Cronovirus appears more hype than substance

[hopefulson]

The virus advertised as deadly and highly contagious has now found it's way to my home town and city wide hospital. I was discharged from that same hospital 2 weeks ago and within 2 days had a fever of 102 . A flue test was given to me and it showed negative. I have come to the conclusion, and test results may well demonstrate, that this virus has been in our communities for awhile and has spread in the undercurrent undetected. It is little more dangerous than the common flue. Once the spread has been statistically determined and a real quotient for the actual death total by percent is established I think some embarrassment will arrive. We will see. I for one am not going to panic in any way at all. Use your good sense be wise and be well, remember the common flue precautions. God Bless.

 

[PloughBoy]

Yes, He is in control.

 

[Hekuran]

The death rate by percentage has been determined. It's about 2%. A 98% survival rate. It's dangerous for older people and for people with pre-existing medical conditions such as asthma. For many others it's not so serious.

 

[hopefulson]

The death rate by percentage has been determined. It's about 2%. A 98% survival rate. It's dangerous for older people and for people with pre-existing medical conditions such as asthma. For many others it's not so serious.

I am uncertain the 2% figure is correct it may be much lower, the true rate of the population that HAS BEEN affected is not and cannot be known. What bothers me most is how this got started. How did the Chinese identify this flue like disease as opposed to the flue itself? How did they know to look and what processing protocol was present for the testing? Do they always go through genetic identifying process for every flue like encounter? There are many questions and I don't think they are being very forthcoming.

 

[Hekuran]

It's unhelpful for those of us who are not medical professionals and who lack expertise in this area to start making speculative judgements. One of the biggest dangers in a situation like this is that the population starts to mistrust the work and advice of the experts and takes things into their own hands.

Here in the UK, we've had good access to medics and researchers informing us what they do know, what they don't know yet, contingency plans for the various ways the disease might spread, and what we in the general population can do in response.

Of course it's a developing situation, and the known science is struggling to catch up. But it's not good to be fostering mistrust in doctors at this stage.

 

[hopefulson]

I think it a very great mistake not to ask every question and to ask it publicly. Where there are answers there are answers and once examined fully it should end any speculation. The questions asked may have raised controversy but to trust blindly is a weak foundation for a factual and actual situation in itself. Truly I don't just think, I am certain we cannot ask enough questions and we cannot explore enough the implications. Trouble has a chance to build a camp in your policies where the explorations and questions stop. It rarely has a chance to establish a foothold where it is constantly examined and questioned when your intentions are determined towards honesty.

Here in the US, The Senate asked some of these questions concerning the Chinese. They have been raised, the questions, and the implications of this lack of transparency. These queries are truly global and consequential to millions of individuals in so many ways. So lets toss the concept up in the air and see how it lands. Should we wait for diplomats to tell us what to think or openly and publicly ask the questions we know the Chinese have the answers to and the politicians know are meandering through the public opinion undercurrent ?

Blessings Hekuran

 

[Hekuran]

I'm all for asking intelligent questions of the right people. I'm absolutely against stoking speculation and conspiracy theories.

 

[hopefulson]

Is that what you feel I was doing? Promoting a conspiracy theory , or asking relevant questions and making relevant points? I don't think any points I made or questions asked were made in that spirit.. In truth they were more observations seeking answers with no disrespect conveyed and certainly none intended.

 

[Hekuran]

I'm not questioning the spirit you made the posts in, but the content. The title is 'Coronavirus appear more hype than substance', and the opening line says the virus is 'advertised' to be deadly and contagious. It's beyond 'advertised': many people have died.

If there are enough people writing dismissively about the disease, it will have an impact on public response -- people will not take it as seriously as they should. That could cause the disease to spread further and lead to more sickness and death.

 

[hopefulson]

I'm not questioning the spirit you made the posts in, but the content. The title is 'Coronavirus appear more hype than substance', and the opening line says the virus is 'advertised' to be deadly and contagious. It's beyond 'advertised': many people have died.

If there are enough people writing dismissively about the disease, it will have an impact on public response -- people will not take it as seriously as they should. That could cause the disease to spread further and lead to more sickness and death.

Perhaps my treatment of public opinion is where the difference is found. I do insist on wide open questions deliberate and substantive towards the issue. I respect the right of every person to be exposed to it and not be sheltered from them. This sheltering policy produces a circumstance I feel left as established conduct is dangerous as well as costly in many, many ways.

So perhaps the opening statement using the word hype had a derogatory connotation in use, however hype outside of established facts is the problem the thread is meant to explore. That exploration doesn't require a degree it requires a question and a willingness to explore with an honest eye to fully uncover the answers. These are answers required for the establishment of correct conduct going forward. All this being said lets take a moment to consider what we do not know.

We do not know what TRUE percentage of cases result in fatalities. Unless true and actual exposure can be established that figure cannot be determined I don't need an expert to tell me these things common sense and basic math application takes over the argument. In short what is the exposure rate among the general population PERIOD. Now let's consider what is transpiring globally.

Italy has 1/3 of the population under quarantine right now. I am not saying this policy is wrong but I am saying that a massive testing program with a high degree of accuracy requirement is immediately needed meaning NOW. These kinds of questions and the reality of these circumstances should be considered by everyone on earth as they have a right to know the truth even demand that the speculation portion of the policies should have the gap closed.

Further when you say (people have died) the statement the way you made it bears examination itself. The flue is alive and active right now globally. There is a fatality quotient associated with it. It does not produce quarantine or panic like we are seeing right now with Coronavirus. Now I have referred to this circumstance as HYPE that was probably a poor word, however when you examine where we are I think you have to concede that the current atmosphere is laced with hype and not so much deliberately. Should the Italians have quarantined a third of their population? No one can fault them for caution but do they have the courage to say they do not know the exposure rate and what the unanswered question implies. So there are a lot of loose ends to tie up here, what do the Chinese know and why are they not sharing the answers to so many questions, answers they owe the world. Do you really think silence is helpful?

 

[Hekuran]

Todays reports from Italy: the number of cases has risen to 2,502 in the space of 12 days. The number of deaths in Italy is 79. The present death rate is at least 3.15%

 

[hopefulson]

The following is the number of tests given to date in the US. What I am stating is we need a real picture of spread before we can ascertain a death rate. once we have a big picture of true exposure the true depth of and more accurate picture of what is factually going on here.

Number of specimens tested for the virus that causes COVID-19 by CDC labs (N=3,698) and U.S. public health laboratories* (N=4,856) by date of specimen collection†
*Reporting public health laboratories are 42 state public health labs (AL, AR, AZ, CA, CO, CT, DE, GA, HI, IA, ID, IL, IN, KS, KY, LA, MA, MD, MI, MO, MS, MT, NC, ND, NE, NH, NJ, NM, NV, NY, OH, OK, OR, PA, RI, SC, TN, TX, VT, WA, WI and WY), New York City, USAF, and 5 California counties.
† Non-respiratory specimens were excluded. If collection date is not available then, for CDC results, the date received or reported is used and, for U.S. public health laboratories, the date tested is used. Results reported as of 3:15pm on March 9 were included.
‡ Data during this period are pending.
Lab Collection Dates

Date Collected	CDC Labs	US Public Health Labs
1/18	4	0
1/19	0	0
1/20	7	0
1/21	7	0
1/22	17	0
1/23	58	0
1/24	79	0
1/25	160	0
1/26	86	0
1/27	154	0
1/28	84	0
1/29	404	0
1/30	175	0
1/31	114	0
2/1	47	0
2/2	53	0
2/3	96	0
2/4	72	0
2/5	86	0
2/6	62	1
2/7	83	0
2/8	37	0
2/9	45	2
2/10	69	0
2/11	50	0
2/12	36	0
2/13	39	0
2/14	39	4
2/15	11	2
2/16	12	0
2/17	62	26
2/18	65	2
2/19	54	3
2/20	226	0
2/21	290	0
2/22	23	2
2/23	46	1
2/24	46	12
2/25	109	11
2/26	63	22
2/27	104	106
2/28	88	140
2/29	84	232
3/1	70	184
3/2	105	405
3/3	34	585
3/4	27	758
3/5	6	750
3/6	10	800
3/7	0	525
3/8	0	261
3/9	0	22
	3698	4856

Page last reviewed: March 9, 2020
Content source: National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases (NCIRD), Division of Viral Diseases

 

[hopefulson]

The following is the number of tests given to date in the US. What I am stating is we need a real picture of spread before we can ascertain a death rate. once we have a big picture of true exposure the true depth of and more accurate picture of what is factually going on here.

Number of specimens tested for the virus that causes COVID-19 by CDC labs (N=3,698) and U.S. public health laboratories* (N=4,856) by date of specimen collection†
*Reporting public health laboratories are 42 state public health labs (AL, AR, AZ, CA, CO, CT, DE, GA, HI, IA, ID, IL, IN, KS, KY, LA, MA, MD, MI, MO, MS, MT, NC, ND, NE, NH, NJ, NM, NV, NY, OH, OK, OR, PA, RI, SC, TN, TX, VT, WA, WI and WY), New York City, USAF, and 5 California counties.
† Non-respiratory specimens were excluded. If collection date is not available then, for CDC results, the date received or reported is used and, for U.S. public health laboratories, the date tested is used. Results reported as of 3:15pm on March 9 were included.
‡ Data during this period are pending.
Lab Collection Dates

Date Collected	CDC Labs	US Public Health Labs
1/18	4	0
1/19	0	0
1/20	7	0
1/21	7	0
1/22	17	0
1/23	58	0
1/24	79	0
1/25	160	0
1/26	86	0
1/27	154	0
1/28	84	0
1/29	404	0
1/30	175	0
1/31	114	0
2/1	47	0
2/2	53	0
2/3	96	0
2/4	72	0
2/5	86	0
2/6	62	1
2/7	83	0
2/8	37	0
2/9	45	2
2/10	69	0
2/11	50	0
2/12	36	0
2/13	39	0
2/14	39	4
2/15	11	2
2/16	12	0
2/17	62	26
2/18	65	2
2/19	54	3
2/20	226	0
2/21	290	0
2/22	23	2
2/23	46	1
2/24	46	12
2/25	109	11
2/26	63	22
2/27	104	106
2/28	88	140
2/29	84	232
3/1	70	184
3/2	105	405
3/3	34	585
3/4	27	758
3/5	6	750
3/6	10	800
3/7	0	525
3/8	0	261
3/9	0	22
	3698	4856

Page last reviewed: March 9, 2020
Content source: National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases (NCIRD), Division of Viral Diseases

I apologize for the way this chart copied lets see if the graph alone copies Here is the link This list is provided by the Association of Public Health Laboratories (APHL)external icon. Contact your state health department regarding questions about testing.

In summary and to the point in the US the numbers are small.


Number of specimens tested for the virus that causes COVID-19 by CDC labs (N=3,698) and U.S. public health laboratories* (N=4,856) by date of specimen collection†

*Reporting public health laboratories are 42 state public health labs (AL, AR, AZ, CA, CO, CT, DE, GA, HI, IA, ID, IL, IN, KS, KY, LA, MA, MD, MI, MO, MS, MT, NC, ND, NE, NH, NJ, NM, NV, NY, OH, OK, OR, PA, RI, SC, TN, TX, VT, WA, WI and WY), New York City, USAF, and 5 California counties.


† Non-respiratory specimens were excluded. If collection date is not available then, for CDC results, the date received or reported is used and, for U.S. public health laboratories, the date tested is used. Results reported as of 3:15pm on March 9 were included.

 

[Hekuran]

There's no lack effort going into research to find ways to curb the spread of the disease. As it's a fast-changing situation, decision makers have to act now on the best available information.

Sure, better information will be available later, and it's easy to be wise after an event. But the experts in this area have to give advice based on what is known now.

 

[hopefulson]

I can't argue with anything you are saying but I will reiterate this point that the reaction itself by those decision makers you are referencing have a responsibility to provide an atmosphere of care and control. Here is what I am alluding to, the virus information is very heavy in terms of management and precaution. That is fine but the information train should begin with what this is and focus on it in depth. This illness has limits say what they are. There is an experience quotient as more is known focus on what is ahead and what limits we are dealing with not the fear of spread issue. I can't put my finger solidly on it but I see it and feel it and it is the method and nature of the sharing of information that is the problem. Look we are all members of the populace it is impossible to shut down the questions and speculations but the information string is being heavily pulled from only one end.

Anyway this word (hype) I would change to the remedial concept of focused honesty. I think we are being treated like children and we are somewhat forced to live down to that level by the information process we need more, it needs to be clear. I hope I conveyed this sensibly it is a nebulous concept more felt than can be specifically defined. I have this feeling that only the truth provides a foundation I can rest on. It is OK for things to be missing provided it is known what they are. These things are known because they are asking the questions associated with them so it's not hype but a request for a more exact framework of the possibilities that would shut down this crazy media coverage. 20,000 flue related deaths this year in the US. The latest number I saw for covid -19 deaths in the US. is 269. What are we dealing with here?

 

[Hekuran]

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has released their estimates for the influenza season from October 1, 2019 and February 29, 2020. During that period, an estimated 34 to 49 million people have been sickened with the flu, with 350,000 to 620,000 hospitalized. The estimated deaths from the flu is between 20,000 and 52,000 people.

The estimates are provided in ranges, since the CDC does not capture all cases of flu that occur in the U.S., since influenza is not a reportable disease in most areas of the U.S.

On these estimates, the death rate for influenza in the US this year is in the range of 0.04% to 0.15%. By way of contrast we've seen from Italy that the COVID-19 is highly contagious and the death rate in excess of 3%.

There's plenty of information available from reliable sources for anyone who wants to take the effort to look into it.

 

[hopefulson]

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has released their estimates for the influenza season from October 1, 2019 and February 29, 2020. During that period, an estimated 34 to 49 million people have been sickened with the flu, with 350,000 to 620,000 hospitalized. The estimated deaths from the flu is between 20,000 and 52,000 people.

The estimates are provided in ranges, since the CDC does not capture all cases of flu that occur in the U.S., since influenza is not a reportable disease in most areas of the U.S.

On these estimates, the death rate for influenza in the US this year is in the range of 0.04% to 0.15%. By way of contrast we've seen from Italy that the COVID-19 is highly contagious and the death rate in excess of 3%.

There's plenty of information available from reliable sources for anyone who wants to take the effort to look into it.

As I stated before the numbers for COVID-19 are incomplete. I think I will have to leave it at that. The general commentary from authorities tend to support that assertion. BTW deaths in the US are 69 not the 269 I stated in my previous post. I don't know what to say past this point except we will all live with the reality as it actually is and we can look back and review what was what in every context at some point in the future.

Blessings Hekuran

 

[Hekuran]

News reports today -- 10 March -- say the death toll in the US is 29, all but five of them in Washington State.

 

[hopefulson]

Dyslexia? I didn't know I had it. My apologies.

Blessings All

 

[PloughBoy]

Breaking News:
Ohio in USA. 100,000 cases
Michigan all Schools will be close beginning Monday.
So far only 12 cases in Michigan.