Jump to content

Discussion:2019 Novel Corona Virus (Covid19) and It's Political Ramifications #3


Recommended Posts

I just read this in relation to the news of the coronavirus and it comes from a beginning of study done in the United States, it is rather interesting for those who think that it was the miracle product

Twice as many deaths "and" no benefit "with hydroxychloroquine. It is an American medical study involving several hundred patients who states: "We have found no evidence that hydroxychloroquine, associated or not with azithromycin, reduces the risk of mechanical ventilation in hospitalized patients. covid-19. " And there is worse: mortality, which rises to 11% in the "control" group (benefiting from the usual treatment), reaches 22% in patients treated with the hydroxychloroquine / azithromycin combination, and even 28% in those that are only treated with hydroxychloroquine. "These results underscore the importance of awaiting the results of current, prospective, randomized and controlled studies before generalizing the use of these drugs" against covid-19, conclude the authors.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Ridgerunner said:

In the future it will be interesting to see whether mitigation efforts have stopped the coronavirus pandemic or just prolonged it. :confused:

Are you talking about having set up containment?
Statisticians have given figures recently which said that without it, mortality would be higher than now but that it also requires that we have no collective immunity because there is only a small part of the population who has the coronavirus
This is why deconfinement must be done gradually and step by step to avoid a second wave even worse than the first when most countries are only leaving it now.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, moos54 said:

Are you talking about having set up containment?
Statisticians have given figures recently which said that without it, mortality would be higher than now but that it also requires that we have no collective immunity because there is only a small part of the population who has the coronavirus
This is why deconfinement must be done gradually and step by step to avoid a second wave even worse than the first when most countries are only leaving it now.

The same statisticians who said with the lock down 240,000 people in the U.S. would die from the first wave of the coronavirius, and without the lock down 2.2 million would die ? Their projections were ridiculous.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, moos54 said:

Are you talking about having set up containment?
Statisticians have given figures recently which said that without it, mortality would be higher than now but that it also requires that we have no collective immunity because there is only a small part of the population who has the coronavirus
This is why deconfinement must be done gradually and step by step to avoid a second wave even worse than the first when most countries are only leaving it now.

So far, IMO, the models and the statistics that have been reported were grossly wrong--and that is the basis for the ridiculous numbers of deaths that were originally predicted.  I also believe that the "second wave" can also

be false overstatement of the predicted outcome for mortality.  This is getting ridiculous.  I it always sad to lose lives, to see anyone die, but the fact is that more people died in a year from causes other than Covid19 and that

based on new serology data, the percentage of deaths vs the number of cases, is actually very low.

Destroying the economies of the world due to an over-reaction by "the professionals" and governments can be far worse for humankind than the virus itself.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Ridgerunner said:

The same statisticians who said with the lock down 240,000 people in the U.S. would die from the first wave of the coronavirius, and without the lock down 2.2 million would die ? Their projections were ridiculous.

You know what, the best is that you test for us, just to see if you're right or not making fun of them
We will talk about it later, or not depending on the result :angel:

For information, knowing that we learn from the virus every day, this allows us to establish better statistics too
But hey you seem to always know better than the others while they are in the middle of the cyclone
Could you in this case find us the remedy, that people who try to do it can stop breaking their ass for nothing :biggrin:

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, happyone said:

So far, IMO, the models and the statistics that have been reported were grossly wrong--and that is the basis for the ridiculous numbers of deaths that were originally predicted.  I also believe that the "second wave" can also

be false overstatement of the predicted outcome for mortality.  This is getting ridiculous.  I it always sad to lose lives, to see anyone die, but the fact is that more people died in a year from causes other than Covid19 and that

based on new serology data, the percentage of deaths vs the number of cases, is actually very low.

Destroying the economies of the world due to an over-reaction by "the professionals" and governments can be far worse for humankind than the virus itself.  

I will not speak for the Americans but I can speak about the case in France

We have passed the 20,000 deaths due to the Covid19, which has made it more deadly than a simple flu or the big heat wave that we experienced a few years ago
We are only talking about mortality but no percentage of deaths compared to those who have the virus
We know that it is more deadly for men than women and that it is the elderly who have the most impact.
But this virus puts in difficulty any type of person and can evolve differently according to people, even those in good health

Now if we talk about statistics, we have a little more than 115,000 people who have the virus and we are about 67 million living in France, I let you do the calculation with a percentage of about 6% mortality, that's a lot of people still who would die from this virus if it weren't for containment

In the United States at the moment you have 800,000 sick for 40,000 dead, it's true that mortality is lower in percentage, but if you apply this to the entire population of the country, it would surely be a disaster too

I understand that you have a different way of living than mine, but I don't think that we have to do anything either because in the end we only have one life

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, moos54 said:

I will not speak for the Americans but I can speak about the case in France

We have passed the 20,000 deaths due to the Covid19, which has made it more deadly than a simple flu or the big heat wave that we experienced a few years ago
We are only talking about mortality but no percentage of deaths compared to those who have the virus
We know that it is more deadly for men than women and that it is the elderly who have the most impact.
But this virus puts in difficulty any type of person and can evolve differently according to people, even those in good health

Now if we talk about statistics, we have a little more than 115,000 people who have the virus and we are about 67 million living in France, I let you do the calculation with a percentage of about 6% mortality, that's a lot of people still who would die from this virus if it weren't for containment

In the United States at the moment you have 800,000 sick for 40,000 dead, it's true that mortality is lower in percentage, but if you apply this to the entire population of the country, it would surely be a disaster too

I understand that you have a different way of living than mine, but I don't think that we have to do anything either because in the end we only have one life

You already, according to these statistics, have more deaths than the 6% mortality you quote.  The thing is you are assuming that the 115,000 people who have the virus is an accurate figure.  I submit that based on future testing, that number is far greater, and therefore your mortality % would be a lot less. And stating that a lot of people still who would die from this virus if it weren't for containment may be true to a point---but out of those people that would or could die, some maybe would have died anyway. 

The article below (read the article) states that the mortality rate in France in 2018 was 9.2% or 601,000 deaths and continues to increase.  That is a lot more than the 20,000 deaths due to Covid19 or the prediction of the numbers that might have died with the virus-with no containment. 

WWW.STATISTA.COM

From 2004 to 2018, the total number of deaths in France has been increasing, reaching 601,000 in 2018 compared to 509,429 deaths fifteen years earlier.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, happyone said:

You already, according to these statistics, have more deaths than the 6% mortality you quote.  The thing is you are assuming that the 115,000 people who have the virus is an accurate figure.  I submit that based on future testing, that number is far greater, and therefore your mortality % would be a lot less. And stating that a lot of people still who would die from this virus if it weren't for containment may be true to a point---but out of those people that would or could die, some maybe would have died anyway. 

The article below (read the article) states that the mortality rate in France in 2018 was 9.2% or 601,000 deaths and continues to increase.  That is a lot more than the 20,000 deaths due to Covid19 or the prediction of the numbers that might have died with the virus-with no containment. 

WWW.STATISTA.COM

From 2004 to 2018, the total number of deaths in France has been increasing, reaching 601,000 in 2018 compared to 509,429 deaths fifteen years earlier.

 

We are talking about people who die because of covid19 but nothing says that they would die this year either without this virus, so because they are old and in good health a little precarious then they would be sacrificable for you?
For example, my grandmother is not in superb health, but that does not prevent her from being able to live for another hopefully several years, on the other hand if she becomes ill due to the virus, then it is almost certain that she won't be spending the week
All I know at the moment is that we have regions that are in excess of mortality compared to last year and that we are only in the first quarter of the year, so yes at the end of the year, this year 2020 will surely be the most deadly because of this pandemic
And I remain convinced that it could have been worse if we had continued to live normally

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...