Coronavirus death rate is lower than previously reported, study says

We aren't counting all of the people who have been dying of this since the first of the year. There's going to be a lot of people found dead in their homes for months.

Now let's GET TO WORK!

There's basically no way the death rate for this goes over 2% world wide, and that's stretching it. The problem is its exceptional transmission rate. It spreads so fucking fast.

If the Lancet article is true it puts the death rate roughly equal to Hong Kong Flu in 1969/70 which was 0.5%.

You can only get really accurate statistics after the epidemic is over.

The knock on effects of shutting down the economy will be far worse than the virus in the long run.

Yes, but they're lying.

Nobody knows what the death rate is because most people hospitalized with it have never recovered but are still alive.

R4 Was there a shutdown during that pandemic?

This is such a beat up.

Look at the total deaths. Not deaths as per percentage of known cases.

A lot of people dying probably would be dead from something else within a couple of years.

And whilst it isn't 'the flu', there is always 'healthy' people that die of the flu every year - corona looks to be no different.

Whilst corona could be six times deadlier - flu or corona still both have very low rates.

I think governments have been forced to lockdown by public pressure and hysteria.

Such BS to try to compare this to the usual flu with some idea of justifying.... who knows what.

The point is covid19 spreads much more quickly than the flu... and our "herd immunity" and other tools (vaccine, treatment protocols) to resist it are zero, compared to the flu. Even at the (as yet unsubstantiated) lower fatality rate of .o5%, if 60% of the country is infected, that's 850k deaths.

Science, your friend.

We are better of getting the herd immunity in case there is a deadlier second wave where we won't be able to close down again because no government could afford it.

Look at the "absent" data from Wuhan. You know, where they reported 2535 deaths but the actual estimate is 42k-46k. That kind of data suppression surely skews data. The numbers from Italy are 4%. The numbers in America are 1.6%. When the dust settles, I think we'll find that it's actually 1.2%. And I crunch these numbers daily.

A clear example of the Dunning-Kruger effect in action.

R1 There are also much more people alive who have had the virus but were asymptomatic or had very mild illness who were never tested. We can’t cherry-pick doomsday scenario this and doomsday scenario that while ignoring totality of evidence. This is why at times such as this you trust the scientific process, not politicians of both sides trying to score points. And certainly not people who freak out over faulty projections or over strict numbers that don’t tell us anything of importance.

[quote] Nobody knows what the death rate is because most people hospitalized with it have never recovered but are still alive.

Uh, what??

You can’t base a study around Chinese (fake) data.

It’s meaningless. Like this thread.

Just to throw something else into the mix. Almost 50,000 Americans committed suicide last year.

It's the 10th leading cause of death in the US and increasing, maybe something that Governments need to look at more closely.

Suicide isn't contagious... although this thread...................

R14 here are the French tests. The Chinese was a lot smaller:

"Results Six patients were asymptomatic, 22 had upper respiratory tract infection symptoms and eight had lower respiratory tract infection symptoms.

Twenty cases were treated in this study and showed a significant reduction of the viral carriage at D6-post inclusion compared to controls, and much lower average carrying duration than reported of untreated patients in the literature. Azithromycin added to hydroxychloroquine was significantly more efficient for virus elimination.

Conclusion Despite its small sample size our survey shows that hydroxychloroquine treatment is significantly associated with viral load reduction/disappearance in COVID-19 patients and its effect is reinforced by azithromycin."

And let’s not forget we also don’t know how many people have permanent ongoing issues afterwards.

R16, large suicide numbers can be the result of a poor economy.

R16 I've experienced within my own extended family one suicide triggering several others, it does seem to be like a bit of a contagion if you witness it.

Suicide is considered contagious.

R19 R20 R21 Yeah... at exactly the rate of contagion of this virus. Right.

R21 No it's not, it doesn't fit the medical definition of contagious.

There is a vast literature on suicide as a contagion. Of course it's not "exactly like" the coronavirus.

Death rates depend on access to good quality healthcare. Spanish Flu death rates in 1918 varied widely from country to country.

When the health care system is overwhelmed, up to 10% of people can die (as in Italy right now). Wait till you see NYC in a couple of weeks.

When health care is well-resourced and plentiful, it can be under 1% - like on the Diamond Princess, which was moored in the harbour of a first-world country and had governments around the world sending teams of doctors to help.

The purpose of shutting down is to keep death rates low by preventing the rapid contagion from getting out of hand and overwhelming health care systems. This is quite a simple point but apparently it needs to be repeated and repeated.

Thank you, r13, I was going to say the same thing.

R6, care to clarify?

You can't compare this to the Spanish Flu of 1918 because there are so much advances now that the world didn't have back then. Not just scientific and medical breakthroughs but containment and sanitizing methods.

I think of those things too, r27, whenever I hear the comparison on the news or anywhere.

We’ve come a LONG way in the last 100 years medically. It’s comparing apples to oranges.

You peasants need to get back to the fields. I can't stay on this yacht forever.

Suicide is painless. It brings on many changes.....................

Spanish Flu is was before antibiotics, (though they were probably better at barrier nursing and Isolation due to TB).

A better example is the Hong Kong (H3N2) Pandemic Flu of 1968-1970, it killed an estimated 1 million people worldwide.

The most worrying aspect of the figures is that 10% (100,000) of the deaths were in the US when the US only had a population of 200 million (World population was 3.9 Billion in 1969).

I just want to say to you, r31, you are one of the many reasons I come to Datalounge.

Fascinating shit, friend.

R31 will be an even greater poster once s/he learns that antibiotics do not work on viruses.

The real problem with this virus is everyone getting sick all at once and overwhelming the healthcare system. A lot of people die unnecessarily due to a shortage of ventilators and patients with other illnesses also die because their treatment gets delayed or cancelled. This is what will drive up the death rate.

r33 so tired of hearing this. I'm in the sciences and have had a shitty immune system my whole life. Antibiotics are - and always have been - first line defense for viruses and infections because the infections invariably cause infections. Repeating what your retarded family doctor tells you or what you've heard from nurses - go to google scholar, spend a few hours and learn something before you pass on this fake information. It does not KILL viruses, it protects from the hundreds of infections caused by viruses that kill people. Get it? The virus doesn't kill people, the pneumonia (whatever) does. Currently arithromyzin is first line defense for COVID. It is standard protocol and always will be.

The lie you are repeating was a response to the overuse of antibiotics in the 1980's and 1990's and the fear of creating superbugs or immunity - which has also been proven to be fictitious. The cool thing about medical lies, is there are always retarded willing to repeat them ad-nasuem forever.

r34 I mean the viruses cause infections, I always get worked up over this, because without access to antibiotics I would have died in teens/early 20's, and I'm 48 now. My whole life people have argued with me about this, and it is much harder to get them prescribed now, because even doctors have jumped on the anti-antibiotics bandwagon. And yes, they destory your intestinal flora, I live in yogurt, kefir, saurkraut, and other fermented foods and supplement as well. I'm very healthy besides have no immune system, but without strong antibiotics I get allergies, then cold, then bronchitis, then pneumonia, then die.

R36 what if someone were already taking an antibiotic (like many do for their skin, for example)? Would they now be totally fucked and immune to antibiotic treatment for this (or any other ) virus?

R37 No.

[QUOTE] We aren't counting all of the people who have been dying of this since the first of the year. There's going to be a lot of people found dead in their homes for months.

Fuck off, catastrophe queen.

R33 Antibiotics treat the secondary bacterial infections associated with viruses (pneumonia etc) . If you'd bothered to read further than the headline page the CDC came to the same conclusion during the Hong Kong Flu pandemic.

They can and do reduce the mortality rate, ask anyone with HIV who's had Pneumocystis (Carinii) Jiroveci Pneumonia and been successfully treated with Bactrim.

Antibiotics do not treat viral pneumonia. This virus causes viral pneumonia. Bacterial pneumonia can be treated with antibiotics.

Difference between corona& flu is there’s a vaccine for flu that saves countless lives.

'They can and do reduce the mortality rate, ask anyone with HIV who's had Pneumocystis (Carinii) Jiroveci Pneumonia and been successfully treated with Bactrim.'

That's the dreaded AIDS pneumonia, boy.

'Would they now be totally fucked and immune to antibiotic treatment for this (or any other ) virus?'

No, you spaz. Hardly anyone ever becomes immune to antibiotics. I've taken 10mg of doxycycline every day for twenty years to treat dry eye and it still works.