Die Judicii wrote:I just tried to upload an article (link) regarding the possible very first case of Covid19
But,,,, was met with "The extension html is not allowed. The upload was rejected because the uploaded file was identified as a possible attack vector"
The article refers to a woman that was working in a "wet market" in Wuhan that sells Bats, Dogs, Cats, etc etc for food.
She was diagnosed with the typical Covid19 signs and symptoms along with other work colleagues all having the same symptoms.
She was admitted to hospital, recovered, and was discharged in late January
Jan. 26, 2020
Wuhan seafood market may not be source of novel virus spreading globally
As confirmed cases of a novel virus surge around the world with worrisome speed, all eyes have so far focused on a seafood market in Wuhan, China, as the origin of the outbreak. But a description of the first clinical cases published in The Lancet on Friday challenges that hypothesis.
The paper, written by a large group of Chinese researchers from several institutions, offers details about the first 41 hospitalized patients who had confirmed infections with what has been dubbed 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV).
In the earliest case, the patient became ill on 1 December 2019 and had no reported link to the seafood market, the authors report. “No epidemiological link was found between the first patient and later cases,” they state. Their data also show that, in total, 13 of the 41 cases had no link to the marketplace. “That’s a big number, 13, with no link,” says Daniel Lucey, an infectious disease specialist at Georgetown University.
Lucey says if the new data are accurate, the first human infections must have occurred in November 2019—if not earlier—because there is an incubation time between infection and symptoms surfacing. If so, the virus possibly spread silently between people in Wuhan—and perhaps elsewhere—before the cluster of cases from the city’s now-infamous Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market was discovered in late December.
“The virus came into that marketplace before it came out of that marketplace,” Lucey asserts.
https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/01/wuhan-seafood-market-may-not-be-source-novel-virus-spreading-globally#
TassieTiger wrote:“The paper, written by a large group of Chinese researchers...” ie the Chinese govt...
Can’t and won’t trust them...
TassieTiger wrote:The death rate will be very questionable (thankfully), due to the large numbers that are infected but not recorded which could be many many thousands - this will be especially so, where our Au numbers are relatively low in statistical comparison.
The who is still tracking towards an approx 3% fatality rate - which is still extremely high - and I guess could obviously change at any time.
These stats are all interesting but do hard to quantify until after the fact - which will be a loooong time coming...
TassieTiger wrote:One of the worry’s from what you posted above (link) - dr was tested several times and it came back negative...bloody hell. That dr knew he had it...but testing was showing negative? That’s a worry.
Ziad wrote:Baron, mate what you are proposing is a very deeply flawed way to think.
Firstly that website is not a legitimate source, ie you or i can add in information... which can cause cases to be missed to doubled up.
So if you use your logic a person who wasn't tested as there wernt any tests available at that time due to shortages but had the symptoms doesn't have the crona virus (Even though they probably do)
To bring the whole circus to context, total deaths from cronavirus all over the world is less than 25,000 in 3 months. In Australia we have 3,500 cases and 14 deaths.
TassieTiger wrote:
I don’t agree with the numbers baron is posting - or more so, numbers are correct - but calculus is flawed in trying to reach an outcome that’s just not there yet.
I ver heard the term - a system is only as good as its data? Or maybe “sh1t in equals sh1t out?
If you really want to consider a more accurate mortality rate, you DO need to factor in the most educated guess possible, pertaining to survivors, even that will be flawed but...
Ziad wrote:You are thinking of the term GIGO, garbage in garbage out.
I have been thinking about it like everyone. the second number that i looked at is the ratio of mild cases to severe cases... which is standing at 95 to 5% (was 96/4). So of the 95% of cases the expectation is almost all will survive. We have heard of many cases where people who have mild cases of cronavirus are told to self isolate at home (tom hanks as an example).
So logic of looking at what cases have recovered vs dead is not right. They don't do that in flu or any disease i know off
Tom Hanks and Rita Wilson say they are taking coronavirus isolation "one day at a time" and have thanked Queensland Health staff.
The Hollywood duo were placed in isolation on Thursday at the Gold Coast University Hospital after testing positive to COVID-19.
In a social media post, Hanks and Wilson thanked "everyone here Down Under who are taking such good care of us".
A Queensland Health spokeswoman said on Friday morning all coronavirus patients at the Gold Coast University Hospital — including Hanks and Wilson — were in a stable condition.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-03-13/tom-hanks-coronavirus-isolation-queensland/12053576
TassieTiger wrote:Your surprised at how many don’t understand it?
Maybe, just maybe - it’s you not understanding...walks like a duck?
The only time your X/y = mortality rate is going to make sense, is after the fact...
Clem wrote:
sungazer wrote:So what about the cases were the virus is not confirmed as it is mild and people stay at home for two weeks then go on to get better, completely avoiding any statistics that you are proposing.
Of course you are not paying attention to any of the stats from china where it is reported that 76,000 people have recovered and only 3,300 people have died.
All the BS that you are purporting about China is mostly BS there are a huge number of foreigners that are in china and can report back to people in their own country. Their are Australians still in Whuhan there are heaps of Chinese from Malaysia that set up companies in china for manufacturing, Chin ease from all over the world have moved back there to start up businesses. Of course there will be some under reporting but the numbers you are talking about are fiction they would be noticed. China has a very smart young population many educated abroad they are not indoctrinated quite the opposite the young university and ex uni students are very inquiring minds.