Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

I’m glad you asked, skepticism can be a healthy attitude in moderations and there is a lot of FUD around, but here’s an article from the Lancet. These were 99 patients, 11 of whom ultimately died. That means from the stats below a significant number of the patients with organ damage, possibly most of them, must have survived. Also the stats below were on admission, it’s likely even more of the patients may have suffered organ damage by the time they were discharged.

https://www.thelancet.com/pdfs/journals/lancet/PIIS0140-6736...

>Many patients presented with organ function damage, including 17 (17%) with ARDS, eight (8%) with acute respiratory injury, three (3%) with acute renal injury, four (4%) with septic shock, and one (1%) with venti­ lator­associatedpneumonia(table2).




These conditions are listed as “comorbidities”, which means that they’re illnesses they already had, in addition to the virus.

In no way is this paper saying that the virus caused the listed conditions.


If you know what comorbidity means, you must know perfectly well that it includes secondary conditions, such as organ function damage, caused by the primary condition.

At these levels of prevalence, I think that comfortably clears the bar for having some pretty credible evidence.




Consider applying for YC's Spring batch! Applications are open till Feb 11.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: