Quote:
Originally Posted by Harvey Specter
I wouldn't hang on every word and number the WHO is reporting. Go back and look at the numbers they reported for the Ebola outbreak, they were way way off and anyone that challenged them during that outbreak was called a conspiracy nutjob.
|
I've been pulling info from this thread, though some of that may have come from the WHO one way or another. The numbers are artificially low out of China and now Italy as well since they stopped recording deaths in nursing homes.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CivicBlues
Ninety Five Percent? Where did you pull that number out of? I've seen projections of 30-70% but never any numbers approaching 95%, that's some nice alarmism there.
|
That was the number I saw earlier in this thread, I don't recall who posted it or what the source was. If the thread wasn't 105 pages long I'd go back and find it.
Even at "only" 30-70% getting infected, with no action and how the US is they're likely to be at the higher end of that. Hard to say thus far how that number splits into asymptomatic/mild symptoms vs severe cases but you're still going to end up with a large number of people out of action for quite a while and a lot of people dead if you dump them all on the health system at the same time.
327 million people x (30 to 70%) = 98 to 229 million infected. Say 1 in 10 has a severe reaction, that's 9.8 to 22.9 million.