Mega Thread Coronavirus & the AFL - season postponed. (Thread part 1 - cont in part 2, link in thread)

Has the coronavirus outbreak made you reconsider attending the footy

  • Yes

    Votes: 285 44.9%
  • No

    Votes: 350 55.1%

  • Total voters
    635

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.

Log in to remove this ad.

images
Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing Testing
 
Not simples, irrelevant.

The reported mortality rates relate to known cases, projected mortality rates also relate to known cases.

Your reducing the mortality rate, based on an ASSUMPTION of large numbers of unreported infections. Then you seem to be applying this guessed at lower mortality rate to projected estimated infections, and ignoring that these projections are based on known cases.

If mortality rate is 2%. But you decide that there are 10 times as many infected as reported, so your guessed at mortality rate is 0.2%

If estimated number of infected in 1 year is 10 mill, then 2% is 200000.

We can apply your logic (guess). Number of infected is 10 times reported, mortality is 1/10 reported.

Calculate that out, you get what!! 200000. Shock horror.

Could it be, let's go really crazy here. Could it be that actual epidemiologists, crunching the actual raw data, might have figured out there are infected people that aren't known about?

Like maybe someone suggested it to them, or maybe they read bigfooty.

What a sight that would have been, high and mighty up himself WHO epidemiologist sitting down at his cornflakes, flicking through bigfooty, comes across Frumpy. What a forehead slapping moment that would have been, oh for fu**s sake, we've been doing it all wrong.

They should make your lounge room WHO crises headquarters, you've got it all going on.


On moto g(6) plus using BigFooty.com mobile app
So there are or aren't more people out there who have this disease than reported?

Sent from my CPH1879 using Tapatalk
 
If the Anzac Day match is played in an empty stadium, there is less chance of some random yelling out during the last post minutes silence.
They may even run the minutes silence for an actual minute rather than the 40 seconds the administration think is long enough for Gen Y not to get distracted
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

That's not what the experts are saying.
What the experts like the who are saying is that the mortality rate of 2-4% is Wildly speculative and exaggerated because it is only reporting mortality rates of people hospitalized, and takes very little consideration of under reporting or undetected infections in people (such as children) who show no symptoms. The vast majority of cases are also in places with lower quality health systems like rural China, or in places like Iran where it was deliberately ignored. Mortality rates in more developed places like Korea and suburban China are in the .5-.8% range. General predictions are that the mortality rate will drop significantly once recording of milder cases and treatment catches up.

There's more to it than the number morning tv wants to put out there to get eyeballs
 
Come again?
Its simple.

He decided it isnt really that serious because mortality rates are much lower than reported.

He decided they are much lower than reported by making the assumption that the infection rate is much higher than reported.

However, the assumed drop in mortality is matched by the assumed increased infection rate. Mortality rate is half what they say, if the infection rate is twice what they say.

But if the infection rate is higher and the mortality rate is lower, they cancel out, you end up with the same number of dead people.

In fact, its worse.
There are 2 cohorts, the vulnerable, with a high mortality rate, and the rest (young healthy), that have a really low death rate. The overall mortality rate is a mix of the 2 cohorts.

The vulnerable are less likely to be under diagnosed as they are more likely to show symptoms, so most of the people that get infected and never get diagnosed because they dont fall ill will be in the healthy young cohort. So the mortality rate for the vulnerable is probably about what they say it is. Its the overall mortality rate thats lower.

With a lot more infected and infectious people walking around, the likelihood of keeping the disease out of the cohort that is vulnerable is much lower. Infected but well person passes the illness to a young healthy nursing home nurse, who never gets tested because she never gets ill, and who then passes it around the nursing home.

He is right though, many people do not really care about the elderly or the infirm dying. If you dont have elderly parents, or chronically ill friends/relatives you would like to see not die from this disease, then you probably dont care all that much about other peoples elderly parents dying either, and this is all a storm in a teacup.

Lots of people realising this is unlikely to kill them, and that ends their concern.
 
So there are or aren't more people out there who have this disease than reported?

Sent from my CPH1879 using Tapatalk
Your the one with the evidence apparently. I am just pointing out the logical consequence of deciding the disease has a lower mortality rate at the same time as assuming its infecting more people.
 
Your the one with the evidence apparently. I am just pointing out the logical consequence of deciding the disease has a lower mortality rate at the same time as assuming its infecting more people.
My logic tells me there are slot more that haven't been diagnosed than reported.

Round and round we go

Sent from my CPH1879 using Tapatalk
 
Its simple.

He decided it isnt really that serious because mortality rates are much lower than reported.

He decided they are much lower than reported by making the assumption that the infection rate is much higher than reported.

However, the assumed drop in mortality is matched by the assumed increased infection rate. Mortality rate is half what they say, if the infection rate is twice what they say.

But if the infection rate is higher and the mortality rate is lower, they cancel out, you end up with the same number of dead people.

In fact, its worse.
There are 2 cohorts, the vulnerable, with a high mortality rate, and the rest (young healthy), that have a really low death rate. The overall mortality rate is a mix of the 2 cohorts.

The vulnerable are less likely to be under diagnosed as they are more likely to show symptoms, so most of the people that get infected and never get diagnosed because they dont fall ill will be in the healthy young cohort. So the mortality rate for the vulnerable is probably about what they say it is. Its the overall mortality rate thats lower.

With a lot more infected and infectious people walking around, the likelihood of keeping the disease out of the cohort that is vulnerable is much lower. Infected but well person passes the illness to a young healthy nursing home nurse, who never gets tested because she never gets ill, and who then passes it around the nursing home.

He is right though, many people do not really care about the elderly or the infirm dying. If you dont have elderly parents, or chronically ill friends/relatives you would like to see not die from this disease, then you probably dont care all that much about other peoples elderly parents dying either, and this is all a storm in a teacup.

Lots of people realising this is unlikely to kill them, and that ends their concern.
I actually think the general well adapted human is concerned about people dying.. call me crazy
 
My logic tells me there are slot more that haven't been diagnosed than reported.

Round and round we go

Sent from my CPH1879 using Tapatalk
Scientists have already determined that you can catch covid19 and transmit it without symptoms, so it's not just logical to say that it's under reported because many people haven't been diagnosed, it's expected that is th case by scientists themselves. But psychotic panic is more fun.
 
What the experts like the who are saying is that the mortality rate of 2-4% is Wildly speculative and exaggerated because it is only reporting mortality rates of people hospitalized, and takes very little consideration of under reporting or undetected infections in people (such as children) who show no symptoms. The vast majority of cases are also in places with lower quality health systems like rural China, or in places like Iran where it was deliberately ignored. Mortality rates in more developed places like Korea and suburban China are in the .5-.8% range. General predictions are that the mortality rate will drop significantly once recording of milder cases and treatment catches up.

There's more to it than the number morning tv wants to put out there to get eyeballs
Without doubt there are more that are effected with CV but haven’t got strong enough symptoms for testing- but it is still something to be concerned about.
Look at Italy in the past 24 hours, 97 deaths and a total of 463.
9000 reported cases with 463 deaths. That’s 1 in 5 reported cases dying..
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top