Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
We didn't know what the potentials were, so yeah, the initial lockdowns were smart. We were also treated with the most outrageous, kook, fringe predictions of the mortality rates. We were led to believe the death rate for anyone catching the virus could be 4%. Now we find out it's more like 98% are asymptomatic, and for the 2% who do have synptoms, the mortality is 2%. So 2% of the 98% should worry.
But once everyone was aware of the virus, and started practicing social distancing, using masks once we had the PPE, then the lockdowns were no longer necessary. That was like over a month ago, and 35 million lost jobs later.
It took weeks to engage this sort of thing as most of our hospitals were not prepared. Then a period of time to realize all the differing local potentials. Then the matter of unwinding. All taking time. March, then April, now here we are unwinding in many low risk locales. Massive job loss wass inevitable IMO, but also mostly temporary.
The CDC just came out with a report that should be earth-shattering to the narrative of the political class, yet it will go into the thick pile of vital data and information about the virus that is not getting out to the public. For the first time, the CDC has attempted to offer a real estimate of the overall death rate for COVID-19, and under its most likely scenario, the number is 0.26%. Officials estimate a 0.4% fatality rate among those who are symptomatic and project a 35% rate of asymptomatic cases among those infected, which drops the overall infection fatality rate (IFR) to just 0.26% — almost exactly where Stanford researchers pegged it a month ago.
Until now, we have been ridiculed for thinking the death rate was that low, as opposed to the 3.4% estimate of the World Health Organization, which helped drive the panic and the lockdowns. Now the CDC is agreeing to the lower rate in plain ink.
Plus, ultimately we might find out that the IFR is even lower because numerous studies and hard counts of confined populations have shown a much higher percentage of asymptomaticcases. Simply adjusting for a 50% asymptomatic rate would drop their fatality rate to 0.2% – exactly the rate of fatality Dr. John Ionnidis of Stanford University projected.
More importantly, as I mentioned before, the overall death rate is meaningless because the numbers are so lopsided. Given that at least half of the deaths were in nursing homes, a back-of-the-envelope estimate would show that the infection fatality rate for non-nursing home residents would only be 0.1% or 1 in 1,000. And that includes people of all ages and all health statuses outside of nursing homes. Since nearly all of the deaths are those with comorbidities.
The CDC estimates the death rate from COVID-19 for those under 50 is 1 in 5,000 for those with symptoms, which would be 1 in 6,725 overall, but again, almost all those who die have specific comorbidities or underlying conditions. Those without them are more likely to die in a car accident. And schoolchildren, whose lives, mental health, and education we are destroying, are more likely to get struck by lightning.
What are you talking about? That link is about potential scenarios.
One that a lot of other epidemiologists are saying is way too optmistic. I don't think it will make any difference to the OP though. Any way, the OP misunderstood what they were reading.
__________________ ____________________________________________
My posts as a Mod will always be in red.
Be sure to review Terms of Service: TOS
And check this out: FAQ
Moderator: Relationships Forum / Hawaii Forum / Dogs / Pets / Current Events
The CDC just came out with a report that should be earth-shattering to the narrative of the political class, yet it will go into the thick pile of vital data and information about the virus that is not getting out to the public. For the first time, the CDC has attempted to offer a real estimate of the overall death rate for COVID-19, and under its most likely scenario, the number is 0.26%. Officials estimate a 0.4% fatality rate among those who are symptomatic and project a 35% rate of asymptomatic cases among those infected, which drops the overall infection fatality rate (IFR) to just 0.26% — almost exactly where Stanford researchers pegged it a month ago.
Until now, we have been ridiculed for thinking the death rate was that low, as opposed to the 3.4% estimate of the World Health Organization, which helped drive the panic and the lockdowns. Now the CDC is agreeing to the lower rate in plain ink.
Plus, ultimately we might find out that the IFR is even lower because numerous studies and hard counts of confined populations have shown a much higher percentage of asymptomaticcases. Simply adjusting for a 50% asymptomatic rate would drop their fatality rate to 0.2% – exactly the rate of fatality Dr. John Ionnidis of Stanford University projected.
More importantly, as I mentioned before, the overall death rate is meaningless because the numbers are so lopsided. Given that at least half of the deaths were in nursing homes, a back-of-the-envelope estimate would show that the infection fatality rate for non-nursing home residents would only be 0.1% or 1 in 1,000. And that includes people of all ages and all health statuses outside of nursing homes. Since nearly all of the deaths are those with comorbidities.
The CDC estimates the death rate from COVID-19 for those under 50 is 1 in 5,000 for those with symptoms, which would be 1 in 6,725 overall, but again, almost all those who die have specific comorbidities or underlying conditions. Those without them are more likely to die in a car accident. And schoolchildren, whose lives, mental health, and education we are destroying, are more likely to get struck by lightning.
Obvious from very early on.............they KNEW the ones getting very sick and/or dying, were nearly all already in poor healthy, or their health was compromised in some other way.
I am calling it......an opportunity for yet another Goonvernment power-grab was not wasted
with this current "pandemic".
Obvious from very early on.............they KNEW the ones getting very sick and/or dying, were nearly all already in poor healthy, or their health was compromised in some other way.
I am calling it......an opportunity for yet another Goonvernment power-grab was not wasted
with this current "pandemic".
Why don't you take a shot as to what part of the population falls into that category.
As I have said MANY times before, if COVID-19 was more deadly than a very bad flu, there would be a LOT more deaths, and there would be a great shortage of grocery clerks, TSA agents, etc. These people come in contact with dozens of people a day, and so if the virus was all that terrible to MOST people, we would be seeing close to a million deaths in the U.S. by now, at least.
And, again, YES, I do know that this is NOT a hoax, but I am taking the view that although it was wise to be VERY cautious in February/March, this is no longer the case now, with more accurate numbers being known, "ENOUGH ALREADY, AND LET'S GET BACK TO TO HOW THINGS WERE IN 2019!!" (And I'm over 65, btw.) However, if there is a second and much deadlier wave in the autumn, I might very possibly change my mind.
Yes, people will continue to die from this, but the great majority of them are/were in bad health, anyway; and as many others have said, the chances of dying from other causes are MUCH greater than dying from COVID-19.
As I have said MANY times before, if COVID-19 was more deadly than a very bad flu, there would be a LOT more deaths, and there would be a great shortage of grocery clerks, TSA agents, etc. These people come in contact with dozens of people a day, and so if the virus was all that terrible to MOST people, we would be seeing close to a million deaths in the U.S. by now, at least.
And, again, YES, I do know that this is NOT a hoax, but I am taking the view that although it was wise to be VERY cautious in February/March, this is no longer the case now, with more accurate numbers being known, "ENOUGH ALREADY, AND LET'S GET BACK TO TO HOW THINGS WERE IN 2019!!" (And I'm over 65, btw.) However, if there is a second and much deadlier wave in the autumn, I might very possibly change my mind.
Yes, people will continue to die from this, but the great majority of them are/were in bad health, anyway; and as many others have said, the chances of dying from other causes are MUCH greater than dying from COVID-19.
The flu's annual mortality rate is .1%. There are also also vaccines which either prevent or minimize the impact of the flu, and there are treatments.
In NYC, less than 20% of people are hypothesized to have been infected based on broad based antibody testing. Based on that data, NYC's mortality rate is .9%. The math is simple, but maybe you need help - that's 9x more
In Massachusetts, deaths in 2 1/2 months of COVID-19 are more than 5 times the entirety of the 2017 flu season (the last year recorded but also one of the worst flu seasons recently).
What "very bad flu" has had these numbers?
Many cashiers and such *have* gotten sick. A local Walmart shut down because 40+ employees were sick. The reason there's not more of that is because of social distancing. Yes, cashiers and other public facing employees are exposed to a lot of people, but those people are not generally exposed to a lot of other people. For those people, their 20 minutes in the grocery store, especially with everyone appropriately masked as they are required in my state, has been shown to have very little risk as long as you're not lingering and everyone is social distancing.
So it looks like President Trump and Rush Limbaugh were right all along, while the so-called "Experts" at the WHO and the panic promoting mass media have been consistently and spectacularly wrong.
What a complete fiasco this has been.
Where are all the CD naysayers who criticized those of us who inherently knew the projections and early figures were way off?
Heck I remember them saying this was nothing like H1N1 in the context of trying to cover for Obama/Biden's poor response to their pandemic. Yet they attacked Trump/Pence continuously, implying the figures were much worse.
`
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
