Formerly DT: COVID-19 - Featuring Lots of Politics, now CR because political talk not going away

[Brisketexan 105095]

2 minutes ago, NoName said:

By comparison, COVID-19 is around 2% (2.3% is what I am seeing reported now, it was 2.4% for a while)

Except that is almost certainly NOT the CFR.  The data producing that number is garbage, and you know it -- the set that it's drawing from is NOT the set of all infected people.  It's the set of "all the people that certain governments know are infected, based on the limited testing that they've been doing."  We know that MANY other people are infected, but have not been confirmed as cases (and likely never will).

Right now, what we know with some certainty -- at the HIGH end, the CFR is around 2%.  But that's almost certainly very high, when applied to the total number of infected people.  And, at the low end, it's still something higher than the CFR of the flu - so we may be looking at around .3% (which is still high, relatively speaking). 

So, it's scary, and we have to be serious when dealing with it.  But tossing around a 2.3% CFR is wildly irresponsible, and is almost certainly false. 

[gecko 1104]

18 minutes ago, The Royal We said:

What's the threshold on the number of US deaths as a result of this outbreak that would cause you adjust your outlook that this is just like Ebloa?  25?  100? 1,000? 10,000?  I'm curious where folks like you, Zork and the rest of the Ministers of Information might draw the line here.

Some number north of the number of people who die annually from the flu.

[triplehorn 2664]

That WHO live update I linked last page just ended.  Worth watching later on youtube.  They strongly emphasized that travel restriction alone fails.  They didn't day don't do travel restriction, and implicitly said basic common sense travel should still happen, but that other measures are needed.  Again, the real emphasis they made was on aggressive testing and contact tracing.  China has been able to identify pre-symptomatic cases using PCR on those under observation with contact tracing and walling them off from further transmission.  They said that while a percentage of infected patients appear to be asymptomatic, the majority of those do actually go on to show signs of illness.  They also said there are sero-studies now underway testing populations for covid antibodies to better estimate how many people worldwide have been infected without detection.  We are several weeks out from initial data on that - the meaning obviously having important consequence.  Overall they described the global response as unprecedented in that this ordeal is 8 weeks old and early on they had identified it, sequenced it, had PCR testing available, and now sero-studies underway to further delineate it.  

[Dbeasy 15047]

It just proves that many Americans hate going to large events, and hate their coworkers and/or want to sit at home in their underwear.   

Who said anything about underwear?

[Trey3216 15346]

3 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Except that is almost certainly NOT the CFR.  The data producing that number is garbage, and you know it -- the set that it's drawing from is NOT the set of all infected people.  It's the set of "all the people that certain governments know are infected, based on the limited testing that they've been doing."  We know that MANY other people are infected, but have not been confirmed as cases (and likely never will).

Right now, what we know with some certainty -- at the HIGH end, the CFR is around 2%.  But that's almost certainly very high, when applied to the total number of infected people.  And, at the low end, it's still something higher than the CFR of the flu - so we may be looking at around .3% (which is still high, relatively speaking). 

So, it's scary, and we have to be serious when dealing with it.  But tossing around a 2.3% CFR is wildly irresponsible, and is almost certainly false. 

I agree with you, but I wouldn't be surprised to find out China also has 10x as many dead as they are announcing to go along with the 10x as many cases.   We'll really have a grip as we see what happens in Italy and what continues to happen in SOK and here.    

[akhornfan 4]

12 minutes ago, NoName said:

I mean, it was really fucking bad.

40% of people who got it died. Of the 17,000ish people who survived MANY  have post-Ebola syndrome and deal with symptoms for the rest of their lives.

The CFR for Hospitalized Ebola patients was 57-59%. Overall it was about 71%,

By comparison, COVID-19 is around 2% (2.3% is what I am seeing reported now, it was 2.4% for a while)

If you do not understand how scary Ebola is once it gets going you need to spend like 2 minutes reading up on it. 

COVID-19 is bad in a different way - not in an Ebola "everyone is going to die" way but in a "everything has the potential to be fucked in every way - plus a ton of people will die" way. 

The CFR is not 2%. Have to stop repeating this. 

[NoName 16351]

4 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Except that is almost certainly NOT the CFR.  The data producing that number is garbage, and you know it -- the set that it's drawing from is NOT the set of all infected people.  It's the set of "all the people that certain governments know are infected, based on the limited testing that they've been doing."  We know that MANY other people are infected, but have not been confirmed as cases (and likely never will).

Right now, what we know with some certainty -- at the HIGH end, the CFR is around 2%.  But that's almost certainly very high, when applied to the total number of infected people.  And, at the low end, it's still something higher than the CFR of the flu - so we may be looking at around .3% (which is still high, relatively speaking). 

So, it's scary, and we have to be serious when dealing with it.  But tossing around a 2.3% CFR is wildly irresponsible, and is almost certainly false. 

That is absolutely fair and a great point. The 2.3% is what is widely reported but yes, that number isn't going to be truly anywhere close to "accurate"

My overall point was the CFR comparison for that specific Ebola outbreak (57-59% & 71%) vs COVID-19 at any percent.

 

 

[Brisketexan 105095]

Just now, Trey3216 said:

I agree with you, but I wouldn't be surprised to find out China also has 10x as many dead as they are announcing to go along with the 10x as many cases.   We'll really have a grip as we see what happens in Italy and what continues to happen in SOK and here.    

Agreed.  We're still in the super-early stages -- it's like when news breaks of a mass shooting, and there's always a second shooter, and all that crap.  Between insufficient data and noise, we don't have a clear picture of what's going on at all - just a fuzzy picture that tells us enough that we know some steps we should take.

For example, we can't contain the virus any longer.  BUT, what we MIGHT be able to do is slow the rate of transmission enough to mitigate how overwhelmed our hospitals will be by it.  If 2,000 people in Austin are going to need hospitalization, it would be best if we can spread that out over several months as opposed to it happening all at once.

[NoName 16351]

1 minute ago, akhornfan said:

The CFR is not 2%. Have to stop repeating this. 

the point was the comparison of that Ebola outbreak vs the widely reported CFR for COVID-19.

Widely reported as in here is the top results on Google:

 

[Sbbruin 21843]

7 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Except that is almost certainly NOT the CFR.  The data producing that number is garbage, and you know it -- the set that it's drawing from is NOT the set of all infected people.  It's the set of "all the people that certain governments know are infected, based on the limited testing that they've been doing."  We know that MANY other people are infected, but have not been confirmed as cases (and likely never will).

Right now, what we know with some certainty -- at the HIGH end, the CFR is around 2%.  But that's almost certainly very high, when applied to the total number of infected people.  And, at the low end, it's still something higher than the CFR of the flu - so we may be looking at around .3% (which is still high, relatively speaking). 

So, it's scary, and we have to be serious when dealing with it.  But tossing around a 2.3% CFR is wildly irresponsible, and is almost certainly false. 

Agreed.  Once testing on a grand scale is implemented, we will have much better data on CFR.  And while I'm no big-city doctor (although I did sleep at a Holiday Inn Express last night), my guess is this thing lands somewhere closer to 1% than 2%, and when applied to healthy people only, probably a lot lower.  Not looking forward to getting it though.

[B00M 6414]

17 minutes ago, closetojumping said:

But it probably won't happen. And this ain't it. AI synthesized a fucking vaccine for this strand in a week's time.

Link?

[HenryJames 66041]

 

[Pato del Muerto 52489]

I’m sorry but cfr stands for code of federal regulations. You can’t all of a sudden have another cfr. This duplication requires immediate adjudication. This is the real tragedy. 

[akhornfan 4]

3 minutes ago, NoName said:

That is absolutely fair and a great point. The 2.3% is what is widely reported but yes, that number isn't going to be truly anywhere close to "accurate"

My overall point was the CFR comparison for that specific Ebola outbreak (57-59% & 71%) vs COVID-19 at any percent.

 

 

 

1 minute ago, NoName said:

the point was the comparison of that Ebola outbreak vs the widely reported CFR for COVID-19.

Widely reported as in here is the top results on Google:

 

There’s no saving you if you’re going to believe what you read.  All that is a reporting of deaths divided by cases. Yes the calculation is correct but all analysis and projection based on that figure is bullshit. 

[triplehorn 2664]

4 minutes ago, Trey3216 said:

I agree with you, but I wouldn't be surprised to find out China also has 10x as many dead as they are announcing to go along with the 10x as many cases.   We'll really have a grip as we see what happens in Italy and what continues to happen in SOK and here.    

That WHO update involved a clear intent to work with China to best learn from their experience.  Also, from the Vox article, the WHO official reveals a detailed knowledge of the medical capacity China has to keep its people alive.  In short, China is not hiding anything monumentally shocking here.  

An example of China's medical capacity not shared by many other countries:

"Second thing they do is ventilate dozens in the average hospital; they use extracorporeal membrane oxygenation [removing blood from a person’s body and oxygenating their red blood cells] when ventilation doesn’t work. This is sophisticated health care. They have a survival rate for this disease I would not extrapolate to the rest of the world. What you’ve seen in Italy and Iran is that a lot of people are dying."

[Enchubben 5510]

22 minutes ago, Thetexashammer said:

I stored up guns and ammo and 30rd magazines. I should have stored up N95 masks. Damn you all to hell.

trade you a box of n95's for some ammo?    I know a guy that can get you Lysol for the right price.   What is the going rate for a can you may ask? If you have to ask, you cant afford it.

[Hate 20108]

Agreed.  Once testing on a grand scale is implemented, we will have much better data on CFR.  And while I'm no big-city doctor (although I did sleep at a Holiday Inn Express last night), my guess is this thing lands somewhere closer to 1% than 2%, and when applied to healthy people only, probably a lot lower.  Not looking forward to getting it though.

You’re in LA. You drive through worse viruses than this daily. You’ve probably already had it and you’re body just brushed it off because it’s no worse than the living in la virus.

[InkaUtexas 25909]

Latest Italy numbers. 

 

[NoName 16351]

2 minutes ago, akhornfan said:

 

There’s no saving you if you’re going to believe what you read.  All that is a reporting of deaths divided by cases. Yes the calculation is correct but all analysis and projection based on that figure is bullshit. 

Why is this so complex.

Someone compared this to the most recent "big" Ebola outbreak that was basically localized in Western Africa.

That had a CFR that was in the high 50s if hospitalized and about 71% otherwise. For the sake of this comparison it doesn't matter if the CFR for COVID-19 is 10%, 2.3%, 1% or 0.1%

Pick any of those. I don't care.

Then compare that to the Western Africa outbreak from 2013-2016. One is way higher.

One was localized (99.9% of cases) - one is global.

For this comparison the CFR literally doesn't matter - it is so much fucking lower than the Western Africa.

Comparing the Western Africa Ebola outbreak from 13-16 to this is fucking dumb.

That was the point that people somehow missed because they got caught up on a detail.

[akhornfan 4]

5 minutes ago, NoName said:

Why is this so complex.

Someone compared this to the most recent "big" Ebola outbreak that was basically localized in Western Africa.

That had a CFR that was in the high 50s if hospitalized and about 71% otherwise. For the sake of this comparison it doesn't matter if the CFR for COVID-19 is 10%, 2.3%, 1% or 0.1%

Pick any of those. I don't care.

Then compare that to the Western Africa outbreak from 2013-2016. One is way higher.

One was localized (99.9% of cases) - one is global.

For this comparison the CFR literally doesn't matter - it is so much fucking lower than the Western Africa.

Comparing the Western Africa Ebola outbreak from 13-16 to this is fucking dumb.

That was the point that people somehow missed because they got caught up on a detail.

You’re hung up on one stupid comment about Ebola. Let that one go. There has been a lot of chatter about what ifs around the 2%+ CFR and 20% hospitalization. 
 

The actual figure for both of those is very important as it drives the answer to ‘what do we do now?’  No one cares about the relative comparison to the Ebola CFR. 

Edited March 3, 2020 by akhornfan

[Thetexashammer 1062]

10 minutes ago, akhornfan said:

 

There’s no saving you if you’re going to believe what you read.  All that is a reporting of deaths divided by cases. Yes the calculation is correct but all analysis and projection based on that figure is bullshit. 

I don't disagree that the kill rate may be less than 2%. But that assumes good medical care. If 5% require ICU care, and there are 95,000  ICU beds, of which ~85,000 are currently occupied, you will see a different rate. Full disclosure, I have no fucking idea what is going to happen.

[GreenspointTexas 9600]

Mortality rate now closer to 4%
 

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/

[Pato del Muerto 52489]

18 minutes ago, triplehorn said:

That WHO update involved a clear intent to work with China to best learn from their experience.  Also, from the Vox article, the WHO official reveals a detailed knowledge of the medical capacity China has to keep its people alive.  In short, China is not hiding anything monumentally shocking here.  

An example of China's medical capacity not shared by many other countries:

"Second thing they do is ventilate dozens in the average hospital; they use extracorporeal membrane oxygenation [removing blood from a person’s body and oxygenating their red blood cells] when ventilation doesn’t work. This is sophisticated health care. They have a survival rate for this disease I would not extrapolate to the rest of the world. What you’ve seen in Italy and Iran is that a lot of people are dying."

You are telling me that you see all the new facilities being built to house the sick, and you believe that they have the capacity to ventilate and blood filter all of them?

[F250 28767]

2 hours ago, Anastasis said:

Just got the travel directive from the mothership. All international business travel is terminated immediately, all non-essential domestic travel including conferences cancelled, all "essential" domestic travel should be moved to webex if possible, don't schedule any new F2F meetings.  

We got a similar notice yesterday. A sizable portion of our company is remote/work from home already so it's mainly just business as usual.

 

[Coelenterate Fuccboi 13091]

27 minutes ago, Trey3216 said:

I agree with you, but I wouldn't be surprised to find out China also has 10x as many dead as they are announcing to go along with the 10x as many cases.   We'll really have a grip as we see what happens in Italy and what continues to happen in SOK and here.    

Ok, but how many of those were just deaths of opportunity initiated by the government? My tin-foil hat can get Kentucky Derby absurd because this is America! If I keep typing I might even start believing myself.

[Pato del Muerto 52489]

1 minute ago, GreenspointTexas said:

Mortality rate now closer to 4%
 

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/

Mortality rate of known cases. 
 

flu mortality rate would jump if we changed the metric to deaths over confirmed cases. 

[TexasGolf 4896]

21 minutes ago, InkaUtexas said:

Latest Italy numbers. 

 

wonder how many are critical and how many have recovered ?

[closetojumping 62605]

26 minutes ago, B00M said:

Link?

I read an article about it on my Apple newsfeed like a month ago. I assume it was known and linked here around then. They said in the story it would take half a year or more to get anything produced en masse. I think the company that did it was based in San Diego, if that helps. 

[InkaUtexas 25909]

Just now, TexasGolf said:

wonder how many are critical and how many have recovered ?

Don't know, but not seeing much on recovery. But Italy is now a spreader with cases in China being travelers. 

[triplehorn 2664]

Just now, Pato del Muerto said:

You are telling me that you see all the new facilities being built to house the sick, and you believe that they have the capacity to ventilate and blood filter all of them?

No, no one said "all of them."  China has very rapidly upscaled their capacity to provide medical care, from mass "fever centers" for screening and testing, to acute care with measures that go beyond mechanical ventilation to include "extracorporeal membrane oxygenation" (think dialysis but for exchanging O2/CO2).  A lot of affected countries don't have that capacity.  China has got their poop in a group a lot more so than others, and ultimately the final numbers may be telling.

[B00M 6414]

10 minutes ago, NoName said:

Why is this so complex.

because China successfully slowed the spread (narrator: through mass quarantine) and it's barely spreading in America (narrator: we're still not testing for it) so anyone that was concerned about this is currently an idiot.  

[InkaUtexas 25909]

WHO chiming in with global CFR. 

 

[crimsonlonghorn 2306]

53 minutes ago, NoName said:

I mean, it was really fucking bad.

40% of people who got it died. Of the 17,000ish people who survived MANY  have post-Ebola syndrome and deal with symptoms for the rest of their lives.

The CFR for Hospitalized Ebola patients was 57-59%. Overall it was about 71%,

By comparison, COVID-19 is around 2% (2.3% is what I am seeing reported now, it was 2.4% for a while)

If you do not understand how scary Ebola is once it gets going you need to spend like 2 minutes reading up on it. 

COVID-19 is bad in a different way - not in an Ebola "everyone is going to die" way but in a "everything has the potential to be fucked in every way - plus a ton of people will die" way. 

Oh shit. You convinced me. I’ll start panicking right away. Thanks for the tip. 

[triplehorn 2664]

1 hour ago, triplehorn said:

 

Click for the video playback of the WHO update referenced in the Reuters tweet above.  I only caught the last 15-20 min of it live which was informative. The actual conference starts about 30 min in.

 

Edited March 3, 2020 by triplehorn

[Skipper 6133]

9 minutes ago, Pato del Muerto said:

Mortality rate of known cases. 
 

flu mortality rate would jump if we changed the metric to deaths over confirmed cases. 

If you think it's annoying that people have to keep explaining this over and over in this thread, just wait until we see the downside of the US  primarily testing extremely sick people in the hospital, our mortality rate is going to look like shit in a couple of weeks.

[B00M 6414]

6 minutes ago, closetojumping said:

I read an article about it on my Apple newsfeed like a month ago. I assume it was known and linked here around then. They said in the story it would take half a year or more to get anything produced en masse. I think the company that did it was based in San Diego, if that helps. 

Must be Inovio. They're projecting human clinical trials in April, results in the fall, and 1 million doses produced by end of 2020 for further trials and emergency use.

[Coelenterate Fuccboi 13091]

1 minute ago, crimsonlonghorn said:

I’ll start panicking right away. Thanks for the tip. 

You think you’re panicking now? Wait until you get the entire length.

[crimsonlonghorn 2306]

Just now, Casual Encounter said:

You think you’re panicking now? Wait until you get the entire length.

Surly gonna surly

[akhornfan 4]

7 minutes ago, InkaUtexas said:

WHO chiming in with global CFR. 

 

So dumb. See my previous comment about believing what your read instead of thinking. Those figures are apples and oranges and they should be called out for making a comparison. 

[InkaUtexas 25909]

Just now, akhornfan said:

So dumb. See my previous comment about believing what your read instead of thinking. Those figures are apples and oranges and they should be called out for making a comparison. 

Just passing it on. And I think WHO would be calculating Iran vs. China vs. Italy, etc. 

Ya never know, maybe they know something the Surl doesn't. 

 

[akhornfan 4]

1 minute ago, InkaUtexas said:

Just passing it on. And I think WHO would be calculating Iran vs. China vs. Italy, etc. 

Ya never know, maybe they know something the Surl doesn't. 

 

Wasn’t directed at you. I think it’s Reuter’s making the comparison. WHO is being more vague. At least from the quote in the article. 

[NoName 16351]

5 minutes ago, crimsonlonghorn said:

Oh shit. You convinced me. I’ll start panicking right away. Thanks for the tip. 

You are the one who downplayed something as not a big deal just because it didn't happen in your backyard. 

Ebola is a big deal.

Full stop.

[Hate 20108]

3 minutes ago, InkaUtexas said:

Just passing it on. And I think WHO would be calculating Iran vs. China vs. Italy, etc. 

Ya never know, maybe they know something the Surl doesn't. 

 

That's unpossible.

[Somnio 751]

22 minutes ago, TexasGolf said:

wonder how many are critical and how many have recovered ?

140 critical according to this data, but it's not been updated with the above info. yet.

https://bnonews.com/index.php/2020/02/the-latest-coronavirus-cases/

Edited March 3, 2020 by Somnio

[WhatTheBuck 28776]

2 hours ago, Francisco 2.0 said:

Sort of related.

Late January, I ordered 120 engraved iPads from Apple.  I've done this for several years now, and usually, the turnaround on engraved iPads is 5 days or so.

It's March 3, and I've still not received notification from Apple that they have shipped.

Jesus, just how much porn do you watch?

[hopkinsnhorns 533]

My FIL this morning in the group chat - "3x as many people died in TN tornado last night as all Coronavirus victims in US... just saying"

My response: "Let me know when the rate of tornadoes starts to increase exponentially."

He did not like that.  Dude has a PhD in Synthetic Organic Chemistry, but Fox News is making him retarded in his old work-from-home age.

[atomheartbevo 89650]

16 minutes ago, Casual Encounter said:

You think you’re panicking now? Wait until you get the entire length.

Are they a NowThis sock?

[Wally Fairway 5543]

10 minutes ago, NoName said:

You are the one who downplayed something as not a big deal just because it didn't happen in your backyard. 

Ebola is a big deal.

Full stop.

Just wait until the Ebola countries catch some coronavirus; then again they have a warmer climate and that is supposed to stall the COVID-19 spread.

[Vic Mackey 47024]

 

[atomheartbevo 89650]

57 minutes ago, Sbbruin said:

Agreed.  Once testing on a grand scale is implemented, we will have much better data on CFR.  And while I'm no big-city doctor (although I did sleep at a Holiday Inn Express last night), my guess is this thing lands somewhere closer to 1% than 2%, and when applied to healthy people only, probably a lot lower.  Not looking forward to getting it though.

I’m more worried about what it will be in the older populations,    I’ve got two parents and a step parent in their 60s and 70s.  An in-law in their late 80s, great-aunts in their 80s and 90s, and some older relatives who smoke.    This thing could put an end date on quite a few parts of my family tree.