Indra (![[info]](http://klab.lv/img/userinfo.gif){kind=small} rindra) rakstīja, |
Šī nav vnk pačalošana par filozofiju. Tevis teiktais var ietekmēt cilvēkus; tie var sākt pārdroši uzvesties, inficēties un mirt.
Kāpēc tu vēl joprojām esi slinks un vnk pasaki, ka manis teiktajam "ir tikai panikas nevis argumenta spēks", nevis sniedz vairāk datu? Papildus datus studijā, lūdzu. Ar vienu raksteli nepietiek. Riski ir pārāk lieli, lai pļāpātu, balstoties uz vienu rakstu.
Būtu jauki, ja kāds nopietnāks cilvēks runātu manā vietā, bet nopietniem cilvēkiem ir citas nopietnākas lietas, ko darīt. Taču pat es spēju piedāvāt vairāk kā vienu avotu, kas dod pamatu šaubām par tevis teikto, piemēram:
https://ourworldindata.org/coronavirus
Daži izvilkumi:
In the period up to and including 15th March 2020, the global Case Fatality Rate for COVID-19 are as follows.
Case fatality rate globally = 3.7%
Case fatality rate in China: 3.9%
Case fatality rate for the rest of the world: 3.5%
As explained above, this number has changed and it will continue to change. It’s currently higher than the estimates of a CFR of around 2% that were published until early February.
As we’ve discussed above, this does not necessarily represent a worsening of the situation: as we saw during the SARS outbreak, the CFR can rise during an outbreak because the outcome of more cases becomes known.
There is no single case fatality rate for a disease – it is context-specific, changing with time and location.
The true total number of cases is likely higher than the number of confirmed cases.
If there are a large number of undiagnosed cases, we would overestimate the probability of dying from this disease. The CFR value would be too high.
If this is the case then the probability of dying from the disease is lower than the measured CFR.
We need to be careful in interpreting the case fatality rate of an ongoing outbreak.
Though they may be now be counted as confirmed cases, those that will go on to die will not yet be included in the current count of the number deaths. This means we would underestimate the eventual case fatality rate of the infected population.
This is what happened during the SARS-CoV outbreak in 2003: the CFR was initially reported to be 3-5% during the early stages of the outbreak, but had risen to around 10% by the end.
The low numbers that were published initially resulted in an underestimate of the severity of the outbreak. And the rise of the CFR over time gave the wrong impression that SARS was becoming more deadly over time.
Kāpēc tu vēl joprojām esi slinks un vnk pasaki, ka manis teiktajam "ir tikai panikas nevis argumenta spēks", nevis sniedz vairāk datu? Papildus datus studijā, lūdzu. Ar vienu raksteli nepietiek. Riski ir pārāk lieli, lai pļāpātu, balstoties uz vienu rakstu.
Būtu jauki, ja kāds nopietnāks cilvēks runātu manā vietā, bet nopietniem cilvēkiem ir citas nopietnākas lietas, ko darīt. Taču pat es spēju piedāvāt vairāk kā vienu avotu, kas dod pamatu šaubām par tevis teikto, piemēram:
https://ourworldindata.org/coronavirus
Daži izvilkumi:
In the period up to and including 15th March 2020, the global Case Fatality Rate for COVID-19 are as follows.
Case fatality rate globally = 3.7%
Case fatality rate in China: 3.9%
Case fatality rate for the rest of the world: 3.5%
As explained above, this number has changed and it will continue to change. It’s currently higher than the estimates of a CFR of around 2% that were published until early February.
As we’ve discussed above, this does not necessarily represent a worsening of the situation: as we saw during the SARS outbreak, the CFR can rise during an outbreak because the outcome of more cases becomes known.
There is no single case fatality rate for a disease – it is context-specific, changing with time and location.
The true total number of cases is likely higher than the number of confirmed cases.
If there are a large number of undiagnosed cases, we would overestimate the probability of dying from this disease. The CFR value would be too high.
If this is the case then the probability of dying from the disease is lower than the measured CFR.
We need to be careful in interpreting the case fatality rate of an ongoing outbreak.
Though they may be now be counted as confirmed cases, those that will go on to die will not yet be included in the current count of the number deaths. This means we would underestimate the eventual case fatality rate of the infected population.
This is what happened during the SARS-CoV outbreak in 2003: the CFR was initially reported to be 3-5% during the early stages of the outbreak, but had risen to around 10% by the end.
The low numbers that were published initially resulted in an underestimate of the severity of the outbreak. And the rise of the CFR over time gave the wrong impression that SARS was becoming more deadly over time.
Nopūsties:
