SARS - what next? Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : SARS - what next?

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Maurice Winn who wrote (771)	10/1/2003 8:46:16 AM
From: Henry Niman	Read Replies (1) of 1070

WHO not only reduced the case fatality rate by changing the definition, they also dropped the total number of SARS cases in Taiwan from 665 to 346. Sounds like patients who were infected with SARS CoV were not considered a SARS case if some other medical diagnosis could be made. Also sounds like administrators have SARS CoV infections and fatalities well under control. I'm sure that friends and relatives of the patients will feel much better when they are told that SARS CoV infections do not mean the patient has SARS and patient deaths are due to chronic diabetes! >===== Original Message From "Henry L Niman, PhD" <henry_niman@hms.harvard.edu> ===== I misread the asterisk. It is actually defined as "Includes only cases whose death is attributed to SARS". I think WHO needs a column for those who died while infected with SARS CoV, regardless of revisions for causes of death.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next