Page 9 of 45 FirstFirst ... 789101119 ... LastLast
Results 241 to 270 of 1345

Thread: Disease and pandemics thread (because it's science)

  1. #241
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Wisconsin USA
    Posts
    3,154
    Quote Originally Posted by Van Rijn View Post
    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.
    Reference https://www.technologyreview.com/s/6...on-censorship/
    The moment an instant lasted forever, we were destined for the leading edge of eternity.

  2. #242
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    2,606
    The death rate is more than 2%.

    The 2% figure comes from dividing the deaths to date by the number of cases. Death lags behind number of cases by 24 days on average.

    If you have an exponentially increasing number of cases, the death rate is underestimated by this calculation.

    A cohort of 41 hospitalised cases from 2nd January had a death rate of 14.6%. Although these are "hospitalised cases", not "infections", so in this case the death rate could be overestimated.

    Then again, there are reports of people dying of "pneumonia". To be recorded as a coronavirus death they have to be diagnosed as such. Diagnosis and admittance to hospital depends on "nucleic test strips". Thing is, there is a shortage of test strips, so they are being sent home. When they die, it is recorded as pneumonia.

    I guess it will come out between 5-10% in the end.

  3. #243
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    The beautiful north coast (Ohio)
    Posts
    49,526
    I found this article from National Public Radio interesting. It is titled "Why The World Cares More About The New Coronavirus Than The Flu".

    The number of people who are infected with the new coronavirus that is spreading from China is dwarfed by those affected by a far more common respiratory illness: seasonal flu.

    Every year there are as many as 5 million severe flu cases worldwide and hundreds of thousands of deaths. By contrast, so far there have been about 17,000 (and rising) cases of coronavirus, most of them mild.

    Yet governments are responding to the new outbreak with drastic measures — airlifting their citizens out of China; shutting down border crossings; and in, the case of United States, barring or quarantining travelers from China's most affected province, Hubei.

    Why has the reaction been so aggressive?

    A major factor is the uncertainty surrounding this new virus, says Anthony Fauci, director of the U.S. National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.

    When it comes to the flu, Fauci said at a news conference Friday, "there's a certainty. I can tell you, 'Guaranteed, that as we get into March and April, the flu cases are going to go down.' You could predict pretty accurately what the range of the mortality is and the hospitalizations."
    But even if the death rate for the new coronavirus turns out to be more on par with the flu, Althaus says there's another consideration: If officials could permanently eliminate the flu, they would. The trouble is that the flu is already too widespread. By contrast, this new coronavirus has only just started circulating in humans.

    "We basically have the opportunity to prevent spread of a new respiratory disease in the first place," says Althaus.

    Indeed, Althaus notes, nearly 20 years ago the world succeeded in eliminating another coronavirus — the one that caused severe acute respiratory syndrome, or SARS — which infected at least 8,000 people globally and killed hundreds.
    At night the stars put on a show for free (Carole King)

    All moderation in purple - The rules

  4. #244
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Posts
    13,075
    Here are a few graphs that help tell the story. The Ro value, however, may be as high as 4, which is another reason to push confinement actions.

    CFR as of Feb 3.jpg
    Cases Growth Rate thru Feb 3.jpg

    Data from Wiki.
    Last edited by George; 2020-Feb-04 at 07:14 PM.
    We know time flies, we just can't see its wings.

  5. #245
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    14,080
    I just calculated the increase in deaths for yesterday, and this time I got and increase of 425 to 492, so a 13.6% increase. Again, it seems to be a slowing trend. Perhaps the quarantine measures are having an effect on the spread.
    As above, so below

  6. #246
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    18,680
    Quote Originally Posted by Copernicus View Post
    So you got information from an article about misinformation and censorship, mentioning things that may or may not be true?

    And at that, the claim is not that the 100.000 claimed beds would only be for treatment, with no attempt at quarantine as you suggested.

    "The problem with quotes on the Internet is that it is hard to verify their authenticity." — Abraham Lincoln

    I say there is an invisible elf in my backyard. How do you prove that I am wrong?

    The Leif Ericson Cruiser

  7. #247
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Posts
    13,075
    I just saw that the CDC, having pushed through the FDA, has today found approval to ship a "first diagnostic" to 137 (IIRC) US labs. This after having the genetics from China in just one month. They also have a candidate vaccine, but emphasize it may indeed be a year to produce a proper one.
    We know time flies, we just can't see its wings.

  8. #248
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    18,680
    Yes, i read about the vaccine. It takes time to verify one is safe and effective and then to put it into production. Still, wouldn’t shock me to see test vaccines tried in China on an accelerated basis, or elsewhere if it really did spread heavily internationally.

    "The problem with quotes on the Internet is that it is hard to verify their authenticity." — Abraham Lincoln

    I say there is an invisible elf in my backyard. How do you prove that I am wrong?

    The Leif Ericson Cruiser

  9. #249
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Wisconsin USA
    Posts
    3,154
    Quote Originally Posted by Van Rijn View Post
    So you got information from an article about misinformation and censorship, mentioning things that may or may not be true?

    And at that, the claim is not that the 100.000 claimed beds would only be for treatment, with no attempt at quarantine as you suggested.
    There were others.

    https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sour...1434Q_&ampcf=1
    The moment an instant lasted forever, we were destined for the leading edge of eternity.

  10. #250
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Wisconsin USA
    Posts
    3,154
    Quote Originally Posted by Jens View Post
    I just calculated the increase in deaths for yesterday, and this time I got and increase of 425 to 492, so a 13.6% increase. Again, it seems to be a slowing trend. Perhaps the quarantine measures are having an effect on the spread.
    Would this be (492-425)/425*100 =15.6 percent
    The moment an instant lasted forever, we were destined for the leading edge of eternity.

  11. #251
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    14,080
    Quote Originally Posted by Copernicus View Post
    Would this be (492-425)/425*100 =15.6 percent
    Sorry, yes, that is the correct way to calculate it. But in that case all my previous calculations were wrong as well, because in all of the cases I was dividing the difference by the larger number, so in this case (492-425)/492*100. That would make the ratio larger, but it would also make all the previous calculations larger. So the fact that is is growing smaller would remain the same.
    As above, so below

  12. #252
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Wisconsin USA
    Posts
    3,154
    Quote Originally Posted by Jens View Post
    Sorry, yes, that is the correct way to calculate it. But in that case all my previous calculations were wrong as well, because in all of the cases I was dividing the difference by the larger number, so in this case (492-425)/492*100. That would make the ratio larger, but it would also make all the previous calculations larger. So the fact that is is growing smaller would remain the same.
    Thanks.
    The moment an instant lasted forever, we were destined for the leading edge of eternity.

  13. #253
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    1,816
    A Google search is the only thing I can do.
    https://www.google.com/search?q=Trea...od+transfusion
    Perhaps it can somehow help.

  14. #254
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    2,606
    How about this to estimate the case fatality rate:

    According to the link below, time from symptoms appearing to death is 14 days.

    On 23 Jan 2020 there were 844 cases.

    +14 days to 04 Feb 2020, and there are 66 deaths on that date.

    66/844 = 7.8% case fatality rate.

    There are errors in this method of course. But at least it accounts for the lag between symptoms and death, which the 2% estimate does not.

    https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/

  15. #255
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    2,606
    Note on my Post #254:

    The number of NEW cases on 23 Jan 2020 was 265. Above, I used the total cases on the books on that date, which was 844.

    If instead we use this 265 as our cohort and see the deaths 14 days later, we have 66 deaths divided by cohort of 265.

    This gives a case fatality rate of nearly 25%. I believe this to be too high but not sure why it has worked out so high.

    As of just now, 13% of 24,627 cases are "critical". There will however be a lag between symptoms appearing and going "critical", so 13% is likely an underestimate of how many end up critical.

  16. #256
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    4,233
    As of now (CNN), 492 dead, 24,500 infected. Two cruise ships quarantined. Hong Kong healthcare workers on strike, ERs are closed. Rumors of new vaccine are unsubstantiated but have dramatic effects on oil prices, etc.
    Last edited by Roger E. Moore; 2020-Feb-05 at 02:00 PM.
    Do good work. —Virgil Ivan "Gus" Grissom

  17. #257
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    1,816
    Quote Originally Posted by kzb View Post
    Note on my Post #254:

    The number of NEW cases on 23 Jan 2020 was 265. Above, I used the total cases on the books on that date, which was 844.

    If instead we use this 265 as our cohort and see the deaths 14 days later, we have 66 deaths divided by cohort of 265.

    This gives a case fatality rate of nearly 25%. I believe this to be too high but not sure why it has worked out so high.

    As of just now, 13% of 24,627 cases are "critical". There will however be a lag between symptoms appearing and going "critical", so 13% is likely an underestimate of how many end up critical.
    I think your math is flawed.
    You seem to assume that all the critical cases end up dead and that all deaths occur precisely 14 days after being detected.
    While you have a point in the lag between number of deaths and the number of reported infections the effect will decrease as time goes by and the two curves get more precise. All indications so far is that the death rate will be less than 2% of the total reported which is definitely a fraction of the actual cases.
    Still, even one case of death by suffocation is too much and must be prevented if possible.
    Just my 2 cents.

  18. #258
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    4,233
    Several news reports that infection rate is much underreported as many sick people report online that they were turned away from Wuhan's overcrowded hospitals or that no testing kits were left. Reports that many with mild cases are self-isolating. Fatality rate could be as low as 1% or lower.
    Last edited by Roger E. Moore; 2020-Feb-05 at 03:26 PM.
    Do good work. —Virgil Ivan "Gus" Grissom

  19. #259
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Wisconsin USA
    Posts
    3,154
    Quote Originally Posted by Roger E. Moore View Post
    Several news reports that infection rate is much underreported as many sick people report online that they were turned away from Wuhan's overcrowded hospitals or that no testing kits were left. Reports that many with mild cases are self-isolating. Fatality rate could be as low as 1% or lower.
    This is a little disconcerting. https://www.taiwannews.com.tw/en/news/3871594

    Tencent may have accidentally leaked real data on Wuhan virus deaths
    The moment an instant lasted forever, we were destined for the leading edge of eternity.

  20. #260
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    2,606
    Quote Originally Posted by Roger E. Moore View Post
    Several news reports that infection rate is much underreported as many sick people report online that they were turned away from Wuhan's overcrowded hospitals or that no testing kits were left. Reports that many with mild cases are self-isolating. Fatality rate could be as low as 1% or lower.
    Yes the infection rate is being underreported because the test strips are being rationed.

    Far from seeing "mild cases self-isolating", I am reading that people are going home to die because they can't be admitted. The death is then recorded as "pulmonary" whatever, and not coronavirus.

    Even the current deaths divided by the case number is 2.0% (493/24642) and it is well known that deaths lag behind symptoms. 2% is thus the minimum possible death rate. It can't be as low as 1% unless there are a huge number (c. 25k) of unrecorded "mild cases". Then you get into what is the definition of a case. It can only be the recorded number for comparability purposes, i.e. 24,642 at the time of writing.

  21. #261
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    2,606
    Quote Originally Posted by a1call View Post
    I think your math is flawed.
    You seem to assume that all the critical cases end up dead and that all deaths occur precisely 14 days after being detected.
    While you have a point in the lag between number of deaths and the number of reported infections the effect will decrease as time goes by and the two curves get more precise. All indications so far is that the death rate will be less than 2% of the total reported which is definitely a fraction of the actual cases.
    Still, even one case of death by suffocation is too much and must be prevented if possible.
    Just my 2 cents.
    I know it is flawed. The big problem is what is the cohort size from which the current day's deaths are drawn. I am hoping some of our more mathematically inclined members can help.

    I don't agree that all indications are the death rate will be less than 2%. On the contrary, 2% is the minimum possible death rate. The totals at the time of writing are 493 deaths/24642 cases, which is 2.0%. Those 493 deaths are drawn from a cohort infected many days ago, when the case number was far smaller than 24642. So it must be greater than 2% if anything.

  22. #262
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    2,606
    Quote Originally Posted by Copernicus View Post
    This is a little disconcerting. https://www.taiwannews.com.tw/en/news/3871594

    Tencent may have accidentally leaked real data on Wuhan virus deaths
    I saw that as well. I've seen a lot of frightening things online, including armed squads marching through the streets with clinical gear on. A doctor is reported saying more patients are going out dead than cured in his department. But then I don't know if it is fake news.

  23. #263
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    1,816
    I think the correct way to compensate for the lag in the number of deaths related to the number of reported infections is to establish/assume a number say 7 days for the average number of days between reporting a person infected and reporting the same person demised. Then divide the total-number of deaths by the total-number of infected from that many days before.
    One trend with the reported figures is that there seems to be a more exponential growth for the number of infected than the number of deaths which is an expected feature with a new outbreak since only the more severe cases would be detected.
    It might be a bit of a comparison between apples and oranges, but it would be useful if someone would start calculating the number of lagged-deaths (current=2) outside of China with the total number of infections outside of China from a few days ago (probably a 14 day Max for the worst case scenario).
    That should eliminate any Chinese manipulation of real numbers if any.
    Just my 2 cents worth.

  24. #264
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    18,776
    Once you start introducing the conspiracy theories, there's essentially nothing left to discuss--we're all going to die miserably in a welter of our own secretions, and this thread might as well be in OTB (because it's not science any more).
    Does anyone else find the idea that Tencent might be party to the "real" figures, if the real figures were being suppressed by the Chinese government, deeply improbable?

    But I'll just wish you all good luck, and go and busy myself with something else.

    Grant Hutchison

  25. #265
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    2,606
    Quote Originally Posted by a1call View Post
    I think the correct way to compensate for the lag in the number of deaths related to the number of reported infections is to establish/assume a number say 7 days for the average number of days between reporting a person infected and reporting the same person demised. Then divide the total-number of deaths by the total-number of infected from that many days before.
    One trend with the reported figures is that there seems to be a more exponential growth for the number of infected than the number of deaths which is an expected feature with a new outbreak since only the more severe cases would be detected.
    It might be a bit of a comparison between apples and oranges, but it would be useful if someone would start calculating the number of lagged-deaths (current=2) outside of China with the total number of infections outside of China from a few days ago (probably a 14 day Max for the worst case scenario).
    That should eliminate any Chinese manipulation of real numbers if any.
    Just my 2 cents worth.
    You can't track the person infected and the same person demised. All we have are numbers on dates going back 14 days, patients are not identified.

    There is a paper out on bioarxiv which says the death rate in Asian males is expected to be 15%. Asian females lower, and Caucasians lower still. This because of the incidence of a certain cell receptor in the lung in the different groups. Can't seem to access it just now.

  26. #266
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    4,233
    arxiv paper attempting to estimate the basic reproduction number of the novel coronavirus. https://arxiv.org/abs/2001.10530
    Do good work. —Virgil Ivan "Gus" Grissom

  27. #267
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    4,233
    Quote Originally Posted by kzb View Post
    There is a paper out on bioarxiv which says the death rate in Asian males is expected to be 15%. Asian females lower, and Caucasians lower still. This because of the incidence of a certain cell receptor in the lung in the different groups. Can't seem to access it just now.
    Biorxiv.org seems to be flooded with coronavirus papers. Warnings are posted that these papers are not peer reviewed.
    Do good work. —Virgil Ivan "Gus" Grissom

  28. #268
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    The beautiful north coast (Ohio)
    Posts
    49,526
    Chemical & Engineering News has an update on 2019-nCoV that they are updating daily. It has information about the origins, the spread, and other issues.

    According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, coronaviruses, in general, cause respiratory illness, with fevers, runny noses, coughs, and sore throats. This new coronavirus appears to be no different. Disease severity for 2019-nCoV has been variable, with some people requiring hospitalization and others reporting mild symptoms.

    The World Health Organization reported that the novel coronavirus’ R0, which is a number that describes a disease’s spread, is between 1.4 and 2.5, meaning every infected person will, on average, infect about two more people. A team of researchers in China calculated the R0 as between 2.24 and 3.58 (bioRxiv 2020, DOI: 10.1101/2020.01.23.916395). The R0 of seasonal flu is about 1.4, but varies. For measles, it’s between 12 and 18.
    Some infected people are being treated with interferon and a combination HIV drug called Kaletra (iopinavir and ritonavir) sold by AbbVie. Researchers from the Chinese Academy of Sciences have published a list of drugs they say could work against the coronavirus’ main protease, including the antibiotic colistin, several antitumor drugs, and perphenazine, an antipsychotic. Knocking out the virus’s protease prevents it from successfully replicating.
    At night the stars put on a show for free (Carole King)

    All moderation in purple - The rules

  29. #269
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Fresno CA USA
    Posts
    1,467
    My personal experiences with viruses tells me to keep my hands away from my face (and perhaps use a surgical mask in extreme circumstances). I am not looking forward warmer temps and wetter weather.


    "Truth is the daughter of time, not of authority."
    Francis Bacon


    Life isn't about finding yourself. Life is about creating yourself
    George Bernard Shaw


    "Man must evolve for all human conflict a method which rejects revenge, aggression and retaliation. the foundation of such a method is love."
    Martin Luther King

  30. #270
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Norfolk UK and some of me is in Northern France
    Posts
    8,917
    Quote Originally Posted by Strange View Post
    Apparently, a lot of people think it means "the very centre" (or something like that)
    Indeed. Maybe it will become “the epidemic centre”! But this is far from the only abuse of epicentre. Oh well, we lost control of “incredible”, at least we still have epidemic and pandemic being tested as we watch.
    sicut vis videre esto
    When we realize that patterns don't exist in the universe, they are a template that we hold to the universe to make sense of it, it all makes a lot more sense.
    Originally Posted by Ken G

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •