2019-nCoV / Corona virus Pt 2

[Giordano]

The decrease of lung capacity with age has been hypothesized as a factor in why older people are more likely to become seriously ill than younger people. I don't know what the status of this idea is, but I am continuing to work out. It can't hurt.

Depends where you do it and near who!

 

[angrysoba]

The decrease of lung capacity with age has been hypothesized as a factor in why older people are more likely to become seriously ill than younger people. I don't know what the status of this idea is, but I am continuing to work out. It can't hurt.

Depends where you do it and near who!

Absolutely. The gym I went to (before it closed at the end of last month) has a lot of elderly members who would surely be very high risk.

I would also think how hard you work out *could* also be a risk factor.

 

[sir drinks-a-lot]

A contrary opinion

 

[Darat]

A contrary opinion

...snip...
The woefully inadequate data we have so far, the meta-research specialist argues, indicates that the extreme measures taken by many countries are likely way out of line and may result in ultimately unnecessary and catastrophic consequences...snip...​

The world is not a lab, we can't run a few repeatable tests to get better than "woefully inadequate" data. Can you tell us what calculus of risk we should be using? What is your life worth, the life of your loved ones worth?

 

[sir drinks-a-lot]

Can you tell us what calculus of risk we should be using?

Me? Why?

What is your life worth, the life of your loved ones worth?

To whom?

 

[Darat]

Me? Why?

Why not you?

To whom?

To the person I asked the question to.

 

[Ron Swanson]

The death rate is not 3 5%, nobody is saying that anymore.

Noted: I'll do more research on that

 

[Ron Swanson]

Problem: Not enough medically approved face masks are available.
Trump: Invokes an old Korean War-era law giving the president extraordinary authority to compel industries to expand production and turn out vital materials.

Trudeau: *we got this*
"Health Canada is loosening regulations on protective equipment including masks , making some available that previously wouldn't meet the bar"

 

[Kings Full]

Problem: Not enough medically approved face masks are available.
Trump: Invokes an old Korean War-era law giving the president extraordinary authority to compel industries to expand production and turn out vital materials.

Trudeau: *we got this*
"Health Canada is loosening regulations on protective equipment including masks , making some available that previously wouldn't meet the bar"

Are you not aware that we did the very same thing earlier this week?

 

[sir drinks-a-lot]

Why not you?

I post a link where a Stanford of professor of medicine, biomedical data science, statistics, and epidemiology and population health makes some points that run contrary to some of the more popular opinions on the corona virus. You know, skepticism - looking at alternative viewpoints.

I never indicated whether or not I agreed or disagreed with his views. Nor that I'm the now who knows what calculus of risk we should be using.

To the person I asked the question to.

Tough question, hard to say. Pretty darn high though.

ALSO: My original post included the wrong link. The original link is an article that points to the "real" article I intended to link. You must have started your pot in the one minute span before I edited because your quote still contains the old link.

 

[angrysoba]

...snip...
The woefully inadequate data we have so far, the meta-research specialist argues, indicates that the extreme measures taken by many countries are likely way out of line and may result in ultimately unnecessary and catastrophic consequences...snip...​

The world is not a lab, we can't run a few repeatable tests to get better than "woefully inadequate" data. Can you tell us what calculus of risk we should be using? What is your life worth, the life of your loved ones worth?

Hmmm... one question that the paper raised is the question of what happens if delaying the peak leads to the healthcare system straining for a prolonged period of time instead of a short massive peak? In that situation, death tolls could conceivably be higher as those needing emergency services months down the line for heart attacks, strokes or car accidents (or winter illnesses) may not receive treatment from overstretched healthcare services.

It’s not simply “are these people worth the money?” It’s whether or not we really have the most beneficial response.

I can’t say what that is, but it is would be a mischaracterization or the article to assume it is arguing that some people’s lives are not valuable.

 

[Steve]

A contrary opinion

I do not see much opinion there. The article contains some statistics, a summary of the many things we do not yet know about COID-19, and a little speculation. Actual opinion seems to be lacking.

 

[Ron Swanson]

Some people may object to the 'Target' wording - I'm open to suggestions for a better word.

"Zeroed in on"

"Right in the sights"

"Kill Zone"

"Prepared to Fire"

"Tango Alpha"

"Prepared to Kill"

"In the Cross Hairs"

"Ballistically Available"

"Dead in the Lead"

"Rage Calculated, Windage Adjusted"

"Prepared to Click the Bye Bye Lever"

 

[TellyKNeasuss]

Depends where you do it and near who!

Since all the gyms are closed, my exercise is primarily running. I also have a few other things I can do that don't involve touching anything or interacting with anyone.

 

[TellyKNeasuss]

Since I'm on a roll, I'll ask another (potentially) stupid question. Is there any indication of what the current primary means of transmission is? Inhaling contaminated air from someone else's cough or sneeze? Touching something and getting viruses on hands and then eating or rubbing eyes? Second- or third-order contamination, e.g., getting viruses on hands, touching something and leaving viruses on that something, and then later touching that same something and getting viruses back on hands and then eating or rubbing eyes? Are all of the above significant?

 

[Ron Swanson]

Since I'm on a roll, I'll ask another (potentially) stupid question. Is there any indication of what the current primary means of transmission is? Inhaling contaminated air from someone else's cough or sneeze? Getting viruses on hands and then eating or rubbing eyes? Second- or third-order contamination, e.g., getting viruses on hands, touching something and leaving viruses on that something, and then later touching that same something and getting viruses back on hands and then eating or rubbing eyes? Are all of the above significant?

My take is (and I read a lot) the primary means of transmission is direct contact with an infectious person.

But for those who do not know, all the above is applicable.

Corona is much easier to catch than the flu. (like almost 3 times)

 

[JeanTate]

This gives me no pleasure at all ... the only thing I'd edit is that +/- 30% should be +/- 0.3 dex

Thanks for responding, blutoski and eeyore1954.

Next level OOM-ing: what do you think are reasonable upper and lower estimates?

Contagion: 100% and 10%? Something else?
Death rate: 8% and 0.3%? Something else?

The UK is modelling on 80% of the population infected.

The latest LSHTM paper
https://cmmid.github.io/topics/covid...estimates.html
From Chinese data suggests infection fatality rate (IFR) of 0.5% (95% CI: 0.2–1.2%) and case (symptomatic) fatality rate (CFR) of 1.1% (95% CI: 0.3–2.4%). From the Diamond Princess ship IFR 1.2% (0.38–2.7%) and CFR as 2.3% (0.75%–5.3%). Average age of passengers was 58.

This matches with estimates from elsewhere that half of those infected are symptomatic.

For the US assuming an adult population of 250,000,000. An 80% infection rate is 200,000,000 and a 0.5% fatality rate is 10,000,000 deaths most of which will be in the next 6 months.

This paper has some nice epidemic curves.
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medr...22566.full.pdf

But of more interest is the seasonality modelling. For those relying on the warmer weather to save us it really depends on just how much of an impact on transmission summer has. Paradoxically a big drop in transmission may be worse than a moderate drop, in that it just pushes the epidemic in to the winter with no effect on the severity, whilst a modest impact smears the epidemic into a biphasic pattern making the peak cases much smaller and easier to manage.

Thanks!

So at this OOM stage:
- population 330 million
- will get infected: 40-80%; geometric mean 56.6%
- of those, will die: 0.2-5.3%; geometric mean 1.0%

Total estimated deaths:
- high: 13.99 million
- low: 264k
- mean: 1.92 million.

FWIW, in my experience, this OOM-ing is pretty good, surprisingly so. And it is very easy to generate inputs ("reasonable" ranges, or upper and lower limits). In this case, with just a handful of independent estimates (or guesses), from a half-dozen ISF members who've posted regularly here (call it wisdom of the crowd, if you like), I think you'd find the estimated mean number of deaths would vary only slightly, perhaps by only +/- 30%.

A selection of subsequent posts:

My own OOM estimate of the number of Covid-19 deaths in the US (upthread) is ~1.9 million. Spread out over two years. Assuming no significant, effective vaccination. Assuming efforts to contain it are unsuccessful. And no significant change in (virus) behavior (which could be good or bad).

There will be a vaccine, anti-virals are being tested for effectiveness.
The 1968 H3N2 pandemic killed around 34,00 in the USA, ~700,000 worldwide. This won't be as bad, even with Trump.

.

Skip the first five minutes of intro, in the next ten minutes the Johns Hopkins expert re-inforces what I have felt all along. .6% fatality tops, once you figure in all the mild cold like cases. NOT the end of the world. The PANIC will have a bigger effect.

.6% => 327m * 0.006 = 1.962m dead in the USA in a very short period of time.

You sir, are either stupid or deluded.

.

Global death number as of today, 7,905. The tenth leading cause of death in a single country, the US, in 2017 was 47,173. Yes, I know it is early in the epidemic for some countries, but the risk seems way out of proportion with the economic destruction already caused.

In a sharp toughening of Britain’s approach to the outbreak on Monday, Prime Minister Boris Johnson closed down social life in the world’s fifth largest economy and advised those over 70 with underlying health problems to isolate.

The modelling study, by a team led by Neil Ferguson, a professor of mathematical biology at Imperial College London, used new data gathered from Italy where the infectious disease epidemic has surged in recent weeks.

Comparing the potential impact of the COVID-19 disease epidemic with the devastating flu outbreak of 1918, Ferguson’s team said that with no mitigating measures at all, the outbreak could have caused more than half a million deaths in Britain and 2.2 million in the United States.

https://uk.reuters.com/article/us-h...britain-to-toughen-its-approach-idUKKBN2141EP

 

[dudalb]

Are they aware that "coronavirus is gone" is probably never?

And they are not quite thinking through what Edngame C would do a society. Like the total destruction of the economy. More people would probably die in the resulting upheavel then the Corona Virus could hope to kill.

 

[Andy_Ross]

Problem: Not enough medically approved face masks are available.
Trump: Invokes an old Korean War-era law giving the president extraordinary authority to compel industries to expand production and turn out vital materials.

Trudeau: *we got this*
"Health Canada is loosening regulations on protective equipment including masks , making some available that previously wouldn't meet the bar"

Trump already did that.

 

[JeanTate]

(continued)

A sort of goodbye, spread over a post or three ...

Those of my fellow ISF members who've been around for a while and hang out in this SMM&T board may have wondered why I have posted so much in this thread. After all, my wheelhouse is astronomy, astrophysics, cosmology, physics, that sort of thing.

A long time ago, in a thread now far far away, I mentioned that someone near and dear to me has cancer. Metastatic, or Stage 4, cancer. I'll call him Alex (not his real name). The cancer is a rare one, and he's had the metastatic form for ~ten years now. While he rarely has any symptoms due to the cancer, his lungs have dozens of tumors (one blocked a bronchus; easy to remove). And every now and then a tumor turns up in his liver. He's been on infusion chemo for over five years, with surgeries and radiotherapy sprinkled through the years. He's otherwise healthy ... never smoked, a lifetime of regular exercise, slightly overweight but not obese, etc, etc, etc. But he's in his 70s. He has had his flu shots, pneumonia shots, etc. Use to suffer from seasonal allergies, but the chemo put paid to those.

We saw Covid-19 coming, from the first reliable reports out of China. We knew it was almost inevitable that a day like today would come, here in the US. So we have a good supply of face masks, soap, etc; a well-stocked chest freezer; a working generator (thank you Sandy); etc. Alex has not been out of the house for quite some time now, except to go to the cancer center for treatment.

I tried to learn as much as I could about Covid-19. And this thread has been extremely helpful to that end. I also read government (and their agencies) websites, those in English anyway. Until recently, the only one that I'd recommend is that of Singapore. And it goes without saying, for regular readers, that the Federal US government's "message" has been, variously, dishonest, muddled, confused, inconsistent, ... perhaps a textbook case of what NOT to do, in terms of public health communication.

(to be continued)

.

(continued)

The chance that Alex will die in the next few months, of Covid-19, is certainly much greater than 5%. True, getting the flu could also kill him ... but the chance is far less than 5%.

One likely scenario: triaged out ... he needs a respirator but he's not rich/famous/etc enough to pull strings, and there aren't enough respirators to go round. So, who you gonna let die? An immuno-compromised man in his 70s with a chronic, incurable lung condition ...

If we lived in a just world, I - along with possibly millions of others - would demand criminal sanctions against Xi and Trump.

Xi? Not for being responsible for the initial failures in Wuhan (though those failures alone make him a criminal), but for not doing what was so obviously needed after SARS ... close the "wet markets", eliminate the eating of "wildlife", prepare adequately for the next SARS.

Trump? The US may not have been able, ultimately, to contain the spread of Covid-19 as Singapore, Taiwan, ... even S Korea has done (touch wood). But to have done essentially nothing (until it's too late) is criminal. And yes, he's the one responsible.

(to be continued)

An astronomer's perspective on disasters, or death from the skies (hat-tip to Phil Plait).

Some are both unpredictable, on an hours to ~decades timescale, and unavoidable, e.g. GRBs (gamma-ray bursts), supernovae.

Some are predictable, on a weeks to ~years timescale, but potentially avoidable, e.g. an asteroid or comet collision.

Some are in between, e.g. extreme solar flares and CMEs (coronal mass ejections).

What's key about "avoidable" is preparation. Or, if you prefer, insurance.

For example, even a large, new comet (one making its first pass through the inner solar system in ~1+ million years) need not wipe out London let alone do the dinosaur thing for all animals if we can see it coming in time and have prepared methods to deflect it. But if no one is scanning the skies any more, or if a few $million has not been spent studying deflection techniques ...

Similarly, a few $millions (times 10 to 100?) spent now, researching how to harden communications satellites and "the grid", etc - and implementing and practicing - would greatly reduce the impact of even a series of extreme solar flares.

The Covid-19 pandemic is, from my POV, a textbook example of multiple failures to act on what are well-established scientific certainties. From the multiple failures of the Chinese PTBs well before December 2019, to the Trump administration's well-documented disdain for heeding the advice of experts.

Several of you who've posted in this thread have wondered why there's such a panic, including (or especially) the tanking of the stock market. You won't find the answers you seek in the science of epidemiology, but rather one or other of the behavioral sciences. And those answers have, I think, little to do with whether it's Trump/Xi über alles or Xi/Trump the devil incarnate.

(to be continued)