Of course, "where they've found cases" has only limited correlation with where the disease is actually spreading. We're far from doing universal testing.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Coronavirus
- Thread starter Wenche
- Start date
Of course, "where they've found cases" has only limited correlation with where the disease is actually spreading. We're far from doing universal testing.
adiggs
Well-Known Member
Thanks for posting that. It's a much better researched and articulated statement of what I'm seeing. He makes the point about 2nd order (and 3rd order) affects, that we mostly just don't think about or see.
This is what I'm worried about.
Dr. J
Active Member
@Fact Checking
Thanks for the update. Is there a source (link) were to gather this statistic-information?
Rotte
Member
A little perspective: I am sure it has been stated but it bears repeating: In the US only this year, influenza has caused 32 million illnesses, 310,000 hospitalizations and 18,000 deaths. Corona virus globally this year has caused 111,317 infections and 3,892 deaths.
290,810,000 population in 2003, and in that year, approx. 2,419,900 deaths occurred in total, giving a crude death rate of 832 deaths per 100,00. AS of 2020, the CIA estimates US crude death rate will be 8.3 per 1000 and global rate of 7.7 per 1000. (wikipedia)
290,810,000 population in 2003, and in that year, approx. 2,419,900 deaths occurred in total, giving a crude death rate of 832 deaths per 100,00. AS of 2020, the CIA estimates US crude death rate will be 8.3 per 1000 and global rate of 7.7 per 1000. (wikipedia)
Dr. J
Active Member
Does your perspective take into account that flu season is ongoing, and that the impact of Covid-19 cases will be on top of flu cases?
IMHO announcing a trend from day-to-day fluctuations is misleading, even if you afterwards admit it might be just fluctuations.
This was posted here before - no individual countries, but due to the greater amount of data much smaller statistical error. Anything levelling off? Not that I see. Wake up, everyone.
Corona virus
Last edited:
Incomplete information makes this whole situation particularly annoying. I could make a pretty good model for estimating the actual number of cases in each area if I knew not just diagnoses in each area, but the # of tests conducted in each area, and how the targets of the tests were allocated. Also correlating current air travel figures for people traveling round trip A->B->A, with the # of people diagnosed in A after returning from B, relative to the rate of testing conducted in A relative to how the tests are allocated.
I'm sure CDC and WHO have such models. Would be great to have them public-facing. Because these "# of diagnoses" metrics are horribly misleading.
I'm sure CDC and WHO have such models. Would be great to have them public-facing. Because these "# of diagnoses" metrics are horribly misleading.
IMHO, there's not "enough" until every single person who has flu symptoms can get tested. :Þ
Rotte
Member
Does your perspective take into account that flu season is ongoing, and that the impact of Covid-19 cases will be on top of flu cases?
It's not MY perspective, it is just the objective facts. I'm not short but maybe you are.
To be fair, everyone understands and nobody disputes the fact that total flu deaths are currently higher. The concern is that this goes pandemic - which it's looking likely to do - wherein the total number of COVID-19 deaths would be significantly higher than the total number of flu deaths, since its CFR is higher. It's not about the present; it's about the clear path where things are heading.
A couple things can prevent this figure.
- Regional quarantines - though this looks to have failed.
- Expansive testing increases. Possible, but scaleup has been going slowly, and it's not clear that everyone's willing to pay for tens of millions of tests per week.
- Antivirals. Does not prevent disease transmission, but could reduce the severity of infections down to that of a typical flu. Probably a couple months before they're available.
- Vaccines. But it's going to be a long time before they're ready.
For those speaking German here is todays account from Italy. Similar articles can be found in the Italian Press e.g. in the various regional editions of the Corriere della sera.
You can read in those links what happens in reality in an overloaded health care system.
You can read in those links what happens in reality in an overloaded health care system.
Causalien
Prime 8 ball Oracle
Coronavirus: State Department warns against cruise ship travel
seems like stronger language discouraging air travel is inevitable despite the US federal government's slow walking of their response.
Dr. J
Active Member
I am slightly above average height.
bkp_duke
Well-Known Member
Saudi Arabia and Russia picked a piss-poor time to get into a price war on oil. The world economy does not need another hard hit during a viral-induced economic downturn.
Dow futures tumble as Saudi-Russia oil price war adds to coronavirus stress
bkp_duke
Well-Known Member
I agree with a lot of what you say, but we'll have to agree to disagree here. Universal testing would be expensive and pointless. No epidemiologist ever recommends universal testing.
Testing for those with symptoms and especially at-risk populations is appropriate (it's what we do for influenza). Testing EVERYONE, nope.
She said people with flu symptoms. Is there some other easy way to differentiate patients with flu symptoms and COVID-19 symptoms?
Seems like the focus for testing should be in areas with high incidence of COVID-19 to avoid overwhelming medical facilities. Get people to self-quarantine at home as much as possible and avoid spreading. Not sure how successful that would be, but it at least may reassure the public that they are doing something.
Last edited:
bkp_duke
Well-Known Member
You are correct. I need more coffee. Damn daylight savings.
Similar threads
