Originally Posted by
slats11 [img]images/buttons/viewpost.gif[/img]
The basic reproduction number (R0) is the reproduction number
when there is no immunity from past exposures or vaccination, nor any deliberate intervention in disease transmission.
Yeah, thanks, you're telling me nothing about R0 I don't already know.
I suspect that you are well informed about R and R0. But my point was that other readers may be falsely reassured by the fact measles is not out of control despite its R0 of 14, and the explanation for this is immunisation.
Originally Posted by
slats11 [img]images/buttons/viewpost.gif[/img]
That is a disaster with no immunity, and a vaccine perhaps 12 months away.
No, it is not a disaster because immunity and vaccines are not the only method of containing or curtailing the spread of a disease.
OK. Lets revisit this debate in a week
SARS was contained through the deployment of basic infection control practices.
Sure. But that hasn't worked this time has it?
2019-nCoV has already infected far more people in a little over a month than did SARS in 7 months.
Cities were not locked down and borders closed for SARS.
In
the city of Huanggang, people are housebound and 1 family member is allowed outside even 2nd day to get necessities. That didn't happen with SARS.
But if it makes you happier to say it is SARS...... then that's fine.
I don't which people remember SARS having a mortality rate of 12%?! There were 8,098 recorded cases resulting in 774 deaths for a mortality rate of 9.55%, or at least that's the I remember it.
Estimates of SARS death rates revised upward | CIDRAP
May 7, 2003 (CIDRAP News) – The World Health Organization (WHO) today estimated the overall fatality rate for SARS (severe acute respiratory syndrome) patients at 14% to 15%, significantly higher than previous estimates. The agency estimated the rate for people older than 64 years to be more than 50%.
In the early stages of the SARS epidemic, health officials estimated the mortality rate at less than 4%. More recently, officials have cited rates in the 6% to 7% range. Today's SARS figures from the WHO—6,903 cumulative cases and 495 deaths—point to a case-fatality ratio of 7.2%. But WHO officials note that this calculation underestimates the rate, since some currently ill patients will die of the disease.
WHO officials observed that calculating the case-fatality ratio for a disease outbreak is difficult while the outbreak is still evolving. The true ratio cannot be determined until the outbreak is over, when the total numbers of deaths and recoveries are known.
The point is the mortality rate appears to increases over time due to the lag between getting sick and dying.
The final SARS mortality is still disputed due to concerns about the completeness of the mainland Chinese dataset. Maybe it was 10%, maybe 12, maybe 14. It was almost certainly between the range of 10-14% anyway.
MERS was accepted to be 35%
This is the 3rd recent coronavirus outbreak. To accept the current 2% figure is very optimistic. Especially when the data from Wuhan (where the epidemic has been unfolding longer) suggests a mortality of 5.5% (and this too will go up).
Do you understand what an 'order of magnitude' is?
Umm, do you add a zero? Is that right?
So MERS was perhaps 2,494 (858 deaths, fatality 35%)
It is estimated that the number of infected in Wuhan alone could be greater than 75,000. That was the calculation on Tuesday - with continued exponential growth in the 4 days since then.
https://www.scmp.com/news/china/arti...hubei-province
Thats just Wuhan city. What about the rest of the province? What about the rest of China?
You realise they have run out of test kits in Wuhan
You realise Indonesia doesn't have a reported case - because it currently has no testing.
So Mick, by what order of magnitude do you believe 2019-nCoV exceeds MERS? Because I suspect it is close to 2.