The fatality rate of Covid19

[Mrs Miggins]

This ^ is precisely the kind of attitude I alluded to earlier when I said that it seems as if people actually * want * covid19 to be more deadly serious than it actually is, by a wide margin.

Something isn't adding up right.

No. You could not be more wrong. I would love it to not be but I am not going to take that chance.

I really do not understand the mindset that you have about this. Why do you want this all to be a big conspiracy?

I don't get it and I repeat, what do you hope to gain from this?

 

[littlebabyjesus]

This ^ is precisely the kind of attitude I alluded to earlier when I said that it seems as if people actually * want * covid19 to be more deadly serious than it actually is, by a wide margin.

Something isn't adding up right.

I really am going to leave you alone, but bollocks. Second time you've said it. You've been wrong both times. Listen to what people are telling you!

It is * you * that wants it to be true that people want c19 to be really bad.

 

[planetgeli]

This ^ is precisely the kind of attitude I alluded to earlier when I said that it seems as if people actually * want * covid19 to be more deadly serious than it actually is, by a wide margin.

Something isn't adding up right.

Twat.

 

[joe_infinity]

tell everyone how wrong they were.

I think the issue here isn't about right or wrong, rather it's about * consistency *

Perhaps this is 'right', and the hygeine lockdown is a justified and effective response to the thread of covid19.

However that seems to imply, according to the information we can see here, that to be consistent we should do the same kind of thing when a new strain of influenza comes round every year, and lock everybody down inside their homes to prevent the spread of disease and deaths.

But since that doesn't ever happen, it seems that there is some kind of gap in logic here somewhere....

Why are we treating covid19 so much more seriously than we treat flu? When it clearly isn't that much more serious or deadly?

 

[strung out]

Why do you want this all to be a big conspiracy?

I suspect there's a very simple answer to that.

 

[weltweit]

Both China and Russia have form for being economical with the truth.

There is a post was it xes that proposed that the Chinese were cremating many more than the official figures for deaths. Was this taken into account in the article referenced?

 

[Mrs Miggins]

I think the issue here isn't about right or wrong, rather it's about * consistency *

Perhaps this is 'right', and the hygeine lockdown is a justified and effective response to the thread of covid19.

However that seems to imply, according to the information we can see here, that to be consistent we should do the same kind of thing when a new strain of influenza comes round every year, and lock everybody down inside their homes to prevent the spread of disease and deaths.

But since that doesn't ever happen, it seems that there is some kind of gap in logic here somewhere....

Why are we treating covid19 so much more seriously than we treat flu? When it clearly isn't that much more serious or deadly?

I'm not sure what qualifies you to make statements like this. I certainly don't know enough about epidemiology to analyse this information effectively. Do you?

 

[elbows]

This ^ is the part I have some trouble believing, it depends on what are the actual benefits/relief to intensive care as a result of the lockdown measures, compared to the negative effects of the lockdown measures.

But yes, time will tell.

This ^ is precisely the kind of attitude I alluded to earlier when I said that it seems as if people actually * want * covid19 to be more deadly serious than it actually is, by a wide margin.

Something isn't adding up right.

I do not like to rule possibilities in or out prematurely, I like to keep an open mind and not demand answers where there are none. Therefore, I cannot yet exclude a situation that ends up at least partially in line with your thinking about this.

Its also entirely predictable that some people will conclude that something isnt adding up right. There are numerous worldviews and suspicions of authority which would generate such thoughts, quite separate from what we actually do and dont know about the virus and pandemic.

However, I would strongly suggest that if you worked in a hospital in an affected area then you would not need to worry about the data or any theories in order to determine that the situation was quite serious enough to be treated the way the world has treated it so far.

It is perfectly possible to believe that there could be a much nicer picture ahead without needing to downplay the seriousness of the initial situation. And its also quite possible that such hopes for the future will be dashed too, its just too early to say either way.

 

[Mrs Miggins]

I suspect there's a very simple answer to that.

I really do want them to explain though because I'm fed up of everything having to be a conspiracy.

 

[keybored]

Something isn't adding up right.

Nothing is going to "just add up" when you're "just asking questions" you have no interest in having answered now, is it?

 

[elbows]

Also, if I wanted to be extra skeptical about the report, I would note that it was funded by Japan and was published at a time when they were still hoping to keep the olympics on track.

 

[keybored]

It concludes that the fatality of Covid19 even in the Chinese city of Wuhan was only 0.04% to 0.12% and thus * rather lower * than that of seasonal flu

The whole thread is based on a study which claims that covid19 is actually significantly * less * deadly than flu

According to this information, covid19 is both less deadly, and less infectious than flu.

...

Why are we treating covid19 so much more seriously than we treat flu? When it clearly isn't that much more serious or deadly?

Which is it, more or less?

 

[editor]

I really do want them to explain though because I'm fed up of everything having to be a conspiracy.

Sometimes easily understandable answers to highly complicated things don't come quickly, if at all, but that is zero justification for conspiracy nutjobs filling the void with their lunatic yarns and random accusations (see: 9/11).

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Put it this way: If, eg, the UK had continued on its 'herd immunity' tactic, what's so special about the UK that it wouldn't have had an overwhelmed health service, leading to many unnecessary deaths, like has happened in Italy and Spain? (And this still could be about to happen, of course.)

In a situation of uncertainty like this, you hope for the best but prepare for the worst. Like Germany appears to have done. The lesson thus far is not 'you're doing too much'!

 

[joe_infinity]

This WHO fact-sheet (see here - Q&A: Similarities and differences – COVID-19 and influenza) re-iterates that Covid-19 is in fact spreading slower, not faster, than influenza by a factor of about 50%. Also that pre-symptomatic transmission appears to be much lower with Covid-19 than with influenza.

 

[joe_infinity]

In a situation of uncertainty like this, you hope for the best but prepare for the worst. Like Germany appears to have done. The lesson thus far is not 'you're doing too much'!

It would be irresponsible to disagree with this ^ kind of sentiment, except that this is based on projections of the future, with apparently no consideration to what is going on in the present.

My comments here are based on present observations, not future projections.

After all, anything could happen in the future, like Earth could be hit with a massive asteroid tomorrow, but we aren't going to move the whole world's population into underground bunkers just in case of a future asteroid impact right? But wouldnt we have to do that in order to truly "prepare for the worst"?

Surely somewhere there is a balance between sensibly preparing for bad things that might happen in the future, versus outright lunacy like moving humanity into bunkers to protect them from potential asteroid impact? so where is that balance?

Have we overstepped that balance, and veered into outright lunacy territory, by responding to covid19 (= mild seasonal illness) with this worldwide lockdown?

Is it at least reasonable to enquire about this?

 

[Saul Goodman]

This WHO fact-sheet (see here - Q&A: Similarities and differences – COVID-19 and influenza) re-iterates that Covid-19 is in fact spreading slower, not faster, than influenza by a factor of about 50%. Also that pre-symptomatic transmission appears to be much lower with Covid-19 than with influenza.

From your link.

The reproductive number – the number of secondary infections generated from one infected individual – is understood to be between 2 and 2.5 for COVID-19 virus, higher than for influenza.
.
.

While the range of symptoms for the two viruses is similar, the fraction with severe disease appears to be different. For COVID-19, data to date suggest that 80% of infections are mild or asymptomatic, 15% are severe infection, requiring oxygen and 5% are critical infections, requiring ventilation. These fractions of severe and critical infection would be higher than what is observed for influenza infection.
.
.

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%

 

[joe_infinity]

Regarding Japan, I have repeatedly cautioned that the picture seen in some countries like that is not guaranteed to last.

surely seasonality has some effect on this though? Since the warmer months are starting to arrive, when seasonal illnesses like colds and flu subside dramatically.

 

[Supine]

This ^ is precisely the kind of attitude I alluded to earlier when I said that it seems as if people actually * want * covid19 to be more deadly serious than it actually is, by a wide margin.

Something isn't adding up right.

Things might look clearer if you take your tin foil hat off.

 

[joe_infinity]

Which is it, more or less?

The numbers show very clearly that covid19 is vastly less serious/deadly and less infectious than flu.

Covid19 infects fewer people, and kills fewer people, than flu...

 

[frogwoman]

'Actually, you're more likely to die from slipping on a banana peel'

 

[elbows]

surely seasonality has some effect on this though? Since the warmer months are starting to arrive, when seasonal illnesses like colds and flu subside dramatically.

It is unclear whether it will make much difference. The dynamics are often different for pandemics, because the sheer number of people who are susceptible to the new virus makes up for the seasonal factors. eg Swine Flu pandemic 2009, where the first epidemic wave in the UK happened in July.

All the same, I believe in waiting to see rather than assuming to know for sure.

 

[keybored]

The numbers show very clearly that covid19 is vastly less serious/deadly and less infectious than flu.

Covid19 infects fewer people, and kills fewer people, than flu...

But you went on to say

Why are we treating covid19 so much more seriously than we treat flu? When it clearly isn't that much more serious or deadly?

So no, not very clearly. You don't know yet, nor does anyone else.

 

[frogwoman]

It's freezing in Egypt and South Africa at the moment isn't it? You absolute dolt.

 

[scifisam]

From your link.

Blimey. Joe, did you even read the link you posted?

Again, you are falling victim to the correlation =/= causation fallacy

It is impossible to assert that corona 'caused' death in this instance, because you do not know that the person would not have died anyway, even in the absence of corona.

Saying that they had '6 months to live' is not an accurate guide to the exact time when they are going to die.

I do not know, and you do not know, but their doctors do. Doctors do not say someone has "six months to live" (they don't usually say anything like that in the UK at all anyway) and then assume that any death earlier than that is due to another cause. There are post-mortems, and the people conducting them actually know what they're talking about, far more than a health minister.

By your reasoning, if someone on death row has cancer, but is executed before they succumb to the cancer, they still died from cancer?

Or if they had a car crash on the way to the hospital, or fell off a ladder - nope, the underlying condition is still the cause of death.

I understand why people want this to be a conspiracy though. It feels safer than there actually being a disease that's killing people. The fact that it would take worldwide cooperation between thousands of world leaders and their staff, many of whom hate the other countries and many of whom are incompetent at everything except bigging themselves up, has never stopped any conspiracy theory before.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

It would be irresponsible to disagree with this ^ kind of sentiment, except that this is based on projections of the future, with apparently no consideration to what is going on in the present.

My 'sentiment' is based purely on what is going on in the present. It is a tentative suggestion that it appears that Germany might have got things much more right than most in Europe. Note the qualifications. Only a fool makes firm predictions atm.

 

[elbows]

The numbers show very clearly that covid19 is vastly less serious/deadly and less infectious than flu.

Covid19 infects fewer people, and kills fewer people, than flu...

The WHO thing you were keen to link to for another purpose earlier says:

While the range of symptoms for the two viruses is similar, the fraction with severe disease appears to be different. For COVID-19, data to date suggest that 80% of infections are mild or asymptomatic, 15% are severe infection, requiring oxygen and 5% are critical infections, requiring ventilation. These fractions of severe and critical infection would be higher than what is observed for influenza infection.

Also, although that report says that spread is slower than influenza, it is stupid to miss this bit out:

The reproductive number – the number of secondary infections generated from one infected individual – is understood to be between 2 and 2.5 for COVID-19 virus, higher than for influenza. However, estimates for both COVID-19 and influenza viruses are very context and time-specific, making direct comparisons more difficult.

Although as per the logic of my earlier points, it is possible for you to be utterly wrong and ignorant about the current threat posed by this virus, ie the threat posed by the inital wave in countries, but that the medium term picture could still end up being one in which your opinions of the severity of the disease are somewhat closer to the reality.

 

[joe_infinity]

It's freezing in Egypt and South Africa at the moment isn't it?

That is irrelevant.

Irrespective of temperature, incidence of infectious diseases like cold and flu always falls dramatically in the warmer part of the year, they are 'seasonal' conditions.

 

[Buddy Bradley]

Covid19 infects fewer people, and kills fewer people, than flu...

Where are you getting your numbers? Flu kills ~0.5m a year worldwide. Covid-19 is heading for way more than that.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Is it at least reasonable to enquire about this?

Enquire away. But listen to the answers to your queries.