Covid-19 Virus

I already pointed out on the previous page that for under 60s the mortality rate is 0.2%.

Your subsequently stating it to be potentially almost 5 times higher than it actually is does little to help reassure people.

Wuhan Virus

 

Except it's actually not even 1%, it's 0.2% - see my post above.

 

And you have to take into account that a higher proportion of that 0.2% will have underlying medical conditions that will have been a factor in their death.

If you are under 60 and relatively healthy the threat from Covid-19 is minimal.

Having said that, it is wise to follow the advice already provided to prevent the spread and protect those who are in the vulnerable groups from contracting it.

 

Seems you can now only get alcohol hand gel on the black market & it's expensive!

 

Apparently you can make your own alcohol sanitising gel at home with Vodka. Who knew. Got loads of the stuff.

 

Where is your source that the mortality rate in Italy is "actually higher", at least for those under 60?

The total mortality rate for Italy so far on only known cases appears to be about 2.5% (52 deaths on over 2,000 known to have tested positive so far). Also, as you point out the number of people having been infected with coronavirus in Italy could indeed be much higher than just over 2,000, which would bring the total mortality rate lower.

However, as with the general trend globally "most of the victims who have died were elderly, many over the age of 80, had underlying health conditions including cancer, and were already in hospital when the virus was detected." I've not yet seen a breakdown of exactly how many of those 52 deaths were people under 60 though.

https://www.thelocal.it/20200302/coronavirus-cases-italy-latest-numbers

I did see the "less than" caveat to your 1% comment, but the thing is, as demonstrated by lm_wfc's misunderstanding of your point, even rounding the figure in such a way can be both misleading and unnecessarily scaremongering.

The difference between a 0.2% mortality rate and a 0.99% mortality rate is the difference between a '1 in 500' chance of dying and a '1 in 101' chance of dying - which is absolutely huge, so rounding it up, or expressing it in a broader way, should not be done so nonchalantly.

 

Given 98% of the forum members seem to be >60 that means the forum mortality rate will be much higher ? The forum owner can ill afford the lost advertising income from a decimated membership.

 

Yup, must be at least £1.50 a day in lost income.

 

Dont feed into the fear about it all, watch the Government turn it into something massive as a big distraction away from what they are doing, or not doing what they are meant to be doing.

 

They're probably hoping any economic decline from Brexit can be attributed to the virus instead.

 

You need a manager...this time next year we could be millionaires.

 

1% is the number of deaths Vs total cases.

A lot of those 99% are still infected and many in critical condition.

Deaths Vs recorded recovery is around 6%, though obviously there will be people with mild cases who just stayed at home.

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/

 

After all the criticism Boris got for not turning up at Shrewsbury recently with a mop and bucket, it's good to see him getting stuck in at the Coronavirus sharp end.

 

I've happened upon some further information:

"The virus has killed 79 people in Italy, all aged between 63 and 95 with underlying serious illnesses."

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/mar/03/italy-elderly-population-coronavirus-risk-covid-19

 

100% the Boomervirus.

 

Would "voting for Brexit" also count as an "underlying serious illness"?

 

I'll allow it.

 

WHO estimates global death rate at 3.4%, raising it from their previous estimates.

Not good.

 

Neville Southall has the best tweet on the subject so far....

https://twitter.com/NevilleSouthall/status/1234466863482130443?s=19

 

The use of inorganic elements in medicine has a long and distinguished history:

 

Genius.

 

Oh no! According to the Mail, the back-of-a-fag-packet, "anyone got any other ideas" action plan 'could force Brits to suspend their social lives and cut back on eating out, going to the pub, shopping and shows".

You can imagine, we're devastated at this blow to our everyday routine and can only hope it won't affect our regular jaunts to Tuscany or the golf.

Who could have foreseen or guessed that the 'action plan' would involve sending in the bloody military? I genuinely feel sorry for them. Anything that's going, they're the government's response. Fire, flood, fever, strike, earthquake, locusts - send in the squaddies!

Genuinely worried about my oldies. 14.7% mortality rate amongst the over 80s and almost all mine have other complications such as COPD, MS etc.

 

This would be the woefully undermanned UK military that doesn't actually have the personnel at the moment to do their actual core military/defence tasks but suddenly they're going to take on civilian roles/skill gaps in infrastructure? The undermanned super-skilled military that will also be, presumably, immune to COVID-19?

 

Well I've got 2 holidays booked in May so I'm very worried about possible disruption due to all these sick people around the world.
The army is always the first response because they are a govt funded payroll sitting on their arses doing nothing. It's good to keep them busy. It's better than declaring war on someone.

 

A friend who lives in Perth, Australia said people have been stockpiling bog roll all week in case of self-isolation and there's none left in the city.

 

Might also affect the working man's games of shove ha'penny with a pint of mild down the Dog and Duck.

 

It’s not ‘Wuhan’ virus any more. Time to rename the thread?