Here's the link:
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/index.html
Posted on 03/06/2020 9:14:39 AM PST by FreedomNotSafety
Because the U.S. data on coronavirus infections are so deeply flawed, the quantification of the outbreak obscures more than it illuminates.
(Excerpt) Read more at amp.theatlantic.com ...
Trump must have read this article. It aligns with his recent remarks.
An idea not without merit.
+
I’m not and never have been a hand-shaker. I don’t see the point of shaking someone’s hand. Common sense also tells me to avoid people who are coughing or blowing their noses as well as crowded, closed-in spaces. Especially in the winter months.
How many cases have to be out there to turn 3,454 deaths into a less than 1% mortality rate?
Is this article saying that the contagion is far wider than they say? But we can’t quantify the number of cases because of low levels of testing? And that the mortality rate is therefore very low in the US because we do have an idea of the number of dead, but not the number of infected?
Or am I mis-reading?
That is nice. Did you read the article? It is about the use of misleading statistics.
Here's the link:
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/index.html
How many cases have to be out there to turn 3,454 deaths into a less than 1% mortality rate?
The issue addressed by the article is that we do not have the data to calculate meaningful statistics. It has nothing to do with cultural norms. Unless you count hysteria as a cultural norm.
The Atlantic is filled with leftist drivel and anti Trump hatred. Every article is filled with bias. Not a believable source.
As I understand, 14 people in the US have died. Twelve of them are in Washington state, ten of which came from the Life Site care center.
So doesn’t that mean, discounting Life Site, that a total of four people in this country have died from coronavirus?
A typical flu is measured over how many months?
Towering intellect, Alexis Madrigal.
No question that it is. My surprise is that it is so prevalent on FRee Republic.
People with extra strong immune systems may not even know they were infected. Some may think they had a flu virus because they never needed treatment but got better. But since they had the virus they were able to spread it.
While I personally think the numbers are inaccurate, the fact that China was the hardest hit points to that country as the definite origin of the virus.
This may help answer your question. From the article:
“ The point is that every country’s numbers are the result of a specific set of testing and accounting regimes. Everyone is cooking the data, one way or another. ”
He seems to want to fan the flames of alarm rather than quell it, although he did indeed mention that possibility
.
That uncertainty is always present because of the same issue... if it’s not alarming enough, said event will not be reported.
But author instead seems intent on putting everyone on high alert and that this might be some kind of major negligence.
A typical flu is measured over how many months?
It would take that many undetected cases TODAY to make the death rate like the flu, though right now, neither is done this year.
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.