Why Coronaviral 'Infection Rate' figures are Grossly Inaccurate

The BBC, and other 'news' sources, keep banging on about 'infections rates' with a doomsday focus on how it is rising here and there. It is times like this that gives me the uncomfortable notion that i might be one of the last surviving intelligent lifeforms on the planet. How is it that people are so easily led man? So the BBC keeps harping on how Africa, or India, are going past a million or so infection rates, as if that spells a resounding doom doom doom on the clock of life. What if i told you that they already hit 100 million 2 months ago? Wouldn't you then say, 'oh really? So many cases, and yet so few deaths?' So it is either that i am one of the few intelligent lifeforms left on the planet in a post-apocalyptic world where smartphones are frying to a frizzle lots of minds throughout the world every passing minute, not with its 4g or 5g or whatnot, but with the assimilation of all into a mainstream network of consumeristic nitwits, OR, that the 'news' - pronounced as 'noose' by americans, which might be a Freudian slip - is purposely and purposefully skewing news so as to keep people fearing, subservient and kow-towing like our sino brethren in s.e.asia. Come on, let's not ignore the fact that it is generally only those whom are highly symptomatic who get identified as chinavirus19 carriers, or whom happen to be tested and found to have it even though they are asymptomatic. It basically excludes those who just sniffed a couple of times and then carried on with their day. The Washington Post, for instance, reported that only 40% of those with chinavirus infections have symptoms. But actually no. It is only 40% of those IDENTIFIED to have or have had the virus whom have no symptoms. This figure leaves out, for instance, a 100 times more people whom have not been identified, but who have it, or had it. I'm not trying to say that we ought not to take this latest viral import of China seriously. I'm saying that we should not fear more than we ought. And most importantly, and i'm saying MOST IMPORTANTLY, it is important to use this opportunity to train ourselves into objective thinking by looking at things logically. That is our greatest advantage in fighting off anything, be it in viral or fascist form. Be objective. Alright. Follow the following closely..... Infection rates till now, refer to only those whom have been IDENTIFIED to have the virus. In other words, it actually refers NOT to infection rates, but to Symptomatic or Identified rates - those with or without symptoms and who have been officially diagnosed as having it, or having had it. So Infection rates itself might be, say, Identified rates x 10, or 100 etc. The 'experts' out there can develop a particular way to calculate that on the basis of the study of various populations, and random testing of people to determine how many have had it are fine and dandy, and were not included in the 'infection rates' figure. So it can go like, 'such and such an area has 1000 identified carriers' - and that would be the 'Identified rate'. And in addition to this, they can continue, 'on the basis of random testing of asymptomatic people in that region, it has been determined that 25% of the population have had it but not included in the official 'infection' rates figure. THEN, finally, they can say that for every 1000 identified Symptomatic people, there are 25% people whom have not been identified to have it, but have gotten it, and are fine. The total will make up the Real Infection Rates figure. Till now, the infection rates figure does not include this, so it is pointless, unless it is to discern the correlation between Identified Infection rates and death rates. Yeah, let's call it that - Identified Infection Rates.

'Experts' till now, are talking about how death rates might be underreported here and there, but have not done what they should have done from the start and spoken about how infection rates only refer to Identified Infections, and not Real Infections. The media is having a ball of a time getting clicks on the basis of this oversight and fearmongering due to such an oversight on the part of 'experts'. 

 So the reason why we need to give up the 'infection rates' nonsense is that it overstates and wrongly states, or skews our objective appreciation of the situation. 

 1. We need to give up this erroneous terming so that we can stop fearing, be more positive, engender more objectivity, and like the British like to say, 'Keep calm and carry on'. 

 2. We need to give up this erroneous terming so as to start questioning after what is going into making certain populations less likely to die from this virus. When they say, India has 2 million cases, let's assume its 10million, and then ask why they have so few deaths in relation to infection rates, or why they have so few symptomatic cases in relation to Real Infection Rates (which is reported plus unreported cases together). 

 3. We need to give up this erroneous terming so that we can stop giving credit where it isn't due in assuming that this or that country's 'measures' are fantastic, and which goes into curtailing their Identified Infection Rates, because for all you know, their Real Infection Rates might be a 100 times more, but with few Symptomatics or death rates. 

 4. We need to give up this erroneous terming so that we can avoid being complacent when Identified Infection Rate figures drop to zero. All that means is that many of the more vulnerable have become symptomatic in the past, and not other vulnerable people whom have not been exposed to it via asymptomatic people. 

 5. Finally, with an objective appreciation of the Real Infection Rates, we should appreciate the fact that unless we completely shut the country off from the outside world, and have people observe stay-home measures for the incubatory period, nothing can be done about the spread of the virus, and that Infection Rates only identify those with a weaker immune system whom have got it and not those whom actually have it which might be a 100 times more. 

 This sort of approach gives us more control over the situation and look into other possible factors that might be saving populations rather than what might very well be paltry and pathetic efforts to stop the viral march forward in various countries. I'm not saying that no measures are ineffective. What i'm saying is that we cannot give all credit to such measures and miss out on extraneous factors that might be at play in keeping Symptomatic rates or Death rates low. 

 edX 

#covid19 #chinavirus #chinavirus19 #science #health