Coronavirus - worldwide spread and control

Status
Not open for further replies.
Esther12 said:
You have seen areas being locked down during this. eg no one in or out of a city/region without approval.
Click to expand...

Yes but people are also largely confined to their homes.
Wessely said:
And yet, while anxiety among people subjected to quarantine is troubling, perhaps the most pernicious effect is on how those outside the cordon come to view those on the inside. Previous incidents have seen residents of affected areas socially shunned, discriminated against in the workplace, and their property attacked
Click to expand...

To me that was an argument that was falling back to having a cordon and claiming people inside would be stigmatized rather that the lock down that seems to be happening where people are largely confined to their houses and in large regions. (With heavy track and test policies in China)
 
Adrian said:
To me that was an argument that was falling back to having a cordon and claiming people inside would be stigmatized rather that the lock down that seems to be happening where people are largely confined to their houses and in large regions. (With heavy track and test policies in China)
Click to expand...

I see. Without references it's difficult to know what previous incident's he's talking about - maybe he means a sustained stigmatisation of an area once the quarantine has ended? His concern about vigilantes imposing quarantines seems a little out of the blue.

You're right that the fact that Wessely opinion piece with no references was one of the seven bits of evidence cited is a worry.
 
Evergreen said:
Thought y’all might be interested in this analysis of Irish cases. Smaller numbers and earlier stage of the pandemic than some other European countries. Bit of context first:

Population is approx. 5

Ireland had its first case confirmed 29th February. (Compare to UK end January.)

Schools were closed in Ireland from 13th March, at which point 70 cases had been confirmed.

(Compare to UK where a BBC report 14th March reported 1410 confirmed cases.)

Ireland has 557 confirmed cases as of Wed 19 March. Testing is being ramped up, so as well as the spread itself increasing, Ireland’s numbers are expected to increase quite a lot.

This analysis is of the first 350 confirmed cases:

https://www.gov.ie/en/publication/c...at-as-of-midnight-tuesday-17-march-350-cases/


Median age of Irish cases to 17th March is 43.

Compare to median age of 63 in Italy in @Simon M ’s post above, although the median age of Irish cases could increase as testing and spread etc increases.



Compare also to the Chinese data:



It seems possible that the median age of cases increases as the virus spreads through the community. The younger, more mobile people might be the first to get it and then it gradually makes its way to the older ones?

31% of the 350 Irish cases were hospitalised and the stats show that more older patients were hospitalised.

2% were admitted to ICU.

There have been 3 deaths.

No information on co-morbidities unfortunately. My understanding is that the first two deaths did have other illnesses, and the third fatality did not.

There was a big jump in confirmed cases between March 18th (74 new cases) and March 19th (191 new cases).

More on how covid-19 has evolved in Ireland here:

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/health/coronavirus-how-it-has-affected-ireland-day-by-day-1.4206691
Click to expand...

UK needs someone like this . No bullshit
 
Lucibee said:
I don't think folk do get it. But because [some people] have warned the govt against scaring people too much, they seem to be much more worried about causing PTSD than they are about people actually dying. Human beings are not good at assessing risk, and sometimes we just need to be shouted at to get us to act. All this "would you mind awfully" is not terribly effective!
Click to expand...
Simon M said:
Until very recently, the US and UK governments were taking a relatively gentle approach to controlling the new coronavirus epidemic – compared with most other governments around the world.
Click to expand...
So many comments about the UK situation is very much relevant to the same in Sweden. I'm really worried, sad and frustrated :( Too slow, too little, no real sense of urgency, the public health authority publishes information that clashes with the advice from WHO etc...

For example, the majority of the confirmed cases* are reportedly those who caught the virus while on (skiing) holiday in northern Italy and Austria. What did that teach us? Soon there's the Easter break when lots and lots of Swedish people usually go travelling across the country, many of them to skiing resorts, the big cities and other popular holiday spots...

*) Sweden is testing very few people nowadays, currently only hospitalised people and healthcare professionals, I believe? Which means that the numbers are no longer meaningful.

How is the government handling this major risk? From what I can tell, apparently by saying "spending time outdoors and in the mountains is good for your health", "Please consider whether your trip really is necessary?". Already today there has been news articles about a confirmed case at one of the largest ski-resorts, someone who reportedly went to a popular après-ski event :( Meanwhile, on the other side of the border, Norwegian ski-resorts have reportedly already closed for the time being. All this while large parts of the world are practising strict social distancing and/or are in various degrees of lock-down...

The spread in Sweden seems to still be worst in the three largest cities, and I can't bear the thought of what will happen after the Easter holidays...

The public health authority is getting lots of criticism from experts as well as the public, but they stand firm. Many are urging them to change their strategy "like the UK recently did", to try and stop the epidemic (not just try to slow it down a little bit).
 
Last edited:
I was initially optimistic about things here in the US. While some states have brilliant measures, there's still an issue of interstate travel, which needs to be stopped immediately, and family coming to visit each other and commuting, etc. and the half measures (only groups of under 50, work from home if you can) lasted too long. I expect to surpass Italy and even China in a week or two. Many people are still out and about, millions.
 
FMMM1 said:
Haven't read your blog yet but thanks in advance. I was surprised when I listened to the Radio 4 6pm news this evening. Apparently, they can ease restrictions/re-instate restrictions to manage the availability of ventilators in ICU. When there are ventilators available --- the cafe's will open and when the ventilators are full the cafes will close --- who would have thought it was that easy! Modelling who needs it!
Click to expand...

I have a feeling that when the time comes to it, if they start with their yo-yo strategy and deaths start to increase once again (while other countries are probably doing the opposite), they’ll be forced to backtrack and do a U-turn, all the while saying the “science has changed”. Just like with the herd immunity strategy.
 
Hmm...
The figures for coronavirus are eye-watering. But what is not clear - because the modellers did not map this - is to what extent the deaths would have happened without coronavirus.

Given that the old and frail are the most vulnerable, would these people be dying anyway?
Click to expand...

As we get deeper into this crisis, we will need much greater intelligence on just how many lives are truly being saved, and compare that to the wider cost to society, so the government and the public can weigh up the best course of action.
Click to expand...
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-51979654

It's already been re-titled since it was first published, originally it was "Have UK experts over-egged coronavirus deaths?"

The author is coming in for some considerable criticism on Twitter
 
Michiel Tack said:
So if you're able to do determine X cases of COVID-19 you have to wait two weeks or more to see how many of those X cases have died because of the illness. I think most CFR reported simply divide the number of cases and deaths momentaneously, which makes them a bit of an underestimation. It explains why the CFR has been increasing in countries like China and South-Korea where the number of cases has fallen dramatically as the death rate has a delay in catching up. Similarly, in Germany, the epidemic probably has only just started so one could expect the CFR to rise significantly over the coming weeks.
Click to expand...
Yes, it's not how many have died but how many will die. Given how rapid the rate of rise of known cases, presumably when someone dies you have to compare with known cases at the time they contracted the illness?
 
In one Italian town, we showed mass testing could eradicate the coronavirus

By identifying and isolating clusters of infected people, we wiped out Covid-19 in Vò

It’s now about one month since Covid-19 began to sweep across Italy. With more than total cases topping 40,000 as of 19 March, it is now the worst-affected country outside of China.

But in the last two weeks, a promising pilot study here has produced results that may be instructive for other countries trying to control coronavirus. Beginning on 6 March , along with researchers at the University of Padua and the Red Cross, we tested all residents of Vò, a town of 3,000 inhabitants near Venice – including those who did not have symptoms. This allowed us to quarantine people before they showed signs of infection and stop the further spread of coronavirus. In this way, we eradicated coronavirus in under 14 days.
Click to expand...

https://www.theguardian.com/comment...ed-coronavirus-mass-testing-covid-19-italy-vo
 
The figures for coronavirus are eye-watering. But what is not clear - because the modellers did not map this - is to what extent the deaths would have happened without coronavirus.

Yes, well, all people die, so why bother being a doctor?

From what I can see there is no similarity between coronavirus deaths and the deaths from influenza that occur in the very frail. These are not end of life people in care homes barely able to feed themselves. A lot of them are people leading normal lives who happen to be diabetic or have cardiac problems.
 
Jonathan Edwards said:
The figures for coronavirus are eye-watering. But what is not clear - because the modellers did not map this - is to what extent the deaths would have happened without coronavirus.
Click to expand...
We don't have full data, there is uncertainty. Ergo, you cannot believe any of it? Where have I seen that tactic before?

Take something self-evident, like we don't have all the data on survivors, non-survivors, and survivors with ongoing problems. This is obvious. Then imply there is nothing to see here. Hmmm ...

This sounds an awful lot like the messages from Big Tobacco.

All you need to do to see the seriousness is look at the data from hospitals in Lombardy. How often do modern and well equipped medical systems get overwhelmed? How is this illness as usual? How many flu seasons see makeshift hospitals springing up?

Right now I am becoming more interested in the survivors and how they are doing. Lung problems seem to occur, but in how many, and how severe? These people may need help long after we contain the initial infection or it burns itself out.

On a good front, one engineer seems to have figured out how a respirator can be rigged to treat as many as nine patients at the same time. Progress, if its a workable solution. I hope so.
 
More from Hilda Bastian:

"FIASCO" REBUTTAL POSTSCRIPT: WHAT ABOUT THAT 0.3% CASE FATALITY ESTIMATE?
http://hildabastian.net/index.php/8-secondary/88
Hilda Bastian said:
A couple of days ago, I read John Ioannidis' opinion piece in Stat News on Covid-19, as well as tweets raging about, or defending, it. I quickly posted a rebuttal. A large part of the opinion piece centered on his estimates of the potential risk of dying from the coronavirus disease, Covid-19. But no sources were provided and it was complicated, so that was going to need more time. I've had a chance to do that now - helped along by people on Twitter who responded to my post (thank you everyone!).
Click to expand...


Also, an interesting article on Buzzfeed by Alex Wickham: 10 Days That Changed Britain: “Heated” Debate Between Scientists Forced Boris Johnson to Act on Coronavirus:
https://www.buzzfeed.com/amphtml/al...oronavirus-approach?__twitter_impression=true
 
This is the official Public Health England tracker site (mobile version).

https://www.arcgis.com/apps/opsdashboard/index.html#/ae5dda8f86814ae99dde905d2a9070ae

What I still don't understand is that there are numerous regions who are still way down in single digits of reported cases. The bulk of cases are in London. Surely tracing contacts and testing for asymptomatic carriers would not be such an onerous task in these places and then they could potentially be declared 'clean' which would massively help with infrastructure issues. I honestly don't understand why we aren't doing this.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom