Another credible source telling the world that the "deadly" coronavirus is nowhere near as deadly as first thought when a 5% figure was used as justification for locking down large segments of society.
To summarize, a large (4,600 people) randomized testing for both the virus as well as antibodies demonstrated that a more apt name would be "the mostly benign" coronavirus.
And yet, in my home province of Ontario, we continue fumbling along. People are dying while waiting for delayed surgeries like vital cardiac operations and transplants. More people will die because cancer screenings were cancelled, taking away the most vital tool in the box for surviving a malignancy, early detection. And then there's the millions of Canadians out of work with liquor stores deemed essential, there's a great idea.
"Sorry we closed your school Sally and left you home with an out of work alcoholic, we hope you didn't get hurt too bad, but these other nice people here were too afraid of the virus so.....well, you know".
In Brampton by-law officers are handing out citations to hardened criminal types who dare have people over for an outdoor backdoor visit. Meanwhile indoor businesses where almost all outbreaks occur continue merrily along. "Hey you, get out of your neighbour's backyard and get over to Costco so you can breathe recycled indoor air with hundreds of other people".
Ontario needs leadership, but our Captain Kirk has abdicated the Captain's chair and has handed it to Bones. "I'm just a simple country doctor Doug, I don't know anything about spousal and child abuse, I just know how to stop a virus, maybe".
Posts
Seed Newsvine
2 comments:
Okay, Gordie, you've got one source, at best an anecdotal reference, but there are many contrary views. I'm not a doctor. I'm pretty sure you're not. This reminds me of nothing so much as the anti-vaxxers who always manage to drag out some authoritative contrarian. Climate science has been plagued with this nonsense for decades. Before that, it was the experts who served RJ Reynolds so well by sowing confusion about the link between tobacco and lung cancer.
You've got one guy. There are thousands who are telling us something much different. Those of us who can't comment one way or the other are left to sort the wheat from the chaff. So, why don't you gather up the hundreds and thousands of highly-educated experts who must surely agree with your guy to refute the other side? Because you can only find a contrarian here and there?
If you've got a case, and after all, he who propounds must prove, then produce the contrary scientific consensus. Every anti-vaxxer produces a couple, perhaps a few contrarians with solid credentials. Big Oil had on its payroll, a cadre of contrarians, some of whom actually cut their teeth on the RJ Reynolds campaign.
If there's any truth to what you imply it should be very easy to prove it.
So, I'm waiting.
There's more than one source now, USC, Stanford, Oxford have all engaged in radomized testing, now we can just add Indiana to NYC, California and Great Britain.
Do take note, there's a difference between the case mortality rate and infection fatality rate. The former only looks at the confirmed cases, while the latter uses randomized sampling to include all the unidentified infections where symptoms are so mild people don't get tested, or complete asymptomatic people.
I do understand that those who are afraid of contracting the virus, which is understandable after all the "deadly coronavirus" messaging...they'll want to justify their fear and will ignore the science being put out by John Hopkins, Stanford, USC and Oxford.
The case mortality rate is the "tip of the iceberg", organizations like the WHO and CDC do randomized sampling all the time to get the more important infection mortality rate.
Ultimately though, as I've said in previous posts....for someone like an 85 year old diabetic, the mortality rate is obviously not less than 1%....while for a younger healthier person its likely not even 0.5%.
Post a Comment