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

Coronavirus Real Time Map

gisanddata.maps.arcgis.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 146 posts

Re: Coronavirus Real Time Map

#121

Post by ilkan »

bart_spoon wrote: post #107
koheripbal wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's 3-4 orders of magnitude more deadly than the normal seasonal flu. The mortality rate is similar to SARS, but with far more infections. The above comment saying that it "mostly" impacts elderly is a bit vague. The fact that within the first 100 deaths were multiple young healthy people means it is dangerous for the entire population. People in their 30s and 40s are not "old".

There was a single death of someone in their 30s out of 100+. And I don't even know if its been confirmed if they were immunocomprimised or not. Every other person to die was 47 or above, many of who had previous health issues. 1 out of 100 is is a pretty good indication that it mostly dangerous to the older population. The fact that no young children to have died yet, which also tend to be a vulnerable group for vir…

"50% of the deaths were under 47"... fixed that for you. Also implying people over 47 are elderly and not worthy caring about? Most middle managers, craftsmen, ceo's, politicians, doctors, professors, military officers would disagree.

Re: Coronavirus Real Time Map

#123

Post by brylie »

Please don't use circle radius for indicating the number of observations. It is really easy to confuse the circle radius with the geographic extent of the observations, when in reality they are likely more tightly clustered.

Rather, consider using a heatmap to show the proportional density of observations in a way that better highlights their geographic distribution.

Re: Coronavirus Real Time Map

#125

Post by Izkata »

ComodoHacker wrote: post #78
kscriby wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, they do on all the devices we've tested the app on. What device/browser are you using?

Firefox latest on Win7. Turning off adblocking didn't help.

Likewise on Firefox on Ubuntu. It looks like the map is fully desaturated, the green is a light grey and the red is a dark grey.

Re: Coronavirus Real Time Map

#126

Post by infinity0 »

lsllc wrote: post #117
infinity0 wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What about a 99.99% reduction in travel? Wuhan has 11 million and 1% of that is 100k, I'd imagine the quarantine is more successful than preventing 100k people from travelling.

According to published reports (see [1]), 5 million people left Wuhan before the quarantine was implemented. [1] https://www.scmp.com/news/china/society/article/3047720/chin...

As I said in a different comment, 5 million people leave Wuhan every year around this time, and the model that made this 99%/25% prediction is using data that already takes into account this mass-migration.

Re: Coronavirus Real Time Map

#127

Post by sliken »

shadowgovt wrote: post #92

If these stats hold, the disease looks to have a mortality of around 2%. Doesn't sound like a lot, but an R0 of >2 is concerning because of what it means for total infected. 2% of everyone within range of access to modern transportation is an awful lot of people.

So far the number of recovered people is trailing deaths, if that holds then it's going to be pretty dire.

Re: Coronavirus Real Time Map

#128

Post by sliken »

yakshaving_jgt wrote: post #80
lysp wrote: post #35

Found this report circulating on twitter from a junior doctor in Australia. https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.01.23.20018549v... Novel coronavirus 2019-nCoV: early estimation of epidemiological parameters and epidemic predictions > Key findings: > ● We estimate the basic reproduction number of the infection (𝑅𝑅0) to be significantly greater than one. We estimate it to be between 3.6 and 4.0, indicating t…

Western news media are currently reporting ~100 dead and ~4,500 infected (though that number is surely much higher in reality). This is a ~2% mortality rate. Can we naïvely extrapolate that we expect ~4,000 casualties from ~190,000 infections? I'm not good at understanding numbers, but I'm sure someone here can chime in with a better way to read this.

See: https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6...

From the above URL, among 41 people who went to the hospital:

  * All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest CT

  * acute respiratory distress syndrome (12 [29%])

  * RNAaemia (six [15%])

  * acute cardiac injury (five [12%])

  * secondary infection (four [10%])

  * 13 (32%) patients were admitted to an ICU

  * six (15%) died
So among those that were able to get to a hospital 15% died.

Question is what percentage of people exposed get bad enough to want to go to the hospital?

Re: Coronavirus Real Time Map

#129

Post by ShorsHammer »

ta999999171 wrote: post #109
ShorsHammer wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People who are actually concerned at this stage while ignoring the scientists who say there's no proof it's serious are prime examples of the types who get worked up by the media hypetrain and should be actively avoided. It's a harsh assessment but honestly think it's the case. The media sell stories. People click on those stories, the stories that get clicked on most get other stories written on the topic. This is h…

You can outsmart a traffic accident. Tough for most to outrun/outsmart an epidemic. Read/watch some of the Twitter whistleblowers. Govs have no reason to tell everyone the true risks - and every reason to hide them.

> You can outsmart a traffic accident.

That's absurd considering how many people are unwilling victims of accidents, how exactly would you outsmart it? Never leave home?

Re: Coronavirus Real Time Map

#130

Post by brigandish »

infinity0 wrote: post #113
brigandish wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Figure 4 in the images from this tweet[1] (taken from the same paper above, page 8) show the effect of a 99% reduction in travel, over 65% of people in cities across China will become infected. [1] https://twitter.com/DrEricDing/status/1220919589623803905

The guy needs to Chill T F O. R0 of measles is like 12-18. And with the city-wide quarantine people should be modelling 99.99% reductions in travel not 99%.

> Dr. Eric Feigl-Ding (Eric Ding) is a health economist, epidemiologist, and nutrition scientist at the Harvard Chan School of Public Health, and an expert advisor to the World Health Organization.

I'm not usually one for relying heavily on authority, but this guy[1] is likely to know when the R0 number looks very, very bad.

[1] https://scholar.harvard.edu/ericding/home

Post reply on HN