I work in a medical office, flu shots have been mandatory for the last 16 years
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple CEO Tim Cook: 'It Feels to Me China is Getting Coronavirus Under Control'
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I work in a medical office, flu shots have been mandatory for the last 16 years
I'm glad. I hate when people talk about what a public health threat the flu is, yet don't get vaccinated.
I’ve been getting flu shots for years. Two years I came down with the flu. Go figure.
Take a trip to Wuhan then and prove to us it’s “hysteria.”
Multiplying by 10 is math, but it’s based on nothing. The ratio of non-severe to severe is much larger than 10. I’ve cited to multiple academic medical papers that show that the fatality rate is more like 0.05% for flu.
Correction was coming no matter what. Just needed an excuse. Media sunk their teeth into it is all and caused more panic.
During most routine corrections, as this one is, it’s always the end of the world. We’ll be back to record highs before the fall if not sooner.
Sorry I didn't explain myself well. By "case complete mortality" I was referring to the closed cases. The expected outcome after disease has run its course.
Coronavirus Cases: Statistics and Charts - Worldometer
Updated Statistics, graphs, and data tables showing the total number of cases, cases per day, cases by country, cases outside of Hubei in China, recoveries and discharges, newly infected, active cases, outcome of closed cases: death rate vs. recovery rate for patients infected with the COVID-19...
As of now, the mortality rate of closed cases sits at 6.9%. It is going down as we speak fortunately.
Sorry I didn't explain myself well. By "case complete mortality" I was referring to the closed cases. The expected outcome after disease has run its course.
Coronavirus Cases: Statistics and Charts - Worldometer
Updated Statistics, graphs, and data tables showing the total number of cases, cases per day, cases by country, cases outside of Hubei in China, recoveries and discharges, newly infected, active cases, outcome of closed cases: death rate vs. recovery rate for patients infected with the COVID-19...www.worldometers.info
As of now, the mortality rate of closed cases sits at 6.9%. It is going down as we speak fortunately.
It's not a very meaningful figure. Within Hubei province, it stands at 8.6%. Taking cases outside of China it is currently at 17.7%.
Can you define the medical term aggressive virus? You are contradicting yourself. If something is more deadly (i.e. has higher mortality rate 0.5-2.5% vs. <0.05) [1,2] and more contagious [3-10], it IS more dangerous.
I love how lightly people throw around numbers like 3.5% mortality. Would you want to board a plane if you were told there's a 1 in 30 chance of a fatal crash? Probably not. Would you antagonize those demanding better safety regulations in that setting? I hope not.
Also, mortality rate is not something static. It depends on the comorbidities (not only the age), the genetic make up, nutrition, financial and healthcare infrastructure and resources, population density of the population amongst other factors. The editorial below [1] elaborates on this, how overwhelming an unprepared healthcare system can increase mortality. If this is the case, the worst thing we can do is underestimate the threat.
[1] https://www.thelancet.com/action/showPdf?pii=S2214-109X(20)30068-1
[2] https://www.cdc.gov/flu/weekly/#S6
[3] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32097725
[4] https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.02.17.20023747v2.full.pdf
[5] https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/Delivery.cfm/SSRN_ID3545759_code3386367.pdf?abstractid=3543150&mirid=1
[6] https://www.aimspress.com/fileOther/PDF/MBE/mbe-16-05-174.pdf]
[7] https://www.worldscientific.com/doi/abs/10.1142/S0218339013400044
[8] https://www.eurosurveillance.org/content/10.2807/ese.17.02.20052-en
[9] https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/j.1750-2659.2012.00388.x
[10] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6670001/
Nothing's more ironic that the same generation that down plays the threat the most is also at the highest risk of dying from it.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Last edited by a moderator:
It wasn’t me the one speaking about mortality rate in a phase when it is not possible to say.
Now the virus is spreading out of China and real data will be available (we know Chinese government is not exactly famous for being transparent).
Nobody is downplaying the threat, but this is not Ebola and doesn’t have to be treated like that.
[automerge]1583065045[/automerge]
Understood.Sorry I didn't explain myself well. By "case complete mortality" I was referring to the closed cases. The expected outcome after disease has run its course.
Coronavirus Cases: Statistics and Charts - Worldometer
Updated Statistics, graphs, and data tables showing the total number of cases, cases per day, cases by country, cases outside of Hubei in China, recoveries and discharges, newly infected, active cases, outcome of closed cases: death rate vs. recovery rate for patients infected with the COVID-19...
As of now, the mortality rate of closed cases sits at 6.9%. It is going down as we speak fortunately.
Unfortunately those statistics will became relevant only at the end of the crisis.
Last edited:
"The only critical factor with COVID-19 is its spreading rate. It is a more aggressive virus than "normal" flu, but not more dangerous."
1. Mortality rate can and should be estimated in every phase of an epidemic. The spreading rate (R0) alone is insufficient to comment on how dangerous a disease is. It's like making a statement on how dangerous a shadow boxer is solely taking their punching speed into consideration. Also, according to your logic we don't need speedometers when we could just calculate the relevant speed AFTER the end of a trip.
2. We are in agreement about the questionable reliability of data coming through the filter of the Chinese government or statements by Tom Cook, but the direction (not the extent) of bias is quite predictable based on the financial interests of the one reporting. In this case that is towards underreporting. The stock market agrees with this notion.
3. When you are saying COVID-19 is "not more dangerous than normal flu", you ARE downplaying its significance. Just because it doesn't carry a punch like Ebola, it's bad enough to disrupt global manufacturing, and in fact any other business that requires large crowds in small spaces.
People were at some point saying that Corona virus only hit countries in tropical regions, as was someone else on here.
Last edited by a moderator:
Luckily, for lack of a better term given the situation, it's only killed people who were compromised health wise thus far.
And the comment you’re replying to is also an opinion, why are you so defensive of Apple?
From what I've read, I haven't seen any deaths from that demographic. I could very well be wrong, but I've been following it and I haven't read any news about it being otherwise. Link me if you have a link handy.
The doctor who discovered the disease in china was in good health before he contracted the disease and died, just as an example.
Knew it. Tim Cook is part of the fake mouthpiece.
https://www.scmp.com/news/china/soc...ngry-residents-shout-chinese-vice-premier-sun
https://www.scmp.com/news/china/soc...ngry-residents-shout-chinese-vice-premier-sun