WHO says coronavirus death rate is 3.4% globally, higher than previously thought

I'm shocked you brought this thread back to life some real gem predictions made from you and others on the left in this one. Thanks.

 

I am not shocked that you fail to grasp why I brought back this thread. The reason is to show the deviation from exponential growth caused by social distancing. Here is the comparison. The black line is an extrapolation of where we would be without social distancing:



Can you not see how the social distancing is working? That the curve is flattened?

 

You mean the foresight to implement the CDC guidelines??? Didn’t take a rocket scientist to start doing that

 

Thank God for Trump and his calls for social distancing!

 

Trump wasted a precious 70 days and that is why the growth curve in the United States is still much, much steeper than anywhere else in the world.

 

It took medical and data scientists - thousands of them - to create and incentivize the implementation of the CDC guidelines.

 

Well, since we are talking about bringing back predictions from this thread - how about a revisit of the mortality rate estimate presented by the WHO - which is the topic of this thread.

There are two primary methods for determining the mortality rate of the virus and it depends on whether the pandemic has essentially ended or whether it is still ongoing in a given country.

If the pandemic has ended in a region - as it has in China - then you find the mortality rate by dividing the mortalities by the total resolved (mortalities + recovered). As of yesterday, China has had 81907 confirmed cases. Of those, 80791 are resolved. Of those 80791, there were 3336 deaths.

That's a mortality rate of 4.129%.

If the pandemic is still ongoing in a region - as it is in the United States - then you find the mortality rate by dividing the mortalities from a single day by the total resolved cases, thus far. As of yesterday, the United States had 42619 resolved cases. Of those 42619 resolved cases, 1900 were deaths that happened on a single day.

That is a mortality rate of 4.458%. But let's say that you don't trust the mortality rate from a single day and you'd like to smooth out the data by averaging it over the course of a week.

For the past week, the average mortality rate in the US was 4.918%.

 

So the communists have been doing a better job of saving lives, than we have? That's not going to sell well in certain quarters.

 

The UK is still trying to seel their doom & gloom

According to the communist they do everything better than us, just ask em!

 

According to us they do nothing better than us. So maybe the question is how did we fail to save more lives than China has?

 

Which came too little too late

 

Largest communist country on Earth vs freest country on Earth. Guess which one can be locked down with military force and which can't? Guess which has a more complex society and general population? Economic system? Political system? Your comparing two places very unlike each other when it comes to reactions to a crisis.

You would prefer we give up our liberties because of a virus, for a little security? Freedom is not free.

Now perhaps we should ask why the Chinese have been pretty underhanded about this entire thing, from before, during and I'm willing to bet after. There is a question worth pondering.

 

I do not think this was ever as deadly as the screaming heads predicted so I'm not ont hat band wagon that social distancing "saved us all"! But for those who are, those who predicted "bodies in the streets!" their only recourse now is to say social distancing saved us or we would have had those bodies in the streets. And thus they have to give Trump credit. It was and is his mug on TV daily preaching social distancing.

 

Remember we are not discussing infection rates. We are discussing death rates from the infection. So its about what happens to the sickest of these patients there and here, probably after patients are admitted to the hospital. I am not drawing conclusions as to why but I really don't think civil liberties or social homogeny are going to be a big part of this answer.

 

Huh? You can not determine and thus talk about death rate without an infection rate. They are linked and not separable in this conversation.

https://www.health.com/condition/infectious-diseases/coronavirus/covid-19-hospitalization

I'm not giving up my liberties for a tiny bit of security. The story linked above is clear proof that we do not need to lock the country down because of this. Those who need it or want to can shelter in place if they choose.

 

Did you look at full list of those 'preexisting conditions'? People over 65, people who are obese, people with high blood pressure, people with diabetes, and then there are those with lung problems like a propensity for bronchitis, or asthma and auto immune like HIV, Chronic renal failure and they go on and on. Its a huge percentage of the population and of doctors, nurses. caregivers, teachers, cooks, parents, grandparents. You have no clue what happens if this thing spreads to all those groups and you have no clue how you get anyone taken care of without the quarantines in place.

 

True. Took leads to put the trump admin guidelines into place.

 

Huh? Death rate is the % of people who die after they are infected. Infection rate is a measure of how easily the disease infects others. You can very easily talk about death rate without discussing infection rate.

 

You should correct that Y Axis a jump from 10k to one million misleads.

 

The actual mortality rate of the virus, IMO, should be understood by distinguishing between what I would call:

A) "full blown Covid-19 cases" (Category A), and
B) people who have been merely exposed to the "SARS 2/CoV-2" virus but have not developed "full blown Covid-19" (Category B).

The number or people in Category B may never been known, unless antibody tests are developed and administered to lots of people.

On the other hand, we do have more or less reliable numbers when it comes to Category A people (especially since February).

Overall, besides the risk factors already well known, the level of exposure to the virus is also a key factor in whether someone who tests positive for the virus goes on to have full blown Covid-19 symptoms.

The main danger that Category B people present is passing the virus to people with compromised health conditions. Otherwise, the mortality rate among this group is indeed very low.

Significant exposure to the virus, even for otherwise healthy people, and even more moderate exposures for those with compromised health or pre-existing conditions, is the real precursor to having what I would call 'full blown Covid-19" illness. And the mortality rate for this category is high.

While the data is still incomplete, and the numbers will certainly change, the overall mortality rates even in countries with significant numbers of 'closed cases' such as Spain, Italy, Iran and many others, is rather high. Add to this number of people with full blown Covid-19 who need hospitalization and end really ill, and I wouldn't advise anyone to take this virus lightly. Not even otherwise healthy people with no preexisting conditions.

 

What percentage ?? Being over the age of 65 is not a precondition.

 

But category B is the required statistic to determine mortality based on all persons infected by the virus. If the study that determined that each infected person infects 6 other individuals is accurate Category B could be many tens of millions of individuals.

 

40% of the US adult population is classified as obese. Add to that millions of people, including some who aren't obese, with pre-diabetes and diabetes, millions of such people with high blood pressure, millions of ex-smokers and smokers, and, yes, the 'pre-conditions' basically cover the majority of the US population.

 

How does this prove that social distancing is responsible for the flattening of the curve ?? The federal guidelines were released on 3/16 but many people were implementing social distancing before then.

 

But the only stats that I've seen show that the most at risk are the pre diabetic and diabetic persons in combination with a BMI over 30. This comes from Dr. Stephan Smith who runs a investious disease clinic in NJ. Why the feds don't release more statistics on what the percentages of these preconditions are is baffling.