Matrix Games Forums

ORIGINAL: z1812

https://nypost.com/2020/02/16/chinese-b ... ronavirus/

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

Something I think missing from most breathless news coverage is relative risk. In the United States, 34,000-44,000 people die annually from influenza and complications from influenza. Probably that number times 100 are clinically affected, but recover. Other countries have similar incidence/case fatality rate per unit of population.

My guess is that those individuals that tested positive for the Wuhan Coronavirus were *not* screened or reported for co-pathogens or factors that could substantially influence co-morbidity. For example, how many of the reported deaths "due to Coronavirus" were also screened for influenza or other causes of bacterial pneumonia? What number of the coronavirus-ascribed mortality were elderly with pre-existing conditions related to respiratory failure? I haven't seen any reports of insight into the effects that mundane features / causes of respiratory disease are being screened and weighed relative to their importance.

The Wuhan Coronavirus (2019) is an interesting development that bears watching. But let's not lose sight of the forest for the trees. It's still a novel respiratory pathogen that is unlikely to be a pandemic or even a major WHO health concern.

Take a deep breath. Remember the tendency of media towards the salacious: see SARS, Ebola (outside of West Africa) and any number of other novel health developments. Outside of the central nidus of viral origin, none of these 'outbreaks' bore out the drama that media heaped upon them at the time.

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

Something I think missing from most breathless news coverage is relative risk. In the United States, 34,000-44,000 people die annually from influenza and complications from influenza. Probably that number times 100 are clinically affected, but recover. Other countries have similar incidence/case fatality rate per unit of population.

My guess is that those individuals that tested positive for the Wuhan Coronavirus were *not* screened or reported for co-pathogens or factors that could substantially influence co-morbidity. For example, how many of the reported deaths "due to Coronavirus" were also screened for influenza or other causes of bacterial pneumonia? What number of the coronavirus-ascribed mortality were elderly with pre-existing conditions related to respiratory failure? I haven't seen any reports of insight into the effects that mundane features / causes of respiratory disease are being screened and weighed relative to their importance.

The Wuhan Coronavirus (2019) is an interesting development that bears watching. But let's not lose sight of the forest for the trees. It's still a novel respiratory pathogen that is unlikely to be a pandemic or even a major WHO health concern.

Take a deep breath. Remember the tendency of media towards the salacious: see SARS, Ebola (outside of West Africa) and any number of other novel health developments. Outside of the central nidus of viral origin, none of these 'outbreaks' bore out the drama that media heaped upon them at the time.

Just wanted to keep it real. In the third post on this thread (from January), I poo-pooed the possibility of this becoming a major disease issue or the WHO declaring this a pandemic. While much of what I thought would happen with this disease has happened, I understated the contagious nature of this disease to spread globally. I was wrong. Mea culpa and all that.

ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

Something I think missing from most breathless news coverage is relative risk. In the United States, 34,000-44,000 people die annually from influenza and complications from influenza. Probably that number times 100 are clinically affected, but recover. Other countries have similar incidence/case fatality rate per unit of population.

My guess is that those individuals that tested positive for the Wuhan Coronavirus were *not* screened or reported for co-pathogens or factors that could substantially influence co-morbidity. For example, how many of the reported deaths "due to Coronavirus" were also screened for influenza or other causes of bacterial pneumonia? What number of the coronavirus-ascribed mortality were elderly with pre-existing conditions related to respiratory failure? I haven't seen any reports of insight into the effects that mundane features / causes of respiratory disease are being screened and weighed relative to their importance.

The Wuhan Coronavirus (2019) is an interesting development that bears watching. But let's not lose sight of the forest for the trees. It's still a novel respiratory pathogen that is unlikely to be a pandemic or even a major WHO health concern.

Take a deep breath. Remember the tendency of media towards the salacious: see SARS, Ebola (outside of West Africa) and any number of other novel health developments. Outside of the central nidus of viral origin, none of these 'outbreaks' bore out the drama that media heaped upon them at the time.

Just wanted to keep it real. In the third post on this thread (from January), I poo-pooed the possibility of this becoming a major disease issue or the WHO declaring this a pandemic. While much of what I thought would happen with this disease has happened, I understated the contagious nature of this disease to spread globally. I was wrong. Mea culpa and all that.

warspite1

Hindsight is a wonderful thing. Good of you to say it but frankly what you thought was understandable given the previous scares.

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe

ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy




Just wanted to keep it real. In the third post on this thread (from January), I poo-pooed the possibility of this becoming a major disease issue or the WHO declaring this a pandemic. While much of what I thought would happen with this disease has happened, I understated the contagious nature of this disease to spread globally. I was wrong. Mea culpa and all that.

warspite1

Hindsight is a wonderful thing. Good of you to say it but frankly what you thought was understandable given the previous scares.

I still think that you are still correct about co-pathogens and other factors. Apparently the older men in China who tended to smoke tobacco have a much higher mortality rate than women of the same age who tended not to smoke. Also other factors such as heart disease, diabetes, obesity, et al are not usually found in the children who catch it and shrug it off.

Italy also has a much higher rate of cigarette smoking as well.

ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe

ORIGINAL: warspite1


warspite1

Hindsight is a wonderful thing. Good of you to say it but frankly what you thought was understandable given the previous scares.

I still think that you are still correct about co-pathogens and other factors. Apparently the older men in China who tended to smoke tobacco have a much higher mortality rate than women of the same age who tended not to smoke. Also other factors such as heart disease, diabetes, obesity, et al are not usually found in the children who catch it and shrug it off.

Italy also has a much higher rate of cigarette smoking as well.

warspite1

May have been noted before, but apparently Italy has the oldest population in Europe. Almost a quarter over 65.

ORIGINAL: Zorch

Yes, some of them can even remember HMS Warspite.

ORIGINAL: Orm

ORIGINAL: Zorch

Yes, some of them can even remember HMS Warspite.

Yes, with horror. They use true stories about HMS Warspite to scare children. And to teach them to never mess with the Royal Navy again.

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel
I hope he won't be dissuaded by the fact ...

ORIGINAL: sPzAbt653

NBA cancels its season !!