General Discussion

LiberalArkie

(19,525 posts)

74. Facts do not back you up at all./

Wed Feb 26, 2020, 06:13 PM

Feb 2020

C current Johns Hopkins stats are:

Total confirmed cases: 81,322

Total Recovered: 30,322

Total Deaths: 2.770

https://gisanddata.maps.arcgis.com/apps/opsdashboard/index.html#/bda7594740fd40299423467b48e9ecf6

Click here to purchase valentine hearts!

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

137 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Richard Engel: "Don't panic. Doctors/ virologists I'm speaking to say 98% of people will be fine" [View all] Dennis Donovan Feb 2020 OP

I dont reckon this journalist did a follow-up question, such as GusBob Feb 2020 #1

Or the 6 plus million lame54 Feb 2020 #2

The current numbers being put out there SCantiGOP Feb 2020 #28

Facts do not back you up at all./ LiberalArkie Feb 2020 #74

Of patients with and outcome, recovered plus deaths defacto7 Feb 2020 #80

One thing to remember about China and their reporting is GemDigger Feb 2020 #131

Get a can of Lysol spray, one you've had over a year, and you will see that one of the bacterias Perseus Feb 2020 #29

Practically anything kills viruses. They're actually pretty fragile. Girard442 Feb 2020 #33

Unfortunately,we can't go around spraying marybourg Feb 2020 #41

lysol huh? GusBob Feb 2020 #68

Muddy thinking is part of the panic. Coronavirus is NOT a bacteria. Your post wasn't a panic Bernardo de La Paz Feb 2020 #78

What do you propose?? That people walk with a can spraying the air? 58Sunliner Feb 2020 #104

I would ask DENVERPOPS Feb 2020 #45

Richard Engel is a damn good journalist. cwydro Feb 2020 #55

His statement is about as close to the fact as you can get. defacto7 Feb 2020 #82

As a scientist he's a good journalist... charliea Feb 2020 #95

Yes I'm sure he's a hero GusBob Feb 2020 #128

"This journalist" - some background mahina Feb 2020 #86

Almost all mutations kill viruses. In most pandemics the virus weakens as it spreads. . . . nt Bernardo de La Paz Feb 2020 #112

Agreed. TwilightZone Feb 2020 #3

Yup. cwydro Feb 2020 #7

Ain't it the truth. Hysteria rules the day. nolabear Feb 2020 #9

If death rate is 2 %, and everybody gets infected, we are getting 6 million dead people. But LisaL Feb 2020 #24

See, that's not what I said. Of course it's a "biggie." nolabear Feb 2020 #30

THANK YOU!!!! crimycarny Feb 2020 #84

NOT everyone will become infected, there will likely be vaccine, and treatment options. . . . nt Bernardo de La Paz Feb 2020 #42

Your figures don't represent the facts. It doesn't work that way. defacto7 Feb 2020 #89

He's saying 2% won't be. herding cats Feb 2020 #4

However, 2% is still potentially a lot of people. The Velveteen Ocelot Feb 2020 #5

Not 3 billion in US unc70 Feb 2020 #6

You're right, got one too many zeros. Fixed it. Still a lot of people. The Velveteen Ocelot Feb 2020 #8

That's between 62 and 109 million people dead world wide Jarqui Feb 2020 #12

What is the basis for estimating an infection range of 40% to 70%? onenote Feb 2020 #81

World Health Organization defacto7 Feb 2020 #83

Some media attributed it to the CDC others to a Harvard epidemiologist Jarqui Feb 2020 #97

I've been using this everytime someone comes at me with, dewsgirl Feb 2020 #15

Highest estimation from the CDC for this flu seaon SDANation Feb 2020 #31

2% is the rainbows and unicorns number JCMach1 Feb 2020 #21

2.5% during a time where mass travel did not exist yet SDANation Feb 2020 #40

NOT applicable. Flu virus first grown 1931. 1918 knew very little about viruses, discovered in 1892. Bernardo de La Paz Feb 2020 #46

So 1918 is not valid because we developed a vaccine for SDANation Feb 2020 #54

You are not being logical. . . . nt Bernardo de La Paz Feb 2020 #57

Since it will take at least a year to develop a vaccine, it's not so different from 1918. Chemisse Feb 2020 #98

Your assumption is incorrect. And in 1918, they couldn't even cultivate the virus in the lab: 1931. Bernardo de La Paz Feb 2020 #100

How is my assumption incorrect? Chemisse Feb 2020 #103

It will NOT take a year to develop a vaccine. Treatments today & testing are MUCH better. Bernardo de La Paz Feb 2020 #106

You are not employing logic. I bid you good evening. n/t Chemisse Feb 2020 #118

I'm employing logic and FACTS. You have no counters. So be it. . . . nt Bernardo de La Paz Feb 2020 #119

The first potential vaccine was announced in the last week and the estimate was that approval likely JudyM Feb 2020 #133

Thanks for update. I expect that if there is pandemic in US, then approval happen overnight. Bernardo de La Paz Feb 2020 #136

New, much better update here! JudyM Feb 2020 #137

Mass travel DID exist. Millions of people moved in WW1. It was just slower movement. . . . nt Bernardo de La Paz Feb 2020 #52

Exactly. By ship. That limited transmission SDANation Feb 2020 #56

Not logical. An infected ship spreads more infection than an infected airplane. Bernardo de La Paz Feb 2020 #59

How so? It slowed the spread significantly which helped. SDANation Feb 2020 #69

It spread slowly & wide. You feel better about that than fast & wide? We respond much faster today. Bernardo de La Paz Feb 2020 #72

True. Just saying that if a highly pathogenic flu emerged again SDANation Feb 2020 #75

Actually, ... one person on a plane does NOT infect the whole plane. STOP panicking! Bernardo de La Paz Feb 2020 #77

The only way you have a faster response is if you know there has been exposure. 58Sunliner Feb 2020 #113

Yes, spread is a deep concern. But your last sentence is spot on & panicked posters need to read it. Bernardo de La Paz Feb 2020 #114

How long is a ship journey? 58Sunliner Feb 2020 #108

Less time on board, less contact between passengers. 1918 didn't quarantine. . . . nt Bernardo de La Paz Feb 2020 #109

You are essentially in a metal tube with air currents. Shared air. 58Sunliner Feb 2020 #115

You are not sitting at tables sharing cards, meals, and aerosol. Airplane air is filtered. Bernardo de La Paz Feb 2020 #117

People weren't changing 1 or more hemispheres in the matter of hours. SDANation Feb 2020 #58

Speed of transportation is not a factor. Rates and dispersal are. Slow dispersal is just as infectio Bernardo de La Paz Feb 2020 #61

Panic is infecting your thinking. There is only one other hemisphere when you are in one. . . . nt Bernardo de La Paz Feb 2020 #64

Not panicked, meant time zones not hemispheres 🤦🏻‍♂️ SDANation Feb 2020 #71

That is incorrect. Because of WWI there was extensive travel. GulfCoast66 Feb 2020 #120

The panic in not the disease but with Dolt45 & his war on science. bronxiteforever Feb 2020 #10

+1. . . . nt Bernardo de La Paz Feb 2020 #47

Define "vulnerable people" MiniMe Feb 2020 #11

I think they are most concerned about elderly people with existing chronic health problems The Velveteen Ocelot Feb 2020 #13

I'm vulnerable geardaddy Feb 2020 #50

I am vulnerable also. I have end stage renal disease and I'm on the transplant list. n/t totodeinhere Feb 2020 #105

Hugs to you! geardaddy Feb 2020 #126

Thanks so much. Thank God I became eligible for Medicare due to my totodeinhere Feb 2020 #130

I know, I had Medicare for 18 months, I think during my transplant geardaddy Feb 2020 #132

Wishing you the best possible turns of good luck. JudyM Feb 2020 #134

Thank you so much. n/t totodeinhere Feb 2020 #135

Bypass surgery! Hope your recovery is going well. nt Duppers Feb 2020 #53

Yeah, that would be me and my wife Boomer Feb 2020 #60

I really like Richard Engel, but I'm sorry, this tweet almost seems like a parody. DanTex Feb 2020 #14

I usually am on board with everything he says, but yes dewsgirl Feb 2020 #17

+1 That is a good point. bronxiteforever Feb 2020 #19

Sorry for going full-on Sheldon Cooper here, but it doesn't "imply" 2% won't be fine. Girard442 Feb 2020 #34

I know. It seemed like dark humor to me. n/t Chemisse Feb 2020 #99

2% fatality rate is very high in a contagious disease Ex Lurker Feb 2020 #16

+1 uponit7771 Feb 2020 #62

The mortality rates being reported are skewed as they include current treating cases. The mortality stewrat Feb 2020 #18

Those (yours) are the stats and if people would just stick to that defacto7 Feb 2020 #85

Mortality rate is still not certain 2-9% JCMach1 Feb 2020 #20

Sucks for those 2 % that will die, but don't panic. No biggie. LisaL Feb 2020 #22

So he's saying 98% survival sounds better than 2% mortality? tandem5 Feb 2020 #23

i detect satire 0rganism Feb 2020 #25

Not panicking for myself, but I do have immunosuppressed/elderly family BusyBeingBest Feb 2020 #26

Don't worry! Those 2% were dead weight anyway RGTIndy Feb 2020 #27

The danger is to vulnerable people. Hospitals/ old age homes Submariner Feb 2020 #32

2% in a population of 80,000 "confirmed" cases SDANation Feb 2020 #35

Correct. And most often viruses in pandemics weaken as they proliferate. . . . nt Bernardo de La Paz Feb 2020 #49

Not comforting snowybirdie Feb 2020 #36

Panic serves no one and could only make the bad far far worse. The empressof all Feb 2020 #37

When people are more than a little sick, they're knocked down Warpy Feb 2020 #38

The flu has an R0 of 1.5, the R0 for Coronavirus is between dewsgirl Feb 2020 #63

It's not less contagious than the flu. That's just incorrect. defacto7 Feb 2020 #87

98%? Whew, only 140,000,000 of us will die, tops. paulkienitz Feb 2020 #39

Unfortunately, the death rate for people like me is likely 100%. WheelWalker Feb 2020 #43

trying to save his 401k? but with a 3% mortality rate for 60 yr olds & a 10% for 80 yr olds yaesu Feb 2020 #44

So, if a million Americans contract the disease, rateyes Feb 2020 #48

Not necessarily. Quite a number will not experience symptoms or worrisome symptoms. . . . nt Bernardo de La Paz Feb 2020 #51

And this will make them super-spreaders Boomer Feb 2020 #70

Sure, they might spread, but don't count on 2% of US being wiped out. Many fewer would die. Bernardo de La Paz Feb 2020 #76

2% or 1% or .5% Boomer Feb 2020 #110

If I were a betting person I'd make money betting on you & similar people surviving. . . . nt Bernardo de La Paz Feb 2020 #111

Wow Boomer Feb 2020 #121

Sorry, I thought I was clear. It is my hope and wish and expectation that you will be fine. Bernardo de La Paz Feb 2020 #122

Thank you Boomer Feb 2020 #123

You mean a carrier. A super spreader is a carrier who has an unusually high viral load. n/t Chemisse Feb 2020 #101

16,000 in the US have already died of the flu during the current season killaphill Feb 2020 #96

Well, first the fatality rate is 3.4%, not 2% Miguelito Loveless Feb 2020 #65

WHO scrapped that calculation. defacto7 Feb 2020 #90

I'm sure that's right, but what about people without insurance? alarimer Feb 2020 #66

Does he know who the IMPOTUS is? Nothing is guaranteed Hassler Feb 2020 #67

wash your hands, don't touch your face handmade34 Feb 2020 #73

TWO PERCENT OF PEOPLE GONNA DIE shenmue Feb 2020 #79

No. Start thinking, not PANICKING. You ASSUME everyone will be infected & other assumptions. Bernardo de La Paz Feb 2020 #88

not likely defacto7 Feb 2020 #93

Uhm, it must nice not to worry about dying. 58Sunliner Feb 2020 #91

That's a very good point. A lot of people who get it and don't die will nevertheless have totodeinhere Feb 2020 #107

No, you wouldn't. 58Sunliner Feb 2020 #116

By "Fine" he means "Not Dead" ThoughtCriminal Feb 2020 #92

I heard it can frequently cause organ failure, like kidney failure. nt Ilsa Feb 2020 #94

Actually, 2% is a very high rate for something like this. totodeinhere Feb 2020 #102

This is exactly right. Sloumeau Feb 2020 #125

Wow what a god damned fool ProfessorPlum Feb 2020 #124

The 2% that will die is only 6,540,000 people. Firestorm49 Feb 2020 #127

So how come the doctor who discovered it died? RhodeIslandOne Feb 2020 #129