Beijing's SARS Attack

Time ^ | , April 8, 2003 | SUSAN JAKES

[CathyRyan]

A physician at Beijing's Chinese People's Liberation Army General Hospital (No. 301) in a signed statement provided to TIME, says that at one Beijing hospital alone, 60 SARS patients have been admitted of whom seven have died. That indicates the number of patients infected with SARS in Beijing may be significantly higher than those totals made public by China's Ministry of Health. Last Thursday Chinese Minister of Health Zhang Wenkang announced to the press that China's capital had seen just 12 cases of SARS of whom three had died. Today's edition of the official China Daily put the number of SARS infections in Beijing at 19 with four dead.

[VeganFreeper]

Big Bump

[CathyRyan]

OCM Backs IBF's Plan To Postpone World Championship

KUALA LUMPUR, April 8 (Bernama) -- Olympic Council of Malaysia (OCM) is in favour of the International Badminton Federation's (IBF) consideration to postpone the World Championship in Birmingham due to the outbreak of the Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS).

[theFIRMbss]

>That indicates the number of patients infected with SARS in Beijing may be significantly higher than those totals made public by China's Ministry of Health

And do you believe
our officials are telling
all of us the truth?

Officially, here,
there have been zero SARS deaths.
Even months ago,

however, people
were contracting -- and dying
from -- a flu-like bug.

I'm sure the Chinese
are down-playing things. I fear
it's bad here, as well.

[CathyRyan]

It does make you wonder what is really going on.

[tallhappy]

Two months ago, when SARS didn't exist but "atypical pneumonia" was causing panic in China I posted this comment where 280 people had died in China.

The misinfo spewed by the communists is great.

Still, SARS is over hyped and nothing for people to worry about unnecessarily.

[aristeides]

60 SARS patients have been admitted of whom seven have died.

Sounds like a higher death rate than 3%.

[EternalHope]

Great article. The entire article is worth reading.

The doctor they cite as the source is risking his life to speak up. Still, I suppose some will discount his information, or claim Time made the story up.

If the story is true, then SARS is way out of the box in Beijing. That means it is likely to be out of the box in the rest of China as well.

It also explains why the U.S. pulled all but essential diplomatic personnel out of China.

[CathyRyan]

Dying is not the worst thing that can happen. HK's medical resources are not tanking from all the dying but from the people who are still sick. HK as of yesterday have 127 recovered, 23 dead, and 733 still in hospital. The number of dead and recovered equals about the number of cases they had 3.19. HK can only handle about 767 more cases. This bug likes to kill medical people that means more time and money has to going toward protecting medical staff. Lack of resources may in the end kill more people that the bug does.

[Petronski]

All these people who pooh-pooh this by saying it's only 3% are really starting to make me angry.

It may be that this ends up being nothing, and it may be that it is big but fizzles out, but we have to remember something important: the early presenters get the most comprehensive treatment. The 10,000th patient to present is not going to get the same care as the 10th or the 100th. There just aren't enough ventilators.

So, while increased understanding of the causes may improve care, if we don't have a handle on this by the time the ventilators are all occupied, the death toll is going to end up being much higher than 3% or 11% (as in 7 out of 60).

There's no need to panic, but I think a vigilant devotion to the development of this story is warranted.

[discostu]

The official word I've heard is 100 dead worldwide. We must be listening to different officials.

[per loin]

Hospitalized Hong Kong SARS cases

Time			Cases				Increase			Dispositon of Cases							Dead as % of cases at prior times
Day	Date		New	Week	Total		Day	Week		Hospital	%	Recover	%	Dead	%		Day ago	3 Day	5 Day	Week	2 Week
Wed	03/19				150
Thu	03/20		23		173		15.3%
Fri	03/21		30		203		17.3%
Sat	03/22		19		222		9.4%
Sun	03/23		25		247		11.3%
Mon	03/24		13		260		5.3%
Tue	03/25		26		286		10.0%
Wed	03/26		30	166	316		10.5%	110.7%
Thu	03/27		51	194	367		16.1%	112.1%
Fri	03/28		58	222	425		15.8%	109.4%
Sat	03/29		45	248	470		10.6%	111.7%						10	2.1%		2.4%	3.2%	3.8%	4.5%
Sun	03/30		60	283	530		12.8%	114.6%						13	2.5%		2.8%	3.5%	4.5%	5.3%
Mon	03/31		80	350	610		15.1%	134.6%						15	2.5%		2.8%	3.5%	4.7%	5.8%
Tue	04/1		75	399	685		12.3%	139.5%						16	2.3%		2.6%	3.4%	4.4%	5.6%
Wed	04/2		23	392	708		3.4%	124.1%		603	85.2%	89	12.6%	16	2.3%		2.3%	3.0%	3.8%	5.1%	10.7%
Thu	04/3		26	367	734		3.7%	100.0%		619	84.3%	98	13.4%	17	2.3%		2.4%	2.8%	3.6%	4.6%	9.8%
Fri	04/4		27	336	761		3.7%	79.1%		645	84.8%	99	13.0%	17	2.2%		2.3%	2.5%	3.2%	4.0%	8.4%
Sat	04/5		39	330	800		5.1%	70.2%		673	84.1%	107	13.4%	20	2.5%		2.6%	2.8%	3.3%	4.3%	9.0%
Sun	04/6		42	312	842		5.3%	58.9%		704	83.6%	116	13.8%	22	2.6%		2.8%	3.0%	3.2%	4.2%	8.9%
Mon	04/7		41	273	883		4.9%	44.8%		733	83.0%	127	14.4%	23	2.6%		2.7%	3.0%	3.2%	3.8%	8.8%
Tue	04/8		45	243	928		5.1%	35.5%		765	82.4%	138	14.9%	25	2.7%		2.8%	3.1%	3.4%	3.6%	8.7%
Averages			39	294			9.6%	96.1%			83.9%		13.6%		2.4%		2.6%	3.1%	3.7%	4.6%	9.2%

[EternalHope]

All these people who pooh-pooh this by saying (the death rate's) only 3% are really starting to make me angry.

The 3% was a number used early in the course of the outbreak. It came from mathematical geniuses who simply divided the number of deaths by the number of cases.

People (and reporters) seemed oblivious to the fact that the vast majority of vicitms had just gotten the disease and were still in the hospital. Many of the victims were in intensive care, and some were certain to die.

In spite of the obvious idiocy of this approach, the 3% stuck. News reports now tend to cite 4%, but the underlying mathematical approach is still the same.

It is too soon to know the death rate, but it's not 3% and it's not 4% either.

As you and CathyRyan have pointed out, the death rate once the hospitals are overwhelmed will be a lot different than it is now, too.

China has mishandled the outbreak horribly, and we have no reliable information on the situation there. Hence, Hong Kong is the best place to look for statistics.

Hong Kong is making heroic efforts to put this thing back in its box. If it is under control in Hong Kong two months from now, then I think the rest of the world (except China) will have a good shot at keeping the lid on this thing. Otherwise, we will get a look at what SARS can really do.

Asia seems so far away to most Americans that what happens there is not considered relevant to most Americans. However, I guarantee it will not seem far away if SARS gets established in the slums of Mexico City.

[SauronOfMordor]

"60 SARS patients have been admitted of whom seven have died. " Sounds like a higher death rate than 3%.

Of the 60 who were sick enough to need hospitalization, 7 have died. We do not know how many people were exposed-but-immune and how many got mildly sick and never saw a doc about it (and thus were never reported).

[aristeides]

I see that the number of new cases has been creeping up again since it hit a low point late last week.

[per loin]

Yesterday's South China Morning Post said that many patients in Beijing are being hidden in army hospitals. It said that 15 had died there.

[EternalHope]

We do not know how many people were exposed-but-immune and how many got mildly sick and never saw a doc about it (and thus were never reported).

This is the best argument in favor of a lower mortality rate. We do not know enough to answer this question at this time, but the experience at Prince of Wales Hospital may be a clue.

A good portion of the staff got SARS. However, there were NO reports of mild illness in the rest of the staff. It seems unlikely that the disease would not have made at least some people mildly sick, but the lack of reported mild illnesses would seem to indicate that people in this category were not prevalent.

In a related item, the U.S. CDC reports a case of a person with a mild case of SARS, not thought serious enough for hospitalization, who nevertheless infected others. These others were made seriously ill.

The CDC cited this as evidence in two key areas. One is that the disease did not seem to be burning itself out, since mild cases would not cause severe illness if the mildness of the carrier's case was due to weakening of the virus. The second point made by the CDC was that the case provided evidence supporting quarantine of those suspected of being possible carriers.

[per loin]

Yes. If the HK authorities have this under control, that upcreep should slow soon.

[aristeides]

Evidence Mounts SARS Linked to New Virus Strain .

[EternalHope]

The following article expands a little on the Time article that started this thread:

Beijing Doctors: Government Hiding SARS Figures
VOA News
08 Apr 2003, 16:13 UTC


Doctors at hospitals in China's capital, Beijing, say the government is hiding the extent to which the deadly respiratory virus called Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome, or SARS, has infected the city.

An independent survey by Reuters news agency shows epidemic wards at Beijing hospitals are full of patients thought to have the virus. Reuters quotes several doctors who say the number of people killed or sickened by the disease is much higher than the government has revealed. They also say they have been forbidden to disclose the actual number of infections.

Time magazine quotes one Beijing doctor who says he and his colleagues are angry that the government is playing down the extent of infection in the capital.

To date, China's government has acknowledged only four deaths and 19 infections in Beijing. But the local doctor told Time that in one Beijing hospital alone there are 60 patients with the virus, and that seven have died.

A Foreign Ministry spokesman Tuesday defended his government's response to the disease. He said all relevant Chinese agencies are cooperating to inform the public.

In the five months since the SARS virus first appeared in China's southern Guangdong province, it has spread to five continents and killed more than 100 people. More than half the deaths have been on the Chinese mainland, and most of the rest have been in Hong Kong.

The World Health Organization on Monday criticized China for not requesting help sooner in dealing with the disease. A WHO team that has been in Guangdong for the past few days left the region Tuesday, saying it has reached no conclusions on what may have caused the virus.


Some information for this report provided by AP, AFP and Reuters.