Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

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

1…211212214216217…331

Comments

  • #6392
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 9,005 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Mic 1972 wrote: »
    explain your "healthcare" logic then
    I know where the 2% comes from and it does not not represent your chances of survival were you unfortunate enough to get the virus

    You are basing that 2% off total confirmed cases/deaths. The majority of cases will be self isolating/mild so won't be confirmed. You usually only end up in hospital if you have complications. Think of that 2% as a maximum and also take into fact that the Wuhan region is overwhelmed at the moment.


  • #6393
    SeaBreezes
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,554 ✭✭✭SeaBreezes


    TomSweeney wrote: »

    God love her, she will disappear next. Though I was thinking the people will never forgive the CCP for this.


  • #6394
    Mic 1972
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,213 ✭✭✭Mic 1972


    Deleted User wrote: »
    You are basing that 2% off total confirmed cases/deaths. The majority of cases will be self isolating/mild so won't be confirmed. You usually only end up in hospital if you have complications. Think of that 2% as a maximum and also take into fact that the Wuhan region is overwhelmed at the moment.


    That's not how stats work. A figure is the result of a specific calculation
    "the majority of cases.." is an assumption

    You could also assume that a lot of people with complications didn't go to hospital, equally random and unusable for calculation prurpose


  • #6395
    igCorcaigh
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 12,571 Mod ✭✭✭✭igCorcaigh


    TomSweeney wrote: »

    Wow, that was heartfelt.

    I wonder could this situation trigger revolt in China.

    2020 is turning out to be some year.


  • #6396
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 9,005 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    In reality. The most concerning feature of the Covid-19 is the ability to cause long term organ damage. It's not really a feature of influenza.


  • Advertisement
  • #6397
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 9,005 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    igCorcaigh wrote: »
    Wow, that was heartfelt.

    I wonder could this situation trigger revolt in China.

    2020 is turning out to be some year.

    I imagine the US will leverage this for as much as they can.


  • #6398
    igCorcaigh
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 12,571 Mod ✭✭✭✭igCorcaigh


    [Deleted User] wrote: »
    In reality. The most concerning feature of the Covid-19 is the ability to cause long term organ damage. It's not really a feature of influenza.

    That's true, it really has its own characteristics.

    Is organ damage caused by low blood oxygen or by the virus itself?


  • #6399
    SeaBreezes
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,554 ✭✭✭SeaBreezes


    Deleted User wrote: »
    You are basing that 2% off total confirmed cases/deaths. The majority of cases will be self isolating/mild so won't be confirmed. You usually only end up in hospital if you have complications. Think of that 2% as a maximum and also take into fact that the Wuhan region is overwhelmed at the moment.

    Your assuming your stats.

    Even though it's against the law to self isolate people are staying home?

    (Though I would to be honest if in the same situation)

    I keep thinking of that poor lady on the balcony crying my husband is dying, please I don't want to bother anyone, but can anyone help? Christ. What a situation to be in. But it's just the flu....


  • #6400
    Mic 1972
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,213 ✭✭✭Mic 1972


    Pneumonia causes lung damage, not Covid-19
    People in critical condition spend weeks on strong meds attached to a machine while their bodies are fighting against the virus, that may also be the reason for heart failure


  • #6401
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 9,005 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    SeaBreezes wrote: »
    Your assuming your stats.

    Even though it's against the law to self isolate people are staying home?

    (Though I would to be honest if in the same situation)

    I keep thinking of that poor lady on the balcony crying my husband is dying, please I don't want to bother anyone, but can anyone help? Christ. What a situation to be in. But it's just the flu....
    I'm using my clinical judgement. The stats aren't there to confirm one way or the other (at the moment) but clinically, the above 2% death rate seems very unlikely.


  • Advertisement
  • #6402
    wakka12
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,786 ✭✭✭wakka12


    Deleted User wrote: »
    You are basing that 2% off total confirmed cases/deaths. The majority of cases will be self isolating/mild so won't be confirmed. You usually only end up in hospital if you have complications. Think of that 2% as a maximum and also take into fact that the Wuhan region is overwhelmed at the moment.

    Thats not necessarily true. In China you can now face imprisonment or legal punishment for not admitting yourself to a hospital after developing flu symptoms.You must also show and ID and have your identity recorded when buying any medication from pharmacies. Why would anyone take that risk? I would imagine at the beginning a lot of mild cases went unconfirmed, but not any longer.

    Anyway, the mortality rate is higher than 2% in Wuhan, I think it is about 3-4%. In Hubei province outside Wuhan it is 2.7%.Outside of Hubei, in the rest of China, it is 0.5%, the often cited 2 % is just the average of them all. Internationally it is 0.4% and it is interesting that it falls in line with mainland China, an area experiencing cases but similarly to international situations, their hospitals not being overwhelmed like Hubei, but the sample is really just too small still.


  • #6403
    Charles Babbage
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,555 ✭✭✭Charles Babbage


    wakka12 wrote: »
    China is not a poor country, at all, nor Singapore where many of the measures mentioned have occurred.

    Singapore has not quarantined large areas, but has restricted public events and traced contacts of those involved.


  • #6404
    4068ac1elhodqr
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,586 ✭✭✭4068ac1elhodqr


    Mic 1972 wrote: »
    Pneumonia causes lung damage, not Covid-19
    People in critical condition spend weeks on strong meds attached to a machine while their bodies are fighting against the virus, that may also be the reason for heart failure
    Some medic was saying the strong meds can weaken the heart, thus if caught again for a 2nd time (after 14days antibodies, or wave mutation) not long after the 1st, heart failure can be a factor.

    The single most important preventative advice would be to never ever smoke, go easy on junk food, and live a healthy active life.

    There are dietary/nutritional (and other) methods of increasing or preparing the immune system, but could be here all day, it would need a seperate thread.


  • #6405
    Mic 1972
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,213 ✭✭✭Mic 1972


    wakka12 wrote: »
    Thats not necessarily true. In China you can now face imprisonment or legal punishment for not admitting yourself to a hospital after developing flu symptoms.You must also show and ID and have your identity recorded when buying any medication from pharmacies. Why would anyone take that risk? I would imagine at the beginning a lot of mild cases went unconfirmed, but not any longer.

    Anyway, the mortality rate is higher than 2% in Wuhan. Outside of Hubei, in the rest of China, it is 0.5%, the often cited 2 % is just the average of them both.


    2% is based on a sample that contains 85% of cases still without outcome, it means nothing


  • #6406
    gozunda
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,996 ✭✭✭✭gozunda


    Catmaniac wrote:
    Our elderly deserve to be protected, they too have lives to get on with.

    They certainly do. Sorry to hear about your Mam btw.

    To often older people are not given the determination that they should be given with regard to their own lives and / or healthcare.

    As to Pneumonia- I have been hospitalised with this and ended up in isolation with medical staff in full PPE (The hospital wasn't sure at the beginning what I had gone down with). I've had Pleurisy and at least 2 serious doses of influenza. So I have great respect for those who have suffered these types of conditions or similar. I've also heard of pneumonia being described as the old persons friend - meaning that it will sometimes take older people who are longterm sick or unwell. The problem with that is that people dont get to make the choice whether they would wish for that option or otherwise. Not an infection I'd wish on anyone tbh.


  • #6407
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 13,842 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Cabin fever has well and truly set in with the posters in this thread. This is the practice run, folks. Get it together!

    Today I have made chicken curry and Aloo Gobi. All portioned and in the freezer. Don’t know whether to go Middle Eastern or Italian cuisine tomorrow.


  • #6408
    4068ac1elhodqr
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,586 ✭✭✭4068ac1elhodqr


    2% has been widely mentioned and accepted as the fatality rate, even if it's lower at 1%, that's still 'tenfold' any regular Inf A/B type of flu.

    Likey too early to say for sure, the boat with 185circa confirmed cases would make an ideal study.


  • #6409
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 9,005 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Mic 1972 wrote: »
    2% is based on a sample that contains 85% of cases still without outcome, it means nothing

    Exactly. It's way over-estimated.


  • #6410
    Mic 1972
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,213 ✭✭✭Mic 1972


    Legacy Better Explosion wrote: »
    2% has been widely mentioned and accepted as the fatality rate, even if it's lower at 1%, that's still 'tenfold' any regular Inf A/B type of flu.

    Likey too early to say for sure, the boat with 185circa confirmed cases would make an ideal study.


    2% is total deaths / total cases (including people still sick)
    it's a widely useless figure, i cant say that enough


  • #6411
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 9,005 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Legacy Better Explosion wrote: »
    2% has been widely mentioned and accepted as the fatality rate, even if it's lower at 1%, that's still 'tenfold' any regular Inf A/B type of flu.

    Likey too early to say for sure, the boat with 185circa confirmed cases would make an ideal study.
    It's not accepted. We don't have enough data to go on yet


  • Advertisement
  • #6412
    Mic 1972
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,213 ✭✭✭Mic 1972


    Deleted User wrote: »
    Exactly. It's way over-estimated.


    again, you need to do the math
    Deaths increase, total cases stay the same (in a correct calculation), as a result the death rate will increase and will show the correct mortality rate


  • #6413
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 9,005 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Mic 1972 wrote: »
    2% is total deaths / total cases (including people still sick)
    it's a widely useless figure, i cant say that enough

    So you reckon it's going to be higher? Say..... 9%?


  • #6414
    odyssey06
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 36,211 ✭✭✭✭odyssey06


    Even if the death rate is 2%, we don't even know that that is 2% of, as we don't know how many people will get infected...

    We're spinning our wheels on ice folks... the data is too dodgy \ too many gaps to draw any firm conclusions.
    The key question for me is whether enough critical cases will be caused by the virus to overwhelm the medical capacity to treat them - which seems to be what's happening in Wuhan.

    "To follow knowledge like a sinking star..." (Tennyson's Ulysses)



  • #6415
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 9,005 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Mic 1972 wrote: »
    again, you need to do the math
    Deaths increase, total cases stay the same (in a correct calculation), as a result the death rate will increase and will show the correct mortality rate

    What is a correct calculation? One that is convenient to your belief of the truth? In two months time, I'm 99.9% certain the mortality rate will be less than 2%. Fancy a charity bet? 100 euros? Say 3 months time if it's more than 2% I'd give the money to MSF, if it's below. You do.With your belief in the "business analyst" side of things. It should be an easy win for you.


  • #6416
    4068ac1elhodqr
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,586 ✭✭✭4068ac1elhodqr


    Mic 1972 wrote: »
    2% is total deaths / total cases (including people still sick)
    it's a widely useless figure, i cant say that enough

    It's also the best 'theoretical' figure available, at this early stage, for a virus with no vaccine or prevention available.

    Yes it will adjust over time (time+data=accuracy). But for the time being the global media and organisations (wisely perhaps) are running with the 1-2% figure.

    If you have firm, conclusive evidence otherwise, sure lash out an aul email to the bossman/lady at [email]info@who/odc/ecdh/nch/dxy.org[/email] etc they'll likely be on the edge of their seats waiting for such an email. Use uppercase, and an inverted smilie face emoticon, so it won't go to the spam folder.


  • #6417
    SeaBreezes
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,554 ✭✭✭SeaBreezes


    Deleted User wrote: »
    I'm using my clinical judgement. The stats aren't there to confirm one way or the other (at the moment) but clinically, the above 2% death rate seems very unlikely.

    Clinically, this is a new virus. Never seen before. Confounding those on the front line. (As previously quoted which you referred to) clinically you may be judging this against your assessment of the flu, or SARS. It is neither.


  • #6418
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 9,005 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    SeaBreezes wrote: »
    Clinically, this is a new virus. Never seen before. Confounding those on the front line. (As previously quoted which you referred to) clinically you may be judging this against your assessment of the flu, or SARS. It is neither.

    Whilst it is a new virus. It is still a coronavirus which have been widely studied. So they can be educated messages made alongside known epidemiology of the coronavirus's in general.


  • #6419
    fritzelly
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,185 ✭✭✭✭fritzelly


    Getting sick of post after post after post about the death rate - what's it matter, it's more than flu


  • #6420
    Scrabbles38
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 29 ✭Scrabbles38


    Mic 1972 wrote: »
    2% is total deaths / total cases (including people still sick)
    it's a widely useless figure, i cant say that enough

    Your figures are as useless... last week it was a 20% mortality rate you where throwing around..


  • Advertisement
  • #6421
    SeaBreezes
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,554 ✭✭✭SeaBreezes


    Deleted User wrote: »
    What is a correct calculation? One that is convenient to your belief of the truth? In two months time, I'm 99.9% certain the mortality rate will be less than 2%. Fancy a charity bet? 100 euros? Say 3 months time if it's more than 2% I'd give the money to MSF, if it's below. You do.With your belief in the "business analyst" side of things. It should be an easy win for you.

    Your a gambling man.. :-) not too many posts ago
    You said; "I don't agree with the Harvard professor. If the Covid-19 has infected 70% of the world by 31/12/20. I'd resign from my job. That's how confident I am at the moment."

    I admire your courage, putting it all on the line like that!! Hats off to you.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement