Yadda wrote on Mar 17
th, 2020 at 8:10am:
KangAnon wrote on Mar 17
th, 2020 at 7:40am:
KangAnon wrote on Mar 16
th, 2020 at 1:26pm:
What are you trying to gain from focusing on these numbers?
Ok, so you don't want to answer that question, do you at least understand the inherent inaccuracies of these numbers, namely the death rate?
.
"the inherent inaccuracies of these numbers" ???
Again.....
Quote:
sadkanga,
You need to contact Johns Hopkins University CSSE,
and tell them that the information which they are publishing on the internet,
is being reported on a public internet forum in Australia.
And that you are finding those reportings about the spread and lethality of the COVID-19 virus, very, very alarming!!
And that you want Johns Hopkins University CSSE, to stop and desist,
from providing this information about the COVID-19 virus, on the internet!!!
[There. That will fix it.]
I have no reason to question their statistics, nor their calculation of the death rate.
It's just they are only focusing on confirmed cases, which they must do, meaning it is not representative of the total infected, and that's fine when talking about confirmed cases.
When you use that to calculate the death rate however, it's factors higher than reality.
So focusing on it now, so early in the pandemic when the experts are warning of its inaccuracy is just spreading unnecessary fear.
As I asked you,
KangAnon wrote on Mar 16
th, 2020 at 1:26pm:
What are you trying to gain from focusing on these numbers?
Well?
The WHO’s original declaration of 3.4 percent death rate is quite implausible, if not wildly inaccurate.
The figure does not include mild cases that do not require medical attention and is skewed by Wuhan, where the death rate is several times higher than elsewhere in China. It is also quite possible that there are many undetected cases that would push the mortality rate lower. Still, it was the first time that the organization had offered a global mortality rate for the disease.
Most people will have mild disease and get better without needing any special care. Because most cases are mild, these cases are excluded by definition from “reported cases,” the WHO’s alleged 3.4% mortality rate is nothing more than sensationalist nonsense.
Johns Hopkins University are using the same methodology for their calculations, it's just "(Deaths / Confirmed Infected) x 100".
So what you're posting is the death rate of the confirmed infected which for the majority are those who've needed medical intervention or are in positions of power or celebrity because testing kits are limited.
How could that possibly be representative of an entire population?
It can't!
So again, I ask you:
KangAnon wrote on Mar 16
th, 2020 at 1:26pm:
What are you trying to gain from focusing on these numbers?
Forum
Pages: 
