Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: larrysav
SARS has a 3.7% mortality rate but appears to be less transmissible than flu.

Please, I've been trying to get a handle on numbers on this and have found nothing but confusion.

Are you saying if one excludes those currently afflicted/infected by the disease, that 3.7% of those who caught SARS died and 96.3% recovered (albeit possibly impaired)?

Or are you saying that 3.7% of those diagnosed thus far have died?

There's a big difference between the two. Imagine a disease that takes exactly 10 years to run its course and at the end of the course it is always, 100%, fatal. Let's say it's detected one year after first onset. For 9 years, under the second definition above, it has a 0% "mortality rate"; nobody's died (yet). After 10 years the rate will start to grow, but as long as the disease exists it will never reach a mortality rate of exactly 100%, even though everyone who gets it dies of it (uless they die of something else first).

Forgive me for stating the obvious, but I've seen enough of the above confusion. I'd like real answers and it seems you might have them -- I just want to be sure. (Can you provide sources for these figures, btw?)

117 posted on 03/29/2003 6:43:52 PM PST by Eala
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies ]


To: Eala
Additionally, I would like to know-of those people who have gotten ill and haven't died-a break down of those that are hospitalized and still not recovered, home but still not recovered, hospitalized but citical and, most importantly, if anyone has made a complete recovery and is out and about doing OK?

This is driving me crazy. Is there a chance that people out there have gotten SARS and never gotten to the point where they have been hospitalized? Does everyone who gets it end up in ICU?

118 posted on 03/29/2003 6:48:05 PM PST by riri
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 117 | View Replies ]

To: Eala
Or are you saying that 3.7% of those diagnosed thus far have died?

The 3.7% is computed by dividing the total number of deaths by the total number of cases.

And you're right: It's a totally bogus way of computing the mortality rate for a new disease at such an early stage that the vast majority of the victims are still sick, with many in intensive care.

125 posted on 03/29/2003 10:36:07 PM PST by EternalHope (Chirac is funny, France is a joke.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 117 | View Replies ]

To: Eala
Are you saying if one excludes those currently afflicted/infected by the disease, that 3.7% of those who caught SARS died and 96.3% recovered (albeit possibly impaired)? Or are you saying that 3.7% of those diagnosed thus far have died?

3.7% of those admitted to the hospital and formally diagnosed have died thus far. Some folks have recovered enough to be released. Most of those still in the hospital are reported to be feeling better.

As was said earlier, we don't really know what the mortality rate is as there are probably people in the population that are not seeking or requiring medical care for this.

Good data only exists for those in the hospital.

If you are looking for a good, level-headed source of information, I recommend the PROMED list.

http://www.fas.org/promed/index.html

126 posted on 03/30/2003 6:10:02 AM PST by larrysav
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 117 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson