Posts: 24520
Joined: 6/29/2002 From: San Antonio, TX Status: offline
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.
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.
Sage advice.
There is also the CB-AE virus that has 100% mortality.
Where is this new wargame, on steam? The game was be traducted from Chinese? Could I download it on 5G? Why isn't it on Kickstarter? In last news, Warvirus in development...
Posts: 24520
Joined: 6/29/2002 From: San Antonio, TX Status: offline
quote:
ORIGINAL: Zorch
quote:
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.
Sage advice.
There is also the CB-AE virus that has 100% mortality.
Aye. But there are certain mitigating features that can reduce the mortality. Both of my 2x2 partners are still alive and well, thank goodness. I believe that the 'dilution' effect from having twice as many partners was protective.
Also, one of the survivors of that game went on to challenge me in a 1x1 campaign. He is thankfully still alive. But I reckon that previous low-dose exposure to the CB-AE virus left him with a certain degree of protective immunity.
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.
Sage advice.
There is also the CB-AE virus that has 100% mortality.
Aye. But there are certain mitigating features that can reduce the mortality. Both of my 2x2 partners are still alive and well, thank goodness. I believe that the 'dilution' effect from having twice as many partners was protective.
Also, one of the survivors of that game went on to challenge me in a 1x1 campaign. He is thankfully still alive. But I reckon that previous low-dose exposure to the CB-AE virus left him with a certain degree of protective immunity.
Just make sure he doesn't become a super-spreader...
Posts: 18715
Joined: 10/28/2002 From: Graham, NC, USA Status: offline
quote:
ORIGINAL: Zorch
quote:
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.
Sage advice.
There is also the CB-AE virus that has 100% mortality.
Posts: 18715
Joined: 10/28/2002 From: Graham, NC, USA Status: offline
quote:
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.
Posts: 13450
Joined: 11/16/2015 From: My Mother, although my Father had some small part. Status: offline
quote:
ORIGINAL: USSAmerica
quote:
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.
I agree. The media has to hype things up to make it more newsworthy.
_____________________________
Seek peace but keep your gun handy.
I'm not a complete idiot, some parts are missing!
“Illegitemus non carborundum est (“Don’t let the bastards grind you down”).” ― Julia Child
Posts: 24520
Joined: 6/29/2002 From: San Antonio, TX Status: offline
Well, to amend my previous comments, it appears that the WHO is classifying this outbreak as a major global health issue today. But that doesn't mean dink for the world at large. They also said that twice for Ebola and Polio in 2014. Regional-yes-but hardly global health issues.
Posts: 13450
Joined: 11/16/2015 From: My Mother, although my Father had some small part. Status: offline
quote:
ORIGINAL: Chickenboy
Well, to amend my previous comments, it appears that the WHO is classifying this outbreak as a major global health issue today. But that doesn't mean dink for the world at large. They also said that twice for Ebola and Polio in 2014. Regional-yes-but hardly global health issues.
That is so they can extract more money from countries, especially the United States even though it is mostly a mainland Chinese concern at the present.
_____________________________
Seek peace but keep your gun handy.
I'm not a complete idiot, some parts are missing!
“Illegitemus non carborundum est (“Don’t let the bastards grind you down”).” ― Julia Child
Posts: 24520
Joined: 6/29/2002 From: San Antonio, TX Status: offline
quote:
ORIGINAL: Blond_Knight
Im at home with Influenza not dying as we speak.
Those adverse to making a donation to the WHO can make one directly to me. :)
I'm sorry, my good man, but I will require the PCR/Rapid antigen test results confirming that diagnosis before tendering my donation. God forbid that I should send you a donation for the common cold! If malingering / goldbricking on the sick lists was financially rewarding, I'd have retired by now.
Also, I assume that donations should be in the denomination of "Whiskey, Bourbon"?
Those adverse to making a donation to the WHO can make one directly to me. :)
I'm sorry, my good man, but I will require the PCR/Rapid antigen test results confirming that diagnosis before tendering my donation. God forbid that I should send you a donation for the common cold! If malingering / goldbricking on the sick lists was financially rewarding, I'd have retired by now.
Also, I assume that donations should be in the denomination of "Whiskey, Bourbon"?
In addition, a specialist Dr. will visit your home to ensure compliance with all aspects of quarantine protocol.
We still don't need any additional viruses to our cesspool. If it hits the homeless in California, it will be a disaster. I don't trust the Chinese government and just like 1986 Chernobyl, lies and more lies.
Posts: 13450
Joined: 11/16/2015 From: My Mother, although my Father had some small part. Status: offline
quote:
ORIGINAL: Zorch
quote:
ORIGINAL: Chickenboy
quote:
ORIGINAL: Blond_Knight
Im at home with Influenza not dying as we speak.
Those adverse to making a donation to the WHO can make one directly to me. :)
I'm sorry, my good man, but I will require the PCR/Rapid antigen test results confirming that diagnosis before tendering my donation. God forbid that I should send you a donation for the common cold! If malingering / goldbricking on the sick lists was financially rewarding, I'd have retired by now.
Also, I assume that donations should be in the denomination of "Whiskey, Bourbon"?
In addition, a specialist Dr. will visit your home to ensure compliance with all aspects of quarantine protocol.
If you drink a liter of Jack Daniels, the influenza will not bother you.
_____________________________
Seek peace but keep your gun handy.
I'm not a complete idiot, some parts are missing!
“Illegitemus non carborundum est (“Don’t let the bastards grind you down”).” ― Julia Child
Posts: 6668
Joined: 2/23/2009 From: United States Status: offline
quote:
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.
Do you really have to ask that?
I mean the whole time I was stationed at Fort Bliss every Thursday night was 19 cent Corona night in Juárez, and every Friday morning during our Post Run at 0615 we be not only gasping for breath from our run but gagging for air due to all the nasty smelling farts in front of us. Every 5 minutes you see a soldier who dropped out of formation to puke up his share of $1.14 - $1.71 worth in beer.
Fun times you say? Or was the Chinese in kohoots with the Mexicans experimenting with chemical warfare in 1987 - 1988?
I know where I am placing my bets...
< Message edited by Zovs -- 1/31/2020 5:06:48 AM >
_____________________________
Beta Tester for: Flashpoint Campaigns: Sudden Storm War in the East 1 & 2 WarPlan & WarPlan Pacific Valor & Victory DG CWIE 2 SPWW2 & SPMBT scenario creator
At first, I was very scared! This thing that crosses the entire planet at a crazy speed here must cost a crazy nut! Then when I learned that it was free, I breathed!
Posts: 37503
Joined: 3/28/2000 From: Vermont, USA Status: offline
I'll feel much less concerned about it if we can see the case count stabilizing or declining. Right now, even using the "official" figures from China, it's growing at an alarming rate if that continues for another few weeks.
Printable Version
All Forums >> [General] >> General Discussion >> OT - The New Coronavirus 
OT - The New Coronavirus - 
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread