dreamshark (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
dreamshark) wrote2020-02-23 12:59 pm
dreamshark) wrote2020-02-23 12:59 pm
Entry tags:
Am I the only one worrying about the new coronavirus?
I admit it, my first reaction was along the same lines as everybody else I know. Oh, it's that SARS thing again. Wait, whatever happened to SARS anyway? It just kind of disappeared after a while, right? Never did spread much beyond China. Too bad about the deaths in China, but *shrug* not something I need to worry about. And, hey, a 2% fatality rate isn't really that high, right?
But I can't help following medical news obsessively, and I'm beginning to realize that this is much worse than SARS. The fatality rate is lower (SARS was an alarming 5-10%) but it is FAR more contagious. It's following a pattern much more reminiscent of the 1918 Spanish Flu (which had a mortality rate of only 2-5% but spread like wildfire and killed more people worldwide than World War I).
Usually, when a new disease is identified the initial fatality rate estimate is way too high because it's based solely on people who were sick enough to seek medical care. Once we get better at identifying cases, the mortality rate usually starts dropping. For the first few weeks the rate held steady at 2% even as the total number of cases exploded, but I really expected it to head down to about 1%. But no. Now the rate is inching UP instead of down. The most recent numbers I've seen were about 75,000 cases confirmed (worldwide) with about 2,000 deaths. Do the math. The reported fatality rate is RISING, even as more sub-clinical cases are identified. That is Not Good.
Worst of all, there is growing evidence that people who are completely asymptomatic can spread the virus. That's not 100% clear, but there doesn't seem to be any doubt that people with symptoms no more concerning than a common cold can spread the disease. And the initial guess of a 2-week incubation period seems to be about right (and that's a long incubation period). The epidemiologists' nightmare is a highly contagious disease with a long incubation period that is contagious during the incubation period. That might be what we have here.
Remember those 400 Americans who were evacuated from the Diamond Princess plague ship? The ones that were sick were sent to hospitals in Japan, so supposedly the only evacuees being repatriated were healthy. But it turns out that 14 of those 400 actually had the virus (but no symptoms). They had all been tested, of course, but the results didn't come back until they were loading them into the planes. So they sealed off these potential carriers with plastic in the rear of the planes, hoping that would keep them from infecting any of the healthy people in the front. Did that work? I don't know. I think all those unfortunate folks are still in quarantine, so it's too soon to be sure.
Latest news of the day - a surprise explosion of cases in northern Italy. Nobody seems to know the source of infection - a single individual? Health officials seem to think so, as they are reportedly desperately searching for Patient Zero. If one infected person in a public space can lead to 170 cases in 3 days, we're in trouble, folks.
But I can't help following medical news obsessively, and I'm beginning to realize that this is much worse than SARS. The fatality rate is lower (SARS was an alarming 5-10%) but it is FAR more contagious. It's following a pattern much more reminiscent of the 1918 Spanish Flu (which had a mortality rate of only 2-5% but spread like wildfire and killed more people worldwide than World War I).
Usually, when a new disease is identified the initial fatality rate estimate is way too high because it's based solely on people who were sick enough to seek medical care. Once we get better at identifying cases, the mortality rate usually starts dropping. For the first few weeks the rate held steady at 2% even as the total number of cases exploded, but I really expected it to head down to about 1%. But no. Now the rate is inching UP instead of down. The most recent numbers I've seen were about 75,000 cases confirmed (worldwide) with about 2,000 deaths. Do the math. The reported fatality rate is RISING, even as more sub-clinical cases are identified. That is Not Good.
Worst of all, there is growing evidence that people who are completely asymptomatic can spread the virus. That's not 100% clear, but there doesn't seem to be any doubt that people with symptoms no more concerning than a common cold can spread the disease. And the initial guess of a 2-week incubation period seems to be about right (and that's a long incubation period). The epidemiologists' nightmare is a highly contagious disease with a long incubation period that is contagious during the incubation period. That might be what we have here.
Remember those 400 Americans who were evacuated from the Diamond Princess plague ship? The ones that were sick were sent to hospitals in Japan, so supposedly the only evacuees being repatriated were healthy. But it turns out that 14 of those 400 actually had the virus (but no symptoms). They had all been tested, of course, but the results didn't come back until they were loading them into the planes. So they sealed off these potential carriers with plastic in the rear of the planes, hoping that would keep them from infecting any of the healthy people in the front. Did that work? I don't know. I think all those unfortunate folks are still in quarantine, so it's too soon to be sure.
Latest news of the day - a surprise explosion of cases in northern Italy. Nobody seems to know the source of infection - a single individual? Health officials seem to think so, as they are reportedly desperately searching for Patient Zero. If one infected person in a public space can lead to 170 cases in 3 days, we're in trouble, folks.
no subject
I don't have a link handy, but I was both amused and reassured when the Minnesota Department of Health, maybe a week or two ago, issued a series of guidelines basically saying what they'd tell people to do if the virus actually arrived. They did not explicitly say either "We got you" or "We know the Trump administration has gotten rid of a lot of the experts who could handle things at the federal level, but in Minnesota, we definitely know what we're doing," but there was some strong subtext.
P.
no subject
no subject
K.
no subject
I haven't seen this mentioned much, but wouldn't "don't shake hands" seem like a more important precaution? Seems like a more polite option than rushing into the bathroom to scrub up after every handshake.
no subject
P.
no subject
I think it's most likely that Health Authorities are advising AGAINST masks because they don't want to contribute to mass panic. It might be unnecessary, but how could it be bad for you? Without an accompanying explanation, I just blow off "advice" like that as an officious attempt by authorities to sound like they know what they are talking about. It annoys me that they are spewing advice with no clear justification, though.
I see absolutely no reason for people in the US to be wearing masks in public at this point, and am not trying to whip up mass panic. It would, however, be nice to know at some point whether masks are helpful or not, or just the health equivalent of Security Theater.
no subject