Death Percent

[ironyak]

It might help to edit that info to make it more readable?
0-19 years old = 0.1%

So there are ~1000 children (age 0-19) in the Pahoa school complex. That means if all these kids get exposed, 1 of them would likely die.
For their ~2000 parents (age 20 - 60): 7 of them would likely die
For their ~4000 grandparents (age 60+): 352 of the would likely die

So that's at least 360 people from one school area's community that would likely die from this (no aunties and uncles accounted for). IF everyone is exposed to the virus, we all will know someone who dies from COVID-19.

We don't have any real control over the mortality percentages, but we do have some control over how many people are exposed to the virus.

Dr. Anthony Fauci (NIH) urged the American public to take seriously the threat of coronavirus and change behaviors to slow its spread.

"If we are complacent and don't do really aggressive containment and mitigation, the number could go way up and be involved in many, many millions"

[rainyjim]

Not sure what the obsession with the death rate is; long story short we won’t have a solid number for a while.

Regardless of the numbers importance, the chance any given individual might die isn’t the only factor you might want to know.

Some rates or risks that could be more beneficial to consider and more difficult to calculate might be the chance that infected individuals who are in low risk groups have to pass on the virus to individuals in high risk groups.

Some factors to consider might be downplaying the seriousness of the global pandemic on online forums, unwillingness to prepare for global pandemics as instructed by local government ahead of time and even a lack of effort to self-quarantine and cancel high/volume social events.

I am unsure why the fascination with the mortality rate - again it’s unknowable currently. I suspect any attention brought to it that’s not out of ignorance is just a weak attempt to downplay the seriousness of the situation our small community is currently facing.

[MarkP]

"Also alarming was Italy’s high fatality rate: With 463 dead and 9,172 infected, Italy’s fatality rate is running at 5% nationwide and 6% in Lombardy, far higher than the 3%-4% estimates elsewhere.

Dr. Giovanni Rezza, head of infectious disease at the National Institutes of Health, attributed the high rate to the fact that Italy has the world’s oldest population after Japan, and the median age of its virus-related dead is 80.

But there are young people who are infected too. Some have been in intensive care, including the first person to test positive in the north who hadn’t been to China, a 38-year-old Unilever worker named Mattia. He came to be known in Italy as Patient No. 1.

At the San Matteo hospital in Pavia, there was a sigh of relief after Mattia began breathing on his own Monday with just a small amount of oxygen assistance, said Dr. Francesco Mojoli, head of intensive care. He was moved out of the ICU to a sub-ICU unit and was speaking with doctors."

By NICOLE WINFIELD, AP News.

Seems relevant.

[kander]

Yea the numbers are all over the place. Its best guess to tell who is telling truth and who is fudging numbers. Aside from our policy of dont test dont tell for many weeks. Its going to be difficult if not impossible to tell whats going to happen with any reasonable certainty other than some people will get sick. some of them will die. flip a coin to the numbers depending on how they handle the situation. Something that I feel we are not doing very well.

[Mangosteen]

quote:

---

Originally posted by MarkP

"Also alarming was Italy’s high fatality rate: With 463 dead and 9,172 infected, Italy’s fatality rate is running at 5% nationwide and 6% in Lombardy, far higher than the 3%-4% estimates elsewhere.

Dr. Giovanni Rezza, head of infectious disease at the National Institutes of Health, attributed the high rate to the fact that Italy has the world’s oldest population after Japan, and the median age of its virus-related dead is 80.

But there are young people who are infected too. Some have been in intensive care, including the first person to test positive in the north who hadn’t been to China, a 38-year-old Unilever worker named Mattia. He came to be known in Italy as Patient No. 1.

At the San Matteo hospital in Pavia, there was a sigh of relief after Mattia began breathing on his own Monday with just a small amount of oxygen assistance, said Dr. Francesco Mojoli, head of intensive care. He was moved out of the ICU to a sub-ICU unit and was speaking with doctors."

By NICOLE WINFIELD, AP News.

Seems relevant.

---

Northern Italy is a hotbed of illegal immigrants from China who were brought in to work in the garment industry. The factory owners are able to stamp "Made in Italy" on their products as opposed to the less desirable "Made in China" label. The vast majority of these Chinese are from the Wuhan area.

[Punatic007]

Thanks for that info mangosteen, starting to make sense why the Italy numbers were so high. I was aware they had Chinese illegal immigrant but not about the clothing scam alluding to perhaps 10's of 1000's of Chinese in northern Italy.

edit to add link: https://www.altnewsmedia.net/news/corona...why-italy/

[Guest]

starting to make sense why the Italy numbers were so high.

imo, the nationality, and or the type of work they do, has nothing to do with the difference in the way Italy handled their outbreak verses somewhere like China.

Italy is a free society, as such they took longer than totalitarian China to impose a quarantine. It's as simple as that.

When we look at the two models, our, the USA, response is more in keeping with Italy's than China's. As such we are heading to a similar outcome. Without aggressive testing we are just guaranteeing the worst of that outcome. And, having a dysfunctional federal government is just compounding it that much more.

Freedom can be a bitch, eh?

[knieft]

I thought it would be interesting to calculate the death rate per capita by country at this point in time. And I must be doing something fundamentally wrong, because the per capita death rates have a lot of decimal places.

I used death stats from https://ourworldindata.org/coronavirus updated March 16.

I used population stats from https://www.worldometers.info/world-popu...y-country/

deaths population per capita deaths
China 6606 1,439,323,776 0.00000459
Italy 1,809 60,461,826 0.0000299
Iran 853 83,992,949 0.0000102
Spain 288 46,754,778 0.00000616
France 127 65,273,511 0.00000195
South Korea 75 51,269,185 0.00000146
United States 41 331,002,651 0.000000124
United Kingdom 35 67,886,011 0.00000056
Japan 24 126,476,461 0.000000190

World 6603 7771524000 0.000000850

(sorry I can't format it better)

Hard to compare to the Spanish Flu's fuzzy stats. But let's try. World population in 1900 was 1.65 billion, and in 1928 2 billion, so lets say it was around 1.75 billion in 1918, as a conservative estimate.

https://ourworldindata.org/world-population-growth

And the deaths of 50 to 100 million from the Spanish Flu. Estimates vary.

So 50 million / 1750 million is 0.0667

Double that if 100 million people died: 0.1334

Of course COVID-19 has just started out, but appears there is much room for exponential growth before it would be comparable to the Spanish Flu. Of course there is much time as well.

Spanish flu deaths world per capita: 0.0667 to 0.1334
COVID-19 world deaths so far per capita: 0.000000850

I wonder if most people's take away from the usually reported 2.4% or 4% death rate stats generally used is that 4 out of a 100 people will die. But that seems very contradictory to the per capita calculations.

What don't I understand? Wouldn't the per capita death rate be the "purist"?

I wonder how it compares to my wife's chances of dying on her daily 130 commute to Hilo and back for 20 years? (3 crashes but no deaths.)

I know: lies, damn lies, and statistics...

Cheers,
Kirt

[ironyak]

I wonder if most people's take away from the usually reported 2.4% or 4% death rate stats generally used is that 4 out of a 100 people will die. But that seems very contradictory to the per capita calculations.

Briefly, your per capita calculations don't account for the fact that there has not been 100% infection so while the deaths for the total population are small now, they would approach 3% or 4% IF everyone gets infected (which is what social distancing etc is trying to at least slow, or prevent if better therapeutics become available over time)

- "97% percent of people recover fine, what's the big deal?"
- "If I gave you 100 skittles and told you 3 of them could kill you.... I’m sure you would avoid the ****ing skittles"
https://twitter.com/MrDre_/status/1238612571193827335

[Mangosteen]

Who is actually dying from COVID 19?

According to the U.S. Surgeon General Jerome Adams, the average age of people dying from the virus in the U.S. is 80 years old.

31 Washington State elderly. That includes 27 in King County, (22 at the same elderly nursing facility in Kirkland), three in Snohomish county, and one in Grant County, a patient in their 80s.
4 California elderly: A woman in assisted living in her 90s, a hospitalized woman Santa Clara in her 60s, an “elderly man” in assisted living, and a 71-year-old man with underlying health conditions who’d been on a Grand Princess cruise ship.
2 Florida residents in their 70s who had traveled overseas.
1 New Jersey diabetic man, 69, who suffered two cardiac arrests.
1 South Dakota man aged 60-69, with “underlying medical conditions”
1 Georgia man, 67, with “underlying medical conditions”
*These numbers figured prior to new deaths over the weekend.

As you can see, the deaths have been the elderly, whether that brings you comfort or concern I don’t know, but it should at least give you the information you need to make the right decisions about what to do.

You’ll also notice for the most part that those who were younger (60s) who died had underlying medical conditions already. Over half of the deaths in the U.S. so far from coronavirus come from a single nursing facility