HN Theater @HNTheaterMonth

> HIV is so fundamentally different

Coronaviruses are very different. We've rarely had any this deadly before. All vaccines are different; they're not one blanket thing. Smallpox vaccines are attenuated virus (a virus that has mutated to be benign in humans; in the case of Smallpox, the first vaccine by Jenner was injecting people with Horsepox).

Most Influenza vaccines are heat treated/inactivated virus.

In all cases, vaccines try to produce antibodies and force our immune systems to develop a memory for a virus we haven't actually been exposed to. As shown in the links above, this might not work at all for coronavirus.

To some extent, the actual interactions of vaccines, are somewhat opaque. This In A Nutshell video shows a very small part of the adaptive immune system, greatly simplified:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BSypUV6QUNw

> The virus isn't just going to "burn out" anytime soon

Exponential growth doesn't go on forever. It has to hit an inflection point:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kas0tIxDvrg

The more deadly a virus is, the faster it does burn out. It runs out of hosts to infect or everyone develops an immunity. SARS/MERS may have had lower outbreaks because of how much more dangerous they were.

If you graph fatalities on a logarithmic scale, you'll see we're already well past the inflection point in the US:

https://aatishb.com/covidtrends/?data=deaths

The cases are going up, but the fatalities are not, indicating there may be a lot of over-counting. Keep in mind people who test positive but die of a car wreck are counted as COVID19. All these people getting surgery after 3 months are required to get tested just for their surgery, and a positive antibody test counts as an active case, even if they're not sick or have the virus at all.

It's so bad in the UK they've stopped reporting fatality numbers due to issues with the data.

⬐ DiogenesKynikos

> Coronaviruses are very different. We've rarely had any this deadly before.

SARS and MERS.

> Keep in mind people who test positive but die of a car wreck are counted as COVID19.

I'd like to see evidence that this has happened, that's it's not some freak outlier, and that it has any meaningful impact on the reported death toll. Looking at excess mortality, it looks like deaths have been under-reported, if anything. It's getting tiresome to see people trotting out the anecdote about someone getting in a car wreck and being counted as a CoVID-19 death.

⬐ KaiserPro

In the UK, there are the daily public health england tallies, which are unrelaible and include anyone who has died and tested for covid.

Then there are the stats from the ONS where they have actually verified that covid is the cause. The numbers are not very different.

⬐ fiftyfifty

> Keep in mind people who test positive but die of a car wreck are counted as COVID19.

In Colorado there was lawsuit over this, because there was a case of a college age man dying of alcohol poisoning but he tested positive for Covid-19 so was counted as a Covid-19 death per CDC regulations. So the Colorado Health Department now tracks two numbers: people that died with Covid-19 and people that died because of Covid-19. As of right now the first is 1,752 deaths and the second is 1,615 deaths. Statistically it's not a huge difference, you can see the numbers here:

https://covid19.colorado.gov/data/case-data

⬐ xienze

> Statistically it's not a huge difference

8.5% isn’t significant?

⬐ DiogenesKynikos

These numbers aren't directly comparable. They're reported on different timescales, because determining cause of death takes longer than determining that someone who died had CoVID-19.

⬐ brohee

The UK got a 65k people over mortality over the last months, for 45k official COVID-19 victims. So if anything the UK is undercounting COVID-19 victims.

See https://www.ft.com/content/a26fbf7e-48f8-11ea-aeb3-955839e06... for excess mortality in a few countries. Many victims are not counted.

⬐ refurb

There are already plenty of stories of empty ERs - people with chest and abdominal pain aren’t coming in.

You cant lump all excess mortality into the Covid bucket.

⬐ brohee

In many countries, e.g. France, excess mortality and COVID-19 victims match very closely. Sure there may have been more untreated cardiovascular events, but there were also a lot less accidents and it seems it evened out...

⬐ Nursie

Nearly all countries are like this AFAICT the US coronavirus deaths figure is around 140k, but the full excess death figure is somewhere around 170k (it's difficult to find good figures, some are here - https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid19/excess_deaths.htm )

⬐ polack

> It's so bad in the UK they've stopped reporting fatality numbers due to issues with the data.

If the UK where really serious about the actual covid death toll they should address the huge discrepancy between the reported covid deaths and the excess mortality during the pandemic. Not a good look for the UK.

⬐ Nursie

Nearly all countries have a discrepancy there, if you can find the figures. You can find some for the US here, though not a single, unified figure - https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid19/excess_deaths.htm

Interestingly enough the weekly UK excess death figures went negative at the end of June, meaning less people died that week than in previous years. Presumably this is due to the huge number of deaths in care homes in previous weeks.

⬐ rotexo

There is more to the immune system than antibody production. A lot of the focus is on antibody production, because it is easy to measure. T Cell responses, for instance, can be very durable for coronaviruses--for instance, people who recovered from SARS in 2003 still have a T Cell response when exposed to a protein from that virus (https://blogs.sciencemag.org/pipeline/archives/2020/07/15/ne...).

The Oxford/AZ (https://blogs.sciencemag.org/pipeline/archives/2020/07/20/ne...) and the Pfizer team (https://blogs.sciencemag.org/pipeline/archives/2020/07/20/mo...) have both reported T Cell responses induced by their vaccines.

Robus T Cell responses should be protective, but we are still mapping that out for SARS-CoV-2 (https://blogs.sciencemag.org/pipeline/archives/2020/07/15/ne...).

⬐ tonyedgecombe

>It's so bad in the UK they've stopped reporting fatality numbers due to issues with the data.

They were reported again today. They weren't stopped because they were bad but because there were descrepencies between the counting for each nation of the UK.

⬐ fwip

> Keep in mind people who test positive but die of a car wreck are counted as COVID19.

This simply isn't true.

⬐ Trasmatta

I know that all vaccines are different, the thing I take issue with is using HIV as evidence that a vaccine for this virus might take decades to develop, despite all the current evidence to the contrary.

> The more deadly a virus is, the faster it does burn out. It runs out of hosts to infect or everyone develops an immunity. SARS/MERS may have had lower outbreaks because of how much more dangerous they were.

At what point is the virus going to "run out of hosts to infect" or reach a point where "everyone develops an immunity"? Everything I've read from epidemiologists seems to indicate we're a long ways away from that. We're not going to get a free pass from herd immunity anytime soon (https://covid19-projections.com/us estimates that the US is at 8.4% total infection so far), and we can't count on it just burning itself out. It's a bad combination, where it's not deadly enough to quickly burn itself out like SARS/MERS, but has a death rate higher than something like the flu, and is very transmissible.

> The cases are going up, but the fatalities are not, indicating there may be a lot of over-counting

I'm very skeptical of the over-counting claim, without evidence. And I don't think it's quite true to claim that fatalities are not going up. The 7-day rolling average of deaths in the US has been climbing since around July 5th.

100k is a rough estimate. It might be higher, but will most likely be lower. The data will need to be pruned and carefully looked at. There are incentives for people to misclassify deaths at COVID19[0]. It will likely not get much higher than 100k as exponential growth doesn't continue indefinitely[1]. It's practically gone in Italy right now.

600k die every year from hearth disease. 700k died globally from mosquito transmitted illness[2]. There are tons of secondary effects. People in America have died of Malaria. Many have committed suicide (Including my best friend's flatmate). Many were told not to come to hospitals. Many hearth attacks were wrongly attributed to COVID if a patient tested positive for it.

We've seen massive amounts of people at beaches in Florida, Texas and other places, as well as these protests and riots, and there are no massive spikes in fatalities 2~4 weeks after those events. The WHO said asymptomatic spread was rare, then waked it back (probably because of political pressure from Dr Fauchi), even though it was known asymptomatic spread was probably not a major transmission in February[3]!

This entire thing has been one massive media manipulation, and in less than two days, the entire thing flipped from one global narrative to another, like a switch!

[0]: https://battlepenguin.com/tech/fighting-with-the-data/#incen...

[1]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kas0tIxDvrg

[2]: https://www.isglobal.org/en_GB/-/mosquito-el-animal-mas-leta...

[3]: https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/02/paper-non-symptomati...

⬐ bombas

“ We've seen massive amounts of people at beaches in Florida, Texas and other places, as well as these protests and riots, and there are no massive spikes in fatalities 2~4 weeks after those events.”

https://dfw.cbslocal.com/2020/06/13/texas-sets-another-recor...

Wrong. But yes please continue trying to explain shit you have no idea about.

⬐ jessaustin

100k is a rough estimate. It might be higher, but will most likely be lower.

How is this going to happen? We haven't controlled the disease even by shutting lots of stuff down, and the political will does not exist to keep that stuff shut down. After everything reopens the disease will certainly kill more people. There won't be an effective vaccine until a great deal more research is done; that's a decade away at least. Effective treatments such as antibodies will not be scalable for many months. We'll be lucky if we hold USA covid deaths this year to 200k.

"there are plenty of other data" -- would you be able to educate with some sources? I've been digging in deep and trying to keep an impartial opinion, but have not seen solid evidence that this is true -- or, as you say "there is a study for every truth", I've seen no study to indicate "it is hardly dangerous" (which also feels subjective in those words)

> Also, so many deaths are being counted as covid when the patient already had a severe condition

Yes... as many scientists talk about, COVID-19 has a much more severe effect in people with underlying conditions. Here is where Dr. Fauci, or the CDC as a whole talks specifically about underlying issues: https://www.cdc.gov/.../hcp/underlying-conditions.html

"the numbers are way inflated" is using generalized language for something that might be true, but even if you take a _very_ conservative view and consider 50% of the reports are false (and I've seen nowhere claiming it's anywhere near that high), the 50% of remaining deaths and complications are significantly high enough that it's far worse than the flu, and far worse if lockdown wasn't in play where some basic math indicates it would be 10x worse: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kas0tIxDvrg

3 blue one brown had a great video on exponential growth that detailed how a 10% difference in the numbers is the difference between being halfway there and having orders of magnitude to go.

As I'm sure you're aware, the point of the numbers isn't to change the reality of the situation, it's to understand what that reality is. And the people that care are epidemiologists and leaders with decades of experience fighting pandemic after pandemic. You know, people that know what they're talking about? Might be worth trying to spend time actually learning how the people that are spending day and night trying to save your life and the lives of your loved ones do their work before dismissing them as useless.

https://youtu.be/Kas0tIxDvrg

⬐ phaemon

I didn't. Try reading what I wrote. I'm dismissing half-brained idiots who try to downplay the seriousness of the situation by playing with numbers while ignoring what those numbers mean.

I don't need any self-righteous advice from you.

you're right if one assumes a linear growth, but the reality is that it has an exponential growth. See https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kas0tIxDvrg for a short intro.

⬐ tarruda

It only looks exponential at the beginning: https://voxeu.org/article/it-s-not-exponential-economist-s-v...

⬐ cycrutchfield

It certainly looks exponential until mitigation/suppression measures are put in place or you reach herd immunity. Guess which of the two will result in more deaths?

⬐ glofish

the problem with that approach is that treats everyone as equally susceptible

most likely those more susceptible get it first

it is not clear what percentage of the population would either not get it or if they do get not get noticeably affected

⬐ cycrutchfield

I think Diamond Princess is a pretty good petri dish scenario for testing that hypothesis. In fact, although there are still some ongoing cases so the data is not finalized, you can normalize by passenger/crew age and reach a final infection fatality rate estimate for the whole population.

Here's a tip: it still comes out to be 5-10x higher than the seasonal flu.

⬐ DiogenesKynikos

Virtually everyone is susceptible. This is a novel virus, spreading in a human population with virtually 0% immunity.

With an R_0 of 2.4, approximately 60% of the population can be expected to contract the virus within a few months, unless mitigation measures are taken.

I live in Bergen County. There is a lack of panic - although I'm on the north side, opposite of the most infected parts.

I went grocery shopping earlier today, there were a few people with masks but no one was really trying to keep a distance from others. Plenty of people there, perhaps a few less than usual. At times there are so many people that they have to restrict entry into the store and create a line outside (possibly to help with social distancing, but there are still too many people in the store for that to matter). It's the opposite of social distancing.

The disaster in NYC, and the counties immediately north/east of Bergen (Westchester, Rockland) is going to spill over. We're not going to be able to handle it and we don't have the clout of NY to push for more resources.

In a recent video, 3Blue1Brown wrote "The only thing to fear is a lack of fear itself." This is what worries me. My parents are at risk as long-time smokers and if Valley runs out of ventilators and PPE, our major/usual option is out.

(excellent video by the way) https://youtu.be/Kas0tIxDvrg

⬐ m0zg

> no one was really trying to keep a distance from others

Get ready then. I'm in WA, at the former epicenter, and the distancing is pretty pervasive. WA managed to get to the point where growth in cases is linear and decreasing, it looks like. NJ graphs look pretty scary right now.

⬐ OrangeMango

> runs out of ventilators

Production is ramping up. I know some people that own a factory in Illinois that makes ventilator components. They've been running full bore but just yesterday got the Federal certification of essential parts so they can get an uninterrupted supply of aluminum and steel.

⬐ everybodyknows

Same here in yet-to-be-hit pocket at other side of US, SoCal. Hardware store staff conferring with grey-haired customers at 2' distance. No sanitizer anywhere.

⬐ danharaj

Even on this site where people are somewhat more technically oriented than the general public, you see people who haven't a fucking clue what an exponential function looks like. NYS is expecting the peak 2 weeks from now. The numbers are Not Good. ICU's will certainly be overwhelmed and doctors will have to choose who must die. I don't think the healthcare system in NY will collapse but it will be tenuous even with the field hospitals they're setting up.

I think in large parts of the country where people aren't taking this seriously, the healthcare system will collapse and it will be awful. Especially if national leaders push to end lockdown very prematurely.

3blue1brown did a good video explaining the logistic shape of pandemic curves: https://youtu.be/Kas0tIxDvrg

My key takeaway was that once you see the inflection point, you know that you’ll have roughly 2x the number infections by the time it’s done.

⬐ polishdude20

I'm wondering if the claim that we will have two times the number infections after the inflection point is seen will actually be worse. I have a feeling when people see there is an inflection point, they will relax their precautions and make it worse.

This is the time to resort to drastic measures to prevent drastic consequences. Have you seen this from 3Blue1Brown: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kas0tIxDvrg "Exponential growth and epidemics" ?

And those who don't understand, or need a refresher on, exponential growth should watch this great video by 3Blue1Brown.

Exponential growth and epidemics:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kas0tIxDvrg

⬐ voxadam

While not specifically about the exponential growth of pandemics I've always liked the lecture "Exponential Growth, Population and Energy" by Dr. Albert Bartlett.

https://youtu.be/kZA9Hnp3aV4

> "Or, multiply it by less if you want to take into account various amounts of social distancing we're all doing. I'll cut that number above down by a huge amount – 90% – on the assumption that we all learn to stay home and self-isolate immediately, just to be super aggressive on my assumptions about how humanity will rise to the occasion"

Dropping 90% is not a great way to calculate this. Look at the math for 61 days out (from March 8): https://youtu.be/Kas0tIxDvrg?t=465

I don't think our social distancing and hand washing will be near enough to prevent millions of deaths, but it's important to recognize that a small change in the growth rate does make a huge difference.

Estimating how much we can affect the growth rate is hard, but I think models should be based on a iffy guess on that value rather than an iffy guess on the resulting count. (Expert models certainly are.)

A lot of people have similar statements, but the use of the word "most" in this context just doesn't matter past some cutoff. The flu is very far on the safe side of that cutoff, and the coronavirus is very far on the bad side.

The flu and the common cold virus behave comparably to the current pandemic. The flu in particular kills about 300K per year after infecting about 20% of the global population. That's a mortality rate of 0.02% and a survival rate of 99.98% for the general population, which is not a fun statistic, but nothing to panic about either.

Critically, the hospitalisation rates for the flu are so low that the current infrastructure can handle it. People still die, but only if they couldn't be saved with medical intervention. Much of the time they will receive treatment and live.

Even if you shift the numbers around a lot -- say, 50% infection rate -- the orders of magnitude come out to about the same. Governments can just put out ad campaigns to encourage people to get the flu vaccine to compensate for a particularly bad flu season.

The critical thing with the cold and the flu is that they move well past the initial exponential growth phase into a "logistic curve" long before the hospital systems become overloaded with the sick. That is, each new strain of the flu runs out of victims by hitting the population ceiling of 7.6 billion. Not everyone is vulnerable, and the rest either become immune or protected by herd immunity.

Now compare this to the Coronavirus. It has a mortality rate of about 0.8% of confirmed cases, with medical care. Much more importantly, about 10% of the confirmed cases required intensive care.

Nobody really knows the ratio of confirmed-to-real cases, but I'll be generous and assume that only 20% of all cases get a confirmed diagnosis, with 80% of cases just shrugging it off as a case of the "sniffles". Similarly, I'll assume that the virus will halt at around 20% of the total population.

For Italy, with a population of 60M people, that's 12 million infected, equivalent to 2.4 million confirmed cases, 240K in intensive care, and 19K dead.

But I lied.

I lied when I said "240K in intensive care". There just aren't that many beds, or intubation kits, or CPAP machines, or even oxygen masks. There aren't anywhere near enough doctors, or nurses, or any resource you care to name. I know this to be true because all of these things have run out already.

Long before the exponential curve starts to "slow down" and become logistic, the entire medical infrastructure becomes overwhelmed and the cases that "would survive with intensive care" turn into "deaths".

Worse, this happened at a "confirmed case count" of about 10K. I said 2.4M above!

The conclusion is that the Coronavirus can overwhelm medical systems waaaaaaay before it hits the "knee of the logistic curve", making it a nearly pure exponential curve. Exacerbating this is the incubation time, meaning that any measure taken today will have essentially no effect for at least a week.

Act now and save lives, act tomorrow and see your loved ones die.

This is the difference.

3blue1brown explains it quite well, and I recommend everyone watch his video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kas0tIxDvrg

Maybe they should include this 3Blue1Brown video to explain what 'exponential' means in this context:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kas0tIxDvrg

All epidemiologists agree with this. All of them. They've been making public statements to that effect and signing letters reiterating the urgency of the situation.

So what are you saying exactly? I don't understand what your point is!

I'm agreeing with the epidemiologists. Their maths checks out. It's the same maths as my maths. It's the same maths as everyone's maths: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kas0tIxDvrg

The only people I hear disagreements from are people who don't know how to use a calculator, Or they do, but haven't bothered. Nonetheless, they seem to have lots of time argue online, dismissing logical, coherent, and factual arguments without making any defensible statements of their own.

⬐ UncleMeat

The situation is urgent. Action is warranted.

But snarkily saying "well obviously you understand excel here just type in some numbers" is not productive, specifically when somebody is asking for information from experts. The experts exist. They've done the research. Let's point people to them rather than signal boosting blogs written by engineers.

Obviously it takes more than just "this is how exponentials work" to distinguish between different outcomes and decide on the appropriate action plans.

At the current exponential rate of worldwide growth, by the end of June, we will be in one of these two scenarios:

1) Almost everyone in the world who is susceptible has it, or had it.

2) We implemented a way to slow down the global growth rate, or it slowed down by itself.

One way or another, we will know in a just a few months.

If you want to check the math, skip to about 3:20 on this video from 3Blue1Brown, Exponential growth and epidemics.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kas0tIxDvrg

To be exact, it's a "logistic curve", which initially is exponential. From this 3Blue1Brown excellent video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kas0tIxDvrg

Even at a 0.7% mortality rate, you’re talking about a small percentage of a very big number. Up to 70% of the world’s population may become infected. [0] In that case, a 0.7% death rate converts into 37 MILLION deaths.

The runs on toilet paper are the irrational panic of humans. I saw some comments on the internet early on in the outbreak telling people to buy anything they can’t live without for two weeks, with particular emphasis on toilet rolls, so that’s probably where that came from.

With regards to the extreme measures, my understanding is that this is primarily to try to prevent health care systems collapsing.

Around 20% [1] of people with COVID-19 are sick enough to need hospitalisation, and 1/4 of those (5% of total cases) require intensive care. The number of hospital beds is finite, and the number of ICU beds even smaller. Most health care systems already run near maximum capacity, and right now we’re barely past the peak of flu season [2], so there is very little buffer.

The rate for new infections is dictated by the number of people exposed to an infected person and the probability of each exposure becoming an infection [3]. As such, the primary lever we have to try to “flatten the curve” is to reduce the number of people exposed to an infected person, and the way to do that from the top-down is to ban as many congregations of people as possible. Again, since this is exponential growth we’re talking about, even a tiny downward shift in the number of exposures results in an unintuitively large reduction in total cases.

The rate of infection today is still exponential—doubling every 6 days in most places—and there are enough infections already that just a few more case doublings in many areas will overwhelm hospital systems, leading to situations equal or worse to what we are seeing already in Italy [4].

Once hospitals are full, it will be impossible for every person who needs hospital care to receive it. People with treatable injuries and illnesses will die simply because there is no more capacity—and this is every person, not just those infected with COVID-19.

In the state where I live, which has a population of ~5.6 million, we’ve got about 500 free hospital beds right now. Without these extreme measures to reduce the infection rate, it’s obvious that we’re headed toward catastrophe. We lost the luxury of using a light touch approach because the case numbers are already too high to gently steer the ship away from the iceberg. We’re going to hit it anyway, but more people will survive if we don’t crash into it full steam ahead. [5]

[0] https://www.cbsnews.com/news/coronavirus-infection-outbreak-...

[1] http://weekly.chinacdc.cn/en/article/id/e53946e2-c6c4-41e9-9...

[2] https://www.cdc.gov/flu/weekly/weeklyarchives2019-2020/image...

[3] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kas0tIxDvrg

[4] https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/03/who-gets-h...

[5] https://www.flattenthecurve.com/

Much like this... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kas0tIxDvrg

This is a simple tool for visualizing how massive the impact if minor behavioral changes can be in the spread of infectious diseases. This model is mostly based off of the math discussed in 3Blue1Brown's video on exponents and epidemics.

https://youtu.be/Kas0tIxDvrg

There are tons of ways this model could be improved, so please feel free to contribute.

https://github.com/ralusek/worse-than-flu

This went by here from 3Blue1Brown: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kas0tIxDvrg "Exponential growth and epidemics"

Hopefully you're correct and it won't grow out of control and infect most of the world, but for now the idea is to keep the burden on the medical systems low to prevent knock-on effects of over-running our caring capacity.

⬐ aty268

Thank you for sharing! I'll check this out after work.

But months ago they really couldn’t have known. We still don’t know how many will be infected. All we can do is take precautionary measures. The WHO messaging should have been stronger and earlier, but it isn’t their fault for not labeling a pandemic months ago. Granted, there was enough data and research done to squarely label this as a pandemic, and that’s really where I assign blame on them.

Here is a neat video that helps put things in perspective for most any viewer. https://youtu.be/Kas0tIxDvrg

⬐ pier25

> But months ago they really couldn’t have known

It already looked pretty bad mid/late January when China started construction of hospitals. Were there any reasons to think it would no go global?

⬐ makomk

Wuhan was probably a lot further up the curve of exponential spreading before China took any action than a superficial reading of the stats would suggest. Their reported cases were basically rate-limited by how fast they could test people with the most obvious and serious symptoms at the point they locked down Wuhan. It's not clear exactly how bad it was - I don't think there's much data out there - but there's a couple of alarming numbers quietly tucked away in the WHO joint mission's report. Apparently they went back and tested samples taken from people in Wuhan with influenza-like symptoms at the start of January. 1 out of 20 samples from the first week of January tested positive and 3 out of 20 samples from the second week. That's... not good. (No numbers are given for subsequent weeks.)

There's no particular reason to assume it would take the same path in other countries took some sort of action, even if the actions weren't nearly as forceful as a complete lockdown. Especially since that lockdown was basically a blind and desperate shot in the dark based on incomplete and dubious information.

⬐ fock

in Germany in January people talked about: - well, it's China, you know, they don't have nice hospitals there - the flu is killing people too and you're not vaccinated! - our democratic society will be much better at containing that, people are mord open - the methods in China are soooo stoneage, we are good at contact tracing.

So: no, there was no objective reason to think it would not go global, but it was faaaar away...

⬐ paulmd

"that's two-months-from-now-me's problem!"

⬐ beaunative

To be fair, China already delcared state of emergency months ago, but for the WHO to declare pandemic and recognize it as a international problem, it has to be that other countries has also done that. WHO cannot predict things, and they can't declare Pandemic when what they have is mere suspicion, it has to be an actual pandemic to declare. I'm pretty sure numerous experts have warned about the pandemic thing.

⬐ pier25

Ok, the WHO has to wait until it's a pandemic to declare it a pandemic. But if it's already a pandemic how does that help?

Wouldn't it be better if the WHO actually helped prevent the pandemic in the first place?

⬐ beaunative

I'm pretty sure WHO is involved early on along with the Chinese authories when they first spotted it. They are already helping.

WHO is merely declaring matter of fact about the virus's spreading. Which is kind of it's primary function, to declare things and publish reports so the governments can act on them. They can't really do much beyond that.

⬐ pier25

> Which is kind of it's primary function, to declare things and publish reports so the governments can act on them

Thanks for clarifying, I thought the WHO was more like a global CDC.

3Blue1Brown has a recent video on this that explains it really well: https://youtu.be/Kas0tIxDvrg

⬐ jmkni

Thanks!

⬐ plemer

3Blue1Brown is just exceptional. I don’t know anyone else’s combination of animation and explanation that comes close.

3blue1brown does: https://youtu.be/Kas0tIxDvrg

> That's my point: to observably flatten the curve, you need to go almost all the way there of killing it altogether.

no, you don't. killing it completely would (hand-waving) require taking R0 < 1, and holding it there indefinitely.

any reduction in R0 at all will flatten the curve, at least a bit. and small changes in the rate of growth can have a huge impact when you're dealing with (even temporarily) exponential growth. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kas0tIxDvrg

3B1B to the rescue

https://youtu.be/Kas0tIxDvrg

People keep extrapolating that tens of millions will die, and I don't doubt that tens of millions surely would _if_ there were no lock-downs! (The subject of this article!)

The whole point of locking down Wuhan/Hubei and then northern Italy and now the whole country and other places and cancelling large public gatherings and events is that local, regional, and national authorities start seeing the numbers soaring and initiate extreme mitigation strategies.

We don't know how successful these strategies will be individually/collectively in the long run but if China is anything to go by it can severely retard the spread of the virus.

To show I'm not spouting out of my derriere compare the logarithmic infection and death rates of China[1] and Italy[2]

So you have to modify your formula: `7.8 billion * 0.6 * 0.03 * mitigation_factor = ?` We just don't know what the mitigation_factor is yet and because the spread is exponential any dent in the rate of spread brings the fatality number tumbling down[3].

I happen to believe this virus is a very serious global threat and I assure you that I am not one given to alarmism. But I also have never seen governments respond to the onset of an epidemic like this before and I'm nearly fifty and my mother says she can't remember anything like this in her lifetime. So yes, tens of millions absolutely could die but I'm willing to bet that between lock-downs and modern medicine tens of millions won't and I pray to, you know, $deity I am not wrong.

[1] https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/china/

[2] https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/italy/

[3] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kas0tIxDvrg [Exponential growth and epidemics]

⬐ jpster

I’m not sure about the overall efficacy of lockdowns unless:

- The US plays along. We are likely a hotspot now, whether we go the “undertest and live in ignorance” route, or not.

- We have an effective plan for rebooting out of the lockdown. Which, until we have an effective treatment or vaccine, to me means temperature scanning in most public places imaginable, continued vigilance around disinfecting, continued limits on public gatherings, and more.

⬐ igravious

From what the numbers are saying it looks like the USA is both under-testing and over-reporting simultaneously. Very odd state of affairs. I'm ignoring the total cases number from the USA at present because it is a clear outlier. The # of deaths is much more reliable but that number will lag as tests are performed.

(The # of deaths for Germany is suspiciously low, as is the # of deaths for S. Korea.) I actually think the Chinese data is fairly accurate. the Iranian data, well, who knows. I'd like to think the European data is reliable, but again, who knows.

If the USA becomes a hot-spot then other countries will undoubtedly institute a travel ban to/from there like is happening with parts of China, S. Korea, Italy, Iran, and so on.

⬐ senordevnyc

This is impossible to contain. The purpose of the lockdown isn't to contain, it's just to spread out the infections over a larger period of time so that hospitals don't get overwhelmed. But there's likely not a plausible scenario at this point where we globally jump on this and only a few million or even tens of millions are infected. All we can do is slow it down.

⬐ igravious

China has demonstrated that it is in fact possible to contain the spread. Please use the links I provided to review the data. Do remember that the Chinese built two make-shift hospitals in something like 10 days. Once a couple of weeks pass we'll see if Italy is able to replicate what China did.

Here are my calculations based on current data[1]:

   Country     tot. deaths    pop. (1m)   tot. deaths/1m pop.
   Italy        463             62        7.46
   Iran         237             83        2.85
   China       3120           1384        2.25
   South Korea   53             51        1.03
   Spain         30             49        0.61
   France        30             67        0.44
   USA           26            329        0.08

Italy has blown past China which is why they've locked down the country. Iran will surely do so next if they are not already doing so unless they want a national calamity. South Korea reacted quicker. Spain, France, will have to act next, possibly next week or the week after, the USA will have to act in about 3 or 4 weeks assuming things remain the same but by that time it'll be early April and the weather will be getting warmer so who knows.

[1] https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/

⬐ senordevnyc

China’s current status is impressive but it’s come at enormous cost which is unsustainable in the long run. And it’s unclear what’s going to happen in the long run as China opens up workplaces and public gatherings, and as international travel and commerce resumes. It may very well explode again. Some countries will get a handle on this for now, but many won’t, and it will continue to spread globally. It might take months, it might take years, but it’s not going away.

⬐ igravious

People can do great things when needed. Who says it is unsustainable? Can we not change our habits? Can we not provide the equipment and supplies (respirators, medicines, masks, disinfectant and sanitizers) that need providing?

With any luck we'll have a vaccine in 18 to 24 months. The flu season is halted by warmer weather. We can change our behaviour for a few years until we get it under control.

⬐ adventured

There is cause for optimism in the numbers out of South Korea and China. Even assuming China has lied about their numbers (population ratios with Italy and South Korea vs China make that plainly clear, they lied to a large degree on the numbers), if China has managed to bring it under control through their extreme quarantine measures, then we can prevent it from killing tens of millions. South Korea seems to have considerably slowed it there. Japan has done a good job of limiting its spread.

China has 1.4 billion people, and they've had ~3,000 deaths (let's assume it's several times higher in reality). But we'll see tens of millions dead globally? No we will not. If you killed every person that has been infected in China, and extrapolated that event globally, we would not see tens of millions dead. So that premise is absurd, to an extreme.

I consider this to be a very serious situation, however, it's not very serious as a great mass mortality threat (unless it mutates and becomes far more deadly and we prove unable to slow it down or vaccinate against it). It's a serious threat for massive disruption to our daily lives, including severely harming the global economy. It's a serious threat to swamping our healthcare systems due to ICU demands and diverting our resources to managing the ongoing crisis (instead of routine, normal productive work).

Assuming this isn't going to burn out come Spring & Summer, the next step is to rush to vaccine, at any cost. That will end this thing globally. Maybe we'll need to vaccinate against it annually, maybe it won't come back after this year, who knows of course.

Tens of millions will not die. Tens of thousands might die in the plausible worst case scenario, before we get a vaccine ready. We can rush to vaccine at greater patient risk and financial cost, as necessary.

⬐ igravious

Thoughtful and level-headed response. :)

We might ballpark the number of global deaths – in the optimistic case† at between 20,000 and 30,000 souls. Not a global tragedy, on a scale of the recent Ebola outbreak, but warranting much more drastic action.

There's a huge sense of urgency. We could have a vaccine before the next flu season in the northern hemisphere.

† assuming not every country acts quickly when the time comes nor acts as effectively as China

⬐ airstrike

> We could have a vaccine before the next flu season in the northern hemisphere.

That's quite unlikely. We're looking at 12-18 months if everything goes perfectly according to plan and we get it right on the first try.

> nor acts as effectively as China

Only if you take China's numbers at face value, which nobody really seems keen on doing.

⬐ greedo

I think this is far too optimistic.

1. We don't know the actual reality of what's happening on the ground in China. Hubei and Italy have approximately the same population, yet Italy is suffering more proportionally. I think the obvious explanation is drastic underreporting of cases and fatalities in China. When all is said and done I think China probably has underreported by at least a magnitude if not double that.

2. Most Western countries won't impose the type of strategies that China undertook; they simply can't. When things get too bad to impose draconian quarantines, it'll be too late. Even Italy's efforts in quarantining the nation are not enough.

3. Most of the world doesn't have good healthcare. I'm talking about Africa, Southwest Asia, South America. There simply aren't enough ICU beds and ventilators to go around. Even in the US, I've read reports of only 100K ventilators nationwide. If the pandemic keeps growing exponentially with a doubling period of 4 days, the US alone will have 1M cases by mid-April.

4. Simple math. World population outside of China is 6.5B. If 10% are infected (very conservative imho) we're looking at 650M cases world wide. If the CFR drops to 1%, then we're in the neighborhood of 6.5m fatalities. And the survivors? Roughly 81% of those infected survive with no serious side effects. The remainder have serious health issues even after the disease runs its course. That's 117M casualties. This is world altering.

https://ourworldindata.org/coronavirus

⬐ cma

The region in Italy has something like 3x more elderly, proportionately, than Wuhan.

⬐ igravious

And I think your assessment is too pessimistic.

To address (1.) You and others are going to have to provide sources for why you think that China "probably has under-reported by at least a magnitude if not double that". I've seen the ill feeling and distrust towards China increase on HN and elsewhere in the last 5 years and this fits the bill.

You can explain the differences between Hubei and Italy by the differences in responses. As has been pointed out, China built two make-shift hospitals in ~ 10 days and quarantined 100s of millions in cities. Have you not seen the pictures coming out of China. Now that Italy is taking drastic steps we'll see the outcome in a few weeks and it will tell us if it is an effective strategy. If any of the reported numbers is suspect it is the total number of cases that the USA is reporting: https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/ It's completely out of whack with every other country. This implies the US has been under-testing, something which we have lots of evidence for. On the other hand we have no evidence China is under-reporting.

To address (2.) "Most Western countries won't impose the type of strategies that China undertook; they simply can't." Why not? Why can't they?

To address (3.) "Most of the world doesn't have good healthcare." But most of the world has soap, most of the world understands what it means to self-isolate, most of the world can implement quarantining. "If the pandemic keeps growing exponentially with a doubling period of 4 days," Looks like mitigation strategies slow the doubling period to three weeks, why pick the worst case scenario?

To address (4.) "Simple math." Yes! Times an unknown mitigation factor of ? This outbreak is scary because it's exponential (highly lethal and highly infectious), but the total fatalities is also highly susceptible to interventions exactly for the same reason.

⬐ greedo

Chinese underreporting is currently underestimated by a factor of 20:(https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.01.23.20018549v...)

I have no ill feeling towards China other than the fact that they have a repressive, authoritarian government. Those types of government necessarily try to control and spin the news to maintain their authority. If a country is willing to censor Winnie the Pooh to make their leader feel better, than they'll naturally minimize the effect of SARS-Cov2.

I also agree that the US is underreporting due to inadequate testing. Estimates in the US should be closer to 9-10K. I think that we'll see a large spike in cases as soon as testing approaches levels in other countries.

My inclination regarding quarantine controls in Western countries stems from the willingness of these societies to restrict freedoms. Italy's quarantine is very basic, a 1 on a 1-10 level. Compared to what China implemented, it's not even close.

Soap isn't the ability to treat cases; it's a way of trying to mitigate the spread.

it is because the warmer weather is what stopped SARS-COV in 2002 from spreading this far. the western world was lucky in that ignoring it the first time was an okay strategy. SARS-COV-2 is making its way around the globe right now and hopefully has the same limitations or this may get out of control. ignoring is the most dangerous option at this point. please watch this video by 3blue1brown https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kas0tIxDvrg a math professor in the US about the situation.

⬐ UncleOxidant

But maybe the main reason that SARS died out by the summer was not primarily because of the temperature but had more to do with the fact that it wasn't as nearly contagious and they were able to contain it with social distancing?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kas0tIxDvrg please watch this video by 3blue1brown, a math professor in the US, about the situation.

⬐ hef19898

Maybe take a biologist next time?

⬐ vecter

Grant Sanderson is a great guy and makes wonderful educational videos, but he isn't a math professor (not that that's relevant to this discussion either).

⬐ officialjunk

thanks for the correction

regardless of what you hear, china takes outbreaks very seriously and responds aggressively. the general population in china also takes it very seriously. normal behavior response in china looks like over reaction in the us. please watch this video by 3blue1brown https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kas0tIxDvrg china is past its inflection point and we have yet to determine where our inflection point will be. everyone should be changing your behavior now. the fact that sars-cov didn’t get as far in 2002 as sars-cov-2 virus is currently going should be concerning. the us could ignore prior outbreaks because china is aggressive to stop it.

because regardless of what you hear, china takes outbreaks very seriously and responds aggressively. the general population in china also takes it very seriously. normal behavior response in china looks like over reaction in the us. please watch this video by 3blue1brown https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kas0tIxDvrg china is past its inflection point and we have yet to determine where our inflection point will be. everyone should be changing your behavior now. the fact that sars-cov didn’t get as far in 2002 as sars-cov-2 virus is currently going should be concerning. the us could ignore prior outbreaks because china is aggressive to stop it.

⬐ honestoHeminway

China says it takes outbreaks very serious. Saying is not doing. Saying is saying. Stalin said he worried about the workers. The workers starved. Words are cheap. The Subversion of public moral by facade action and routine subversion by blackmarket egoism in any socialist country is not helping. China is a disaster waiting to be exported once the borders reopen.

⬐ SuoDuanDao

I was in China during the swine flu scare (I'm Canadian originally). I agree that China takes these sorts of things very seriously based on what I saw.

That doesn't necessarily mean they'll succeed every time though, or that they'll respond as aggressively to a dangerous background virus as to a novel one.

Just watched the 3brown1blue video today, which talks about exponential growth and fixes it to the latest actual COVID-19 numbers. Really helped it all click.

https://youtu.be/Kas0tIxDvrg

Edit: separate HN discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22520152

⬐ nabla9

In simplest possible SIR model that takes into account the growing recovered and immune, (1 − 1/R0) of the population gets infected. R0 is the reproduction rate.

    R0 | % of population
    ----------------
    2.5  60% 
    2.0  50% 
    1.5  30%

The effective reproduction rate decreases when people take precautions. There is no reason to assume it's constant or same in different countries and cultures.

⬐ geggam

In countries where sanitation is an issue will the infection rate ever slow and when people from countries who have it controlled travel to those countries does it restart ?

I think I have more questions now that I watched the video than I do answers :)

⬐ ajuc

Countries with worse sanitation also tend to have slower transportation and less population shuffling.

In the times of plague the places that suffered the least were:

- sparsely populated

- didn't participated much in the international trade

- used quarantines on the borders early

https://bigthink.com/strange-maps/bubonic-plague-spares-pola...

⬐ jacobolus

In modern times there is plenty of transportation and shuffling in crowded countries with poor sanitation. Remember it only takes a tiny bit of travel to spread a virus far and wide. I would predict things will get very bad in many parts of Latin America, Africa, and South and Southeast Asia.

⬐ ajuc

There's a big difference between average daily commute being 5 km and 50 km.

⬐ microcolonel

> The effective reproduction rate decreases when people take precautions.

In looking at the outbreak gripping Italy, it seems like hard quarantine is the most basic precaution, and perhaps we should be taking it before the first hundreds of people die in each of our countries.

⬐ vanniv

Italy's quarantine will probably kill many more people than the virus ever could

⬐ microcolonel

What's your reasoning on that? I really want to know, since on the face it seems like an absolutely outrageous, borderline random conclusion to draw.

⬐ vanniv

It has been 2 days. Now, all businesses except grocers are closed, and grocers are mostly out of food.

Roads are closed.

People are going to be very, very hungry very, very soon.

Hunger will create desperation, which will create violence, which will quickly dwarf the few thousands of people that covid will kill

⬐ TrumpMyGuns

Most people are reactive and view proactivity as stupid, a waste of time, etc.

I'm sure many people have dealt with this while writing software.

tl;dr: People are idiots.

⬐ melling

The video says that it's really a logistic curve. Which is also the activation function (sigmoid) in a few machine learning articles that I've been reading.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sigmoid_function

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logistic_function

Can anyone recommend anything to read to add more clarity?

Why does this appear in deep learning too?

⬐ andrewprock

It's used in algorithms to provide a continuously differentiable function, which is much easier analyze than a step function.

⬐ bno1

In machine learning it's used as an activation function. Activation functions are used to add non-linearity to the model. I think sigmoid functions are inspired from neurons, but I'm not sure exactly how. Nowadays, ReLU activations are used more often than sigmoidals because they are quicker to compute.

⬐ bno1

>I think sigmoid functions are inspired from neurons I mean the use of sigmoids as activations in NNs

⬐ cmarschner

ReLu are mainly used because in practice they show better results than sigmoids in many areas. The fact that they are also faster to compute is just a nice side effect.

⬐ Florin_Andrei

> The video says that it's really a logistic curve.

I mean, of course it's not a true, complete exponential, or else it would take over the universe in 2.3 years or something.

All exponentials run out of something eventually. The question is, how soon does that happen.

⬐ fsh

For neural networks to work, the activation function has to be nonlinear and monotonic. In order to be able to apply the chain rule for training the weights by backpropagation, the function also has to be differentiable. The logistic function is one obvious choice, but other functions such as tanh, arctan or relu are popular as well.

⬐ melling

China looks like its growth has flatlined, while the rest of the world is moving along an exponential curve.

https://www.arcgis.com/apps/opsdashboard/index.html#/bda7594...

Also, notice that 57k out of 81k have recovered.

⬐ cklaus

China has only flatlined because extremely aggressive social distancing. I don't see that in the US occurring.

⬐ UncleOxidant

US is not being proactive at all. Only reactive at this point.

⬐ Leary

The US is blessed with low population density, and people don't share meals family style.

We don't have to copy everything China does, just do what has proven to work:

Fast testing and contact tracing.

⬐ kohtatsu

Shame they're failing miserably on both of those fronts.

https://twitter.com/drdenagrayson/status/1235703439688175618

⬐ maxerickson

Why? We're a bunch of paranoid lunatics, primed to avoid each other.

⬐ hurrdurr2

Just a small sampling but most of my neighbors are retired and they think it's a MSM scare tactic to drum up views. Some say it's no worse than the flu and then you have the Trump supporters saying it's all a Democrat hoax.

In CA btw.

⬐ gwright

> Trump supporters saying it's all a Democrat hoax

Hard to know exactly what you are referring to here but it sounds like you are spreading more misinformation. We all need to get better at communicating. I swear that half of public discussion these days is based on fictional situations and not reality.

    1) Democrats accused Trump of mishandling COVID-19.
    2) Trump labeled the *criticism* as another "hoax" about his presidency/competency.
    3) Democrats react to 2) and accuse Trump of labeling COVID-19 a "hoax".
    4) Bipartisan collection of journalist pointed out that 3) is bogus and 2) is what was said.
    5) hurrdurr2's comment appears to be a variation of 3) relative to 2).
    6) this comment is an attempt to point out this history and correct the record similar to 4)

I'm taking no stance here on 1) as it really depends what specific criticism is being evaluated. Some of it was/is reasonable and some of it was/is ill-founded.

I have no idea what exactly motivated all the bullshit associated with 3) but it was some combination or poor reading comprehension, slopping rumor mongering, or disgusting politicization of a major public health crisis.

⬐ nodamage

(3) is kind of a strawman. No one actually thinks Donald Trump said the virus itself is a hoax. In context the "hoax" is referring to the claims about the seriousness of the virus and the government response to it.

And there are definitely Trump supporters calling the situation a hoax, as in, "this is a hoax to blow up the stock market and make Trump look bad, don't you know that more people die of the flu every year?".

⬐ hurrdurr2

I'm just repeating what I was told when I chatted with some neighbors. Some are Trump supporters and they said it's a hoax. Anecdotal so take it as you will. Not sure why my comment warranted such a longwinded defensive reply.

⬐ gwright

Because it sounded like you were talking about 3) which I find supper annoying. I tried to caveat my comments in case you weren't talking about 3).

⬐ triangleman

It could have been cognitive dissonance. Certain segments of the population couldn't possibly be dismissing this virus as no worse than the flu, could they?

https://www.scottadamssays.com/2020/03/05/episode-840-scott-...

"Nobody under 70 has died, and over 700 people infected on that ship. So that's impressive."

That's just from randomly seeking through one of his recordings.

⬐ hurrdurr2

You'd be surprised how many people I have talked to who told me they are not worried at all because it's just like the flu.

Yeah, China, Korea, and Italy quarantined millions over just the flu. Some people's ability to deny reality is very impressive.

⬐ kohtatsu

WRT 1) I think the fact the CDC hasn't had enough testing capability–as well as far too strict requirements surrounding the tests, perhaps because of their inadequate capabilities—is enough of a black mark.

⬐ gwright

Sure but 3) is just bullshit that just confuses everything for no valid reason. It is distracting dangerous noise that increases the anxiety of the public for no good reason.

⬐ kohtatsu

3) will do a lot less harm than botching the response in the long run. AFAIAC none of that politicking matters.

⬐ gwright

So what? Why are you trying to assess the relative harm of a fabrication with anything at all? 3) is just nonsense that distracts from real discussion and yet there are people here defending it. I just don't understand.

⬐ kohtatsu

What I'm saying is don't bother with it; it will die on its own. You're the one bringing that discussion to life here; I only intended to comment on the CDC's response, I didn't intend to involve whatever the "Democrats" said. (Scare quotes because you can't coalesce them as one being)

⬐ abootstrapper

False. We’re a bunch of mostly self centered individualist who don’t like being told what to do and don’t trust facts, ideas, opinions, or people that contradict our preconceived notions.

⬐ originalbryan2

Word. If I didn't dislike people we could be friends.

⬐ maxerickson

What exactly do you think "paranoid" and "lunatic" mean?

⬐ sigstoat

"doesn't behave in a fashion maxerickson approves of"

⬐ TeMPOraL

Problem is: when what authorities tell you is to distance yourself for others, a paranoid lunatic will obviously smell a conspiracy and do the exact opposite.

⬐ microcolonel

> Also, notice that 57k out of 81k have recovered.

But also, at least 3,097 people out of the 80,699 have already died, and by the same measure, 20,283 of the confirmed have yet to recover.

⬐ d0mine

The death ratio should only increase as the medical resources are exhausted

⬐ melling

If the curve has flatlined in China and only 20,283 remain, China should not have a further problem with resources.

The rest of the world, of course, is just getting started.

⬐ geggam

What happens when infected soul from US / other place visits china ?

Is there an immunity built up in infected people or does the clock reset ?

You cant quarantine the world and expect a global economy to survive

⬐ DailyHN

Gotta love the people that see people dying and are most concerned about the economy.

⬐ geggam

I am not worried about the economy as in I need to get rich ( Im not close) but realistically if no one is making money the impact of folks being out of work and unable to buy food starts to weigh in.

The simple fact most countries are interdependent ( see : Toilet paper) is a real issue.

⬐ vanniv

Stopping the world economy will kill many millions more people than COVID-19 could dream of

⬐ DailyHN

What does stopping the world economy entail?

⬐ vanniv

In the context of this post: the kind of quarantine where nobody is allowed to venture far from their homes.

Where goods can't travel from where they are made to where they could be sold, or worse can't be made because nobody is allowed to leave home to go make them.

Where we isolate each country from the others, each state/province/region, each everywhere.

Where commerce is effectively ended due to the inability of people to participate in it.

⬐ vanniv

It's been 2 days, and already the food markets are running out.

With no resupply available for weeks at a minimum, people are.going to get mighty hungry.

Funny how quickly the HN crowd cheers for these incredible restrictions on life and freedom, and yet pretend not to favor totalitarianism

⬐ gizmo686

How do you think people get food, shelter, medicine, and other necessities?

The rich can wait out a downturn. It is the poor who will struggle.

⬐ d0mine

If if the curve flattens for the World early, then obviously the medical resources won't be exhausted.

I don't know how long the exponential growth might continue.

⬐ m3kw9

China is in a different phase where it seems they have surpressed it rather than contained it. which means if they loosen up the lock down it could revert. It’s also an economic disaster that are trying contain from all the lock down.

⬐ greenhatman

I don't understand the difference between surpressed and contained?

Yeah, if they stop containing it, it will start spreading again...

⬐ Retric

Suppressed means there is continued transmission, contained means that’s stopped. Rabies is suppressed with a continuing threat from wild animal populations. The recent Ebola virus outbreak on the other hand is an example of containment in action, with zero active cases at this point.

The only long term success for suppression is from a vaccine. Contained on the other hand means every infected person can gain immunity and the virus would then run out of new hosts.

⬐ empath75

Well if they manage to keep it suppressed they can keep the health care system from collapsing at least.

⬐ cklaus

American Hospital Association "Best Guess Epidemiology" for #codiv19 over next 2 months:

96,000,000 infections

4,800,000 hospitalizations

1,900,000 ICU admissions

480,000 deaths

vs flu in 2019:

35,500,000 infections

490,600 hospitalizations

49,000 ICU admissions

34,200 deaths

⬐ nabla9

Where it says next 2 months?

If the doubling time is one week there is just something like 100k - 200k infections in next two months.

I think those numbers are yearly infection estimates.

⬐ graeme

I think the graph meant 96 million infections active in the peak two months. Hard to be sure without seeing the presentation, but it definitely isn’t the next two months.

⬐ abootstrapper

Source link?

⬐ CharlesW

https://www.businessinsider.com/presentation-us-hospitals-pr...

⬐ cklaus

Source:

https://www.businessinsider.com/presentation-us-hospitals-pr...

⬐ nateberkopec

"The American Hospital Association said the webinar reflects the views of the experts who spoke on it, not its own."

You're quoting the opinion of one person: Dr James Lawler, a professor at the University of Nebraska Medical Centre. That person researches infectious diseases, so, their opinion isn't a complete guess of course, but we should ascribe the numbers to the right source.

⬐ yters

Seems to have a much lower hospitalized mortality rate than 2017 flu https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.livescience.com/amp/new-cor...

⬐ wcoenen

The article that you linked to, doesn't seem to support your claim. The lowest death rate estimate that it quotes for corona is 1.4%, while the flu numbers at the start are only 18K/32M=0.05%. Can you quote the relevant section?

⬐ empath75

Not a useful statistic without knowing the hospitalization rates.

⬐ shawabawa3

From (probably slightly misremembered) stats I've seen, it has approximately 40x the hospitalisation rate, but only 10x the death rate of flu

So yes, lower hospitalised mortality rate but only because so many more people are hospitalised

⬐ yters

Do we have an accurate count of cases? For example if most cases are determined based on hospitalization, then the hospitalized death rate is the same as the estimated actual death rate.

I haven't been able to find studies on the hospitalization rate to know.

⬐ FranceBacce

If anyone wants to dig into the math, this is a non linear recurrence relation, with an external dependency, that is n_d+1 = f(a,n_d) n^(d+1)

bad news: How this behaves will depend a lot on a (containment measures etc...)

good news: If we can make a grow faster than an exponential, we can win

⬐ sgt101

Does anyone have numbers for testing? I'd like to know how many tests are being done in each territory?

⬐ JetBen

As an anxious person, I actually found it calming to watch the math of it all.

⬐ forkexec

Sigh. It's not exponential growth, it's best modeled by a differential equation. Like population, the rate of growth is proportional to the amount present up to the current carrying capacity (that varies widely in the real world and with time).

⬐ CPUstring

That is explained in the video

⬐ XiZhao

VCs love this virus!

⬐ tic_tac

There are two extreme paths we can take. The first is that we do nothing, the other is that we completely lock down our society like China.

While the first option would be unwise, the second would also be unwise.

A complete shutdown for a disease as virulent as Covid-19 will just suppress the virus for the duration of the shutdown. Ignoring the extreme difficulty and impracticality of shutting society down for a moment, recognize that the moment the shutdown ends, the virus will probably reappear and continue to spread.

What then? Another complete shutdown? When does it end?

No, the right solution is a distributed solution in which affected companies and communities deal with the virus, imposing gradual restrictions on gatherings, work, schooling etc in an organic way. Which is exactly what is happening in the US right now.

The point of all this is, what more can the US government do than it is already doing? Send the military in to shut down the highways? Hold scientists at gunpoint until they produce a vaccine?

Many (Media, Democrats) are trying to leverage this to their political advantage, but aside from small changes in approach, what exactly do they want the government to do differently?

⬐ DuskStar

Not limit testing? Approve the use of private testing facilities? Allow automated testing?

Those would all be good steps.

⬐ Florin_Andrei

> Many (Media, Democrats) are trying to leverage this to their political advantage

lol, found the echo chamber repeater

⬐ qqqwerty

> Many (Media, Democrats) are trying to leverage this to their political advantage

To date, most of the complaints about the current administrations' handling of COVID-19 have been about the cuts to the CDC, the history of Pence and Redfield regarding HIV, and other fact based arguments and criticisms. It is entirely possible that none of these factors had or will have a substantive impact on the spread of COVID-19. But they are still valid criticisms none the less.

In contrast, take Trump's response to the Ebola crisis[1], which was a remarkable example of fear-mongering and politiking in the face of a potential crisis.

[1]https://www.vox.com/2020/2/26/21154253/trump-ebola-tweets-co...

⬐ ccarpenterg

What about Polynomial growth: https://oeis.org/wiki/Growth_of_sequences#Polynomial

⬐ tunesmith

I figure there's some kind of "true" fatality rate that just answers the question of "If you catch the virus, you have this (age-adjusted) chance of dying". It seems like we'll asymptotically reach that "true" rate once testing is extremely common and liberal (to have confidence you are identifying all cases). Some countries are reaching that testing rate. Then your upper and lower bounds for that death rate are "deaths / deaths + recoveries" and "deaths / confirmed cases", respectively, and they should converge as "active cases" decrease over time (as they either recover or die). You can use that "band" (between the upper and lower bounds) to judge other countries and determine whether they are testing enough - if they are above that "band", they are clearly not testing enough.

⬐ m463

A friend mentioned to me that smokers seem to be more likely to succumb, probably because of the effect on lungs.

⬐ swsieber

Are we talking with or without ventilator/hospital support?

⬐ tunesmith

Yeah, that's a good point. Fatality increases as treatment options decrease. Treatment options can decrease whether it's a less advanced country, or a more advanced country that just gets overwhelmed due to poorer containment than other advanced countries.

⬐ MaysonL

The thing is, there are probably some people who won't die, no matter how they're treated, and some who will die, no matter how they're treated. There are also quite a large number, probably about 4-5% of the population, who can be saved with correct treatment, from not very aggressive to extremely aggressive - up to running the blood through artificial lungs.

⬐ lhl

I've been tracking the coronavirus news for the past few weeks and have found https://www.reddit.com/r/covid19 to be good for tracking the latest scientific/medical publications, and https://www.reddit.com/r/coronavirus for general news.

For transmission rates, this team is updating their modeling results often: https://cmmid.github.io/topics/covid19/current-patterns-tran...

On twitter, @datagraver is publishing some of the most interesting visualization/graphs: https://twitter.com/Datagraver

I've found this via mrb (@zorinaq) who's been tracking the covid19 spread: https://twitter.com/zorinaq/status/1235850389020270595

⬐ haunter

Both of those subs are incredibly tinfoily and panicky. Honestly reddit is the worst. And BI is right that they are doing the same as always, just consiparcy things

https://www.businessinsider.com/coronavirus-reddit-social-pl...

Also you might as well rename /r/Coronavirus/ to /r/politics2 aka fucktrump. It's the same thing over and over again

⬐ jacobolus

Edit: here’s a Lancet Editorial “COVID-19: too little, too late?” https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6...

* * *

Seattle is about 2 weeks behind Lombardy. The Bay Area maybe 3 weeks behind. Everywhere in the US is going to be in that situation in 2 months at most, unless something very dramatic changes ASAP.

The kinds of measures being taken in the US are grossly inadequate for this challenge: leaders and some media outlets continue to downplay risks, residents continue to blithely go about their everyday lives, large gatherings like church meetings and sporting events continue as usual, the CDC/FDA is still blocking sufficient testing around the country, hospitals and medical workers are not being sufficiently trained and prepared, and the supply of personal protective gear and ICU beds is not going to suffice.

We have squandered 4–6 weeks of preparation for this crisis, and hundreds of thousands of people in the US may die as a result, with others experiencing permanent lung damage.

China has shown that this virus can be managed if the number of patients stays low enough that infections are discovered early and patients are treated aggressively with antivirals, supplemental oxygen as soon as blood oxygen starts to drop, mechanical ventilators for severe cases, etc. People’s immune systems generally do fight this virus off if we can keep them breathing for long enough. But that depends on having enough hospital capacity.

If everyone stays complacent and continues to mingle until there are hundreds of local deaths in each area it’s going to be a disaster.

Edit 2: To everyone here: If you have what seems like a minor cold, even if you are a young adult, please stay away from people and don’t spread it. What is 2 weeks of minor cough and sore throat for you might become severe pneumonia requiring hospitalization for your parent or neighbor or coworker. If anyone in the family gets a minor cold, please keep your kids out of school. Etc.

⬐ lettergram

I had an interesting experience - my local hospital (which is actually a very good medical hospital). Has already called in every at risk (which I am) person and had them do a check up (and in my case an x-ray).

They also have already stock piled masks and additional resources. The medical staff in the area are similarly mentally preparing, schools are prepping for the shutdown (at home school).

I wouldn’t say the US is doing nothing, this is rural Illinois. There just isn’t much to do here until it’s a problem. But as soon as we get a few test positives schools are planning shutdown (I’m assuming gyms will be used for patients as necessary).

⬐ war1025

> If anyone in the family gets a minor cold, please keep your kids out of school. Etc.

Unfortunately this is effectively "let them eat cake" for many people.

Keeping kids out of school means not going to work. Not going to work means not having money to pay the bills, and very possibly losing your job.

In China, where the state has basically total control, things like this can be done. In the US, it's going to be a tough sell for an awful lot of people.

⬐ po

Ask any taxpayer and they will tell you that the US also has total control. I get your point about not having the right to force people to do things (ie people ignoring mandatory hurricane evacuation orders) but they do have the power to make it such that the people who do want to stay home but can’t due to financial reasons can. If there were the will for it.

⬐ jacobolus

I would feel a lot more comfortable if the USA had a testing setup like South Korea (where they have performed something like 500 times as many tests per capita as the USA, and then done aggressive isolation and contact tracing for positive cases).

If it were up to me the federal government and state and local governments would be closing schools, closing nursing homes to visitors, canceling church services and sporting events, figuring out how to make transportation less risky, closing restaurants and bars to customers and drafting those workers to make deliverable prepared meals instead, recruiting childless people aged 15–40 into temporary (paid) public service jobs, doing everything possible to guarantee sufficient supply of protective equipment, taking every roadblock out from researching antiviral drugs for treating positive cases, etc.

Governments should be figuring out how to guarantee anyone with untested minor colds to stay home from work without losing pay until they can be tested; figuring out how to temporarily relieve rent, loan payments, and taxes for people quarantined or with jobs in temporarily affected industries; preparing to distribute food, medicine, and other items to patients in quarantine or isolated at home, and so on.

With a robust public response it should be possible to dramatically slow this virus without completely collapsing the economy. The fallout (not just illness/death but also economic impact) from all the cases hitting at once within a few weeks is going to be much more worse.

I’m not sure exactly what the best responses would be, I’m just spitballing here. But it seems to me we should have been thinking and talking about possible extreme measures for the past 6 weeks instead of collectively twiddling our thumbs and going on with our ordinary lives.

⬐ gurumeditations

Everybody who works any public-facing job will go to work with a “cold”, I guarantee it. I did. The alternative is losing said job. Welcome to America.

⬐ nolta

In the last few days Ontario has found 2 cases of Covid-19 in people who recently travelled to the US:

https://news.ontario.ca/mohltc/en/2020/03/ontario-confirms-n... https://news.ontario.ca/mohltc/en/2020/03/ontario-confirms-n...

All the other cases we've seen were related to travel to Iran, Italy, Egypt, & China IIRC.

EDIT: one was a woman who returned from Colorado on Mar 2, the other a man who returned from Las Vegas on Feb 28.

⬐ molmalo

In Argentina a new case just confirmed some hours ago is from a young man coming back from a conference in Boston, MA.

⬐ killjoywashere

Your take on things is interesting as one instance of 3blue1brown's point in the video: if everyone is worrying, you don't have anything to worry about. But if no one is worried, you should be worried.

You seem to be taking a position of "Everyone else is worried. I assert that my non-worry will be proven to be the correct position." Yet, your prediction that the redditors are excessively worried ("panicky") will only be borne out if those who worry are sufficient in number and intensity to keep downward pressure on the exponential multiplier.

There's a worry vector field around the Earth here, I can feel it. I wonder what you get with the line integral?

⬐ haunter

I worry but I don't accept reddit's panicky "70% will be infected + 4% death rate = 150 million deaths"

I even think the 500k death in the US is too much

https://www.businessinsider.com/presentation-us-hospitals-pr...

>Lawler's estimates include:

>4.8 million hospitalizations associated with the novel coronavirus

>96 million cases overall in the US

>480,000 deaths

Once again I'm not downplaying it but I think we will be closer to the 1957-59 asian flu which had 70k deaths in the US and 2 million global BUT maybe that's even too much https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Influenza_A_virus_subtype_H2N2

⬐ oska

Except downplaying it is exactly what you are doing, based solely on a personal opinion which you do not back up in any way.

⬐ icegreentea2

/r/coronavirus can definitely be bad on your mental health, but /r/covid19 is pretty level headed. Like ya, there are some scared people on it, but it's not very conspiracy-y.

⬐ asdfman123

One thing I don't understand is why we shouldn't all have a healthy dose of anxiety about the outbreak. Most of the stuff in life people go around worrying about is meaningless -- what will people think of me? What happens if I lose my job?

But if anxiety leads more people to self-quarantine and wash their hands over and over again, it will save lives. Potentially a lot of them.

Anxiety doesn't normally have a place in society because it's so overwhelmingly safe most of the time, but we're facing a legitimate threat that people can do something about.

Obviously, there's no place for panic and stockpiling, but most of the people I see don't seem too worried -- they don't seem worried enough. People should be more cautious.

⬐ knzhou

I've yet to see any opinion pieces from Business Insider that weren't shallow hit pieces. It's not a place for intelligent people to get information. Or, really, anyone.

⬐ meroes

BI posts a hitpiece on their competitor and that's the message you took. Social media and YouTube at least provide a way to find and post first hand information that is needed when traditional news sources have their own agendas that don't always align with the truth.

⬐ asdfman123

The thing about reddit is it can be very useful if you know when to take it seriously and know when they're being over the top. All the subs are subject to hivemind, so you have to correct for that.

⬐ DuskStar

/r/Coronavirus used to have some info on it. But yeah, for the past week+ (since Reddit began linking it on the front page, maybe?) every other article has been "the US isn't testing enough", and the comments of every article have degenerated into "Trump is literally evil, this is all being done for the benefit of corporations, he just wants to protect the stock market" which is really not helpful.

It might (or might not) be accurate, but that's kinda irrelevant.

⬐ tic_tac

Agreed, Reddit is cancer. Reactionary hive mind internet at its worst.

One of the biggest problems with Reddit is that Americans go on boards like /r/politics or in this case /r/Coronavirus, see extreme hostility towards America and Trump and assume that this hostility is all coming from Americans themselves, when really a substantial number of Reddit users (and users elsewhere on the Internet) are not American.

Not being Americans, their hostility comes more from predisposed bias against Trump and America than a careful analysis of what's best for America.

⬐ hombre_fatal

Reddit is clearly just self-hating Americans, mostly kids. I guess you assume no American would spend so much time writing anti-Trump comments on r/politics?

I think the real issue is that you go to a place like r/politics or r/vancouver or r/bitcoin and think it's some canonical forum with some semblance of fairness but it's really just someone's little world with its own rules and agenda.

But you can't simply start your own subreddit because you're now r/vancouver2, r/TrueVancouver, or whatever and it can never get the same traction just because it's not the official-looking r/vancouver anymore.

⬐ tic_tac

I think there are a lot of Americans writing anti-Trump comments on Reddit, but I think the numbers are boosted by non Americans doing the same thing. It artificially inflates the number of anti Trump posters.

⬐ TeMPOraL

Yup. You can't think of Reddit as a single forum. A subreddit is a community. By size, shape and behavior, Reddit itself is a privately owned Web inside the public Web, with its own, centrally controlled DNS.

⬐ endorphone

Reddit is 50% American, and overwhelmingly skews young. It isn't surprising that it has a "predisposed bias" against Trump: The young aren't really a key Trump demographic (Trump has a >67% unfavorability rating among those under 40).

Indeed, Trump's statist media is Fox News that has an average viewer ago of 68 years old (who, ironically, will be the bulk of the victims of COVID-19).

Though anyone with even the slightest hint of morality or intellectual sincerity has a predisposed bias against Trump. He has pushed it way beyond politics, and now it's whether you're a very stupid, terrible person or not.

⬐ unishark

The thing is Trump isn't even particularly relevant to the vast majority of the stories, even when it's the federal govt screwing up. But reddit posters are constantly making it about him. The moderators do try to prevent the worst of political posting to their credit.

What's so ironic about foxnews viewers being victims? They aren't panicking appropriately enough or something? I just glanced at their website and it didn't seem particularly slanted on the topic. Looks like they have multiple coronavirus stories coming out every hour. One can easily freak out if so inclined.

⬐ endorphone

"What's so ironic about foxnews viewers being victims?"

Trump has played down the potential of this and has been primarily concerned about keeping the stock market frothing and the counts artificially low. He also called it a hoax, the guy he just gave the presidential medal called it the common cold, he is an anti-vaxxer, etc. His entire administration has to spend their day doing absurd deflection to tell you how great the clothes are that the empower is wearing and to continually reframe everything to make whatever idiotic thing Trump said last not seem quite as stupid.

The surgeon general - a fit man in his 40s - just went on TV to announce that Trump — a sedentary obese fast food fanatic in his 70s — is fitter than him. We've seen a parade of these absolutely depraved displays, where people who once were credible completely debase themselves to ensure the emporer's ego is massaged.

These are extraordinary times and it is ironic that Trump’s hubris, ego, anti-intellectualism, and his circle of profoundly unqualified rats are going to hit the demographic that put him in power the hardest.

And every time Trump talks, the market collapses. He is very close to the worst possible person to be in that position during a crisis.

⬐ unishark

I told you dude, sea lions...

⬐ JaxonH

I’m not a fan of the man, but frankly, so many on the other side make him look like a saint that I struggle to understand the outpouring of hate against him. And it’s true Fox is just an extension of the Republican Party, but so likewise are CNN, MSNBC and (basically every other major news site) extensions of the Democratic Party. In fact I think that’s why Fox News was created, to have at least one outlet of propaganda for the Republicans given everything else was propaganda for the Democrats. The big take away from that though is that all major media is just official propaganda for a political party.

What kills me though is the “if you disagree with me politically you’re obviously just a racist/homophobe/etc. That social justice agenda has to stop. And reddit is prime real estate for where they congregate. I watched a mass reddit mob harass anyone who claimed an accusation from a woman shouldn’t be automatically taken as fact, and that women NEVER lie and you are guilty the moment you are accused, and you’re a “horrible human being” if you even dare to think a single woman could EVER possibly lie when accusing someone.

The internet has done a lot of good, but it’s become Ground Zero for extremist ideology like that to run rampant.

⬐ nodamage

This Business Insider article seems really pointless and vapid to me. Their criticism of reddit is they don't link to official CDC or WHO pages at the top of their search results? You might as well level the same accusation at Hacker News or any other internet forum. And the fact that Facebook and Twitter has those links does nothing to stop them from being full of misinformation themselves.

I looked through /r/covid19/ and it mostly seems to be an aggregator of research papers. Don't really see much tinfoily or panicky stuff there.

I also have no idea why posting this chart would be considered "making bold and fearmongering claims": https://www.reddit.com/r/dataisbeautiful/comments/euokq5/oc_...

Besides, I'm not sure why Business Insider thinks linking to the CDC is some sort of be all end all solution to providing coronavirus information. They've actually been incredibly slow to provide up to date information (not to mention testing).

This article comes across as Business Insider taking a petty swipe at reddit to generate clicks and trying to stir up drama where none exists.

⬐ TeMPOraL

It is, and pulling out the marathon bombing case just shows it's a hit piece.

Social media in general, and Reddit in particular, are commoditizing news publications, and displacing them as trusted sources of information. That's IMO why there have been so many such articles coming out regularly in the past few years.

⬐ lonelappde

You don't find it terrifying that anonymous unaccountable randos are displacing the mainstream media?

⬐ TeMPOraL

Mainstream media is almost as anonymous and just as unaccountable as Internet "randos". The latter at least link to their sources sometimes.

⬐ crocodiletears

Such demands infuriate me to no end. BI's prescription seems more mild than others, but a good example of where they can go awry is YouTube. Youtube used to be a great tool for finding primary sources and citizen livestreams during ongoing events.

The coup in Venezuela, the Yellow Vest protests, and even Charlottesville all had individuals, both partisans and observers contributing to a body of information that allowed interested people to develop a more holistic awareness of the ground-level context as it unfolded in real-time.

Seemingly there are a number of medical professionals providing coolheaded analysis of the COVID outbreak, but if I were to search it up, I would be subject to a tsunami of vapid, hyperbolic observations and speculations breathlessly belted out by talking heads whose two great skills are reading a teleprompter, and running their mouths between segments.

Every time something of cultural interest or controversy occurs, self-interested media outlets run hitpiece after hitpiece against whichever platform hasn't bent the knee to their industry in the recent past, all under the auspices of the public good, and ensuring only the highest quality information is available.

Which, of course, only inflames the skepticism and paranoia of those convinced that the media is plotting to control them, even as they deny knowledge to those capable of keeping themselves informed and acting through their own sources.

Traditional media is being outcompeted as a primary source for both critical audiences that want to stay informed, as well as for credulous audiences who want to be entertained, and hear what they already agree with.

This isn't to denigrate the great work being done around the globe by investigative journalists. News reporting is a thankless, and unprofitable venture. It's unfortunate that their great work is so often buried beneath a sea of punditry with little more insight than a reddit thread.

HN has been a great source for information on COVID 19, and I get links to primary articles that I wouldn't know to find, and which most publications only reference in passing. It helps me stay informed. If I was just passively reading/watching the news, I shudder to imagine what I'd think.

⬐ momentmaker

This is a good dashboard tracker as well:

https://avatorl.org/covid-19/

⬐ humaniania

Why not get the news right from the primary source? The World Health Organization (part of the United Nations) publishes a daily situation report:

https://www.who.int/emergencies/diseases/novel-coronavirus-2...

Their director also has statements published regularly:

https://www.who.int/dg/speeches/detail

⬐ kohtatsu

The numbers from China are not reliable; there are only disincentives to proper reporting. The way the WHO has coddled China is not exactly commendable.

Diversity of sources and information is good anyway, barring some caveats. There is more than just raw numbers at play; you need a variety of sources to see impacts on daily life, how people are preparing, etc. I follow CBC (Canada), some fellow humans on twitter, and especially appreciate the stuff this guy puts out; https://twitter.com/balajis

⬐ duedl0r

China is not reliable? You follow some random guy on twitter?

Here is some tinfoil for you...

⬐ kohtatsu

I get info from WHO, just making it clear they're not my only source. If I had to choose just one, sure WHO is great. Nobody has the "real" numbers for China so it's moot.

He's not a random guy; https://twitter.com/balajis/status/1228752554022068226 but he's also not my only source.

[Edit: I also didn't get my suspicion of China's numbers from him or anyone in particular; I follow China a lot and it's my own conclusion. In January I personally saw packed hospitals and dozens of dead bodies in twitter videos, and it's not exactly easy or safe to get those videos out.]

Maybe I've just been following the topic a lot more than other people. I can understand not having time for it. I have a respiratory condition, and live with an elderly person, so I actually worked my last day as a barista today in order to eliminate public contact. Where I am the virus probably won't come for a couple to a dozen weeks, if ever, but it's still a precaution I can afford to take so I did (I can consult from home).

Also I love tinfoil hats, thank you <3 (Sorry for the long thread, kinda hoping we get collapsed)

⬐ kohtatsu

Here are a two threads I just read that I think illustrate the breadth of perspective that isn't possible with just centralised reporting;

https://twitter.com/balajis/status/1236815743079067649

https://twitter.com/tony_zy/status/1236139704627728385

⬐ TeMPOraL

WHO reports have stats lagging 1 to 2 days. They're definitely not the primary source.

CSSE seems to be the most up-to-date aggregate source, though their Github repo is lagging half a day behind the map at here: https://gisanddata.maps.arcgis.com/apps/opsdashboard/index.h....

⬐ gruez

>[...] and https://www.reddit.com/r/coronavirus for general news

A couple of weeks ago I saw a comment alleging that the subreddit had a pro-china bias[1]. Personally, I've noticed some patterns that seem to be consistent with those allegations:

* I frequent /r/all. when the subreddit shows up on /r/all (first or second page), it's almost always negative news about some country other than china

* I visited the subreddit on occasion and negative news about china are... few and never anywhere close to the top. At the writing of this comment[2] the only post about china is good news about a 100 year old man recovering from the infection.

* A few days ago there were stories of a hotel collapse in china (it was used to quarantine patients). Posts from various subreddits were showing up on /r/all (first page), however in the /r/coronavirus subreddit the story was in the middle of the first page. You'd think that if such a story was showing up on /r/all, that it'd be #1 or #2 place in the subreddit.

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22438754

[2] https://archive.is/DBWSj

⬐ knzhou

Just a month ago that subreddit was nothing but negative news about China, because China was doing a terrible job. Now China is evidently doing a good job and other countries are screwing up, so they're getting called out. Please don't turn every observation into the world into a conspiracy. It's possible for people to lack your nationalist fervor without being paid shills.

⬐ gruez

> Just a month ago that subreddit was nothing but negative news about China, because China was doing a terrible job. Now China is evidently doing a good job and other countries are screwing up, so they're getting called out.

That explains the first two points, but not the last. It is also consistent with a "moderator takeover" that the original commenter claimed. As it stands, the subreddit hasn't gone full blown /r/sino so it's hard to definitively tell.

> Please don't turn every observation into the world into a conspiracy.

Actually I never claimed there was any sort of conspiracy, just a bias. /r/politics has a liberal (and probably bernie) bias, but I, nor most people would call it a conspiracy.

> It's possible for people to lack your nationalist fervor without being paid shills.

Sure. OTOH you don't seem to think it's possible for me to bring up this topic without being nationalist.

⬐ knzhou

It's the same set of moderators as when the sub was exclusively anti-China. The point is that the median reader of that sub is concerned with results, that's why the narrative their changed.

And yes, if you think celebrating the survival of Chinese grandmothers and grandfathers is so unbelievable that that anybody upvoting it must be a shill, you are blinded by politics. There are forums made for spewing out attitudes like yours, on the grimier parts of the internet. Please consider commenting over there instead, so we can keep HN clean. Thanks.

⬐ lobotryas

I wonder how the US military is preparing or dealing with Corona. We have multiple active deployments and need to maintain a fairly robust military readiness. Soldiers often live very close together. Imagine an entire regiment being sick and unable to deploy.

⬐ yodsanklai

This is a good list of resources.

https://gist.github.com/Gro-Tsen/866cb55d6004356c142ebab462b...

⬐ yodsanklai

> https://cmmid.github.io/topics/covid19/current-patterns-tran...

I found this link very interesting. It seems to show the reproduction number is decreasing quite fast in Italy (before the latest quarantine measures, making me wonder if they were really needed). In Korea, it's also just below 1, which would mark the end of the virus propagation if this is confirmed. If these numbers are accurate, it seems that the epidemics can be controlled without resorting to extreme measures. I'd be curious to get other people's opinions. I'm not quite sure I'm interpreting this data correctly.

⬐ lhl

Yeah, certain countries seem to be doing a very good job at keeping the spread at bay. SK is doing the best job at mitigation. TW, HK, and SG have so far been very effective at containment. CN dropped to the ball to start, but it turns out they managed to take it seriously in time and it may be under control. Their biggest risk, ironically enough is probably going to be spread from international travelers.

From today's new case report and death count (not to mention the 16M person lockdown of all of Lombardy), the worst may not be over for Italy yet (although I think they're doing the best job of the European countries from what I can see)... https://www.reddit.com/r/Coronavirus/comments/fffppj/italy_r...

Of the 133 deaths today in Italy, it appears to be primarily older folks atm, but the reports of running out of ICU beds is not a good sign (anyone in serious condition, regardless of age, requires intubation at least): https://i.imgur.com/VYWdjEI.png

For those that aren't taking COVID-19 very very seriously, I'd recommend reading a frontline report from an Italian HCW: https://www.reddit.com/r/Coronavirus/comments/ffa2tf/testimo...

I'd also encourage everyone to take as many reasonable steps as possible to reduce the spread of infection (proper hygiene, avoiding crowds/public contact as much as possible, social distancing when unavoidable), as lowering the capacity pressure on the healthcare system will be key to saving lives, even if your personal risk is low.

We'll be able to see on a country-by-country basis soon which governments/societies have responded the best, but as the WHO put it, "this is not a drill," and I hope everyone here stays safe.

⬐ lonelappde

Old people dying is not a good sign either.

Please show a little compassion for your elders.

⬐ lhl

I think that goes without saying and is the primary reason people should be concerned about slowing the spread irrespective of personal risk.

The elderly death rate is as expected though - the Chinese epidemiological numbers show a close to 15% CFR for 80yo+ - if you are older or have pre-existing conditions, it's even more important that you do your best to avoid catching this.