COVID-19 could affect more races this year.

[Phil]

People are rubbish at understanding risk and likelihoods etc. They face bigger risks every day than they do from COVID-19. That's the reality of it.

Alright; Can you make a risk assessment for me? I'm 36, in a good health, sporty, but have asthma. I drive every day to work and do about 40'000km per year and have been doing so, for the last 17 years. What are my risks and survival odds, considering "only 1.3million" die a year?

Your risk from COVID-19 will be higher than otherwise similar groups in your area who don't have asthma because you have a relevant underlying health issue. Your risk from driving will be greater than the majority in your area because you do more driving than the majority.

My risk from COVID-19 is higher than some because I have hypertension and this is a risk factor in severity. My risk from driving is higher than the majority because, like you, I do a higher than usual annual mileage. Do I consider COVID-19 to be a greater risk to me than being hit by a truck driven by a tired, likely-foreign, driver who is lost and using his phone to get directions whilst driving? No, I don't think it is.

Your risk from worrying yourself to death? It's higher than it was a month ago I'd suggest.

To be frank and completely honest, my "worry" is not in regard to myself, but people around me who are close and most probably at a higher risk than I am. This isn't entirely relevant to this discussion though.

I'd be interested in actual numbers though. It's easy to say "greater" risk to die of COVID-19. I know that already without having to crunch the actual numbers. It'd be interesting however to actually do the math. If you won't, I will (if I have the time). Just to put the discussion and claims into proper context. I feel we are witnessing an unprecedented situation that is new for everyone. In some places we are in the midst of it, some of you might not be, but will and some of you might be lucky and avoid it all.

[Just_a_fan]

Would Govts of the world be less worried about COVID-19 if the Spanish Flu pandemic of 1918-20 hadn't happened?

Would Govts of the world have reacted as they have if coronavirus had quietly slipped out of Wuhan province?

Is the similarity between COVID-19 and SARS the real worry for Govts? SARS had a high mortality rate - up around 10%. MERS, of course, was much higher at about 33%.

[adrianjordan]

People are rubbish at understanding risk and likelihoods etc. They face bigger risks every day than they do from COVID-19. That's the reality of it.

Alright; Can you make a risk assessment for me? I'm 36, in a good health, sporty, but have asthma. I drive every day to work and do about 40'000km per year and have been doing so, for the last 17 years. What are my risks and survival odds, considering "only 1.3million" die a year?

Given you are talking about "bigger risks" and seem to be good at numbers, I look forward to your assessment.

While you're at it, make sure to consider how many kms are driven every year by how many people to put that 1.3 million figure into the proper context. And don't forget to exclude the numbers from certain countries that have a multitude more fatal accidents due to higher density, less road and safety regulations, older and less safe vehicles. Then compare it to the large spike of corona cases, the very real possibility that health systems are/will be overloaded (yes, in the country where I am) and therefore will influence (increase) the death rate. For the fun of it, assume I live in Italy, where the CFR is 6.7% (measured against positive confirmed cases).

The reason Italy has such a high fatality rate is that, particularly Northern Italy, has a higher than average density of older people and those over 50 are significantly more at risk than those under 50. They also have higher smoking rates than many other countries - another significant risk factor.

So assuming you don't smoke and as you are in yours 30's, you're risk would be lower than the average in Italy. However your asthma puts you more at risk than someone in your age group who doesn't have it.

If you take sensible measures, wash hands and apply some sensible social distancing then you can significantly reduce that risk.

[nzjrs]

The reason Italy has such a high fatality rate is that, particularly Northern Italy, has a higher than average density of older people and those over 50 are significantly more at risk than those under 50. They also have higher smoking rates than many other countries - another significant risk factor.

I think it's reasonably well established that an equally large cause of the large number of deaths in Italy was that the health system was/is overwhelmed with people needing critical care. As you say, they likely needed more critical care than average because of contributing factors you list. The health of a person and demography of Italy are 'in the hands of god', however what is in the 'hands of man' was slowing the wave to some degree, which Italy didn't do well at the start.

[godlameroso]

It's not a fun disease to have, albeit it's deadliness is overblown as far as I'm concerned. I think the media has made it seem worse than it actually is. 2-4 weeks to recover fully. I'm on day 15 and am pretty much back to normal. I have 9% body fat and train like an athlete, I am 38 years old. YMMV.

Critical care = getting asthma medication. If you smoke, now's a great time to quit.

Develop a taste for raw garlic, it's a great anti-viral.

[Phil]

The reason Italy has such a high fatality rate is that, particularly Northern Italy, has a higher than average density of older people and those over 50 are significantly more at risk than those under 50. They also have higher smoking rates than many other countries - another significant risk factor.

There are many factors. Including those that you mentioned, there's also the point that health institutes are overwhelmed and people who could be helped, can't be helped. This is a situation every directly affected country with high number of cases is or will be facing.

Every country has it's own share of "logical reasons" for high fatality rate. I can already say now that in *my* country (Switzerland), I fully expect large number of infections due to the fact that we have high density population, lots of people who rely on public transportation (close proximity to one another) and the belief by many people that "it's just another flu and more people die of that so what's the big deal"... a bit to the tone you posted earlier a week ago.

Adding to that, in my opinion, governments are reacting way to slow to what's happening. Despite the measures many are taking today, the effects of those measures will only be seen in 10+ days (due to incubation period).

[adrianjordan]

Would Govts of the world be less worried about COVID-19 if the Spanish Flu pandemic of 1918-20 hadn't happened?

Would Govts of the world have reacted as they have if coronavirus had quietly slipped out of Wuhan province?

Is the similarity between COVID-19 and SARS the real worry for Govts? SARS had a high mortality rate - up around 10%. MERS, of course, was much higher at about 33%.

I may be showing my cynical side here, but I suspect the governments of the world would be less worried if we didn't have social media spreading so much hysteria and the mass media feeding that hysteria. After all, in most countries they want to keep getting elected and so are reacting as the public demands to some extent.

I'm actually in favour of the British government approach of allowing some spread to help develop herd immunity and focusing efforts on slowing the spread and protecting at risk groups to limit mortality.

The problem with the China and Italy models is that you don't build immunity and can see a secondary spread when everyone comes out of isolation and there is still a small number of carriers there.

[godlameroso]

The reason Italy has such a high fatality rate is that, particularly Northern Italy, has a higher than average density of older people and those over 50 are significantly more at risk than those under 50. They also have higher smoking rates than many other countries - another significant risk factor.

There are many factors. Including those that you mentioned, there's also the point that health institutes are overwhelmed and people who could be helped, can't be helped. This is a situation every directly affected country with high number of cases is or will be facing.

Every country has it's own share of "logical reasons" for high fatality rate. I can already say now that in *my* country (Switzerland), I fully expect large number of infections due to the fact that we have high density population, lots of people who rely on public transportation (close proximity to one another) and the belief by many people that "it's just another flu and more people die of that so what's the big deal"... a bit to the tone you posted earlier a week ago.

Adding to that, in my opinion, governments are reacting way to slow to what's happening. Despite the measures many are taking today, the effects of those measures will only be seen in 10+ days (due to incubation period).

Incubation period is 4-10 days, 10 days being typical upper limit of symptoms manifesting themselves. You can be completely asymptomatic and still spread it. I believe there are FAR more people infected than we know of.

[adrianjordan]

It's not a fun disease to have, albeit it's deadliness is overblown as far as I'm concerned. I think the media has made it seem worse than it actually is. 2-4 weeks to recover fully. I'm on day 15 and am pretty much back to normal. I have 9% body fat and train like an athlete, I am 38 years old. YMMV.

Critical care = getting asthma medication. If you smoke, now's a great time to quit.

Develop a taste for raw garlic, it's a great anti-viral.

Critical care is far more intensive than needing salbutamol. It's needing constant salbutamol, oxygen, possibly CPAP and either antivirals or antibiotics depending on whether it's the virus or a secondary pneumonia.

[Just_a_fan]

To be frank and completely honest, my "worry" is not in regard to myself, but people around me who are close and most probably at a higher risk than I am. This isn't entirely relevant to this discussion though.

Likewise, the worry is about those in the "at risk" groups. Sadly, the "not really at risk" groups are the one panic-buying etc.
My slightly flippant earlier comments were an attempt to show that for most of the population, being sensible is all that is required to look after themselves and their loved ones. Irrational responses aren't going to be helpful.

I'd be interested in actual numbers though. It's easy to say "greater" risk to die of COVID-19. I know that already without having to crunch the actual numbers. It'd be interesting however to actually do the math. If you won't, I will (if I have the time). Just to put the discussion and claims into proper context. I feel we are witnessing an unprecedented situation that is new for everyone. In some places we are in the midst of it, some of you might not be, but will and some of you might be lucky and avoid it all.

I found this page with some death rates associated with age, sex, underlying conditions. Might be of interest:
https://www.worldometers.info/coronavir ... ographics/

I think the worry is because it's a new illness that we haven't yet had a chance to build herd immunity to. A bit like the Spanish Flu outbreak after WW1. I'm sure we won't have that type of outcome, however, because our medical systems are much better today than they were 100 years ago, obviously.

To quote the old World War 2 message: Keep calm and carry on.

[Phil]

Incubation period is 4-10 days, 10 days being typical upper limit of symptoms manifesting themselves. You can be completely asymptomatic and still spread it. I believe there are FAR more people infected than we know of.

To clarify: incubation period + getting checked + getting result = ~10+ days.

It takes time for symptoms to come, it takes time for people to draw the conclusion and get a check (and be allowed to get it checked), and then it will take time to actually get a result. Here in Switzerland, it's around 2 days AFAIK. Add that up and you're up to 10 days.

So in other words, the numbers that are out now are at best a reflection of what was 10 days ago. Measures taken today will take around that time to show an effect.

[Just_a_fan]

I have 9% body fat

I think I've got the rest of your share here...

[godlameroso]

It's not a fun disease to have, albeit it's deadliness is overblown as far as I'm concerned. I think the media has made it seem worse than it actually is. 2-4 weeks to recover fully. I'm on day 15 and am pretty much back to normal. I have 9% body fat and train like an athlete, I am 38 years old. YMMV.

Critical care = getting asthma medication. If you smoke, now's a great time to quit.

Develop a taste for raw garlic, it's a great anti-viral.

Critical care is far more intensive than needing salbutamol. It's needing constant salbutamol, oxygen, possibly CPAP and either antivirals or antibiotics depending on whether it's the virus or a secondary pneumonia.

That's just it, the virus itself isn't what causes complications it's the pneumonia part. Needing such intensive care isn't common. I was prescribed anti-biotics and am taking them just for precaution, as well as an asthma inhaler which I never used.

[godlameroso]

Incubation period is 4-10 days, 10 days being typical upper limit of symptoms manifesting themselves. You can be completely asymptomatic and still spread it. I believe there are FAR more people infected than we know of.

To clarify: incubation period + getting checked + getting result = ~10+ days.

It takes time for symptoms to come, it takes time for people to draw the conclusion and get a check (and be allowed to get it checked), and then it will take time to actually get a result. Here in Switzerland, it's around 2 days AFAIK. Add that up and you're up to 10 days.

So in other words, the numbers that are out now are at best a reflection of what was 10 days ago. Measures taken today will take around that time to show an effect.

And that's only for people who show symptoms, if you don't have any symptoms at all and are a carrier, you are essentially slipping through the cracks.

[adrianjordan]

The reason Italy has such a high fatality rate is that, particularly Northern Italy, has a higher than average density of older people and those over 50 are significantly more at risk than those under 50. They also have higher smoking rates than many other countries - another significant risk factor.

There are many factors. Including those that you mentioned, there's also the point that health institutes are overwhelmed and people who could be helped, can't be helped. This is a situation every directly affected country with high number of cases is or will be facing.

Every country has it's own share of "logical reasons" for high fatality rate. I can already say now that in *my* country (Switzerland), I fully expect large number of infections due to the fact that we have high density population, lots of people who rely on public transportation (close proximity to one another) and the belief by many people that "it's just another flu and more people die of that so what's the big deal"... a bit to the tone you posted earlier a week ago.

Adding to that, in my opinion, governments are reacting way to slow to what's happening. Despite the measures many are taking today, the effects of those measures will only be seen in 10+ days (due to incubation period).

I never said it was "just another flu" because it is not an influenza strain. I'm actually getting very wound up by people calling it anything other than it is.

However I stand by my argument that for the vast majority of people it is no more serious than a heavy cold or mild flu.

The latest theory developing seems to be that it has actually been in circulation for a month or two longer than we have realised - that is the basis for the statement Boris Johnson released yesterday that there could already be as many as 10,000 cases in the UK.