OtherGround Forums Covid-19 Mortality Rate In USA Now At 0.015%!

14 days ago
8/1/13
Posts: 24591

https://www.theguardian.com/world/ng-interactive/2020/mar/26/coronavirus-map-of-the-us-latest-cases-state-by-state

 

69133 cases

1045 deaths

 

Mortality rate will continue to decline to the point it will soon be under the .01% influenza death rate.

 

14 days ago
2/28/13
Posts: 2634

You should just stop posting you fucking moron 

14 days ago
10/30/14
Posts: 3351
YaoMingia -

You should just stop posting you fucking moron 

.

14 days ago
4/18/02
Posts: 10236
YaoMingia -

You should just stop posting you fucking moron 

Why ! Does the truth bother you ? 

14 days ago
3/23/07
Posts: 60258

That isn't how you calculate the mortality rate IMO.

The problem with this measure of mortality:  (dead_amount / (infected_amount))  is that you're speculating that the infected won't die.  

With a situation like this, a disease that is aggressively expanding, I think that a better method of evaluating it might be to look at the death to recovery rate:  (dead_amount / (recovered_amount + dead_amount)).

14 days ago
1/14/07
Posts: 18815

Interesting thread.

The title is only off by 100x.

14 days ago
6/28/10
Posts: 30511

OP just wants to say TRump was right about the 15 day quarantine

14 days ago
8/29/09
Posts: 17153
CMX -
YaoMingia -

You should just stop posting you fucking moron 

Why ! Does the truth bother you ? 

The math bothers me.

14 days ago
3/23/07
Posts: 60259
BrckNoHitBk - 

OP just wants to say TRump was right about the 15 day quarantine


I think OP's position is actually far different from Trumps. Trump is actually taking the virus very seriously, unlike OP.

Edited: 14 days ago
1/14/07
Posts: 18816
Bad Monkey - 
CMX -
YaoMingia -

You should just stop posting you fucking moron 

Why ! Does the truth bother you ? 

The math bothers me.


Oh come on... give ol' Cami a break... he didn't graduate high school.
14 days ago
8/1/13
Posts: 24594

Sorry my bad on the calculation. Calculators arent what they used to be..

Rate is actually around 1.5%

MODS HALP!

 

 

14 days ago
3/17/03
Posts: 17631
Please refer to Cami's last flu thread where he admitted to not knowing the difference between number of deceased and mortality rate.
14 days ago
1/2/15
Posts: 10002

Lol

14 days ago
3/9/13
Posts: 4430

My god this math.

 

 

Edited: 14 days ago
8/1/13
Posts: 24595

HALP! Please MODS banish this thread to the cornfield.

14 days ago
1/1/01
Posts: 1206
camicom -

https://www.theguardian.com/world/ng-interactive/2020/mar/26/coronavirus-map-of-the-us-latest-cases-state-by-state

 

69133 cases

1045 deaths

 

Mortality rate will continue to decline to the point it will soon be under the .01% influenza death rate.

 

We actually have one of the lowest death rates in the world. 

If we excluded the filthy, disease ridden, elitist, arrogant, condescending, disgusting, worthless, liberal, sodomite infested, cesspool of New Yawk, we'd far exceed the rest of the world. 

14 days ago
3/13/18
Posts: 5864

14 days ago
10/31/05
Posts: 7771

Either you’re trolling on a very fucked up topic to do so, or you’re so fucking stupid, you can’t do basic math. Either way, should be banned for spreading misinformation on an important topic.

14 days ago
1/1/01
Posts: 15834
saglv - 

That isn't how you calculate the mortality rate IMO.

The problem with this measure of mortality:  (dead_amount / (infected_amount))  is that you're speculating that the infected won't die.  

With a situation like this, a disease that is aggressively expanding, I think that a better method of evaluating it might be to look at the death to recovery rate:  (dead_amount / (recovered_amount + dead_amount)).


There's not good way to calculate it. The mild cases don't even make the books. Kids seem to be largely unaffected (sure there are exceptions) but they carry the fuck out of like the rest of us. How do you even include that in the study? They are infected, they just don't get sick.
14 days ago
8/23/11
Posts: 8699
saglv -

That isn't how you calculate the mortality rate IMO.

The problem with this measure of mortality:  (dead_amount / (infected_amount))  is that you're speculating that the infected won't die.  

With a situation like this, a disease that is aggressively expanding, I think that a better method of evaluating it might be to look at the death to recovery rate:  (dead_amount / (recovered_amount + dead_amount)).

Sagiv. You’re also assuming that confirmed cases are the only people that had the virus. 
Confirmed cases does not include people who had c19 or have it now and don’t show symptoms or didn’t get tested and have cleared or are clearing the virus without a test 

14 days ago
10/22/14
Posts: 6056
saglv -

That isn't how you calculate the mortality rate IMO.

The problem with this measure of mortality:  (dead_amount / (infected_amount))  is that you're speculating that the infected won't die.  

With a situation like this, a disease that is aggressively expanding, I think that a better method of evaluating it might be to look at the death to recovery rate:  (dead_amount / (recovered_amount + dead_amount)).

Not true either. It's somewhere in between since people will die before they recover, so both methods would be flawed in opposite direction.

None of it would be accurate though since both recovered amount and infected amount are just confirmed cases whereas dead is confirmed cases too but likely every death is counted whereas we have no idea how many infected or recovered people there are until they do population wide testing or reliable contact tracing and testing(i think most countries have given up on this approach)

14 days ago
3/17/03
Posts: 17632
Please let this be your last covid thread, cami
14 days ago
3/23/07
Posts: 60260
JitsuGuy - 
saglv - 

That isn't how you calculate the mortality rate IMO.

The problem with this measure of mortality:  (dead_amount / (infected_amount))  is that you're speculating that the infected won't die.  

With a situation like this, a disease that is aggressively expanding, I think that a better method of evaluating it might be to look at the death to recovery rate:  (dead_amount / (recovered_amount + dead_amount)).


There's not good way to calculate it. The mild cases don't even make the books. Kids seem to be largely unaffected (sure there are exceptions) but they carry the fuck out of like the rest of us. How do you even include that in the study? They are infected, they just don't get sick.

You're right. The denominator is the big unknown here. There is no perfect way to calculate it. Good post bud.

14 days ago
5/5/07
Posts: 11728

Ged education coming to good use i see

14 days ago
3/9/13
Posts: 4431

I mean, just look at the numbers. Around 70k cases. Around 1k deaths.

 

How can someone POSSIBLY look at that and think to themselves "yea 0.015% makes sense, better go make a thread about this".

 

Just mind-blowing.