AntonStratiev

6 ms·

1.
by AntonStratiev 7y ago
And the survival rate is only 3% to 20% for COVID-19 specifically, based on data from Wuhan, following patients for a month. Long-term mortality will be even less. https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article&
2.
by AntonStratiev 7y ago
https://twitter.com/NAChristakis/status/1240689935557865472 Details a study on a different Coronavirus in 1990. There is definitely some immunity, but its complicated.
3.
by AntonStratiev 7y ago
We can take the age profile of Venezuela[1] and the estimated hospital rates and general virus profile from the Imperial College report[2]. Assume 80% infection, and assuming that 100% of people who would have needed hospitalization die. Th
4.
by AntonStratiev 7y ago
Based on data from China, 97% of the people who need ventilators will die anyway: https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6... The Ventilator just keeps them alive for a few days, but there
5.
by AntonStratiev 7y ago
The people who are going to die are already in very poor health. The median age of deaths in Italy is 80 from yesterday's data. [1] Previously it has been communicated that 99% of deaths are to people with existing health problems. ht
6.
by AntonStratiev 7y ago
We should be building palliative care centres across the country, not pop-up hospitals. Pay everyone who contracts Coronavirus in the next 4 months and is refused ICU care, $100,000. If they die, the amount is divided between their survivin
7.
by AntonStratiev 7y ago
There is no need to imagine, we have the forecasts from the Imperial College report: https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imperial-college/medicine/s... There are 40 million 40-somethings in the USA, you're
8.
by AntonStratiev 7y ago
I meant to say 'fatal cases' and have corrected the text. Thanks for pointing it out.
9.
by AntonStratiev 7y ago
Its simpler than that, if we're brutally honest and scientific: the developed world had accumulated, through extensive use of modern medicine and redistributive welfare schemes, a large population of people who were kept alive solely b
10.
by AntonStratiev 7y ago
Focusing on positive or negative is the wrong focus, we need to test for immunity. Those who are immune can contract the virus again in a year, but will do so without symptoms, according to older studies for similar viruses. And most import
11.
by AntonStratiev 7y ago
Vaccine estimate is 18 months according to the Imperial College: https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imperial-college/medicine/s... Vaccines in human trials in the US now need to go through a 14 month observatio
12.
by AntonStratiev 7y ago
500,000 people with an average age of 79, the vast majority of whom are in poor health with existing conditions. This is what the data from Italy shows. Coronavirus is just the last nail in the coffin - it brings forward the deaths that wou
13.
by AntonStratiev 7y ago
What does a pound or a dollar even represent anymore? They are being printed and given out with little consideration to the impact. I think we are going to see hyperinflation at some point, particularly if this is dragged on for the 18 mont
14.
by AntonStratiev 7y ago
Has anyone calculated the value of life that we are saving here? The Imperial College report had 510,000 dying in the UK under a no-action scenario. Average age lets say 79 as the virus progresses. 510,000 * (82.5-79) * GBP 30,000 (QALY for
15.
by AntonStratiev 7y ago
Our national priority needs to be on testing for people who have developed an immunity: https://twitter.com/NAChristakis/status/1240689935557865472 Who can then go on and socialise and operate the economy as usual
16.
by AntonStratiev 7y ago
Introducing social distancing for the entire population comes at huge economic and social cost. It is more effective to follow these three simple measures: 1. Symptomatic cases stay at home for 7 days 2. All household members of symptomatic
17.
by AntonStratiev 7y ago
There is no indication that 5% of the population will die. The Imperial College report finds that in a complete do-nothing scenario, 4 million Americans will die, which is only 1.2% of the population. With some mitigation (isolation of the
18.
by AntonStratiev 7y ago
That would only be the case for 3 months, after which those who were most vulnerable to the virus would have perished. 2.8m Americans die annually, basically we are just seeing 1-2 years of deaths brought forward into a 3 month window. It w
19.
by AntonStratiev 7y ago
No but I am in the tens of millions of Americans who will lose their job and go bankrupt if things continue this way. I could sell my possessions and move back with my elderly parents (ironically exposing them even more to the virus). Suici
20.
by AntonStratiev 7y ago
The Imperial College report: https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imperial-college/medicine/s... Full suppression will require total shutdown for ~18 months. Mitigation, specifically requiring the sick and elderl
21.
by AntonStratiev 7y ago
We need to just accept 2-4 million sick and elderly Americans dying. That outcome cannot be any worse than complete economic and social destruction that we seem to be pursuing in the name of virus suppression. Edit: I am specifically referr