Coronavirus questions answered...

[pbmus]

Link to tweet

[matt819]

1. Looks like pretty good info

Here's the part about mortality:

How deadly is the virus?
The fatality rate of the new coronavirus is still being studied, but it appears to be deadlier than the flu, which has a fatality rate of about 0.1%. In a large study published Feb. 18 in the China CDC Weekly, researchers found a death rate from COVID-19 to be around 2.3% in mainland China. But on March 5, the World Health Organization announced a slightly higher fatality rate of around 3.4%. Still, it's possible that mild cases of the virus are being missed, which could lower the death rate. Overall, older adults and those with underlying medical conditions appear to most at risk for serious complications from COVID-19.

Kind of bad news/good news. Mortality rate could be 3.4%. But it might not be. And another poster observed yesterday that another source put the rate at under 2%. At the same time, I suppose it's also possible that people have died whose deaths have not been attributed to COVID-19. Could be okay-ish. Could be awful. Could spread like wildfire. Might not. Most things I've read have not yet likened it to the Spanish Flu of 1918-1919. I suppose that's good.

I would like to see an analysis of the data so far - infections, deaths, recovery, still sick - and liken it to, say the H1Ni pandemic from 2009 or even the Spanish flu. From around zero at the beginning of the year to almost 100,000 confirmed cases 65 days later. Is that a lot? Not so much. Exponential. Hair on fire terrifying? Data's great, but in the absence of intelligent analysis, it's just, well, data.

Of course, we're not going to get any reliable information, or any information at all, from our own government. And any information that is released will be suspect and probably best ignored.

The WHO has situation reports, but, again, more data, no analysis.

And I'm getting tired of reading op-eds in place of actual analysis. Or of analysis that is nothing more than back of the envelope speculation.

Of course, I could avoid this if I just stopped going online. But then what would I complain about?

It is pretty funny, though. For the past few nights my wife and I have been amused by reports of panic buying and hoarding. We look at each other and ask if we should stock up on toilet paper and pet food. And then we feel pretty silly about that.

We live in strange times.

[genxlib]

2. There is a danger to it being less dangerous

Hear me out.

This statement ... "Still, it's possible that mild cases of the virus are being missed, which could lower the death rate." sounds like a great thing.

However, those mild cases could be potentially out spreading the disease to a much broader group of people. The most dangerous carrier is the one that doesn't know he has it. If all of the cases were significant, there would be a much higher incidence of identification and containment.

The net result is that the spread could be greater. If you greatly increase the number of infected, even the lower mortality rate could end up with more deaths.

Perhaps this is the exact kind of speculation that we should not engage in. It is just a caution to consider behavior as part of the spread.

[uponit7771]

3. "stay home when you are sick" .. good luck with this in the USA