COVID-19 — Coronavirus

[RadcliffeRick]

You are Xi Jinping and I claim my £5!

要为读者介绍来自峇株巴辖石文丁渔村的鸾笔雕刻师王国政（35岁），他从17岁至今已雕刻了逾百支鸾笔 £5

 

[SebastianBlue]

要为读者介绍来自峇株巴辖石文丁渔村的鸾笔雕刻师王国政（35岁），他从17岁至今已雕刻了逾百支鸾笔 £5

I’ll never believe you are a sculptor carving artist, Wang.

 

[George Hannah]

Can and have, there's thousands of them around here, it's as simple as walking out at sunset and sticking your hands out.

Do your eyes go red and your teeth get bigger then as well?

 

[bluesteel]

the lancet is working on a doubling of infection every 6.4 days.

And as you say, if this gets into Mumbai for example, and infects about 20% of the population that’s 100k dead right there.

We will never know tho as who’s going to count them in the slums.

I also assume the mortality rate will be higher in poorer countries, but probably not counted either.

30 million is 2.5% of China’s population. Grim.

or 20% of the world population get infected and it kills 2.5% of those infected

7.7billion - 80% - 97.5-% = 38.5 million.

 

[cibaman]

This new virus, has an r0 of 2.6, that means on average 1 person with it will infect 2.6 others. Influenza has an r0 between 1.4-1.6.

this new virus has a mortality rate of 2.5% at the moment. Influenza has a mortality rate of 0.05%.

So this new one spreads faster, infects more and kills 50x more people it infects compared to seasonal influenza.

On top of that, this new one has currently puts 18% of people it infects in hospital.

Isn’t the mortality rate probably overstated? There will probably be thousands of people who have contracted the virus but don’t have serious or any symptoms, haven’t been diagnosed and aren’t recorded in the numbers. Whereas the mortality figures will be much more accurate.

Hopefully the virus will become less virulent as it spreads.

 

[denislawsbackheel]

Well said.

 

[marco]

Isn’t the mortality rate probably overstated? There will probably be thousands of people who have contracted the virus but don’t have serious or any symptoms, haven’t been diagnosed and aren’t recorded in the numbers. Whereas the mortality figures will be much more accurate.

Hopefully the virus will become less virulent as it spreads.

BBC saying the figures of infected could be 25 times higher than the 60,000,,if my maths are correct thats 1.2 million now infected (in china),if the mortality rate is true then that reduces the percentage rate of death but if they have lied about the infection rate they will almost certainly have twistd the death figures

 

[BlueHammer85]

BBC saying the figures of infected could be 25 times higher than the 60,000,,if my maths are correct thats 1.2 million now infected (in china),if the mortality rate is true then that reduces the percentage rate of death but if they have lied about the infection rate they will almost certainly have twistd the death figures

 

[grunge]

Isn’t the mortality rate probably overstated? There will probably be thousands of people who have contracted the virus but don’t have serious or any symptoms, haven’t been diagnosed and aren’t recorded in the numbers. Whereas the mortality figures will be much more accurate.

Hopefully the virus will become less virulent as it spreads.

Probably yeah, but that's the math's available at the moment based on confirmed cases. from what has been made available ( not including the surge today ) its seems to have actually risen, 2 weeks ago it was 2%, yesterday it was 2.5%

I did see comments somewhere that the fact that the mortality being so static around the 2% mark was a sign the Chinese were massaging the figures ( may have been on here ) as you would expect fluctuations.

Just did some quick napkin maths and with todays new figures its still coming out at 2.2%

if you go by deaths vs recovered the figures ( ignoring those still infected as they may recover or die so cant count them ) is closer to 18% but no where near enough data have any accuracy there.

 

[Tricky_Trev]

Isn’t the mortality rate probably overstated? There will probably be thousands of people who have contracted the virus but don’t have serious or any symptoms, haven’t been diagnosed and aren’t recorded in the numbers. Whereas the mortality figures will be much more accurate.

Hopefully the virus will become less virulent as it spreads.

The reported deaths won’t be anywhere near accurate either.

 

[grunge]

This guy is well worth keeping up with, he's being fact based, uses all the facts available and peer reviewed medical journals to come to his conclusions in his vid's..

he's a medical professor so knows his stuff.




Edit: Watching this now, this one is about the calculations of mortality rates, the fluctations on it, time lag etc.

Also trying to compare good clinical care vs poor clinical care.

Edit2: Imperial collage in London ( major medical source ) suggesting 1% mortality rate with there modelling.

 

[marco]

so when we have a stable percentage of the death rate lets assume 3% then those figures (in the UK) can be worked with and you may find if your fit,young and healthy you have say a 1% chance of death where as someone over 50 who smokes could have a 6% chance of death, thats a little scary if your middle aged

 

[Le Havre Oswald]

Think I may have it fuck

 

[denislawsbackheel]

so when we have a stable percentage of the death rate lets assume 3% then those figures (in the UK) can be worked with and you may find if your fit,young and healthy you have say a 1% chance of death where as someone over 50 who smokes could have a 6% chance of death, thats a little scary if your middle aged

why do you presume it targets the older or infirm?
Spanish flu didn’t.
It targeted fit, healthy young adults with strong immune systems.

 

[TonyM]

If I was the virus I wouldn't target me. Where's the fun in that. Surely it'd be better sport infecting the rich and beautiful.

 

[SebastianBlue]

why do you presume it targets the older or infirm?
Spanish flu didn’t.
It targeted fit, healthy young adults with strong immune systems.

That is the presumption by researchers right now because this is a severe respiratory illness and older/infirm people are classified as at-risk for more severe complications with such illnesses. Early death metrics show skewing older, as well. But we won’t have a particularly sound understanding of mortality rates for sometime. And perhaps, not at all, as there are reports China are taking actions to suppress reported deaths to keep the reported mortality rate lower and if the virus were to establish itself in large poor urban centres elsewhere in the world the vast majority of cases and deaths would likely go unreported, unfortunately. The totals for the Spanish Flu are still debated today for that very reason, actually.

And, although this is not an influenza virus, so Spanish Flu is not a great model for COVID-19 apart from establishing an understanding of how *a* virus can spread, it is worth noting that the Spanish Flu had a bimodal mortality rate, meaning mortality was high in people 20-40 years old and people 65 years and older (which is the latter “expected” at-risk group). It *did* disproportionately impact the older/infirm. This was in addition to increased risk in the very young, which is nearly always the case with any illness, unfortunately.

 

[snorky]

Think I may have it fuck

Violate yourself.

 

[blue b4 the moon]

Think I may have it fuck

Disable your account, you need to think of all of us on here & not yourself ;)

 

[BlueHammer85]

Has the Chinese government been on TV to address the nation about this ? just out of curiosity

 

[SebastianBlue]

Has the Chinese government been on TV to address the nation about this ? just out of curiosity

This is as close as they have come, which caused quite a stir and generally not in the good way.

‘Let’s Not Shake Hands’: Xi Jinping Tours Beijing Amid Coronavirus Crisis
China’s leader, who rarely mingles with the public, visited several sites in the capital and spoke to medical workers in Wuhan via video conferencing.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/10/world/asia/xi-jinping-coronavirus.html