Posted on 01/26/2020 3:12:08 AM PST by LibWhacker
HOLY MOTHER OF GOD - the new coronavirus is a 3.8!!! How bad is that reproductive R0 value? It is thermonuclear pandemic level bad - never seen an actual virality coefficient outside of Twitter in my entire career. I’m not exaggerating... #WuhanCoronovirus #CoronavirusOutbreak
2/ “We estimate the basic reproduction number of the infection (R_0) to be 3.8 (95% confidence interval, 3.6-4.0), indicating that 72-75% of transmissions must be prevented by control measures for infections to stop increasing...
3/ ... We estimate that only 5.1% (95%CI, 4.8-5.5) of infections in Wuhan are identified, and by 21 January a total of 11,341 people (prediction interval, 9,217-14,245) had been infected in Wuhan since the start of the year. Should the epidemic continue unabated in Wuhan....
4/ we predict the epidemic in Wuhan will be substantially larger by 4 February (191,529 infections; prediction interval, 132,751-273,649), infection will be established in other Chinese cities, and importations to other countries will be more frequent. Our model suggests that..
5/ travel restrictions from and to Wuhan city are unlikely to be effective in halting transmission across China; with a 99% effective reduction in travel, the size of the epidemic outside of Wuhan may only be reduced by 24.9% on 4 February. Our findings are...
6/ ...critically dependent on the assumptions underpinning our model, and the timing and reporting of confirmed cases, and there is considerable uncertainty associated with the outbreak at this early stage. With these caveats in mind, our work suggests that...
7/ a basic reproductive number for this 2019-nCoV outbreak is higher compared to other emergent coronaviruses, suggesting that containment or control of this pathogen may be substantially more difficult.”!!!! #wuhanvirus #CoronavirusOutbreak #ChinaCoronaVirus ...
8/ ... SUMMARY: so what does this mean for the world??? We are now faced with the most virulent virus 🦠 epidemic the world has ever seen. An R0=3.8 means that it exceeds SARS’s modest 0.49 viral attack rate by 7.75x — almost 8 fold! A virus that spreads 8 faster than SARS...
9/ ...cannot be stopped by containment alone. A 99% quarantine lockdown containment of Wuhan will not even reduce the epidemic’s spread by even 1/3rd in the next 2 weeks. Thus, I really hate to be the epidemiologist who has to admit this, but we are potentially faced with...
10\ ... possibly an unchecked pandemic that the world has not seen since the 1918 Spanish Influenza. Let’s hope it doesn’t reach that level but we now live in the modern world 🌎 with faster ✈️+ 🚞 than 1918. @WHO and @CDCgov needs to declare public health emergency ASAP!
11/ REFERENCE for the R0 attack rate (reproductive coefficient) of 3.8 and the 99% containment models come from this paper: medrxiv.org/content/10.110…
12/ What is the typical R0 attack rate for the seasonal flu in most years? It’s around an R0=1.28. The 2009 flu pandemic? R0=1.48. The 1918 Spanish Flu? 1.80. This new #WuhanCoronavirus reproductive value again? R0=3.8. (Flu reference: Estimates of the reproduction number for seasonal, pandemic, and zoonotic influenza: a systematic review of the literature The potential impact of an influenza pandemic can be assessed by calculating a set of transmissibility parameters, the most important being the reproduction number (R), which is defined as the averag… https://bmcinfectdis.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1471-2334-14-480 )
13/ ...and it gets even worse, the Lancet now reports that the coronavirus is contagious even when *no symptoms*: specifically: “crucial to isolate patients... quarantine contacts as early as possible because asymptomatic infection appears possible”! Doctors warn China coronavirus carriers may show no symptoms of illness CAT scan revealed signs of pneumonia on 10-year-old Shenzhen boy’s lungs even though he had no outward signs of infection. https://www.scmp.com/news/china/society/article/3047636/doctors-warn-china-coronavirus-carriers-may-show-no-symptoms
14/ Let’s pretend the 3.8 estimate is too high (there’s unpublished estimates of 2.5). even if this virus’s R0=2.5, that’s still 2x higher than seasonal flu’s 1.28 (ref above), and higher than 1918 Spanish Flu pandemic of 1.80 that killed millions. So 2.8 is still super bad folks
*
In Asian cultures being able to afford a disposable face mask is a status symbol.
I am hearing the masks are useless.
Photoshop a surgical mask onto him.
Historic range of numbers is large but many deaths were never officially recorded and other numbers fudged - today, the numbers could be more accurate, but again it depends on what each country will admit to - China will never reveal their actual numbers, but rather a number that fits their politics.
Just keep in mind, this virus, 2019-ncov, has a larger R0 number that either the Swine or the Spanish flu; therefore, the infection number and the death number can, putatively, be commensurately larger ...
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.01.23.20018549v1
https://twitter.com/JonRead15/status/1220749549318430721
The studies I’ve seen put an R-0 at 1.4-3.8 with 2.5 at 95% confidence, (one had an R-0 of 2.5 with 2.4-2.6) and one study at 2.6. It does appear that the True R-0 will be in the 2.4-2.6 range.
Infection can be asymptomatic with the potential for asymptomatic transfer. It can take 14 days for an infection to show symptoms (if any, i.e. asymptomatic) and during this time it is contagious.
We are currently looking at 25% of cases being serious with 10% requiring incubation in an ICU.
Transmission appears to be air based with fomite transmission.
One of the first cases (and a cured case) involved a doctor who admits they were wearing an n95 facial mask. The doctors first symptom was Conjunctivitis followed by typical symptoms, suggesting that eye-protection may be necessary to avoid infection (or worse that n95 masks are not sufficient enough).
*
Where the cure caused more damage than the disease. Naturally, the military made the shot mandatory. I had to get it in Afghanistan.
How are you calculating your denominator?
Yup. Doing a good job of panicking. We are about to get real data on spread and mortality here instead of garbage numbers out of China. The. we will see what we really are dealing with.
Another attempt at population control.
And what do you think the numbers are for the run of the mill flu? there are millions of cases and thousands of swaths worldwide every year.
Just to lighten the mood...
I keep having dreams of a nice black lady telling me to come visit her in Hemingford Home, Nebraska. Me and all my friends are welcome...strange.
"Our findings are critically dependent on the assumptions underpinning our model, and the timing and reporting of confirmed cases, and there is considerable uncertainty associated with the outbreak at this early stage."
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.01.23.20018549v1
% of diagnosed cases.
So, yes, 10% of cases require ICU.
As testing is becoming more widespread and thorough and we see more asymptomatic cases. Those two may go down.
At what point does Sa*an get into diminishing returns? IOW what's really the difference in 2.5 and 3.8 except... except a probably brief interval of time?
When calculated from mathematical models, particularly ordinary differential equations, what is often claimed to be R0 is, in fact, simply a threshold, not the average number of secondary infections. There are many methods used to derive such a threshold from a mathematical model, but few of them always give the true value of R0. This is particularly problematic if there are intermediate vectors between hosts, such as malaria.
What these thresholds will do is determine whether a disease will die out (if R0 < 1) or whether it may become epidemic (if R0 > 1), but they generally can not compare different diseases. Therefore, the values from the table above should be used with caution, especially if the values were calculated from mathematical models.
Methods include the survival function, rearranging the largest eigenvalue of the Jacobian matrix, the next-generation method, calculations from the intrinsic growth rate, existence of the endemic equilibrium, the number of susceptibles at the endemic equilibrium, the average age of infection and the final size equation. Few of these methods agree with one another, even when starting with the same system of differential equations. Even fewer actually calculate the average number of secondary infections. Since R0 is rarely observed in the field and is usually calculated via a mathematical model, this severely limits its usefulness.
And I feel fine...
the R0 number for the “run of the mill flu” = 1.25,
Swine flu R0 number = 1.5
Spanish flu R0 number = 1.8
2019ncov R0 number = 3.8
R0 tells you the average number of people who will catch a disease from one contagious person. It specifically applies to a population of people who were previously free of infection and haven’t been vaccinated. If a disease has an R0 of 18, a person who has the disease will transmit it to an average of 18 other people, as long as no one has been vaccinated against it or is already immune to it in their community.
If R0 is less than 1, each existing infection causes less than one new infection. In this case, the disease will decline and eventually die out.
If R0 equals 1, each existing infection causes one new infection. The disease will stay alive and stable, but there won’t be an outbreak or an epidemic.
If R0 is more than 1, each existing infection causes more than one new infection. The disease will spread between people, and there may be an outbreak or epidemic.
Importantly, a disease’s R0 value only applies when everyone in a population is completely vulnerable to the disease. This means:
no one has been vaccinated
no one has had the disease before
there’s no way to control the spread of the disease
2019ncov meets all three of these last criteria
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.