Posted on 03/17/2020 12:40:25 PM PDT by ChicagoConservative27
A Belgian doctor working to battle the coronavirus says he’s treated several seriously ill young patients — and their lung scans were “nothing short of terrifying,” according to reports.
Dr. Ignace Demeyer, who works at a hospital in Aalst, said an increasing number of people between the ages of 30 and 50 have presented with severe symptoms, despite having “blank medical records” that show no underlying conditions that would make them high-risk, the Brussels Times reported.
“They just walk in, but they are terribly affected by the virus,” Demeyer told the Belgian broadcaster VRT.
He said CT scans indicated they were suffering from severe lung damage.
“The images we took yesterday are nothing short of terrifying,” the doctor told the station.
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...
That's what the textbook formula will show for any historical epidemic.
Why? Because ALL the cases are resolved.
The text book formula assumes everyone who had the Spanish Flu in 1918 either died of it or survived. A very reasonable assumption for 102 years later...
Using a formula that is based on all cases resolved for an ongoing epi-(or pan-)demic is flawed at the get-go.
If you use ALL RESOLVED cases as the denominator the recovered and deceased percentages will add up to 100. And those percentages will better predict the outcomes for the still ill.
I am not adding them to anything, that is where you have gone astray here.
There were 712 people infected.
Of those 712, 525 have recovered and 7 have died, which total 532. That means I have left out 180 people, and that is because they are still classified as infected.
(525/712) * 100 = 73.7%
(7/712) * 100 = 1%
(180/712) * 100 = 25.3% (actually 25.28, but rounded up is 25.3%)
Those 3 classifications add up to 712, which is 100% of the number infected. Thus when the still infected classification hits 0, the 2 remaining classifications will adjust and their percentages with also adjust. But in no way can the recovered equal 100%.
Note: I think in my previous response I think I typed 108 instead of 180. My dyslexia at work there. 8>)
At some point in time it will, but there are 180 people who have not died, nor have they recovered. I just didn’t present the still infected number and percentage. I gave the dead and recovered and their percentages thus far. It’s still ongoing. We are not talking about something that happened in the past we are talking real time here.
Hello? Helloo?
You are using everyone diagnosed as the denominator, INCLUDING people who are not RESOLVED cases.
Try:
(525/(7+525)) * 100 = 98.7% (7/(7+525)) * 100 = 1.3%
98.7+1.3=100% of the RESOLVED cases
We can now predict that of the 180 still sick people about 178 will recover and about 2 won't.
What does vaping do to lungs? Especially the stuff that was killing kids a while back?
Beat me to it.
The Netherlands ICUs are over HALF filled with patients UNDER 50.
So tell me how many ICU beds exist in each country as a percent of the population?
You statistic has a "yuge" gaping hole in it.
If this is so, it is definitely not like the normal flu viruses.
To carry that point to its logical conclusion, how could anyone know what the long term prognosis is since this Coronavirus mutation has not existed for very long?
obvious questions I am not even seeing discussed publicly.
the answers likely are somewhere in the ‘not ideal’ range at best.
i have posters on reddit chide me for asking or making speculative questions when I point this general issue up. this years damaged survivors increase the death pool next wave.
The way you are doing it is giving you the resolved percentages.
That is not what I was trying to provide, nor is it the way any of the sites that are reporting report on this, or any virus, does it. They give you the real time percentages based upon the number infected. If you don't believe me, check for yourself. In the case where you know the number of infected can no longer increase, you can determine with certainty when the recovered is going to be the majority outcome. With the Diamond Princess we know what the final infected number is. We also know that a recovery rate of 73.7% is the lowest possible percentage, but we still do not know what the final percentage will be. That gives you some kind of statistics from which to make projections, especially with the Diamond Princess, because of the circumstances involved. It was the perfect petri dish to see real results in a very controlled environment, where infected crew members cooked food, people eating together, close living quarters, lots of social interaction, and a lot of older people were a part of the population on the cruise ship, yet 83% did not get infected. Since we know that 83% did not get infected, that means 17% did get infected. we also know that 712 people got infected. Thus 712 / .17 = 4,188. 4,188 - 712 = 3,476 who did not get infected under those conditions. Why is that We don't know completely, but we know that under those conditions it affected 17% or 712 people. So we can use that as a worse case scenario and say that 17% of the world is the upper end of the number that would possibly be infected. But thankfully the world is not like being in close quarters like a cruise ship for an extended period of time. In the U.S. that means the upper number who contract the virus is 59,500,000 in a worse case scenario. If the recovered rate is 73,7%, 43,851,500 would recover and 15,648,500 would die in the U.S. alone. Remember now that we are using the current recovered rate, so this is a worse case scenario as it stands now, Scary numbers, but they are based upon the information that is currently available, so it truly is the worse possible outcome as it stands with the percentages we know today. But the real world would probably bring far less numbers then this worse case scenario.
Using your method we would have a 98.7% recovered rate, but at best it would stand pat, but more likely it would decline, as more people died. So you would give a rosier worse case scenario than using my method, but when is starts declining it becomes worse. So you might tend to react slower, rather than quicker in the worse case scenario my method delivers. I'm not going to take the effort to actually calculate out the worse case scenario using your method, but I know already that 98.7% recovery rate is going to lessen the impact of that using 73.7 recovery rate. Using my method I know right now what the worse recovery rate I can expect, even though it is not the final recovery rate. Yours is going to offer the best possible as it stands right now.
OK, I think we’ve both done a good job of explaining why we do the calculations the way we do.
We are both honest brokers in attempting to sell our methods to each other.
Neither has convinced the other.
I think we should just agree to disagree and let our grandchildren decide if either of us was right!
I’d rather tell one of the still sick that so far 98.7% of the resolved cases survived. You’d rather say at least 73.7% of the infected have already survived. Both are accurate. Either way the survivors will survive, and the fatalities won’t be complaining!
Good story.
Not relevant. This isn’t the flu. I wish you understood the difference. But, You and your pappy had pneumonia and you were just fine.
You have no idea how ignorant that it.
And what part did the dog and dating service have to do with this?
And, if I had smoked as long as you did, I would be paying a lot better attention...because your flu infested lungs are just what this virus is looking for.
And..moving on and getting on with life? What is that all about? You have the opportunity to not get this thing, and you dismiss it so casually? How stupid is that?
If your best case scenario does not pan out then everyone accuses you of not telling the truth. If you plan on the worse case scenario then you will not be caught flat footed. This is why I do not have an issue with the measures being taken. It can only hasten the flat line of progression. While giving the best case scenario you might lessen the fear & panic for the moment but as it worsens, which it would, then the fear & panic will ensue at that later point in time. So far the numbers still look good, and I truly believe a better case scenario will be the reality then my current worse case scenario points to. But panic is never beneficial in either scenario.
I believe that the cases are extremely under reported which is skewing the percentages. That won't correct itself until mass testing can occur.
I blame the CDC for this lack of testing, and the primary cause has been their foray into studies that are useless and offer nothing. Their mandate and reason for existing is just these types of events. They have no reason testing monkeys drinking alcohol for example and seeing what happens. Even I could have told them the monkeys would get drunk. Same goes for looking into why lesbians are fat. Because they eat to compensate for their attraction to the same sex. They know that their desires are not normal. Even if we accept their behavior it will not make them any happier. But this is exactly why the CDC has failed, not following their stated mandate and branching off into nonsense that helps no one in the long run.
Any way, let's join forces and pray that the good Lord will assist us in combating this virus. 8>)
Any way, let's join forces and pray that the good Lord will assist us in combating this virus. 8>)
ummm, I'm an agnostic. I'll worry, you pray. No one should do both!
We'll get through this at least somewhere between 73.7 to 98.7% of us in your example...
i don’t know- i read it here on FR the other day- 2-3 days ago now- talking about a more virulent strain in certain countries- I can’t recall now whether it was a medical article or just another reporter’s opinion to be honest-
have a look at this thread talking about soem other strains of it- it’s just a post- 2n’d one- but i guess they saw the article too
https://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3825640/posts
You have no idea how ignorant that it.
I never had pneumonia with that fungus infection, just a persistent unproductive cough, the same as the dog I didn't even feel sick at all but it left visible lasting scars in my lungs. You have no idea how ignorant you sound. I was talking about surviving with scarring in my lungs with no later symptoms, the same as the permanent effects of a history of smoking.
Here is what I would like to get across to you and your Coronavirus Crisis Clowns. Your collective extreme agitation and fear mongering is causing our economy to tank. My 401k has lost tens of thousands of dollars in value in just weeks. It was supposed to be there for wife's and my survival when we are incapacitated in later years.
I cannot comprehend what you hope to achieve by your ranting and posturing. Our government is doing all that anyone could hope to be done. Do want martial law declared to keep everyone off of the streets for months on end? Your panic is the worst part of this Coronavirus scare.
Your reading comprehension is not very good is it. I didn’t say I smoked for 35 years. I have been a non-smoker for 35 years. I believe I was an addicted smoker for about 12 years. I cannot be sure because I neglected to write down anywhere the date that I quit and of course I got into the habit gradually so I couldn’t say when that was too.
I do not dismiss it casually. I recognize the full risks. I was a PMI and ITIL certified Program and Project Manager at Verizon Business. I know how to calculate risk. I have health risk factors myself.
The greatest risk that I see right now is people that scream to the world that the sky is falling which is causing the destruction of our nation with their panic.
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.