Coronavirus Sars-CoV-2/Covid-19 Megathread

[Tamas]

So the plan Is to cull out the weak, but just do so at a convenient schedule

you might be embellishing a bit.

Well what he seems to he saying is that these measures are not stop the spread, they actively want it to spread, just at a slow enough rate to lose less people than we would if it was spreading at a worse time.

Which may be the only realistic option. But it is a bit grim and explains why they are doing less than many other countrues

[Sheilbh]

Isn't that the basis of the "delay" approach?

I mean you're right - that's the whole approach and they've been fairly explicit about it. The other point is that actually the mortality rate is likely far higher if it overwhelms a healthcare system - so spreading it over a longer period will, hopefully, deliver better results because people who contract can be cared for.

The alternatives, they'd argue, are you let it spread and burn-out, or you immediately go to shut down but then risk a re-occurence. I'm not sure if they're right but I think at least they've been fairly transparent. But it is grim.

I think Merkel has also been explicit that this is the approach Germany is trying to take.

[crazy canuck]

First death reported in Canada. Looks like one of the B.C. ones.

It is one of the people in the old age care home where the virus showed up.

[crazy canuck]

Isn't that the basis of the "delay" approach?

I mean you're right - that's the whole approach and they've been fairly explicit about it. The other point is that actually the mortality rate is likely far higher if it overwhelms a healthcare system - so spreading it over a longer period will, hopefully, deliver better results because people who contract can be cared for.

The alternatives, they'd argue, are you let it spread and burn-out, or you immediately go to shut down but then risk a re-occurence. I'm not sure if they're right but I think at least they've been fairly transparent. But it is grim.

I think Merkel has also been explicit that this is the approach Germany is trying to take.

The economist had a good piece in last week's edition regarding the goal of flattening out the curve for the spread of the virus. 

[Barrister]

I really wonder what's going to happen when Covid-19 starts showing up in prisons and remand centres.

[Tamas]

Isn't that the basis of the "delay" approach?

I mean you're right - that's the whole approach and they've been fairly explicit about it. The other point is that actually the mortality rate is likely far higher if it overwhelms a healthcare system - so spreading it over a longer period will, hopefully, deliver better results because people who contract can be cared for.

The alternatives, they'd argue, are you let it spread and burn-out, or you immediately go to shut down but then risk a re-occurence. I'm not sure if they're right but I think at least they've been fairly transparent. But it is grim.

I think Merkel has also been explicit that this is the approach Germany is trying to take.

I guess.

[fromtia]

Well what he seems to he saying is that these measures are not stop the spread, they actively want it to spread, just at a slow enough rate to lose less people than we would if it was spreading at a worse time.

Which may be the only realistic option. But it is a bit grim and explains why they are doing less than many other countrues

I think that's essentially what hes saying. Rather grim, yes I agree. What Sheilbh said.

[fromtia]

I am enjoying this clear concise information, that is followed by a plan that is transparent and can be understood with a bit of examination and research. Its like the UK government is taking it seriously and accepting that they have a responsibility to manage the nations public health.

Here in the US on the other hand its a bit more opaque. Its a media scare and the Libs, and its just a flu, nbd.

[The Larch]

I really wonder what's going to happen when Covid-19 starts showing up in prisons and remand centres.

We had one case in a prison in Spain, but of one of the workers rather than an inmate.

[Iormlund]

The mortality rate seems to be less than 1% and the infection rate is going to be less than 100%. I'm not saying this isn't bad but there isn't a reason to overstate the worst case.

Mortality rate is only around 1% as long as the are ICU beds available. Most first world countries only have a few thousand beds available at any one time. And most of those will be in use.

Italy's health system is collapsing, Spain's will last another week tops. The NHS is notoriously ill-equipped for an outbreak after savage cuts. Germany has a crapload of beds, so they should be good for maybe a month.

Scaling these resources is very difficult, because few nurses are actually qualified to work ICU. The closest thing are maybe surgical, so I expect a lot of surgery cancellations and shadowing of ICU nurses by surgical colleagues.

The reason why the Chinese did what they did in Wuhan is that they saw themselves facing this abyss. So they built prefab hospitals, made equipment to fill them and transferred 40 thousand medical and nursing staff to the city from elsewhere.

[Sheilbh]

Isn't that the basis of the "delay" approach?

I mean you're right - that's the whole approach and they've been fairly explicit about it. The other point is that actually the mortality rate is likely far higher if it overwhelms a healthcare system - so spreading it over a longer period will, hopefully, deliver better results because people who contract can be cared for.

The alternatives, they'd argue, are you let it spread and burn-out, or you immediately go to shut down but then risk a re-occurence. I'm not sure if they're right but I think at least they've been fairly transparent. But it is grim.

I think Merkel has also been explicit that this is the approach Germany is trying to take.

I guess.

Having said that I've now read that the government is making this assessment - with the medical and scientific guys obviously - and that it is being informed by data scientists. Who are of course famous for producing studies that are difficult to replicate and very difficult to generalise from. So I'm escalating my panic levels to: The Road

[merithyn]

The mortality rate seems to be less than 1% and the infection rate is going to be less than 100%. I'm not saying this isn't bad but there isn't a reason to overstate the worst case.

Mortality rate is only around 1% as long as the are ICU beds available. Most first world countries only have a few thousand beds available at any one time. And most of those will be in use.

Italy's health system is collapsing, Spain's will last another week tops. The NHS is notoriously ill-equipped for an outbreak after savage cuts. Germany has a crapload of beds, so they should be good for maybe a month.

Scaling these resources is very difficult, because few nurses are actually qualified to work ICU. The closest thing are maybe surgical, so I expect a lot of surgery cancellations and shadowing of ICU nurses by surgical colleagues.

The reason why the Chinese did what they did in Wuhan is that they saw themselves facing this abyss. So they built prefab hospitals, made equipment to fill them and transferred 40 thousand medical and nursing staff to the city from elsewhere.

And here are where all of my concerns lie.

[Tamas]

Isn't that the basis of the "delay" approach?

I mean you're right - that's the whole approach and they've been fairly explicit about it. The other point is that actually the mortality rate is likely far higher if it overwhelms a healthcare system - so spreading it over a longer period will, hopefully, deliver better results because people who contract can be cared for.

The alternatives, they'd argue, are you let it spread and burn-out, or you immediately go to shut down but then risk a re-occurence. I'm not sure if they're right but I think at least they've been fairly transparent. But it is grim.

I think Merkel has also been explicit that this is the approach Germany is trying to take.

I guess.

Having said that I've now read that the government is making this assessment - with the medical and scientific guys obviously - and that it is being informed by data scientists. Who are of course famous for producing studies that are difficult to replicate and very difficult to generalise from. So I'm escalating my panic levels to: The Road

I really hope they are right. I am just slightly worried about the arrogance of the approach.

[crazy canuck]

The mortality rate seems to be less than 1% and the infection rate is going to be less than 100%. I'm not saying this isn't bad but there isn't a reason to overstate the worst case.

Mortality rate is only around 1% as long as the are ICU beds available. Most first world countries only have a few thousand beds available at any one time. And most of those will be in use.

Italy's health system is collapsing, Spain's will last another week tops. The NHS is notoriously ill-equipped for an outbreak after savage cuts. Germany has a crapload of beds, so they should be good for maybe a month.

Scaling these resources is very difficult, because few nurses are actually qualified to work ICU. The closest thing are maybe surgical, so I expect a lot of surgery cancellations and shadowing of ICU nurses by surgical colleagues.

The reason why the Chinese did what they did in Wuhan is that they saw themselves facing this abyss. So they built prefab hospitals, made equipment to fill them and transferred 40 thousand medical and nursing staff to the city from elsewhere.

And here are where all of my concerns lie.

Yes and no.  A lot of the cases (the young and the older active and healthy) don't need hospitalization.  We have cases here in BC where the symptoms are relatively mild and the people recovered at home.  The ICU is going to be needed for the elderly compromised patients.  But many of those elderly patients are already in medically assisted beds at their care homes.

[Admiral Yi]

Heard on NPR that Trump was visiting the CDC and he announced that "anyone who wants to get tested can get tested."