How many healthy people killed by covid-19

Good point! They should really have a separate category and this should be part of the statistics. It's much more meaningful for the general population to know how many people who are healthy are being killed by this rather than just counting anyone who dies and test positive for this as a coronavirus victim

You would think this would be the most glaring statistic that everyone is talking about but I haven't seen it at all

Let's also remember the virus had weeks if not months to spread in Wuhan China City of 11 million and from what I can gather they were very few healthy people killed by it, 2,000 total deaths but mostly people already sick in that number

Absolutely now you're talkin sense! Seriously what good is it to tell me how many people died from it if you're including people who are terminal or in the hospital for serious conditions. Can I get a accurate picture of how many healthy people die from this

ALL LIVES MATTER!!!

Obviously that would be very useful info. But it gets a little dicey cuz people might start thinking you're not taking all I've seriously. I guess they could just separate out pre-existing conditions or a lot of time ago talk about comorbidity. Your chance of dying if you're a kid is almost zero. I know it's not technically zero but basically for all intensive purposes. Anyway I guess you just got to figure out how close your immune system is to that of a child's and if it's fairly close you probably have almost no chance of being injured from this disease

Stopwatcher wrote:

Obviously that would be very useful info. But it gets a little dicey cuz people might start thinking you're not taking all I've seriously. I guess they could just separate out pre-existing conditions or a lot of time ago talk about comorbidity. Your chance of dying if you're a kid is almost zero. I know it's not technically zero but basically for all intensive purposes. Anyway I guess you just got to figure out how close your immune system is to that of a child's and if it's fairly close you probably have almost no chance of being injured from this disease

It’s “intents and purposes.”

Maybe literally zero.

8. Deaths under the age of 50 yearsTo date (March the 20th), 36 of 3200 (1.1%) COVID-19 positive patients under the age of 50 have died. Inparticular, 9 of these were younger than 40 years, 8 men and 1 woman (age range between 31 and 39years). For 2 patients under the age of 40 years, no clinical information is available; the remaining 7 hadserious pre-existing pathologies (cardiovascular, renal, psychiatric pathologies, diabetes, obesity).

https://www.epicentro.iss.it/coronavirus/bollettino/Report-COVID-2019_20_marzo_eng.pdf

Yeah the funny thing is just how a rational people are about being germophobic and thinking they're not going to be exposed to the virus

I mean you can't live in a bubble and obviously the virus is being transmitted. Yeah it makes sense to be cautious and slow the spread so Healthcare doesn't get overwhelmed but that's kind of why it would be important to figure out what risk category different people fall into

Obviously it's better to keep high-risk people isolated then to kill the whole economy and caused a lot of needless problems.

The problem with a lot of this is you get the pigeon in a box psychology phenomenon where people think that ineffective prevention measures are actually effective

Allen53 wrote:

8. Deaths under the age of 50 yearsTo date (March the 20th), 36 of 3200 (1.1%) COVID-19 positive patients under the age of 50 have died. Inparticular, 9 of these were younger than 40 years, 8 men and 1 woman (age range between 31 and 39years). For 2 patients under the age of 40 years, no clinical information is available; the remaining 7 hadserious pre-existing pathologies (cardiovascular, renal, psychiatric pathologies, diabetes, obesity).

https://www.epicentro.iss.it/coronavirus/bollettino/Report-COVID-2019_20_marzo_eng.pdf

Good post. So were killing the whole economy for nothing. Why isn't this being more widely reported?

Because people are Wishful thinkers who have Tendencies to see patterns where they are not. We are not good at judging risks and rewards and tend to fall into groupthink and herd like mentalities. Just like the reasons we are hoarding toilet paper

Seriously the info in this thread is what people need to hear. The media is being crazy for just pumping out figures of everyone who dies that is positive for the virus. Why don't we just do the same thing for the common cold also I'm sure thousands of thousands of people are dying with the common cold but it's really not very useful info

statistics can be deceiving wrote:

Allen53 wrote:

8. Deaths under the age of 50 yearsTo date (March the 20th), 36 of 3200 (1.1%) COVID-19 positive patients under the age of 50 have died. Inparticular, 9 of these were younger than 40 years, 8 men and 1 woman (age range between 31 and 39years). For 2 patients under the age of 40 years, no clinical information is available; the remaining 7 hadserious pre-existing pathologies (cardiovascular, renal, psychiatric pathologies, diabetes, obesity).

https://www.epicentro.iss.it/coronavirus/bollettino/Report-COVID-2019_20_marzo_eng.pdf

Good post. So were killing the whole economy for nothing. Why isn't this being more widely reported?

Because ALL LIVES MATTER, you damn murderous lib.

We’re not were*

Allen53 wrote:

8. Deaths under the age of 50 yearsTo date (March the 20th), 36 of 3200 (1.1%) COVID-19 positive patients under the age of 50 have died. Inparticular, 9 of these were younger than 40 years, 8 men and 1 woman (age range between 31 and 39years). For 2 patients under the age of 40 years, no clinical information is available; the remaining 7 hadserious pre-existing pathologies (cardiovascular, renal, psychiatric pathologies, diabetes, obesity).

https://www.epicentro.iss.it/coronavirus/bollettino/Report-COVID-2019_20_marzo_eng.pdf

Also heard that on average death statistics are actually down this year compared to the last several years for the same time frame January through April. Anyone else heard that. Maybe more specifically even deaths from respiratory illnesses. Or just deaths from infectious agents

statistics can be deceiving wrote:

Allen53 wrote:

8. Deaths under the age of 50 yearsTo date (March the 20th), 36 of 3200 (1.1%) COVID-19 positive patients under the age of 50 have died. Inparticular, 9 of these were younger than 40 years, 8 men and 1 woman (age range between 31 and 39years). For 2 patients under the age of 40 years, no clinical information is available; the remaining 7 hadserious pre-existing pathologies (cardiovascular, renal, psychiatric pathologies, diabetes, obesity).

https://www.epicentro.iss.it/coronavirus/bollettino/Report-COVID-2019_20_marzo_eng.pdf

Good post. So were killing the whole economy for nothing. Why isn't this being more widely reported?

That would then entail a full accounting of the media and those that have whipped up this frenzy. Means those who have been doing such hackneyed reporting would have to now do reports that should, in a sane world, cost them their jobs.

It's not "we" who are killing the economy BTW- it's "they." And that includes every member of Congress and Trumpster (as it was with Obama Inc.) who are fleecing the public yet again. Over 6 trillion just sucked into Wall St. yesterday.

“It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it.” ― Upton Sinclair

No hadn’t heard that.

ALL LIVES MATTER!!!

Chris P wrote:

Allen53 wrote:

8. Deaths under the age of 50 yearsTo date (March the 20th), 36 of 3200 (1.1%) COVID-19 positive patients under the age of 50 have died. Inparticular, 9 of these were younger than 40 years, 8 men and 1 woman (age range between 31 and 39years). For 2 patients under the age of 40 years, no clinical information is available; the remaining 7 hadserious pre-existing pathologies (cardiovascular, renal, psychiatric pathologies, diabetes, obesity).

https://www.epicentro.iss.it/coronavirus/bollettino/Report-COVID-2019_20_marzo_eng.pdf

Also heard that on average death statistics are actually down this year compared to the last several years for the same time frame January through April. Anyone else heard that. Maybe more specifically even deaths from respiratory illnesses. Or just deaths from infectious agents

This is accurate for Europe excepting Italy, Switzerland and Denmark. The latter two had a miniscule uptick.

Italy is the only country with a significant uptick in "excess mortality." However, there is even a caveat to that: 1) 68% of those excess deaths are in one region; 2) that region has been experiencing this excess mortality (25,000 in 16/17 season e.g.) for 7 straight years (maybe longer only been studied for that time) which is long before COVID was birthed. The reasons for this are easy to understand with the main culprit being air pollution- worst air quality in all of Europe in N Italy.

So is social distancing even having any effect

Look at Wuhan China the statistics there are the same as anywhere else and the virus had several months to proliferate with people unaware

Apparently social distancing does nothing because the virus is still proliferating and many cities are as bad as Wuhan which makes no sense if it actually did anything.

So basically this is all people just doing nonsensical behavior that has zero impact on transmitting disease but has a lot of impact and insight into human psychological needs

Ezrun wrote:

So is social distancing even having any effect

Look at Wuhan China the statistics there are the same as anywhere else and the virus had several months to proliferate with people unaware

Apparently social distancing does nothing because the virus is still proliferating and many cities are as bad as Wuhan which makes no sense if it actually did anything.

So basically this is all people just doing nonsensical behavior that has zero impact on transmitting disease but has a lot of impact and insight into human psychological needs

Good points. Seriously this is one of the most informed threads I've ever been a part of. I want to say thank you to everyone you are all well-informed people and Scholars. Kudos to you sir

Chris P wrote:

Ezrun wrote:

So is social distancing even having any effect

Look at Wuhan China the statistics there are the same as anywhere else and the virus had several months to proliferate with people unaware

Apparently social distancing does nothing because the virus is still proliferating and many cities are as bad as Wuhan which makes no sense if it actually did anything.

So basically this is all people just doing nonsensical behavior that has zero impact on transmitting disease but has a lot of impact and insight into human psychological needs

Good points. Seriously this is one of the most informed threads I've ever been a part of. I want to say thank you to everyone you are all well-informed people and Scholars. Kudos to you sir

True dat homie! I've been inspired as well! Probably going to get out and fly a kite in my front yard. Which for some reason my neighbors find ominous for me to do at 11 at night but the heck with it and then get some fresh air and going to taking all that I have learned