

TomSweeney wrote: »

Wow, that was heartfelt.

I wonder could this situation trigger revolt in China.

2020 is turning out to be some year.

In reality. The most concerning feature of the Covid-19 is the ability to cause long term organ damage. It's not really a feature of influenza.

igCorcaigh

igCorcaigh wrote: »

Wow, that was heartfelt.

I wonder could this situation trigger revolt in China.

2020 is turning out to be some year.

I imagine the US will leverage this for as much as they can.

igCorcaigh

[Deleted User] wrote: »

In reality. The most concerning feature of the Covid-19 is the ability to cause long term organ damage. It's not really a feature of influenza.

That's true, it really has its own characteristics.

Is organ damage caused by low blood oxygen or by the virus itself?

SeaBreezes

Deleted User wrote: »

You are basing that 2% off total confirmed cases/deaths. The majority of cases will be self isolating/mild so won't be confirmed. You usually only end up in hospital if you have complications. Think of that 2% as a maximum and also take into fact that the Wuhan region is overwhelmed at the moment.

Your assuming your stats.

Even though it's against the law to self isolate people are staying home?

(Though I would to be honest if in the same situation)

I keep thinking of that poor lady on the balcony crying my husband is dying, please I don't want to bother anyone, but can anyone help? Christ. What a situation to be in. But it's just the flu....

Mic 1972

Pneumonia causes lung damage, not Covid-19
People in critical condition spend weeks on strong meds attached to a machine while their bodies are fighting against the virus, that may also be the reason for heart failure

SeaBreezes

SeaBreezes wrote: »

Your assuming your stats.

Even though it's against the law to self isolate people are staying home?

(Though I would to be honest if in the same situation)

I keep thinking of that poor lady on the balcony crying my husband is dying, please I don't want to bother anyone, but can anyone help? Christ. What a situation to be in. But it's just the flu....

I'm using my clinical judgement. The stats aren't there to confirm one way or the other (at the moment) but clinically, the above 2% death rate seems very unlikely.