News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Chloroquine, past and present by gnulinux on Friday March 20, 2020 @03:06PM (#22640545)
COVID. For >70 y.o. individuals mortality rate is 30%. If you're >70 y.o. have heart condition and have diabetes (all risk factors) COVID is clearly more deadly than some (most?) cancers, not to mention it kills in the order of weeks, when cancer kills in the order of months or years.
Re:Chloroquine, past and present by mcguire on Friday March 20, 2020 @04:20PM (#22641254)
"For >70 y.o. individuals mortality rate is 30%."

Where are you getting this number? It is significantly higher than any I have seen.

https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/mm6912e2.htm - TABLE. Hospitalization, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, and case–fatality percentages for reported COVID–19 cases, by age group —United States, February 12–March 16, 2020

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/coronavirus-age-se... - Age of Coronavirus Deaths

Re:Chloroquine, past and present by tveita on Friday March 20, 2020 @04:21PM (#22641266)
https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/mm6912e2.htm gives a CFR of 4.3–10.5% for age group 75-84 and 10.4–27.3% for age group ≥85. Your number is over that by quite a bit, where is it from?
Re:Chloroquine, past and present by cameldrv on Friday March 20, 2020 @03:58PM (#22641037)
Right. OTOH in the Chinese treatment guidelines, they say not to give it for >65 y.o. Unfortunately that's exactly the population it would potentially benefit the most. I'm guessing there must be some reason that's in there, but I'd like to see numbers.