I don't really trust the math on this one. Germany considers a 60% total infection rate to be quite likely in an unmitigated scenario. If that happens quickly enough, we could expect to see...
I don't really trust the math on this one. Germany considers a 60% total infection rate to be quite likely in an unmitigated scenario. If that happens quickly enough, we could expect to see healthcare systems breaking down and I would expect a 3% death rate globally. That puts the tally at 126 million dead for me, less if populous regions are spared. That's a decade and a half of air pollution.
I didn't even bother. But I'm sure it's going to be substantial, even though they're mostly talking about moving elective stuff. The way it went in italy and china, it'd involve a lot more than...
I didn't even bother. But I'm sure it's going to be substantial, even though they're mostly talking about moving elective stuff. The way it went in italy and china, it'd involve a lot more than that.
Oh, and 126 million deaths should be around the ballpark of the amount of natural deaths we see every year. (If 2% of the population dies every year, that would induce a life expectancy of 50 years, which globally is not toooo far off.) No cause of death over a single year could compare to a complete unmitigated coronavirus pandemic.
I suspect though, unless they maintain strict border controls for people coming into the country, China will simply be re-infected through imported cases coming back from other countries. It's...
I suspect though, unless they maintain strict border controls for people coming into the country, China will simply be re-infected through imported cases coming back from other countries. It's also a case of whether you trust the Chinese figures on the situation. How many tests are being conducted outside of Hubei/Wuhan right now?
There's no way they contain it at 80,000 cases in a country with 1,000,000,000+ people while the pandemic ravages the rest of the world.
Yep! But i'm just highly skeptical that you'll have perfect, 100% enforcement. Most people are famously terrible at policing themselves, and all you need is a few not to give a fuck.
Yep! But i'm just highly skeptical that you'll have perfect, 100% enforcement. Most people are famously terrible at policing themselves, and all you need is a few not to give a fuck.
Because infectious diseases don't care if your rich or poor. Unless you have your own bunker to hide in, there's no way to guarantee you're safe.
I think this is something that should question us: why are we so much more afraid of the coronavirus than we are of climate change or atmospheric pollution or other kinds of threats. What is so special about the coronavirus that we are ready to put the whole world on lockdown because of that?
Because infectious diseases don't care if your rich or poor. Unless you have your own bunker to hide in, there's no way to guarantee you're safe.
There are still plenty of places where pollution isn't very bad. I live in the San Francisco bay area, along with a ton of billionaires. It's easy to forget the state of many other places in the...
There are still plenty of places where pollution isn't very bad. I live in the San Francisco bay area, along with a ton of billionaires. It's easy to forget the state of many other places in the world when the weather is as nice and air as clean as it is here.
I don't really trust the math on this one. Germany considers a 60% total infection rate to be quite likely in an unmitigated scenario. If that happens quickly enough, we could expect to see healthcare systems breaking down and I would expect a 3% death rate globally. That puts the tally at 126 million dead for me, less if populous regions are spared. That's a decade and a half of air pollution.
Have we estimated the number of deaths caused by uninfected patients that can't receive care?
I didn't even bother. But I'm sure it's going to be substantial, even though they're mostly talking about moving elective stuff. The way it went in italy and china, it'd involve a lot more than that.
Oh, and 126 million deaths should be around the ballpark of the amount of natural deaths we see every year. (If 2% of the population dies every year, that would induce a life expectancy of 50 years, which globally is not toooo far off.) No cause of death over a single year could compare to a complete unmitigated coronavirus pandemic.
60% is assuming no steps are taken to contain the virus.
China didn't get anywhere near that high before new infections started subsiding.
I suspect though, unless they maintain strict border controls for people coming into the country, China will simply be re-infected through imported cases coming back from other countries. It's also a case of whether you trust the Chinese figures on the situation. How many tests are being conducted outside of Hubei/Wuhan right now?
There's no way they contain it at 80,000 cases in a country with 1,000,000,000+ people while the pandemic ravages the rest of the world.
Right now they have a mandatory quarantine period for all people entering the country.
Yep! But i'm just highly skeptical that you'll have perfect, 100% enforcement. Most people are famously terrible at policing themselves, and all you need is a few not to give a fuck.
Because infectious diseases don't care if your rich or poor. Unless you have your own bunker to hide in, there's no way to guarantee you're safe.
Neither does pollution really. We all breathe the same air.
There are still plenty of places where pollution isn't very bad. I live in the San Francisco bay area, along with a ton of billionaires. It's easy to forget the state of many other places in the world when the weather is as nice and air as clean as it is here.