Since there is no medication for it, "treatment" is strictly palliative, like a ventilator when the lungs have given up.

@AnneWimsey yep, although new courses of treatment are being devised, used, and evaluated daily. that's why it all ties to medical availability.

@JeffMesser ummmm, name one...?

@AnneWimsey find out for yourself. I'm not here to give lessons. I'm tired of arguing about the efficacy of any treatment regimen. different places are doing different things and our ability to exchange notes will help. so I'm not up for the argument here. believe whatever you want.

@JeffMesser when you state "new courses of treatment" you are telling a blatant LIE to buttress your
indefensible position. I call BULLSHIT!

@AnneWimsey then you are rather uninformed.

@JeffMesser twice now I have directly asked you, and you have deflected........you got nothin'

@AnneWimsey and I said go educate yourself.

The testing for infection is so low that we cannot accurately calculate a death rate, especially since many have minimal or no symptoms and do not get tested. 4% is much higher than reality, apparently ten times too high. The calculation is deaths/infections*100%. Without testing we do not know infections.

@EdEarl ummm, almost half a million cases (hospitalized, not total cases!!!) as of yesterday, the 10th, with almost 30,000 deaths...that IS 4+%.

@EdEarl But we can calculate deaths from known infections. So if you display sufficient illness for it to be known, then you have a 19% chance of becoming seriously ill, and a 5% chance of dying. This is indisputable.

@Petter Known infections does not include all infections. The 0.37% figure is closer to calculating death rate for all infections.

The known infections are based on people who seek medical help because they have a fever and perhaps other symptoms (e.g., a dry cough). The test given at this time is designed to detect if the person is currently ill with covid or not. That is a confirmed case.

The test reported by the video is different. It tells whether a person has had covid in the past, recovered, and created antibodies that make him or her immune. It also gives an indication of whether the person is currently ill with covid. A person can have covid and not be sick; thus they would not go fo the most common test to determine if they are ull with covid or something else. People who are not tested are not counted in confirmed casas. The figures for confirmed cases is very low compared to all infections, because not everyone is tested while they are sick. The antibody test that shows immunity from past infection is newer and less used than the test currently used to determine whether a person has covid now.

Ummm, nope, as of April 10, about a 4%+ death rate just in the USA

@AnneWimsey no the doctor has more accurate data.

It is unfortunate he didn't tell the number of deaths in the village where they tested the 1000.

@EdEarl not true, my data comes from WHO & the CDC...his comes outta his ass

@AnneWimsey I believe his figures to be accurate. He is only reporting in this video of testing percentage per 1000. Not death rates.

@AnneWimsey .... and of that 4%, a quarter had no underlying problems, meaning at least a 1% death rate in the USA among healthy people, who were below 65 years of age.

@AnneWimsey His data came from Oxford. There may be flaws in all the reporting, that is why you examine any reputable data!

@Freedompath teeny tiny samples do not science make! Try WHO and/or CDC websites for actual Facts.

@AnneWimsey Now, keep in mind that trump has a ‘toe hold’ with CDC, I could even imagine they are under siege...I hope I am wrong but, trump does ‘whatevet’ comes over him at any given time! Non of our agencies are free from his influence and mostly wrath...I am just saying! I realize that all reports will be updated as time passes. I may never write anything in stone! And, I am becoming more skeptical by the day!

@AnneWimsey The CDC is compromised by Trump. The WHO figures are accurate, but cannot be used to calculate either total infections or death rate vs total infections. I've explained some limitations with "confirmed cases", but have not done it well enough for you to understand. I do not know how to help you understand; thus, there is no piint in continuing. Fin

All we know is tested an confirmed cases, but only a few countries have tested as much as 20% of their population, with most under 10% and some below 1%. If everyone was tested, there would be many more confirmed cases. This data indicates 10X actual infections compared to current confirmed cases.

@EdEarl the "infected" figures are ONLY hospitalizations, (and this probably very low), the death figures are obvious. Facing the truth may be hard, but a damn sight better than burying your head in the sand.

@AnneWimsey The infection figures given by Dr. Campbell do not depend on hospitalizations. They were collected by university researchers. The antibody tests show people who either have had covid in the past and recovered and are now immune, or it shows they are currently are ill with covid, whether they have symptoms or not, and whether they have reported their infection to a doctor or not.

The test given to confirm a person is sick with covid is completely different, and does not indicate that a person had covid, recovered, and is currently immune. All this is explained by Dr. Campbell in the video.

Why should I listen to you? Are you a doctor? Are you doing research on covid with a major university and publishing papers in medical journals? I'm not a doctor and not doing research, but this video was made by a doctor and presented published research done by university researchers.

You didn't show how you got 4%, so I am suspicious of that figure. If you share, I will examine your method. Perhaps you can change my mind.

@EdEarl as of yesterday the 10th...almost 500,000 confirmed cases, almost 30,000 deaths. Simple math =4%+

@AnneWimsey That is simple. What do you want to know? Is it what you are calculating?

Your calculated value confuses me. Deaths from covid occur a week or two after being tested positive and admitted; a more meaningful number would be deaths of people who tested positive on a given day. In other words, compare those who test positive on a given day, e.g., the 1st with future deaths of all those who tested positive on the 1st. That compares apples to apples. If there are a hundred people admitted on the 1st and a thousand on the 15th when the death of someone admitted on the 1st dies, your calculatuon gives confusing results. There are other things that make your calculated number confusing. If you are interested I can explain them.

In the mean time, I'll explain what I'd like in a death rate fron covid. It's simple, if i catch covid what is the probability I'll die?

Your figure is closer to, the probability of if I catch covid, feel sick, and get tested positive will I die? It's not exactly that because you aren't comparing apples to apples.