quote:

Originally posted by asonie:
While I’m always an advocate of taking reasonable precautions against disaster, do people really believe that this is a lights out/water supply failure-level event? Of course it’s good to have some water stashed but does anybody really believe the tap is going to run dry because of this???

I agree. From things I have read, the flu is more of a threat and has a higher mortality rate than Coronavirus. On average the flu kills half a million people world-wide each year, or 2% mortality rate. I did the math on the number today of people known to be infected with Coronavirus and to have died and the mortality rate is .45%. Of course the Coronavirus is not as established yet as the flu, but I just don’t thing it is a super threat as being reacted to. I went to stores today for errands and noticed gloves, masks, Tylenol, Advil, cold medicine, and hand cleaner are either totally wiped out or almost wiped out. If the flu really is deadlier, than people should be panic buying at the start of flu season.

I've been watching for a while and I would put the death rate % higher than that. Along the timeline in the 2% to 3% or more range. But as most were in China and chain smoke, and you have to bend over and squint to see the ground beneath your feet through the pollution, I think I'm going to go about my business. In fact, I intend to attend a conference next week that draws 40,000 annually from all over the world.

This year attendance was set to be down I'm out of irrational panic. But the President just committed to being there next Monday, so maybe it'll tick up a bit.

quote:

Originally posted by StorminNormin:

quote:

Originally posted by asonie:
While I’m always an advocate of taking reasonable precautions against disaster, do people really believe that this is a lights out/water supply failure-level event? Of course it’s good to have some water stashed but does anybody really believe the tap is going to run dry because of this???

I agree. From things I have read, the flu is more of a threat and has a higher mortality rate than Coronavirus. On average the flu kills half a million people world-wide each year, or 2% mortality rate. I did the math on the number today of people known to be infected with Coronavirus and to have died and the mortality rate is .45%. Of course the Coronavirus is not as established yet as the flu, but I just don’t thing it is a super threat as being reacted to. I went to stores today for errands and noticed gloves, masks, Tylenol, Advil, cold medicine, and hand cleaner are either totally wiped out or almost wiped out. If the flu really is deadlier, than people should be panic buying at the start of flu season.

With all due respect I haven’t seen those mortality rates you are presenting. Maybe you would source the information that is giving you those mortality rates.

Well what I would like to see is a home test kit. I hope someone is working on that item.

I imagine there are actually thousands, probably tens of thousands, of cases of people getting infected and thinking it's nothing but a mild cold and going about their business eventually getting better. These are not being factored into the death rate.

quote:

Originally posted by StorminNormin:

quote:

Originally posted by asonie:
While I’m always an advocate of taking reasonable precautions against disaster, do people really believe that this is a lights out/water supply failure-level event? Of course it’s good to have some water stashed but does anybody really believe the tap is going to run dry because of this???

I agree. From things I have read, the flu is more of a threat and has a higher mortality rate than Coronavirus. On average the flu kills half a million people world-wide each year, or 2% mortality rate. I did the math on the number today of people known to be infected with Coronavirus and to have died and the mortality rate is .45%. Of course the Coronavirus is not as established yet as the flu, but I just don’t thing it is a super threat as being reacted to. I went to stores today for errands and noticed gloves, masks, Tylenol, Advil, cold medicine, and hand cleaner are either totally wiped out or almost wiped out. If the flu really is deadlier, than people should be panic buying at the start of flu season.

Here read this. 15-20 times more leathal than flu.

I went to Costco tonight to pickup a prescription for the dog an get some bird seed for the birds.

They were out of toilet paper.
They were out of paper towels.
They were out of Kleenex.
They were out of flour.

Flour? Seriously? The Wupocalypse is coming and people suddenly want to bake bread?

Oh, and they were out of vinegar.

That also seemed strange.

Out of curiosity, I called around. All local Costco locations were out of toilet paper.

"Situation reports from the World Health Organization provide an upper boundary of the mortality rate. As of Wednesday, there were more than 60,150 laboratory-confirmed infections around the world, resulting in at least 1,365 deaths. A bit of simple arithmetic indicates that slightly more than 2% of those infections were fatal."

https://www.latimes.com/scienc...avirus-fatality-rate

Actual World Health Organization situation reports:
https://www.who.int/emergencie...9/situation-reports/

"The Report of the WHO-China Joint Mission published on Feb. 28 by WHO [12] is based on 55,924 laboratory confirmed cases. The report notes that "The Joint Mission acknowledges the known challenges and biases of reporting crude CFR early in an epidemic" (see also our discussion on: How to calculate the mortality rate during an outbreak). Here are its findings on Case Fatality Ratio, or CFR (the mortality rate):
"As of 20 February, 2,114 of the 55,924 laboratory confirmed cases have died (crude fatality ratio [CFR: 3.8%) (note: at least some of whom were identified using a case definition that included pulmonary disease).
The overall CFR varies by location and intensity of transmission (i.e. 5.8% in Wuhan vs. 0.7% in other areas in China).
In China, the overall CFR was higher in the early stages of the outbreak (17.3% for cases with symptom onset from 1-10 January) and has reduced over time to 0.7% for patients with symptom onset after 1 February. " [12]"

https://www.worldometers.info/...onavirus-death-rate/

Toilet paper? What's this fascination with toilet paper?

I seem to remember maybe back in the 1970s Johnny Carson mentioned that the military had been unable to buy toilet paper and suddenly there was a rush on toilet paper.

What's the matter with taking some old t-shirts and cut them into squares and using that? Then rinse it out in the sink let it dry and go on with life. Course I'm just an old farm boy

quote:

Toilet paper? What's this fascination with toilet paper?

Beats using leaves or paper towels.

Here's a handy COVID-19 TRACKER. I just discovered there's a presumptive positive case in my county.

Flour can be made into many things, that's probably why. When UN goes to famine relief areas, guess what they bring truckloads of besides water and medicine? You guessed it, flour.

quote:

Originally posted by Fenris:
I went to Costco tonight to pickup a prescription for the dog an get some bird seed for the birds.

They were out of toilet paper.
They were out of paper towels.
They were out of Kleenex.
They were out of flour.

Flour? Seriously? The Wupocalypse is coming and people suddenly want to bake bread?

Oh, and they were out of vinegar.

That also seemed strange.

Out of curiosity, I called around. All local Costco locations were out of toilet paper.

quote:

Originally posted by Fenris:
Flour? Seriously? The Wupocalypse is coming and people suddenly want to bake bread?

A 5 lb bag of flour cost $1.50 at my local ALDI supermarket. That one bag has 8360 calories. You wont find a more dense, cost effective way to get that many calories into people, for $1.50.

Yeah you have to bake it into bread or make pancakes with it, but its a GREAT storage item for cheap.

Not that many people have large budgets, but Im sure they would rather eat some home baked bread and pancakes every day than nothing.

Well, there’s now a baby diaper shortage in the Philly area.

Luckily, I buy ours in bulk from Sams Club, so we’re good for a bit. But sucks for everyone else with babies, guess they gotta try the old cloth way.

It was supposed to read "Dem Panic" not "Pandemic".

When I went shopping this weekend it was a mad house at Costco. Everything was in stock thought.

I'm prepped for end of times, or one hell of a barbeque. Bought a whole rib and whole tenderloin.

quote:

Originally posted by jimmy123x:
"Situation reports from the World Health Organization provide an upper boundary of the mortality rate. As of Wednesday, there were more than 60,150 laboratory-confirmed infections around the world, resulting in at least 1,365 deaths. A bit of simple arithmetic indicates that slightly more than 2% of those infections were fatal."

https://www.latimes.com/scienc...avirus-fatality-rate

Actual World Health Organization situation reports:
https://www.who.int/emergencie...9/situation-reports/

"The Report of the WHO-China Joint Mission published on Feb. 28 by WHO [12] is based on 55,924 laboratory confirmed cases. The report notes that "The Joint Mission acknowledges the known challenges and biases of reporting crude CFR early in an epidemic" (see also our discussion on: How to calculate the mortality rate during an outbreak). Here are its findings on Case Fatality Ratio, or CFR (the mortality rate):
"As of 20 February, 2,114 of the 55,924 laboratory confirmed cases have died (crude fatality ratio [CFR: 3.8%) (note: at least some of whom were identified using a case definition that included pulmonary disease).
The overall CFR varies by location and intensity of transmission (i.e. 5.8% in Wuhan vs. 0.7% in other areas in China).
In China, the overall CFR was higher in the early stages of the outbreak (17.3% for cases with symptom onset from 1-10 January) and has reduced over time to 0.7% for patients with symptom onset after 1 February. " [12]"

https://www.worldometers.info/...onavirus-death-rate/

So, a question:

So far, all of the mortality rate estimates seem to be using the number of deaths divided by the total number of infected. It's seems that this would skew the numbers, as all of the recently infected would only increase the denominator value, with no corresponding change to the numerator.

Would it not be more accurate to divide the number of deaths by the number of cases concluded through death and recovery?

In that method, all newly resolved cases would increase both the denominator and numerator, and result in an increasingly accurate rate, as the sample size increases?

FWIW.



Dr. Drew: Media-driven panic over coronavirus is a bigger problem than the virus


Addiction specialist Dr. Drew Pinsky panned the media's response to the coronavirus outbreak, telling "The Ingraham Angle" on Monday that the root of the larger problem domestically has been the panic being spread by the mainstream media.

"Essentially the entire problem we are having is due to panic, not the virus," he said. "I was saying this six weeks ago. We have six deaths from the coronavirus, 18,000 from the flu. Why isn't the message, 'Get your flu vaccine'"?

Pinsky, host of "Dr. Drew After Dark," said the coronavirus impact has been milder than initially projected.

"The entirety of the problem now is that people are being pushed into bankruptcy. Travel is down. The supply chain is being interrupted because of panic," he reiterated.

"The flu virus is vastly more consequential and nobody is talking about that."

He said that people who are wearing respirator masks are engaged in "panic behavior" rather than preventative measures.

"It is a press-induced panic that will have real consequences. It will not be the virus," Pinsky said.

President Trump boasted of his administration’s work in combating the coronavirus during a campaign rally in Charlotte, N.C. Monday evening, while laying into Democrats and his political rivals for trying to “politicize” the outbreak.

Trump promised that there will soon be a vaccine ready to deal with the deadly virus and said that his administration is working hard to contain the current outbreak in the United States.

“My administration has taken the most aggressive approach in American history to deal with coronavirus,” Trump said on stage at the Bojangles Coliseum. “We have strong borders and our tough and early actions have proven 100 percent right”

He added: “We closed our borders very early to certain countries. We took a lot of heat ... Washington Democrats are trying to politicize the coronavirus.”



https://www.foxnews.com/media/...c-than-the-contagion

quote:

Originally posted by Ken226:

quote:

Originally posted by jimmy123x:
"Situation reports from the World Health Organization provide an upper boundary of the mortality rate. As of Wednesday, there were more than 60,150 laboratory-confirmed infections around the world, resulting in at least 1,365 deaths. A bit of simple arithmetic indicates that slightly more than 2% of those infections were fatal."

https://www.latimes.com/scienc...avirus-fatality-rate

Actual World Health Organization situation reports:
https://www.who.int/emergencie...9/situation-reports/

"The Report of the WHO-China Joint Mission published on Feb. 28 by WHO [12] is based on 55,924 laboratory confirmed cases. The report notes that "The Joint Mission acknowledges the known challenges and biases of reporting crude CFR early in an epidemic" (see also our discussion on: How to calculate the mortality rate during an outbreak). Here are its findings on Case Fatality Ratio, or CFR (the mortality rate):
"As of 20 February, 2,114 of the 55,924 laboratory confirmed cases have died (crude fatality ratio [CFR: 3.8%) (note: at least some of whom were identified using a case definition that included pulmonary disease).
The overall CFR varies by location and intensity of transmission (i.e. 5.8% in Wuhan vs. 0.7% in other areas in China).
In China, the overall CFR was higher in the early stages of the outbreak (17.3% for cases with symptom onset from 1-10 January) and has reduced over time to 0.7% for patients with symptom onset after 1 February. " [12]"

https://www.worldometers.info/...onavirus-death-rate/

So, a question:

So far, all of the mortality rate estimates seem to be using the number of deaths divided by the total number of infected. It's seems that this would skew the numbers, as all of the recently infected would only increase the denominator value, with no corresponding change to the numerator.

Would it not be more accurate to divide the number of deaths by the number of cases concluded through death and recovery?

In that method, all newly resolved cases would increase both the denominator and numerator, and result in an increasingly accurate rate, as the sample size increases?

This is something I also don't understand. Should be deaths/resolved cases, not deaths/infected. If it were months from now deaths/infected would be fine, but for those who have yet to die/recover, why are they being counted?

quote:

Originally posted by Ken226:

quote:

Originally posted by jimmy123x:
"Situation reports from the World Health Organization provide an upper boundary of the mortality rate. As of Wednesday, there were more than 60,150 laboratory-confirmed infections around the world, resulting in at least 1,365 deaths. A bit of simple arithmetic indicates that slightly more than 2% of those infections were fatal."

https://www.latimes.com/scienc...avirus-fatality-rate

Actual World Health Organization situation reports:
https://www.who.int/emergencie...9/situation-reports/

"The Report of the WHO-China Joint Mission published on Feb. 28 by WHO [12] is based on 55,924 laboratory confirmed cases. The report notes that "The Joint Mission acknowledges the known challenges and biases of reporting crude CFR early in an epidemic" (see also our discussion on: How to calculate the mortality rate during an outbreak). Here are its findings on Case Fatality Ratio, or CFR (the mortality rate):
"As of 20 February, 2,114 of the 55,924 laboratory confirmed cases have died (crude fatality ratio [CFR: 3.8%) (note: at least some of whom were identified using a case definition that included pulmonary disease).
The overall CFR varies by location and intensity of transmission (i.e. 5.8% in Wuhan vs. 0.7% in other areas in China).
In China, the overall CFR was higher in the early stages of the outbreak (17.3% for cases with symptom onset from 1-10 January) and has reduced over time to 0.7% for patients with symptom onset after 1 February. " [12]"

https://www.worldometers.info/...onavirus-death-rate/

So, a question:

So far, all of the mortality rate estimates seem to be using the number of deaths divided by the total number of infected. It's seems that this would skew the numbers, as all of the recently infected would only increase the denominator value, with no corresponding change to the numerator.

Would it not be more accurate to divide the number of deaths by the number of cases concluded through death and recovery?

In that method, all newly resolved cases would increase both the denominator and numerator, and result in an increasingly accurate rate, as the sample size increases?

That's a question that I cannot answer. I do believe the number is a bit high (death rate) as there are plenty of carriers that simply aren't showing signs yet or sick enough to be counted in the total number effected or possibly don't get sick enough to ever be counted.

There is no denying that people are contagious far longer than normal FLU, and that it is a serious virus. If you look at the total number of deaths in the city it origionated in, it's a serious total number. The biggest issue is that nobody really knows it's depths as it's a new virus.