I have the coronavirus. So far, it isn't that bad • Hacker News Board

Re: I have the coronavirus. So far, it isn't that bad

#91

Post by oefrha » Sat, Feb 29, 2020, 2:42 PM UTC

40four wrote: post #13

oefrha wrote: post #3

Those who died from the virus aren’t writing in to tell us it’s very bad, so there’s that. Edit: To be clear, I’m not being dismissive of this patient’s experience; just want to point out the element of survivorship bias.

I think this mans perspective is important. For the vast majority of people who get this it isn’t much different then having a cold or the flu. The large majority of people this is killing are elderly, whose immune systems are less likely to successfully defend. https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/coronavirus-age-se... But that is not the picture painted by media day in and day out. There is so much hype and se…

Okay, now that people are treating this worldometers.info page as gospel, some clarification is in order.

The fatality stats from that page is entirely from Table 1 of this paper, http://weekly.chinacdc.cn/en/article/id/e53946e2-c6c4-41e9-9..., analyzing 44,672 confirmed cases (including 1023 deaths) in China as of Feb 11. Apparently at that point most non-death cases haven’t been cured yet, but some of those people have died since, which would push the fatality rates up. Just compare the daily reported stats:

- Feb 11, 44,653 confirmed, 8204 severe (ongoing), 4740 cured, 1113 dead (I guess deaths data were lagging by a day in that paper);[1]

- Feb 28, 79,251 confirmed, 7664 severe (ongoing), 39002 cured, 2727 dead.[2]

Also, it is possible (in my layman’s opinion) that older people succumb to the virus faster, while some young people struggle for a long time before dying.

[1] http://www.nhc.gov.cn/yjb/s7860/202002/395f075a5f3a411f80335...

[2] http://www.nhc.gov.cn/yjb/s7860/202002/4ef8b5221b4d4740bda31...

Edit: Actually the worldometers page also lists some stats from another paper, but the point stands.

Re: I have the coronavirus. So far, it isn't that bad

#92

Post by Medicalidiot » Sat, Feb 29, 2020, 2:42 PM UTC

sciinfo wrote: post #77

Medicalidiot wrote: post #22

This is dangerous. Take every precaution you can not to get infected for as long as you can and that you don't infect anyone else. This is not the flu. The flu makes you more susceptible to a material pneumonia and that's how it kills. SARS-CoV-2 is NOT the flu. COVID-19 is the disease, by the way. Here is the list of complications: -ARDS in 29% (Acute respiratory distress disease, this needs mechanical ventilation t…

If most people don't care to prevent infection, the hospitals and medical resources will soon be overwhelmed, the death rate will surge from 0.5-4% (no exact figure at the moment) to 10-20% like earlier in Wuhan. When viral load in the environment becomes sufficiently high, some young people will be taken away by it too, as in the case of several Wuhan doctors who sacrificed themselves under that circumstance. Among…

^This is exactly why we should take this seriously. Even if this "isn't a big deal" that attitude will get people you love and care about sick potentially leading to their death. I'm advocating that people be mindful and try to take this very seriously.

Re: I have the coronavirus. So far, it isn't that bad

#93

Post by bart_spoon » Sat, Feb 29, 2020, 2:43 PM UTC

ptx wrote: post #29

goatherders wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

what nonsense?

Downplaying the seriousness of the pandemic. First there was nothing to worry about because it was localized to Wuhan, then there was nothing to worry about because it was only spreading in China and surely would not spread to $YOUR_COUNTRY, then there was nothing to worry about because it was only a few isolated cases that were easily dealt with, and now we seem to be moving into how there's nothing to worry about b…

No one is downplaying anything. If anything, people are overemphasizing the danger. Even in Wuhan, the center of the outbreak, less than half a percent of the population has contracted this thing, and of that half percent, 4 out of 5 have mild symptoms. And the outbreak there seems to be stabilizing.

That isn’t to say it isn’t serious, or that we shouldn’t be taking measures to guard against it. But a large contingent of people are acting as if it’s the Walking Dead outside, and the apocalypse is just around the corner. But irrationally overblown fear and misinformation is just as likely to result in suffering and loss of life as the disease right now. An increase of unemployment of 1% is estimated to result in anywhere from 1500-40000 deaths in the US, and vague fears over this disease have been driving some of the biggest free falls in the market in decades. Part of an appropriate response to something like this means not overreacting just as much as it means not undereacting.

Re: I have the coronavirus. So far, it isn't that bad

#94

Post by Medicalidiot » Sat, Feb 29, 2020, 2:44 PM UTC

Hendrikto wrote: post #53

Medicalidiot wrote: post #22

This is dangerous. Take every precaution you can not to get infected for as long as you can and that you don't infect anyone else. This is not the flu. The flu makes you more susceptible to a material pneumonia and that's how it kills. SARS-CoV-2 is NOT the flu. COVID-19 is the disease, by the way. Here is the list of complications: -ARDS in 29% (Acute respiratory distress disease, this needs mechanical ventilation t…

> This is dangerous. How? He is not advocating to take things likely. He is not promoting dangerous practices nor a cavalier attitude. This is just some person sharing his first hand experience.

"Hey it's not as bad as people making it out" will make people complacent. People need to self quarantine if we want this to be well contained. We need people to understand that if they don't take this seriously people will die, people they care about.

Re: I have the coronavirus. So far, it isn't that bad

#95

Post by ocho » Sat, Feb 29, 2020, 2:49 PM UTC

40four wrote: post #40

nkozyra wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even if one was this cynical, do you not think a novel (not influenza) virus with an unusually high mortality rate spreading internationally is worthy of news coverage? The media didn't name this thing, nor SARS, nor avian bird flu.

It is worthy of coverage, but it’s only interesting because it’s new. It really not the super virus they make it out to be. The news coverage does not paint a realistic picture. The height mortality rate is mostly due to the novelty and the fact we haven’t developed drugs for it yet. Also, it is killing almost exclusively elderly people. People who don’t have fully functioning immune systems. I’m willing to be the co…

This is a rather high mortality rate for hospitalized patients.

People with the new coronavirus have a very wide spectrum of symptoms which can be harmless, remain almost unnoticed up to very deadly syndromes. How can you justify that people spread the virus with almost 0 symptoms, killing basically other people. People respond differently to certain diseases, its normal. I had a relative early January in Bangkok hospitalized due to the coronavirus. Some patients do not even develop fever, where some other have to hang on artificial respirators for more than a week. Although my relative survived the illness after a very severe situation for 10 days on artifical respirator, he also now has permanent damages of the lungs. Would've probably died without rapid hospitalization rather quickly. After seeing that in real life I feel like many more people actually died without proper diagnosis of this new type of virus.

For now, take these WHO-stats with a grain of salt and wait for stats in European countries. Currently it is roughly above 2% fatal. Which is similar to the Spanish Flu from 1918. FML. I don't want to know how SARS-CoV-2 would have wrecked in 1918 compared to healthcare in 2020.

Re: I have the coronavirus. So far, it isn't that bad

#96

Post by leereeves » Sat, Feb 29, 2020, 2:52 PM UTC

Medicalidiot wrote: post #86

bart_spoon wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your numbers aren’t matching other published statistics. For one, 81% of cases are considered mild. I don’t know how that is supposed to square with your statistic that 30% of patients need mechanical ventilation to survive. I agree that the disease is something to take seriously, but pushing incorrect information to fear monger is just wrong.

These are the most common complications that leads to death. The clinical presentation is very different here. And yes, my source backs everything I said. Also, the Lancet is one of the most respected medical journals in the world. I'm giving your primary literature that I took from the current medical guidelines from what's published. I'm a medical student and, although not a board certified physician, I'm going to…

The article is fine, but you're not reading it correctly.

> Here is the list of complications: -ARDS in 29% (Acute respiratory distress disease, this needs mechanical ventilation to survive) -acute cardiac injury in 12% (this potentially kills your heart tissue which leads to arrhythmia and then a heart attack) -secondary infection in 10%

Those percentages say how many out of 41 admitted hospital patients have those serious complications.

But of course they have serious complications, that's why they were admitted to the hospital.

Those percentages say nothing about the health risks to the average person who is infected.

Re: I have the coronavirus. So far, it isn't that bad

#97

Post by bart_spoon » Sat, Feb 29, 2020, 2:54 PM UTC

Medicalidiot wrote: post #86

bart_spoon wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your numbers aren’t matching other published statistics. For one, 81% of cases are considered mild. I don’t know how that is supposed to square with your statistic that 30% of patients need mechanical ventilation to survive. I agree that the disease is something to take seriously, but pushing incorrect information to fear monger is just wrong.

These are the most common complications that leads to death. The clinical presentation is very different here. And yes, my source backs everything I said. Also, the Lancet is one of the most respected medical journals in the world. I'm giving your primary literature that I took from the current medical guidelines from what's published. I'm a medical student and, although not a board certified physician, I'm going to…

If you are going to flex your (yet unearned) credentials, I will flex mine. I’m a statistician, and your source is a perfect example of an egregious statistical fallacy: sampling bias. Yes, it says 30% had ARDS, but it was based on the first 40 cases, all of whom were identified before January 2nd. It’s literally just a sample of the the cases that were so severe that they popped up on the radar before people were even aware that there was an epidemic of a novel virus occurring. Even now many of the mild cases may be being undercounted. Back at the beginning of January, all of the mild cases were being missed.

Being a medical student gives you no authoritative expertise, especially when it is clear you need to hit the books a little harder. That you will be part of a care team diagnosing the disease doesn’t make me trust you more, it makes me trust the competence of our medical professionals less.

Re: I have the coronavirus. So far, it isn't that bad

#98

Post by Medicalidiot » Sat, Feb 29, 2020, 3:03 PM UTC

leereeves wrote: post #96

Medicalidiot wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These are the most common complications that leads to death. The clinical presentation is very different here. And yes, my source backs everything I said. Also, the Lancet is one of the most respected medical journals in the world. I'm giving your primary literature that I took from the current medical guidelines from what's published. I'm a medical student and, although not a board certified physician, I'm going to…

The article is fine, but you're not reading it correctly. > Here is the list of complications: -ARDS in 29% (Acute respiratory distress disease, this needs mechanical ventilation to survive) -acute cardiac injury in 12% (this potentially kills your heart tissue which leads to arrhythmia and then a heart attack) -secondary infection in 10% Those percentages say how many out of 41 admitted hospital patients have those…

Let me try to rephrase what you're saying just to understand where you're coming from. "these are cool numbers, but what's the chance that the average person is going to actually have any of these complications?". I don't have any cogent numbers on that, but the current deaths/(deaths+resolved) percentage is 8%.

Re: I have the coronavirus. So far, it isn't that bad

#99

Post by ubercow13 » Sat, Feb 29, 2020, 3:09 PM UTC

rhynie wrote: post #81

war1025 wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a difference between going to work when you're sick because "you have to" and going to work when you're sick because "you feel mostly fine". This is a virus that in it's milder forms generally just causes a cold. I've never stayed home from anything because of a cold. Colds are just a fact of life. I imagine a lot of people feel similarly.

You never stayed home with a cold? Your co-workers, if they could identify that it was you all those times getting them sick, would like to have a word with you. Is this going to become like the anti-vaxx shit? Demanding freedom to get everyone around you sick, no matter the illness? Do we now have 40% of the US thinking it's a conspiracy that people infect each other with disease or something?!!? Are showers now an…

Is it realistic to stay at home to prevent colds spreading? People with a cold are infectious for around two weeks, and get up to 4 cold on average a year. You may not be able to do your job from home easily, so that's 8 weeks of sick leave per year just to stop your coworkers getting a runny nose. Assuming you work 47 weeks a year, that's 17% of your work hours spent on sick leave, ignoring other illnesses.

In the UK you would not be entitled to pay for that sick leave unless you had a note from a doctor stating that you are unfit for work, which you would not be able to get for a cold. Moreover it is legal for you to be fired for taking too much sick leave, so you would be putting your ability to pay rent and, over the longer term, your job at risk.

Re: I have the coronavirus. So far, it isn't that bad

#100

Post by leereeves » Sat, Feb 29, 2020, 3:09 PM UTC

Medicalidiot wrote: post #98

leereeves wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The article is fine, but you're not reading it correctly. > Here is the list of complications: -ARDS in 29% (Acute respiratory distress disease, this needs mechanical ventilation to survive) -acute cardiac injury in 12% (this potentially kills your heart tissue which leads to arrhythmia and then a heart attack) -secondary infection in 10% Those percentages say how many out of 41 admitted hospital patients have those…

Let me try to rephrase what you're saying just to understand where you're coming from. "these are cool numbers, but what's the chance that the average person is going to actually have any of these complications?". I don't have any cogent numbers on that, but the current deaths/(deaths+resolved) percentage is 8%.

> what's the chance that the average person is going to actually have any of these complications?

Yes, that's the question we'd all like to have the answer to.

But we don't know how many mild or asymptomatic cases have resolved, so the deaths/(deaths+resolved) calculation is a known divided by an unknown.