Worst-case coronavirus scenario: 214 million Americans infected, 1.7 million dead
Nah, worst case - NY and LA are hit with nuclear bombs.
People need to stop the fear mongering. Its irresponsible.
Nalle wrote:
https://www.technologyreview.com/s/615358/worst-case-coronavirus-scenario-214-million-americans-infected-17-million-dead/
PLEASE DON'T print a BEST case scenario.....I'd HATE to read anything positive from this pit.
Nalle wrote:
https://www.technologyreview.com/s/615358/worst-case-coronavirus-scenario-214-million-americans-infected-17-million-dead/
What a bunch of garbage. I'd be surprised if 500 Americans died of it by the end of the flu season.
JohnFrim
Loc: Somewhere in the Great White North.
Steven Seward wrote:
What a bunch of garbage. I'd be surprised if 500 Americans died of it by the end of the flu season.
I suspect you will have to eat that number. The number of cases is directly dependent on the number of tests carried out, beginning with zero cases if no tests are carried out. With the promise of millions of test kits becoming available in the next few weeks and the number of actual tests being done going up, the number of people infected by the virus will grow hugely. It will be interesting to see if the US with it's "best medical/scientific capabilities in the world" can do better than Europe and S Korea.
I hope you are correct, but I fear you are erring on the low side.
JohnFrim wrote:
I suspect you will have to eat that number. The number of cases is directly dependent on the number of tests carried out, beginning with zero cases if no tests are carried out. With the promise of millions of test kits becoming available in the next few weeks and the number of actual tests being done going up, the number of people infected by the virus will grow hugely. It will be interesting to see if the US with it's "best medical/scientific capabilities in the world" can do better than Europe and S Korea.
I hope you are correct, but I fear you are erring on the low side.
I suspect you will have to eat that number. The nu... (
show quote)
I invite you to keep track of my prediction. I could be wrong, but probably not by much, and I will fully own up if so. I'm not worried much about numbers of cases, just numbers of deaths. China and South Korea, the first two infected places, are already winding down. China is only reporting a couple dozen new cases per day, and a dozen deaths as well. I always take their results with a grain of salt though, because they are not trustworthy.
JohnFrim wrote:
I suspect you will have to eat that number. The number of cases is directly dependent on the number of tests carried out, beginning with zero cases if no tests are carried out. With the promise of millions of test kits becoming available in the next few weeks and the number of actual tests being done going up, the number of people infected by the virus will grow hugely. It will be interesting to see if the US with it's "best medical/scientific capabilities in the world" can do better than Europe and S Korea.
I hope you are correct, but I fear you are erring on the low side.
I suspect you will have to eat that number. The nu... (
show quote)
Doesnt matter much in the quantity of people who may have it, you can estimate the number by how many people have died from the Coronavirus. So exactly how many people are known to have died from Coronavirus complications?
EyeSawYou wrote:
Doesnt matter much in the quantity of people who may have it, you can estimate the number by how many people have died from the Coronavirus. So exactly how many people are known to have died from Coronavirus complications?
Latest U.S. number, 91 people.
Steven Seward wrote:
Latest U.S. number, 91 people.
OK 91 deaths from Coronavirus complications, so the going death rate is estimated at 3.6% right? So 91 deaths is 3.6% of 2,530 infected persons total est., Am I incorrect? The known number of people that tested positive for the virus IN the U.S. stands at 4,500, so the death rate falls even lower to a 2.1% death rate.
EyeSawYou wrote:
OK 91 deaths from Coronavirus complications, so the going death rate is estimated at 3.6% right? So 91 deaths is 3.6% of 2,530 infected persons total est., Am I incorrect? The known number of people that tested positive for the virus IN the U.S. stands at 4,500, so the death rate falls even lower to a 2.1% death rate.
As Ed McMahon used to say, "You are correct, Sir!"
However, there are more complications. If no new cases emerge at all, the death rate will still go up because there are some ill people laying in hospital beds right now who haven't died yet but probably will eventually. That will bring the rate up. On the other hand, there are certainly more cases out there right now that have not been tested and never will because they are just not very sick. If you can count them, then the death rate goes back down.
That mortality rate that you quoted of 3.6% was based on Chinese deaths which were unusually high, and has since been revised down several times, in some estimates as low as .05%. China has many compounding factors to kill more sick people such as heavy smoking, air pollution, and unsanitary conditions. Italy's rate is also extremely high, but South Korea is right at or just below 1%. Israel has the most number of people infected without having a single death, 304. They list only four of those people in serious or critical condition.
Here's the master list of all countries that updates every day:
https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.