Novel coronavirus (covid-19), Pandemic or Not?

I'll avoid anyone with the sniffles or a cough, no matter their ancestry.  This is no longer an Asian illness.

I know a few restaurants in town that are shut for self-quarantining.  The owners/operators returned from vacation (not in ASIA) and are staying home just in case they caught something.  Only one of those shops sells Chinese food - and those owners aren't Chinese.  

Lorinne Anderson wrote:Not sure where "2% " fatality rate comes from, or frankly even what the population of China is, but they report 70,000 currently infected (I do not know how many have recovered) and 2,000 dead.  Certainly not 2% of the population of China which I am comfortable guessing is significantly higher than the US.  At the beginning of any newly emerging disease death rates are higher, simply because medical diagnoses, and care lag behind.

2% of 70,000 is 1400.  If 70,000 is the correct number of infected people, and 2,000 is the correct number of deaths, the death rate is much closer to 3%.  I believe the number of infected to be much higher considering that there are not enough kits to test, and many of the test kits are defective.  I also believe the China is hiding the true number of deaths, but that is purely conjecture on my part.

The population of China is about 1 and a half billion people.

The fatality rate is interesting.

We could look at it as a percentage of total cases or as a ratio of cured:dead.

If we look at total Known cases: dead (confirmed from this virus) it's about 2% or maybe a bit less.

But now parts of the world are diagnosing by symptoms - during cold and flu season - we don't have accurate numbers.  Not all the dead are tested nor are all the cases tested to confirm they have the virus.  With that in mind, the current suspected cases:suspected dead is about 3% or more.

But if we take a look at the cured:dead percentage, things look pretty glum.  

edit to ad: looking at the cured:dead ratio, it's not so bad as I expected.  About 9% with 2,708 dead / 27,879 recovered
https://gisanddata.maps.arcgis.com/apps/opsdashboard/index.html#/bda7594740fd40299423467b48e9ecf6

I don't think there's anything racist about playing the odds. The statistical probability of meeting an infected person of asian descent is higher than any other demographic. I am not changing my behaviour personally, but I also won't make unnecessary trips to places likely to be frequented by widely- and recently-travelled individuals. Sadly, this will include some of the best Chinese, Japanese, Korean, and asian fusion restaurants in the province.

I don't begrudge them my business. I just think that I am worth more to them alive.

-CK

by applying wikipedia definition of pandemic this corona virus sure is one.

former cdc director might know what he's talking about in this news report

https://www.cnn.com/2020/02/25/health/coronavirus-pandemic-frieden/index.html

the virus is not under control and continues to spread world wide. a treatment or cure is probably at least 8 months to a year away and there must be a serious reason why most all of china is shut down and what Americans would call Marshall law has been applied there.
and the stock market is crashing as a direct result of this virus spreading and factories and supply chains have come to a grinding halt in Asia.

This is indeed one of those major downsides of globalism. Supply chains will be in shambles for some time.

I was hoping to find an equivalent table for influenza, but could not do so on the spur of the moment.  The one below was from  https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/coronavirus-age-sex-demographics/

Lorinne Anderson wrote:Based on the cases here (our province has over 3 million people, over 700 tested, locally, in province, with only 7 cases confirmed in the entire country of Canada), the illness was NOT severe, no worse than a cold and those infected are being self quarantined, at home, and have recovered well.  The cases we have locally did originate from Wuhan, from travelers who were asymptomatic upon arrival (no fever, coughing, sneezing etc.), who voluntarily sought medical diagnosis out of an abundance of caution, when symptoms surfaced days later.  And yes, it was transmitted to others within the home who had not traveled, so yes, it is contagious.  IF we start to target, based on race or ethnicity, that will lead to shame, fear and secrecy which will certainly lead to unnecessary deaths and transmission.  

I read through the case report of the one person who had got coronavirus in Washington State, USA. You can read it HERE.

Here in this graph, you can see that it started out very mild, with a cough, mild fever, and runny nose.



It then transformed into severe pnemonia complete with high fevers, need for supplemental oxygen, and diarrhea. Providence Regional Medical Center pulled out all the stops to make sure he survived it. But, it was not something he could likely have survived at home. Here's the direct quote of his treament during that time:

However, a second chest radiograph from the night of hospital day 5 (illness day 9) showed evidence of pneumonia in the lower lobe of the left lung (Figure 4). These radiographic findings coincided with a change in respiratory status starting on the evening of hospital day 5, when the patient’s oxygen saturation values as measured by pulse oximetry dropped to as low as 90% while he was breathing ambient air. On day 6, the patient was started on supplemental oxygen, delivered by nasal cannula at 2 liters per minute. Given the changing clinical presentation and concern about hospital-acquired pneumonia, treatment with vancomycin (a 1750-mg loading dose followed by 1 g administered intravenously every 8 hours) and cefepime (administered intravenously every 8 hours) was initiated.

On hospital day 6 (illness day 10), a fourth chest radiograph showed basilar streaky opacities in both lungs, a finding consistent with atypical pneumonia (Figure 5), and rales were noted in both lungs on auscultation. Given the radiographic findings, the decision to administer oxygen supplementation, the patient’s ongoing fevers, the persistent positive 2019-nCoV RNA at multiple sites, and published reports of the development of severe pneumonia3,4 at a period consistent with the development of radiographic pneumonia in this patient, clinicians pursued compassionate use of an investigational antiviral therapy. Treatment with intravenous remdesivir (a novel nucleotide analogue prodrug in development10,11) was initiated on the evening of day 7, and no adverse events were observed in association with the infusion. Vancomycin was discontinued on the evening of day 7, and cefepime was discontinued on the following day, after serial negative procalcitonin levels and negative nasal PCR testing for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus.

He survived, but things looked very touch-and-go for a while, and that's with the whole hospital focused on making sure he survived. I would not want to see the survival rates if there were a lot of patients with this at the same time.

On a positive note, he contracted it before January 15th, and no one else has contracted it in Washington since then. It's been over a month. I find that hopeful.

7 billion human petri dishes for disease is an unprecedented density of biomass in one species. Pandemic is inevitable. I doubt it will be from a virus with a 2% mortality rate though, which is what I have heard quoted.

John Weiland wrote:I was hoping to find an equivalent table for influenza, but could not do so on the spur of the moment.  The one below was from  https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/coronavirus-age-sex-demographics/

John - I supplied this info, i.e. statistics for the common/seasonal flu on the previous page.  I also gave the link which now, curiously just says 'page can not be found'!!!  (Conspiracy alert!??  Ha!)

"Worldwide, these annual epidemics are estimated to result in about 3 to 5 million cases of severe illness, and about 290 000 to 650 000 respiratory deaths." WHO statistic from 2018.  

Brazil has just announced the first confirmed case of Coronavirus. Funnily enough, all the media stories are showing pictures of Asian people, but it was a guy from Italy. I`m quite honestly surprised it took this long to get here (and after all the Carnaval tourism expect that we will be hearing a lot more).
The official announcement said that with the beginning of flu season starting here the symptoms are likely to be confused.

I think it's easy to assume that because China is not, erm, forthcoming with its data that things must be worse than we can imagine. But we have data from the UK, especially, about contagion. Of the 83 evacuated from Wuhan, none were infected. Of the 800-ish Americans evacuated from Wuhan (not the cruise ship, but Wuhan), 3 were infected. 58 Brazilians evacuated or health workers on the flight, none were infected after 3 tests. outside the incubator of a cruise ship, which honestly tends to concentrate the elderly, it seems like a different illness.

I'm suggesting to my kid (who lives at college) that she make plans for a lockdown, not for the end of the world. We are also making plans for our business (I work from home, but the husband has a shop where people come in). We`ll be stocking up on some essentials and maybe rethinking our travel plans for Easter. Other than that, we`re thinking like it`s flu season.

I just read an article on NPR yesterday stating that the Coronavirus may be about to cross over into pandemic territory.  I will see if I can find a link to the article, but I thought it pertinent considering the basic question that prompted this whole thread.

Eric

I would love to see it, Eric, but I also think that the CDC covered it yesterday when they made their pronouncements of "...not a question of if, but when..." and "...it could be bad..."

And to clarify my earlier position, there are many popular and tourist hotspots that I won't be frequenting with the possibility of pandemic looming. These include malls, zoos, movie theatres, the opera, many excellent restaurants of many different types, and crowded public transit vehicles.

I think if everyone pulled back a little,  maybe did a week or two of home cooking and Netflix-and-chilling, we'd see a slowdown in its spread. They might also discover what they're missing in home-cooked meals, but that's another story.

I am not rejoicing at the knock-on effects that will be decreased cashflow for all businesses that rely on people leaving their houses, but what is the better alternative in the face of pandemic? What if the mortality rates are closer to 6%, and it spread everywhere? That's over 19.86 million americans dead. What do you suppose the economic knock-on effects for those businesses would be in that scenario?

-CK

Chris Kott wrote:I would love to see it, Eric, but I also think that the CDC covered it yesterday when they made their pronouncements of "...not a question of if, but when..." and "...it could be bad..."

-CK

Is this the speech you are referring to? I saw it to... and shared with friends/family. Most are in denial at this point but concerned.

I am on my last day of leave. So... while out and running errands to get settled into the new home. I shall also be making organized stops along the way to grab things like a gallon of bleach, water filters for my new rain barrel water, dried rice and beans, top off the spare propane tank for the grill, etc.

I believe 1 gallon of bleach can make 30 gallons of disinfectant if I remember correctly.

May order some UV plant grow lights from Amazon. Then use it to sterilize shoes and masks.

Chris Kott wrote:I am not rejoicing at the knock-on effects that will be decreased cashflow for all businesses that rely on people leaving their houses,

This is going to be the big difference between China and everyplace else. China can order all businesses to close (and has the govt/community structure for enforcement) and everyone just has to smile and take it. Italy maybe will give a better example in terms of how well this works in a non-authoritarian state. In the US and other countries it is going to be a harder sell for people to close their small businesses, for example, or to stay home if they are hourly wage earners (and not salaried) when they still have to pay their bills. I feel very, very fortunate that I have a large tax refund coming in this year, because it is going to appear in a couple months, right about the time when we might be feeling the effects of a crappy month of March.

Here is an interesting vid of the Iranian official profusely sweating just before he found out he had contracted the disease.

As of this moment Iran has significantly jumped to 139 confirmed infections and 19 passed away. There are zero confirmed people that have recovered since they just started tracking a few days ago.

South Korea has jumped to 1261 confirmed infected, 12 passed and 22 recovered.

Of the folks that remain on the ported ship... 705 confirmed, 4 passed, 0 recovered. I assume (and hope) they are just not re-testing for recovery.

Italy has 374 confirmed, 12 passed, 1 Recovered (just started tracking as well though).

France has 14 confirmed, 2 passed, 11 recovered.

Japan has jumped to 178 confirmed, 2 passed, 22 recovered.

It does indeed look like the mortality rate is higher than 2%.

Earlier this week I was talking to a friend from the Middle East who stays alert to political stuff.  

Apparently, there was a lot of suggestion that the virus took hold in Iran in one of the main pilgrimage sites but they didn't want media coverage because of the election.

Now that the election is over, we can expect the numbers to go up more quickly than is real so it will look like a sudden increase when it was actually a gradual one over a few weeks.

according to my friend.  I don't know because politics make me sleepy so I generally avoid them.  

Chris,

I believe my article was referencing the CDC so you are probably correct about the substance.

Unfortunately I saw the article while at school and I don’t ever make a post from a school computer for several reasons.  I will have to dig and I just can’t right now.

Eric

There's some symmetry between what happened with Chinese New Year and the Iranian pilgrimmage issue, I think. It will be, in my opinion, the same sort of sentiment as if Tokyo decides to hold the Olympics as planned. Nobody wants to lose the potential gains, for the economy and for morale, that such events bring, for something so seemingly ephemeral as the outbreak of a new disease of unknown communicability and mortality.

I think it's likely to be business-as-usual everywhere, until it's not.

As to people absenting themselves from society, I think it's reprehensible to quarantine based on ethnicity. I think that if there are, say, at-risk children in the school system or immune-compromised individuals in the workplace, that they should be accomodated where necessary, such that students can learn in the short-term from home, and so those immune-compromised individuals can feel safe and work from home, where applicable. I don't think it's for anyone else to say that because someone belongs to a specific ethnicity, they have to stop going to work or sending their kids to school.

But I do think that, in a case such as this where we are still identifying individual cases rather than having uncounted infected overwhelming ERs, it may be prudent to flag travellers. Not Asians, or Italians, or Iranians, or Wakandans, but anyone going through major international transit hubs, for instance. Leaving aside all ethnic distinctions, who is more likely to contract any disease originating overseas, a hermit who makes food at home and drives to and from work in an isolated building, or someone who flies regularly, or someone who relies on public transit as their primary mode of transportation, sharing that shuttle or subway car with some corporate dude on his way to the Union-Pearson Express to parts unknown?

And I will be honest. Part of the reason I haven't had sushi in months has more to do with my pocketbook than anything. I have become good at making food at home because I can't afford to eat out all the time, or even a lot. And I also crave dim sum in the worst way...*drools onto keyboard, which snaps, and pops, and explodes a little bit, and Chris pulls out another keyboard, as this happens regularly*

But there is a reason why quarantine procedures keep people from congregating. In essence, that's what pulling back in the way I describe is in a voluntary, individually, and internally-oriented fashion.

I could really go for some beef tripe, though...

-CK

Tereza Okava wrote:.....In the US and other countries it is going to be a harder sell for people to close their small businesses, for example, or to stay home if they are hourly wage earners (and not salaried) when they still have to pay their bills.

How most approach illness versus maintaining employment in the US can be gauged from what happens during typical flu seasons.  Most will tough it out either at work or with a mixture of sick leave (if it's granted at the place of employment) and being at work.  With the apparent long incubation time and transmissibility of the COVID-19, a person will be viremic and transmitting well before they are symptomatic which is a real advantage for the pathogen and makes containment possibilities more problematic.  It would be pretty interesting to see how they would try to enforce some sort of containment within the US and like countries.

Today the Canadian government is talking about "social distancing" measures for virus control.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/coronavirus-iran-champagne-repatriation-1.5476434

On the radio, they are talking about the vaccine.

But... isn't this a relative of the common cold?  But we don't have vaccines for that because the virus changes too fast.  So it's a bit confusing to see how they can make a vaccine for this one?  

r ranson wrote:
On the radio, they are talking about the vaccine.

But... isn't this a relative of the common cold?  But we don't have vaccines for that because the virus changes too fast.  So it's a bit confusing to see how they can make a vaccine for this one?  

I've seen very little discussion of this, but my understanding is as follows:

Rapidly mutating viruses are not impossible to create vaccines for, but the vaccines are complex, expensive, and need to be revised every year.  Each year's vaccine design includes guesses (predictions) about how the vaccine will mutate.  Some years, the guesses are better than other years.  When the guesses are good, the vaccine effectiveness is high.  When the guesses are bad, effectiveness is lower, but never zero.  Even a little effectiveness slows down the epidemic/pandemic and is useful from a public health (not necessarily so much from the individual) perspective.  

What I've just described is the situation for flu.  It's a bad enough disease that enormous resources go into making a vaccine every year.  

There is no vaccine for the four or so coronaviruses that cause the common cold.  It's not because a vaccine would be impossible; it's because chasing an ever-changing vaccine for the common cold has been deemed not worth the public health expenditure.  It doesn't kill "enough" people to "justify" the expense.  But if we get a new coronavirus that's more deadly, the calculus changes, maybe.

It's also probably not known yet whether this new coronovirus changes as rapidly as the existing four.    So a vaccine might need less evolution and maintenance.  I don't know how likely that is.

Nothing I've written here is reliable; it's just me trying to distill (oversimplify?) a bunch of stuff I've read over the years.  

Chris Kott wrote:'... I think it's reprehensible to quarantine based on ethnicity.'

I tend to disagree, at least in the preliminary stages. For example, this disease began in one country (China) so, by definition, other countries had the right to ban all people entering their county directly or indirectly from China - that's NOT discriminatory, it's sound disease control. Ditto with Ebola. It is also prudent to conduct mandatory checks on all people travelling to/from ground-zero and adjoining areas, in this instance most were Chinese because of the Lunar New Year celebrations. It was a perfect storm of all things wrong.

I totally disagree with the so-called 'voluntary isolation' practices being promoted by some governments, that is, sending people home and expecting self-regulation. Besides the obvious 'mistakes', there are huge cultural differences regarding the definition of 'isolation' - think of that comment in the movie 'My Big Fat Greek Wedding' where the prospective Anglo-husband says he is a vegetarian and doesn't eat meat, then the Greek Aunt says that's okay, we've got lamb! Scenarios like that do actually happen - isolation to most would mean being alone or with similarly afflicted family members, in other cultures it could mean an entire family group who simply eat meals together. Voila - we have a pandemic!

Typically, it isn't the disease that kills, it's the related effect, I'm guessing pneumonia is the major one - a VERY nasty disease that chews up huge hospital resources per patient and takes a long time to see change and recovery.

The video of the Iranian politician is a blatant example of what NOT TO DO - WORST PRACTICE. Why the hell was he in a public place happily spreading the disease?! Irresponsible at the highest level. No wonder it's now a major issue there.

Most of those who get the disease in countries with advanced medical facilities should be okay, I feel sorry for those elsewhere - the UN needs to dispatch teams ASAP.

Some of the mapping data is also incorrect and close to scare-tactics. For example, they show Australia, Canada and the USA as being totally affected. So far, here, it has been contained to quarantine facilities or isolation wards in hospitals. As yet it hasn't got into 'the wild'.

Anyway, we have a long road to go before this disease drops off the headlines - initially they were saying April ... but not what year!

My laptop broke so I am on my phone. I will therefore have to keep this brief.

I speak and read Chinese,  and I've spent time there. The virus is much worse than they're saying,  in my opinion. One doctor I know of reported 50 new infections,  but the government only recorded one, to keep numbers down. And many of the deaths were recorded as pneumonia,  to bring those numbers down. It is already disrupting trade--my dentist says a glove and mask shortage is nigh, as 99% of both (for the USA) are made in China, according to her.

Keep in mind that many countries that have had some infections seem to have a  low outbreak,  but in fact do not have/are not administering tests. This is true in the USA. Out of thousands evacuated or returned to the USA from hot zones only around 500 have been tested,  and many may be asymptomatic

I feel badly for public health officials worldwide. They are underfunded and struggling to contain both panic and the virus. In China, for example,  they must also choose between extending the quarantine and bringing the economy back online.  It is a hard set of decisions.

Stay calm and stock up on what you need. Take care of yourself and your neighbors. At the very least,  if you have need of a tool or manufactured good order it now. Some laptops are already backordered

Sorry to hear, James.

I have been trying to keep a handle on my skepticism about the accuracy of the reporting, and as unsettling as it is to have backup in that area, I am also comforted in that it's not just me seeing bogeymen in every dark corner.

It's not terribly surprising, unfortunately. We're seeing a similar, albeit, um, simpler, dynamic in the untied states. I don't like it when heads of state whine about legitimate concerns negatively affecting the market, especially when doing so involves directly contradicting their own experts hired to handle pandemic disease. I have little doubt that similar feelings of saving of face were top of mind in some places, where they should have been more concerned with keeping a new disease from becoming a pandemic.

What is currently most worrisome to me, and what I think is probably of prime concern to most on this issue, at least where the North American continent is concerned, is the case of community transmission they've identified in California, where the patient hasn't travelled, and has no known direct contact with anyone who has. This is the point where it starts to spread like wildfire.

The other issue that is of concern to me is the case of the woman, I believe in Florida, but I need to check my sources, who has contracted it again. That is concerning for me, because it suggests either that it is new enough to the immune system that only limited immunity is conferred after contracting it the first time, or that it is mutating rapidly enough that there are multiple strains out there, and that they are dissimilar enough that catching one doesn't protect you from catching the others in the future.

Most of the solutions offered are pretty standard permie-prepper (if you'll forgive the term, or are we using Adaptationist?) fare: stock your pantry and medicine chests, buy extra dried goods that you know you'll eat anyways within their lifespan, and take super-normal hygienic precautions if there are cases anywhere near you. I don't like hand sanitizer, and I wouldn't go overboard with it, because disrupting the phospho-lipid layer of the skin actually increases the ability of some microorganisms to enter the body. But it might not be a bad idea to use it where offered in high-traffic, and therefore high-risk, public areas, especially if there are a lot of commonly touched surfaces, such as doorknobs.

In situations such as these, I wish I didn't live in downtown Toronto. I would prefer to be in the middle of a hundred acres somewhere between Toronto and Kingston, at least a half-hour from the nearest small town. To me, that would mean much less need for hand sanitizer. This would be a dirty trick, but I would probably hole up with my family and put up quarantine signs at every access point. I wouldn't bother to explain that I would be quarantining the whole rest of the world, and nobody would take a chance getting exposed to ask dumb questions about a quarantine sign.

This would be something of an extreme reaction, but the spectre of communicable disease is probably a better safeguard than any other weapon against "foragers," if that is the concern. In reality, I would expect municipalities isolated enough for such controls to be viable to set up roadblocks and have testing centres, perhaps facilitated by the National Guard and FEMA or analogous organisations within comparable frameworks in other countries. Every roadblock would likely have to have quarantine-capable wall-tent facilities at least, and the ability to hold travellers for a quarantine period.

For now, this is all conjecture, the stuff of an early Stephen King novel. Our reality is much more boring. We currently have a communicable disease whose highest mortality rates are in elderly cases. This is sad, but not unusual. I haven't seen any infant mortality at all, which would concern me more, and not much in healthy, young people, which would concern me most.

This suggests that most normal precautions that susceptible individuals take at the height of flu season should work, and that if entire populations did the same, community transmission rates would stay low, safeguarding those who need it most.

So again, panicking is the last thing we should be doing. Maybe, if we do a lot of hand-shaking and public touch-surface-using in our daily lives, we should annoint our palms with hand sanitizer when we can't wash regularly with soap, scrubbing for at least half a minute. If using an air dryer, it is recommended to hold one's hands in the air stream, but not rub them together, as the skin-on-skin friction is more likely to encourage anything sitting atop your skin to be absorbed. Dry your hands, as everything has a hard time surviving without moisture.

And maybe we should think about treating at-risk individuals with the same forethought that conscientious visitors treat newborns and the immune-compromised: if we aren't feeling well, it is better to err on the side of caution and not expose the vulnerable to any illness, as anything will make them less able to combat any illness in the same timeframe thereafter.

We can't yet know how this will proceed, but we know that there are concrete measures we can take on the personal level to minimise potential exposure and spread, at least to the most vulnerable of us.

Keep calm, carry on (or whatever thematic variant speaks to you personally; I like the one that ends with "Eat Pierogi.").

-CK

My perspective helps prevent me from panicking i.e. that the common/seasonal flu virus has killed FAR more (as quoted in a previous post of mine here, giving WHO statistics) than the current case with this new virus.  

I feel fairly reassured that, whilst there may yet be further escalation to take place, it will subside without taking hold as envisaged by some.  If nothing else it will provide a useful blueprint for when 'the big one' may present itself.  

I am glad that people are waking up to overuse of antibiotics and - at least here, in UK - GPs are encouraged not to prescribe these as often as used to be the case.  This, in itself, may well help so many from further weakening their immune system.

Exactly as Chris has mentioned, getting ready for a "normal flu season", is exactly what I spent my morning doing (alcohol gel, cleaning supplies, paper towels, basic pharmacy stock-up). In any case, flu season *is* arriving, and now we are ready. I'm also finding that the easiest way to describe this to my family, my employees, and everyone else. Normal measures, being careful, being prepared. There may also be pierogies in my future.

All my immediate family are in the "high risk" categories - very old dad (89), husband with leukemia, and me with weak lungs.  So yay.  

We are planning to stock up a bit more on supplies and work harder at keeping hands and surfaces clean, and avoid crowds.

Current info:  https://www.cdc.gov/media/releases/2020/s0226-Covid-19-spread.html

I am on my lunch break and just did some number crunching.

Please bear in mind that the following death rates deserve a large grain of salt! Most folks only bother going to the hospital when they are super symptomatic. So... there is likely many orders of magnitude infected people walking around out there than the "confirmed" ones that are currently documented. This is using the numbers fresh off of the John Hopkins website.

China: 78,497 Confirmed, 2,744 Dead, 32,879 Recovered = 7.70% Death Rate
South Korea: 1766 C, 13D, 22R = 37.14% DR
Diamond Princess Cruise ship: 705 C, 4 D, 10R = 28.57% DR
Italy: 528C, 14D, 40R = 25.92% DR
Iran: 245C, 26D, 49R = 34.67% DR
Japan: 189C, 3D, 22R = 12% DR

Then you have a whole slew of countries like the U.S. that have had a lot of recovered and a 0% death rate. So... it is all over the place.

Marty Mitchell wrote:I am on my lunch break and just did some number crunching.

Please bear in mind that the following death rates deserve a large grain of salt! Most folks only bother going to the hospital when they are super symptomatic. So... there is likely many orders of magnitude infected people walking around out there than the "confirmed" ones that are currently documented. This is using the numbers fresh off of the John Hopkins website.

China: 78,497 Confirmed, 2,744 Dead, 32,879 Recovered = 7.70% Death Rate
South Korea: 1766 C, 13D, 22R = 37.14% DR
Diamond Princess Cruise ship: 705 C, 4 D, 10R = 28.57% DR
Italy: 528C, 14D, 40R = 25.92% DR
Iran: 245C, 26D, 49R = 34.67% DR
Japan: 189C, 3D, 22R = 12% DR

Then you have a whole slew of countries like the U.S. that have had a lot of recovered and a 0% death rate. So... it is all over the place.

Marty, you had a glitch somewhere, your death rate percentages are far too high.  Take Italy for instance.  528 cases.  3% would be 16 people, so the death rate is somewhat under 3%.  South Korea's death rate is less than 1%.

I see what I perceive as confusion on figuring the percentages for a mortality rate.  There are 2 approaches I see taken.  

The first seems to be   (# OF DEATHS/ # OF PEOPLE SICK).  In a quickly accelerating illness like this one, I think this gives a falsely low # because many of those who are sick are still in the early stages of the disease and have not gotten to the "die or begin to get better" stage.

The second is  (# OF DEATHS/ # OF PEOPLE RECOVERED).  This is probably a better formula.

I don't think we have good data yet.  From what I'm reading, we are not really testing for it in the US yet.  It seems we're mainly trying the tried and true "stick you head in the sand and yell EVERYTHING IS FINE" until forced to do otherwise" strategy.  While this may be a good approach for some smallerl problems, (where panic will cause more problems than the disease i.e. yelling 'FIRE' in a crowded theater), it's a bad idea when facing a real world issue, like maybe, A PANDEMIC).  Most people don't go to the hospital for every sniffle and cough.  It may be that the majority of the cases are fairly benign or even asymptomatic.  It may well play out differently in different parts of the world due to genetic variation (both in disease and hosts) as well as level of care availability.  I'm waiting for further data.
 
The good news to me is that apparently some people aren't getting sick even when they 'have it'.  I wonder what the % of the population this is.  Worst case, there will be survivors.  Bad news, you can get it again.

I am wondering about how they determine whether you have the disease if you are asymptomatic.  Are they checking for the actual virus in you saliva or something?

My grandma told me that even though she had never had tuberculosis, she like many, maybe most people her age tested positive on a TB test because the disease was fairly common in their youth and they had been exposed to it and developed antibodies.  

Trace Oswald wrote:

Marty Mitchell wrote:I am on my lunch break and just did some number crunching.

Please bear in mind that the following death rates deserve a large grain of salt! Most folks only bother going to the hospital when they are super symptomatic. So... there is likely many orders of magnitude infected people walking around out there than the "confirmed" ones that are currently documented. This is using the numbers fresh off of the John Hopkins website.

China: 78,497 Confirmed, 2,744 Dead, 32,879 Recovered = 7.70% Death Rate
South Korea: 1766 C, 13D, 22R = 37.14% DR
Diamond Princess Cruise ship: 705 C, 4 D, 10R = 28.57% DR
Italy: 528C, 14D, 40R = 25.92% DR
Iran: 245C, 26D, 49R = 34.67% DR
Japan: 189C, 3D, 22R = 12% DR

Then you have a whole slew of countries like the U.S. that have had a lot of recovered and a 0% death rate. So... it is all over the place.

Marty, you had a glitch somewhere, your death rate percentages are far too high.  Take Italy for instance.  528 cases.  3% would be 16 people, so the death rate is somewhat under 3%.  South Korea's death rate is less than 1%.

I basically ignored the "Confirmed" category. We do not yet know who will survive if they are still sick.

I did my math based on the Recovered/Death ratio.

Mick Fisch wrote:I see what I perceive as confusion on figuring the percentages for a mortality rate.  There are 2 approaches I see taken.  

The first seems to be   (# OF DEATHS/ # OF PEOPLE SICK).  In a quickly accelerating illness like this one, I think this gives a falsely low # because many of those who are sick are still in the early stages of the disease and have not gotten to the "die or begin to get better" stage.

The second is  (# OF DEATHS/ # OF PEOPLE RECOVERED).  This is probably a better formula.

I don't think we have good data yet.  From what I'm reading, we are not really testing for it in the US yet.  It seems we're mainly trying the tried and true "stick you head in the sand and yell EVERYTHING IS FINE" until forced to do otherwise" strategy.  While this may be a good approach for some smallerl problems, (where panic will cause more problems than the disease i.e. yelling 'FIRE' in a crowded theater), it's a bad idea when facing a real world issue, like maybe, A PANDEMIC).  Most people don't go to the hospital for every sniffle and cough.  It may be that the majority of the cases are fairly benign or even asymptomatic.  It may well play out differently in different parts of the world due to genetic variation (both in disease and hosts) as well as level of care availability.  I'm waiting for further data.
 
The good news to me is that apparently some people aren't getting sick even when they 'have it'.  I wonder what the % of the population this is.  Worst case, there will be survivors.  Bad news, you can get it again.

I am wondering about how they determine whether you have the disease if you are asymptomatic.  Are they checking for the actual virus in you saliva or something?

My grandma told me that even though she had never had tuberculosis, she like many, maybe most people her age tested positive on a TB test because the disease was fairly common in their youth and they had been exposed to it and developed antibodies.  

That Recovered vs Death rate was where I did the simple math.

I agree entirely and don't understand why folks keep using the main "confirmed" category when most folks are still sick. Especially with a solid chunk of them still being in the ICU fighting for their lives.

From what I have seen... most of the folks who reach the "Confirmed" category in china are sent to the general hospital area. Around 20 something % are sent to the ICU. Later on some are removed from the ICU and some are moved to the ICU. A good solid portion of the folks that are sent to the ICU require forced oxygen or mechanical oxygenation of the blood to stay alive. Often requiring to be chemically paralyzed, or to be put in a medical coma in order to overcome their body's urge to fight the forced air.

Saw a vid of a study at one point to where there was indeed a large portion of the group that were showing either mild or no symptoms.

I personally think that the "Unknown" is what is freaking out everyone the most. I have a feeling that in the end the death rate will be MUCH lower once everyone realizes that the disease is already much further widespread. I saw a scientist calculating the # of infected in China to be well into the hundreds of thousands a few weeks ago. Which would make their death toll MUCH lower than the 7% I calculated earlier. UNLESS, they are hiding the real death toll. Which is also a subject that keeps popping up in my searches.

I will be watching S. Korea closely. They seem to be on the ball. As well as the Diamond Princess cruise ship.
Also, you are right, there have been a few cases of folks being deemed recovered... then contracting COVID 19 again a few weeks later.

Marty Mitchell wrote:
Also, you are right, there have been a few cases of folks being deemed recovered... then contracting COVID 19 again a few weeks later.

Which is another point in itself:  At best, "recovered" can only mean "lookin' good!" along with either an antibody test or PCR test (more sensitive) to show that the virus is **below the level of detection**.....interpreted to mean "gone", even if that is not exactly the case.  In such a case, the person didn't contract the virus again from the outside, --rather the immune system became compromised in some way and/or the virus remaining in the body at a low titre mutated to the extent that it was able to circumvent the anti-viral state in the body.

Marty Mitchell wrote:

I did my math based on the Recovered/Death ratio.

The reason I didn't use recovered/death, is the numbers are abnormally high.  And figuring it with recovered to death, the numbers would be far higher than those you gave.  South Korea for instance isn't 37%, it's nearly 60%.  I sincerely believe that the death rate won't approach 60%. Regardless, it's too early in the game to know, we are all just guessing.  I do think the approach of "this is no worse than the flu" is a mistake.

People seem determined to compare coronavirus to the flu.  

From Politifact "According to the WHO, about 80% of 2019 coronavirus patients have recovered from mild symptoms without needing special treatment, while roughly 1 in every 6 people have become "seriously ill." About 2% of people have died. (For comparison, the flu — which is more severe than the common cold — has an estimated death rate in the United States of about 0.1%).

People who are older or have certain pre-existing health conditions have been more likely to experience serious symptoms, the WHO’s website says.

"There are alpha coronaviruses that cause common cold," said David Fisman, an epidemiologist at the University of Toronto. "This is a beta coronavirus like SARS and MERS and is approximately 20 to 30 times more deadly than (the) flu."

Politifact

Trace Oswald wrote:

Marty Mitchell wrote:

I did my math based on the Recovered/Death ratio.

The reason I didn't use recovered/death, is the numbers are abnormally high.  And figuring it with recovered to death, the numbers would be far higher than those you gave.  South Korea for instance isn't 37%, it's nearly 60%.  I sincerely believe that the death rate won't approach 60%. Regardless, it's too early in the game to know, we are all just guessing.  I do think the approach of "this is no worse than the flu" is a mistake.

Nah. I added the Recovered and Death together for a total of 35 persons that are either dead or recovered.

Then did the math to figure out what percent 13 deaths of 35 would equal.