7 ms·

Can someone explain why /this/ level of isolation is necessary? I understand that comparison of mortality rates is difficult, so this does seem "more deadly" t

Can someone explain why /this/ level of isolation is necessary? I understand that comparison of mortality rates is difficult, so this does seem "more deadly" than the flu, but likely we have no idea of the actual number of people with it, both for reporting reasons and because many people may just have minor symptoms. But, if we use SARS as a comparison which also had this level of pandemic fear+isolation (and was way way worse handled in China at the beginning) I think final stats were like 1000 deaths worldwide. Compare that to what, over 2k deaths in just the US every year from the flu? I'm not saying we shouldn't be concerned (it is new and unknown, and seems to have a higher mortality rate than other viruses) but it seems this level of treatment (and entire city-wide lockdowns in China right now) is like Ebola level precautions for what seems like a difficult but fairly standard level respiratory virus? Honestly curious here from medical professionals/epidemiologists..

viklove 7y ago
It's a new virus, so we don't really know what it'll do, do we? Maybe it has a 100% mortality rate after 180 days -- we won't know until more time has passed. This is like introducing new code into a system. You have no idea what it's going to do in the long run, and all you can do is patch it out or wait to see what problems it causes in the long run.
- throwaway5752 7y ago
  It is a new coronavirus, it's not an alien. Coronaviruses cause the common seasonal cold, too, and are endemic in multiple commercial livestock populations. Please don't spread bad information if you don't have the background to talk about it.
  - afjl 7y ago
    This doesn't sounds like bad information to me, especially considering the lack of conclusive, empirical information on death rates, pathology, etc. It just sounds like normal speculation to me. For example, initial reports only days ago claimed that human-to-human transmission was not possible, but that's been disproved already. Combine that with the government's mismanagement of SARS/African swine fever, and you've got plenty of reason to speculate.
    - throwaway5752 7y ago
      Well, it is bad information and poorly informed speculation. It's sequenced already. There's a reasonable R0 for it. There are patients that have gone through the entire lifecycle of the disease while under observation. There's already a RT-PCR test for it. It has known similarities to existing coronavirii that are well understood. Don't be a conspiracy theorist, particular when the "unknowns" are just - and there is no nicer way to put this - ignorance of internationally sourced public epidemiological data. The first cases of this occurred less than 7 weeks ago. If someone can't intelligently process news about this topic, they shouldn't add to the already large level of concern and confusion about it.
      - afjl 7y ago
        >> Well, it is bad information and poorly informed speculation. I agree, but this is just the information that the vast majority of the public is receiving from the media. Perhaps you should direct your displeasure in that direction. >> It's sequenced already. There's a reasonable R0 for it. There are patients that have gone through the entire lifecycle of the disease while under observation. There's already a RT-PCR test for it. It has known similarities to existing coronavirii that are well understood. Major publications are not smacking you over the head with jargon like R0 or RT-PCR tests. Those words mean nothing to most people. What matters is relatable things: how does this impact my travel plans, what precautions should my co-worker take on his business trip to China next week (literally). >> Don't be a conspiracy theorist, particular when the "unknowns" are just - and there is no nicer way to put this - ignorance of internationally sourced public epidemiological data. Is this not exactly the problem here? The government's response to the outbreak was slow, with reports of local officials suppressing information. When information became available, it was factually incorrect (human-to-human transmission) and propagated. The way this played out is remarkably similar to SARS. And much like SARS, the credibility of the government handling the outbreak has significantly harmed the public's trust. There is much reason to believe that the Chinese government is not being forthcoming with information. >> If someone can't intelligently process news about this topic, they shouldn't add to the already large level of concern and confusion about it. The question was "why /this/ level of isolation is necessary". He answered that question by saying "we don't know how bad it could be". He isn't shouting off the top of a roof to distrust the CDC.
bagacrap 7y ago
A single "super-spreader" in Wuhan infected 14 healthcare workers. Is that sufficient reasoning for you?
_rpd 7y ago
Any new flu could be the next ... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_flu https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_flu > The 1918 influenza pandemic (January 1918 – December 1920; colloquially known as Spanish flu) was an unusually deadly influenza pandemic, the first of the two pandemics involving H1N1 influenza virus.[1] It infected 500 million people around the world,[2] including people on remote Pacific islands and in the Arctic. Probably 50 million, and possibly as high as 100 million (three to five percent of Earth's population at the time) died. Lowering risk to medical personnel is crucial to prevent degradation of health care capability.
sails 7y ago
_not a doctor_ This seems to cover it [0], an "early estimation" gives a high R0 number indicating a higher transmission rate (more worrying than mortality rate). Also worth noting, WHO initially suggesting a lower R0. [0] https://www.reddit.com/r/China_Flu/comments/et8zs8/novel_coronavirus_2019ncov_early_estimation_of/ https://www.reddit.com/r/China_Flu/comments/et8zs8/novel_cor...
Voloskaya 7y ago
You said it: > It is new and unknown Better be safe than sorry. Can you imagine what we sould say if the virus ended up spreading and killing a fair amount of people just because we couldn't be bothered taking a few precautions? The reasoning is simply that there is no good reason not to do it.
- 0xffff2 7y ago
  There's certainly a good reason not to do it. Even discounting the bizarre and arcane nature of medical billing in the United States, this level of care is surely costing someone a great deal of money. That doesn't mean it's not worth it, but to say there is "no good reason not to do it" is trivially untrue.
  - Voloskaya 7y ago
    > this level of care is surely costing someone a great deal of money. This level of care prevents spending much more money monitoring/treating many more people that this patient might have been in contact with otherwise (some of them being doctors and expert on this kind of disease that we don't want to have to put in isolation for a week when we need them the most).
  - nexuist 7y ago
    > this level of care is surely costing someone a great deal of money. Do you think it costs more to operate the robot than the robot company will make from the good PR this sort of headline generates for them? How many more hospitals and doctors will invest in the field of robotics and this company specifically if they can say it was them to helped get this virus under control? Not to mention the ISOPOD manufacturer, who will no doubt be fielding new orders after this article. There is no good reason not to do it because, even if this turns out to be a slightly more harmful flu, the lessons, experience, and data gained from using these procedures and technology will enable a better response the next time something similar happens, and next time might be the "real deal." To hell with financial responsibility if stopping a global pandemic is on the line!
- llamataboot 7y ago
jeffdavis 7y ago
Perhaps the deaths will be equal to deaths from the flu if it spreads widely. That would still be bad, no?

viklove 7y ago

It's a new virus, so we don't really know what it'll do, do we? Maybe it has a 100% mortality rate after 180 days -- we won't know until more time has passed. This is like introducing new code into a system. You have no idea what it's going to do in the long run, and all you can do is patch it out or wait to see what problems it causes in the long run.

throwaway5752 7y ago
It is a new coronavirus, it's not an alien. Coronaviruses cause the common seasonal cold, too, and are endemic in multiple commercial livestock populations. Please don't spread bad information if you don't have the background to talk about it.
- afjl 7y ago
  This doesn't sounds like bad information to me, especially considering the lack of conclusive, empirical information on death rates, pathology, etc. It just sounds like normal speculation to me. For example, initial reports only days ago claimed that human-to-human transmission was not possible, but that's been disproved already. Combine that with the government's mismanagement of SARS/African swine fever, and you've got plenty of reason to speculate.
  - throwaway5752 7y ago
    Well, it is bad information and poorly informed speculation. It's sequenced already. There's a reasonable R0 for it. There are patients that have gone through the entire lifecycle of the disease while under observation. There's already a RT-PCR test for it. It has known similarities to existing coronavirii that are well understood. Don't be a conspiracy theorist, particular when the "unknowns" are just - and there is no nicer way to put this - ignorance of internationally sourced public epidemiological data. The first cases of this occurred less than 7 weeks ago. If someone can't intelligently process news about this topic, they shouldn't add to the already large level of concern and confusion about it.
    - afjl 7y ago
      >> Well, it is bad information and poorly informed speculation. I agree, but this is just the information that the vast majority of the public is receiving from the media. Perhaps you should direct your displeasure in that direction. >> It's sequenced already. There's a reasonable R0 for it. There are patients that have gone through the entire lifecycle of the disease while under observation. There's already a RT-PCR test for it. It has known similarities to existing coronavirii that are well understood. Major publications are not smacking you over the head with jargon like R0 or RT-PCR tests. Those words mean nothing to most people. What matters is relatable things: how does this impact my travel plans, what precautions should my co-worker take on his business trip to China next week (literally). >> Don't be a conspiracy theorist, particular when the "unknowns" are just - and there is no nicer way to put this - ignorance of internationally sourced public epidemiological data. Is this not exactly the problem here? The government's response to the outbreak was slow, with reports of local officials suppressing information. When information became available, it was factually incorrect (human-to-human transmission) and propagated. The way this played out is remarkably similar to SARS. And much like SARS, the credibility of the government handling the outbreak has significantly harmed the public's trust. There is much reason to believe that the Chinese government is not being forthcoming with information. >> If someone can't intelligently process news about this topic, they shouldn't add to the already large level of concern and confusion about it. The question was "why /this/ level of isolation is necessary". He answered that question by saying "we don't know how bad it could be". He isn't shouting off the top of a roof to distrust the CDC.

bagacrap 7y ago

A single "super-spreader" in Wuhan infected 14 healthcare workers. Is that sufficient reasoning for you?

_rpd 7y ago

Any new flu could be the next ... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_flu https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_flu > The 1918 influenza pandemic (January 1918 – December 1920; colloquially known as Spanish flu) was an unusually deadly influenza pandemic, the first of the two pandemics involving H1N1 influenza virus.[1] It infected 500 million people around the world,[2] including people on remote Pacific islands and in the Arctic. Probably 50 million, and possibly as high as 100 million (three to five percent of Earth's population at the time) died. Lowering risk to medical personnel is crucial to prevent degradation of health care capability.

sails 7y ago

_not a doctor_ This seems to cover it [0], an "early estimation" gives a high R0 number indicating a higher transmission rate (more worrying than mortality rate). Also worth noting, WHO initially suggesting a lower R0. [0] https://www.reddit.com/r/China_Flu/comments/et8zs8/novel_coronavirus_2019ncov_early_estimation_of/ https://www.reddit.com/r/China_Flu/comments/et8zs8/novel_cor...

Voloskaya 7y ago

You said it: > It is new and unknown Better be safe than sorry. Can you imagine what we sould say if the virus ended up spreading and killing a fair amount of people just because we couldn't be bothered taking a few precautions? The reasoning is simply that there is no good reason not to do it.

0xffff2 7y ago
There's certainly a good reason not to do it. Even discounting the bizarre and arcane nature of medical billing in the United States, this level of care is surely costing someone a great deal of money. That doesn't mean it's not worth it, but to say there is "no good reason not to do it" is trivially untrue.
- Voloskaya 7y ago
  > this level of care is surely costing someone a great deal of money. This level of care prevents spending much more money monitoring/treating many more people that this patient might have been in contact with otherwise (some of them being doctors and expert on this kind of disease that we don't want to have to put in isolation for a week when we need them the most).
- nexuist 7y ago
  > this level of care is surely costing someone a great deal of money. Do you think it costs more to operate the robot than the robot company will make from the good PR this sort of headline generates for them? How many more hospitals and doctors will invest in the field of robotics and this company specifically if they can say it was them to helped get this virus under control? Not to mention the ISOPOD manufacturer, who will no doubt be fielding new orders after this article. There is no good reason not to do it because, even if this turns out to be a slightly more harmful flu, the lessons, experience, and data gained from using these procedures and technology will enable a better response the next time something similar happens, and next time might be the "real deal." To hell with financial responsibility if stopping a global pandemic is on the line!
llamataboot 7y ago

jeffdavis 7y ago

Perhaps the deaths will be equal to deaths from the flu if it spreads widely. That would still be bad, no?