Covid 19 virus

[GlennSprigg]

Why are the Chinese Government attacking Australia, for being over zealous???

 

(Sorry about the delay, from 26th Feb...)
I don't understand the 'FacePalm' ?   Last week, on Australian TV News, (can't remember who),
it was stated that the Chinese Govt was disappointed with Australia limiting certain flights or
travel from certain regions. I found that irresponsible & offensive. Next few months will tell... 

[NiHaoMike]

Folding@Home has started a project to fight the virus.
https://foldingathome.org/2020/02/27/foldinghome-takes-up-the-fight-against-covid-19-2019-ncov/
Also keep in mind that you can still mine Curecoin and Foldingcoin, without reducing your contribution to science.

[Cerebus]

.... Then use the same mortality rate of the regular Flu of 2%. ...

At least one problem there with your sums, the case fatality rate for regular seasonal flu is about 0.1%, not the 2% you quoted.

[Cerebus]

Stocking up on food for an illness like this is just ridiculous.  Do you stock up on 2 weeks of food during influenza season? No! Not even 2 days worth!

Seeing that you are from Puerto Rico, I'm surprised you have such a lax attitude regarding emergency preparedness.

I'd take that location with a pinch of salt if I was you.



Two new users appear on 24th February and 3rd of March, both immediately move to high post counts for newbies, both from the same apparent country and a fixation on little tweety things? Now, I may be wrong, but I think I can smell someone's sock drawer being opened.

[Simon]

Don't worry, done and dealt with.

Stocking up on food is not a bad idea. No need to go prepper mad with food for 2 years but a months supply of tins is not a bad call, just saw an interview with an "expert" who said that to have some food would be a good idea. My brexit buffer is now my covid 19 buffer.

[SiliconWizard]

Yup, and also we obviously have many more cases of flu recorded than cases of this virus so far, so the mortality rate can't really be compared so far (and I hope it doesn't spread as much as "regular" flu so we don't have to know for sure.)

You can't properly calculate the mortality rate or the case-fatality ratio until an epidemic is over. Mostly because an on-going epidemic involves a lot of ongoing cases where the outcome is, kind of obviously, uncertain.

Just so we're all singing from the same hymn sheet, in epidemiological terms:

• Mortality rate - the proportion of the general population (i.e. infected and uninfected alike) who become infected and die from a disease in an epidemic. Usually expressed as the number of deaths per 100,000.
• Case-fatality ratio - the proportion of people who have become infected who will die from a disease in an epidemic. Usually expressed as a percentage.
• R₀ - the basic reproductive ratio - the number of other people that an infected person will infect in turn.

So, best estimates for Covid-19 at the time of writing:

• Mortality rate - none, the epidemic is still in progress.
• Case-fatality ratio - 2-3%. Estimates vary widely.
• R₀ - 1.4-3.8

Well yes, thanks for correcting the terms. "Death rate" and "mortality rate", which we hear about a lot in the media, are improper terms here.
What was meant was the case-fatality ratio instead, which so far looks much higher for this virus than for regular "flu", but as I said, even that can't be completely figured out yet as (fortunately) the number of detected infected people is still very low compared to the figures we have for regular flu.

[iMo]

How to interpret this? True/False?

https://www.zerohedge.com/health/man-behind-global-coronavirus-pandemic

[Cerebus]

How to interpret this? True/False?

https://www.zerohedge.com/health/man-behind-global-coronavirus-pandemic

As dumb conspiracy theory stuff.

Wuhan is a big city, it has the Wuhan Institute of Virology. As a parallel, London (another high population city) has the London School of Hygiene and Tropical medicine, which has the high biosecurity labs necessary for investigating diseases, as it does. (It also has Northwich Park MRC, several other governmental/quasi-governmental medical research establishments that handle viruses, lord knows how many Hospital pathology labs, and about a dozen Universities conducting microbiological research and god knows how many private research institutes). If there is an outbreak of disease in London, do we attribute it to shadowy bio-weapons research? No, we do not.

You could pick any major city in any major country in the world and come up with a similar candidate list of labs conducting virology research or handling live virus samples. Shadowy government bio-weapons labs tend to be situated in the arse end of nowhere, for obvious reasons.

[Bud]

Can we have a Raspberry Pi version of this?

[DrG]

Yup, and also we obviously have many more cases of flu recorded than cases of this virus so far, so the mortality rate can't really be compared so far (and I hope it doesn't spread as much as "regular" flu so we don't have to know for sure.)

You can't properly calculate the mortality rate or the case-fatality ratio until an epidemic is over. Mostly because an on-going epidemic involves a lot of ongoing cases where the outcome is, kind of obviously, uncertain.

Just so we're all singing from the same hymn sheet, in epidemiological terms:

• Mortality rate - the proportion of the general population (i.e. infected and uninfected alike) who become infected and die from a disease in an epidemic. Usually expressed as the number of deaths per 100,000.
• Case-fatality ratio - the proportion of people who have become infected who will die from a disease in an epidemic. Usually expressed as a percentage.
• R₀ - the basic reproductive ratio - the number of other people that an infected person will infect in turn.

So, best estimates for Covid-19 at the time of writing:

• Mortality rate - none, the epidemic is still in progress.
• Case-fatality ratio - 2-3%. Estimates vary widely.
• R₀ - 1.4-3.8

Yes, I agree, "You can't properly calculate the mortality rate or the 'case-fatality ratio' until an epidemic is over." You do not, however, wait "until the epidemic is over" to make decisions. If they are to be evidenced-based decisions, then they need to be based on the evidence that is available. I am not saying that you disagree with that or that you have said otherwise, I am emphasizing the point.

Take, for example, the graphs below (I have not attempted to validate the data):

from:https://www.popsci.com/story/health/covid-19-coronavirus-death-rate-by-age/ Source:CDCC Most recent data available as of March 5, 2020Infographic by Sara Chodosh

The need for a presumptive overall mortality rate is less compelling than looking at where the deaths have occurred, "so far" - at least for the over 50 crowd.

If you are trying to decide whether to close schools, for example, do you decide based on the observed overall mortality rate so far? I might add that the under 50 crowd is less likely to have the "responsibility" of deciding whether to close a school or not.

I like that you brought up the terms and this is not a counter-post to what you have said, it it just expressing a very difficult and practical matter. I am glad that I do not have to make such decisions, but I want to see them as evidenced-based.

[ebastler]

I'd take that location with a pinch of salt if I was you.

(Attachment Link) (Attachment Link)

Two new users appear on 24th February and 3rd of March, both immediately move to high post counts for newbies, both from the same apparent country and a fixation on little tweety things? Now, I may be wrong, but I think I can smell someone's sock drawer being opened.

Three users, actually.

[Simon]

the two spare chicks got banned. He's Angrybird, anything else get's banned.

[hamster_nz]

Something I found interesting.

COVID-19 cases per million people (Populations from Google, cases from WHO Situation report 46):

Hubei Provence: 1145.6 (67592/59M)

South Korea: 123.2 (6284/51M)

Italy 64.3  (3858/60M)

All of China: 56.5 (80711/1428M)

Iran: 43.3 (3513/86M)

USA: 0.5  (148/330M)

One perspective that seems to be completely lacking is that you can't outrun exponential growth.

If nothing is done differently, this time next week there will be more cases outside China than inside - if anything the pace of growth seems to have picked up in the last week or so.

China started the Wuhan lockdown at about 2,300 cases (on 23 Jan), and it seems to have settled down at 80k cases...

[DrG]

NIH to start SARS-CoV-2 vaccine trial next week.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2020/03/06/coronavirus-live-updates/#link-7DHARJPWIFE5JPOWTVZU5SUUDQ
https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/health/clinical-trials-for-coronavirus-vaccine-will-take-place-at-seattle-research-institute/

Planned to run for some 13 months.

[thinkfat]

I expect to see acceleration in China in the next few days while people start migrating again.

[james_s]

That will probably happen here too. Give it a few weeks and the news media will find some new shiny thing to focus on, people will get tired of being cooped up at home and slide back toward complacency. The status quo is not sustainable at all, though I'm really enjoying the much lighter traffic.

[Simon]

I am just wondering about all of the inconvenient stuff that is being put out at a time when all we are looking at is the numbers of covid-19

[ebastler]

I am just wondering about all of the inconvenient stuff that is being put out at a time when all we are looking at is the numbers of covid-19

Not sure I get your point. We are observing an exponential growth of confirmed infections in many countries (e.g. doubling every 2 days in Germany and UK). If we let that trend continue unmitigated, hospitals would soon be unable to cope with even a small percentage of severe cases. Isn't that a plausible cause to instigate measures to try and slow down the spread?

[Simon]

While the worlds media feeds on the covid-19 story it's a good time for governments to make unpopular announcements as they won't get as much coverage. The media is mare worried about filling it's air time and less worried about what it fills it with.

[EEVblog]

While the worlds media feeds on the covid-19 story it's a good time for governments to make unpopular announcements as they won't get as much coverage. The media is mare worried about filling it's air time and less worried about what it fills it with.

Here in Australia the government is making a huge to-do about it and press conferencing every chance they get. They are trying to make up for the lack of s!#t given when the fires happened. Our PM was famously overseas on holidays and didn't seem to care and he copped a hiding for it in the media. His advisers are now no doubt telling him to milk the crap out of this crisis to win back Joe Public.

[Cerebus]

I am just wondering about all of the inconvenient stuff that is being put out at a time when all we are looking at is the numbers of covid-19

What, the old "This is good day to publish bad news" schtick?

If you're bored and want a good cynical laugh, compare the kind of press releases that any government department puts out at 09:00 on a Monday versus the ones they publish at 17:01 on a Friday.

[Simon]

seen it locally where they decide to run a consultation process about some unimportant matter like splitting the county in two or privatizing the counties services or closing the local library. Funny that these things always come around in December. i can't possibly think why.....

[DrG]

I don't know about the media subterfuge angle or even the panic angle.

In the US, what has me very concerned is the lack of pressure by the news media to address (by address, I mean raise the public's awareness and anger) a horrendous lack of availability of testing kits. In fact, there is argument on whether or not there is a shortage of test kits https://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/486416-azar-contradicts-pence-says-theres-no-coronavirus-testing-kit-shortage  - If so, have tests been conducted in all at-risk populations (like senior homes)?  Where are the priorities for testing?- Who is in charge around here?! That is the kind of response that I would like to hear but it has not been a news item - right now there are some grumblings - e.g., https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/02/united-states-badly-bungled-coronavirus-testing-things-may-soon-improve .

Drive through testing has only now begun in Seattle. But how long it takes to get the swabs read is not in the article except for "as soon as possible". https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2020/03/08/813501632/seattle-health-care-system-offers-drive-through-coronavirus-testing-for-workers

B&M Gates foundation is funding home test kits, but they are mail back swabs https://q13fox.com/2020/03/08/gates-foundation-to-soon-offer-home-testing-kits-for-coronavirus-in-seattle-area/

I am not an immunologist and I don't know how possible it is to have a truly rapid test kit that uses Real-time reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction (rRT-PCR) assays https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/mers/lab/lab-testing.html. Maybe the best that you can get right now are 10 zillion well plates.

But this is absolute must have for any kind of control

Edited to fix link

[Bud]

Who is in charge around here?!

I heard Pence ...?

[DrG]

Who is in charge around here?!

I heard Pence ...?

I'm trying really hard to leave the politics out of it....on here I respect that for an electronics site. So, I will just say that I am very disappointed in the response so far and that I hope it gets a lot better very soon. I am optimistic that the response will get much better.

As I understand it the R0 measure is for uncontrolled growth in the population (no vaccination, immunity, isolation). The idea is NOT to have the R0 materialize. Somebody on here said something like, "it is hard to outrun exponential growth". This is especially true when you wait until after the starting gun to move.

OK, got it out of my system for now. Sorry.