Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Geek Talk & Media
D&D and the rising pandemic
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Celebrim" data-source="post: 7942693" data-attributes="member: 4937"><p>You had the hypothesis: "If 5 times the people have it than are confirmed as having it (presumably most of those cases would be milder) then you have a much lower mortality rate."</p><p></p><p>In other words, you are suggesting that far more than 80% of the cases are mild, and that in fact the outbreaks are 500% large than have been documented. This would suggest that perhaps 96% of the cases are mild, and we are catching only the 4% most severe and only like a 5th of the mild cases. And it's possible to believe that in say the USA where testing has been limited so far, but in cases like South Korea that pattern of the disease is in fact impossible. Because if the disease had that pattern, South Korea with its wide nets of testing would be detecting all of those mild cases. With an R0 that high and a disease spreading that widely, they'd get lower and lower numbers of negative tests. Most tests would be turning up positive. But that isn't being observed. Instead, as they casts their nets wider, they get fewer and fewer positives.</p><p></p><p>And again, in fact R0 was high enough that the disease was spreading everywhere sufficiently to see the real numbers of cases be 5 times that observed, then we'd see very different things than we see. The R0 is in fact fairly well constrained at this point. It might be 2.5, it might be 4, but it very unlikely to be wildly off that.</p><p></p><p>Similarly, so is the mortality rate assuming sufficient care is available. It might be 2%. It might be 3.6%. But it's very unlikely to be wildly off that.</p><p></p><p>Now, left untreated, we have very good reason so suspect that it's much higher than 3.4%. Those numbers assume that those requiring oxygen can receive it. If they can't, experience shows mortality rate shoots up over 5%. And of course, different demographics in a population will effect the observed rate as well.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Well in the sense that we would expect early on in an epidemic if you have spotty documentation for cases to be about 240 times more than deaths if in fact the R0 is around 3, and the mortality rate is around 3.4, and the disease takes 5-7 days to incubate, and then another 12-14 days to become lethal, then yes.</p><p></p><p>However, the R0 and mortality rate that we have are being increasingly tightly constrained.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Celebrim, post: 7942693, member: 4937"] You had the hypothesis: "If 5 times the people have it than are confirmed as having it (presumably most of those cases would be milder) then you have a much lower mortality rate." In other words, you are suggesting that far more than 80% of the cases are mild, and that in fact the outbreaks are 500% large than have been documented. This would suggest that perhaps 96% of the cases are mild, and we are catching only the 4% most severe and only like a 5th of the mild cases. And it's possible to believe that in say the USA where testing has been limited so far, but in cases like South Korea that pattern of the disease is in fact impossible. Because if the disease had that pattern, South Korea with its wide nets of testing would be detecting all of those mild cases. With an R0 that high and a disease spreading that widely, they'd get lower and lower numbers of negative tests. Most tests would be turning up positive. But that isn't being observed. Instead, as they casts their nets wider, they get fewer and fewer positives. And again, in fact R0 was high enough that the disease was spreading everywhere sufficiently to see the real numbers of cases be 5 times that observed, then we'd see very different things than we see. The R0 is in fact fairly well constrained at this point. It might be 2.5, it might be 4, but it very unlikely to be wildly off that. Similarly, so is the mortality rate assuming sufficient care is available. It might be 2%. It might be 3.6%. But it's very unlikely to be wildly off that. Now, left untreated, we have very good reason so suspect that it's much higher than 3.4%. Those numbers assume that those requiring oxygen can receive it. If they can't, experience shows mortality rate shoots up over 5%. And of course, different demographics in a population will effect the observed rate as well. Well in the sense that we would expect early on in an epidemic if you have spotty documentation for cases to be about 240 times more than deaths if in fact the R0 is around 3, and the mortality rate is around 3.4, and the disease takes 5-7 days to incubate, and then another 12-14 days to become lethal, then yes. However, the R0 and mortality rate that we have are being increasingly tightly constrained. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Geek Talk & Media
D&D and the rising pandemic
Top