The lack of data on actual number of CV infections

[Blue3]

The figures are all over the place.. This is the one I use, it is in German, but is pretty self explanatory.
What is weird is that over here we have a much lower mortality rate than most places including the UK
Country Cases Recovered Dead
Deutschland 14.292 113 43
Uk 2.644 67 104

https://interaktiv.morgenpost.de/corona-virus-karte-infektionen-deutschland-weltweit/

Just makes you wonder how many people have had it and dont know it

I think it might have more to do with the numbers of beds doctors nurses and medical equipment available

 

[beorhthelm]

working with healthcare data i can tell you it is generally not good, inconsistent sources and variable statistical methods. the Diamond Princess provides a really good data set, a verifiable sample with very high confidence, and therefore a good indication of the seriousness. other hand some countries dont know accurately how many incidence they have within a week. the NHS being single bureaucratic organsation does well here, but we're let down by the lack of testing (not enough licenced labs to process tests if we had them). it will be fanscinating to see the post-analysis when they can measure antibodies in the population and see what the real prevalence was.

 

[Saunders]

If it turns out the that the dangers of this virus is heavily overestimated it comes with a set of new "problems":
- Antivaxxers will probably increase. A lot.
- Confidence in governments and science and basically the whole establishment will get a fundamental blow.
- This wolf cry would ensure that a possible future pandemic would be VERY DIFFICULT to deal with through "advice" etc

Yet I very much prefer that kind of chaos to the chaos of a very deadly pandemic.

Measles spreads at least 10x quicker than CV...think on that for a second. Its not a wolf cry.

 

[Saunders]

If it in the end turns out to be not much worse than the flu I will just hold my hands up and say "you were right and I was wrong and I'm ****ing euphoric about it."

There will be plenty of documented footage anyway. Not something I will want to watch, the chinese nurse documentary was too much for me. Fill your boots though.

 

[zefarelly]

Data seems to vary wildly. I think we're slow with our response, unsurprisingly, and way behind with testing quantity
I also think there are a lot of people unnecessarily self isolating. They'll largely strut out in two weeks possibly as things ramp up for,the worse . . . . Who knows.

 

[Hugo Rune]

The government are hoping to keep deaths down to 20,000. Are you saying that's certainly an over estimate, and it'll be a lot less?

I’ve noticed that the PM’s rhetoric has shifted to ‘our actions are going to save thousands of lives’. With the 100,000 deaths he announced as a worse case scenario, I guess the government will be taking credit for anything under that number?

I thought China’s death total was extraordinary but several European countries (including ours) sadly look like they’ll be exceeding this.

 

[Soylent Blue]

An interesting piece on the lack of data on known infections.

[MENTION=616]Guinness Boy[/MENTION] will take some interest in particular as it talks about the data from the Diamond Princess cruise ship. An excerpt:

The one situation where an entire, closed population was tested was the Diamond Princess cruise ship and its quarantine passengers. The case fatality rate there was 1.0%, but this was a largely elderly population, in which the death rate from Covid-19 is much higher.

Projecting the Diamond Princess mortality rate onto the age structure of the U.S. population, the death rate among people infected with Covid-19 would be 0.125%. But since this estimate is based on extremely thin data — there were just seven deaths among the 700 infected passengers and crew — the real death rate could stretch from five times lower (0.025%) to five times higher (0.625%). It is also possible that some of the passengers who were infected might die later, and that tourists may have different frequencies of chronic diseases — a risk factor for worse outcomes with SARS-CoV-2 infection — than the general population. Adding these extra sources of uncertainty, reasonable estimates for the case fatality ratio in the general U.S. population vary from 0.05% to 1%.​

Link: A fiasco in the making? As the coronavirus pandemic takes hold, we are making decisions without reliable data

Note: I'm not advocating any kind of "ahhhh, it IS all a fuss over nothing" sentiment as there is clearly the propensity for health services to be overwhelmed very quickly with those who do require hospital care, but it does provide a possible positive outlook with regard to the scale of "they had it, but didn't even know" group.

First problem with the data is that Cruise passangers tend to be fitter, healthier middle class types and not fat smoking, diabetic Americans. they also have 178 active cases of which 14 are critical. Even if no more die it can not be taken as a cross section of a population. It is more a measure of how good the outcome can be rather than how bad.

 

[Soylent Blue]

Measles spreads at least 10x quicker than CV...think on that for a second. Its not a wolf cry.

The rate of spread of measles is estimated to be between r0 12 and r0 18
The r0 of CV is estimated between r03.7 and 6.7 between 2 and 6 times greater, it is very infectious.

 

[The Wookiee]

I thought China’s death total was extraordinary but several European countries (including ours) sadly look like they’ll be exceeding this.

Italian death toll has now exceeded China’s

 

[Triggaaar]

I’ve noticed that the PM’s rhetoric has shifted to ‘our actions are going to save thousands of lives’. With the 100,000 deaths he announced as a worse case scenario, I guess the government will be taking credit for anything under that number?

If the people follow the advice from government, and we don't lose many lives, then the credit will belong to everyone who has adjusted their lives for the good of the many. That should be all of us.

Worst case is a lot worse than 100,000.

I thought China’s death total was extraordinary but several European countries (including ours) sadly look like they’ll be exceeding this.

If China's death total stops as it is now, it will indeed be extraordinary. The worry is that the virus will spread again as they try and get the country going. But if they're successful, surely the rest of the world has to learn from them.

 

[colinz]

The epicentre for statistical analysis about the Corona Virus is the Johns Hopkins University research centre. In Baltimore
https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/map.html

They have their international research centres in China (Nanjing) & Italy (Bologna).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johns_Hopkins_University

 

[Napper]

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...-died-from-virus-had-other-illness-italy-says

Little bit of more perspective around Italy death rate currently sitting at 0.8 for healthy people . Note also the cases that are analysed are again diagnosed and real number more like 100k

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...-died-from-virus-had-other-illness-italy-says

 

[Stephen Seagull]

Where did you get that article [MENTION=6886]Bozza[/MENTION]

I posted it on Linkedin yesterday morning and took it from a group called Revenue Collective - just curious as it’s an article I appreciated.

Would you rather have shit data, no data or pure conjecture?

 

[beorhthelm]

...Would you rather have shit data, no data or pure conjecture?

as long as its recognised as conjecture, is preferable. risk with shit data is it being accepted as good too easily without verification, leading to bad decisions.

 

[hans kraay fan club]

First problem with the data is that Cruise passangers tend to be fitter, healthier middle class types and not fat smoking, diabetic Americans.

Wait? What?

What the actual ****? Have you ever been on a cruise? Seen cruise ship passengers disembark? Seen a documentary about a cruise on the TV?

Amazing levels of wrong.

 

[Audax]

working with healthcare data i can tell you it is generally not good, inconsistent sources and variable statistical methods. the Diamond Princess provides a really good data set, a verifiable sample with very high confidence, and therefore a good indication of the seriousness. other hand some countries dont know accurately how many incidence they have within a week. the NHS being single bureaucratic organsation does well here, but we're let down by the lack of testing (not enough licenced labs to process tests if we had them). it will be fanscinating to see the post-analysis when they can measure antibodies in the population and see what the real prevalence was.

Only problem here is that the NHS actually *is not* a single bureaucratic organisation. The reality is that it is broken up into a lot of local area trusts, and the exchange of data between trusts is not as seamless as you would hope or expect.

I've been exposed to exactly how big a problem it is - several years ago, my father in law probably died earlier than he otherwise would have due to failings in his care arising directly from difficulties in passing his patient data between trusts when he was transferred from Trust A, to Trust B, to Trust C all in a single day. Ultimately Trust C ballsed up his care because they didn't have access to his full patient records.

 

[Commander]

Wait? What?

What the actual ****? Have you ever been on a cruise? Seen cruise ship passengers disembark? Seen a documentary about a cruise on the TV?

Amazing levels of wrong.

Exactly what I thought. Bizarre claim.

 

[stingray]

err...no

 

[Giraffe]

An interesting piece on the lack of data on known infections.

[MENTION=616]Guinness Boy[/MENTION] will take some interest in particular as it talks about the data from the Diamond Princess cruise ship. An excerpt:

The one situation where an entire, closed population was tested was the Diamond Princess cruise ship and its quarantine passengers. The case fatality rate there was 1.0%, but this was a largely elderly population, in which the death rate from Covid-19 is much higher.

Projecting the Diamond Princess mortality rate onto the age structure of the U.S. population, the death rate among people infected with Covid-19 would be 0.125%. But since this estimate is based on extremely thin data — there were just seven deaths among the 700 infected passengers and crew — the real death rate could stretch from five times lower (0.025%) to five times higher (0.625%). It is also possible that some of the passengers who were infected might die later, and that tourists may have different frequencies of chronic diseases — a risk factor for worse outcomes with SARS-CoV-2 infection — than the general population. Adding these extra sources of uncertainty, reasonable estimates for the case fatality ratio in the general U.S. population vary from 0.05% to 1%.​

Link: A fiasco in the making? As the coronavirus pandemic takes hold, we are making decisions without reliable data

Note: I'm not advocating any kind of "ahhhh, it IS all a fuss over nothing" sentiment as there is clearly the propensity for health services to be overwhelmed very quickly with those who do require hospital care, but it does provide a possible positive outlook with regard to the scale of "they had it, but didn't even know" group.

Agreed, been saying this for weeks. I would be amazed if the death rate is as high as even 1% in reality. However people compare this to the flu at 0.2% and that is inaccurate as well as a lot of flu cases are clearly not reported either.

 

[Shropshire Seagull]

This seems reliable from Public Health England