you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]magnora7[S] 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

95-97% of people who get the virus recover from it, so either:

  1. Assuming it doesn't cause longer-term effects in the central nervous system that kills people, which they're finding more and more

  2. There are now two strains, so a person can get one and be fine and then get the second one and die.

So the real death rate might be like 10-20% instead of merely 4% (which is already very high)

[–]fuckCNN123 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Furthermore there are numerous observations of varied genetic mutations on both main strains of the virus, which is a bad sign for both personal immunity and the production of immunizations going forward.

My personal opinion is that the mortality rate is lower than 4% due to lackluster testing resulting in most recording cases being severe, but even 1% would be an intense rate when numerous epidemiologists are predicting 40-60% global infection rates by the end of the year and credible virologists are suggesting that, due to mutation, this could be consistent/seasonal.

[–]magnora7[S] 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

My personal opinion is that the mortality rate is lower than 4% due to lackluster testing resulting in most recording cases being severe,

I am hoping the same. There is a serious serious shortage of tests worldwide, so only the most serious cases are even being tested at all, so that's definitely creating a bias in the results.

But on the flip side, some covid-19 deaths were being mis-attributed to things like emphysema, both out of ignorance and intentionally to fix the numbers. So that would make the percentage biased to appear smaller than it actually is.

Maybe those two things balance each other out.

I think the economic failures will be blamed on the virus, but this bubble has been baked in the cake since the end of the last recession. The virus will be a convenient scapegoat. But there will probably also be genuine supply shortages too. It will be the straw that breaks the camel's back. That's my take on it

[–]fuckCNN123 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

That's a good point. If a patient died and wasn't tested for the virus before death, their death would probably be credited to emphysema, pneumonia, organ failure, a misdiagnosis, or an existing illness that worked in combination. Lack of tests would affect both the case rate but also the perceived fatality rate. The fact that the WHO, who has been so dance-on-coals about this shit, is claiming it could be that high is a bad sign.

I tend to agree economically. All bubbles pop, they just wait for the right amount of pressure.