Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Deaths are also much lower in the US.


Only vs. China, Iran and Italy. We're within a factor of two (that is, about 5-6 days) of everyone else. A 5-6 day head start is not enough window to save ourselves with a travel ban.

And just like Italy went from "contained" to a country-wide lockdown in the space of a week, so will we at this point. Those tens of thousands of cases are incubating right now and will emerge in the coming days.

This travel ban does nothing.


>Only vs. China, Iran and Italy.

What are you on about? We have fewer deaths than far more countries than that (France and Spain for instance) and per capita we are doing even better.

The US has fewer deaths than the following countries per capita:

Italy, Iran, China, S. Korea, Spain, France, Switzerland, Hong Kong, Albania, Lebanon, Netherlands, Belgium, Panama, Ireland, Iraq, Bulgaria, Japan, Australia, UK

Country Population and coronavirus numbers can be pulled here:

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/


>> Only vs. China, Iran and Italy.

> What are you on about? We have fewer deaths than far more countries than that

You edited out the second sentence. The full quote is:

Only vs. China, Iran and Italy. We're within a factor of two (that is, about 5-6 days) of everyone else.

which is accurate.


Again not even close, France for instance has a death rate 10x ours per capita, that's gonna take way more than 5-6 days.

The statement is inaccurate any way you slice it. Why use incomplete information when more is available?


He didn't say per capita.

The statement was accurate. It may not be a useful metric, but it was an accurate one.


> He didn't say per capita.

But it's also not the case when looking only at absolute numbers either. I would also argue that per capita is implied because it's the only way you can really make that comparison.


The lack of testing must be depressing the death numbers here too.


I’m not sure this is true, as the deaths from coronavirus are distinguishable based on their clinical features, as I understand it (e.g., the chest X-ray of a COVID-19 patient is readily identifiable)


Nobody is giving chest x-rays to older people here who have died, apparently of pneumonia.


I'm not a clinician, but getting to the diagnosis of pneumonia usually involves imaging, as I understand it:

https://www.aafp.org/afp/2011/0601/p1299.html


We're kinda going around in circles here.

In order to not significantly undercount the number of coronavirus deaths attributed to other causes in the US, there would need to be wide-spread testing here... which there isn't.

Imaging (by the way, you're referencing tests on live patients not dead ones) could be used as another kind of coronavirus test, though an extremely inefficient one, so probably is essentially un-used. Anyway, for pneumonia I believe we're talking about x-rays which is poor at distinguishing coronavirus (see link). Not to mention all of this is brand new. So approximately zero Radiologists are trained and using radiology in a clinical setting to diagnose coronavirus in people who have apparently died of pneumonia.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: