Coronavirus

[1208]

Coronavirus: Netherlands recalls 'defective' masks bought from China | DW | 29.03.2020

"The Dutch government has ordered a recall of around 600,000 masks out of a shipment of 1.3 million from China after they failed to meet quality standards.

The defective masks had already been distributed to several hospitals currently battling the COVID-19 outbreak, news agency AFP and Dutch media reported. The Dutch Health Ministry has kept the rest of the shipment on hold.

An inspection revealed that the FFP2 masks did not protect the face properly or had defective filter membranes. The fine filters stop the virus from entering the mouth or nose. The masks failed more than one inspection.

"A second test also revealed that the masks did not meet the quality norms. Now it has been decided not to use any of this shipment," said the health ministry said in a statement to news agency AFP."

 

[marvinat0rz]

Dunno if this was posted already (article in Norwegian), but Iceland is now testing a sampling of asymptomatic, arbitrary people in Reykjavik. Approximately 1% of the tests have come back positive. 52 of 6163. Island tester tusenvis av helt friske personer – nå skal Norge følge etter

Iceland's confirmed cases is 0.25% of the population, and Iceland currently leads the testing with 25,000 tests per million. 0.25% is a lower bound, but it's closer to the real number of symptomatic people than all other countries due to intensive testing.

This is good: These numbers can be used to give an idea of how quickly the epidemic will burn through the whole population. The 1% number should be reasonably accurate for total asymptomatic cases in the communities that have been sampled. The real number is probably a little higher, due to people who got the virus and got well, but it won't be much larger since most infections happened very recently or are still ongoing.

1% is a lot more promising than a worst-case scenario of say 0.1%, which would imply that lockdowns or extreme measures have to be in effect for years if we're to get through this without overloading the healthcare system all the way through. Iceland's data supports what other early data indicates; 50-75% cases are asymptomatic.

This is admittedly much worse than the dream/fantasy scenario of the British preprint study that (with some major & shaky assumptions) estimated 60% of the population has already had the virus. We can probably discount that hope, but the real situation seems to be much better than the worst case.

Herd immunity for Covid19's level of transmissibility is estimated at a 60% cumulative infection rate, but some brief reasoning implies that milder quarantine measures (contact tracing, mask usage in public, intensive testing of symptomatic cases, probably certain quarantine measures regarding crowds) will have good effect even before this number is reached. Ditto for warmer climate during the summer months, which won't stop the epidemic in its tracks, but will similarly have a positive effect on the R0 number (new infections per case)

Iceland is already on the order of 2,5% of the way there, with a cumulative infection rate of ~1.5%.

Let's say Iceland has twice the number of symptomatic cases reported (0.5%) and the number of asymptomatic cases is representative (1%). This means that you can multiply the number of symptomatic cases by 3 to estimate the total/cumulative number of infections. And most countries don't catch nearly as big a portion of the symptomatic cases as Iceland does. Look at the number of dead compared to the confirmed cases to get an idea.

I haven't done the maths for the US yet, but it should be more promising even though the body count will look extremely bleak in the following weeks.

Tl;dr: if herd immunity is possible, it can be achieved in a reasonable timeframe. We're already making good progress. Probably not most of the way there yet, but it won't take years.

 

[EinSV]

Dunno if this was posted already (article in Norwegian), but Iceland is now testing a sampling of asymptomatic, arbitrary people in Reykjavik. Approximately 1% of the tests have come back positive. 52 of 6163. Island tester tusenvis av helt friske personer – nå skal Norge følge etter

Iceland's confirmed cases is 0.25% of the population, and Iceland currently leads the testing with 25,000 tests per million. 0.25% is a lower bound, but it's closer to the real number of symptomatic people than all other countries due to intensive testing.

This is good: These numbers can be used to give an idea of how quickly the epidemic will burn through the whole population. The 1% number should be reasonably accurate for total asymptomatic cases in the communities that have been sampled. The real number is probably a little higher, due to people who got the virus and got well, but it won't be much larger since most infections happened very recently or are still ongoing.

1% is a lot more promising than a worst-case scenario of say 0.1%, which would imply that lockdowns or extreme measures have to be in effect for years if we're to get through this without overloading the healthcare system all the way through. Iceland's data supports what other early data indicates; 50-75% cases are asymptomatic.

This is admittedly much worse than the dream/fantasy scenario of the British preprint study that (with some major & shaky assumptions) estimated 60% of the population has already had the virus. We can probably discount that hope, but the real situation seems to be much better than the worst case.

Herd immunity for Covid19's level of transmissibility is estimated at a 60% cumulative infection rate, but some brief reasoning implies that milder quarantine measures (contact tracing, mask usage in public, intensive testing of symptomatic cases, probably certain quarantine measures regarding crowds) will have good effect even before this number is reached. Ditto for warmer climate during the summer months, which won't stop the epidemic in its tracks, but will similarly have a positive effect on the R0 number (new infections per case)

Iceland is already on the order of 2,5% of the way there, with a cumulative infection rate of ~1.5%.

Let's say Iceland has twice the number of symptomatic cases reported (0.5%) and the number of asymptomatic cases is representative (1%). This means that you can multiply the number of symptomatic cases by 3 to estimate the total/cumulative number of infections. And most countries don't catch nearly as big a portion of the symptomatic cases as Iceland does. Look at the number of dead compared to the confirmed cases to get an idea.

I haven't done the maths for the US yet, but it should be more promising even though the body count will look extremely bleak in the following weeks.

Tl;dr: if herd immunity is possible, it can be achieved in a reasonable timeframe. We're already making good progress. Probably not most of the way there yet, but it won't take years.

Thanks for posting.

You might be interested in this site from the Icelandic government that contains data, updated daily, broken down by testing by deCODE of the broader population and testing by The National University Hospital of Iceland (NIHU) of symptomatic patients. The site also contains Icelandic hospitalization, ICU and fatality data. Data

Because Iceland is the only place in the world that seems to be doing widespread testing of asymptomatic people, I think it will be very interesting to see the information that develops from their efforts.

 

[Lessmog]

Dunno if this was posted already (article in Norwegian), but Iceland is now testing a sampling of asymptomatic, arbitrary people in Reykjavik. Approximately 1% of the tests have come back positive. 52 of 6163. Island tester tusenvis av helt friske personer – nå skal Norge følge etter

Iceland's confirmed cases is 0.25% of the population, and Iceland currently leads the testing with 25,000 tests per million. 0.25% is a lower bound, but it's closer to the real number of symptomatic people than all other countries due to intensive testing.

This is good: These numbers can be used to give an idea of how quickly the epidemic will burn through the whole population. The 1% number should be reasonably accurate for total asymptomatic cases in the communities that have been sampled. The real number is probably a little higher, due to people who got the virus and got well, but it won't be much larger since most infections happened very recently or are still ongoing.

1% is a lot more promising than a worst-case scenario of say 0.1%, which would imply that lockdowns or extreme measures have to be in effect for years if we're to get through this without overloading the healthcare system all the way through. Iceland's data supports what other early data indicates; 50-75% cases are asymptomatic.

This is admittedly much worse than the dream/fantasy scenario of the British preprint study that (with some major & shaky assumptions) estimated 60% of the population has already had the virus. We can probably discount that hope, but the real situation seems to be much better than the worst case.

Herd immunity for Covid19's level of transmissibility is estimated at a 60% cumulative infection rate, but some brief reasoning implies that milder quarantine measures (contact tracing, mask usage in public, intensive testing of symptomatic cases, probably certain quarantine measures regarding crowds) will have good effect even before this number is reached. Ditto for warmer climate during the summer months, which won't stop the epidemic in its tracks, but will similarly have a positive effect on the R0 number (new infections per case)

Iceland is already on the order of 2,5% of the way there, with a cumulative infection rate of ~1.5%.

Let's say Iceland has twice the number of symptomatic cases reported (0.5%) and the number of asymptomatic cases is representative (1%). This means that you can multiply the number of symptomatic cases by 3 to estimate the total/cumulative number of infections. And most countries don't catch nearly as big a portion of the symptomatic cases as Iceland does. Look at the number of dead compared to the confirmed cases to get an idea.

I haven't done the maths for the US yet, but it should be more promising even though the body count will look extremely bleak in the following weeks.

Tl;dr: if herd immunity is possible, it can be achieved in a reasonable timeframe. We're already making good progress. Probably not most of the way there yet, but it won't take years.

Arbitrary -- but were they really random? It seems from the article that they were in fact self-selected:
"Screener befolkningen

– Nesten alle land tester nå folk som har symptomer på viruset, eller har vært i kontakt med noen som kommer fra et høyrisikoland. Vi derimot, vi screener hele befolkningen, sier Kári Stefánsson.

Genselskapet satte opp en åpen påmeldingstjeneste på nett."

Still important data, but not perhaps iron-clad evidentially. Certainly raises hope!

Thanks for the news.

Edit: Typed while @EinSV posted ...

 

[EV Promoter]

What are people's suggestions as to what the US should do from here?

Look what social-commercial measures Italy has taken, the most affected western country, and actually the most strict rules applied to this emergency apart the measures taken by oriental countries, that can just be applied to their people.

 

[Norbert]

Arbitrary -- but were they really random? It seems from the article that they were in fact self-selected:

Also they were from Iceland's largest city, where the percentage of confirmed cases is probably higher than country-wide.

The concept of herd immunity for CV has been questioned in this thread, especially the number 60%, but I'll leave that for others to comment on who know more about it.

Also a video was posted here of an interview with one of South Korea's medical experts who says it may be possible to become sick again after recovery.

Meaning that relying on the idea of herd immunity might be very dangerous, until proven.

 

[SageBrush]

Dunno if this was posted already (article in Norwegian), but Iceland is now testing a sampling of asymptomatic, arbitrary people in Reykjavik. Approximately 1% of the tests have come back positive. 52 of 6163. Island tester tusenvis av helt friske personer – nå skal Norge følge etter

Iceland's confirmed cases is 0.25% of the population, and Iceland currently leads the testing with 25,000 tests per million. 0.25% is a lower bound, but it's closer to the real number of symptomatic people than all other countries due to intensive testing.

By definition people are asymptomatic during the incubation phase of the disease.
Prior studies have suggested that people may be infectious for up to 12 hours prior to symptoms onset

You are mixing apples and oranges

 

[HG Wells]

Well, now I've heard everything.

My wife told me the following.
Public restrooms are not working because people stole all the toilet paper and people are using scarves and ties to clean themselves.
They then flush the scarves and clog the toilets.

She actually believes this.

 

[bpsmits]

One of the most informative Covid overviews yet. From South Korea.

Thank you for sharing. Very interesting to listen to. At the end of the interview, especially the part of being humble.
Some people could learn from that

 

[Dr. J]

What are people's suggestions as to what the US should do from here?

What we *should* do is lock down the entire country for ~4 weeks, test everyone, isolate the infected, test everyone again, and then restart commerce as we are able without reigniting the epidemic while caring for the ill--much like the Italian community of Vo Euganeo:

Do try this at home: how one Italian town fought coronavirus

Iceland's testing suggests 50% of COVID-19 cases are asymptomatic

But this requires federal government leadership we don't have, competence we can't muster, supplies we can't get or make, logistics that elude us, and political will that is entirely absent.

Here is an alternative view from Cramer:-
Cramer: Investors are 'betting against science' if they are betting against the stock market

I'm quoting your post from another thread. I'm not short the market, but I'm not jumping all in until some or all of the deficiencies above are theoretically remediable (a federal official can reach around with both hands and find his/her butt). I am currently not so much betting against science as betting on continued stupidity. I wish it weren't so.

edit: I think there are two approaches to this pandemic: the hard way (taken by most affected Asian countries) and the extremely painful way (taken by most European countries and the US).

 

[Krugerrand]

Absolutely.
About a thousand times more useful than this preoccupation with ventilators without operators for people to die on.

You teach people. There are plenty of medical staff who don’t know, that can be taught.

Yes, I’d learn on behalf of a family member in a heartbeat.

Not a thing wrong with coming at the problem from multiple directions.

 

[traxila]

Clinical Pearls Covid 19 for ER practitioners | TexAgs

This is the New Orleans post I referred to previously.

 

[MXLRplus]

I don't know if this has been posted about US patient zero. The first case was in the greater Puget Sound area outside of Seattle, WA, and how the case was handled, apparently America didn't just laugh off the case as has been reported. I thought it was interesting reading. If it's a repeat, sorry:

https://www.nejm.org/doi/10.1056/NEJMoa2001191

Bloomberg - Are you a robot?
Let me know if link two (plain English story) is broken, it works here, but with the wrong title.

 

[bpsmits]

I don't know if this has been posted about US patient zero. The first case was in the greater Puget Sound area outside of Seattle, WA, and how the case was handled, apparently America didn't just laugh off the case as has been reported widely. I thought it was interesting reading. If it's a repeat, sorry:

https://www.nejm.org/doi/10.1056/NEJMoa2001191

Bloomberg - Are you a robot?
Let me know if link two (plain English story) is broken, it works here, but with the wrong title.

interesting read.
link two works

 

[marvinat0rz]

Arbitrary -- but were they really random? It seems from the article that they were in fact self-selected:
"Screener befolkningen

– Nesten alle land tester nå folk som har symptomer på viruset, eller har vært i kontakt med noen som kommer fra et høyrisikoland. Vi derimot, vi screener hele befolkningen, sier Kári Stefánsson.

Genselskapet satte opp en åpen påmeldingstjeneste på nett."

Still important data, but not perhaps iron-clad evidentially. Certainly raises hope!

Thanks for the news.

Edit: Typed while @EinSV posted ...

Yes, you are right. I tried to make this distinction clear by saying arbitrary and not random. The sample is self-selected and then screened for symptoms. It is not a random sampling. I could probably have worded myself better, but didn't want to go off on a tangent in my reasoning.

There is another erroneous point in my comment worth mentioning, and that's the 0.25% of the population confirmed positive point. I presume that these 52 positive cases must be included in the 950-ish total confirmed cases, but since 52 is a small part of 950, this doesn't have a significant effect on my argument.

 

[bkp_duke]

For anyone wanting to know the basic biology of SARS-CoV-2, this is a great summary video by a physician scientist:
Basic Biology of COVID-19 Virus (SARS-CoV-2): How Sensitive is the Virus to UV? How Long Does it Survive on Cardboard or Plastic?

(you will likely need to give your email address to access the video - I could not find another copy)

 

[SageBrush]

World data through Mar 28
All the usual caveats apply

Benders:
Italy, Norway, Switzerland

Least control
US
Turkey

 

[Daniel in SD]

It's crazy how bad the science reporting is during this crisis. As several others have pointed out the deCode sample in Iceland is not randomly selected.

erd immunity for Covid19's level of transmissibility is estimated at a 60% cumulative infection rate,

If it's already spread as fast as you are suggesting then the herd immunity level would be higher than 60%.

The data from Iceland does seem unusual though. Their hospitalization rate seems much lower than expected. I ran the numbers, taking into account the age of those infected, from the Imperial College study and it predicts they should have 53 hospitalizations, they have 25 and 9 in intensive care (I assume this is included in the 25). And that's assuming they caught all the cases which of course they have not. Of course it's likely that many of the known cases will end up needing to be hospitalized.

 

[Lessmog]

Yes, you are right. I tried to make this distinction clear by saying arbitrary and not random. The sample is self-selected and then screened for symptoms. It is not a random sampling. I could probably have worded myself better, but didn't want to go off on a tangent in my reasoning.

There is another erroneous point in my comment worth mentioning, and that's the 0.25% of the population confirmed positive point. I presume that these 52 positive cases must be included in the 950-ish total confirmed cases, but since 52 is a small part of 950, this doesn't have a significant effect on my argument.

Thanks again! I wasn't arguing against you in any way, just trying to clarify the statistical implications.

 

[SageBrush]

directions

There is a lot wrong with unfocused action. Just look at the unimpeded US growth rate