Still: we're way smarter, richer, & healthier than in 1919. Some think most 1919 deaths were due to a bacterial co-infection – they hadn't even discovered penicillin yet!
-
-
No, not really, we may be in the West, but there are nearly as many ppl living in extreme poverty today as there were in 1800. (90% of 1B in 1800 vs 10% of 7.5B now, that's 750M in extreme poverty, w/o ability to get medical care, much less get into ICU as so many need w/COVID19.pic.twitter.com/23uV2CXfRb
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
From an eyeball estimation, your graph suggests about half as many people, in absolute terms, in 'extreme poverty' in 2015 as in ~1919 – which supports, rather than refutes, my claims above.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
750M in extreme poverty wouldn't survive bad case. Many just above that wouldn't either – extreme poverty is <$2/day (adjusted locally). And, again, there are millions here in US w/o healthcare. Ppl who won't seek medical care. Self-dentistry is a thing. They'd not have a chance.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Yes, they'd mostly survive the bad case, because twice as many people were in 'extreme poverty' during the 'Spanish flu', and over 96% survived even then, in a world with far less knowledge/resources/capacity/treatment-options.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Did you not bother reading the thing I posted earlier, where entire villages died in 1918? National populations were decimated by 15%? 33%? where up to 70% of pregnant women died? "Bad cases" need ICU/oxygen support. Where do you suggest those in poverty or homeless get that?pic.twitter.com/a3d120NDLA
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
You said "750M in extreme poverty wouldn't survive bad case". I read as "bad case scenario for world", implying high overall rate of death among very-poor. But your own graph showed ~1.3B extreme-poor in 1919; even if all 50M 1919 flu deaths among them, that's 96%+ surviving. …
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
ICU/oxygen. This isn't 1918 flu, it's different disease w/different means of attack. There are significantly more ppl being hospitalized w/this than w/regular flu (today's), of those many need ICU (all the while being contagious, possibly infecting others in hosp). Poor will die.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Putting aside both problems with China's response & reporting, do you have any reliable 'requiring hospitalization' numbers from outside China?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
I have seen best guesses from 14-17%.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
This is a good reference, I think the most highly regarded https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imperial-college/medicine/sph/ide/gida-fellowships/Imperial-College-2019-nCoV-severity-10-02-2020.pdf …
-
-
Yes, pretty good, as a bunch of point-in-time guesses. Suggests CFR of 0.9% (95%CI 0.5%-4.0%). If as some suggest 20x more mild cases never reported, IFR is ~1/20th that: 0.045% (95%CI 0.025%-0.2%)
0 replies 0 retweets 0 likesThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.