Isn’t this true for all viruse? Someone please correct me if I’m wrong.
We won’t know the actual death rate for a while. But the studies currently available (big caveat of course) indicate lower than initial claims.
The actual number of deaths due to The Virus? Well, that’s a can of worms I’m not going to open.
ddinante nailed it. It is common for even well established viruses to have a range of R0 values–this is because both environment and methodology make a difference in the contagious nature of the virus. For example, built up immunity will lower R0 for an established pathogen–colonists vs. Native Americans for example.
It is most common for initial R0 values to be calculated based on exponential spread (meaning, before any isolation, mitigation, etc.). This allows people to track changes to how virulent the pathogen is throughout an outbreak and potentially compare interventions and environments for spread. It also allows an “apples vs apples” comparison between pathogens. But it is VERY IMPORTANT to realize that the nature of R0 is by design an estimation rather than a simple, directly measured “velocity” of some kind. It can be directly measured but most often is not due to practical constraints or risk. IT IS ALWAYS dependent on 3 things: how many people a contagious person contacts on average (contact rate), likelihood of a contact producing a new infection (transmission effectiveness basically), and how long a person remains contagious (incubation time, asymptomatic spread, how long after infection control are they still contagious, etc.
In addition you have behaviors, cultural norms (African burial rights contributing to Ebola spread) etc.etc.
Short answer–I would say the current range of 3.8 - 5+ passes the smell test, and is probably in the ballpark. It is currently (to the best of my knowledge) the accepted range among pros. Several earlier estimates were in the high 2s, but they did not have access to the same data and made some other assumptions that aren’t likely true (notably on “little to no symptomatic spread”).
Smallpox is around the same range, 3 something - 6 ish. The 1918 flu pandemic is estimated around middle 1s - 3 or so. This is a great example because we’ve had about 100 years to refine that number and we still use a low/high range. Smallpox is also a great example for the same reason. Seasonal flu most often falls between 1 - 2.
2 Likes
The “Post Mortem” of this pandemic will be amazing.
There will be many lessons learned. Some things we would have done right; some things we did we will find were absolutely FUBAR. There is no question that there will be those “new norms” everyone talks about.
My questions is about mass events… (concerts; conventions; College and Pro Basketball, Football, etc). A small hair salon is one thing…the NFL playoffs, Super Bowl or even a groups National Convention are quite another.
Anyone with either a link or thoughts on how they think all of this will finally roll out?
Thanks for the great answer.
1 Like
Serious question: At what point does COVID stop being a “pandemic” and just becomes another disease that kills people?
Thanks, @Aragorn !
Even if one did not have the R0…I am at a loss as to how people could look at high density areas like NYC and their overwhelmed ER’s and ICU’s; and the devastation that went through numerous nursing homes and elderly facilities; and still say “It’s just like a bad Flu Season?”.
1 Like
Hey looks like I was on to something…even if it is coming from the Daily Mail…
Uhh…HIV is a virus.
It’s trolling. We’ve actually had the conversation before. He knows what the CDC recommends and he’s a Trump fan who isn’t fond of the WHO. He just trots it out whenever anyone says they wear a mask.
I know. I generally pay little attention to the one-liners; the callowness just drips from them.
Glad it was useful! It can be hard because a lot of terms are thrown around but with very little explanation of what the hell they actually are…
No chance. I have absolutely no idea what’s will happen. I am a huge huge concert goer so I hope to high heaven we can still have mosh pits…if I have to live without heavy metal nobody will like the result lol.
Good question, sadly no idea. My best thought is a) we know we don’t have any workable vaccines b) have actual drugs that treat it effectively c) when it becomes obvious it’s not going to be eradicated by a and b in reasonably short order.
No idea when that is.
I don’t pay any attention to the newspaper, but those Hopkins boys are pretty sharp! I’ll have to find the print on them.
2 Likes
Why? I couldn’t care less about either, and I don’t think either should exist.
D-UH moment on my part. Thanks for pointing that out and stealing the thunder from a “gotcha” comment LOL.
I’ve got flu(s) on the brain now. (respiratory viruses)
1 Like
You definitely prefer the WHO’s recommendation when making the same troll post multiple times.
Probably from feeling like you know you have all the answers, but no one will listen to anything you’re saying because it’s insanity would be my guess.
LOL. How is it a “troll post?” Trolling isn’t “posting something with which others disagree.”
How about these: Wearing a mask while driving alone with your windows up seems silly. Wearing a mask pulled down under your nose seems silly.
We’ve had this conversation before and you only link that recommendation even though you’re well aware of the CDC’s recommendation. Trying to get a certain reaction from people is usually the definition of trolling to me. You’re a Trump fan (who is at war with the WHO) but you’ll post that recommendation only.
Why would I link any other? Linking either is just an appeal to authority, so why not use the one I feel like using?
Not trying to get a certain reaction-just shows that recommendations vary.
Not really.
I had no idea. The only things he does that I see are the things posted on this board. One unnecessary medical group is no better or worse than any other.
See above.
Paint it as sincere if you want. You make fun of people wearing masks and then when people say something you post that link. When called out now you’re just trying to have a conversation that opinions vary? And now you’re not a Trump fan either…just on PWI.
It’s whatever man. Other people have called it trolling on various threads. If the definition offends you ask yourself why.
So shouldn’t everything be open then? Currently the death rate according to current antibody testing is estimated at .2% -.5% So the facts have changed and alot if people gave already had this. So what the he’ll are we doing?