Worried about coronavirus part 10

[GPwife2411]

Previous thread www.mumsnet.com/Talk/coronavirus/3836973-To-be-worried-about-coronavirus-part-9

updated data on this page every day at 2pm until further notice.
www.gov.uk/guidance/coronavirus-covid-19-information-for-the-public#number-of-cases

It's not just like flu www.theguardian.com/world/2020/mar/01/yes-it-is-worse-than-the-flu-busting-the-coronavirus-myths

Why WHO not declaring a pandemic www.newscientist.com/article/2235342-covid-19-why-wont-the-who-officially-declare-a-coronavirus-pandemic/

Worldometer www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/#countries

BNO News bnonews.com/index.php/2020/02/the-latest-coronavirus-cases/

Link to WHO report www.who.int/emergencies/diseases/novel-coronavirus-2019

The Lancet coronavirus hub - latest research and comment www.thelancet.com/coronavirus

JAMA coronavirus research centre jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/pages/coronavirus-alert

@ofwarren - are you looking at table 1 for that bit or somewhere else on the article?

I wonder if the very limited criteria for testing here will change, otherwise there's just no way to know the approximate numbers.

I would be incredibly surprised data is 100% accurate due to the extreme circumstances.
It said some of the babies were 34w, so could have been one of those,
I would hope there are plans to treat covid patients in separate hospitals, so general patient s who are at high risk, incl maternity services and children.
But I think it's probably sensible for anyone who can wait to ttc to do so. As I would think they are better off to either catch it or be vaccinated beforehand. (There could be fewer Dr or midwives etc to look after babies by next Xmas 9m time. ) Hopefully this will be over long before then.

The BBC take on it ... The CFR of 3.4 is a lot more than flu which is less than 1%.

No shit the flu is less than 1%.

www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0163445313003733

"Influenza accounted for ∼10% of the attributed respiratory admissions and deaths in hospital. Healthy children under five had the highest influenza admission rate (1.9/1000). The presence of co-morbidities increased the admission rate by 5.7 fold for 5–14 year olds (from 0.1 to 0.56/1000), the relative risk declining to 1.8 fold in 65+ year olds (from 0.46 to 0.84/1000). The majority (72%) of influenza-attributable deaths in hospital occurred in 65+ year olds with co-morbidities. Mortality in children under 15 years was low with around 12 influenza-attributable deaths in hospital per year in England; the case fatality rate was substantially higher in risk than non-risk children. Infants under 6 months had the highest consultation and admission rates, around 70/1000 and 3/1000 respectively."

Flu is so low they are measuring it as a fraction of 1000 to tidy up the small numbers.

www.nytimes.com/2020/02/27/world/asia/coronavirus-treament-recovery.html

There were two other categories of cases, severe and critical. Severe cases featured shortness of breath, low blood oxygen saturation or other lung problems. Critical cases featured respiratory failure, septic shock or multiple organ dysfunction.

Just under 14 percent of patients were severe, and just under 5 percent critical.

I've no idea GPWife I struggle to understand medical papers.
I'm not sure which bit they were referring to but they seemed to think the paper showed that children do sometimes have bad outcomes.
Could all be bollocks though 😂

The death rate outside of China is 1.5%, was most like much higher in china as for a while they had no idea what they were dealing with.

Also 80% could get this???

Please remember that this is the absolute worst case scenario. It was in Hubei for 40 days before lock down took place and even to now it has infected just over 80000 it has also now peaked confirmed by the WHO in China. this is 0.0014% of the Chinese population currently infected!

Yes they were very robust, but those robust plans are also in the government plans if it comes to it.

@ofwarren Ah, I'm working backwards from the paper itself. Were you reading a summary of it from elsewhere - sorry, I can't keep up with the thread!

Spain reports first death from coronavirus in Valencia

Anyone got any guess on we the likelihood is the schools will close?

My LEA said "low risk" and will prosecute for non- attendance

No GP
Someone on twitter claiming it meant that younger people were getting ill at a higher rate than reported.
I can't get my head round papers like this so just wanted someone to cast an eye over it.
You know what twitter is like though, full of misinformation.

For those that asked, my son is at Birmingham City University

#FLORIDA- 3rd case of #Coronavirus

I don't think they will close at all blueberry to be honest.
If anything, they are wanting to change the rules to make classes bigger to take into account that staff may be off ill.

Paper does show that severe disease is present in younger people but the possible definition (15-49 years) is really broad, compared to the next two age increments which are narrower (50-64 and 65+). It therefore looks like there are greater numbers of severely ill 'younger' people than older people but when you add together the numbers in the two older categories it shifts to show what you would assume i.e. more older people present in the severely ill group. Hope that's of some use @ofwarren

The big change today is that the government are officially saying they are no longer trying to stop the disease in this country as they no longer believe that to be possible.

Everyone on this thread needs to understand this fundamental shift in policy.

The situation is now that the government want some of us to catch covid-19 to get the ball rolling on this, so that we can peak in May as that fits with planning and doesn't prolong things even further.

This means that there is no point in stopping travel abroad. It would damage the economy and if most cases are imported atm, then that's not a good thing either.

In some ways testing at this stage is now about understanding the spread of the disease. The point in contact tracing becomes not about stopping numbers but about knowing where the hot spots are so they can manage the spread of the disease rather than stop it in its tracks.

Any school closures will be localised and will be rolling from place to place. One place will get a certain number of infections and will be shut down for a while to slow things down. The idea being that the whole country does not shut down at the same time. (Also means you can draft in health care staff from other areas more easily too).

So the number of cases we get moves from being about individuals to cold hard numbers.

Ah sorry cross-posted, I don't think it can show that the current assumptions around age etc. are wrong as it's only a case series of 1099 people from a specific place in China. Interesting but not enough to cast doubt on other research I would think? If other papers then show a similar pattern then maybe but again, the 15-49 age range is too broad to really tell us anything.

Honestly, if anywhere in the world should be criticised for their handling of this, IMO it's the US.

At federal level yes. At state level New York is galvanising itself. I feel reassured by the fact there is at least effort, planning and action happening.

Testing capacity has been urgently expanded, the new test has results in a few hours.

Legislature has been activated that mean no fee for testing - I think this is brilliant, some Americans are concernred there will be a rush on NYC hospitals now. So we''ll see. They need a campaign making sure people call ahead before showing up at the ER or doctor's office.

The subway is being cleaned! This is great news in general

I asked earlier but not sure I saw a reply, are they disinfecting the tube?

I don't know how effective NYC's plan will be of course but I feel it will definitely contribute to slowing transmission, which can only be a good thing.

Where can I view this @RedToothBrush ??

That is interesting re the shift

Iirc France and other places have issued statement on travel. I wonder why the difference.

New thread: www.mumsnet.com/Talk/coronavirus/3838636-Worried-about-coronavirus-part-11

@ChipotleBlessing how do i find the who guidance on this? Im in a right state now

@jrobhatch29 I read the WHO guidance the other night and it said that steroids aren't recommended. I'm not an expert but perhaps the mother wasn't given steroids to help develop the babies lungs prior to the c section incase it made her worse? Just a theory but I honestly think that could be more to with prematurity than the virus. It is very sad though.