new coronavirus outbreak China, Korea, USA - mod warnings in OP (updated 24/02/20)

16 new cases in Italy today? What's going on there. Very worrying

Cody montana wrote: »

Why is it very worrying?

That many cases in a short time and in different regions would imply sustained h2h transmission, once it starts its hard to stop

And given that a 1/3 of them are suffering severe complications would also probably mean there are significantly more cases as yet unknown as the virus only seems to cause complications in 4-10% of people who catch it

Mic 1972 wrote: »

Still, with such emergency i dont see why people with mild flue symptoms couldn't stay home, possibly work from home if they can for a couple of weeks

By the time you have symptoms you have been incubating it for anywhere from 3 days to 3 weeks.. and infecting everyone ..

Mic 1972 wrote: »

Still, with such emergency i dont see why people with mild flue symptoms couldn't stay home, possibly work from home if they can for a couple of weeks

Problem is some people have no symptoms at all so might be spreading it unknowingly.

This chap tested positive but never developed symptoms. He also claims quarantine on cruise was a joke

Big change in apparent level of concern of American CDC. They seemed almost apathetic just days ago.

https://twitter.com/BNODesk/status/1230907665846611973?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1230907665846611973&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.redditmedia.com%2Fmediaembed%2Ff7eh81%3Fresponsive%3Dtrue%26is_nightmode%3Dfalse

Just an aside.....
Sligo General have closed doors to visitors to protect the infirm. Vomiting bug and diarrhoea very active in wider area ( I heard salmonella mentioned by a nurse ).
An acquaintance went there in early January with his wife for a cataract assessment. The next day he had the flu, first time in 28 years. And the wife got a bout of pneumonia 3 days later.

So if covid19 does make it here don't flock to the hospitals with mild symptoms.

1800_Ladladlad wrote: »

Im due to head to rome on March 1st. Do you think I'd be ok or should I take the tin foil hate off

Could have repercussions for us in a couple weekends, Italy playing Ireland in Dublin 7th march, am sure plenty of Italian fans will travel over, the northern part of Italy being the "hotbed" of rugby over there, so plenty of those fans likely to come from there.

Apologies to others for this post but it has to be done.

Mic 1972 wrote: »

I haven't misinterpreted stats at all. I know quite well how to look at the numbers, plus the stats i'm reporting here are officially published

Ok you're gonna make me do this again. I've done it several times already and you just ignored it. Maybe you want to try and offer a rebuttal this time.

Originally Posted by Gynoid
It was a joke Obviously not a great one.
But now you are telling me 15% of us are all gonna die......AAaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhhhhh!!!

Mic 1972 wrote: »

more likely 20% so far

You say this isn't misrepresenting stats?

I'll stick this here too as it's important. It relates to the h1n1 but also applies to covid.

The global case fatality ratio looks only to the official tally[28] of cases confirmed by the WHO. It takes no account of other cases, such as those appearing in press reports. Nor does it reflect any estimate of the global extent of mild, asymptomatic,[29] or other cases which are undiagnosed, unreported by national governments to the WHO, or for any reason cannot be confirmed by the WHO. While the WHO's case count is clearly the most authoritative, these unavoidable limitations result in an unknown number of cases being omitted from it.

Unconfirmed cases have a potentially huge impact on the case fatality ratio. This mathematical impact is well understood by epidemiologists, and is easy to see in theory. For example, if for each confirmed case reported by the WHO we assume that there has been another mild and unreported case, the actual global number of cases would be double the current number of WHO-confirmed cases. The fatality ratio for H5N1 infections would then be calculated as the same number of deaths, but divided by a doubled number for total cases, resulting in a hypothetical death ratio of half the currently reported fatality ratio. Such a result would indicate to epidemiologists that the world was confronting an H5N1 virus that is less-lethal than currently assumed, although possibly one that was more contagious and difficult to track.[31]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_mortality_from_H5N1

I've been saying this all along.

Mic 1972 wrote: »

Ok, for the 2% to become even lower the assumption to make is for more people to get infected and no one out of the total currently infected are going to die. That's the most unrealistic scenario


For the 20% to become a more accurate stat we would need to analyses a specific sample of people who all got infected at the same time and have now either died or survived, This % may or may not be lower than 20%

Failure of logic here. For the 2% to become lower the recoveries from currently infected would have to simply outnumber the deaths by a higher factor than they have been currently. Not simply none dying from the remaining cases.

Mic 1972 wrote: »

Latest update

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/

Closed Cases (Cases which had an outcome) = 5,386
Deaths = 1,018
Rate = 19%

Active Cases (Currently Infected Patients) = 37,760
Serious or Critical = 7,345
Rate = 19%

Critical/serious cases are people who require to be attached to a machine in order to be able to breath
That 19% looks like it's going to become the death rate after all

Reading the same material for calculations as you, from the WHO, you have to understand the limitations with those calculations for an an ongoing potential pandemic which are seriously flawed. But they are the only ones they can make with the currently limited information.

It' not an exact science so representing them as factual is disingenuous.

Those figures have trended downwards but still don't take into account unconfirmed cases which at this moment in time are hard/impossible to estimate.

Mic 1972 wrote: »

Hospitals around the world are not equipped to treat an increasing number of critical patients. Once capacity limit is reached how are such patients going to be treated?
That's when the 19% becomes a reality. Let's hope this isn't going to happen

You never mentioned any of the caveats I've made above. To the uninformed your 19% number is simply scaremongering.

Mic 1972 wrote: »

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/

Closed cases have a Death rate of 15%
Open cases have a Critical/Serious rate of 19%

Can't believe reports are still throwing around the 2% death rate bull****

Still trying to imply that the death rate is far higher than 2.1%

Mic 1972 wrote: »

Extreme measures are in place because the death rate is way higher than 2%, the data is out there, you just need a calculator


2% death rate means that out of 100 people, 2 people died and 98 people recovered
At the moment however out of 100 people we have 2 deaths, 13 recovered and 85 still sick

Again misrepresenting the numbers which are extremely flawed. Taking the 1 caveat into account from above, there are others, the number could only be lower. Not higher.

I could link more but I think I've made my point.

All it would take to cause problems for us is one asymptomatic case arriving here and passing it on to others. You just have to think that one of those is ill with 'f'lu' arrives into one of our busy regional hospitals for it to spread among all there.

The status of a seventh coronavirus patient in Italy has become critical. An elderly man in the Veneto Region of the North who was confirmed positive today, the second case in the area is his wife.

Deleted User wrote: »

Are any of the places this is getting bad warm? Wuhan, Tokyo, Tehran, and that region in Italy are all under 15c, or were when I checked.

How bad is it in Thailand , its very warm there all year round