google translate probably, you should tell google to clean up their grammer haha
So exactly who is making the decision not to test people unless they become symptomatic???
Want to revisit the Diamond Princess Cruiseship:
6 deaths,
3,711 on board,
706 got the virus (19%) according to what??? symptoms or test?
Death rate was 6/(706 or more) <= .8%.
The ages of those who died are mostly in the 80s. It’s my opinion (feel free to argue) that most people taking a cruise, especially during the school year, are going to be older retired people. They’re not the only people, but I’d bet that the ages of people on that ship skewed high.
Of the 300 Americans who were removed, 14 tested positive despite being asymptomatic 2-3 days after the test. (Let’s keep in mind, there may be false negatives and false positives, so I don’t know if that means they were in fact all truly infected).
Assuming perfect tests, that means that there was 5% asymptomatic carriers as the tests were done 2-3 days before people were loaded, and they were loaded only if asymptomatic.
If the tests are mucus/spit tests, a person could’ve caught it and not be shedding and test negative. Certainly there’s a period of time where people can be sick and symptomatic but are not contagious because the body is fighting the illness. In addition, I’ve had a situation where I was taking a high dose Vitamin C while I had Strep throat and tested negative despite having a sore throat and everyone else in my family being positive (and I’ve never tested negative for Strep before despite having it, so I’m not one of those people who always test negative). It’s reasonable to assume more than just 706 people caught it, but that some might have developed or were developing an immunity to it and went undetected simply because they were not contagious. (If the tests were blood-based, then this would be different since it’d be antibody based, but from what I read the tests were spit/mucus.)
So you’ve got less than a 0.85% death rate on a group of people all of whom were tested, skewing high on the age, with likely several more who were infected, but not contagious. But even if you had 10% more who were infected and tested negative, it simply reduces it to 6/776= .77%. But the age group represented is on the older side, so for a total population, the death rate should be lower if Manch’s Chinese CDC stats are even close to correct.
OK. SF’s run of zero cases is about to come to an abrupt end…
We’ve been accepting flights from symptomatic countries. I assumed that it was >0 a while ago.
On the “not to worry” side of the fence:
I don’t mean to laugh, but…
Coming back to SF…
Cruise stocks in the toilet
Cruises are for the newly wed and the nearly dead. Just like golf, I at 66 am too young for cruising. Looks like the cruise business is going to be devastated. Why would anyone on their honeymoon or over eighty want to risk a totally voluntary possible exposure to any risk?
2 Likes
Time to buy.
Uh oh.
School closures:
Local: https://patch.com/california/paloalto/coronavirus-fears-shutter-menlo-school-atherton
1 Like
Prison break came to life:
We are much slower to act than Korea, but with a reasonably well run healthcare system death rate should be much lower than global average.
- Amazon (NASDAQ:AMZN) told employees in Seattle to avoid coming into their offices for the rest of the month after an employee tested positive and Washington state emerged as one of the hardest hit by the coronavirus.
- Facebook (NASDAQ:FB) also confirmedthat a contractor at at its Seattle office was been diagnosed with the disease and it would close that location until March 9.
To be expected. Lots of travel to Asian nations.
Us stay-at-home bumkins in AZ so far have two cases. I believe both are in the Phoenix metro area.
1 Like
I have thought that some of my REITS might be at risk. Prisons and senior centers (I try to make bank off both the young and the old). An outbreak in either would be very expensive. But I haven’t sold any.
1 Like