Gert van der Hoek
In Memoriam - Editor, Senior Moderator
Cool!
-
FluTrackers.com Inc. does not provide medical advice. Information on this web site is collected from various internet resources, and the FluTrackers board of directors makes no warranty to the safety, efficacy, correctness or completeness of the information posted on this site by any author or poster. The information collated here is for instructional and/or discussion purposes only and is NOT intended to diagnose or treat any disease, illness, or other medical condition. Every individual reader or poster should seek advice from their personal physician/healthcare practitioner before considering or using any interventions that are discussed on this website. By continuing to access this website you agree to consult your personal physican before using any interventions posted on this website, and you agree to hold harmless FluTrackers.com Inc., the board of directors, the members, and all authors and posters for any effects from use of any medication, supplement, vitamin or other substance, device, intervention, etc. mentioned in posts on this website, or other internet venues referenced in posts on this website.
-
We are not asking for any donations. Do not donate to any entity who says they are raising funds for us.
Discussion thread II - Covid-19 (new coronavirus)
- Thread starter Pathfinder
- Start date
Cool!
Great link.
I did some headcalculations based on # of serious, critical or lethal cases. I end up with 504 of these in alle non Hubei cases. So better than Hubei (app 2500 in 13000, Just under 20%) but almost at 8% also for international cases).
Does this suggest that severity will be similar outside of Hubei when cases have the same length of disease symptoms ? OR let's say half the severity as long as healthcare is working ok ?
Note added : none is listed as critical in the international cases, in Chinas other provinces many are
sharon sanders
Editor-in-Chief & President
I really like that a high school student is responsible for that site! Just a word of caution - not all of the provinces report daily. The National Health Commission reports at about 8 pm ET. Their numbers are comprehensive. So for about an hour the numbers on everyone's pages are correct but the further away from that time, they become more incorrect. For instance, at 3pm ET all of the lists are missing cases and deaths. Not until Hubei reports at about 5 pm ET can you start to get an idea of what the national numbers will look like.
But, buyer beware - China's numbers for the outbreak are not correct. At this point, even if they were attempting to be truthful, I think many cases are missed due to no diagnosis, human error, deaths of people who were not officially diagnosed etc. In short - we may never know the real numbers.
We have a case list here but it is out-of-date within an hour of when I update it.
But, buyer beware - China's numbers for the outbreak are not correct. At this point, even if they were attempting to be truthful, I think many cases are missed due to no diagnosis, human error, deaths of people who were not officially diagnosed etc. In short - we may never know the real numbers.
We have a case list here but it is out-of-date within an hour of when I update it.
Commonground
Senior Moderator
Underreported, Warns Hong Kong Academic
Published:
February 4, 2020 1:05 PM UTC
According to a professor at the Chinese University of Hong Kong, number of people affected by coronavirus likely far exceeds official numbers.
“The official tally in Wuhan could be ‘just the tip of the iceberg’ because it only reflected the acute cases where patients were admitted to hospital.”
https://www.ccn.com/coronavirus-infe...kong-academic/
Published:
February 4, 2020 1:05 PM UTC
According to a professor at the Chinese University of Hong Kong, number of people affected by coronavirus likely far exceeds official numbers.
“The official tally in Wuhan could be ‘just the tip of the iceberg’ because it only reflected the acute cases where patients were admitted to hospital.”
https://www.ccn.com/coronavirus-infe...kong-academic/
gsgs
Registered User
... and many people are doing just that impossible thing. Some are even calculating pandemic probabilities which
were termed as impossible by others. Of course, these are just estimates, no math theorems.
But the "impossibility" is being used as an "escuse" by people who are reluctant to give estimates.
Shiloh
Editor, Senior Moderator
Source: https://www.statnews.com/2020/02/04...d-on-faulty-information-health-officials-say/
High-profile report on asymptomatic spread of coronavirus based on faulty information, health officials say
By Helen Branswell
February 4, 2020
A high-profile scientific paper that found that a patient with the new coronavirus had transmitted it to other people in Germany before showing any symptoms was based on faulty information, health officials say...
High-profile report on asymptomatic spread of coronavirus based on faulty information, health officials say
By Helen Branswell
February 4, 2020
A high-profile scientific paper that found that a patient with the new coronavirus had transmitted it to other people in Germany before showing any symptoms was based on faulty information, health officials say...
Shiloh
Editor, Senior Moderator
Source: https://www.wired.com/story/amid-co...cial&utm_social-type=owned&utm_source=twitter
02.04.2020 07:00 AM
Amid Coronavirus Fears, a Mask Shortage Could Spread Globally
Most of the world's supply of masks and respirators comes from China, and a supply chain gap poses a risk to everyday health care beyond the viral epidemic.
02.04.2020 07:00 AM
Amid Coronavirus Fears, a Mask Shortage Could Spread Globally
Most of the world's supply of masks and respirators comes from China, and a supply chain gap poses a risk to everyday health care beyond the viral epidemic.
Ronan Kelly
Retired 2020
The actual numbers by province can be found here: https://ncov.dxy.cn/ncovh5/view/pneumonia
Hyundai in South Korea stops all domestic production. This is a total of 7 out of 13 plants worldwide. The reason? Supply chain.
South Korea's largest automaker Hyundai Motor will suspend all domestic production this week because of a lack of parts due to the coronavirus outbreak in China, it said Tuesday.
https://www.business-standard.com/a...ea-over-shortage-of-parts-120020400851_1.html
South Korea's largest automaker Hyundai Motor will suspend all domestic production this week because of a lack of parts due to the coronavirus outbreak in China, it said Tuesday.
https://www.business-standard.com/a...ea-over-shortage-of-parts-120020400851_1.html
Information Lockdown
North Carolina State health officials say they will no longer announce when someone in North Carolina is being tested for the coronavirus, the deadly respiratory illness that flared up in China this month, unless and until the person has tested positive.
https://amp.heraldsun.com/news/local/article239768368.html
North Carolina State health officials say they will no longer announce when someone in North Carolina is being tested for the coronavirus, the deadly respiratory illness that flared up in China this month, unless and until the person has tested positive.
https://amp.heraldsun.com/news/local/article239768368.html
Treyfish
Moderator
...The number of new cases for the flu-like coronavirus surged in the last day, with more than 3,100 new cases confirmed in China over the last 24 hours, World Health Organization officials said Wednesday.
WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus said at a news conference that the reported cases are “the most cases in a single day since the outbreak started” Dec. 31.
Just 191 of the total cases are outside mainland China, and 80% of those cases are concentrated in the Hubei province where the virus was first detected in the city of Wuhan, he said. Of the cases outside of China, 31 of them spread through human-to-human contact, mostly from close friends or relatives who had recently been to China.
Tedros on Wednesday issued a warning for countries monitoring the outbreak and plea for funding: “Invest today or pay more later.”
“Our greatest concern is about the potential for spread in other countries with weaker health systems and who lack the capacity to detect and diagnose the virus,” he said. “We’re only as strong as the weakest link.”..:tiphat:https://www.cnbc.com/2020/02/05/who...e-outbreak-started.html?__source=twitter|main
WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus said at a news conference that the reported cases are “the most cases in a single day since the outbreak started” Dec. 31.
Just 191 of the total cases are outside mainland China, and 80% of those cases are concentrated in the Hubei province where the virus was first detected in the city of Wuhan, he said. Of the cases outside of China, 31 of them spread through human-to-human contact, mostly from close friends or relatives who had recently been to China.
Tedros on Wednesday issued a warning for countries monitoring the outbreak and plea for funding: “Invest today or pay more later.”
“Our greatest concern is about the potential for spread in other countries with weaker health systems and who lack the capacity to detect and diagnose the virus,” he said. “We’re only as strong as the weakest link.”..:tiphat:https://www.cnbc.com/2020/02/05/who...e-outbreak-started.html?__source=twitter|main
A friend plotted the numbers. Here is his analysis and plot:
First...don't shoot the messenger. I'm no epidemiologist, and I'm aware of the conversation about the numbers. That said...
I've modeled the available data from Wikipedia with respect to the total China cases, total Hubei province cases, and total cases in China except for Hubei. The data runs from 11 Jan to 3 Feb. I've looked at all three trends, and tried to fit the data to curves.
For the whole of China data, a model can be fit for both exponential and polynomial trends. It diverges away from the exponential trend in the past few days.
For the Hubei data, the data suggests that the trend could be either exponential (R-squared 0.98) or third-degree polynomial (R-squared 0.9984), but the data diverges away from the exponential model in the last two days of data, to the low side, and hugs the 3rd degree polynomial model.
The software doesn't want anything to do with an exponential trend for China cases excluding Hubei province. This fits to a 3rd degree polynomial.
What does this mean practically? Is it inability to accurately report? Saturation of case testing resources? Something else? Who knows. In either model, the number of Hubei cases is still clearly in the expansion phase.
What does this mean numerically? Extrapolation of both Hubei-only models three-weeks down the track is 156K for the polynomial model, and 7.2M for the exponential model. Both bad, but let's hope the polynomial holds out.
First...don't shoot the messenger. I'm no epidemiologist, and I'm aware of the conversation about the numbers. That said...
I've modeled the available data from Wikipedia with respect to the total China cases, total Hubei province cases, and total cases in China except for Hubei. The data runs from 11 Jan to 3 Feb. I've looked at all three trends, and tried to fit the data to curves.
For the whole of China data, a model can be fit for both exponential and polynomial trends. It diverges away from the exponential trend in the past few days.
For the Hubei data, the data suggests that the trend could be either exponential (R-squared 0.98) or third-degree polynomial (R-squared 0.9984), but the data diverges away from the exponential model in the last two days of data, to the low side, and hugs the 3rd degree polynomial model.
The software doesn't want anything to do with an exponential trend for China cases excluding Hubei province. This fits to a 3rd degree polynomial.
What does this mean practically? Is it inability to accurately report? Saturation of case testing resources? Something else? Who knows. In either model, the number of Hubei cases is still clearly in the expansion phase.
What does this mean numerically? Extrapolation of both Hubei-only models three-weeks down the track is 156K for the polynomial model, and 7.2M for the exponential model. Both bad, but let's hope the polynomial holds out.
Treyfish
Moderator
[h=1]“No Reason for Alarm” Is a Foolishly
Over-Reassuring Message about the Novel Coronavirus Spreading from Wuhan, China[/h] Email from Peter M. Sandman to National Post journalist Sharon Kirkey, January 29, 2020
(Sharon Kirkey’s January 30 article in the National Post, based in part on this email, is available online.)
My most fervent risk communication complaint at the moment is the tendency of many top officials in the U.S., Canada, and Europe to overemphasize the fact that the risk of the novel Wuhan coronavirus here and now is tiny – as if that meant that people should (or could!) wait to worry until the risk here and now got bigger. “No reason for alarm,” is bad science as well as bad risk communication. Officials and experts are alarmed already – reason enough for the public to gird up its loins as well.
Worry is about the future. Telling people not to worry about an emer..
Instead of deriding people’s fears about the Wuhan coronavirus, I would advise officials and reporters to focus more on the high likelihood that things will get worse and the not-so-small possibility that they will get much worse. I think there is little need to ameliorate public over-reaction now. The bigger need is to reduce public over-reaction later to predictable bad news that will take people by surprise insofar as they weren’t sufficiently forewarned and didn’t get enough chance to rehearse emotionally. My wife and colleague Jody Lanard MD says to tell you that adjustment reactions are “like tabletop exercises for regular people.” Officials should help the public rehearse better, not tell people not to rehearse.
I’m particularly put off when officials deride the public for worrying more about Wuhan coronavirus than influenza. They say that people are fools if they’re freaking out about the coronavirus but not getting a flu shot. But that doesn’t stop them from freaking out about the coronavirus and it doesn’t make them want to get a flu shot. I’d much rather see officials warn that “One flu is bad enough. A second flu would be awful. One of our fears is that this new coronavirus could possibly become as widespread and dangerous as flu – and at least at first, with no vaccine to help ameliorate the threat!”
A great Canadian example: Allison McGeer in a January 26 STAT article by Helen Branswell:
Over-Reassuring Message about the Novel Coronavirus Spreading from Wuhan, China[/h] Email from Peter M. Sandman to National Post journalist Sharon Kirkey, January 29, 2020
(Sharon Kirkey’s January 30 article in the National Post, based in part on this email, is available online.)
My most fervent risk communication complaint at the moment is the tendency of many top officials in the U.S., Canada, and Europe to overemphasize the fact that the risk of the novel Wuhan coronavirus here and now is tiny – as if that meant that people should (or could!) wait to worry until the risk here and now got bigger. “No reason for alarm,” is bad science as well as bad risk communication. Officials and experts are alarmed already – reason enough for the public to gird up its loins as well.
Worry is about the future. Telling people not to worry about an emer..
Instead of deriding people’s fears about the Wuhan coronavirus, I would advise officials and reporters to focus more on the high likelihood that things will get worse and the not-so-small possibility that they will get much worse. I think there is little need to ameliorate public over-reaction now. The bigger need is to reduce public over-reaction later to predictable bad news that will take people by surprise insofar as they weren’t sufficiently forewarned and didn’t get enough chance to rehearse emotionally. My wife and colleague Jody Lanard MD says to tell you that adjustment reactions are “like tabletop exercises for regular people.” Officials should help the public rehearse better, not tell people not to rehearse.
I’m particularly put off when officials deride the public for worrying more about Wuhan coronavirus than influenza. They say that people are fools if they’re freaking out about the coronavirus but not getting a flu shot. But that doesn’t stop them from freaking out about the coronavirus and it doesn’t make them want to get a flu shot. I’d much rather see officials warn that “One flu is bad enough. A second flu would be awful. One of our fears is that this new coronavirus could possibly become as widespread and dangerous as flu – and at least at first, with no vaccine to help ameliorate the threat!”
A great Canadian example: Allison McGeer in a January 26 STAT article by Helen Branswell:
“The more we learn about it, the greater the possibility is that transmission will not be able to be controlled with public health measures,” said Dr. Allison McGeer, a Toronto-based infectious disease specialist who contracted SARS in 2003 and who helped Saudi Arabia control several hospital-based outbreaks of MERS.
If that’s the case, she said, “we’re living with a new human virus, and we’re going to find out if it will spread around the globe.” McGeer cautioned that because the true severity of the outbreak isn’t yet known, it’s impossible to predict what the impact of that spread would be, though she noted it would likely pose significant challenges to health care facilities...
Feel free to use any of the above if it’s useful.:tiphat:http://psandman.com/articles/Corona1.htmIf that’s the case, she said, “we’re living with a new human virus, and we’re going to find out if it will spread around the globe.” McGeer cautioned that because the true severity of the outbreak isn’t yet known, it’s impossible to predict what the impact of that spread would be, though she noted it would likely pose significant challenges to health care facilities...
sharon sanders
Editor-in-Chief & President
In Hong Kong:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mm4IBTpWvcc&t=576s from 9:36
Why are you not wearing mask?
Cos I don’t have any.
So no more at home?
No.
Not even one? What are you going to do? Are you worried?
What good would worrying do? It’s useless… Maybe go out less.
Did you try somewhere else?
I get in line wherever there’s a line.
How many times (have you stood in line)?
Three, four times
But still you couldn’t buy any?
Yes.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mm4IBTpWvcc&t=576s from 9:36
Why are you not wearing mask?
Cos I don’t have any.
So no more at home?
No.
Not even one? What are you going to do? Are you worried?
What good would worrying do? It’s useless… Maybe go out less.
Did you try somewhere else?
I get in line wherever there’s a line.
How many times (have you stood in line)?
Three, four times
But still you couldn’t buy any?
Yes.