Second Travel-Related Case of 2019 Novel Coronavirus Detected in United States

Post by stock_toaster » Sat, Jan 25, 2020, 11:11 AM UTC

secondo wrote: post #17

Both to those making claims or asking about the severity of the Wuhan coronavirus The Guardian offers a sober perspective of the current situation. We don’t yet know how dangerous the new coronavirus is – and we won’t know until more data comes in. Twenty-six deaths out of 800 reported cases would mean a 3% mortality rate. However, this is likely to be a overestimate since there may be a far larger pool of people who…

Post by yorwba » Sat, Jan 25, 2020, 11:23 AM UTC

dis-sys wrote: post #77

yorwba wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sometimes it's also possible to draw inferences by observing how the numbers were massaged. For example if you look at the red graph of confirmed cases at [1], there's a very noticeable jump from 1-17 to 1-18. Coincidentally, the third session of the 13th Hubei Provincial People's Congress concluded on January 17. [2] [1] https://3g.dxy.cn/newh5/view/pneumonia [2] http://en.hubei.gov.cn/news/newslist/202001/t20200119…

That jump was explained in details when it happened - test kits were made available shortly before that date. To be more specific, first batch of test kits were delivered to Wuhan on the 16th Jan [1]. [1] http://www.thepaper.cn/newsDetail_forward_5588213

Post by nikofeyn » Sat, Jan 25, 2020, 11:53 AM UTC

catalogia wrote: post #75

nikofeyn wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

if you have even a modicum of knowledge of china, you will understand why certain cities were shutdown. saturday is new year's day in china, and thus, thursday and friday are the two busiest travel days of the year. it's like thanksgiving and the related travel in the u.s. but on a whole other level. since wuhan, where the outbreak originated, has a population of around 10 million, the city and two surrounding cities…

Well jeez, excuse me for being wrong. Thank you for the correction.

Post by shkkmo » Sat, Jan 25, 2020, 2:38 PM UTC

Barrin92 wrote: post #16

legionof7 wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't this more infectious and potentially deadlier?

it may be possible that it is more infectious than ordinary pneumonia but it doesn't appear more deadly, in fact it appears to be less severe in the majority of patients. The mortality rate for hospitalized pneumonia patients, in general, is about 5%, for the coronavirus it appears to be about 3% right now but that number is likely too high because a lot of the less severe cases might not be diagnosed as such.

Post by jquery » Sat, Jan 25, 2020, 4:13 PM UTC

nikofeyn wrote: post #66

14 wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even if the numbers are skewed it is already really bad imo. From my quick search at this point the virus seems to have a 4% mortality rate. The number of infections are low at this point and the spread is slow. But if my city of 35,000 people had this blast through the city and it got out of hand and only 1000 people caught it that is still 40 people statistically could die. 40 people suddenly dying in my small town…

the mortality rate is heavily skewed towards the elderly and/or already sick. from what i have read, it doesn't kill healthy young or middle aged adults.