You know it's never good when a public health scientist starts off a tweet with "HOLY MOTHER OF GOD"

[kpete]

2/ “We estimate the basic reproduction number of the infection (R_0) to be 3.8 (95% confidence interval, 3.6-4.0), indicating that 72-75% of transmissions must be prevented by control measures for infections to stop increasing...

3/ ... We estimate that only 5.1% (95%CI, 4.8-5.5) of infections in Wuhan are identified, and by 21 January a total of 11,341 people (prediction interval, 9,217-14,245) had been infected in Wuhan since the start of the year. Should the epidemic continue unabated in Wuhan....

4/ we predict the epidemic in Wuhan will be substantially larger by 4 February (191,529 infections; prediction interval, 132,751-273,649), infection will be established in other Chinese cities, and importations to other countries will be more frequent. Our model suggests that..

5/ travel restrictions from and to Wuhan city are unlikely to be effective in halting transmission across China; with a 99% effective reduction in travel, the size of the epidemic outside of Wuhan may only be reduced by 24.9% on 4 February. Our findings are...

6/ ...critically dependent on the assumptions underpinning our model, and the timing and reporting of confirmed cases, and there is considerable uncertainty associated with the outbreak at this early stage. With these caveats in mind, our work suggests that...

7/ a basic reproductive number for this 2019-nCoV outbreak is higher compared to other emergent coronaviruses, suggesting that containment or control of this pathogen may be substantially more difficult.”!!!! #wuhanvirus #CoronavirusOutbreak #ChinaCoronaVirus ...

@laevildea
Do you think China is reporting actual numbers or do you think they are suppressing information?

By all reports, I highly doubt the cases and death counts are accurate. Authorities already admit the numbers are too lonw. But knowing Chinese media, it’s always worse than they admit. I predict number will soar to 5 figures over weekend, and 6 figures next 2 weeks + worldwide.

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

[Mike 03]

1. Jeeze:

We estimate that only 5.1% (95%CI, 4.8-5.5) of infections in Wuhan are identified

Think about that for a second.

Thanks for finding and posting this.

[Mike 03]

2. Kicking for visibility.

[WhiskeyGrinder]

3. It's certainly isn't helpful. Like...what's the specific takeaway I'm supposed to get from this?

What, exactly, does "thermonuclear pandemic" mean?

[mnhtnbb]

4. Definition of a pandemic

A pandemic is an epidemic of disease that has spread across a large region; for instance multiple continents, or even worldwide.

Apply thermonuclear to that...

A thermonuclear weapon, fusion weapon or hydrogen bomb, is a second-generation nuclear weapon design. Its greater sophistication affords it vastly greater destructive power than first-generation atomic bombs, a more compact size, a lower mass or a combination of these benefits

So I would interpret the phrase to mean this virus is going to spread faster, farther, and with greater mortality and morbidity consequences than we have seen with normal virus activity.

In other words, I am happy I have no air travel planned for at least another 5 weeks and I won't be headed to Asia.

[WhiskeyGrinder]

7. My point being the language is inflammatory, panicky, vague and based on like two weeks of

sketchy data from an unreliable source. Not helpful, when it comes to public health.

[Leith]

6. I'm with you

We all know what a "pandemic" is and it isn't hard to figure out "thermonuclear."

Okay, I'm not a stupid person, but I got the lowest passing grade in Probability and Statistics 301 in college (about 1/3 of the class failed) and I was ecstatic. And I have no background in the medical sciences.

So, what does "3.8" mean? What is "reproductive R0?" What does a "virality coefficient" do?

I get it - it will spread faster than the flu outbreak of 1918 which killed more people than WW I did. So obviously it's horrifically bad. There are documentaries on YouTube which explain the Spanish flu that are scary as hell.

So, can anyone explain this Asimov style?*

* That mean taking difficult and complex scientific concepts and explaining them in ways that a normal person can understand. Thanks in advance.

[DiverDave]

8. R naught

Is the number of people infected by 1 person.
This is a huge number.

[muriel_volestrangler]

5. See earlier thread on this, in particular that the R_0 value he freaked about has been cut

from 3.8 to 2.5, by the lead author of the paper: https://www.democraticunderground.com/100212907959#post34

[XRubicon]

9. "never seen an actual virality coefficient outside of Twitter in my entire career."

Who is this Bozo?

[My Pet Orangutan]

11. Someone apparently not familiar with measles R_0 14 - 18.

[My Pet Orangutan]

10. Irresponsible and reprehensible.

Over the top alarmist language in response to an emerging, if urgent public health situation is irresponsible, and a blot on Dr Feigl-Ding's reputation.

The R_0 of 3.8 was amongst the earliest (highly speculative) estimates and has since been revised down to R_0 2.5, a number in line with the common flu.

Language like "themonuclear pandemic level bad" has no place in a public health discussion. He will be rightly be censured by his colleagues.

[KY_EnviroGuy]

12. Someone of authority needs to call this guy out.....

behind the woodshed. Alarmist dialog of this ferocity has no place coming from scientists. This sort of shit can cause mass panic and harm. Calm, rational thinking and action is crucial at this time around the globe.

Our CDC seems to be doing their job: https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/index.html

Read a good, rational discussion about this situation from one of our states that would have the most concern:

Why Washington state’s health experts aren’t panicking yet about the Wuhan coronavirus
Jan. 24, 2020 at 7:39 pm

Link: https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/health/why-washington-states-health-experts-arent-panicking-yet-about-the-wuhan-coronavirus/

KY.........