(Vanity) ChiCom Flu Mortality Rates

Self and Johns Hopkins COVID-19 Site ^ | March 21, 2020 | ConservativeInPA

[Svartalfiar]

I suspect, since this virus presents very much like the flu, the same is happening. I believe, as do many medical professionals, that millions have already been infected but only to levels of sickness seen with the flu.

Common cold, actually. The Wuhan virus is in the same family as four other viri that all cause the common cold. Course, SARS and MERS are in there too, but this one doesn't seem to be near as bad as them, for most people.

[Svartalfiar]

Tell me, if YOU worked in a grocery store or wanted to shop in a grocery store - would you rather that people had been turned away at the door who had a temp - or that everyone had been let in?

That's not going to be that effective. More people have fevers due to other causes than are sick with the Wuhan virus. Many of those are non-contagious. If the virus is contagious when someone is asymptomatic, that means they have no fever. People have different body temps, what number is the line for kicking them out or not? Low-grade, mid-, high-grade fever? What about kids/infants? Infants generally run hotter anyway, and they'll have a high body temp from all sorts of stuff, to something as simple as teething?

[GOPJ]

103 and above - that leaves out a lot of common infections. Besides anyone with a fever can sit in their air conditioned car and a ‘shopper’ will pick up stuff on their list and bring it to the car.

We have to start making sane decisions or we’ll destroy the country while trying to save lives. We can save lives AND save the country. Risk management.

The White House is using this system - and if it’s good enough for Trump it should be good enough for grocery stores and pharmacies...

[GOPJ]

Of course not - and I almost lost two children to the Hong Kong flu many years ago. Did the Chinese treat any of the other flu types their country 'gave to the world' this way? No, of course not. The reason why it's so different this time is because people are treating this like an escaped bio-weapon. Even the Chinese. Even the Russians. Even the Europeans and us too... That's why it's 'different'...

Have you ever seen the Chinese act like this with any other flu?

[jdsteel]

https://asiatimes.com/2020/03/why-are-koreas-covid-19-death-rates-so-low/

https://www.9news.com.au/world/coronavirus-pandemic-south-korea-italy-deaths-covid-19/741673b9-ec7e-4c96-93dd-9b76d7e47ca6

Worldwide mortality rate is between 3-6%, and that is so high because of countries like Iran & China who have horrible healthcare systems and don’t much value human life on a regular basis.

South Korea is 0.6% to 0.7%.

Your numbers are off.

[Svartalfiar]

South Korea is 0.6% to 0.7%.

Your numbers are off.

No, your numbers are off.

Your first link is supposedly based on WHO estimates, which hasn't been very accurate at all, both numbers and general information (especially from China). And, it's an article from 11 days ago, pulling numbers that are two weeks old (from today). They claim 51 deaths, when current Johns Hopkins shows 104 deaths. More than double.

Your second link is an Australian website that's also outdated (five days old, 66 deaths), and also doesn't have any source mentioned for their numbers. WHO is mentioned later about some death analysis, so I assume that's the source for their stats.

Can we both agree that the Johns Hopkins aggregator is a reliable source for numbers? Or are you disputing that? And I posted the math in my first post - the LOWEST the SKorea CFR can go, if every current case recovers, was ~1.15%

[Svartalfiar]

103 and above - that leaves out a lot of common infections. Besides anyone with a fever can sit in their air conditioned car and a ‘shopper’ will pick up stuff on their list and bring it to the car.

103° is a rather high temp, at which point you should probably be getting ready to head to the hospital. Wuhan virus or anything else.

I don;t deny that temp-checking everyone everywhere might help some, but I don;t think it's gonna be nearly as helpful as everyone thinks it will be.

[jdsteel]

I do not know if the John Hopkins aggregator is reliable or not. Neither do you.

Yes, the links were days old (gasp). The number of deaths would certainly have changed, but to think that the PERCENTAGE showing the mortality rate would double or more over those days is extremely unlikely.

But please, go back to panicking.

[Svartalfiar]

I do not know if the John Hopkins aggregator is reliable or not. Neither do you.

It's probably the most reliable source I know of, besides doing painstaking research through hundreds of countries' official websites, trying to track that info down. Which may not be that accurate either. BUT, if you know a site that's better than Johns Hopkins, please, do tell?


Yes, the links were days old (gasp). The number of deaths would certainly have changed, but to think that the PERCENTAGE showing the mortality rate would double or more over those days is extremely unlikely.

Actually, it did change, a lot. I'll use deaths / total cases, because I don't have historical data on recoveries, and your article didn't mention that number at all, so no current CFR. Going from your article to JH today, number increases were:
- Cases: 7478 to 8961, a 20% increase.
- Deaths: 51 to 111, a 118% increase.
- Best-case CFR: 0.68% to 1.24%, an 82% increase. Pretty close to doubling.


But please, go back to panicking.

The only thing I'm panicking about is all these idiot Governors and Mayors destroying the economy. But posting false information doesn't help anyone either.

[Svartalfiar]

And, only making this comment cause I posted the SK numbers again elsewhere, they're up to 120 deaths (3 hours later, +9). Total cases still the same. So, re-kajiggering the numbers:

- Cases: 7478 to 8961, a 20% increase.
- Deaths: 51 to 120, a 135% increase.
- Best-case CFR: 0.68% to 1.34%, a 97% increase. We're one (two?) deaths away from doubling the best-case mortality rate.

[jdsteel]

As the number of previously undiscovered infections rise the mortality rate plummets.

As in this FR post: https://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/3827759/posts

[Svartalfiar]

As the number of previously undiscovered infections rise the mortality rate plummets.

As in this FR post: https://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/3827759/posts

I highly doubt 86% of cases are so mild they go undetected. It is very odd for any particular virus to have severe symptoms across a range of people, then have a bunch of people with... nothing. If you're taking that number from the Chinese study, well that poses a couple problems. Mostly, it's out of China, so it really can't be trusted at face value no matter what. Secondly, their study oinly states that the rapid spread was due to infected people not being confirmed to have the virus, NOT that all those people were perfectly healthy-appearing. Many of the Chinese infected in the hospitals were never officially tested, so they were never included in China's official numbers. But certainly contributed to the viral spread. Also, lots of sick people were given diagnoses of 'pneumonia' or 'respiratory issue' or something (NOT Wuhan virus), to hide the case count within China.

Also, SKorea has been pretty diligent about testing everybody even close to in contact with infected, whether there's good reason to test them or not. SKorea and Bahrain are more than double the next country's testing rate, and over 50x more then these US's. So we can easily assume that SKorea has a rather minimal number of non-confirmed cases, definitely not anywhere near 86%. Probably closer to 5-10%, if even that many. And yet, they still have a best-case CFR of ~1.35%.

[jdsteel]

“ I highly doubt“

But you do not know.

Neither does anyone else, especially since the WHO tests are so inaccurate with both false positives and negatives.

Garbage in, garbage out. We’ll know more in a week or two.

[Svartalfiar]

“ I highly doubt“

But you do not know.

Neither does anyone else, especially since the WHO tests are so inaccurate with both false positives and negatives.

Garbage in, garbage out. We’ll know more in a week or two.

No one truly knows anything. But you can make a educated guess based on circumstances and evidence available. None of which points to huge numbers of infected going with no symptoms and staying undetected. And, here's a post from another poster with several links/summaries on that myth.

The original 86% study authors apparently dropped their estimate to 35%, when China switched from denying everything to actually treating/quarantining. And another study based on the isolated cruise ship put the estimate around 18%.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3828006/posts?page=114#114

[jdsteel]

“ No one truly knows anything. ”

That’s plain wrong. I know 2+2 = 4.
I know the sun will rise tomorrow.

And I know you are trying to justify a post that is unjustifiable.

[Svartalfiar]

“ No one truly knows anything. ”

That’s plain wrong. I know 2+2 = 4. I know the sun will rise tomorrow.

And now you're simply expanding what I said to non-arguments that aren't related to the topic at hand at all. Why not argue the facts I mentioned, not the generic non-argument statement? Also, how sure are you that the sun will rise tomorrow? Someday, it definitely won't. So your statement isn't 100% true. See? I can argue nonsense too!


And I know you are trying to justify a post that is unjustifiable.

Right, because I already posted links and facts that proved my point. You haven't argued anything factual, just vague arguments on non-related stuff I said. Where's your proof that 85% or so of infections go asymptomatic and undiscovered? Right, you don't have any real evidence, or even non-evidence, to support your argument.

[jdsteel]

Your quote:

“However, I cannot vouch for the validity of data.”

You should have just stopped there.

[Svartalfiar]

Your quote:

“However, I cannot vouch for the validity of data.”

You should have just stopped there.

Huh? Of course I can't vouch for it - JH is a medical institution (well-respected) that I am in no way affiliated with, so I have no involvement in the procurement of said data. Of course I can't vouch for it, but that has nothing to to with its reliability.

But no, I should have stopped much earlier. It was pretty obvious early on in our conversation that you aren't here to have intellectual discussion or learn new things, you just want to argue and grasp at nonsensical/tangential parts of the conversation to make argument over that, and avoid any kind of real discussion.

[jdsteel]

Cool. So stop responding and I will.