IFR 0.4% ?
-
wrote on 12 Apr 2020, 12:05 last edited by George K 4 Dec 2020, 13:22
Small sample, but...
The interesting thing is the huge percentage of this town (and 80% were tested) that tested positive - 15%.
-
wrote on 12 Apr 2020, 12:09 last edited by
IFR but yeah. Klaus posted that the other day.
-
wrote on 12 Apr 2020, 12:11 last edited by George K 4 Dec 2020, 13:22
@jon-nyc said in CFR 0.4% ?:
IFR but yeah. Klaus posted that the other day.
Whoopsie. Title changed.
-
wrote on 12 Apr 2020, 12:13 last edited by
Beer kills the virus?
Germans don't expect hugs and kisses at every greeting. That might be helping.
-
wrote on 12 Apr 2020, 12:13 last edited by
If that number obtains in the US, it would imply we have well over 5MM people infected right now.
-
wrote on 12 Apr 2020, 12:14 last edited by
(ps I doubt that number obtains here)
-
Beer kills the virus?
Germans don't expect hugs and kisses at every greeting. That might be helping.
wrote on 12 Apr 2020, 12:39 last edited by@brenda said in CFR 0.4% ?:
Beer kills the virus?
Germans don't expect hugs and kisses at every greeting. That might be helping.
I like that.
-
wrote on 12 Apr 2020, 12:46 last edited by
Why should the IFR depend on hugging or kissing or anything like that?
These things influence transmission, but I don't see why they should influence fatality.
I think there are various potential factors. Nobody knows, I guess, the importance of these factors:
- maybe the way the data was collected was wrong - there are doubts about how representative they are
- a somewhat decent health system with well-educated doctors and enough ICU places might be a factor
- some people claim that we test more and earlier than others; also, people aren't concerned about costs and will go to the doctor early. Together, this might contribute to often catching the disease in its early form when there are more medical options
- probably a dozen more potential factors
-
wrote on 12 Apr 2020, 13:03 last edited by jon-nyc 4 Dec 2020, 13:05
I wouldn’t think social factors would be a big deal but, now that I think about it, it could influence average initial viral load which very much correlates with outcomes. Getting it from family is said to be much worse.
Also demographics, rates of comorbidities, lots of things could affect it.
Here’s another data point:
Castiglione D’Adda, in Lombardy. Population 4659. 80 deaths. That’s 1.7% of the town dead.
I don’t think that’s what we’ll see either. Point is simply that data is all over the map now.
-
wrote on 12 Apr 2020, 13:05 last edited by
Lombardy has 10.5k deaths.
If the IFR in Lombardy is 0.37%, that would imply that almost 3 million are infected. Their population is 10MM
-
wrote on 12 Apr 2020, 13:50 last edited by
Meanwhile, our hospitals are getting filled with patients from neighbouring countries. In my state alone we have around 30 ICU patients from France and Italy right now. I'm not sure, though, whether that's an efficient use of resources. I've seen reports of big passenger airplanes flying only for one or two ICU patients. Recently a whole TGV was used for three ICU patients or the like.
-
Why should the IFR depend on hugging or kissing or anything like that?
These things influence transmission, but I don't see why they should influence fatality.
I think there are various potential factors. Nobody knows, I guess, the importance of these factors:
- maybe the way the data was collected was wrong - there are doubts about how representative they are
- a somewhat decent health system with well-educated doctors and enough ICU places might be a factor
- some people claim that we test more and earlier than others; also, people aren't concerned about costs and will go to the doctor early. Together, this might contribute to often catching the disease in its early form when there are more medical options
- probably a dozen more potential factors
wrote on 12 Apr 2020, 13:52 last edited by@Klaus said in IFR 0.4% ?:
Why should the IFR depend on hugging or kissing or anything like that?
These things influence transmission, but I don't see why they should influence fatality.
I think there are various potential factors. Nobody knows, I guess, the importance of these factors:
- maybe the way the data was collected was wrong - there are doubts about how representative they are
- a somewhat decent health system with well-educated doctors and enough ICU places might be a factor
- some people claim that we test more and earlier than others; also, people aren't concerned about costs and will go to the doctor early. Together, this might contribute to often catching the disease in its early form when there are more medical options
- probably a dozen more potential factors
Note that he didn't question the beer connection at all. He must agree.
