But bearing in mind that the 2-3% is in all likelihood a huge over-estimation, all this logic is out the window.I think the issue is exactly that it's not as deadly as SARS, for example, so that makes it much harder to contain from an epidemiology standpoint. A disease with acute symptoms is less likely to travel under the radar and therefore escape containment. So although 2-3% mortality rate doesn't seem like much (especially to someone who's not in the riskiest part of the population), it's orders of magnitude more than the usual 0.1% mortality rate of the flu. That is all compounded by the novelty of it, meaning that it hasn't been studied enough to be totally understood, although the earlier cases and recoveries are giving a better picture of the medium-term consequences (which so far seem to be like getting over a flu) at least.
The combination of a virus that is very contagious, not deadly enough to be treated as a concern by many people who may be carriers, but deadly enough to be 20-500x more deadly than a regular flu, is a pretty scary thing, especially if your goal is to protect the most vulnerable members of society from death. So although I'm not personally worried about the potential health consequences, I get why it's being treated seriously.
I understand why you think 2-3% is a huge over-estimation (under-reporting of positives). However you should also consider that the 2-3% rate as percentage of positives is a big under-estimation because it assumes that all current cases will survive. If you look at the number of closed cases (positives who have either died or are known to have recovered) then it's more like 7-8%. Overall the data is unreliable for many reasons.But bearing in mind that the 2-3% is in all likelihood a huge over-estimation, all this logic is out the window.
Cancelling races because two helpers from a team have a fever is ridiculous.
Yes, I know, but that proportion is likely to be much smaller than the non-hospitalised one.I understand why you think 2-3% is a huge over-estimation (under-reporting of positives). However you should also consider that the 2-3% rate as percentage of positives is a big under-estimation because it assumes that all current cases will survive. If you look at the number of closed cases (positives who have either died or are known to have recovered) then it's more like 7-8%. Overall the data is unreliable for many reasons.
The latest news is that there are no positives so far, none, not even the two UAE staff, who appear to have flu/cold.Gotta say that Hello Dolly's post is 100% in alignment with my views - Will add two things - Some races could be cancelled because of rider availability - For example some UAE, FDJ and Bahrain riders/staff will be out for 14 days and the teams may extend that period which will impact races in March - Second why is Het organisers having public press conferences after what happened yesterday in the UAE tour - It is bewildering.
Vegni is also over there. Maybe the can keep him a bit longer and we get a Zomegnan comeback.De Ronde van de Verenigde Arabische Emiraten is gestaakt nadat twee stafleden van een Italiaanse ploeg besmet bleken met coronavirus. Jumbo-ploegleider Grischa Niermann schetst de sfeer.nos.nl
Whether the corona infection turns out to be real or not, Grischa niermann here says that the entire committee organizing San Remo and Strade is there in the quarantine. If they can't fly home sunday they will definitely be cancelled because of it!
Cause italian press is a world leader in overreaction))That's really strange. On the facebook page there is the official statement that two italian staff members tested positive for the coronavirus. How can they say without a positive test? That would be just plain panic.
Really poor public health methodology to release news that 187 tests from UAE tour came back negative (which is, of course, the CN headline), while still waiting for the remainder of results which they think will be available in just a few hours. Just frickin' wait till you have all the results so folks get an accurate picture of the outcome! The overzealous response to some aspects of COVID-19 is not just the result of the news media, but also government spokespeople in these countries.
Certain the 167 negative results were from the teams who are in one hotel. Teams are in one hotel and the remaining test results will be for journalists and organisers who are in a different hotel - Seems like teams can go homa as planned on Sunday - The important aspect is that 167 from the peleton have been tested which is a baseline for the future.
Wow, what a weird response. No, what I was trying to say is that you only wait a few more hours to get the rest of the results (as stated in the article) it’s always better to provide complete results rather than partial results. Although, as the posters above suggested, perhaps it’s because they are releasing the rider’s dataset first, which I can understand.It seems to me that you are disappointed that they came back negative and the suffering to riders and staff hasn't happened. Just remember that Armstrong passed many tests so the illnesses you crave may still appear.
It seems to have worked very well in China, where cases have been increasing at a rate of less than 1% per day for two weeks.I dont think total lock down is an option anywhere
Yes, but that's because there's a lag in the people who are infected but haven't yet recovered. A couple of weeks ago, the fraction of closed cases that ended in death was about 12%. It's been steadily dropping since, as more people recover. A study in China (see below) found that about 80% of cases were mild, 15% severe, and 5% critical. Only people classified as critical died, about half of them. I don't k ow how long after infection in a critical case an individual typically lives before succumbing, but recovery, as technically classified I believe as two negative tests, may take considerable time, even for someone who rather quickly feels fully health.If you look at the number of closed cases (positives who have either died or are known to have recovered) then it's more like 7-8%.
A study of about 45,000 confirmed cases in China found that people over 80 had a 15% death rate, while those 70-79 had an 8% rate. Younger people had less than an 0.2% rate. But no information on the health problems the older people may have had or not had.I've read about three fatal cases. All in their 70s.
I'm no medical expert but wouldn't you expect the average 75 year olds to survive a regular influenza?
If we are talking about very old people in their late 80's and up, it's another matter.
Who are those teams? We know of UAE and Bharain but who is the third one?View: https://twitter.com/stefanorizzato/status/1233847255368687616?s=19
Stefano Rizzato reports 3 teams won't be allowed to leave UAE cause there are indeed confirmed cases of COVID-19.