wired.com/story/coronavirus-… scientificamerican.com/artic…
You didn’t read the article? 🤷🏼‍♂️
But we’re ignoring the rate of spread and the death rate? I don’t understand how those numbers “hold”.
We know the lower bound of absolute deaths though, and the rate of increase of those deaths, and that number on the lower bound is holding at exponential growth.
2
If there's an optimistic note (and I struggle to find one), it's that the start date is likely earlier than CN accounts would suggest.
1
1
So there may also be significant numbers of uncounted deaths, because people who died also may not be tested for the virus. However, I think a big cause for optimism is that most people in the affected areas have not (or only barely) been out of their apartments for 2 weeks.
1
1
3
Replying to @davidbaron @slightlylate @MarcosC @SlexAxton @auchenberg
It sounds like a big portion of the recently infected are medical workers.

Feb 10, 2020 · 3:01 AM UTC

1
1
Replying to @davidbaron @slightlylate @MarcosC @SlexAxton @auchenberg
Actually, maybe the latter statement about medical workers was wrong -- but I have too many sources at this point and maybe I'm just getting them confused.