Coronavirus - Is this the killer flu that will wipe us out?
Discussion
turbobloke said:
RTB said:
V6 Pushfit said:
Oh dear.
I'm trying to have a discussion. I understand the maths but the maths has to have some utility in describing where we're going to end up with this. You can't calculate CFR whilst an outbreak is ongoing you can only model and make predictions (which you don't agree with - fair enough, write a paper addressing the various model shortcomings and get it peer reviewed)I don't know if the final CFR will be 1% 2% 7.7% or 30% and neither does anyone else at this point in time.
I've noted that the CFR numbers are provisional via comments such as seeing what's what 'when the dust settles' and as yet it hasn't settled. That doesn't mean that the Ferguson / Imperial College 1% is worthless.
ETA I'd go for a final value <1% with my shilling on the side.
Edited by turbobloke on Thursday 27th February 17:48
So, for now, until they update their studies in light of new data, or perhaps some other scientists cast serious doubt on their estimates, I’m satisfied to use just under 1% **infection** fatality rate as the basis for my understanding of how seriously to take this.
As far as I can see, the IFR (rather than the CFR) is what matters to people... of those that get infected, what percentage on average are estimated to die. That’s part 1 of what I want to know.
That seems much more relevant to individuals than the CFR.
The next huge question for which the answer has to be estimated, if the IFR is to mean anything in real terms, is then obviously how many people might get infected..... this is part 2.
Reasonable worst cases scenarios are how plans have to be made. There’s little point in planning for the reasonable best case scenario. I think the same way. I like to know, reasonably, how bad could it be, and then 'prepare' mentally and practically for that possible scenario, rather than be surprised should it happen because I’d hoped the best case would happen. I think a lot of this just comes down to natural differences between optimists and pessimists. I’m happy to acknowledge that I naturally swing towards pessimism, and I do think it’s also the logical position to take when contemplating something such as this virus. The world absolutely needs both optimists and pessimists... but when facing a novel virus and contemplating how severe it could be, and hence how to prepare, (reasonable) pessimism seems to me the only logical position.
So, again, until I see something from other scientists stating why it absolutely won’t infect a large proportion or even a majority of adults (if we don’t implement lasting and severe control measures), then the 40%+ getting infected seems a reasonable worst case to me.
I keep half expecting the studies to be updated to drastically reduce the IFR estimate, or for the experts to come out and say they now only think a reasonable worst case is that 10% or less get infected... hopefully they will soon.
Edited by nffcforever on Thursday 27th February 20:36
V6 Pushfit said:
isaldiri said:
Given how one poster is convinced that everyone else (university professors included) hasn't a clue on how to estimate this other than him, he should easily be able to win a nobel prize once he releases that paper detailing how things should be done.
Back in the real world with hopefully a larger number of rational people, as you said just as well no one in any kind of decision making process used such an utterly meaningless and useless estimate to decide on what actually needed to be done 2-3 weeks ago as the consequences of the government deciding to do something about a fairly easily transmissive disease that they thought had a 30% fatality rate would be absolutely massive. There's just possibly a rather good reason why no one anywhere other than PH uses that number as the 'true' cfr.
Just give up will you. Does your ignorance always show as moaning at others while unable to offer anything else? I’ve done updates on the rates regularly but you don’t appear to have been able to find them - best get someone to help maybe? Back in the real world with hopefully a larger number of rational people, as you said just as well no one in any kind of decision making process used such an utterly meaningless and useless estimate to decide on what actually needed to be done 2-3 weeks ago as the consequences of the government deciding to do something about a fairly easily transmissive disease that they thought had a 30% fatality rate would be absolutely massive. There's just possibly a rather good reason why no one anywhere other than PH uses that number as the 'true' cfr.
You have incomplete data wrt to number of recovered cases. You do not have a damn clue what the lag between death/recovered cases is or is likely to be and simply are taking dead vs recovered at the same point when as it has been pointed out to you, recovered usually takes a while longer (2 tests have to be negative iirc). Given that, you think you have a better idea of what the cfr is than what has been estimated by Imperial and others...?
Also, what is the point of you constantly spouting off on your figures when they have had to be changed so much so quickly? Is it any kind of basis for any serious decision making process if estimated fatality rate can go from 30% to 10% in 2 weeks?
Edited by isaldiri on Thursday 27th February 19:17
First town in lockdown More to follow?
A bit grim looking at map below, almost whole planet infected.
A bit grim looking at map below, almost whole planet infected.
anxious_ant said:
First town in lockdown More to follow?
A bit grim looking at map below, almost whole planet infected.
One school shut, one gp surgery shut, and that’s your definition of lockdown?A bit grim looking at map below, almost whole planet infected.
And that map - one case in Brazil, and the whole country is infected?
Let’s get a grip, folks.
anxious_ant said:
First town in lockdown More to follow?
A bit grim looking at map below, almost whole planet infected.
Not like the daily mail to be overly dramatic... A bit grim looking at map below, almost whole planet infected.
But for example Canada and Russia combined have about the same number of cases as the UK but cover a huge percentage of the map. (I have personal doubts about the latter)
Just saw first case in Northern Ireland which takes UK to 16.
anxious_ant said:
First town in lockdown More to follow?
A bit grim looking at map below, almost whole planet infected.
FFS. The vast majority of those have got 1 / 2 / 3 cases. Bring on the sensationalism A bit grim looking at map below, almost whole planet infected.
anxious_ant said:
First town in lockdown More to follow?
A bit grim looking at map below, almost whole planet infected.
I'd perhaps ask yourself when looking at the way the map has been designed i.e. colours and use of skulls if it's intended to simply be factual or designed to try to scare the sA bit grim looking at map below, almost whole planet infected.
t out of people.V6 Pushfit said:
isaldiri said:
Graveworm said:
It makes more sense, when you factor in how the increase in rate of infection, means the numbers who are in the early stages, are exponentially greater than those far enough in to be classified as recovered. Fatal could often be much earlier in the disease cycle. This is coupled with the most serious cases presenting first. Looking at the best estimate as to how long before, statistically, they can assume it isn't fatal can give a better estimate.
Illustrative non real world example.
Lets say 10 percent are going to die. It is fatal within 3-5 days and takes 10 days to recover.
If day 1 there is one case, day 2, 2 new cases, making 3, 4 in day 3 making 7 etc by day 10 you will have 1023 cases. 102 are going to die. 921 will survive.
But a maximum of 1 person will have recovered, whereas 26 could have died. 2 days later still only 6 or seven recovered and all 102 could be dead.
That would give a near 100 percent CFR by your method.
Well he was claiming exactly that -> Italy having a 87.5% fatality rate as of yesterday... special italian mutation of covid19 or something.....Illustrative non real world example.
Lets say 10 percent are going to die. It is fatal within 3-5 days and takes 10 days to recover.
If day 1 there is one case, day 2, 2 new cases, making 3, 4 in day 3 making 7 etc by day 10 you will have 1023 cases. 102 are going to die. 921 will survive.
But a maximum of 1 person will have recovered, whereas 26 could have died. 2 days later still only 6 or seven recovered and all 102 could be dead.
That would give a near 100 percent CFR by your method.
At today Italy has 17 deaths to 45 recoveries. What rate is that? Can you do that?
CFR = the proportion of people with a disease who will eventually die as a result of infection, often expressed as a percentage. Small or very small subsets of data (hospitalisations, or the Italy 62) of themselves are of little use.
bhstewie said:
hstewie said:anxious_ant said:
First town in lockdown More to follow?
A bit grim looking at map below, almost whole planet infected.
I'd perhaps ask yourself when looking at the way the map has been designed i.e. colours and use of skulls if it's intended to simply be factual or designed to try to scare the sA bit grim looking at map below, almost whole planet infected.
t out of people.anxious_ant said:
First town in lockdown More to follow?
A bit grim looking at map below, almost whole planet infected.
Yup certainty the whole planet ! 5 Whole people in Russia... Population density of 22 people per square mile ...A bit grim looking at map below, almost whole planet infected.
Narcisus said:
anxious_ant said:
First town in lockdown More to follow?
A bit grim looking at map below, almost whole planet infected.
Yup certainty the whole planet ! 5 Whole people in Russia... Population density of 22 people per square mile ...A bit grim looking at map below, almost whole planet infected.
f
k this stupid scaremongering nonsense. 
Massive spike in new infections and deaths outside of China. Bit worrying?
Source : http://avatorl.org/covid-19/
Source : http://avatorl.org/covid-19/
philv said:
The death rate as d / (d + r) is heading towards an accurate figure for confirmed cases.
Currently at less than 8%.
Falling every day, as it becomes more accurate as time and numbers increase.
The greater unknown is the number of never diagnosed.
That's the figure the who will guesstimate using their vast experience.
But they could be wildly wrong in this as a lot is unknown about this virus.
Of course if it mutates then who knows.
So, the above is for the current strain.
All imho.
.... that ‘missing cohort’ may still be there!Currently at less than 8%.
Falling every day, as it becomes more accurate as time and numbers increase.
The greater unknown is the number of never diagnosed.
That's the figure the who will guesstimate using their vast experience.
But they could be wildly wrong in this as a lot is unknown about this virus.
Of course if it mutates then who knows.
So, the above is for the current strain.
All imho.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff