Why is the death rate higher in Mexico? Maybe it isn't:
Of the 110 million people in Mexico, 1,600 cases have been reported, with about 100 deaths–suggesting a mortality rate of 6 percent. This is almost certainly bad math, as the total case count almost certainly ignores thousands or tens of thousands of other cases that have taken milder courses like those in the United States. It's perfectly conceivable Mexico has actually had 10,000 or 100,000 cases–or even 1 million cases. If so, then the kill rate would be not 6 percent but 0.1 percent (given 10,000 cases) or 0.01 percent (given 100,000 cases). If it's 1 million cases (quite possible if this thing really spreads easily) then the mortality rate is just 1 in 10,000. Meanwhile, because the United States is on high alert–and can take special note of people with recent travel to Mexico–it is probably picking up a fairly high percentage of its cases, including milder instances that would have gone unnoticed in Mexico a few weeks ago.
…For one thing, it's also possible that Mexico is missing, undercounting, or badly underreporting deaths. But if this virus really does spread rapidly, its kill rate is fairly low; and if its kill rate is anywhere near as high as the 100-out-of-1,600 suggests, then it doesn't spread very easily.
Here is the full article.
Addendum: Have the first U.S. deaths arrived?
Socialist statistics bureaucracy meets socialist health care bureaucracy.
most people living in the united states are already dead, and given the fact that the death operator is idempotent, dying from the virus has no effect.
I live in Mexico City.
Ten days ago -the weekend before the media started paying attention to the flu-, me, my wife and my son all had what we tought was an “atypical flu”, characterized by headache, dizzines, fever and thick mucus, just as the simptoms of the swein flu.
Only my son got treated -normal treatment for a regular flu- at an emergency room, because he was the first of us to have symptoms. My wife and I just took aspirines. By the time the media reported the outbreak, we were ok and without simptoms.
Right now at work, I haven´t mentioned the whole thing just to avoid freaking out my coworkers.
The end of this BBC article says that nearly all non-Mexico cases have been mild. A Bloomberg article I read today said only 1 of the 64 Americans has needed hospitalization… so until things change this sounds analogous to freaking out because “64 children contacted chicken pox yesterday!”
I do like the point about the bad math… reminds me of black swan man Taleb’s “silent evidence.”
from the “US Deaths” link, it seems that the answer is no:
[Updated at 2:08 p.m.: The L.A. coroner’s office said this afternoon that further testing indicated neither of two flu-related deaths being investigated in Los Angeles County appeared to be linked to the swine flu. Read full story: Coroner doubts 2 men died of swine flu
i pick an actual reason: altitude. anyone want to pick comorbid lung disease from pollution or smoking ?
I thought the main reason for concern was that otherwise healthier young people were getting a severe flu (one of the main issues with the 1918 pandemic). If that’s the WHO’s issue with this flu I can see the issue.
I knew it all along.
ç¿»è¯|
醫å¸ç¾Žå®¹|
æ±½è»Šå ±å»¢|
ç«¥è£æ‰¹ç™¼|
家教|
催情性藥å“
Comments on this entry are closed.