Then you need to take fear mongering 101, your levelheadedness has no place here!!!This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
Then you need to take fear mongering 101, your levelheadedness has no place here!!!This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
I do see what you are saying but the same thing is true for the common flu. How many people just ride it out and don't seek help? Numbers can never be completely accurate but in the end does it really matter? For example consider these two scenarios.This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
Scenario 1:
- 100,000 infected
- 7,500 hospitalized
- 2,000 deaths
Scenario 2:
- 500,000 infected
- 7,500 hospitalized
- 2,000 deaths
At the end of the day, does it matter which scenario it is? People are still dying, and medical facilities are getting overloaded which puts others at greater risk. Does arguing whether it's 2% fatality rate or 1% really make any difference if the same thousands of people die?
So superstores flyer this week is a single page leaflet?
DXY 100
I would say that yes it does. Not for the ones already infected, but the next ones to be infected. Assuming more people will become infected without a vaccine etc... at 1,000,000 it will look like this:This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
Scenario 1:
- 1,000,000 infected
- 75,000 hospitalized
- 20,000 deaths
Scenario 2:
- 1,000,000 infected
- 15,000 hospitalized
- 4,000 deaths
yes I prefer the dark humor
30 flu deaths a week is their peak in Italy? We have 1/2 the population and average 70 a week yearly. Something doesn't add up here.This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
Originally posted by SEANBANERJEE
I have gone above and beyond what I should rightfully have to do to protect my good name
This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
The flu, short for influenza, causes about 12,200 hospitalizations and 3,500 deaths in Canada each year, according to the Canadian government. Influenza and pneumonia are ranked among the top 10 leading causes of death in Canada. Worldwide, seasonal flu causes an estimated 250,000 to 500,000 deaths annually
I think the concern is how quickly COVID-19 is spreading, and the fact we don’t have a vaccine for it yet.
May be population density is a factor.This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
EDIT: NVM, the numbers are opposite..... may be weather related?
Last edited by Xtrema; 03-05-2020 at 03:19 PM.
Haha, I genuinely find all this interesting, but at the same time I don't see the value in re-posting tweets and death rates with zero context or information surrounding the most important variables such as the individual's health prior to infection and testing/data collection.This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
Certainly there are non-reporters with the 'normal' flu, but we have the benefit of decades of data compared to weeks with the Coronavirus. Historically, death rate percentages tend to drop substantially as more (or better) data becomes available because every outbreak starts with limited testing before they are able to do so more broadly, and until you increase your data pool your results are going to be skewed, and probably quite heavily at that. I agree it's not game changing if the death rate is 1% instead of 2%, but that's still double. And if the new number being passed around is 3.4% but if it's really say 0.5% (not saying it is), then that starts to become quite significant IMO. Also if people are going to use those statistics to start comparing to other outbreaks to which we have way better data on, or make a big deal about it by posting updated death rates, their accuracy then becomes more important.This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
At least within Alberta, which perhaps can't be directly compared with other parts of the world, Hospitals are being overloaded in no small part by paranoid people who do not have the virus but think they might, and that isn't being helped by all the fear mongering and inaccurate data floating around. My GF is in a managerial role at one of the hospitals in Calgary and she tells me that everyone comes in demanding to be tested for it if they have even the slightest symptom, but on the plus side people are actually willingly wear masks which is a huge struggle for them normally haha.
I guess at the end of the day I feel it's important to point out that while the majority of deaths are being accounted for, the majority of infections are not being accounted for, so when you go to calculate a death rate, it's not just a little bit off but probably way off. Also apparently the under-20 age group has quite a few people that don't show symptoms at all, but unless you just randomly tested everyone you would never capture all those people in the statistics. I get that they're probably using the best information available, but that doesn't make it accurate. When that sentiment is echoed by people who have spent their careers studying exactly these situations, and more specifically the statistics and reporting side of these situations, I think that carries some weight. It also just makes logical sense. I recognize that part of the problem is the dramatic difference in testing frequency and ability country-to-country, which is one of the biggest issues right now in collecting good data. That will improve with time, and when it does the calculated death rate will likely fall.
I just don't see the value in constantly reporting on death rates when they aren't accompanied by any context, patient details, or information on how the data was collected. Even ethnicity has turned out to be a significant determining factor in how the virus affects a person. With almost every individual case I have read about so far, somewhere in the article it inevitably mentioned underlying health conditions or the persons old age, though I did read a 98 year old survived it, so good on them haha.
And if the broader concern is simply total number of people dying, not to diminish the significance of even 1 person dying, but if that is the concern then the coronavirus should be near the very bottom of the list compared to all the other things that are killing many times more people every year and at higher rates.
mitsu- What are your thoughts with the massive closures of cities, stadiums or schools that countries have introduced. It seems your not concerned about the virus. Shouldnt we all be concerned when you see countries shutting down entire provinces/cities, the prevention of professional sports teams from being shown to the public or entire closures of school systems?
You dont see these steps for the flu. For people to dismiss all that the govts are doing as tho its somehow normal or no different then the flu is crazy.
Theres some historic efforts that have never been taken in our lifetime all in the hope of preventing the disease from spreading. So far they have all failed.
The 18,000 regular flu deaths that are reported this season are associated with 32 million people having the flu. 0.05% mortality rate.
If 32 million people end up with corona virus (and lets lower the mortality rate to 1% instead of the 2-3% currently being stated), that's 320,000 dead.
This isn't an "everyone is going to die" scenario, but if this becomes widespread there will be a lot of deaths.
Its spread is eerily similar to the Black Death of the mid 14th century. Originates in China, reaches Italy through trade then spreads to the rest of Europe.
Totally, here's hoping everybody forgets what the hell running water and soap is.
https://edmonton.ctvnews.ca/video?clipId=104070
Calgary woman in her 50's is showing symptoms and has tested positive at a provincial level, but they are waiting for full confirmation through the national lab. She was on the Grand Princess cruise in Cali.
There was a full week where she was out and about from when she returned till she decided to self-isolate.... What an absolute moron.
This is really great work. Because anyone she infected will have zero idea they should isolate.This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
Not really. We live in an age of hysteria. It's impossible to tell what is of legitimate concern, and when is just all flash so the government can say "We did something".This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
Years crying wolf, it's too easy to dismiss everything now because of it. Especially when the origin is fucking China, who's conditions are shit, and you'll never hear an actual truth. If this had started in the USA first, it would be easier to believe it actually is dangerous.
What you’re missing is that nobody gives a shit about splitting hairs over the death rate. Everybody is unclear on them. Why are you so hung up on it? It’s pointless to question it. Everybody understands that it’s an estimate and it’s unclear what the true stats are. They’ll continue to change as more information is known.This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
What we do know is that the CDC/WHO/NIH/whatever already knows everything you’re saying and they have more up to date data than mitsu3000gt or whatever podcast guest you heard. You really think the possibility of underreporting hasn’t crossed their mind?
Maybe you ought to call them up and let them know how smart you are and that they aren’t fooling you with their lies.
Again, that is not the broader concern, but we all really appreciate you pointing this out.This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote