Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Initial Covid-19 infection rate may be 80 times greater than originally reported

news.psu.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 210 posts

Re: Initial Covid-19 infection rate may be 80 times greater than originally reported

#21

Post by jakeogh »

jjjensen90 wrote: post #15
gvjddbnvdrbv wrote: post #3

How does this reconcile with the actual data we have on total infection rate in e.g. Spain where a representative poll was done?

Because it's possible that there are many, many infected who don't seroconvert or ever manifest symptoms, and therefore would not have been tested with a PCR test, and would have a negative antibody test. We can see this in effect in studies of household attack rates and seroconversion. See this recent preprint and interesting thread (/r/covid19 is a strict science sub, not to be confused with /r/coronavirus) https:/…

Excellent.

un-nerfed link: https://old.reddit.com/r/COVID19/comments/hdxwf5/intrafamili...

Re: Initial Covid-19 infection rate may be 80 times greater than originally reported

#22

Post by chrisco255 »

ManlyBread wrote: post #12

I became numb to news like this because it doesn't seem to have any reflection in the reality around me. The numbers are supposed to be huge yet hospitals are nearly empty and no one I asked knows anyone who was infected. The 80x number looks like science fiction to me.

This is number of infections not number of hospitalizations. This study implies the disease is orders of magnitude less deadly than we thought.

Re: Initial Covid-19 infection rate may be 80 times greater than originally reported

#23

Post by Animats »

This is not new data, but a re-interpretation of previously available data. With lots of assumptions. Now, if they'd gone back and analyzed samples taken in February and March with the newer tests, they'd have new data.

Anyway, all of this is about reconstructing the early days of the epidemic. With good tests now available, it's not that useful at this point.

Re: Initial Covid-19 infection rate may be 80 times greater than originally reported

#24

Post by MattGaiser »

goatinaboat wrote: post #5

At this point every scientist in the world is throwing any random theory out there in the hope one sticks and they will be showered in new funding. The track record of Neil Ferguson‘s Group at Imperial is representative of this industry, however. https://github.com/mrc-ide/covid-sim/issues/176

Don’t models assume a lack of action?

Given that an alarming model is going to alter our behaviour, it seems unrealistic to expect them to match what actually happens.

Re: Initial Covid-19 infection rate may be 80 times greater than originally reported

#25

Post by adamhearn »

crooked-v wrote: post #18
ManlyBread wrote: post #12

I became numb to news like this because it doesn't seem to have any reflection in the reality around me. The numbers are supposed to be huge yet hospitals are nearly empty and no one I asked knows anyone who was infected. The 80x number looks like science fiction to me.

Well, that obviously depends on where 'around you' is. Compare to New York City, where there have been an estimated 17,000 deaths (and even that's probably undercounted, going by some studies of excess deaths compared to previous years), and at the peak there were hundreds of unclaimed bodies per week being buried in mass graves.

This is completely anecdotal, but my good friend’s brother is an ER doctor. He said the hospital required them to label the cause of death for all patients in the hospital as covid if there was as much as one symptom.

I don’t want to downplay the sadness of the deaths, but I think it is a bit foolish for us to base our number of deaths of off untested patients...

Re: Initial Covid-19 infection rate may be 80 times greater than originally reported

#26

Post by puranjay »

ManlyBread wrote: post #12

I became numb to news like this because it doesn't seem to have any reflection in the reality around me. The numbers are supposed to be huge yet hospitals are nearly empty and no one I asked knows anyone who was infected. The 80x number looks like science fiction to me.

That depends entirely on where you are and what time you started looking. Three weeks ago if you'd asked me I would have said the same things as you.

Since then, cases in my city have started increasing drastically. And now, I have at least two people I know who've tested positive.

Re: Initial Covid-19 infection rate may be 80 times greater than originally reported

#27

Post by baddox »

christkv wrote: post #9
gvjddbnvdrbv wrote: post #3

How does this reconcile with the actual data we have on total infection rate in e.g. Spain where a representative poll was done?

We now know a significant amount of people have no symptoms or very light symptoms and no antibody response. An anecdote. My friend and his wife got tested when giving birth. She was positive for antibodies he was not. It is quite possible that for ever person who had antibodies there is some unknown x of people who got it and never developed antibodies.

What is the actual effect on the world if that’s true? I’m assuming that people who were infected but never developed symptoms or antibodies were still able to infect other people who might develop symptoms and antibodies.

Re: Initial Covid-19 infection rate may be 80 times greater than originally reported

#28

Post by pjc50 »

ManlyBread wrote: post #12

I became numb to news like this because it doesn't seem to have any reflection in the reality around me. The numbers are supposed to be huge yet hospitals are nearly empty and no one I asked knows anyone who was infected. The 80x number looks like science fiction to me.

Odd, I know a number of people who've had serious symptoms and a friend of a friend was Scotland's longest hospitalised case (well over a month). Fortunately nobody I know has died but some are reporting lingering symptoms.

Re: Initial Covid-19 infection rate may be 80 times greater than originally reported

#29

Post by fredzel »

ManlyBread wrote: post #12

I became numb to news like this because it doesn't seem to have any reflection in the reality around me. The numbers are supposed to be huge yet hospitals are nearly empty and no one I asked knows anyone who was infected. The 80x number looks like science fiction to me.

In Poland there has been an outbreak among miners in multiple coal mines. 98% of them are reported to be asymptomatic and those are people often working in hazardous conditions.

Re: Initial Covid-19 infection rate may be 80 times greater than originally reported

#30

Post by crooked-v »

arrrg wrote: post #7
fsiefken wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

yes, but the flatten the curve crowd assumes a higher lethality

Do they? I think we have pretty ok lethality estimates somewhere in the ballpark of 0.2 to 0.5 percent.

The lethality rate without care is much higher than the lethality rate with care, and said care often needs to be exhaustive and for an extended period, which can easily fill the entire capacity of hospitals if enough people get infected at once.
Post reply on HN