Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'The Mainboard' started by TrustyPatches, Mar 15, 2020.
Can I bother you for any thoughts you have here? That mortality rate looks really bad...
I can't go into too many details (mainly because I'm way out of swim lane here), but the Army is making some major head way in collaboration with UT-Austin for discovering neutralizing antibodies to COVID19. This would ultimately help lead to developing a treatment. Army Research Labs is coordinating efforts with industry, academic, and other Army partners to integrate and accelerate the response.
I think ultimate deaths will be life altering but a little lower than some of you in this thread. Take a look at this Nobel laureates approach. You can definitely poke some holes in it but it also raises some good points.
He’s completely made the wrong conclusions about the data on this graph.
If they have only been testing people showing symptoms who had close contact with a known case this mortality rate is consistent with data elsewhere. Of the total pool of infected persons, the mortality rate is probably closer to 1%.
Gwnrmany has tested everyone pretty much everyone. Their death rate is like .05%
That's a 20% positivity rate for tests. The rest of the country is averaging 10% so they are WAY WAY WAY under testing in Georgia. Cutting the hospitalization and CFR rate in half roughly put them still above, but roughly close to the country average for this.
Germany is very interesting at this point. Their data stands out in its difference with data from other countries. I’m hoping their numbers are close to the truth when the retrospective studies dig into the pandemic. It wouldn’t surprise me at all.
.5% who get it or .05% of the population?
Theres something wrong with those numbers or they are doing something extremely right, would the mortality rate be significantly lower if we tested everyone? Absolutely, but thats not what Germans done so theres something weird going on or they have done a fantastic job.
Yes, good stuff. Vir Biotechnology in collaboration with Regeneron also today announced some news on neutralizing antibodies that should be in clinical trials in a couple of months.
I think he's make some poor assumptions. The context around some of those numbers - what China did to mitigate spread, what Diamond Princess did to mitigate spread, we aren't doing here in many places of the country yet, and where we have it may be too late. It's also easy to handle a 20% surge of cases on a confined cruise ship early on in the pandemic where ventilators and care of the highest quality was provided. It's totally different if you surge the hospitals and run out of beds and ventilators. We will see.
Your decimal place needs to move over 1 spot. Read about what they did and why they could do it. Not happening here.
A poster earlier on this page said Germany has tested almost every one. Frankly, I do not know what they have done.
I get just under 30%. what are you calculating?
They have a very large network of diagnostic labs
From what I've read they are doing 150k tests a week with a pop of 82 million so they haven't tested everyone (But probably started out better than us). I haven't followed their situation closely as well so I'll differ to someone with better knowledge on their tactics but I would guess they were on it early with testing and tracking.
Just the percent + for today 3/25
0.5% I typed too fast originally
41,266 confirmed cases, 216 reported deaths
What methods did they use? Their mortality rate suggests they avoided overwhelming hospitals which makes me assume they got after it early with track and trace.
(Edit: looking at their deaths chart it seems to be taking off now though huge increase today)
bingo. but yes, they flattened the curve. should help them long term.
They are also.pnly reporting 23 "severe" cases
No idea what the definition is for that, but we show almost 1,200, France has 2,500, Italy has 3,500 and Spain has 3,200
also side note pperc15 do you have that sequencing guys twitter? I recall seeing a tweet about someones guess for how long a vaccine might be useful for. Whoever it was commented he figured we had a couple years before it would be ineffective.
I see. I worry all over we will see percent + go up because we are starting to not test the really sick people assuming that they are Covid +. I fear that means they won't make it into the statistics or won't until they die and death is attributed to Covid.
Also, i fear HHS is starting to tells states to test less which will make the numbers look better but the ground situation will be worse.
Yes, Trevor Bedford.
Here in Utah we're at a 5% positive rate. Ideally what should the number get down to to start saying "we have a better grasp on this thing locally"
The State is pushing a test test test mindset, and the labs are not up to being able to process 3,500 test a day.
You have ARUP there in Utah. Huge advantage for the state.
I think getting down to 0.1-1% positivity (on patients showing symptoms) + serological testing would be a breaking point but that's just a guess.
If we are still under testing and seeing large positive percentages from the overall tests, that has to mean the fatality rate of this virus is lower than we have previously thought correct?
Obviously the higher transmission and infection rates mean its much more deadly, but it means from a percentage who get it will die perspective, that has to be less. Am I missing something?
The lethality of the virus in a single case scenario isn’t really the problem (and has never been). The problem is the numbers of infected and what that does to the healthcare system. The virus becomes deadlier (as does every single other disease) when you can’t be appropriately treated for it because the healthcare system is swamped.
It means it's probably lower than what we've seen in the U.S. so far which is 1.4% or so. We still have many cases that are in the ICU and we haven't yet overloaded hospital capacity or ventilator capacity. We are still EARLY in terms of spread and case progression in the U.S. In South Korea it's around 0.6% because they flattened the curve. In Italy is 8-9%. Not testing doesn't change what we previously thought which is fatality in the 5x - 15x greater than influenza range which is being held up by data.
I don't think you are missing something, but you tell me.
I just got off the phone with my oral surgeon and he said one of the scariest things he’s seeing is a lot of the non geriatric deaths are cardiac. Said there’s a group where fever/symptoms start subsiding but then the virus is causing a weird form of afib that’s leading to cardiac failure. Are you hearing/seeing that in any of the literature RonBurgundy?
I guess does the hospital capacity being overloaded effect the fatality rate from a reporting statistic? Is it reported as two numbers? As we are seeing there is the 0.6 in SK and the 8-9% in Italy. How do they report on the fatality rate of a disease like this? The variance of 0.6 - 9% is such a wide variance, I would think there would have to be some sort of factor used to explain the differences for each population.
The testing numbers are too easily skewed, especially from a state to state perspective where testing standards have been all over the board. Some states are aggressive and some are doing a poor job. However the death rate is a much easier number to report on and in those cases we should see a much smaller margin of error in looking at the reporting. If we can figure out the true fatality rate of this disease, we can back in to the total infection numbers that way, which would give us a much better idea of how many people are infected in the US.
It’s like ranking the world’s deadliest snakes. You can measure the amount of venom dosed with each bite. You can study the mechanism of the venom’s action in human bodies. But if you just look at the numbers of people bitten by that snake and how many of those ultimately die, what you’re mostly measuring isn’t how deadly the snake is - you’re measuring the access to adequate medical care and antivenin.
And it’s the same thing with this virus.
Thank you for explaining. Determining a true death rate is impossible in a vacuum. And it’s dependent on knowing actual infection numbers, etc. only with serological testing many months from now in hindsight will we be able to determine this and even then it’s complicated by many variables.
the assumption that the death rate is easier to report on than the positivity rate is incorrect and flawed logic. They are dependent on each other. The death rates denominator is the number of positive cases.
I shitting your brains out the last few days a symptom? Just peeing out my butthole.
It can be, yes. GI involvement prior to respiratory symptoms has been described.
Can’t tell if it’s that or maybe my body rejecting all the horrible food I ate over last weekend. I’ll also get the shits when I start exercising again after taking off for a bit. Gonna watch it. Mentioned in another thread but had some shortness of breath and chest discomfort but I also have anxiety issues. As far as lungs go I ran 3 miles today with no real issues outside of normal being out of breath from running.
Take your temperature. It’s the easiest way to know. If it’s over 100 it’s not 100% but it’s an indicator that you might have it. If it’s less than 99.5 or so you should be fine.
I had a temp of 99.2 the other day when I gave blood and they considered that normal.
I was thinking that the 100° cutoff doesn't really reflect. Like AVG temp is 98.6 but mine is always like 97.5. I understand that most people don't know there healthy temp but by the time I cross a hundred I'm feeling really bad.
I read somewhere Germany/EU countries were getting a bit creative with Covid reported deaths. Essentially anyone that had a pre-existing condition, they were reporting the pre-existing condition as cause of death, not Covid. Only previously healthy people that died were counted in their death totals ... any truth?
I wouldn’t put it past a lot (most?) of countries to minimize death totals to keep fear down.
But we’re going to have bodies stacked everywhere soon and there will be no way to minimize it.
We’re 28% today, and Director of Health Amy Acton cautioned reliance on the numbers because our testing is so limited.
That is often done in the USA with influenza. They call such deaths “influenza associated” deaths.
Have not seen or heard that
I don’t think he’s wrong - I’m mentally prepping myself not to be able to go back into the office until sometime in May
Yes. Viral myocarditis causing arrhythmia and cardiomyopathy. Killer in ~20-30% of cases. Always in severe cases though, not in mild.