Wuhan coronavirus

[Van wink 2,994]

A small sample size but very significant findings, very infectious in the early stages. Spread by asymptomatic persons!!

Coronavirus patients with mild symptoms are most infectious within a week of contracting the disease but are unlikely to pass the virus on after 10 days, German researchers have revealed.

In the study of just nine patients - one of the first one of the first to map when people actively transmit the illness to others - scientists found that patients with mild symptoms emit extremely high amounts of the virus at an early stage of their infection.

“Peak shedding” - when a person with Covid-19 is most infectious - typically occurs within five days of picking up the disease, and patients emit 1,000 times more virus than during peak shedding of a Sars (severe acute respiratory syndrome) infection. 

This very high rate helps to explain why the virus has spread so rapidly across the globe, with more than 120,000 people in well over 100 countries now infected, the researchers say. By comparison Sars, a closely related coronavirus, infected some 8,000 people and killed 800 in 2002-03. 

“This is in another dimension compared to Sars,” Dr Clemens Martin Wendtner, co-author of the report and a professor at the Ludwig-Maximilians University in Munich, told The Telegraph.

“The bottom line is that you are infectious even when you have no lung disease. You don’t have to be seriously ill to pass the virus onto other people.

“This virus is spreading even in very asymptomatic patients,” he added.   

Edited March 11, 2020 by Van wink

[Barbe bleu 815]

So what is to be made of the numbers being reported.  Today its 460 confirmed cases, up 80 odd on yesterday.

How much delay is in this reporting, were these tests undertaken today, yesterday, or even before then?

How many of the 460 cases are now recovered?

If R0=2 why are we not seeing exponential growth?  When will this come, or will it  it come as measure are having some success?

What's the estimate on cases suspected but not confirmed ?

I can't help feeling that the top line number is entirely devoid of meaning

 

[Van wink 2,994]

5 minutes ago, Barbe bleu said:

So what is to be made of the numbers being reported.  Today its 460 confirmed cases, up 80 odd on yesterday.

How much delay is in this reporting, were these tests undertaken today, yesterday, or even before then?

How many of the 460 cases are now recovered?

If R0=2 why are we not seeing exponential growth?  When will this come, or will it  it come as measure are having some success?

What's the estimate on cases suspected but not confirmed ?

I can't help feeling that the top line number is entirely devoid of meaning

 

I think that some still struggle to grasp the significance of asymptomatic spreaders, and there is an indication in my above post that at certain times individuals can be highly infectious, not what we have been lead to believe so far.

[ricardo 7,348]

7 minutes ago, Van wink said:

I think that some still struggle to grasp the significance of asymptomatic spreaders, and there is an indication in my above post that at certain times individuals can be highly infectious, not what we have been lead to believe so far.

I think asymptomatic contagion has been known or at least suspected for some time.

[Surfer 1,547]

15 minutes ago, Van wink said:

A small sample size but very significant findings, very infectious in the early stages. Spread by asymptomatic persons!!

Coronavirus patients with mild symptoms are most infectious within a week of contracting the disease but are unlikely to pass the virus on after 10 days, German researchers have revealed.

In the study of just nine patients - one of the first one of the first to map when people actively transmit the illness to others - scientists found that patients with mild symptoms emit extremely high amounts of the virus at an early stage of their infection.

“Peak shedding” - when a person with Covid-19 is most infectious - typically occurs within five days of picking up the disease, and patients emit 1,000 times more virus than during peak shedding of a Sars (severe acute respiratory syndrome) infection. 

This very high rate helps to explain why the virus has spread so rapidly across the globe, with more than 120,000 people in well over 100 countries now infected, the researchers say. By comparison Sars, a closely related coronavirus, infected some 8,000 people and killed 800 in 2002-03. 

“This is in another dimension compared to Sars,” Dr Clemens Martin Wendtner, co-author of the report and a professor at the Ludwig-Maximilians University in Munich, told The Telegraph.

“The bottom line is that you are infectious even when you have no lung disease. You don’t have to be seriously ill to pass the virus onto other people.

“This virus is spreading even in very asymptomatic patients,” he added.   

I think the same study said "not infectious" after 6 days.... or 6 days after first symptoms become observable... and still measurable as "infected" 

[Van wink 2,994]

15 minutes ago, ricardo said:

I think asymptomatic contagion has been known or at least suspected for some time.

Indeed, but the high level of peak infectivity has not been mentioned as far as I have seen.

[Yellow Fever 3,749]

30 minutes ago, Van wink said:

Indeed, but the high level of peak infectivity has not been mentioned as far as I have seen.

Frankly I think this blows a huge hole in the current policy. 

Too little too late.

[ricardo 7,348]

9 minutes ago, Yellow Fever said:

Frankly I think this blows a huge hole in the current policy. 

Too little too late.

We will see our acceleration in the next few days when things start to shut down. I would have preferred to see it happen last week.

[Yellow Fever 3,749]

7 minutes ago, ricardo said:

We will see our acceleration in the next few days when things start to shut down. I would have preferred to see it happen last week.

I suspect the natural assumption was that peak infectivity occured when the disease was fully developed... and hence easier to spot such individuals. 

Now we know (or suspect) otherwise all the ealier models will need correction.

Edited March 11, 2020 by Yellow Fever

[T 190]

The WHO are saying you should be aware at first sign of symptoms eg even mild fever of 37.3. and that has been the advice we have received for weeks at work but we can easily work from home. . But please read original source yourselves. 
 

But it is largely been based on risk Locations in UK up until now as still a lot of cold and flu circulating and Covid 19 spread was very limited. The UK has said for sometime that it will switch to symptoms based isolation shortly based on the risk assessment  But again please read the official sources yourselves  

please though  people should for their own safety and the safety of others be looking at official primary sources for their information or reliable news sources that check their info and don’t sensationalise. They should not be looking at unreliable secondary sources and you tubers and sharing this information. Check the information is coming from an official credible source.

this is a lot more important than individual egos on here. . Ignoring experts on that other subject just costs money and jobs. Ignoring experts on this cost lives. 

[Van wink 2,994]

Interesting to see the Liverpool ATM players not shaking hands, followed by Madrid players and management spending most of the game gobbing.

[Van wink 2,994]

 

[ricardo 7,348]

Don't bang on about this nonsense of appeals to authority. You could fill a thousand books with instances where the so called experts got it wrong, from the unsinkable Titanic to professor Paul Ehrlich and his population bomb nonsense. People need to absorb all the information available not just the propoganda from vested interests. Most of what is now being diseminated by governments was well known to those who made it their business to investigate weeks ago, they have already enacted what governments have only just started to propose. Some governments acted quickly eg S Korea, Hong Kong etc. I wonder why their expert opinion differed from Italy's or Spain's.

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

Liz Truss reiterates "That's a disgrace!" 

 

[Herman 9,717]

 

[Herman 9,717]

The Danes are shutting down now for a couple of weeks.

[Yellow Fever 3,749]

16 minutes ago, ricardo said:

Don't bang on about this nonsense of appeals to authority. You could fill a thousand books with instances where the so called experts got it wrong, from the unsinkable Titanic to professor Paul Ehrlich and his population bomb nonsense. People need to absorb all the information available not just the propoganda from vested interests. Most of what is now being diseminated by governments was well known to those who made it their business to investigate weeks ago, they have already enacted what governments have only just started to propose. Some governments acted quickly eg S Korea, Hong Kong etc. I wonder why their expert opinion differed from Italy's or Spain's.

 

50 minutes ago, T said:

The WHO are saying you should be aware at first sign of symptoms eg even mild fever of 37.3. and that has been the advice we have received for weeks at work but we can easily work from home. . But please read original source yourselves. 
 

But it is largely been based on risk Locations in UK up until now as still a lot of cold and flu circulating and Covid 19 spread was very limited. The UK has said for sometime that it will switch to symptoms based isolation shortly based on the risk assessment  But again please read the official sources yourselves  

please though  people should for their own safety and the safety of others be looking at official primary sources for their information or reliable news sources that check their info and don’t sensationalise. They should not be looking at unreliable secondary sources and you tubers and sharing this information. Check the information is coming from an official credible source.

this is a lot more important than individual egos on here. . Ignoring experts on that other subject just costs money and jobs. Ignoring experts on this cost lives. 

 

Did I just see/hear that new cases in Lombardy are now dropping ? - following their lock down a week or so ago. Who would of believed it! 

The point to T is the 'precautionary' principal. I wouldn't of expected a lockdown earlier but stopping large gatherings much earlier and some social distancing when the Italian example was vividly real may well of bought an extra week or two or even three of low level case numbers - and yes time for more wisdom and information on the virus

[ricardo 7,348]

5 minutes ago, Herman said:

The Danes are shutting down now for a couple of weeks.

Very sensible, obviously they have different experts.

[Yellow Fever 3,749]

2 minutes ago, ricardo said:

Very sensible, obviously they have different experts.

As people like quoting scientific experts - 

“From a purely scientific standpoint, putting in place a combination of interventions as early as possible is the best way to slow spread and reduce outbreak size,” said Prof Andrew Tatem at the University of Southampton.

Our problem is not the science but our politics.

[T 190]

Yes expert knowledge does change over time as they freely admit in this case where new information  is being collected. Hoever to think that someone with no knowledge qualifications or experience knows better than someone with knowledge qualifications and experience is absurd. On  some occasions they will prove to be right but it is far more likely an expert is correct as one is based on knowledge reason and logic and the other is just based on guessing.and speculation.

 By that logic then I know a lot more than some people on here on say the history of NCFC or printing. I don’t and I know I don’t because I don’t have knowledge training and experience  in these matters. And I would never pretend otherwise.

Spreading false information is dangerous and irresponsible. Lives are more important than individual  egos and that is why I would encourage people to go to the original source and certainly not me. There is a lot of good information on the WHO and NHS websites and to think some football punter or you tuber Knows better is just truly bizarre. That is just Ego over commonsense and ego and I know best is never a good basis for decisions.
 

By all means I understand that people who are at higher risk or are more caurious in nature may want to take different decisions   The government is taking decisions for the overall UK and is not basing their decisions just on the high risk and risk adverse  people. These people may wish to isolate themselves from the rest of their humanity now and that is absolutely their choice as far as I’m concerned but that doesn’t make it the right choice for the UK as a whole. 

[Van wink 2,994]

If you are trying to push the curve back the best way to do that is lockdown. The current policy seems to be heading us towards an early peak which is what we are supposed to be trying to avoid.

[T 190]

20 minutes ago, Yellow Fever said:

As people like quoting scientific experts - 

“From a purely scientific standpoint, putting in place a combination of interventions as early as possible is the best way to slow spread and reduce outbreak size,” said Prof Andrew Tatem at the University of Southampton.

Our problem is not the science but our politics.

That may well be right but they also said which you conveniently omit  for you but not for the argument that any measures have to be sustainable. Ie not only medically appropriate but also socially and economically acceptable. That is why the WHO said need to be propionate and short.  I think you are thinking about what you want because of your circumstances but that is not the same as what society wants. That is why they keep repeating the balanced approach Mantra. 

Edited March 11, 2020 by T

[ricardo 7,348]

10 minutes ago, T said:

Yes expert knowledge does change over time as they freely admit in this case where new information  is being collected. Hoever to think that someone with no knowledge qualifications or experience knows better than someone with knowledge qualifications and experience is absurd. On  some occasions they will prove to be right but it is far more likely an expert is correct as one is based on knowledge reason and logic and the other is just based on guessing.and speculation.

 By that logic then I know a lot more than some people on here on say the history of NCFC or printing. I don’t and I know I don’t because I don’t have knowledge training and experience  in these matters. And I would never pretend otherwise.

Spreading false information is dangerous and irresponsible. Lives are more important than individual  egos and that is why I would encourage people to go to the original source and certainly not me. There is a lot of good information on the WHO and NHS websites and to think some football punter or you tuber Knows better is just truly bizarre. That is just Ego over commonsense and ego and I know best is never a good basis for decisions.
 

By all means I understand that people who are at higher risk or are more caurious in nature may want to take different decisions   The government is taking decisions for the overall UK and is not basing their decisions just on the high risk and risk adverse  people. These people may wish to isolate themselves from the rest of their humanity now and that is absolutely their choice as far as I’m concerned but that doesn’t make it the right choice for the UK as a whole. 

So which expert opinion is correct, the WHO a week ago claimed there was little asymptomatic contagion, tonight thr Germans say there is a lot. Some countries experts recommended aggressive testing and early shutdowns. Other countries expert begged to differ.

Expert opinion is just that, OPINION. We won't  know who is right until its over but we already know that both can't  be right. You pick your experts and let others pick theirs. At the end of the day we make our own balanced judgements.

As for spreading false information, I have yet to see anybody doing that on here.

Edited March 11, 2020 by ricardo

[Yellow Fever 3,749]

5 minutes ago, T said:

Yes expert knowledge does change over time as they freely admit in this case where new information  is being collected. Hoever to think that someone with no knowledge qualifications or experience knows better than someone with knowledge qualifications and experience is absurd. On  some occasions they will prove to be right but it is far more likely an expert is correct as one is based on knowledge reason and logic and the other is just based on guessing.and speculation.

 By that logic then I know a lot more than some people on here on say the history of NCFC or printing. I don’t and I know I don’t because I don’t have knowledge training and experience  in these matters. And I would never pretend otherwise.

Spreading false information is dangerous and irresponsible. Lives are more important than individual  egos and that is why I would encourage people to go to the original source and certainly not me. There is a lot of good information on the WHO and NHS websites and to think some football punter or you tuber Knows better is just truly bizarre. That is just Ego over commonsense and ego and I know best is never a good basis for decisions.
 

By all means I understand that people who are at higher risk or are more caurious in nature may want to take different decisions   The government is taking decisions for the overall UK and is not basing their decisions just on the high risk and risk adverse  people. These people may wish to isolate themselves from the rest of their humanity now and that is absolutely their choice as far as I’m concerned but that doesn’t make it the right choice for the UK as a whole. 

I have no idea who is at higher or lower risk. It doesn't change the point at all. The purely uncoloured untainted scientific view has always been to control it hard and early.

Other factors such as economic costs, leadership, the political 'art of the possible' will dilute the purely scientific advice.

[Yellow Fever 3,749]

All I'm trying to put clearly is what is the best scientific thing to do. That is and has always been obvious. Action this day.

Now if our government decides to dilute that advice with other political, economic or social considerations they should say so and not pretend their advice is pure untainted scientific advice.

It is and has always been Johnson's  choice. Don't hide behind your advisors.

[wooster 134]

Apparently Matt Hancock is meeting opposition parties tomorrow to take them through the Govt's plans that will be announced in the Commons next week.

These plans may change the current approach, hence the need for buy-in from (or discussion with) opposition parties.

 

[ricardo 7,348]

15 minutes ago, T said:

That may well be right but they also said which you conveniently omit  for you but not for the argument that any measures have to be sustainable. Ie not only medically appropriate but also socially and economically acceptable. That is why the WHO said need to be propionate and short.  I think you are thinking about what you want because of your circumstances but that is not the same as what society wants. That is why they keep repeating the balanced approach Mantra. 

So what do you think is going to look best at the ballot box

A few hundred extra people died but we saved the country a billion pounds

Or

It cost us a hell of a lot but many lives that would otherwise have been lost were saved.

[T 190]

I think both are saying that there is little spread with no symptoms as it is spread by cough droplets But they are both saying that people are infectious at an early stage with mild symptoms so should isolate which is what I was told to do weeks ago given I work in an international Environment and therefore higher risk that someone had come in contact. 
 

The testing is a question of resource availability and risk assessment.  More lwas available in Asia following the SARS experience.  I think you will find that shutdown has waited until it escalated in all counties. There was earlier shut down in Asia where they were closer and more links with China so took more because higher risk. I think you will find everywhere is following a strategy of containment delay mitagation and reSearch.

Boris and deputy CMO have said decisions wil be based on scientific assessment and not  Politics and a balanced approach. . I’m fine with that as I take a balanced risk eg on finance and risky sports but I understand that you may have higher risk and be more risk adverse so as you say take individual actions rather than complain as complaining will not change anything so social distance if you are concerned.

But as I’ve said the decisions  will Be based on the Mass Majority not just the minority so you were never going to get what you want as I warned you at the start. There is no one size fits all solution so yes you will have a different opinion than others but you don’t have to work for a living so of course you have a different view. 

[Yellow Fever 3,749]

7 minutes ago, wooster said:

Apparently Matt Hancock is meeting opposition parties tomorrow to take them through the Govt's plans that will be announced in the Commons next week.

These plans may change the current approach, hence the need for buy-in from (or discussion with) opposition parties.

 

Sensible. It should be a non political effort.

[Van wink 2,994]

“#coronavirus Italy update: Codogno, the first town to face lockdown about three weeks ago, just reported that the number of new infected patients has reached 0.

The lockdown works: the draconian measures imposed on the area made this happen in just a few weeks”

 

Don’t know how reliable this source is but if true illustrates the point nicely