Mattowander said:

---

It seems to be much more easily transmissible than the flu. It also seems to have a longer time before there are any visible symptoms, meaning you could be infected with the virus and transmit it to others before you even know that you're sick.

---

Is the thought based on the above that enough people would get serious cases and would then exceed hospital capabilities, leading to a much higher mortality rate than what we're seeing today?

Death rate would have been higher with a spike.

Maybe true

Quote:

---

From an article I read, only 20 percent of that cruise ship became infected. Of that group 700 came down with the virus and only 7 died. These were probably older people, because that is who normally go on cruises. So, you do the math, that is a 20 percent infection rate

---

Just note that as was stated on another thread, that infection rate is misleading because the "experiment" was stopped: the passengers were disembarked at a certain point and sent elsewhere. No one can tell what the true rate was.

But weren't they on the ship for an extended period of time?

I do not remember how long they were on the ship, and they left at different points as other nations repatriated their nationals, etc.

All my opinion...

5-7% of the persons infected between March 1st and April 20th will die. The surge started today and will continue through early May. Counting backwards from 211 deaths today, it is reasonable to assume about 20,000 were infected on March 1st. That number is doubling every 5-6 days. By April 20th 6.7 million will be infected. It takes about 17 days from infection to death, so by May 7th I expect about 400,000 dead.

Stronger lockdown measures will help. As I type this something popped up about a full lockdown in California. That would make a huge difference. Anything to slow down the rate it doubles.

It would be at least quadruple my prediction through July if the measures taken over the last 10 days hadn't happened.

Thomas Ford 91 said:

---

zebros_95 said:

---

Thomas Ford 91 said:

---

All my opinion...

5-7% of the persons infected between March 1st and April 20th will die. The surge started today and will continue through early May. Counting backwards from 211 deaths today, it is reasonable to assume about 20,000 were infected on March 1st. That number is doubling every 5-6 days. By April 20th 6.7 million will be infected. It takes about 17 days from infection to death, so by May 7th I expect about 400,000 dead.

Stronger lockdown measures will help. As I type this something popped up about a full lockdown in California. That would make a huge difference. Anything to slow down the rate it doubles.

It would be at least quadruple my prediction through July if the measures taken over the last 10 days hadn't happened.

---

There is zero evidence available that suggests this is even a remote possibility.

---

Again, just my opinion. But, we have lots of evidence. We know the average time from infection to death (17 days). We know it doubles every 5-6 days. We know 211 are dead today. 800 infections for every death is a reasonable number. So, we can safely calculate 160,000 are infected today.

Do you think Donald Trump and 49 governors purposefully executed the US economy over the ******* flu? Over 1,000 deaths? 10,000? 100,000? Of course not. They were shown real projections that are probably worse than mine.

I'd be thrilled to be wrong about this. Where am I wrong?

---

I think you are wrong about the part of the virus killing 1% of those getting adequate treatment and everyone who doesn't get treatment.

Humans are resilient and I believe (no data) there are plenty of people who got and survived without "adequate" treatment. They are still trying to determine the best regiment to treat it and the death rate in China was in the single digit % for known cases with unkown treatement protocols.

Yes, I understand the system will be overwhelmed, but I believe untreated (average health) humans will have a high survivability.

We have a long ways to go to know best treatment options but most people who get it will survive with or without treatment IMO.

No one knows what the rate is because nobody has any idea how many are actually infected. So trying to extrapolate is very difficult and most likely will be wrong.

Point being is I could say the death rate is closer to zero than the flu and the viral spike has already happened and could support that theory with actual evidence. But again no one knows

Before you tell me how we have 5 times the bed capacity of the Italians, let's look at that. The US has the highest per capita critical care beds, 34.7 for every 100,000 people. But, if you take out the neonatal and pediatric beds, we get to 68,000 total (can neonatal and pediatric beds be repurposed for adult use?).

Lets optimistically assume 75% of those are open now. That's about 50,000 available beds. Assuming no other illnesses need those beds and 13% of Covid19s will need one, we will run out of beds around 350,000 infected.

We probably have 160,000 now. When we get to 430 deaths, you can safely assume we have 350,000 infected.

MASSIVE EDIT: I have a lot of bourbon in me and I realize I miscalculated here. Only 4% need an ICU bed, not 13%. So, you need 1.2 million infected to fill the ICU beds. So, when we get to 1500 deaths you can assume the beds are full. After that, you need a death or recovery (2-4 weeks) to open up a bed.

If you use deaths to estimate real infection numbers, and deaths continue to double every 2 days, we run out of ICU beds next Wednesday.

Eso si, Que es said:

---

Thomas Ford 91 said:

---

zebros_95 said:

---

Thomas Ford 91 said:

---

All my opinion...

5-7% of the persons infected between March 1st and April 20th will die. The surge started today and will continue through early May. Counting backwards from 211 deaths today, it is reasonable to assume about 20,000 were infected on March 1st. That number is doubling every 5-6 days. By April 20th 6.7 million will be infected. It takes about 17 days from infection to death, so by May 7th I expect about 400,000 dead.

Stronger lockdown measures will help. As I type this something popped up about a full lockdown in California. That would make a huge difference. Anything to slow down the rate it doubles.

It would be at least quadruple my prediction through July if the measures taken over the last 10 days hadn't happened.

---

There is zero evidence available that suggests this is even a remote possibility.

---

Again, just my opinion. But, we have lots of evidence. We know the average time from infection to death (17 days). We know it doubles every 5-6 days. We know 211 are dead today. 800 infections for every death is a reasonable number. So, we can safely calculate 160,000 are infected today.

Do you think Donald Trump and 49 governors purposefully executed the US economy over the ******* flu? Over 1,000 deaths? 10,000? 100,000? Of course not. They were shown real projections that are probably worse than mine.

I'd be thrilled to be wrong about this. Where am I wrong?

---

I think you are wrong about the part of the virus killing 1% of those getting adequate treatment and everyone who doesn't get treatment.

Humans are resilient and I believe (no data) there are plenty of people who got and survived without "adequate" treatment. They are still trying to determine the best regiment to treat it and the death rate in China was in the single digit % for known cases with unkown treatement protocols.

Yes, I understand the system will be overwhelmed, but I believe untreated (average health) humans will have a high survivability.

We have a long ways to go to know best treatment options but most people who get it will survive with or without treatment IMO.

---

I wasn't clear. I'm assuming 87% of all infected will need no treatment whatsoever. Most will be asymptomatic. About 13% of infected will need a hospital bed of some type.

Actually there are multiple sources describing all kinds of rates. The ones I listed are extremely low compared to others.

Just this evening the new numbers out of China show 1.4%

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.wsj.com/amp/articles/coronavirus-death-rate-in-wuhan-lower-than-initial-estimates-new-study-finds-11584663474

"The chance of someone with symptomatic Covid-19 dying varied by age, confirming other studies. For those aged 15 to 44, the fatality rate was 0.5%, though it might have been as low as 0.1% or as high as 1.3%. For people 45 to 64, the fatality rate was also 0.5%, with a possible low of 0.2% and a possible high of 1.1%. For those over 64, it was 2.7%, with a low and high estimate of 1.5% and 4.7%."
https://www.statnews.com/2020/03/16/lower-coronavirus-death-rate-estimates/

I could keep listing sources but I'm gonna stick with what I said.

So it's less about mortality rate and more about the massive spread? Everyone seems o be getting hung up on the mortality rate but people seem to be giving less consideration to the spread factor.

Agree! Great point! I think if the media spent time describing spread rates in conjunction with mortality rates, the public's response to need for social distancing might be taken more seriously.

Thomas Ford 91 said:

---

Eso si, Que es said:

---

Thomas Ford 91 said:

---

zebros_95 said:

---

Thomas Ford 91 said:

---

All my opinion...

5-7% of the persons infected between March 1st and April 20th will die. The surge started today and will continue through early May. Counting backwards from 211 deaths today, it is reasonable to assume about 20,000 were infected on March 1st. That number is doubling every 5-6 days. By April 20th 6.7 million will be infected. It takes about 17 days from infection to death, so by May 7th I expect about 400,000 dead.

Stronger lockdown measures will help. As I type this something popped up about a full lockdown in California. That would make a huge difference. Anything to slow down the rate it doubles.

It would be at least quadruple my prediction through July if the measures taken over the last 10 days hadn't happened.

---

There is zero evidence available that suggests this is even a remote possibility.

---

Again, just my opinion. But, we have lots of evidence. We know the average time from infection to death (17 days). We know it doubles every 5-6 days. We know 211 are dead today. 800 infections for every death is a reasonable number. So, we can safely calculate 160,000 are infected today.

Do you think Donald Trump and 49 governors purposefully executed the US economy over the ******* flu? Over 1,000 deaths? 10,000? 100,000? Of course not. They were shown real projections that are probably worse than mine.

I'd be thrilled to be wrong about this. Where am I wrong?

---

I think you are wrong about the part of the virus killing 1% of those getting adequate treatment and everyone who doesn't get treatment.

Humans are resilient and I believe (no data) there are plenty of people who got and survived without "adequate" treatment. They are still trying to determine the best regiment to treat it and the death rate in China was in the single digit % for known cases with unkown treatement protocols.

Yes, I understand the system will be overwhelmed, but I believe untreated (average health) humans will have a high survivability.

We have a long ways to go to know best treatment options but most people who get it will survive with or without treatment IMO.

---

I wasn't clear. I'm assuming 87% of all infected will need no treatment whatsoever. Most will be asymptomatic. About 13% of infected will need a hospital bed of some type.

---

I think the vast majority of infections are asymptomatic or mild symptoms and not showing up in our infection totals. If you add all those people into the denominator the hospitalization rate and death rate can be altered dramatically.

No one knows the true number. I think it is really high... 10 times the number of confirmed cases or more. That is just a guess because so many people that are asymptomatic and randomly tested have had it and there seems to be community spread all over the place in towns with previously zero confirmed cases.