Quote:
Originally Posted by stinkypete
If China has 100k+ infections already and the majority of them are in Wuhan, that would suggest the death rate is lower than it appears, which is optimistic for the rest of the world.
I disagree. There's a very long lead time between infection and death. Given 10K infected and the spread rate, 100K infected is likely, but they will be asymptomatic so far and many weeks from death. Don't forget that two weeks ago there were only a few hundred infected. The 200 dead and 1100 seriously ill belong to first few thousand cases, the other 3rd level/4th level infections which make up the bulk of the numbers haven't had time to incubate, let alone proceed to serious illness and death. The virus takes time to destroy your deep lungs and then it takes more time again for that destroyed tissue to get infected and turn into pneumonia and then sepsis and finally death. Given that there are 200 dead, 800 seriously ill and 290 critically ill in Wuhan, the final death toll from these is probably at least 400 from those 5K infections.
Given that this is a cousin of MERS (35% death rate) and SARS (10%) death rate, given what we see in the early cases. I think it's quite likely it's a 4+% death rate.
Quote:
Originally Posted by stinkypete
There will be a big difference in the reproduction rate though. The virus was allowed to spread pretty much completely unobstructed for the first month or so in China. Awareness, masks, hand sanitizer/washing, self-quarantines, etc. etc. mean that the spread will be much slower than initially in China.
Also disagree. China is masked up like crazy, travel banned, the cities almost shut down, and it's spreading rapidly through every province. The rest of the world is still completely open with no precautions. Most Chinese tourists of the thousands I've seen in Europe still have no masks. No one else is wearing masks anywhere.
Quote:
Originally Posted by punter11235
I have no clue about epidemiology but is it possible that European population is better predisposed to handle the virus? It might be that death rate is very low among Europeans but still very high among Chinese (for example). Any data on differences among populations from the past epidemics?
I think there's close to zero chance of this, but strangely many people are relieved by lack of deaths in the West despite it being completely illogical. Look at the China data. Wuhan has nearly all the deaths. Other Chinese provinces have a death rate of 0 so far. Are Wuhan residents more genetically susceptible to the virus than other Chinese? Obviously not. It just takes a long for it to incubate, progress to pneumonia from lung tissue damage, and then turn into severe pneumonia, and then slowly die from the organ failure that causes. The rest of the world hasn't had time to catch up because there's a lead time of many weeks from infection to death. It's also possible that many of those in the West who've caught it so far are in the 25-44 age group with a lower death rate, given that's it's spreading to travelers and those in contact with them first.
Last edited by ToothSayer; 01-31-2020 at 09:42 AM.