Warning to All MLW Members - Fear and the Cronavirus

[Dougie93]

It apparently has a 14% lethality rate, which is very high, for people with diabetes.

How many Canadians have diabetes ?   3.5 million

14% is almost 500, 000 Canadians.

If only 10% were infected, that's still 50,000 Canadians, the same number as were killed by the Spanish Flu.

Edited March 4, 2020 by Dougie93

[WestCanMan]

3 minutes ago, Dougie93 said:

The mechanism is the same, the Flu kills by immune system reactionary pneumonia, Coronavirus is the same.

I'm not suggesting you get too worked up about it, but all this happy talk about it being no big deal is premature.

Just because it's not the 1919 Flu doesn't mean it's not a pandemic, pandemic will grind things to a halt now even more than the Flu did in 1919.

The Flu in 1919 killed 50 million people when there were less than 2B people on the planet. Some people were dying within hours of getting their first symptoms. Coronavirus is not comparable in any way, shape or form to the Spanish Flu. 

The Swine Flu in 2009 was a similar strain to the Spanish Flu, and affected mostly young people because those over 60 had already been exposed to similar strains of the flu so they had strong immunity to it, but the swine flu still didn't kill a lot of young people.

Cornavirus has a high death rate by comparison to Swine Flu, at 7%, but the death demographic is the opposite of that for the Spanish Flu.

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/coronavirus-age-sex-demographics/ :

 

Quote

 

Age of Coronavirus Deaths

COVID-19 Fatality Rate by AGE:

*Death Rate = (number of deaths / number of cases) = probability of dying if infected by the virus (%). This probability differs depending on the age group. The percentages shown below do not have to add up to 100%, as they do NOT represent share of deaths by age group. Rather, it represents, for a person in a given age group, the risk of dying if infected with COVID-19. 

AGE	DEATH RATE confirmed cases	DEATH RATE all cases
80+ years old	21.9%	14.8%
70-79 years old		8.0%
60-69 years old		3.6%
50-59 years old		1.3%
40-49 years old		0.4%
30-39 years old		0.2%
20-29 years old		0.2%
10-19 years old		0.2%
0-9 years old		no fatalities

 

I don't "know" where Cornavirus originated, but there's a BSL4 lab in Wuhan and the Coronavirus is on hand in a lot of the BSL4 labs around the world.

It just happened to get out in a country with a huge overpopulation problem, where they were recently curbing their population by limiting the number of births, and putting healthy young "overlimit" babies into care facilities with high infant mortality rates. This is also a country whose culture demands that young people care for their elderly family members to a far greater extent than is normal here in North America. So along comes Coronavirus which is almost like a designer virus which lowers the population, and frees up the younger generations from the burden of caring for the elderly. Now there are less homes needed, less food needed, and more of the young people in China can get back into the work force. 

If you were a heartless dictator and you wanted to "cull the herd", you'd release this virus on your own people. I don't have proof that that's what happened, but I've heard crazier conspiracy theories.  

Cliff Clavin's Buffalo Theory:

Quote

"Well ya see, Norm, it’s like this… A herd of buffalo can only move as fast as the slowest buffalo. And when the herd is hunted, it is the slowest and weakest ones at the back that are killed first. This natural selection is good for the herd as a whole, because the general speed and health of the whole group keeps improving by the regular killing of the weakest members. In much the same way, the human brain can only operate as fast as the slowest brain cells. Excessive intake of alcohol, as we know, kills brain cells. But naturally it attacks the slowest and weakest brain cells first. In this way, regular consumption of beer eliminates the weaker brain cells, making the brain a faster and more efficient machine. That’s why you always feel smarter after a few beers.”

-Cliff Clavin

 

[Dougie93]

7 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

The Flu in 1919 killed 50 million people when there were less than 2B people on the planet.

Whoop dee do.  Just because it's not the Spanish Flu doesn't mean anything, my niece just got back from South Korea and she says they are freaking out over there.

She wasn't even planning to leave, but decided to get out of there before they declare martial law.

Edited March 4, 2020 by Dougie93

[WestCanMan]

5 minutes ago, Dougie93 said:

Whoop dee do.  Just because it's not the Spanish Flu doesn't mean anything, my niece just got back from South Korea and she says they are freaking out over there.

She wasn't even planning to leave, but decided to get out of there before they declare martial law.

I've just been saying this whole time that the Spanish Flu can never be used as a comp for the current strain of coronavirus. Apples and oranges.

TBH, exposure to the current strain could actually be a good thing, because the Spanish Flu had a first go-round which was quite mild. If you're healthy, and 25, and you don't have to work like the doctors in Chinese hospitals are working right now, you'll just be picking up immunity to a virus that could come back a lot stronger later this year, or 30 years from now.

[Dougie93]

3 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

I've just been saying this whole time that the Spanish Flu can never be used as a comp for the current strain of coronavirus. Apples and oranges.

I didn't compare it to the Spanish Flu, you did.   All I said was it kills the same way all novel viruses do, in that the body overreacts to a lack of effective antibodies.

[Dougie93]

In actual fact the 1919 Flu killed 50,000 out of 10 million Canadians, so the lethality rate for Spanish Flu in Canada was only 0.5%

[Iceni warrior]

5 minutes ago, Dougie93 said:

In actual fact the 1919 Flu killed 50,000 out of 10 million Canadians, so the lethality rate for Spanish Flu in Canada was only 0.5%

That's not how you work out lethality rate unless 100% of Canadians caught Spanish flu.

One of the factors which made the Spanish flu spread so widely was the way it was kept secret as a matter of wartime security. We don't have that this time around.

Even if this virus was as deadly as the 1918-1920 flu it will never spread as far due to better reporting and better containment measures being taken.

[Dougie93]

Now, if you do want to compare to 1918 H1N1, I'm reading the World Health Organization stating that the lethality rate was 2.3% to 2.5%. not 10%, not 20%

The mechanism of death was the same;  cytokine storm.

The Spanish Flu also came in two waves, the first wave was relatively mild, then a much deadlier wave came after.

[Dougie93]

Just now, Iceni warrior said:

That's not how you work out lethality rate unless 100% of Canadians caught Spanish flu.

One of the factors which made the Spanish flu spread so widely was the way it was kept secret as a matter of wartime security. We don't have that this time around.

Even if this virus was as deadly as the 1918-1920 flu it will never spread as far due to better reporting and better containment measures being taken.

I calculate the lethality rate by your chances of dying from it, net-net.

Your numbers on the Spanish Flu are wrong anyways, both the CDC and the WHO say 2.3% to 2.5% lethality, which is the same as they are reporting for Coronavirus.

In terms of transmission, I would say it's an exponentially greater threat now, things were nowhere near as interconnected then as they are now.

[Dougie93]

Bear in mind, I'm not suggesting you worry about it, I'm not taking any special precautions at all, my wife has an N95 mask, but I don't, I put my fate in the hands of the Lord, but she's an atheist.

 

[Iceni warrior]

14 minutes ago, Dougie93 said:

I calculate the lethality rate by your chances of dying from it, net-net.

Your numbers on the Spanish Flu are wrong anyways, both the CDC and the WHO say 2.3% to 2.5% lethality, which is the same as they are reporting for Coronavirus.

In terms of transmission, I would say it's an exponentially greater threat now, things were nowhere near as interconnected then as they are now.

I didn't give any numbers.

During WWI there was plenty of interconnectedness, troops were being mobilised to and from all corners of the globe and with the exception of Australia there was little attempt to quarantine countries or isolate victims.

BTW, there were 3 waves not 2 with the second, as you say, being the worst.

Edited March 4, 2020 by Iceni warrior

[Dougie93]

2 minutes ago, Iceni warrior said:

I didn't give any numbers.

On 3/2/2020 at 5:16 PM, Iceni warrior said:

No, Spanish flu had a death rate of 10-20%.

An estimated 500 million cases with deaths of 50 -100 million.

[Dougie93]

Like, that estimate is not coming from the CDC nor the WHO.   The WHO number is 2-3% case mortality ratio.

 

[Moonlight Graham]

18 hours ago, Dougie93 said:

My niece just arrived back from South Korea, the worst effected country outside of China

She says there was no screening at the airport at all, it's business as usual at Pearson.

What an utter failure of a government we have.  You've got to be joking me.

We're relying on self-reporting and self-quarantines.  Total incompetence.  Lives will be lost from this.  All because sissy boy is afraid to offend anyone.

[Iceni warrior]

2 minutes ago, Dougie93 said:

 

Sorry, I thought you were refering to my post that you were replying to.

Those numbers are based on an estimated 500 million cases and 50-100 million deaths or 10-20%.

They are estimates though as testing and recording were nowhere near as accurate then as they are today.

 

 

[Dougie93]

Just now, Iceni warrior said:

Sorry, I thought you were refering to my post that you were replying to.

Those numbers are based on an estimated 500 million cases and 50-100 million deaths or 10-20%.

That estimate is unfounded, according to the World Health Organization, the Spanish Flu case mortality rate was 2-3% not 10-20%

[Dougie93]

1 minute ago, Moonlight Graham said:

What an utter failure of a government we have.  You've got to be joking me.

We're relying on self-reporting and self-quarantines.  Total incompetence.  Lives will be lost from this.  All because sissy boy is afraid to offend anyone.

In the event of a pandemic, I prefer a completely useless government,  because once people start to panic, the government itself becomes a threat to you the individual

They're not trying to save you at that point, you become expendable as an individual, it's like war and you are going over the top, whether you like it or not.

People are not lining up in Hubei province to be taken away by the government, they are hiding from them.

[Iceni warrior]

4 minutes ago, Dougie93 said:

That estimate is unfounded, according to the World Health Organization, the Spanish Flu case mortality rate was 2-3% not 10-20%

At the low end of the estimate, 50 million was 2.77% of the total world population of 1.8 billion people in 1918.

If only 500 million caught Spanish flu then the mortality rate has to be more than 2-3%.

Are you sure the WHO figures you have are refering to the mortality rate and not the percentage of total world population who died from Spanish flu?

 

[August1991]

On 2/28/2020 at 11:47 AM, Argus said:

No, he does not exaggerate at all. This is NOT the flu. We don't know the exact mortality rate due to uncertainty with Chinese results, but it is more contageous and far more cases require hospitalization. It also appears to have a much higher mortality  rate.

....

Argus, I haven't read through this thread so I don't what has been posted.

======

1) I still reckon that this "Coronavirus" is a "very bad cold". (Mostly old people die.)

It's contagious (since carriers are not detectable) but not mortal - unless you have pre-existing conditions.

2) I also reckon that the MSM, Experts, Modern Science etc will once again lose credibility among ordinary people.

======

Global warming? Climate change?

I expect the next money-train will be research into "viral pandemics".

[Dougie93]

10 minutes ago, Iceni warrior said:

At the low end of the estimate, 50 million was 2.77% of the total world population of 1.8 billion people in 1918.

If only 500 million caught Spanish flu then the mortality rate has to be more than 2-3%.

Are you sure the WHO figures you have are refering to the mortality rate and not the percentage of total world population who died from Spanish flu?

 

The WHO says case fatality rate, the number of people who caught the flu and then died from it : 2-3%

Under Table 2. Background Characteristics of the three Pandemics of the 20th Century, page 13

https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/44123/9789241547680_eng.pdf

 

Edited March 4, 2020 by Dougie93

[Moonlight Graham]

17 minutes ago, Dougie93 said:

In the event of a pandemic, I prefer a completely useless government,  because once people start to panic, the government itself becomes a threat to you the individual

Well, the point is, the gov at this point has the ability to try and prevent a possible pandemic, or make it less worse.  Their job isn't to not offend people, it's to protect Canadians from outside threats.  The CBSA controls who comes into this country, they stop each and every person crossing our border and screens them.

Once the pandemic is here the gov can't do much even if it wanted to.  When the going gets tough, Trudeau is always paralyzed by political correctness. I guess if people die they can't get offended.

[August1991]

With all that said:

I reckon that we should spend money to research how "CO2 affects our atmosphere".

.... and impose a tax on CO2 emissions, as a way to control CO2 emissions - depending on research.

====

Just as we did with nicotine in the 1990s  But not as we did with booze in the 1920s.

[Iceni warrior]

13 minutes ago, Dougie93 said:

The WHO says case fatality rate, the number of people who caught the flu and then died from it : 2-3%

Under Table 2. Background Characteristics of the three Pandemics of the 20th Century, page 13

https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/44123/9789241547680_eng.pdf

 

CDC says

Quote

It is estimated that about 500 million people or one-third of the world’s population became infected with this virus. The number of deaths was estimated to be at least 50 million worldwide

Which is at least 10%.

https://www.cdc.gov/flu/pandemic-resources/1918-pandemic-h1n1.html

Whatever the actual figure is it is unlikely that Covid19 will be as lethal (in the first world) due to much better preparation and understanding of pandemics now compared to 100 years ago.

The Spanish flu lasted around 3 years with no vaccine and no cure. Hopefully, there could be a vaccine in around a year and effective treatment even sooner.

As with AIDS, this is going to hit much harder in places like Africa and other under developed nations.

Edited March 4, 2020 by Iceni warrior

[Dougie93]

2 minutes ago, Iceni warrior said:

CDC says

Which is at least 10%.

https://www.cdc.gov/flu/pandemic-resources/1918-pandemic-h1n1.html

Whatever the actual figure is it is unlikely that Covid19 will be as lethal (in the first world) due to much better preparation and understanding of pandemics now compared to 100 years ago.

The Spanish flu lasted around 3 years with no vaccine and no cure. Hopefully, within a year there could be a vaccine in around a year and effective treatment even sooner.

As with AIDS, this is going to hit much harder in places like Africa and other under developed nations.

The WHO also has the 20-50 million deaths number, but not as case fatality rate, rather "attributable excess mortality"

That is people who died due to the pandemic generally, but not necessarily killed by the flu itself, that likely includes people killed by complications rather than the virus.

[Argus]

On 3/2/2020 at 6:24 PM, Shady said:

I was right.  Don’t ever doubt me. 

Uhmmm, really? 

Market down almost 900 points today.