Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Here are your chances of dying from COVID-19 in the next six months
NY Post ^ | December 10, 2020 | 2:17pm | Lia Eustachewich

Posted on 12/10/2020 12:02:01 PM PST by conservative98

Americans have a 1-in-1,000 chance of dying of COVID-19 in the next six months, a Stanford University health expert said Thursday at a Food and Drug Administration hearing.

Dr. Steven Goodman, an associate dean at Stanford’s School of Medicine, based that probability off recent statistics showing roughly 285,000 deaths in the country over the last seven months and about 1,000 deaths a day.

“A randomly chosen US citizen has an average risk of dying from COVID in the next 6 months, that is by the end of May, of roughly 1 in 1,000 and the risk of hospitalization of roughly about 1 in 200,” Goodman told an FDA advisory committee at a virtual hearing.

“These numbers obviously vary widely by individual,” he said.

Goodman said the findings also don’t factor in Wednesday’s record mortality rate, when 3,000 daily deaths were reported for the first time.

The all-day hearing is being held by the FDA’s Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee, which is weighing whether the benefits of Pfizer and BioNTech’s COVID-19 vaccine outweigh the risks — and it should be approved for emergency use.

The panel of 23 health experts will vote at the end of the meeting.

(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...


TOPICS: Chit/Chat
KEYWORDS: covid1984; fakenews; science; stanford; stevengoodman; youlie
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-89 next last
To: GrandJediMasterYoda

“Chances of dying in a car crash in the USA according to the NY Times: 1 in 103.”

You must be planning some very unsafe driving over the next six months.


21 posted on 12/10/2020 12:16:48 PM PST by Meatspace
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Meatspace
“Chances of dying in a car crash in the USA according to the NY Times: 1 in 103.” You must be planning some very unsafe driving over the next six months.

That's only in Jersey :)

22 posted on 12/10/2020 12:17:28 PM PST by 1Old Pro ( )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Archie Bunker on steroids

170 dead in San Francisco

Population: 800,000

Good grief can they not even try to sound believable?


23 posted on 12/10/2020 12:17:56 PM PST by Persevero (I am afraid propriety has been set at naught. - Jane Austen )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: conservative98

With so many gaslighters, liars, thieves and just generally mentally-disturbed people out there these days, I think this will become the motto of the 21st century:

Never listen to ANYONE. About ANYTHING.


24 posted on 12/10/2020 12:18:13 PM PST by JennysCool
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: conservative98
Daily slaughter of the unborn is: 1,820 per day or 664,435 per year; 13.5 per 1,000 per women ages 15-44

From 1973-2018 61.8 million.

25 posted on 12/10/2020 12:20:38 PM PST by SkyDancer (~ Pilots: Looking Down On People Since 1903 ~)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All

I don’t get the controversy.

You can go get the excess deaths numbers yourself. Don’t go reading largely English articles about a math issue. Get the numbers yourself.

There are about 1000 deaths per day for most of this year. 80% of those are over 65. 20% under.

So 800 deaths per day over 65. Over 365 days (come March) this will be 292,000 elderly deaths.

The number of elderly deaths per year in the US is 1.76 Million. 292,000 is 17%.

Society has to decide if 17% is an acceptable number for their parents and grandparents dying more readily than in a normal year. And not 17% is what you get with the measures taken.

You want fewer measures, you want stricter measures. Whichever direction you want society to go it will move the 17% number (as well as reduce society’s life expectancy a bit).


26 posted on 12/10/2020 12:20:54 PM PST by Owen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: conservative98

Patently false.


27 posted on 12/10/2020 12:21:34 PM PST by Chengdu54
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: conservative98

I’ll take my chances.


28 posted on 12/10/2020 12:22:00 PM PST by JoSixChip (2020: The year of unreported truths. )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #29 Removed by Moderator

To: conservative98

Complete nonsense. Don’t they even teach mathematics anymore? The John Hopkins study documented that the death rate pre vs post WuFlu is not statistically different. WuFlu deaths were documented and many other categories showed decreases in death rates netting to zero change.

Another study found only 6k deaths in the US with no additional co-morbidities.

Therefore, the only logical way to state this is if you are at risk of dying from another disease, you still are at risk but they might call if WuFlu after you die. If you have no other co-morbidity factors, your chance of death due to WuFlu starts to approach the odds of being hit by lightning in the next 6 months.


30 posted on 12/10/2020 12:23:49 PM PST by rigelkentaurus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: conservative98
I just turned 70 two months ago. According to one source, the average life expectancy for a white American male is 76.1 years. I guess that means I have roughly a 50% chance of dying in in the next six years, so - again speaking very roughly - I have a 4-5% chance of dying in the next six months.

That's a lot worse than the estimate of 1/1,000, or one-tenth of one-percent, which is the study's Covid estimate for the entire population, including the young.
31 posted on 12/10/2020 12:24:06 PM PST by Steve_Seattle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Quality_Not_Quantity

We don’t want the Goodmans mixed up. Get the right guy’s pic into Google for lying.


32 posted on 12/10/2020 12:27:17 PM PST by conservative98
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: rigelkentaurus

There was no Johns Hopkins study. There was a student newsletter that put out a document from an economics PhD with no training in public health, diseases or anything else medical. The students withdrew it. Hopkins Medical School had nothing to do with any of it.

And why are you quoting studies? Get the numbers yourself.


33 posted on 12/10/2020 12:28:15 PM PST by Owen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: desertfreedom765
"So a family of

No, because a high-percentage of the one-in-a-thousand deaths would be in people over the age of 70, and with "pre-existing" conditions. Most families of four (parents under 55 with kids under 25) would have no deaths at all.
34 posted on 12/10/2020 12:28:32 PM PST by Steve_Seattle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: conservative98

As of December 8, 2020, an average of around 905 people per day have died from [from, or with?] COVID-19 in the U.S. since the first case was confirmed in the country on January 20th.

On an average day, nearly 8,000 people die from all causes in the United States, based on data from 2019.

Based on the latest information, one in nine deaths each day can be attributed to COVID-19 since January 20th.

The daily death toll from seasonal flu stood at an average of almost 332 people (using preliminary maximum estimates from the 2019-2020 influenza season).


35 posted on 12/10/2020 12:29:38 PM PST by deks (No machines, no software, nothing that can be electronically manipulated -- paper ballots only)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: conservative98

“These numbers obviously vary widely by individual,” he said.

A too cute way of skirting the issue that the majority of people dying ofc covid are 80+ and already have other health issues. That’s why the net morbidity for 2020 is essentially identical to 2019, or 2018, or 2017.

This article is just an opening salvo on a sick idea I saw pitched by our “superiors” that now that the vaccine is becoming available, they want to scare the public into taking the vaccine, because they know what is best for us, capisce?


36 posted on 12/10/2020 12:29:58 PM PST by Flick Lives (My work's illegal, but at least it's honest. - Capt. Malcolm Reynolds)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Steve_Seattle

Right, the vast majority of fatalities were elderly patients with preexisting conditions.


37 posted on 12/10/2020 12:30:08 PM PST by rdl6989 ( )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: conservative98

Where do they find these nut cakes?
He’s pulling the numbers out of the air, because he doesn’t really know.
I’ll bet he believes in global warming too.


38 posted on 12/10/2020 12:31:37 PM PST by BuffaloJack (Neither safety nor security exists in nature. Everything is dangerous and has risk.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Colt1851Navy

What is so hard to figure out the dose?


39 posted on 12/10/2020 12:33:00 PM PST by zek157
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: conservative98

285,000 deaths. B.S. That’s not how many people died FROM Covid19. That’s how many people died WITH it. Big difference.


40 posted on 12/10/2020 12:40:33 PM PST by Veggie Todd (Religion. It's like a History class. Without the facts. )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-89 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson