SI
SI
discoversearch

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.
Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Crony who wrote (702633)2/1/2020 8:02:20 PM
From: skinowski2 Recommendations

Recommended By
lightshipsailor
Stock Puppy

  Read Replies (1) of 793964
 
So the most logical thing to do is to sit home and go to a hospital only when one feels really bad.

It’s a conundrum. Some people would go to a hospital out of fear - or wanting to protect the people around them. And yes, in the hospital they may contract the disease even if they didn't have it previously.

You make very sensible points... I’m aware that we still know very little about the nature and the epidemiology of the disease. It may yet blow up into something very bad... hope this doesn’t happen.

The true incidence is probably a lot higher than the number of “confirmed” cases.

To check a large number of people randomly would help discover the true prevalence of the virus in the community... but it sounds like they have their hands full taking care of those who may be sick or dying.

Ultimately, I think the key issue is - how truly bad is the disease. It is possible that we know about the sickest “tip of the iceberg” - and that in most cases it’s not nearly as fatal. At this point we don’t know.

Fatality rate among “confirmed” cases should drift down, as more people are diagnosed - and if the disease is not as bad as feared.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext