re: Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) ***W.H.O. DECLARES A GLOBAL PANDEMIC***

quote:

---

Considering it's a novel virus, their embarrassing handling of SARS, and the international criticism they received, I'd expect the pendulum to swing the opposite direction this time. Lo and behold, they're "quarantining" 56 million people, a decision that most medical experts think is completely ineffective, but a decision that sends a big message.

---

In other words you’re speculating just like the poster your critiquing.

We always seem to have these outbreaks in Olympic years.

China's propaganda team working overtime

quote:

---

Sigh. Sure, going with the CDC, WHO, and the actual, verified reports of 1399 cases this far is speculation.

---

Again everyone agrees the response is out of proportion to the death totals. You say the Chinese are simply incompetent on the response strategy but not the reporting. He thinks they are competent on the strategy but incompetent/deceitful on the reporting.

I really don’t think either is unreasonable and the truth probably lies in between.

My assumption is the CPC is in cover your arse mode

22% isn't close to 75%

Lol.

Do you not start at 100 though? Like you assume healthy transmission in terms of the virus replicating at 100 and then if it falls to 75% success then it starts to die off. So if you reduce transmission by 22% are you not then reducing the efficacy to 78%.

Honest. I’m not trying to be a wise arse. I’m legit scratching my head about that trying to understand it.

Found the source of that screenshot.

quote:

---

We estimated that the ascertainment rate in Wuhan is 5.1% (95%CI, 4.8–5.5), reflecting the
difficulty in identifying cases of a novel pathogen. Given the generally good accessibility to
healthcare in China, this suggests that the majority of infections may be mild and
insufficiently serious for individuals to seek treatment. However, it is worth noting that a
number of identified cases have died (Centre for Disease Control and Prevention 2020) and
that the true case fatality rate has yet to be estimated accurately. We also estimated the size
of the epidemic in Wuhan at the time of the market closure to be 24 individuals (95%CI, 22–
25). Our estimates of epidemiological parameters are sensitive to our assumption regarding
the length of the incubation period; see Figure 2.

---

That's pretty interesting and follows the same logic I was using last night. In the early stages, the confirmed cases are going to be coming from patients with severe enough symptoms to go to the hospital. That significantly skews the fatality rates. You can't take 42/1400 (3%) and apply it to 250k future estimated cases. According to their estimates, the 15 deaths at the time of model would have been from nearly 13,000 estimated cases. That's a fatality rate that's almost exactly like the CDC's estimate for this year's flu season (actually lower than the flu this year).

Granted, as they say in the article, there are alot of assumptions.

LINK

Canada says hello.

1 Case

Twitter