Covid 19, novel corona virus. Split from off-grid thread

[PeterC]

Scouse humour !

Student new to Liverpool asks bus-driver "Do you go to the university?"

"Oh no luv, I'm too old for that sort of thing"

[AB|W]

Reports are that Coronavirus came from an animal host, bats , pangolin whatever. I know we expected bird flu at one time so is there anticipation that the coronavirus will enter a  European non-human animal species and provide an ongoing host?

I did read of a Japanese dog which tested positive recently but that was eventually given the all clear.

Alan

 

[PeterC]

10 hours ago, AB|W said:

Reports are that Coronavirus came from an animal host, bats , pangolin whatever. I know we expected bird flu at one time so is there anticipation that the coronavirus will enter a  European non-human animal species and provide an ongoing host?

I did read of a Japanese dog which tested positive recently but that was eventually given the all clear.

Alan

 

Alan,  I dont see that being impossible. But few europeans have contact with potential wild animal hosts. So transfer from us to bats will be improbable. Pets are an open question. Cats and dogs have their own coronaviruses, but dont seem to be a problem to humans. More likely, to my thinking, is that SARS-CoV-2 will become a peristent human virus once the  pandemic has abated. Italy found it mutating between patients so it may be able to avoid extinction, or even become more dangerous to the young.

I fail to see why we oldies are not being advised now to go into protective isolation, as we are at highest risk of death. The overall death rate is 1 to2% but almost all of those are in the 70+ age group. I am watching out for the House of Lords to be closed, the bug is in Westmonster.

In the meantime I am studiously avoiding all pangolins.and shall emerge from isolation when the pandemic has abated and ther is adequate ICU provision. Drugs and vaccines are probably a long way off, so at some point infection is inevitable, but now is the wrong time.

Peter

 

[JohnD]

Well, there goes my planned trip to America!      I was saying to a neighbour only yesterday that it was in the (little) hands of Mr.Trump, and then today, he's stopped all travel from Europe.  Except from the UK - Great Little Country, really Great! - but how long will that last?   We'll be next.

My family and I have cancelled my visits to see either set of grandchildren in the next two weeks, as in one case I saw them recently, and the others are in London, so I don't fancy a long train journey and then the Tube!  Birthday presents must go by mail.   And a big Family Weekend in May has to await developments.    

So, wash hands frequently, but after what?   I sat at breakfast thsi morning, reading the newspaper as usual, and then thought - is that a good idea, while I'm eating?   Better to read the paper afterwards, then wash hands again?   Ditto, the post?    Paranoia looms!

[PeterC]

...................after the horse has bolted.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/global-health/climate-and-people/patients-mild-coronavirus-symptoms-may-highly-infectious-study/

So that means "containment" cannot work....has not worked.

Clever , this virus.

Peter

[John I]

1 hour ago, PeterC said:

 

Clever , this virus.

Peter

Doesn't say much for the politicians which it has managed to outfox.

[PeterC]

44 minutes ago, John I said:

Doesn't say much for the politicians which it has managed to outfox.

Boris carries the can but  the CMO and CSO have made assumptions that now look dangerous, to me. The acid test is how quick they implement random testing and change the advice.

[PeterC]

Here;s the relevant paragraph:

[JohnD]

But the sane study showed that, "after eight days of mild illness the team found that it was no longer possible to grow the virus from throat or sputum swabs - suggesting patients are not infectious once they start to recover. ".        So on the basis of nine patients (!) lingering infection seems unlikely.

And its unfair to criticise the CMO and CSO for making decisions on minimal data.   And not a good idea. If I.may say so, Peter, to describe it as "clever".    This paper describes the virus as, "organized in a +ssRNA of approximately 30 kb in length — the largest known RNA viruses" which cannot imply sentience in any form.    Well adapted to.its new host, yes.

John

[Nick Jones]

It’s well adapted to what viruses do.... colonising hosts.  In fact, killing your host, or even making them very sick is bad policy as they won’t continue to transmit to others. Therefore evolution will tend to favour those who make their hosts “bit messy” (think common cold or even norovirus) without slowing them down too much.

This is probably still an unfashionable view but looking at the chaos unfolding around the world I can’t help but think that the baby is being thrown out with the bath water. Italy’s economy is screwed (was shaky before), but that is just the start.  Trump’s beloved Wall Street torpedoed by their very own orange moron...... the economic ramifications will rumble on for years causing untold hardship for many. CV19 unchecked may kill more than we are used to from seasonal flu, but so far it appears the vast majority of victims will be old and sick already, whereas the special measures consequences will affect the futures of those who actually have a future.

Consider that malaria kills around 1100 people a day. Every day. Every year. Just one example. Road traffic accidents, 6,700, per day.  Perspective.....

There may be a bug out there that will substantially rid the planet of of its most serious infestation, but it doesn’t look to me like this is it.

[JohnD]

Oh, and while the paper from Germany seems perfectly valid, I wouldn't rely on the Daily Telegraph to tell me what time it is, let alone about Covid-19.   The latest offering is a "Guide to boosting your immune system", which starts (I can't read it all - i'll be damned if I'll subscribe to get through their paywall) "there are plenty of small things you can do that may strengthen your immune system."    Note the "may", which is about as valid as anything said by the charlatan poo doctor, "Dr." Gillian McKeith.

John

Edited March 12, 2020 by JohnD

[PeterC]

40 minutes ago, JohnD said:

But the sane study showed that, "after eight days of mild illness the team found that it was no longer possible to grow the virus from throat or sputum swabs - suggesting patients are not infectious once they start to recover. ".        So on the basis of nine patients (!) lingering infection seems unlikely.

And its unfair to criticise the CMO and CSO for making decisions on minimal data.   And not a good idea. If I.may say so, Peter, to describe it as "clever".    This paper describes the virus as, "organized in a +ssRNA of approximately 30 kb in length — the largest known RNA viruses" which cannot imply sentience in any form.    Well adapted to.its new host, yes.

John

John, It is I admit evolution that is clever, with SARS-CoV-2 its bearer. Beig highly infectious before symptoms appear is clever evolution, resulting in  the  virus propagating fast. If modelling was based on SARS the 1000-fold greater shedding in that period msut mean sleepless nights for the CMO and CSO teams. Peter

[TR5tar]

Each day I watch the number of confirmed cases mounting up ... https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/ 

What strikes me from this is just how in the dark we are to the true extent of the spread. Finland, for example, has carried out a total of 720 tests to date, according to this ... https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/covid-19-testing/ I cannot see it possible to get a true reading from such small numbers, and for each country it must be that there's a bias in favour of testing people showing some symptoms. How many thousands, then, have mild symptoms and are never detected? These differences between the numbers each country tests seems to be highlighted when looking at Spain and Portugal. I would expect to see similar confirmed cases in each of these countries given that they are neighbours, yet Spain has 3146 confirmed cases, whereas Portugal has only 78. What could account for that other than the number of tests being carried out?   

If we are seriously under estimating the overall number of cases, then the mortality rate is probably lower than the current figure of 3.5%. That's perhaps something to give us a bit more hope. 

Darren

   

[PeterC]

35 minutes ago, TR5tar said:

there's a bias in favour of testing people showing some symptoms. How many thousands, then, have mild symptoms and are never detected?

Darren, Indeed, and those showing NO symptoms , we hear today from that German work, have been spreading virus like billy-oh for severla days. So self-isolating when symptoms show will fail to contain spread. Indeed has failed.  As you point out without random testing there is no measure of the populatio infected to compare with deaths. BUT deaths counted today have to be compared with infections a month ago , that being the time it takes to die . Anf there were a handful of positve tests a month ago. Either death rate is extraordinalriy high or there are faaaar more infected people around us than we know.

An pandemic modeller on Newsnight said we as a nation will look back on COVID as we look back on the blitz. He also said isolating the oldies was the way tp prevent the majority of deaths, Macron did that jsut now: oldies stay in there homes. But not to look after grandchildren.

Peter

 

 

[PeterC]

4 hours ago, Nick Jones said:

 

There may be a bug out there that will substantially rid the planet of of its most serious infestation, but it doesn’t look to me like this is it

Indeed killing off the post-reproductives wont do much to delay 9 billion. 

But as herd immunity mounts there will be evolutionary pressure that favours more aggressive virus mutants and that might cull more of the young,

Peter

[TR5tar]

20 minutes ago, PeterC said:

Either death rate is extraordinalriy high or there are faaaar more infected people around us than we know.

 

We must hope that it is the latter. 

Figures coming out of China intrigue me. Three new cases today and one death. I'd like to think that that is because they are getting on top of it, but is that likely and if so can that really just be due to the lockdown.

As Nick said earlier, survival comes from the ability to adapt (that goes for virus and host), so wouldn't evolution push this to end up something like the common cold? That might not be of much comfort in the short term, but perhaps in a few years. 

Watching the government presentation earlier, I noted the aim of delaying the peak until the summer. I understand that these things tend to follow patterns, but why will the peak come in a few weeks, or months if successfully delayed, and then drop off? In other words, what's to stop it just climbing and climbing? I know very little about how these patterns tend to play out. 

Darren

[Chris W]

40 minutes ago, TR5tar said:

Watching the government presentation earlier, I noted the aim of delaying the peak until the summer. I understand that these things tend to follow patterns, but why will the peak come in a few weeks, or months if successfully delayed, and then drop off? In other words, what's to stop it just climbing and climbing? I know very little about how these patterns tend to play out. 

Hi Darren,

I think the aim is twofold.  Firstly, in the summer there is less pressure on the NHS and secondly, the virus doesn't like the heat.

 

[TR5tar]

5 hours ago, Chris W said:

Hi Darren,

I think the aim is twofold.  Firstly, in the summer there is less pressure on the NHS and secondly, the virus doesn't like the heat.

 

Hi Chris, 

I can understand the thinking behind wanting to delay the peak, for the reason that the NHS will be under less pressure in May/June.  What I do not understand is why the virus should peak and then tail off, unless it is as you say that the virus is less likely to thrive in warmer weather. But, do we know for sure that that is the case? It seems to be doing pretty well in countries where it is warmer than here. I was just trying to get to the science behind the pattern that is anticipated.

Darren  

 

[AB|W]

Ramblings of an old man.

Can someone explain what happened in China please? They quarantined 60million people, but only, according to figures about 100k had the virus. That is a very low number why did not 10 million or so catch the virus? An infection of 1:600 is very good, OK the figures are dubious but the result is still very impressive especially with such high-density living accommodation.

In the UK in the early days we had relatively few cases but a disproportionate of elderly seemed to die, is that because there are many, many more cases of very low level infection going unnoticed? I was reading of the very low levels of infection in Africa many cases of infection are obviously not being reported but agencies on the ground are not reporting deaths amongst the elderly.

Are there substantial percentages of the population out there with an immunity to Coronavirus infections? Or is coronavirus a binary infection needing an additional secondary condition or genetic disposition to do its worst not just the more obvious existing lung infections as per many reports of fatalities?

 

Alan

 

[richy_rich]

59 minutes ago, AB|W said:

is that because there are many, many more cases of very low level infection going unnoticed?

That would be my guess.

[Nick Jones]

Agree.  Because there has been very little actual testing of anyone at all, much less of anyone who does not present with symptoms, how can the prevalence in the general population possibly be known or even estimated?  South Korea leading the testing (and indeed the general fight) but can't find any data from there.....

The other thing I wonder about is that we are told that this virus is new to humans so we have no resistance to it.  The wide variability of severity in different people makes me wonder about this.  Could it be that it is sufficiently like another corona virus (corona viruses are one of the regular offenders in common colds) than some people do in fact have some immunity and hence have minimal symptoms?  Increased severity in the elderly (who ought to have the most experienced immune systems) possibly doesn't support this......

[zetecspit]

And it seems children are hardly affected?

I wonder if the very young have highly responsive immune systems that react to infection fast, and old people's immune systems are much slower?

Death rates are near enough impossible to ascertain as it seems many cases are unreported. Goodness knows how they do the figures for other (mainly mild) illness such as the flu. 

[PaulAA]

8 hours ago, Chris W said:

... the virus doesn't like the heat.

 

Hi Chris

From what I have seen published, this is still a supposition and not supported by the (admittedly as yet lower) community spread in the southern hemisphere.

There is already a report, based on modelling of earlier non-pharmaceutical interventions in China, that suggest substantial reductions in spread would have been achieved if the lock-down had been enforced just one week earlier.

Hindsight is great, but the UK Govt does appear to be somewhat cavalier in its response to the risk.

Paul

[PaulAA]

This is the graphic illustrating the difference between what happened (on the left) and what might have happened in the lock-down occurred just one week earlier (on the right).

[PeterC]

56 minutes ago, zetecspit said:

And it seems children are hardly affected?

I wonder if the very young have highly responsive immune systems that react to infection fast, and old people's immune systems are much slower?

Death rates are near enough impossible to ascertain as it seems many cases are unreported. Goodness knows how they do the figures for other (mainly mild) illness such as the flu. 

One possibility is that the young use D3 to enhance their immune systems more effectively then the aged. As we age our DNA gets more methylated and gene promoters work less well

https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fgene.2019.00107/full

The D3 receptor when occupied with D3 acts to demethylate the upstream DNA and so switches itself on, So the aged need more D3 than the young to switch on, but often are very low in D3

This paper makes the linsk between D3 and immunity in the lungs , table 2

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/1753425910365734