By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General Discussion - Coronavirus (COVID-19) Discussion Thread

SvennoJ on 25 March 2020
crissindahouse said:

You could also just use numbers from single regions of countries like Italy because you can't just say Norway is a better representation as Italy because of a higher percentage of testing when different regions test differently.

Italy tested over 80k people in the Lombardy which has 10m people. Of those 80k tested, you have around 4,5k deaths and like 33k positive cases.

Lombardy has around as many people as Norway with the same amount of tests and you have like a 30x higher death rate.

Italy might be a very negative scenario but Norway is at least right now a very positive one. But the death rate will increase there as well like it also did everywhere else. That's sadly the truth like we also see in countries like Germany now (which does still look good compared to many others)

I've been analyzing the data for a while now and what stands out is that the time from where detected cases first start to climb (accelerate) to where the death rate slowly starts to climb is on average 12 days. France only took 9 days, while Germany took 15 days. Italy started seeing deaths a lot sooner but the early data is clearly lacking there. A quick look at Norway shows that the ball started rolling there around March 4th. The mean time from onset of symptoms to death is 20 days. Norway is definitely not a better representation since it's only 21 days since cases started getting detected on a regular basis.



Around the Network
Teeqoz on 25 March 2020
crissindahouse said:

You could also just use numbers from single regions of countries like Italy because you can't just say Norway is a better representation as Italy because of a higher percentage of testing when different regions test differently.

Italy tested over 80k people in the Lombardy which has 10m people. Of those 80k tested, you have around 4,5k deaths and like 33k positive cases.

Lombardy has around the same amount of tests and you have like a 30x higher death rate as Norway has.

Italy might be a very negative scenario but Norway is at least right now a very positive one. But the death rate will increase there as well like it also did everywhere else. That's sadly the truth like we also see in countries like Germany now (which does still look good compared to many others)

Lombardy has half the test coverage of Norway, per capita. About 6% of the tests that are performed in Norway test positive for the virus. If 50% of the tests performed in Lombardy are positive as you say, then it is highly likely that they are not able to test enough people and have to focus on strongly suspected cases.

Other countries that have high testing rates - Germany, South Korea, all show a much lower CFR than Italy.



crissindahouse on 25 March 2020
Teeqoz said:
crissindahouse said:

You could also just use numbers from single regions of countries like Italy because you can't just say Norway is a better representation as Italy because of a higher percentage of testing when different regions test differently.

Italy tested over 80k people in the Lombardy which has 10m people. Of those 80k tested, you have around 4,5k deaths and like 33k positive cases.

Lombardy has around the same amount of tests and you have like a 30x higher death rate as Norway has.

Italy might be a very negative scenario but Norway is at least right now a very positive one. But the death rate will increase there as well like it also did everywhere else. That's sadly the truth like we also see in countries like Germany now (which does still look good compared to many others)

Lombardy has half the test coverage of Norway, per capita. About 6% of the tests that are performed in Norway test positive for the virus. If 50% of the tests performed in Lombardy are positive as you say, then it is highly likely that they are not able to test enough people and have to focus on strongly suspected cases.

Other countries that have high testing rates - Germany, South Korea, all show a much lower CFR than Italy.

I'm sure the death rate will be much lower as what we have right now in the Lombardy but it will be also much higher as what Norway has right now until we find better medication.

And let's hope we won't get a second wave even worse than this one



SvennoJ on 25 March 2020
Teeqoz said:

I did say these numbers will rise, and that includes the CFR and the hospitalization rate. However the current numbers are already enough to say that a 15% mortality rate is completely ridiculous, even as a worst case scenario, which was what I was responding to. However the progression of cases turning more serious might just as well be countered by undiagnosed cases, as we certainly have plenty of them in Norway in too.

As for the rest you are saying, everyone won't be infected at the same time, and everyone won't require hospitalization at the same time. Even if they would, it's not like every single person that would be hospitalized will die if they aren't. People are hospitalized to keep them under observation in case their condition worsens, and they might be treated with antiobiotics to prevent opportunistic bacterial infections, but everyone hospitalized case won't automatically turn critical without hospital care.

There are so many ludicrous assumptions to get to an 8% mortality rate that it's a scenario that's not worth thinking about - not in relation to the Covid19 pandemic anyway.

China has done far fewer tests per capita than Norway. South Korea is another country that has a good dataset, and which seem to have gotten some control of the epidemic. They currently have a ~1.3% Case Fatality Rate, and of cases that had an outcome, 3.31% died, though that number is dropping (just 4 days ago it was 4%. Recoveries take more time than fatalities).

I don't assume that everyone that needs to be hospitalized will die without hospitalization, but I also doubt that only 8% need hospital care.

Germany and Italy are two opposites. In Germany the virus was mostly imported by younger / fitter people returning from ski vaction where it mostly stayed. While in Italy it circulated around and got a grip on the older population because of the way families live together.

South Korea was different again, a super spreader causing an early spike which was contained. A good scare that got things under control before it could spread undetected.

Anyway I calculated this through before
https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imperial-college/medicine/sph/ide/gida-fellowships/Imperial-College-COVID19-NPI-modelling-16-03-2020.pdf

0 to 9 -> 3.8 million people, 70% infected 2.66 million, 2.6K in the hospital, 53 in ICU (50 dead)
10 to 19 -> 3.7 million people, 70% infected 2.59 million, 7.8K in the hospital, 388 in ICU (155 dead)
20 to 29 -> 4.4 million people, 70% infected 3.08 million, 37K in the hospital, 1800 in ICU (924 dead)
30 to 39 -> 4.6 million people, 70% infected 3.22 million, 103K in the hospital, 5150 in ICU (2570 dead)
40 to 49 -> 4.4 million people, 70% infected 3.08 million, 151K in the hospital, 9500 in ICU (4620 dead)
50 to 59 -> 4.7 million people, 70% infected 3.29 million, 336K in the hospital, 40940 in ICU (19714 dead)
60 to 69 -> 3.4 million people, 70% infected 2.38 million, 395K in the hospital, 108250 in ICU (52360 dead)
70 to 79 -> 2.8 million people, 70% infected 1.96 million, 476K in hospital, 206K in ICU (100K dead)
88 to 99 -> 1.5 million people, 70% infected 1.05 million, 287K in hospital, 203K in ICU (98K dead)

Now not all will be in the hospital at the same time, but with long recovery times the demand on the hospital system will be far greater than the 4,000 ICU beds in the UK.

A lot depends on the age demographics of a country. The UK would have no problem if they put everyone over 35 out of the way ;) (Apart from a couple thousand deaths and a lot of sick people :/)

Btw China did plenty testing, but with 1.3 billion people, per capita is kinda pointless as a measure when the virus started and mostly stayed in one region
https://www.vox.com/2020/3/2/21161067/coronavirus-covid19-china
China had the luxury of one patient zero, Europe and the rest of the world imported lots of patient zeros in lots of locations :/


Looking at the average hospitalization rate for the UK, about 8%! I stand corrected.
A 1.2% average death rate for the UK and about double that for ICU needs.

So even if the healthcare system collapses, 5% mortality rate is about the most to expect.

Last edited by SvennoJ - on 25 March 2020

Teeqoz on 25 March 2020
crissindahouse said:
Teeqoz said:

Lombardy has half the test coverage of Norway, per capita. About 6% of the tests that are performed in Norway test positive for the virus. If 50% of the tests performed in Lombardy are positive as you say, then it is highly likely that they are not able to test enough people and have to focus on strongly suspected cases.

Other countries that have high testing rates - Germany, South Korea, all show a much lower CFR than Italy.

I'm sure the death rate will be much lower as what we have right now in the Lombardy but it will be also much higher as what Norway has right now until we find better medication.

And let's hope we won't get a second wave even worse than this one

If that was your point, I never suggested otherwise. I just pointed out that Norwegian data is enough to easily disprove any ludicrous notion of a 15% fatality rate.



Around the Network
Teeqoz on 25 March 2020
SvennoJ said:
Teeqoz said:

I did say these numbers will rise, and that includes the CFR and the hospitalization rate. However the current numbers are already enough to say that a 15% mortality rate is completely ridiculous, even as a worst case scenario, which was what I was responding to. However the progression of cases turning more serious might just as well be countered by undiagnosed cases, as we certainly have plenty of them in Norway in too.

As for the rest you are saying, everyone won't be infected at the same time, and everyone won't require hospitalization at the same time. Even if they would, it's not like every single person that would be hospitalized will die if they aren't. People are hospitalized to keep them under observation in case their condition worsens, and they might be treated with antiobiotics to prevent opportunistic bacterial infections, but everyone hospitalized case won't automatically turn critical without hospital care.

There are so many ludicrous assumptions to get to an 8% mortality rate that it's a scenario that's not worth thinking about - not in relation to the Covid19 pandemic anyway.

China has done far fewer tests per capita than Norway. South Korea is another country that has a good dataset, and which seem to have gotten some control of the epidemic. They currently have a ~1.3% Case Fatality Rate, and of cases that had an outcome, 3.31% died, though that number is dropping (just 4 days ago it was 4%. Recoveries take more time than fatalities).

I don't assume that everyone that needs to be hospitalized will die without hospitalization, but I also doubt that only 8% need hospital care.

Germany and Italy are two opposites. In Germany the virus was mostly imported by younger / fitter people returning from ski vaction where it mostly stayed. While in Italy it circulated around and got a grip on the older population because of the way families live together.

South Korea was different again, a super spreader causing an early spike which was contained. A good scare that got things under control before it could spread undetected.

Anyway I calculated this through before
https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imperial-college/medicine/sph/ide/gida-fellowships/Imperial-College-COVID19-NPI-modelling-16-03-2020.pdf

0 to 9 -> 3.8 million people, 70% infected 2.66 million, 2.6K in the hospital, 53 in ICU (50 dead)
10 to 19 -> 3.7 million people, 70% infected 2.59 million, 7.8K in the hospital, 388 in ICU (155 dead)
20 to 29 -> 4.4 million people, 70% infected 3.08 million, 37K in the hospital, 1800 in ICU (924 dead)
30 to 39 -> 4.6 million people, 70% infected 3.22 million, 103K in the hospital, 5150 in ICU (2570 dead)
40 to 49 -> 4.4 million people, 70% infected 3.08 million, 151K in the hospital, 9500 in ICU (4620 dead)
50 to 59 -> 4.7 million people, 70% infected 3.29 million, 336K in the hospital, 40940 in ICU (19714 dead)
60 to 69 -> 3.4 million people, 70% infected 2.38 million, 395K in the hospital, 108250 in ICU (52360 dead)
70 to 79 -> 2.8 million people, 70% infected 1.96 million, 476K in hospital, 206K in ICU (100K dead)
88 to 99 -> 1.5 million people, 70% infected 1.05 million, 287K in hospital, 203K in ICU (98K dead)

Now not all will be in the hospital at the same time, but with long recovery times the demand on the hospital system will be far greater than the 4,000 ICU beds in the UK.

A lot depends on the age demographics of a country. The UK would have no problem if they put everyone over 35 out of the way ;) (Apart from a couple thousand deaths and a lot of sick people :/)

Those numbers imply an overall 8% hospitalization rate...



SvennoJ on 25 March 2020
Teeqoz said:

Those numbers imply an overall 8% hospitalization rate...

Yep, I just realized that and edited, I stand corrected.



supermattia10 on 25 March 2020

The same italian region of Veneto, which has the highest number of tests per capita in the world(80K tests on 5M people and 7K positives), has a far lower mortality rate than Lombardy. (Lombardy 13%, Veneto 3.5%, and the rest of Italy 7% of mortality)

However the same head of the italian "civil protection" Borrelli says that in regions with many cases, as Lombardy, the real cases are 8 times higher than discovered ones through tests, so in Lombardy there have been more than 100K of real cases,where many of them are people closed at home for links with certified positive cases or people without symptoms.

If you want to see more specific data of italian regions check this github: https://github.com/pcm-dpc/COVID-19/tree/master/schede-riepilogative/regioni

Last edited by supermattia10 - on 25 March 2020

SvennoJ on 25 March 2020
NightlyPoe said:
JRPGfan said:

*edit2:
If you want to use big data sets, use China's.
No country has been as strict as them with testing.

They meassure your temperature everytime you exit your apartment buildings, everytime you enter a shop, everytime you return ect.
Ontop of testing for the virus, everytime anyone had symptoms or fever.

This ofc means they "found" alot of sick people really early, and could treat them early.
They have a Mortality rate of over 4% currently.

Leaving aside that I don't trust China's numbers, they did reach a point where their hospitals were completely overwhelmed.  After that, the mortality rate skyrockets.

So much about this depends on the stress to the system.  As long as there are enough beds, equipment, and personnel, it's manageable in a "that's life" sort of tragedy.  You reach beyond that point and it quickly becomes a horror show.

It's not just the healthcare system that gets overwhelmed. If 20% or more of the essential workforce gets too sick to work for a couple weeks we likely end up having a lot more problems. I have no idea what the redundancies are to keep the power on.

The higher death rate in Wuhan probably also has to do with early hospital transmission Hospital-associated transmission was suspected as the presumed mechanism of infection for affected health professionals (40 [29%]) and hospitalized patients (17 [12.3%]).

That happened a lot despite quarantine precautions. Italy has the same problem but Singapore and Hong Kong seem to handle it better
https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/keeping-the-coronavirus-from-infecting-health-care-workers

Meanwhile in Europe it's a real problem
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/24/world/europe/coronavirus-europe-covid-19.html

Out of Spain’s 40,000 confirmed coronavirus cases, 5,400 — nearly 14 percent — are medical professionals, the health ministry said on Tuesday. No other country has reported health care staff accounting for a double-digit percentage of total infections.

But the problem is widespread throughout Europe. In Italy, France and Spain, more than 30 health care professionals have died of the coronavirus, and thousands of others have had to self-isolate.

In Brescia province, the center of Italy’s outbreak, 10 to 15 percent of doctors and nurses have been infected and put out of commission, according to a doctor there.

Patients that are already weakened are more at risk in hospitals where covid19 patients are sent to, and healthcare workers are even more at risk chipping away at the ability to cope with the outbreak.

So yep, flatten it as fast as possible. While hospitals fill up, the people that need to run them run out :/



kazuyamishima on 25 March 2020

USA will surpass Italy and China “confirmed” cases in about 2 days.

Edit: it seems that it will surpass China tomorrow and maybe Italy.

almost 13.5k new cases confirmed for today 😮

Last edited by kazuyamishima - on 25 March 2020