4 ms·
> The virus has a ≈15% critical illness rate[1]. This is completely implausible.
by jsight 7y ago
> The virus has a ≈15% critical illness rate[1].
This is completely implausible.
- empath75 7y agoWhy do you say that? That’s what all the reporting says. That’s why the health care systems were overwhelmed.
- jennyyang 7y agoNot at all. The number of serious/critical outside of China are about 3% and mostly elderly people.
- jsight 7y agoWe are seeing a lot of cases that are only being discovered after the patient has had symptoms for some period of time. It seems like a number of these cases have been mild enough that a lot of people would not have even sought care. The idea that 1/6 cases are "critical" just doesn't align with this reality.
- tristanj 7y agoA 15% critical rate is very plausible. A widely shared report [1] on Chinese media described how an entire family died to virus. A man, his sister, mother, and father all died to the coronavirus. His wife is in serious condition. Using the reported death rates posted above, the odds of this happening are 1.3% * 1.3% * 8% * 8% = 1/924556. That's nearly 1 in a million. I concede that the medical system in Wuhan was overwhelmed, and these 5 patients did not have access to medical care. [1] https://www.caixinglobal.com/2020-02-17/four-deaths-in-one-family-show-danger-of-wuhans-home-quarantine-policy-101516690.html https://www.caixinglobal.com/2020-02-17/four-deaths-in-one-f...
- username90 7y agoNo it is not, Diamond Princess is the only controlled environment we have and it didn't have even close to 15% critical rate.
- jsight 7y agoExactly... also see this report: https://twitter.com/balajis/status/1232797151941611520 https://twitter.com/balajis/status/1232797151941611520 The situation is horrible, but look at the hospital workers rate of infection vs mortality. Even horrible things can still be made to look more horrible.