Dödligt virus från Kina orsakar panik (SARS-CoV-2, COVID-19)

16,600~ deaths in New York City now.

The IFR is getting closer to 1% as the backlog is fleshed out and the median time to death vs median time to IgG antibody production is matched (IgG antibodies present themselves at a median time of 14 days whereas median time to death after symptom onset is 18.8 days + 5 days median incubation, for a total of 23.8 days — meaning all deaths attributable to this 21.2% are not accounted for yet.)

0.2% of New York City has died, further confirmation that the FHM has wildly underestimated this virus even after adjusting their IFR upwards.

Note that New York reports a roughly 90% mortality rate for intensive care patients, evidence they are not triaging in the same way we are and that everybody is given a fighting chance at survival. However, this means of the 780 or so patients in their intensive care unit, 700 will die. This gives us 17,300 deaths and a 0.97% IFR — which will be skewed higher as backlog reports come in (they admit to a backlog in statistics).

Note that a 1% IFR in New York City does not equal a 1% IFR in Sweden. While Sweden is healthier, with less obesity and general health complications — one in five people in Sweden are over the age of 65 compared to one in eight for New York City. This will likely skew our base-IFR higher.

Assuming a 1% IFR, we can calculate different outcomes based on the percentages required for herd immunity. The highest I have seen is the CDC’s appraisal at 82% and the lowest I have seen is the FHM’s appraisal of 50%.

IFR = 1% (base) — this is our best-case scenario where adequate care can be given to everybody, and resources are available.

50% = 50,000+ deaths
60% = 60,000+ deaths
70% = 70,000+ deaths
82% = 82,000+ deaths

Considering our triage methods, I personally believe this will skew our IFR somewhere between 1.5% to 2%. Care is beginning to become stretched as resources are thin, and patients are actively triaged against. This is where I personally believe we’ll end up if hospitals do not collapse further.

IFR = 1.5% (lower-bound current)

50% = 75,000+ deaths
60% = 90,000+ deaths
70% = 105,000+ deaths
82% = 123,000+ deaths

IFR = 2% (higher-bound current)

50% = 100,000+ deaths
60% = 120,000+ deaths
70% = 140,000+ deaths
82% = 164,000+ deaths

If our hospitals collapse further then adequate care will not be given to any patient, as resources will be stretched extremely thin. Triaging will become far stricter as the age cut-off becomes younger. We can assume a 3% IFR in this situation. This is the hard collapse scenario, and the one I believe we are heading towards unless immediate action is taken.

IFR = 3% (hard collapse)

50% = 150,000+ deaths
60% = 180,000+ deaths
70% = 210,000+ deaths
82% = 246,000+ deaths

We also have the complete collapse scenario in which no care at all is given to those who need medical care to survive. This is in the event of resources running out completely, an overwhelming majority of doctors becoming sick, or hospitals being abandoned. I’d estimate this at around a 5% IFR.

IFR = 5% (complete collapse)

50% = 250,000+ deaths
60% = 300,000+ deaths
70% = 350,000+ deaths
82% = 410,000+ deaths

Sources:
Press regarding antibody test findings. Note they calculate a 0.5% IFR but forget to account for clinically diagnosed deaths, the backlog and ICU patients + their mortality rate. ref. Bloomberg

11544 deaths, 5102 clinically diagnosed deaths reported on the 23rd ref. NYC government statistics (note they report a backlog and numbers will be higher today, not updated)

88% mortality rate for ICU patients in New York City. ref. medpagetoday

Det hade ju dessutom varit så mycket bättre om en lock down skett då vädret var sämre och att vi nu, inom en månad eller så, hade kunnat lätta lite på restriktionerna.

Varför inga krigsrubriker i tidningarna om Stockholmare som blivit sjuka mer än en gång?

I synnerhet när många av de första smittade inte ens varit i närheten av marknaden. T ex den de kallar patient zero i Kina

Ungefär såhär, funkar den svenska modellen! Den skall vi vara mycket stolta över!

https://youtu.be/K6m40W1s0Wc

Studien från USA va nog den som stack ut mest, med enbart 1,4% (?) rökare bland dom insjuknade. Vården är ju vanligtvis inte precis ”gratis” där borta varför man kan anta en viss ”försiktighet” kan prägla svaren.

Men ja, fler studier globalt har pekat i samma riktning.

För att man inte blir sjuk två gånger.
Eller ja det blir man om man använder kina test som visar varannan gångn fel. Negativt sedan oj positivt. Blev frisk och sedan sbuk igen

De spelar Sim City med folket

Jag ville sett att väst drämt igen gränsen ögona böj, redan i December!
Efter det:
Masstesta, forska på tillförlitliga tester, rejäla karantäner för inresenärer osv.

Som det är nu har vi tydligen NOLL försvar mot biologisk krigföring. Gissa om terrorister måste älska den gubben!

Saken borde vara en fråga för försvarsmakten. FHM kunde återgå till att beställa trippelvaccin och räkna knäckebröd.

Astmatiker tar ju inte blodförtunnande. Det var medicin mot högt blodtryck som de menade kunde förvärra covid-19. Pga ökade receptorer genom vilka viruset tar sig in.

De flesta grannländer till Kina stängde sina gränser lika snabbt. Det finns i regionen en vana vid att det med några års mellanrum uppstår nya virus i Kina och att man behöver vara på sin vakt. Så det har inget samband med att veta något specifikt angående just det här viruset.

Vilken gubbe?