Corona Virus in Chiang Mai

[orang37]

Kudos to WaveHunter for struggling to keep the flag of reason-though-science flying above the tsunami of ... whatever else is being said here ???? But, I disagree with his statements about China not being able to control the situation monolithically because of political structure: no other nation could, imho, by such top-down intervention, seal off sixty million people quickly, or arbitrarily detain 1.5 million Uighur Muslims in Xinjiang "re-education" camps.

 

I'm sending a humble single-use wai to Samuttodd, since I now realize his batty comments are backed up by some new research. If bats are the primary source, and some other wild critter is an intermediary, that is big news, and might explain some of the homologues of HIV structure observed.

 

We are all elephants in a dark room feeling up gender-indeterminate prophets ... to try and see the big picture ... but our trunks get in the way (did you know that elephants have little depth vision abilities, are myopic, as well as having dichromic vision ... only red and green cones? but, they do have the facility of altering their sensitivity to different wavelengths of light in response to day or night ... more sensitive to blue and violet as it goes dark).

 

~o:37;

[samuttodd]

Samuttodd wais orang37 back.  

[XGM]

3 hours ago, WaveHunter said:

when hospitals will become overwhelmed with serious cases (i.e.: have more ICU cases than they have ICU beds)

With 11,177 confirmed cases in Hubei province alone, I imagine that is already the situation there, even with the two new hospitals.

https://bnonews.com/index.php/2020/02/the-latest-coronavirus-cases/

 

Hubei province (including Wuhan)

11,177

cases 350 deaths

1,223 serious, 478 critical

Edited February 3, 2020 by XGM

[Logosone]

4 hours ago, WaveHunter said:

Again, I do not care what the mortality rate currently is.  At best it is only a rough gauge of change until it can be accurately determined from a historical perspective (i.e.: after the crisis ends).  To state that the mortality rate is 0.1% at this stage of the outbreak is simply nonsense.  Nobody knows what it really is at this point.

 

Far more important are stats that can predict when hospitals will become overwhelmed with serious cases (i.e.: have more ICU cases than they have ICU beds) because THAT is when the mortality rate will skyrocket (what ever the actual stat turns out to be)

 

The three stats I keep discussing are the most appropriate ones to predict how soon this could happen and therefore are the ones that are genuinely important to consider IMHO.

 

You can agree or disagree.  I am not a scientist or doctor, but that's my impression from speaking with people who are, and who are on the actual front lines of all of this in Shenzhen.

 

I place far more credence in what they say and feel than I do in anyone not over there right now, irregardless of their sophisticated models and credentialed predictions.

 

Well, that's a bit careless, isn't it? I care very much what the mortality rate is. And the estimate from Dr Read at Lancaster looks absolutely credible. A lot more credible than your 'the mortality rate is 3%' in post 66 on this thread.

 

If you don't care what the mortality rate is, why did you post 'the mortality rate is 3%' in post 66?

 

Ah that's right, you wanted to give the impression of super mortality for this virus. 

 

Of course nobody knows the final figures now, but we can make very highly educated estimates based on past figures for pandemics and number of infected in Wuhan. 

 

People on the ground in Wuhan have of course confirmed Dr Read's estimate. 

 

I place a lot more credence in his careful and painstaking work than your hysterical and alarmist posts.

 

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.01.23.20018549v2.full.pdf

 

 

 

[WaveHunter]

2 hours ago, orang37 said:

Kudos to WaveHunter for struggling to keep the flag of reason-though-science flying above the tsunami of ... whatever else is being said here ???? But, I disagree with his statements about China not being able to control the situation monolithically because of political structure: no other nation could, imho, by such top-down intervention, seal off sixty million people quickly, or arbitrarily detain 1.5 million Uighur Muslims in Xinjiang "re-education" camps.

 

I'm sending a humble single-use wai to Samuttodd, since I now realize his batty comments are backed up by some new research. If bats are the primary source, and some other wild critter is an intermediary, that is big news, and might explain some of the homologues of HIV structure observed.

 

We are all elephants in a dark room feeling up gender-indeterminate prophets ... to try and see the big picture ... but our trunks get in the way (did you know that elephants have little depth vision abilities, are myopic, as well as having dichromic vision ... only red and green cones? but, they do have the facility of altering their sensitivity to different wavelengths of light in response to day or night ... more sensitive to blue and violet as it goes dark).

 

~o:37;

Thanks for the Kudos, and yes, I agree that the Chinese Central Government officials are true masters of reacting to such a crisis, but my point is that they are abysmal when it comes to be proactive to prevent one.  Furthermore, while they have instituted a lockdown that would be impossible by almost any other nation in the world, it was not really that effective in a number of serious ways.

 

For instance, even though they knew that at this time of year, the Lunar New Year holiday, when the largest migration of people in the world occurs every year, they waited until over 5 million people in Wuhan left the city before announcing the lockdown.  Even worse, they made the announcement a day before actually imposing it, allowing over 200,000 vehicles to flee the city.

 

I see this as a major issue right now because many of those people may have travelled outside of China before screening practices at international airport was in place.  Furthermore, many would have been asymptomatic yet fully capable of spreading the virus.  I see this as a major "wild card" in how likely it will add to the possibility of a true pandemic.  I think over the next week there will be more of them developing symptoms in foreign countries and being confirmed as infected, and worse, new human-to-human transmissions of the virus being confirmed in those countries.

 

IMHO the big problem with Chinese Central government is simply that those in power are more concerned with decision making that assures their power base than they are with the true needs of their citizens.  My big hope is that the Chinese government appear to be granting access to the front lines to members of the World Health Organization and other international experts, more appropriate actions will be taken.

[WaveHunter]

49 minutes ago, Logosone said:

 

Well, that's a bit careless, isn't it? I care very much what the mortality rate is. And the estimate from Dr Read at Lancaster looks absolutely credible. A lot more credible than your 'the mortality rate is 3%' in post 66 on this thread.

 

If you don't care what the mortality rate is, why did you post 'the mortality rate is 3%' in post 66?

 

Ah that's right, you wanted to give the impression of super mortality for this virus. 

 

Of course nobody knows the final figures now, but we can make very highly educated estimates based on past figures for pandemics and number of infected in Wuhan. 

 

People on the ground in Wuhan have of course confirmed Dr Read's estimate. 

 

I place a lot more credence in his careful and painstaking work than your hysterical and alarmist posts.

 

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.01.23.20018549v2.full.pdf

 

 

 

Sorry to say, but you are just talking through your hat with your antagonistic dribble.  I already explained, and then explained again why I quoted 3% in some of my posts, and why I actually consider that the mortality rate is NOT even a critical factor at predicting the future course of this crisis right now, nor is it accurately quantifiable at this stage of the outbreak.  For you to emphatically infer that it is only 0.1% (or any specific number), and then to not give credence to how important the other stats are that I mentioned, is simply idiotic and ignorant! 

 

I am neither being hysterical nor am I being an alarmist in my posts.  Contrarily it seem to be you who is acting that way towards what I am saying.  Please take it easy; I'd hate to see you blow a gasket LOL!

 

The simple fact is, much of what I believe is based on information I get from friends of mine living in China right now, some of whom are practicing physicians and nurses working in hospitals in Shenzhen.

 

I will take what they have to say about what is REALLY going on there right now inside their hospitals, and their genuine fears and concerns FAR MORE seriously than what you have to say, or what anyone has to say who is not actually there on the front-lines right now.

 

There are now three (3) major epicenters for this outbreak inside of China and the rate of newly confirmed infections is remaining exponential with no sign of a downtrend occurring despite containment efforts to date.  There is now every reason to expect this to become a pandemic.  It is serious and it is real.  It's time that people recognize that and that is why I post my messages.  I am not posting hysteria or being an alarmist.  I am simply being a realist.

 

I would not be so passionate in my viewpoint if I did not have valid reasons to be genuinely concerned.  Believe what you wish but please stop with all of your antagonistic and personal attacks.  It really doesn't give you or what you have to say much credence, and truthfully it is starting to get a little bit annoying!

Edited February 3, 2020 by WaveHunter

[Logosone]

1 hour ago, WaveHunter said:

Sorry to say, but you are just talking through your hat with your antagonistic dribble.  I already explained, and then explained again why I quoted 3% in some of my posts, and why I actually consider that the mortality rate is NOT even a critical factor at predicting the future course of this crisis right now, nor is it accurately quantifiable at this stage of the outbreak.  For you to emphatically infer that it is only 0.1% (or any specific number), and then to not give credence to how important the other stats are that I mentioned, is simply idiotic and ignorant! 

 

I am neither being hysterical nor am I being an alarmist in my posts.  Contrarily it seem to be you who is acting that way towards what I am saying.  Please take it easy; I'd hate to see you blow a gasket LOL!

 

The simple fact is, much of what I believe is based on information I get from friends of mine living in China right now, some of whom are practicing physicians and nurses working in hospitals in Shenzhen.

 

I will take what they have to say about what is REALLY going on there right now inside their hospitals, and their genuine fears and concerns FAR MORE seriously than what you have to say, or what anyone has to say who is not actually there on the front-lines right now.

 

There are now three (3) major epicenters for this outbreak inside of China and the rate of newly confirmed infections is remaining exponential with no sign of a downtrend occurring despite containment efforts to date.  There is now every reason to expect this to become a pandemic.  It is serious and it is real.  It's time that people recognize that and that is why I post my messages.  I am not posting hysteria or being an alarmist.  I am simply being a realist.

 

I would not be so passionate in my viewpoint if I did not have valid reasons to be genuinely concerned.  Believe what you wish but please stop with all of your antagonistic and personal attacks.  It really doesn't give you or what you have to say much credence, and truthfully it is starting to get a little bit annoying!

You mean personal attacks like "For you to emphatically infer that it is only 0.1% (or any specific number), and then to not give credence to how important the other stats are that I mentioned, is simply idiotic and ignorant!" 

 

I don't give any credence to your stats because they are ridiculous. You jumped from waving your hands in the air 'The mortality rate is 3%' in post 66 to 'actually the mortality rate doesn't matter at all and can't be quantified'. Do you have any idea how ridiculous that looks?

 

 

 

 

[samuttodd]

 

[samuttodd]

Of course the mortality rate matters,  but it is going to take some doing to actually ever tabulate it.   The test kits are in the 10s of thousands.     In china alone there may be hundreds of millions that are possible cases when all is said and done.

 

There simply will not be any way to know who died of what.  

[Trujillo]

 

A Thai taxi driver has been confirmed to have the virus, and he's never been to China. 

 

Let that sink in a bit....

[EricTh]

1 hour ago, Trujillo said:

 

A Thai taxi driver has been confirmed to have the virus, and he's never been to China. 

 

Let that sink in a bit....

Well if people are so paranoid about one Thai person getting the virus out of 70 million Thai, what's stopping you guys from going back to your home country and lie low for a few months?

 

There are hundreds of Chinese at immigration everyday and you have to do 90 days report and what not which'll expose you to the risk.

Edited February 3, 2020 by EricTh

[Haecksler]

n-CoV.

9 hours ago, Logosone said:

You are failing to grasp what was in the link provided. Jonathan Read of Lancaster University is precisely NOT taking the Chinese figures as accurate, he is saying that they are only able to record 5% of cases. Again, that means there are about 350,000 cases and with the current number of deaths, that is roughly a 0.1% mortality rate. Same as influenza.

 

His calculation is based on a variety of factors. Read the link.

 

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.01.23.20018549v2.full.pdf

 

 

I don't know which part of the story is not understood.

The data coming out of China are not trustworthy.

The University assumes 5% of cases are reported only which seems to be realistic.

But then they take the death numbers for real which is wrong IMO.

The deaths on stat counts only with n-CoV on the certificate.

That is not happen as many are dying without being tested.

You can let any spread sheet look good depending on the numbers inserted

[Haecksler]

8 hours ago, WaveHunter said:

To me, this does not sound like very effective government.  Even now, all you hear from state-sponsored media in China (which is virtually ALL media) is "happy-face" proclamations by Party officials about how glorious and effective the people's government efforts are, and that there is no need for concern, that all is just fine, and there is nothing to worry about.

And from the WHO, too. ????

[Haecksler]

7 hours ago, samuttodd said:

I think that what has happened in wuhan will happen in Bkk.   It is just that there is a lag time for the virus to catch up... I hope I am wrong.

You could be right.

But I hope not

 

[khunpa]

37 minutes ago, Haecksler said:

You could be right.

But I hope not

 

Kind of looks like this....

 

 

 

[khunpa]

http://rocs.hu-berlin.de/corona/#relative-import-risk

 

[Cat ji]

5 hours ago, WaveHunter said:

Thanks for the Kudos, and yes, I agree that the Chinese Central Government officials are true masters of reacting to such a crisis, but my point is that they are abysmal when it comes to be proactive to prevent one.  Furthermore, while they have instituted a lockdown that would be impossible by almost any other nation in the world, it was not really that effective in a number of serious ways.

 

For instance, even though they knew that at this time of year, the Lunar New Year holiday, when the largest migration of people in the world occurs every year, they waited until over 5 million people in Wuhan left the city before announcing the lockdown.  Even worse, they made the announcement a day before actually imposing it, allowing over 200,000 vehicles to flee the city.

 

I see this as a major issue right now because many of those people may have travelled outside of China before screening practices at international airport was in place.  Furthermore, many would have been asymptomatic yet fully capable of spreading the virus.  I see this as a major "wild card" in how likely it will add to the possibility of a true pandemic.  I think over the next week there will be more of them developing symptoms in foreign countries and being confirmed as infected, and worse, new human-to-human transmissions of the virus being confirmed in those countries.

 

[...]

Yes, good one.

Apparently they first requested people not to leave, but many did, of course, so they started with the lockdown.

However, wrt the lockdown, and the quick building of hospitals and so on, still better than any other country would have / could have done.  The high volume of people travelling in and out of China, though, is also a unique factor.  Aside from that, though, better in China than if it had happened in Cairo or Lagos. ...I'm quite familiar with one or two places that are not capable of doing anything, except maybe the lockdown. Utterly incapable or incompetent wrt the organisation and provision of masks and hand cleaners and the testing equipment and skills, never mind the hospitals.

[CobraSnakeNecktie]

Interesting because Wuhan was one of first cities to get 5G and 5G is known to cause flu like symptoms.

[chaila]

55 minutes ago, Cat ji said:

Yes, good one.

Apparently they first requested people not to leave, but many did, of course, so they started with the lockdown.

However, wrt the lockdown, and the quick building of hospitals and so on, still better than any other country would have / could have done.  The high volume of people travelling in and out of China, though, is also a unique factor.  Aside from that, though, better in China than if it had happened in Cairo or Lagos. ...I'm quite familiar with one or two places that are not capable of doing anything, except maybe the lockdown. Utterly incapable or incompetent wrt the organisation and provision of masks and hand cleaners and the testing equipment and skills, never mind the hospitals.

 

[samuttodd]

This is why they are only reporting 2000 new cases daily

 

https://www.businessinsider.com/wuhan-coronavirus-china-shortage-test-kits-lottery-2020-1

 

 

Here is "A" Theory  

"that the virus was released before it was perfected.   I believe that the vials being smuggled from the us to Wuhan's lab may have had the final piece of the puzzle.   The piece that bridges the gap from the virus affecting the Alveolar ACE2 expressing sites more prevalent in people of asian ancestry to map to either a different site in the lung,  or to a site more available in Caucasian alveolar tissue.

 

 

Why it was released in Wuhan early?    Perhaps as a test,  or as a mistake in the lab prior to its final tweak...  

 

Its release in China also changes the plausable deniability factor.   It plants the seed that the Chinese were the victims of a biological attack.   And in the mind of the public,   it is difficult to convice that the Chinese would attack their own.

 

they are waiting to get the virus tweaked so that it will hit the full spectrum of the population (more broad spectrum as far as races targeted than just E.Asian.)

 

I believe that the ones behind this are pushing it through to coincide with a Market collapse where they will profit..  First they will drive the market higher and higher and then when the time is right,   the virus will be perfected (or a second virus will finish off much of the population)   They will then buy up what is left of the market for pennies on the dollar,  and move to their bunkers until the disease has run its course.

 

Once this is done,  they will control the market even more than they do now,  and what is left of the population will serve them.   The dollar will go away and a new digital currency will reign supreme.  The push to solidify the American union will incorporate Mexico/US/ and canada into one nation.  Or perhaps ultimately the Globalization plan with One world Government/one religion/1 currency...  The whole shooting match run by A.I."

 

[Logosone]

13 hours ago, Haecksler said:

n-CoV.

I don't know which part of the story is not understood.

The data coming out of China are not trustworthy.

The University assumes 5% of cases are reported only which seems to be realistic.

But then they take the death numbers for real which is wrong IMO.

The deaths on stat counts only with n-CoV on the certificate.

That is not happen as many are dying without being tested.

You can let any spread sheet look good depending on the numbers inserted

 

Well perhaps you should read the thread. A poster who went on here to claim there is a 3% mortality rate then proceeded to declare that mortality rate can't be calculated and doesn't matter at all. Even more curiously he then proceeded to accuse John Read of Lancaster university of just using Chinese figures. However the whole point of Read's calculation was to go beyond the Chinese figures and calculate the number of actual infected and thus likely mortality rate can be calculated. He did this very convincingly.

 

While the number of cases can not be logged by the Chinese for obvious reasons, not all are caught, want to come forward or even know they have the virus, the registering of deaths is a much more accurate exercise. For obvious reasons the number of deaths is much closer to an accurate figure than the number of infected.

 

Since the COV virus is easily identified and the Chinese have the labs to do so, there is no doubt at all that the number of deaths is closer to accuracy than the number of infected people. 

 

And Read did not do a spreadsheet. He used sophisticated models and equations.

 

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.01.23.20018549v2.full.pdf

 

[jimgilly]

Just watched this interview and hope he is wrong.  Unfortunately, there is quite a bit of evidence to back up this might be what's going on and if so, the world will be heading into one of its darkest periods of all time. 

 

[samuttodd]

Good find Jimgilly

[samuttodd]

Francis Boyle is a professor of international law at the University of Illinois College of Law. He received an AB (1971) in Political Science from the University of Chicago, then a JD degree magna cum laude from Harvard Law School, and AM and PhD degrees in Political Science from Harvard University. He practiced tax and international tax with Bingham, Dana & Gould. Professor Boyle serves as counsel to Bosnia and Herzegovina and to the Provisional Government of the Palestinian Authority. He also represents two associations of citizens within Bosnia and was involved in developing the indictment against Slobodan Milosević for genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Over his career, he has represented national and international bodies including the Blackfoot Nation (Canada), the Nation of Hawaii, and the Lakota Nation, as well as numerous individual death penalty and human rights cases. He has advised numerous international bodies in the areas of human rights, war crimes and genocide, nuclear policy, and bio-warfare. From 1991-92, he served as Legal Advisor to the Palestinian Delegation to the Middle East Peace Negotiations. Professor Boyle served on the Board of Directors of Amnesty International, as a consultant to the American Friends Service Committee, and on the Advisory Board for the Council for Responsible Genetics. He drafted the U.S. domestic implementing legislation for the Biological Weapons Convention, known as the Biological Weapons Anti-Terrorism Act of 1989, that was approved unanimously by both Houses of the U.S. Congress and signed into law by President George H.W. Bush.

 

 

Sounds like a pretty good person to consult re: many aspects of what is going on right now.

 

Edited February 4, 2020 by samuttodd

[Haecksler]

16 minutes ago, Logosone said:

 

Well perhaps you should read the thread. A poster who went on here to claim there is a 3% mortality rate then proceeded to declare that mortality rate can't be calculated and doesn't matter at all. Even more curiously he then proceeded to accuse John Read of Lancaster university of just using Chinese figures. However the whole point of Read's calculation was to go beyond the Chinese figures and calculate the number of actual infected and thus likely mortality rate can be calculated. He did this very convincingly.

 

While the number of cases can not be logged by the Chinese for obvious reasons, not all are caught, want to come forward or even know they have the virus, the registering of deaths is a much more accurate exercise. For obvious reasons the number of deaths is much closer to an accurate figure than the number of infected.

 

Since the COV virus is easily identified and the Chinese have the labs to do so, there is no doubt at all that the number of deaths is closer to accuracy than the number of infected people. 

 

And Read did not do a spreadsheet. He used sophisticated models and equations.

 

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.01.23.20018549v2.full.pdf

 

Well yes I did read the thread and many many others which you obviously did not.

Otherwise you would not post this utter rubbish "Since the COV virus is easily identified and the Chinese have the labs to do so"

Which makes me completely laugh and show me that you understood nothing.

I saw many utterly wrong stats as I know how data was gathered. Again it depends on the numbers inserted.

I believe the people which are outside at the front line which did here some outstanding work instead of some air condition room - spread sheet manager.

[samuttodd]

If you believe it to be rubbish, then simply disregard it or post your ideas...  Who knows,  you may both be full of <deleted>.

 

This whole thing could have something to do with 5g which is firmly embedded in much of the afflicted area in china (where this all started.)

 

In any event,  if you really believe each other to be idiots,  or anyone else,  do not waste your energy arguing with an idiot.   You are wasting valuable time.    Work with whom you have an audience.   

 

That is where your energies will best be utilized.    Stop fighting with each other.  

Edited February 4, 2020 by samuttodd

[CGW]

2 hours ago, samuttodd said:

Why it was released in Wuhan early?    Perhaps as a test,  or as a mistake in the lab prior to its final tweak.

Mere coincidence! 

"In January 2018, China's first maximum security virology laboratory (biosecurity level 4) designed for the study of the world's most dangerous pathogens opened its doors — in Wuhan Is it pure coincidence that Wuhan City is now the epicenter of this novel coronavirus infection?"

[WaveHunter]

Global experts are now calling this a global pandemic so all those people who continue to downplay the significance of what is happening should consider the words of the German philosopher Arthur Shopehauer who said "All truth passes through three stages.  First it is ridiculed.  Second, it is violently opposed.  Third, it is accepted as being self-evident."  We are rapidly approaching the third stage.

 

As of today, 04 February, the stats for the nCoV outbreak are (according to the Johns Hopkins tracking site):

Confirmed cases: 20,606

Confirmed Deaths: 427 (657 have recovered)

 

For those who continue to downplay the significance of the nCoV outbreak, I would urge them to read a white paper on the outbreak released by Lancet (probably the most reputable source of peer-reviewed medical studies and literature in the world.  It was released on January 31, and describes the present state of the outbreak with sophisticated computer modelling and then forecast expectations during the next few months, until April when the outbreak is expected to peak on its' own (i.e.: herd immunity effect).  It is about as science-based and truthful as you can get!  It can be seen here: https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)30260-9/fulltext.

 

IMPORTANT:  I will add this just to be crystal clear:  I am not a doctor or scientist.  I make no claim to understand all that is said in this paper, or much of the underlying science.  That's why I urge everyone to make their OWN assessment of this paper (or anything I say, to be frank).  All I am really trying to do is make people open their eyes and, as the German Philosopher said, allow the truth to become self-evident. 

 

The take-away points IMO of this particular paper are:

1) The basic reproductive number (R0, pronounced R-Naught) is 2.68 (with 95% probability that it is between 2.47-2.86)

The reason I mention this is because there's been a lot of debate on what the R0 might really be with some saying it could be as high as 4.1.  This figure published in Lancet is supported by strong peer-reviewed computer modelling though. So, consider it 2.68 for now.  Why is that so significant?

 

For those who don't understand what R0 (R-Naught) is, and why it is important to consider with nCov, it is because it describes the number of people, on average, each infected person goes on to infect.  In other words, how infectious the virus actually is.  Basically it is an estimate of "spreadability"  of the virus.

 

If a R-naught equals one, one person infects only on another person, and so on, but an epidemic will not occur.  However, if the R-Naught is greater than one, then an epidemic outbreak will occur, and the number of newly infected will be exponential, in relation to the R-Naught number. 

 

To me this is the single most troubling statistic because as more and more of these unknown cases (described in point 2 below) become "suspected" cases, and then "confirmed" cases, 20% of them will become "Serious Complication Cases" requiring ICU care.  The number of such cases will outpace the number of available ICU beds, and that is when the mortality rate (whatever the actual number ends up being) will skyrocket!

 

So, here is what R0=3 looks like:

It is pretty clear how many new cases will result as those infected in Generation 2 go on to infect three more people each, and then they all go on to infect three more, and so on, and so.

 

2) While the number of "confirmed cases" right now is 20,606, the computer modelling suggest that actual number of infected people is FAR higher.  As of 25 January, the computer models suggest that the number of infected people is likely to actually be 75,815 (with 95% probability that the number is between 37,304 - 133,330). 

 

This means as more and more if these unknown infected people become confirmed cases, 20% of them will become Serious Complication Cases requiring ICU care, and the number of available ICU beds will be exceeded in an overwhelming way.  THAT is when mortality rate (whatever the stat ends up being will SKYROCKET!

 

3) City Seeding in China has occurred in all other provinces:  What this means is that people who have travelled from the affected area (Hubei province) to other provinces are spreading the virus to other regions of China and outbreak cluster are occuring in those areas now.  In fact, all provinces are now affected.

 

As of 03 February, here are the numbers:

 

4) Epidemic doubling time is 6.4 days...so the epidemic is growing exponentially in all major cities in China, and the infections are self-sustaining so the data could end up being similar to Wuhan with a lag time of around 1-2 weeks.

 

5) The computer models suggest that the peak of the epidemic in Wuhan will occur on 20 April 2020, with other cities lagging 2 weeks behind.

As more and more people are exposed to the virus, more and more people will develop immunity, and this "herd" immunity effect will curtail the spread of the virus.

 

6) Oversea cities have a strong potential for self-sustaining outbreak epicenters unless substantial public health interventions are implemented immediately and well beyond current measure involving only temperature screening to avoid substantial exportation of pre-symptomatic infected people in the incubation period.

 

So, this paper was released on 31 January, and it appears it had a major effect on the World Health Organization taking a more serious stance on this outbreak, as well as on world leaders in most western countries.  So, overall there is cause to be optimistic for the ultimate outcome, but still grave concern for what the next few months hold until April arrives.

 

I am not trying to be an alarmist which is why I hope people will look at what this paper says.  I think it is an honest and unbiased assessment of the crisis and where it will go in the near future.  It is promising to see an end point in April, but very troubling to consider what will occur between now and then, not only in China, but in all nations of the world because this IS a pandemic now by definition of the word, and how serious a one it will be depends on people making the right decisions, right now.

Edited February 4, 2020 by WaveHunter

[samuttodd]

Wavehunter,  Do I have your permission to share this (credit to you)?  Respect.

 

Edited February 4, 2020 by samuttodd

[WaveHunter]

33 minutes ago, samuttodd said:

Wavehunter,  Do I have your permission to share this (credit to you)?  Respect.

 

Of course.  All the facts and data I have relayed are in the public domain other than my personal take on things and things I have been told anecdotally by others (i.e.: Chinese doctors and nurses who are friends of mine in Shenzhen).  The more people that consider all of this with an open mind, the better for everyone IMO.

 

Edited February 4, 2020 by WaveHunter