In reply to  Jonathan Berry's message of Mon, 10 Feb 2020 07:44:04 +1300:
Hi,

Note that when deriving the mortality rate, one needs to take into account the 
time it takes an average victim to die.
E.g. if that is 2 weeks, then the deaths now need to be compared with the 
number of people that were infected 2 weeks
ago, not with the number infected now.
Also the numbers are too low because of people that are infected and die away 
from medical care and thus don't get
included in the statistics.


>If it's just a slightly worse flu, these would be bizarre
>over-reactions from a Government that was initially very laidback.
>
>At any rate I wrote this last night and am sending the almost still up
>to date figures now:
>Infected:
>37,553  nowish
>30,000 2 days ago
>20,000 5 days ago
>
>Despite the efforts it's still growing, though the rate of growth is
>slowing down.
>https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/  See the chart, the growth
>is steep despite massive efforts by China
>https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/coronavirus-cases/  <both
>encouraging and frightening, the daily cases and growth factor show
>potential hope that it will be under control, but
>813 (this morning 815) deaths
>
>Looking though at the deaths .vs recovered, well everyone who hasn't
>yet died or recovered could still do either one, so 2,990 recovered
>and 815 dead, that's 21.4% fatality rate.
>
>Not sayig that reflect reality, but it does come closer to some of the
>other bits of evidence that support the idea that the lethality of
>this is an order of magnitude worse than what is publicly disclosed.
>
>On Sun, Feb 9, 2020 at 3:55 AM Terry Blanton <hohlr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Some good news:
>>
>> https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/feb/08/misinformation-coronavirus-contagious-infections
>>
>> and some not so good:
>>
>> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7980883/Video-shows-officials-protective-suits-dragging-suspected-coronavirus-carriers-homes.html
>>
>>>
Regards,


Robin van Spaandonk

local asymmetry = temporary success

Reply via email to