Coronavirus (COVID-19) Discussion Thread

[SvennoJ]

NightlyPoe said:

SvennoJ said:

What is complete fiction? The 80K? Nothing in any of the other data suggests that 80K is too low for the extreme measures that were taken.

Januari 23rd, full lockdown, much stricter than anything Italy is doing.
Growth factor first started declining on Februari 5th, 12 days after full lock down, in line with the incubation period.
Daily active cases peaked on Februari 17th, 25 days after full lock down.
Februari 17th they still reported 1888 new cases which didn't go under 100 until March 6th.

The time line, the math, it all fits.

Where is the complete fiction?

This entire section has no relevance to the question.  There is no math or timeline to fit given that the main variable is the spread before the lockdown.

Italy had it's first cases confirmed on Januari 31st.
They went into lock down on March 13th. (but not as drastic as Wuhan and surrounding cities)

Okay, this is a gross manipulation of the timeline.  Aside from 3 travelers testing positive weeks earlier who had been in China (of whom there's no evidence they are the source of Italy's outbreak), it wasn't until February 19 that Italy got its 4th patient in the Lombardy region where the real outbreak would happen.  In only 18 days Lombardy was under quarantine with the rest of the country only 5 days behind.

Italy would pass China's death total only 29 days after the first person in this outbreak was discovered. 

So yes, China probably suppressed the early numbers, so did Italy.

Well, that's quite the accusation.  What evidence do you have of Italy's malfeasance?

And, btw, even if you provide it, the rate of spread in other countries is more than sufficient.  I didn't use Italy's rate of spread as a guidepost.  Many different, much smaller countries have seen growth rates much higher than what China claims.  And given China's size and density, their growth rate should have been significantly higher than most countries.

Now maybe it was going on for 2 months in China before full lock down

Again, you're making a significant assumption that it was only 2 months.  It was probably significantly longer.  It's extremely unlikely that doctors discovered the virus for some time after it had been introduced.  Remember, no one was looking for it.

Now given this and the incredible rate that it's burning through Europe, yeah, there's pretty much no way that China had such a low transmission rate in the time before they put a lid on things.

Suppressed is the wrong term, my bad. Many of these cases go undetected. The cases from Januari 31st could have already infected other people days before that, who then walked on with maybe just mild flu like symptoms. That's how it starts pretty much everywhere. Canada is also not showing the correct numbers, actively sending people away that want to be tested because they do not fit the profile (travel + age). Community spread isn't admitted to until somebody ends up in the hospital with serious symptoms, tests positive, and contacts can't be traced back to travel. So in essence Canada has been in denial, suppressing numbers, as well. Not by choice, more by incompetence, badly prepared. I expect quite the surge now testing finally gets up to speed. (Already happening)

China shows an average growth rate of 1.15 the week before the first growth peak. Italy is at 1.10 currently.
The average growth rate in the week right after lock down was 1.34 in China, in Italy 1.13 (they already had some other measurements earlier)
Before total lock down in Italy it was 1.19 on average.

Europe is reporting growth rates as low as 1.01 (Denmark) to 1.26 (Switzerland)

So yes it was spreading faster in China!


It starts slow, then accelerates. It's how exponential growth works. It also depends on how contagious and how serious the first few cases were. If the first people were only mildly infected, they might also have a much lower transmission rate. The incubation period varies a lot as well. But once the ball starts rolling, it all averages out and picks up steam.


Btw maybe this will clear some things up
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/02/26/confusion-breeds-distrust-china-keeps-changing-how-it-counts-coronavirus-cases.html
I'm not a fan of cnbc but I already saw the same explanations from a more scientific source a month ago, can't google it atm but it's the same.

The same problem persists now. Clinical suspected cases mixed with lab confirmed tests. Not enough lab capacity, unreliable tests. Different criteria for who to test. Post mortem testing and then it's still the question if the virus killed the patient or an underlying condition etc. Hence I try to look at averages only to lessen the impact of noise in the data.

Last edited by SvennoJ - on 21 March 2020