OT - coronavirus

[wickedsolo]

Yeah, Wicked nailed it.

Fast forward to around this time next year, around 40-60% of the world's population will have caught it and gotten over it. At that point we're not "immunologically naive" anymore; it could flare up again like flu season every year, and not be as deadly. Plus we could have a vaccine. Last I read a couple weeks ago, it wasn't mutating as fast as the flu does, so a hypothetical vaccine would have a good chance of retaining its effectiveness. (I mean moreso than the flu vaccine does; and the flu vaccine is not useless, at all.)

So: it'll never be gone. But we (as a population) won't be as vulnerable to it.


In the nearer-term – I expect governors will try to keep "containment" measures in place as long as they can; certainly into May, maybe even into June. But there will be increaasing pressure for people bust out – from pure cabin fever on the part of those of us lucky enough to be able to work from home, to economic pressure from people who need to reopen their businesses or else lose their shirt, to people who need to buy food.

My wild-assed guess is that new cases in the Balto-Wash area will start to taper toward the end of this month / early May. If new cases start to decline, it'll be very hard to keep containment measures in place, and we'll see easing in mid May / early June. Probably some kind of phased-in easing, where say "non-essential" businesses can open up, but there has to be a limit on how many people in the store at once, and employees have to wear masks – something like that.

Of course once containment is eased, cases will spike up again. But maybe by that point we'll have enough protective equipment for health-care workers, and more ventilator capacity. Maybe even some effective treatment protocols. And serological tests to identify who's "over it" and immune.

Still riffing, I'd guess approaching near "normal" in July / August. But, y'know, don't quote me, I don't know anything.

I'm still strongly hoping to see airports/public terminals implement thermo detection capability at a larger scale. So, every time you pass through security at BWI or something, your internal temperature is also being looked at. If you have a fever, you don't get on the plane. Period.

[JimZipCode]

The reason this is so tough is the infection rate is 4 to 5 times higher than the flu. One person infects about 5.7 vs. The flu with one in 1.3-2.

This is inaccurate.

The transmissibility rate for COVID19 is a rate of 1 to 2.5. So, for every 1 person, 2.5 people are infected.

Those numbers were thought to be true at one point. That's another thing about this. In the digital age, everyone thinks all the info we get is accurate right away. This thing has been global like less then 3 months, I don't believe for a second we've had time to study this enough to know all we claim to about it.

I'm with NC on this one. We're still in the earliest stages of learning about this. Lots of info is going to change over the next 3 to 15 moinths. In particular, I think that R0 is low.

• The NIH published a study of the Diamond Princess cruise ship, which estimated the "transmissibility rate" at about 2.28 (2.06-2.52)

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32097725

• CDC Europe says that "it is currently estimated that, on average, one infected person will infect between two and three other people."

https://www.ecdc.europa.eu/en/covid-...stions-answers

Those are good, responsible sources. But if they are considering only confirmed cases, then that estimate is WAY too low. We have good evidence that the actual infection is much, much more prevalant than the number of confirmed cases.

For contrast, this 2018 paper estimates the transmissibility of MERS at around 4. But MERS was contained! Covid-19 hasn't been. I don't see how there's any way the actual "infectiousness" of the novel coronavirus is lower than that of MERs. If the MERS number is right, then the Covid-19 number is wrong (and vice-versa).


This meta-study lists some higher estimates for transmissibility:

https://academic.oup.com/jtm/article...aaa021/5735319

The first studies initially reported estimates of R0 with lower values. Estimations subsequently increased and then again returned in the most recent estimates to the levels initially reported (Figure 1).



A closer look reveals that the estimation method used played a role.

The two studies using stochastic methods to estimate R0, reported a range of 2.2–2.68 with an average of 2.44. The six studies using mathematical methods to estimate R0 produced a range from 1.5 to 6.49, with an average of 4.2. The three studies using statistical methods such as exponential growth estimated an R0 ranging from 2.2 to 3.58, with an average of 2.67.

I don't think the NIH and ECDC researchers have yet had time to reckon with the number of infections over and above the confirmed cases. I expect the transimissibility to come in higher than what we've currently read.

The hidden good news there is that it would mean that the "infection fatality rate" is much lower than the case fatality rates we've been seeing. Lots of asymptomatic infections, or mild cases where people think they just had the flu and got better without getting tested. But, I'm just spit-balling at this point.

[The Excellector]

This: "Or, is it taking measures such as the ones being taken now, combined with vaccinations down the line?"

Thank you.

[BearArms]

I'm with NC on this one. We're still in the earliest stages of learning about this. Lots of info is going to change over the next 3 to 15 moinths. In particular, I think that R0 is low.

• The NIH published a study of the Diamond Princess cruise ship, which estimated the "transmissibility rate" at about 2.28 (2.06-2.52)

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32097725

• CDC Europe says that "it is currently estimated that, on average, one infected person will infect between two and three other people."

https://www.ecdc.europa.eu/en/covid-...stions-answers

Those are good, responsible sources. But if they are considering only confirmed cases, then that estimate is WAY too low. We have good evidence that the actual infection is much, much more prevalant than the number of confirmed cases.

For contrast, this 2018 paper estimates the transmissibility of MERS at around 4. But MERS was contained! Covid-19 hasn't been. I don't see how there's any way the actual "infectiousness" of the novel coronavirus is lower than that of MERs. If the MERS number is right, then the Covid-19 number is wrong (and vice-versa).


This meta-study lists some higher estimates for transmissibility:

https://academic.oup.com/jtm/article...aaa021/5735319

I don't think the NIH and ECDC researchers have yet had time to reckon with the number of infections over and above the confirmed cases. I expect the transimissibility to come in higher than what we've currently read.

The hidden good news there is that it would mean that the "infection fatality rate" is much lower than the case fatality rates we've been seeing. Lots of asymptomatic infections, or mild cases where people think they just had the flu and got better without getting tested. But, I'm just spit-balling at this point.

I just saw this today based on all data including China. Not that anyone really knows, but it is much more contagious than the flu.

Only thing I do know is this sucks, and will continue to suck for a while. A vaccine will end this fear, but that's a while away.

Having diabeties and seeing it hit 2 family members is pretty nerve wracking. People losing income and jobs is as well and it's the choice between the two that is the hardest part of this crisis. I won't personally be able to return to anywhere near normal having the risk factors.

Anyone else have any preexisting high risk conditions that feel the same?

[FloridaBasedFan]

Mortality rates will change as well. As it stands today, at home deaths are not counted in the death toll unless the patient tested positive for the virus at some point. At home deaths in NYC for example have increased 10 fold this past month. Death by pneumonia has seen a tripling in some states but are not counted either as tests were not available to confirm the diagnosis.

[mmi16]

Some think Doctors may be looking at Covid-19 wrong and thus treating it wrong.

https://news.yahoo.com/rethinking-co...123733204.html

[stevez51]

I'm still strongly hoping to see airports/public terminals implement thermo detection capability at a larger scale. So, every time you pass through security at BWI or something, your internal temperature is also being looked at. If you have a fever, you don't get on the plane. Period.

I believe Japan has something like this.

[The Excellector]

Mortality rates will change as well. As it stands today, at home deaths are not counted in the death toll unless the patient tested positive for the virus at some point. At home deaths in NYC for example have increased 10 fold this past month. Death by pneumonia has seen a tripling in some states but are not counted either as tests were not available to confirm the diagnosis.

Those are two sets of numbers to consider as well.

[WrongBaldy]

Mortality rates will change as well. As it stands today, at home deaths are not counted in the death toll unless the patient tested positive for the virus at some point. At home deaths in NYC for example have increased 10 fold this past month. Death by pneumonia has seen a tripling in some states but are not counted either as tests were not available to confirm the diagnosis.

i read the same

[BustOfPallas]

Mortality rates will change as well. As it stands today, at home deaths are not counted in the death toll unless the patient tested positive for the virus at some point. At home deaths in NYC for example have increased 10 fold this past month. Death by pneumonia has seen a tripling in some states but are not counted either as tests were not available to confirm the diagnosis.

60K people died in the US alone of influenza/pneumonia in 2018.

We are at 14K now in the US for this particular virus based on official counts.

We are at 88K worldwide right now.

We had 30K deaths from Fentanyl in the US back in 2017 and most of that comes from China as well.

We average about 70K deaths in the US due to drug overdose every year.

[Desert Raven]

60K people died in the US alone of influenza/pneumonia in 2018.

We are at 14K now in the US for this particular virus based on official counts.

We are at 88K worldwide right now.

We had 30K deaths from Fentanyl in the US back in 2017 and most of that comes from China as well.

We average about 70K deaths in the US due to drug overdose every year.

You can choose to not abuse and overdose on drugs so I don’t understand what the relevance is.

[The Excellector]

You can choose to not abuse and overdose on drugs so I don’t understand what the relevance is.

Yeah, if there is a clear jump in numbers that coincides with the coronavirus, it's worth heavy consideration. No, it doesn't mean that every in-house death is from the coronavirus, but I don't think anyone ever implied that. The key in what Floridabasedfan's post said was "At home deaths in NYC for example have increased 10 fold this past month". As well as, "Death by pneumonia has seen a tripling in some states".