More about COVID-19

More about COVID-19

By ilnegro | ilnegro | 6 Apr 2020


351665157-7e2272d6a3efe5b157a171410831e37a72e6f306fd5ec12736870d91f4d7da3b.gif

 

I return to the subject COVID-19, the disease of which, willy-nilly, we are talking about.

I have already talked about it here.

There are two aspects that I would like to expand on.
The first concerns the phenomenon of the interference between flu vaccines and other respiratory diseases.

In my previous post I mentioned a study, anyone can easily find many, I want to mention two more here, the first ones I found:

Here is one where it states:

Temporary nonspecific immunity would lead to a higher risk of noninfluenza respiratory virus infections among vaccine recipients.

Here's another one:

In that study, influenza vaccination appeared to be associated with an increased risk of non-influenza respiratory virus infections, which is consistent with temporary non-specific immunity. In a separate placebo-controlled trial of influenza vaccination, we reported that recipients of influenza vaccine had
significantly higher risk of non-influenza respiratory virus infections.

What I want to point out is that, as is obvious and intuitive, an influenza vaccination tends to leave, so to speak, more space for other viral infections that are not covered by the vaccination itself, both variants of the same virus not covered, and other viruses, such as, for example, coronaviruses.

Obviously, even these researches, like all those available, CANNOT refer to the virus responsible for COVID-19, but make clear how such an interference is highly plausible, although, it certainly cannot be demonstrated.

Another aspect that I would like to address is that of data reliability.

Given that the trust in the data from China for me, as for many in the West, is rather low, however, it should be noted that unofficial Chinese sources speak openly of at least 40,000 deaths in the city of Wuhan alone.

Moving from China to another country that personally leaves me somewhat perplexed about the reliability of the data, Germany, I am thinking, for example, of the Volkswagen case or the Deutsche Bank one, I only point out these two articles which, in my opinion, reading between the lines reveal two aspects:

  • Germany has been the center of the epidemic in Europe and this disease has been in Germany for several months
  •  
  • The number of sick and dead in Germany is intentionally or involuntarily largely underestimated.

Flu in Germany
Not only Coronavirus

I summarize the reasons, valid for all, including Italy, for which, however, the data are unreliable.

The number of positives depends on the number of swabs made, on the type of laboratory analysis, on whether swabs are made even post-mortem or not, on whether it is correctly assessed whether COVID-19 is a contributing cause, the main cause or how much it affected the death of a patient anyway.

For this reason I modified my table trying to take into account only the fairly certain data, which, in my opinion, are three:

  • beginning of the epidemic in that country
  • number of deaths
  • population

The population is a given, for European countries quite reliable.

The beginning of the epidemic, excluding Germany, I consider it a fairly reliable figure.

In my opinion the number of deaths is not entirely reliable and it is not at all in the case of Germany, but it is quite indicative.

In the case of Italy we now know with great reliability that for the province of Lodi and Bergamo the death toll is largely underestimated, overall, i.e. at national level, I believe that the number of official deaths in Italy is higher than that declared but in any case not so as to completely distort the validity of the data.

Having said this, I hypothesized a trend of the bell epidemic, obviously how flat this bell is questionable, I have taken an average figure, thus extrapolating a forecast taking into account the "stage" of the epidemic in the individual country, that is, who would appear later probably faced with a certain trend, those who are further back will have to see a greater rise, so I related the mortality rate to the total population, not believing the data on the positive and made a prediction on the total deaths and, consequently, on the relationship between the total deaths and the population at the end of the epidemic.

This is still a rough version, but I think it is a good start and then work on it.

X7oNQmq0-image.png

 

  •  

ilnegro
ilnegro

I was born, I am currently alive, sooner or later I will die


ilnegro
ilnegro

ilnegro

Send a $0.01 microtip in crypto to the author, and earn yourself as you read!

20% to author / 80% to me.
We pay the tips from our rewards pool.