The WHO is now claiming 3.4% fatality rates, but a Harvard doctor disputes that and says it's under 1%. (The President also disputes it, although I'm not convinced that he is the best expert to heed on this subject.)
As Gavin, who has been arguing a bit with Trent Telko over at ChicagoBoyz about this, put it the death rate depends a lot on what you use for the denominator. If you use just confirmed COVID cases you're going to wind up with a much higher percentage of fatalities than if you make an estimate of how many people were affected by COVID but never presented themselves for diagnosis or were otherwise tested. The figure I've seen is that 80%+ of cases are mild enough to be 'treated' with bed rest which makes me think quite a few people who will write off experiencing COVID as a bad cold or flu. Of course you've got some bias about how widespread you think the disease will be. You could make a case that the WHO is lowballing the estimate of people affected (assuming they did that) so they don't look as bad at controlling the spread so their fatality percentage would be higher than someone who expects a wider spreading outbreak.
Gavin is correct. The death rate is calculated strictly by dividing the number of deaths by the number of cases. If we only count the people who have been tested and came up positive for COVID-19, then yes the number will be far higher than the number who may have had it and didn't report it/weren't tested/didn't know they had it but got better.
And I again stick to my guns and say that the true death rate will likely never be known as the ChiComs are almost certainly misreporting the actual numbers of ill and dead, and mismanaged the whole affair so badly as to inflate the actual severity well out of proportion to what this would have been had it started in the West (e.g. had COVID-19 broken out in France).
Flat out, I am not concerned about catching Corona virus myself. If I do, it is almost certain that I'd be fine. I would be concerned if my parents (in their early 80s) caught it, as they have no anti-bodies against it (no one really does save for the ones who have already had it) and it could be life threatening for them. In the case of the flu, chances are they've been exposed to it before and might have some anti-bodies against that strain, but I'd still be concerned because at their age any illness can be life threatening. I'd be very concerned for my brand new (three day old) grand-niece catching it. She has no anti-bodies against it and it could be life-threatening for her. With the flu, she might have anti-bodies against it (from her mother), but I'd still be concerned for the same reason.
Ebola terrifies me. I have no anti-bodies against it and it very easily can kill otherwise healthy adults. My best defense against ebola is to never be exposed to it. COVID-19 is not ebola. It lacks the killing mechanisms ebola (and diseases like it) has. It has the same effects and risks as a flu, and is more infections than a flu mostly because we lack anti-bodies against it, and nothing more.
All that to say, we ought to be concerned with protecting our immune-compromised citizens. They are the ones at risk. But that's always true, regardless of what the disease is. It truly confounds me that people are (on nothing more than the basis of press coverage) treating this "flu in all but name" as if it were the next smallpox.
The mortality rate of COVID-19 also varies with age and health: 100% of the fatalities, so far, have been over 60-ish, and a large fraction of those have been much older and already had serious health problems. That will change, as there nearly always are exceptions to any overall trend.
The mortality rate also varies, I suspect, with the quality of medical care available to the population involved.
I'm also not the least bit worried about the virus for my sake or my wife's, even though we're in that most-at risk age cohort: we're both healthy, have access to quality medical care, the odds are strongly in our favor even in our cohort, and no piss-ant molecule is going to kill our pale behinds. Full stop.
5 comments:
As Gavin, who has been arguing a bit with Trent Telko over at ChicagoBoyz about this, put it the death rate depends a lot on what you use for the denominator. If you use just confirmed COVID cases you're going to wind up with a much higher percentage of fatalities than if you make an estimate of how many people were affected by COVID but never presented themselves for diagnosis or were otherwise tested. The figure I've seen is that 80%+ of cases are mild enough to be 'treated' with bed rest which makes me think quite a few people who will write off experiencing COVID as a bad cold or flu. Of course you've got some bias about how widespread you think the disease will be. You could make a case that the WHO is lowballing the estimate of people affected (assuming they did that) so they don't look as bad at controlling the spread so their fatality percentage would be higher than someone who expects a wider spreading outbreak.
Gavin is correct. The death rate is calculated strictly by dividing the number of deaths by the number of cases. If we only count the people who have been tested and came up positive for COVID-19, then yes the number will be far higher than the number who may have had it and didn't report it/weren't tested/didn't know they had it but got better.
And I again stick to my guns and say that the true death rate will likely never be known as the ChiComs are almost certainly misreporting the actual numbers of ill and dead, and mismanaged the whole affair so badly as to inflate the actual severity well out of proportion to what this would have been had it started in the West (e.g. had COVID-19 broken out in France).
Flat out, I am not concerned about catching Corona virus myself. If I do, it is almost certain that I'd be fine. I would be concerned if my parents (in their early 80s) caught it, as they have no anti-bodies against it (no one really does save for the ones who have already had it) and it could be life threatening for them. In the case of the flu, chances are they've been exposed to it before and might have some anti-bodies against that strain, but I'd still be concerned because at their age any illness can be life threatening. I'd be very concerned for my brand new (three day old) grand-niece catching it. She has no anti-bodies against it and it could be life-threatening for her. With the flu, she might have anti-bodies against it (from her mother), but I'd still be concerned for the same reason.
Ebola terrifies me. I have no anti-bodies against it and it very easily can kill otherwise healthy adults. My best defense against ebola is to never be exposed to it. COVID-19 is not ebola. It lacks the killing mechanisms ebola (and diseases like it) has. It has the same effects and risks as a flu, and is more infections than a flu mostly because we lack anti-bodies against it, and nothing more.
All that to say, we ought to be concerned with protecting our immune-compromised citizens. They are the ones at risk. But that's always true, regardless of what the disease is. It truly confounds me that people are (on nothing more than the basis of press coverage) treating this "flu in all but name" as if it were the next smallpox.
The mortality rate of COVID-19 also varies with age and health: 100% of the fatalities, so far, have been over 60-ish, and a large fraction of those have been much older and already had serious health problems. That will change, as there nearly always are exceptions to any overall trend.
The mortality rate also varies, I suspect, with the quality of medical care available to the population involved.
I'm also not the least bit worried about the virus for my sake or my wife's, even though we're in that most-at risk age cohort: we're both healthy, have access to quality medical care, the odds are strongly in our favor even in our cohort, and no piss-ant molecule is going to kill our pale behinds. Full stop.
Eric Hines
Covid 19 is not the bio weapon. Just unmutated.
Also stay away from 5g fields.
https://www.exopolitics.org/is-the-coronavirus-linked-to-chinas-rollout-of-5g-and-biowarfare/
Here is a briefing.
Post a Comment