What has that got to do with it?
And I wouldn’t say they support it so much as accept that there is nothing they can do about it.
I’m sure that initially that was the case. They also only know about cases where medical help has been solicited. They have learned anecdotally that many people who are infected show only slight symptoms, so they don’t seek medical attention. And they really have no idea how many people have been exposed, which is usually the metric used to calculate the fatality rate.
Congrats on a complete misrepresentation of the piece.
Have they finally given the WHO officials and teams complete access? Up until a week or so they were still denying same.
The spread and critical case percentage of ~20% is concerning, but with it still hanging at ~2% deaths, this does seem to only be a real danger to the elderly and medically compromised. Especially considering how overwhelmed China is where the vast majority of this is being reported.
There has not been some drastically different outcome observed outside China, so I am not really concerned with their reporting.
Edit: Just considering closed cases, the rate is 11%, which does give some pause. Especially since this does not seem to be an illness that is overcome quickly.
The death rate is concerning but from an economic and infrastructure standpoint the greater problem is the rate of infection and length of time patients are debilitated.
This is true and why it has gone from being a mild concern to me, to a very big one. This illness at a minimum is hard to contain and puts a huge strain on resources.
Refer back to my early posts in the thread.
Why? Mortality rate and r0 are both less than SARS. Mortality rate will likely be less than 1% when all things are said and done. Typically people begin recovery by day 11 after onset of symptoms. Seasonal influenza is 14 days.
https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2001316?
The new coronavirus isn’t believed to be an airborne virus, like measles or smallpox, that can circulate through the air. “If you have an infected person in the front of the plane, for instance, and you’re in the back of the plane, your risk is close to zero simply because the area of exposure is thought to be roughly six feet from the infected person,” said Chiu.
“I believe that the actual calculated death rates will go down over time, perhaps to less than 1 percent” said Chiu.
After day 11, most patients who survive are on their way to recovery.
You’re wrong. This virus has already killed more people than SARS have now exceeded those of SARS as was reported a week or more ago.
The smart money right now says we’ll see a global slowdown if not retraction starting probably in the 3rd quarter as a result of this virus and it’s impact on global manufacturing.
The impact of the Wuhan CV is already greater than that of ether SARS or MERS.
Hmmm…mortality vs mortality rate. Read again.
So now total numbers matter? Again, might want to check seasonal flu if that’s the only statistic of importance.
1 Like
We can treat the flu and stop it dead in it’s tracks now with several prescription med’s as long as the patient properly identifies the symptoms and gets to a doc.
We’re barely 3 months into the first outbreak of this CV and have no idea yet what the actual rates are going to look like because China is not providing reliable numbers and there is no similar treatment for it.
You’re misinformed if you think we have a medicine which can stop flu “dead in it’s tracks.” That is complete and total BS. It’s dangerous to think we have some magic medication to stop the flu.
This season alone, over 14,000 Americans have died of the flu. That’s 7 times the amount who have died of the coronavirus. Would you like to tell their families there was a magic drug that could have saved them?
1 Like
It’s not “magic”.
If you get in early they are as much as 90% effective and you will be over it within four days.
Those dying of the flu in the US are those who are already extremely sick and usually immune compromised before they ever get treatment.
LOL. WebMD. You’re an expert now! Maybe read a Cochrane review? A meta-analysis or two? Nah, why bother. (In their defense, your made up “90% effective and over it within 4 days” is nowhere to be seen on WebMD.)
Don’t worry, you’re not alone. I have plenty of patients who use websites, talk radio and social media to become “experts.” The sad thing is, science doesn’t give a pass to the misinformed. They get sick just like everyone else. I take that back, they end up a whole lot sicker. To each their own.
I just wish they’d keep it to themselves. If you want to get sick or killed through your own devices, more power to you. Spreading bad information that could get someone else sick or killed because they believe you? Different story.
5 Likes
Patients? Are you now claiming to be a doctor?
I’m not spreading anything but well understood fact here.
I’m not claiming. I am a doctor. The whole medical school and MD behind my name. It’s not anything that hasn’t been discussed on here before.
1 Like
Then you know better.
When used for treatment, antiviral drugs can lessen symptoms and shorten the time you are sick by 1 or 2 days. They also can prevent serious flu complications, like pneumonia. For people at high risk of serious flu complications, treatment with antiviral drugs can mean the difference between milder or more serious illness possibly resulting in a hospital stay. CDC recommends prompt treatment for people who have influenza infection or suspected influenza infection and who are at high risk of serious flu complications.
Cochrane review. 2014. The gold standard in the medical field. What did it show? No decrease in hospitalizations, complications or mortality. Additional meta-analyses since then show that complications are more likely than disease reduction in those most severely affected.
One single non-review study showed that in otherwise healthy individuals, taking an antiviral within 1-2 days of symptoms may reduce symptoms by one day. That’s it. That’s the magic. Reducing 2 weeks of symptoms by a day in people who are the most likely to do fine on their own.
Look at the overall mortality from the flu since 2000. It’s decreased by 3.8%. No magic there. 20 years and no drugs to stop flu in it’s tracks. The only reason we’ve gotten that meager reduction is because vaccination rates have gone from less than 20% to around 45%.
I don’t expect to change your mind. Just hoping others won’t hurt themselves by believing what you’ve said. You can think anything you want.
5 Likes
That just means it is more virulent, not that it’s more deadly. In terms of total eventual deaths that is of great concern, but it’s certainly no Ebola. However, you are right, because China is a major player in the world market, the intensity of the containment effort is having a global impact on the global economy. Until the spread of the disease is contained to where new cases are few, we are all in for a bumpy ride.
