3 ms·

The thing I don't get is this explains how people didn't get sick. What it doesn't explain is how so many got better after getting sick compared to other count

The thing I don't get is this explains how people didn't get sick. What it doesn't explain is how so many got better after getting sick compared to other countries.

greedo 7y ago
Well, their CFR is currently around 2%. I tend to think this will be roughly the best that can be achieved considering their investment in both T&T as well as an excellent healthcare system. If you are effective at preventing the spread, then you can get lucky in terms of protecting the more vulnerable. I'd love to see some demographic breakdowns of deaths/infections in SK to see if they mirror the general population, or skew a different direction.
seunosewa 7y ago
Their health system didn’t get overwhelmed. Thus they could provide every patient with the best care.
joe_the_user 7y ago
The fatality rate of countries with active epidemics is skewed by a variety of factors: - With exponential growth, most cases will new and so not become potentially lethal. This can lower the observed fatality rate (I think this explained Germany's original "great" rate which doesn't look at great any more). - With cases rising quickly, most countries don't have infrastructure or the time to increase testing (US testing is failing on multiple levels but even France, Spain and Italy are just overwhelmed with the sick and testing is less important). - With cases rising quickly, the fatality rate increases as hospitals are no longer able to provide adequate care. - Different countries have different age-profiles and the disease hits the elderly harder (but once hospitals break down, the odds for the young decrease). South Korea's fatality rate is similar to the ostensible fatality rate of Turkey and Luxembourg but likely for different rate. We probably won't have a complete idea what's happened until these events are done.

3 ms·

The thing I don't get is this explains how people didn't get sick. What it doesn't explain is how so many got better after getting sick compared to other count

by narrator 7y ago

The thing I don't get is this explains how people didn't get sick. What it doesn't explain is how so many got better after getting sick compared to other countries.

greedo 7y ago
Well, their CFR is currently around 2%. I tend to think this will be roughly the best that can be achieved considering their investment in both T&T as well as an excellent healthcare system. If you are effective at preventing the spread, then you can get lucky in terms of protecting the more vulnerable. I'd love to see some demographic breakdowns of deaths/infections in SK to see if they mirror the general population, or skew a different direction.
seunosewa 7y ago
Their health system didn’t get overwhelmed. Thus they could provide every patient with the best care.
joe_the_user 7y ago
The fatality rate of countries with active epidemics is skewed by a variety of factors: - With exponential growth, most cases will new and so not become potentially lethal. This can lower the observed fatality rate (I think this explained Germany's original "great" rate which doesn't look at great any more). - With cases rising quickly, most countries don't have infrastructure or the time to increase testing (US testing is failing on multiple levels but even France, Spain and Italy are just overwhelmed with the sick and testing is less important). - With cases rising quickly, the fatality rate increases as hospitals are no longer able to provide adequate care. - Different countries have different age-profiles and the disease hits the elderly harder (but once hospitals break down, the odds for the young decrease). South Korea's fatality rate is similar to the ostensible fatality rate of Turkey and Luxembourg but likely for different rate. We probably won't have a complete idea what's happened until these events are done.