Posted on 03/29/2020 7:00:50 PM PDT by FoxInSocks
If one assumes that the number of asymptomatic or minimally symptomatic cases is several times as high as the number of reported cases, the case fatality rate may be considerably less than 1%. This suggests that the overall clinical consequences of Covid-19 may ultimately be more akin to those of a severe seasonal influenza (which has a case fatality rate of approximately 0.1%) or a pandemic influenza (similar to those in 1957 and 1968) rather than a disease similar to SARS or MERS, which have had case fatality rates of 9 to 10% and 36%, respectively.
(Excerpt) Read more at nejm.org ...
Did he actually say that now?
That editorial was published Feb 28. I do not believe this is his current position, and if it is, he is talking some awfully high numbers of case fatalities.
At the time the article was written, there were only a small number of cases in the USA:
"As of February 26, 2020, there had been 14 cases detected in the United States involving travel to China or close contacts with travelers, 3 cases among U.S. citizens repatriated from China, and 42 cases among U.S. passengers repatriated from a cruise ship where the infection had spread."
Dr. Fauci was writing about the situation when there were 17 cases in the entire country, plus the isolated cruise ship passengers.
Also, he was contrasting COVID-19 to SARS and MERS which have dramatically higher fatality rates.
This article is interesting for historical purposes, but not much else.
So far there has been appx 2100 deaths from the corona flu. They didn’t all die in one day. This has been going on for a couple of weeks so the daily death rate would be around 150 people a day. Plus babies are being born every day. So the percentage of deaths are lower than total deaths to the population of America.
This question has been debated every day. I thought the same thing but have been convinced that you can’t determine the fatality rate at this time. There are too many cases that are unresolved. Today the confirmed cases is about 140,000 and only about 9,000 have cleared with apx 1200 deaths. That leaves 130,000 of the confirmed cases undetermined - too big a number to draw any conclusions, and anything you did conclude would only be a snapshot in time not predictive of anything.
The editorial date must be an error as many of the references in the article are dated in March 2020.
as my lab virologist contact has pointed out from the first week or so of their own data collection. as they ramped up testing (now 100’s per run), they still get about a 10% covid positive rate from *symptomatic* testing.
NEJM, dated March 26th.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019%E2%80%9320_coronavirus_pandemic#Epidemiology
United States
Cases 142,402
Deaths 2,497
Recoveries 4,767
There’s much pressure on him from political investment interests, and he’s old. This nurse was very ill for 26 days (see do the math).
Colorado nurse contracts coronavirus: ‘A lot of my friends are nurses at the hospital and they’re very worried’
https://www.foxnews.com/media/colorado-nurse-coronavirus-hospital-worried
Posted again?
“If one assumes that the number of asymptomatic or minimally symptomatic cases is several times as high as the number of reported cases,”
If one assumes
If one assumes
If one assumes
That phrase means it is not based upon data, but is conditional if one assumes certain things which are not known.
This was from over a month ago. He’s now said otherwise.
There’s some difficulty in reading scientific papers, but this is pretty straightforward here. Did people forget how to read?
So far there has been appx 2100 deaths from the corona flu. They didn’t all die in one day. This has been going on for a couple of weeks so the daily death rate would be around 150 people a day. Plus babies are being born every day. So the percentage of deaths are lower than total deaths to the population of America.
Good Data from South Korea, just use them.
“That editorial was published Feb 28. I do not believe this is his current position, and if it is, he is talking some awfully high numbers of case fatalities.”
*********************************************
He is a data guy who is facing a situation that has been, up to now, severely deficient in HARD DATA. As a result of that DATA DEFICIT, he has been all over the board with his PROJECTIONS. He has has projections of deaths that are very low based upon optimistic ASSUMPTIONS & ESTIMATES. And he has some very depressing PROJECTIONS based upon the most PESSIMISTIC (and UNREALISTIC) ASSUMPTIONS & ESTIMATES.
As more data accumulates, the projections will be more accurate. And with the waves of new and FASTER testing capabilities coming online in vastly greater volumes, HARD DATA WILL RAPIDLY ACCUMULATE. And, in my opinion, the projections will grow both more accurate and LOWER.
From where do you get a publish date of 2/28?
The article is dated 3/26.
Right below the last sentence of the article it states it was published on Feb 28th
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.