Coronavirus Thread

[CuseJacket]

The death rate is 20-50x higher than the regular Flu.

If you take the data at face value, yes.

Putting the data into context suggests almost entirely the opposite. I personally don't repeat the stat you continue to cite when having conversations with folks, because it falls apart when you go a single layer deep. I think you know this from prior posts, but you keep repeating the stat which I assume means you believe it means something. So I disagree with the framing the conversation that way.

 

[Deleted member 2897]

If you take the data at face value, yes.

Putting the data into context suggests almost entirely the opposite. I personally don't repeat the stat you continue to cite when having conversations with folks, because it falls apart when you go a single layer deep. I think you know this from prior posts, but you keep repeating the stat which I assume means you believe it means something. So I disagree with the framing the conversation that way.

To hit the mortality level as the Flu this year (0.2% death rate), we would need to have 5,500 people in the US actually have Coronavirus instead of the ~150 that have actually been confirmed. Maybe it is somewhere that big and this is just like the regular Flu. Maybe its not. All the Epidemiologists and similar experts that I've seen continue to state the death rate is substantially higher with this virus.

Italy has had 150 deaths in the last 2 weeks. At a 0.2% death rate (if this is like the Flu), that would imply 75,000 Italians have it. Maybe they do. They have reported that 4,000 have it. Is 4,000 correct? Probably not. Is 75,000 the real number? I have no idea. But I'd imagine not.

 

[CuseJacket]

To hit the mortality level as the Flu this year (0.2% death rate), we would need to have 5,500 people in the US actually have Coronavirus instead of the ~150 that have actually been confirmed. Maybe it is somewhere that big and this is just like the regular Flu. Maybe its not. All the Epidemiologists and similar experts that I've seen continue to state the death rate is substantially higher with this virus.

If you exhibit mild or no symptoms, are you going to the doctor to get diagnosed?

 

[Deleted member 2897]

If you exhibit mild or no symptoms, are you going to the doctor to get diagnosed?

How many people have tested positive that showed no symptoms?

The same probably applies to the Flu.

 

[CuseJacket]

How many people have tested positive that showed no symptoms?

The same probably applies to the Flu.

My understanding is those who believe they've been exposed to corona are those that are being tested. Given the hysteria, that makes sense.

I have never heard of no symptom flu.

 

[Deleted member 2897]

My understanding is those who believe they've been exposed to corona are those that are being tested. Given the hysteria, that makes sense.

I have never heard of no symptom flu.

Yep.

Edit. Sorry, yes you can have the flu with mild or no symptoms. So it’s a difficult to quantify problem for both.

 

[RonJohn]

If you exhibit mild or no symptoms, are you going to the doctor to get diagnosed?

There is a patient in Floyd County, GA who tested positive. According to the news report, when she first visited the hospital with symptoms, they couldn't test her for COVID-19 because she didn't meet the testing criteria. When she returned to the hospital with very bad symptoms the hospital admitted her but was still not allowed to test her. The hospital petitioned for permission to test her, and she tested positive.

The death rate stats are all useless. There are many more cases in the US than are being reported, since only a small number of people are actually being tested. The death rate stats are trash. The spread rate stats are trash, because it isn't known what the current infection rate actually is, nor what the actual infection rate a week ago actually was. The only stat that is known is how many people who were tested do have the virus. Since the number of people tested is so low, the data is useless for any statistical analysis.

https://www.wsbtv.com/news/local/fl...s-cdc-now-testing/YWK6AIO7UNHU7PVMINX26ZA3HM/

 

[CuseJacket]

There is a patient in Floyd County, GA who tested positive. According to the news report, when she first visited the hospital with symptoms, they couldn't test her for COVID-19 because she didn't meet the testing criteria. When she returned to the hospital with very bad symptoms the hospital admitted her but was still not allowed to test her. The hospital petitioned for permission to test her, and she tested positive.

The death rate stats are all useless. There are many more cases in the US than are being reported, since only a small number of people are actually being tested. The death rate stats are trash. The spread rate stats are trash, because it isn't known what the current infection rate actually is, nor what the actual infection rate a week ago actually was. The only stat that is known is how many people who were tested do have the virus. Since the number of people tested is so low, the data is useless for any statistical analysis.

https://www.wsbtv.com/news/local/fl...s-cdc-now-testing/YWK6AIO7UNHU7PVMINX26ZA3HM/

Yep, again, data in context. If a provider does not/cannot test for the virus, which has been an issue all along, you cannot be diagnosed with having the virus. Let alone patients opting in for testing.

And if you believe folks have been in airports in the U.S. and elsewhere with it, that means the virus is everywhere right now. We haven't had a spike in patients dying from unknown causes to my knowledge.

 

[CuseJacket]

Yep.

Edit. Sorry, yes you can have the flu with mild or no symptoms. So it’s a difficult to quantify problem for both.

So the death rates for both are likely much lower to a degree we cannot measure.

ETA: see prior post also.

 

[Deleted member 2897]

Italy has had 150 deaths in the last 2 weeks.

Well no sooner did I type this than numbers were updated and they have 200 deaths now. ~50 more died in the last day.

 

[RonJohn]

Yep.

Edit. Sorry, yes you can have the flu with mild or no symptoms. So it’s a difficult to quantify problem for both.

However during flu season doctors know when/if the flu is spreading through a community. They will diagnose people as having the flu without testing simply because they have the symptoms and have been in close proximity with other people who have had the symptoms. (Such as kids in a school) Running a swab or laboratory test for the flu does not change the treatment, so it isn't always run.

So in comparison the COVID-19. You go to the doctor during flu season with non life-threatening flu symptoms, it is likely that you will be diagnosed with the flu whether you are tested or not. You go to the doctor now with COVID-19 symptoms and it is unlikely that you will be tested for COVID-19 unless you traveled internationally to a location with a known high infection rate. I am not aware of any doctors in the US who are diagnosing COVID-19 without a test.

Therefore: Many people who go to the doctor during flu season will be diagnosed as having the flu, even some portion of people who don't actually have the flu virus. COVID-19 is only diagnosed on positive testing, and testing is being restricted to only very small set of people who fit a certain profile. Many people who have the virus are not being diagnosed. Comparing death rates of an over diagnosed virus to death rates of a virus that is very likely under diagnosed isn't valid.

 

[Deleted member 2897]

However during flu season doctors know when/if the flu is spreading through a community. They will diagnose people as having the flu without testing simply because they have the symptoms and have been in close proximity with other people who have had the symptoms. (Such as kids in a school) Running a swab or laboratory test for the flu does not change the treatment, so it isn't always run.

So in comparison the COVID-19. You go to the doctor during flu season with non life-threatening flu symptoms, it is likely that you will be diagnosed with the flu whether you are tested or not. You go to the doctor now with COVID-19 symptoms and it is unlikely that you will be tested for COVID-19 unless you traveled internationally to a location with a known high infection rate. I am not aware of any doctors in the US who are diagnosing COVID-19 without a test.

Therefore: Many people who go to the doctor during flu season will be diagnosed as having the flu, even some portion of people who don't actually have the flu virus. COVID-19 is only diagnosed on positive testing, and testing is being restricted to only very small set of people who fit a certain profile. Many people who have the virus are not being diagnosed. Comparing death rates of an over diagnosed virus to death rates of a virus that is very likely under diagnosed isn't valid.

Why do you think the epidemiologists are saying what they're saying? Just wondering what you think is behind it.

Here are some comments from Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, which to me seems totally appropriate.
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/03/04/fau...etermine-us-death-rates-from-coronavirus.html
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/03/03/who...-globally-higher-than-previously-thought.html

They know that they don't know what they don't know but based on all of the available data, the mortality rates even in good scenarios are significantly higher than the traditional Flu.

I don't see anybody saying "The mortality rate is X". But what I do see them saying is gathering as much data as they can, and there's enough out there, that the range of possibilities even on the super ultra low end is not good.

I just don't see what's wrong or provocative about that.

 

[RonJohn]

Why do you think the epidemiologists are saying what they're saying? Just wondering what you think is behind it.

Here are some comments from Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, which to me seems totally appropriate.
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/03/04/fau...etermine-us-death-rates-from-coronavirus.html
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/03/03/who...-globally-higher-than-previously-thought.html

They know that they don't know what they don't know but based on all of the available data, the mortality rates even in good scenarios are significantly higher than the traditional Flu.

I don't see anybody saying "The mortality rate is X". But what I do see them saying is gathering as much data as they can, and there's enough out there, that the range of possibilities even on the super ultra low end is not good.

I just don't see what's wrong or provocative about that.

The death rate is 20-50x higher than the regular Flu.

I am not the one saying that the death rate is X percentage higher than the flu. In the two articles you posted: One says that the denominator to calculate death rate is unknown. The other says the death rate of "reported cases" is 3.4%. According to the first article, the death rate listed in the second article was elevated because they don't believe there are many asymptomatic cases. I haven't seen any data from any source that can be used to determine how many cases there actually are. Without knowing how many cases there actually are, you cannot calculate an accurate death rate.

As to what I think is behind it: News stories won't get a lot of traction if they report that nobody knows what the death rate actually is, or that nobody knows what the infection rate actually is, or that nobody knows how fast it is spreading. If you post stories that show alarming infection rates and alarming death rates then people will read and come back for more. People will post those meaningless stats on message boards as "proof" that this virus is out of control and links to the news stories.

 

[Deleted member 2897]

I am not the one saying that the death rate is X percentage higher than the flu. In the two articles you posted: One says that the denominator to calculate death rate is unknown. The other says the death rate of "reported cases" is 3.4%. According to the first article, the death rate listed in the second article was elevated because they don't believe there are many asymptomatic cases. I haven't seen any data from any source that can be used to determine how many cases there actually are. Without knowing how many cases there actually are, you cannot calculate an accurate death rate.

As to what I think is behind it: News stories won't get a lot of traction if they report that nobody knows what the death rate actually is, or that nobody knows what the infection rate actually is, or that nobody knows how fast it is spreading. If you post stories that show alarming infection rates and alarming death rates then people will read and come back for more. People will post those meaningless stats on message boards as "proof" that this virus is out of control and links to the news stories.

I didn't say you were the one saying it. I have been the one repeating what the medical community is stating. And I'm asking why do you think they are saying what they are saying. I think I know why - because they have enough information and all of it is not good, so in the interest of caution, they're explaining what they know.

Its not the news, its the scientists. The news isn't making up numbers - they're reporting what they're being told.

You should read what those articles state again.

Dr. Fauci said they've seen 2%, 3.4%, 4%. They're doing the best they can with incomplete information. “You know as well as anybody that the mortality for seasonal flu is .1%,” he added. “So even if it goes down to 1%, it’s still 10 times more fatal.”

I mean, these are the experts. Not sure what else to tell you. They're doing the best they can to keep people informed. It seems to me you're taking the position that since they don't know precisely what the numbers are, it would be better for them to just stay quiet. I don't see any value in that. If they've seen enough that in their professional opinion they need to communicate what they know, then go for it.

 

[dtm1997]

More cases in NY today.

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/03/06/new-york-state-coronavirus-cases-triple-over-48-hours-to-33.html

 

[RonJohn]

I mean, these are the experts. Not sure what else to tell you. They're doing the best they can to keep people informed. It seems to me you're taking the position that since they don't know precisely what the numbers are, it would be better for them to just stay quiet. I don't see any value in that. If they've seen enough that in their professional opinion they need to communicate what they know, then go for it.

My position is that people should realize that these numbers are not accurate. People should not be overly alarmed, at least to this point. Cautious yes. Alarmed, not yet. I blame the hysteria more on the news media than medical experts. The media likes hockey stick graphs and hyped pseudo statistics more than long form articles with actual explanations. The medical experts can't give better information than what they have. At the moment, they don't have good information, but the media, politicians, and public still demand data so they give what they have. The media has a responsibility to put that information in context, but they refuse to do so.

I go further than saying that we don't know "precisely" what the numbers are. We don't have a clue what the numbers are. In the US, not only are we not testing everyone, we are not even testing people with symptoms that are medically grave.

 

[dtm1997]

 

[jwsavhGT]

Trip to Cherokee cancelled - I've had a headache & sore throat this afternoon. Oh lordy...

 

[Deleted member 2897]

US positive tests (approximate) last 5 days:
102
126
158
215
317

 

[CuseJacket]

https://www.businessinsider.com/south-korea-coronavirus-testing-death-rate-2020-3

- South Korea has tested more than 140,000 people for the new coronavirus and confirmed more than 6,000 cases. Its fatality rate is around 0.6%.
- This suggests that, as many health experts have predicted, the virus' fatality rate seems to decrease as more cases are reported. That's because more widespread testing leads more mild cases to be included in the count.
- The US, by contrast, has tested around 1,500 people. The country has 221 confirmed cases and 12 deaths, suggesting a death rate of 5%.

"If indeed we discover that there are far more cases that are actually being reported, and that one of the primary reasons for this is that we're just not detecting asymptomatic or mild or moderately symptomatic cases that don't end up seeking healthcare, then our estimates for the case fatality rate will likely decrease," Lauren Ancel Meyers, an epidemiologist at the University of Texas at Austin, told Business Insider.

Mild cases, she added, "may not make it onto the radar of public health agencies."

In the US, people without severe symptoms haven't been tested because of limited availability, which may explain why the nation's death rate so far is high: more than 5%.

People under age 40 have just a 0.2% risk of dying from the virus, early research has shown. The majority of severe cases are among elderly patients or those with preexisting health problems.

But until Wednesday, the CDC had only tested people who had recent exposure to a confirmed patient, had travelled to a country with an outbreak, or required hospitalization. This has made it difficult for doctors and health officials to test or diagnose many patients with mild cases, which likely explains the US' high death rate.