All things Chinese CoronaVirus

[Bart]

Looking at the total number of cases, 96888, vs total number of deaths, 3300, gives you a 3%+ mortality rate.

During their recent press conference, they are stating that the 3% number is currently not reflective of the total number of people who have the virus, but don't get tested.

The "denominator" is "inaccurate"....

Do you think the denominator is accurate? I certainly do not. China with 94k cases? I don’t trust that number one bit. I am afraid we will never know the true denominator snd as a result the true mortality rate. The numbers out of Korea would be a better estimate when it’s all said and, hopefully, done.

[foreverlax]

Looking at the total number of cases, 96888, vs total number of deaths, 3300, gives you a 3%+ mortality rate.

During their recent press conference, they are stating that the 3% number is currently not reflective of the total number of people who have the virus, but don't get tested.

The "denominator" is "inaccurate"....

Do you think the denominator is accurate? I certainly do not. China with 94k cases? I don’t trust that number one bit. I am afraid we will never know the true denominator snd as a result the true mortality rate. The numbers out of Korea would be a better estimate when it’s all said and, hopefully, done.

Agreed.

[jhu72]

Looking at the total number of cases, 96888, vs total number of deaths, 3300, gives you a 3%+ mortality rate.

During their recent press conference, they are stating that the 3% number is currently not reflective of the total number of people who have the virus, but don't get tested.

The "denominator" is "inaccurate"....

I believe this is the case. The Chinese have an excuse. The rest of the world less so. The rest of the world had warning as to what was coming. Multiple countries and the WHO developed test diagnostics given the warning. Clearly some of these less serious about it than others. There is no excuse for the US to have twice the rate of the Chinese. We had 6-8 weeks warning and p*ssed it away. Then we don't test a clear problem site until 3 months in after 6 people died at the facility.

Trump is right, the real mortality rate is lower than 3% very likely even thought he can't talk about it intelligently. I am really tired of hearing the happy horseshlt about how the US has the best healthcare system money can buy - the greatest. The healthcare system of every western socialized medicine country is responding better to this pandemic.

[jhu72]

Looking at the total number of cases, 96888, vs total number of deaths, 3300, gives you a 3%+ mortality rate.

During their recent press conference, they are stating that the 3% number is currently not reflective of the total number of people who have the virus, but don't get tested.

The "denominator" is "inaccurate"....

Do you think the denominator is accurate? I certainly do not. China with 94k cases? I don’t trust that number one bit. I am afraid we will never know the true denominator snd as a result the true mortality rate. The numbers out of Korea would be a better estimate when it’s all said and, hopefully, done.

I agree, the truth is closer to the SK case, although I do have to wonder if they are over reporting the number of cases. Not intentionally but through some artifact of their test protocol. We know nothing about the accuracy of any of these diagnostics.

[Brooklyn]

Trump and CV:

[jhu72]

Finally some truth from these guys. May just be they realized that it could not be hidden any longer.

[Trinity]

We don’t have the tests. Walk it off, America.

[jhu72]

Chinese scientists have isolated two strains in the outbreak.

[Bart]

Looking at the total number of cases, 96888, vs total number of deaths, 3300, gives you a 3%+ mortality rate.

During their recent press conference, they are stating that the 3% number is currently not reflective of the total number of people who have the virus, but don't get tested.

The "denominator" is "inaccurate"....

Do you think the denominator is accurate? I certainly do not. China with 94k cases? I don’t trust that number one bit. I am afraid we will never know the true denominator snd as a result the true mortality rate. The numbers out of Korea would be a better estimate when it’s all said and, hopefully, done.

I agree, the truth is closer to the SK case, although I do have to wonder if they are over reporting the number of cases. Not intentionally but through some artifact of their test protocol. We know nothing about the accuracy of any of these diagnostics.

Point taken. Like everything new, the bugs of testing will need to be worked out. I would err on the side of over diagnosis than not however. May make the true mortality rate hard to pin down however.

Here is a worrying thought. We are about to enter into spring break season across the college spectrum. It is also a time when we are realizing the virus has begun to spread across the country. What is worrying is that college aged kids will be massing in several spots to enjoy the spring ritual of break. If one of these hot spots has a "flare up" of the virus by some means the spread would be immense and immediate. It is not like these kids would be looking for signs of infection, I wouldn't be if I was there, as they have other things on their mind. If this happens it would change the landscape dramatically on many, many college campuses and certainly would be harder to track. This entire thing is a nightmare for any public health official.

[MDlaxfan76]

Looking at the total number of cases, 96888, vs total number of deaths, 3300, gives you a 3%+ mortality rate.

During their recent press conference, they are stating that the 3% number is currently not reflective of the total number of people who have the virus, but don't get tested.

The "denominator" is "inaccurate"....

Do you think the denominator is accurate? I certainly do not. China with 94k cases? I don’t trust that number one bit. I am afraid we will never know the true denominator snd as a result the true mortality rate. The numbers out of Korea would be a better estimate when it’s all said and, hopefully, done.

I agree, the truth is closer to the SK case, although I do have to wonder if they are over reporting the number of cases. Not intentionally but through some artifact of their test protocol. We know nothing about the accuracy of any of these diagnostics.

Point taken. Like everything new, the bugs of testing will need to be worked out. I would err on the side of over diagnosis than not however. May make the true mortality rate hard to pin down however.

Here is a worrying thought. We are about to enter into spring break season across the college spectrum. It is also a time when we are realizing the virus has begun to spread across the country. What is worrying is that college aged kids will be massing in several spots to enjoy the spring ritual of break. If one of these hot spots has a "flare up" of the virus by some means the spread would be immense and immediate. It is not like these kids would be looking for signs of infection, I wouldn't be if I was there, as they have other things on their mind. If this happens it would change the landscape dramatically on many, many college campuses and certainly would be harder to track. This entire thing is a nightmare for any public health official.

More importantly than any risk to the kids themselves would be the inevitable spread to the communities to which they return. The youngsters tend to be far less compromised so risk of the most serious complications not very great, but that's not the case for those they come into contact with subsequently.

The issue with the spring break stuff relative to other mass gatherings is that a heck of a lot of close proximity and 'exchange of body fluids' occurs...

[jhu72]

Western Europe has seen 1920 cases, 15 dead, 43 recoveries --> .78% mortality rate / 2.2% recovery rate (does not include Italy)

Italy has seen 3858 cases, 148 dead, 414 recoveries --> 3.8% mortality rate / 10.7% recovery rate

South Korea has seen 6593 cases 42 dead, 135 recovered --> .63% mortality rate / 2.0% recovery rate

China has seen 80556 cases, 3042 dead, 53829 recovered --> 3.8% mortality rate / 66.8% recovery rate

I have created a Western Europe average sans Italy

Interesting to see that WE and SK statistics look very similar and China and Italy look very similar. Is this a signature for two strains?? One very aggressive and one much less so? If so it looks like the very aggressive strain resolves more quickly than the less aggressive which tends to linger.

[thatsmell]

We don’t have the tests. Walk it off, America.

Maybe it's the conspiracy theorist in me. I think Corona's been here and around the world, circulating for a while now.

I think it's likely many cases were just assumed to be the common cold or flu by patients...then the "oh shoot" moment/discovery occurred.

[CU88]

We don’t have the tests. Walk it off, America.

Maybe it's the conspiracy theorist in me. I think Corona's been here and around the world, circulating for a while now.

I think it's likely many cases were just assumed to be the common cold or flu by patients...then the "oh shoot" moment/discovery occurred.

So we just ignore it and go one with our daily lives???

[thatsmell]

We don’t have the tests. Walk it off, America.

Maybe it's the conspiracy theorist in me. I think Corona's been here and around the world, circulating for a while now.

I think it's likely many cases were just assumed to be the common cold or flu by patients...then the "oh shoot" moment/discovery occurred.

So we just ignore it and go one with our daily lives???

Not ignore, but certainly treat it like we treat bad flu/cold years.
The hysteria here was created because the Chinese gov treated it like they do everyhting else. Heavy handed and totalitarian. They treated it and it's people like there was a zombie virus outbreak.
Wash those hands, stay home from work/school if showing symptoms, and take those steps of closing schools/offices/sporting events if necessary. If you're older, younger or have medical history, take extra precautions - limit travel when possible.
I forget what outbreak it was a few years ago. The MIAA in Maryland mandated no shaking hands after lax games. The kids were relegated to going through the lineup and nodding their heads at eachother.
Simple, but smart. Inform people, and take a measured approach. It's not a cure-all but little things can certainly help.

[Trinity]

A semblance of competence would certainly calm the markets. All the mixed messages from the Federal government are scaring the 10-year to record lows.

[jhu72]

We don’t have the tests. Walk it off, America.

Maybe it's the conspiracy theorist in me. I think Corona's been here and around the world, circulating for a while now.

I think it's likely many cases were just assumed to be the common cold or flu by patients...then the "oh shoot" moment/discovery occurred.

That is consistent with the knowledge that there are two strains. A similar thought occurred to me. The less aggressive strain was some how triggered to produce the more aggressive strain and that burns through the population quickly and goes dormant. Interesting hypothesis.

I don't think the Chinese have over reacted. The deaths are real and they aren't being caused by the common cold.

[RedFromMI]

Matthew Yglesias of vox.com has a podcast called The Weeds. In his latest episode he interviews Josh Michaud, associate director for Global Health Policy at the Kaiser Family Foundation.

To summarize - (my bolding of the quote)

But these were my seven key takeaways:

In the typical case, Covid-19 will generate flu-like symptoms, and just like the flu will mostly not require hospitalization or pose a risk of death. In that sense, a typical non-elderly person who isn’t immunocompromised or for some other reason at unusually high risk does not have all that much to fear from coronavirus and shouldn’t panic.

On the other hand, while severe cases of Covid-19 are a distinct minority of cases, they appear to be a much larger minority than what we see with seasonal flu. A large swath of Covid-19 patients end up requiring hospitalization, and the mortality rate appears to be several times higher than for the flu. These adverse outcomes are highly concentrated among the elderly, meaning that while the risk to the typical person is low, the risk to specific population subgroups is high.

A particular risk with coronavirus (or any outbreak) is that it occurs in addition to all the other health problems of the world. Health care systems in the United States and around the world do not typically carry a lot of spare capacity. So a big surge in the number of people requiring hospitalization risks overwhelming health care systems. That’s particularly true because, as with any new virus, frontline health care workers are relatively likely to get sick, thus diminishing capacity.

The fact that most Covid-19 cases are mild is good news on one level, but it also makes the virus hard to contain. The typical infected person develops mild symptoms that are not readily distinguishable from those of a normal cold or flu, so you can’t tell who has coronavirus unless you do a special test. And those with mild cases will generally remain ambulatory and capable of going about their business — unwittingly spreading infection to friends and colleagues and putting vulnerable populations at risk.

Because coronavirus is not easy to detect, when it first arose in Wuhan, China, it quickly got out of control. By the time enough severely ill people were in the hospital for authorities to realize there was a new virus in play, mild cases had spread the illness, and they were left playing catch-up.

China eventually acknowledged the scale of the problem and began to lock down travel and curtail social interactions, dramatically slowing the spread of infection. At the same time, foreign countries imposed restrictions on Chinese travelers, slowing further spread of the infection. But due to the hard-to-detect nature of coronavirus, those border control measures were doomed to eventually fail — though they did buy time.

The case of Singapore (and eventually China) shows that with effective policies in place, the infection can be controlled. But that requires aggressive, proactive measures, widespread testing, and compliance with directives to self-isolate and practice social distancing. The United States did successfully buy time with border control measures but did not actually use that time to get an infection surveillance infrastructure in place, and is now playing catch-up — running a big risk of the problem becoming much more serious.

[jhu72]

Matthew Yglesias of vox.com has a podcast called The Weeds. In his latest episode he interviews Josh Michaud, associate director for Global Health Policy at the Kaiser Family Foundation.

To summarize - (my bolding of the quote)

But these were my seven key takeaways:

In the typical case, Covid-19 will generate flu-like symptoms, and just like the flu will mostly not require hospitalization or pose a risk of death. In that sense, a typical non-elderly person who isn’t immunocompromised or for some other reason at unusually high risk does not have all that much to fear from coronavirus and shouldn’t panic.

On the other hand, while severe cases of Covid-19 are a distinct minority of cases, they appear to be a much larger minority than what we see with seasonal flu. A large swath of Covid-19 patients end up requiring hospitalization, and the mortality rate appears to be several times higher than for the flu. These adverse outcomes are highly concentrated among the elderly, meaning that while the risk to the typical person is low, the risk to specific population subgroups is high.

A particular risk with coronavirus (or any outbreak) is that it occurs in addition to all the other health problems of the world. Health care systems in the United States and around the world do not typically carry a lot of spare capacity. So a big surge in the number of people requiring hospitalization risks overwhelming health care systems. That’s particularly true because, as with any new virus, frontline health care workers are relatively likely to get sick, thus diminishing capacity.

The fact that most Covid-19 cases are mild is good news on one level, but it also makes the virus hard to contain. The typical infected person develops mild symptoms that are not readily distinguishable from those of a normal cold or flu, so you can’t tell who has coronavirus unless you do a special test. And those with mild cases will generally remain ambulatory and capable of going about their business — unwittingly spreading infection to friends and colleagues and putting vulnerable populations at risk.

Because coronavirus is not easy to detect, when it first arose in Wuhan, China, it quickly got out of control. By the time enough severely ill people were in the hospital for authorities to realize there was a new virus in play, mild cases had spread the illness, and they were left playing catch-up.

China eventually acknowledged the scale of the problem and began to lock down travel and curtail social interactions, dramatically slowing the spread of infection. At the same time, foreign countries imposed restrictions on Chinese travelers, slowing further spread of the infection. But due to the hard-to-detect nature of coronavirus, those border control measures were doomed to eventually fail — though they did buy time.

The case of Singapore (and eventually China) shows that with effective policies in place, the infection can be controlled. But that requires aggressive, proactive measures, widespread testing, and compliance with directives to self-isolate and practice social distancing. The United States did successfully buy time with border control measures but did not actually use that time to get an infection surveillance infrastructure in place, and is now playing catch-up — running a big risk of the problem becoming much more serious.

I would not disagree with any of those points. He nailed it. I would however add to his final point. The US incoming travel ban did buy time in the US. However, the bigger effect was the action taken by the Chinese themselves to distance their society. Banning travel of anyone in the infected areas. They bought time for everyone.

[jhu72]

Learned something interesting today from my wife. Newborns, before leaving the hospital are typically tested for coronavirus. The tests will detect multiple strains. She has no idea whether it detects the current COVID-19. I am guessing not, but do not know.

[jhu72]

Fauci now saying it will be more than a few weeks before the US has the ability to test 1 million people. Should not surprise anyone.