COVID-19

1567911

Comments

  • Here's the article from above:

    Is the Coronavirus as Deadly as They Say?
    Current estimates about the Covid-19 fatality rate may be too high by orders of magnitude

    If it’s true that the novel coronavirus would kill millions without shelter-in-place orders and quarantines, then the extraordinary measures being carried out in cities and states around the country are surely justified. But there’s little evidence to confirm that premise—and projections of the death toll could plausibly be orders of magnitude too high.

    Fear of Covid-19 is based on its high estimated case fatality rate—2% to 4% of people with confirmed Covid-19 have died, according to the World Health Organization and others. So if 100 million Americans ultimately get the disease, two million to four million could die. We believe that estimate is deeply flawed. The true fatality rate is the portion of those infected who die, not the deaths from identified positive cases.

    The latter rate is misleading because of selection bias in testing. The degree of bias is uncertain because available data are limited. But it could make the difference between an epidemic that kills 20,000 and one that kills two million. If the number of actual infections is much larger than the number of cases—orders of magnitude larger—then the true fatality rate is much lower as well. That’s not only plausible but likely based on what we know so far.

    Population samples from China, Italy, Iceland and the U.S. provide relevant evidence. On or around Jan. 31, countries sent planes to evacuate citizens from Wuhan, China. When those planes landed, the passengers were tested for Covid-19 and quarantined. After 14 days, the percentage who tested positive was 0.9%. If this was the prevalence in the greater Wuhan area on Jan. 31, then, with a population of about 20 million, greater Wuhan had 178,000 infections, about 30-fold more than the number of reported cases. The fatality rate, then, would be at least 10-fold lower than estimates based on reported cases.

    Next, the northeastern Italian town of Vò, near the provincial capital of Padua. On March 6, all 3,300 people of Vò were tested, and 90 were positive, a prevalence of 2.7%. Applying that prevalence to the whole province (population 955,000), which had 198 reported cases, suggests there were actually 26,000 infections at that time. That’s more than 130-fold the number of actual reported cases. Since Italy’s case fatality rate of 8% is estimated using the confirmed cases, the real fatality rate could in fact be closer to 0.06%.

    In Iceland, deCode Genetics is working with the government to perform widespread testing. In a sample of nearly 2,000 entirely asymptomatic people, researchers estimated disease prevalence of just over 1%. Iceland’s first case was reported on Feb. 28, weeks behind the U.S. It’s plausible that the proportion of the U.S. population that has been infected is double, triple or even 10 times as high as the estimates from Iceland. That also implies a dramatically lower fatality rate.

    The best (albeit very weak) evidence in the U.S. comes from the National Basketball Association. Between March 11 and 19, a substantial number of NBA players and teams received testing. By March 19, 10 out of 450 rostered players were positive. Since not everyone was tested, that represents a lower bound on the prevalence of 2.2%. The NBA isn’t a representative population, and contact among players might have facilitated transmission. But if we extend that lower-bound assumption to cities with NBA teams (population 45 million), we get at least 990,000 infections in the U.S. The number of cases reported on March 19 in the U.S. was 13,677, more than 72-fold lower. These numbers imply a fatality rate from Covid-19 orders of magnitude smaller than it appears.

    How can we reconcile these estimates with the epidemiological models? First, the test used to identify cases doesn’t catch people who were infected and recovered. Second, testing rates were woefully low for a long time and typically reserved for the severely ill. Together, these facts imply that the confirmed cases are likely orders of magnitude less than the true number of infections. Epidemiological modelers haven’t adequately adapted their estimates to account for these factors.

    The epidemic started in China sometime in November or December. The first confirmed U.S. cases included a person who traveled from Wuhan on Jan. 15, and it is likely that the virus entered before that: Tens of thousands of people traveled from Wuhan to the U.S. in December. Existing evidence suggests that the virus is highly transmissible and that the number of infections doubles roughly every three days. An epidemic seed on Jan. 1 implies that by March 9 about six million people in the U.S. would have been infected. As of March 23, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, there were 499 Covid-19 deaths in the U.S. If our surmise of six million cases is accurate, that’s a mortality rate of 0.01%, assuming a two week lag between infection and death. This is one-tenth of the flu mortality rate of 0.1%. Such a low death rate would be cause for optimism.

    This does not make Covid-19 a nonissue. The daily reports from Italy and across the U.S. show real struggles and overwhelmed health systems. But a 20,000- or 40,000-death epidemic is a far less severe problem than one that kills two million. Given the enormous consequences of decisions around Covid-19 response, getting clear data to guide decisions now is critical. We don’t know the true infection rate in the U.S. Antibody testing of representative samples to measure disease prevalence (including the recovered) is crucial. Nearly every day a new lab gets approval for antibody testing, so population testing using this technology is now feasible.

    If we’re right about the limited scale of the epidemic, then measures focused on older populations and hospitals are sensible. Elective procedures will need to be rescheduled. Hospital resources will need to be reallocated to care for critically ill patients. Triage will need to improve. And policy makers will need to focus on reducing risks for older adults and people with underlying medical conditions.

    A universal quarantine may not be worth the costs it imposes on the economy, community and individual mental and physical health. We should undertake immediate steps to evaluate the empirical basis of the current lockdowns.

    Dr. Bendavid and Dr. Bhattacharya are professors of medicine at Stanford. Neeraj Sood contributed to this article.
  • There is no chance the Democrats and the supporting media will allow us to have a reasonable response to this, they know this is their only shot to get President Trump out of office.
  • "There is no chance the Democrats and the supporting media will allow us to have a reasonable response to this, they know this is their only shot to get President Trump out of office. "

    I think there is also little chance that media who are invested in this being a catastrophe to be laid at DJT's feet will do anything but fan the hysteria.
  • edited March 25
    Does anyone know where I can find a case fatality rate curve or trend? According to the CDC numbers updated today, there are 54,453 confirmed cases in the US. There have been 737 deaths. That's about 1.35%. We are being told that the worst has yet to come in terms of infections, but that we're also ramping up testing.

    There's just not enough data.

    The XW says there are about 20 infected at her hospital. 12 have already been in over the last week, but 8 more came in last night. She said the entire city is readying for a surge over the next 1-2 weeks. I don't know if their information is better than anyone else's.
  • We’re probably never going to know what the actual rate is because without knowing how many people were actually infected you can’t calculate the mortality index. And the problem is, so many of the people who catch this virus never get anything worse than an ordinary called and they don’t even realize they had it.
  • "Big pharma was so evil, until now." - Norm McDonald
  • Why do I have the feeling that in 2024 Democratic candidates are going to be complaining about Big Mask, Big Sanitizer, and Big Ventilator?
  • Norm is great, the full bit -

  • Another good data source: https://corona.help/

    Also, the USA surpassed China in "confirmed infections" (82K+). My takeaway is the same as I've already suspected... China has been lying the whole time. Seeing how virulent this thing really is, there's no way they managed to mobilize and contain it within Wuhan in such a short period of time.
  • "Seeing how virulent this thing really is, there's no way they managed to mobilize and contain it within Wuhan in such a short period of time."

    ...or it's just not as virulent as panicked people made it out to be.
  • edited March 26
    By virulent, I mean infectious, not necessarily deadly, but you could still be right. Scientists and physicians have been saying that it grows and sheds more than influenza. But I think they only know that from testing symptomatic people. I suppose it’s possible that asymptotic folks aren’t as efficient at passing it along. I just don’t know...
  • edited March 27
    Birx, the girl doc, not Brix, the ineffective UN envoy, was on again this evening during DJT's press marathon.

    Her point is that the models embraced by the panic crowd are defective. Either the transmission rates are vastly lower than first thought/feared, or the mortality rates are vastly lower, but the models on which zombie apocalypse projections were based just aren't panning out in the places that got it earlier.

    The original projections in the UK were 500,000 deaths. Today they've scaled that back to 20,000. Those same models showed the US with 2.2 million deaths, and the revised model indicating 88,000 deaths.

    That's roughly twice as bad as seasonal flu. That isn't a trivial thing. Last season I knew a couple of people who nearly called for an ambulance during their bout with the flu, and one of them was me.

    It does mean that the motives of people who promote panic deserve scrutiny. Screeds about DJT being an ass and how this episode proves the need of a nationalized system (like they have in Italy?) are transparent. Giddiness about an induced recession just before an election has been put into words by few, but may have been thought by more who had enough shame not to utter the sentiment. The impulse to use "war powers", i.e. explicitly assert federal power over industrial policy is socialist pornography.
  • “...like they have in Italy?”

    Part of Italy’s problem stems from the north, which has been their center of industry since the days of factories drawing mechanical power from water wheels. One of the big industries there is textiles. Want to guess which country has a lot of involvement/investment there, and by extension travel back and forth?
  • Severity rates are at least high enough that NYC and Washington state hospitals are at a breaking point. Even if mortality rates are exaggerated, the need for hospital treatment seems far higher than current resources allow for.
  • Mayor Commie McFuckstick should have bought those 16,000 respirators back in 2015 when he was told to and had a chance to buy them at a steep discount. Instead he spent $1 billion on a green power boondoggle in upstate New York.
  • I read about that, too. Is the argument that NY was chronically unprepared (regardless of this outbreak) and these are their chickens coming home to roost? My city is home to one of the largest (if not the largest) medical centers in the world. I will have to look up what our resource capacity is compared to NYC.
  • "the need for hospital treatment seems far higher than current resources allow for"

    This is the actual problem.
  • Several of the manufacturers I work with in the US and abroad have shifted idle capacity to produce medical equipment of various types, the daily capacity of these factories is huge and they've made it known they are looking for more buyers of their goods. Here is an example of an offer that came to me yesterday -
    Disposable N95 masks 600,000pcs per day
    Disposable surgical masks 3,000,000pcs per day
    Bottles of hand sanitizer 10000bottles per day
    Protective Gowns 1,000,000pcs per month
    Test kits 20,000pcs per day
    Forehead thermometer 30,000pcs per week
    Fully Enclosed Goggle 1,000,000pcs per month

    Also, since ventilators are a known shortage I've seen some product development companies work together to create alternatives that can get to the market place quickly. One is leveraging existing CPAP machines. They know the FDA won't approve these machines as quickly as needed so they are offering it to foreign locations first.

    I hate the news, they are FOS.
  • The “news” isn’t in the business of providing news.
  • Oof, the pool is going full level 11 retard. They believe everything the media feeds them.
  • edited March 27
    Really?

    When were they ever at 10?
  • I refuse to go near them right now.
  • Any good one to link? I'm willing to be entertained.
  • edited March 27
    This story (from 9 days ago) backs up my contention that China has been lying to the world this whole time.

    https://www.axios.com/timeline-the-early-days-of-chinas-coronavirus-outbreak-and-cover-up-ee65211a-afb6-4641-97b8-353718a5faab.html

    Their total numbers are Wei Tu Lo.
  • That's Lacist!
  • edited March 27
    “...153 pages strong.”

    I’ll pass.

    “That's Lacist!”

    More so or less so than my indecision between “Chingchongoronavirus” and “CoronaZionist”?

    Speaking of which:
    https://legalinsurrection.com/2020/03/coronavirus-reportedly-kills-founding-member-of-irans-islamic-revolutionary-guard-corps/
  • WaitAGoddamnedMinute

    "That Place" is still in operation???
  • I like Coronazionist.
  • edited March 28
    "IN RE: Voluntary vs Compelled

    I think that would be more of a question under a different president."

    Getting a request for something that can be compelled differs inherently, and calls into question the voluntary nature of the response. "Your money (or your life)" doesn't allow for a voluntary response in a conventional sense.

    DJT's public admonition of GM illustrates the universal temptation of power.


    ""the need for hospital treatment seems far higher than current resources allow for"

    This is the actual problem. "

    Seems more of a potential problem, at least in NY which still has a respirator surplus.


    Politically, there is still huge benefit to feeding the panic. Dewine is seeing approval numbers in polling for which he likely never dreamed.

    Also,

    https://i0.wp.com/www.mercurynews.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/coronaad.jpg?fit=620,9999px&ssl=1
Sign In or Register to comment.