Wuhan virus 2020

[Shearwater]

I was officially released from quarantine yesterday - quarantine, mind you, not isolation. I wasn't even allowed to go shopping or take down the trash. My SO and our two kids still have to remain completely indoors for another 6 days.

Originally Posted by Skybird

What Germany does better than others. And were it was more lucky than others.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/04/w...eath-rate.html

Test, test, test. Track, track, track. Isolate, isolate, isolate.

Sounds like plain reason, doesn't it.

Testing is paramount, but it isn't a flawless either -

My SO had herself tested on the very day I got my positive result. I got the result only 14 hours after taking the test (I was told that it took somewhere between 2 and 5 days), but in her case, she had wait much longer and had to ring the place up herself to get her results. She was tested negative, even though we share the same apartment, which is so small that isolation is impossible - so, given how contagious this virus is, she must have contracted it. Our symptomts were both fairly mild - as I wrote, loss of sense of smell, and something that maybe feels like a mild cold. We're both relatively young and healthy, and our infection wasn't much of a problem. Still, she got her negative result, and I'm fairly sure our two kids have contracted it as well. It seems possible that her infection took place before mine and has receded to a degree where it is no longer traceable.

None of that will make it into the official statistics - that means 4 new cases, and only one among these that will count officially.
Germany seems to hold up pretty well so far, and there is a lot of testing going on. But it's cases like this that make me wonder just how many infections still go undetected.

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by Shearwater

I was officially released from quarantine yesterday - quarantine, mind you, not isolation. I wasn't even allowed to go shopping or take down the trash. My SO and our two kids still have to remain completely indoors for another 6 days.



Testing is paramount, but it isn't a flawless either -

My SO had herself tested on the very day I got my positive result. I got the result only 14 hours after taking the test (I was told that it took somewhere between 2 and 5 days), but in her case, she had wait much longer and had to ring the place up herself to get her results. She was tested negative, even though we share the same apartment, which is so small that isolation is impossible - so, given how contagious this virus is, she must have contracted it. Our symptomts were both fairly mild - as I wrote, loss of sense of smell, and something that maybe feels like a mild cold. We're both relatively young and healthy, and our infection wasn't much of a problem. Still, she got her negative result, and I'm fairly sure our two kids have contracted it as well. It seems possible that her infection took place before mine and has receded to a degree where it is no longer traceable.

None of that will make it into the official statistics - that means 4 new cases, and only one among these that will count officially.
Germany seems to hold up pretty well so far, and there is a lot of testing going on. But it's cases like this that make me wonder just how many infections still go undetected.

I
use a random factor between 5 and 20 for total cases. The death numbers also are flawed, because different nations count differently, some only caused by corona directly, others also counting deaths due to the coincidence of corona present as well as another desease or cause - Germany does like this for example. Because the desease developes so fast that its presence is seen as a decisive factor even if technically tge death is due to another factor. Finally governments have their own motives to count death numbers low. For example the US death are assumed to be twice as high as the njmber says

[August]

Originally Posted by Skybird

IFor example the US death are assumed to be twice as high as the njmber says

Assumed by who? If anything our government is over inflating the death toll.

[Onkel Neal]

Originally Posted by Shearwater

I was officially released from quarantine yesterday - quarantine, mind you, not isolation. I wasn't even allowed to go shopping or take down the trash. My SO and our two kids still have to remain completely indoors for another 6 days.



Testing is paramount, but it isn't a flawless either -

My SO had herself tested on the very day I got my positive result. I got the result only 14 hours after taking the test (I was told that it took somewhere between 2 and 5 days), but in her case, she had wait much longer and had to ring the place up herself to get her results. She was tested negative, even though we share the same apartment, which is so small that isolation is impossible - so, given how contagious this virus is, she must have contracted it. Our symptomts were both fairly mild - as I wrote, loss of sense of smell, and something that maybe feels like a mild cold. We're both relatively young and healthy, and our infection wasn't much of a problem. Still, she got her negative result, and I'm fairly sure our two kids have contracted it as well. It seems possible that her infection took place before mine and has receded to a degree where it is no longer traceable.

None of that will make it into the official statistics - that means 4 new cases, and only one among these that will count officially.
Germany seems to hold up pretty well so far, and there is a lot of testing going on. But it's cases like this that make me wonder just how many infections still go undetected.

That's really good to hear. Good for you, I bet that's a relief.

Overall the rate of new reported infections has dropped dramatically, so we may be looking at better days.

[Mr Quatro]

Do you think going out to eat will ever be the same again?

I don't think it will be the same at least at buffets like I use to go to where you could eat all you wanted all you had to do was get a clean plate. Family Buffet, Corral and all you can eat salad bars.

My favorite was a nice Chinese place for lunch, but if you wanted it to go they would put everything in one big bucket container like Kentucky Fired Chicken had, which was kind of yucky by the time you got to the bottom.

I see Pizza places someday having all booths instead of tables in the middle and salad bars and buffet's having employees that serve you behind a sneeze glass covering like the ice cream places have.

Everything is going to change at the grocery store too. protection, protection, protection especially from law suits.

[Jimbuna]

Originally Posted by Onkel Neal

Who takes over if Boris goes kaput? You guys have a Vice Prime Minister?

Just the flu, bro

Dominic Raab, the foreign secretary, became Britain’s de facto prime minister last night after he was handed powers to lead the government and its efforts to tackle coronavirus in Boris Johnson’s absence.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/d...irus-png9zft2b

[Jimbuna]

China reports no deaths for first time since crisis began.

There were 32 new cases in the country - all from overseas.

In the UK, Prime Minister Boris Johnson is in intensive care.

He tested positive on 27 March but his condition has worsened.

New cases in South Korea stay under 50 for second day in a row.

NZ health minister calls himself an "idiot" for going to beach during lockdown.

[Skybird]

Why we must switch our statistics to representative pooling.

https://www.focus.de/gesundheit/news..._11855864.html


Statistician: The corona numbers are wrong because they do not represent reality

Katharina Schüller calls for representative tests to better estimate the extent of the coronavirus.
Schüller / gettyimages Katharina Schüller calls for representative tests to better estimate the extent of the coronavirus.

The number of cases that supposed "experts" have been analyzing for weeks does not reflect the true extent of the corona epidemic in Germany. That is why it is now essential to test representative. This is the only way we will have enough data to correctly assess the virus.

In the past few days, more and more "statistics experts" have been analyzing the COVID 19 case numbers to the extreme. Colorful, interactive graphics explain to us what is really the truth now. This has nothing to do with data literacy.

We know that each of our model calculations has to be wrong. Nevertheless, the conclusions are correct: if we fail to quickly bring the infection rate to a level lower than that of the most optimistic scenarios, our healthcare system will collapse. Even the “best case” scenario does not allow carelessness. It takes considerable data competence to understand that correct action can also be derived from “wrong” numbers.

The numbers are "wrong" because they only represent a small part of the reality: the seriously ill, a part of the more easily ill with symptoms and a very small part of people without symptoms who were tested because they were suspected. The undisclosed figure is unknown. We statisticians therefore have a problem. We are expected to make forecasts, but the data is not suitable because it contains too little information.

The longer this phase of uncertainty continues, the greater the risk that many people will no longer want to accept the restrictions. That is why it is essential to carry out tests on representative population samples.

Politicians can and must take responsibility here by ensuring that sufficient test capacity is available for this. It is not a matter of refusing to test people who are obviously sick "for statistics". Reliable statistics only require around 1,000 tests a day. This would enable the effectiveness of the control measures to be assessed almost immediately, without having to wait up to two weeks for the newly reported cases and deaths.

We can combine different approaches to assess the current, previous and future infection rate. Random, repeated testing with the available PCR tests allows measures to be validly justified for the entire population. Such a strategy can also uncover clusters of infected people, in which more tests are carried out or special precautions are necessary.

Test pooling, in which the samples of several people are tested together, can be more efficient, at least initially. If there are two tests with positive results in ten pooled tests with the samples of ten people each, the 20 people shown therein can be re-tested. So you only need 30 tests instead of 100 to test 100 people.
Combine data and analyze it as "Big Data"

What characterizes people with symptoms that do not meet the inclusion criteria for tests?
Which tests come from groups with an increased risk, e.g. by hospital staff
Where have relatives living in the household not been tested and are they symptomatic?
How old and sick were positive test persons as opposed to negative test persons, were people with symptoms and those without?
How many tests have you had so far?

In order to recognize the overall picture, we can apply a generous measure of the sensitivity and specificity of the tests. It is not an argument to reject representative testing for error rates as long as these error rates are known and not related to the likelihood of being included in the sample. Then the false positive and false negative results can be calculated. Error rates only play a role if COVID-19 is suspected in individual cases and a reliable result is required.


Nordic countries such as Iceland, Norway and Sweden are leading the way, and Luxembourg is also planning a strategy for representative tests. If one compares the distribution of the proven COVID-19 cases between the age groups between Iceland and the Netherlands, one notices how strong the bias by non-representative tests is. Even if you take into account that the Icelandic population is on average around 6 years younger than the Dutch, there remains a serious difference.

A Europe-wide coordinated strategy that allows benchmarking is essential. This is the only way we can gradually return to a reasonably normal life and thus limit the negative consequences of this pandemic to some extent. It's not just about the economy. Isolation is a disaster for mentally ill people and for women and children (and of course men) who are at risk of domestic violence. These possible consequences, which can bring our society out of joint, are not thought through to the end.

In November 2019, the Federal Government only presented a key point paper on the data strategy. It starts with the words: “Data [are] a key resource (..) for government action. The ability to use data responsibly and self-determined is (...) equally the basis for (...) generating knowledge and for social cohesion. " Responsible use of data and increasing data literacy are required as key areas of action.

In contrast, the Donors' Association of Sciences already presented a comprehensive data literacy framework for data literacy in August 2019, which provides concrete examples of the application of data ethics. In particular, the need to include a wide variety of perspectives (subject matter experts, data experts, data protection experts, data ethicists) has been worked out.

Therefore, the Bavarian government's initiative to carry out a randomized sample is to be welcomed without restriction, even if Bavaria's Science Minister Bernd Sibler is opposing the opinion of the RKI President and other scientists. Sibler rightly points out that the coronavirus and its distribution need to be better understood in order to be able to react with the right measures. But that is only possible on the basis of reliable figures and data analyzes.

As part of the Munich COVID-19 cohort, 3000 households households from Munich are selected. The tropical institute of the Ludwig Maximilians University in Munich wants to find out from around 4,500 people how many people are actually infected with the corona virus. About three milliliters of blood are taken each time the sample is taken and then also tested for antibodies against SARS-CoV-2.

In this way, people can also be found who are probably immune to the corona virus - either because they have overcome the disease or because they have pre-existing immunity. Doctors, epidemiologists, microbiologists, but also statisticians, mathematicians and computer scientists are involved in the study.

Such an interdisciplinary collaboration is urgently needed in order to generate not only data, but also practical knowledge. The dispute between scientists from different and the same disciplines has shown one thing above all: we have a lot of catching up to do when it comes to data literacy and ethics. The numerous "corona dashboards" that can now be found on the Internet may be impressive evidence that their creators have mastered the use of professional visualization and BI tools. But this has little to do with data literacy as a key competency of the 21st century.

Data literacy includes:

complex expertise
the ability and skill to use it correctly
the motivation and value to do the right thing with data

On the one hand, data literacy requires the ability to recognize the meaningfulness of data and where its limits lie. That is critical thinking. On the other hand, you need motivation not to present data in such a way that the layperson draws wrong conclusions from it. That is data ethics.



he great scientist and Nobel laureate Friedrich August von Hayek (1899–1992) warned against the presumption of knowledge many decades ago - albeit in the context of the complex system of economics. A pandemic is also a complex system that cannot be understood with intuition alone. "It sometimes looks like the techniques of science are easier to learn than the thinking that shows us what the problems are and how to address them."

Munich and Heinsberg, where the virologist Hendrik Streeck is carrying out a representative cohort study, show that there is another way. It is important to take an integrated perspective that takes into account all the consequences for health, social cohesion and prosperity.

This requires reliable data that can measure the effects of COVID-19 and the various possibilities of government action on all areas of life. This is the only way to deal politically with the corona crisis in Germany as a lesson in responsible data usage and data literacy.

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by August

Assumed by who? If anything our government is over inflating the death toll.

The international observer and scoentist community beyond the US government. Your government has zero interest in over inflating the numbers, but has always tried to play down the scale of the desaster. The interest is like that in any other country where they play fown the numbers: to let the govenrment appear to be in control and to manage the crisis well.

It has been the same procedure almost every day since the onset of the corona crisis. Hundreds of people are dying in the country, and hospitals are working to the limit. Donald Trump is in the small press room of the White House and talks about how great he and his government are supposed to be working to get the situation under control.

"I think we're doing a great job," he said recently. If he had to grade himself and his team, he would give "ten out of ten points". And on Twitter he gave the impression on Monday that the crisis could soon be over: "There is light at the end of the tunnel."

Self-praise and demonstrative optimism are part of the typical Trump tactic: With the election date on November 3 firmly in mind, the president tries to cut the best possible figure in the crisis. He presents himself to the nation as a "war president" who campaigns against an "invisible enemy" and does practically everything correctly. Errors, omissions are denied and critics are attacked.

So that voters can follow him, Trump raises hopes of supposed miracle cures or an early comeback of the US economy. Above all, however, he tries as a precaution to rewrite history: Although he obviously underestimated the danger at the beginning, he now claims that he saw the pandemic coming for a long time. Trump is obviously "revisionist," the New York Times states soberly.

Trump has systematically made a whole series of contradicting claims and made misleading statements since the beginning of the crisis. The result is a zigzag course that confuses friend and foe alike. Some of the press briefings become fairy tale hours.

What is true? What is exaggerated What wrong? Four examples of Trump's confusion:

1. Trump and the pandemic

The statement: "I sensed that it would become a pandemic long before it was called that," Trump said on March 17. And afterwards: "I always took it very seriously."

The reality: Trump has long downplayed the danger posed by the virus.

At first he never spoke of a pandemic. When the disease was already raging in China at the end of January and threatened to spread to other countries, he claimed that his government had "the situation completely under control". When asked a reporter whether he was concerned about a possible pandemic, on January 22, he said, "No, not at all." And: "Everything will be fine."

Then he claimed that the disease would "miraculously go away" in April.

And on February 26, he said: The United States has very few cases. "We'll have only five people soon. And in a very short time it could only be two or one."

2. Trump and the treatment methods

The statement, "It shows some very good results. I hope it would be phenomenal," Trump said on April 3 about the prospect that anti-malaria drugs such as hydroxychloroquine could be used to treat Covid-19. On April 5, he said there were very strong signs that it was working.

Reality: Trump has been hoping for weeks that anti-malaria drugs could help with the virus. Larger clinical trials have just started. Many experts warn against drawing premature conclusions about the applicability of the product from some treatment successes.



The FDA has not approved the drug for the treatment of Covid-19 in general. Trump's adviser to the Corona Task Force, Anthony Fauci, has repeatedly pointed out that the evidence for effectiveness has so far been thin and "anecdotal". For serious statements, one needs "more data" first. When Fauci was questioned again by reporters last Sunday, Trump prevented a direct response from the expert. "He has answered this question 15 times," the president told the journalist.

Trump has repeatedly spread hopes of the rapid availability of vaccination protection. This will be "very soon", he said on March 7th. Experts believe that the vaccine will not be available until next year.
Anthony Fauci has frequently corrected statements made by Donald Trump - including those regarding possible treatment methods

3. Trump and the flu

The statement, "A lot of people said, a lot of people thought about it: 'Sit it out. Don't do anything, let's just sit it out and treat it like the flu.' But that's not the flu. It's sneaky," Trump said on March 31 about the corona virus.

The reality: Trump is recognizably trying to rewrite history here. He wants to forget that he has long dismissed the illness as a kind of flu. "It's a flu. It's like the flu," he said in February.

Trump apparently took the spread of the virus seriously when more and more people died of it in late March and early April. He warned of more than 100,000 deaths in the United States.

Previously, he compared the corona virus to the flu several times and gave the impression that one could sit out the crisis. On February 26, Trump said, "It's a bit like the normal flu that we have vaccinations for. We'll be vaccinated for that pretty quickly, too."

4. Trump and the tests

The statement: "The original tests we inherited ... were broken, they were out of date, they weren't good tests," Trump said on April 3.

Reality: Trump has made misleading statements about Covid 19 tests since the onset of the crisis. He has tried several times to give the impression that the USA initially did not test properly, which is the responsibility of the previous government of Barack Obama. But: This cannot be because the virus has only been known since the end of December 2019, long after the end of the Obama administration. Only then could a test for the infection be developed.

https://www.spiegel.de/politik/ausla...4-780e6bf6d71a

And this:

https://www.axios.com/exclusive-nava...48f8382a9.html

[Jimbuna]

[Jimbuna]

UK coronavirus live news: Boris Johnson 'stable' in hospital and does not have pneumonia, Downing Street says.

[vienna]

There's an old maxim about searching for the truth in political matters:

"Follow the Money"...

I had suspicions there was a lees than altruistic or humanitarian or compassionate motivation behind Trump's aggressive touting of hydroxychloroquine and Trump, once again, does not disappoint; it is well known Trump does nothing nor advocate anything unless there is profit in it for him; with the health, well-being and, in many cases, the lives of those afflicted by Covid-19 at stake, Trump acts less like a compassionate leader and more like a venal Ferengi...


Donald Trump Has Stake In Hydroxychloroquine Drugmaker: Report --

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/donal...b6e1d10a696280

President Donald Trump reportedly owns a stake in a company that produces hydroxychloroquine, the anti-malaria drug he has repeatedly touted as a coronavirus treatment even though his experts say there’s no strong evidence it works.

Trump “has a small personal financial interest” in Sanofi, the French drugmaker that makes Plaquenil, the brand-name version of hydroxychloroquine, The New York Times reported Monday.

In addition, Sanofi’s largest shareholders include a mutual fund company run by major Republican donor Ken Fisher, the paper said. Trump’s three family trusts, as of last year, each had investments in a mutual fund whose largest holding was Sanofi, according to the Times. Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross also had ties to the drugmaker, the Times reported.

Trump’s “assertiveness” in promoting the drug contrary to the recommendation of top health experts “has raised questions about his motives,” the Times noted.

Trump’s Aggressive Advocacy of Malaria Drug for Treating Coronavirus Divides Medical Community --

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/06/u...aria-drug.html

Some associates of Mr. Trump’s have financial interests in the issue. Sanofi’s largest shareholders include Fisher Asset Management, the investment company run by Ken Fisher, a major donor to Republicans, including Mr. Trump. A spokesman for Mr. Fisher declined to comment.

Another investor in both Sanofi and Mylan, another pharmaceutical firm, is Invesco, the fund previously run by Wilbur Ross, the commerce secretary. Mr. Ross said in a statement Monday that he “was not aware that Invesco has any investments in companies producing” the drug, “nor do I have any involvement in the decision to explore this as a treatment.”

As of last year, Mr. Trump reported that his three family trusts each had investments in a Dodge & Cox mutual fund, whose largest holding was in Sanofi.

<O>

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by vienna

There's an old maxim about searching for the truth in political matters:

"Follow the Money"...

I had suspicions there was a lees than altruistic or humanitarian or compassionate motivation behind Trump's aggressive touting of hydroxychloroquine and Trump, once again, does not disappoint; it is well known Trump does nothing nor advocate anything unless there is profit in it for him; with the health, well-being and, in many cases, the lives of those afflicted by Covid-19 at stake, Trump acts less like a compassionate leader and more like a venal Ferengi...

I had suspicions like this, too, but did not knew anything. Now that I learn it is like this, I am not surprised at all. Not at all. It had to be like this, somehow.

[u crank]

Originally Posted by Skybird

That is somewhat correct but ....

New York Governor Andrew Cuomo: “It is about the vulnerable. It's not about 95% of us. It's about a few percent who are vulnerable. That's all this is about. Bring down that anxiety, bring down that fear, bring down that paranoia.”

New York City Mayor Bill De Blasio: "I'm encouraging New Yorkers to go on with your lives: get out on the town despite Coronavirus.”

Oxiris Barbot, New York City health commissioner: “We are encouraging New Yorkers to go about their everyday lives and suggest practicing everyday precautions that we do through the flu season.”

[vienna]

Well, they were being assured nothing was wrong by the the great stable genius, you know, who kept saying it was "just the flu"...





<O>