Debt Rattle February 9 2020

 

Home Forums The Automatic Earth Forum Debt Rattle February 9 2020

This topic contains 42 replies, has 17 voices, and was last updated by  TamHob 2 weeks, 1 day ago.

Viewing 3 posts - 41 through 43 (of 43 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #53756

    zerosum
    Participant

    The following is a google translation of the previous link.

    http://politics.people.com.cn/n1/2020/0210/c1001-31578622.html
    Beijing issued epidemic prevention and control notice, strictly closed management of residential communities (villages)
    07:47, February 10, 2020 Source: Beijing Daily

    #53757

    zerosum
    Participant

    Beijing : Population: 21.54 million (2018)

    Imagine closing the top 4 cities in the USA
    1 New York New York 8,398,748
    2 Los Angeles California 3,990,456
    3 Chicago Illinois 2,705,994
    4 Houston Texas 2,325,502
    That add up to only approx.18 million

    Aint hapng man

    #53758

    TamHob
    Participant

    Re the paper with the 138 Wuhan pneumonia cases/5% death rate. This paper has the same flaw for calculating death rates as the previous two (with 41 and 99 cases) – it only follows up patients for a short time after the end of the sample period. Therefore, the majority of the patients are still in hospital/ICU without a resolution either way. However, I did note that he reported a series of blood test results for 33 patients for which there was a full case history. Since the testing began on the first day symptoms developed, I’m presuming these 33 were part of the set of confirmed cases originating in the hospital, in order to have been picked up so quickly. Possibly they were even all staff. Anyways, out of this small more or less random sample of 33 resolved cases, 5 died. That’s approximately a 15% fatality rate of confirmed cases with pneumonia. I can’t interpret the blood test charts so I can’t assess how many of the 33 probably received ICU treatment (my indicator of the likely fatality rate in a true pandemic).

    What is still missing is how many people from the same cohort tested positive but weren’t included in the study as they didn’t develop pneumonia, which would give a better idea of mortality overall once infected. Also, for whatever reason, the international mortality so far seems to be substantially less than in Wuhan. Thirdly, as noted in the comments above, medical staff with inadequate protection equipment may be getting super doses of infectious material and thus more likely to succumb. Probably lots of other factors.

Viewing 3 posts - 41 through 43 (of 43 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.