Posted on 01/31/2020 8:50:37 PM PST by catnipman
They found that all four of these spike protein inserts appear as matches to at least one sequence in at least one variant of the HIV virus. The sequences come from the gp120 and Gag proteins in HIV, the former of which is also a viral envelope recognition protein. This has led many to credulously assume that this is evidence, or even a strong indication, that 2019-nCoV was engineered from its bat ancestor by humans inserting HIV sequences.
But they’re wrong; it’s still not engineered. An analysis of the paper clearly reveals that:
1. There is nothing remarkable about the fact that 2019-nCoV’s sequence diverges from its nearest known relative, or that its unique sequences are conserved among cases of 2019-nCoV.
2. The sequence matches with HIV are very short and appear in hypervariable regions of both virus, and similar overlaps are seen between 2019-nCoV sequences and many other organisms.
3. The unique biological properties that HIV sequences could theoretically impart to another virus are completely missing from 2019-nCoV, and 2019-nCoV has no unique clinical properties that are outside what is known to be possible for a coronavirus.
In other words, the sequence overlap is not actually uncanny, and there is no big scoop here. The group in India fell prey to some of the pitfalls of bioinformatics research.
The 2019-nCoV genome does not contain remarkable genomic properties which need explaining, and for which we’d look to some kind of bioengineering as a cause.
2019-nCoV continues to give every appearance of being a wild coronavirus that jumped from bats to humans by way of an animal intermediary in the Huanan seafood market in Wuhan in late 2019.
(Excerpt) Read more at theprepared.com ...
No deaths in the west is promising.
Have you read the NEJM paper?
https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2001191
“People won’t get bills by November.”
I had to fly through the ER last January. Bills arrived in late February.
Everything else is only a guess, heavily skewed by deliberate false reporting.
I've set the ceiling, oddly enough at one point almost exactly the number you found - based on the same type of ICU specific data - that scared you with your daughter.
The floor set by CCP processed information is 2.2%, or if you can't see past lunch, 0% in the western world.
I hope your daughter is OK. Hang in there.
That’s a false equivalence. A death and a number of fully recovered patients is not the same thing. People on the way to full recovery are not counted, nor are people who are not close to death. Apples and oranges. You are STILL assuming that half of the people who get infected are going to die without evidence that is the case, when there is no such factual evidence.
The SARS outbreak in 2003 is the only analog to this outbreak and it does not support your assumptions. Not even close. There the WHO report shows an average mortality rate of 9.6% with the vast majority of deaths and virulence in China with a mortality rate of 17%, with almost no deaths outside of Asia and an equal 17% rate in Canada (why? I suspect a large influx on a couple of flights into Canada), but everywhere else, the mortality rate was essentially zero.
82.154% of statistics are made up on the spot.
Where did your number come from? The only official recovered numbers I've seen thus far are the ICU numbers. We know how many are reported sick, but not much in the way of how many recovered or died on their own.
Show me! I really want to know!
I have numbers on documented cases back to 01/20/2020. I only have mortality and recovery numbers since the 27th.
Since the 27th the recovery rate has risen from 1.407% to 2.387, just short of 1.0% better.
That was reasoned, because as time passes, one outcome or another will result. It was too early to expect a large recovery number on the 27th. Now we’ll probably (hopefully) see that percentage climb.
The mortality rate has drifted a bit down since the 27th, 2.392% to 2.154%.
Both of these percentages fluctuate during the day. By this evening the mortality percentage may eclipse the recovery percentage again.
That has happened once before.
I hadn’t realized that until I noticed it in my figures a few minutes ago.
China doesn’t seem to release their mortality figures until after 20:00 EST each day. That’s when the mortality percentages look the highest and the recovery percentages can drop below.
We’ll see later how that turns out for today.
The real election impact will come from a worldwide slowdown led by China, a shutdown in tourism, and other economic and market impacts. We have to get it under control by the spring for the markets to bounce back in time.
Once again, as I have repeatedly said, and will repeat yet again: I'M ONLY REPORTING THE ICU OUTCOMES!!!
This is the very worst case.
This is also the only hard numbers available for how many recovered. I'm not going to assume that everyone "on the way to full recovery are not counted, nor are people who are not close to death" is going to live, nor do I count the merely sick as alive or dead, I'm only counting the cohort that includes the ONLY mention of recovered, the sick enough to be in the ICU cohort.
Relapses and recoveries on the uncounted masses cannot be quantified. ICU numbers are as solid as the CCP will admit.
If 10,00 people came down with nCoV today, what would you report as their survival rate today? No fatalities, everyone survives!!!!
TODAY some 12,000 cases are reported. Since only 287 ICU patient have died, does this mean the fatality rate is 2.39%?
That's what half the people here seem to be stubbornly asserting!
IOW, anyone ending up in an ICU has a less than 50% chance of walking out.That's what the actual published statistics say.
And that is NOT what those statistics you pointed to are reporting. They are NOT reporting ICU admissions. If they were, I’d agree with you, but they are reporting worldwide infections, deaths, and full recoveries. (What is a full recovery? Asymptomatic? Release from the hospital? What?) So far, every one of the deaths have occurred in mainland China, where the medical care is not as good as it could be.
Also, as I mentioned, recovering patients are not counted, nor are merely ill patients. For example, the linked patient #1 in the US in the Seattle area, a 35 year old man, is on his way to recovery, but is not listed on the map you linked as even being in the USA. No red dot there. However, he is out of danger.
OK, now do the reverse, rather than comparing the total number sick to the ICU fatalities numbers, compare it to the ICU recovered numbers.
12,000 sick 287 recovered means it has a recovery rate of 2.39% or a fatality rate of 97.6%, that’s rather absurd don’t ya think?
12,000 sick 259 reported fatalities means a fatality rate of only 2.16%, or a 97.8% survival rate. I like that number, but in requires no one sick today ever die of nCoV.
Thank you.
That Remdesivir seems to be a helpful tool, although it was mentioned that the best dosage regimens are still to be determined.
The regular medications did not seem to have much effect on this virus, but upon initiation of the Remdesivir, improvement seemed rather pronounced.
I’ll keep that medication in mind for future reference, for myself and my circle of family members and friends.
This article is an excellent reference, if a physician should challenge a patient who requests this medication upon initiation of therapy for 2019 nCoV.
Exactly. . . The mild symptomatic cases that take Robitussin or other over-the-counter flu medications and go about their business, spreading it during its viral shedding stage as the cough and sneeze. They don’t report they have it.
I see. If we only count people going into ICU we can ignore the ones who aren’t dead yet and count them as survivors.
So if the ICU admitted 100 struggling patents, and today 5 left in a box, while 5 were released, then the fatality rate is 5%, not half the people leaving are dead?
Did I capture your reasoning?
Johns Hopkins University
https://gisanddata.maps.arcgis.com/apps/opsdashboard/index.html#/bda7594740fd40299423467b48e9ecf6
I fervently hope most patients only need Robotussin, and that they won’t catch it again, and that they have the good sense to self-isolate!
I ignored the 24 extra patients in my 12,000 number, so sue me.
Until a person is not classified as deceased or recovered, they are classified as indeterminate, not a fatality.
That’s okay. I understood your point.
Yup, so you admit using an indeterminate number as your denominator? How does that work on your calculator? Mine seems to be missing an indeterminate number key.
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.