Page 40 of 73 FirstFirst ... 30383940414250 ... LastLast
Results 1,171 to 1,200 of 2161

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

  1. #1171
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    27,229
    Quote Originally Posted by grant hutchison View Post
    The thing about the herd immunity threshold is that it varies with R0: the proportion of a randomly mixing homegeneous population that must be immune in order to prevent disease spread is 1-1/R0.
    Yes that's true, but that doesn't mean herd immunity works unless it's either very high (like the canonical 50% value I used), or R0 is weirdly close to 1. But if we can get R0 weirdly close to 1, it would be much better to just get it below 1. And the 50% goal is nothing short of catastrophic. So there's no situation where substantial herd immunity on a one year timescale or less makes any sense.
    And if you isolate the part of the population most at risk of winding up on an ICU ventilator (which is what's being implemented in the UK today), then you can afford to have more new infections per week without running out of ventilators.
    That strategy made more sense when it looked like only elderly needed ventilators. It seems to be more true that younger people often do need ventilators, but they are more likely to survive the experience. So although separating R0 into two different populations might help reduce death rates, I don't think it will by itself be enough to alleviate the healthcare crisis and wartime triage problem.
    (And if we were to find an antiviral cocktail that is effective in moderating the COVID-19 pneumonia, then that would allow us to accept more infections per week without running out of ventilators, too. But of course we can't pin our hopes on that.)
    Yes, I'm certainly hoping that medical advances can help, but I'm going with the current situation.
    It's a fine balancing act, though, and it's becoming evident that we don't have enough control over the behavioural aspects to actually make this into a long flat curve.
    I'm fine with shooting for a long-term flat curve, despite its difficulties to achieve-- my issue is with the claim that this will lead to a significant fraction of people getting the virus, i.e., both flat and high. The real reason to flatten the curve is to drastically reduce the total number of people who get the virus, which it does very effectively-- it's the often-heard idea that "we'll mostly all get it but we can slow that down" that just doesn't make sense. I don't see any situation where that is not a disaster, unless it happens over a timescale longer than the time to get vaccines, rendering it of null value in terms of herd immunity. Basically, it all comes down to the fact that the infection curve is so sensitively dependent on R0, that you always get either a significant fraction of your population sick, or a rather small fraction, there just isn't much phase space for anything in between (because that's the nature of 1 - 1/R0).
    What looks like happening is a cycle of imposing and relaxing draconian measures, with the infection returning when the measures are relaxed.
    Yes, somehow a sustainable steady state must be discovered, where R0 is in the vicinity of 0.8-1.1 or so. Less than 0.8 is overkill, and anything above 1.1 is starting to risk overwhelming the ventilators.

    In the UK, the latest calculations reportedly show that that such a cycle would need to go on for two years (presumably damping with time), before the social measures could come off and stay off. But if you want any kind of social freedom in the meantime, then every little bit of herd immunity acquired along the way is helpful.
    I agree that if you are finding your R0 is around 1.1, then any amount of immunity will help. That's just a pretty narrow regime, it might take a long time to find the social measures that do that, and by then hopefully we are looking at cures and/or vaccines, or milder mutations. All I'm really saying is the goal cannot be to allow a 50% level of infection, just over a timeframe of a few months to a year-- if we can flatten the curve enough to do that, it's much better to just flatten it a little more still, and not have anywhere close to half the population exposed (as that would always lead to the healthcare crisis, it's just too many patients). By the time you can flatten it to a year and have 50% infection rate, you could drop it to 1% infection rate with only the smallest additional suppression, because that's exactly where the total number of cases becomes incredibly sensitive to R0. I think the policy of all countries, in regard to their countermeasures, should be no more than a few percent total infection rate, as any effort to raise that with slightly less draconion measures would be very ill advised since it wouldn't be much different in terms of social freedom, but vastly different in the ERs.
    Last edited by Ken G; 2020-Mar-23 at 07:47 AM.

  2. #1172
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Norfolk UK and some of me is in Northern France
    Posts
    9,125
    Surely the point is R0 is an average, useful for math modelling, but R actual is very varied. A genuine self isolated infected person scores 0 but a symptomless carrier could infect dozens easily. These super infectors are the ones we need to concentrate on to bring that average under one.
    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

  3. #1173
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    19,185
    Quote Originally Posted by profloater View Post
    Surely the point is R0 is an average, useful for math modelling, but R actual is very varied. A genuine self isolated infected person scores 0 but a symptomless carrier could infect dozens easily. These super infectors are the ones we need to concentrate on to bring that average under one.
    Potential superspreaders are difficult to identify, but there's definitely a big behavioural component to superspreading. Typhoid Mary was leaking typhoid bacteria, for sure, but she wouldn't have spread the disease to so many other people if she'd modified her behaviour and stopped working as a cook. So if you can get the behavioural changes in place, and control the defaulters, you're also addressing the superspreaders.
    The other component to getting on top of superspreading events, which we're doing poorly at present, is widespread testing and contact tracing--which becomes difficult once an epidemic is well underway.

    Good recent review from the CDC here.

    Grant Hutchison

  4. #1174
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Norfolk UK and some of me is in Northern France
    Posts
    9,125
    Quote Originally Posted by grant hutchison View Post
    Potential superspreaders are difficult to identify, but there's definitely a big behavioural component to superspreading. Typhoid Mary was leaking typhoid bacteria, for sure, but she wouldn't have spread the disease to so many other people if she'd modified her behaviour and stopped working as a cook. So if you can get the behavioural changes in place, and control the defaulters, you're also addressing the superspreaders.
    The other component to getting on top of superspreading events, which we're doing poorly at present, is widespread testing and contact tracing--which becomes difficult once an epidemic is well underway.

    Good recent review from the CDC here.

    Grant Hutchison
    Thank you, excellent reference. There seems to me to be one more extreme policy available, which is to encourage survivors to undertake jobs where close contact cannot be avoided. I know there are delivery drivers confined to their cabs to reduce their own risk, and NHS staff inadequately protected during testing, and so on. Survivors could be given a route to volunteer and financial incentive. Plus training. With a prospect of years, this aspect should be worth a centralised and local effort.
    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

  5. #1175
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Norfolk UK and some of me is in Northern France
    Posts
    9,125
    Is the publicised finger prick antibody test (UK) genuine and approved for use?
    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

  6. #1176
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    19,185
    Quote Originally Posted by profloater View Post
    Is the publicised finger prick antibody test (UK) genuine and approved for use?
    A lot of these are popping up, and no doubt one or more will come into use soon, but there's a lack of validation at present that makes public health authorities reluctant to engage with them. We need good data on sensitivity and specificity before we can know which populations (if any) these tests will be useful for.

    Grant Hutchison

  7. #1177
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    NEOTP Atlanta, GA
    Posts
    3,130
    As an aside, The New York Times has suspended subscription requirements to read stories about the Coronavirus. And that’s about all there is on the site right now.


    https://www.nytimes.com/news-event/c...e=articleShare

  8. #1178
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    19,185
    Singapore's National Environment Agency has collated a couple of potentially useful tables of disinfectants active against coronaviruses generally, which they will update as data comes in on SARS-CoV-2. The table of active ingredients and working concentrations is particularly helpful, I think.

    Grant Hutchison

  9. #1179
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    27,229
    Quote Originally Posted by grant hutchison View Post
    Good recent review from the CDC here.
    It is remarkable that the numbers quoted in that article for various diseases involving superspreading (at one point it says "20% of the population contributed to >80% of transmission" and at another point "3% of cases were estimated to be responsible for 61% of infections") are consistent with a much broader effect called the "Pareto principle." That principle is said to appear in many unrelated situations, and there seems to be some fundamental scale-invariant probability distribution behind it. For example, one can note that the 20/80 numbers are consistent with the 3/61, because if 20% cause 80%, then 20% of that 20% cause 80% of the 80%, meaning 4% cause 64%, if these various subsets are independent copies of the same overall phenomenon.

    I would say the fact that "superspreading" seems to follow this widely applied principle (originally intended to apply to the idea that in free-market economies, 20% of the population acquires 80% of the wealth, 4% acquires 64%, and 1/600 of the people have about half the wealth), means that it is perhaps not so much a special behavior of communicable diseases, but a more widespread example of scale-free behavior of a certain underlying power law exponent. Not a lot is known about why the scale-free behavior is of this overall type, but it is reminiscent of nonlinear phenomena of a common fractile dimension-- another thing that is not well understood. But the main keys would appear to be the combination of nonlinear elements with scale-free behavior, where the nonlinearily plays out in the form of superspreaders being exceptionally qualified for what they do, and the scale-free elements play out in the sense that the domains in which the superspreaders function are a kind of microcosm of the entire society at large.

    So what this article is basically saying, in a nutshell, is that the same strategies that are often applied in a wide variety of situations (including things like product safety and computer code debugging) that follow the Pareto principle should also be applied to epidemics. Engineers who operate in those spheres already know a lot about those kinds of strategies, perhaps some of them could be useful to the epidemiologists as consultants. The greatest benefit would be in discovering what fraction of the social freedom infringement and economic impact is of largest efficacy agaist the epidemic, presumably in terms of what measures have the greatest impact on the superspreaders. Identifying that might allow the most sustainable disease control.
    Last edited by Ken G; 2020-Mar-23 at 02:41 PM.

  10. #1180
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Wisconsin USA
    Posts
    3,166
    Quote Originally Posted by PetersCreek View Post
    Indeed. I are one of those people and I'm on a couple of those medications.
    I'm in the same boat. Sorry you have to go through this.
    The moment an instant lasted forever, we were destined for the leading edge of eternity.

  11. #1181
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    27,229
    Here's another thought related to not treating R0 as a global average but instead looking more at the details of disease spread. It looks like after lockdown is invoked, deaths continue to rise for about two weeks before starting to decline, and after that they decline sharply. That seems like a surprisingly slow response, given that serious symptoms tend to appear about a week after infection, and then the subsequent response seems surprisingly fast. I would speculate that what we are seeing there is that even after lockdown, the disease continues to spread within households, which is to be expected. The timescales seem to work out as well, if one imagines that it takes about one week for an infected family member to spread it to the rest of the household, and a week after that for the severe symptoms to appear. Then after the entire household passes through the severe period, the cases drop precipitously.

    If this is a correct interpretation of those timescales, it suggests that perhaps lockdown of households could be improved as a strategy by locking down individuals within the household. This is of course quite tricky given that a household is usually a family, with longstanding patterns of interaction that are highly conducive to disease transmission. Also, if a member gets sick, it is essential that other family members serve as healthcare providers, given that outside healthcare must be restricted to only the most serious cases. So either we have to accept that entire households will come down with the virus, and hope the total number of infected households won't overtax the respirators, or else we need guidelines that help salvage sections of the household. For example, the first week of lockdown could come with self quarantine of all family members, who practice strict social distancing within the household. Then, if one shows symptoms of being ill, only one other member becomes their caregiver, with complete quarantine from all others. This could in principle spread out the time it takes for the whole household from being infected by another week or two, which might be an important means of "flattening the curve" in the short run, after lockdown. Guidelines like that are currently not being offered.

    This might have been a good idea to instigate following the spring breaks in the U.S., as we have lots of college students who travelled and partied in groups, finding their dorms are closed at college with online classes, who then return to their households and start the transmission all over again. It would be self-limited transmission, but it should mean that we continue to see cases rise in the US for about another two weeks, as entire households fall to this new meaning of spring break fever.

  12. #1182
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    19,185
    Quote Originally Posted by Ken G View Post
    It is remarkable that the numbers quoted in that article for various diseases involving superspreading (at one point it says "20% of the population contributed to >80% of transmission" and at another point "3% of cases were estimated to be responsible for 61% of infections") are consistent with a much broader effect called the "Pareto principle."
    Yes, although not mentioned by name in the article, it's a tool much used in epidemiology and health care planning. First random example from the literature here.

    Grant Hutchison

  13. #1183
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Clear Lake City, TX
    Posts
    12,896
    From Matador Travel Security
    March 23, 2020

    Some positive news: Almost all new infections in China continue to be imported ones. The infection rate in South Korea continues to be slowed at this time. In Germany there is cautious optimism that the exponential upwards curve in new coronavirus infections is flattening off for the first time thanks to social distancing measures in force, school closures, and instructions on hand-washing, according to the head of the country’s Robert Koch public health institute, though an extra couple of days would be needed to confirm this.

    Following the announcement by U.S. President President Donald Trump on March 18 that the U.S. Canadian border will be closed to non-essential traffic, the closure came into effect at 11.59 EDT on March 20. The closure does not apply to the movement of trade and essential supplies through the border, nor essential workers such as medical workers, accredited diplomats and airline employees. The closure will be in effect until at least 12.00 (local time) on 21 April, at which time the Canadian and U.S. governments will evaluate whether or not it ought to continue. All travelers arriving from outside Canada, including Canadian nationals and their immediate family members and residents, are recommended to self-quarantine for 14 days upon entry to the country.

    President Trump announced on March 20 that the US and Mexico have implemented new rules similar to those agreed to with Canada on March 18, restricting non-essential travel across the border. The rules will allow for essential travel, such as travel for trade purposes, medical reasons, emergency and public health services, or education-related travel. Acting Homeland Security Secretary Chad Wolf emphasized that the restrictions are not meant to harm economic activity, assuring that trade and commerce between Mexico and the U.S. will not be affected.

    On March 19 the US State Department raised their Global Health Advisory to its highest level; Level 4 - Do Not Travel. The State Department advised, "Many countries are experiencing COVID-19 outbreaks and implementing travel restrictions and mandatory quarantines, closing borders, and prohibiting non-citizens from entry with little advance notice. Airlines have cancelled many international flights and several cruise operators have suspended operations or cancelled trips. If you choose to travel internationally, your travel plans may be severely disrupted, and you may be forced to remain outside of the United States for an indefinite time frame." Duration of restrictions vary considerably. This reinforces the importance of keeping up to date with the fast-changing situation. ...

    The global number of reported infections now stands at 350,536 with 15,328 fatalities. 100,182 people are reported to have recovered ...

    Updated figures can be found on Johns Hopkins University's coronavirus tracking map.​​​​​​
    Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by ignorance or stupidity.
    Isaac Asimov

    You know, the very powerful and the very stupid have one thing in common. They don’t alter their views to fit the facts. They alter the facts to fit their views.
    Doctor Who

    Moderation will be in purple.
    Rules for Posting to This Board

  14. #1184
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    27,229
    Quote Originally Posted by grant hutchison View Post
    Yes, although not mentioned by name in the article, it's a tool much used in epidemiology and health care planning. First random example from the literature here.
    Aha, then the epidimiologists are already on top of that. Not clear it really helps much, but perhaps it informs a different attitude-- instead of a "kitchen sink" approach where "every little bit helps", it might suggest more of an approach that focuses on the most effective disease suppressors that are also the least invasive to the economy (such as handwashing, of course, but either that by itself is not nearly enough or people just aren't listening). That is certainly the tightrope we will be looking at for the next year or so!

  15. #1185
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    27,229
    "The global number of reported infections now stands at 350,536 with 15,328 fatalities. 100,182 people are reported to have recovered ..." Thus there have been 115,510 completed cases with 15,328 fatalities, which is a death rate of about 13% among resolved cases worldwide.

    In China, there were 75973 completed cases with 3270 deaths, so that's a death rate of only 4%.

    It looks like the death rate is high during the exponential phase, presumably because cases that go badly do so fairly quickly, and then settles down to about 4%. To get the actual death rate, one needs to include the cases that are subclinical or otherwise never get reported. I wonder what that percentage is? We can get a handle on that by looking at groups that are tested without any symptoms, like government bodies or sports teams, and watch how many would never have reported symptoms. Is there data on the subclinical fraction? Then we can know the actual death rate.

  16. #1186
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    1,894
    Is there an online map that shows active coronavirus cases as a percentage of countries' populations? (as opposed to showing the number of cases per country)

  17. #1187
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Posts
    13,162
    With guarded optimism, and with some reluctance since such things can be misinterpreted, there is a preliminary report with positive results for a possible therapeutic, though hardly anything to begin to push until real studies can be done.

    It is the combination of two drugs: hydroxychlorquine (a traditional malaria drug) and Z-pack.

    From Fox video this morning with Dr. Oz... here.

    Does this have merit? [Google related articles show more caution must be applied.]
    We know time flies, we just can't see its wings.

  18. #1188
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Posts
    13,162
    Quote Originally Posted by tashirosgt View Post
    Is there an online map that shows active coronavirus cases as a percentage of countries' populations? (as opposed to showing the number of cases per country)
    Yep. [Scroll down to table. It's in the last column. You can click the header to get increasing or decreasing order.]
    We know time flies, we just can't see its wings.

  19. #1189
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    14,149
    Quote Originally Posted by George View Post
    With guarded optimism, and with some reluctance since such things can be misinterpreted, there is a preliminary report with positive results for a possible therapeutic, though hardly anything to begin to push until real studies can be done.

    It is the combination of two drugs: hydroxychlorquine (a traditional malaria drug) and Z-pack.

    From Fox video this morning with Dr. Oz... here.

    Does this have merit? [Google related articles show more caution must be applied.]
    The problem with that study is that they just looked a whether the virus could be detected at a point in time (I think six days after starting treatment). And the treated patients did better. But whether that means anything therapeutically is a different issue. Of the 26 people who were treated with hydroxycloroquine, six "dropped out" of the trial because: three were transferred to ICUs, one died, one left the hospital, and one had side effects. So although the treatment was apparently good at getting rid of the virus, it didn't stop three people from becoming critical or one person from dying...
    As above, so below

  20. #1190
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    18,860
    Quote Originally Posted by George View Post
    With guarded optimism, and with some reluctance since such things can be misinterpreted, there is a preliminary report with positive results for a possible therapeutic, though hardly anything to begin to push until real studies can be done.

    It is the combination of two drugs: hydroxychlorquine (a traditional malaria drug) and Z-pack.

    From Fox video this morning with Dr. Oz... here.

    Does this have merit? [Google related articles show more caution must be applied.]
    A much less optimistic take here, from a skeptical doctor that I trust a lot more than Oz. Note that there will be a swipe or two at certain politicians. Honestly, it is hard to avoid articles that don’t bring up politics one way or another when discussing this subject:

    https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/are...-for-covid-19/

    A summary is that the existing not peer reviewed paper was unimpressive and poorly done with a small number of research subjects. There are also questions about the investigators. The medicines might have useful antiviral activity against this virus, but that will need to be determined in proper studies and don’t be surprised if results are disappointing. Due to the hype, there is now a shortage of the medicines which do have important existing uses. There have been various doctors getting them just in case for their families, even dentists writing prescriptions for them. The medicines also have dangers, as both drugs can affect the heart, and the combination can increase the risk. Also they have some immunity suppression effects which has its own risks. Damage to vision is also possible.
    Last edited by Van Rijn; 2020-Mar-24 at 02:56 AM.

    "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

  21. #1191
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    14,149
    Just an observation about behavior. It's been so weird to see the panic buying of groceries in the US and elsewhere. There really hasn't been anything like that here in Japan. On the day the toilet paper disappeared about three weeks ago I think, people were also buying up things like bread and rice. But now shopping is back to normal (except for toilet paper, masks, and disinfectant spray). But I wonder if some of is is just about the size of refrigerators. Because actually, at my apartment, there are just two of us (me and my wife) and our freezer was packed full even last autumn before any of this started--it's always full because our kitchen isn't very big... So there just isn't that much place to put things even if we buy them.
    As above, so below

  22. #1192
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    27,229
    For some reason in the US right now a new dialog has emerged, the "dollars vs. lives" issue-- I'm not kidding, that's exactly the language we're seeing now, as though there was a choice between saving the economy or saving the people, like a nation is something other than a collection of people and dollars exist to do something other than serve people. No recognition that both the economy and the people benefit from controlling the spread of the disease, over the long haul. It's as though there is actually serious consideration of letting the virus run its course just to keep the economy moving normally, as if people can be ordered to suspend social distancing and get themselves infected. We might actually see a shift in the US from the people not obeying limitations imposed on them by their government, to people disregarding orders from the government to avoid safe precautions. Imagine sports teams being told they have to play against opponents who might be infected, or fans being told it's safe to pack themselves into arenas because they're going to get sick soon enough anyway. That's a guarantee of wartime triage in the hospitals, and I hardly think the economy does better in the long run. At the very least, the insurance companies would need bailouts. Maybe they want to solve the problem of social security payments to retired people, perhaps a quarter of whom will die in that scenario.

    Let's hope the dialog soon shifts to where it should have been all along-- finding the social and economic compromises that keeps the disease in check but allows goods and services to continue moving. Dollars were invented to make that easier, not to become a priority in themselves.
    Last edited by Ken G; 2020-Mar-24 at 05:12 AM.

  23. #1193
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    14,149
    I completely agree it's really odd to worry about the effect it will have on the economy, per se. Of course, it's important to consider the effects that an economic downturn will have on people, and to try to craft a response the contains the virus as best as possible while minimizing the shock to the economy, as you say. But worrying about avoiding a recession because we'd prefer to have growth seems weird given the circumstances.
    As above, so below

  24. #1194
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    3,567
    World: "There's no way we can shut everything down in order to lower emissions, slow climate change and protect the environment".

    Mother Nature: "Here's a virus. Practice".

  25. #1195
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    18,860
    Quote Originally Posted by Selfsim View Post
    World: "There's no way we can shut everything down in order to lower emissions, slow climate change and protect the environment".

    Mother Nature: "Here's a virus. Practice".
    Yeah sure, practice destroying the economy. Obviously, what we are doing now is unsustainable without at least changing our energy sources to nuclear, solar, wind and other non-fossil energy sources. Without doing that, I suppose we could prioritize food production and let the rest of the economy die, but that would kill far more people than the pandemic and would be a terrible way to live for the survivors.

    "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

  26. #1196
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    18,860
    Quote Originally Posted by Jens View Post
    I completely agree it's really odd to worry about the effect it will have on the economy, per se. Of course, it's important to consider the effects that an economic downturn will have on people, and to try to craft a response the contains the virus as best as possible while minimizing the shock to the economy, as you say. But worrying about avoiding a recession because we'd prefer to have growth seems weird given the circumstances.
    There is some talk in the US of limiting the shelter in place to 15 days, but I expect it will be significantly longer than that once the disease ramps up a bit and changes attitudes. Besides, much of this is up to the states anyway, and depends on conditions in each state.

    But. it isn’t necessary just a recession we could be dealing with, so there really is no way that can go on too long, at least if done simplistically. If pushed too hard and too long, people will work illegally to put food on the table. All too many live paycheck to paycheck. And for the rest, savings only matter if the economy stays basically sound.

    Singapore seems to be doing well with a very extensive testing regime and having many investigators tracking back who infected whom combined with careful targeted isolation. We’ll probably see more of that in the US as our own testing gets ironed out. And then as there are more people that have gotten over it, more people will be able to safely go to work where they would come into heavy contact with others. For instance, I can’t really imagine a dentist working in heavy isolation gear. Either they’ll need to be immune or patients will need to be tested first.

    "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

  27. #1197
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    14,149
    Quote Originally Posted by Jens View Post
    And it's still rising.

    50 5.3%
    51 7.0%
    52 7.5%

    It is clear from what's happening though that there are definite differences in how it spreads depending on the policies and local situation. Korea and Italy were in the same situation a while back, but the spread has been fairly well contained in Korea while in Italy is has really spiraled out of control.
    Some more updates on the increase rate of deaths

    53 7.4%
    54 8.8%
    55 6.4%
    56 14.9%
    57 7.1%
    58 10.4%
    59 10.6%
    60 12.0%
    61 13.7%
    62 14.3%
    63 13.5%

    Again, a continuation in the rise in the rate of increase. It was kind of at that level in China as they started to put strong measures in place, so it might be that that is sort of the natural increase and that as countries outside China strengthen their measures, it will start to go down again. But that's just guessing.
    As above, so below

  28. #1198
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    18,860
    Jens, could you put in a reminder of what those numbers mean (rate of deaths with respect to . . .?) and where you are getting them? I looked back at earlier posts, but didn’t see an explanation.

    "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

  29. #1199
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Norfolk UK and some of me is in Northern France
    Posts
    9,125
    Come on now, This will be a setback and a reset in many ways but most people will survive and things will slowly get going again. Countries will get the message that shut down gives a two week pause for the hospitals to catch up while production of ventilators will continue, even if started late. True, I fear the US is the least prepared of all major nations but has the ability to adjust and change better than most. So keep calm and carry on.
    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

  30. #1200
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    4,805
    Quote Originally Posted by profloater View Post
    Come on now, This will be a setback and a reset in many ways but most people will survive and things will slowly get going again.
    Crossing fingers for everyone here and myself as well.
    Do good work. —Virgil Ivan "Gus" Grissom

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
  •