Змінюй хід війни! Допомагай ЗСУ!

Коронавирус

  • Автор теми Автор теми Dimoks
  • Дата створення Дата створення

Какой вакциной от коронавируса вы привились?

  • Covishield

    Голосів: 16 1.4%
  • Coronavac

    Голосів: 165 14.1%
  • AstraZeneca

    Голосів: 52 4.4%
  • Pfizer

    Голосів: 339 28.9%
  • Johnson & Johnson

    Голосів: 12 1.0%
  • Moderna

    Голосів: 123 10.5%
  • Ещё не сделал прививку от коронавируса

    Голосів: 249 21.2%
  • Делать прививку от коронавируса не буду

    Голосів: 216 18.4%

  • Кількість людей, що взяли участь в опитувані
    1172
всё зависит от плотности населения. Если смотреть на NY, там плотность очень высокая, а немного отъехал от мегаполиса - в штате Нью Джерси в целом плотность довольно низкая. Плюс к этому международные переезды, чем более развита страна, тем больше у неё контактов с другими странами.

Соответственно в густонаселённых местах с большим потоком туристов и бизнесменов риск и скорость распространения вируса выше.

причём тут распространение? я говорю о проценте выживания УЖЕ заразившихся. В одних странах из заразившихся умерло 5%, а в других 33% - я об этом говорю. Разницу чувствуете где 5 а где 33?
 
Японская компьютерная игра, в которой нужно контролировать социальное дистанцирование населения :-)

 
причём тут распространение? я говорю о проценте выживания УЖЕ заразившихся. В одинх странах из заразившихся умерло 5%, а в других 33% - я об этом говорю. Разницу чувствуете где 5 а где 33?

Это не совсем процент выживания. Это скорее процент отражающий скорость заражения. Чем выше скорость заражения, тем больше будет этот процент смертей относительно выздоровевших. Процент выживания станет ясен после завершения эпидемии, когда будет ясна статистика по тем, кто ещё болеет. А пока это скорее индикатор оценки смертности.

Пока что процент смертей можно оценивать только по Китаю, где эпидемия закончилась и все уже выздоровели, там процент смертей 6%. Но это не значит, что в других странах процент смертей будет такой-же. Не везде медицина и технологии такие-же высокие как в Китае. Есть и много других факторов.

Например чем хуже соблюдается карантин, тем больше будет смертей и дольше прийдётся сохранять карантинные меры.
 
Это не совсем процент выживания. Это скорее процент отражающий скорость заражения. Чем выше скорость заражения, тем больше будет этот процент смертей относительно выздоровевших. Процент выживания станет ясен после завершения эпидемии, когда будет ясна статистика по тем, кто ещё болеет.

т.е. хошь сказать, что если человек заразился и ему не суждено выжить, он умерает относительно за короткий промежуток времени, а выздоравливает долго. И из за этого статистический перекос?
 
Доказательства "матового стекла"

⚠ Тільки зареєстровані користувачі бачать весь контент та не бачать рекламу.

Chest CT Findings in Cases from the Cruise Ship “Diamond Princess” with Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19)
Results

Of 104 cases, 76 (73%) were asymptomatic, 41 (54%) of which had lung opacities on CT. Other 28 (27%) cases were symptomatic, 22 (79%) of which had abnormal CT findings. Symptomatic cases showed lung opacities and airway abnormalities on CT more frequently than asymptomatic cases [lung opacity; 22 (79%) vs 41 (54%), airway abnormalities; 14 (50%) vs 15 (20%)]. Asymptomatic cases showed more GGO over consolidation (83%), while symptomatic cases more frequently showed consolidation over GGO (41%). The CT severity score was higher in symptomatic cases than asymptomatic cases, particularly in the lower lobes [symptomatic vs asymptomatic cases; right lower lobe: 2 ± 1 (0-4) vs 1 ± 1 (0-4); left lower lobe: 2 ± 1 (0-4) vs 1 ± 1 (0-3); total score: 7 ± 5 (1-17) vs 4 ± 2 (1-11)].
Conclusion

This study documented a high incidence of subclinical CT changes in cases with COVID-19. Compared to symptomatic cases, asymptomatic cases showed more GGO over consolidation and milder extension of disease on CT.

An earlier incorrect version appeared online. This article was corrected on April 8, 2020.
Summary

We revealed a high incidence of subclinical CT changes in COVID-19 infected cases, which showed more GGO predominance over consolidation and milder severity on CT than symptomatic cases.
Key Points

■ Of 104 cases analyzed, 76 (73%) were asymptomatic, 41 (54%) of which had pneumonic changes on CT. Other 28 (27%) cases were symptomatic, 22 (79%) of which had abnormal CT findings.

■ Asymptomatic cases showed more GGO predominance over consolidation (83%), while symptomatic cases were more likely to show a consolidation predominance over GGO (41%).

■ Asymptomatic cases showed milder CT severity score than symptomatic cases.

Introduction

The respiratory infection caused by a new strain of coronavirus not previously identified in humans, SARS-CoV-2, has received the name of Coronavirus Disease 2019, COVID-19 (1). Originally reported in December 2019 as “pneumonia of unknown cause” in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China, COVID-19 has spread rapidly and progressively to other regions of China as well as adjacent Asian countries (2). The International Health Regulations Emergency Committee of the World Health Organization officially declared the outbreak a “public health emergency of international concern” on January 30, 2020, and the disease was declared pandemic on March 11, 2020.

Recently, the international cruise ship “Diamond Princess”, carrying about 3,700 passengers, temporarily became the largest cluster of COVID-19 cases outside China (3). The cruise ship docked at Yokohama Bay, Japan, on February 3, 2020, and after quarantine, passengers started to disembark on February 14, 2020. The Ministry of Health, Labor, and Welfare from Japan reported that of the 1,723 national passengers, a cumulative number of 454 cases were recognized as pathogen carriers on real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), including 189 asymptomatic cases who initially tested negative on February 17, 2020. During and after the quarantine period, passengers and crew members were referred to the Japan Self-Defense Forces Central Hospital by the government.

The clinical course and spectrum of radiological patterns seen in COVID-19 have gradually become apparent with recent publications; however, most publications have been focused on symptomatic cases occurring in China (9, 13, 15-19). This prompted us to undertake the present study to retrospectively evaluate the computed tomographic (CT) findings in laboratory-confirmed cases of COVID-19, conveniently sampled from the passengers and crew members of the “Diamond Princess” cruise ship in Japan. We specifically compared the radiological findings of COVID-19 infection between asymptomatic and symptomatic cases.
Materials and Methods
Cases

This study was approved by the Institutional ethics review board, and written informed consent was obtained from all cases. In this retrospective study, the medical records were reviewed for clinical and imaging findings of cases diagnosed with COVID-19 from February 7th to 28th, 2020. Passengers and crew members of the “Diamond Princess” cruise ship underwent RT-PCR during the quarantine period, and those who showed positive results were transferred to hospitals in Japan. Among all RT-PCR positive cases from the cruise ship, asymptomatic, mildly symptomatic, or familial clusters with infection among relatives were admitted to the Japan Self-Defense Forces Central Hospital (Tokyo, Japan) for further investigation. Consecutive cases from this single-center cohort who had confirmed COVID-19 infection and underwent chest CT were included. Those who showed negative results on RT-PCR underwent repeat RT-PCR examination. On admission, all cases underwent chest CT irrespective of the RT-PCR results, based on the following grounds: (1) a previous report describing positive CT findings in cases with RT-PCR positive status without symptoms (4, 5), (2) previous reports of person-to-person transmission from asymptomatic cases (6-8), and (3) the need to judge the precaution level necessary on admission to prevent nosocomial infection in the hospital. Based on our previous experience, CT parameters were optimized to minimize patient exposure to radiation as detailed below.
Clinical Data

The following data were extracted from the medical records: demographic data, medical history, presence or absence of underlying comorbidities, symptoms, and signs. Cases were classified as symptomatic if they had any signs or symptoms of pneumonia, including fever (>37.5℃), cough, dyspnea, and fatigue on admission. Otherwise, cases were classified as asymptomatic.
Chest CT Acquisition

Non-enhanced chest CT was performed using a 6-row multi-detector CT unit (SOMATOM Emotion 6 scanner; Siemens, Tokyo, Japan) on admission with the following parameters: tube voltage, 130 kVp; effective current 95 mA; collimation, 6×2 mm, helical pitch, 1.4. Acquisition parameters were modified to minimize patient radiation exposure while maintaining sufficient resolution for chest CT evaluation. Based on measurements of the dosimetry phantom (diameter 32 cm, length 35 cm) under automatic exposure control (CARE Dose4D; Siemens, Tokyo, Japan), the radiation exposure of each subject was estimated to be less than 2.8 mSv. CT images were acquired during a single inspiratory breath-hold to minimize motion artifacts. A 2.0-mm gapless section was reconstructed before being reviewed on the picture archiving and communication system (PACS) monitor.
Image Analysis

Image analysis was performed independently by three chest radiologists (A. F., M. J., and S.I. with 31, 19 and 6 years of experience, respectively), who were blinded to the clinical data, followed by joint consensus. The chest CT findings were recorded based on the Fleischner Society glossary of terms (9-12). Parameters evaluated included: the presence or absence of ground-glass opacity (GGO), consolidation, intra- or interlobular septal thickening, linear opacities (including subpleural curvilinear opacities), and “reversed halo” sign. According to the proportion of each pattern in comparison with the totality of the lung opacification, cases were classified as GGO dominant or consolidation dominant, if the proportion of each one of the patterns was respectively greater than 50% of the total (13). Zonal distribution patterns of the lesion were visually classified as peripheral predominant (involving mainly the peripheral one-third of the lung), central or peribronchovascular predominant, or mixed (without predilection for subpleural or central region) (14).

The number of lobes involved and laterality of lung abnormalities were determined. A semi-quantitative scoring system was used to quantitatively estimate the pulmonary involvement of all these abnormalities on the basis of the percentage of the total lung involved per lobe (9, 15). The extension of the lung opacification was visually scored from 0 to 5 as follows: score 1, 1-5% involvement; score 2, 6-25% involvement; score 3; 26-50% involvement; score 4, 51-75% involvement; score 5, 76-100% involvement. Total lung scores were calculated as the sum of individual lobe scores.

The presence or absence of pleural effusion, thoracic lymphadenopathy (as defined by lymph node size of ≥ 10mm in short-axis dimension), airway abnormalities (i.e. airway wall thickening, bronchiectasis, and endoluminal secretions), and any underlying lung disease, including emphysema or fibrosis was also recorded.
Statistics

Statistical analysis was done using the SPSS 11.0 statistical software program (Dr. SPSS II for Windows, standard version 11.0; SPSS Inc, Chicago, IL, USA). Quantitative variables were expressed as mean±standard deviation (range), and the categorical variables were presented as the percentage of the total. The comparisons of categorical data were evaluated using Pearson χ2 test and non-paired quantitative data using the Mann-Whitney U test, according to the normal distribution assessed by the Shapiro-Wilk test. Statistical significance level was set at p <0.05.
Results
Clinical Findings

Demographics and clinical characteristics of the study population are summarized in Table 1. The study population comprised 104 cases (54 men, mean age, 60 years ± 17, range: 31-87; 50 women, 63 years ± 15, range: 25-93). Of these cases, 76 (73%) were asymptomatic and 28 (27%) cases were symptomatic. The most frequent symptoms on admission were cough (20 [19%] cases), fever (11 [11%] cases), and fatigue (10 [10%] cases).
Chest CT Findings

The frequencies of the major chest CT findings of all cases are summarized in Table 2. Abnormal lung opacities (GGO and/or consolidation) and airway abnormalities (bronchiectasis and/or bronchial wall thickening) were present in 63 (61%) and 29 (28%) of the whole cohort, respectively. Lung opacities on CT were found in 41 (54%) of 76 asymptomatic. Twenty-two (79%) of 28 symptomatic cases had abnormal CT findings consistent with viral pneumonia. Comparing the two groups, symptomatic cases showed lung parenchymal and airway abnormalities on CT more frequently than did asymptomatic cases [symptomatic vs asymptomatic, lung opacity: 22 (79%) vs 41 (54%), p=0.023; airway lesion: 14 (50%) vs 15 (20%), p<0.002]. No significant differences in age, *** distribution, or comorbidities were identified between symptomatic and asymptomatic cases. Representative CT patterns of asymptomatic cases are shown in Figures 1-3.
ryct.2020200110.fig1.gif

Figure 1. A 70-year-old asymptomatic woman. On axial CT image, focal subpleural ground-glass opacities with smooth intralobular and interlobular smooth septal thickening were demonstrated in the right and left lower lobes (arrow). The left lower lobe lesion was accompanied by air bronchogram with mild bronchial dilation (arrowhead).
ryct.2020200110.fig2a.gif

Figure 2a. A 66-year-old asymptomatic woman. On axial CT images, focal rounded ground-glass opacities with partial consolidation in a peribronchial and subpleural distribution were noted in the right upper (a), middle (b) and lower (c) and left lower (b) lobes.
ryct.2020200110.fig2b.gif

Figure 2b. A 66-year-old asymptomatic woman. On axial CT images, focal rounded ground-glass opacities with partial consolidation in a peribronchial and subpleural distribution were noted in the right upper (a), middle (b) and lower (c) and left lower (b) lobes.
ryct.2020200110.fig2c.gif

Figure 2c. A 66-year-old asymptomatic woman. On axial CT images, focal rounded ground-glass opacities with partial consolidation in a peribronchial and subpleural distribution were noted in the right upper (a), middle (b) and lower (c) and left lower (b) lobes.
ryct.2020200110.fig3a.gif

Figure 3a. A 73-year-old asymptomatic woman. On axial CT images, focal peripheral ground-glass opacities with intralobular and interlobular smooth septal thickening were shown in the left (a, arrow) and right upper lobe (a, arrowhead). The right upper lobe lesions were accompanied by subpleural curvilinear lines (a, arrow). Diffuse ground-glass (reticular) opacities with consolidation with bronchiectasis and bronchial wall thickening were demonstrated in the left and right lower lobes (b, c).
ryct.2020200110.fig3b.gif

Figure 3b. A 73-year-old asymptomatic woman. On axial CT images, focal peripheral ground-glass opacities with intralobular and interlobular smooth septal thickening were shown in the left (a, arrow) and right upper lobe (a, arrowhead). The right upper lobe lesions were accompanied by subpleural curvilinear lines (a, arrow). Diffuse ground-glass (reticular) opacities with consolidation with bronchiectasis and bronchial wall thickening were demonstrated in the left and right lower lobes (b, c).
ryct.2020200110.fig3c.gif

Figure 3c. A 73-year-old asymptomatic woman. On axial CT images, focal peripheral ground-glass opacities with intralobular and interlobular smooth septal thickening were shown in the left (a, arrow) and right upper lobe (a, arrowhead). The right upper lobe lesions were accompanied by subpleural curvilinear lines (a, arrow). Diffuse ground-glass (reticular) opacities with consolidation with bronchiectasis and bronchial wall thickening were demonstrated in the left and right lower lobes (b, c).
CT patterns were compared between asymptomatic and symptomatic cases who had positive lung parenchymal CT findings. The results are summarized in Table 3. Of 41 asymptomatic cases with lung opacities on CT, 17 (41%) cases had pure GGO, 7 (17%) GGO with intra- and interlobular septal thickening without consolidation, and 17 (41%) GGO with consolidation. Of 22 symptomatic cases who had lung opacities on CT, 5 (23%) cases had pure GGO, 4 (18%) GGO with intra- and interlobular septal thickening and without consolidation and 13 (59%) GGO with consolidation. In terms of the predominance of the lung parenchymal findings, asymptomatic cases showed GGO predominance over consolidation, while symptomatic cases were more likely to show consolidation predominance over GGO [asymptomatic vs symptomatic cases; GGO predominance: 34 (83%) vs 13 (59%); consolidation predominance: 7 (17%) vs 9 (41%), p=0.038]. In terms of the number of lesions, asymptomatic cases had a single lesion in 9 (22%) and more than 2 in 32 (78%) cases, compared to symptomatic cases, who had a single lesion in 4 (18%) and more than 2 in 18 (82%) cases. In terms of the axial distribution, more than half of the cases in each group showed a peripheral dominant distribution [24 (59%) asymptomatic vs 11 (50%) symptomatic cases]. On the other hand, only asymptomatic cases [4 (10%) cases] showed a central dominant distribution with single or multiple rounded GGO in one or multiple lobes. Symptomatic cases were more likely to show a mixed distribution (coexisting peripheral and central distribution) than asymptomatic cases [11 (50%) symptomatic vs 13 (32%) asymptomatic cases]. In both groups, the lower lobes were the most frequently affected; left and right lower lobe involvement were present in 17 (77%) and 17 (77%) of symptomatic cases and in 29 (71%) and 29 (71%) of asymptomatic cases. In addition, more than 2 lung lobes were affected in more than 75% of cases and bilateral lungs in more than 80% in both clinical groups. The CT severity score was significantly higher in symptomatic cases than asymptomatic cases in the right and left lower lobes and overall lung [symptomatic vs asymptomatic cases; right lower lobe: 2 ± 1 (0-4) vs 1 ± 1 (0-4), p=0.048; left lower lobe: 2 ± 1 (0-4) vs 1 ± 1 (0-3), p=0.019; total lung score: 7 ± 5 (1-17) vs 4 ± 2 (1-11), p=0.025].
ryct.2020200110.tbl3.png

Airway abnormalities included dilated bronchi in association with GGO or consolidation (i.e., as “air bronchograms”), without airway secretions. Cavitation, thoracic lymphadenopathy and pleural effusion were not observed.
Discussion

In this study, we investigated the chest CT findings in laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 cases in an environmentally homogenous cohort of cruise ship passengers and crew members, comparing the CT characteristics of asymptomatic and symptomatic cases. Although lung parenchymal and airway abnormalities were more frequent in symptomatically than asymptomatic cases, noticeably, we found lung parenchymal changes on CT in up to 54% of the asymptomatic cases. In those who showed CT abnormalities, asymptomatic cases showed significantly predominance of GGO, while consolidation was predominant in symptomatic cases. Similarly, the CT severity score was significantly higher in symptomatic cases than asymptomatic cases in both lower lobes and on total lung assessment.

Although various CT findings were observed in cases with COVID-19, we found several common characteristic CT patterns, such as (1) single or multiple half-round or rectangular-shaped GGO in subpleural area with or without intra- or interlobular septal thickening (Figure 1), (2) single or multiple rounded GGO in both peribronchial and subpleural areas (Figure 2), (3) bilateral diffuse or multiple patchy GGO with or without intra- or interlobular septal thickening or consolidation in both peribronchial and subpleural areas, with a lower lobe predilection (Figure3). Dilated bronchi were frequently associated with all of these CT patterns. These observations are mostly consistent with those of previous studies from China (9, 13, 15-19). All of the above-described characteristic CT patterns were found in both groups. However, differences were observed in the extension of the lung involvement as calculated by the mean CT severity score. The maximum total lung CT score was 11 in asymptomatic cases and 17 in symptomatic cases. In addition, the predominance of opacities also differed between the two groups; GGO was predominant in asymptomatic cases, whereas consolidation was predominant in symptomatic cases.

Some studies have reported clinical-radiological dissociation in COVID-19 (20). For instance, several previous reports described asymptomatic cases who had evidence of lung opacities on chest CT (4, 5, 13). These observations have been confirmed by the results of the present study, highlighting the relative high prevalence of CT abnormalities even in asymptomatic cases. The presence of the subclinical CT findings in COVID-19 is an enigma. To the best of our knowledge, such cases with subclinical CT abnormalities have not been reported in either Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS-CoV) or Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS-Cov) infection. Several hypotheses could explain this discrepancy. One possibility is that these cases have developed immunity against SARS-CoV-2 due to re-infection, leading to subclinical presentation. Such a case of relapse was reported from China and a suspected case of re-infection from Japan (21, 22). Other possibilities are that such cases are still in the healing phase of COVID-19, and the symptoms may have already subsided by the time of admission and CT scan. However, the lack of typical characteristic of the healing stage of COVID-19 pneumonia have not been frequently observed (e.g., perilobular pattern), weakening this hypothesis (9, 19). Other possibilities include a discrepancy between the timing of CT positivity and clinical symptoms like in other types of pneumonia. The clinical-radiological dissociation noted in many of COVID-19 cases in this cohort is a conundrum that still needs further investigation.

RT-PCR is currently considered as the gold standard diagnostic method for COVID-19. However, the sensitivity of this method in throat swabs in COVID-19 is around 59% (23). To date, in several studies the sensitivity of chest CT has exceeded that of RT-PCR, and the authors emphasized the potential of chest CT as the primary screening tool for COVID-19 (24, 25). The sensitivity of chest CT is unquestionable and encouraged for cases where there is need to determine the extension of disease and alternative diagnoses. The results of this study, however, do not directly allow the conclusion that all persons with positive RT-PCR findings should undergo chest CT for screening purposes. Before arriving at any such conclusion, the bioactivity and clinical impact of asymptomatic CT findings in COVID-19 infection will have to be investigated. One important issue is the need to distinguish the natural history of symptomatic and asymptomatic COVID-19 cases presenting with CT abnormalities, including the potential for infectivity and progression to acute severe respiratory distress. More appropriate use of CT will be possible when this information becomes available.

This study has various limitations. First, it included only adult cases. Second, because it included only passengers and crew members of a cruise ship, we acknowledge a selection bias. However, this environmentally homogeneous cohort enabled an investigation that eliminates other potential geographic confounders.

In conclusion, this study documented a high incidence of subclinical CT changes in COVID-19. Asymptomatic cases showed more GGO over consolidation and milder extension of lung parenchymal opacities. Further studies still are warranted to uncover the underlying mechanism responsible for the clinical-radiological dissociation seen in some of asymptomatic COVID-19 cases, as well as to determine the impact of these findings on clinical decision-making.
Disclosure of Conflicts of Interest: No financial conflicts of interest to disclose with regard to this study.
Article History
Published online: Mar 17 2020
 
причём тут распространение? я говорю о проценте выживания УЖЕ заразившихся. В одинх странах из заразившихся умерло 5%, а в других 33% - я об этом говорю. Разницу чувствуете где 5 а где 33?
Процент зависит от тестирования.
В некоторых странах тестируют очень много, отслеживают контакты, находят большинство случаев заражения .
Там где очень много зараженных - тестируют только тех кого необходимо госпитализировать, большинство легких случаев заболевания не попадают в статистику (а их примерно 80%).

К тому же бывают разные стадии эпидемии.
Там где заболеваемость растет - процент выздовевших низкий.
Там где заболеваемость падает - соотвественно выше процент выздоровевших.
 
Упс...
⚠ Тільки зареєстровані користувачі бачать весь контент та не бачать рекламу.


Rockefeller университет, его лидеры и факультет не разделяют мнение Кнута Виттковски по поводу социальной изоляции и стадного иммунитета.
Виттковски работал в Rockefeller университете как биостатистик. Он никогда не был профессором в Rockefeller университете.
Теоретически этот дедок может и прав.А вот на практике,учитывая реалии(менталитет населения,уровень медицины,экономического развития
etc.) ,наверное, вряд ли...Особенно порадовало ключевое слово - этот вирус НЕМНОГО хуже обычного орви(с).И как я поняла ,он переболел бессимптомно.
 
Пока что такой процент смертей можно оценивать только по Китаю, где эпидемия закончилась и все уже выздоровели, там процент смертей 6%. Но это не значит, что в других странах процент смертей будет такой-же. Не везде мидцина и технологии такие-же высокие, как в Китае.

Я это понимаю что процент будет разный в разных странах - зависит от многих факторов. Но не на столько.
Естессно во многих сранах это процент будет больше ну пусть в 2 раза, ну пусть даже в нереальные 3. Но не в 6 же раз!
 
т.е. хошь сказать, что если человек заразился и ему не суждено выжить, он умерает относительно за короткий промежуток времени, а выздоравливает долго. И из за этого статистический перекос?


тут много скрытых факторов. Этот показатель довольно близок к реальной картине. По крайней мере для SARS-1 он показывает довольно близкую к реальности картину. Но не всегда. Если скорость заражения слишком высока, а скорость выздоровления слишком низка, то этот показатель может давать сильное завышение. Во время эпидемии нет способов получить точное значение.
 
Естессно во многих сранах это процент будет больше ну пусть в 2 раза, ну пусть даже в нереальные 3. Но не в 6 же раз!

может и в десятки и в сотни раз отличаться. Например если в одной стране карантин не соблюдают, высокая плотность населения никакая медицина и малая ёмкость больниц, а в другой всё наоборот, то можно и разницу в тысячи раз получить :)
 
Особенно порадовало ключевое слово - этот вирус НЕМНОГО хуже обычного орви.
К сожалению, намного хуже.
От гриппа каждый год умирает по самым пессимистичным оценкам 650 тысяч
Это 0.008% населения.
По разным странам можено смотреть - в самый худший год в некоторых странах может быть до 0.02% смертность - это потолок смертности от гриппа.

От коронавируса в Италии уже умерло во многих муниципалитетах более 1% населения, в среднем по провинции Бергамо - 0.4%

По Нью Йорку получается смертность примерно 1% (на сегодня примерно 0.2% умерших, и результатыт тестов на антитела показывают что примерно пятая часть ньюйкорцев уже переболели).

Сравните 0.008% и 1% - в 125 раз более смертелен коронавирус чем грипп.
Или хотя бы 0.008% и 0.4% - в 50 раз более смертелен коронавирус чем грипп.
0.4% - это самый оптимистичный подсчет, если нет никакой перегрузки медицины, почти к каждому заболевшему успевает скорая и хватает мест в больнице и аппаратов ИВЛ
1% - это более реальная цифра в странах с достаточным количеством пожилого населения.
 
К сожалению, намного хуже.
От гриппа каждый год умирает по самым пессимистичным оценкам 650 тысяч
Это 0.008% населения.
По разным странам можено смотреть - в самый худший год в некоторых странах может быть до 0.02% смертность - это потолок смертности от гриппа.

От коронавируса в Италии уже умерло во многих муниципалитетах более 1% населения, в среднем по провинции Бергамо - 0.4%

По Нью Йорку получается смертность примерно 1% (на сегодня примерно 0.2% умерших, и результатыт тестов на антитела показывают что примерно пятая часть ньюйорцев уже переболели).

Сравните 0.008% и 1% - в 125 раз более смертелен коронавирус чем грипп.
Или хотя бы 0.008% и 0.4% - в 50 раз более смертелен коронавирус чем грипп.
То был сарказм.Уже отредактировала.
 
Пока что процент смертей можно оценивать только по Китаю, где эпидемия закончилась и все уже выздоровели, там процент смертей 6%.
Какие нахер 6%? Синьхуа ж писали что 480 тысяч переболевших не были включены в официальную статистику в связи с тем, что не отвечали диагностическим критериям по тяжести болезни. За пару дней до этого они "вспомнили" про дополнительно 1200 умерших. Но умерших все трупометрические сайты включили в свою статистику, а 480К переболевших "аккуратно забыли" почему-то (хотя понятно почему).
Если посчитать с учетом них, то выходит 560000 переболело и 4600 умерло. Итого летальность чуть менее 1%, что и наблюдается многими.
 
Если посчитать с учетом них, то выходит 560000 переболело и 4600 умерло. Итого летальность чуть менее 1%, что и наблюдается многими.

ну это всё вилами по воде писано, бабушка гадала, да надвое сказала - то ли дождь, то ли снег, то ли будет, то ли нет :D

А по официальной статистике 6 %
 
ну это всё вилами по воде писано, бабушка гадала, да надвое сказала - то ли дождь, то ли снег, то ли будет, то ли нет :D

А по официальной статистике 6 % :)
Официально и в Туркменистане вируса нет, так что с того? Нужно быть идиотом чтобы верить официальным источникам стран вроде Китая.
 
Напоминаю школьный курс биологии. Мутации не бывают направленными и их невозможно такими сделать. Они случайны. Поэтому утверждения типа того, что муиации проектируются с заранее ожидаемым результатом - это бред полный.
 
Саша, если и есть в теме провокатор - то это ты. )))
А я - объясняю на пальцах людям то чему нас учили на спецкафедрах ОМП как кадровых офицеров советского ХВВКУ для организации защиты л\с части и помощи гражданскому ГО в слдучае применения противником биологического ОМП.
***не вас там учили, да и ту ты забыл.
 
Официально и в Туркменистане вируса нет, так что с того? Нужно быть идиотом чтобы верить официальным источникам стран вроде Китая.

смотря с какой стороны посмотреть, в США вон уже ходили разговорчики о конфискации долга США Китаю в качестве компенсации за утаивание информации об опасности коронавируса. Для Китая это ****, так что не в их интересах утаивать
 
Я блин эти книжки с номерами вытесненными (которые для спецпользования) читал. Благо их полно брошенных осталось. Ниче там нет секретного, сейчас нагуглить можно в разы больше.
Просто в советской армии конструкция даже электрической лампочки была секретной, а на военных кафедрах бухарь-препод рассказывал про секретные и опасные компоненты лампочки, два "В": вольфрам и вакуум. После в воспаленном мозгу тех, кто на них учился рождались вакуумные бомбы с ***ким вакуумом внутри )))
Это аллегория, если что.
 
Назад
Зверху Знизу