"Just letting you know that out of the current 185 countries that do have it the DRC is ranked at 165th in terms of cases per 1M population.
0.2 people for every 1m.
34 people for every 1m in Aus.
Basic maths would suggest you're a 170 times more likely to catch it/have it in Aus than you are in the DRC. Long way to go before the economical impact is comparable.
Data's good for manipulating to suit ones agenda - inclusive of those justifying their investment decisions.
For disclosure to the forum (as i have been absent for a while) The absenteeism being from a trip to vegas a few weeks back just prior to all the global commotion. Additionally there hasn't really been much point in adding stock specific context on most stocks as they currently all at the mercy of the wider market sentiment. I sold a lot of my AVZO's which i had said I would do in advance of time. Post #:42518341 Post #:43034524.
The intention being to rebuy with AVZ's shares on the pullback. IMV AVZ has some seriously decent news on the horizon and i'm very close to piling my profits back in at these levels. Whilst i am optimistic in the relative approvals, offtake, DFS etc people should acknowledge them as real risks if they are delayed or, in the worst and very unlikely case, fall through. Admittedly i don't consider the likelihood that high but to discern risks on any stock would be at your own peril.
Regardless of all that, i think AVZ is on the cusp of some material changes regarding the fundamentals. DFS/PFS's in my experience (whilst good reading) don't light the price on fire. What will, is some more ironclad news around offtakes or equity. It is not atypical for stocks to announce equity investment on the back of DFS announcements. I.E go into a halt for the DFS and announce it along with a major equity placement/offtake. This occurred recently on quite a few stocks i hold and is the main precipice for the S/P appreciation in those cases.
Exciting couple of months here - timed nicely IMO with the global over-reaction to subside in the coming weeks and months."
"Are you asking me answers or do you have any factual data to support those arguments?
If anything can be proven candidly re Covid19 is that medical aptitude of the country has slim to nil effect on the death rate.
Argument 1: Third world
Here are the top 13 countries in order of total deaths. Can you highlight which of these are 3rd world? Arguably some of the best medical facilities in these countries so that argument of yours is false.
Argument 2: What are the amount of travellers going in/out Aus?
Not only have you not indicated whether your insinuating more or less inbound or outbound passengers in this argument you've also given zero information to support this point in any way shape or form. Regardless, given the current freezes/restrictions on travel across most countries the virus is more likely to spread from the current carriers as opposed to people travelling internationally.
Secondly, i don't believe the DRC would have the same amount of international travel when compared to Aus so i wasn't sure if you were insinuating this is the reason Australia has a higher count. Because if so, that really just proves my point that australia or countries with higher international travel are more susceptible to new human hosts.
Argument 3: What is the possible exposure rate?
Can you elaborate on what this means. Exposure rate to what? i haven't heard this terminology. If you're referring to the R naught written R^0 which is the mathematically/statistically representation of how contagious an infectious disease is. Now i'm not sure what your argument was -if that was the point... are you suggesting its more contagious if the longitudinal and latitudinal co-ordinates of an infected person alter, because that makes no sense.
A valid argument which i'll help you with would be regarding population density.
Australia has an extremely low density of just 3 km^2
DRC is around 37
US is around 34
Italy 200
China 145
Spain 93
Interesting right, it appears that the population density has much greater impact on the number of cases. Nothing to do with medical capability. Because medical capability does not prevent cases from occuring. It just limits the mortality rate of severe cases. So there's some info to help you with your argument which you're embarrassingly losing just FYI. Seems to be a fairly linear relationship between them doesn't it.
Begs the question why australia has as many cases as it does. But i'll answer that for you as well. Despite australia's low density population as a country - it's city's are actually far higher in density. Because 80-90% of australia is uninhabited in any reasonable manner our population density on livable cities is actually a lot higher. A country like the the DRC or other african countries have their populations spread across the country.
So; Aside from the fact china and europe were the epicenter of the event it's quite evident that the total cases a country has seems fairly proportionate to the population density.
The factor of how many of these become deaths is also interesting.
Italy's mortality rate is around 10%.
China's is around 3%
Spain is around 5%
France is around 4%
US is around 1.5%
Aus is around 1%
DRC is around 0%
Now death's are primarily the old or already existing conditions.
Italy average age - 45
china - 37
spain - 42
france - 41
US - 37
Aus - 38.6
DRC - 19.6
Wow - what are revelation. So again it appears that mortality rate looks fairly linearly related to the average age of the country. http://world.bymap.org/MedianAge.html
*note for the mathematicians - It does say median but the calculation is actually the average
So, if you have a high population density, more people will be affected.
The higher the average age of the country - the higher the mortality rate is likely to be given that the virus average age of mortality is around 65-70. Picture here for you in case reading isn't you're strong point.
Any noted correlation between where the mortality rate is high and where it's low? lol.
When it comes to infectious diseases which rely somewhat solely on the persons immune system and body to fight it, the medical aptitude of the country has very minimal affect. Whilst this will help to mitigate the mortality rate it will not prevent it. The 2 largest impacts on a country re covid19 is number of cases (driven by population density, mitigating by social distancing decent hygiene etc) and mortality rate (driven by the average age of the population infected, mitigated by medical response).
Countries that are overloaded with cases don't have the hospital beds to treat the patients and is the sole reasons countries have implemented such drastic over the top mandates so as the flatten the curve of the infected.
This will be my last response as I do not wish to consume any more time responding factually and unbiased to your silly one liner remarks. The main reason for my response was to give the rest of the forum some balanced, valued commentary of my opinion on the matter.
In the future, if you're going to pick an argument make sure you can win it."
And finally my post which expresses my opinion of those whom are relishing at current circumstances without seeking guidance from a moral compass.
(20min delay)