COVID COVID-19 Coronavirus Containment Efforts

Click For Summary
Containment efforts for the COVID-19 Coronavirus are facing significant challenges, with experts suggesting that it may no longer be feasible to prevent its global spread. The virus has a mortality rate of approximately 2-3%, which could lead to a substantial increase in deaths if it becomes as widespread as the flu. Current data indicates around 6,000 cases, with low mortality rates in areas with good healthcare. Vaccine development is underway, but it is unlikely to be ready in time for the current outbreak, highlighting the urgency of the situation. As the outbreak evolves, the healthcare system may face considerable strain, underscoring the need for continued monitoring and response efforts.
  • #751
At the time Italy had found 900 cases they had 20 deaths. Germany has found 1200 cases, but only two deaths (both from today). I don't think Germans live that much healthier. Okay, Italy had a couple of older patients early on, but it's still a big difference. Most likely it's a better test coverage.
chirhone said:
What happens if you want to transfer from one house to another 10 blocks away?
Then you do that. It's a travel restriction (and a ban of events with large crowds), not a restriction on any movement.
Here is BBC's article
 
  • Like
Likes bhobba
Biology news on Phys.org
  • #752
chemisttree said:
I don’t know how to interpret the phylogeny map perhaps but it seems to me that the virus is most closely related to bat and civet strains rather than the pangolin. The pangolin strain is off on its own branch?

How does a pangolin catch something from a bat?
IMG_20190910_091214.jpg

This is a wet market in thailand. The venders do very little cleaning . So a pathogen can easily transfer anywhere in this environment. For example note that blue plastic mesh used to weigh the seafood. Most of the mesh is black from never being cleaned.
 
Last edited:
  • #753
mfb said:
Germany has found 1200 cases, but only two deaths (both from today). I don't think Germans live that much healthier.

Were their ages and health conditions announced? I remember an article about one of the early German cases, a quite young guy who needed to be put on a lung machine, but it didn't mention whether he had other health problems, nor whether he survived: https://www.spiegel.de/internationa...at-all-a-d91de996-0705-437d-8706-5682e8c0cbee (citing the article mainly for its description, it says Germany is not well prepared, but that doesn't seem obviously true to an outsider like me)

Edit: New York Times reports "No deaths of people with the virus were reported in Germany before the first two announced Monday: an 89-year-old in the western city of Essen and a 78-year-old man in Heinsberg county near the Dutch border. Both locations are in North Rhine-Westphalia state, which accounts for 484 of the 1,112 infections confirmed in Germany to date. ...
The 79-year-old man who died in Heinsberg, where a large cluster of cases has been linked to traditionally raucous German carnival celebrations last month, had numerous underlying health problems including diabetes and heart trouble, said Stephan Pusch, who heads the county administration. "
https://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2020/03/09/world/europe/ap-eu-virus-outbreak-germany.html
 
Last edited:
  • #754
Time to lighten up. Bangkok style
doc25087320200310091424_001.jpg
 
  • #755
We were being comforted by local TV that there is nothing to fear. Most would only suffer slight runny nose and cough like common colds. Only the elderly and those with weak immune system can suffer.

Do you know someone with strong immune system yet succumb to the disease?

Also I think there is overreaction worldwide. Do you know that pollution kills 7 million people every year? This would make the COVID-19 pale in comparision. Death won't even reach a million.

https://www.who.int/health-topics/air-pollution#tab=tab_1

After the dusts (or virus) settle. We must focus on pollutions. This COVID-19 thing will only give us greater awareness for stronger immune system and make us health conscious (mind and body).
 
  • Like
Likes morrobay
  • #756
Here is question about test kits. First. Our department of health has finally admitted there was underreporting of cases because of our lack of test kits:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/newsin...ional-underreporting-of-coronavirus-cases/amp

So we produced locally made test kits.

https://newsinfo.inquirer.net/12391...Social&utm_source=Facebook#Echobox=1583808169

What must be standards in test kits. Our worry is it can produce false negative. Are test kits made in USA only for USA and test kits for south korea only for south korea? Can't any nation sell us extra to avoid underreporting?
 
  • #757
chirhone said:
Here is question about test kits. First. Our department of health has finally admitted there was underreporting of cases because of our lack of test kits:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/newsin...ional-underreporting-of-coronavirus-cases/amp

So we produced locally made test kits.

https://newsinfo.inquirer.net/12391...Social&utm_source=Facebook#Echobox=1583808169

What must be standards in test kits. Our worry is it can produce false negative. Are test kits made in USA only for USA and test kits for south korea only for south korea? Can't any nation sell us extra to avoid underreporting?
At least, Early Detection Protocol is now available in the Philippines.

Singapore developed new test kits. In 3 hours... results are out! Excellent!

I wonder if SG will sell it and at what cost. Sometimes some patients will need to use up more than one test kit. Example, a PUI may be negative on day 3, 5, and 7 then turns positive on day 10. Then retest on day 14 to see if negative already. If not, then retest until 2 negatives. Let’s say one test kit is around 5k Philippine Peso (that’s the average cost of a test kit), that would mean around 5 test kits per patient or 25k. So that means the 2000 test kits are good for around 400-500 people only. That’s why it's a goos news that we were able to developed our own. Because other countries may have, but they may not be selling it because they need it themselves. If we will wait for donated ones, it may take awhile.
 
  • Like
Likes chirhone
  • #758
chirhone said:
Do you know someone with strong immune system yet succumb to the disease?

There are probably some "normal healthy folks" who have severe disease. The following paper says that about 4.5% of people had illness that was severe enough to require intensive care even though they did not have hypertension, cardiovascular diseases, cerebrovascular diseases, diabetes, hepatitis B infections, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, chronic kidney diseases, malignancy and immunodeficiency

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.02.25.20027664v1
The composite endpoint was documented in 77 (19.3%) of patients who had at least one comorbidity as opposed to 54 (4.5%) patients without comorbidities (P<0.001)
 
  • Like
Likes jim mcnamara and Ygggdrasil
  • #759
morrobay said:
View attachment 258420
This is a wet market in thailand. The venders do very little cleaning . So a pathogen can easily transfer anywhere in this environment. For example note that blue plastic mesh used to weigh the seafood. Most of the mesh is black from never being cleaned.
Are you saying it transferred from a dead bat to pangolin meat? All I see in the picture is animal corpses.
 
  • #760
kadiot said:
At least, Early Detection Protocol is now available in the Philippines.

Singapore developed new test kits. In 3 hours... results are out! Excellent!

I wonder if SG will sell it and at what cost. Sometimes some patients will need to use up more than one test kit. Example, a PUI may be negative on day 3, 5, and 7 then turns positive on day 10. Then retest on day 14 to see if negative already. If not, then retest until 2 negatives. Let’s say one test kit is around 5k Philippine Peso (that’s the average cost of a test kit), that would mean around 5 test kits per patient or 25k. So that means the 2000 test kits are good for around 400-500 people only. That’s why it's a goos news that we were able to developed our own. Because other countries may have, but they may not be selling it because they need it themselves. If we will wait for donated ones, it may take awhile.

What countries have extra test kits now.

We can trust the locally produced ones?

I wonder how they acquire test kits in very poor countries like south africa?

The obvious victims of this are the elderly, parents, grandparents, etc.
 
  • #761
chirhone said:
We can trust the locally produced ones?
I don't trust much after they approved Dengvaxia vaccine and several children died. Good thing DOH has permanently revoked the certificates of product registration (CPRs) of the controversial Dengvaxia anti-dengue vaccine manufactured by Sanofi Pasteur. Anyway, FDA approves UP NIH test kits for Coronavirus infection through a certification of exemption. It's just a test kit. Not a vaccine.
 

Attachments

  • FB_IMG_1583820502479.jpg
    FB_IMG_1583820502479.jpg
    37.2 KB · Views: 170
  • Like
Likes chirhone
  • #762
chemisttree said:
Are you saying it transferred from a dead bat to pangolin meat? All I see in the picture is animal corpses.
No only saying that a wet market environment that is not sanitary is conducive to pathogen transfers in general. There are no bats or pangolins in this market. If the virus in China transferred between the two outside of a wet market I would not speculate .
 
  • #763
chirhone said:
Death won't even reach a million.
We'll see.
 
  • Like
Likes mattt, bhobba and DennisN
  • #765
morrobay said:
No only saying that a wet market environment that is not sanitary is conducive to pathogen transfers in general. There are no bats or pangolins in this market. If the virus in China transferred between the two outside of a wet market I would not speculate .
I think anyone handling an infected {insert animal name} would risk infection whether it was in a wet market or somewhere else.
 
  • #766
To put things in perspective, this is how Covid-19 compares with other viruses in terms of transmission.
 

Attachments

  • FB_IMG_1583852394195.jpg
    FB_IMG_1583852394195.jpg
    26 KB · Views: 207
  • #767
What would Issac Newton think about viruses, and illnesses based on his research.
 
  • #768
Ygggdrasil said:
Here is an article summarizing some of the characteristics of those infected in China: https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2762130. While women have slightly lower mortality, they are by no means spared. Children however, do seem to exhibit very low mortality for unknown reasons (for a discussion of the issue in the popular press see )

Here's an article which discusses some of the potential reasons why the virus shows higher mortality in men, including a higher prevalence of smoking in men and differences in immune responses between the sexes: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/20/health/coronavirus-men-women.html


Interesting article, especially the link between a higher prevalence of smoking in men in China (which may not necessarily be true for other countries) and its link to greater mortality rates for COVID-19.

I am curious about the differences in immune responses between the sexes. In particular, I wonder if the differences in immune responses may be due to a greater number of older men with pre-existing or co-morbid medical conditions (e.g. heart disease, diabetes, high blood pressure) which likely will have an impact on immune responses, as was suggested in the following article below.

https://www.statnews.com/2020/03/03...n-of-coronavirus-risk-by-demographic-factors/
 
  • #769
Mask vs. Beard:
thumbnail_image002.jpg


Masks will not work well if the mask-face seal is compromised by facial hair.
I like the names for the different hair styles.
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Likes DennisN, anorlunda and Klystron
  • #770
StatGuy2000 said:
Interesting article, especially the link between a higher prevalence of smoking in men in China (which may not necessarily be true for other countries) and its link to greater mortality rates for COVID-19.

I am curious about the differences in immune responses between the sexes. In particular, I wonder if the differences in immune responses may be due to a greater number of older men with pre-existing or co-morbid medical conditions (e.g. heart disease, diabetes, high blood pressure) which likely will have an impact on immune responses, as was suggested in the following article below.

https://www.statnews.com/2020/03/03...n-of-coronavirus-risk-by-demographic-factors/

Higher rates of certain medical conditions in men could certainly contribute to the differences in immune responses between the sexes. However, the NYT piece also notes higher rates of autoimmune disease in women ("Nearly 80 percent of those with autoimmune diseases are women, Dr. Clayton noted."), which could suggest some underlying biological differences between immunity in men and women.
 
  • #771
A NY Times interview with a mathematician who studies virus spread.
He details how the stats should be done and provides some interesting rules of thumb and back of the envelope, such as:

One signal to watch out for is if the first case in an area is a death or a severe case, because that suggests you had a lot of community transmission already. As a back of the envelope calculation, suppose the fatality rate for cases is about 1 percent, which is plausible. If you’ve got a death, then that person probably became ill about three weeks ago. That means you probably had about 100 cases three weeks ago, in reality. In that subsequent three weeks, that number could well have doubled, then doubled, then doubled again. So you’re currently looking at 500 cases, maybe a thousand cases.
 
  • Like
Likes StoneTemplePython and DennisN
  • #772
homeylova223 said:
What would Issac Newton think about viruses, and illnesses based on his research.

Probably nothing interesting. It took over 200 years since Isaac Newton before science recognized the existence of germs. Newton probably accredited illness to acts of god, demons, or the occult or something like that.

It's actually kind of an eye opening story how germ theory started. The first scientist to challenge the dogma was Ignaz Semmelweis in the mid 1800's who promoted hand washing as a means to prevent infection. For that, the mainstream scientific community shunned him, and drove him into a mental institution. They weren't going to take this radical, crazy, paranoid, blasphemous idea that invisible things are floating around infecting people.

I use this story to remind myself not to take mainstream scientific views for granted. The fact is, it's made up of the same species that not long ago held that hand washing and germs were pseudo-scientific crack-pottery.

https://www.mentalfloss.com/article...got-one-19th-century-doctor-institutionalized
 
Last edited:
  • #773
kadiot said:
To put things in perspective, this is how Covid-19 compares with other viruses in terms of transmission.
The factor is called R0 (basic reproduction number). Estimates from the 1918 Spanish Flu were R0=2 to 3.

Several sources say we have no reliable number yet on COVID19, but the following is from the CDC.

https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/26/2/19-0697_article said:
Reproduction Number and Attack Rates
The number of secondary cases resulting from a single initial case (reproduction number, R0) (Appendix reference 74) ranges widely for MERS-CoV, e.g., from 8.1 in the South Korea outbreak, compared with an overall R0 of 0.45 in Saudi Arabia (Appendix reference 74). Superspreading events, which generally describe a single MERS-CoV case epidemiologically linked to >5 subsequent cases, have been frequently described, particularly in healthcare-associated outbreaks (Appendix references 55,56). R0 estimates, however, can vary depending on numerous biologic, sociobehavioral, and environmental factors, and must be interpreted with caution (Appendix reference 75). Most studies estimating R0 across multiple areas, or at the end stage of an outbreak, result in estimates of R0<1, consistent with the knowledge that the virus does not continue to circulate in humans and that outbreaks are eventually contained. A wide range in published attack rates (the proportion of exposed persons who are infected) has also been reported (Appendix reference 74).

WHO says:
https://www.who.int/news-room/detail/23-01-2020-statement-on-the-meeting-of-the-international-health-regulations-(2005)-emergency-committee-regarding-the-outbreak-of-novel-coronavirus-(2019-ncov) said:
Human-to-human transmission is occurring and a preliminary R0 estimate of 1.4-2.5 was presented.

Wikipedia says: R0=2.2 to 3.9

To interpret the significance of R0, consider starting with one case, then secondary, then tertiary, ..., up to N stages away. Starting from one person, and N generations of infection, the number of people infected will be R0N.

The extremes from that are all over the map, so until we know better all outcomes are possible, from almost nothing, to everyone on the planet getting it. That's not very helpful. The CDC source above says that they expect the final estimate will show R0<1. That's reassuring, but it is also obvious that R0>1 today.

Here are some numbers to put it in perspective. With N=20, and with the low to high estimates for R0, we get:

0.9420~0.3
1.420~800
2.520~108
3.920~1012
8.120~1018
 
  • #775
Jarvis323 said:
...For that, the mainstream scientific community shunned him, and drove him into a mental institution.
Just for the log: the most likely reason for his mental breakdown is suspected to be an illness - progressing late stage syphilis, what was kind of common at that time for his profession. This is suspected to be behind the really provoking, negative and obsessed tone of his later publications, what led to negative response.

Yup, kind of trolling.

While the theory was not accepted, the practice actually was: not by all, but by many.

I don't know what's the moral of this sad story.
 
  • #776
jedishrfu said:
ArsTechnica has an FAQ article (see below) that they say will be updated at 3 pm EST every day with the very latest in COVID-19 information:

https://arstechnica.com/science/202...ive-ars-technica-guide-to-the-coronavirus/#h1
For balance,

When an official makes a statement such as "There is no need for public panic," it indicates a limited understanding of how people behave during disasters. Moreover, it reflects a fundamental distrust in the tendency of the public to generally do the right things when given the right information.
https://www.crainsdetroit.com/other-voices/commentary-stop-telling-us-not-panic-about-covid-19
 
  • Like
Likes mattt, DennisN, mfb and 1 other person
  • #777
Rive said:
This is suspected to be behind the really provoking, negative and obsessed tone of his later publications, what led to negative response.

But it would seem perfectly normal for him to have such a negative tone, because this is after his ground breaking ideas had been ridiculed, gotten him kicked out the university, and shunned from the medical community. Meanwhile they were continuing to cause thousands of preventable deaths by ignoring him. I would expect most people in that situation would have a really provoking, negative and obsessed tone.

Anyway I guess this is getting off topic. Sorry.
 
Last edited:
  • #778
jedishrfu said:
ArsTechnica has an FAQ article (see below) that they say will be updated at 3 pm EST every day with the very latest in COVID-19 information:

Nice. I think the key point to take away is its coming - like it or not. It's entirely up to us how bad it is. I think what happened in Italy is because they did not act fast enough. We will see what happens now they have finally acted, and acted hard. I think China did the same, but its difficult to really know because of the secrecy they had in the early stages. My suspicion is some infected people got into Italy before containment measures were taken in China, which is how Italy's troubles started. Here in Australia the government has not acted hard - yet - I just prey they time it right. And while 'amusing' the toilet paper debacle does not give me confidence. Unfortunately my gut feeling is people really are that 'dumb' in which case acting 'hard' may require more than just voluntary compliance.

A reporter decided to check out the measures they have put in place such as fever clinics. It was hopeless. Nobody really knew what what they were doing. Everyone was told to leave at least a seat between them and other people. But most didn't and nobody in authority stopped it. Another suspected they had it, had the test done, was promised the results reasonably quickly, but had to follow it up himself. He was sent on a goose-chase from person to person for days before he found out the results well after they should have been available. A lot of issues need fixing.

One show I watched lamented at students shying away from science and hence may not really understand the necessity for this.

Thanks
Bill
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes atyy, DennisN and jedishrfu
  • #779
Here is a good source on crisis communication. They also point out the myth of public panic tendencies.

What about Panic? Contrary to what you may see in the movies, people seldom act completely irrationally during a crisis. During an emergency, people absorb and act on information differently from nonemergency situations. This is due, in part, to the fight-or-flight mechanism.The natural drive to take some action in response to a threat is sometime described as the fight-or-flight response. Emergencies create threats to our health and safety that can create severe anxiety, stress, and the need to do something. Adrenaline, a primary stress hormone, is activated in threatening situations. This hormone produces several responses, including increased heart rate, narrowed blood vessels, and expanded air passages. In general, these responses enhance people’s physical capacity to respond to a threatening situation. One response is to flee the threat. If fleeing is not an option or is exhausted as a strategy, a fight response is activated. You cannot predict whether someone will choose fight-or-flight in a given situation.These rational reactions to a crisis, particularly when at the extreme ends of fight-or-flight, are often described erroneously as “panic” by the media. Response officials may be concerned that people will collectively “panic” by disregarding official instructions and creating chaos, particularly in public places. This is also unlikely to occur. If response officials describe survival behaviors as “panic,” they will alienate their audience. Almost no one believes he or she is panicking because people understand the rational thought process behind their actions, even if that rationality is hidden to spectators. Instead, officials should acknowledge people’s desire to take protective steps, redirect them to actions they can take, and explain why the unwanted behavior is potentially harmful to them or the community. Officials can appeal to people’s sense of community to help them resist unwanted actions focused on individual protection.In addition, a lack of information or conflicting information from authorities is likely to create heightened anxiety and emotional distress. If you start hedging or hiding the bad news, you increase the risk of a confused, angry, and uncooperative public.

https://emergency.cdc.gov/cerc/ppt/CERC_Psychology_of_a_Crisis.pdf
 
  • Informative
  • Like
Likes bhobba, atyy and DennisN
  • #780
Ygggdrasil said:
Higher rates of certain medical conditions in men could certainly contribute to the differences in immune responses between the sexes. However, the NYT piece also notes higher rates of autoimmune disease in women ("Nearly 80 percent of those with autoimmune diseases are women, Dr. Clayton noted."), which could suggest some underlying biological differences between immunity in men and women.

It is well documented that women have higher rates of various autoimmune diseases. The article you link to suggests a possible mechanism, where preceding infections could stimulate pro-inflammatory cytokines fro mast cells during the innate immune response, and how sex hormones may amplify this effect.

At the same time, I'm curious if the lower mortality rates for COVID-19 in women compared to men could be explained primarily through such a mechanism. I would be especially curious as to how this would compare with SARS or MERS.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 42 ·
2
Replies
42
Views
9K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 516 ·
18
Replies
516
Views
36K
Replies
0
Views
460
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
5K