It was with dread I wondered what my first post said back in February, but I guess it wasnt too bad. Hopefully I was almost certainly wrong about it mutating (with even more serious consequences) and it would seem the experts probably thought this unlikely even at this early stage as this type of virus rarely mutates in a way that reduces the effect of vaccines or its impact on mortality. We know the collapse of health services has proved to me the most significant threat caused by this virus. I am not going to look at what I said subsequently!
I think this is one case where all the extreme rumours are very unlikely to be true. The virus is an RNA virus and the sequence well established. If it had been artifically engineered there would be more tell tale indicators. Outside of China, there is already a reasonable about of evidence of its communicability and its typical course and the prognosis of those infected. I suspect the concern is its ability to mutate (RNA viruses are particularly adept at doing so) and becoming more dangerous. I also suspect that because there is no herd immunity there is considerable concern at the disruption that will be caused to any society if it takes hold. We are already aware it is having a very serious impact on China’s economy. There may be question marks over how well many other countries health services would respond as well. Even ours is over stretched most of the time and there is little surplus capacity. If it were to spread rapidly in our population, I suspect, desite the Governmenet’s assurance to the contrary, the NHS would be over whelmed quite quickly – I guess it could cope, but at the expense of a lot of its routine work being postponed, with all the consequences that would follow on.
Cobalt wrote:
the second “Spanish Flu” wave killed mostly young and healthy people.
Not right! The Spanish Flu had two distinct peaks in mortality in the age distribution: The above 50yr old and around 30yrs. This has been heavily discussed in academia and there are some potential explanations still in the race – from impacts of WW1 to the Russian Flu of 1889-90 (to which these 30 year olds were exposed as infants). Only few of these explanations have to do with the specifics of the virus.
I think you have just argued against yourself. Not only does the graph start with the very young on the largest peak (though infant mortality was higher 100yrs ago anyway, there is a clear peak of young people on that graph, at 25-30yrs old, ie working age. When looking at the 65+yr old end of the graph you have to remember that 100yrs ago that would be the usual age of mortality, much like 75-80+yrs today. Additionally 100yrs ago many of the “vulnerable” groups being affected today wouldnt have survived in the first place the way they have today due to modern medical treatments.
That working age spike isnt in the current C-19 data for mortality.
This is why there is, how shall I say it politely, a certain “pushback” from some, that the economic and social cost of what governments are forcing the working age generations to do is out of proportion to what is happening.
Regards, SD..
skydriller wrote:
I think you have just argued against yourself.
Not seeing where I argued against myself ?!?
I was just giving facts showing that the statement “… Spanish Flu killed mostly young and healthy people” was wrong. It killed mostly elderly (and yes: babies but this is a different story).
It is right (as I said) that it also killed young (healthy is to be debated) but not mostly: mortality for elderly was still higher. And the pattern of the young ones is even more interesting: It didn’t kill all young ones – and not even all “working age” ones which would have been around 16-60 years at these days, It was particularly deadly for quite a narrow age band around 25 to 35. Younger ones and the “middle agers” were affected much less. As far as I know we haven’t seen a similar pattern at any other pandemic until today.
And this very fact leads most researches to the conclusion, that it is likely not any property of the virus but something this very generation has experienced that lead to this peak. As said, exposure to the Russian Flu pandemic at very young age or exposure to something during WW1 or in war related manufacturing jobs obviously comes to mind.
Hope this longer explanation made the point better.
Fuji_Abound wrote:
One of the things I find fascinating with these long running discussions is to go back to page one and see what some of us were saying then. It is surprising for various reasons how much views change over time and as more information becomes available, and who had polished their crystal ball the best.
Yes, a really interesting exercise. My own view shifted considerably as more information became available. My very first post on this thread, on page 1, starts with
I am not concerned
Then a few pages later I get obviously more concerned but still argue against wearing face masks for those "not at risk "
MedEwok wrote on 03 March:
Unless belonging to an at-risk group, there is no need for a face mask, you’re only contributing to their shortage for the professionals if you buy or steal one (the latter is a serious problem in our hospital right now!)
In the same post, I was already raging:
It is sad to see how stupid and vulnerable our societies are.
And listening some facts which later turned out to be untrue, such as
The virus seems to be unable to survive warm temperatures (roughly >27°C) for relevant time periods, meaning the epidemic will most likely end in the summer at the latest
Ultimately, changing one’s opinion as new information becomes available is a sign of maturity, not of inconsistency as esp. politicians are often accused of..
I initially thought the thing would fizzle out, like the rest of them. Probably by June. One doctor working in ICU told me in March it would be hell in April and May and by June it would be all over. The reason it didn’t fizzle out is that it is incredibly infectious.
Peter wrote:
The reason it didn’t fizzle out is that it is incredibly infectious.
Indeed. In hindsight, only completely stopping travel to and from China as early as January might have stopped this from becoming a pandemic. Even then I’m not sure, as we had those studies where the virus was found in the sewage in France and Italy as early as autumn 2019…
Cobalt wrote:
the second “Spanish Flu” wave killed mostly young and healthy people.
is not contradicted by:
Malibuflyer wrote:
mortality for elderly was still higher
because you are comparing deaths per person in the former with deaths per person by age group in the latter.
There were more young and healthy people than elderly people, so if the mortality were the same for both groups the Spanish Flu would have killed more young and healthy people.
You argue that the mortality rate was higher for the elderly, but without knowing the relative sizes of the two age groups we can’t make any conclusion about which group had the largest absolute number of deaths, which is what ‘mostly’ means.
MedEwok wrote:
MedEwok
16-Dec-20 08:51
780Fuji_Abound wrote:
One of the things I find fascinating with these long running discussions is to go back to page one and see what some of us were saying then. It is surprising for various reasons how much views change over time and as more information becomes available, and who had polished their crystal ball the best.Yes, a really interesting exercise. My own view shifted considerably as more information became available. My very first post on this thread, on page 1, starts with
I am not concernedThen a few pages later I get obviously more concerned but still argue against wearing face masks for those "not at risk "
MedEwok wrote on 03 March:
Unless belonging to an at-risk group, there is no need for a face mask, you’re only contributing to their shortage for the professionals if you buy or steal one (the latter is a serious problem in our hospital right now!)In the same post, I was already raging:
It is sad to see how stupid and vulnerable our societies are.And listening some facts which later turned out to be untrue, such as
The virus seems to be unable to survive warm temperatures (roughly >27°C) for relevant time periods, meaning the epidemic will most likely end in the summer at the latestUltimately, changing one’s opinion as new information becomes available is a sign of maturity, not of inconsistency as esp. politicians are often accused of..
I could not agree more with the last sentence. There is a lesson for all of us.
It is interesting I recall well the SARS outbreak in Canada, and the concerns then it would translate into an equivalent pandemic, which it did not. Clearly the margin between these viruses running out of control (and not) is maybe relatively small, and perhaps also part of the reason why politicians were keen not to over react. The problem I suspect is that if you delay at all, then you have probably missed the boat, at least in countries with significant movements of people. However, if you dont delay and are proved wrong, you will be lynched.
I know in WA they say you come to WA to see friends (on the whole). In other words it is so remote they have very little through traffic, or even the wealth of business travelers that we know and love as keeping the first and business classs seats full. In this respect they had a chance of controlling Covid, which they did. It was barely establishing by the time it was out of control in Europe.
I suspect that if we were to have similar warning signs from China in a few years time, we may still be equally too late restricting the spread of the virus. i also suspect the speed with which vaccines could be engineered will not yet have been significantly reduced, so I am not sure the timeline will change significantly, although perhaps, just perhaps we may have gained some experience at checking the rate of growth, and, again perhaps, some of the treatment protocols which may be appropriate to any virus that over activates the immune system and which is perhaps a generic feature of this group of virus may prove equally useful. I have a feeling at the moment however in terms of the economic catastrophy we are positioned to do much better yet.
I’ve reread all my posts in this thread up to mid-May. Slightly surprisingly, I can still stand by everything I’ve written. I guess the reason is that I did very little (if any) speculating, instead referring to facts.
