50% – 75% of cases of Covid-19 are asymptomatic • Hacker News Board

Re: 50% – 75% of cases of Covid-19 are asymptomatic

#471

Post by rojobuffalo » Wed, Mar 18, 2020, 6:32 PM UTC

petre wrote: post #447

rojobuffalo wrote: post #332

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This reflects the opinions shared by Michael Osterholm, Amesh Adalja, and Nicholas Christakis: a final case mortality of ~0.7%. But just to highlight the point, that's on a strong assumption that critical cases receive proper medical attention. I don't think that's a safe assumption for the outbreak in the United States.

Now it's really not the time to speculate with numbers that could downplay the risks. We'll see in a few years. 0.\d+% could be someone we love. Keep safe. Prevent if you can.

I'm just quoting experts. But I agree with your point. Only one of them stated that figure with "confidence", but he also was clearly motivated to downplay the risk because he was worried about panic. My intuition is that a final case mortality < 1.5% would be towards a "best case" outcome; and we should expect worse.

Re: 50% – 75% of cases of Covid-19 are asymptomatic

#472

Post by collinmanderson » Wed, Mar 18, 2020, 8:47 PM UTC

senordevnyc wrote: post #446

beatgammit wrote: post #225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh, it's absolutely not "the big one", which is why I'm so frustrated at all of the panic buying. It was pretty clear early on that this isn't that deadly and that the main issue with it is filling up hospitals. We later learned that the whole process from infection to recovery (well, enough to be released from a hospital) is about 2 weeks, maybe less. This isn't some society-collapsing event, but it does require con…

So when you get 1-2 months of essentials just in case, it’s a good idea, but when other people do it, it’s panic buying and overreaction?

The trick is to already have 1-2 months of essentials before hand. The issue is when everyone tries to get 1-2 months of essentials all at the same time.

Re: 50% – 75% of cases of Covid-19 are asymptomatic

#473

Post by dnautics » Thu, Mar 19, 2020, 4:06 AM UTC

bryanrasmussen wrote: post #451

dnautics wrote: post #340

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 320,000 people without symptoms in China Wuhan (the city, not even the entire province of Hubei) has 11 million people. Given what we know now about how virulently and covertly COVID-19 spreads and how (relatively late) Wuhan went into lockdown, how do you feel about that number?

if 50% to 75% of cases are asymptomatic that means 25% to 50% are symptomatic. I'm not taking the exact 75% number here in the following - but close, and I will do some hasty approximations. Current total cases (maybe off by some hours) is 80,894. 80894 is 20.2% of 400000. 400000 - 80000 = 320000. So yes, given the article's premises 320000 is pretty much on the optimistic side for humanity. on edit: but once again m…

you're assuming everyone is capable of being infected to detectable levels.

Re: 50% – 75% of cases of Covid-19 are asymptomatic

#474

Post by senordevnyc » Thu, Mar 19, 2020, 4:10 AM UTC

collinmanderson wrote: post #472

senordevnyc wrote: post #446

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So when you get 1-2 months of essentials just in case, it’s a good idea, but when other people do it, it’s panic buying and overreaction?

The trick is to already have 1-2 months of essentials before hand. The issue is when everyone tries to get 1-2 months of essentials all at the same time.

Obviously, but that doesn’t make it an overreaction for people who waited until now to buy what they need.

Re: 50% – 75% of cases of Covid-19 are asymptomatic

#475

Post by teslaAC » Thu, Mar 19, 2020, 6:33 AM UTC

MOST COVID19 CASES ARE ATYPICAL AND NOT REPRESENTED BY ADVERTISED SIDE EFFECTS

ATYPICAL SIDE EFFECTS: Light Fever, Severe Lightheadedness, Long Duration Headache, Sore Throat, Severe Body Aches, Tight Chest, Very Light Cough No Phlegm, Sharp Edged Flush on Cheeks with Pale Circle Surrounding Lips, Slight Runny Nose, Lethargy, Confusion, Hot Flashes, Inconsistant Diarrhoea Without Discomfort, Trouble Focusing on Conversations, Shakiness, No Issues Breathing Until Exercise, Flush After Taking Anti-Inflammatories, Very Shakey Legs on Rising, Swollen Lymph Nodes (under arms), Nervous System Issues: Anxiety, Change in Perception of Senses, Insomnia These symptoms will cycle and not present at the same time which is indicative of COVID19

YOU WILL NOT HAVE THE COUGH OR FEVER YOU EXPECT AND MOST PEOPLE BLAME IT ON STRESS,ALLERGIES,COLD,FLU,ETC.

DO NOT TAKE NAPROXEN, IBUPROFEN OR ANY ANTI-INFLAMMATORIES

Example Symptom Progression From an Interview:

“ I’ve been so tired and so winded and just kind of moody and had a constant headache for a week and hot flashes mostly at night where it felt like I had a fever but only at night, random coughing. I figured it was just the weather and stress. Then last night came to a head—terrible brain fog yesterday could barely hold a convo, would shake (like when you’re blood sugar crashes) when I’d try to get up and do something, Had the worst migraine ever last night and terrible nausea and was throwing up. Then today this is my face with a huge rash.”

Examples of Corona Rash:

https://imgur.com/a/dXz52rR

Re: 50% – 75% of cases of Covid-19 are asymptomatic

#476

Post by easytiger » Thu, Mar 19, 2020, 7:55 AM UTC

bennyelv wrote: post #469

easytiger wrote: post #452

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The rate is decreasing, not increasing

How would you accurately attribute that to the risk of the disease being overestimated, rather than the measures taken being effective?

Because it's becoming obvious the disease is vastly more widespread and far further ahead than the official numbers based on death rate/testing data show.

Death is usually around 20 days after first symptoms

Re: 50% – 75% of cases of Covid-19 are asymptomatic

#477

Post by bryanrasmussen » Thu, Mar 19, 2020, 1:53 PM UTC

dnautics wrote: post #473

bryanrasmussen wrote: post #451

Earlier quoted context omitted.

if 50% to 75% of cases are asymptomatic that means 25% to 50% are symptomatic. I'm not taking the exact 75% number here in the following - but close, and I will do some hasty approximations. Current total cases (maybe off by some hours) is 80,894. 80894 is 20.2% of 400000. 400000 - 80000 = 320000. So yes, given the article's premises 320000 is pretty much on the optimistic side for humanity. on edit: but once again m…

you're assuming everyone is capable of being infected to detectable levels.

no that is exactly what I am not doing, hence my starting off my explanation with:

"if 50% to 75% of cases are asymptomatic that means 25% to 50% are symptomatic."

then I go ahead and choose a number (400000) which is on the optimistic end of this range - 80894 is 20.2% of 400000 - I believe that is quite clear, if 80894 is 20.2% of 400000 and 80894 is the amount of total cases counted in China (no longer the case) then I am assuming 79.8% people asymptomatic that have not been counted! (although of course I did some simplifying of things around so my percentages and numbers are not exact, but I think given the linked article slightly under 320000 people being asymptomatic and 80894 being symptomatic is a very optimistic take)

what number do you want to assume is not counted? millions? I assume that from your earlier post but that does not follow from the 50% to 75% cases are asymptomatic.

Obviously if 50% to 75% are asymptomatic and you had 1 million people infected all together (symptomatic and asymptomatic) that would mean you needed to have at least 250000 (25% of a million) to 500000 (50% of a million) people symptomatic. But we don't have those numbers symptomatic, we have slightly under 81000.

Re: 50% – 75% of cases of Covid-19 are asymptomatic

#478

Post by fragmede » Thu, Mar 19, 2020, 10:37 PM UTC

nodamage wrote: post #382

surfsvammel wrote: post #339

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think there is a more reasonable explanation why they are not testing you. Simply because they wouldn’t do anything with that information anyway. If the test is positive they’ll send you home to quarantine telling you to call back if your fever worsens. If the test would show negative, they’d tell you, guess what; “please call back if your fever worsens, and stay in quarantine anyway”. So the information doesn’t re…

> Unless you are in a risk group, the test doesn’t really make a difference. If the test is positive, you can self-quarantine and notify everyone you've been in contact with that they need testing . Then any one of those people that tests positive can do the same thing, etc. etc. If you don't do any testing, you end up with a bunch of positive but asymptomatic carriers wandering around unknowingly infecting other peo…

Thank you!

There is a HUGE cost to "shelter-in-place". People's businesses and jobs depend on customers going out and using their services, and without customers, they won't have jobs, business will fail, and people will get hurt, and die. (Hopefully fewer now that Trump's doing a bail out.)

Shelter-in-place may be the right thing to do, now that that containment has failed, because people will get hurt and die otherwise, but containment wasn't doomed to failure from the start. It's wrong to frame it that way. It's like running for the bus. You don't have to run as fast as a bus can possibly, you only have to run fast enough to catch it before it leaves the bus stop.

Containment isn't supposed to last forever, it lasts as long as it lasts. It absolutely required far more aggressive action to be successful, and one of those was testing. Which we dropped the ball on.

Re: 50% – 75% of cases of Covid-19 are asymptomatic

#479

Post by sjg007 » Sat, Mar 21, 2020, 11:42 PM UTC

thu2111 wrote: post #316

barrkel wrote: post #289

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What they're saying is so far they've had to turn away noone; that everyone who needs treatment is getting it. > all patients with a reasonable chance of recovering and living an acceptable quality of life had been treated. These two quotes from you are mutually contradictory.

They're not quotes from me. I'm directly citing the head of ICU for all of Lombardy. I think reading the Reuters article I'm citing in full is the best way to understand what's going on. I've also tried to summarise it here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22607485 The confusion probably comes from the definition of treatment. It's possible for simultaneously nobody to be turned away due to lack of a bed, whilst…

So if you have a terminal cancer and get coronavirus that means you don't get a ventilator. That's the nice part.

The next part is "living an acceptable" quality of life. This probably means anyone not brain damaged and anyone they think won't require oxygen later. Might mean people not currently on oxygen when they get covid-19.

And despite all of that he says that this system is under strain.

Read between the lines.

Re: 50% – 75% of cases of Covid-19 are asymptomatic

#480

Post by groby_b » Sat, Mar 28, 2020, 4:52 AM UTC

woodandsteel wrote: post #426

groby_b wrote: post #389

Earlier quoted context omitted.

^^^^^^^ This, right here. The entire world is struggling to get enough testing supplies. Testing somebody who's experiencing mild symptoms takes away from testing cases that are much more important - because part of what is happening right now is that everybody with a light fever is all "I GOT THE COVIDS" and wants a test. Fact of the matter: We don't have enough tests, worldwide. We can't produce them fast enough. W…

Yes, but it is also true that the number of available tests is increasing rapidly, and also is partly in response to government demand. If the the available number increased to the level where everyone with symptoms could be tested, would you favor doing so? and do you think that governments should push til enough tests are available to do that?

Late reply, but yes to the former, with the caveat that it's contingent on sensitivity and specificity. (I.e. false negatives/positives)

Probably yes to the latter, unless it takes away resources we need more urgently elsewhere.

But really, what we need to do is depress the count of infected people to a point where it's even feasible to test everybody with symptoms.

Even if we rolled out testing to a point where we can test 1M/day (I think it's 200K/day right now?), it'd take a year to test all of the US. If we're in flu-prevalence territory, that's only 19M, and so suddenly much more doable.

And at that level, we need the ability to both test anybody with symptoms and to conduct random samplings of asymptomatic people, because without that, we couldn't lift shelter-in-place until we have a vaccine. That's... a tad long.

So, more tests, plus suppression doing its job. And it'd be lovely if our government would push to get anything done, really. They've wasted 8 weeks by now, at least. Coordinated response is allowed to kick in any day, by my book.