adrianjordan wrote: ↑03 Mar 2020, 10:01
Lies, damned lies and statistics.
The figure of 0.1% for Influenza is 0.1% of the entire population. Though that fluctuates each year depending on a multitude of factors. Remember that figure is also despite immunisation programmes. The actual fatality rate for infected patients varies between 1 and 6% depending on strain etc.
adrianjordan wrote: ↑04 Mar 2020, 02:08
To add to that, the CFR for Influenza A varies wildy year on year and has ranged from as low as 0.1% to as high as 10% depending on the specific strain and which study you look at and whether the correct strain was chosen for vaccination programs that year.
Important points of note, there will be a lot of patients who have Flu A that never get formally diagnosed, because they will just self-care at home. Thanks to vaccination programmes, fewer people actually catch Flu than they would otherwise.
The fact that many people who have the flu and never get formally diagnosed decreases the CFR, not increases it. As for your numbers - first 1-6% and then in your last post 0.1%-10%... now which is it? In either case, there's nothing I can find from any reputable source that would give some weight to either of them, especially the former, unless you are looking at studies of very specific groups (i.e. certain age-groups, regions etc).
Given you work in the health sector, it would be great if you could give some insight to the numbers you are supplying. It's hard to have a constructive discussion without, given I don't want to completely disagree with them without knowing the proper context.
From all the numbers in regards to the flu that I've seen, the actual CFR is way closer to the 0.1% in developed countries, if not even lower considering many don't report it. I have posted numbers from our government that underline these numbers. That some fatalities might be attributed to COPD instead of the flu is true, just as is the fact that there are possibly way more people who were infected by the flu but didn't report it (and survived it). And if there is a fatality, there's always an investigation of cause-of-death.
adrianjordan wrote: ↑04 Mar 2020, 02:08
I'm not saying it's not a serious virus for some people, I'm saying the media is building mass hysteria and social media is fueling that fire. The vast, vast majority of people will not die from this virus and it will, before long, become just another virus that is out there along with Flu and Norovirus amongst others.
I agree that the media is building mass hysteria which certainly isn't good. However, how founded that hysteria, fear or whatever you want to call it is, is a matter of perspective. I.e. Are you among those that are especially endangered by it?
The fatality rate is higher than the flu so far (I suppose subject to debate if you wish & disagree); In Italy there are reported to be 79 fatalities with 2502 infected. This equals a CFR of 3.16%, a developed country/region within Europe.
Having that said, I'm not entirely sure what you are arguing here. Are you saying that the flu is just as bad and dangerous? Or do you agree that COVID-19 is [worse], but the hysteria is unfounded, and that we should just go on living and not be impacted by it? At what expense (to the economy) are governments issuing bans, taking precautionary measures and calling off large events... on, in your view, unfounded hysteria?