regardless of the number of deaths if we consider the number of pneumonia complications and breathing difficulties that require mechanical respirators, wouldn't Coronavirus be much worse than the common flu?
This was confirmed today. Read the statistics. https://www.ovulation-calculators.com/coronavirus/it/corato
Yes, it seems to be worse than the flu particularly for at risk populations. Exactly how much worse is the question of the day.
If we use the lower numbers 38 million people had the flu & 24,000 died that means 37,972,000 recovered Case fatality rate = o.o6% The 23,000 were 'flu-related' deaths in other words there would have been other health issues. How many of the death certificates would have 'influenza only' as the cause of death - I reckon a small proportion.
I heard it suggested today that the reason older people are worse affected by the virus is because so many of them have had the flu vaccine and this virus reacts badly to whatever is in the flu vaccine. Don't know whether there could be any truth to this...
One more reason to avoid the flu vaccine......if you find an article to support this, please post it. Thanks! Does this implicate Big Pharma?
Larry C. Johnson: Corona Projections, Flawed Models versus Real Life Data The panic surrounding the Corona pandemic is real, not imagined. But the source of the panic comes from ignorance rather than the alleged lethality of Corona. I understand why the average person with no medical training or background will hear the various shrill media reports and assume that everyone who tests positive will soon be on death’s door. But that is not the truth. The data that is being reported so fat shows that only 12% of those who tested positive were admitted to a hospital in New York. And only 20% of that number were admitted subsequently to an ICU. While that number is not astronomical, it still creates significant problem because ICU beds represent only a small fraction of the Hospital beds available. Take the Bronx Care Hospital Center as an example. It has a total of 415 beds, but only 26 ICU beds and 11 Coronary Care beds (the Coronary Care beds can be used as ICU beds). In other words, only 9% of the beds have the infrastructure and the nursing staff to support ventilators. If we use that number as a benchmark, NYC has a total of 2139 ICU beds. The real problem is the lack of nurses qualified and trained to work in an ICU environment. You can deploy 5000 ventilators but there are not enough nurses and Respiratory Therapy techs available to operate and maintain these machines. Respiratory Therapy techs are unsung heroes because they are the ones who actually make the machines run. The tubes connecting the patient to the vent must be checked every hour and changed out every shift. It is this human factor that is at the breaking point even if only 3000 ICU beds are needed in New York City. Ford or Boeing cannot mass produce these professionals. I think there is a widespread belief that the U.S. Government–the CDC in particular–has a good grasp on the number of infections and patients. But that does not appear to be true if the same methodology being used to count Influenza is being used for Corona. You may be shocked to learn that the CDC is NOT, I want to repeat that, NOT counting and then reporting the actual numbers of people who contract influenza or pneumonia during the current 2019/2020 Flu season. Because influenza surveillance does not capture all cases of flu that occur in the U.S., CDC provides these estimated ranges to better reflect the larger burden of influenza. These estimates are calculated based on CDC’s weekly influenza surveillance data and are preliminary. In other words, the US Government numbers on who is infected with the flu and who is hospitalized and who dies is just an ESTIMATE based on a statistical methodology. This raises some valid concerns about the numbers kicking around on the Corona virus. Is the CDC using a different methodology? Are they actually counting tests that turn out positive? The numbers tell an important story. A positive test for Corona does not mean that the person is deathly ill and must be admitted immediately to a hospital. As I noted above, the data being reported by New York showed that only 12% who tested positive were being admitted to the hospital. Is that number holding true for all states? Is it true for other countries? When you look at the WHO data on various diseases you will discover that WHO is relying on statistical models as well for its projections. The raw numbers for Corona, when compared to other infectious diseases, raises some legitimate questions about the disproportionate global panic. As of 10pm edt on April 1, 2020 there are 935,817 “cases” (i.e., people who have tested positive). The key number is the number of deaths–47,208. How does that stack up with other infectious diseases? Influenza–the World Health Organization (WHO) estimated the annual mortality burden of influenza to be 250 000 to 500 000 all-cause deaths globally. Tuberculosis–1.3 million deaths per year (see here). Malaria–403,000 deaths. Why is it that we can live normal lives with diseases such as Influenza, Tuberculosis and Malaria swirling around us but go into complete shutdown over Corona? It does not make sense. Life is not risk free. We learn to live with risk. We need to learn to live with Corona as well. https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/20...jections-flawed-models-versus-real-life-data/
I took a look back here and realize my decimal was in the wrong place! 43,ooo/ 46,ooo,ooo equals just under one-tenth of 1%. Let's see, did I pray for humility this morning?
If true this is devastating to the elderly (myself included). I thought the reason we were so affected is that by our age we have picked up another medical condition or two.
Booklady, I think what you say about pre-existing health conditions is true. But this might be a new and different angle as well. I’d like to know for sure.
And, yes, Frodo was exactly right when he pointed this out to me! Safe in the Refuge of the Immaculate Heart!
it is likely that the Pope will make a Mass in thanksgiving when the pandemic is over, and invite all the bishops to do the same, I think it would be the right time to make a consecration of all peoples to the Immaculate Heart.
Here's a link to a study published in a medical journal along with the summary. It indicates that those who received flu shots were more likely to get respiratory viruses over the next 9 months. Not good with this corona virus. But does anyone warn you of this when you get the flu shot? No way. The whole big pharma vaccine industry makes me crazy in many ways. https://academic.oup.com/cid/article/54/12/1778/455098 Increased Risk of Noninfluenza Respiratory Virus Infections Associated With Receipt of Inactivated Influenza Vaccine Benjamin J. Cowling,1 Vicky J. Fang,1 Hiroshi Nishiura,1,2 Kwok-Hung Chan,3 Sophia Ng,1 Dennis K. M. Ip,1 Susan S. Chiu,4 Gabriel M. Leung,1 and J. S. Malik Peiris1,5 1 School of Public Health, Li Ka Shing Faculty of Medicine, The University of Hong Kong, Pokfulam, Hong Kong SAR, China; 2 PRESTO, Japan Science and Technology Agency, Saitama; 3 Department of Microbiology, Li Ka Shing Faculty of Medicine, The University of Hong Kong, Queen Mary Hospital, 4 Department of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine, The University of Hong Kong, Queen Mary Hospital, and 5 Centre for Influenza Research, Li Ka Shing Faculty of Medicine, The University of Hong Kong, Pokfulam, Hong Kong SAR, China We randomized 115 children to trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (TIV) or placebo. Over the following 9 months, TIV recipients had an increased risk of virologicall yconfirmed non-influenza infections (relative risk: 4.40; 95% confidence interval: 1.31-14.8). Being protected against influenza, TIV recipients may lack temporary non-specific immunity that protected against other respiratory viruses.
Also, if a vaccine for this virus is developed there's no way I'd get it. I remember reading that those who received a vaccine for SARs (which was a corona virus) were more likely to have worse respiratory infections later.
COVID-19 seems most serious for those with underlying conditions. Yet those who die from it are apparently classified as victims of COVID-19 only, while the fact that they might have died from, for example, COPD complicated by COVID-19 is rarely mentioned. It is unfortunate that anybody should die of it, but those with many underlying conditions are in constant danger of succumbing to opportunist infections and this one being novel, they are completely devoid of immune protection, unlike influenzas which are regular and annual. Perhaps the steps taken should have concentrated more on isolating vulnerable groups rather than the general population. This would have been less detrimental to the livelihoods of many and might have allowed a natural immunity to develop more quickly among the less vulnerable, leaving them less of a threat for the compromised. As it now stands, when these current restrictions are eventually lifted, the vulnerable who remain will still be extremely vulnerable.
Maybe I'm stupid or something but I don't undersand this person's logic. He says we can live with diseases such as influenza and malaria -- of course we can - they have been around for years. We are at the beginnning of this corona virus cycle yet he compares the total annual flu figures with the present corona virus figures. Not like for like! That is why this is called the novel corona virus as we haven't come across it before -- and we will eventually live with it when we develop herd immunity. But at the minute it is overwhelming particular health services which lack resources hence it's regional impacts. I agree that governments have been over-cautious in their approach to this virus but this pundit has just fired out an article with a particular political spin just to get a couple of dollars into his pocket. Not impressed by this article at all.
