71–80 of 438 posts
This page only has death rates, not number of cases for each group, so it only tells half of the story. See Table 1 of the actual paper for complete stats (source of the stats on the linked page). http://weekly.chinacdc.cn/en/article/id/e53946e2-c6c4-41e9-9...
https://imgur.com/a/Ve5gT3O (posted by me)
This is the email I sent my team last night. We should consider working from home. You may all have seen the news by now. A patient was just diagnosed with COVID-19 at UC Davis after having no known contact with anyone travelling. Importantly, they were diagnosed after being intubated already for 7 days. It is suspected that this is the first known case of public transmission of the virus in the US. From what we know…
The general issue with this measure of mortality (dead/(infected + dead)) is that you're assuming that the infected won't die. In a disease that is exponentially growing, a better approximation of evaluating your survival chances is to look at the death to recovery rate (dead / (recovered + dead)). Based on the available data [1], we are closer to 7.8% than 2% mortality, which is closer to the final mortality rate of…
I don't understand your first argument. Surely increasing the denominator would lower the mortality percent? Also does the total number of infected not include the dead?
There seems to be many cases of young patients dying in Iran. Either because there are way more cases than being officially reported or (hopefully not) the virus has mutated to affect the young more, or both. The first hypothesis is likely based on the number of infections found in international travellers who went to Iran. We still cannot rule out the second hypothesis though. A 23-year-old woman soccer player: http…
Dr. Li Wenliang, who warned of Covid early on, was also only 34 years old.
The general issue with this measure of mortality (dead/(infected + dead)) is that you're assuming that the infected won't die. In a disease that is exponentially growing, a better approximation of evaluating your survival chances is to look at the death to recovery rate (dead / (recovered + dead)). Based on the available data [1], we are closer to 7.8% than 2% mortality, which is closer to the final mortality rate of…
I think you mean (dead/(recovered+dead)).
The general issue with this measure of mortality (dead/(infected + dead)) is that you're assuming that the infected won't die. In a disease that is exponentially growing, a better approximation of evaluating your survival chances is to look at the death to recovery rate (dead / (recovered + dead)). Based on the available data [1], we are closer to 7.8% than 2% mortality, which is closer to the final mortality rate of…
I don't understand your first argument. Surely increasing the denominator would lower the mortality percent? Also does the total number of infected not include the dead?
This is the email I sent my team last night. We should consider working from home. You may all have seen the news by now. A patient was just diagnosed with COVID-19 at UC Davis after having no known contact with anyone travelling. Importantly, they were diagnosed after being intubated already for 7 days. It is suspected that this is the first known case of public transmission of the virus in the US. From what we know…
my concern is that it's trained many people (especial those living paycheck to paycheck) to simply not seek medical services unless their condition demands the emergency room.
I feel this economic reality will create conditions advantagous to the spread of Covid 19 in the United States.