Category: cvirus

A disturbing article in the Grunian yesterday challenging the Chinese cases-deaths-recovery statistics suggesting that the virus has been completely eliminated.  Many doubt the numbers are as good as officials have reported, and while the data we have used here comes from John Hopkins University, that is simply a copy of what the Chinese authorities say it is.

Any rational person would doubt these figures,” one internet user wrote in response to an essay posted by a volunteer in Wuhan questioning the statistics.

So the data really reflects 3 things. (1) the biological properties of the virus, i.e. whether it can be transmitted by sneeze droplets, how far and so on. (2) The expectations and fears of the population reacting to data about the epidemic, and (3) control exercised by the authorities over the properties of the data.

An excellent article from Jonathan Kay published last week, echoing the points that Eumaeus has been making for the last month.

The more aggressively that our leaders act to suppress the spread of COVID-19, the more quickly the crisis will pass, and the sooner we will all be able to return to normal daily life. The decisions we make now could mean the difference between a global recession and a historical event on par with The Great Depression.

The good news is that we definitely can suppress COVID-19, even if no cure or effective vaccine emerges. We know this because it already has been done in the most populous country on Earth.

The chart shows the latest data from John Hopkins. Existing cases = diagnosed cases minus recoveries minus deaths.

Existing cases have been zero for a number of days. I have been discussing with public health experts and the two arguments against the Chinese experiment, with my replies, are as follows.

(1) We can’t replicate the Chinese measures, which require an authoritarian approach. I reply: First, why can’t we implement an authoritarian approach in the West? Second, the evidence from provinces outside Hubei is that the measures were not particularly authoritarian, and relied mostly on community support.

(2) There will be a resurgence of the epidemic in China once restrictions have been lifted. I reply: this hypothesis has yet to be tested. Furthermore, it is falsified by the SARS 2002 epidemic, which was completely eradicated, also by the Spanish Flu epidemic 1917-1919. Admittedly the Spanish flu resurged in 1918, but the evidence suggests that was due to demobilisation, and in any case it disappeared the following year.

In this article, Tim Gowers (highly respected mathematician and Fields Medal winner) argues for a full lockdown.

The New York Times reports:

For the first time since the coronavirus crisis began, China on Thursday reported no new local infections for the previous day, a milestone in its costly battle with the outbreak that has since spread around the world.

Officials said 34 new coronavirus cases had been confirmed, all of them involving people who had come to China from elsewhere.

In signaling that an end to China’s epidemic might be in sight, the announcement could pave the way for officials to focus on reviving the country’s economy, which nearly ground to a halt after the government imposed travel restrictions and quarantine measures. In recent days, economic life has been resuming in fits and starts.

But China is not out of danger. Experts have said that it will need to see at least 14 consecutive days without new infections for the outbreak to be considered over. It remains to be seen whether the virus will re-emerge once daily life restarts and travel restrictions are lifted.

Continue reading “Patient zero to zero patients”

Article in the FT today which corroborates everything we have been saying at Eumaeus. For those without access, the key points:

The first testing round, carried out on the town’s entire population in late February, found 3 per cent of the population infected, though half of the carriers had no symptoms. After isolating all those infected, the second testing round about 10 days later showed the infection rate had dropped to 0.3 per cent.

Source: John Hopkins University

Contrasts with the rest of the world, particularly Europe. Yet when you look at the media, China always appears as a massive blob, as though the worst of the lot.

This may partly reassure us. Hunan (population 67m) is another province where all cases are now resolved (i.e. cases = deaths plus recoveries). See chart. Case fatality rate about 0.4%. Population fatality rate 0.000006%.

‘Partly reassure’ because UK scientific advisers are not following Chinese policy.

People have been attributing the different policy to Tory politics (‘slay them all, or most of them’). I think it’s a Kuhn thing. Senior advisers are not scientists any more, having last engaged with a peer reviewed paper perhaps 20-30 years ago. And they adhere to what seemed to work 20-30 years ago.

Thankfully a lot of scientists wrote in and pointed out this is not such a good idea. Let’s see.

Fujian looks like the first province to have completely eradicated the corona virus, if the figures are to be believed.  See chart above. 296 cases diagnosed, 295 recoveries and 1 death. Thus the two methods of computing the case fatality converge.

CFR  =  D(R+D)  =  D/C  = 1/(295+1)  =  0.34%.

or 1 in 296. With a population of 38.6m, the ratio of fatalities to population is thus 1 in 38.6m, proving again as I argued yesterday, the best chance of surviving the virus is not getting it.