Coronavirus - Is this the killer flu that will wipe us out?
Discussion
JPJPJP said:
Reading that an Iranian cleric of some note Hadi Khasrushahi has died of Covid
An Iranian BBC reporter did note that the theocracy did appear to be taking the slightly bonkers ‘act of god: if we die it will be the will of god’ approach.Seems to be working out. For someone’s God. I’m sure Netanyahu is offering up fatted calves.
superkartracer said:
Literally nothing to do with UK contingencies and does not support your original claim that there are really millions of cases. More on Iran (from thewuhanvirus.com)
Iran’s Vice President for Women and Family Affairs, Masoumeh Ebtekar, is the latest high-profile government official to test positive for novel coronavirus.
Iran has emerged as a regional breeding ground for the pathogen, with the most confirmed cases — 245 cases including 26 deaths — in the region. The vast majority of coronavirus cases across the Middle East have been linked to Iran.
Here's a look at other high-profile cases:
Two members of parliament, including the chair of the parliamentary committee for national security, have also been infected by the virus.
One of the country’s top clerics, Hadi Khosroshahi, died on Thursday after he contracted the sickness.
Deputy Health Minister Iran Haririchi announced on social media Wednesday that he tested positive for COVID-19 — just 24 hours after he tried to downplay the threat of the virus in a press briefing.
Iran’s Vice President for Women and Family Affairs, Masoumeh Ebtekar, is the latest high-profile government official to test positive for novel coronavirus.
Iran has emerged as a regional breeding ground for the pathogen, with the most confirmed cases — 245 cases including 26 deaths — in the region. The vast majority of coronavirus cases across the Middle East have been linked to Iran.
Here's a look at other high-profile cases:
Two members of parliament, including the chair of the parliamentary committee for national security, have also been infected by the virus.
One of the country’s top clerics, Hadi Khosroshahi, died on Thursday after he contracted the sickness.
Deputy Health Minister Iran Haririchi announced on social media Wednesday that he tested positive for COVID-19 — just 24 hours after he tried to downplay the threat of the virus in a press briefing.
CallMeLegend said:
CallMeLegend said:
scottydoesntknow said:
RizzoTheRat said:
Foliage said:
isaldiri said:
Foliage said:
I think a lot of people miss the point about this virus, no medication, I repeat NO medication works against this virus, going to the doctors wont help at all, you have to ride it out in isolation and let your immune system deal with it NOTHING helps, not even paracetamol will help, its just wont bring the fever down. You have to ride it out
And where exactly have you found that out to make the claim absolutely no medicine of any sort works and even those that help control symptoms are ineffective.....? "Is there a vaccine, drug or treatment for COVID-19?
Not yet. To date, there is no vaccine and no specific antiviral medicine to prevent or treat COVID-2019. However, those affected should receive care to relieve symptoms. People with serious illness should be hospitalized. Most patients recover thanks to supportive care."
https://www.who.int/news-room/q-a-detail/q-a-coron...
"Treatment for coronavirus
There is currently no specific treatment for coronavirus.
Antibiotics do not help, as they do not work against viruses.
Treatment aims to relieve the symptoms while your body fights the illness.
You'll need to stay in isolation away from other people until you've recovered."
https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/coronavirus-covid-19...
Oh, and apart from there being antivirals for seasonal flu.
But yeah, apart from those central key points, just like it.
nffcforever said:
Probably best to check the sources directly:
10 Jung S, Akhmetzhanov A, Hayashi K , Linton N, Yang Y , Yuan B, et al. Real-Time Estimation of the Risk of Death from Novel Coronavirus (COVID-19) Infection:
Inference Using Exported Cases, J. Clin. Med. 2020, 9(2), 523
https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/9/2/523
11 Dorigatti I, Okell L, Cori A, Imai N, Baguelin M, Bhatia S, et al. Report 4: Severity of 2019-novel coronavirus (nCoV),
https://www.imperial.ac.uk/mrc-globalinfectious-di...
12 Famulare M. 2019-nCoV: preliminary estimates of the confirmed-case-fatality-ratio and infection-fatality-ratio, and initial pandemic risk assessment,
https://institutefordiseasemodeling.github.io/nCoV...
Yes all based on case numbers. As regards WHO and the other referenced experts - I just DO NOT UNDERSTAND why they use case numbers its quite clear which way this is going (and I know obvious to you). 10 Jung S, Akhmetzhanov A, Hayashi K , Linton N, Yang Y , Yuan B, et al. Real-Time Estimation of the Risk of Death from Novel Coronavirus (COVID-19) Infection:
Inference Using Exported Cases, J. Clin. Med. 2020, 9(2), 523
https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/9/2/523
11 Dorigatti I, Okell L, Cori A, Imai N, Baguelin M, Bhatia S, et al. Report 4: Severity of 2019-novel coronavirus (nCoV),
https://www.imperial.ac.uk/mrc-globalinfectious-di...
12 Famulare M. 2019-nCoV: preliminary estimates of the confirmed-case-fatality-ratio and infection-fatality-ratio, and initial pandemic risk assessment,
https://institutefordiseasemodeling.github.io/nCoV...
From Tuesday:
V6 Pushfit said:
So IMO - WHO have pissed about with the figures to give a more acceptable rate up to today by:
a) using case numbers on the recovery side of the equation
b) using the ‘dont know how many home recoveries there are’ as an extra mythical fudge.
c) finally fudging it with ‘this might not be accurate’ or in some instances just x%?
Now b) has gone, they’re faced with the reality of ‘the hospital stats are it’ so I expect a revision of the rate will be in order after pressure from scholars for them to update it in the light of this.
THEN this Govt will do something …
It IS NOT my objective to scaremonger – it is to understand why case numbers are included when its clearly misleading and the numbers are simple: How many recover vs how many die. Yes it results in a higher figure but what’s better for us and Govt:?a) using case numbers on the recovery side of the equation
b) using the ‘dont know how many home recoveries there are’ as an extra mythical fudge.
c) finally fudging it with ‘this might not be accurate’ or in some instances just x%?
Now b) has gone, they’re faced with the reality of ‘the hospital stats are it’ so I expect a revision of the rate will be in order after pressure from scholars for them to update it in the light of this.
THEN this Govt will do something …
a) To base strategic decisions on an artificially low figure – to plan on the basis of there being a bit of a ‘flu type superficial problem we can all ignore or:
b) Realise this is f
king serious stuff and put absolutely every effort into pre planning for it nowAs I have said before, I would love to see a lower figure without the very basic almost schoolboy fudge of sticking the case numbers all on one side when the current reality points to something completely different. Anyone with a basic understanding of maths can see if the case numbers are used then eg a doubling of case numbers overnight leads to a massive fall in death rate overnight for no justifiable reason as the death rate is still the output rate which stays the same.
FFS sake anyone tell me I’m wrong, but don’t be one of the idiots who hasn’t a clue and just likes a PH row with no worked out alternative themselves.
Pope caught with the sniffles at mass. Good job they have a spare hanging around - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BGW1iL88Fws
I have today been bombarded with COVID-19 information and prep.
A girl at my daughter's school is "under surveillance", with phenomena (4 years old)
Another school down the road has been closed as a precaution.
I have datacenters up and down the country kicking off their disaster recovery and contingency plans. A few are also trying to sell remote access solutions off the back of it too.
The NHS and government plan right now is rapidly shifting. Contain - Delay - Research and Mitigate.
NHS and government pandemic plans have been dusted off. Although these are designed for influenza, they are still quite scary when you look at the detail.
At least a lot more people are starting to take this more seriously. Oh.. and first confirmed cases of re-infection. Be good to track the death rate of these seporatly. The runing theory is the 2nd time round is way worse.
A girl at my daughter's school is "under surveillance", with phenomena (4 years old)
Another school down the road has been closed as a precaution.
I have datacenters up and down the country kicking off their disaster recovery and contingency plans. A few are also trying to sell remote access solutions off the back of it too.
The NHS and government plan right now is rapidly shifting. Contain - Delay - Research and Mitigate.
NHS and government pandemic plans have been dusted off. Although these are designed for influenza, they are still quite scary when you look at the detail.
At least a lot more people are starting to take this more seriously. Oh.. and first confirmed cases of re-infection. Be good to track the death rate of these seporatly. The runing theory is the 2nd time round is way worse.
V6 Pushfit said:
...without__ the very basic almost schoolboy fudge of sticking the case numbers all on one side when the current reality points to something completely different. Anyone with a basic understanding of maths can see if the case numbers are used then eg a doubling of case numbers overnight leads to a massive fall in death rate overnight for no justifiable reason as the death rate is still the output rate which stays the same.
FFS sake anyone tell me I’m wrong, but don’t be one of the idiots who hasn’t a clue and just likes a PH row with no worked out alternative themselves.
FFS sake anyone tell me I’m wrong, but don’t be one of the idiots who hasn’t a clue and just likes a PH row with no worked out alternative themselves.
WHO said:
The reported case fatality rate (CFR) is a measure of the severity of a disease and is defined as the proportion of reported cases of a specified disease or condition which are fatal within a specified time.
https://www.who.int/gho/epidemic_diseases/cholera/case_fatality_rate_text/en/WindyCommon said:
V6 Pushfit said:
...without__ the very basic almost schoolboy fudge of sticking the case numbers all on one side when the current reality points to something completely different. Anyone with a basic understanding of maths can see if the case numbers are used then eg a doubling of case numbers overnight leads to a massive fall in death rate overnight for no justifiable reason as the death rate is still the output rate which stays the same.
FFS sake anyone tell me I’m wrong, but don’t be one of the idiots who hasn’t a clue and just likes a PH row with no worked out alternative themselves.
FFS sake anyone tell me I’m wrong, but don’t be one of the idiots who hasn’t a clue and just likes a PH row with no worked out alternative themselves.
WHO said:
The reported case fatality rate (CFR) is a measure of the severity of a disease and is defined as the proportion of reported cases of a specified disease or condition which are fatal within a specified time.
https://www.who.int/gho/epidemic_diseases/cholera/case_fatality_rate_text/en/otolith said:
No point arguing about the numbers. Their relevance depends on what you're trying to answer (i.e. I'm healthy, what's the chance it will kill me? / I've got it, what's the chance it will kill me? / I'm in hospital with it, what's the chance it will kill me?/etc)
Chance you will get it: Down to your luck/level of isolation/contact levels/time frame.You've got it: Down to your age/pre existing/luck with a current average of 1 in 13.
WindyCommon said:
V6 Pushfit said:
Thanks, that's exactly what I'm saying.
If there have been 100 cases of which 10 have died, what is the CFR?If it’s 90 recovered then you can get an answer.
Problem with the real world numbers is there are lots of “pending”, not dead or recovered.
V6 Pushfit said:
otolith said:
No point arguing about the numbers. Their relevance depends on what you're trying to answer (i.e. I'm healthy, what's the chance it will kill me? / I've got it, what's the chance it will kill me? / I'm in hospital with it, what's the chance it will kill me?/etc)
Chance you will get it: Down to your luck/level of isolation/contact levels/time frame.You've got it: Down to your age/pre existing/luck with a current average of 1 in 13.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff