Merged 2019-nCoV / Corona virus

Status
Not open for further replies.
Dr.Sid said:
It may also change in different environment.
Click to expand...

That's what's so cool - and terrifying - about viruses. You cannot predict with any accuracy what they will do. H1N1 is a great example, and I hope I'm right in analogising the two, because that was going to be Spanish 'Flu 2.0 and wasn't. This looked briefly like SARS 2.0 but isn't.

It's also why the world should still treat Covid-19 seriously - the little bastard could mutate and become deadly tomorrow. Again, as I mentioned way back, the more people infected, the greater the chances of a mutation.

It also highlights why people need to learn to deal with animals in a way that doesn't encourage cross-infection. We might not be so lucky next time.
 
novaphile said:
Meanwhile, something very odd is going on here in South Australia...



The Health Minister is refusing to say how many people have been exposed, how many people are in hospital, and how many are in quarantine elsewhere.



Just watched the TV news and he said, "I don't have any of that information, I haven't requested any of that information" and "that information is irrelevant."



It just looked really, really, odd.

(Especially for the Health Minister.)
Click to expand...
If the Chinese did that we would be criticising them.
 
pipelineaudio said:
So has anyone actually been confirmed to have it and then got better and was released? I realize its pretty new and perhaps could just kill them later, but I mean, do we know for sure it doesnt kill everyone who gets it?
Click to expand...

So far 7,080 people have recovered.
 
pipelineaudio said:
So has anyone actually been confirmed to have it and then got better and was released? I realize its pretty new and perhaps could just kill them later, but I mean, do we know for sure it doesnt kill everyone who gets it?
Click to expand...
It's very hard to say at this stage, but there are a few estimates that put the mortality rate at around 3%-4%. In other words, between 96% and 97% of people who are infected recover.
 
pipelineaudio said:
So has anyone actually been confirmed to have it and then got better and was released? I realize its pretty new and perhaps could just kill them later, but I mean, do we know for sure it doesnt kill everyone who gets it?
Click to expand...

arthwollipot said:
It's very hard to say at this stage, but there are a few estimates that put the mortality rate at around 3%-4%. In other words, between 96% and 97% of people who are infected recover.
Click to expand...

The major problem with these figures (mentioned in Arthwollipot's link) is that the number of people who have been infected, during an outbreak, is unknown. A number of people will get infected and recover and they are not counted in any figures as they did not seek medical treatment and if they did the doctor did not count them as having the virus. One option is to say that a certain % of the population died from the virus. I have often seen this when reading about the black death. One small problem with this is that maybe no one died (400 population) from the virus on Lord Howe Island. This may be because they stopped all flights to the Island, rather than the Island being made of super people.
 
rjh01 said:
The major problem with these figures (mentioned in Arthwollipot's link) is that the number of people who have been infected, during an outbreak, is unknown. A number of people will get infected and recover and they are not counted in any figures as they did not seek medical treatment and if they did the doctor did not count them as having the virus. One option is to say that a certain % of the population died from the virus. I have often seen this when reading about the black death. One small problem with this is that maybe no one died (400 population) from the virus on Lord Howe Island. This may be because they stopped all flights to the Island, rather than the Island being made of super people.
Click to expand...
Yes, I would definitely not take the 3%-4% figure as definitive. But it definitely appears to be less deadly than SARS and MERS.
 
The MRC Centre for Global Disease Analysis at Imperial College in London is giving a preliminary rate of 1%, while admitting the ratio of infections against cases tested is at least 19:1. Serious case death rate of 20%, which is huge.

They explain it all pretty well here: https://www.imperial.ac.uk/news/195217/coronavirus-fatality-rate-estimated-imperial-scientists/

If the 1% holds and 60% of the world is infected, that's 40,000,000 people dying.

You'd better hope they're wrong, because that's getting into nightmare scenario territory - a city of 1,000,000 people will need 5000 critical care beds. Auckland at 1,600,000 probably only has 5000 beds in total and maybe 200 intensive care beds.

That's going to be a very big gap that would be repeated around the world. Let's hope they're overestimating the impact.

And go long on funeral directors.
 
rjh01 said:
The major problem with these figures (mentioned in Arthwollipot's link) is that the number of people who have been infected, during an outbreak, is unknown. A number of people will get infected and recover and they are not counted in any figures as they did not seek medical treatment and if they did the doctor did not count them as having the virus. One option is to say that a certain % of the population died from the virus. I have often seen this when reading about the black death. One small problem with this is that maybe no one died (400 population) from the virus on Lord Howe Island. This may be because they stopped all flights to the Island, rather than the Island being made of super people.
Click to expand...

It's sad to think, if only they'd stopped more flights during the black death how many more lives could have been saved.
 
a_unique_person said:
Everyone's immune system is different. It's just like any other disease. The odds are that the weaker people are more likely to die and the stronger are more likely to survive.
Click to expand...

Weaker and stronger in the context of the immune system has no meaning. Young, fit people died of flu in 1918 due to cytokine storm. HIV resistance is conferred by the CCR5 mutation. That's genetics.
 
Capsid said:
Weaker and stronger in the context of the immune system has no meaning. Young, fit people died of flu in 1918 due to cytokine storm. HIV resistance is conferred by the CCR5 mutation. That's genetics.
Click to expand...

Can't use the fact most who die had some kind of health compromise or were over 75 as an amulet.

Fact is, one of my great uncles (whom, of course, I never met) died suddenly and unexpectedly of a flu-like illness two weeks after contracting it, aged 23. This was in 1914 so a bit before the Spanish flu in 1918.
 
Vixen said:
Can't use the fact most who die had some kind of health compromise or were over 75 as an amulet.

Fact is, one of my great uncles (whom, of course, I never met) died suddenly and unexpectedly of a flu-like illness two weeks after contracting it, aged 23. This was in 1914 so a bit before the Spanish flu in 1918.
Click to expand...
Well, the thymus does involute as we get older and probably accounts for a declining immunity. Not sure I would describe that as "weaker" since the experience of being exposed to a lifetime of pathogens is retained.
 
This article is quite helpful, reporting deaths in health care staff.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-china-51501005
Six health workers have died and 1,716 have been infected since the outbreak
Click to expand...
Health workers are likely to be relatively young and relatively fit. Ascertainment of infection is likely to be very good as they would try and avoid even staff with mild infections working to minimise transmission. These figures give a mortality of 0.3% in a working age population, probably comparable to seasonal flu. Other estimates are that if this does spread to be a pandemic about 30% - 60% of the global population would be infected. This suggests a global mortality of 6+ million, with 60+ million needing hospitalisation.
 
Capsid said:
Weaker and stronger in the context of the immune system has no meaning. Young, fit people died of flu in 1918 due to cytokine storm. HIV resistance is conferred by the CCR5 mutation. That's genetics.
Click to expand...
I'm a bit confused here. The immune system does age like the rest of the body. It's one reason we are giving quadruple strength influenza vaccine to people 65 and older.

However there have been occasional exceptions to the rule with flu, not always for clear reasons. The 2009 new variant hit younger people harder than the elderly.
 
Skeptic Ginger said:
I'm a bit confused here. The immune system does age like the rest of the body. It's one reason we are giving quadruple strength influenza vaccine to people 65 and older.



However there have been occasional exceptions to the rule with flu, not always for clear reasons. The 2009 new variant hit younger people harder than the elderly.
Click to expand...


Welcome to the host pathogen relationship.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom