Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > PPRuNe Social > Jet Blast
Reload this Page >

Coronavirus: The Thread

Jet Blast Topics that don't fit the other forums. Rules of Engagement apply.

Coronavirus: The Thread

Old 9th May 2020, 09:46
  #6401 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,021
Originally Posted by VP959 View Post
I'm pretty sure that comparing one country with another is inherently very deeply flawed. The rate at which this disease spreads depends on the population density to a fair extent; it has to, as it's passed from one person to others via close contact or proximity in the main. Densely packed cities will see a much faster spread of disease than sparsely populated rural areas, just because the probability of anyone being close to someone that's infected is so much higher in cities.

The comparison has been made in this thread before, but it seems pretty clear that, more than any other single factor, it's local population density that seems to be driving the infection rates. I'd hazard a guess that, when we've had a couple of years to analyse what's been happening, with the benefit of studies looking at the distribution of those who have been infected (from antibody testing) it will turn out that many of the measures that have been taken have not had much impact on the rate of spread of infection outside densely populated areas.
Lets test your assertion with a comparison to Hong Kong.

Hong Kong - 17,000 people per square mile, 4 fatalities/ 7 million + population

UK - 671 people per square mile, 31,000+ fatalities/ 66 million + population

currawong is offline  
Old 9th May 2020, 10:01
  #6402 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,021
Originally Posted by ORAC View Post
Who are you going to give the contract too, Serco? Besides the tags work by the tag sending a regular signal to a receiver attached to the wearer's home phone. Not sure how that would work with most visitors - or how it would be quickly installed.

Frankly the imposition of such a quarantine seems more to be pandering to public opinion than scientific analysis and judgement. The majority of those entering the country are UK nationals returning home who will enter the same lockdown as everyone else and the same requirement to self isolate if they develop symptoms or are key workers who have to fly. The biggest risk would be from those who are entering the country and then roaming around such as HGV drivers through ports such as Dover - who reportedly will be exempt.

Good relevant post on another thread on the subject.

14 day quarantine

Given that “key workers” are likely to be exempted and, at the moment, are probably are the overwhelming number of people travelling by air (don’t think there are many holidaymakers), then how does quarantining a small fraction of those on a flight do anything at all?
As you say, it may be a "too hard basket" issue for the UK.

Many of the positive cases recorded in Australia now are those in the mandatory 14 day quarantine. This is at government expense, supervised, in hotels.

Had those individuals gone supermarket shopping on the way home from the airport, we would probably have different numbers.

Other nations are having success with tracking bracelets, others still with phone apps to achieve the same aim.

I would postulate it is less about population density or bad luck and more to do with willpower.
currawong is offline  
Old 9th May 2020, 10:07
  #6403 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Peripatetic
Posts: 10,715
The UK went into lockdown on 24th March, before Hong Kong. By that date COVID was already rife with hundreds of cases countrywide from those returning from ski holidays in Italy.

As has been pointed out epreviously trying to determine why some nations seem to have escaped large scale infections doesn't seem to pinpoint any cause except perhaps luck.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...-and-cannot-do

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COVID-...ong_Kong#March

On 25 March, Hong Kong closed its border to all incoming nonresidents arriving from overseas.

On 25 March, Hong Kong closed its border to all incoming nonresidents arriving from overseas.

On 27 March, Hong Kong Chief Executive Carrie Lam banned indoor and outdoor public gatherings of more than four people.

On 1 April, the Hong Kong government announced the temporary closure of karaoke lounges, nightclubs and
mah-jong premises.

On Friday 3 April at 6 p.m., all pubs and bars across the territory were ordered to close for 14 days.
ORAC is offline  
Old 9th May 2020, 10:14
  #6404 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: West Wiltshire, UK
Age: 67
Posts: 390
Originally Posted by currawong View Post
Lets test your assertion with a comparison to Hong Kong.

Hong Kong - 17,000 people per square mile, 4 fatalities/ 7 million + population

UK - 671 people per square mile, 31,000+ fatalities/ 66 million + population

However, that's ignoring the way Hong Kong implemented the plan they had developed after the SARS outbreak, that seemed to work a lot better during the initial stages of the disease than many other countries reaction to it. The countries that had experienced SARS, and to a lesser extent H1N1 in 2009, seem to have been a lot better prepared than many other countries, including the UK

There seems to have been a very definite impact on spread with those countries that managed to control this disease during the very early stages, before it got established in the population at large. The UK, and many other countries failed to detect early cases and introduce controls at an early stage, so that by the time we imposed lockdown the disease was already running out of control, especially in densely populated areas.

One glance at the regional data for the UK shows just how big an impact population density has though, with the incidence of disease in London (per 100,000 population) being 2.3 times higher than the incidence here in the sparsely South West. Looking at the relative population densities, London is around 5,666 people per km˛, whereas the South West is around 220 people per km˛.

I bet the same tendency to have a higher infection rate in densely populated areas is mirrored in other countries, too. Seems to apply to Australia, for example, with NSW having around 37 cases per 100,000, and the NT having less than 12 cases per 100,000.
VP959 is online now  
Old 9th May 2020, 10:19
  #6405 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: australia
Posts: 90
LOL, You guys should be selling motor cars.
NT is quite different to NSW on why covid went the way it did, but no matter.
golder is offline  
Old 9th May 2020, 10:24
  #6406 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: West Wiltshire, UK
Age: 67
Posts: 390
Originally Posted by golder View Post
LOL, You guys should be selling motor cars.
NT is quite different to NSW on why covid went the way it did, but no matter.

Of course it is, probably for very similar reasons that SW England is way different to London, or Idaho is quite different to New York. In pretty much every infectious disease epedemic/pandemic we've ever seen densely populated areas have had a significantly faster spread of disease than sparsely populated areas.
VP959 is online now  
Old 9th May 2020, 10:31
  #6407 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: australia
Posts: 90
Originally Posted by VP959 View Post
Of course it is, probably for very similar reasons that SW England is way different to London, or Idaho is quite different to New York. In pretty much every infectious disease epedemic/pandemic we've ever seen densely populated areas have had a significantly faster spread of disease than sparsely populated areas.
No it was how many cases they had before they locked it down tight. No one in and no one out. If they had to come in, with permission it was 14 day quarantine, most case came from these. They also tested and traced a lot. They had 0.5% positive rate on testing Check that with UK testing numbers. But don't let me get in the way of your fantasy.

My states testing and tracing only missed 1.6% of where they got it from

Source of infection in confirmed cases of COVID-19 in SA

Source of infection
Overseas acquired 299
Locally acquired (close contact of a confirmed case) 125
Locally acquired (Interstate travel) 6
Locally acquired (contact not identified) 7
Under investigation 2
TOTAL 439

Last edited by golder; 9th May 2020 at 10:50.
golder is offline  
Old 9th May 2020, 10:50
  #6408 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: West Wiltshire, UK
Age: 67
Posts: 390
Originally Posted by golder View Post
No it was how many cases they had before they locked it down tight. No one in and no one out. If they had to come in, with permission it was 14 day quarantine, most case came from these. They also tested and traced a lot. theu had 0.5% positive rate on testing Check that with UK testing numbers. But don't let me get in the way of your fantasy.
It's not "my fantasy" at all, it's a pattern that's repeated all over the world. Pretty much every country has a significantly higher rate of spread of infection is densely populated areas, when compared to their more sparsely populated areas. It only takes ten minutes looking at the data from countries all around the world to show this very clearly.

VP959 is online now  
Old 9th May 2020, 11:01
  #6409 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,021
VP959 writes -

"However, that's ignoring the way Hong Kong implemented the plan they had developed after the SARS outbreak, that seemed to work a lot better during the initial stages of the disease than many other countries reaction to it. The countries that had experienced SARS, and to a lesser extent H1N1 in 2009, seem to have been a lot better prepared than many other countries, including the UK"

Like I said, willpower.

Out of curiosity, where are the transmissions coming from in the UK now, given it is "locked down"?
currawong is offline  
Old 9th May 2020, 11:16
  #6410 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: West Wiltshire, UK
Age: 67
Posts: 390
Originally Posted by currawong View Post
VP959 writes -

"However, that's ignoring the way Hong Kong implemented the plan they had developed after the SARS outbreak, that seemed to work a lot better during the initial stages of the disease than many other countries reaction to it. The countries that had experienced SARS, and to a lesser extent H1N1 in 2009, seem to have been a lot better prepared than many other countries, including the UK"

Like I said, willpower.

Out of curiosity, where are the transmissions coming from in the UK now, given it is "locked down"?
Indeed, very much will power, plus, I think, a degree of cultural acceptance of responding more reasonably when being told what to do, perhaps because they had seen what SARS could do, and may well have feared that this might be similar.

It seems that we may have an increasing problem in hospitals and care homes, I think. Both patients/residents and staff seem to be getting infected, which I guess isn't surprising. There have been suggestions that some poor decisions have been made, for example, transferring patients with mild disease from hospitals to care homes, risking a spread of infection from them to others. Much of this seems to be anecdotal, though, as we still don't seem to have very reliable data on what's really going on within those environments.

There's lots of complaints about testing of care home staff, but given that staff testing would need to be very frequent to have any really useful effect, with results being provided quickly after testing, I'm not sure that the apparent lack of testing is really the main reason for this. Staff, who often seem to move around a fair bit, would need to be tested maybe once or twice every day, with results being available within hours, to try to to isolate any one of them that becomes infected, before they have a chance to spread the disease, plus there would still remain the chance that uninfected staff could inadvertently spread it.
VP959 is online now  
Old 9th May 2020, 11:23
  #6411 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: australia
Posts: 90
Originally Posted by VP959 View Post
It's not "my fantasy" at all, it's a pattern that's repeated all over the world. Pretty much every country has a significantly higher rate of spread of infection is densely populated areas, when compared to their more sparsely populated areas. It only takes ten minutes looking at the data from countries all around the world to show this very clearly.
No, it starts at a transport hub, normally a major city. Then it spreads from there. The busier the hub, the sooner it started. We got our first positive case before the UK, go figure. I wonder what would have happened, if the UK followed australia in prevention?
golder is offline  
Old 9th May 2020, 11:29
  #6412 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: West Wiltshire, UK
Age: 67
Posts: 390
Originally Posted by golder View Post
No, it starts at a transport hub, normally a major city. Then it spreads from there. The busier the hub, the sooner it started. We got our first case before the UK, go figure.
I agree, but it seems very clear from the data that the infection rate in densely populated areas is a great deal faster than it is in sparsely populated areas. This seems pretty obvious - wherever people are packed more closely together infection is likely to spread more rapidly. It's a principle that has been known since long before this pandemic, and applies to all infections diseases where the spread is from an airborne pathogen. It's such a well-established principle that we've been using it to reduce the spread of infectious disease since long before we had drugs and vaccination.
VP959 is online now  
Old 9th May 2020, 11:55
  #6413 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,021
Originally Posted by VP959 View Post
I agree, but it seems very clear from the data that the infection rate in densely populated areas is a great deal faster than it is in sparsely populated areas. This seems pretty obvious - wherever people are packed more closely together infection is likely to spread more rapidly. It's a principle that has been known since long before this pandemic, and applies to all infections diseases where the spread is from an airborne pathogen. It's such a well-established principle that we've been using it to reduce the spread of infectious disease since long before we had drugs and vaccination.
Absolutely.

Quarantine is also a well established principle.

Not that long ago we were doing it for mumps, measles, you name it.

The time to act throughout this thing has generally been two weeks prior, such is the mobility of the contagion and ourselves.



currawong is offline  
Old 9th May 2020, 12:04
  #6414 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: australia
Posts: 90
Originally Posted by VP959 View Post
I agree, but it seems very clear from the data that the infection rate in densely populated areas is a great deal faster than it is in sparsely populated areas. This seems pretty obvious - wherever people are packed more closely together infection is likely to spread more rapidly. It's a principle that has been known since long before this pandemic, and applies to all infections diseases where the spread is from an airborne pathogen. It's such a well-established principle that we've been using it to reduce the spread of infectious disease since long before we had drugs and vaccination.
Yet every corner, the whole of the UK and australia gets the flu. That is a less contagious base RO than covid. There is no where it won't get to in time. Time to travel is the difference, unless something stops it. Wishes and prayers may not work.
golder is offline  
Old 9th May 2020, 12:23
  #6415 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: West Wiltshire, UK
Age: 67
Posts: 390
Originally Posted by golder View Post
Yet every corner, the whole of the UK and australia gets the flu. That is a less contagious base RO than covid. There is no where it won't get to in time. Time to travel is the difference, unless something stops it. Wishes and prayers may not work.
However, we're talking about the rate of infection, and the fact that this is faster in densely populated areas than it is in sparsely populated areas. Ultimately most infectious diseases end up being pretty much everywhere eventually, but at any instant during the active spread of disease phase there will always be a pattern, that follows well-understood principles that define how quickly infection spreads. Not sure why this seems so hard a thing to grasp, as it seems pretty intuitive. One case in somewhere like London is very likely to cause a larger number of subsequent cases in a given time period as one case in somewhere like the middle of Dartmoor, simply because more people are likely to be exposed to each case.

It's easy enough to show this by just looking at the impact of changing R is (R being dependent on population density, as well as other factors). For 5 generations of infection from a single case (roughly 20 to 25 days), with R at 3 there would be around 243 cases. If R reduces to 2, because people are more spread out within a population, then after 5 generations from a single case there would be around 32 cases, a significant difference.

The whole principle behind social distancing is to spread people out, so the risk of infection reduces, which is reflected in a reduction in R, the effective reproduction number. It doesn't matter whether social distancing is an enforced measure, or a natural one as a consequence of population density, it has the same impact on reducing R.
VP959 is online now  
Old 9th May 2020, 12:25
  #6416 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: australia
Posts: 90
It's not rocket science. Taiwan, HK and South Korea, Thailand and Malaysia have played this game before with recent virulent viruses. They knew what to do and they did it.
​​​​​​​

Last edited by golder; 9th May 2020 at 13:08.
golder is offline  
Old 9th May 2020, 12:52
  #6417 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Ilmington, Warwickshire
Posts: 1
Mrs BBE received an email yesterday from the Covid 19 Symptom tracker inviting her in for a test following her reporting her Covid toes. She attended the local drive through centre today although I suspect the results will possibly be negative as she has had the symptoms for at least 4 weeks and an antibody test would probably be more revealing.
BehindBlueEyes is offline  
Old 9th May 2020, 13:07
  #6418 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Balikpapan, INDONESIA
Age: 68
Posts: 536
Originally Posted by VP959 View Post
I agree, but it seems very clear from the data that the infection rate in densely populated areas is a great deal faster than it is in sparsely populated areas. This seems pretty obvious - wherever people are packed more closely together infection is likely to spread more rapidly. It's a principle that has been known since long before this pandemic, and applies to all infections diseases where the spread is from an airborne pathogen. It's such a well-established principle that we've been using it to reduce the spread of infectious disease since long before we had drugs and vaccination.
The rate in NSW as compared to the NT is due to a combination of factors, one of which would be population density.
But the most significant being that the NT didn't let a boat-load of infected and infectious tour-boaters go roaming uncontrolled amongst the population as NSW did.
Don't just look at the graphs. The devil is in the details.
WingNut60 is offline  
Old 9th May 2020, 13:09
  #6419 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Balikpapan, INDONESIA
Age: 68
Posts: 536
Originally Posted by BehindBlueEyes View Post
Mrs BBE received an email yesterday from the Covid 19 Symptom tracker inviting her in for a test following her reporting her Covid toes. She attended the local drive through centre today although I suspect the results will possibly be negative as she has had the symptoms for at least 4 weeks and an antibody test would probably be more revealing.
The first image that came to mind just then was of Mrs BBE with her toes poked out through the car side window.
WingNut60 is offline  
Old 9th May 2020, 13:18
  #6420 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Peripatetic
Posts: 10,715
That’ll nail it.....
ORAC is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.