- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Diamond Princess Final numbers:3711 passengers,712 positive ,7 deaths
Posted on 3/16/20 at 9:44 am to loogaroo
Posted on 3/16/20 at 9:44 am to loogaroo
quote:
So why don't we just quarantine the vulnerable 15% and let the the other 85% keep the country going?
That's essentially what the UK is doing. Will be interesting to see the results there compared to other countries.
0
Posted on 3/16/20 at 9:46 am to Pettifogger
quote:
Pettifogger
I would think this particular case would be a good example of what to expect in a worst case scenario. Aside from the recycled air aspect, we know that this virus can live on surfaces for 9 days. All of these people will be touching the same surfaces on this ship. Close quarter contact with one another as well.
These numbers should be higher than they would be elsewhere IMO. And it would be interesting to find out if those 7 deaths, all over the age of 70, were in patients who had underlying health issues.
Nobody is saying that this virus can't kill folks. It obviously can. But I believe in the end when all the tallies are made, we will discover it was no more deadly or dangerous than the common flu.
Add to this that zero children on this ship were infected. And we are closing down all schools over this? It's crazy.
Posted on 3/16/20 at 9:46 am to RD Dawg
quote:
That 0.5 percent is far less than the 3.4 percent of confirmed cases that end in death cited by the World Health Organization, but troubling nonetheless. The WHO’s number has come under fire because the true number of people infected with the virus worldwide is not known.
Frick the fearmongering WHO.
Posted on 3/16/20 at 9:46 am to BoarEd
quote:
I would think this particular case would be a good example of what to expect in a worst case scenario.
Posted on 3/16/20 at 9:48 am to BoarEd
quote:
I would think this particular case would be a good example of what to expect in a worst case scenario. Aside from the recycled air aspect, we know that this virus can live on surfaces for 9 days. All of these people will be touching the same surfaces on this ship. Close quarter contact with one another as well.
I think those infection numbers are pretty bad. 20% is serious, IMO.
quote:
But I believe in the end when all the tallies are made, we will discover it was no more deadly or dangerous than the common flu.
I just don't get this. Based on the information in this thread alone - which was posted in part to claim there is an ongoing overreaction - it's significantly more dangerous than the common flu.
Posted on 3/16/20 at 9:49 am to RD Dawg
quote:
Researchers are also extrapolating about a 0.5% mortality rate in China from their study
Sounds about right - outside of Wuhan/Hubei, it was something like 0.4%.
It will be 0.2% to 0.3% here (or less if this is as infections as they say) - so if 60m infections, 12k to 18k deaths is likely a worst case scenario and very much in line with H1N1 - of course we've taken far more aggressive and bold action so it may end up under that.
Now, the functional problems with CDC testing and so forth will be fixed for large scale pandemics going forward. We definitely have Trump and the private sector to thank for that. The MSM will do the opposite of that.
This post was edited on 3/16/20 at 9:50 am
Posted on 3/16/20 at 9:50 am to Pettifogger
Virus is just another example of just how stupid the average American is and no one understands percentages.
0.5% mortality is 50x more deaths than the flu
0.5% mortality is 50x more deaths than the flu
Posted on 3/16/20 at 9:51 am to RD Dawg
quote:
So 19.19% infection rate
And that is on a cruise ship. That is a bunch of people put together.
Posted on 3/16/20 at 9:51 am to RD Dawg
quote:
So 19.19% infection rate
According to a DR. I listened to yesterday, Flu Pandemic is 20-40% of a community population.
If the 19% holds true, this won't even be a true pandemic breakout.
Not saying that it will or it won't, but utilizing pop of china and cases as of 3/13, infection rate of population is .005%
Posted on 3/16/20 at 9:52 am to Pettifogger
quote:
I would think this particular case would be a good example of what to expect in a worst case scenario.
quote:
I think those infection numbers are pretty bad. 20% is serious, IMO
quote:
I would think this particular case would be a good example of what to expect in a worst case scenario.
quote:
I just don't get this. Based on the information in this thread alone - which was posted in part to claim there is an ongoing overreaction - it's significantly more dangerous than the common flu.
quote:
I would think this particular case would be a good example of what to expect in a worst case scenario.
How dangerous would the common flu be if we didn't already have herd immunity to it and vaccines to boot?
The final tallied mortality rate will end up being significantly less than 1%, because again:
quote:
I would think this particular case would be a good example of what to expect in a worst case scenario.
Posted on 3/16/20 at 9:52 am to Ace Midnight
quote:
Now, the functional problems with CDC testing and so forth will be fixed for large scale pandemics going forward. We definitely have Trump and the private sector to thank for that. The MSM will do the opposite of that.
This won't occur, of course, if GOP adopts the view of many Republican voters who are likely to claim this was complete overkill and Trump conspiracy, etc. (assuming we retain majorities).
Which would be a mistake, IMO. Public health is a very valid role of government and we should come out of this going "if that had been SARS, we would have been crushed and would be picking up the pieces for decades."
Posted on 3/16/20 at 9:54 am to Pettifogger
quote:
20% infection rate in close proximity and 1% death rate is probably realistic
Once again,this was place where the population density was probably 20X if not more than any city in the world
My entire point is that we won't
come anywhere near 20% and 1% and it absurd to think so.
And remember these are positive test not people who had symptoms.
Posted on 3/16/20 at 9:56 am to Oizers
quote:
If you apply those rates to cities, would it overwhelm the healthcare system?
Depends on how many of the positive tested actually required healthcare and to what degree. That seems to be what is missing here.
Posted on 3/16/20 at 9:57 am to Pettifogger
quote:
It's unlikely that the virus circulated through the vents, but it does reflect the close proximity of people eating and drinking and walking around - more akin to a crowded city.
A cruise ship is closer to "living on top of each other" than it is to "a crowded city in the United States".
That cruise ship isn't representative of how we live. Maybe it's representative of other HIGHLY dense places.
quote:
20% infection rate in close proximity and 1% death rate is probably realistic
Be specific. Where in the United States do you think the cruise ship would be a reasonable model?
Posted on 3/16/20 at 9:59 am to Pettifogger
quote:
20% infection rate in close proximity and 1% death rate is probably realistic. But I would certainly differ from OP in his idea that it's not all that significant.
It would be helpful to understand how many patients where hospitalized and how many needed intensive care. As more evidence comes in, it seems clearer that this disease is manageable so long as sick patients have access to the services their conditions require.
Posted on 3/16/20 at 9:59 am to Pettifogger
quote:
think those infection numbers are pretty bad. 20% is serious, IMO.
Unbelievable that you think a 20% number ON A CRUISE SHIP would be close to even the most crowded city on the planet.
Posted on 3/16/20 at 9:59 am to Pettifogger
quote:
20% infection rate in close proximity and 1% death rate is probably realistic. But I would certainly differ from OP in his idea that it's not all that significant.
Dude the average age on the ship was 58.
Posted on 3/16/20 at 9:59 am to moneyg
quote:
That cruise ship isn't representative of how we live.
It isn't representative of the preventative measures we've taken, either.
Put simply, it isn't representative of anything except for that one specific example.
Posted on 3/16/20 at 9:59 am to RD Dawg
quote:
Once again,this was place where the population density was probably 20X if not more than any city in the world
Once again, my point is that .5% or 1% death rate is very epidemiologically significant and people who continue to compare this to the flu are spreading ignorance.
Also, the idea that it's absurd to think we'll come anywhere close to 1% mortality just isn't a reasonable position. One study based on a limited sample extrapolated to China doesn't make it so in light of everything else we know.
I personally believe that we'll be well below 1%, but I'm not an epidemiologist and finding a few pieces of evidence to support a preconceived belief in a politically-motivated response to an illness the entire world is taking seriously doesn't make me correct.
Posted on 3/16/20 at 10:02 am to RD Dawg
quote:
Unbelievable that you think a 20% number ON A CRUISE SHIP would be close to even the most crowded city on the planet.
Listen, we all know your motivations here - you don't care about whether this is representative, etc.
I have no idea how to compare a cruise ship and large, dense cities. I do think treating this like a truly airborne illness (recirculating air) is questionable.
Page 2 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News