Coronavirus

[Serial_Apologist]

The likely death ratio for all those infected with Covid-19 (as distinct from confirmed cases) has been estimated as being between 0.5% and 1.0% (SAGE document "SPI-M-O: Consensus Statement on 2019 Novel Coronavirus (COVID-19)" dated 2nd March. https://assets.publishing.service.go..._covid-19_.pdf

If we take the lower 0.5%, then if 50% of the UK population has been infected with Coronavirus that would imply a minimum of 166,000 additional deaths for the UK over January, February and March. (66.4M x 0.5 x 0.005). The figure for England and Wales only would be 148,000 additional deaths.

The registered deaths for England and Wales were

Jan 19: 53,910
Feb 19: 45,796
Mar 19: 43,946

Jan 20: 56,706

https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/deaths/datasets/monthlyfiguresondeathsregisteredbyareaofusualresidence

So an additional 148,000 deaths over a three month peiod would be very dramatic indeed. It doesn't show up in January. February 2020 hasn't yet been published but it is highly doubtful whether such a rise would have gone unnoticed.

So, if the 50% already infected theory is correct the Infected Fatality Ratio would have to be very considerably lower than the 0.5% to 1.0% - by an order of magnitude.

In any case the 0.5% to 1.0% is an estimate because we don't really know the number of mild coronavirus cases.

The only way to prove things one way or the other is by extensive antibody testing.

The title of the paper referred to by the FT is "Fundamental principles of epidemic spread highlight the immediate need for large-scale serological surveys to assess the stage of the SARS-CoV-2 epidemic".

No, I don't work in this field so my ramblings should be taken with a very large pinch (not to say bucket) of salt.

I have seen it argued that the government's predicted death calculations do not exclude deaths from causes other than C19 in the high risk category, thereby offering a generous spin on the effectiveness of their strategy.

[oddoneout]

I guess this is obvious but I haven't seen it said.

With the closure of almost all eating establishments, the wholesale suppliers to the catering trade must be stacked out with foodstuffs, toilet rolls etc and many of them will be heavily concentrated in cities like London and Manchester.

With commuters who routinely bought lunches and dinners near place of work now staying at home, a lot of stuff is now presumably sitting on shelves in completely the wrong place.

I'd have thought that the wise ones in such wholesalers would have got quickly on the phone to the supermarkets (local ones or central buying departments) but have they?

Some individual places have distributed their stock to suitable outlets as a one-off according to the local paper, but a good few have got themselves organised to offer delivery(in several cases free) of products.

[LMcD]

Our local medical centre now allows patients over 75 to request repeat prescriptions by phone, giving 5 days' notice, and the medicines will be delivered. (For some reason, this is not mentioned on its website).

[Serial_Apologist]

Some individual places have distributed their stock to suitable outlets as a one-off according to the local paper, but a good few have got themselves organised to offer delivery(in several cases free) of products.

Whatever happened to the Freegan movement? One hears nothing of it these days...

[oddoneout]

Our local medical centre now allows patients over 75 to request repeat prescriptions by phone, giving 5 days' notice, and the medicines will be delivered. (For some reason, this is not mentioned on its website).

Limit demand? Or else the bod responsible for the website is unavailable.

[Dave2002]

The likely death ratio for all those infected with Covid-19 (as distinct from confirmed cases) has been estimated as being between 0.5% and 1.0% (SAGE document "SPI-M-O: Consensus Statement on 2019 Novel Coronavirus (COVID-19)" dated 2nd March. https://assets.publishing.service.go..._covid-19_.pdf

If we take the lower 0.5%, then if 50% of the UK population has been infected with Coronavirus that would imply a minimum of 166,000 additional deaths for the UK over January, February and March. (66.4M x 0.5 x 0.005). The figure for England and Wales only would be 148,000 additional deaths.

The registered deaths for England and Wales were

Jan 19: 53,910
Feb 19: 45,796
Mar 19: 43,946

Jan 20: 56,706

https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/deaths/datasets/monthlyfiguresondeathsregisteredbyareaofusualresidence

So an additional 148,000 deaths over a three month peiod would be very dramatic indeed. It doesn't show up in January. February 2020 hasn't yet been published but it is highly doubtful whether such a rise would have gone unnoticed.

So, if the 50% already infected theory is correct the Infected Fatality Ratio would have to be very considerably lower than the 0.5% to 1.0% - by an order of magnitude.

In any case the 0.5% to 1.0% is an estimate because we don't really know the number of mild coronavirus cases.

The only way to prove things one way or the other is by extensive antibody testing.

The title of the paper referred to by the FT is "Fundamental principles of epidemic spread highlight the immediate need for large-scale serological surveys to assess the stage of the SARS-CoV-2 epidemic".

No, I don't work in this field so my ramblings should be taken with a very large pinch (not to say bucket) of salt.

A few points, and this is based on the speculative ideas one has heard as rumours. If - and it's a big "If" 50% of the population already have the disease or have had it, then they were probably either asymptomatic, or experienced a very mild illness - and perhaps didn't even think it was CV19.

The other point is that if people are infected and recover, this might reduce the transmission rate. That means that scaling things linearly wouldn't be the best model. However, I think you are right that there would be a significant and measurable increase in the number of deaths if half the population had suffered the full strength disease - and reacted badly. That suggests that if there is anything in that paper, it might be due to the disease coming in under the radar and havinig only limited effect.

Right now we just don't know. Have you looked back at the SIR model and the graphs? They do suggest effectively distinct phases if the disease goes like that.

[Simon B]

The likely death ratio for all those infected with Covid-19 (as distinct from confirmed cases) has been estimated as being between 0.5% and 1.0% (SAGE document "SPI-M-O: Consensus Statement on 2019 Novel Coronavirus (COVID-19)" dated 2nd March. https://assets.publishing.service.go..._covid-19_.pdf

If we take the lower 0.5%, then if 50% of the UK population has been infected with Coronavirus that would imply a minimum of 166,000 additional deaths for the UK over January, February and March. (66.4M x 0.5 x 0.005). The figure for England and Wales only would be 148,000 additional deaths.

What this short paper appears to be saying* is that:

1) They run their Susceptible-Infectious-Recovered model.
2) This model simultaneously varies numerous key parameters of an epidemic at random - Reproduction No, Proportion of Population at Risk of Serious Disease, Actual Introduction Date versus First Observed Case etc.
3) It outputs a time series of deaths. This is the only thing we can assume we are currently measuring with any accuracy in reality.
4) By running it a huge number of times, you eventually get a small fraction of runs for which the modelled death trajectory matches what we are seeing.
5) Each corresponding set of the above key parameters that gives a good match is recorded: thus obtaining their a posteriori (of the model) estimates.

Among these matches, they observe:
6) Some parameter sets that align better with current best guesses - Every infected person infects 2.25 others, 1% of infected people get seriously ill, 14% of those die
7) Some other very different parameter sets which cause the model to work just as well - Every infected person infects 2.25 others, 0.1% of infected people get seriously ill, 14% of those die

In the much more optimistic case 7), the a posteriori parameter that shifts notably to accommodate the outcome is that the epidemic has actually been going on for much longer than suspected.


The key caveat* is that this either a) tells you a lot about what we do/don't really know or b) tells you a lot about how the model will turn out to have not been a good model of the outbreak, but you only know afterwards

I read* this paper as primarily an exhortation to do mass antibody testing. The title "Fundamental principles of epidemic spread highlight the immediate need for large-scale serological surveys to assess the stage of the SARS-CoV-2 epidemic" as good as says so.

No, I don't work in this field so my ramblings should be taken with a very large pinch (not to say bucket) of salt.

*Ditto

[Andrew]

Has anyone heard the figure for deaths from Covid 19 in the U.K. today? Yesterday's was 442, an increase of about 80. Today's figure was NOT given at the daily press conference and I wondered why.......

[johnb]

Very unusually, the government website hasn't yet been updated with today's data.

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/coronavirus-covid-19-information-for-the-public#number-of-cases

[Old Grumpy]

Thanks, may look into that.

OG

Thanks, guys. Analogue Hotpoint washer of a certain age (not one of the inflammatory ones!). I opened the exit trap, cleaned it out and found a tissue wrapped around the impeller.

Now on a test wash:. So far so good...

OG

[Bryn]

Thanks, guys. Analogue Hotpoint washer of a certain age (not one of the inflammatory ones!). I opened the exit trap, cleaned it out and found a tissue wrapped around the impeller.

Now on a test wash:. So far so good...

OG

[Padraig]

I agree Bryn - a good news story. Well done OG.

[Dave2002]

Thanks, guys. Analogue Hotpoint washer of a certain age (not one of the inflammatory ones!). I opened the exit trap, cleaned it out and found a tissue wrapped around the impeller.

Now on a test wash:. So far so good...

OG

Excellent. You might need to run it one more time empty, as sometimes the tissues break up, and you get lots of bits. On the other hand it might all be clear. Either way it'll probably be OK, except that if there are bits of tissue, they'll get all over the clothes and be a bit of a nuisance.

[LHC]

Has anyone heard the figure for deaths from Covid 19 in the U.K. today? Yesterday's was 442, an increase of about 80. Today's figure was NOT given at the daily press conference and I wondered why.......

41 today I think. 28 in England and 13 in the other nations.

[Simon B]

I read* this paper as primarily an exhortation to do mass antibody testing. The title "Fundamental principles of epidemic spread highlight the immediate need for large-scale serological surveys to assess the stage of the SARS-CoV-2 epidemic" as good as says so.

And lo: https://www.theguardian.com/science/...s-of-modelling

Unsurprisingly, it appears to have been taken out of context/seriously overinterpreted in parts of the media.