new coronavirus outbreak China, Korea, USA - mod warnings in OP (updated 24/02/20)

givyjoe

givyjoe wrote: »

Arbitrary? Are you having a laugh? It's been stated multiple times drawing from various sources that the 80% of cases are mild.

Again, as for arbitrary, how about you practice what you preach and provide with a source that breaks down exactly how they've calculated the worst scenario. Seems an awful lot like they've literally just taken the widely stated mortality rate of 2% and applied it to a guesstimate of 1million infections.

But how many people are asymptomatic Joe? I'll put my boards membership that the mortality rate will be less than 2% when all this is done. I don't believe that 20% of all cases of coronavirus in the world need ICU intervention.

BanditLuke

Deleted User wrote: »

Luke. Luke. Luke. Ye wee petal. Love putting words in other people's mouth because you were caught wrong. Whilst our health service could be better (never denied that), it's still a lot better than an authoritarian country who's healthcare is worse than Uzbekistan.

Anyway, you continue to post lies and misrepresentations like a good little boy.

You where caught out saying our health service isn't a mess. It is and you know it.

Please stop saying i am posting up lies as that in inaccurate. Iv'e been consistent from day one on this thread that my biggest concern is that our health service will collapse under the pressure of this virus as we have very little capacity built in for something of this scale. I say again we haven't the ability to do what China has done and that is obvious.

Duke of Url

Ulysses Gaze wrote: »

Narrow-minded to not believe 100% what a Totalitarian Communist Regime is saying?

Okay then...

lol

How did you get that from my post.

If you believed 100% what a Totalitarian Communist Regime is saying that would also be Narrow minded.

givyjoe

Deleted User wrote: »

But how many people are asymptomatic Joe? I'll put my boards membership that the mortality rate will be less than 2% when all this is done. I don't believe that 20% of all cases of coronavirus in the world need ICU intervention.

Who knows, how many people with flu are?

How many people with flu dont seek medical attention. The same hidden iceberg of patients applies to other viruses where people don't make it into the system. If this was just another strain of flu virus, with similar morbidity rates, why on earth would there be such draconian measures in place to stop it's spread? Measures which we have literally never seen before.

Kermit.de.frog

Duke of Url wrote: »

Seem very narrow minded but each to themselves I suppose.

If you want to believe the politburo in Beijing each to themselves I suppose.

BanditLuke

Stock markets taking a hammering around the globe on the back of this. Couldn't give a hoot myself but it's obvious they are spooked by this and the effects on the world economy.

Duke of Url

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

If you want to believe the politburo in Beijing each to themselves I suppose.

Its weird that your logic is to pick sides.

Im not picking any.

timmyntc

Deleted User wrote: »

But how many people are asymptomatic Joe? I'll put my boards membership that the mortality rate will be less than 2% when all this is done. I don't believe that 20% of all cases of coronavirus in the world need ICU intervention.

If they're asymptomatic they'll probably never get diagnosed, and never be included in the mortality rate in the first place.

DrumSteve

givyjoe wrote: »

Who knows, how many people with flu are?

How many people with flu dont seek medical attention. The same hidden iceberg of patients applies to other viruses where people don't make it into the system. If this was just another strain of flu virus, with similar morbidity rates, why on earth would there be such draconian measures in place to stop it's spread? Measures which we have literally never seen before.

I'm presuming cos there is a vaccine for the flu and not for this; so if the Flu gets out of hand everyone gets a vaccine.

If this gets out of hand, they have to lock everything down til it's figured out.

odyssey06

givyjoe wrote: »

Who knows, how many people with flu are?
How many people with flu dont seek medical attention. The same hidden iceberg of patients applies to other viruses where people don't make it into the system. If this was just another strain of flu virus, with similar morbidity rates, why on earth would there be such draconian measures in place to stop it's spread? Measures which we have literally never seen before.

Let's take one example.
Russia closed its land border with China.
A decision to ban mass Chinese tour groups — the biggest driver of growth for Russia’s tourist industry since 2015 — was also taken.
https://www.ft.com/content/5b61d6e4-4367-11ea-a43a-c4b328d9061c

Russia is dependent on trade with China since the sanctions applied by the West due to Ukraine. Russia wants friendly trade relations with China.

Russia didn't do all this because it was spooked by the declared death rate in Hubei.

Candamir

givyjoe wrote: »

No it doesn't, it assumes a 2% death rate on 1000000 infections (20k), which won't be the case if we don't have enough respirators etc for critical patients. 20% of cases being critical means 200k will have been in critical condition, that's an enormous number. Hopefully that worst case scenario doesn't happen, but if does we have to hope those numbers are spread over as long a time period as possible. Thats why it's so important to do as much as we possibly can to slow down the spread.

Ok, so 2% mortality, 80% are mild infections and 22% are critical. So no asymptomatic cases? No moderate infections?

Can we expect a quarter of the population to be infected just this season, or will it continue every year?

Those two proper oxygen ventilatiors are going to be worked hard!!

timmyntc

DrumSteve wrote: »

I'm presuming cos there is a vaccine for the flu and not for this; so if the Flu gets out of hand everyone gets a vaccine.

If this gets out of hand, they have to lock everything down til it's figured out.

It's because this has a reported 2% mortality rate - influenza is closer to 0.02%.

imfml

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Anyone living in Australia? You made the list...

“Today, we added Australia and Italy to the list of countries from which returning travelers will be required to enter quarantine,” the prime minister said. “As necessary, we will add other countries to the list.

https://www.jpost.com/HEALTH-SCIENCE/Netanyahu-International-coronavirus-quarantine-list-may-grow-618492

Hmmmm. My partners best friend is returning from Australia next week. Obviously lots of eating, drinking and hanging out planned. If this was Israel that would all be postponed, yet in Ireland we march on.

Mic 1972

Deleted User wrote: »

But how many people are asymptomatic Joe? I'll put my boards membership that the mortality rate will be less than 2% when all this is done. I don't believe that 20% of all cases of coronavirus in the world need ICU intervention.

Unreported cases are a big grey area, personally i wouldn't make too many assumptions on unknown numbers
People die without being tested for coronations. There was a case in Italy few days ago of a woman who was tested after she died, and she was positive
There will be mild symptoms and deaths both falling out of the official reported data.

givyjoe

Candamir wrote: »

Ok, so 2% mortality, 80% are mild infections and 22% are critical. So no asymptomatic cases? No moderate infections?

Can we expect a quarter of the population to be infected just this season, or will it continue every year?

Those two proper oxygen ventilatiors are going to be worked hard!!

Those ones likely wont show up to hospital, just like they dont show up in flu cases.

You'd need a crystal ball for the infection rates/speed, who knows. Doing whatever we can to slow it down, should be a priority.

givyjoe

DrumSteve wrote: »

I'm presuming cos there is a vaccine for the flu and not for this; so if the Flu gets out of hand everyone gets a vaccine.

If this gets out of hand, they have to lock everything down til it's figured out.

We didn't see these measures with Swine Flu, not even close.

DrumSteve

givyjoe wrote: »

We didn't see these measures with Swine Flu, not even close.

I'm guessing that was due to the low incubation period for the swine flu (it was generally pretty easy to catch); the long incubation period for COVID seems to be what is spooking a lot of people as it's much harder to catch at an early stage.

volchitsa

BanditLuke wrote: »

No it's like you didn't read my post. China has the ability to build hospitals in days, they have robots bringing infected people food in those hospitals, they have the ability to make thousands of ventilators, the ability to lock down a city with a population twice the size of ours in hours. We have none of that.

I saw a graph somewhere showing that Wuhan (and perhaps the province of Hubei generally) has a fraction of the number of hospital beds per head of population than the average in China, which is pretty close to Ireland's rate. That may help explain why the death rate in Hubei is so much worse than even the rest of China.

I'm not convinced that a city that is notably short of hospital beds is really going to be able to provide robots and other high tech solutions to make up for this shortfall, never mind use them to give better care than other places.

(I'm always puzzled by a number of posters who seem determined to use every possible excuse to "knock" Ireland - it seems like they would prefer Ireland to suffer as many disasters as possible to prove them right in some way about how awful Ireland is. Sometimes it seems to be some sort of Cassandra syndrome, other times it's just civil war politics. Mad anyway, IMO. Ireland's far from perfect, but like, seriously?)

Candamir

givyjoe wrote: »

Those ones likely wont show up to hospital, just like they dont show up in flu cases.

You'd need a crystal ball for the infection rates/speed, who knows. Doing whatever we can to slow it down, should be a priority.

Not true. You’re saying that only cases requiring critical care turn up in hospital? Or don’t turn up anywhere for that matter (and don’t get counted)

That’s not how it works.

The bit about the crystal ball is about right though. Even though people seem to be fairly certain churning out the stats.

DrumSteve

I will say one thing, if you were planning on giving up smoking in the future, now might be a good time.

MD1990

BanditLuke wrote: »

They had some talking head from the HSE on earlier. The presenter just threw some softball questions at him and his answers where all nothing to see here don't panic type guff. He was saying our health system is more thna ready to cope with this i just laughed out loud.

Really bizarre to laugh at this.

You seen to nearly enjoy posting on here every day about how ill equipped we
are

Your the same guy who revels in telling other posters who though it was just a flu how bad it will likely become or has in other countries.

givyjoe

Candamir wrote: »

Not true. You’re saying that only cases requiring critical care turn up in hospital? Or don’t turn up anywhere for that matter (and don’t get counted)

That’s not how it works.

The bit about the crystal ball is about right though. Even though people seem to be fairly certain churning out the stats.

No, but most won't. Why would you go to hospital or the doctor for a illness with mild symptoms? How would they be accounted for if no one but the patient even knows they are ill.

DrumSteve

Some interesting stats here:

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/coronavirus-age-sex-demographics/

Age of Coronavirus Deaths
Based on all 72,314 cases of COVID-19 confirmed, suspected, and asymptomatic cases in China as of February 11, a paper by the Chinese CCDC released on February 17 and published in the Chinese Journal of Epidemiology [1] has found that the risk of death increases the older you are, as follows:

COVID-19 Fatality Rate by AGE:
*Death Rate = (number of deaths / number of cases) = probability of dying if infected by the virus (%). This probability differs depending on the age group. The percentage shown below does NOT represent in any way the share of deaths by age group. Rather, it represents, for a person in a given age group, the risk of dying if infected with COVID-19.

AGE
DEATH RATE*
80+ years old
14.8%
70-79 years old
8.0%
60-69 years old
3.6%
50-59 years old
1.3%
40-49 years old
0.4%
30-39 years old
0.2%
20-29 years old
0.2%
10-19 years old
0.2%
0-9 years old
no fatalities
*Death Rate = (number of deaths / number of cases) = probability of dying if infected by the virus (%).

In general, relatively few cases are seen among children.

Sex ratio
COVID-19 Fatality Rate by SEX:
*Death Rate = (number of deaths / number of cases) = probability of dying if infected by the virus (%). This probability differs depending on sex. When reading these numbers, it must be taken into account that smoking in China is much more prevalent among males. Smoking increases the risks of respiratory complications.

SEX
DEATH RATE *
Male
2.8%
Female
1.7%
*Death Rate = (number of deaths / number of cases) = probability of dying if infected by the virus (%).

Pre-existing medical conditions (comorbidities)
Patients who reported no pre-existing ("comorbid") medical conditions had a case fatality rate of 0.9%. Pre-existing illnesses that put patients at higher risk of dying from a COVID-19 infection are:

COVID-19 Fatality Rate by COMORBIDITY:
*Death Rate = (number of deaths / number of cases) = probability of dying if infected by the virus (%). This probability differs depending on pre-existing condition. The percentage shown below does NOT represent in any way the share of deaths by pre-existing condition. Rather, it represents, for a patient with a given pre-existing condition, the risk of dying if infected by COVID-19.

PRE-EXISTING CONDITION
DEATH RATE*
Cardiovascular disease
10.5%
Diabetes
7.3%
Chronic respiratory disease
6.3%
Hypertension
6.0%
Cancer
5.6%
no pre-existing conditions
0.9%
*Death Rate = (number of deaths / number of cases) = probability of dying if infected by the virus (%).

this is an interesting point I'd hadn't seen before; I'd imagine smoking and the general low air quality in China might be having a larger impact than thought.

pc7

Another death in Italy, seems a really yuck illness for elderly people
https://twitter.com/bnodesk/status/1231900241298968576?s=21

Titclamp

If there was no internet we'd not be infected virus paranoia

Candamir

givyjoe wrote: »

No, but most won't. Why would you go to hospital or the doctor for a illness with mild symptoms? How would they be accounted for if no one but the patient even knows they are ill.

And moderate cases? Like those that require 24/7 medical care but don’t quite make it to the ICU and need ventilation? Do you know how sick you need to be to end up in ICU?

But you think those patients stay home and invisible?

Titclamp

pc7 wrote: »

Another death in Italy, seems a really yuck illness for elderly people
https://twitter.com/bnodesk/status/1231900241298968576?s=21

They already had cancer.

Mic 1972

You keep forgetting about all the death cases that are not tested for corona virus
Don't assume that unreported cases are all going to be asymptomatic

givyjoe

Candamir wrote: »

And moderate cases? Like those that require 24/7 medical care but don’t quite make it to the ICU and need ventilation? Do you know how sick you need to be to end up in ICU?

But you think those patients stay home and invisible?

What are you talking about? I think you are completely misunderstanding the point i'm making and to be honest, I've now no idea what point you are trying to make. There are mild cases in both illnesses, we will not see most of these in the stats because they won't be needing hospital treatment.

Here's an example of critical cases as quoted by the IT last year. 2083 cases of which 112 were critical, thats 5%. As already quoted, the currently available stats for covid19 suggest a 20% severe/critical rate.

Fr_Dougal

DrumSteve wrote: »

I will say one thing, if you were planning on giving up smoking in the future, now might be a good time.

Not sure about that. The coughing and symptoms associated with quitting smoking might actually help the spread of the virus.

Candamir

givyjoe wrote: »

What are you talking about? I think you are completely misunderstanding the point i'm making and to be honest, I've now no idea what point you are trying to make. There are mild cases in both illnesses, we will not see most of these in the stats because they won't be needing hospital treatment.

Here's an example of critical cases as quoted by the IT last year. 2083 cases of which 112 were critical, thats 5%. As already quoted, the currently available stats for covid19 suggest a 20% severe/critical rate.

The point I’m making is that the numbers need to be taken with a very large heap of salt at this stage, and drawing conclusions from that data, by people without any epidemiological background (such as journalists who are selling papers), such as 20,000 deaths and however many was said would need critical care is pretty much meaningless.

Re the mild:critical cases - you left out probably the biggest cohort of cases in your numbers - moderate.

Seamai

I see the government here is advising against people travelling to those parts of Italy affected, short of cancelling flights I can't see too many people changing their plans. We'll have several thousand Italian over here the weekend after next for the 6 Nations match, most of them from Northern Italy where the game is more popular. Issuing travel advice is pointless unless it's heeded.

Mic 1972

DrumSteve wrote: »

Some interesting stats here:

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/coronavirus-age-sex-demographics/



this is an interesting point I'd hadn't seen before; I'd imagine smoking and the general low air quality in China might be having a larger impact than thought.

major flaw in that article


*Death Rate = (number of deaths / number of cases) = probability of dying if infected by the virus (%).


Using that calculation all you really get is
3% probability of dying
31% probability of recovery
66% probability of sitting in a limbo until you either die or recover


totally useless!

Seamai

Seamai wrote: »

I see the government here is advising against people travelling to those parts of Italy affected, short of cancelling flights I can't see too many people changing their plans. We'll have several thousand Italian over here the weekend after next for the 6 Nations match, most of them from Northern Italy where the game is more popular. Issuing travel advice is pointless unless it's heeded.

Where did you see that?

Seamai

Strawberry Milkshake wrote: »

Where did you see that?

https://www.thejournal.ie/irish-citizens-advised-not-to-travel-to-italy-areas-with-coronavirus-5019341-Feb2020/

DrumSteve

Mic 1972 wrote: »

major flaw in that article


*Death Rate = (number of deaths / number of cases) = probability of dying if infected by the virus (%).


Using that calculation all you really get is
3% probability of dying
31% probability of recovery
66% probability of sitting in a limbo until you either die or recover


totally useless!

I was referring more to the smoking aspect of it, we probably won't know for another week or so what the actual recovery rate is.

SARS eventually came in at around 91% recovery rate. If we get 9% mortality rate with COVID's incubation period, the **** will truly hit the fan.

pc7

Titclamp wrote: »

They already had cancer.

I mean in general seems to be affecting older people (most tend to have underlying illnesses). Still it’s yuck!

DrumSteve

pc7 wrote: »

I mean in general seems to be affecting older people (most tend to have underlying illnesses). Still it’s yuck!

I suppose the one bright spot coming out of this (if you can call it that) is that it doesn't really seem to be affecting kids.

Mic 1972

DrumSteve wrote: »

I suppose the one bright spot coming out of this (if you can call it that) is that it doesn't really seem to be affecting kids.

Natural selection at its best!

givyjoe

Candamir wrote: »

The point I’m making is that the numbers need to be taken with a very large heap of salt at this stage, and drawing conclusions from that data, by people without any epidemiological background (such as journalists who are selling papers), such as 20,000 deaths and however many was said would need critical care is pretty much meaningless.

Re the mild:critical cases - you left out probably the biggest cohort of cases in your numbers - moderate.

That was a medical professional, not a newspaper reporter, professor of Tropical Medicine at Beaumont.

I'd more inclined to take posters who are downplaying this with a pinch of salt. All I've seen so far is an alarming level of head in the sand thinking "be grand.. not that bad.. nothing to worry about.. etc." Its a very real problem regardless of exact numbers, medical supplies are limited and this virus has the potential to cause cases exceeding our supply of respiratory equipment. The health system is ALREADY creaking at the seams.

skimpydoo

Titclamp wrote: »

They already had cancer.

Cancer gives you a compromised immune system. I should know as I have cancer and I know that if I get Covid19 I could be screwed.

silverharp

How many Italian fans tend to travel? They should stop those flights coming over as far as I am concerned. I live 10min walk from the Stadium, cant say im thrilled at the idea of a concentration like that even if logically the sum total of other travel maybe a greater risk.

Seamai

Seamai wrote: »

https://www.thejournal.ie/irish-citizens-advised-not-to-travel-to-italy-areas-with-coronavirus-5019341-Feb2020/

Have to click through a few pages on the dfa website

https://www.dfa.ie/travel/travel-advice/a-z-list-of-countries/italy/

They haven’t listed the affected areas but say to consult your travel or accommodation provider to find out if it is an affected area. If you are in Italy, dial 1500 (is that like 999?)

Found it

1500: Call centre for health emergencies managed by the Department of Health which gives information to the population in case of health emergencies, notably information about SARS, flu syndromes, bioterrorist threat or information about the risk of excessively warm weather. The service is active only in some periods of the year.

skimpydoo

skimpydoo wrote: »

Cancer gives you a compromised immune system. I should know as I have cancer and I know that if I get Covid19 I could be screwed.

Try not to worry.

BanditLuke

Thought this was cool. Can't see this level of calmness when it reaches here unfortunately though sadly.

https://www.bbc.com/news/av/world-asia-51609712/coronavirus-drone-captures-massive-queue-for-masks-in-south-korea

BanditLuke

silverharp wrote: »

How many Italian fans tend to travel? They should stop those flights coming over as far as I am concerned. I live 10min walk from the Stadium, cant say im thrilled at the idea of a concentration like that even if logically the sum total of other travel maybe a greater risk.

Ridiculous if that goes ahead. We need to start getting real.

Mic 1972

5th death in Italy, the list so far

60 yo man
88 yo man
68 yo woman
77 yo woman
78 yo man

Candamir

givyjoe wrote: »

That was a medical professional, not a newspaper reporter, professor of Tropical Medicine at Beaumont.

I'd more inclined to take posters who are downplaying this with a pinch of salt. All I've seen so far is an alarming level of head in the sand thinking "be grand.. not that bad.. nothing to worry about.. etc." Its a very real problem regardless of exact numbers, medical supplies are limited and this virus has the potential to cause cases exceeding our supply of respiratory equipment. The health system is ALREADY creaking at the seams.

1 million infected with 20% requiring critical care - that’s 200,000 needing icu level care. We have less than 300 ICU beds in this country. We really don’t need to go to exaggerated ‘worst case scenario’ levels to overwhelm our health services. If it ever got to anywhere near that level, we’re in a field hospital/triage scenario.

VinLieger

silverharp wrote: »

How many Italian fans tend to travel? They should stop those flights coming over as far as I am concerned. I live 10min walk from the Stadium, cant say im thrilled at the idea of a concentration like that even if logically the sum total of other travel maybe a greater risk.

Theres 2 weeks till the next matches, i dont think we will see them played and they will get postponed till later in the year, probably autumn similar to what happened the year of foot and mouth

imfml

Seamai wrote: »

I see the government here is advising against people travelling to those parts of Italy affected, short of cancelling flights I can't see too many people changing their plans. We'll have several thousand Italian over here the weekend after next for the 6 Nations match, most of them from Northern Italy where the game is more popular. Issuing travel advice is pointless unless it's heeded.

Great to see they're back in work today. This should have been the advice given late last Friday evening or early Saturday.