4 ms·

"while nCoV rates are still TBD we're probably looking at an upper bound closer to half a percent, or 3-4 order of magnitude lower" This is incredible. Not onl

"while nCoV rates are still TBD we're probably looking at an upper bound closer to half a percent, or 3-4 order of magnitude lower" This is incredible. Not only do you start with an "upper bound" less than one-half the accepted value, you then toss in a "3-4 order of magnitude" reduction, which is so fantastically impossible that there has clearly been zero actual thought. Just rhetoric. Elon Musk, is that you? Actual medial professionals are seeing that even tiny spread in a community the healthcare system becomes absolutely overwhelmed. Hence all of the emergency declarations. The Internet intelligentsia would like us all to believe that millions are walking around with it, and the fact that you can trace individual branches and the horrifying results is just a remarkable coincidence happening throughout the globe. No, this isn't the plague. At the same time anyone who seriously compares this virus to the cold has started in a completely broken, intellectually dishonest and dangerous place. Add that to the silly claims about death rates... As to investment opportunities, this is an incredibly lazy, zero-value observation -- yes, in the future the market will grow. Nobody thinks otherwise. But right now the market has lost some 35% off a frothy, already-in-danger high, and ahead of us are heroic government responses and a lot of economic disruption. But yeah, at some point it's going to hit bottom, and if someone is willing to churn on limited returns for a while it'll eventually pay off. You could say that in every downturn throughout history.

arcticbull 7y ago
> This is incredible. Not only do you start with an "upper bound" less than one-half the accepted value, you then toss in a "3-4 order of magnitude" reduction, which is so fantastically impossible that there has clearly been zero actual thought. Just rhetoric. Elon Musk, is that you? 3-4 orders of magnitude lower than the plague which has an upper bound fatality of 100%. That's not controversial. 3-4 order of magnitude lower than 100% is 0.01 to 0.9%, a range very much in line with your suggestion and that of health officials.
- endorphone 7y ago
  My mistake. I misinterpreted the wording as being a modifier of the range on SARS-CoV-2. The rest of my comment stands. Though 0.5% is 2 order of magnitude less than 50%. Not to mention that the plague had a mortality rate between 1 - 15%...
  - arcticbull 7y ago
    Wikipedia puts bubonic plague at 30-90% if untreated and 10% with treatment [1] and septicemic plague at 100% [2] when untreated. You really don't want a Yersinia pestis infection. I think that's a fair comparison as at this point we don't have a treatment for COVID-19. It's not clear to what extent hydroxychloroquin kills SARS-COV-2 vs. modulating the immune system and preventing cytokine storm. I do understand your point, and I could have been more clear. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bubonic_plague https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bubonic_plague [2] https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/rxforsurvival/series/diseases/plague.html https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/rxforsurvival/series/diseases/plagu...

arcticbull 7y ago

> This is incredible. Not only do you start with an "upper bound" less than one-half the accepted value, you then toss in a "3-4 order of magnitude" reduction, which is so fantastically impossible that there has clearly been zero actual thought. Just rhetoric. Elon Musk, is that you? 3-4 orders of magnitude lower than the plague which has an upper bound fatality of 100%. That's not controversial. 3-4 order of magnitude lower than 100% is 0.01 to 0.9%, a range very much in line with your suggestion and that of health officials.

endorphone 7y ago
My mistake. I misinterpreted the wording as being a modifier of the range on SARS-CoV-2. The rest of my comment stands. Though 0.5% is 2 order of magnitude less than 50%. Not to mention that the plague had a mortality rate between 1 - 15%...
- arcticbull 7y ago
  Wikipedia puts bubonic plague at 30-90% if untreated and 10% with treatment [1] and septicemic plague at 100% [2] when untreated. You really don't want a Yersinia pestis infection. I think that's a fair comparison as at this point we don't have a treatment for COVID-19. It's not clear to what extent hydroxychloroquin kills SARS-COV-2 vs. modulating the immune system and preventing cytokine storm. I do understand your point, and I could have been more clear. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bubonic_plague https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bubonic_plague [2] https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/rxforsurvival/series/diseases/plague.html https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/rxforsurvival/series/diseases/plagu...