Cont: 2019-nCoV / Corona virus Pt 3

Status
Not open for further replies.
carlosy said:
A lot of people infected with Covid-19 are not having any symptoms at all.
How does this compare with the regular flu?
Is it similar to the flu or is this exceptional for a corona virus?
Click to expand...

I don't think other coronaviruses are asymptomatic, but influenza definitely can be, as shown by the H1N1 swine 'flu.
 
Planigale said:
In the UK there is a lot of discussion about deaths in care homes from Covid-19. To inform the discussion I attach a break down of deaths in care homes pre-covid. Flu is the fourth most common cause, and will of course be predominantly seasonal. See table 3.
https://assets.publishing.service.g...ent_and_temporary_residents_of_care_homes.pdf
Click to expand...

This morning, the ONS have released death statistics for the week up to 3rd April for England and Wales:

https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopula...glandandwalesprovisional/weekending3april2020

There is an analysis of deaths due out on Thursday which will take a more in-depth look at deaths related to Covid-19 which is linked to in the above webpage.
 
In New Zealand we have 2 deaths in their 70.s 4 in their 80's and 3 in their 90's
8 were in rest homes.
Daily admissions to rest homes are 700, that number surprised me, population less than 5m.

Eta I think it must be 700 a week or 100 a day.
 
Last edited:
Doghouse Reilly said:
Iceland has tested 10% of its entire population, finding that half of all people who get it don't even have symptoms, with an overall fatality rate so far of 0.4%.
Click to expand...
Assuming those figures are correct, we're dealing with a viral infection that's 4 times deadlier than seasonal flu and known to be far more infectious.

And 40 times deadlier than the lowball figure of 0.01% you referenced earlier in the thread.

And 100 times deadlier than casebro's bizarre 0.004% fatality rate.
 
Childlike Empress said:
Meanwhile in Cuba...
Click to expand...


It's actually bloody awful that Cuba, if only in part, resorts to quack medicine in this situation. Cuba's enemies have already caught on to it and are using it in their propaganda against the country, but fortunately Cuban medical doctors also oppose the idea that homeopathic remedies, i.e. "agitated water", has anything in common with actual, science-based medicine:

The announcement about the homeopathic remedy, however, has generated discontent within the Cuban medical community.
“Are these people just ignorant and irresponsible, suggesting meaningless measures, selling agitated water?” asked Dr. Luis Carlos Silva on the website of the local newspaper Venceremos.
Silva said that portraying the use of the product as a preventive measure was “irresponsible” because “people without enough knowledge might believe they are protected.”
Silva, a professor at the University of Medical Sciences in Havana who works with several universities and international health organizations, declined to comment further.
Cuba promotes homeopathy as effective ‘weapon’ against the coronavirus (Miami Herald, April 7, 2020)
Click to expand...


And fortunately, in spite of some Cubans being taken in by the pseudo-science, others also criticize that elements of the medical establishment in Cuba resort to pseudo-scientific medicine.


While Cuban health-care workers are doing a tremendous job (and not based on quack medicine!) all around the world in some of the hardest hit countries like e.g. Andorra, this is how the country is treated by the USA:

While Cuban medical collaboration is extended around the world to help contain the COVID-19 pandemic, the insane blockade imposed by the United States on our country, has just denied our public health system access to two regular suppliers of ventilators, key to the care of the most serious cases of the disease.
In another twist of this genocidal, inhumane policy, the manufacturers IMTMedical AG and Acutronic, announced the end of commercial relations with Cuba, after the companies were acquired by the U.S. firm Vyaire Medical Inc.
"Unfortunately, the corporate guideline we have today is to suspend all commercial relations with Medicuba," both stated, according to the director for Latin America and the Caribbean at Cuba’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs (Minrex), Eugenio Martínez Enríquez, on his Twitter account.
U.S. company buys ventilator supplier and cancels shipments to Cuba citing blockade (Granma, April 13, 2020)
Click to expand...


A similar thing happened when a Danish company was bought by Americans some years ago - they were no longer allowed to deliver necessary spare parts of apparatus for medical analysis to Cuba - but that didn't happen in an emergency like the present situation.
 
Last edited:
Childlike Empress said:
According to their timeline I've posted, China used among other things "traditional Chinese medicine" to combat the virus.
Click to expand...
No doubt among the thousands of TCM concoctions there are chemicals which reduce fever, suppress coughs, etc.

And, like homeopathic stuff, there is surely a placebo effect ... the “mind games” part of medicine, traditional or not, is both real and not all that well understood yet.
 
Childlike Empress said:
According to their timeline I've posted, China used among other things "traditional Chinese medicine" to combat the virus.
Click to expand...


Yes, and I suppose that many Chinese medical professionals are as ashamed about the fact as they are in Cuba! You might as well have priests pray for coronavirus victims (which I'm sure they're already doing).
 
Last edited:
Interesting graph compiled from the ONS data of death registrations in England and Wales.
0 on the graph is the average number over the last 5 years.
 

Attachments

  • EVkLoj2XsAAX3Kz.jpg
    EVkLoj2XsAAX3Kz.jpg
    36.9 KB · Views: 25
The Moog said:
Interesting graph compiled from the ONS data of death registrations in England and Wales.
0 on the graph is the average number over the last 5 years.
Click to expand...

Change in deaths compared to average is another statistic we need now. We already have good some overview about the testing rates.

Especially since this is often compared to flu, and flu death rate is usually estimated the same way. You can't compare confirmed cases of COVID with estimated cases of flu.
 
Another from the ONS statistics just showing the total number of registered deaths in London.
It shows the increase quite starkly.
 

Attachments

  • EVkEjuKWkAULyin.jpg
    EVkEjuKWkAULyin.jpg
    46.3 KB · Views: 40
xjx388 said:
The US is more concentrated in urban centers and, indeed, those are the areas being hardest hit.
Click to expand...

82% of Canadians live in urban areas vs 80.7% in the US. Other than New York & New York area the population densities of urban areas in Canada and the US is comparable as well. What's different is the distance between these urban centers, but this doesn't change how connected these areas need to be.
 
JeanTate said:
IIRC, there is a good article on this general question in a recent issue of The Economist*.

The relationship between economic cycles and deaths, cet. par., is pro-cyclical: in boom times deaths go up; in recessions they go down.

*which I seem to have misplaced. It may the one with the charts/graphs in Matthew Best’s recent post.
Click to expand...

Found it!

It is that issue, April 4th 2020. In the Briefing section, “Hard choices”. Here are some extracts:

“Counter-intuitive as it may be, the economic evidence indicates that mortality is procyclical: it rises in periods of economic growth and declines during downturns. [...] found that in America a 1% rise in unemployment was associated with a 1.3% increase in suicides, but a decline in cardiovascular deaths of 0.5%, in road deaths of 3.0%, and in deaths from all causes of 0.5%.”

“The fact that some of the people now arguing that the exorbitant costs of decisive action against Covid-19 will lead to poorer public health in the future were, after the financial crisis, supporters of an austerity which had the same effect is not without its irony.”
 
Thanks for posting this.

The Moog said:
Another from the ONS statistics just showing the total number of registered deaths in London.
It shows the increase quite starkly.
Click to expand...
Interesting Xmas/New Year effect.

Of the years plotted, which was the worst for the flu?
 
DevilsAdvocate said:
I'm not sure that defeats Doghouse Riley's claim that the reactions are overblown. Are the covid numbers in Michigan any worse than a bad flu season? I don;t know. I can't find the numbers.

In the US, covid has not so far been any worse than a bad flu season, and it looks like it won't be. Plants don't close when they have a bunch of workers sick with the flu (although Michigan did close some schools due to a bad flu season a few years ago).

Is it really more sick workers, or plants closing because they have a few workers with covid and close down when they wouldn't if it was regular flu? Or workers not coming to work if there are reports of someone with covid when they would still show up for work if it was flu?

I'm not sure that plants closing is actually because of more sick people rather than a reaction to sick people that would not occur if this was regular flu.
Click to expand...
(my hilite)

I haven’t yet seen any reliable data to support that; can you point to any please?

And in NY+NJ+CT Covid-19 has, so far, been far worse than any recent flu season, over January-April, in terms of deaths (I’ll see if I can find easily quotable sources).
 
JeanTate said:
It is that issue, April 4th 2020. In the Briefing section, “Hard choices”. Here are some extracts:

“Counter-intuitive as it may be, the economic evidence indicates that mortality is procyclical: it rises in periods of economic growth and declines during downturns. [...] found that in America a 1% rise in unemployment was associated with a 1.3% increase in suicides, but a decline in cardiovascular deaths of 0.5%, in road deaths of 3.0%, and in deaths from all causes of 0.5%.”
Click to expand...

So we really do work ourselves to death? Though these statistics only include those whose deaths actually occurred during downturns and not those whose life spans were shortened due to being pushed into poverty, most of whom would die during a period of economic growth since those periods occupy the majority of time. Admittedly, I have no idea of what the number of such people is; I don't even know the order of magnitude.
 
JeanTate said:
(my hilite)

I haven’t yet seen any reliable data to support that; can you point to any please?

And in NY+NJ+CT Covid-19 has, so far, been far worse than any recent flu season, over January-April, in terms of deaths (I’ll see if I can find easily quotable sources).
Click to expand...

According to the CDC flu seasons usually have between 12,000 and 56,000 deaths, with the 80,000 in 2017-189 being extraordinarily high. The difference, of course, is that "flu season" is between October and April (6 months), whereas the US's first confirmed case of covid-19 was 2 1/2 months ago. That and the fact that nobody goes in to lockdown for the flu.

So we won't know for a while how it actually compares to the flu in terms of numbers dead, and when we do it'll be more of a measure of how well the preventative measures have worked than a direct comparison between the diseases.
 
JeanTate said:
Thanks for posting this.


Interesting Xmas/New Year effect.

Of the years plotted, which was the worst for the flu?
Click to expand...

The graph is when the deaths were registered, so there is always some reporting lag over the holiday period.
And not sure.
 
Thanks.

Squeegee Beckenheim said:
According to the CDC flu seasons usually have between 12,000 and 56,000 deaths, with the 80,000 in 2017-189 being extraordinarily high. The difference, of course, is that "flu season" is between October and April (6 months), whereas the US's first confirmed case of covid-19 was 2 1/2 months ago. That and the fact that nobody goes in to lockdown for the flu.

So we won't know for a while how it actually compares to the flu in terms of numbers dead, and when we do it'll be more of a measure of how well the preventative measures have worked than a direct comparison between the diseases.
Click to expand...
Also: I doubt (but do not know) that the numbers of "flu deaths" during flu season in the US, per month, has ever varied as much as have covid-19 deaths, from February to March say (zero to 2850, per WHO situation reports).
 
Getting back to you on this ...

Doghouse Reilly said:
Today is the 12th of April and we're not even close to being on pace with your forecast. Looks like we're waiting longer than you thought. Or was your "supposing" not meant to be taken seriously, as it was simply "supposing"? It certainly felt as though your intention was to show me, through "supposing" in simple exponential fashion (since apparently you, as so many others,
thought I was too simpleminded to comprehend the premise) just how foolish I was to doubt the claims of massive impending doom and death.
Click to expand...
Here's the post of mine you are quoting, in full:

JeanTate said:
Doghouse Reilly said:
JeanTate said:
(my hilite).

OK, will do. Will you still be reading this thread?

May I take it that you think it exceedingly unlikely that the total number of deaths from covid-19 will exceed 200k, in 2020?
Click to expand...
I think it's possible, but unlikely and it would be around that time that I would begin to think it might be more of a concern than I thought. Yes, I will still be reading the thread.
Click to expand...
Doghouse Reilly said:
The source is all over the news today, give me a break. I didn't tell tall tales, I used existing government figures and projections.

Let me know when the global death toll exceeds 200k. Until then you are the ones saying the sky is falling with no evidence.
Click to expand...
Suppose the global death toll, today (31 March 2020) is 40k.

Suppose it's doubling every four days*.

On 4 April, it will be 80k.

8 April, 160k.

12 April, 320k.

Looks like we won't have to wait for long.

*From the WHO situation reports, Grand Total :
19 March: 8,778
23 March: 14,509
27 March: 23,335
Click to expand...
Turns out the WHO situation report gives a Grand Total of 36,405 for 31 March 2020.

Also:
14509/8778 = 1.65 (not 2.00)
23335/14509 = 1.61 (not 2.00)
36405/23335 = 1.56 (not 2.00)

So what?

For one, my "supposes" were wrong* even as I wrote them.

For another, anyone who read my post could have easily discovered at least these inconsistencies.

Here are the relevant numbers for three dates in April:
4 April: 56,986 (/36405 = 1.56)
8 April: 79,235 (/56986 = 1.39)
12 April: 105,592 (/79235 = 1.33)

The data suggest that the doubling time has gone from ~five days in late March to ~eight days ~two weeks later. This is a very welcome trend, if it indeed reflects accurately how the death toll from covid-19 is changing.

*In the sense that they were obviously inconsistent with what was in the WHO situation reports, although the 36405 value was not known at the time of my post.
 
High percentage of COVID-19 infections and extremely high asymptomatic population amongst women at delivery in NY.

All the women were screened on admission for symptoms of Covid-19. Four women (1.9%) had fever or other symptoms of Covid-19 on admission, and all 4 women tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 (Figure 1). Of the 211 women without symptoms, all were afebrile on admission. Nasopharyngeal swabs were obtained from 210 of the 211 women (99.5%) who did not have symptoms of Covid-19; of these women, 29 (13.7%) were positive for SARS-CoV-2. Thus, 29 of the 33 patients who were positive for SARS-CoV-2 at admission (87.9%) had no symptoms of Covid-19 at presentation.
Click to expand...


https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMc2009316
 
marting said:
High percentage of COVID-19 infections and extremely high asymptomatic population amongst women at delivery in NY.
https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMc2009316
Click to expand...

13% in heavily hit area is on par with 15% people with antibodies from Germany, also from heavily hit area. That's good, that's starting to have some effect on crowd immunity. But that area in Germany had 2% of all population as confirmed case. It won't be as high everywhere. It will be 100x less.
 
Last edited:
JeanTate said:
Getting back to you on this ...


Here's the post of mine you are quoting, in full:


Turns out the WHO situation report gives a Grand Total of 36,405 for 31 March 2020.

Also:
14509/8778 = 1.65 (not 2.00)
23335/14509 = 1.61 (not 2.00)
36405/23335 = 1.56 (not 2.00)

So what?

For one, my "supposes" were wrong* even as I wrote them.

For another, anyone who read my post could have easily discovered at least these inconsistencies.

Here are the relevant numbers for three dates in April:
4 April: 56,986 (/36405 = 1.56)
8 April: 79,235 (/56986 = 1.39)
12 April: 105,592 (/79235 = 1.33)

The data suggest that the doubling time has gone from ~five days in late March to ~eight days ~two weeks later. This is a very welcome trend, if it indeed reflects accurately how the death toll from covid-19 is changing.

*In the sense that they were obviously inconsistent with what was in the WHO situation reports, although the 36405 value was not known at the time of my post.
Click to expand...

[utl=https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/03/21/upshot/coronavirus-deaths-by-country.html]This New York Times graph[/url] still has it as doubling every 5 days.
 
Dr.Sid said:
13% in heavily hit area is on par with 15% people with antibodies from Germany, also from heavily hit area. That's good, that's starting to have some effect on crowd immunity. But that area in Germany had 2% of all population as confirmed case. It won't be as high everywhere. It will be 100x less.
Click to expand...

Do you have a source for that 2% number? I've been looking for it, as mentioned earlier! I assume it's for Gangelt (where the sample was), not Kreis Heinsberg as a whole.

If you've got the number from the 2 page summary of Streeck's study in Gangelt, then I think you are reading it wrong. That's how many active cases he found, not how many had previously been identified. So it's not useful for trying to guess the ratio total cases/reported cases elsewhere.
 
JeanTate said:
Found it!

“The fact that some of the people now arguing that the exorbitant costs of decisive action against Covid-19 will lead to poorer public health in the future were, after the financial crisis, supporters of an austerity which had the same effect is not without its irony.”
Click to expand...

Outstanding point by that person.

marting said:
High percentage of COVID-19 infections and extremely high asymptomatic population amongst women at delivery in NY.
Click to expand...

Nice find. Surely that's enough proof now that 90% of cases are being missed?

It's also going to make it very hard to kill the virus off entirely.
_______________________

Meanwhile, Russia is on the verge of becoming the world's Covid-19 hot spot. Growth curve out of control, very weak health systems and poorly-nourished population.
 
Meridian said:
Do you have a source for that 2% number? I've been looking for it, as mentioned earlier! I assume it's for Gangelt (where the sample was), not Kreis Heinsberg as a whole.

If you've got the number from the 2 page summary of Streeck's study in Gangelt, then I think you are reading it wrong. That's how many active cases he found, not how many had previously been identified. So it's not useful for trying to guess the ratio total cases/reported cases elsewhere.
Click to expand...

Can't find it anymore anyway I remember it being vague, what you say is quite possible.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom