4 ms·

>It has killed a lot more people in China than a normal flu No it hasn't. I can't find good numbers for China, but 80,000 died of the flu in the US in 2018 and

>It has killed a lot more people in China than a normal flu No it hasn't. I can't find good numbers for China, but 80,000 died of the flu in the US in 2018 and china's population is about 4x higher. >SARS That's meaningless, SARS was contained without spreading to nearly as many people. It tells us nothing about the mortality rate, or the severity. >We have some idea. It's a bad one, at least. What I said was we have no idea if it's 20x as deadly. It's likely not 20x as deadly.

gnulinux 7y ago
> It's likely not 20x as deadly. How can you make this statement? A lot of papers claim mortality (accounted for asymptomatic patients) to be around 5% (100x worse than flu) and 1% (20x worse than flu). What evidence do you have that these papers don't?
- learc83 7y ago
  Show me these papers that accounted for asymptomatic patients. https://smw.ch/article/doi/smw.2020.20203 https://smw.ch/article/doi/smw.2020.20203 "The resulting number, however, does not represent the true case fatality rate and might be off by orders of magnitude. " "The true number of exposed cases affected in Wuhan may be vastly underestimated. With a focus on thousands of serious cases, mild or asymptomatic courses that possibly account for the bulk of the 2019-nCoV infections might remain largely unrecognized, in particular during the influenza season. Under-detection of mild or asymptomatic cases may be further fueled after further growth of the outbreak, as healthcare-facilities and testing capacities in Wuhan have reached their limits."
  - usaar333 7y ago
    Just look at Diamond Princess. 4 deaths out of 700 infected after testing everyone with many still not recovered. That's way deadlier than a regular flu. Are you also aware that seasonal flu doesn't completely take out medical systems? (see Wuhan)
    - learc83 7y ago
      1. 4/700 is less than half the 1% lower end number that people are freaking about about when they say 20x more deadly than the flu. 2. All 4 people who died were in their 80s. Cruise ships skew much older than the general population, so there is limited information to learn from this. 3. If every single person who had cold or flu symptoms panicked and went to the ER, it most certainly would overwhelm medical systems. 4. I never said this wasn't worse than the flu, just that it seems likely that it's not 20x as deadly.
      - gnulinux 7y ago
        Not saying you're wrong but 1. 4/700 is only the initial figure. Likely more people will die from cruise ship, COVID-19 takes about 2 weeks to develop severe pneumonia. 2. Since these patients are now not categorized as Diamond Princess, instead they're categorized under their countries' stats, likely we will never hear from them again in such an isolated fashion.
        learc83 7y ago
        1. Yes it's the figure as of right now. There have been hundreds of people sick for over 2 weeks, and hundreds more who are coming up on the 2 week mark. There may very well be more deaths or there may not be. But my point is that the Diamond princess isn't currently good supporting evidence for a 1% mortality rate in the general population. 2. I'm sure all of their names are out there, and someone will eventually put together a study once it's been long enough to know their outcomes.

gnulinux 7y ago

> It's likely not 20x as deadly. How can you make this statement? A lot of papers claim mortality (accounted for asymptomatic patients) to be around 5% (100x worse than flu) and 1% (20x worse than flu). What evidence do you have that these papers don't?

learc83 7y ago
Show me these papers that accounted for asymptomatic patients. https://smw.ch/article/doi/smw.2020.20203 https://smw.ch/article/doi/smw.2020.20203 "The resulting number, however, does not represent the true case fatality rate and might be off by orders of magnitude. " "The true number of exposed cases affected in Wuhan may be vastly underestimated. With a focus on thousands of serious cases, mild or asymptomatic courses that possibly account for the bulk of the 2019-nCoV infections might remain largely unrecognized, in particular during the influenza season. Under-detection of mild or asymptomatic cases may be further fueled after further growth of the outbreak, as healthcare-facilities and testing capacities in Wuhan have reached their limits."
- usaar333 7y ago
  Just look at Diamond Princess. 4 deaths out of 700 infected after testing everyone with many still not recovered. That's way deadlier than a regular flu. Are you also aware that seasonal flu doesn't completely take out medical systems? (see Wuhan)
  - learc83 7y ago
    1. 4/700 is less than half the 1% lower end number that people are freaking about about when they say 20x more deadly than the flu. 2. All 4 people who died were in their 80s. Cruise ships skew much older than the general population, so there is limited information to learn from this. 3. If every single person who had cold or flu symptoms panicked and went to the ER, it most certainly would overwhelm medical systems. 4. I never said this wasn't worse than the flu, just that it seems likely that it's not 20x as deadly.
    - gnulinux 7y ago
      Not saying you're wrong but 1. 4/700 is only the initial figure. Likely more people will die from cruise ship, COVID-19 takes about 2 weeks to develop severe pneumonia. 2. Since these patients are now not categorized as Diamond Princess, instead they're categorized under their countries' stats, likely we will never hear from them again in such an isolated fashion.
      - learc83 7y ago
        1. Yes it's the figure as of right now. There have been hundreds of people sick for over 2 weeks, and hundreds more who are coming up on the 2 week mark. There may very well be more deaths or there may not be. But my point is that the Diamond princess isn't currently good supporting evidence for a 1% mortality rate in the general population. 2. I'm sure all of their names are out there, and someone will eventually put together a study once it's been long enough to know their outcomes.