Lol no it isn’t. 52% of asymptomatic means, those people don’t believe they are sick, they show no symptoms and they infect those around them in a much larger rate.
Yeah, I'm aware of what the word means. Do you realize it's totally unrelated to the point you're arguing? It's like you are totally incapable of accepting anything that even remotely makes Trump look bad. You really should stop just posting logical fallacies when you argue, tho to be honest, it would cut down on most of your posting.
If you have the antibodies, you had the infection. That counts you infected. Why the fuck are you bringing Trump in this conversation? Christ, curb your TDS please. There are the same number of deaths, that’s a lot! Just because the mortality percent is lower, doesn’t mean the disease isn’t scary. This has nothing to do with Trump and it’s embarrassing that you are trying to bring him into another fucking thread. Slow your roll dude.
Its a foregone conclusion that I hate trump more than most, and know im on the right side of history... That said, I dont think mags is totally off base with what hes asserting. Antibody tests, although known to be inaccurate, in its theoretical approach it would tell us a much larger infected population. Until the antibody test can be much more accurate, though... Id hesitate to believe the numbers. I may be wrong, mags.. But its what im cleaning from your side of the argument.
Yeah. So while i cant get behind the numbers they are saying... In theory I understand what antibody tests would portray. Id have to dig deeper on the disscusion of flu vs Covid numbers and mortality rate, etc. Cause i just dont know enough between the two.
I am in the boat that Covid-19 is way more dangerous than the flu. There are aftermath complications that seem to be long term, those with serious infections are in the ICU much longer, and the kill rate for a specific demographic is extremely dangerous.
Making sense of COVID-19 fatality rates A good outcome for reopening relies on fatality rates decreasing significantly. By Editorial Board Star Tribune The case fatality rate for the seasonal flu is about 0.1 to 0.2%. It means that for every 10,000 people with a documented case of the flu, 10 to 20 will die. This method of calculation is often what people use if they casually cite a death rate. But it’s not the most accurate way to estimate your personal risk of dying if you become host to the agents of a disease. That would be the infection fatality rate. For the flu, by one account, it’s 0.04%. That means for every 10,000 people who are infected, whether they report it or not, four ultimately will perish. You’ll see that the extra numeral after the decimal point makes a difference. But you’ll also notice that we’ve gone from a rate that can be calculated with hard data to one that must be inferred. Store those figures in your temporary memory. They’ll be relevant for comparison as Minnesota considers not just whether to lift orders to stay at home during the COVID-19 outbreak but also how best to arrange things if it does. The current order is set to expire next Monday, so another update is coming soon. Fatality rates are not fixed. They can vary by patients’ ages and overall health, among other things, and they can be bent by what medical professionals learn about treating a disease. The circumstances around this new strain of coronavirus have been nothing if not nebulous, but two months into the arc of the pandemic, we can begin to discern a shape. As of Monday in Minnesota, 11,799 cases of the disease had been confirmed by laboratory testing. There were 591 deaths. Case fatality rate? Simple math. Divide the smaller number by the larger, and you get 5%. That’s in range of the 6% figure globally for people with a diagnosis. Infection fatality rate? Here you must make an assumption: How many unreported cases might there be? Last month before testing ramped up in Minnesota, state officials thought it could be 100 times more than reported ones. Provisional antibody tests in other parts of the country have put it closer to 10 times more. This results in an ambiguous estimate for the rate — anywhere from 0.05 to 0.5%. Those arguing against stay-at-home orders are banking on lower rates for COVID-19 in the end analysis. Figures of less than 1% for the case fatality rate and as low as 0.1% for the infection fatality rate have been suggested. So far in Minnesota, about 4 of every 5 fatalities have occurred in nursing homes or assisted-living facilities, and 99.24% of those who have died had an underlying health condition (as discussed in an editorial Sunday). It is indeed plausible that the rates will settle as the virus works into less vulnerable segments of the population. By how much? There’s an example in which nearly an entire population was tested: that of the Diamond Princess cruise ship, which had 3,711 passengers and crew members aboard and was the subject of a follow-up study. (Though not an exact comparison to poll methodology, that number of people would be a statistically significant sample size if applied to Minnesota’s population — for a recent Star Tribune/MPR News Minnesota Poll, 800 people sufficed.) As a caveat, a cruise ship can be a rather ideal petri dish, but among those 3,711 people, the case fatality rate was 2.6%, and the infection fatality rate — which includes those who had no symptoms at the time of the test — was 1.3%. Outcomes can depend on how much virus a person is initially exposed to. The implication is that even as restrictions are lifted or adjusted, distance will matter. May keeping our distance be as easily done as it is said. Minnesota’s stay-at-home order began March 27. When weeks stretch to months, anyone’s resolve can be tested. But for now — despite the skepticism, despite the protests — it appears that most Americans prefer to go slow in the face of uncertainty. A collection of recent polls found support for an immediate reopening of the economy ranging from 10 to 35%. https://www.startribune.com/making-sense-of-covid-19-fatality-rates/570385502/
I get a 5.7% death rate using 85 thousand deaths divided by 1.5 Million infections and converting a fraction of 0.057 to a percentage of 5.7%.. This from the World Health Organization: "Mortality for COVID-19 appears higher than for influenza, especially seasonal influenza. While the true mortality of COVID-19 will take some time to fully understand, the data we have so far indicate that the crude mortality ratio (the number of reported deaths divided by the reported cases) is between 3-4%, the infection mortality rate (the number of reported deaths divided by the number of infections) will be lower. For seasonal influenza, mortality is usually well below 0.1%." Hence my calculation that the Covid-19 mortality rate is at least 35 times higher than the flu mortality rate.
You're not making friends here with this post sly. How dare you not fall in line and post that the numbers are infallible.
Rin Tin Tin, is that you? I loved that dog. In fact, my mother bought a dog for us that was a descendant of Rin Tin Tin who turned out to be my very best companion of all time. Shh, don't tell my wife.
Oh, I'm definitetly in the same boat. Its way worse than the flu. I was more thinkint strictly infextion rates. I worded my last part poorly. I know enough of the two combined to know where i stand. Lol. I suck.
I saw where someone pointed out that NYC has established a lower bound for the mortality rate. If you assume that every single person in NYC got infected, the mortality rate is 0.24%. 20k deaths out of 8.4M people. Since that's not a realistic assumption, the real mortality rate is higher than that. barfo
But the 8.4 million people is just an estimate. There might only be 8.399m people. Which would completely destroy whatever point you're trying to make.
