4 ms·

Earlier today, researchers at Imperial College in London estimated that a total of 4,000 cases of Coronavirus in Wuhan City (with an uncertainty range of 1,000

by cs702 7y ago

Earlier today, researchers at Imperial College in London estimated that a total of 4,000 cases of Coronavirus in Wuhan City (with an uncertainty range of 1,000 to 9,700) had onset of symptoms by January 18. This compares with a Chinese government report of 440 confirmed cases as of January 21: https://www.imperial.ac.uk/mrc-global-infectious-disease-analysis/news--wuhan-coronavirus/ https://www.imperial.ac.uk/mrc-global-infectious-disease-ana... According to the Imperial College researchers: "Exit screening (which reportedly came into force on the 15th January) had no impact on exported cases reported up to 16th January. Exit screening may have reduced exports in recent days, in which case our baseline prediction may be an underestimate of the true number of cases in Wuhan." The researchers also write: "We assume all cases in travelers flying to destinations outside mainland China are being detected at those destinations. This may well not be the case. If cases are being missed in other countries, our baseline prediction will underestimate the true number of cases in Wuhan." If anyone has more recent or higher-quality data or information (especially if it contradicts the Imperial estimates), please post it here!

perennate 7y ago
Are you sure 440 is an estimate? According to LA Times that is the number of cases reported. https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2020-01-21/anxiety-over-coronavirus-rises-as-millions-of-chinese-travel-for-the-lunar-new-year https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2020-01-21/anxiety-...
- cs702 7y ago
  Changed. I meant to write report. The 440 cases are officially confirmed. Thanks!
taiwanboy 7y ago
Up to date map with numbers (in Chinese) https://3g.dxy.cn/newh5/view/pneumonia?scene=2&clicktime=1579582238&enterid=1579582238&from=timeline&isappinstalled=0 https://3g.dxy.cn/newh5/view/pneumonia?scene=2&clicktime=157... Affected: 549 (left most number) Death: 17 (right most number) You can tell from the map that most of China now has affected patients. Also important: 14 patients in Beijing, 26!! Patients in Guangdong and 9 patients in shanghai. That means the coronavirus has already broke out of containment in major cities in China. And because of the 10x gap in aforementioned estimate vs government under reporting, the number is likely 10x is large. https://www.reddit.com/r/China_Flu/comments/eshyhl/as_families_tell_of_pneumonialike_deaths_in_wuhan/ https://www.reddit.com/r/China_Flu/comments/eshyhl/as_famili... No one should be traveling to China right now, period.
- ETHisso2017 7y ago
  > No one should be traveling to China right now, period. You and the LIHKG guy are spamming up this thread with hyperbole
  - hker 7y ago
    The government of Wuhan is asking people not to travel there unless necessary (in traditional Chinese [1] and Google translated [2]), as they announce travel ban. I am not sure if news reporting counts as hyperbole, given that I tried hard not to paint too broad a stroke already. [1]: https://news.mingpao.com/pns/要聞/article/20200122/s00001/1579631419595/武漢管控進出-籲外地人不要來-旅客發燒即送院-鍾南山指做法有效 https://news.mingpao.com/pns/要聞/article/20200122/s00001/1579... [2]: https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Fnews.mingpao.com%2Fpns%2F要聞%2Farticle%2F20200122%2Fs00001%2F1579631419595%2F武漢管控進出-籲外地人不要來-旅客發燒即送院-鍾南山指做法 https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&u=https...
- londons_explore 7y ago
  Right now, if you visit, you have a 1 in 81 million chance of dying from this disease. You have a far far higher chance of dying of something else during your trip. Obviously those odds could change rapidly.
  - taiwanboy 7y ago
    10x underreporting -> 1 in 8 million Fast mutation due to hundreds of million travelers + possiblity of being stuck in a city with a new order of unable to travel out for 30/60 days = no good reason to travel to china
hker 7y ago
A local doctor estimated that the number of infected has surpassed 10K in a chat group (images in simplified Chinese [1]). [1]: https://lihkg.com/thread/1834475/page/1 https://lihkg.com/thread/1834475/page/1
- ETHisso2017 7y ago
  You realize you can fake wechat messages with a simple graphics template, right? LIHKG is not a verifiable source
  - hker 7y ago
    You realize the number quoted there is a reasonable estimate (if not an underestimate) of the number of infected, right? Here is a thread on what Weibo was saying two weeks ago, when Weibo users thought that Hong Kong was overreacting to the outbreak (images in simplified Chinese [1], again, the images are hosted on LIHKG, but you can search Weibo to verify). The fact that disease-related information is censored, hence the misjudgement of the public, is named a reason for the spread of the virus [2]. [1]: https://lih.kg/1835161 https://lih.kg/1835161 "【回顧】兩星期前既微博" [2]: https://www.wsj.com/articles/chinas-censorship-helps-spread-the-virus-11580071968 https://www.wsj.com/articles/chinas-censorship-helps-spread-...
- karmasimida 7y ago
  This is textbook fake news
devy 7y ago
> Imperial College in London estimated that a total of 4,000 cases of Coronavirus in Wuhan City (with an uncertainty range of 1,000 to 9,700) This is an estimate with a whole bunch of assumptions (may or may not be true) and known factors and applied to a probabilistic formula (a very simple one too.) Some I'd say this is a very rough attempt. The 440 confirmed cases released by the daily official press release is a fact, with all of them confirmed with lab tests and been quarantined. Those are live numbers: https://3w.huanqiu.com/a/c36dc8/9CaKrnKp248?agt=8 https://3w.huanqiu.com/a/c36dc8/9CaKrnKp248?agt=8 There is no reason to believe the simply probabilistic model would be accurate (this is also why they suggested that the accuracy is between 1000-9700, almost an order of magnitude difference). And there is no reason to believe their assumptions were right either. So you are comparing Apples to Oranges. The best modeling for estimates about infectious disease is to use ordinary differential equation (ODE) to model and estimate with a set of assumptions. It talks about why the ICL's model only applicable to the early stage of the outbreak.[1] [1]: https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/Ab0fLOWr_9AvU4RA15rMCg https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/Ab0fLOWr_9AvU4RA15rMCg (in Chinese)
- perennate 7y ago
  I also thought parent was comparing the two at first, but after his/her clarification I think parent was just reporting the latest (at the time) numbers for us.
- koheripbal 7y ago
  Given the reports of patients being turned away from hospitals, and the images of flooded hospital corridors and ERs, it would be highly odd to conclude that the Chinese gov't "confirmed" cases represent the extent of those infected. The only accurate method at this point is a probabilistic method.

by cs702 7y ago

perennate 7y ago

Are you sure 440 is an estimate? According to LA Times that is the number of cases reported. https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2020-01-21/anxiety-over-coronavirus-rises-as-millions-of-chinese-travel-for-the-lunar-new-year https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2020-01-21/anxiety-...

cs702 7y ago
Changed. I meant to write report. The 440 cases are officially confirmed. Thanks!

taiwanboy 7y ago

Up to date map with numbers (in Chinese) https://3g.dxy.cn/newh5/view/pneumonia?scene=2&clicktime=1579582238&enterid=1579582238&from=timeline&isappinstalled=0 https://3g.dxy.cn/newh5/view/pneumonia?scene=2&clicktime=157... Affected: 549 (left most number) Death: 17 (right most number) You can tell from the map that most of China now has affected patients. Also important: 14 patients in Beijing, 26!! Patients in Guangdong and 9 patients in shanghai. That means the coronavirus has already broke out of containment in major cities in China. And because of the 10x gap in aforementioned estimate vs government under reporting, the number is likely 10x is large. https://www.reddit.com/r/China_Flu/comments/eshyhl/as_families_tell_of_pneumonialike_deaths_in_wuhan/ https://www.reddit.com/r/China_Flu/comments/eshyhl/as_famili... No one should be traveling to China right now, period.

ETHisso2017 7y ago
> No one should be traveling to China right now, period. You and the LIHKG guy are spamming up this thread with hyperbole
- hker 7y ago
  The government of Wuhan is asking people not to travel there unless necessary (in traditional Chinese [1] and Google translated [2]), as they announce travel ban. I am not sure if news reporting counts as hyperbole, given that I tried hard not to paint too broad a stroke already. [1]: https://news.mingpao.com/pns/要聞/article/20200122/s00001/1579631419595/武漢管控進出-籲外地人不要來-旅客發燒即送院-鍾南山指做法有效 https://news.mingpao.com/pns/要聞/article/20200122/s00001/1579... [2]: https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Fnews.mingpao.com%2Fpns%2F要聞%2Farticle%2F20200122%2Fs00001%2F1579631419595%2F武漢管控進出-籲外地人不要來-旅客發燒即送院-鍾南山指做法 https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&u=https...
londons_explore 7y ago
Right now, if you visit, you have a 1 in 81 million chance of dying from this disease. You have a far far higher chance of dying of something else during your trip. Obviously those odds could change rapidly.
- taiwanboy 7y ago
  10x underreporting -> 1 in 8 million Fast mutation due to hundreds of million travelers + possiblity of being stuck in a city with a new order of unable to travel out for 30/60 days = no good reason to travel to china

hker 7y ago

A local doctor estimated that the number of infected has surpassed 10K in a chat group (images in simplified Chinese [1]). [1]: https://lihkg.com/thread/1834475/page/1 https://lihkg.com/thread/1834475/page/1

ETHisso2017 7y ago
You realize you can fake wechat messages with a simple graphics template, right? LIHKG is not a verifiable source
- hker 7y ago
  You realize the number quoted there is a reasonable estimate (if not an underestimate) of the number of infected, right? Here is a thread on what Weibo was saying two weeks ago, when Weibo users thought that Hong Kong was overreacting to the outbreak (images in simplified Chinese [1], again, the images are hosted on LIHKG, but you can search Weibo to verify). The fact that disease-related information is censored, hence the misjudgement of the public, is named a reason for the spread of the virus [2]. [1]: https://lih.kg/1835161 https://lih.kg/1835161 "【回顧】兩星期前既微博" [2]: https://www.wsj.com/articles/chinas-censorship-helps-spread-the-virus-11580071968 https://www.wsj.com/articles/chinas-censorship-helps-spread-...
karmasimida 7y ago
This is textbook fake news

devy 7y ago

> Imperial College in London estimated that a total of 4,000 cases of Coronavirus in Wuhan City (with an uncertainty range of 1,000 to 9,700) This is an estimate with a whole bunch of assumptions (may or may not be true) and known factors and applied to a probabilistic formula (a very simple one too.) Some I'd say this is a very rough attempt. The 440 confirmed cases released by the daily official press release is a fact, with all of them confirmed with lab tests and been quarantined. Those are live numbers: https://3w.huanqiu.com/a/c36dc8/9CaKrnKp248?agt=8 https://3w.huanqiu.com/a/c36dc8/9CaKrnKp248?agt=8 There is no reason to believe the simply probabilistic model would be accurate (this is also why they suggested that the accuracy is between 1000-9700, almost an order of magnitude difference). And there is no reason to believe their assumptions were right either. So you are comparing Apples to Oranges. The best modeling for estimates about infectious disease is to use ordinary differential equation (ODE) to model and estimate with a set of assumptions. It talks about why the ICL's model only applicable to the early stage of the outbreak.[1] [1]: https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/Ab0fLOWr_9AvU4RA15rMCg https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/Ab0fLOWr_9AvU4RA15rMCg (in Chinese)

perennate 7y ago
I also thought parent was comparing the two at first, but after his/her clarification I think parent was just reporting the latest (at the time) numbers for us.
koheripbal 7y ago
Given the reports of patients being turned away from hospitals, and the images of flooded hospital corridors and ERs, it would be highly odd to conclude that the Chinese gov't "confirmed" cases represent the extent of those infected. The only accurate method at this point is a probabilistic method.