Disease and pandemics thread (because it's science)

[Roger E. Moore]

Now that is odd, CNN also says SARS killed 774 and infected 8,098. Beats me.

[Copernicus]

Generally a bad idea to give antibiotics to "prevent" bacterial infection - you just end up with a resistant strain causing the infection, and contribute to the global phenomenon of antibiotic resistance.
Instead: a high index of suspicion, early sputum samples, a "best guess" antibiotic based on microscopy (which in the old days we used to do almost literally at the bedside), then an appropriate antibiotic based on the culture and sensitivities report, which takes a couple of days.

Grant Hutchison

New study that inappropriate antibiotic prescriptions do happen and do happen often. https://medicalxpress.com/news/2020-...criptions.html 'No clear rationale' for 45% of Medicaid patients' antibiotic prescriptions

[Jens]

Now that is odd, CNN also says SARS killed 774 and infected 8,098. Beats me.

I think the discrepancy is that the higher figures are total figures, so including Hong Kong, whereas the figure of 5,000 or so is just in China. It's interesting that the mortality rate was much higher in Hong Kong than China. I think it must be a reporting issue.

But apparently more people have been infected by the new coronavirus than by SARS.

[Copernicus]

The coronavirus death rate is going up about 20 percent a day. If there are 425 total deaths today then in 10 days 2631 deaths. In 20 days there will be 16300, in 30 days it will be 100,844, in 40 days 624,000, in 50 days 3.9 million, in 60 days it will be 24 million. In 75 days it would be 378 milion people. Hopefully someone finds cures.

[Roger E. Moore]

CNN: 426 dead, 20,000+ (or 19,000+) infected. "The health authority said 10,990 patients have been hospitalized in Hubei, including 576 who are in critical condition."

BBC: "The mortality rate for the new coronavirus is about 2.1%, currently far lower than the 9.6% of SARS."

[Van Rijn]

The coronavirus death rate is going up about 20 percent a day. If there are 425 total deaths today then in 10 days 2631 deaths. In 20 days there will be 16300, in 30 days it will be 100,844, in 40 days 624,000, in 50 days 3.9 million, in 60 days it will be 24 million. In 75 days it would be 378 milion people. Hopefully someone finds cures.

Are you being serious?

I think you need to check your assumptions. It looks like you’re assuming an infected population greater than the number of people on the planet at the end there.

[Jens]

Are you being serious?

I think you need to check your assumptions. It looks like you’re assuming an infected population greater than the number of people on the planet at the end there.

Yes, and it's also wrong, I think, to assume that the whole world's population will get infected and that 2% of the world's population will die. I think it will spread easily in highly populated areas, say downtown cities, but there are lots of people living in sparsely populated places who don't come into really close contact with other people that much, and if it really starts spreading outside of Japan, schools will start getting closed and stuff like that, which will reduce the contagiousness.

[a1call]

Not having a medical degree, I won't know the answer to the following question unless I ask:
Is there anyway to isolate the antibodies from people who have recovered and create vaccines using them?
Thank you for any clarification.

[Jens]

Not having a medical degree, I won't know the answer to the following question unless I ask:
Is there anyway to isolate the antibodies from people who have recovered and create vaccines using them?
Thank you for any clarification.

I may be wrong, but I think the answer to that is that yes, you can, but generally for a person with a healthy immune system it is more efficient to inject an antigen and have the body produce its own antibodies than to actually inject antibodies. I would guess it's a lot more expensive and has side effects. But I think it's done with people who have impaired immune systems.

[Copernicus]

Are you being serious?

I think you need to check your assumptions. It looks like you’re assuming an infected population greater than the number of people on the planet at the end there.

Of course one cannot predict exact outcomes. Too many variables. I did not assume that people would self quarantine, which is likely to happen. Isolation may help, but this thing has spread all over China by now. Someone may find a cure. If the death rate is 2 percent only a max of 150 million would die, but 150 million deaths would lead to other complications. Supposedly 50 million died from Spanish influenza, which is equivalent to about 200 million with today's world population.

[a1call]

I may be wrong,

I think you rarely are if ever Jens.
Thanks for the clarification.

I found the following after posting:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passive_immunity

Artificially acquired passive immunity is a short-term immunization achieved by the transfer of antibodies, which can be administered in several forms; as human or animal blood plasma or serum, as pooled human immunoglobulin for intravenous (IVIG) or intramuscular (IG) use, as high-titer human IVIG or IG from immunized donors or from donors recovering from the disease, and as monoclonal antibodies (MAb). Passive transfer is used to prevent disease or used prophylactically in the case of immunodeficiencydiseases, such as hypogammaglobulinemia.^[11][12] It is also used in the treatment of several types of acute infection, and to treat poisoning.^[2] Immunity derived from passive immunization lasts for a few weeks to three to four months.^[13][14]There is also a potential risk for hypersensitivity reactions, and serum sickness, especially from gamma globulin of non-human origin.^[8]Passive immunity provides immediate protection, but the body does not develop memory, therefore the patient is at risk of being infected by the same pathogen later unless they acquire active immunity or vaccination.^[8]

[Van Rijn]

Of course one cannot predict exact outcomes. Too many variables. I did not assume that people would self quarantine, which is likely to happen. Isolation may help, but this thing has spread all over China by now.

For certain values of “all over.” That is, I would be very surprised if it achieved anywhere near a 100% infection rate in China, which you seem to be assuming. 1% would be more plausible. I am very doubtful that public health measures would be so completely ineffective, even in dense populations.

It is possible that it could turn out to be extremely serious, but I don’t see mich reason to do the chicken little routine just yet.

[Copernicus]

For certain values of “all over.” That is, I would be very surprised if it achieved anywhere near a 100% infection rate in China, which you seem to be assuming. 1% would be more plausible. I am very doubtful that public health measures would be so completely ineffective, even in dense populations.

It is possible that it could turn out to be extremely serious, but I don’t see mich reason to do the chicken little routine just yet.

The first death from corona virus was about January 17th and China closed Wuhan within 2 weeks. How is that not shocking beyond imagination.

[a1call]

The first death from corona virus was about January 17th and China closed Wuhan within 2 weeks. How is that not shocking beyond imagination.

I think it's more like within 5 or 6 days. I think 3 cities were quarantined on January 22nd or 23rd.
Going by an old man's memory here, so corrections are welcome.

[Noclevername]

The first death from corona virus was about January 17th and China closed Wuhan within 2 weeks. How is that not shocking beyond imagination.

A government's overreaction to a new deadly infection is not that shocking. It happens all the time, just look at the overblown fears over Ebola.

[Jens]

The first death from corona virus was about January 17th and China closed Wuhan within 2 weeks. How is that not shocking beyond imagination.

By shocking do you mean because it happened so fast? It does seem fast, but you have to consider that if the virus kills 2% of victims, then there were maybe 10 other people who had the virus before that first death, and in addition, if there is a 10-day incubation period where the virus is transmissible, then there were already lots of other people infected by the time the first death took place.

[Jens]

I don't know how much you can read into this, but the increase in the death toll seems to be (slightly) decreasing. These are the rates of increase from the 10th to 15th WHO reports:

15
15.0%


14
15.7%

13
14.8%

12
17.7%

11
20.1%

10
22.3%

So it seems to be now increasing at a rate of about 15%.

[Jens]

A government's overreaction to a new deadly infection is not that shocking. It happens all the time, just look at the overblown fears over Ebola.

I'm not sure if I would say "overreaction" or "a proper abundance of caution." I'm not really ready to criticize them for quarantining Wuhan, though I hope it turns out it was unnecessary.

[Van Rijn]

The first death from corona virus was about January 17th and China closed Wuhan within 2 weeks. How is that not shocking beyond imagination.

They’re familiar with SARS, as well as other viruses in the family. It doesn’t surprise me that they would act more aggressively with that experience. I don’t see it as shocking.

[Copernicus]

I don't know how much you can read into this, but the increase in the death toll seems to be (slightly) decreasing. These are the rates of increase from the 10th to 15th WHO reports:

15
15.0%


14
15.7%

13
14.8%

12
17.7%

11
20.1%

10
22.3%

So it seems to be now increasing at a rate of about 15%.

Then it would take about 90 days to 123 million. Hopefully someone finds a cure or hopefully isolation and quarantine work.

[Roger E. Moore]

Interesting. Of those in China dead from coronavirus, 80% were over 60, 75% had a secondary disease (heart, circulatory, diabetes), and 2/3rds were male. That's me w/ diabetes 2 and HBP. Well, carry on, then.

[Tom Mazanec]

But 98% of patients recover, this is similar to annual flu. There does seem to be a degree of over reaction. However, as it stands this can only get worse as economic effect. I do wish our radio reporters would stop talking about the epicentre when they mean centre. Another good specific word getting adulterated.

But 10-20% need intensive care to survive. There are not a couple hundred million ICUs worldwide if this goes out of control.

[Tom Mazanec]

I don't know how much you can read into this, but the increase in the death toll seems to be (slightly) decreasing. These are the rates of increase from the 10th to 15th WHO reports:

15
15.0%


14
15.7%

13
14.8%

12
17.7%

11
20.1%

10
22.3%

So it seems to be now increasing at a rate of about 15%.

How much of that is Chinese censoring and/or overwhelming of testing kits?

[grant hutchison]

The first death from corona virus was about January 17th and China closed Wuhan within 2 weeks. How is that not shocking beyond imagination.

Well, I imagined it before it happened, so not that shocking, really
Really just three things you needed to know to see it coming:
1) Personal liberty is always trumped by societal obligation in China
2) China experienced SARS
3) The Chinese government perceived that they had lost face both by their initial secrecy in relation to SARS, and by the fact that that secrecy had contributed to deaths in other countries.

Once this new virus started leading to deaths, it was absolutely predictable that all the draconian stops would be pulled out to try to prevent a repeat of the SARS experience.

Grant Hutchison

[grant hutchison]

I don't know how much you can read into this, but the increase in the death toll seems to be (slightly) decreasing. These are the rates of increase from the 10th to 15th WHO reports:

15
15.0%


14
15.7%

13
14.8%

12
17.7%

11
20.1%

10
22.3%

So it seems to be now increasing at a rate of about 15%.

Yes, I've been tracking that too. Difficult to be sure what it means - either we're getting better a keeping people alive, or something has changed about the death reporting, or the R0 is falling (presumably because of public health interventions), or some combination of those.

Grant Hutchison

[Eclogite]

Yes, I've been tracking that too. Difficult to be sure what it means - either we're getting better a keeping people alive, or something has changed about the death reporting, or the R0 is falling (presumably because of public health interventions), or some combination of those.

It seems likely that, as the epidemic spread, more individuals would be correctly diagnosed. That would create an elevated and inaccurate value for the early death rate figures.

[Copernicus]

Why would the coronavirus overwhelm the healthcare in china, whereas the flu, that everybody says is so much more deadly, does not?

[Van Rijn]

Why would the coronavirus overwhelm the healthcare in china, whereas the flu, that everybody says is so much more deadly, does not?

Is that true? As far as I am aware, there is no attempt made to contain new flu varieties, but in bad years it can push healthcare to the limits with hospitalizations. On the other hand, much of the issue here, I believe, is to limit the spread of this new coronavirus. Not comparable issues.

[Copernicus]

Is that true? As far as I am aware, there is no attempt made to contain new flu varieties, but in bad years it can push healthcare to the limits with hospitalizations. On the other hand, much of the issue here, I believe, is to limit the spread of this new coronavirus. Not comparable issues.

Apparently they are using new facilities with 100000 beds and stadiums to treat people for the coronavirus, not for preventing the spread. The quarantine and isolation are the methods to prevent the spread.

[Van Rijn]

Apparently they are using new facilities with 100000 beds and stadiums to treat people for the coronavirus, not for preventing the spread.

Reference? I am aware of temporary buildings being built for a few thousand people, meant for quarantine and treatment. Of course, there are other methods, like travel restrictions, meant to limit spread.