COVID-19 Mega thread

[Sir Mohamed]

Not directly US-related, but (potentially) another major story developing:

https://twitter.com/cnni/status/1222873359773569024

[GeorgiaModerate]

One thing to remember is that flu-like symptoms are quite likely to be the flu, which is especially bad this flu season.  So far there have been 15 million cases in the US with 8200 deaths.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/01/30/health/flu-deadly-virus-15-million-infected-trnd/index.html

I know two people who have gotten bad cases this year despite having the flu shot last fall.

[Absentee Voting Ghost of Ruin]

https://twitter.com/karaswisher/status/1222896513233215489

[Sir Mohamed]

https://twitter.com/karaswisher/status/1222896513233215489

God, this admin is a joke... What's next? War with Iran is good because creates more jobs in defense industry? More cancer and diabetis are good for big pharma?

[Vaccinated Russian Bear]

"CDC confirms first human-to-human transmission of coronavirus in US"

[Devout Centrist]

I mean, he's not exactly wrong.

Yes, but you shouldn't it, because it's sociopathic.

Anyway, we've had our first confirmed human-to-human transmission in the US (husband of the Illinois case).

So transmission may still be contained to family units?

[Beet]

Doing so means you are leaving out all of the people that have not yet recovered, but will do so in time.

True, but you are also leaving out all of the people that have not yet died, but will do so in time. Since we have no idea what the numbers are for either statistic, it makes no sense to include them in numbers; any such inclusion will necessarily be speculative.

You can only calculate the CFR of a group of patients after they have all either died or recovered.

Well that is precisely my point, my fellow! That is just what I do. Your definition of CFR is perfect, and by adhering to it as I do, you arrive at the statistics I have posted.

Reason 2a, let's look at the designated population part. The numbers are for patients that have been positively diagnosed with the virus. These are a subset of the total infected population. In particular, this is a subset that (for the most part) had such severe symptoms that they went to hospitals. They are likely not representative for the total infected population. (On the other side, if you agree with this paragraph, you do have to admit that the total number of infected is higher than the number of people officially diagnosed.)

Certainly, but absent a statistically randomized study, we don't have any representative data. Thus any attempt to suggest what they would be is speculative and is essentially an exercise in making up data.

Reason 2b again has to do with the designated population. The 73% is reached by picking only hospitalized patients that died or recovered in the last day. Did the disease suddenly become more deadly, or is picking small subsamples a bad way to do statistics?

Well yes actually, this disease has a high mutation rate, and even several days ago, a Wuhan nurse reported that prior to mutation they were able to treat the virus, but post-mutation they cannot. Thus looking at the daily CFR can help us pick up trends, but given its very high volatility (~35% to ~86%) I may switch to a 3-day moving average. Since the Death:Recovery ratio of 81:52 approximately four days ago, according to JHU about 91 have died and 81 recovered, the CFR is about 53%.

[It’s so Joever]

Doing so means you are leaving out all of the people that have not yet recovered, but will do so in time.

True, but you are also leaving out all of the people that have not yet died, but will do so in time. Since we have no idea what the numbers are for either statistic, it makes no sense to include them in numbers; any such inclusion will necessarily be speculative.

You can only calculate the CFR of a group of patients after they have all either died or recovered.

Well that is precisely my point, my fellow! That is just what I do. Your definition of CFR is perfect, and by adhering to it as I do, you arrive at the statistics I have posted.

Reason 2a, let's look at the designated population part. The numbers are for patients that have been positively diagnosed with the virus. These are a subset of the total infected population. In particular, this is a subset that (for the most part) had such severe symptoms that they went to hospitals. They are likely not representative for the total infected population. (On the other side, if you agree with this paragraph, you do have to admit that the total number of infected is higher than the number of people officially diagnosed.)

Certainly, but absent a statistically randomized study, we don't have any representative data. Thus any attempt to suggest what they would be is speculative and is essentially an exercise in making up data.

Reason 2b again has to do with the designated population. The 73% is reached by picking only hospitalized patients that died or recovered in the last day. Did the disease suddenly become more deadly, or is picking small subsamples a bad way to do statistics?

Well yes actually, this disease has a high mutation rate, and even several days ago, a Wuhan nurse reported that prior to mutation they were able to treat the virus, but post-mutation they cannot. Thus looking at the daily CFR can help us pick up trends, but given its very high volatility (~35% to ~86%) I may switch to a 3-day moving average. Since the Death:Recovery ratio of 81:52 approximately four days ago, according to JHU about 91 have died and 81 recovered, the CFR is about 53%.

I think part of the problem is that it takes far longer to recover fully than for another patient to die, even if they were infected at the same time.

[Gass3268]

https://twitter.com/tomrousseyABC7/status/1222969252401090560?s=20

[Vaccinated Russian Bear]

https://edition.cnn.com/2020/01/30/health/coronavirus-who-public-health-emergency-international-concern-declaration/index.html
World Health Organization declares coronavirus a public health emergency of international concern

he World Health Organization has declared the novel coronavirus outbreak a public health emergency of international concern, after an emergency committee reconvened Thursday in Geneva.

Last week, the organization said the virus did not yet constitute the emergency declaration. But with rising numbers and evidence of person-to-person transmission in a handful of cases outside of China, WHO leadership called the committee back together due to the "potential for a much larger outbreak," WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus told reporters earlier this week.

WHO defines a public health emergency of international concern as "an extraordinary event" that constitutes a "public health risk to other States through the international spread of disease" and "to potentially require a coordinated international response." Previous emergencies have included Ebola, Zika and H1N1.

[Absentee Voting Ghost of Ruin]

WHO has officially declared this coronavirus outbreak an international emergency.

A World Health Organization (WHO) panel declared the ongoing coronavirus outbreak that has killed 170 people a public health emergency of international concern on Thursday.

Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, WHO's director-general, announced the decision after a meeting of its emergency committee, an independent panel of experts, amid mounting evidence of the virus's spread from China to some 18 countries.

[Meclazine for Israel]

the Death:Recovery ratio of 81:52 approximately four days ago, according to JHU about 91 have died and 81 recovered, the CFR is about 53%.

Beet, please type "Coronavirus Mortality Rate" into Google.

I am trying to save Dave Leip some costs on his monthly MySQL server costs.

The internet is running out of space.

[PSOL]

Commerce secretary: China virus could bring jobs back to US

Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross suggested Thursday that the viral outbreak in China might offer an unexpected benefit for the U.S. economy: It could encourage American manufacturers in China to return to the United States.

“I think it will help to accelerate the return of jobs to North America. Some to U.S., probably some to Mexico as well,’’ Ross told Fox Business Network.

[Absentee Voting Ghost of Ruin]

Trump says coronavirus outbreak is ‘all under control’ and a ‘very small problem’ in US

President Donald Trump said the U.S. government was working closely with China to contain the coronavirus outbreak that has killed at least 171 people, predicting “a very good ending” for the United States.

“We are working very closely with China and other countries, and we think it’s going to have a very good ending for us, that I can assure you,” Trump said Thursday while visiting a manufacturing plant for auto supplier Dana in Warren, Michigan, a suburb of Detroit.

Trump said U.S. officials believe “we have it all under control,” adding that it’s a “very small problem in this country.”

For once, I really, really hope he's right.

[Yellowhammer]

This thing has been blown 10,000 X out of proportion by the media.

[Arizona Iced Tea]

Should there be a travel ban on Chinese citizens to stop the pandemic?

[Progressive Pessimist]

Trump says coronavirus outbreak is ‘all under control’ and a ‘very small problem’ in US

President Donald Trump said the U.S. government was working closely with China to contain the coronavirus outbreak that has killed at least 171 people, predicting “a very good ending” for the United States.

“We are working very closely with China and other countries, and we think it’s going to have a very good ending for us, that I can assure you,” Trump said Thursday while visiting a manufacturing plant for auto supplier Dana in Warren, Michigan, a suburb of Detroit.

Trump said U.S. officials believe “we have it all under control,” adding that it’s a “very small problem in this country.”

For once, I really, really hope he's right.

Same. Maybe we can trust him this time too. He is a notorious germaphobe after all.

[It’s so Joever]

Should there be a travel ban on Chinese citizens to stop the pandemic?

I mean, considering we had a travel ban on citizens of places such as Sudan for potential threat to American citizens, we may as well be consistent.

[It’s so Joever]

This thing has been blown 10,000 X out of proportion by the media.

A deadly virus with high infectivity and no known cure is not being “blown out of proportion.” I bet within a month, this post will look terrible.

[Cinemark]

I think we'll be seeing the amount of chinese cases go up pretty quickly in the next few days. Not because of increased spread but because of a rapid increase in test availability and also 10 new test centers opening.

[Florida Man for Crime]

Details on the asymptomatic transmission which occurred in Germany -

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMc2001468

This case of 2019-nCoV infection was diagnosed in Germany and transmitted outside of Asia. However, it is notable that the infection appears to have been transmitted during the incubation period of the index patient, in whom the illness was brief and nonspecific.3

The fact that asymptomatic persons are potential sources of 2019-nCoV infection may warrant a reassessment of transmission dynamics of the current outbreak. In this context, the detection of 2019-nCoV and a high sputum viral load in a convalescent patient (Patient 1) arouse concern about prolonged shedding of 2019-nCoV after recovery. Yet, the viability of 2019-nCoV detected on qRT-PCR in this patient remains to be proved by means of viral culture.

Despite these concerns, all four patients who were seen in Munich have had mild cases and were hospitalized primarily for public health purposes. Since hospital capacities are limited — in particular, given the concurrent peak of the influenza season in the northern hemisphere — research is needed to determine whether such patients can be treated with appropriate guidance and oversight outside the hospital.

[emailking]

A deadly virus with high infectivity and no known cure is not being “blown out of proportion.” I bet within a month, this post will look terrible.

Isn't this also true of the flu?

[Florida Man for Crime]

And now we learn that the asymptomatic lady who visited Germany apparently infected at least 5 people, not just 4. All without realizing she had it.

https://afludiary.blogspot.com/2020/01/germany-confirms-5th-locally-acquired.html

One wonders how many other such people might be infected and asymptomatic, but nevertheless spreading the virus in other locations and have not been detected yet. And if this single person could infect 5 in Germany, how many are other possible asymptomatic carriers in other places spreading it to?

110 others are being tested related to this cluster in Germany, so there may be more on the way.

[Florida Man for Crime]

A deadly virus with high infectivity and no known cure is not being “blown out of proportion.” I bet within a month, this post will look terrible.

Isn't this also true of the flu?

Supposing that this ends up like the flu, a persistent virus that spreads every year and kills many thousands globally, that would be very bad by itself.

It is realistically possible that it could be worse than that, however. It may not be, but it might be, it seems to be still too early to tell how this will go reliably (in particular with regards to the fatality rate, though at least to me the evidence on contagiousness appears to be at least somewhat clearer).

[100% pro-life no matter what]

There are still two notable encouraging things:

-The fatality rate still appears to be less than SARS and certainly less than MERS
-It hasn't really taken off in any country outside of China, and it's still true that the vast majority of cases outside of China have been imported, with some direct familial cases and very few less apparent infections.

I have kind of been bouncing back and forth on the "most likely scenario", and I think it's true that the number of cases are drastically understated.  It wouldn't surprise me if there have been 500K+ cases by this point.  But, the fatality rate may then be <1%.  At this point, I think that "Swine Flu 2.0" is probably the "most likely scenario", not the "best case scenario" or the "worst case scenario".