today's death tolls continue to be miniscule. While the numbers of new cases is rising quickly in some places, deaths are not, except in Iran and Italy. Seems that this thing is not a massive killer.
Italy stats not in yet.
Deaths listed as 'today'
Iran 63
China 22
Spain 11
South K 1
Germany 1
USA 1
Belgium 1
Lebanon 1
Indonesia 1
Panama 1
Nothing else listed.
Trollminator wrote:
Ciro wrote:
An absolute scumbag, I present Jamin’s hero.
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/infowars-host-alex-jones-charged-dwi-texas-n1154816Like I said, it’s unfortunate the cops stopped him before he drove drunk across some nice tall bridge.
Be better.
agip wrote:
today's death tolls continue to be miniscule. While the numbers of new cases is rising quickly in some places, deaths are not, except in Iran and Italy. Seems that this thing is not a massive killer.
Italy stats not in yet.
Deaths listed as 'today'
Iran 63
China 22
Spain 11
South K 1
Germany 1
USA 1
Belgium 1
Lebanon 1
Indonesia 1
Panama 1
Nothing else listed.
P is going to yell at you now.
Yosinglerct wrote:
agip wrote:
today's death tolls continue to be miniscule. While the numbers of new cases is rising quickly in some places, deaths are not, except in Iran and Italy. Seems that this thing is not a massive killer.
Italy stats not in yet.
Deaths listed as 'today'
Iran 63
China 22
Spain 11
South K 1
Germany 1
USA 1
Belgium 1
Lebanon 1
Indonesia 1
Panama 1
Nothing else listed.
P is going to yell at you now.
yeah and I am a bit of a hack on this thing since I don't know much about the subject.
But it sure seems to me that this will be remembered as an illness that was contagious but not particularly deadly. I sure hope that is how it is remembered anyway.
Quibbling over death rates and number of reported cases doesn't matter so much as how people and businesses are reacting to the situation.
Businesses are concerned about a recession and are looking to prepare.
Some will be looking to stockpile cash to be able to handle a downturn. Businesses building cash is not a good thing for the economy, because it means they aren't buying stuff from other businesses. And as these other businesses look at a softer forecast, they will also back off of purchases.
This will spread faster than a virus and affect the entire economy.
A tax cut doesn't help this because people will not spend the extra money.
It will juice the stock market for a minute, but it doesn't pay a great return on the borrowing.
In 2008, TARP was a program that bought bad assets from banks and helped them continue.
They need to be smart about this and I don't trust this administration to be smart and I don't trust the president to listen to smart people.
agip wrote:
today's death tolls continue to be miniscule. While the numbers of new cases is rising quickly in some places, deaths are not, except in Iran and Italy. Seems that this thing is not a massive killer.
Italy stats not in yet.
Deaths listed as 'today'
Iran 63
China 22
Spain 11
South K 1
Germany 1
USA 1
Belgium 1
Lebanon 1
Indonesia 1
Panama 1
Nothing else listed.
Those numbers are as of midnight GMT today. So the day is only half over and nations like the US are just starting to report their data. (For the US, the numbers are almost meaningless because we are still ramping up our testing.)
Italy had 168 deaths yesterday. Iran had 54. So 63 deaths at this point in the day for Iran is rather alarming.
As to the question of how deadly this disease is, it's still hard to tell. It's obvious that COVID-19 is several times more deadly than the common flu. And it's extremely contagious so we need to slow down its spread so that health care systems are not overwhelmed and we have time to develop a vaccine.
In terms of total deaths, this is very likely to be the worst pandemic since the 1918 Spanish Flu. The fact that Tiny has been bumbling his response and STILL doesn't have a comprehensive plan means a lot more Americans will die.
agip wrote:
Yosinglerct wrote:
P is going to yell at you now.
yeah and I am a bit of a hack on this thing since I don't know much about the subject.
But it sure seems to me that this will be remembered as an illness that was contagious but not particularly deadly. I sure hope that is how it is remembered anyway.
Spanish flu had an estimated 1% mortality rate and killed around 50 million world wide. Covid-19 has a similar mortality rate. Whether it kills as many as Spanish flu will depend largely on how successful countries are at containing it and limiting its spread, and the quality of general healthcare, which is better than it was in 1918.
L L wrote:
Quibbling over death rates and number of reported cases doesn't matter so much as how people and businesses are reacting to the situation.
No, no, no, no!!!!!!
Deaths are a LOT more important than business and the economy.
Screw the economy. The economy will recover. You don't recover from death. The numbers are important because they guide our response and help us prevent those deaths.
Armstronglivs wrote:
agip wrote:
yeah and I am a bit of a hack on this thing since I don't know much about the subject.
But it sure seems to me that this will be remembered as an illness that was contagious but not particularly deadly. I sure hope that is how it is remembered anyway.
Spanish flu had an estimated 1% mortality rate and killed around 50 million world wide. Covid-19 has a similar mortality rate. Whether it kills as many as Spanish flu will depend largely on how successful countries are at containing it and limiting its spread, and the quality of general healthcare, which is better than it was in 1918.
Spanish flu killed young healthy people. Particularly young, healthy men.
this thing absolutely does not. Or has not, anyway. It doesn't even seem to have any affect on children.
Remember we're three months into this thing and we're counting deaths per country on one hand.
Except in Italy and Iran, which is a big 'except' yes.
But I suspect the quarrantines and hand washing will work there like it works everywhere else.
One thing on testing...do not trust any mortality statistics at all. We have no idea how widespread this thing is. We won't until afterwards when we test for antibodies. Saying the mortality rate is similar to Spanish Flu is just not a scientific fact. It should not be repeated.
Fat hurts wrote:
L L wrote:
Quibbling over death rates and number of reported cases doesn't matter so much as how people and businesses are reacting to the situation.
No, no, no, no!!!!!!
Deaths are a LOT more important than business and the economy.
Screw the economy. The economy will recover. You don't recover from death. The numbers are important because they guide our response and help us prevent those deaths.
In the context of a political thread, how the economy reacts to the spread of the virus affects way more people than the virus itself.
And I was talking about the quibbling over the numbers. 1 death vs 5 deaths. 1% death rate vs 4% death rate.
Delving into this minutia of detail overlooks a bigger affect to more people.
If I have a friend that gets killed by a drunk driver, that's not making national news and won't change business behavior. But it's a death. And it's preventable.
If I have a friend that dies of the coronavirus, that is making national news and it does change businesses behavior. It's still one death.
Obviously some deaths are more important to the news cycle than others.
Let's assume the virus comes and then passes and we move on. The economic impact could be much greater than the health impact compared to other health and death issues.
This is about fear of the unknown.
I think much of the issue here is that people aren't making enough of a distinction between the number of infections and the number of deaths.
The number of infections is alarming and scary.
The number of deaths is neither alarming nor scary.
But people conflate the two and it's causing a lot of panic.
this is where we are probably going with this one 20% of humans had the thing but wasn't particularly deadly. On a percentage basis anyway.
The 2009 flu pandemic or swine flu was an influenza pandemic that lasted from early 2009 to late 2010, and the second of the two pandemics involving H1N1 influenza virus (the first of them being the 1918–1920 Spanish flu pandemic), albeit a new strain. First described in April 2009, the virus appeared to be a new strain of H1N1 which resulted when a previous triple reassortment of bird, swine and human flu viruses further combined with a Eurasian pig flu virus,[1] leading to the term "swine flu".[2] It is estimated that 11–21% of the then global population (of about 6.8 billion), or around 700 million–1.4 billion people contracted the illness — more in absolute terms than the Spanish flu pandemic.[3][4] However, with about 150,000–575,000 fatalities, it had a much lower case fatality rate of 0.01-0.08%.[5]
Maybe the panic is unwarranted and stats are being conflated but the panic is real and is affecting decisions.
Shutting whole countries down.
I got a text that our school system is shutting down all out of state travel for the year.
The markets are obviously not happy about the future. Then people react to how the markets are reacting.
Plus, people don't believe stats or the news.
The cases of infections may be way under reported, which means the actual death rate would be much lower.
My company had 5 people out with the flu last week and survived. Maybe they all had coronavirus and weren't tested for it. That would bring the death rate down.
L L wrote:
My company had 5 people out with the flu last week and survived. Maybe they all had coronavirus and weren't tested for it. That would bring the death rate down.
If there is a positive, it is that people who are actually sick will stay home from work instead of dragging it to their office and infecting their co-workers. Cornoavirus of not, that is the sensible thing. I have gotten so tired of telling coworkers not to come in when they are sick....I mostly work from home now so it no longer affects me as directly
L L wrote:
The cases of infections may be way under reported, which means the actual death rate would be much lower.
My company had 5 people out with the flu last week and survived. Maybe they all had coronavirus and weren't tested for it. That would bring the death rate down.
Unless your company is in a known hot spot, that's unlikely. Enough people apparently have serious enough symptoms to require hospitalization for COVID-19, so if you were in a population that's been exposed to the virus, it's likely you would know it. That is, these people almost certainly had something other than COVID-19.
Consider that a lot of the survivors in Wuhan were hospitalized for a week or more which is a huge strain on the healthcare system (and personal finances) that isn't captured by mortality statistics.
I seriously doubt my coworkers had it but how many people catch any flu or virus without being tested and going onto any statistical database?
Weird. It seemed like South Korea had things under control with new cases declining each day. Suddenly today we already have 242 new cases.
agip wrote:
I think much of the issue here is that people aren't making enough of a distinction between the number of infections and the number of deaths.
The number of infections is alarming and scary.
The number of deaths is neither alarming nor scary.
But people conflate the two and it's causing a lot of panic.
Correct!
Monkeys typing wrote:
L L wrote:
The cases of infections may be way under reported, which means the actual death rate would be much lower.
My company had 5 people out with the flu last week and survived. Maybe they all had coronavirus and weren't tested for it. That would bring the death rate down.
Unless your company is in a known hot spot, that's unlikely. Enough people apparently have serious enough symptoms to require hospitalization for COVID-19, so if you were in a population that's been exposed to the virus, it's likely you would know it. That is, these people almost certainly had something other than COVID-19.
Consider that a lot of the survivors in Wuhan were hospitalized for a week or more which is a huge strain on the healthcare system (and personal finances) that isn't captured by mortality statistics.
This is every local government's worst nightmare... which is why reducing the number of people commuting and commuting at the same time is critical now to reduce the intensity of the spread. Don't want hospitals and clinics to get too overwhelmed.