3 ms·

> asymptomatic carriers are the norm Asymptomatic people while they are infecting others doesn't mean these people will remain asymptomatic all the time. Just

by acqq 7y ago

> asymptomatic carriers are the norm Asymptomatic people while they are infecting others doesn't mean these people will remain asymptomatic all the time. Just that at the moment they are spreading the virus they aren't having any symptoms. They can and it seems a lot of them do develop the symptoms only days later (especially once the children aren't considered). That just means that it's hard to contain the carriers early enough to limit the growth of infection based on the symptoms. Until the antibody tests show otherwise, we can't even assume that "most will be fine" in the sense that it's not true that 20% of all infected (again, maybe excluding children) would really need the hospital. One of the reasons 20% of all "confirmed cases" need the hospital is that the doctors can't know who of those 20% will get even worse to need the machine to be kept alive. And no country could ever have enough doctors and machines to treat such a big part of population at once.

taeric 7y ago
My question is if you are making up 20%. Especially if you consider children and younger family, it is a reasonable hypothesis that entire Italian families are getting this, not just the older members. At that point, it seems also reasonable that it could have hit many many more than they are reporting. My hypothesis is that whatever that number is, it is not constant across regions. Something is marking it higher where it is higher. Across age ranges, even; unless Japan starts a massive upswing soon.
- acqq 7y ago
  > My question is if you are making up 20%. No. There are countries which do test all that could possibly be infected (e.g. if they were in contact with the person who was tested positive). Even then, those that are positive are the small percentages from all tested, but it‘s still that 20% from positives need the hospital.
  - taeric 7y ago
    I haven't been able to find hospitalization numbers. And this seems flat incompatible with the idea that asymptomatic is the norm. Which, I grant is the new narrative, not the old. I have found reliable death numbers. Well, posted death numbers. Quite easy to find that. I haven't even seen any posted recovery time numbers. Just recovered. Do, not sure what to make of that. I assume you could proxy "serious/critical" with "needs hospitalization". But, that number seems to be all over the place. From 4% to 10%. Still below 20%. So, where are you getting 20%?
    - acqq 7y ago
      > From 4% to 10%. Still below 20%. So, where are you getting 20%? From the graphs of all countries that publish their data. Those that publish give you statistic of the number of tested, number of tested positive, those needed hospitalisation and the dead. The death happens with delay of up to two weeks, hospitalsation one. The doubling time of positive tested is 3 days typically. Calculate.
      - taeric 7y ago
        What is the label that says hospitalization? All I have seen are "serious". And that has not been 20%. Am I just finding junk sources?
        acqq 7y ago
        Yes, in the countries that officially label cases as such, the "serious" ones are those needing hospitalization. Others are being told to remain at home and stay isolated. Also note that even some of those who remain at home get worse later, and some die before they can be hospitalized. The major point that you have to be aware of is that the hospitalizations and deaths come later and that the doubling time is short. Also, the doubling time of 3 days means that the country which has 1/2 of the coronavirus allocated bed capacity on 1st of April won't have enough beds starting with 4th. Also, please try to analyze as much countries (I know about European ones) as possible. Go for the official sources, or the pages in the Wikipedia on local languages, you'll find much more reliable data, and for some countries even official "in hospital" "in intensive care" and "deaths" numbers.
        acqq 7y ago
        > Also note that even some of those who remain at home get worse later The most recent example Boris Johnson is in hospital since only a day: https://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2020/apr/06/uk-coronavirus-live-boris-johnson-spends-night-in-hospital https://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2020/apr/06/uk-cor... News about him being tested positive: 27 March 2020: https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-52060791 https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-52060791 at that moment: "the total number of UK deaths 759, with 14,543 confirmed cases." Now: "47,806 confirmed, 4,934 dead." That they understand that it's going to grow more: "The National Health Service freed up 30,000 beds by discharging patients who were well enough and delaying non-emergency treatment,[342] and acquired use of 20,000 beds in private sector facilities." (wikipedia) But they still also hope that the current measures will slow down the growth. The Nederlands publishes hospitalizations: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_coronavirus_pandemic_in_the_Netherlands https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_coronavirus_pandemic_in_t... All cases, hospitalized, deaths: 10,866 3,483 771 They test less than some countries though, but you can see the factor of hospitalizations against the deaths, and note that deaths reflect many days older (and smaller) "cases" count and hospitalizations are somewhere in between.

by acqq 7y ago

taeric 7y ago

My question is if you are making up 20%. Especially if you consider children and younger family, it is a reasonable hypothesis that entire Italian families are getting this, not just the older members. At that point, it seems also reasonable that it could have hit many many more than they are reporting. My hypothesis is that whatever that number is, it is not constant across regions. Something is marking it higher where it is higher. Across age ranges, even; unless Japan starts a massive upswing soon.

acqq 7y ago
> My question is if you are making up 20%. No. There are countries which do test all that could possibly be infected (e.g. if they were in contact with the person who was tested positive). Even then, those that are positive are the small percentages from all tested, but it‘s still that 20% from positives need the hospital.
- taeric 7y ago
  I haven't been able to find hospitalization numbers. And this seems flat incompatible with the idea that asymptomatic is the norm. Which, I grant is the new narrative, not the old. I have found reliable death numbers. Well, posted death numbers. Quite easy to find that. I haven't even seen any posted recovery time numbers. Just recovered. Do, not sure what to make of that. I assume you could proxy "serious/critical" with "needs hospitalization". But, that number seems to be all over the place. From 4% to 10%. Still below 20%. So, where are you getting 20%?
  - acqq 7y ago
    > From 4% to 10%. Still below 20%. So, where are you getting 20%? From the graphs of all countries that publish their data. Those that publish give you statistic of the number of tested, number of tested positive, those needed hospitalisation and the dead. The death happens with delay of up to two weeks, hospitalsation one. The doubling time of positive tested is 3 days typically. Calculate.
    - taeric 7y ago
      What is the label that says hospitalization? All I have seen are "serious". And that has not been 20%. Am I just finding junk sources?
      - acqq 7y ago
        Yes, in the countries that officially label cases as such, the "serious" ones are those needing hospitalization. Others are being told to remain at home and stay isolated. Also note that even some of those who remain at home get worse later, and some die before they can be hospitalized. The major point that you have to be aware of is that the hospitalizations and deaths come later and that the doubling time is short. Also, the doubling time of 3 days means that the country which has 1/2 of the coronavirus allocated bed capacity on 1st of April won't have enough beds starting with 4th. Also, please try to analyze as much countries (I know about European ones) as possible. Go for the official sources, or the pages in the Wikipedia on local languages, you'll find much more reliable data, and for some countries even official "in hospital" "in intensive care" and "deaths" numbers.
        acqq 7y ago
        > Also note that even some of those who remain at home get worse later The most recent example Boris Johnson is in hospital since only a day: https://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2020/apr/06/uk-coronavirus-live-boris-johnson-spends-night-in-hospital https://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2020/apr/06/uk-cor... News about him being tested positive: 27 March 2020: https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-52060791 https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-52060791 at that moment: "the total number of UK deaths 759, with 14,543 confirmed cases." Now: "47,806 confirmed, 4,934 dead." That they understand that it's going to grow more: "The National Health Service freed up 30,000 beds by discharging patients who were well enough and delaying non-emergency treatment,[342] and acquired use of 20,000 beds in private sector facilities." (wikipedia) But they still also hope that the current measures will slow down the growth. The Nederlands publishes hospitalizations: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_coronavirus_pandemic_in_the_Netherlands https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_coronavirus_pandemic_in_t... All cases, hospitalized, deaths: 10,866 3,483 771 They test less than some countries though, but you can see the factor of hospitalizations against the deaths, and note that deaths reflect many days older (and smaller) "cases" count and hospitalizations are somewhere in between.