Coronavirus - worldwide spread and control

[Leila]

I suspect the convalescing may be aimed at the gap in social care provision .
If they have been in hospital they have probably already been tested?

Sorry I misread then - I thought this was referring to "forced" quarantine for milder cases that never even needed hospital care. To avoid further transmission in households.

 

[Amw66]

Sorry I misread then - I thought this was referring to "forced" quarantine for milder cases that never even needed hospital care. To avoid further transmission in households.

No problem . I have had a full day of getting the wrong gist of things ! Easily done.

 

[FMMM1]

Yes, part of an overall strategy. But if the strategy is to return to something near previous economic activity that is going to require getting your country virus free so that you can be on the list of accessible countries for other states free of virus. Muddling along with a few cases here and there will be economic disaster. Getting virus free will very likely require centralised quarantine at some point.

I think there are a number of countries doing this and I haven't been shocked by the idea. In China I think they tested people and if they were positive they didn't go home --- would you want to infect vulnerable members of your family? In Australia it's off the plane and off to the quarantine hotel --- for 14 days? I heard a western academic who was quarantined in China (where he lives/works) he didn't mind that much.
TB quarantine would have been 6 months/year back in the day (1930s?).

 

[Invisible Woman]

How about if the docs in such places decide ME isn't a real illness and use the new power to section individuals using only one doctor on that basis.

Yeah. Give some people some power and they get carried away.... At the very least I wouldn't be at all surprised if under circumstances such as these there are some who would insist in treatment plans and recommendations.

I've been treated badly enough by docs with no legal power over me.

 

[Amw66]

https://www.theguardian.com/comment...in-failed-prepare-mers-sars-ebola-coronavirus

 

[AliceLily]

Interesting article about how these well known New Zealand businessmen helped to ready the country early for what was coming.

I noticed near the end of the article they were talking about after lockdown and how different life will be as an example when going to a café we will most likely have to write our name and phone number in a book so that we can be easily traced if someone gets the corona virus and had been to that particular café on the same day.

https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/12...yfe-worked-to-ready-country-for-covid19-fight

 

[Hutan]

A number of posts about social distancing and what infection prevention steps are feasible for people with ME have been moved to the Members Only thread:
How can people with ME cope with covid-19?

 

[Snow Leopard]

This was a “hard hit” area of Germany:


“How many people have really been infected by the coronavirus? In one German town a preliminary answer is in: about 14%.

The problem is that serological tests have poor specificity, around 80-90% (possibly sensitive to antibodies to other coronaviruses). If you test the whole town, then you need to expect false positives.

Reflecting on the “reality of the situation”, he said that “we will all be exposed to it at some point”. According to the “current modelling we are working on, 80% will get it – of that, a large portion won’t notice that they have it. Another substantial portion will have very, very mild symptoms. And a small portion will have a very significant reaction”.

Even at current infection rates it will take many years before 80% would get it. Even modest restrictions (mandatory self-quarantine for those with the virus and overseas arrivals, no large gatherings) will prevent this happening, unless a vaccine never eventuates. Also, the idea that many people won't notice they have it is total bullshit.

 

[spinoza577]

This was a “hard hit” area of Germany:


“How many people have really been infected by the coronavirus? In one German town a preliminary answer is in: about 14%.

Case fatality came out 0.37%.

I think a case is anybody who tested positive.

Mortality was estimated 0.06%; I don´t know how they did it. For Ínfluenza it is done via excess deaths in a given periode (over an average evaluated over a longer periode).

If this were done here as well, then it would independly match up pretty well with 14%, if my maths didn´t fool me.

The problem is that serological tests have poor specificity, around 80-90% (possibly sensitive to antibodies to other coronaviruses). If you test the whole town, then you need to expect false positives.

The PCR has been tested very quickly, but they said it didn´t show any cross reactivity with other corona viruses. If this holds the water - as assumed and accepted by everybody here - an adjustment is easily done.

 

[Jonathan Edwards]

More about the BBC article from earlier about those in the passport office being told to go to work...

LEAKED HOME OFFICE CALL
Reveals Government Wants Economy to ‘Continue Running’
As ‘We Will All Get’ COVID-19 Anyway

I wonder when this occurred? Particularly in relation to Boris Johnson's experience. I fear that although Johnson is likely to stabilise he must have had sufficient pathology for him to be taken into ICU and there may well be sequelae from that over weeks or possibly years. Surely sooner or later those who still think it is OK to let everyone get ill will realise that the entire economy will be taken up with long term care of survivors.

The good news is that as Anthony Costello has pointed out it is never too late to get this right. At any point a month's hard lockdown will get us back to where we ought to be.

 

[Jonathan Edwards]

The problem is that serological tests have poor specificity, around 80-90% (possibly sensitive to antibodies to other coronaviruses). If you test the whole town, then you need to expect false positives.

I agree I also think it is interesting that this was apparently a badly affected area. It strongly suggests that across a European country infection rates so far may be below 10%. That fits with Vallance's admission that in many places the rate is in single figures.

It will take four months for the current bump of the curve to play out. If that is 10% of people we can expect another 40 months of the same. And that will become ever more unsustainable as the load on the NHS of chronic survivors piles up. Thee is no second wave. Only a second, third, fourth, thirt-ninth and so on wave - or you do it the antipodean/Chinese way and have one wave.

 

[Jonathan Edwards]

Wouldn't a concentrated quarantine measure mean that people would do anything NOT to get tested?

I certainly would.

With contact tracing you do not get a choice. It is routine for TB testing in the UK anyway. As I understand it if you are a contact you are legally obliged to be tested if you are dealing with a notifiable disease

 

[Sly Saint]

Only a second, third, fourth, thirt-ninth and so on wave - or you do it the antipodean/Chinese way and have one wave.

or mexican?

 

[Adrian]

There is more about the leaked recording, (edit: including saying that the lockdown itself is causing other forms of death, trying to reassure people who live with vulnerable people that it’s still good to go to work, and quoting made up science as to how long the virus survives on surfaces), what was said, here:

https://bylinetimes.com/2020/04/09/...e-running-as-we-will-all-get-covid-19-anyway/

This article is worrying on two counts. Firstly it seems to provide evidence that the UK government is following a herd immunity strategy although not admitting to it in public. This seems to fit with there in action of tracking. Secondly, the quotes from the the Home office's scientific adviser suggests incompetence of someone in this position basically giving views not backed up be science and contradictions. If we have people like that advising the government that is concerning.

 

[Adrian]

The problem is that serological tests have poor specificity, around 80-90% (possibly sensitive to antibodies to other coronaviruses). If you test the whole town, then you need to expect false positives.

Its not just that they are false positives its also the lack of balance in the population causes massive numbers of false positives for even quite an accurate test. If a population of 100,000 people where 3% have the disease are tested with a test with a 5% false positive rate then that is 4,850 false positives with 3,000 genuine positives (and about 8% of the population appearing to test positive). The lack of balance causes a massive skew. It more have the disease it is less so with 10% of people having the disease you would still have 4,500 false positives but 10,000 true positives so the proportions aren't as bad.

With a 10% false positive rate things are worse again say with 3% disease rate giving 9700 false positives and 3000 true positives (assuming a 100% true positive rate). Now reporting 12.7% of the population have the virus.

So we need to be really careful about figures quoted.

 

[Sly Saint]

Firstly it seems to provide evidence that the UK government is following a herd immunity strategy although not admitting to it in public.

I only caught a bit of this program but they as good as said that herd immunity is what they are aiming for.
Horizon: 2020 Coronavirus special part 1

In just over 100 days, a new coronavirus has taken an unprepared world by storm, infiltrating every corner of the globe, sending entire nations into lockdown, killing thousands and infecting countless more. Across the world, governments are scrambling to react, hospitals are struggling to cope and an increasingly anxious public are starting to panic.

The world’s media is awash with data, information and misinformation. But what are the facts? What is COVID-19 and why is this strain of coronavirus so dangerous? What happens in our bodies when the virus attacks? How does this compare to previous pandemics? What do all the the numbers really mean, and how can data modelling help us look for an exit strategy?

This programme investigates the scientific facts and figures behind the biggest public health crisis in living memory, and explores the latest research from the frontline of the medical and scientific fightback.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/m000h3nm/horizon-2020-coronavirus-special-part-1

 

[lunarainbows]

I wonder when this occurred? Particularly in relation to Boris Johnson's experience. I fear that although Johnson is likely to stabilise he must have had sufficient pathology for him to be taken into ICU and there may well be sequelae from that over weeks or possibly years. Surely sooner or later those who still think it is OK to let everyone get ill will realise that the entire economy will be taken up with long term care of survivors.

The good news is that as Anthony Costello has pointed out it is never too late to get this right. At any point a month's hard lockdown will get us back to where we ought to be.

All the articles (Guardian, BBC, independent, byline times) were published on Thursday (yesterday) and in all of them they say the Conference Call happened on “Tuesday”. By that I’m presuming this Tuesday just gone - 7 April. So very recently.

 

[lunarainbows]

I only caught a bit of this program but they as good as said that herd immunity is what they are aiming for.
Horizon: 2020 Coronavirus special part 1

https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/m000h3nm/horizon-2020-coronavirus-special-part-1

I did not watch this (I am not able to watch it at the moment as I find that watching things visually make things feel more real and distressing than if I read it or discuss the science or policies here).

I know they used to follow herd immunity and the leaked records and definitely suggest they’re still following it. But are they genuinely going to follow the same policy from now until the next few years? I simply don’t understand how they can. The hospitals are already overwhelmed and everything else has been cancelled. How will they keep this up - as Jonathan Edwards says - for years and years? And other countries will start to close their borders to us when so many people die here that aren’t dying there. I thought even the “science” had changed and they admitted as much. So why are they back on their old plan? What changed - did it say in the programme what modelling / what they are basing this on?

 

[mango]

Sweden: "70 out of 100 infected at a party in Stockholm"

Göteborgsposten: 70 av 100 smittade på Stockholmsfest
Google Translate, English

A hundred people gathered at a 60th anniversary party in Stockholm in early March - about 70 of them fell ill shortly thereafter. Two party participants ended up in respirators.

The day after the party, the host became very ill with flu-like symptoms. He later ended up in a respirator with confirmed covid-19, as well as another party participant. In total, about 70 of those who attended the party became ill with flu-like symptoms.

The host was in the respirator for 17 days and was close to death before it turned.

The party took place when there was still a large focus on infection tracking of people who had traveled and fallen ill, but is a cautionary example that shows how inappropriate it is to gather in larger groups right now. This is the opinion of the Stockholm infection control physician Per Follin.

 

[Snow Leopard]

The PCR has been tested very quickly, but they said it didn´t show any cross reactivity with other corona viruses. If this holds the water - as assumed and accepted by everybody here - an adjustment is easily done.

Who said anything about RT-PCR? They were identifying antibodies in serum, aka serology.

We can't do any sort of adjustments unless they also used PCR tests in the same population and therefore had strong indications of the sensitivity and specificity of the antibody test.