COVID-19 Coronavirus Containment Efforts

[chemisttree]

Sooner or later lies will be uncovered to the world.

My favorite crazy theory is that “Corona” being an anagram of “Racoon“ somehow proves the virus was engineered. People should instead spend their time praying for the sick and dying.

 

[kyphysics]

On a practical level, has anyone been avoiding travel spots/services, such as hotels, buses, and airports, due to this virus?

I've wondered about even eating at a buffet, where you have people touching those tongs. Greater possibility of spreading germs it feels like.

 

[kadiot]

We don’t know full picture of this highly contagious virus. Details evolving.

https://www.straitstimes.com/asia/east-asia/coronavirus-new-study-finds-incubation-period-of-up-to-24-days

 

[WWGD]

I am not going to deny your right to feelings of outrage, @chemisttree. I just don't share it in this case.

If you're a history buff, you might find the idea of China (or its proxy) snaffling US IP very ironic. Peter Andreas chronicles the US Government's wholesale IP theft in his book “Smuggler Nation: How Illicit Trade Made America”, though back then - the late 18th and early 19th centuries - the main victim was Britain.

Clearly, times change, but I have no doubt that if a foreign company had IP that would help America in a crisis such as this, it would be appropriated without a second thought, esp, if that might save thousands. This is clearly a hypothetical question, but I am interested in whether you would feel outrage in such circumstances.

There is also the book "Bad Samaritans" documenting how Western , now-developed countries did not respect copyright in their tespective beginnings yet now expect poor countries to do so, making it almost impossible for those countries' economies to take off.

 

[chirhone]

To be on topic. Why does the novel Coronavirus infect the insides of lungs causing pneumonia, while the common colds cant? What receptors do the viruses lock into?

 

[chemisttree]

To be on topic. Why does the novel Coronavirus infect the insides of lungs causing pneumonia, while the common colds cant? What receptors do the viruses lock into? ACE-2 receptors. Some are saying the differences in the expression of these ACE-2 receptors in different populations is responsible for the differences seen in incubation and outcomes.

 

[kadiot]

Is the newly suggested 24 days incubation period just an OUTLIER?

 

[chemisttree]

Is the newly suggested 24 days incubation period just an OUTLIER?

No way to tell from the study.
The ONLY mention of the incubation period in the study is this:
“The median incubation period was 3.0 days (range, 0 to 24.0 days).” (pg. 11)

That’s it! No further elaboration on this very important point. Can’t tell if this was one patient or a hundred. We have to assume they are including all data from the 1,099 records they examined. Kind of infuriating!

 

[chemisttree]

This study describes the variability of expression of ACE2 in various tissues, by gender, race and smoking status. The upshot is that ACE2 is correlated with infectiveness, that one or more lung tissue types express ACE2, men express it more than women, asian men more than caucasian or African men, and that smoking status is not correlated with expression.

Time will tell if this holds true or if it is important to the infectiveness and severity.

 

[kadiot]

No way to tell from the study.
The ONLY mention of the incubation period in the study is this:
“The median incubation period was 3.0 days (range, 0 to 24.0 days).” (pg. 11)

The paper says it's not yet a peer reviewed. It is a preprint. The media should have not used it as reference in their news report like it has been validated.

 

[member 656954]

The Quirks and Quarks science podcast has an interesting interview with assistant professor of epidemiology at the Gillings School of Global Public Health at the University of North Carolina, Timothy Sheahan, who has been testing Remdesivir. Sheahan describes his findings when it is applied to coronaviri (is that the plural? My bad if not) and offers a perspective on nCoV.

 

[member 656954]

The media should have not used it as reference in their news report like it has been validated.

It would be a wonderful world if the media was only allowed to report from validated sources, @kadiot. Kind of like PF on steroids

But at least this seems a well structured report, and given validation takes time, do you see a case for rapid research to be released in the public interest from reputable experts, rather than the report being held up by the review cycle?

 

[kadiot]

Were the hiv link, snake, pangolin, and airborne debunked already?

 

[chirhone]

Here is good news.

https://www.dimsumdaily.hk/senior-m...ys-coronavirus-outbreak-may-be-over-by-april/

 

[russ_watters]

Topic may need to be split...

There is also the book "Bad Samaritans" documenting how Western , now-developed countries did not respect copyright in their tespective beginnings yet now expect poor countries to do so, making it almost impossible for those countries' economies to take off.

Er: They are developing much, much faster than we did (their economic growth runs double or triple ours now and growth during the industrial revolution was quite slow), precisely because they benefit from our experience. Why would they even want to repeat our mistakes and our pain? Because being corrupt would allow them to develop even a little bit faster? They're trying to have it both ways.

 

[kadiot]

The virus is evolving. From nCov to COVID-19

"Having a name matters to prevent the use of other names that can be inaccurate or stigmatizing. It also gives us a standard format to use for any future Coronavirus outbreaks,” said Ghebreyesus.

https://cnnphilippines.com/world/2020/2/12/novel-coronavirus-is-now-COVID-19.html?fbclid=lwAR2

 

[mfb]

The paper says it's not yet a peer reviewed. It is a preprint. The media should have not used it as reference in their news report like it has been validated.

The outbreak is too fast for the formal peer review system. By the time these studies are peer-reviewed they will be outdated.
"Not peer reviewed" doesn't mean wrong (and "peer reviewed" doesn't mean right!), it just means it's advisable to be more careful with the conclusions.

 

[Ygggdrasil]

Were the hiv link, snake, pangolin, and airborne debunked already?

As far as I can tell:

• The non-peer-reviewed pre-print claiming the HIV link was flawed and has been retratcted: https://www.statnews.com/2020/02/03/retraction-faulty-coronavirus-paper-good-moment-for-science/
• The snake origin theory is doubtful: https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-00180-8
• There is evidence for pangolins as an intermediary for the current outbreak, but the results are preliminary and have not yet undergone peer-review: https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-00364-2
• Like other coronaviruses and respiratory viruses, it is thought that the current Coronavirus outbreak can be spread through airborne droplets:

  Most often, spread from person-to-person happens among close contacts (about 6 feet). Person-to-person spread is thought to occur mainly via respiratory droplets produced when an infected person coughs or sneezes, similar to how influenza and other respiratory pathogens spread. These droplets can land in the mouths or noses of people who are nearby or possibly be inhaled into the lungs. It’s currently unclear if a person can get 2019-nCoV by touching a surface or object that has the virus on it and then touching their own mouth, nose, or possibly their eyes.

  https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/about/transmission.html

 

[russ_watters]

The outbreak is too fast for the formal peer review system. By the time these studies are peer-reviewed they will be outdated.
"Not peer reviewed" doesn't mean wrong (and "peer reviewed" doesn't mean right!), it just means it's advisable to be more careful with the conclusions.

It's worth pointing out that ordinarily these types of sources (and news sources) would violate our guidelines, but in my opinion (not discussed by the mod team), this situation should warrant an exception to those guidelines.

 

[chemisttree]

The virus is evolving. From nCov to COVID-19

"Having a name matters to prevent the use of other names that can be inaccurate or stigmatizing. It also gives us a standard format to use for any future Coronavirus outbreaks,” said Ghebreyesus.

https://cnnphilippines.com/world/2020/2/12/novel-coronavirus-is-now-COVID-19.html?fbclid=lwAR2

Meet the new virus... same as the old virus! I love the politics of it even though we’re not supposed to discuss it on the Forum.

Here’s the lesson:

"Having a name matters to prevent the use of other names that can be inaccurate or stigmatizing. It also gives us a standard format to use for any future Coronavirus outbreaks,” said Ghebreyesus.”

Here’s the rationale:

“Further, the WHO also said that there is a "realistic chance" of stopping the outbreak.”

And here’s an example of how you should use it in a sentence:

"If we invest now in rational and evidence-based interventions, we have a realistic chance of stopping the COVID19 outbreak,” said Ghebreyes.”

I know I feel better about it!

 

[chirhone]

Here is good news.

https://www.dimsumdaily.hk/senior-m...ys-coronavirus-outbreak-may-be-over-by-april/

His words may placate us making us think its just a bad dream. But other experts seemed to be saying the nightmare scenerio could still happen infecting 60% of the world's populations.

 

[chemisttree]

0.60 * 6,000,000,000 * 0.022 = 79,200,000 projected deaths

ugh! That for a fatality rate of 2.2%. If it’s closer to 6%, it’s nearly 240,000,000.

 

[WWGD]

0.60 * 6,000,000,000 * 0.022 = 79,200,000 projected deaths

ugh! That for a fatality rate of 2.2%. If it’s closer to 6%, it’s nearly 240,000,000.

Over what timeline? The short run?

 

[chemisttree]

Over what timeline? The short run?

Over the timeline it takes for 60% of the world’s population to catch it plus a couple of weeks. R0 is very different in various places.

 

[kadiot]

The increase on the number of Confirmed cases vs Suspected cases is something positive as this means one thing. The lock-down and containment efforts of the Chinese government is effective and is working as they were able to search, quarantine, identify, treat patients.

The continued rise of Recovered (patients) vs Death is very encouraging to the total effort and to the whole world who is still very scared. The correlation between numbers in Confirmed, Suspected, Recovered cases is very evident. AS the numbers of Confirmed rises so is the slow increase of the daily new suspected cases and the overall drop in numbers. The continued rise in the numbers of Recovered patients shows the correlation in the overall decrease of the numbers of confirmed cases. Overall, this trend manages the CFR to just 2-3%.

What we need to wait if this trend continues is the exponential increase in the numbers of Recovered patients and a big drop from the numbers of Suspected cases and the continued steady decrease in the numbers of Confirmed cases in the next couple of weeks.

 

[kadiot]

Meet the new virus... same as the old virus! I love the politics of it even though we’re not supposed to discuss it on the Forum.

Here’s the lesson:

"Having a name matters to prevent the use of other names that can be inaccurate or stigmatizing. It also gives us a standard format to use for any future Coronavirus outbreaks,” said Ghebreyesus.”

Here’s the rationale:

“Further, the WHO also said that there is a "realistic chance" of stopping the outbreak.”

And here’s an example of how you should use it in a sentence:

"If we invest now in rational and evidence-based interventions, we have a realistic chance of stopping the COVID19 outbreak,” said Ghebreyes.”

I know I feel better about it!

For accuracy, the name of the disease is COVID-19 (COrona VIrus Disease), BUT the VIRUS itself is called SARS-CoV 2. Because COVID-19-CoV (Corona Virus Disease - Corona Virus) would just be strange.

 

[morrobay]

Over the timeline it takes for 60% of the world’s population to catch it plus a couple of weeks. R0 is very different in various places.

And also depends on the generation/infecting period. With x(log3) = log42000 in about 42 days then about 9.7 generations so about 4.33 days.

 

[kadiot]

0.60 * 6,000,000,000 * 0.022 = 79,200,000 projected deaths

ugh! That for a fatality rate of 2.2%. If it’s closer to 6%, it’s nearly 240,000,000.

If I undertood correctly, the overall mortality worldwide is 2.2%. That means we expect 97.8% of the total infected to recover. Correct?

 

[kadiot]

His words may placate us making us think its just a bad dream. But other experts seemed to be saying the nightmare scenerio could still happen infecting 60% of the world's populations.

Would you know the expert's basis for 60%? Any forecast ought to have assumptions and basis to support the % number. I'm looking for that one even if mostly qualitative.

 

[WWGD]

Topic may need to be split...

Er: They are developing much, much faster than we did (their economic growth runs double or triple ours now and growth during the industrial revolution was quite slow), precisely because they benefit from our experience. Why would they even want to repeat our mistakes and our pain? Because being corrupt would allow them to develop even a little bit faster? They're trying to have it both ways.

I don't want ti derail the thread, but. I agree some like China, possibly others do want to have it both ways in that they are very advanced in many high-tech areas (and I don't fault either now-developed countries for not respecting copyright/patents in their respective beginnings for the same reason). But there are African countries with net GDP less than 1/1000 of that of developed (e.g. OECD) countries. It seems until a country reaches a baseline level where/when it can compete on a reasonably level playing field, it ought to be able to not follow Copyright lest they never be able to build themselves up. There is an analogy with poor students downloading protected material. Until they graduate and have a reasonable salary, I don't see a problem with them doing this. Of course, tis may just have to see with my just having a couple of obscure papers out there and no more, I admit.

 

[kadiot]

Faulty ones must have been bought by the Indonesia health ministry or they have an amazing immune system? They are covid19-free so far.

https://www.channelnewsasia.com/new...-faulty-coronavirus-test-kits-across-12429566

 

[mfb]

Maybe they just don't have much exchange with China.

Singapore stays the only place outside China that regularly gets new cases. The international case count is at 520, with just two deaths (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:2019%E2%80%9320_Wuhan_coronavirus_data/International_medical_cases). Meanwhile China reports 60,000 cases and 1355 deaths. The distribution in time is somewhat similar so this doesn't explain the difference. China is missing most infections, underreporting the number of infections, other places didn't report deaths or overreported infections, or China has a much higher death rate than other places.

 

[chemisttree]

We’ve just had a news story in San Antonio that the city will hold an unscheduled news conference tomorrow morning at 10:00 am. When asked if it was to report a case of nCoV the representative said they, “...could neither confirm nor deny.”

This is very unusual so I expect the worst. Hoping the recent arrivals in quarantine at JBSA-Lackland aren’t infected!

 

[chemisttree]

Maybe they just don't have much exchange with China.

Singapore stays the only place outside China that regularly gets new cases. The international case count is at 520, with just two deaths (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:2019%E2%80%9320_Wuhan_coronavirus_data/International_medical_cases). Meanwhile China reports 60,000 cases and 1355 deaths. The distribution in time is somewhat similar so this doesn't explain the difference. China is missing most infections, underreporting the number of infections, other places didn't report deaths or overreported infections, or China has a much higher death rate than other places.

I think they’re just making it up at this point. Not that they haven’t been up to this point!
Only now are clinical diagnoses being counted in the daily numbers in Hubei, the epicenter of the outbreak.
Quoting Feng Zhanchun, president of the School of Medicine and Health Management under the Tongji Medical College of Huazhong University of Science and Technology in Wuhan,

“...this will not lead to a surge in the number of new cases.”

Oops!

 

[kadiot]

Maybe they just don't have much exchange with China.

Singapore stays the only place outside China that regularly gets new cases. The international case count is at 520, with just two deaths (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:2019%E2%80%9320_Wuhan_coronavirus_data/International_medical_cases). Meanwhile China reports 60,000 cases and 1355 deaths. The distribution in time is somewhat similar so this doesn't explain the difference. China is missing most infections, underreporting the number of infections, other places didn't report deaths or overreported infections, or China has a much higher death rate than other places.

Yes. This graph is in full agreement with you.