2019 Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV)

[Intrepid_Timer]

Re: COVID-19; was 2019 Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV)

I truly wish that this was a valid comparison, but sadly I do not think that it is. The death toll in Italy just topped 10,000... Don’t underestimate this monster, this is different...

Older population eating tons of carbs is a recipe for disaster. And that goes for any virus.

 

[Intrepid_Timer]

Re: COVID-19; was 2019 Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV)

Older population eating tons of carbs is a recipe for disaster. And that goes for any virus.

https://www.ijidonline.com/article/S1201-9712(19)30328-5/fulltext

"We estimated excess deaths of 7,027, 20,259, 15,801 and 24,981 attributable to influenza epidemics in the 2013/14, 2014/15, 2015/16 and 2016/17, respectively, using the Goldstein index. The average annual mortality excess rate per 100,000 ranged from 11.6 to 41.2 with most of the influenza-associated deaths per year registered among the elderly. However children less than 5 years old also reported a relevant influenza attributable excess death rate in the 2014/15 and 2016/17 seasons (1.05/100,000 and 1.54/100,000 respectively)."

 

[exnavyew]

[h=1]Progress hopefully. :smile:

The FDA has approved emergency use of a new coronavirus test that delivers positive results in 5 minutes and negative results in 13[/h]
https://news.yahoo.com/fda-approved-emergency-coronavirus-test-155923129.html

 

[James48843]

Great stuff James, thanks. Where did you find the mortality rate of those on ventilators vs those that aren't but need one (1% to 6%)? That is terrifying for New York, where they will probably be in this situation within the next few days if not already.

That was in a paper I read a couple of days ago about Italy; and also part of the daily briefings I get from Dr. John Campbell on Youtube. Campbell is a U.K. Nursing instructor who does a daily world-wide report on new data, who is trying what to fight the virus, and what seems to be working and what is not. I highly recommend subscribing to his YouTube channel and spending 20 minutes a day listening to his daily reports.

Here is today’s:

https://youtu.be/dsce2GLH_Dw
Good stuff



Sent from my iPhone using TSP Talk Forums

 

[k0nkuzh0n]

Re: COVID-19; was 2019 Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV)

So from that site, here is the graph

"Total number of specimens, number of positive specimens for influenza and ILI cases (per 1,000 per inhabitants) by week and season. Italy, 2013/14, 2014/15, 2015/16 and 2016/17 season."

Few things to get from this. One, there are more influenza like illnesses that did NOT test positive for influenza, than there are that tested positive. Coronavirus would actually be classified as an ILI. Two, these numbers are cases in a week; Notice it peaks at 1600 cases in a week. Coronavirus is doing 6000+ a DAY in Italy.

https://www.ijidonline.com/article/S1201-9712(19)30328-5/fulltext

"We estimated excess deaths of 7,027, 20,259, 15,801 and 24,981 attributable to influenza epidemics in the 2013/14, 2014/15, 2015/16 and 2016/17, respectively, using the Goldstein index. The average annual mortality excess rate per 100,000 ranged from 11.6 to 41.2 with most of the influenza-associated deaths per year registered among the elderly. However children less than 5 years old also reported a relevant influenza attributable excess death rate in the 2014/15 and 2016/17 seasons (1.05/100,000 and 1.54/100,000 respectively)."

 

[bmneveu]

Re: COVID-19; was 2019 Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV)

So from that site, here is the graph
View attachment 45828
"Total number of specimens, number of positive specimens for influenza and ILI cases (per 1,000 per inhabitants) by week and season. Italy, 2013/14, 2014/15, 2015/16 and 2016/17 season."

Few things to get from this. One, there are more influenza like illnesses that did NOT test positive for influenza, than there are that tested positive. Coronavirus would actually be classified as an ILI. Two, these numbers are cases in a week; Notice it peaks at 1600 cases in a week. Coronavirus is doing 6000+ a DAY in Italy.

We had 19.4K new cases in the US yesterday, and on pace to surpass that today. # of new cases per day is doubling every 3-5 days. Source: https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/us/

 

[k0nkuzh0n]

Re: COVID-19; was 2019 Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV)

Fully aware. I posted the worldometer site to this thread over a month ago. I've been following this stuff since mid January, checking several websites several times a day. But the post I responded to was talking about Italy.

We had 19.4K new cases in the US yesterday, and on pace to surpass that today. # of new cases per day is doubling every 3-5 days. Source: https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/us/

 

[evilanne]

Re: COVID-19; was 2019 Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV)

Turn off the News & come play poker tonight

Fully aware. I posted the worldometer site to this thread over a month ago. I've been following this stuff since mid January, checking several websites several times a day. But the post I responded to was talking about Italy.

 

[Intrepid_Timer]

Re: COVID-19; was 2019 Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV)

So from that site, here is the graph
View attachment 45828
"Total number of specimens, number of positive specimens for influenza and ILI cases (per 1,000 per inhabitants) by week and season. Italy, 2013/14, 2014/15, 2015/16 and 2016/17 season."

Few things to get from this. One, there are more influenza like illnesses that did NOT test positive for influenza, than there are that tested positive. Coronavirus would actually be classified as an ILI. Two, these numbers are cases in a week; Notice it peaks at 1600 cases in a week. Coronavirus is doing 6000+ a DAY in Italy.

That graph is "specimens" tested, not total cases......

Total deaths in Italy due to coronavirus has passed 10000, out of 60.5 million people.

 

[James48843]

The USA is about 14 days behind Italy. All those new cases we are seeing- at least 3% -3.5% will be deaths in 14 to 21 days.

That means, by about April 10, we are looking at a likely 5,000 deaths, just based on the number of positive tests so far, and we are still at least five weeks from the peak of transmission, and about eight weeks away from the peak number of deaths, IF we are lucky!



Sent from my iPhone using TSP Talk Forums

 

[bmneveu]

"Conservative estimation based on numbers of urns being given out at 8 crematoriums in Wuhan by financial analyst @charles984681
Total death in Wuhan: 59K
Total death in China: 97K
Total infection in China: 1.21 M"

https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/88435z/wuhans-crematoriums-are-filling-thousands-of-urns-with-coronavirus-remains-each-day?utm_source=vicenewsfacebook&fbclid=IwAR3Kitq0r---KRlkhF6GHhpQzi0bQEIVqy3lfkVJliyCMv9bVf2EmnrZJzM

 

[k0nkuzh0n]

Re: COVID-19; was 2019 Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV)

That graph is "specimens" tested, not total cases......

Total deaths in Italy due to coronavirus has passed 10000, out of 60.5 million people.

You need to do a specimen test to confirm a case. So yes, that is total cases tested, the summation of positive (dark bars) and negative (lighter bars). In comparison, the coronavirus numbers you see all only the positive cases.

 

[nnuut]

Re: COVID-19; was 2019 Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV)

Is this the Magic elixir?

 

[k0nkuzh0n]

Re: Science: 2019 Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV)

interesting, but didn't actually say how many of his patients were treated with drugs, or any age demographics of his patients.

 

[bmneveu]

Re: COVID-19; was 2019 Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV)

Is this the Magic elixir?

No, its not. This has been debunked. There is a link to the drafted study somewhere on this forum as well, which if you read closely you can see that they excluded the results of any patients that couldn't complete the study. For example, if you DIED from COVID-19, you didn't complete the study, and therefore were left out of the results. He also removed the results of 3 patients who were transferred to ICU, and one who stopped taking the drugs due to nausea. But hey, 100% success rate in those that finished the study. Even I could have a 1.000 batting average in the majors if you only counted my hits!

 

[bmneveu]

Re: Science: 2019 Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV)

interesting, but didn't actually say how many of his patients were treated with drugs, or any age demographics of his patients.

I believe the study started with 26, ended with 20, and 2 of those were placebo so 18 took the drug. Of those, I believe 6 took both drugs combined.

 

[k0nkuzh0n]

Re: Science: 2019 Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV)

I believe the study started with 26, ended with 20, and 2 of those were placebo so 18 took the drug. Of those, I believe 6 took both drugs combined.

In NY? This guy said he has had almost 700 patients.

He also said he "Lost count".... not sure that helps his credibility if hes not writing this stuff down. Video also seemed very politically charged.

 

[nnuut]

Re: Science: 2019 Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV)

Will someone prove their opinions, this someone said or posted stuff, let the truth be known and substantiated.

 

[bmneveu]

Re: Science: 2019 Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV)

In NY? This guy said he has had almost 700 patients.

He also said he "Lost count".... not sure that helps his credibility if hes not writing this stuff down. Video also seemed very politically charged.

Apologies. Sounds like this guy added Zinc to the previous 2 drugs tested and says he is having great results with that. I was referring to the original study done in France.

 

[James48843]

Is this the Magic elixir?

NO!!!

That guy Rudi G. Is NOT a licensed physician. The guy who he is interviewing is NOT accurate in the information is he sharing.

I know because I read the French Study he is referring to.

He just said, in this interview, that the study showed “100% resolution”. That is incorrect.

In the study, 80 patients who tested positive were given the drugs. There were NO equivalent group given placebos, which is the standard for evaluating success or failure.

Of the 80 hospitalized patients who tested positive and took the drugs, 8 ended up in the ICU. That number, about 10%, is comparable to what would be expected with no treatment.

In the study, of the 8 who ended up in the ICU, ONE DIED before the end of seven days, and one was still in critical condition after seven days.

The remaining six patients were released from ICU and tested at low or no remaining virus in their system. THAT part is good, in that it appears to be a lower virus replication. However, having one dead, and one still in the ICU, shows that the death rate remains comparable to the number of dead without the drug being used.

More study is required.

Here is the study. Your video is debunked: https://www.mediterranee-infection.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/COVID-IHU-2-1.pdf


Sent from my iPhone using TSP Talk Forums