Coronavirus Part III - 9 cases across the Island - 503 errors abound!! *read OP*

cnocbui wrote: »

They had to perform a lung transplant on a patient in China. Must be a nightmare case to manage given the immuno-suppressants required.

I'm afraid. I'm afraid for Australia because of their recent difficulties with fires.

fritzelly wrote: »

Why do you keep posting this guys tweets when all the info he is using is nothing to do with this strain of virus

Are you Eric?

I'll bite but then I have to go to bed :eek:

You are right it is a different virus but it is very very similar and we can learn from something that is very similar.

"SARS-CoV-2 shares a highly similar gene sequence and behavior pattern with SARS-CoV "

https://www.mdpi.com/1999-4915/12/2/244/pdf

Here's a table of comparison from someone who actually understands this ****. Feel free to play spot the difference. You might be there a while though.

No I'm not Eric. Good night

wakka12 wrote: »

Nobody seems to know if it is 0.1% or 3.4%. Doesnt really seem to be any clearer on it 2 months on

From WHO press conference 2nd. March Mike Ryan who is Irish Responding to questions.

https://www.who.int/docs/default-source/coronaviruse/transcripts/who-audio-emergencies-coronavirus-press-conference-final-02mar2020.pdf?sfvrsn=cf76053d_2

"we do know that 80% of those that are infected will have mild disease and recover. We do know that there’s approximately 15% that will have severe and another 4% or 5% that will be critical, which will require oxygen support."

"The DG will speak to the issue of what you mentioned regarding this outbreak or this epidemic being like flu or not like flu or whatever. It’s a difficult position for any individual or organisation or anyone to be in because if you say, we have a disease for which we don’t know the full transmission dynamics, which on the face of it has a case fatality of 2% or possibly more in certain circumstances, we’re up to... in some cases, 10% of people with underlying conditions can die who present clinically. Then, if someone is trying to tell me, we shouldn’t be trying to stop that, we should just accept that as normal business, then I don’t know why I’m doing this job, frankly.
"

MR I believe everyone is still very much committed to containment. I would hate to think that countries in Europe who currently have no cases are now moving to mitigation. They will find that quite difficult to explain to their citizens right now. So I do believe that when we speak at a regional level, it’s very important that we’re not saying that containment has no place in this. We can see the statement and see what it says. There is a point in any epidemic where you believe you can no longer contain the virus like if it was influenza and you have to shift your resources to saving lives, but in doing that, you’re accepting that you can no longer affect the course of the disease. You can no longer change the shape of the epidemic and you’re purely moving in that sense to save as many lives as you can.
Now, WHO does not believe that we’re there yet based on what the director-general has presented to you today. We can have that argument. We can sit around the coffee tables all week long and for the next month and we can talk about who’s right and we can talk about who’s wrong or we can get on with it. That’s the question. History will tell who was right or who was wrong. The real question is, we can’t miss this opportunity to save lives and we can’t miss this opportunity to protect our health systems. So let’s just get on with it."

BloodBath wrote: »

Yes I am. Have a look at the links. 1 is speculation about transmission from fecal matter from an unproven study with 4 people tested and more speculation from a SARS case. Far from confirmed.

The other about the virus living for over a week also from sars/mers studies and no mention that it was a massive concentration/viral load of it.

All used to generate sensational clickbait headlines. At least he used a caveat in 1 of them.

Sorry yeah SARS is totally different best wait til everyone dies so we can truly know instead of going with science/research likely scenarios based on evidence.

Sorry if stupid question. Is it really that different to SARS bearing mind both are coronavirus / share 80% of their genome. Likely originated in bats (not cross over). Cause respiratory disease. Happy to slearn something new but I'd say prudent to consider and worth erring on side of caution given the transmission dynamics we are seeing.

fritzelly wrote: »

Do you actually understand what you keep posting or just look for soundbites in what's posted online?

It's a transcript and I'm helping out those who don't like to click links. You know you can open a new tab, then close once finished?