4 ms·
> I think you're putting words in his mouth... again, you put words in his mouth as well. FYI I am totally different person to jacobolus, who made the origina
by tristanj 7y ago
> I think you're putting words in his mouth... again, you put words in his mouth as well.
FYI I am totally different person to jacobolus, who made the original post you responded to. I'm not the one putting words in people's mouth. I don't totally agree with jacobolus's statement, I think the final numbers will be lower [0], but I do believe there's merit to his claim and am more than happy to respond and provide sources.
> Re: Leung
Leung has made further statements, suggesting that billions could be infected. For example, in this recent interview, he stated: https://www.news.com.au/technology/public-health-expert-warns-coronavirus-could-infect-60-per-cent-of-world-population/news-story/d71b9792e47df37d44df03bbb8b3f8e3 https://www.news.com.au/technology/public-health-expert-warn...
“Everybody is susceptible. If you assume that everybody randomly mix with each other, then eventually you will see 40, 50, 60 per cent of the population get infected.”
> Lipsitch's comment in your own link begins with "if a pandemic happens"
That's a moot point. Lipsitch is saying we're already in a pandemic, under almost any reasonable definition of pandemic. https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-00551-1 https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-00551-1
I think you'd have a better line of argument if you pointed out that neither of the two explicitly stated "millions if not tens of millions" of people will die. I'll conceded that's true, I haven't yet seen a top epidemiologist explicitly state so. However if you take one of the lower estimates of the death rate (0.5%), and apply it to their infection estimates, you'll get millions dead. If the WHO's official 3.4% CFR announced a couple days ago holds or increases, we'll see tens of millions dead.
[0] Once enough people have died (tens of thousands), countries will get their act together and start doing proper quarantines, social distancing, and hygienic controls.
- masonic 7y agoBut "everybody randomly mix with each other" means everybody within an infected locale, not everyone on the planet. As far as we know, it can only be transmitted by contact (including surfaces), only while the virus is active, and only from an infected person while communicable. A huge portion of world population outside of the First World won't even be "in range." Its spread has been very constrained given that it was in the wild for months with most people taking no special precautions whatsoever. Look how ridiculously transmissible measles is, yet it took centuries to get to some highly populated regions.
- gremlinsinc 7y agoI've heard it may be airborn --i.e. be able to survive minutes or longer free-floating in the air after someone coughs. It also can survive pretty long on surfaces, I heard > 9 hours even. So you touch a pole on a subway car, and for 9 hours others are sharing the infection with you.
- masonic 7y agoI've heard it may be airborne I haven't heard a single credible claim to that effect from any researcher. It's not like measles.
- mygo 7y agoAll of the factors you mentioned play into its R0, and yet it is still orders of magnitude more infectious and deadly than SARS was this number of days after outbreak. Also, centuries ago this global phenomenon wasn’t a thing: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oR00_uLfGVE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oR00_uLfGVE
- masonic 7y agothis number of days after outbreak The trick is having trustworthy timelines in the first place.