new coronavirus outbreak China, Korea, USA - mod warnings in OP (updated 24/02/20)

Mic 1972 · 10-02-2020 02:35PM

Drumpot wrote: »

20%? That sounds innacurate or at least a statistic that’s missing a lot of information.

Does anybody have a link to a website with general information like statistics on infected and deaths outside of China? I think it’s fair to say that the statistics from China are very likely not accurate.

That's far from inaccurate. The data is pulled from the daily update on Death, Recoveries and total infected. The stat was pulled today

Drumpot · 10-02-2020 02:37PM

wakka12 wrote: »

https://bnonews.com/index.php/2020/02/the-latest-coronavirus-cases/
Tracks Chinese and international
The sample size outside China is small with the majority of the cases being on a boat in Japan and confirmed within the last 48 hours

Only 1 death in 390 cases outside of China? Now wonder it’s not getting the kind of attention or concern a 2% virus would get. If or when those death rates increase, then we might see some real response. I guess it might be possibly if disease mutates or if death rates increase due to high numbers of infected and services being unable to look after them. That would explain why so few early infected have died (so far). Suppose time will tell.

CinemaGuy45 · 10-02-2020 02:37PM

Mic 1972 wrote: »

death rate = total death / (total death + recover)
you can't include to the calculation the "ongoing" people as we dont know if they are going to die or recover
So, the correct death rate so far is 20%

Be quiet will you nobody wants your common sense.

All we want is everybody is doomed or sure it will be all grand.:D:P

On a serious note 20% death rate sounds bloody nasty and the UK has 8 or 9 confirmed cases now it is on our doorstep.:(

Drumpot · 10-02-2020 02:37PM

Mic 1972 wrote: »

That's far from inaccurate. The data is pulled from the daily update on Death, Recoveries and total infected. The stat was pulled today

But it’s clearly not accurate, it doesn’t have all available information and as I said, China is an unreliable source. If that virus had a 20% kill rate the whole world would be shut down.

Stark · 10-02-2020 02:39PM

Takes longer to declare someone "recovered" than "dead" so the recovery rate is rising more slowly than the death rate. If you look at deaths vs confirmed cases, it's around 2%.

Drumpot · 10-02-2020 02:41PM

Stark wrote: »

Takes longer to declare someone "recovered" than "dead" so the recovery rate is rising more slowly than the death rate. If you look at deaths vs confirmed cases, it's around 2%.

Wouldn’t that suggest that the death rate will end up below 2% over time?

Seems to me like we are going to Have to wait a few weeks or months before we start getting an accurate picture of true mortality rates on this illness.

CinemaGuy45 · 10-02-2020 02:42PM

Stark wrote: »

Takes longer to declare someone "recovered" than "dead" so the recovery rate is rising more slowly than the death rate. If you look at deaths vs confirmed cases, it's around 2%.

To be honest I think it is way above 2% the Chinese Government is not known for its openness and honesty.

Nor is ours for that matter.

wakka12 · 10-02-2020 02:42PM

CinemaGuy45 wrote: »

Be quiet will you nobody wants your common sense.

All we want is everybody is doomed or sure it will be all grand.:D:P

On a serious note 20% death rate sounds bloody nasty and the UK has 8 or 9 confirmed cases now it is on our doorstep.:(

Its just not 20% though. If there were 40,000 cases of a 20% mortality rate virus going around and 8 cases in UK now, dont think youd be going to work today, or any of us, normal life worldwide would stop

tuxy · 10-02-2020 02:43PM

Look at how many people have a mild version compared to how many are critical.
Unless this is unlike any other virus that we have ever encountered the majority of the people will be on their way to recovery.

The people that die often do so within 10 days of being diagnosed, the people that will recover will take 3 - 4 weeks.
The recovery numbers are lagging way behind the death numbers.

This virus is barely even 2 months old yet.

Mic 1972 · 10-02-2020 02:44PM

wakka12 wrote: »

But it is never actually calculated that way because death and recovery take different amounts of time. Of course the best wya to assess it is to take a large sample of early infections and calculate the outcome of all of them. I'm sure that is how the figure of around 2% has been arrived at

you are correct about analisying a large sample, that is the correct way to calculate the death rate. The sample at the moment is still small. There are about 4500 people who either died or recovered and the break down is 1 in 5

the 2% however was calculated as below, and that's a useless stat unfortunately
Total death / Total infected = 2%

givyjoe · 10-02-2020 02:45PM

tuxy wrote: »

Look at how many people have a mild version compared to how many are critical.
Unless this is unlike any other virus that we have ever encountered the majority of the people will be on their way to recovery.

The people that die often do so within 10 days of being diagnosed, the people that will recover will take 3 - 4 weeks.
The recovery numbers are lagging way behind the death numbers.

This virus is note even 1 month old yet.

It's over 2 months since the outbreak started. The wide scale tracking is lagging behind though.

tuxy · 10-02-2020 02:46PM

givyjoe wrote: »

It's over 2 months since the outbreak started. The wide scale tracking is lagging behind though.

Yes edited, that was a mistake but I think the point still holds.

wakka12 · 10-02-2020 02:47PM

tuxy wrote: »

Look at how many people have a mild version compared to how many are critical.
Unless this is unlike any other virus that we have ever encountered the majority of the people will be on their way to recovery.

The people that die often do so within 10 days of being diagnosed, the people that will recover will take 3 - 4 weeks.
The recovery numbers are lagging way behind the death numbers.

This virus is barely even 2 months old yet.

It was never in question whether 'we will all survive', it is how does worldwide health infrastructure potentially deal with a large percentage of it's population being hospitalised simultaneously in a pandemic scenario. The answer is not good, as you see in Wuhan. The scenario is unlike anything in encountered for a long time, hence the reactions worldwide from governements. There are way more recovered than seriously ill but up to 15% of patients experiencing severely compromised health is extremely significant

Drumpot · 10-02-2020 02:49PM

Mic 1972 wrote: »

you are correct about analisying a large sample, that is the correct way to calculate the death rate. The sample at the moment is still small. There are about 4500 people who either died or recovered and the break down is 1 in 5

the 2% however was calculated as below, and that's a useless stat unfortunately
Total death / Total infected = 2%

You need to also factor in information , how accurate is China’s information?

Then there is also a question of how much does governmental response , environment (weather, smog etc) and cultural (families/community’s closer) differences affect transmission. And of course medical access, how has this effected survival rates in China?

I really think every information discussed and quoted should have massive caveats. As I said, I think when we see how this affects people in comparable countries , only then can we be confident on these numbers. Mass numbers being infected is possibly a bigger issue then catching the virus itself.

Mic 1972 · 10-02-2020 02:49PM

this is the link where I get the data, it's updated a couple of times per day
(UK new cases are still not showing)

https://gisanddata.maps.arcgis.com/apps/opsdashboard/index.html#/bda7594740fd40299423467b48e9ecf6

Mic 1972 · 10-02-2020 02:52PM

Drumpot wrote: »

You need to also factor in information , how accurate is China’s information?

Then there is also a question of how much does governmental response , environment (weather, smog etc) and cultural (families/community’s closer) differences affect transmission. And of course medical access, how has this effected survival rates in China?

I really think every information discussed and quoted should have massive caveats. As I said, I think when we see how this affects people in comparable countries , only then can we be confident on these numbers.

As of now we have data to know that the death rate is nowhere near 2%

Unearthly · 10-02-2020 02:53PM

I see the people on the cruise ship will be provided a full refund + a credit to take another cruise ship in the next 12 months :pac:

CinemaGuy45 · 10-02-2020 02:54PM

OK 20% sounds extreme however 2% seems to be downplaying things.

I don't know the real death rate but those videos coming out of China look like they come straight out of a zombie movie.

I have seen loads of people with this collapse the flu does not do this.

Time will tell.

marvin80 · 10-02-2020 03:00PM

CinemaGuy45 wrote: »

I don't know the real death rate but those videos coming out of China look like they come straight out of a zombie movie.

Please read this:

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-51429400

tuxy · 10-02-2020 03:01PM

Unearthly wrote: »

I see the people on the cruise ship will be provided a full refund + a credit to take another cruise ship in the next 12 months :pac:

The British couple on channel 4 had already said they plan to take the other cruises they have booked so they will be happy.

Drumpot · 10-02-2020 03:01PM

Mic 1972 wrote: »

As of now we have data to know that the death rate is nowhere near 2%

CinemaGuy45 wrote: »

OK 20% sounds extreme however 2% seems to be downplaying things.

I don't know the real death rate but those videos coming out of China look like they come straight out of a zombie movie.

I have seen loads of people with this collapse the flu does not do this.

Time will tell.

The only accurate statement is that we really don’t know for sure.

I think the pictures of panic and society breaking down is exactly what I would expect. It’s not clear how much is being communicated to it’s population.

I rememeber when sept 11 happened and at the time everybody was panicking. Was it a new world war? Was it China? Wtf was going on.... The lack of information was leading to all sorts of crazy stuff.

We aren’t programmed to deal with these sort of incidents. Most of us go along thinking we’ve got everything sorted. Feel sick, goto doctor or hospital. Need money, work and get loans. Need food, goto shops. Nature is an after thought if even an thought at all. How we abuse our environment is a testament to that.,

When something unplanned happens (like a virus) I would suggest panic is one of our greatest threats. People turning on each other and not trusting one another. What’s probably upsetting about these Chinese pictures and stories is that unlike war torn countries, this could very well happen to us if we don’t manage it correctly. That’s what frightening, more so then the virus itself (at this early stage)

Scrabbles38 · 10-02-2020 03:04PM

Mic 1972 wrote: »

you are correct about analisying a large sample, that is the correct way to calculate the death rate. The sample at the moment is still small. There are about 4500 people who either died or recovered and the break down is 1 in 5

the 2% however was calculated as below, and that's a useless stat unfortunately
Total death / Total infected = 2%

If it is 20% like you say than we should be seeing this in cases outside of China by now... it my not be 2% but it’s not 20%.. it might even be lower

fritzelly · 10-02-2020 03:05PM

If this turns out positive along with the doctors surgery the UK could be in serious trouble

https://www.dailyecho.co.uk/news/18224218.st-marys-independent-school-southampton-closed-evacuated-coronavirus-fears/?Ref=fbpg

CinemaGuy45 · 10-02-2020 03:07PM

marvin80 wrote: »

Please read this:

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-51429400

I did read it and I do agree there is a lot of bull going around, however,.

We cannot trust China to be honest.

Even if death rates are about 2% this thing looks nasty more than a flu.

Mic 1972 · 10-02-2020 03:08PM

Personally i only trust the actual data that is published, anyone can make up a % rate but i like to know how that was calculated before i take it seriously. One thing is panic, another thing is being accurate

wakka12 · 10-02-2020 03:09PM

Drumpot wrote: »

Wouldn’t that suggest that the death rate will end up below 2% over time?

Seems to me like we are going to Have to wait a few weeks or months before we start getting an accurate picture of true mortality rates on this illness.

Not really, unless there are a lot of unrecorded cases . Even if 100% of the remaining confirmed cases recovered the mortality rate would stay at 2.2%

wakka12 · 10-02-2020 03:11PM

Scrabbles38 wrote: »

If it is 20% like you say than we should be seeing this in cases outside of China by now... it my not be 2% but it’s not 20%.. it might even be lower

But then there are real life variables that affect that mortality rate. In chinese cities where there a lot of cases, the mortality rate is 4-5% due to hospitals being overwhelmed. Patients outside China are tiny in number, and receieve adequate care

SeaBreezes · 10-02-2020 03:11PM

wakka12 wrote: »

Its just not 20% though. If there were 40,000 cases of a 20% mortality rate virus going around and 8 cases in UK now, dont think youd be going to work today, or any of us, normal life worldwide would stop

Life DID stop in Many cities in China....

And mic is right, the actual time lag from infection to death or recovery is min 3 weeks. SARS when it was happening had a death rate of 2% it was only after, when actual numbers were gathered the 10% figure was realised.

That said there may be many many mild cases not presenting at hospital at all.
It's the cases that get to hospital (and are tested) have a 20% fatality rate.

So, watching the cases in Singapore, Germany and UK with interest as we will get more accurate idea of stats. And hoping it is just a flu for all concerned

Mic 1972 · 10-02-2020 03:12PM

Scrabbles38 wrote: »

If it is 20% like you say than we should be seeing this in cases outside of China by now... it my not be 2% but it’s not 20%.. it might even be lower

Ok, for the 2% to become even lower the assumption to make is for more people to get infected and no one out of the total currently infected are going to die. That's the most unrealistic scenario

For the 20% to become a more accurate stat we would need to analyses a specific sample of people who all got infected at the same time and have now either died or survived, This % may or may not be lower than 20%

ceadaoin. · 10-02-2020 03:16PM

Today a student from china is spending 2 weeks in my daughters class. The school have implemented a policy that anyone who has been in China within the past 2 weeks can not come to school. Am I being a dick if I double check that this is actually the case with this child? I mean, I know the chances that this one person from a population of a billion is infected but I cant help but worry.

new coronavirus outbreak China, Korea, USA - mod warnings in OP (updated 24/02/20)

Comments