bttt
Ah, so including China, which is not reporting significant new cases and assuming you trust that, with the rest of the world implies a slowdown, because Chinas reported cases represent the significant majority of the total cases even still. They are a different parabola from the rest of the world.
Here are the figures for some of the last few days for the world outside of China and Iran:
. . . Cases. Dead. Recovered. Dead/Resolved. . . . .
4 Mar 12085,,181,,,670,,,,,,,,21%
5 Mar 13944,,227,,,818,,,,,,,,22%
8 Mar 22733,,511,,1239,,,,,,,,29%
Unfortunately, I didn’t start keeping the captured figures until last week, only some of the results. Since Tuesday before last, the dead/resolved has been holding at 14-15%, and then began creeping up to 20% last Tuesday. So, that does not imply at all what the thesis of this article suggests. It does confirm that China is not reporting many new cases, and if it is to be believed, it is roughly contained there. The rest of the world, not so much.
Now, some things to keep in mind, since in the early part of the outbreak, the fatality rate is overstated since it takes less time to die than it does to recover. Further, there is some unknown number of people who are sick, but not discovered. With the lack of test kits until recently, this unknown number may be larger in the US, especially than in South Korea or Italy, but do not appear to be hugely so as a ratio - certainly nowhere close to enough to suppose COVID-19 is on the order of a bad flu in regards lethality. If the Chinese have actually begun to report numbers reliably (which the article’s these firmly relies upon), then the numbers of cases which were unknown is relatively small. Do keep in mind that unlike the flu, where no real effort is made to track down the source of an infection, there has been a very vigorous effort to track down every single COVID case.
https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/coronavirus-death-rate/#days
**Days from first symptom to death
The Wang et al. February 7 study published on JAMA found that the median time from first symptom to dyspnea was 5.0 days, to hospital admission was 7.0 days, and to ARDS was 8.0 days.[9]
Previously. the China National Health Commission reported the details of the first 17 deaths up to 24 pm 22 Jan 2020. A study of these cases found that the median days from first symptom to death were 14 (range 6-41) days, and tended to be shorter among people of 70 year old or above (11.5 [range 6-19] days) than those with ages below 70 year old (20 [range 10-41] days.[6]
**Median Hospital Stay
The JANA study found that, among those discharged alive, the median hospital stay was 10 days.[9] “
The faulty method of calculating mortality rate of dividing deaths by spread has been persistent, and even WHO has put out numbers based upon this ridiculous case of bad math.
Here is an good explanation of why deaths/cases is absurd:
https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/coronavirus-death-rate/#correct
“The correct formula, therefore, would appear to be:
CFR = deaths at day.x / cases at day.x-{T}
(where T = average time period from case confirmation to death)
This would constitute a fair attempt to use values for cases and deaths belonging to the same group of patients.
One issue can be that of determining whether there is enough data to estimate T with any precision, but it is certainly not T = 0 (what is implicitly used when applying the formula current deaths / current cases to determine CFR during an ongoing outbreak). “
If you were to replace “Coronavirus” with “Ricin”, and inject 100 people with a dose which would kill 100% in a week, then every day double the number of people you give the injection, using the deaths/cases method, after one week you would have a fatality/injection ratio of 0.78% (100/12,700), for a 100% fatal toxin.
Plenty here gonna disagree vociferously
Another contrived "crisis" the DUmocrats and the DNC media let slip through their fingers!
I'm not sure what data he's looking at. I've been recording in a spreadsheet the last data posted from Johns Hopkins each day since Jan 25.
Two of the columns I've been saving are automatic calculations of "new cases today" and "new deaths today". If you look at "new cases today" (worldwide) the last several days (starting 2-29), the numbers are 1801, 2090, 1863, 2224, 2265, 2957, 3806, 3973, and today at 3880.
The "new deaths for today" for the same days are 54, 70, 69, 81, 88, 97, 108, 103, and today at 231.
It's interesting (and sad for those affected) to watch and not as ugly as predicted, but I'm not sure how the numbers are considered decreasing.
L8r
The media can’t help themselves, they are inherently lazy, dishonest and full of TDS - this plays into their hands reporting every single case as it becomes known takes up 99% of their broadcasts and allows them to do no work.