OT: Corona virus

[obvert]

ORIGINAL: Ian R

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe

There is a test that China is using to find them. If nothing else, if they are immune then those people should not have to be quarantined. But just try to arrange that.

If a test costs US$100 (includes materials, lab costs, medical fees etc) then it's a bit of a stretch to test 100 million working people. If you could somehow reduce the price to US$1 then it survives costs/benefit analysis - you get back the costs in taxes because people are working & spending*.

*Although if the lockdowns are going to diminish the US taxation revenue by $10billion, they may as well pay the $100 per head and get on with it.

It doesn't seem any other country is talking about the cost of testing. It's good though that most states now are footing the bill instead of throwing onto individual patients. This is actually the strength of the US system; the regional ability to adapt and step in to deal with different levels of crisis or need.

Lots of countries have some different blocks to extensive testing though. Here the issue is still the definition of who should be tested, which is defined by inpatient criteria examination in hospital. Any patients with mild symptoms are being asked to stay home and not tested. So the government is still for some reason wanting to keep tests down and the overall positive numbers low.

Why, when we know and they even admit in press briefings that they're 10x the actual published numbers? Is it to calm markets? Keep the public more calm? Does it have to do with cost or availability of tests? Why?

From the Govt advice for doctors page:
https://www.gov.uk/government/publicati ... ection#inp

[font="Trebuchet MS"]2.1 Patients who meet the following criteria (inpatient definition)
requiring admission to hospital (a hospital practitioner has decided that admission to hospital is required with an expectation that the patient will need to stay at least one night)
and

have either clinical or radiological evidence of pneumonia
or

acute respiratory distress syndrome
or

influenza like illness (fever ≥37.8°C and at least one of the following respiratory symptoms, which must be of acute onset: persistent cough (with or without sputum), hoarseness, nasal discharge or congestion, shortness of breath, sore throat, wheezing, sneezing
Note: Clinicians should consider testing inpatients with new respiratory symptoms or fever without another cause or worsening of a pre-existing respiratory condition.

2.2 Patients who meet the following criteria and are well enough to remain in the community
new continuous cough and/or
high temperature
Individuals with cough or fever should now stay at home.

Clinicians should be alert to the possibility of atypical presentations in patients who are immunocompromised.

Alternative clinical diagnoses and epidemiological risk factors should be considered.[/font]

[Zerberus_MatrixForum]

Cost of testing is not a topic here, the slogan is "whatever it takes".

Nevertheless there is a change in testing strategy, especially in southern Germany (still not yet the whole country).

It's said, that the limited testing ressources are concentrated now on vulnerable groups, that means persons with symptoms and older than 65 or already chronical ill or medical workforce. It becomes harder from day to day to test area-wide. People should stay at home, when they have mild symptoms only.

South Korea seems to be no model anymore, because the situation is not comparable. There you had a managable group of infections caused by this crazy religious group, which you could contain and track down. Here, and of course in other european countries, you have a nationwide impact from travellers all over the country, coming back from winter holidays.

Another point is, that tests of people without any symptoms are not safe enough. The first 2 - 3 days after infection tests are often negative, so you have to test the same people 2 - 3 times.

Source for this information is Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung ,that means a reputable nationwide paper (article has to be paid and is in german)

https://www.faz.net/aktuell/politik/inland/coronavirus-krise-wer-darf-sich-noch-testen-lassen-16688735.html?premium

[obvert]

ORIGINAL: Zerberus_MatrixForum

Cost of testing is not a topic here, the slogan is "whatever it takes".

Nevertheless there is a change in testing strategy, especially in southern Germany (still not yet the whole country).

It's said, that the limited testing ressources are concentrated now on vulnerable groups, that means persons with symptoms and older than 65 or already chronical ill or medical workforce. It becomes harder from day to day to test area-wide. People should stay at home, when they have mild symptoms only.

South Korea seems to be no model anymore, because the situation is not comparable. There you had a managable group of infections caused by this crazy religious group, which you could contain and track down. Here, and of course in other european countries, you have a nationwide impact from travellers all over the country, coming back from winter holidays.

Another point is, that tests of people without any symptoms are not safe enough. The first 2 - 3 days after infection tests are often negative, so you have to test the same people 2 - 3 times.

Source for this information is Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung ,that means a reputable nationwide paper (article has to be paid and is in german)

https://www.faz.net/aktuell/politik/inland/coronavirus-krise-wer-darf-sich-noch-testen-lassen-16688735.html?premium

Yes, I see. Could be the same here. That early or mildly symptomatic cases are false results. This means that the antibodies test is then so much more important and I hope that gets going soon everywhere. To test whether people have had it. Both to have them donate plasma and to get more true numbers.

It does make me wonder though how South Koreanis managing to get such good results from extensive testing of all, not just symptomatic, people? They’re seeing cases drop and have a very low mortality rate per positive.

[Zerberus_MatrixForum]

ORIGINAL: obvert


Yes, I see. Could be the same here. That early or mildly symptomatic cases are false results. This means that the antibodies test is then so much more important and I hope that gets going soon everywhere. To test whether people have had it. Both to have them donate plasma and to get more true numbers.

I absolutely agree with you. But in moment I can not imagine, how this will work. We would have to test parallel for infections and antibodies for months (or years).

Also for antibody tests it will be necessary to test the same people more often (until they finally have antibodies). This will not work with some hundredthousand tests per month, you will need millions, otherwise it will last for years.
So we need tests, which are so simple, that every local doctor can execute them without special laboratory.

I guess, the development of a vaccine will be the faster and more effective solution.

[Zerberus_MatrixForum]

Testing limitations also in the U.S. with similar criterias:

http://www.aphlblog.org/covid-19-testing-needs-limited-priority-groups-sufficient-testing-supplies-personal-protective-equipment-available-nationwide/


1. Healthcare workers and first responders with COVID-19 symptoms.
2. Older Americans who have symptoms of COVID-19, especially those living in congregate settings.
3. Individudals who may have other illnesses that would be treated differently if they were infected with COVID-19 and therefore physician judgement is especially important for this population.

[MakeeLearn]

ORIGINAL: Kull

ORIGINAL: obvert

ORIGINAL: MakeeLearn

More than 70% of Coronavirus deaths in Italy are men and scientists admit they are 'mystified' by the disparity between genders


https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... y-men.html


"At least 3,400 people in Italy have died of the devastating disease - it yesterday announced it had a higher death toll than China - but less than 1,000 of them have been women"

I use to joke that "they" would release a virus that would kill just men.

I'd guess this is more of a social gender difference with men covering more territory, spending more time out of the home, and seeing more people. There may also be the bravado/carelessness that they wouldn't be affected. In general when you hear or see of those now breaking curfew, the majority are men.

This is mostly old men, but men in general are more risk-taking than women.

There's more to it than that. Something surprisingly fundamental:

The X chromosome and X-linked variants have largely been ignored in genome-wide and candidate association studies of infectious diseases due to the complexity of statistical analysis of the X chromosome. This exclusion is significant, since the X chromosome contains a high density of immune-related genes and regulatory elements that are extensively involved in both the innate and adaptive immune responses. Many diseases present with a clear sex bias, and apart from the influence of sex hormones and socioeconomic and behavioural factors, the X chromosome, X-linked genes and X chromosome inactivation mechanisms contribute to this difference.

Historically, females babies have a higher survivability than male babies. Females also suffer more from auto immune diseases.

[alanschu]

ORIGINAL: Ian R

ORIGINAL: alanschu
The last time there was changes of 10%+ was February 14th when global exposure was much, much less and death rates themselves much lower

That date tracks consistently with the first (China) spike on the WHO new cases bar graph. What is your source for saying death rates were lower than they are now? It has been consistently reported that the death rate in China is a higher percentage number than elsewhere.

Referring to the changes in *new* deaths, it was in the link. The amount of new deaths per day continues to accelerate.


https://www.worldometers.info/coronavir ... eath-toll/

[Wuffer]

ORIGINAL: Ian R

If a test costs US$100 (includes materials, lab costs, medical fees etc) then it's a bit of a stretch to test 100 million working people. If you could somehow reduce the price to US$1 then it survives costs/benefit analysis - you get back the costs in taxes because people are working & spending*.

Here we have to disagree. 100,- €or £, $ per capita, even repeated severel times, would have been muuuuch cheaper than this ongoing desaster. Propably even 1000,- or 10000,-! )

On a sidenote, although there is no statistic about negative test results, Germany has the ability to perform some 20 000 tests per day in total, from which on averridge at least around 12 000 were used for Covid, sometimes more (and even this was not nearly enough for a population of 85 mil). The first generation of the test was developed as early as 10th January. For the first months nearly all cases could be contained and tracked down to the spreader, health officals literally went from door to door, until they get finally overwhelmed from the steady steam of infected holidaymakers coming back from the Alpine regions, which had developed into a huge germ breeding petricase at that time.
So in difference to other countries most cases are mild or asymptomatic younger sportsmen; last week some additional 100 000 people were in prophylactic quarantine, which in total explains the low fatalities so far. So far... Thx to this affords some 7-14 days could be "won", one of the most affected states had even free ICUs, which were filled now with french patients.
Sources mostly in German (and to busy atm for searching them, sry).

[MakeeLearn]

There are currently 282,868 confirmed cases and 11,822 deaths from the Coronavirus COVID-19 outbreak as of March 21, 2020, 11:02 GMT.
https://www.worldometers.info/coronavir ... rus-cases/

Survivability ~95% ?????


Age, preexisting conditions, etc.????
https://www.worldometers.info/coronavir ... ographics/

Death Rate
"no pre-existing conditions 0.9%"

[Wuffer]

@MakeeLearn
Take it easy, in the long run we are all dead anyway.
Scnr

[MakeeLearn]

ORIGINAL: Wuffer

@MakeeLearn
Take it easy, in the long run we are all dead anyway.
Scnr

OH, no doubt. Everyone is dying. I use to work in a library, a human Google machine. I work in health care and Iam getting ready to do 3 12-16 hour days.

RECON RECON RECON

[Wuffer]

You have my respect, Sir. I quit my medicine studium long ago, all these misery made me really depressive.

[Wuffer]

ORIGINAL: alanschu



That date tracks consistently with the first (China) spike on the WHO new cases bar graph. What is your source for saying death rates were lower than they are now? It has been consistently reported that the death rate in China is a

...a state secret?

Honestly, as it was hapening, most people had serious doubt at the numbers.
I think it was bigger in each direction, so much more asymtomatic and mild cases as well in total.
Let's wait and see.

[RangerJoe]

The Doctor Who Helped Defeat Smallpox Explains What's Coming
Epidemiologist Larry Brilliant, who warned of pandemic in 2006, says we can beat the novel coronavirus—but first, we need lots more testing.

https://www.wired.com/story/coronavirus ... miologist/

[Ian R]

ORIGINAL: alanschu

ORIGINAL: Ian R


What is your source for saying death rates were lower than they are now?

Referring to the changes in *new* deaths, it was in the link. The amount of new deaths per day continues to accelerate.

Hang on, the 'amount' is a fraction of infections - more deaths does not mean the rate of deaths has increased, if the spread of infection went up more.

Where is the overall calculation that includes both total known infections, and total known deaths?

The WHO site probably has one. We should look at that.

[Ian R]

ORIGINAL: Wuffer

ORIGINAL: Ian R

If a test costs US$100 (includes materials, lab costs, medical fees etc) then it's a bit of a stretch to test 100 million working people. If you could somehow reduce the price to US$1 then it survives costs/benefit analysis - you get back the costs in taxes because people are working & spending*.

Here we have to disagree. 100,- €or £, $ per capita, even repeated severel times, would have been muuuuch cheaper than this ongoing desaster. Propably even 1000,- or 10000,-! )

On a sidenote, although there is no statistic about negative test results, Germany has the ability to perform some 20 000 tests per day in total, from which on averridge at least around 12 000 were used for Covid, sometimes more (and even this was not nearly enough for a population of 85 mil). The first generation of the test was developed as early as 10th January. For the first months nearly all cases could be contained and tracked down to the spreader, health officals literally went from door to door, until they get finally overwhelmed from the steady steam of infected holidaymakers coming back from the Alpine regions, which had developed into a huge germ breeding petricase at that time.
So in difference to other countries most cases are mild or asymptomatic younger sportsmen; last week some additional 100 000 people were in prophylactic quarantine, which in total explains the low fatalities so far. So far... Thx to this affords some 7-14 days could be "won", one of the most affected states had even free ICUs, which were filled now with french patients.
Sources mostly in German (and to busy atm for searching them, sry).

I agree with the emboldened bit.

The reaction has been a day late, many dollars short, and driven by political point scoring instead of science or even common sense.

[RangerJoe]

ORIGINAL: Ian R

ORIGINAL: Wuffer

ORIGINAL: Ian R

If a test costs US$100 (includes materials, lab costs, medical fees etc) then it's a bit of a stretch to test 100 million working people. If you could somehow reduce the price to US$1 then it survives costs/benefit analysis - you get back the costs in taxes because people are working & spending*.

Here we have to disagree. 100,- €or £, $ per capita, even repeated severel times, would have been muuuuch cheaper than this ongoing desaster. Propably even 1000,- or 10000,-! )

On a sidenote, although there is no statistic about negative test results, Germany has the ability to perform some 20 000 tests per day in total, from which on averridge at least around 12 000 were used for Covid, sometimes more (and even this was not nearly enough for a population of 85 mil). The first generation of the test was developed as early as 10th January. For the first months nearly all cases could be contained and tracked down to the spreader, health officals literally went from door to door, until they get finally overwhelmed from the steady steam of infected holidaymakers coming back from the Alpine regions, which had developed into a huge germ breeding petricase at that time.
So in difference to other countries most cases are mild or asymptomatic younger sportsmen; last week some additional 100 000 people were in prophylactic quarantine, which in total explains the low fatalities so far. So far... Thx to this affords some 7-14 days could be "won", one of the most affected states had even free ICUs, which were filled now with french patients.
Sources mostly in German (and to busy atm for searching them, sry).

I agree with the emboldened bit.

The reaction has been a day late, many dollars short, and driven by political point scoring instead of science or even common sense.

I disagree on part of that about the science. If you don't have the tests to detect an unknown virus, you can't test specifically for it and other tests may not catch it. At first, it was not known that it was new.

It did not help things in Italy where the people were encouraged to hug Chinese people, even those wearing masks.

The main reason for the delay was China.

Study suggests China’s cover up caused the spread of the virus to worsen by 95%
https://www.independentsentinel.com/stu ... sen-by-95/

[RangerJoe]

The World Health Organization (“WHO”) released a study on how China responded to COVID-19. Currently, this study is one of the most exhaustive pieces published on how the virus spreads.

The results of their research show that COVID-19 doesn’t spread as easily as we first thought or the media had us believe (remember people abandoned their dogs out of fear of getting infected). According to their report if you come in contact with someone who tests positive for COVID-19 you have a 1–5% chance of catching it as well. The variability is large because the infection is based on the type of contact and how long.

The majority of viral infections come from prolonged exposures in confined spaces with other infected individuals. Person-to-person and surface contact is by far the most common cause. From the WHO report, “When a cluster of several infected people occurred in China, it was most often (78–85%) caused by an infection within the family by droplets and other carriers of infection in close contact with an infected person.

Evidence over hysteria — COVID-19
https://medium.com/six-four-six-nine/ev ... 767def5894

It appears to be a good synopsis of what has been happening. It also appears to be more relevant to the United States of America.

[Canoerebel]

We should know in a week or less if the pandemic will continue exponentially in the USA or if the countermeasures that kicked in have "nipped it" effecitvely. Right now the daily mortality number remains comparatively low. The darned thing about bell-shaped-curves is that you don't know a trend is established until it's established - not merely by watching the curve day by day.

When this thread started, China was the only country we could monitor. Then South Korea became relevant, at the first of the month. Then Italy the first week into the month (not Iran, due to doubts about the numbers). Now most of Europe and the USA and Canada and some others have been dealing with this for a week to ten days. So now a lot of countries are "mature" in the virus cycle and bear watching.

Solid evidence that one of them tapers off and then declines, as did China and South Korea, will provide the first real surge in confidence. I think that will happen any day now.

[geofflambert]

The NYT said a day ago that the US had tested 25,000 while New South Wales, Australia had tested 33,000. Australia is in the Southern Hemisphere and experiencing Summer, where the virus has gone "poof", not there.