Math geeks needed

[wd9]

A case isn't concluded or considered recovered until they are have tested negative, between recovery time and lag in testing. i heard that can take up to 30 days, so there is a lag. 3.5% death rate is most common assumption over 80 years of age is something like 18%. higher in North America because they are only testing people showing symptoms. Thousands go untested because they are not serious.

The numbers get real ugly once we run out of hospital capacity. Italy Death rate almost 10% and anyone over 65 doesn't get treatment because they don't have enough ventilators. up to 13% of all cases need oxegen or ventilators. last i heard is in Sask we have 180 ventilators. We get to over 3000 active cases here in Sask and doctors could have to start making tough decisions.

Spoke with a former colleague in Edmonton in biomedical eng, all the old vents are pulled out of mothball status and being put in service, but that is only around 14 i think. Given the numbers of potential infections, 14 additional looks pretty small, but it could be someone's parents, or spouse, or....

[AlbertaFarmer5]

The biggest thing you’re missing is that most of the lower risk people never got sick enough to be tested and recovered at home without being accounted for in the numbers. I would guess that out of the total stats 70-80% of those are “at risk” people in the first place

99% of those in Italy had underlying health problems, a full half of them had 3 or more underlying issues. More people over 90 than under 60 died in Italy.

[the big wheel]

It’s not just old people. And even if so
You’re basically saying they’re worthless?
Oh ya ok that’s what Fox News said rhen
Trump watches it then he said it. So I guess
It’s good rhey all die off because if that loser
Opens up venues too early rhey all will and
More

[farming101]

Incomplete datasets can skew the result. They will have to test till they can't test no more to get best data for deducing ratios and lethality.

In lands where the disease has taken off at a terrible rate, only those susceptible and actually not feeling well are likely being tested. Doesn't minimize the chances of a poor outcome once you have it as highlighted by your numbers but it does skew the numbers and thus they cannot be used to apply across the total population of a nation.
You are indeed correct on age being a complicating factor.
Based on a partial data set from Italy:
Under 30 chances of death are negligible
30-39 extremely low
40-49 1.5X as high as the 30-39 age group
50-59 2.0X as high as the 40-49 age group
60-69 4.0X as high as the 50-59 age group
70-79 3.1X as high as the 60-69 age group
80-89 1.5X as high as the 70-79 age group
90+ 1.1X as high as the 80-89 age group

the lethality for someone over 90+ is 64 times that of a 30-39 year old

Based on the premise of equal opportunity for exposure from males and females, females are less likely to get the disease and less likely to die from it if the get it.

Most at risk age groups are 60-79 year old males, followed by 70-79 year old females and then 80-89 year old males.

The concept of equal opportunity for infection is important. Anything that can be done to lower your risk is going to change your prospects for contracting the virus. Once you have it the outcome is much more definitely known. Interesting that fewer of the oldest of Italy's population have tested positive. Only reason I can think of is they haven't been exposed. They are not out in the streets and common areas and buildings.
Another obvious difference is the lethality rate when comparing nations. Different variants of the virus?
Greater resistance in a certain population? Lower exposure? Better health care?

[farming101]

More people over 90 than under 60 died in Italy.

I did not see stats on that. Reference?

[wd9]

99% of those in Italy had underlying health problems, a full half of them had 3 or more underlying issues. More people over 90 than under 60 died in Italy.

I have that too, am immuno-compromised, guess its ok if i just die as well. Just trying to calculate my odds of living, so humour me. The bigger issue is the collapse of the medical system there, they couldn't save them even if they could.

In Bergamo they have a 48 ventilated bed facility with a 4300 patient caseload in just Covid. Many come in and are just ushered straight to palliative care to die. They can only the save the ones with the highest odds of living, not because the rest can't be medically saved, there is just too many. Remember, just because you have a pandemic, doesn't mean you stop all the other diseases, influenza, heart attacks, pneumonia, cancer, blood disease, leukemia, and a million other things. The deaths would have been far less if they just listened.

This is what is trying to be prevented in Canada.

[shtferbrains]

I try not to watch the world numbers so much because we just get data from the media.

I have been watching VanCong fairly close and to this point most of the dead come out of one nursing home.

Yesterday I think they were reporting 6 long term care homes had infection.

Bigger numbers to come there, but not "general population" picking it up at work.

I think Alberta also reports a long term care case in ICU.

Certainly seniors dying is a crisis, but can we not do better at keeping that group better protected rather than just shotgun the whole population?

[AlbertaFarmer5]

I did not see stats on that. Reference?

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2020/03/24/the-italian-connection/

[farming101]

Thanks, I'll have a look.

A good article.
Couple things. The findings were based on 355 out of 2003 cases.

His article might lead the reader to think that it's kind of expected because people with hypertension, diabetes and atrial fibrillation are sick already. These three maladies can be controlled to some extent. People can live with these conditions.

Also he leaves the reader to assume that every one who died in the group were in a hospital and contracted the virus there and then died for other reasons. Huh? I don't think the study revealed any of that info. Maybe I'm missing something

[burnt]

I suppose using numbers from the US would be even more complicated as some would rather almost die before going to the hospital then get stuck with a $50,000 medical bill.

Two indirectly related deaths near here - 1 with appendicitis, 1 with twisted bowel. Both refused to go to hospital for help because of risk of exposure. No reported cases in that city.

Poor choice?