Support the Arctic Sea Ice Forum and Blog

Poll

How many will die of Covid19 in the 2020s directly and indirectly

Less than 10,000
10 (14.7%)
10,000-100,000
9 (13.2%)
100,000-1,000,000
9 (13.2%)
One to ten million
13 (19.1%)
Ten to a hundred million
14 (20.6%)
Hundred million to one billion
9 (13.2%)
Over a billion
4 (5.9%)

Total Members Voted: 67

Voting closed: March 03, 2020, 12:39:52 AM

Author Topic: COVID-19  (Read 193492 times)

sigma_squared

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 109
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 52
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: COVID-19
« Reply #5200 on: April 10, 2020, 02:21:03 AM »
I am still of the opinion that they have completely missed the obvious.

Those are all valid points, though I think your forecasts are perhaps a little pessimistic.

Alberta released its modeling yesterday and is doing fairly well so far, knock on wood.
Quote
Protecting lives and livelihoods: Premier Kenney address
Premier Jason Kenney’s address to Albertans on the COVID-19 pandemic | April 7, 2020

Alberta’s Plan –the next 6 to 8 weeks
  • World class testing and surveillance
  • Aggressive contact tracing and containment
  • Public health Interventions based on evidence of what works
  • Supporting Albertans in pushing the peak down
  • Supporting fellow Canadians in a time of crisis
What’s next?
Relaunch Strategy
  • Aggressive system of mass testing, including serological testing
  • Strong tracing and tracking of contacts leveraging technology
  • Strong border screening
  • Use of masks
https://www.alberta.ca/release.cfm?xID=7003168647E46-E91D-4945-E9517ABC712B807E
https://www.alberta.ca/assets/documents/covid-19-case-modelling-projection.pdf

Hefaistos

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 580
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 69
  • Likes Given: 202
Re: COVID-19
« Reply #5201 on: April 10, 2020, 02:24:46 AM »
...
Now - of course - humanity may fail to extirpate this virus. In that case, we will lose 4-12% of the population over the next year or two, ...
Sam

Sam, I'd appreciate if you could please tell us how you came to that very high figure, and range!

In Nothern Italy, the highest lethality is 1% of population, and that is in municipalities that have a very old population on average (around 45 years iirc), and with many lifestyle diseases. I would say that 1% lethality is proven under such circumstances of old people and many comorbidities, but cannot see what can contribute to an even higher figure than that?

So why should we expect even higher lethality on a global scale?

Rodius

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 255
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 192
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: COVID-19
« Reply #5202 on: April 10, 2020, 02:47:03 AM »
...
Now - of course - humanity may fail to extirpate this virus. In that case, we will lose 4-12% of the population over the next year or two, ...
Sam

Sam, I'd appreciate if you could please tell us how you came to that very high figure, and range!

In Nothern Italy, the highest lethality is 1% of population, and that is in municipalities that have a very old population on average (around 45 years iirc), and with many lifestyle diseases. I would say that 1% lethality is proven under such circumstances of old people and many comorbidities, but cannot see what can contribute to an even higher figure than that?

So why should we expect even higher lethality on a global scale?

Sam will give a better explanation but here is my take on why 10% is possible.

1 - it isn't going anywhere. There are too many carriers without symptoms, it is global and it spreads easily. Even lockdown don't truly stop it. As soon as a lockdown is removed it reappears.

2 - there is a growing body of work that is beginning to suggest that immunity either doesn't happen or disappears quickly.

3 - Without decent medical treatment, a lot more people die. It appears that about 1% of people die when treated well but it leaps up quickly when hospitals are overwhelmed. And soon, it will hit countries with inadequate medical services to begin with.

4 - give the above, the virus can potentially do the rounds over and over again in the same people until they die.

5 - with a mutation rate similar to flu, there is a chance that it will mutate every two years. If that happens, it becomes a flip of the coin as to what it does next.

To me, it is not unreasonable to see a significant ongoing event that will cause many problems for a long time.
I am not saying this will happen..... but it isn't out of the realms of possibility. And if it does happen, 10% will be on the low end of victims.

oren

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 5194
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1439
  • Likes Given: 1471
Re: COVID-19
« Reply #5203 on: April 10, 2020, 02:58:14 AM »
Preliminary results and conclusions of the COVID-19 Case Cluster Study (Gangelt municipality)

Gangelt (12,529 inhabitants) in the Heinsberg district. The World Health Organization (WHO) recommends a protocol in which, depending on the expected prevalence, 100 to 300 households are randomly examined. This random sample was coordinated with Prof. Manfred Güllner (Forsa) to ensure its representativeness.

Aim: The aim of the study is to determine the status of SARS-CoV2 infections (percentage of all infected persons) in the community of Gangelt, which have been and are still occurring. In addition, the status of the current SARS-CoV2 immunity shall be determined.

Procedure: A serial letter was sent to about 600 households. In total, about 1000 inhabitants from about 400 households took part in the study. Questionnaires were collected, throat swabs taken and blood tested for the presence of antibodies (IgG, IgA). The interim results and conclusions of approx. 500 persons are included in this first evaluation.

Preliminary result: An existing immunity of approx. 14% (antiSARS-CoV2 IgG positive, specificity of the method >.99 %) was determined. About 2% of the persons had a current SARS-CoV-2 infection detected by PCR method. The infection rate (current infection or already been through) was about 15 % in total. The case fatality rate in relation to the total number of infected persons in the community of Gangelt is approx. 0.37 % with the preliminary data from this study. The lethality rate currently calculated in Germany by Johns-Hopkins University is 1.98 %, which is 5 times higher. The mortality in relation to the total population in Gangelt is currently 0.15 %.

Preliminary conclusion: The lethality calculated by Johns-Hopkins University is 5 times higher than in this study in Gangelt, which is explained by the different reference size of the infected persons. In Gangelt, this study covers all infected persons in the sample, including those with asymptomatic and mild courses. In Gangelt, the proportion of the population that has already developed immunity to SARS-CoV-2 is about 15%. This means that 15% of the population in Gangelt can no longer become infected with SARS-CoV-2, and the process has already begun until herd immunity is achieved. This 15% of the population reduces the speed (net reproduction rate R in epidemiological models) of a further spread of SARS-CoV-2 accordingly.

Updated link to German source.
https://www.land.nrw/sites/default/files/asset/document/zwischenergebnis_covid19_case_study_gangelt_0.pdf
Thanks a lot KG. A very interesting study.
Now I wonder about remaining questions:
A. What was the official case count in Gangelt at the time of the study? How much higher is the 15% compared to the expectation? This is crucial.
B. What was the distribution of recalled symptoms (if any) among those found infected?
C. How was the death rate calculated? As the people involved in the study are all alive, I am guessing this means official COVID-19 deaths in Gangelt divided by 15% of 12529.
D. Has anyone looked at total mortality in Gangelt to calculate excess mortality? This would help uncover biases in death count. This is crucial as well.

dnem

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 516
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 229
  • Likes Given: 119
Re: COVID-19
« Reply #5204 on: April 10, 2020, 03:30:58 AM »
https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/26/7/20-0282_article
 :o
Abstract
Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 is the causative agent of the 2019 novel coronavirus disease pandemic. Initial estimates of the early dynamics of the outbreak in Wuhan, China, suggested a doubling time of the number of infected persons of 6–7 days and a basic reproductive number (R0) of 2.2–2.7. We collected extensive individual case reports across China and estimated key epidemiologic parameters, including the incubation period. We then designed 2 mathematical modeling approaches to infer the outbreak dynamics in Wuhan by using high-resolution domestic travel and infection data. Results show that the doubling time early in the epidemic in Wuhan was 2.3–3.3 days. Assuming a serial interval of 6–9 days, we calculated a median R0 value of 5.7 (95% CI 3.8–8.9). We further show that active surveillance, contact tracing, quarantine, and early strong social distancing efforts are needed to stop transmission of the virus.

KiwiGriff

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 649
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 370
  • Likes Given: 101
Re: COVID-19
« Reply #5205 on: April 10, 2020, 04:27:27 AM »
Oren
I only posted it because someone requested the actual study not the press pieces.
Quote
The case fatality rate in relation to the total number of infected persons in the community of Gangelt is approx. 0.37 % with the preliminary data from this study. The lethality rate currently calculated in Germany by Johns-Hopkins University is 1.98 %, which is 5 times higher. The mortality in relation to the total population in Gangelt is currently 0.15 %. 

I do not find the study's conclusions convincing yet.
Much more information is needed than they disclosed.
Age demographics in the study and within the population, wealth of the community, cases still unresolved ,unattributed death rate  and many other confounding factors suggest them self's.

oren

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 5194
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1439
  • Likes Given: 1471
Re: COVID-19
« Reply #5206 on: April 10, 2020, 04:30:06 AM »
Age demographics in the study and within the population, wealth of the community, cases still unresolved ,unattributed death rate  and many other confounding factors suggest them self's.
Good points KG. And I was the someone requesting the actual study, hence my thanks!

Sam

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 417
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 372
  • Likes Given: 68
Re: COVID-19
« Reply #5207 on: April 10, 2020, 04:33:20 AM »
...
Now - of course - humanity may fail to extirpate this virus. In that case, we will lose 4-12% of the population over the next year or two, ...
Sam

Sam, I'd appreciate if you could please tell us how you came to that very high figure, and range!

In Nothern Italy, the highest lethality is 1% of population, and that is in municipalities that have a very old population on average (around 45 years iirc), and with many lifestyle diseases. I would say that 1% lethality is proven under such circumstances of old people and many comorbidities, but cannot see what can contribute to an even higher figure than that?

So why should we expect even higher lethality on a global scale?

Sam will give a better explanation but here is my take on why 10% is possible.

1 - it isn't going anywhere. There are too many carriers without symptoms, it is global and it spreads easily. Even lockdown don't truly stop it. As soon as a lockdown is removed it reappears.

2 - there is a growing body of work that is beginning to suggest that immunity either doesn't happen or disappears quickly.

3 - Without decent medical treatment, a lot more people die. It appears that about 1% of people die when treated well but it leaps up quickly when hospitals are overwhelmed. And soon, it will hit countries with inadequate medical services to begin with.

4 - give the above, the virus can potentially do the rounds over and over again in the same people until they die.

5 - with a mutation rate similar to flu, there is a chance that it will mutate every two years. If that happens, it becomes a flip of the coin as to what it does next.

To me, it is not unreasonable to see a significant ongoing event that will cause many problems for a long time.
I am not saying this will happen..... but it isn't out of the realms of possibility. And if it does happen, 10% will be on the low end of victims.

Precisely.

Round and round and round she goes, until no one susceptible dies anymore.

Meanwhile, the virus is morphing into new forms.

Sam

Archimid

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 2959
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 655
  • Likes Given: 194
Re: COVID-19
« Reply #5208 on: April 10, 2020, 05:05:52 AM »
In the Diamond Princess, we know the IFR is at least 1.54%. We also know the population of the Diamond Princess was skewed towards older people.

Let's take this german study at face value. Germany has consistently shown an extraordinarily low fatality rate. Fatality reporting is iffy. But at the same time, I haven't seen any reports of overwhelmed medical systems in Germany.

So with the apparent best available healthcare available on Earth, the IFR is somewhere in the range of:

0.38%-1.54%

In places with inferior healthcare systems, that are overwhelmed or the population has different distribution we can expect a much higher IFR.

Let me point out that this is the IFR, an estimation of the true number of infected people, not just the people that were tested.

The CFR of influenza is about .1% in the US. The midpoint of the IFR with ideal health care is around an order of magnitude worse than influenza. With an overwhelmed system or no healthcare, the IFR will be close to the hospitalization rate.


There is no iceberg under the tip. Multiyear sea ice at most.
I am an energy reservoir seemingly intent on lowering entropy for self preservation.

sigma_squared

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 109
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 52
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: COVID-19
« Reply #5209 on: April 10, 2020, 05:11:12 AM »
Study posted on medRxiv April 7: countries with multiple BCG vaccination policies have 0.6% CFR, compared to 5.2% in high burden countries (p < 0.0001).

Connecting BCG Vaccination and COVID-19: Additional Data
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.07.20053272v1
Quote
Abstract
The reasons for a wide variation in severity of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) across the affected countries of the world are not known. Two recent studies have suggested a link between the BCG vaccination policy and the morbidity and mortality due to COVID-19. In the present study we compared the impact of COVID-19 in terms of case fatality rates (CFR) between countries with high disease burden and those with BCG revaccination policies presuming that revaccination practices would have provided added protection to the population against severe COVID-19. We found a significant difference in the CFR between the two groups of countries. Our data further supports the view that universal BCG vaccination has a protective effect on the course of COVID-19 probably preventing progression to severe disease and death. Clinical trials of BCG vaccine are urgently needed to establish its beneficial role in COVID-19 as suggested by the epidemiological data, especially in countries without a universal BCG vaccination policy. Keywords: COVID-19, BCG vaccination, case fatality ratio, mortality, low resource countries

Hefaistos

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 580
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 69
  • Likes Given: 202
Re: COVID-19
« Reply #5210 on: April 10, 2020, 07:35:37 AM »
In the Diamond Princess, we know the IFR is at least 1.54%. We also know the population of the Diamond Princess was skewed towards older people.

Let's take this german study at face value. Germany has consistently shown an extraordinarily low fatality rate. Fatality reporting is iffy. But at the same time, I haven't seen any reports of overwhelmed medical systems in Germany.

So with the apparent best available healthcare available on Earth, the IFR is somewhere in the range of:

0.38%-1.54%

In places with inferior healthcare systems, that are overwhelmed or the population has different distribution we can expect a much higher IFR.

Let me point out that this is the IFR, an estimation of the true number of infected people, not just the people that were tested.

The CFR of influenza is about .1% in the US. The midpoint of the IFR with ideal health care is around an order of magnitude worse than influenza. With an overwhelmed system or no healthcare, the IFR will be close to the hospitalization rate.


There is no iceberg under the tip. Multiyear sea ice at most.

Indeed!
For Diamond Princess we have a current lethality of 12 deaths related to 3700 people on board, i.e. 0.32%
Expect a few more deaths from those who are still in ICU, and we could reach 0.5%.
That is a very far cry from Sam's proposed 4 -12 % lethality range.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_coronavirus_pandemic_on_Diamond_Princess

Hefaistos

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 580
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 69
  • Likes Given: 202
Re: COVID-19
« Reply #5211 on: April 10, 2020, 08:05:06 AM »
...
Now - of course - humanity may fail to extirpate this virus. In that case, we will lose 4-12% of the population over the next year or two, ...
Sam

Sam, I'd appreciate if you could please tell us how you came to that very high figure, and range!

In Northern Italy, the highest lethality is 1% of population, and that is in municipalities that have a very old population on average (around 45 years iirc), and with many lifestyle diseases. I would say that 1% lethality is proven under such circumstances of old people and many comorbidities, but cannot see what can contribute to an even higher figure than that?

So why should we expect even higher lethality on a global scale?

Sam will give a better explanation but here is my take on why 10% is possible.

1 - it isn't going anywhere. There are too many carriers without symptoms, it is global and it spreads easily. Even lockdown don't truly stop it. As soon as a lockdown is removed it reappears.

However, eventually herd immunity will be reached. We haven't seen much research on that. In this thread it was reported about one Italian municipality where 70% of tested in Castiglioni d'Adda, ie 40 out of 60 had antibodies. The town has 4600 population and lost 62 people.
62 is the total number of deaths for ca 2 months, that is an anomaly of ca 52 deaths, ie. slightly above 1% of total population. That seems to be enough to create herd immunity as based on these blood tests 2/3 of them have antibodies.
So we have a 1.0 % lethality of C19 but in a place where immunity was checked for. That is the price of herd immunity.
This was reported upthread, with links to La Stampa.
No support here or from other Italian places for anything above 1% lethality of population.

Quote
2 - there is a growing body of work that is beginning to suggest that immunity either doesn't happen or disappears quickly.

We have seen very few reports on immunity and one of them shows weak immunity in young people. But some immunity is also immunity. Where are the reports that "immunity disappears quickly"?

Quote
3 - Without decent medical treatment, a lot more people die. It appears that about 1% of people die when treated well but it leaps up quickly when hospitals are overwhelmed. And soon, it will hit countries with inadequate medical services to begin with.

Italy is the benchmark here, and we got 1% population lethality there in the OVERWHELMED parts of Northern Italy. We supposedly won't get much more lethality than that anywhere.

Quote
4 - give the above, the virus can potentially do the rounds over and over again in the same people until they die.

Herd immunity was reached, and 1% of people died in overwhelmed parts of Italy. Your claim assumes that there will be no herd immunity, but that is just empty speculation.

Quote
5 - with a mutation rate similar to flu, there is a chance that it will mutate every two years. If that happens, it becomes a flip of the coin as to what it does next.
To me, it is not unreasonable to see a significant ongoing event that will cause many problems for a long time.
I am not saying this will happen..... but it isn't out of the realms of possibility. And if it does happen, 10% will be on the low end of victims.

The virus will have to mutate to survive and thrive. But why should we assume that a mutated virus will be more contagious, or more deadly? The null hypothesis should be that future mutations will be just like other corona virus seasonal flu mutations, with similar lethalities below 0.1%.

Overall, the forecast of 4 - 12 % population lethality is unfounded. It's actually nothing but speculation and fearmongering.

Jim Hunt

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 4509
  • Stay Home, Save Lives
    • View Profile
    • The Arctic sea ice Great White Con
  • Liked: 415
  • Likes Given: 30
Re: COVID-19
« Reply #5212 on: April 10, 2020, 08:53:03 AM »
3,160 strains analyzed in a near real-time phylogenetic tree, by country, by clade, ...
https://nextstrain.org/ncov/global?l=unrooted

Sam

Thanks Sam. I'd not seen that before!
Reality is merely an illusion, albeit a very persistent one - Albert Einstein

Neven

  • Administrator
  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 7595
    • View Profile
    • Arctic Sea Ice Blog
  • Liked: 937
  • Likes Given: 501
Re: COVID-19
« Reply #5213 on: April 10, 2020, 09:16:43 AM »
Preliminary results and conclusions of the COVID-19 Case Cluster Study (Gangelt municipality)

Prof. Dr. Hendrik Streeck (Institute for Virology)

I saw an interesting interview with the main author last week on the German ZDF. What struck me most, was that he explained that they checked all kinds of surfaces for the virus (including mobile phones, remotes, door knobs and even pets) and found that it was very hard for the virus to be transmitted that way. He literally said: Someone with the virus would have to cough in their hand, immediately after that touch a door knob, and not too long after that, someone else would have to touch that same door knob.

This contradicts that study that was widely circulated a few weeks ago about the virus being able to survive on plastic for X days, cardboard for Y days, etc. Is it because the study was conducted in a lab environment, and in the real world the virus isn't able to survive as long on surfaces?
Il faut comparer, comparer, comparer, et cultiver notre jardin

blumenkraft

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3883
  • Fans of Hans Ø Club - circa 2018
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1356
  • Likes Given: 2137
Re: COVID-19
« Reply #5214 on: April 10, 2020, 09:25:57 AM »
10 requirements for the evaluation of "Contact Tracing" apps

Link >> https://www.ccc.de/en/updates/2020/contact-tracing-requirements
CEO of bitcoin & Antifa

Rodius

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 255
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 192
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: COVID-19
« Reply #5215 on: April 10, 2020, 10:39:38 AM »
Hefaistos - I cant be bothered figuring gout how the quote separation works but here is my response.

Everything I have mentioned has information within this thread. Given the 100+ pages, it is a lot to go through to find related links. Since I broke my response into 5 sections, all different concepts, I will leave the links alone. I will, next time, stick to one concept and provide links.

Herd immunity is not a given. In the last few days discussions have been had that suggest antibodies are below a level that would provide immunity in 30% of cases. That is high. But it isn't peer-reviewed and the sample is small. But, there are people who have caught it and have little to no immunity. This will affect the production of a vaccine.
For you to say that not gaining herd immunity is pure speculation when research is coming out with 30% with low or ineffective immunity, it seems odd to say herd immunity is possible. It isn't a given. I said it was possible for herd immunity to not be possible and I stand by that line of thinking until peer-reviewed research appears saying herd immunity is possible. If 30% ends up being correct, herd immunity is not possible.

Lethality..... the range varies widely but they all agree it is much worse than a bad flu year and up to 4%. The percentage is fuzzy but bad regardless. 1% in one region doesn't mean a lot when other regions with collapsed health care systems record much higher rates of death. It has happened multiple times already. Italy started out okay then the death rate sky rocketed when ICU became overburdened. New York is doing it now. Spain has been through it. China has. And other countries will.
Low percentages of deaths relies heavily on a functioning health care system. Take it away and Covid is much worse.

Mutations..... I didn't say it would mutate for the worse. I said it would mutate and you can flip a coin as to which direction it goes.
I could be wrong, but it doesn't make sense for a virus to always weaken over time. It is common but not a requirement.
This virus can easily spread. To me, that is the key driver. With 7.7 billion people, it could happily mutate and kill more people and do very well because it spreads fast, hidden and easily. Killing the host with a huge buffet of humans on the table is not a problem.
Flip the coin...... each mutation could weaken it.... it could make it worse too. So long at it can spread undetected, the virus will be okay.

If this virus lasts more than two years and mutates, even with the same lethality, while maintaining its ability to spread, and providing a high level of people who catch it have low immunity.... all of which is plausible.... then 10% is not fear mongering. It is a fairly solid possibility.

But there isn't enough information to make a call on it with certainty.
There is enough information to make the statement of 10%. Under this criteria, all of which has been researched with links within this thread, it is possible.


pietkuip

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 243
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 118
  • Likes Given: 169
Re: COVID-19
« Reply #5216 on: April 10, 2020, 11:16:57 AM »
Now - of course - humanity may fail to extirpate this virus. In that case, we will lose 4-12% of the population over the next year or two, and it will become an ongoing predator, culling the old and infirm, the unhealthy, and the weak. In time, those who are genetically less vulnerable will prevail and have children, lessening the impact of the virus; and conversely - suppressing those genetic lines that are less able to withstand its ravages.

Sam

Extirpation has only succeeded with smallpox (almost). It needs a vaccine.

And Sam keeps ignoring data. I am sure he knows the Gangelt result where 15 % had had the infection at the time of the study. Death rates are ten times lower than his lower boundary. Lower than 0.4 % of the population (which is about 10 times as bad as a bad flu season).

Data should be more convincing than such looong pieces of overly dramatic prose.
« Last Edit: April 10, 2020, 12:55:26 PM by pietkuip »

oren

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 5194
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1439
  • Likes Given: 1471
Re: COVID-19
« Reply #5217 on: April 10, 2020, 11:31:30 AM »
In the Diamond Princess, we know the IFR is at least 1.54%. We also know the population of the Diamond Princess was skewed towards older people.

Let's take this german study at face value. Germany has consistently shown an extraordinarily low fatality rate. Fatality reporting is iffy. But at the same time, I haven't seen any reports of overwhelmed medical systems in Germany.

So with the apparent best available healthcare available on Earth, the IFR is somewhere in the range of:

0.38%-1.54%

In places with inferior healthcare systems, that are overwhelmed or the population has different distribution we can expect a much higher IFR.

Let me point out that this is the IFR, an estimation of the true number of infected people, not just the people that were tested.

The CFR of influenza is about .1% in the US. The midpoint of the IFR with ideal health care is around an order of magnitude worse than influenza. With an overwhelmed system or no healthcare, the IFR will be close to the hospitalization rate.

Indeed!
For Diamond Princess we have a current lethality of 12 deaths related to 3700 people on board, i.e. 0.32%
Expect a few more deaths from those who are still in ICU, and we could reach 0.5%.
That is a very far cry from Sam's proposed 4 -12 % lethality range.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_coronavirus_pandemic_on_Diamond_Princess
Pray tell, do you think herd immunity was reached on the Diamond Princess? What stopped the infection case count at ~712 out of 3700?
If this may have been achieved by lockdown and quarantine and removing people off the ship, then this 0.32% calculation is meaningless. 12 out of 712 is 1.68% IFR (Infection Fatality Rate) and this without counting those still hospitalized. Total Fatality Rate not known for the whole 3700 population, but no reason why it should have been less than 1% even assuming 60% is enough for herd immunity and even assuming no more deaths will occur. This needs to be corrected for demographics, to which I do not have access but which should lower the result. OTOH healthcare for those infected was optimal with no hospital overwhelm and with early detection.
Note: estimates are that herd immunity is reached with 90%, certainly more than 60% with such a contagious virus.

Archimid

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 2959
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 655
  • Likes Given: 194
Re: COVID-19
« Reply #5218 on: April 10, 2020, 11:57:15 AM »
Indeed!
For Diamond Princess we have a current lethality of 12 deaths related to 3700 people on board, i.e. 0.32%
Expect a few more deaths from those who are still in ICU, and we could reach 0.5%.
That is a very far cry from Sam's proposed 4 -12 % lethality range.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_coronavirus_pandemic_on_Diamond_Princess

I believe Sam's number was 3.79% of those TESTED. That is the CFR, not IFR.

I think his number was right on point and in places like the US the number will be an underestimate.

At any rate, the number is much better than the cherry-pick that is using Germany, the Diamond Princess or Iceland.

(You can remove Germany from the list of low IFR if they are dieselgating fatalities)
I am an energy reservoir seemingly intent on lowering entropy for self preservation.

blumenkraft

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3883
  • Fans of Hans Ø Club - circa 2018
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1356
  • Likes Given: 2137
Re: COVID-19
« Reply #5219 on: April 10, 2020, 12:26:18 PM »
Extirpation is has only succeeded with smallpox (almost). It needs a vaccine.

Extirpation can only succeed if there are no animal or insect reservoirs.

Smallpox has no such reservoirs, but SARS-CoV-2 has!
CEO of bitcoin & Antifa

be cause

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1157
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 448
  • Likes Given: 327
Re: COVID-19
« Reply #5220 on: April 10, 2020, 12:48:43 PM »
just saw interviews with Italian mayors .. they are convinced mortality has been much higher , at least double that recorded. This echos the reports from Spain and the UK .. if only hospital deaths with a confirmed test are counted , then even health workers now dying at home (UK) do not count .
  A close friend last night lost his father in a care home outbreak here in NI .. no one dying in such circumstances are making it into the stats .. b.c.
2007 + 5 = 2012 + 4 = 2016 + 3 = 2019 + 2 = 2021 
 (phew)

pietkuip

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 243
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 118
  • Likes Given: 169
Re: COVID-19
« Reply #5221 on: April 10, 2020, 12:59:32 PM »
just saw interviews with Italian mayors .. they are convinced mortality has been much higher , at least double that recorded. This echos the reports from Spain and the UK .. if only hospital deaths with a confirmed test are counted , then even health workers now dying at home (UK) do not count

No need for guessing anymore, it is showing up in total death rates at http://www.euromomo.eu/

See different countries and regions for detail.

Archimid

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 2959
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 655
  • Likes Given: 194
Re: COVID-19
« Reply #5222 on: April 10, 2020, 01:12:50 PM »
This is a NOVEL coronavirus, not an endemic disease. The novel characteristic of the virus is what gives it epidemic characteristics. The novel characteristics make it different from other respiratory pathogens. There are no immunes and there may not be permanent immunes.

But also it isn't widespread yet. Most people haven't been infected. Anywhere in the world that shutdown or took up social distancing got a reduction of the spread. Many countries have reverse growth and are successfully extirpating C19.

It is entirely possible to extirpate this virus and then keep track of it. This is easier said than done, but nothing worth doing is ever easy. What we need is cooperation at all levels. What we have is a President enriching himself and his friends beyond his wildest dreams at the expense of life.
I am an energy reservoir seemingly intent on lowering entropy for self preservation.

dnem

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 516
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 229
  • Likes Given: 119
Re: COVID-19
« Reply #5223 on: April 10, 2020, 01:18:59 PM »
I have a question that perhaps belongs in the Stupid thread. I'm struggling with the concept of R0.  Humans live in such vastly different arrangements with such vastly different patterns of movement and behaviors across the planet. How can there be a single R0? I can see coming up with some sort of standardized number for a population with a given set of parameters, but a single number for how a disease moves among "people"? It doesn't make sense to me. People live at such different densities and have such different cultural norms around touching, kissing, hugging, hand-holding, hygiene, etc., etc.

vox_mundi

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3100
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1793
  • Likes Given: 229
Re: COVID-19
« Reply #5224 on: April 10, 2020, 01:21:27 PM »
Less Than 1% of Austria's Population Infected With Coronavirus, Study Finds
https://www.nytimes.com/reuters/2020/04/10/world/europe/10reuters-health-coronavirus-austria-study.html

The principle of “herd immunity”, at one stage touted by the UK government as a possible solution to the coronavirus outbreak, has taken an apparent blow after a study in Austria found less than 1% of the population is infected with coronavirus.

The first such study in continental Europe, led by pollster SORA which is known for projecting election results, aimed to provide a clearer picture of the total number of infections, given gaps in testing, Reuters reports.

“Based on this study, we believe that 0.33% of the population in Austria was acutely infected in early April,” SORA co-founder Christoph Hofinger told a news conference. Given the margin of error, the figure was 95% likely to be between 0.12% and 0.76%.

Sebastian Kurz, Austria’s chancellor, whose government commissioned the study and saw initial findings a few days ago, said on Monday that the rate of infection was around 1%. He said that disproved the idea of herd immunity - which requires widespread infection - as a viable policy option.

---------------------------------

China's Wuhan to Keep Testing Residents as Coronavirus Lockdown Eases
https://mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUSKCN21S0FV

WUHAN, China (Reuters) - China's Wuhan city, where the global coronavirus pandemic began, is still testing residents regularly despite relaxing its tough two-month lockdown, with the country wary of a rebound in cases even as it sets its sights on normalising the economy.

Concerns remain over an influx of infected patients from overseas as well as China's ability to detect asymptomatic patients, and the government in Wuhan has tried to reassure the public that it remains vigilant.

Feng Jing, who runs a group of community workers looking after the Tanhualin neighbourhood in Wuhan, said during a government-run tour for journalists on Friday that they would continue to carry out extensive checks on residents.

... "We carry out comprehensive health checks everyday and keep detailed records of their health condition," she said, adding that there is no likelihood of asymptomatic cases in her community.

-----------------------------

Lack of Coronavirus Testing May Blunt Trump's Planned Economic Revival
https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2020/04/10/politics/donald-trump-testing-economy-coronavirus/index.html

President Donald Trump says America does not need and will never have mass coronavirus testing, despite warnings by experts that a comprehensive program is vital to getting life back to normal.

The inadequacy of testing for the virus has been a constant deficiency of the government's handling of the pandemic from the start. Fixing this deficiency, as well as creating antibody testing that can identify if someone has already had the disease and may be less apt to get it again, may be the key to effectively reopening the economy while preventing a second wave of infections. It could also help identify which workers can return to work, and those who still present a risk of infection.

But the continued lack of a robust testing program, despite weeks of claims by Trump that the problem is fixed, is raising stark new questions about the White House's management of the situation. After being slow to recognize the extent of the pandemic, the testing shortfall means the administration is yet to prove it is capable of charting an effective path out of the crisis.

... Asked by CNN's Jim Acosta how the administration could contemplate reopening the economy without sufficient testing in place, Trump insisted the US system was "the best in the world."

"There are certain sections in the country that are in phenomenal shape already, other sections are coming online, other sections are going down, and we, in addition to that, are giving out millions of tests every day," the President said.

"We're doing it exponentially, we're picking up, and what we'll be doing in the very near future is going to certain areas of our country and do massive testing. It's not necessary but it would be a good thing to have," he said.

But seconds later, the President however appeared to contradict his own comment that the administration would put in place "massive testing" in some areas of the country.

"We want to have it and we're going to see if we have it. Do you need it? No. Is it a nice thing to do? Yes," Trump said. "We're talking about 325 million people and that's not going to happen, as you can imagine, and it would never happen with anyone else, either. Other countries do it but they do it in a limited form. We'll probably be the leader of the pack."
“There are three classes of people: those who see. Those who see when they are shown. Those who do not see.” ― Leonardo da Vinci

Insensible before the wave so soon released by callous fate. Affected most, they understand the least, and understanding, when it comes, invariably arrives too late

Richard Rathbone

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 717
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 100
  • Likes Given: 10
Re: COVID-19
« Reply #5225 on: April 10, 2020, 01:39:22 PM »
just saw interviews with Italian mayors .. they are convinced mortality has been much higher , at least double that recorded. This echos the reports from Spain and the UK .. if only hospital deaths with a confirmed test are counted , then even health workers now dying at home (UK) do not count .
  A close friend last night lost his father in a care home outbreak here in NI .. no one dying in such circumstances are making it into the stats .. b.c.

In England care homes and prisons are the same priority for testing as hospitals. NI may or may not be different, and I wouldn't be surprised if the testing outside hospitals was less efficient, but it is done. Deaths in care homes don't make it into the daily headline figure of hospital deaths, but they do make it into the weekly ONS update on death certificate data.

vox_mundi

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3100
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1793
  • Likes Given: 229
Re: COVID-19
« Reply #5226 on: April 10, 2020, 01:51:22 PM »
Coronavirus Traces Found in Massachusetts Wastewater at Levels Far Higher Than Expected
https://www.statnews.com/2020/04/07/new-research-wastewater-community-spread-covid-19/

In a paper posted Tuesday to the preprint server medRxiv, researchers collected samples in late March from a wastewater treatment plant serving a large metropolitan area in Massachusetts and found that the amount of SARS-CoV-2 particles in the sewage samples indicated a far higher number of people likely infected with Covid-19 than the reported cases in that area.

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.05.20051540v1

Researchers from biotech startup Biobot Analytics, working with a team from Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Harvard, and Brigham and Women’s Hospital, estimate there were at least 2,300 people infected with Covid-19 in the area around the treatment facility. But at the time of analysis, which has not yet been peer-reviewed, there were 446 cases officially reported in that area.

In another preprint, which has also not yet been peer-reviewed and that was posted last week to medRxiv, researchers in the Netherlands similarly described detecting the novel coronavirus in sewage samples — sometimes even before public health officials reported the first diagnosed case of Covid-19 in a given community.

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.03.29.20045880v1
“There are three classes of people: those who see. Those who see when they are shown. Those who do not see.” ― Leonardo da Vinci

Insensible before the wave so soon released by callous fate. Affected most, they understand the least, and understanding, when it comes, invariably arrives too late

Richard Rathbone

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 717
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 100
  • Likes Given: 10
Re: COVID-19
« Reply #5227 on: April 10, 2020, 01:52:06 PM »
I have a question that perhaps belongs in the Stupid thread. I'm struggling with the concept of R0.  Humans live in such vastly different arrangements with such vastly different patterns of movement and behaviors across the planet. How can there be a single R0? I can see coming up with some sort of standardized number for a population with a given set of parameters, but a single number for how a disease moves among "people"? It doesn't make sense to me. People live at such different densities and have such different cultural norms around touching, kissing, hugging, hand-holding, hygiene, etc., etc.

There isn't a single one. There's just a value you choose to use before an epidemic happens, because you don't know how all that stuff will affect the spread until its happened. R0 means the guess I'm starting with for time=0 in my model. (The model structure will affect R too)

The professionals may well come to a consensus on what that value should be, but its a professional consensus about how an epidemic should be predicted, which can and will change as more data comes in.

dnem

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 516
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 229
  • Likes Given: 119
Re: COVID-19
« Reply #5228 on: April 10, 2020, 02:03:02 PM »
Well, yeah, I get that. But that essentially means you need to model the outbreak with incredibly fine geographic detail, as the rate of spread will vary so radically across space. In my city, the way people live together varies dramatically from block to block (as they do in most places).

gandul

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 357
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 105
  • Likes Given: 7
Re: COVID-19
« Reply #5229 on: April 10, 2020, 02:03:38 PM »
I have a question that perhaps belongs in the Stupid thread. I'm struggling with the concept of R0.  Humans live in such vastly different arrangements with such vastly different patterns of movement and behaviors across the planet. How can there be a single R0? I can see coming up with some sort of standardized number for a population with a given set of parameters, but a single number for how a disease moves among "people"? It doesn't make sense to me. People live at such different densities and have such different cultural norms around touching, kissing, hugging, hand-holding, hygiene, etc., etc.
There's not a single R0. AFAIK. There's a baseline R0 for unknown new virus that easily transmits, in a urban environment in particular, and under an ideal weather. Let's say that's the baseline R0, very high for our coronavirus in question (more than 3). Even that number, I assume, is an average, as R0 can be 50 in a choir-singing environment, 20 in a soccer match, 10 in a pub, 1.5 in running in open space, 0 in one's own house. As conditions evolve to impede propagation, R0 is reduced. Am I wrong?

SteveMDFP

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1669
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 330
  • Likes Given: 23
Re: COVID-19
« Reply #5230 on: April 10, 2020, 02:04:45 PM »
I have a question that perhaps belongs in the Stupid thread. I'm struggling with the concept of R0.  Humans live in such vastly different arrangements with such vastly different patterns of movement and behaviors across the planet. How can there be a single R0? I can see coming up with some sort of standardized number for a population with a given set of parameters, but a single number for how a disease moves among "people"? It doesn't make sense to me. People live at such different densities and have such different cultural norms around touching, kissing, hugging, hand-holding, hygiene, etc., etc.

R0 is not a fixed value.  It represents the number of people that are infected by one individual, on average.  Some viruses are more easily spread, some less.  But R0 is not just about viral characteristics.  A contagious virus will have a higher R0 in societies where people shake hands, or where large crowds gather for church or sporting events.   "Social distancing" can be thought of as ways to reduce the R0 number.

KiwiGriff

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 649
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 370
  • Likes Given: 101
Re: COVID-19
« Reply #5231 on: April 10, 2020, 02:07:12 PM »
COVID-19: excess mortality figures in Italy
A comparison between official COVID-19 deaths and mortality in Lombardy
https://towardsdatascience.com/covid-19-excess-mortality-figures-in-italy-d9640f411691
Summary of the stats and insights
Quote
As stated above the 1,084 towns are a subset that is made available by ISTAT. The subset contains 434 towns in Lombardy covering a total of 56.48% of the population (10 million inhabitants). The table below shows the data of deaths grouped by the 12 Lombardy provinces, ordered by the number of deaths in 2020. The province of Bergamo is showing the biggest increase with 454% in 2020 w.r.t. 2019, the province of Milan the smallest with a 42% increase.

If we plot the total number of deaths recorded in the subset of towns in Lombardy we can see that there is a 144% increase in deaths in 2020 between 1–21 Mar 2020 with respect to 2019 (3520 deaths in 2019, 8587 deaths in 2020). So, 5067 more deaths.
But the official number of COVID-19 deaths between 1–21 Mar 2020 is 3072 in Lombardy.

This means that with a subset of 56.48% of the population, the figures show 5067 excess deaths (i.e. 891.8 deaths per 1M pop) which are greater than 3072 (305.4 deaths per 1M pop), the official COVID-19 deaths toll across the whole of Lombardy.
If we consider a year-on-year worst-case scenario fluctuation of up to 20%, the excess deaths are then 767.87 per 1M, we could infer that we might have 7725 excessive deaths between 1–21 Mar 2020 in Lombardy of which 40% is due to COVID-19 and 60% (4653) are unexplained deaths. A question then arises: how much statistical error is it?
This shows that the number of deaths due to COVID-19 could be two-and-a-half times bigger than the official deaths (i.e. 767.87/305.4=2.514). Therefore, 7725 deaths across Lombardy can represent a figure towards an upper bound, given that we do not know if the subset of the towns is a representative sample, but, potentially, we should not be too far away.


Richard Rathbone

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 717
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 100
  • Likes Given: 10
Re: COVID-19
« Reply #5232 on: April 10, 2020, 02:33:47 PM »
Well, yeah, I get that. But that essentially means you need to model the outbreak with incredibly fine geographic detail, as the rate of spread will vary so radically across space. In my city, the way people live together varies dramatically from block to block (as they do in most places).

Some models do that. Whether its needed or not depends on what you are trying to understand.

e.g. the UK lockdown restrictions vary quite a bit across the population depending on how essential or vulnerable you are deemed to be. It will require quite a complex model to inform which restrictions can be eased without taking too much risk of the epidemic flaring up again, but if you just want to know what is the reasonable rate of hospital admissions to plan for in the next week, a pretty crude curve fit will suffice.

Jim Hunt

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 4509
  • Stay Home, Save Lives
    • View Profile
    • The Arctic sea ice Great White Con
  • Liked: 415
  • Likes Given: 30
Re: COVID-19
« Reply #5233 on: April 10, 2020, 02:43:29 PM »
Andrew Neil’s “plan to exploit the Covid crisis”?

https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php/topic,578.msg259172.html#msg259172
Reality is merely an illusion, albeit a very persistent one - Albert Einstein

Archimid

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 2959
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 655
  • Likes Given: 194
Re: COVID-19
« Reply #5234 on: April 10, 2020, 03:17:47 PM »

This means that with a subset of 56.48% of the population, the figures show 5067 excess deaths (i.e. 891.8 deaths per 1M pop) which are greater than 3072 (305.4 deaths per 1M pop), the official COVID-19 deaths toll across the whole of Lombardy.
If we consider a year-on-year worst-case scenario fluctuation of up to 20%, the excess deaths are then 767.87 per 1M, we could infer that we might have 7725 excessive deaths between 1–21 Mar 2020 in Lombardy of which 40% is due to COVID-19 and 60% (4653) are unexplained deaths.
A question then arises: how much statistical error is it?


That is the question that arises? If one looks at the physics of what is happening to inform the statistic, most of that excess death was C19 related.

And remember. the world is shut down. There are no car accidents. Typical influenza deaths have been minimized. If it wasn't for C19 the fatality rates should be way down.

GIGO. Garbage In. Garbage Out. If you are going to err in a model, err on the side of caution. 
I am an energy reservoir seemingly intent on lowering entropy for self preservation.

The Walrus

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 328
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 52
  • Likes Given: 16
Re: COVID-19
« Reply #5235 on: April 10, 2020, 03:21:52 PM »
Now - of course - humanity may fail to extirpate this virus. In that case, we will lose 4-12% of the population over the next year or two, and it will become an ongoing predator, culling the old and infirm, the unhealthy, and the weak. In time, those who are genetically less vulnerable will prevail and have children, lessening the impact of the virus; and conversely - suppressing those genetic lines that are less able to withstand its ravages.

Sam

Extirpation has only succeeded with smallpox (almost). It needs a vaccine.

And Sam keeps ignoring data. I am sure he knows the Gangelt result where 15 % had had the infection at the time of the study. Death rates are ten times lower than his lower boundary. Lower than 0.4 % of the population (which is about 10 times as bad as a bad flu season).

Data should be more convincing than such looong pieces of overly dramatic prose.

Yes, Sam is a true alarmist.  He is consistently posting about tens of millions dying from this virus.  Yet, the data does not confirm his theories.  A confined population of overly susceptible people shows an IFR of less than 1, but Sam still thinks it is ten times higher for the general population.  Even the worst outbreaks in Italy are not that high. 
Without a true vaccine, we will not be able to extirpate this virus.  That does not mean that it will return every year worse than before.  With any pandemic, the first go around is the worst.  The next time is less, due to herd immunity and the most vulnerable having already succumbed.  The hospitals will be better prepared and available also. 
No, we will not experience a population decline like the plague.  However, this types of claims make nice headlines for the inquirer and other rags.  They do not belong in true scientific posts.

Archimid

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 2959
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 655
  • Likes Given: 194
Re: COVID-19
« Reply #5236 on: April 10, 2020, 03:38:31 PM »
Quote
Yet, the data does not confirm his theories.

If he is successful, the data will be completely the opposite of what he predicted. People got scared. People reacted. People will not get sick.

If he fails, the data will prove him right. People will listen to comfy words, get infected and flood the hospitals. People will die.

So far he has been moderately successful.
I am an energy reservoir seemingly intent on lowering entropy for self preservation.

Tom_Mazanec

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 2856
    • View Profile
    • Planet Mazanec
  • Liked: 537
  • Likes Given: 134
Re: COVID-19
« Reply #5237 on: April 10, 2020, 03:58:52 PM »
Walrus:
First time is not always the worst. Spanish flu had three waves and the second one was the worst.
SHARKS (CROSSED OUT) MONGEESE (SIC) WITH FRICKIN LASER BEAMS ATTACHED TO THEIR HEADS

The Walrus

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 328
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 52
  • Likes Given: 16
Re: COVID-19
« Reply #5238 on: April 10, 2020, 04:07:48 PM »
Walrus:
First time is not always the worst. Spanish flu had three waves and the second one was the worst.

Yes, was largely due to the flu occurring late in the season.  Cases dropped precipitously during the summer, only to rebound in the fall, when the weather cooled.  The first wave did not get a chance to run its full course, before the weather warmed.

wili

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 2970
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 431
  • Likes Given: 337
Re: COVID-19
« Reply #5239 on: April 10, 2020, 04:33:44 PM »
Arch wrote:

Quote
If he is successful, the data will be completely the opposite of what he predicted. People got scared. People reacted. People will not get sick.

If he fails, the data will prove him right. People will listen to comfy words, get infected and flood the hospitals. People will die.

So far he has been moderately successful.

Nicely put. And what does that imply about the situation where Walrus 'success'
"A force de chercher de bonnes raisons, on en trouve; on les dit; et après on y tient, non pas tant parce qu'elles sont bonnes que pour ne pas se démentir." Choderlos de Laclos "You struggle to come up with some valid reasons, then cling to them, not because they're good, but just to not back down."

Neven

  • Administrator
  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 7595
    • View Profile
    • Arctic Sea Ice Blog
  • Liked: 937
  • Likes Given: 501
Re: COVID-19
« Reply #5240 on: April 10, 2020, 04:43:20 PM »
Less Than 1% of Austria's Population Infected With Coronavirus, Study Finds
https://www.nytimes.com/reuters/2020/04/10/world/europe/10reuters-health-coronavirus-austria-study.html

The principle of “herd immunity”, at one stage touted by the UK government as a possible solution to the coronavirus outbreak, has taken an apparent blow after a study in Austria found less than 1% of the population is infected with coronavirus.

The first such study in continental Europe, led by pollster SORA which is known for projecting election results, aimed to provide a clearer picture of the total number of infections, given gaps in testing, Reuters reports.

“Based on this study, we believe that 0.33% of the population in Austria was acutely infected in early April,” SORA co-founder Christoph Hofinger told a news conference. Given the margin of error, the figure was 95% likely to be between 0.12% and 0.76%.

Sebastian Kurz, Austria’s chancellor, whose government commissioned the study and saw initial findings a few days ago, said on Monday that the rate of infection was around 1%. He said that disproved the idea of herd immunity - which requires widespread infection - as a viable policy option.

The study used PCR tests, which means only people who had the virus at that time, got 'caught'. It's possible that more people have had it, but to be sure widespread testing with anti-body tests needs to be performed.

I'm not sure if it's "the first such study in continental Europe", given the comparable study in Heinsberg that has been discussed here for a bit already, which showed an infection rate of 15%, albeit in a zone where there were lots of infections.
Il faut comparer, comparer, comparer, et cultiver notre jardin

gandul

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 357
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 105
  • Likes Given: 7
Re: COVID-19
« Reply #5241 on: April 10, 2020, 05:05:58 PM »
And if you look in one of the first hit municipalities in Italy, more than 60% already passed it. And if you look at health workers in Madrid, probably more than 50% already passed it.
But more and more studies show we are really far from herd immunity even in Spain (0.3% or 5% or up to 15% depending on the official data and different studies) or Italy for that regard.
To think the opposite is wishful thinking.
I know already of several cases around my social reach, more each day, and I still doubt it reaches 15% (1 out of 7??)
It's kind of stagnant, with several old and not so old folks in the hospital, and I live in Madrid, and I have family that is health worker, etc etc. It's anecdotal evidence but from the center of one of the craters.

Archimid

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 2959
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 655
  • Likes Given: 194
Re: COVID-19
« Reply #5242 on: April 10, 2020, 05:26:08 PM »
Walrus:
First time is not always the worst. Spanish flu had three waves and the second one was the worst.

Yes, was largely due to the flu occurring late in the season.  Cases dropped precipitously during the summer, only to rebound in the fall, when the weather cooled.  The first wave did not get a chance to run its full course, before the weather warmed.


Any word on the prevalence of climate controlled rooms in 1918? How about the proportion of ourdoor la or to indoor labor?
I am an energy reservoir seemingly intent on lowering entropy for self preservation.

vox_mundi

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3100
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1793
  • Likes Given: 229
Re: COVID-19
« Reply #5243 on: April 10, 2020, 06:26:08 PM »
Doctor's Note: Can Coronavirus Cause Permanent Damage?
https://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/features/doctor-note-coronavirus-permanent-damage-200410112235801.html

As the number of people infected by COVID-19, the disease caused by the new coronavirus, worldwide soars past the one million mark, we know the vast majority will make a good recovery.

But now, scientists are looking at the long-term health implications of having had coronavirus and whether or not it can lead to permanent damage to the body.

Dr Amir Khan explains the evidence showing that COVID-19 could cause long-term lung and kidney problems.

... evidence is mounting to show that those on the moderate to severe end of the spectrum (who experience breathing difficulties and pneumonia) may be left with permanent lung damage. ... This affects approximately 14 percent of infected people.

... According to WHO, SARS, a type of coronavirus that behaves similarly to COVID-19, did the same thing to the lungs of those affected by it and led to permanent damage to these people's ability to breathe normally.

... As the infection worsens, a condition known as sepsis or overwhelming infection sets in. This means that lots of organs become affected by the one infection - the kidneys being one example.

When sepsis takes hold, there is a danger that blood vessels throughout the body will dilate (get wider) in response to the infection and pressure within them will fall.

This sudden drop in pressure stops the kidneys from receiving the flow of blood at the right pressure they need to do their complex set of jobs. Their sensitive cells can die off very quickly, leading to permanent kidney damage. ...

-------------------------

More than 100 Italian doctors die due to coronavirus
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2020/04/italian-doctors-died-coronavirus-200409211435347.html

One hundred Italian doctors have died after contracting coronavirus since the pandemic reached the Mediterranean country in February, Italy's FNOMCeO health association said on Thursday.

------------------------------

US CDC extends 'No Sail Order' for all cruise ships
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2020/04/coronavirus-deaths-rise-signs-progress-live-updates-200409231002574.html

The United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has announced the extension of a 'No Sail Order' for all cruise ships amid the coronavirus pandemic.

... According to the statement, there are approximately 100 cruise ships remaining at sea off the East Coast, West Coast, and Gulf Coast of the United States, with nearly 80,000 crew onboard.
“There are three classes of people: those who see. Those who see when they are shown. Those who do not see.” ― Leonardo da Vinci

Insensible before the wave so soon released by callous fate. Affected most, they understand the least, and understanding, when it comes, invariably arrives too late

gandul

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 357
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 105
  • Likes Given: 7
Re: COVID-19
« Reply #5244 on: April 10, 2020, 06:27:49 PM »
Furthermore, let's assume a worst case scenario of 30000 COVID official deaths in Spain by May (currently at around 15000 but beyond the peak, decelerating steadily).
Let's multiply that by 2 to get an estimate including untested deaths in residences and homes, that's 60000 death. Let's assume an ideal IFR of 1%.
Still that would give us 6 million infected, which is just 13% of the population.
Even assuming worst estimates for deaths and best estimates for IFR, no herd immunity here, unfortunately, and that translates to most of the world.

kassy

  • Moderator
  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1792
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1011
  • Likes Given: 698
Re: COVID-19
« Reply #5245 on: April 10, 2020, 07:00:32 PM »
Dutch Numbers.

I get them from nu.nl but they actually did not post the numbers for two days.
Today they mentioned some and an interesting tidbit:

115 new death lower then 148 a week ago (no totals given formatting changed)
225 new hospitalizations compared to 502 last week.

24% of confirmed Covid patients are health care workers.

In Noord-Brabant the initial local outbreak area only 11% of confirmed were HCW, in Groningen 52%.

This is basically due to the testing protocol.

CBS (Centaal Bureau voor Statistiek) says excess mortality points to the death rate being twice as high as the official number.

Of course these death include both covid deaths and death by secondary causes.
Þetta minnismerki er til vitnis um að við vitum hvað er að gerast og hvað þarf að gera. Aðeins þú veist hvort við gerðum eitthvað.

Alexander555

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1160
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 111
  • Likes Given: 40
Re: COVID-19
« Reply #5246 on: April 10, 2020, 07:25:16 PM »
Preliminary results and conclusions of the COVID-19 Case Cluster Study (Gangelt municipality)

Prof. Dr. Hendrik Streeck (Institute for Virology)

I saw an interesting interview with the main author last week on the German ZDF. What struck me most, was that he explained that they checked all kinds of surfaces for the virus (including mobile phones, remotes, door knobs and even pets) and found that it was very hard for the virus to be transmitted that way. He literally said: Someone with the virus would have to cough in their hand, immediately after that touch a door knob, and not too long after that, someone else would have to touch that same door knob.

This contradicts that study that was widely circulated a few weeks ago about the virus being able to survive on plastic for X days, cardboard for Y days, etc. Is it because the study was conducted in a lab environment, and in the real world the virus isn't able to survive as long on surfaces?

Than how got 700 people infected on a cruis ship in one week time ? Just from sneezing and talking ?

Richard Rathbone

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 717
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 100
  • Likes Given: 10
Re: COVID-19
« Reply #5247 on: April 10, 2020, 07:53:03 PM »
As of 5pm on 9 April, of those hospitalised in the UK who tested positive for coronavirus, 8,958 have died.

Testing figures are even dodgier than normal today due to playing catchup with a bunch that hadn't been included previously. Total positives are now 73758, but about 3000 of the increase from yesterday are results that had fallen through reporting cracks during the past 3 weeks (and are still falling through the cracks in some reports of todays numbers, people who are just adding up the daily numbers each day are going to be 3k short) https://www.gov.uk/guidance/coronavirus-covid-19-information-for-the-public

Daily deaths edge up to 980, 40% increase on a week ago, but nothing like the 350% increase of the previous week.

The numbers in critical care dropped 0.5% over the previous 24 hours.

The slowdown is clear, but it remains to be seen just how fast the drop will be once the full effect of lockdown is felt.

vox_mundi

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3100
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1793
  • Likes Given: 229
Re: COVID-19
« Reply #5248 on: April 10, 2020, 10:05:31 PM »
Dutch Report 2,000 Extra Deaths in Early April, Likely Due to Coronavirus
https://mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUSKCN21S12E

(Reuters) - There were around 2,000 more deaths in the Netherlands in the first week of April than would normally be expected, its statistics office said on Friday, likely the result of the coronavirus outbreak.

Figures released by Statistics Netherlands (CBS) showed around 5,100 deaths registered in the country in the week ended April 5, compared to around 3,200 a week in the same period a year ago, and 3,100 a week in early 2020 before the country registered its first COVID-19 case in late February.

The CBS numbers are complementary to data released by the country's National Institute for Public Health (RIVM), which registers only coronavirus cases that are officially diagnosed. The RIVM reported 881 coronavirus deaths in the same period.
“There are three classes of people: those who see. Those who see when they are shown. Those who do not see.” ― Leonardo da Vinci

Insensible before the wave so soon released by callous fate. Affected most, they understand the least, and understanding, when it comes, invariably arrives too late

Shared Humanity

  • Guest
Re: COVID-19
« Reply #5249 on: April 10, 2020, 10:23:41 PM »
In the Diamond Princess, we know the IFR is at least 1.54%. We also know the population of the Diamond Princess was skewed towards older people.

Let's take this german study at face value. Germany has consistently shown an extraordinarily low fatality rate. Fatality reporting is iffy. But at the same time, I haven't seen any reports of overwhelmed medical systems in Germany.

So with the apparent best available healthcare available on Earth, the IFR is somewhere in the range of:

0.38%-1.54%

In places with inferior healthcare systems, that are overwhelmed or the population has different distribution we can expect a much higher IFR.

Let me point out that this is the IFR, an estimation of the true number of infected people, not just the people that were tested.

The CFR of influenza is about .1% in the US. The midpoint of the IFR with ideal health care is around an order of magnitude worse than influenza. With an overwhelmed system or no healthcare, the IFR will be close to the hospitalization rate.


There is no iceberg under the tip. Multiyear sea ice at most.

Indeed!
For Diamond Princess we have a current lethality of 12 deaths related to 3700 people on board, i.e. 0.32%
Expect a few more deaths from those who are still in ICU, and we could reach 0.5%.
That is a very far cry from Sam's proposed 4 -12 % lethality range.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_coronavirus_pandemic_on_Diamond_Princess

Only 700 of the 3700 were infected which makes the IFR 1.7%.