And again you snipped the *reason* your *behaviour* is troll-like. I doubt anybody here is surprised!
I'm happy being in your kill-file. That means you won't post fatuous attempts at responding to (cf answering) sound points.
The whole public display of kill-filing someone is such a juvenile response to a conversation. It's not about kill-filing, it's about the "attitude" displayed. It's funny actually.
-- Rick C. --+ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging --+ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
Possibly. But he might have been trying to put things in perspective.
Trouble is he may be wrong. While the fatality rate (which is presently no t well known) seems to be lower than with SARS, the infection rate seems to be higher. So ultimately more people may die.
The fatality rate is not well known because this number is the number of in fected people dying compared to those infected. But it has to be the same group of people. Presently the infection rate is such that the current dea th figures are from a smaller pool of infected than the currently infected numbers. So a bias exists if you just use the current numbers.
In the other direction is a bias from the reported infection number not inc luding those who are infected, but do not develop symptoms enough to seek t reatment. This seems to be significant in this case.
He was pretty clearly accurate in saying this is not as bad as Ebola. That 's one bad ass disease. But not so hard to contain as a respiratory virus spread by simply being in the same room as a sick individual... or on a pla ne.
-- Rick C. -+- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging -+- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
:
not well known) seems to be lower than with SARS, the infection rate seems to be higher. So ultimately more people may die.
infected people dying compared to those infected. But it has to be the sam e group of people. Presently the infection rate is such that the current d eath figures are from a smaller pool of infected than the currently infecte d numbers. So a bias exists if you just use the current numbers.
ncluding those who are infected, but do not develop symptoms enough to seek treatment. This seems to be significant in this case.
at's one bad ass disease. But not so hard to contain as a respiratory viru s spread by simply being in the same room as a sick individual... or on a p lane.
Voice of America (is it alarmist?) said daily cremation is around 1500 to 2
000, including all deaths.My infection estimate:
W0 W1 W2 W3 W4 W5 W6 R0 12/30 1/6 1/13 1/20 1/27 2/3 2/10 WH 2.0 41 192 905 2766 13004 26008 52017 LS 1.7 180 306 520 884 RS 1.7 197 334 569 967 RW 1.7 137 232 395 673 G2 1.7 1120 1904 3236 5502 SH 1.5 98 147 220 330 BJ 1.5 113 169 254 381 HK 1.8 17 30 JP 1.5 20 30 US 1.5 11 16
Assumptions: R0 for W0 to W3 was 4.7
35% spread from G0 (Ground 0) to G1 and G2 in W3 G0 is saturated, so reported infection rate is capped G1 (RS, RW, LS are almost saturated G2 is rest of China MP Miltary police and army are not included
Yes, that and more. It looks like the person doing the plonking only wants to: - stroll in - make stupid and/or incendiary statements - refuse to acknowledge that - stomp off to play with other toys all of which are trolling characteristics
I often disagree with what you say (and vice versa!) but I wouldn't dream of putting you in my killfile.
That is reserved for people with potty mouths and no redeeming traits!
Lol, yes, we don't agree on much but usually manage to keep it civil.
-- Rick C. -++ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging -++ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
Frequently where we /do/ agree, I don't make a comment. "Me too" should be kept to a minimum :)
te:
as
y not well known) seems to be lower than with SARS, the infection rate seem s to be higher. So ultimately more people may die.
f infected people dying compared to those infected. But it has to be the s ame group of people. Presently the infection rate is such that the current death figures are from a smaller pool of infected than the currently infec ted numbers. So a bias exists if you just use the current numbers.
including those who are infected, but do not develop symptoms enough to se ek treatment. This seems to be significant in this case.
That's one bad ass disease. But not so hard to contain as a respiratory vi rus spread by simply being in the same room as a sick individual... or on a plane.
2000, including all deaths.Where? China as a whole has a population of 1.386 billion, and a life expec tancy of 76.25 years.
That's a average death rate of 49,800 people per day.
clearly shows that the number of infections has stoppled rising exponential ly and is now starting to look more like a logistic curve,
An optimist might hope that the total number infect might flatten out at ar ound 60,000, but what we can see now is dominated by what's going on in Wuh an and adjacent areas, which are in lock-down. The R0 is going to be higher in places where there have been fewer infections so far and correspondingl y less effort to minimise normal social contacts.
-- Bill Sloman, Sydney
Meanwhile, more and more cases in Europe and America. This is the critical period now in containing it. Looks like it's touch and go right now. :(
-- - Winston Spencer Churchill
are interested and associated, but not absorbed. And should European states men address us with the question, 'Will you join us in this undertaking?' w e should reply, ?Nay Sir, for we are an island race and we dwell am ong our own.?
There is news that Xi is retreating to South China Island. Well, perhaps t he unfolding of the three kingdoms. RPC/KMD in Taiwan, PRC/CCP in SCI, the rest in China.
According to or resident alarmist gullible twit.
In Cursitor Doom's ever-so-reliable opinion.
shows that the number of new infections per day has dropped.
Some German news service has picked up on this
"Another 89 deaths and 2,656 new cases were reported over the last 24 hours on Sunday, compared to 3,399 new cases recorded the day before."
As I've said before, these numbers are currently dominated by the infrectio ns in WuHan province and adjacent areas, which are in lock-down and should have correspondingly low infection rates. Areas further away from the origi nal outbreak may not be being quite as careful.
-- Bill Sloman, Sydney
Which is to say, our resident alarmist gullible twit has heard a rumour to that effect. It's not exactly a plausible report.
Xi is bound to have some bunker close to Peking that has been designed to survive a nuclear attack and a biological warfare assault. He's not going to isolate himself on some south China island.
-- Bill Sloman, Sydney
ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.