morekaos said:
nosuchreality said:
morekaos said:
daedalus said:
morekaos said:
No, I posed that with that many dead many of us should all know someone (first hand) who has died. (excluding healthcare workers).
It's 1 in 1000. Do you really know that many people, "first hand"? I don't. Not even close. I do have a friend I've known for 20 years--someone in my small happy hour group--who got sick. She was in the hospital a few times for a number of days, missed >12 weeks of work and suffered immensely. I imagine a marginal difference in her condition could have resulted in a worse outcome.
The numbers add up just fine. There's no conspiracy here.
Yes, when I mean first hand I mean I know their name address and phone numbers. I don?t see shame in having it already. Most I know are almost proud of having survived. 40+ and not one hospitalization and no deaths. That number is national, at least 6 states. I still find it curious.
Depends on the testing factor. If they're tested from having symptoms, I'd find 40 with no hospitalizations rare, but not necessarily problematic. it's really depends on the distribution of the people being tested, if they're predominantly under 60 and typical health issues, no hospitalizations out of 40 wouldn't be uncommon.
If they're part of a screening process from employment getting screen with no symptoms, then no hospitalizations is probably expected.
That sample runs the gamut from a 82 year old Cardiac Surgeon in Boston to a good friend of mine who has about a million co-morbidities with obesity, cancer and high blood pressure to several 18-21 year old kids here and in Arizona and Texas. And every kind in between. They all made it.
Doesn?t actually answer the question as to why tested? Generic work screening, close contact screening, etc. If you are dealing with bravado of work screening, ?I had it? versus dealing with people needing to get tested, check past 1 degree of separation and May you find some ugliness.
Your response though really highlights the power of misinformation. Colloquially, lies, damn lies and statistics. I.e. and 82 y.o. Survived and a guy with million comorbidities.
We are bombarded with the misinformation about 40% are nursing home patients, 60% of deaths are over 75, only 6% had no other issues at all, etc. Technically accurate but contorted interpretations, misses that even for 82 y.o. while the mortality is very high, 13.8% (79,000 dead from 580K cases) 6 out of 7 survive. The fact that the 82 y.o. Survive is the expected result not to mention the confirmation bias in dead people aren?t calling you.
The existing death rates for younger go down from there, so while your million comorbidity friend had a higher risk, their age group has 0.6% fatality rate. So again, somewhere between 98 or 99 are expected to live even with comorbidities. As for the 18-21 year olds, their rates are off the chart.
All of which again neglect the damage from hospital stays, long haul affects, and hopefully never to materialize sleeper effect like shingles, cervical cancer, necrotizing fasciitis, etc.
