Coronavirus - Is this the killer flu that will wipe us out?
Discussion
nffcforever said:
The available evidence and studies conducted to date suggests this is more serious that swine flu, because of the number of people it *may potentially* infect.
IF some of the reasonable worst case estimates of 40-60% infected and 1% of infections ending in death are close to being correct, then most countries are not going to stand by and say “life must go on” if that means 0.6% of their population might die.
There is literally life to be gained by slowing the spread and “letting the population get it slowly” as it reduces the concurrent burden on health services and allows for time to research therapeutic treatments and vaccines.
What I don’t understand is how are the estimated infection rates of 40-60% being arrived at? Even on the Diamond Princess the infection rates are well below that and you would imagine that a closed environment like that would have the highest infection rates?IF some of the reasonable worst case estimates of 40-60% infected and 1% of infections ending in death are close to being correct, then most countries are not going to stand by and say “life must go on” if that means 0.6% of their population might die.
There is literally life to be gained by slowing the spread and “letting the population get it slowly” as it reduces the concurrent burden on health services and allows for time to research therapeutic treatments and vaccines.
Edited by nffcforever on Monday 24th February 10:24
Perhaps another (better) question is if it is a simple R0 transmission calculation then over what time period are these infection rates likely to be seen? If it takes 5 years then it’s a rather different situation from it taking 5 months.
tertius said:
nffcforever said:
The available evidence and studies conducted to date suggests this is more serious that swine flu, because of the number of people it *may potentially* infect.
IF some of the reasonable worst case estimates of 40-60% infected and 1% of infections ending in death are close to being correct, then most countries are not going to stand by and say “life must go on” if that means 0.6% of their population might die.
There is literally life to be gained by slowing the spread and “letting the population get it slowly” as it reduces the concurrent burden on health services and allows for time to research therapeutic treatments and vaccines.
What I don’t understand is how are the estimated infection rates of 40-60% being arrived at? Even on the Diamond Princess the infection rates are well below that and you would imagine that a closed environment like that would have the highest infection rates?IF some of the reasonable worst case estimates of 40-60% infected and 1% of infections ending in death are close to being correct, then most countries are not going to stand by and say “life must go on” if that means 0.6% of their population might die.
There is literally life to be gained by slowing the spread and “letting the population get it slowly” as it reduces the concurrent burden on health services and allows for time to research therapeutic treatments and vaccines.
Edited by nffcforever on Monday 24th February 10:24
Perhaps another (better) question is if it is a simple R0 transmission calculation then over what time period are these infection rates likely to be seen? If it takes 5 years then it’s a rather different situation from it taking 5 months.
https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/marc-lipsitch/
https://twitter.com/mlipsitch/status/1228373884027...
“in the coming year”
tertius said:
What I don’t understand is how are the estimated infection rates of 40-60% being arrived at? Even on the Diamond Princess the infection rates are well below that and you would imagine that a closed environment like that would have the highest infection rates?
Perhaps another (better) question is if it is a simple R0 transmission calculation then over what time period are these infection rates likely to be seen? If it takes 5 years then it’s a rather different situation from it taking 5 months.
Maybe, but maybe since they were quarantined for 3 weeks since the first case, they were being extremely careful and fastidious not to spread it, by confining etc, and still 20% odd got it? In the general population, with lower levels of control it could be far higher I suppose is their thinking. Perhaps another (better) question is if it is a simple R0 transmission calculation then over what time period are these infection rates likely to be seen? If it takes 5 years then it’s a rather different situation from it taking 5 months.
red_slr said:
Yep given how long this can live on surfaces it just takes grabbing a door handle or handling money etc.
That's true. It's still odd that given the median incubation time of documented cases is 4.5 days we're not seeing greater spread in the big transport hubs. Unless all of the exported cases are the very long outlier incubation times of 14 days plus.https://www.thelancet.com/journals/landig/article/...
The fact is that most of the answers we want now won't be known until its all over. What I am sure of is that the moment this is all over funding for antiviral research and vaccine development will be pulled.
grassomaniac said:
Despite what I said about the Governor I am surprised this hasn't been announced by the WHO as a pandemic yet, unless I've missed something.
https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-china-health-who/who-says-it-no-longer-uses-pandemic-category-but-virus-still-emergency-idUKKCN20I0PD?il=0poo at Paul's said:
tertius said:
What I don’t understand is how are the estimated infection rates of 40-60% being arrived at? Even on the Diamond Princess the infection rates are well below that and you would imagine that a closed environment like that would have the highest infection rates?
Perhaps another (better) question is if it is a simple R0 transmission calculation then over what time period are these infection rates likely to be seen? If it takes 5 years then it’s a rather different situation from it taking 5 months.
Maybe, but maybe since they were quarantined for 3 weeks since the first case, they were being extremely careful and fastidious not to spread it, by confining etc, and still 20% odd got it? In the general population, with lower levels of control it could be far higher I suppose is their thinking. Perhaps another (better) question is if it is a simple R0 transmission calculation then over what time period are these infection rates likely to be seen? If it takes 5 years then it’s a rather different situation from it taking 5 months.
https://www.businessinsider.com/quarantine-may-hav...
grassomaniac said:
Despite what I said about the Governor I am surprised this hasn't been announced by the WHO as a pandemic yet, unless I've missed something.
The Guardian said:
When is a pandemic not a pandemic?
The World Health Organization (WHO) no longer has a process for declaring a pandemic, but the COVID-19 coronavirus outbreak remains an international emergency, a spokesman said on Monday.
"There is no official category (for a pandemic)," WHO spokesman Tarik Jasarevic said. "WHO does not use the old phasing system that some people may be familiar with from 2009. Under the IHR (International Health Regulations), WHO has declared a public health emergency of international concern."
That might explain it.The World Health Organization (WHO) no longer has a process for declaring a pandemic, but the COVID-19 coronavirus outbreak remains an international emergency, a spokesman said on Monday.
"There is no official category (for a pandemic)," WHO spokesman Tarik Jasarevic said. "WHO does not use the old phasing system that some people may be familiar with from 2009. Under the IHR (International Health Regulations), WHO has declared a public health emergency of international concern."
grassomaniac said:
Thanks for that.
I didn't know about the change to WHO nomenclature either until I saw that article this morning. They seem to be saying that they've already declared what amounts to a pandemic, only they've called it something different and nobody noticed.Well, screw the WHO and their new-fangled definitions. We're having a proper, good old fashioned pandemic like great-grandad had in 1918, and that's bloody it. "Public health emergency of international concern" my hairy arse.
How long does it take them to type in Iran and Italy and add them to the list on this page...?
https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/coronavirus-covid-19...
https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/coronavirus-covid-19...
Edited by nffcforever on Monday 24th February 11:02
rival38 said:
Holders of World Bank ‘pandemic bonds’ will be mighty relieved i immagine !
Maybe not.Virus fallout: World Bank 'pandemic bonds' plummet in value
red_slr said:
You would have to assume some bods in black suits have been out swabbing public areas or sampling the air at ports of entry.
That's the only reason I can think the UK have not taken a tougher stance on people coming and going.
Given the complexity of correctly sampling and detecting the virus in patients that have actively replicating virus the chances of detecting what would probably be trace amounts in the environment is minimal. That's the only reason I can think the UK have not taken a tougher stance on people coming and going.
Plus a negative result only tells you that you've failed to detect it. A pointless exercise.
Chucking the airport cleaners an extra 50 quid and telling them to keep surfaces clean would be a better use of resources
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff