Both of those graphs are incorrect, the virus is over 30 days old therefore infection rate shown at current levels 4800 for 16 days is completely wrong. The current infection rate is on a par with SARS, but the death rate is much lower. Kindly do not share incorrect information
-
-
-
This is "days after tracking", the SARS graph is also incorrect. Actually everything is incorrect in those graphs. The only thing correct is that they didn't mispell the names of the viruses :)
- Još 1 odgovor
Novi razgovor -
-
-
if it cotinues like that, it'll be the end of human being.
-
Unlikely. Just for comparison, the 2009/10 Swine-Flu (H1N1) data.pic.twitter.com/NNxPSNUuke
Kraj razgovora
Novi razgovor -
-
-
Do we get the correct numbers?
-
It depends what you call the correct numbers. Many who aren't gravely ill would just stay at home with it and not be recorded as having it. If you were ill, but not that bad, would you go to hospital & risk infecting others or stay home? Most deceased are over 65.
Kraj razgovora
Novi razgovor -
-
-
@KurzDr: The dynamics of nCov are more similar to a seasonal flu than to SARS even though nCov shares about 80% of RNA with SARS.Hvala. Twitter će to iskoristiti za poboljšanje vaše vremenske crte. PoništiPoništi
-
-
-
very similar


-
Apparently the two viruses are about 90% the same but it is thought SARS more deadly
Kraj razgovora
Novi razgovor -
-
-
Interesting - thanks for sharing. You do have to question (under-reporting) some of the numbers though. I can't believe China were building hospitals as fast as they could for what was initially reported as 13 deaths. Scary though.
Hvala. Twitter će to iskoristiti za poboljšanje vaše vremenske crte. PoništiPoništi
-
Čini se da učitavanje traje već neko vrijeme.
Twitter je možda preopterećen ili ima kratkotrajnih poteškoća u radu. Pokušajte ponovno ili potražite dodatne informacije u odjeljku Status Twittera.