Jump to content
Ham_

Corona Virus vs WotLabs Community Megathread

Recommended Posts

1,000,000 cases worldwide (plus probably another +200k in China)

240,000 Cases in the US

92,000 in New York (population 19.5 Million) - (8.6 Million in New York City alone)

9,900 in California (population 39.5 Million)

West Coast Best Coast

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, NightmareMk9 said:

1,000,000 cases worldwide (plus probably another +200k in China)

240,000 Cases in the US

92,000 in New York (population 19.5 Million) - (8.6 Million in New York City alone)

9,900 in California (population 39.5 Million)

West Coast Best Coast

Can I get an amen for car culture?  Fuck a bunch of riding subways and buses. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, FlorbFnarb said:

Can I get an amen for car culture?  Fuck a bunch of riding subways and buses. ;)

Amen brother

I got my essential letter today as did my wife. The joys of being non-medical critical infrastructure 

West Texas just went to shelter-in-place and are limiting all biz to 10% of max occupancy to enforce distancing etc. I'm seeing a lot more paper masks now, but locally we only have about 24 cases and 8 of those are all 1 family that went to San Antiono

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, simba90 said:

That's a slight misnomer given that deaths happen a lot quicker in the evolution of the case than does recovery. So using the deaths:recovered ratio is never going to accurate while things are moving quickly. Off the top of my head I think the numbers are death is likely in the first 2 weeks while full recovery takes up to 6 weeks. Our resident medical experts can proabably shed more light onto this.

IIRC the overall death rate is trending toward ~1% from expert opinion.

I agree that it is skewed, but I very much disagree on the 1%. If EVERY single active case in the world recovered right now and there were no additional deaths, that would still leave us with a 4% death rate overall.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, PityFool said:

I agree that it is skewed, but I very much disagree on the 1%. If EVERY single active case in the world recovered right now and there were no additional deaths, that would still leave us with a 4% death rate overall.

Granted, However there is still a lot of cases that have very mild symptoms that have not been tested and don't appear on the global statistics. IIRC It is implied that 80% of cases have mild to no symptoms. This represents a huge problem when the primary mechanic for tracking the outbreak revolves around tracing people once they become symptomatic. 

Look closely at the sub populations that invested in _massive_ testing regimes to get ahead of the bug. These sub populations will give a much closer representation of the big picture because they include more of the mild symptom cases.

eg. The diamond princess has more or less run its course and that was ~1.8% mortality. 

I am going to be very curious about where NZ's numbers finally end up. They've implemented an early lock down as well as a pretty intensive testing regime. Granted its not perfect, but its a long way ahead of other commonwealth countries.

I know this goes against most traditions of where larger sample sizes are better. But in this case, the greater population presents an incomplete picture.

Make no mistake, This is a _very_ serious bug and deserves all of our respect. Traditionaly the bugs with lower morbidity can kill more people overall because as opposed to Ebola or MERS, its doesn't kill most of its hosts before they can spread it.

 I haven't gone into the local effects when medical capacity are overwhelms and the ~8 - 10% of hospital cases that would recover if they could get a bed suddenly become statistics, this may well account for the acute spikes in morbidity that we are seeing on a local level (Italy / NYC / Early Wuhan)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

welp finally the FL Gov issued a mandatory 30 day stay at home order for non essential. but i think it might be to little to late. i mean yea close everything after the spring breakers flood the beaches then travel back home lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm more sarcastic than not but sadly I'm kinda serious, which is really more of a commentary on the amazing and wonderful world of Philippine politics than my personal taste(s) or ideas

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, PityFool said:

I agree that it is skewed, but I very much disagree on the 1%. If EVERY single active case in the world recovered right now and there were no additional deaths, that would still leave us with a 4% death rate overall.

True, but then that doesn't count cases not diagnosed as being the Wuhan virus.  I grant you that that's fundamentally an unknowable number, however, and figures have to be based off known, diagnosed cases.

8 hours ago, simba90 said:

Granted, However there is still a lot of cases that have very mild symptoms that have not been tested and don't appear on the global statistics. IIRC It is implied that 80% of cases have mild to no symptoms. This represents a huge problem when the primary mechanic for tracking the outbreak revolves around tracing people once they become symptomatic. 

Look closely at the sub populations that invested in _massive_ testing regimes to get ahead of the bug. These sub populations will give a much closer representation of the big picture because they include more of the mild symptom cases.

eg. The diamond princess has more or less run its course and that was ~1.8% mortality. 

I am going to be very curious about where NZ's numbers finally end up. They've implemented an early lock down as well as a pretty intensive testing regime. Granted its not perfect, but its a long way ahead of other commonwealth countries.

I know this goes against most traditions of where larger sample sizes are better. But in this case, the greater population presents an incomplete picture.

Make no mistake, This is a _very_ serious bug and deserves all of our respect. Traditionaly the bugs with lower morbidity can kill more people overall because as opposed to Ebola or MERS, its doesn't kill most of its hosts before they can spread it.

 I haven't gone into the local effects when medical capacity are overwhelms and the ~8 - 10% of hospital cases that would recover if they could get a bed suddenly become statistics, this may well account for the acute spikes in morbidity that we are seeing on a local level (Italy / NYC / Early Wuhan)

My brother apparently saw something claiming the Wuhan virus is something like five to eight times as virulent as the seasonal flu.  No idea if that's right, but that could be a source of deaths as much as high odds of death could be,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The issue is at this point given current treatments even in ICU a lot of people will die. Without ICU even more. Hence flattening the curve. But then what? Without a vaccine or effective treatment it's still going to go around pretty much everyone unless there's basically a loooooong global lock down. Global economy fucked. And if we don't see acquired immunity after exposure or any successful vaccine life as we know it will have to be different. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Ezz said:

The issue is at this point given current treatments even in ICU a lot of people will die. Without ICU even more. Hence flattening the curve. But then what? Without a vaccine or effective treatment it's still going to go around pretty much everyone unless there's basically a loooooong global lock down. Global economy fucked. And if we don't see acquired immunity after exposure or any successful vaccine life as we know it will have to be different. 

I don't remember if I mentioned this already, but I saw something recently that said that all social distancing (and similar) measures do is delay the spread, and ultimately have no effect on infection rates or deaths, except insofar as the measures prevent the number of serious cases climbing above ICU capacity and available respirator counts.  Which makes sense; the disease still exists and the odds of actually freezing all interaction until the virus has zero non-immune and uninfected people to jump to.

That said, your point about vaccines and immunity is sound - but I know of no instances of virulent viral diseases where we neither develop immunity nor work up a vaccine.  Maybe @sr360 would know of examples of that sort of thing, but it seems unlikely for a virus to come along and sort of become permanent like that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, FlorbFnarb said:

I don't remember if I mentioned this already, but I saw something recently that said that all social distancing (and similar) measures do is delay the spread, and ultimately have no effect on infection rates or deaths, except insofar as the measures prevent the number of serious cases climbing above ICU capacity and available respirator counts.  Which makes sense; the disease still exists and the odds of actually freezing all interaction until the virus has zero non-immune and uninfected people to jump to.

That said, your point about vaccines and immunity is sound - but I know of no instances of virulent viral diseases where we neither develop immunity nor work up a vaccine.  Maybe @sr360 would know of examples of that sort of thing, but it seems unlikely for a virus to come along and sort of become permanent like that.

I'm not a virologist, but I haven't read whether SARS-CoV-2 will be more akin to measles, HBV or poliovirus, where prior exposure/vaccination confers immunity, or rhinovirus where there are multiple strains circulating and you don't have cross-immunity, or influenza where it is constantly mutating to evade vaccine protection. I don't think there's evidence that it lays dormant in a reservoir like the herpesviruses (notably HSV, CMV or VZV)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, sr360 said:

I'm not a virologist, but I haven't read whether SARS-CoV-19 will be more akin to measles, HBV or poliovirus, where prior exposure/vaccination confers immunity, or rhinovirus where there are multiple strains circulating and you don't have cross-immunity, or influenza where it is constantly mutating to evade vaccine protection. I don't think there's evidence that it lays dormant in a reservoir like the herpesviruses (notably HSV, CMV or VZV)

Right.  I guess it seems to me that there are viruses that are virulent, viruses that tend to evade immunity and vaccination, and viruses that are severe...but I can't offhand think of a virus that's achieved all three at once.  Colds are virulent and diverse enough you can't effectively immunize against them all, influenza is virulent and a more severe and mutates, but not fast enough to entirely evade vaccination, and so forth.  But I can't offhand think of a virus that's diverse enough to make natural immunity difficult, and it mutates fast enough to make vaccination a constant battle, and it's virulent, and it's commonly deadly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, FlorbFnarb said:

Right.  I guess it seems to me that there are viruses that are virulent, viruses that tend to evade immunity and vaccination, and viruses that are severe...but I can't offhand think of a virus that's achieved all three at once.  Colds are virulent and diverse enough you can't effectively immunize against them all, influenza is virulent and a more severe and mutates, but not fast enough to entirely evade vaccination, and so forth.  But I can't offhand think of a virus that's diverse enough to make natural immunity difficult, and it mutates fast enough to make vaccination a constant battle, and it's virulent, and it's commonly deadly.

HIV

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, sr360 said:

HIV

Given that it's only (feasibly) transmissible through specific methods of sex, and blood transfusion, it's hard for me to call that virulent compared to respiratory diseases or even diseases transmitted through casual physical contact.

Or is virulence defined by some more specific way to doctors?  To me it just means "spreads easily and quickly."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, FlorbFnarb said:

Given that it's only (feasibly) transmissible through specific methods of sex, and blood transfusion, it's hard for me to call that virulent compared to respiratory diseases or even diseases transmitted through casual physical contact.

Or is virulence defined by some more specific way to doctors?  To me it just means "spreads easily and quickly."

Virulence means the ability to infect, not the ease of transmission. HIV is a virulent virus, in that it evades host defenses pretty easily.

What you're thinking of is infectivity or transmissibility.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, sr360 said:

Virulence means the ability to infect, not the ease of transmission. HIV is a virulent virus, in that it evades host defenses pretty easily.

What you're thinking of is infectivity or transmissibility.

Ah, ok.  Then replace all my previous uses of the term “virulence” with one of those two words.  Such are the risks of my having just enough of a dusting of knowledge of a subject to trip myself up.  :awyeah:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, NightmareMk9 said:

USA

100k Cases on 3/27

200k Cases on 3/31

300k Cases on 4/4

Not quite a log curve, but pretty damn steep

I wonder if any epidemiologist that's reeeeally good with statistics could compare that to the known numbers for deaths due to Wuhan Itis and make a kindasorta estimate about how much of the rising number of cases is due to improved testing, and how much is due to spread of the disease?  There's gotta be statisticians working this issue like crazy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hate the slight paranoia about symptoms that could vaguely maybe sorta make me kinda maybe wonder if I've been Wuhaned.  A sllight headache, anything that logic would normally attribute to my seasonal allergies, and there's a little itch in the back of my mind wondering if I got infected.  I don't even worry about myself, I'm only 50 and in decent health (although out of shape) with no conditions suppressing my immune system and no respiratory issues like asthma, but I do worry about passing something to others.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, NightmareMk9 said:

USA

100k Cases on 3/27

200k Cases on 3/31

300k Cases on 4/4

Not quite a log curve, but pretty damn steep

 

8 hours ago, FlorbFnarb said:

I wonder if any epidemiologist that's reeeeally good with statistics could compare that to the known numbers for deaths due to Wuhan Itis and make a kindasorta estimate about how much of the rising number of cases is due to improved testing, and how much is due to spread of the disease?  There's gotta be statisticians working this issue like crazy.

keep in mind like 140k cases of that is in NY/NJ alone 
new Orleans has like 13k right now and is skyrocketing
Michigan and Cali are both up there with 14k

everywhere is is pretty low (For the US) counts still

Guess the US is going for Herd Immunity? USA! USA! :feelsbad:
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Wanderjar said:

 

keep in mind like 140k cases of that is in NY/NJ alone 
new Orleans has like 13k right now and is skyrocketing
Michigan and Cali are both up there with 14k

everywhere is is pretty low (For the US) counts still

Guess the US is going for Herd Immunity? USA! USA! :feelsbad:
 

Yeah.  I guess I'm hoping there's a lot more people infected already than we know about, and they're just asymptomatic, or have symptoms mild enough they aren't actually bothering to get tested because they think it's a bad cold or the seasonal flu?

Then again, that won't do us any good if there's no lasting immunity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, FlorbFnarb said:

Yeah.  I guess I'm hoping there's a lot more people infected already than we know about, and they're just asymptomatic, or have symptoms mild enough they aren't actually bothering to get tested because they think it's a bad cold or the seasonal flu?

Then again, that won't do us any good if there's no lasting immunity.

I'm wondering if there's any truth to the December flu thing being corona's first lap around the world

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...