Coronavirus Thread

[684Bee]

Let's be honest. I haven't read this yet, but that ain't gonna stop me from posting this headline.

This has already been happening, and they found a good bit, further promoting the belief that there are a lot more cases out there than have been reported.

But yet our hospitals are not overwhelmed, so make of it what you will.

some will say it’s because our drastic measures have worked. Some may conclude it’s not as lethal as once thought.

 

[GT_EE78]

Info could leak out, so something to watch over the next week or two.
Sichuan Province in China is urgently preparing 52K rooms for quarantine purposes

 

[CuseJacket]

Flu data as of week ending 4/4

CDC FluView numbers

Summary by Becker's: Flu killed 24,000, sickened 39M this season

Six things to know:

1. Flu activity is now low across the U.S., although levels of influenza-like illness are still elevated, potentially due to COVID-19.

2. The CDC confirmed four additional pediatric flu deaths in the week ending April 4. This brings the total to 166 for the 2019-20 flu season.

3. The national flu and pneumonia mortality rate rose to 10 percent, which sits above the epidemic threshold of 7.2 percent. The CDC noted this increase is driven by a jump in pneumonia deaths, which may also be related to COVID-19.

4. Nineteen states experienced high flu-like illness activity, four states experienced moderate activity and 12 states had low activity. Fifteen reported minimal activity.

5. The overall flu hospitalization rate increased slightly to 68.2 per 100,000 population for the week ending April 4.

6. Flu activity was widespread in just 11 states, down from 22 states a week prior.

 

[Deleted member 2897]

Flu data as of week ending 4/4

CDC FluView numbers

Summary by Becker's: Flu killed 24,000, sickened 39M this season

I wonder how they're calculating a 10% mortality rate.

 

[RonJohn]

I wonder how they're calculating a 10% mortality rate.

It isn't the mortality rate of people infected with the flu. It is the percentage of deaths related to flu and pneumonia with respect to all deaths. It also says that the percentage has decreased, while the percentage of pneumonia has increased suspected to be because of COVID-19.

 

[CuseJacket]

I wonder how they're calculating a 10% mortality rate.

I think Becker's phrasing is a bit confusing/unintentionally misleading, based on my interpretation of the CDC website.

My interpretation of the CDC website (screenshot below) is that of all deaths in the time period analyzed, 10% can be attributed to flu/pneumonia. If my interpretation is correct, that definition is different than the "mortality rate" that is measured with respect to a specific illness e.g., (# COVID-19 deaths) / (# COVID-19 confirmed infections).

 

[Deleted member 2897]

I think Becker's phrasing is a bit confusing/unintentionally misleading, based on my interpretation of the CDC website.

My interpretation of the CDC website (screenshot below) is that of all deaths in the time period analyzed, 10% can be attributed to flu/pneumonia. If my interpretation is correct, that definition is different than the "mortality rate" that is measured with respect to a specific illness e.g., (# COVID-19 deaths) / (# COVID-19 confirmed infections).

View attachment 8196

Huh, interesting way to look at things. Its certainly weird to use the same phrase differently between subjects. I also find the numbers odd when you consider about 3,000,000 Americans die each year. So to reach 10% of that number, you'd have to have 1 single subject accounting for 300,000...which this clearly doesn't.

 

[CuseJacket]

Huh, interesting way to look at things. Its certainly weird to use the same phrase differently between subjects. I also find the numbers odd when you consider about 3,000,000 Americans die each year. So to reach 10% of that number, you'd have to have 1 single subject accounting for 300,000...which this clearly doesn't.

The numbers cited are only representative of the flu season i.e., a portion of a full year. Again, that's if my interpretation of the CDC website that I linked is correct. I don't know how seasonality plays into the 3M or 300k extrapolations.

Chart data: https://www.cdc.gov/flu/weekly/weeklyarchives2019-2020/data/whoAllregt_cl14.html

 

[RonJohn]

The numbers cited are only representative of the flu season i.e., a portion of a full year. Again, that's if my interpretation of the CDC website that I linked is correct. I don't know how seasonality plays into the 3M or 300k extrapolations.

Chart data: https://www.cdc.gov/flu/weekly/weeklyarchives2019-2020/data/whoAllregt_cl14.html

It is by week. From the CDC website:

Based on National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS) mortality surveillance data available on March 26, 2020, 10.0% of the deaths occurring during the week ending March 28, 2020 (week 13) were due to P&I. This percentage is above the epidemic threshold of 7.1% for week 13.

 

[takethepoints]

I don't have any actual stats to disagree with or agree with the statements made in those links, nor do I have any personal knowledge of what might be or have been the comparison of the US and other countries. But what I do have is a certain measure of personal experience. I am not wealthy, and my very good health insurance is part of my pension package, so I am in pretty good shape. I have never had to wait on appointments or various minor (for the most part) surgical procedures or tests. But my parents, also not wealthy, had to pay for their health insurance, since my dad was self-employed, and yet they didn't go broke nor go into any kind of astronomical debt, nor have to wait at all for my mom to have an artificial valve placed in her heart in the mid '70s. I don't remember the exact year, but I know it was prior to 1978 when my dad retired. Based on their experience, as well as my own with spinal surgery last year, as well as several minor out-patient surgical procedures, I may not have comparisons to what other countries may offer, but I definitely have, nor I'm sure did my parents, any complaints.

Yes to this. It isn't that the healthcare system here doesn't deliver at all; it does. And, like other wealthy countries, it can and does deliver very well. My mother died awhile ago and I have no complaints about how she was treated. She had Medicare and, while not wealthy, was well off. She could avail herself of great treatment at Emory; she had a heart problem and they specialize in that. Medicare paid for all her bills, except minor expenses.

The problem is that the system delivers differentially between groups in the population and is horrendously expensive too boot. As long as we have - and we do - large numbers of people uninsured and many under insured, we are going to get the kinds of results we see in these studies. There is no reason for that. We have the resources; we aren't applying them to deliver healthcare to the population.

And we should.

 

[Deleted member 2897]

Yes to this. It isn't that the healthcare system here doesn't deliver at all; it does. And, like other wealthy countries, it can and does deliver very well. My mother died awhile ago and I have no complaints about how she was treated. She had Medicare and, while not wealthy, was well off. She could avail herself of great treatment at Emory; she had a heart problem and they specialize in that. Medicare paid for all her bills, except minor expenses.

The problem is that the system delivers differentially between groups in the population and is horrendously expensive too boot. As long as we have - and we do - large numbers of people uninsured and many under insured, we are going to get the kinds of results we see in these studies. There is no reason for that. We have the resources; we aren't applying them to deliver healthcare to the population.

And we should.

I took the healthcare discussion to the healthcare-ish thread here: https://gtswarm.com/threads/for-those-that-support-universal-health-care.20268/page-2

 

[MWBATL]

. There is no reason for that. We have the resources; we aren't applying them to deliver healthcare to the population.

And we should.

With respect, perhaps I am not understanding your point, but it seems to me there is a reason for that.

$$$$$$$$

 

[GTRX7]

LOL. For many weeks we’ve shut the country down and we’re social distancing and I can’t see a single thing on that chart that shows the effect from it. Maybe I’m blind. Think about how we’re seeing 30,000 new cases week after week when we’re not even around each other. Meanwhile, the vast majority of the country according to the health experts isn’t expected to peak for a few more weeks even. BTW, when I look at testing volumes, they’ve been flat for weeks. So we’re getting a higher percentage of positives versus catching more people. Not sure what that tells us. Either way, it’s remarkable to me we can generate 30,000 more cases every week when we’re shut down.

The main website I am aware of that has been creating projections for the virus has been projecting the same peak in the US for a while now as the end of last week (LINK). And, in fact, the data does seem to be bearing that out as the curve does now appear to have flattened, which is great! Seems to me like there is a clear effect from social distancing in exactly the same time period that was projected and seen in other countries.

Lets hope it continues!!!

 

[Deleted member 2897]

The main website I am aware of that has been creating projections for the virus has been projecting the same peak in the US for a while now as the end of last week (LINK). And, in fact, the data does seem to be bearing that out as the curve does now appear to have flattened, which is great! Seems to me like there is a clear effect from social distancing in exactly the same time period that was projected and seen in other countries.

Lets hope it continues!!!

One suggestion for why the number of new cases is staying high is that we're actually doing tons of tests that aren't included in the government's published test numbers. I continue to read more and more about companies like Labcorp and Quest (if I have the names right) doing tens and tens of thousands of tests a day that may not be counted by the federal government, since they don't have to report anything. If the number of new cases is the same as it was a couple weeks ago but we're testing twice as many people as we were two weeks ago (for example), that could certainly explain it. The more I think about it, the more I think that must be what it is. In South Carolina, its been over a month that I've consistently heard we aren't at maximum test capacity. And our numbers at the state level have dropped in half, and in my particular county that was one of the first with a drive through test in the nation (population 500,000), our total new cases this entire weekend was a scant 11.

 

[GTNavyNuke]

Any thoughts on this?

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/04/13/who...-patients-are-immune-to-second-infection.html

It's my understanding that there is currently no effective vaccine for other corona viruses (SARS, MERS). If the above is correct, there will be additional challenges if the virus itself doesn't cause some to generate antibodies.

Viruses suck since they are only material and never alive. So it's kind of hard to "kill" them (tic). I had the parvovirus / fifth disease for 18 months and it finally went away (30 years ago and I'll never forget). I was told I could get it back again. Joy.

And the 10% y'all were puzzling over may be the earlier SARS-CoV. The overall case-fatality rate is approximately 10%.[19,203] See https://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/706717_1 at bottom of first page.

 

[GTRX7]

One suggestion for why the number of new cases is staying high is that we're actually doing tons of tests that aren't included in the government's published test numbers. I continue to read more and more about companies like Labcorp and Quest (if I have the names right) doing tens and tens of thousands of tests a day that may not be counted by the federal government, since they don't have to report anything. If the number of new cases is the same as it was a couple weeks ago but we're testing twice as many people as we were two weeks ago (for example), that could certainly explain it. The more I think about it, the more I think that must be what it is. In South Carolina, its been over a month that I've consistently heard we aren't at maximum test capacity. And our numbers at the state level have dropped in half, and in my particular county that was one of the first with a drive through test in the nation (population 500,000), our total new cases this entire weekend was a scant 11.

Then focus on the good news for the new daily deaths flattening. As RonJon has stated, that is a more accurate indicator anyway (in part for the reasons you are talking about).

 

[Techster]

 

[takethepoints]

Any thoughts on this?

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/04/13/who...-patients-are-immune-to-second-infection.html

It's my understanding that there is currently no effective vaccine for other corona viruses (SARS, MERS). If the above is correct, there will be additional challenges if the virus itself doesn't cause some to generate antibodies.

Viruses suck since they are only material and never alive. So it's kind of hard to "kill" them (tic). I had the parvovirus / fifth disease for 18 months and it finally went away (30 years ago and I'll never forget). I was told I could get it back again. Joy.

And the 10% y'all were puzzling over may be the earlier SARS-CoV. The overall case-fatality rate is approximately 10%.[19,203] See https://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/706717_1 at bottom of first page.

A vaccine would be calculated to generate a massive immune response. But … we won't know the full parameters until we have one. We can probably get one faster for COVID-19 because, unlike SARS and MERS, a vaccine batch screw-up is a lot less likely to kill people. We're lucky this one is only as lethal as it is. If it were like SARS or MERS we would be talking about really massive losses. Here's a semi-informative link I posted before:

https://fivethirtyeight.com/videos/how-close-are-we-to-a-covid-19-vaccine/

Answer = we're a lot closer then we could have expected, but there's awhile to go.

 

[takethepoints]

With respect, perhaps I am not understanding your point, but it seems to me there is a reason for that.

$$$$$$$$

If it were a matter of money, we should change our healthcare delivery system tomorrow. As it is the costs are astronomical in relation to the results. But enough on this here.

 

[684Bee]

That is so great.