Math geeks needed

[wd9]

You all know i love math, but this is pretty real math.

Ok, the numbers are this today. (roughly). The number of cases today are kind of irrelevant since they haven't had an outcome.

There are 126,000 cases that have had an outcome. 108,000 recovered and 18,500 have died.

That is around 15% of the cases resulted in someone dying. So, um, uh, if dying from Covid 19 on average is 15% and in order to make that 15% average with young people hardly affected, it would seem older people are at extreme risk.

What am i missing other then conclude this thing is pretty dangerous for the majority of farmers given the average age.

[newguy]

India has shut down for 21 days.They said if people do not comply the country will go backwards 21 years.

[wd9]

Further to that, the USA had 1000 cases with an outcome, 680 died and 370 lived.

Does the death rate mean 66%? Holy crapperooni that is high. What am i missing?

Edit: Source: https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/us/ https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/us/

[dalek]

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

[wd9]

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

Really good point, but do we know that number? I guess it would be really hard to determine even remotely accurate.

[dalek]

Really good point, but do we know that number? I guess it would be really hard to determine even remotely accurate.

No I don’t think we’ll ever know how many people get it. I know the local health unit here says they have 50-60 probable cases but only 3 have been tested and they don’t seem to be in a hurry to test anyone that doesn’t end up in a hospital. I would think that there are probably 10 people who didn’t get tested for every one that did

[wd9]

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.

[dalek]

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.

In some states it’s still $2-3000 just for the test so if you’d have to feel pretty rough to get tested if you don’t have coverage

[mbratrud]

Further to that, the USA had 1000 cases with an outcome, 680 died and 370 lived.

Does the death rate mean 66%? Holy crapperooni that is high. What am i missing?

Edit: Source: https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/us/ https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/us/

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.

[wd9]

Webinar today for AHUS patients. Was pretty interesting to hear from Doctors all over the world discuss this subject in many areas of medicine. Currently they know of almost 300 mutations already, but fortunately the overall structure from the bat remains detectable with only about 20% of that structure changing. So so far one test catches them all, for now.

[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?