But is it really no worse than flu?

By Christopher Monckton of Brenchley

Some commenters responding to this daily series providing some information about the Chinese virus have repeated what seems to have become something of a mantra among libertarians who, understandably, dislike the idea of widespread lockdowns, with the loss of freedom and the economic damage that they entail. That mantra is that the Chinese virus is no more infections or no more fatal than flu, and that if we had allowed everyone to acquire immunity by catching the infection and throwing it off all would be well.

Look at today’s graph. Though the downtrend in the daily compound growth rate in total confirmed cases now appears well established, that growth rate is still very high, averaging around 8% globally outside China and occupied Tibet, where the numbers are unreliable.

Fig. 1. Mean compound daily growth rates in confirmed cases of COVID-19 infection for the world excluding China (red) and for several individual nations averaged over the successive seven-day periods ending on all dates from March 14 to April 7, 2020.

Fig. 1. Mean compound daily growth rates in confirmed cases of COVID-19 infection for the world excluding China (red) and for several individual nations averaged over the successive seven-day periods ending on all dates from March 14 to April 7, 2020.

The red curve shows the case growth rate for the world excluding China. If the 8% daily growth rate were to continue, yesterday’s 1,430,919 confirmed cases (many of which tend to be those serious enough to have come to the authorities’ attention, since testing is still occurring on a tiny scale in most countries) would have risen to nearly 8 million by the end of April, and more than 80 million by the end of May.

It is important, therefore, to ensure that the now well established downtrend is maintained. That is why, for the time being, governments will be keeping lockdowns in place. It would be irresponsible to do otherwise.

Of course, one might legitimately argue that, if the Chinese virus were really no worse than flu, the crippling social and economic cost of lockdowns would be unjustifiable.

Fig. 2. Monckton’s outdoor personal protective equipment

Fig. 2. Monckton’s outdoor personal protective equipment

But governments cannot afford to make policy on the assumption, perhaps a little too carelessly made by some commenters here, that the virus is no more dangerous and no more infectious than flu.

Here, then, to help us to begin to answer that important question, are some tolerably reliable, real-world data. I am grateful to the Intensive Care National Audit and Research Center in London for having made details from its Case Mix Programme Database available. The Case Mix Programme is the national clinical audit of patient outcomes from adult critical care.

The Center has recently issued a report on all confirmed UK cases reported to it up to midday on 3 April, just a few days ago. Critical care units notify the Center as soon as they have admitted any patient with confirmed Chinese virus, together with demographics, initial physiological state, organ support and eventual outcome.

The report concerns 2249 patients, whose mean age at admission was 60 years, compared with 58 years for 4759 patients with non-COVID-19 viral pneumonia, most of them caused by flu, over the three complete years 2017-2019.

Of the 2249 patients, 346 (15%) have died, 344 (15%) have been discharged alive, and 1559 (69%) are still in critical care. The case fatality rate, as a fraction of all closed cases admitted to intensive care, is thus a little over 50%, compared with only 22% for the non-COVID viral pneumonias of the past three years. In each age-group (under 50, 50-69 and 70+), the percentage of patients admitted to critical care with the Chinese virus and subsequently dying in hospital is at least twice the percentage of critical-care patients with other viral pneumonias over the previous three years.

Among those requiring ventilation, two-thirds die by the end of their critical care and only one-third survive. Therefore, the case fatality rate for closed cases where ventilation was required is more than 67%, compared with only 16% for non-COVID viral pneumonia cases requiring ventilation.

Worse, advanced respiratory support for Chinese-virus cases is typically maintained for between 4 and 9 days (average 6 days), while it is not needed at all in non-COVID-19 viral-pneumonia cases, which require only basic respiratory support, and require it only for 2-4 days (average 3 days). The data are similar for cardiovascular support, and for renal support. The Chinese-virus cases tend to require advanced rather than basic support, and to require it for twice as long. And yet, even after all that extra care, the case fatality rate is many times higher than for non-COVID viral pneumonias.

On the assumption that about half of all this year’s critical cases of seasonal viral pneumonia would have occurred by now, and making no allowance for any further exponential growth in Chinese-virus cases in intensive care, and assuming that the summer will stop the virus causing critical cases (an assumption that the authorities, rightly, do not regard themselves as being in any position to make yet), there are approximately three times as many serious Chinese-virus cases than all other viral pneumonias combined, including those caused by flu, in a typical year, and at least twice as many of these will die than with other serious viral pneumonia cases.

Thus, the Chinese virus is six times more fatal than pre-existing viral pneumonias, including those caused by flu.

In the past three years, some 46% of viral-pneumonia cases were female and 54% male. With the Chinese virus, however, only 27% are female and 63% are male.

The report also considers ethnicity. About four-fifths of the UK population is White, but only two-thirds of the critical cases to date are Whites. Blacks, in particular, are three times over-represented in intensive care: they represent one case in seven, but are only one in 20 of the population.

Body mass index was also studied, but the number of cases in the below-normal, normal, overweight, obese and morbidly obese categories is not far out of line with the general population, two-thirds of whom are overweight or obese. Some 72% of intensive-care Chinese-virus cases are overweight or obese.

Interestingly, the number of cases with cardiovascular, respiratory, renal, hepatic, cancerous or immunocompromised comorbidities was quite small. In all these categories, it was less than for the usual viral pneumonias over the past three years.

In the past three years, non-COVID viral pneumonias have put 43% of patients on to ventilators within the first 24 hours. The Chinese virus, however, is worse: it puts 63% on to ventilators within the first 24 hours. Therefore, governments planning hospital capacity for Chinese-virus cases must make extra allowance for the greater demands, both in advanced rather than basic care and in days of treatment, than other viral-pneumonia cases.

The doctor through whom I came upon these figures, who has himself suffered with the Chinese virus and has recovered, is very angry that for political reasons those who understandably dislike lockdowns have been maintaining, contrary to the evidence, that the Chinese virus is “no worse than flu”.

Be in no doubt. This disease is a lot worse than flu. It puts more people into intensive care, where they require costlier and more advanced treatment, where they will be in intensive care for twice the time required by other viral pneumonia-patients, and where they are more than twice as likely to die as those other patients.

So don’t dismiss it lightly. Not any more. Wash hands often. Wear full-face masks when out of doors or away from home. Take Vitamin D3 daily. Be safe.

527 thoughts on “But is it really no worse than flu?

      • We are still waiting to hear from Vuk how we should interpret his “hospital mortality” ratio. Calling it a mortality implies we should automatically regard it as bad , despite the fact it’s rise is simply the result of dividing two exponentials. Is this increase worrying just normal evolution of the epidemic?

        Would an up up turn be good , because it means the case growth rate is starting to break.

        For the nth time: it makes no sense to plot something unless it means something to us .

        The deceitful Monckton keeps pumping his worthless graph which simply blurs what data is available. He insists in claiming the fall is direct proof that confinement works, rather than the reality that this just reflects the normal rounding off of the log plot of any epidemic without govt. intervention.

        It is important, therefore, to ensure that the now well established downtrend is maintained. That is why, for the time being, governments will be keeping lockdowns in place. It would be irresponsible to do otherwise.

        French data does not show the downturn is related to confinement:
        https://climategrog.files.wordpress.com/2020/04/2019-ncov-log-fit-france.png

        Itally has almost halved both cases and deaths in the last 2 weeks, however, CofB has now avoided six requests to point out where the “blindingly obvious” effect of confinement measures is visible in the italiian data:
        https://climategrog.files.wordpress.com/2020/04/2019-ncov-log-growth-italy-2.png

        That is just a perfectly normal evolution of an epidemic.

        If the 8% daily growth rate were to continue

        Firstly the idea of averaging several distinct populations at different stages of an epidemic and pretending that can be characterised by a simple exponential is BS and he knows it. Even worse pretending that such an exponential growth would continue indefinitely is also NOT what anyone who understands the slightest thing about epidemics would suggest. He’s read enough to know that so it yet more deceitful BS.

        Doubtless, like 97% of climatologists , he is so convinced that his initial assumptions are correct he feels entitled to twist the data, publish misleading analyses to convince those lesser beings who inhabit the world outside his mansion they must stay locked inside.

        Why does WUWT keep allowing him this daily slot to promote his Mannian graphs and unscientific claims without addressing this obvious problem that his claims are baseless?

          • You’re welcome. The only kink in the italian data is at the peak, that was well after the shutdown + 5 days incubation. The curve was bending before the shutdown and continued to do so afterwards.

            Now there may be an effect hidden in there somewhere but it certainly does not stand out as a game changer.

            The claim that case data which he chose to present shows anything which could be attributed to the confinement is bogus. He tries to pretend the log plot would be continued straight line had it not been for the drastic measures taken, when it was already bending before they came into effect.

        • Why does WUWT keep allowing you to ask the same rubbish question day in day out?
          You refuse to accept that lockdown is having the desired affect even when the countries involved say it is.
          As to your ridiculous statement that “That is just a perfectly normal evolution of an epidemic” is patent bull shyte.
          The number of people in each country is no where near herd immunity when epidemics decline.
          You even deny that the decrease in France has anything to do with the actions that they have been introducing.
          Not that new cases is a very good metric to start with as it depends too much on who they test and when they test them.

          • You refuse to accept that lockdown is having the desired affect even when the countries involved say it is.

            Quote what I say, not your own straw man version. I have said there is no evidence in the data to support that claim and invited CofB and anyone to else to find some.

            This is essentially a challenge to his dishonest claim that the data DOES show that when it is not the case.

            We can then discuss the quality of the data an what other factors may be masking the EXPECTED effect of confinement.

            I have repeated said the data is not good and have even posted graphs of how french testing was rising exponentially and may be masking any benefit of the measures.

            As for “even when the countries involved say it is”, well they would hardly want to say they had taken unprecedented action, destroyed our freedom of movement and cost us all several TRILLIONS of dollars and all for no gain, would they? To suggest they would say anything else than it was working and they had saved their respective country rather than OOPS we’ve destroy your economy is a brainless argument.

            As to your ridiculous statement that “That is just a perfectly normal evolution of an epidemic” is patent bull shyte.

            Strong words, can you back that up ? I said the gentle curving over leading to the reducing numbers shown in the head graphic is normal. Now back up your claim that is not the normal evolution of an epidemic.

          • You have no proof of your assertions any more than the world governments do. There is simply not enough data. In this case the so called cure is worse than the disease and is highly likely had little to no affect, and yes that is just an opinion.

          • I am not the one going against the rest of the world, it is you.
            I do not need to provide anything at all.

          • His denial is deadly… to others.

            I am claiming there is not a visible impact in the data CofB chose to present as proof that there is an effect.

            If you wish to claim I am “in denial”, doubtless someone with data processing capabilities will instantly back up that insulting claim by pointing to the clear evidence which I am “unable” to see and come to terms with. Go ahead.

            I am not the one going against the rest of the world, it is you.
            I do not need to provide anything at all.

            You picked out one thing I said “That is just a perfectly normal evolution of an epidemic” and called patent bull shyte.

            Clearly you have no idea what the “rest of the world’s” models of an epidemic look like.
            Of course continuing your bluster is much easier than educating yourself and being either the make a credible scientific argument of shut up with the insults.

            I have repeatedly said I also would expect confinement to make a difference. Where I differ from you and CofB is I check my assumptions against fact. When I find the surprising result that there is not visible effect despite it being “blindingly obvious” , take the time to plot a graph and publish it for discussion .

            If someone else is processing the same data and falsely claiming it “proves” confinement is working and we must carry on destroying our own futures, I challenge that claim.

            So far no one has anything but insult to offer in place of a valid rebuttal.

          • Thank you A C Osborn, I am alarmed that seemingly intelligent scientists and professionals on this blog keep the rhetoric up regarding real data. Monckton is not running models, he is presenting real numbers and real comparisons–and his main point being that it is not comparable to the flu, in death rate, severity and use of resources. It is 6 times worse! Looking at hospital data, as opposed to guesstimating rates of infection and contagion, gives us the real picture. A few days ago, I came across the Dallas county data which only confirms the UK data
            https://www.dallascounty.org/Assets/uploads/docs/hhs/2019-nCoV/COVID-19%20DCHHS%20Summary_032720.pdf

            It shocked me and answers the questions about comparing it to the flu–see especially table 6.

            Monckton, “In each age-group (under 50, 50-69 and 70+), the percentage of patients admitted to critical care with the Chinese virus and subsequently dying in hospital is at least twice the percentage of critical-care patients with other viral pneumonias over the previous three years.”

            The above was his point– and if you look at Sweden and New Zealand honestly, you will see that lockdowns do save lives and conserve medical resources.

            However, whether saving the lives and medical resources via lockdown is a better option than absorbing higher fatality rates but keeping the global economy afloat is another discussion–one I am not going to weigh in on. But to see you professional guys and gals comparing apples to oranges and downplaying the severity of this really frustrates me. It rivals my frustration with GW alarmists basing their conclusions on modelling and adjusted figures rather than on raw data. Geeze.

          • If we listened to government experts, many lives saved by HCQ would be lost instead. Please forgive for not accepting what the government says at face value.

            History tells us economic stimulus does not work, that paying people to not work decreases employment and delays economic recovery. But that’s our solution. Spend, borrow and print money does not work.

            We should not have enacted such strict lock downs with rigorous cost/benefit analysis and without considering the unintended consequences. Doing that is a denial of reason.

          • WUWT should not censor respectful or inconvenient facts. Not everyone considers this question to be rubbish.

            Let me ask you, has the question been answered properly already or do you just not want to know the answer?

          • A C… you seem to be having difficulty understanding simple English… Or are you locked into a certain belief, the facts be damned?

          • “Thank you A C Osborn, I am alarmed that seemingly intelligent scientists and professionals on this blog keep the rhetoric up regarding real data. Monckton is not running models, he is presenting real numbers and real comparisons–and his main point being that it is not comparable to the flu, in death rate, severity and use of resources. It is 6 times worse!”

            Look, I don’t know whose numbers are accurate but if what you say is true- that this is ***6 times worse*** than influenza, then you are talking about a number of deaths that is about half of Heart Disease. It is about double road accidents.

            Consider the cost of this intervention. We will have spent 3 Trillion in direct monetary transfers + whatever we lose in economy.

            We as a nation have NEVER thought that spending $3 – $4 Trillion, or ~20% of GDP was acceptable to stop Heart Disease. And we know the major causes of Heart Disease. We could spend $1 Trillion, or 5% of GDP to just crush smoking in this country and we would probably save 1/3 of Heart Disease patients.

            I have several nieces and nephews who are out of work. Two are not getting paid because they own nail salons that are about to go belly up permanently. I would never, ever say it was worth it to them to save a bunch of heart attack victims, and I would never say that it is acceptable to save people from COVID.

          • The Swedes seem to be buying in to the idea that a lockdown isn’t necessary. What could possibly go wrong with that approach? Let’s all watch and find out.

        • Greg, a plot might be useful even if its meaning is not known. Sometimes it takes time for insight to be gained or a trend to develop. Often, it is the unexpected which leads to discovery. You’ve made your points, accept that some people aren’t listening to you. Vuk is putting effort into understanding relationships and he doesn’t deserve your scorn.

          On Monckton, you claim deceit, where is your evidence of that? Perhaps you should hold yourself to the standards that you wish to hold others.

          Everyone makes mistakes. Everyone interprets their views from a bias. Everyone gets angry at the stupidity of others now and again and everyone makes oneself a fool once in a while at the very least.

          It would be more constructive if you would make your case without vitriol. I agree with many of your points, but please.

          Could provide some explanation of why you think that our observations are perfectly normal evolution of a pandemic? The experts have gotten this wrong it appears. I’d like to hear your insight here without the name calling and belittling attitude that you are displaying.

          • Thanks Scissor
            During the last 4-5 days a minor trend is developing with a multiplying factor of k=1.133 which is nearly halving the effect of the previously established k=1.247 trend line. With a new trend after about 5 days the numbers would fall by 50% (currently nearly there at 48%) and after 10 days around 90% in the respect of the longest persisting trend line. It is likely that soon k will head further down towards 1.00, i.e cases will flat-line and when k falls below 1 (k<1), the worst is over and the end of the 'lock-down' may soon follow.

          • Vuk is putting effort into understanding relationships and he doesn’t deserve your scorn.

            I have no scorn for Vuk , he’s a great guy, but I think it would make sense to say what something is and how we should interpret it if someone is going to plot and publish it.

            I have made a few suggestions about what we may expect from that line but that’s just trying to start a discussion about what it means. I was hoping he may comment on that. Sadly he just keep reposting and calling it “hospital mortality”. It looks like a rising mortality would be a bad thing, maybe hospitals getting worse at helping or something. I don’t think that is the case.

          • Greg, do you actually read anything others write?
            You wrote “maybe hospitals getting worse at helping or something. I don’t think that is the case.”
            The Hospitals all become overwhelmed by COV19 because the patients need ICU for weeks, not days like the flu.
            Once that happens people die in the wards and at home.

          • Could provide some explanation of why you think that our observations are perfectly normal evolution of a pandemic? The experts have gotten this wrong it appears.

            We have all seen the idealised mathematical models of epidemic evolution: in terms of daily cases ( not cumulative totals ) that is a hump with fading tail. The initial exponential rise starts to ease of peaks and turns into an exponential decay. That is what I mean by the normal evolution . That is what we see in the graphs I have provided.

            Now if we make a drastic and sudden change to R0 by confining the vast majority of the population with the expressed intention of changing the evolution of the epidemic, that should be visible in new cases within a few days of enforcement, allowing for incubation period.

            I don’t think the experts have got this wrong since I don’t see any of them even showing such a graph and trying to find out whether this is working and what the degree of impact on the epidemic is. They seem content to live inside their models and tweak a few parameters to adjust their models to re-estimate a new peak projection.

            Evaluating a cost – benefit does not seem to be something they want to look at.

          • Greg, do you actually read anything others write?
            You wrote “maybe hospitals getting worse at helping or something. I don’t think that is the case.”

            why do you need to crop of the first half of that sentence to pervert its meaning when replying.

            I was discussing Vuk’s “hospital mortality” on his graph.

            Sadly he just keeps reposting and calling it “hospital mortality”. It looks like a rising mortality would be a bad thing, maybe hospitals getting worse at helping or something. I don’t think that is the case.

            So I’m saying that I do NOT think this rising line on the graph does reflects what it appears to if you call it “hospital mortality”. As I have explain N times already it rises because it is the ratio of two exponentials which is itself an exponential. So that rising value does not indicate hospitals are failing patients. ( Neither does it mean all is fine. It is a measure of success ). It may make a little more sense if it was lagged by about 2weeks to that it uses deaths of the same population from which new cases were taken from, that itself is debatable.

            In fact you have proved my whole point, since you obvious HAVE interpreted this as evidence hospitals are getting saturated and failing to care for patients. I am NOT saying that is or is not the case but what I AM saying is this “ratio” is not measuring that.

            You have been fooled by Vuk’s graph , which is I why I have been imploring him to consider what this line shows and discuss it. Maybe he is still convinced this is showing a failure in our hospitals. I’m saying ( with mathematical reasoning ) why that is not the case.

            Sadly you are too intent on attacking me to bother reading or understanding anything or attempting a reasoned challenge to anything I say, preferring insults, straw man fallacies misleading cropping of what I write.

            Now take a deep breathe , read what I DID write instead of what you think I might have written and try to make a coherent point.

          • https://nypost.com/2020/04/04/long-island-doctor-tries-new-hydroxychloroquine-for-covid-19-patients/ There are 2 points that are not being addressed. 1) The possible cure with hydroxychloroquine in combination with zinc and doxycycline 2) Even though I believe that Monckton is correct when he says that this COVID-19 virus is more dangerous than influenza, he still has not proved that we can avoid it by general non essential business shutdown. There will certainly be a 2nd and even 3rd wave of it (in fact we are seeing 2nd waves of it now in China). We can’t lockdown forever and when it is lifted there will always be those in the population who will be infectious and the troubles will start anew. Only herd immunity, vaccines or cures defeat viruses. This one is a particularly nasty one, but we can’t kill it by trying to avoid it.

        • Greg,

          It is my belief that politically there was no choice to isolation. What we missed, however, is the permanent damage isolation has done to our ability to make our world a better place.

          Our world is going to get ugly with deadly problems and fights because of the isolation. This is one of the biggest mistakes that humanity has ever made.

          The word ‘economy’ does not capture what is happening.

          People are scared of death and there is daily news that keeps them scared. That is what everyone is focused on.

          As countries get poorer life becomes harder and harder. We are so rich, we do understand what poverty is like in a poor country. We are going to face 30% unemployment in every developed country and stimulus spending will not return us to normal.

          Also the ‘novel’ virus is not going away. Every country in the world is going to be forced to end isolation for the general population.

          • Yes, William. It seems many seem to think that wanting save the economy is just some kind of misplaced materialism but fail to see the social harm we are in the process of creating.

            As Willis has been arguing you need to evaluate and balance the costs and benefits. Part of that process is evaluating how much effect confinement is having. It is not a black or white case nor are we allowed to just ASSUME it is the game changer solution just because it seems “blindingly obvious”.

            If we find that ACTUAL effect confinement had on the growth we can be less fearful of relaxing it now minimise the future social disaster we are in the process of making for ourselves.

            If it is not visible in the data ( and they are flawed ) then we should look at not. Is it data corruption, sampling bias or perhaps that the virus is already much wider spread or with thousands of the most at risk cases already sadly departed the virus is quickly running out victims who develop a need for A&E treatment.

            There is not trival answer and those who want trivial answers or black and white issues to shout about are not the ones who will gain the insight we so badly need to tread the high risk paths ahead of us.

          • I discovered that I was vitamin D deficient about 12 years ago, when I was not sleeping through the night, and my doctor wanted me to take sleeping pills as an answer. Through my own research I discovered a new vitamin D study, and it identified the root of my problem, which I fixed with an easy and inexpensive non-addicting over the counter vitamin D supplement. This did much more than help me sleep, and safely. Years later my doctor read the same study I had read, and he suddenly decided he needed to check my vitamin D levels. At the time I was taking 8,000-10,000 IU’s per day, and my blood work came back with slightly lower than recommended vitamin D levels. I now take 18,000-20,000 IU’s per day, and my levels and sleep are excellent. As we age, our bodies’ needs change, and there is no one size fits all. I no longer depend on the advice of experts, I become the expert.

          • Glad that I started to buy precious metals starting in the early 80s and continuing to this day. Hyperinflation will be upon us all. Adding to the Sovereign Credit worldwide there is no other place to hind except in food and commodities. The supply chain is almost irreparable as local dairy farmers are dumping their milk in their lagoons. Want to see more of the issue go to ice-age farmer on youtube.

        • I thank both Christopher Monckton and Greg Goodman for their views (and Willis Eschenbach, Rud Istvan, and others commenting here). My view is that governments around the world, except China, are trying very hard to do the best they can for their countries in very difficult circumstances. Hindsight may eventually show what they got right or wrong. In each country, I think the best approach for citizens is to speak their minds clearly but to try to make their government’s approach work even if they disagree with it – it’s the only approach their country has.

          In view of the high level of uncertainty in many aspects of this issue, it is very helpful to see alternative views expressed and supported by (an interpretation of) the evidence. On this website, more than just about any other, the dialogue should be able to be conducted civilly, though regrettably it has pushed civil limits at times.

          JMHO.

          • Best comment of the day – thank you Mike Jonas.
            Your view mirrors my own.
            I seem to tilt one way then the next, with the fine offerings of the WUWT articles…as they certainly have sound reasoning…yet taking any one as ‘gospel’ may blind me (us) to what may eventuate as the actual situation.
            A little bit of paranoia and ‘gently as we go’ in this situation, may be excusable.

          • I too agree with your sentiments Mike. It seems that this coronavirus is both more virulent and aggressive than the more common virus. Whether it would have run it’s course by now anyway, is not so relevant as the fact that we needed to slow down the pace of the infections so that hospitals had a chance to cope with the numbers.

            If global lockdown had not occurred it feel it would have got out of control very quickly, as it is some countries are struggling, the city of New York is in a bad situation right now. Do you know what is happening with the dead? I believe we had no choice, some medical institutions are barely coping even now, it would have been devastating to be hit with a sudden influx of seriously ill people all at once. We don’t as yet know enough about how this virus works, whether there will be a second wave.

            The same people who are complaining about the restrictions, would be complaining if we didn’t have them. They would be asking how the government could possibly stand by and do nothing? How could they let all those people die? Why don’t we have more help, the hospitals can’t cope. Even those young people who think that it’s doesn’t matter if the ‘old’ people die would soon be complaining when their grandparents and even parents were dying. I used to think anyone over fifty was old when I was young.

            We are not just talking about numbers, we are talking about actual people, family members, friends, colleagues. If we had not made the effort to slow down the pace of this virus then it’s likely we would all know someone who died from it. What is the acceptable number of deaths?

            Please, tell me one government, world wide, who would actually ‘want’ to create the economic chaos that is being experienced around the world. Was there a ‘better’ choice?

            China does indeed have alot to answer for.

          • My problem is that I dislike being treated like a child. In Sweden of all places, they have asked their population to act like adults and follow the rules voluntarily. I would have preferred this course of action first, rather then allowing third rate politicians deciding that I did not have the intelligence to understand why we needed to distance. wash, stay away from Granmom, etc. And use this pandemic to inflict their disgusting hatred of freedom on me.

        • One must make allowances for panic and hysteria among commenters here: nevertheless, it would be better if both Greg Goodman and Greg were to keep their heads. This pandemic requires rational treatment, which is the purpose of these postings.

          Mr Goodman says I “claim” that the daily graph shows lockdowns working. Well, yes it does. Consider the Imperial College predictions for the UK without lockdown, or the McKinsey predictions for New York without lockdown, and then compare them with what these graphs show – a considerable reduction in the daily compound case growth rate – the number that policymakers are most concerned with.

          And Mr Goodman’s childish allegation that I have twisted the data lacks any foundation in reality. One understands that he is upset that governments are following advice such as mine rather than opinions such as his, and one makes allowances. However, all that I have done is to take the published data, to discuss the strengths and weakness of those data, and to plot them in a readily digestible form.

          There is no modeling, there are no complications: there is just a perfectly standard weekly smoothing to iron out the daily fluctuations, a procedure which, if Mr Goodman will consult any elementary textbook of statistics, he will find is perfectly unobjectionable.

          He is, of course, free to produce and publish his own graphs if he wants. But let him take a rather more responsible and less accusatory tone in his future postings. Screaming petulantly does not make his argument seem serious.

          However, these articles have also contained proper qualifications of the argument. The graphs for Sweden are shown, for instance, and the numbers are declining there without the strict lockdowns that most other European countries have introduced. But given the delay of five days between first infection and frank symptoms, and of a few more days before a case becomes serious enough to be notified, tested and confirmed, the full effect of the lockdowns will not become apparent until two or three weeks after they are introduced.

          Mr Goodman imagines that the current numbers indicate “the normal course of an epidemic”. No, they don’t. Let us imagine that the reported cases are 1% of true cases. Then about 150 million people have been infected worldwide. But that is only 2% of global population, leaving 98% still susceptible.

          Therefore, in a normal epidemic one would expect the 20% growth rate that was evident in the three weeks to March 14, when Mr Trump declared an emergency, to have continued – in the absence of lockdowns – until mid-May, by which time those infected would have become a significant enough fraction of the total population to begin to reduce the exponential growth.

          However, control measures with various degrees of strictness are having a discernible effect, and the mean compound daily growth rate in confirmed cases is falling daily.

          Of course, the numbers infected will continue to grow for some time yet: a mean 8% compound daily growth rate is still far too high to be safe. But, if the lockdowns are held in place for a few more weeks, it will become possible to introduce gradual relaxations, while watching the numbers carefully.

          Greg, too, says the assertion that the graph indicates that lockdowns are working is “bogus”. Well, no, it isn’t. The elementary epidemiology of pandemics stipulates that growth will be exponential in the early stages. The exponential growth, however, is definitely slowing. And, since the capacity of an infection to spread exponentially is governed by two numbers – the infectiousness of the pathogen and the numbers that each infected person will meet on average – a severe reduction in social interactions, such as that which even imperfect lockdowns achieve, makes a definite contribution to reducing the spread of the infection.

          It is really no good trying to pretend that lockdowns do not work at all. They do, as is well established. And, like it or not, the compound daily growth rates in total confirmed cases are falling steadily now. Provided that the lockdowns are adhered to for a little longer, I should expect that happier trend to continue.

          And the fact that a visual representation of the fact that lockdowns are working is now available will assist policymakers in deciding when they can bring the lockdowns safely to an end – which is something we all want.

          • In the discussions or either ‘camp’, I am forced to fully agree with Mr Monckton in this.
            Compare and argue as one would, take a look at the reported cases in New Zealand and the deaths.
            Now, compare to other countries.
            What did we get ‘right’? Could it just possibly be the lock-down? If it is NOT, then what?

          • You seem to think that the graph is showing that lockdowns work, yet we there is no actual data showing that wearing masks and physical distancing measures aren’t either just as effective or even the actual measure of what is working. The lockdown nonsense is murdering the economy and ruining the savings of millions and the livelihood of further millions. All because of presupposition. I submit that your graph would look precisely the same if governments asked us nicely to practice distancing, not parading about in public whilst sick, wear masks, and wash up regularly. For that matter I further submit that active government encouragement (and payment!) for all of the public who can tolerate the regimen to see their physicians and get prescribed a course of anti-malarial / z-pack / zinc to act as a prophylactic measure would be a much more productive experiment that the one that is currently being run.

            I say this as one whose spouse has stage 4 cancer and no functional immune system and has been navigating the world wearing masks and carrying on well for the past 9 months. If my spouse with no immune system can successfully avoid disease at the height of flu season and still live a life then I’m quite sure that others can do likewise.

          • Good evening Christopher. Thank you for finally joining the conversation.

            Let me clarify where I think you are making some incorrect assumptions.

            Consider the Imperial College predictions for the UK without lockdown, or the McKinsey predictions for New York without lockdown, and then compare them with what these graphs show – a considerable reduction in the daily compound case growth rate

            ” a considerable reduction” is not really a testable claim. You do not link the studies but I’m au fait with the output of those kinds of models and the effect of parameter tweaking.

            Do you have the output of such a model with lockdown applied half way up the expansive phase, what would that look like ? Can you detect that event in your graph?

            You have repeatedly said in the last few days that “if the initial exp growth continues unabated …” but that is not what any model shows. They show a gradual bending over of the daily compound case growth rate . This is what happens anyway without govt. intervention. So my objections was that simply showing the end of your graph is lower than the start in no way demonstrates, let alone proves, this is due in any significant way to confinement measures.

            You note the odd case of Sweden. This should be telling you there is a problem with your logic since it seems to be showing a fairly steady exponential growth , albeit thankfully fairly slow compared to other countries. Despite apparently still being in the initial exp growth phase it also comes down sharply from your “benchmark” period. Clearly you have not constructed a test which is capable of discerning when a “considerable reduction” is happening.

            Because of the noisy bumps ( despite the filtering ) your graph is not really showing much more detail other than the general reduction , a couple of countries bump in the middle ( a result of choosing the same bench mark period irrespective of when the epidemic took off in different populations).

            In short your method is incapable to showing anything other than the general reduction in daily compound case growth rate which is typical of any epidemic, without external interference. You have not defined a condition which would be a signature of a “considerable reduction” and demonstrated a method which will detect it.

            Until you have demonstrated that you have a means of potentially detecting something if it is present, you are not justified in claiming that you have shown it is present.

            Now a few general points that you may like to consider.

            1. To establish whether your model can detect the change in growth you should create some test data. There are simple mathematical formulae which would provide credible test data. Stop one half way up the exp growth , reduce R0 by 50% and let it continue. Do your bench mark analysis. Can you see this on you graph?

            2. Mixing epidemics in different populations at different phases in their development and then applying the usual epidemic analysis ( as you do with all the world minus commie China ) is not meaningful. The models are not designed to deal with that.

            3. Saying “if the current exponential continues for …. weeks” is not reasonable since no models suggest that would happen. Exponential are always rapidly curtailed in nature since an exponentially increasing flow of raw material is never available. Trying to suggest this is what would have happened in the absence of govt. action is not reasonable. The models you refer to do not allow for continuation of the initial exponential period.

            4. Running means are crude and crappy filters, they leave a lot of noise you though you had removed and can even invert peaks and troughs in the data. https://climategrog.wordpress.com/2013/05/19/triple-running-mean-filters/ Filtering like this will just hide the onset of any change following a confinement order. I try to avoid filtering if possible but a light 1-2-1 binomial may be a better choice here ( just as easy to do as a running mean ).

            But given the delay of five days between first infection and frank symptoms, and of a few more days before a case becomes serious enough to be notified, tested and confirmed, the full effect of the lockdowns will not become apparent until two or three weeks after they are introduced.

            5d no problem, arguably add a few more as suggested. Suddenly this becomes “2 or 3 weeks”.
            This sounds a lot like post hoc definition of what should be expected to better match the known data and thus claim “just as our models predicted”. But let’s look at France:

            https://climategrog.files.wordpress.com/2020/04/2019-ncov-log-fit-france.png

            Restrictions came into effect 17th March, day 77. The only notable change in direction is at day 89. You need to stretch 5 d incubation to fully three weeks and it clicks in within a day or two. Colour me not convinced.

            Also note that what I described as the normal behaviour of an epidemic was indeed happening up until that point. This corresponds to the drop in your graph. In effect what you are plotting is an estimation of the slope of my log plots. We are essentially showing the same thing. I would suggest my presentation makes changes a little clearer but the two should not be contradictory.

            It is really no good trying to pretend that lockdowns do not work at all.

            Another straw man . I never said that. I am discussing whether it is detectable in the data. So far it is not , for some reason which needs to be explained. We need to know HOW effective the measures have been to know how quickly we get out of the mess we have got ourselves into.

            And the fact that a visual representation of the fact that lockdowns are working is now available will assist policymakers in deciding when they can bring the lockdowns safely to an end – which is something we all want.


            Sadly, as I explain in full detail above you have not shown that is the case. You have not demonstrated a method which is capable of differentiating between the normal bending of any epidemic and the bending of an epidemic with a lockdown half way through the expansion phase of growth.

            To “safely” bring lockdowns to an end means ASAP. Baby steps every two weeks is going to be catastrophic for society, not “safe”. Claiming that you have a method which shows measures have been effective when you have not even demonstrated you can detect them at all, is misguided a best.

            I would hope policy makers would pass your work through competent statisticians before giving them any weight and they will doubtless raise at least some of the same objections. In particular the need to demonstrate that you could detect the difference between an uninterrupted epidemic and one hit with a modelled confinement on the population during growth phase.

          • Given you appear to have a sub-0.1% death rate, my guess would be that you tested enough people to find most or all of the infected folks after closing the border. The lockdown probably did a bit to help, if it reduced the rate of spreading while those people were found.

            But if the death rate is really sub-0.1%, then the whole lockdown economic catastrophe was an utter waste of time and will have killed far more people than the disease. And you now have to keep the borders closed so the disease isn’t brought in from overseas, which will be a disaster for the heavily tourism-reliant economy.

          • “What did we get ‘right’? Could it just possibly be the lock-down? If it is NOT, then what?”

            Given you appear to have a sub-0.1% death rate, my guess would be that you tested enough people to find most or all of the infected folks after closing the border. The lockdown probably did a bit to help, if it reduced the rate of spread while those people were found.

            But if the death rate is really sub-0.1%, then the whole lockdown economic catastrophe was an utter waste of time and far more people will die from that than the disease. And you now have to keep the borders closed so the disease isn’t brought in from overseas, which will be a disaster for the heavily tourism-reliant economy.

          • MarkG April 9, 2020 at 3:54 pm – and THAT is where I too, flip flop between the opposing thoughts on this matter.
            Honestly, I can’t fathom a way to go forward in that – so – don’t.
            You may well be right, and as I have completely lost any source of income being a self employed person, fully understand the rationale behind having a more lenient isolation structure.
            The cross over point between being overly cautious and plain reckless is, as I ruminate upon, still being decided.

          • David Hood – What did NZ get right?

            I wonder whether there’s a false premise. Australia has I believe given some consideration for the economy and has done much less of a shutdown than NZ. Yet the latest figures (worldometer) that I have seen for number of cases per million population are Aus 239, NZ 257. And the charts show a better slowdown over the last week or so in Aus than in NZ. So it doesn’t look prima facie like the draconian NZ measures have been worthwhile. But …

            … maybe the difference isn’t in the real number of cases but in the detected cases, and maybe NZ has been better at detecting. Or maybe lockdown does work, but it’s used by governments based on hospital capacity so many countries end up at much the same level anyway.

            One area where NZ may be getting it right is in treatment – NZ deaths per m are a fraction of Aus’s (very small samples). Or have they just been less unlucky?

          • “Mr Goodman imagines that the current numbers indicate “the normal course of an epidemic”. No, they don’t. Let us imagine that the reported cases are 1% of true cases. Then about 150 million people have been infected worldwide. But that is only 2% of global population, leaving 98% still susceptible.”

            ya, what he forgets is that we have no data on what a “normal” course of an epidemic is
            because humanity imposes isolation of some form in every deadly communicable disease
            even in the middle ages people apparently figured out to stay away from others.

            If someone wants to study the effectiveness of isolation then they need
            to compare the treatment case with the no treatment case

            There are plenty of examples of this from 1918. St Louis virus Philidelphia

            And in the treatment case you need to make sure the people actually TOOK the medicine, actually followed the isolation.

            Here one can look at MOBILITY data. In Korea, again, they study mobility data.
            At the start mobility ratcheted down by 60%… over time people relaxed. and mobility
            went up. And yes, we got more cases, so the government came out with enhanced isolation and enhanced testing, and now we are back down to low mobility and new cases under 50/day

            Short version. we know as a matter of biology that a disease that passes person to person will diminish if people reduce their contact. No field experiment required.
            virus don’t teleport last I looked.

          • If someone wants to study the effectiveness of isolation then they need
            to compare the treatment case with the no treatment case

            When I refer to “normal epidemic” , I’m not talking about out in the wild animal populations. I’m talking about the normal course of human epidemics which the various academic studies are based on.

            All the curves turn over gradually then fizzle out. What we are attempting to do here is interfere with R0 to change the course and “flatten the curve”. We need to be able to differentiate between that and an epidemic with no R0 tampering.

            Sadly CofB does not even attempt to do that. He, in effect, claims that all countries would still be in the initial exp growth phase were it not for confinement. That is untenable since all EU countries’ graphs were already showing the curve starting to flatten out.

          • Monkton, the predictions take into account various possible counter-measures. The question is whether or not the observations match the predictions from the model versions that asume counter-measures that most closely match what is being done.

          • David Hood: why does detail escape ypu here? There are various degrees of lockdown. Even the models acknowledge this. The core issue is not an all or nothing question, and anyone who claims otherwise is a sophistic, cynical demagogue.

            New Zeeland is a sparsely populated island and can crack down on all travel to and from it quite easily. So from that standpoint it’s a laughable cherry pick. No other developed country, aside from perhaps Oz, is even close to like that. Furthermore, there are a number of middle of the road options for a lockdown, that do not entail mass accross-the-board closures and household confinement (the extreme at one end of the range of counter-measures).

            So I reject

          • If one cannot remember how to spell Philadelphia, maybe best to just say Philly.
            Just sayin’.
            Locals pronounce the name of their town something like “Fluffya”.

          • It appears that hospitals in US are closing. Doctors, nurses, lab clinicians are getting furloughed. Unfortunately if this is a medical crisis, we are shooting ourselves in the foot.

        • Hi Greg, I respect your intelligent, eclectic postings I’ve seen over some years here at WUWT. A possible disconect on this topic, though in my view, arises from logic and possibly you can straighten this out for me. Setting aside the economic disaster that lockdowns of any duration will cause, why would quarantining, social distancing and wearing masks … NOT blunt the pandemic to a noticeable degree?

          I am with many on the certainty that we will be coping with this virus as a part of our lives for the foreseeable future. The hope is that these measures aren’t likely to be long needed – probably, a little seasonal warming will speed this declining disease as it does for the flu and there is no reason to believe a vaccine won’t be discovered.

          Despite being an octagenarian, I am encouraged that its really an old folks disease and the young will largely just end up with some immunity. It seems to me that with 20-20 hindsight, this whole program might best have been narrowed down to the old folks and let the economy prosper.

          • I agree Gary. Many of us wrote here many weeks ago that it would be far wiser to isolate the elderly and infirm, than trying to lockdown the entire population. Having said that, lockdowns also work, but at what cost? If the cure is worse than the disease, then what was the point. And as you say, there are many other things we can be doing, especially us oldsters who should take this very seriously and take the necessary measures to protect ourselves. There is no doubt that this is much worse than any seasonal flu. But I think Willis is also right, in that destroying the economy or locking down the majority of the healthy population will prove to be a mistake. The more immunity there is for Round 2 of this the next season if it is still with us, the lessor there will be asymptomatic super spreaders. But this will only be evident with the benefit of future 20-20 when this is a long gone memory and this Wuhan virus goes extract, just like the original SARS virus likely has. While a total lock down could work in theory, it could only be implemented in a total state controlled population like China or North Korea. Destroying the economy to try and contain this or slow it down, is just delaying the inevitable and will just prolong the agony. This is akin to cutting off our own head to cure our cold or headache.

          • why would quarantining, social distancing and wearing masks … NOT blunt the pandemic to a noticeable degree?

            I have said several times that I have the same expectation that it should reduce rate of infection. As to whether it is “to a noticeable degree” I turn to analysis. I see no obvious signal let alone a clear attribution. That is why I raise the question of how effective these measure HAVE actually been. Note I say I raise the question. The data has many flaws and complications, some of which may be masking any effect. There maybe other causes.

            But in view of stakes we can not afford to stick with our assumptions. We must try to evaluate how effective the economic self immolation really is. If the effect is a lot less than we anticipated this informs our decisions about how quickly we can release restrictions and get the economy working again before we shoot ourselves in both feet and knee-cap both our own legs.

            We now need to redress the keel AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE. If we do not examine and determine the degree which confinement has reduced spread, we will be taking baby steps every too weeks and waiting to see what happens. If we conclude in 3 months time that we could have moved quicker it will be too late to know that.

            We must do a serious attribution study, country by country or in USA state by state. There is not one-size-fits-all answer here.

            I hope that clarifies.

          • I’m not sure the economy would’ve prospered if we hadn’t shut it down, not with an intense outbreak of a communicable disease roaming the streets. Once public awareness reached a critical mass, the outbreak was going to work negatively on the nation, no matter what our official response was. The negativity would’ve manifested differently, but it was going to manifest itself.
            Frankly, a general mood of, “No one’s doing anything! We’re on our own! They care more about the economy than us! We’re just anonymous cogs in the great machine!” would’ve had a huge negative impact on the economy. Panic might’ve broken out.
            Libertarians will always be a small niche (safely ensconced in the society they fecklessly talk about fraying), because the vast majority of humans want to belong to a community and sense a benefit from community. The Social Contract, especially in democratic societies, required an official response.

        • All very good points. Also people should note:

          1. Everyone claims China data is either just wrong or intentionally wrong but it’s not been excluded from the data.
          2. All the US data is confirmed by Dr. Birx, by admission, that the guidance is to always pad the CV-19 numbers even if negative tests and only suspicion as to CV-19 presence.
          3. Same Dr. Birx guidelines advise to list CV-19 as the primary cause only if suspicious.
          4. all tests have both false negative and false positives; I haven’t found any non-Chinese claim regarding either with the CV-19 testing. See CDC’s assessment of the highly used influenza testing: https://www.cdc.gov/flu/professionals/diagnosis/rapidlab.htm

          Thus, CDC says always record CV-19. Even if only suspicious and ignore negative test results (as in why would you order a test if you’re not suspicious?). Thus, the numbers are going to be skewed with high case counts and high death counts and be even more bogus than Italy’s numbers. It’s almost as if East Anglia is running the numbers with Phil Jones supervising and performing an on-going Nature Trick.

          ———— and some references some might find interesting

          A good video by an expert Professor Knut Wittkowski, an expert on Biostatistics, Epidemiology, and Research Design, “Perspectives on the Pandemic” https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lGC5sGdz4kg&feature=youtu.be

          And France’s chief epidemiologist, Professor Jean-François Delfraissy, reported that obesity is a major factor in CV-19: https://news.trust.org/item/20200408103237-l2epf/

          Which makes lots of sense when one considers the aging time line and the epidemic of metabolic syndrome (aka insulin resistance). Dr. Paul Mason, MD ( Univ. Sydney with degrees in Physiotherapy, Ocupational Health and a Specialist Sports Medicine and Exercise) provides some details and the cause of the obesity epidemic: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wBsnk2PtPeo

        • Greg Goodman: Firstly the idea of averaging several distinct populations at different stages of an epidemic and pretending that can be characterised by a simple exponential is BS and he knows it.

          It is not BS, it is an approximation which gives an idea of what will be happening soon if nothing changes (or if nothing has changed.) It illustrates one of John Tukey’s maxims: Anything worth doing is worth doing badly. Its limitations are known, but more precise methods will probably give results largely in agreement, at least within 25%. All available evidence used as rigorously as possible (with what Galton called “tender caution”, as Christopher Monckton of Brenclley did here) supports his conclusion that COVID-19 is worse than the influenza.

      • The Uber narcissist Greg Goodman is exhibiting his white hot resentment that Monckton is a peer of the realm while he is not. What will it take to make you happy Greg and calm down? Shall we all call you “Lord Gregory the Good”?

        You make clear your exquisite talent for picking up the wrong end of the stick. How is it possible to still not get it, still miss the point, yet continue to claim (along with your cruelly denied peerage) an IQ larger than your shoe size? The only real goal of the lockdown is to reduce the rate of intensive care admissions. Monckton got the nail on the head about the intensity of the intensive care needed by covid19 patients compared with others:

        Worse, advanced respiratory support for Chinese-virus cases is typically maintained for between 4 and 9 days (average 6 days), while it is not needed at all in non-COVID-19 viral-pneumonia cases, which require only basic respiratory support, and require it only for 2-4 days (average 3 days). The data are similar for cardiovascular support, and for renal support. The Chinese-virus cases tend to require advanced rather than basic support, and to require it for twice as long. And yet, even after all that extra care, the case fatality rate is many times higher than for non-COVID viral pneumonias.

        Do you know what a respirator is Greg? Why all this talk of a shortage, companies like Dyson and Mercedes F1 and Babcock all rushing to make them. For what? Does this rush on respirators happen with every winter flu?

        I guess your bottom line is – if (borrowing Monckton’s data) 67% of people entering IC with a respirator will die anyway, why bother? Perhaps once they reach that stage – especially the old and infirm like Boris Johnson – they should just be put down humanely? Perhaps the champions of industry would be more sensibly employed making gas chambers for hospitals?

      • How many people had//have serious cases of the cold and flu this year? How many millions?

        How many died? And what percentage of those deaths were co-compromised by age and existing conditions?

        • “How many died?

          Of colds? Few.
          Of flu? More than colds, certainly.
          Of COVID19? Are you kidding me? Its like asking if they guy you’re in the middle of rescuing from drowning is drowning because he actually had a heart attack first…geeze.

          “And what percentage of those deaths were co-compromised by age and existing conditions?”

          Hate to break it to you Corky, but if you’re going to count co-morbidity for COVID19, you pretty much have to do that with people who died of colds and the seasonal flu.

          Sharpen your pencil.

          • Bad analogy. If someone is drowning because he can no longer swim because he had a heart attack, then he is dying of a heart attack.

          • You remind me of a co-worker who wanted to just code EVERY death as “lack of blood to the brain”

            Seriously, some of us have some experience in this as a career you know…

          • My husband had a heart attack and a triple bypass at 57. That was 11 years ago, if there hadn’t been an intervention then he would have died. Saving a drowning man having a heart doesn’t mean he would have died anyway. Or that he doesn’t have much to contribute having been saved.

            Oi mate, can you swim? Have you got a heart condition? Oh, hope you had a good life!

        • For the US hot spot of infection Washington State, there appears to be a breakdown of flu like illnesses.

          https://www.doh.wa.gov/portals/1/documents/5100/420-100-fluupdate.pdf

          You can view test results for infection of COVID-19 on a daily basis:

          https://depts.washington.edu/labmed/covid19/

          This the data from that dashboard. Please plot this as I do not know how to present the graphs on Anthony’s site:

          Date Negative Inconclusive Positive Positive_tot Tests %Positive
          02/03/20 30 0 1 1 31 3.2
          03/03/20 4 0 2 3 6 33.3
          04/03/20 202 4 7 10 213 3.3
          05/03/20 125 3 0 10 128 0.0
          06/03/20 187 2 16 26 205 7.8
          07/03/20 220 4 14 40 238 5.9
          08/03/20 466 15 79 119 560 14.1
          09/03/20 380 5 40 159 425 9.4
          10/03/20 721 4 46 205 771 6.0
          11/03/20 1113 9 91 296 1213 7.5
          12/03/20 1171 11 82 378 1264 6.5
          13/03/20 1361 8 95 473 1464 6.5
          14/03/20 1529 20 96 569 1645 5.8
          15/03/20 1643 9 94 663 1746 5.4
          16/03/20 1487 8 135 798 1630 8.3
          17/03/20 2134 14 170 968 2318 7.3
          18/03/20 2857 31 183 1151 3071 6.0
          19/03/20 2072 26 138 1289 2236 6.2
          20/03/20 2733 19 193 1482 2945 6.6
          21/03/20 1440 14 114 1596 1568 7.3
          22/03/20 942 8 94 1690 1044 9.0
          23/03/20 987 7 152 1842 1146 13.3
          24/03/20 1257 10 141 1983 1408 10.0
          25/03/20 1755 19 192 2175 1966 9.8
          26/03/20 2406 21 244 2419 2671 9.1
          27/03/20 2116 24 244 2663 2384 10.2
          28/03/20 2114 33 340 3003 2487 13.7
          29/03/20 1280 14 204 3207 1498 13.6
          30/03/20 1048 12 166 3373 1226 13.5
          31/03/20 2073 23 362 3735 2458 14.7
          01/04/20 2350 23 317 4052 2690 11.8
          02/04/20 1920 17 235 4287 2172 10.8
          03/04/20 2008 19 297 4584 2324 12.8
          04/04/20 1750 18 215 4799 1983 10.8
          05/04/20 1152 8 111 4910 1271 8.7
          06/04/20 1257 13 170 5080 1440 11.8
          07/04/20 1734 12 212 5292 1958 10.8
          08/04/20 2626 43 307 5599 2976 10.3

          • to John Broadbent: Thank you for posting the data from UW Medicine’s Department of Laboratory Medicine. I commend UW for showing the %positive results (in last column), which is the metric that matters. So, UW did good — unlike everyone else who frightened the public by showing only the daily #cases in the run-up during March.

            to Monckton: For UK, the graphs of increasing #cases (#positive results from tests) each day during March should not be used to estimate the growth rate for the epidemic, else the calculation will be wrong and then the models using this wrong rate will give inflated projections. If those graphs were used for that purpose, the public needs to know the sleight. The #cases per day can be made to increase simply by increasing the #tests per day (as was done in USA), so that increase does not show the growth rate or spread of an epidemic, rather, it shows the growth rate of the #tests. The correct metric is, instead, the %positive cases (#cases/#tests) as was kindly reported by UW…. but this correct metric was not reported by the main sources of the public’s news. Where is the graph showing the correct metric — how the %positive cases changed over March, and the true growth rate of the epidemic?

            (Note: For correct calculation, the #cases and #tests must be for same day, not lagged as is done by CDC in USA, and the testing must be representative, not drifting toward more “hot spots” over the month.)
            I think that a freshman Statistics 101 class could evaluate the hypothesis that the %positive cases was not increasing and the epidemic was not spreading at all during March.

        • 🙂

          Can’t imagine this scenario: grade school science genius is fast tracked through high school, then gets a coveted MIT scholarship.

          Building robots? Space vehicles? Microbots?

          Nope. Suit up, you’re going into the sewer…

          • True comment, to former classmate, from his older brother:

            “It just ‘friggn’ blows me away that you went to school for five ‘friggn’ years just so and you can can go out and count turds in a pipe”

        • ‘that study is shit’

          How does it compare to your assertion last week that McDonalds workers were picking their noses before handing you your order?

        • Another insightful analysis. /sarc

          Seriously, have a look at “How to Win Friends and Influence” people. It will help with your inability to communicate without p/o everybody.

      • This study says 5% of Boston samples has the virus between March 18 and March 25 – pre lockdown. Thats likely close to 12-20% today.

      • What exactly is it they tested about the sewage?
        Were they looking for virus quantity or something like that?

          • Yes, I made several comment on this a while back, but the entire issue never really got any traction.
            And more recently there was a report that seemed to be saying that doctors in the US were unable to find the virus in feces of patients.
            I regret not saving that item in one of my folders.
            Perhaps I misread it.

            In any case, I am surprised they think they have enough information on the specific concentrations of virus to make a person per day or hour rate of virus which they expect to see for a given number of people with the disease.
            I have a lot of questions if this is what they are doing, such as other viruses in the mix, whether it is stable in sewage, how the amount of virus might change from person to person and stage of disease, etc.

          • Hmmm, i wonder now:
            ““Our next step to make our Covid-19 case estimation model more accurate is to model the person-to-person variability in SARS-CoV-2 shedding in stool…”
            Do they really think they can model this?
            Based on what?

        • Looking for virus in poop since it may be shed there.

          you won’t recall this but in HK there was a tragedy with SARS and a building
          that did not have a good sewer system. Faulty P traps in the Amoy Garden
          apartment complex led to an outbreak.

          With COVID-19 in HK officials have looked into a case in Hong Mei House ( 35 floor building) because there were two cases 10 floors apart. I think it prompted all building
          owners to check their P Traps

          • I recall it perfectly well. I have mentioned it several times as long ago as Early February.
            I wrote several comment expressing concern that possible toilet aerosols are being completely ignored.
            Also fecal oral route transmission.

            What surprises me is the idea they know enough about virus concentration in feces to make even a wild guess about the number of people in an area.
            IN fact I do not think they do do.
            As they admit in the article.

    • The numbers coming from the UK are at least partially explained by their abysmal socialised medical system. We had a friend in the UK who had chest pain from a partially blocked artery in his heart. This is something that would have received immediate attention in the USA. Indeed my father had the same problem and was out doing his normal routine in a couple of weeks. Our friend in the UK waited for two years until his health deteriorated so badly from it that he died.

      He had the money to get it fixed in Thailand, Singapore, Mexico, or the United States, but wanted the NHS to do it largely because of National pride.

      My wife and I live in the eastern part of King County Washington, the place where the coronavirus first was discovered and caused deaths in the USA this year. University of Washington researchers discovered early on that we had community spread here probably starting sometime in December weeks before the first case was discovered in mid-January. My wife and I have been frequent visitors both paid and volunteer at the ill fated Life Care Center in Kirkland, so we were warning from personal experience to all who would listen that this was a serious pathogen.

      The UW researchers initially modelled that we could have tens of thousands of deaths just in our local area. But we peaked in the eastern part of King County nearly three weeks ago. Our hospital Intensive Care Units went back to normal and the deaths from coronavirus slowed to a trickle. Now the entire state has had just over 400 deaths, most of them “presumptive” and not actually confirmed to be coronavirus. The UW has bern lowering its death estimates daily. Yesterday they were down to 614 by August for the the entire state from tens of thousands for just King and Snohomish Counties.

      So while I am a huge fan of Christopher, having just lived through this “crisis” I am more than a little skeptical of his charts and conclusions today. Our peak happened long before governor’s “stay at home order” could have had any effect at all.

      • I’ve heard of several people with similar stories and in particular claims that the virus was in the U.S. in December or even late November and that it just wasn’t recognized. I’m skeptical.

        With regard to the early cases in WA, have you seen any official reporting about this? If so, please provide a reference.

        • My brother has a daughter in Law who lost and uncle in December to an unknown pneumonia. Sound to me like he may be one of the first victims of the virus. I have a sister in law that came down with a bad flu in December after she and my brother returned from Hawaii. I am interest when the blood test for antibodies comes out if she will test positive or not. A friend of theirs does have COVID-19.

      • Steven,
        Your claim about the NHS is simply not justified. The current life expectancy in the UK
        is 81.77 years while in the US it is 79.11 years. In addition average health care costs per
        are $9892 per person in the US and $4192 per person in the UK. So the “abysmal socialised” medical system is working better than the US’s while costing half as much.
        Similarly much of Europe and the developed world have socialised medicine and all have
        better life expectancies than the US (where it has in fact been decreasing for the last few years) at significantly lower costs.

        • You can not compare life expectancies in the UK to those of the US, very different demographics. Has little or nothing to do with quality of healthcare.

          • The numbers coming from the UK are at least partially explained by their abysmal socialised medical system.

            It is very misleading to be this simplistic. UK developed a socialised medical system after WWII and it worked pretty well until late 70s. The neoliberal Thatcher came to power and began to undermine it and aimed to make market based. This processed was accelerated by the similarly neo-liberal Blair and Brown “New Labour” project : Thatcherism with red coloured flag.

            Blair tried to reform the NHS by sacking doctors are bringing in fleets of managers and management consultants. Under Blair and Brown “hospital trusts” were set up where private investments paid for a hospital and were then allowed to exploit if commercially to 20y, with the taxpayer picking up the tab.

            It has been cut to the bone in the process and all it has in common with Ernest Bevan’s 1947 project is the name NHS.

            Similarly the US set up of 52 state monopolies is hardly a “free market”. Trump’s attempts to open them up to real commercial competition have been thwarted by lobby groups and vested interests.

            This really is not a nice simple comparison of free market capitalism vs socialised medicine.

            If one health care system seems to shine above the rest in coping with this epidemic it’s the German one. Once this shit storm passes there will be time to look at what other countries can learn.

      • In response to Mr Miller, it is very easy to say with hindsight that nothing needed to be done. However, at the time when Mr Trump introduced his state of emergency, the global mean daily compound confirmed-case growth rate was about 20%. It would simply not have been responsible for governments to sit on their hands and watch the hospitals become overwhelmed. So action was taken and, to the fury of a few commenters here, it is working. Though on any view the numbers infected to date are insufficient to reduce the numbers still susceptible by more than a tiny fraction, the case growth rates are dropping.

        Would they have dropped so fast if governments had assumed that no action needed to be taken? No, they wouldn’t.

        it is very easy for armchair epidemiologists with no particular experience either of modeling real-world epidemics or of service at a senior level in government to shout the odds – and, in a democracy, there is nothing wrong with their shouting the odds.

        Responsible governments, however, cannot merely assume that the Chinese virus is no worse than flu. It is, as today’s posting evidences, a great deal worse than flu. Governments were right to be careful, even though there is a heavy cost to being careful.

        The advice of those scientific experts who argued passionately that nothing need be done other than to allow the population to become infected, let the old and sick die and leave the remainder with “herd immunity” was heard by governments on both sides of the Atlantic, but it was – in my view rightly – rejected in favour of honoring the ancient principle that the safety, health and well-being of the people comes first and is not to be risked by mere guesswork at a time when there has been insufficient testing to permit the vital parameter of this pandemic to be determined definitively. Sorry, but responsible governments have to be careful.

        Mr Cuomo, in today’s press conference, said that on current central-case to worst-case modeling the hospitals would have been overrun within weeks in the absence of precautionary measures. Of course it is possible that McKinseys and the other modelers on whom he relied may have been wrong, but given the grave and immediate threat to life and limb if they were right he took the same decision that many other governments have taken, and that decision has saved lives and spared the hospital system from outright collapse.

        • Sir – this is so correct.
          In THIS case, the precautionary approach was and is the one which had to be followed – until such time as new data was available – at which point, a course correction could be considered.

        • So action was taken and, to the fury of a few commenters here, it is working.

          Fake news spittle. Name one commenter in any thread who is furious that “action is working”.

          It’s this kind of deceit that makes you a counterproductive ally in the climate change wars. One not worthy of the usual courtesies.

        • I wonder about a few other mortality factors, not cited as co-morbidities or “health problems”: How many were smokers (of anything) or vapers? How many were deficient in vitamins D, C, or A? What was the average BMI? What has been the most common blood type?

      • I live just north of you in British Columbia, Canada, where we are enjoying the exceedingly good fortune of having a certain Dr Bonnie Henry as the province’s Chief Medical Officer. There many places in the world that would benefit greatly from having a courteous and above all unflappable and absolutely levelheaded individual like her in charge of the virus mess.

        One of the defining aspects of her management of the outbreak is the refusal of our province to engage in modelling and projections – unlike the other provinces and the clueless feds, all of whom have produced outlandish forecasts.

        Like my ex – MD, paediatric ICU and lung specialist- and your truly, Dr Henry appears to accept at face value three metrics only: number of/increase or decrease in ICU admissions and number of deaths.
        Like Stanford’s Ioannides, she appears to have been operating on the premise that
        until the arrival of reliable instantaneous serological testing, current testing efforts are not only an exercise in futility but in actual fact feed the GIGO modelling that dangerously generates the surreal casualty projections we’ve seen elsewhere, including the 100,000-240,000 dead for the US.

        At her kind but persuasive insistence, the BC population has generally been observing a reasonable stay-at-home-unless-necessary policy based on transparent detailed daily updates, and so far the province, population 4.8 million, has seen 1,300 confirmed cases and 50 deaths, a large majority of which have been in assisted living facilities, and an ICU system that has not been loaded above 60% of capacity.

        Based on today’s update, we are seeing a decelerating trend in ICU admissions/occupancy and corresponding falling number of deaths.

        Only a post-mortem (bad pun, sorry) including a hard nosed factor analysis will allow us to start figuring out whether and which of/combination of, confinement, testing, etc. actually influenced outcomes. Until then, anything else is to put it charitably, no more than marginally educated guesses.

    • Greg
      You say: “ It may make a little more sense if it was lagged by about 2weeks to that it uses deaths of the same population from which new cases were taken from”

      By 12th of March total number of people hospitalised was 590, 14 days later by 26th of March there were in total 578 patients dead, giving mortality of 98%
      On 12 of March number of patients entering hospital was 130, 14 days later on 26th of March there were 113 patients reported dead, giving mortality of 87%.

      • I know, if you lag it the numbers look far worse ( 14d seem about right for France , means stay before death in Italy was 5 days ! I guess UK would be different again).

        That leaves the question of what such ratios indicate. It is not the mortality of the virus, and I don’t believe, even when lagged , it is a success rate for the hospital.

        There maybe something there but I’m still trying to work out what it can tell us.

        Warning, totally speculative line fitting. Easy to invent stuff which is not really then you let lines prejudice the eye.
        https://climategrog.files.wordpress.com/2020/04/2019-ncov-log-ratio-italy.png

    • So far the death rate hasn’t come anywhere near the death rate of the annual flu world wide. It will have to top 3 million deaths to get there.

  1. Neil “Michael Mann” Ferguson-

    “Take Professor Neil Ferguson of Imperial College, London — arguably the single most influential person in the world right now: it was on the basis of his doomsday report that both Prime Minister Boris Johnson and President Trump were frightened, against their liberty-leaning instincts, into instituting the lockdowns which are killing jobs, businesses and the economy.

    Ferguson’s predictions of mass deaths — 500,000 in Britain alone — would be huge if they came true.

    But it has since emerged that Ferguson has a track record of getting things spectacularly wrong. For example, his recommended response to the UK’s 2001 Foot and Mouth epidemic is now widely recognised as having led to the needless slaughter of millions of animals. (What’s the word for such an unnecessarily zealous response? Oh yes. ‘Overreaction’)

    His modelling has been described by critics as ‘not fit for purpose.’ Worse — a breach of the most basic scientific etiquette — he has been reluctant to share the code which he used to model his doomsday conclusions”

    • In response to Richard, the daily compound rate of growth in recorded Chinese-virus deaths in the UK in the two weeks March 7 to March 21 was of order 40%. Now it is about 17%.

      On 21 March deaths in the UK totaled 233. Had a 40% daily growth rate persisted for just over three weeks, there would have been 500,000 dead. As it is, there have been 10,000 deaths in the UK. At a mean compound daily growth rate of 17%, there would be 500,000 dead in the UK in less than six weeks.

      That is why the UK Government decided that those who wanted to treat the Chinese virus as though it were no worse than flu should be overruled.

      Ferguson was, therefore, right to sound a warning to the Government, based on the established case growth rate at the time when he made the forecast. As the above numbers show, we are still in some danger of seeing 500,000 deaths in the UK from this pandemic in the coming months, unless the lockdown can be left in place for a few week longer.

      • and yet we did not see those figures on the cruise ship , Princess Diamond, which had a high viral load. These projections are not seen in Japan with no lock down.

        Projections are interesting but ….

        • Richard you need to look up the Ruby Princess fiasco. That ship alone was responsible for many of the corona cases we have here in Australia.

          • Richard when the Ruby Princess docked in Sydney Harbour more than 100 passengers were sick with an undetermined illness. It’s been claimed that this was disclosed to the relevant authorities, these passengers had not been tested for Wuhan virus at this stage. There is controversy and an investigation now as to how 2700 passengers were allowed to disembark in Sydney harbour. Many of our coronavirus illnesses and deaths have since been attributed to this event. Hundreds of passengers and crew on this ship have been since been diagnosed with the coronavirus and this event was directly responsible for spread of the infection within Australia. The Health Minister and the State Premier have alot to answer for this negligent event.

            I’m sure there a full details online if you are really interested, simply Google Ruby Princess. This event should not have happened.

        • Feb 6 Various experts..
          Cruise ships a concern but should be OK
          https://www.traveller.com.au/coronavirus-on-cruise-ships-in-australia-what-are-the-risks-h1llk5

          April 5th Not so flash
          https://kfgo.com/2020/04/06/virus-hit-carnival-cruise-ship-docks-in-australia-for-crew-emergencies/

          Current cruise ship voyages into Sydney linked to confirmed COVID-19 cases are Ovation of the Seas which docked 18 March (84 cases), the Voyager of the Seas which docked 18 March (34 cases, as well as 5 crew members), the Ruby Princess which docked 19 March (342, as well as 9 crew members), the Celebrity Solstice which docked 19 March (12 cases).

          And Diamond Princess…aound 700 infections, 18% asymptomatic and 8 deaths [a smigden over 1%]

      • The problem with Ferguson is none of his work has been peer reviewed.

        “Several researchers have apparently asked to see Imperial’s calculations, but Prof. Neil Ferguson, the man leading the team, has said that the computer code is 13 years old and thousands of lines of it “undocumented,” making it hard for anyone to work with, let alone take it apart to identify potential errors. He has promised that it will be published in a week or so, but in the meantime reasonable people might wonder whether something made with 13-year-old, undocumented computer code should be used to justify shutting down the economy. Meanwhile, the authors of the Oxford model have promised that their code will be published “as soon as possible.”

      • Had a 40% daily growth rate persisted for just over three weeks…

        But this never happens, so doing silly extrapolations of exponential function is just scare tactics.

        we are still in some danger of seeing 500,000 deaths in the UK from this pandemic in the coming months, unless the lockdown can be left in place for a few week longer.

        I’m sorry that kind of projection is nonsense. This kind of claim is like “sea level rise by 2100 maybe as much as 6 meters ” and 6 deg C warmer than today. You have always been vociferously opposed that kind of thing here. Why are you now adopting it wholesale?

      • Waow ! what sort of logic, sorry I really appreciated your work on global warming but here it is non sense.

        I just check South Korea and their number of death once it starts exploding after the epidemy was confirmed, 18th of February (remember no lockdown in South Korea).

        From 22nd of February up to 6th or 7th of March, the daily grow rate in South Korea was at a respectively 27% or 25%.

        Had this grow rate continue, South Korea will have now between 108.000 and 166.000 deaths (in fact more, no much more than the rest of the world alltogether). Instead South Korea has 208 deaths.

        Also of interest for you and based on cured people (either recovered or dead) at one point in the beginning of the epidemy the dead ratio was above 40% for 6 days in South Korea, it is now at a low 2.8% and going down. So maybe you should question the quality of the type of medicine given and that there is a learning curve for the medical profession (it is disapointing that countries can’t learn from each other). Some professors have clearly criticized the use of ventilator as being worst than anything else. But they are not listen.

        Finally to extrapolate any trends is to assume that people will not react. Here in Belgium once the cases from Italy returns from the february holidays on the week-end of 29th February and 1st of March, social distance starts to be applied by stopping shaking hands and kissing to great people as we do here and hand washing become more and more used. Now even if government , yes you know those that cant think more than lockdown, have not imposed or advise using masks, people take the power and start using masks, in one week in my neighbourhood masks used has increased from less than 10% to 25% , a friend told me that in his neighbourhood it has increased from 50 to 80%. I believe that in a week time the great majority of people in Belgium will wear a mask, whether or not the government advise it, we don’t give a s**t!

  2. Thank you! I am so sick of hearing this bug is just another flu. The only way one can say it is just like flu is to assume with flu most of the herd has some immunity so when the flu hits, most of us don’t end up in the ICU because our immune systems have encountered this big before. Maybe, if this coronavirus had swept through the population over and over again each year and a large chunk of the population was immune, we would have stats similar to flu. However for now, being an entirely new virus our immune systems have not encountered before, it is certainly not just flu. People who say that are being irresponsible.

    • I agree, it is not the flu. And anyone saying that it is “like the flu” is ill-informed and probably scared to think that it is different, the flu is known and therefore not unknown.

      My problem is with the data. The data to date is not enough–and for 1 reason only, we have no antibody testing going on. We are testing for the virus, not for the antibody to the virus. Until we have antibody testing, we won’t know exactly how and/or why this virus is so aggressive in some and yet not in others. Or how many of those “others” may be the “some”.

      As this is not the flu, we need to stop comparing it to the flu IMO. It is NOT the flu and doing so, leads us down a path we probably don’t want to go, of both extremes.

      • I agree it’s not the flu as well. However, when someone says “it’s like the flu” that are not saying it “is the flu”. They’re merely making a comparison (however a poor comparison it may prove to be). They are using something that is relatively well known (the flu) as a benchmark for evaluating the data (flawed as it is) about something that is unknown (the Wuhan virus). They are not saying the two things are identical, and to pretend that that are is to be as ill-informed as you complain that they are.

        You can cry “don’t compare them” all you want, but that won’t stop the comparisons, it’s human nature to take something known/experienced that may have some (however superficial) similarities and use that as a benchmark for evaluating something unknown/previously unexperienced. Such comparisons can be useful or they can be useless, but they’re gonna happen regardless.

        • Well the “its like the flu” is only a bit less dumb than the “X die of car accidents”, but barely.

          As I’ve mentioned repeatably, while people would never brag about being illiterate, they willingly show off their innumeracy and often brag about it as well.

          • Exactly, it’s not like the flu at all. Corona virus infections can cause symptoms like sore throat, stuffy nose, headaches, fever and cough.

            They’re not even remotely similar to influenza symptoms…oh wait..

          • The symptoms may be similar, but the attack on the body is not.
            The Flu is an Upper respiratory desease and COVID19 is a Lower respiratory desease that directly attacks the lungs.

          • Around 30% of ‘common colds’ are caused by corona viruses. Normally those colds that become ‘chesty’ coughs. It may be that they are all as infective as COVID-19/Novel SARS CV. I presume that it could be that there is a ‘herd immunity’ to the corona viruses in general but some people particularly those low in dietary zinc do not have sufficient immunity. That could explain the huge number of asymptomatic individuals.

          • True. I read years ago that one of the major European plaques developed resistance to HIV.

          • No one compares the virus to car accidents. What they are saying is that we don’t stop the world because people die in car accidents. We live in the natural world and this will happen again. We can’t stop it and hiding in our houses won’t change it.

          • Are you kidding?!?

            That is PRECISELY the type of innumerate “argument” that complete idiots make as you can’t understand multiplicativity.

            Seriously, you can’t understand that because:

            2+2=4

            and

            2*2=4

            it doesn’t mean:

            2+2+2=6
            2*2*2=6

            Here’s a hint: 8 is MORE than 6.

            Jebus, don’t make me sic Taleb on your sorry tuckus.

          • I don’t believe this… both are viruses that cause a similar set of symptoms. Theres an annual flu epidemic that kills tens of thousands of people in every industrialized country across the globe, the corona virus is an epidemic that is killing tens of thousands of people across industrialized countries. The flu is a great benchmark, as a viral epidemic, to use.

          • No it’s no. That’s your lack of reading comprehension showing if you interpret the comparison of response to one type of death to the response to another as being “innumerately comparing a virus to car accidents”. The fact is there are huge amounts of death related to various activities (car driving being but one of many), several of them even surpassing the current estimated numbers for the Wuhan virus. Yet we don’t shut down the world’s economy over them. That’s not innumerate, that’s simple facts. like it or not. You can either deal with the facts or you can mindlessly and inaccurately shout “innumerate” to your hearts content. Clearly you’ve chosen the later. Rational people will tend to choose the former.

        • Comparisons to the flu are not to be dismissive, but simply keep some perspective.

          Whatever the case, I’m anxious to get out of the spot we’re in now, where everyone seems to be in a virtue-signaling contest to see which of our rights and freedoms they can restrict faster and more completely, and perhaps permanently.

          • If we want to go by statistics alone, we don’t want to ride the motorbikes either.

            Motorcycle riders are 26 (not 6) times more likely to die in a crash … this is per mile driven, so it is not a statistical exaggeration in any way.

            I wouldn’t be the first, or loudest, to complain if someone tried to eliminate or restrict motorcycles as a travel (or more often than not simply a recreation) mode, but I would absolutely complain; I would even likely ignore an edict that says I can’t ride a bike.

            When someone points to a 6x statistic and states it is important to save lives, & obviously ignores a personal 26x statistic … well, that someone should look in the mirror while explaining personal freedoms & responsibilities to their own self. If they won’t do that, I don’t want to hear them advocating for taking away any of my current rights or freedoms.

            When I am in a car, my risk is way less than the ’26x’.

            When I stay away from others, my risk of the ‘6x’ is way less.

            I like to make my own choices.

          • Don my whole family rode motorbikes. We all rode motorbikes before we learned to drive cars. My husband taught me and subsequently our four sons to ride motorbikes and he taught us all to drive cars too. None of us went to ‘driving school’ and fortunately none of had anything more than a minor fall. We couldn’t afford to buy vehicles for all four boys, so they started with motorbikes which they bought themselves working part time jobs after school.

            Tried to teach them to be self sufficient, tried to teach them that they wouldn’t always like their boss or decisions that are made for them but to choose their battles because sometimes they themselves were going to be wrong too.

          • Lordy, lordy, lordy,

            I blew the stats by a ‘little’.

            For our U.K. friends, the multiplier is ‘61.5 x’

            (they base it more appropriately on vehicle miles rather than passenger miles).

            61.5 times more likely to die … not 6 times more likely to die.

            If I am the one on the bike, I don’t really see the ‘61.5x’ as an issue. So I don’t try to keep others off bikes either.

            If I am old and susceptible, maybe I stay home more & avoid other contacts for a while. But I don’t try to keep others in their own homes as well.

        • The main argument which is being misrepresented as “it’s just like flu” without citation ( typical straw man fallacy ) is to point out that the excess mortality this year is only going to be like an average flu year.

          The populations which typically die of flu will die of COVID-19 this years.
          That is what meant by “it’s just like flu”.

          most of us won’t end up in the ICU , we will not even know we have been exposed.

          • I felt like hell for several weeks over the winter – not enough to put me down, but it CLUNG – a friend of mind who took a flight between Oregon and DC during the same stretch – with a bunch of Chinese passengers wearing masks – said the same thing.

      • Yes, I’m really scared. That’s why I think the UK YTD deaths are lower than average. That somehow has influenced the data.

        Nobody says “it’s the flu”. What they say is, it’s no worse than the flu. And they compare it to the flu, because both diseases kill mainly the elderly with health problems. If we don’t go into crazy lockdown for flu, why do we do it for this disease?

        As for everything else you say, we don’t know anything about flu or many other diseases either. Every year, flu kills young, healthy people. Not many, but some. Why? No idea. Every year, flu appears in winter then disappear. Why? No idea. How many people get flu each year? We don’t know, because we don’t test everybody with symptoms. We assume its flu but maybe its not.

        It seems to be the ones who scared are the ones thinking its bad, not those who think its like a lot of other diseases we probably havent noticed yet.

      • The flu is probably more deadly to young people, and to people that are healthy with no pre-existing conditions.

        I think there is a biased on WUWT because most who read and respond are old and retired.

    • The more important public health issue is: How does society better protect the most vulnerable to dying with C19. Locking down EVERY ONE is the wrong approach.

      Why? The most vulnerable are people age 60+ with complicating health conditions. See:
      https://digg.com/2020/coronavirus-death-rate-italy-spain-elderly
      https://www.doh.wa.gov/Emergencies/Coronavirus (scan down to get to the age distribution)

      The other very vulnerable group is adults age 40-59 with complicating health conditions.

      These people know who they are. Family members know who they are. Their health care providers know who they are. A benefit to society is: Those who want to live & those who care about them WILL WILLINGLY take adequate precautions.

      Furthermore, they account for less than 10% of most post industrial country populations. The 10% figure is limited to those with complicating health conditions. DIRECTLY protecting these people is much more effective and uses fewer social resources than locking down 100% of the population. It also avoids a surge in anxiety related deaths (suicides, overdoses, heart attacks … ) caused by lost earned income, diminished stock market portfolios, lost interest income, overhyping of C19 by the press and politicians …

      Finally, the likely surge in NEED (as opposed to want) for health care services can be dealt with satisfactorily in the following way. Give priority to the truly vulnerable. Everyone else should be told to take aspirin and stay home for 10 days or so. This procedure was put in place across the US, and has dramatically increased the # of hospital beds & other resources available for C19 cases and others truly needing immediate hospitalization.

      In the event you think the prior paragraph is cold hearted, please consider the following. Flattening the curve does LITTLE to reduce total deaths with C19 over the span of the plague. Take a careful look at IHME, and similar, calculations.

      Let’s focus on how to help best the truly vulnerable and to minimize adverse repercussions for the rest of society.

      • Why are you saying COVID is any different from the many other infections that “kill” the elderly with health problems? Most of the time, many of the people who die in the West are infected just before they die, and that’s the thing that pushes them over the edge. In normal times, we don’t stick them in ICU and ventilate them, because they will die anyway.

        In almost every country, the majority of deaths are deaths that would have happened anyway, with whatever the next infection was. That’s the reality of our counts at the moment, and by say end of May, we will have some inkling of whether there has been any excess deaths this year.

        • Phoenix44, let me rephrase your reply. Why are US officials, and those elsewhere, treating C19 differently than other infections? That is a great question. It is better to ask Dr. Fauci plus the governors of CA, OH, IL, VA, NY … plus relevant European officials … than me.

          I think the official US response violates a basic health care tenet: Either help or do not harm. Lockdowns FAIL to directly protect the most vulnerable. And, they hurt the least vulnerable.

          The exception might by Italy. When C19 began ravaging that country, officials could not learn from experience elsewhere. So, locking down part or all of Italy might have been prudent.

          • In response to DM, Phoenix44 et al., there is a distinction to be drawn between armchair epidemiologists, on the one hand, and governments on the other. Governments, faced with uncertain data and warring scientific factions, one activist and one passivist, must decide whether they can take the risk that the activists are wrong.

            The hard evidence from the report summarized in the head posting is to the effect that in numerous respects the Chinese virus is worse than flu. Governments have to base their life-or-death decisions on evidence, not on opinions. The evidence is that this infection might have killed millions to tens of millions worldwide, and may yet do so unless the daily growth rate in confirmed (i.e., more serious) cases can be brought down very considerably from where it is now.

            That is why the passivists have lost the argument, almost everywhere, and the activists have won. In time, we shall know who was right all along. At present, the data are insufficient to draw conclusions such as those drawn by DM – conclusions at odds with the evidence summarized in the head posting.

          • MoB, you mischaracterize my position. NO where do I dispute the threat SARS cov 2 poses to public health. Furthermore, I deliberately AVOIDED the “no worse than the flu” issue and the libertarian vs statist quarrel.

            Because I recognize SARS cov 2’s potential and KNOWING the major victims in S. Korea, Taiwan, Italy, WA state, NY state … , I reach the following well informed and reasoned conclusions. Society should directly protect the most vulnerable. Doing so is far more effective and uses social resources far better than locking down entire populations. Doing so is also far more effective than measures imposed by too many US states. Those measures typically FAIL to protect directly the most vulnerable. They also do little to reduce the total death count over the course of the plague. They merely increase the time span over which deaths occur

            An understanding of SARS cov 2’s tragic potential and the unknowns is reflected in my explicit tolerance of Italy’s lockdown and implicit acceptance of measures implemented by S. Korea or Taiwan.

            Although we disagree on the best approach to SARS cov 2, your insights, explanations and underlying analyses of this and other issues are profoundly appreciated. All are informative and stimulate thought. That is as good as it gets. Many thanks.

        • Depending on how you define ‘excess’, there will almost certainly be excess deaths this year.

          Most years we have a flu epidemic, which you can easily trace in the mortality figures. These are often designated ‘excess’. Cloud has already caused a rise in the figures – therefore there is an excess. It remains to be seen whether this will be like a mild, medium or heavy flu year….

      • “The other very vulnerable group is adults age 40-59 with complicating health conditions.”

        The coronavirus is infecting and killing black Americans at an alarmingly high rate

        A Post analysis of available data and census demographics shows that counties that are majority-black have three times the rate of infections and almost six times the rate of deaths as counties where white residents are in the majority.

        https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2020/04/07/coronavirus-is-infecting-killing-black-americans-an-alarmingly-high-rate-post-analysis-shows/?arc404=true

        ======

        In both Louisiana and Chicago, for example, recent statistics showed that roughly 70% of COVID-19 deaths occurred among blacks, even though they are a minority in both areas.

        https://www.usnews.com/news/healthiest-communities/articles/2020-04-07/black-people-are-disproportionately-dying-from-coronavirus

        • Latitude, this is also true in NYC per analysis that came out two days ago. DeBlasio was making a big political deal about it yesterday.

          Rate of infections is likely related to living conditions–disproportionately poor, crowded.

          There is also a disproportionate amount of hypertension (55%) and diabetes (35%) in that segment of the NYC population, which are the two principle ones in the NYC study. So the 6x fatalities is probably related to the known higher prevalence of co-morbidities.

          • Rud Istvan is right. It will be at least another generation or two before all races have the same opportunities.

            An additional co-factor is sunlight. Whites evolved fair skins so that in these northern latitudes they would get enough Vitamin D3 from sunlight. Everyone living in temperate climes should take daily Vitamin D3 suppementation, but those with darker skins are particularly at risk of Vitamin D3 deficiency, and it is vital that they should take supplementation every day. See Martineau et al. (2017) for an interesting meta-analysis of clinical trials involving between them more than 10,000 patients, showing that Vitamin D3 both inhibits infection and symptoms in respiratory diseases.

          • Lord Monckton, right on. A personal anecdote.
            My significant other here in south Florida has much skin damage from previous youthful sun exposure exuberance. So now covers, and slathers sunscreen.

            So, was blood tested a few years ago just one whatever above clinically deficient D in our sunshine state–as do 1/3 of all residents for similar precautionary reasons. D supplement is now standard daily praxis for us both, despite my moderate tan.

    • There are many reasons people compare this to the flu, and not all of them are so easily dismissed.

      For example, I have compared it with the flu when responding to ethical positions such as “we must do everything we can to save even one life”. Mayors, governors, and world leaders have said variations of this slogan for weeks.

      The comparison works here because the standard of “doing everything we can to save even one life” is impervious to mortality rates or any other attribute. It’s all-or-nothing. And so whoever holds such a position about one form of death and not another is a hypocrite.

      Scott Adams of Dilbert fame worded it differently, saying “How many grandmothers would you sacrifice to get back to work? Go ahead, make your case.” Again, comparisons to flu are apt, because certainly shutting down the economy would save many grandmothers every winter from seasonal flu. Yet he and everyone else has no problem “sacrificing” those ladies to keep the economy going.

    • The flu season of 2017-2018 some 60,000 people died of the flu in the US alone. I don’t recall any lockdowns. The facility I was doing primary nursing did nothing special about it. Those who died didn’t get green or blue or what color lights put up for them. I guess those people didn’t count because it happens every year? The current pandemic isn’t particularly different from the pandemics we have EVERY YEAR. Deal with it. I flat refuse to change my behavior any more than I am forced to and I will most certainly break any law that tires to put more limits on my constitutionally protected rights.

      Health care amounts to about a seventh of the US GDP and it is getting devastated. Not because we are overwhelmed but because we can’t get work. If the surgery is a success but the patient dies the patient is still and forever dead.

      • Some simple math: divide the 60.000 people dead by flu by 100 winter days when flu rages.That is on average 6000 deaths per day. Divide that by the more than 6000 intensive care beds in the US ( https://www.aha.org/statistics/fast-facts-us-hospitals . Even if the flu victims were on intensive care for ten days,a lot of beds were free for heart attack victims, strokes , road accidents, industrial accidents , measles complications etc etc. The doctors and nurses would cope.

        The difference between flu and the COVId-19 infection is that Covid burns so fast through the population that the hospital beds are overfilled ,doctors have to choose who dies, and coffins line up in ice skating grounds because funeral parlors cannot cope. See this https://www.euronews.com/2020/03/12/coronavirus-italy-doctors-forced-to-prioritise-icu-care-for-patients-with-best-chance-of-s

        I hope your not following rules will not be the cause of one extra death in the sum, or worse, the spread to a new community of the virus.

        The rules are enforced so that hospital care can be given to everybody that needs it, including all those with other ailments than Covod.

    • The problem is that people are told the symptoms are: temperature > 37.8 and/or persistent cough and/or breathlessness.
      They are also asked if they have flu like symptoms: e.g. muscle aches, fever, cough, lethargy.
      Flu like symptoms covers a multitude of illnesses including influenza, cellulitis and sepsis, although for the latter a temperature below 36 is significant.

      Bear in mind that although Covid19 is notifiable and hence should be subject to coroners inquest, this has been suspended by the emergency powers act recently enacted.

      https://drmalcolmkendrick.org/2020/04/06/covid-with-of-or-because-of/
      https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/wuhan-novel-coronavirus-infection-prevention-and-control/transmission-characteristics-and-principles-of-infection-prevention-and-control
      https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/wuhan-novel-coronavirus-infection-prevention-and-control/covid-19-personal-protective-equipment-ppe#section-10
      https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/878750/T2_poster_Recommended_PPE_for_primary__outpatient__community_and_social_care_by_setting.pdf
      https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-51205344

  3. Case Fatality Rate (CFR) is of no use at the point except perhaps in a few place with wide testing. Agreed its worse than the flu but on the order of 1-2.5x. The other issue when comparing is the flu start with vaccinations of 20% of people which limits the spread. Europe is probably over 20% immune now on average and likely higher, so you can start to treat it like a flu unless you are high risk. IFR is certainly <0.20% heavily weighted above 65 years old.

    I can't stress this enough; number of confirmed cases is not relevant. Stop looking at it and using it for any analysis until the sample is massive – such behavior cause this lockdown. It only guides to how likely you are to die if you have serious symptoms, NOT if you get infected. Big, big difference.

    We are close to herd immunity (~60%) in Europe, and the greater NY area. Let it spread but limit the speed with minor measures, mostly gatherings over 30 people, lockdown the high risk and get herd immunity by mid summer..

    • Why do you want to tell the data what to do, instead of being willing to learn what the data says?
      What makes you want to offer an opinion…yes it is only your opinion and you should say so and realize it yourself…that contradicts what the actual circumstance is?

      • I’m just giving you what the literature says and outputs from all the good private models. Its all out there, just not well read. For example:

        https://www.cebm.net/covid-19/global-covid-19-case-fatality-rates/

        This site has a good IFR estimate from Nic Lewis if you read it.

        Here is why you can’t use CFR for Covid yet and the problems with confirmed case count:

        https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/coronavirus-case-counts-are-meaningless/

        There is much more – and interesting study came out a few days ago with an IFR of 0.1%-0.18% based on excess influenza. They believe 9mm Americans had COVID on March 15th – long before any lockdowns.

        https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.01.20050542v1.full.pdf

        If you want more I’ll give them. All the sero studies are confirming the same. Wide distribution of the virus with no symptoms. This makes it in some ways much like the flu (IFR and distribution)

        • Not the same Nic Lewis that based his analysis on an old Diamond Princess report and therefore got the numbers completely wrong?
          The people on the Diamond Princess were put in Cabin Isolation almost from the first couple of cases.

          • Yes and he had too low IFR because he didn’t update for later fatalities. There are many studies around that vessel. The IFR median is about 0.18%. The difference is they only conducted one set of PCR tests and certainly missed some recovered assymptomatics.

        • Guest, It does not make it much like the flu! I don’t care if 1 billion people get Covid and 1 billion get the flu, 3 billion get covid and 70 million get flu, or any combination–the final hospital and mortality numbers are what matters for comparison, “The case fatality rate, as a fraction of all closed cases admitted to intensive care, is thus a little over 50%, compared with only 22% for the non-COVID viral pneumonias of the past three years.” 50 percent admitted to intensive care don’t make it as opposed to 22% for all other viral pneumonias combined! Not just the flu–all others.

      • Without random testing for antibodies, how on earth is it possible to get a sense of how many have been infected? The percentage of population infected…it could be as high as 60% in certain, hot-spots/clusters/regions/demographics

        I hear in Australia random testing is set for next week in the ACT (Australian Capital Territory)

        Took a while.

        • Well there is some random anti-body testing (though limited) as well as Diamond Princess, Vo, Italy, etc… (including that interesting Boston study from above). Its summarized in the links provided.

          You can also infer IFR by looking at development in different areas. It all paints a picture.

          • Oh you mean make a guess.
            None of the current Anti body test kits tested in the UK are any use at all.

    • We are close to herd immunity (~60%) in Europe

      Do you have any evidence for this claim? I doubt any more than 10% have developed Covid-19 immunity. .

      • ” I doubt any more than 10% have developed Covid-19 immunity. .”

        Do you have any evidence for this claim?

        • My ‘claim’ is an opinion based on the data.

          No government would be prepared to risk lifting lockdowns based on a “might be”. I’m fairly confident we, in Europe, are well short of 60% herd immunity. A rapid slowdown & decline in cases would have been seen by now.

          • I don’t agree with “Guest” but I was pointing out that your dismissal applies to your own personal guess just as much as his.

      • Yes there are lots, but for simple hand math, lets use a median IFR if 0.2 for Spain or Italy (its higher there due to older population than other areas). So 20/10,000. Over the past week about 800 people died each day from Covid and the infectious period is about a week. That means that about two weeks ago (average time from infection to death), about 2.8mm Italians were infectious (not have been infected but infectious). 2.75mm are not immune two weeks late and 5,500 are dead.

        Of course those people 2.8mm were infected from 1.4mm people (assuming and R of 2) and so forth. The R goes down and you reach immunity once R<1 (R=1-1/R0). And that was two weeks ago. Those 2.8mm spread it to another 2.8mm who spread it again (R0 is dropping due to lockdown at that point) but if you model it out and add up the numbers, 10-20mm Italians have it. Thats 20-40% of the population as of today.

        There are lots of ways to approach modeling this but assuming the disease is roughly the same, you can use different spreads to constrain IFR to something that fits everywhere. And yes that many people are indeed immune now in Europe. Less so in western North America.

        Its notable that NYC area likely peaked before lockdown and are closer to herd immunity than anywhere. The lockdowns were too late and are likely unnecessary at this point.

        Sorry to rush through it, just busy.

        • The accuracy of your ‘analysis’ relies on the assumption that IFR is 0.2% (why?) -and you still can’t get the number infected to 60%.

          And this is using the 2 countries in Europe which had the earliest outbreaks. The combined population of Italy & Spain is less than 20% of Europe total.

          I think I’ll wait until we get a bit more data before declaring Europe immune to Covid-19.

          • The peak is defined by the peak in infectiousness (because that’s when its being spread) which precedes fatality by 2-3 weeks and hospitalizations by 1-2 weeks. Just back up that March 30th hospitalization peak 10-14 days and Bobs your uncle.

            Its a real thing – you can mark it here when the serum IFR tests they finished end March are published. There will be no 2nd peak there. It over. Safest Covid place on the planet right now.

          • Guest April 9, 2020 at 12:30 pm

            Its a real thing – you can mark it here when the serum IFR tests they finished end March are published. There will be no 2nd peak there. It over. Safest Covid place on the planet right now.

            I very much doubt you’re right on this. If the virus had been allowed to circulate freely with no intervention measures implemented then – YES , there would have been a natural peak & decline (and a lot more deaths). But the majority of NY population are still likely to be susceptible. The spread of the virus was mitigated by strong measures.

            Early indications are that the level of immunity in affected locations is disappointingly low. Single figure percentages in most cases.

    • We are close to herd immunity (~60%) in Europe

      Source?

      Otherwise I’ll have to assume it falls into the category of:
      “80% Of Statistics Are Made Up “

      • Sorry that was poorly written. Herd immunity threshold is 50-60% depending mainly on density. Most of Europe is around 30% recovered – most of which happened pre-lockdown. Some ways to go to herd immunity but the virus will not spread easily now with so much immunity in place.

        • Herd immunity threshold is dependent on the R0 for the infection. We do not yet know this value for Coronavirus, but it’s estimated to be between 2 & 3. It could be higher as we do not have a clear accounting of asymptomatic/minimally symptomatic infections. The model also would need to account for the likelihood that these undercounted cases will also be less infectious.

          Based on the R0 above herd immunity is going to be reached at 60% minimally and may be over 80%.

          • Over 80% is unlikely. Thats an R0 of 5 (R0 varies by region)!! If this started in China in December with an R0 of 5 it would be everywhere. Maybe an R0 of 4 in a hyper dense communal area with limited hygiene (like NYC), but not everywhere. We’d all have it by now if that were the case. Herd immunity is achieved at much lower levels.

        • Exactly, that is why the curves of all european countries are bending over and peaking. This is normal epidemic development.

          That is the reason Monckton’s graph is showing reducing %ages, that is basically a crude approximation to the slope of the log plot of new cases.

          There is no evidence in the graph he has been pushing every day to support the claim that without confinement the exponential would still be climbing unaltered and would soon exceed the total population of the Earth if we did not act.

          He clearly realises that by now ( if he did not realise to start with ) and has no rebuttal. He just ignores it and carries on mis-informing to push his authoritarian agenda.

          • There you go spouting your “normal epidemic development” unproven and unprovable statement again.
            How you can say it will be normal with social disatnces and lock downs in place is denying facts.
            How can it be spreading “normally” when people are not acting normally?

          • Greg,
            You have previously made some cogent rejoinders to M of B’s posts. However, this post seems little more than an attack devoid of substance.

            He quantified the relative morbidity and extended intensive care requirements vis-a-vis influenza.

            By what means to you presume isolation makes no difference in rate of infection and subsequent ICU case loads?

            I’m not an Epidemiological but I’m 100% certain that I cannot be infected if I remain home and free of contact with infected people.

            This is axiomatic to all reasonable people. Of course, this in no way obviates the need to balance economic concerns with controlling infection rates.

          • Rob, I made this exact comment several days ago back when Greg and I were “friends”.
            Since then, he seems to have decided he hates anyone who does not share his inane views about all issues pertaining to this situation.

          • By what means to you presume isolation makes no difference in rate of infection and subsequent ICU case loads?

            It is astounding the propensity of people who are capable of reading something other that which is written, extrapolating what they think someone “meant” in place of what they wrote and then attack them for what they did not say. Remember Willis’ Law : quote what you disagree with.

            In your particular case you also seem confused about the difference between the rate of infection and statistics derived from inconsistently applied tests for the pathogen in a very small % of the population.

            What I am saying is that I’m surprised that there does not seem to be a visible trace of this “blindingly obvious” effect when we look at the data. That does NOT equate to “presuming” there is no such effect.

            I am challenging CofB’s claims about his graph but I have gone into that in detail in my first reply to him today, so I won’t repeat it here. You may like to look back on that if you are still confused.

    • Guest is incorrect to say that the case fatality rate is of no use at this point. It is of use, because during the early stages of a pandemic the least unreliable way to estimate it is as the ratio of deaths to closed cases – i.e., cases where those infected have either recovered or died.

      Unfortunately, innumerate governments, not realizing this, have kept a reasonable track of deaths (subject to endless arguments about whether people have died of or with the infection), but have been lamentably poor at keeping track of those who have recovered. At present, the case fatality rate by the standard early-stages method I have described is a whopping 25%, which shows just how poorly governments are recording recoveries from the infection. If they made a proper effort to record recoveries, and a careful effort to distinguish the “died from” from the “died with”, they would by now have a pretty fair idea of something like the true case fatality rate.

      With Sars 1, a couple of decades ago, the WHO thought the case fatality rate was 2%. It turned out to be nearer 10%. With the present Sars 2, the WHO thought the case fatality rate was 2%, then close to 4%. But it could be higher. We really need to know how many have recovered.

      • The ICU case fatality rate is high, and the pathophysiology of Covid-19 for these patients is quite different from the Influenza cases in the ICU and accounts for the mortality rate difference for this population.

        Of note, the threshold for ICU admission will vary significantly from hospital to hospital, and within a hospital by whether capacity is being reached. This means that the population of patients in the ICU will vary in clinical presentation and this makes the statistics more unreliable.

        Similarly, the threshold for hospitalization will be even more variable. Some regions have a lower and others a higher standard (higher and lower do not imply quality). The team at Dartmouth has done yeoman’s work at demonstrating such variances. We cannot say apples to apples.

        Additionally, I have not seen any prevalence data of consequence. Given the mortality is restricted to an extreme response, what percent of infected patients develop such a response? It is not unreasonable to say it is below 0.1% of infected patients, when all are taken into account. Similar to Influenza, as the Influenza numbers are not based on testing, but on known patterns for spread of infection in a community. In the US, around January is when we stop testing patients as the extent of the infection is then known. With Covid-19 we do not have a clue as to the extent of community infection.

      • Excellent point Lord Monckton,
        and one which has gotten little attention.
        It does increase skepticism of the data sets on the whole, I might add.
        Although on balance, I am not too terribly surprised if the reason is that the individuals who are supposed to be recording, reporting, compiling, and then disseminating this information may be either overwhelmed, understaffed, working from home, or some combination thereof.

  4. BUT FROM WHAT ARE THEY DYING?
    Thank you for the analysis. But one glaring error in your analysis is using “corona death” as one of your data points. Governments world wide have changed the way in which we determine cause of death. One can now merely be a carrier (no cough or fever) while dying from other illnesses such as lung disease, cancer, etc. In the US, our CDC has now demanded not only carriers but anyone “presumed” to be a carrier (i.e. no test needed). Dr. Bhakdi, the most cited disease specialist in the history of Germany, pleads how wrong this is. It is not scientific and goes against all prior precedent. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MARVdS-pHdQ. An article in US explains the “boost” in numbers. https://www.mprnews.org/story/2020/04/03/change-to-death-certificates-could-boost-covid19-counts

  5. World renowned disease scientist, Dr. John Ionnidis, believes we have three excellent case studies. The do show this virus to be similar to influenza in mortality rates. They are The Diamond Princess, Iceland, and Vo’, Italy. He explains in detail starting here https://youtu.be/G3xEOcJ3YUw?t=103.

  6. You are still citing the number of confirmed cases as though they tell us anything except how many are being tested. This is perpetuating misinformation about the spread of the virus.

    Many doctors have questioned whether people are being put too quickly onto ventilation, which is a brutal form of intervention that it is feared may do more harm than good.

    Almost no one has said it is no worse than flu. Many specialists have said it is not much worse than flu, or like a bad flu. The point is not that it is not a serious illness that is killing people, but that it is not so much worse than what goes around some years to justify such a stupendously costly response – a response that itself is killing people.

    It is wrong to accuse people who disagree with you of being politically or ideologically motivated. You should engage with their argument and not make assumptions about their motives. Here is a selection of specialists and medics who oppose lockdowns as a response to this virus:
    – Professor Sucharit Bhakdi, a world renowned expert in medical microbiology, says blaming the new coronavirus alone for deaths is „wrong“ and „dangerously misleading“, as there are other more important factors at play, notably pre-existing health conditions and poor air quality in Chinese and Northern Italian cities. Professor Bhakdi describes the currently discussed or imposed measures as „grotesque“, „useless“, „self-destructive“ and a „collective suicide“ that will shorten the lifespan of the elderly and should not be accepted by society.
    – Pietro Vernazza, a Swiss infectious disease specialist, argues that many of the imposed measures are not based on science and should be reversed. According to Vernazza, mass testing makes no sense because 90% of the population will see no symptoms, and lockdowns and closing schools are even „counterproductive“. He recommends protecting only risk groups while keeping the economy and society at large undisturbed.
    – The President of the World Doctors Federation, Frank Ulrich Montgomery, argues that lockdown measures as in Italy are „unreasonable“ and „counterproductive“ and should be reversed.
    – German Professor Karin Moelling, former Chair of Medical Virology at the University of Zurich, stated in an interview that Covid19 is „no killer virus“ and that „panic must end“.
    – German immunologist and toxicologist, Professor Stefan Hockertz, explains in a radio interview that Covid19 is no more dangerous than influenza (the flu), but that it is simply observed much more closely. More dangerous than the virus is the fear and panic created by the media and the „authoritarian reaction“ of many governments. Professor Hockertz also notes that most so-called „corona deaths“ have in fact died of other causes while also testing positive for coronaviruses. Hockertz believes that up to ten times more people than reported already had Covid19 but noticed nothing or very little.
    – The Argentinean virologist and biochemist Pablo Goldschmidt explains that Covid19 is no more dangerous than a bad cold or the flu. It is even possible that the Covid19 virus circulated already in earlier years, but wasn’t discovered because no one was looking for it. Dr. Goldschmidt speaks of a „global terror“ created by the media and politics. Every year, he says, three million newborns worldwide and 50,000 adults in the US alone die of pneumonia.
    – Professor Martin Exner, head of the Institute for Hygiene at the University of Bonn, explains in an interview why health personnel are currently under pressure, even though there has hardly been any increase in the number of patients in Germany so far: On the one hand, doctors and nurses who have tested positive have to be quarantined and are often hard to replace. On the other hand, nurses from neighbouring countries, who provide an important part of the care, are currently unable to enter the country due to closed borders.
    – Using data from the cruise ship Diamond Princess, Stanford Professor John Ioannidis showed that the age-corrected lethality of Covid19 is between 0.025% and 0.625%, i.e. in the range of a strong cold or the flu. Moreover, a Japanese study showed that of all the test-positive passengers, and despite the high average age, 48% remained completely symptom-free; even among the 80-89 year olds 48% remained symptom-free, while among the 70 to 79 year olds it was an astounding 60% that developed no symptoms at all. This again raises the question whether the pre-existing diseases are not perhaps a more important factor than the virus itself. The Italian example has shown that 99% of test-positive deaths had one or more pre-existing conditions, and even among these, only 12% of the death certificates mentioned Covid19 as a causal factor.
    – The renowned Italian virologist Giulio Tarro argues that the mortality rate of Covid19 is below 1% even in Italy and is therefore comparable to influenza. The higher values only arise because no distinction is made between deaths with and by Covid19 and because the number of (symptom-free) infected persons is greatly underestimated.
    – German Virology professor Dr. Carsten Scheller from the University of Würzburg explains in a podcast that Covid19 is definitely comparable with influenza and has so far even led to fewer deaths. Professor Scheller suspects that the exponential curves often presented in the media have more to do with the increasing number of tests than with an unusual spread of the virus itself.
    – The two Stanford professors of medicine, Dr. Eran Bendavid and Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, explain in an article that the lethality of Covid19 is overestimated by several orders of magnitude and is probably even in Italy only at 0.01% to 0.06% and thus below that of influenza. The reason for this overestimation is the greatly underestimated number of people already infected (without symptoms). As an example, the fully tested Italian community of Vo is mentioned, which showed 50 to 75% symptom-free test-positive persons.
    – A new study by the University of Oxford concludes that Covid19 may already have existed in the UK since January 2020 and that half of the population may already be immunised, with most people experiencing no or only mild symptoms. This would mean that only one in a thousand people would need to be hospitalised for Covid19. (Study)
    – Professor Gérard Krause, head of the Department of Epidemiology at the German Helmholtz Centre for Infection Research, warns on German public television ZDF that the anti-corona measures „could lead to more deaths than the virus itself„.
    – The director of the University Medical Center Hamburg, Dr. Ansgar Lohse, demands a quick end to curfews and contact bans. He argues that more people should be infected with corona. Kitas and schools should be reopened as soon as possible so that children and their parents can become immune through infection with the corona virus. The continuation of the strict measures would lead to an economic crisis, which would also cost lives, said the physician.
    – Professor Martin Haditsch, specialist in microbiology, virology and infection epidemiology, sharply criticises the Covid19 measures. These are „completely unfounded“ and would „trample on sound judgment and ethical principles“.
    – Professor John Oxford of Queen Mary University London, one of the world’s leading virologists and influenza specialists, comes to the following conclusion regarding Covid19: „Personally, I would say the best advice is to spend less time watching TV news which is sensational and not very good. Personally, I view this Covid outbreak as akin to a bad winter influenza epidemic. In this case we have had 8000 deaths this last year in the ‘at risk’ groups viz over 65% people with heart disease etc. I do not feel this current Covid will exceed this number. We are suffering from a media epidemic!“
    – In a 40-minute interview, the internationally renowned epidemiology professor Knut Wittkowski from New York explains that the measures taken on Covid19 are all counterproductive. Instead of „social distancing“, school closures, „lock down“, mouth masks, mass tests and vaccinations, life must continue as undisturbed as possible and immunity must be built up in the population as quickly as possible. According to all findings to date, Covid-19 is no more dangerous than previous influenza epidemics. Isolation now would only cause a „second wave“ later.
    – Dr. Andreas Sönnichsen, head of the Department of General and Family Medicine at the Medical University of Vienna and chairman of the Network for Evidence-Based Medicine, considers the measures imposed so far to be „insane“. The whole state is being paralysed just to „protect the few it could affect“.
    – Professor Klaus Püschel, head of forensic medicine in Hamburg, explains about Covid19: „This virus influences our lives in a completely excessive way. This is disproportionate to the danger posed by the virus. And the astronomical economic damage now being caused is not commensurate with the danger posed by the virus. I am convinced that the Corona mortality rate will not even show up as a peak in annual mortality.“ In Hamburg, for example, „not a single person who was not previously ill“ had died of the virus: „All those we have examined so far had cancer, a chronic lung disease, were heavy smokers or severely obese, suffered from diabetes or had a cardiovascular disease. The virus was the last straw that broke the camel’s back, so to speak. „Covid-19 is a fatal disease only in exceptional cases, but in most cases it is a predominantly harmless viral infection.“

    • Hi Will Jones, – Your compilation reflects the core of intelligent disparate professional opinions I’ve been coming across. Thanx for putting it out today.

    • Puschel says, “I am convinced that the Corona mortality rate will not even show up as a peak in annual mortality.“

      But that’s because the lockdowns will halve deaths from auto accidents, workplace accidents, and ordinary flu.

    • Püschel says, “I am convinced that the Corona mortality rate will not even show up as a peak in annual mortality.”

      But that’s because the lockdowns will halve the deaths from ordinary flu (due to distancing and avoidance of cold weather) and from accidents (auto and workplace). If the lockdowns hadn’t been put in place, deaths from Wu-Flu would sit atop the deaths from those everyday causes.

    • Thank you Will Jones for this good summary of what I have read in the last 2 weeks. I think nearly every good opinion/ news is there ! Good work.

  7. If it is worse than the seasonal flu we should expect at least 3,177,204 deaths as that was the toll from the seasonal flu in 2018. The world did not shut down. Now can someone please tell me just why the current death rate demands that which was not done in any other year?

    • Old White Guy,
      If you do not know by now, and have to ask such questions, i very much doubt anyone can tell you, and also doubt any explication on the subject would suffice to convince you perhaps you need to change your mind.

      I will say this to every single person reading:
      If you have not changed your mind or admitted you were wrong about anything regarding this disease and this virus and this outbreak over the past several months, then you are either a liar, or abjectly obtuse, completely unteachable, and far too dense and rigid of mind to be anything like a scientist.
      When someone has a belief that is belied by the facts, what that means is that person is out of touch with reality.
      This is a new situation, with new information, and much to be discovered.
      And already so many have locked themselves into some preconceived notions of what is what.
      We all know how that goes.
      Intelligent people, people with objective minds and attitudes that are compatible with the scientific method, know when they do not know something, and change their minds when new information becomes apparent.
      If you have not changed your mind when new information has come into view…you ought to know and need to be told…you are out of touch with reality.

      • “well if you don’t know by now, I can’t tell you” has to be one of lamest non arguments every invented. You are not female by any chance?

        • If you want to insult someone, why not use what they actually said, rather than making up a lie, putting it in quotes, and saying it is lame?
          But you have evolved into one of the most insincere and dishonest people on the entire internet, so I am not a bit surprised.
          You should know all about not being able to be told anything.
          You are 100% bone headed and immune to actual information unless it confirms your prior bias.

          In any case, your hatred of women is noted.
          I do not even need to ask if you are homosexual.

      • No kidding. Early models were wrong. We learned that China cannot be trusted. We learned that. We learned that NY is a unique sad case. We learned that people get the virus and exhibit no symptoms. We learned people get the virus and recover. We learned that Governors have no rules to stop stay in place orders or to shut down non “essential” businesses. We learned that people will not go to the doctor now. We learned that millions of people are losing their jobs 🙁

        • I have learned a lot more than that.
          I am trying to find the common thread of the ones you mention.
          I never paid any attention to models, early or later ones.
          I never trusted China.
          Did we learn why New York is so much worse than any other city in the US?
          Is it only unique in the US?
          IDK…I am not spending time looking at the details with that much granularity.
          I think we already knew the vast majority of people do not die.
          Kind of surprising that there is such a large number of people who get nothing or next to nothing, and then also a large number who get really sick.
          I learned that it is not unusual for a lot of people to get a disease and have no symptoms…I would have guessed it was rare.
          But I am still trying to think of one that has so many with a mild case or nothing, AND at the same time makes a lot of people get pneumonia.
          I would have guessed that these two things are inversely proportional…more people that get really sick means a disease is highly virulent and so fewer people get it and have a mild case.
          This one is like a barbell…two big clumps at each end.
          Not clear exactly what you are saying about Governors.
          I am surprised that healthy people can be quarantined without declaring martial law.
          And that no one seems to be suing, or at least it is not being widely reported if they are.
          I am still kind of shocked at how people have reacted to this, but I am not trying to hard to figure it out. I do not think I would have said I would be able to guess exactly what would happen. I never really thought about that part of it in detail.
          Do they have authority to shut down such businesses?
          Staying away from where the sick people are in an epidemic seems like a rational response to me.
          Regarding the jobs, I knew as soon as the NBA cancelled that this would be very bad for the economy. Everything is interrelated. When MLB, Disney, movie theaters, and concerts all shut their doors, what I guessed might happen was confirmed.
          Remains to be seen what happens with the jobs.
          I guess that depends a lot on how soon this ends, but I am not seeing the exit ramp, personally.
          I think someone could declare it all over and ring the all clear and most would not pay attention.
          I think at this point, the people who do not want to get COVID need to hear about a treatment or a vaccine or something that changes the odds of a bad outcome.
          Dying is not the only bad outcome.
          Getting so sick you need to go to a hospital and maybe an ICU sounds very bad to me.
          I have never been that sick.
          I think most people that get pneumonia have damage that may be permanent to some degree.
          I could be wrong about that…just my general sense of the long term consequences of that sort of lung damage.
          A lot of people are getting very sick for what seems to me to be an unheard of amount of time for a virus thing.
          Four weeks is over twice as long as the flu usually lasts, which is typically a several days to a week.
          And this one has people getting to that stage after as much as a week or more of just being kind of sick.
          It seems very weird to take many days to start to feel sick, and then a bunch more of being regular cold or flu type of sick, and then getting a whole bunch worse and having that last for weeks and weeks.
          That is nothing like flu, not that I ever heard of.

          If the malaria drugs are as potent as so many seem to think, hopefully we will see the proof of it soon.
          Really strong results are easier to prove.
          The more time goes by though, the less hopeful I am.
          I do not think anyone knows how to push a restart button on a whole economy.

          And I am wondering how travel can start back up as long as people still have this virus.
          I do not think it is gonna go away.
          So, what happens in places that have snuffed out the epidemic if people travel there who have it? Who wants to get on a plane if they might be tested and quarantined on arrival someplace?
          Hard to see how we get back to where we were.
          Normally I would say…everything will be fine, people never change, but I am really not feeling that for this situation.

          So at this point I am hoping I am wrong about a whole bunch of stuff.

          • The degree of sickness is likely due to multiple factors – one which is the initial dose received and another is the route of exposure. Perchance a high dose received by inhalation could result in pneumonia whereas a low dose via ingestion or contact w/ the eyes, may be asymptomatic. But with a handle of Farmer, what do I know?

          • Chemical engineer too?
            I would think that means you know a lot.
            I have posted studies with scads of evidence that route of exposure and infectious dose can have a large influence on whether someone shows illness from an infection of several other types of viruses.
            It seems that some of them showed that even having antibody protection could be overcome by a large enough dose for some viruses, while others had no protection conferred from having antibodies.

            Here it is just in case you would like to have a look.
            https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12560-011-9056-7

          • Thank you Nicholas. It follows that face coverings (whether N95, surgical, scarf, etc.) can reduce dose and thus improve CV19 outcomes.

          • Yes, that is one of the things that has become very clear to me, from this and many other sources and inferences.

        • “We learned that NY is a unique sad case.”

          Thanks to foot-dragging and “denial”:
          “3 Ways New York Botched the Coronavirus Response in March
          “A hapless mayor and overpraised governor made false promises, gave inaccurate health information, and helped turn Gotham into the pandemic’s epicenter, according to The New York Times”
          MATT WELCH | 4.9.2020 12:45 PM Reason magazine
          https://reason.com/2020/04/09/3-ways-new-york-botched-the-coronavirus-response-in-march/?utm_medium=email

    • Here’s a freaking clue: its called a flu SEASON and its starts in November in the northern hemisphere, and goes until April.

      NOW DO THE MATH: divide those seasonal flu deaths by 6 and get back to us.

    • Old white guy,

      Maybe the answer is that CV19 has spread around the world and the numbers of fatalities have mounted exponentially in just a fraction of a year, not a whole season like 2018. We can compare “seasonal deaths” once this season is over. Our best hope for the economy getting off the economic ventilator is that we can use CV19 models that are verified with real data, unlike the climate models. The precautionary principal may be better suited for a pandemic, not so good for climate change which even the so-called experts can’t predict.

      (Thank you Viscount MoB for the information.)

    • If we would let the virus run wild and become endemic in a population without immunity then the analysis indicates a total death toll of at least 6 times your 3.2 milion, that’s roughly 20 million, 6% of the US population. When the capacity of the health system to treat the ones needing ventilators is outstripped, then those patients will have no chance at all and will perish too which would increase the death toll by another factor of 3 or 4. One can understand why the Chinese, when they realised that they had let the cat out of the bag, resorted to such draconian measures.

      • The draconian measures were more likely a response to quell the insurrection in Hong Kong and protests in Wuhan over the gross air pollution there. And it worked; at least temporarily . One thing the communist party is terrified of is the rebellion in Hong Kong spreading to the rest of China. But it will… eventually.

  8. This is excellent data and much needed.
    Some of these questions regarding the particulars have not been addressed anyplace else I have seen, and I have looked plenty.
    So thank you Mr. Monckton!
    I have to spend some more time looking and cross referencing and then comment some more.

    • Agree.

      And the NYC study from two days ago lends strong support to this UK data. NYC deaths 61% male. 63% over 70. 84% with co-morbidities, biggest two by far being ~55% hypertension and ~35% diabetes.

      Disproportionate deaths among Hispanics and Blacks. BUT those two NYC population subsegments also have known higher prevalences of hypertension and diabetes, both correlated to higher obesity incidence.

      • Thank you Dr. Istvan,
        I appreciate your reply.
        Having confirmation from another large city far removed is strong evidence that these results can be taken at face value, I completely agree.

        Besides for those specific details, I was also struck by what appears to be confirmation of another aspect that has stood out to me as very unusual, that being the length of time that this illness persists.
        We knew that the length of the illness was very long compared to seasonal flu. I was not sure of how long other forms of viral pneumonia took to resolve, but suspected that COVID was keeping people sick for an uncommonly long time even once they reached this third stage of the disease.
        Besides for the CFR, the number of people and the length of time with severe illness are a very large part of this situation, which in my view appears to not be very well appreciated by some.

        Simply stated, a large number of people are suffering critical and possibly life altering illness for a shockingly long period of time. A far larger than the number who ultimately succumb.
        I suspect that many of these people will not survive for as long as they might have expected to had they never contracted this virus. In fact I am sure of it.
        Not only is this, for me anyway, a very strong reason to take the CFR as only part of the bad news for patients, it is obviously a very large part of the reason for the huge impact on hospitals and the medical teams caring for the patients. I am sure it is both exhausting and horrifying for the doctors and the nurses and the other people tending to these patients.
        For one thing, it magnifies the impact of COVID hugely, and distorts any comparison that only looks at mortality in the short term.

    • Sure, the MSM will put up a video of a crazy fundamentalist Christian, or a Shi’a licking a mosque door handle, or a group of Orthodox Jews not practicing social distancing…but this guy doesn’t sound crazy because he wears a funny hat and dresses in robes and more importantly, speaks to the Green Religion narrative.

      • Yeah, since when did a supposed Catholic, heir to St. Peter no less, start worshipping Gaia right up to referring to nature as a sentient “she?” Sounds like some fruitbat braided-beard Druid mumbling around Stonehenge with a skull on a stick! When are devout Catholics going to recognize this guy is an imposter who doesn’t even believe in the religion he was elected to head?

        • I’m no expert but when someone talks about retribution from the earth God Gaia, it sure sounds like paganism to me.

          I’d say the current Pope should step down and join the other Pope, then they can aimlessly wander the musty halls of the Vatican together.

        • It’s happening, Goldrider, v-e-r-y slowly!! It would take quite a while to explain in detail why it is hard for Catholics to disagree with Papal pronouncements (and it’s nothing to do with infallibility!) but this latest interference in matters he doesn’t have a clue about is one big step along the way!

          • I had this guy pegged as a complete fake from about the first thing I heard from his mouth.

    • Is it fair to laugh at the Pope, when so many people seem to hang on his every word?

      I wonder how he explains that 8 of the 800 people in the Vatican have been taken ill. Perhaps they were a little behind with their confessions.

      And when I read this comment –
      “Today I believe we have to slow down our rate of production and consumption and to learn to understand and contemplate the natural world.”

      I first misread it as “reproduction”, and wondered if he would start handing out condoms in St. Peter’s Square

      • The Pope sounds like a true authoritarian.

        Conflating Coronavirus with Human-caused climate change. That’s about as ignorant as conflating Human-caused CO2 with weather events.

        Next thing you know, the Pope will be defending the World Health Organization. The Catholics have a socialist politician as their leader. A rather delusional socialist politician, at that.

    • yeah well popeland started at 1 and over the weeks isnow at 7 in the holy see
      I ‘see theyre beingquiet about that

  9. None of the numbers are reliable now that authorities, including the CDC, have admitted that they are falsely recording deaths as from coronavirus when they are actually people infected with the virus but who died from heart disease or pneumonia. The numbers are made even more worthless by the fact that different countries have different methods of recording deaths. Italy has completely reversed it’s method and now says that only about 12% of previously recorded deaths were actually down to the virus.

    • I dont see that myself
      if you had a heart condition but were otherwise well managed then you got the covid andit brought stress to the heart by struggling to breathe?
      id say the virus was what actually caused death
      aus had cancer patients got infected on wards
      they may have been going to die of cancer but may well have been “cured” or given some time
      the virus they got while on chemo/after surgery was the cause of death to me
      and the covid causes pneumonias in many nastier it appears than standard onset
      so again covid was what killed by causing it.
      usually a few days of antibotics and youre sorted , doesnt seem to work that way with this bug
      i WOULD like to know what strains of pneumonia are the most prevalent in the eu etc pops
      the chinese data listed quite a few strains some were MDR variants of unusual strains. rarely seen, that could be down to lifestyle job or envirnments there too, hard to know.

    • Very many infected after about 5 days get so high fever that they lose consciousness. Quite regardless of age. Whoever experiences the cytokine storm feels like he has returned from the world of the dead.

        • I know, that it may happen. I expierenced it for 5 times in my life, within an hour I got high fever and was quickly far away. In a short moment of presence, I measured above 40 °C, no chance for a phone call. About one day later, all was gone, I wasn’t able to walk more as to the kitchen for drinking some water.
          I had no symptoms of what ever. The doctor I consulted the next day had no idea what that should have been. That was very strange….

      • Hi ren, – The Spanish Flu had many WorldWar 1 USA soldier recruits waking up seemingly normal & by evening collapsing. Their young immunological systems were so strong that when viral replication got going their hearty immune systems produced such a “storm” of cytokines it overwhelmed some of their own organs.

        Wuhan Flu seems relatively to need time to elicit any strong cytokine reaction. Then, depending on each viral victim’s underlying health (& genetics) the side effects of any of their own cytokines, if any, are reflected in the known spectrum of individual symptoms.

        I believe this means WuhanFlu may enter a cell, but it’s novel amino acid substitutions incorporate some dynamic which causes a delay in a kind of RNA fragment (or possibly some other unidentified viral metabolite) from interacting with a cell mitochondria. It is such an upstream interaction with mitochondria which precipitates cytokine synthesis downstream [as I detailed in last month comment].

    • Italy is still counting every death when somebody test positive, as it the UK. Germany does not. It shows up well in graphs – plot daily cases against daily deaths and the UK and Italy have an R2 of over 0.8. Germany’s is 0.3. But shift Germany’s forward seven days to allow for infection then illness, then death, and it goes up to 0.8.

  10. Most interesting.

    Can I request you change the colours in your graph please. Some colours are very similar and difficult to distinguish.

    Perhaps 7 solid lines and 7 dotted lines, so 7 colours in total?

  11. ‘More than 99% of Italy’s coronavirus fatalities were people who suffered from previous medical conditions, according to a study by the country’s national health authority.’

    ‘The average age of those who’ve died from the virus in Italy is 79.5. As of March 17, 17 people under 50 had died from the disease. All of Italy’s victims under 40 have been males with serious existing medical conditions.’

    Instituto Superiore Di Sanita 17 March 2020

    That is pretty much bang on natural mortality.

    No, it isn’t like ‘Flu’ at all; it much more closely resembles other coronaviruses causing the common cold.

    • The common cold doesn’t bring down a healthcare system in the developed. The common cold doesn’t cause the death of 100 frontline medics. Of course, the virus causes higher mortality among the older population, that’s often the case. Younger people tend to survive all sorts of trauma better than older people. The fact that a major traffic accident might kill a higher proportion of older people doesn’t mean the accident is perfectly natural.

      You cite reports from March 17th when Italy had around 2.5k deaths. They now have over 17k. And, no, it isn’t just the elderly who have died. Right across Europe people in their 30s and 40s have succumbed to this disease.

      • Weird, because Hamburg numbers were very similar, except that no-one, that would be no-one, died of Covid 19 who had no prior illness.

        ‘So far, not a single person with no previous illnesses had died of the virus in Hamburg: Everyone we have examined so far has had cancer, chronic lung disease, were heavily smokers or obese, had diabetes, or had cardiovascular disease. Covid-19 is a deadly disease only in exceptional cases’

        ‘In quite a few cases, we have also found that the current corona infection has nothing to do with the fatal outcome because there are other causes of death, such as a cerebral hemorrhage or a heart attack. ‘Corona in itself is a ‘not particularly dangerous viral disease’ says (Professor Klaus Püschel, head of Hamburg forensic medicine) the medical examiner. He advocates statistics based on concrete research findings. ‘All speculations about individual deaths that have not been properly examined only stir up fears.’

        ‘The Free and Hanseatic City of Hamburg had recently, contrary to the requirements of the Berlin Robert Koch Institute, started to differentiate between deaths with and from coronaviruses, which led to a decrease in Covid 19 deaths’

        Hamburger Abendblatt 02 April

        Hmmmm……..

        • So if someone has a heart attack after being in a hospital with viral pneumonia for some length of time, that is not attributable to having viral pneumonia?
          Oh, well, do not want to tell him how to do his job, but as others have noticed, this seems illogical.
          So it seems some people are trying to over count the disease, but are others doing the opposite?
          It seems to me if everyone is counting deaths the same way, we can compare countries with each other, otherwise, not.

          I doubt very many people over 60 and especially 70 have nothing that could be considered a “comorbidity” if needing to take a pill for hypertension, or being a few pounds overweight count.
          One reason, a big one I think, that so many people are living longer than in previous times, is because few people are dying of such things.

          To my way of looking at it, the question ought to be, “Would this person have likely died now if they had never got this virus?”

    • “No, it isn’t like ‘Flu’ at all; it much more closely resembles other coronaviruses causing the common cold.”

      Sure it is, that’s why the death rate from common cold is so high in medical and ancillary staff in hospitals isn’t it.

      Idiot.

      • ‘Rhinoviruses and coronaviruses cause the majority of common colds and play a part in more serious respiratory illnesses that lead to increased morbidity and mortality. Patients who are infants or elderly, have asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), or are immunosuppressed have increased frequency of rhinovirus-related respiratory complications.’

        ‘Rhinovirus and coronavirus infections.’ U.S. National Library of Medicine

        ‘Rhinovirus infection in the adults was associated with significantly higher mortality and longer hospitalization when compared with influenza virus infection.’

        ‘More patients in the rhinovirus group developed pneumonia complications (p = 0.03), required oxygen therapy, and had a longer hospitalization period (p < 0.001), whereas more patients in the influenza virus group presented with fever (p < 0.001) and upper respiratory tract symptoms of cough and sore throat (p < 0.001), and developed cardiovascular complications (p < 0.001).'

        'Unexpectedly Higher Morbidity and Mortality of Hospitalized Elderly Patients Associated with Rhinovirus Compared with Influenza Virus Respiratory Tract Infection'

        International Journal of Molecular Sciences Feb 2017

        Intemperate language invariably signals the wrong end of the argument.

      • Thanks Steve–right on.

        And that is why so many die of the common cold after their cruise ship vacations or all the massive numbers that die in clusters in nursing homes when the common cold breaks out in a community. /sarc

  12. WHERE IS AMERICA HIDING THE BODIES?
    Stay with me here. We often here that CCP is “covering up” the amount of dead. But I have a question for you people who are much smarter than me. So, China had first case Nov. 17, 2019, they then locked down Wuhan Jan. 23. By the end of Feb, they had nearly 2,900 dead. (3 months from 1st case) In America, first case in WA was Jan. 21. Most of America locked down mid-March (months from 1st case). In America, we have around 13,000 deaths (close to 3 months from first case).

    Wuhan: With a population of 11,000,000, .00026 of their total population died (2,900/11M).
    American: Using .00026, we should have nearly 85,800 should be dead.

    And I’ve read the CCP may have had up to 100,000 die. If that is the case, we should have 3,000,000 dead

    We are boosting deaths be redefining “cause of death”. Even with that, we’re nowhere close to 85,800 and certainly not 3,000,000. So, where is America hiding the bodies?

  13. Missing in the above is sensitivity to ACE-2 proclivities, smoking, and effect of age. But overall, conclusion that this virus is MUCH more fatal than normal pneumonia is important for all to know.
    My sister-in-law has been on a ventilator for nearly 3 weeks and has difficulty in keeping her O2 saturation up. Anecdotal information is that Covid-19 attacks Heme in the blood, reducing one’s ability to move oxygen (from the deteriorating lungs) to other organs.
    The fact that the USA defense stockpile of N95 masks was allowed to deplete after N1H1 and not rebuilt will obviously be part of the Lessons Learned from this disaster.

    • It is a lesson taught.
      Whether the right people will learn it…another question.

  14. This is a terrific summary. The ICNARC report can be downloaded from this page:

    https://www.icnarc.org/About/Latest-News/2020/04/04/Report-On-2249-Patients-Critically-Ill-With-Covid-19

    We urgently require community immunity testing on a population basis. Something similar to political polling using a representative sample from a defined geographical area. From this, we can calculate:
    – the true prevalence of past Covid-19 infection
    – the relationship between true prevalence and confirmed cases; hospital admission rate; ITU rate and death

    If it turns out that a majority of Londoners are already infected and we are not close to ventilator/ O2/ staff capacity, then the economic lockdown must be ended.

    • No.
      There is a shortage of ventilators. We know what happens when they are not used. We know what happens when they are used.
      They do not make the situation worse for ill patients. Someone would have noticed.

  15. The annual flu jab in the UK has saved many lives over the years on years. Many elderly folk are alive now because of it but as such have lived to be at the mercy of Covid.

  16. Then again wearing motor helmets outdoors,as the author seems to suggest by example, just for protection seems pathological in itself. It won’t filter out that much as the air one inhales still would have the microscopical “drops” potentially.

    There’s no reason to assume that social distancing without masks, outdoors, would elevate any risk, statistically at least. The numbers quickly become meaningless here.

    In transport, offices and occupations which require close contact: there’s a case. The rest if panic induced control mania, IMO.

    • “Then again wearing motor helmets outdoors,as the author seems to suggest by example, just for protection seems pathological in itself.”

      I don’t recall MoB saying it was for his protection. The attached face shield, which you forgot to mention, would protect others from his coughs and breathing, which would be deflected downward and/or coagulated from contact with the shield.
      Incoming air would also be foreced to take a roundabout and “obstacles” course, probably lowering its infectiousness somewhat.

  17. It would be interesting to see what death from other diseases has been during the same period.

  18. One good thing that has come out of this crisis is that it certainly makes it easy to find the flat earthers and dismiss them.

    I think anyone who says this is nothing more than a flu should be infected with first the seasonal flu strain, let them recover, then infect them with COVID-19.

    You know, so they can experience science first hand…

    • LMAO!
      Yup…no matter what, some people are going to come away from this with a lot of ‘splainin’ to do!

      Jones, your comment made me wonder…who is willing to say how they feel about personally getting this virus? Do not want to get it, do not care if they get it, hope they get it, or what?
      I personally have no embarrassment to say I do not want to spin the COVID 19 roulette wheel.
      I think I am in the 8% chance of getting a case of pneumonia group…which is way to high for feeling safe.
      I would never drive at a speed that gave me an 8% chance of winding up in the hospital or dead.

  19. “The initial results are excellent so that the admissions in the intensive care unit have been reduced, with shortened hospital stays and radiological and clinical responses that I would dare to define as spectacular. We believe that COVID therapy for pneumonia is corticosteroid therapy at the onset of pneumonia at the stage that we consider mild, particularly in febrile patients from the first week and with analytical abnormalities. Initiating anti-inflammatory therapy prior to the development of severe pneumonia, covering the period of time in which the patient can worsen corticosteroid therapy”

    “The OMS made a contraindicated mistake in the use of corticosteroids in patients with COVID infection 19. In this way, this therapy is postponed until a very serious situation in which the therapy is much less effective. Soon we will have data on all this and we will disseminate it but we will disseminate this information inviting you to try this treatment on the patients that I anticipate. Infection Does Not Kill Them Kills The Inflammatory Reaction To Macrophage Activated Infection”
    https://www.elperiodicodeaqui.com/epda-noticias/el-hospital-doctor-peset-de-valencia-aplica–con-mucho-exito–en-pacientes-con-coronavirus-una-terapia-antiinflamatoria-con-corticoides/207638

  20. What the newspaper does not say but all the doctors in Spain already know because it has been spread on social networks:

    “We are starting treatment with a dose of 80 mg of methylprednisolone daily 40 mg every 12 or 80 mg bolus and some patients who see that their correct response add another anti-inflammatory therapy such as tocilizumab or anakinra.”

    “Disseminate this information and put it into action, collect data and we all overcome this epidemic. ” And it ends: ” LUCKY COMPANIONS EARLY ANTI-FLAMMATORY TREATMENT ”.”
    Two medical friends have confirmed it for me, but anyway I imagine that whoever wants to follow this guideline should contact that hospital or the one in Granada:

    Dr. Manuel Calleja. Internist doctor at the Virgen de Las Nieves hospital in Granada
    https://www.huvn.es/

    Dr. Angel Atienza mdico internista y responsable del rea COVID en el Hospital Doctor Peset Valencia
    http://fisabio.san.gva.es/hospital-universitario-doctor-peset

    • odd cos chinese docs reports said using glucocorticoids made little difference
      new research says theres a notable issue of blood clotting badly blocking IV lines and affecting lung oxy exchange etc
      suggesting using existing meds like the urokinase to thin it

    • This is information from Adelaide from Spain.
      Adelaida says:
      April 5, 2020 at 1:06 PM
      From last link:
      “The initial results are excellent so that the admissions in the intensive care unit have been reduced, with shortened hospital stays and radiological and clinical responses that I would dare to define as spectacular. We believe that COVID therapy for pneumonia is corticosteroid therapy at the onset of pneumonia at the stage that we consider mild, particularly in febrile patients from the first week and with analytical abnormalities. Initiating anti-inflammatory therapy prior to the development of severe pneumonia, covering the period of time in which the patient can worsen corticosteroid therapy”

      “The OMS made a contraindicated mistake in the use of corticosteroids in patients with COVID infection 19. In this way, this therapy is postponed until a very serious situation in which the therapy is much less effective. Soon we will have data on all this and we will disseminate it but we will disseminate this information inviting you to try this treatment on the patients that I anticipate. Infection Does Not Kill Them Kills The Inflammatory Reaction To Macrophage Activated Infection”
      https://www.drroyspencer.com/2020/03/covid-19-deaths-in-europe-excess-mortality-is-down/#comments

    • Adelaida says:
      April 6, 2020 at 2:30 AM
      You are welcome!
      Hopefully many people are saved !!!!

      It is information that is not yet official, contradicts the OMS, and that only circulates in social networks and local newspapers … not in the big ones …

      Those of us who believe in God pray intensely for it too !!!!

      And I am sure that those who are not believers also have an inner prayer to whatever the force or energy of the universe that can help this end as soon as possible !!!!
      https://www.drroyspencer.com/2020/03/covid-19-deaths-in-europe-excess-mortality-is-down/#comments

    • Corticosteroid treatment is used in Spain from the sixth to the twelfth day of illness. If we are late, the treatment is not effective.

      • Thanks for that info, ren.

        It sounds like treatment should be started as soon as the infection is discovered. The current policy seems to be to send a positive person home to try to get over it there without medication. Should that continue or should we start treating right away even though we don’t know how hard the Wuhan virus is going to hit a particular person? Some people have practically no problems and don’t need treatment, and some people go down hill very fast.

        More lessons to learn about this virus.

  21. Thank you for the update Lord M of B. I am in the age of high risk, 74, and in a geo-political setting of strict quarantine, and in a Provincial population with 1 in 40,000 Covid-19 infection rate. I will adhere to the various rational protocols, mostly because I don’t want any interaction with the authorities, but partly because I want to avoid nasty comments from others, and just a little bit because I don’t want to experiment with this aggressive virus. The big issue is how to re-start the economy without risking accelerating the infection/fatality statistics. If the world does not get their economies back to production the ability to resist this virus, or anything else, will be soon dangerously compromised. Think and plan and go for it, but stay safe.

  22. All the data is heavily “spun”–by both sides. Testing is notoriously unreliable. The reality is that we do not know to within an order of magnitude how deadly this is. Some of the data I have seen suggest it may be only 1/10 as bad as regular flu if people are allowed to get natural sunshine and the good cheer of social contact. Monckton has done a good job of presenting the more alarming evidence.

    Mankind did not evolve with the gear Monckton has pictured, nor did God make or design us for that. There is good evidence that such will reduce health and make one more susceptible to microorganisms of any kind.

    Research has shown that regular church-goers of any kind live an average of 7 years longer than unchurched (Denver Post ~1999). More recently, I saw a report that said church-goers live 4 years longer. I would expect such figures apply to non-Christian religions as well. This week’s web browsing included an article saying that there is a measurable energy produced in worship meetings, measurable increase in well-being. Last week saw the arrest of a mega-Church pastor for attracting over 1200 people to a Sunday service, with the claim that it had nothing to do with freedom of religion.

    Unemployment and economic loss KILL people. Those arguing for all these restrictions never consider those figures. The deaths from hysteria will be 10-fold to 100-fold higher than the virus itself in the end–at least from first-year infections.

    The virus has been sequenced and found to contain gene insertion tools. It is definitely a bioweapon, which is not proof that it is more contagious, nor especially deadly. Results have shown high contagion beyond a reasonable doubt. Deadly as cold/flu is under considerable argument. The greatest danger is utterly unknown: this virus has AIDS sequences in its genome. HIV kills over time by infecting T-cells and rapidly aging that section of the immune system. We will not know for at least a year whether this virus effectively gives AIDS to non-sexually-active people.

    • “The virus has been sequenced and found to contain gene insertion tools. It is definitely a bioweapon, ”
      In a world where BS is everywhere that sentence is olympic level. If you can provide a reputable reference for that sentence I will be impressed…..

      • Along with

        ” there is a measurable energy produced in worship meetings”

        I wonder what device was used to measure it, and whether it could be used to boil a kettle?

  23. In the municipality of Gangelt in North Rhine-Westphalia, which is particularly affected by the coronavirus, an infection was detected in 15 percent of the examined citizens. The head of the field study in the district of Heinsberg, Hendrik Streeck, reported on Thursday in Düsseldorf.

    These first, but scientifically representative interim results are a rather conservative calculation, said the virologist. According to Streeck, 15 percent of the citizens in the community have now also developed immunity to the virus. The probability of dying from the disease is 0.37 percent based on the total number of people infected. The corresponding rate currently calculated by the American Johns Hopkins University in Germany is 1.98 percent and is five times higher, said the virologist.

    • The study is flawed. Like the Chinese useless test kits their test can also not distinguish sufficiently between cold corona viruses and SARS-CoV-2. No neutralization steps in their procedure. False positive results give therefore the dangerous impression of a lower lethality rate.

      There is huge political pressure from the prime minister of the federal state this study was done in towards a no-lockdown result before Eastern. German politicians are about to decide next step for the pandemic these days.

  24. The common flu kills over half a million every year. So, in that perspective, COVID-19 is not worse than the flu.

    The only difference is that for the flu, humans have reached herd inmunity a long time ago.

    The social distancing measures slows us on our way to herd inmunity for COVID-19.

    • “The common flu kills over half a million every year. So, in that perspective, COVID-19 is not worse than the flu.”

      Yet.

  25. Some conservative websites, Powerline for example, have consistently maintained that this is a media and Democrat exaggeration. Thoroughly discredited themselves.

    • Yeah no kidding. The Governors will keep this stay in place order and shut down non essential businesses indefinitely. They have no incentive and It is political suicide no matter what isle you come from.

  26. “Wear full-face masks when out of doors or away from home.”

    That statement should come with an asterisk- *”if you’re going to be near other people.” I live in an area with many big open spaces, and I am rarely within 100 feet of another human outdoors. It’s silly to wear a mask in those conditions, not to mention demeaning.

    • I do not put mine on until getting out of the car once I get to the store and park.

  27. Thank you for your recent post Christopher Monckton of Brenchley

    With respect to the specific advices, “Take Vitamin D3 daily. Be safe.”

    I would add to take it easy on the D3 and, to especially be sure there is enough K2 intake. This is in my non expert opinion so far and including my regular student disclaimer to indicate i am not an expert at this time. There is nothing to lose because unlike D3, K2 is GRAS (generally regarded as safe) when i last inquired.

    In general, the papers and sources i have perused all seem to indicate D3 can stimulate an increase in osteocalcin production. If there is not sufficient vitamin K2 to carboxylate the osteocalcin, then the osteocalcin ends up sticking to arteries and generally not doing anything for bone density, if not subtracting it is my understanding so far.

    From: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5986531/
    Published online 2018 May 22. doi: 10.3390/nu10050652
    PMCID: PMC5986531
    PMID: 29786640
    Vitamin D in Vascular Calcification: A Double-Edged Sword?
    Jeffrey Wang,1 Jimmy J. Zhou,1,2 Graham R. Robertson,3 and Vincent W. Lee1,*

    “5.1. Hypervitaminosis D and VC

    “Induction of calcification through hypervitaminosis with vitamin D has been demonstrated and well characterised in multiple animal models, including mice, rats, goats and pigs (see Table 1). Treatment of rats with sublethal doses (7.5 mg/kg) of vitamin D plus nicotine produces a lasting 10–40 fold increase in aortic calcium content, resulting in the calcification and destruction of medial elastic fibres, subsequently leading to arterial stiffness [84]. In goats and pigs, dietary supplementation of vitamin D promotes the development of aortic and coronary calcified lesions in association with elevated serum calcium and cholesterol levels [85,86]. Vitamin D induced calcification in mice is currently considered to be one of the more robust models of calcification, in which single doses of 500,000 IU/kg/day can produce severe aortic medial calcification after just 7 days following 3 consecutive days of initial treatment [87]”

    • In reply to Mike from Au,

      Viamin D supplement is a super cheap way to reduce the number of covid cases.

      http://joannenova.com.au/2020/04/perhaps-solve-the-other-pandemic-vitamin-d-deficiency-to-help-beat-coronavirus/

      The maximum safe amount daily dosage of Vitamin D is 4000 IU/day. 500,000 IU/day is crazy and will kill you. Almost everything is dangerous if we take/eat/drink too much.

      It is just like drinking too much water every day will also kill you. Water is not dangerous, but drinking too much water causes dangerously high blood pressure and a loss of electrolytes both of which kills.

      Studies have shown that half the population, in the Northern Countries are ‘Vitamin D’ deficient and taking Vitamin D supplements reduces deaths from all diseases by 50%. It also reduces the incidence of flu by 40%.

      Elderly people are almost all Vitamin D deficient. As when we get older our bodies become less effective in producing Vitamin D which used in more than 200 biochemical processes in the body.

      Our bodies requirement to produce vitamin D in the sun is so important, Europeans evolved to have ‘white’ skin.

      Increasing Vitamin D in the body to normal, has been shown to reduce the instances of breast cancer by roughly 70%.

      Women’s group started a movement in the US to change that. It is just a waste of money to treat people for cancer when taking a Vitamin D supplement would make the problem go away.

      In the US, because of pressure from Women’s groups the recommended daily Vitamin D intake was increased from 400 UI/day to 1000 UI/day. The women’s group think that amount is too low based on the research.

      Based on medical research, the maximum daily amount is conservatively 4000 UI/day.

      My ex-wife, who is a small person, takes 2000 UI/day on the advice of women’s health groups. My wife had breast cancer.

  28. I’m not in a position to dispute anything here, but I have questions. It’s my understanding that occasionally a seasonal influenza can be quite severe, i.e. a higher death rate than the one before. I refer to this March 26 article in the New England Journal of Medicine by Dr. Fauci and others, wherein they state:

    “If one assumes that the number of asymptomatic or minimally symptomatic cases is several times as high as the number of reported cases, the case fatality rate may be considerably less than 1%. This suggests that the overall clinical consequences of Covid-19 may ultimately be more akin to those of a severe seasonal influenza (which has a case fatality rate of approximately 0.1%) or a pandemic influenza (similar to those in 1957 and 1968) rather than a disease similar to SARS or MERS, which have had case fatality rates of 9 to 10% and 36%, respectively.”

    https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMe2002387#.Xn0Zo8RXo10

    Yes, I know Fauci’s credibility is under scrutiny and yes, I know almost everything in the article may be out of date by now. I don’t wish a “severe seasonal influenza” on anyone. So my question is, how do the current Wuhan flu numbers compare to a “severe” flu season?

    P.S. I still have my “classic” leather motorcycle jacket similar to Monckton’s, but alas, my biking days are many years behind me so I did not keep my full-face helmet and gauntlets.

    • Currently the world is running at 6% mortality for known cases and the pandemic has not taken off in many countries yet.
      We do not know whether it will, especially countries where Malaria is prevelent.

  29. “Japan was expecting a coronavirus explosion. Where is it?

    MAR 20, 2020
    ARTICLE HISTORYPRINTSHARE
    Japan was one of the first countries outside of China hit by the coronavirus and now it’s one of the least-affected among developed nations. That’s puzzling health experts.

    Unlike China’s draconian isolation measures, the mass quarantine in much of Europe and big U.S. cities ordering people to shelter in place, Japan has imposed no lockdown. While there have been disruptions caused by school closures, life continues as normal for much of the population. Tokyo rush-hour trains are still packed and restaurants remain open’

    https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2020/03/20/national/coronavirus-explosion-expected-japan/?fbclid=IwAR3k6up3CTrumG4HJX0tOkt7rttY-8iVxMsEof-6RIvydCz1TsInKylQHzw

    “Countries without lockdowns and contact bans, such as Japan, South Korea, Sweden and Belarus, have not yet experienced a more negative course of events than other countries. This speaks against the effectiveness of such extreme measures’

    • In Japan, nose/mouth mask wearing in public is commonplace and public areas are kept cleaner than in most other countries. Lockdowns are a very expensive alternative to these basic and effective habits.

  30. Well said but your criticism of skeptics sure sounds familiar.
    Using the “no worse than flu”is like using there is “no such thing as climate change”.
    IMO most everyone who has a major problem with the response to COVID is not based upon the measure of the virus. But rather the measure of the economic carnage from the response.
    Like many I find the remedy grossly and recklessly disproportionate.

    Governments have indeed recklessly made policy on the assumption that the lock downs are no more dangerous or destructive than some routine recessions.
    They have neglected to anticipate the wide and deep destruction to business and millions pf people’s lives.
    (30%+ unemployment) Almost to the point of being uninterested while being non responsive when queried.
    At the same time suggesting the only alternative to their over reaction is non reaction.

    There has been no definition of how harmful “over-reaction” can be and there is no such choice as “non-reacting”.
    https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2020/03/coronavirus-covid19-global-academics-insights-pandemic/

    ‘Over-reacting is better than non-reacting’ – academics around the world share thoughts on coronavirus

    Then there is the whopper of the lousy models that predicted a far bigger problem.
    In the US they were at a million or so deaths and now predict 60,000?

    So yes the COVID is worse than the common flu. But some flu years are quite tragic. As was 2017-2018.
    How much worse is COVID?
    Not as bad as the widespread shut down in my state and others. Not even close.
    I’ll stick to my earlier assertion that the carnage from the shut downs is far worse than the model exaggerated COVID required.
    More people would have died with less measures but it would have been much wiser.
    Perhaps some people are just too insulated from the economic destruction to recognize it.

    • Exactly. And 60,000 US deaths won’t be reached this year since we’re already in the second week of April. Apparently they think this virus is so special that it simply won’t care about the increased heat, humidity, and increased immune functions.

    • Steve, I totally agree.

      The economic problem has not been discussed and people do not understand how serious it is.

      Not talking about a problem actually makes problems worse. As the ‘novel’ virus is not going away, we need to think out of the box. How the heck are we going to end isolation?

      I do not see any sign in the US yet of critical thought kicking in.

    • Maybe the lockdown order should have been only for persons over a certain age, say 50, or with co-morbitiies, at least initially.

  31. It will be interesting to seperate the data for hospitalization and advanced respiratory care from before and after rapid testing and treatments like HcQ were available.

  32. Thank you Lord Monckton. Another illuminating missive.

    Comment/Appeal to the following :
    Anthony Watts, Christopher Monckton, David Middleton, Dr Roy Spencer, Eric Worrall, Willis Eschenbach, Rud Istvan and Steven Mosher.

    You have all posted interesting, educational, thoughtful, informed, rational and useful articles about the Covid-19 Disease. Clearly there is some “dissension in the ranks” with respect to just about every facet of this event.

    Anthony, I ask you as both the foundation of WUWT (and your current role as a Senior Fellow at the The Heartland Institute), would you consider a virtual (ie video) discussion panel involving as many of the above as possible? Pragmatically, I would guess that you can manage the technology resources to facilitate this kind of presentation and I assume you know all of the above people.

    To the rest of you: I would beg of you to participate in such a discussion. The value to the WUWT community, and perhaps to yourselves would be high (in my optimistic viewpoint..:)). You all are participating in varying degrees in the world outside of WUWT, so are in a position to help influence the future path we are all on, like it or not.

    Suggested format/purpose:
    Duration:3 hours (long enough to be useful, short enough to be manageable)
    Format: Moderated round robin (ie managed discussion)
    Purpose/Subject:
    1) What, if any, knowledge of the attributes of COVID-19 disease are nearly incontrovertible or at least of very high quality.
    2) What are the most critical unknowns? and is/are there any near term paths to usefully answer any of them.
    3) Building on 1) and 2) what paths are available in the next few months? This should be constrained to those that are actually possible (ie take into account the reality of large group human behavior as it exists, not as we would like it).

    “Rules of engagement”:
    -Egos are checked at the door (or at least a convincing rendering of such).
    -Disagreements are opportunities to drill down to agreement (as close as reasonable for such a forum).
    -Pontificating, ad hominem comments, etc, (the glorious list of human frailties that Lord Monckton eloquently mentions on occasion) are verboten as much as possible.
    -Participants are asked to present their views as honestly and rationally as (humanly) possible.
    -A mirror should be set in front of each participant.

    Not knowing any of you, I humbly suggest “Charles the Moderator” as the Moderator.

    The above should be viewed as a catalyst. I strongly suspect that a forum such as the above would be of great value to those interested in fomenting more useful, rational and coherent knowledge about Covid-19 Disease. Perhaps this could lead to a slightly better overall outcome.

    If there is any way I , or any of us (WUWT lurkers) could help, please ask.

    Respectfully
    Ethan Brand

  33. Using data that is not remotely reliable and compiled in very different ways is simply pointless. A simple example – people use UK announced deaths but daily deaths are very different numbers. The announced deaths each day can include deaths from weeks ago that have only just tested positive. So the shape of the graph is actually quite different – it underestimates older deaths and overestimates recent deaths.

    Unreliable data leads to unreliable conclusions.

    • I agree. There is very little reliable data at all at this point. Note Prof. Ioannidis’ comments in this regard.

      Which is why I am only going by Total Mortality. This means I will be behind the times – but I will not be misled…

  34. In the past three years, some 46% of viral-pneumonia cases were female and 54% male. With the Chinese virus, however, only 27% are female and 63% are male.

    There has been a recent discussion that the Wuhan Chinese COVID-19 virus is racist, as the numbers of African-Americans seems quite disproportional.
    Now, we are also saying that the Wuhan Chinese COVID-19 virus is sexist.

    • Clearly Wuhan Chinese COVID-19 virus adheres to identity politics, that makes it leftist. 😉

    • I think Lord Monckton has given us some insight into that.

      He reports that diabesity appears to be a significant co-morbidity in Covid-19 cases.

      Black people do tend to have a significantly-higher risk of diabesity – I believe in particular black males. It is speculated that (ex-)Africans have had perhaps half a millennium exposed to the carbohydrate-laden Caucasian diet, whereas Caucasians have had several millennia to adapt genetically. Ergo, it is being obese and/or diabetic as opposed to being black-skinned which is the problem. Many Africans living on a more traditional diet have remarkably low instances of ‘modern’ diseases.

      Perhaps in his closing remarks, Lord Monckton should have included changing diet as well as recommending vitamin D. I know he has mentioned his own success in that regard in a previous missive. Whilst not an instant prophylactic, it’s a step in the right direction.

    • “the numbers of African-Americans seems quite disproportional.”

      Commenters on the JoNova site speculated that blacks get less vitamin D from the sunlight in the temperate regions, because their darker skin blocks it from getting through.

      • When I researched my own vitamin D deficiency over a decade ago, the most recent study had discovered that 78% of those who are of African descent were vitamin D deficient.

  35. Covid-19 wreaks havoc on the body. People who have recovered look 10 years older than they actually are. Recovery must take a long time.

  36. There are some front line doctors and now I see a report or two that the type of ventilator treatments being used on Covid-19 patients may be making things worse rather than better.

  37. In reply to:

    ” This disease is a lot worse than flu. It puts more people into intensive care, where they require costlier and more advanced treatment, where they will be in intensive care for twice the time required by other viral pneumonia-patients, and where they are more than twice as likely to die as those other patients.”

    … and it is much more contagious than the flu as the crafty virus first attacks the throat and then moves to lungs.

    Yep, no doubt about it.

    This ‘novel’ virus is not the flu and it is deadly in a monsterous way that ties up our healthcare system. The virus has spread to every country in the world.

    In poor countries there is almost no healthcare system and isolation does not work, as people live on their daily work. The sell their products in markets and then use that money to live on. Their governments cannot pay them if they isolate.

    Regardless, isolation does not make the ‘novel’ virus go away. This is the new norm until the US has some technical breakthroughs.

    As we are concerned about deaths.

    The ‘novel’ virus is going to kill more people by its effect on the world economy. Poverty kills in multiple ways.

    This shutdown is analogous to a large fire that is burning and spreading in a city. It is causing permanent damage which will take years to repair. Oddly enough, no one has shouted fire, fire, fire….

    …because we are focused on the first wave of deaths.

    https://www.bbc.com/news/business-52211206

    “By the time the pandemic is over half of the world’s population of 7.8 billion people could be living in poverty. About 40% of the new poor could be concentrated in East Asia and the Pacific, with about one third in both Sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia.”

  38. A further fallacy in the “no worse than the flu” argument is when it compares death rates , while neglectine to note that COVID19 is three times more contagious than the flu. Except for the Spanish flu of 1917-1920, the seasonal flu death count very rarely exceeds 40-50,000, and that is with NO mitigating behavior. e are going to easily surpass that even with out stay at home locked down society.
    The biggest blunder was early on when it was not understood that hose who were spreading the virus in the environment the most, were those who had little ofr no symptoms of the disease – face masks or coverings should have been required from day one. They are still not required, which seems insane to me.

  39. The daily graph is essentially unreadable.

    A link to the PowerPoint slide (as was provided in the previous Lord M post) would be helpful.

  40. I love how the catastrophic thinkers phrase this: 5 to 10 times more deadly than the flu!

    Well, yeah. Maybe.

    But the other way of thinking about this is that your risk of NOT dying decreases from 99.9% for the flu to maybe 99.5% for coronavirus.

    Small numbers don’t require much increase to result in huge percentages, e.g., I have $1. I get $1 more. That’s a 100% increase. Wow. I’m rich! Cf. to: I have $10,000. I get $1000 more. Gee, whiz. That’s only 10% more. Gosh darn it!

    Health and safety are values, sure. Just ask Maslow. But they are not the only values in the world. None of the risks present so far justify abrogating freedom and individual rights. Actions of our government have no constitutional basis. The Constitution doesn’t say we have a right to assembly…except in times various governments decide — by fiat — to suspend them for reasons they and they alone deem sufficient.

    Let free people decide for themselves how much risk they are or are not willing tolerate.

  41. This is taking our argument entirely out of context. You are basically trying to say that we are claiming that deaths from traffic accidents are not bad, in fact they aren’t even real. No one has evah died in a vehicle! Nope, that’s not what we’re arguing obviously. We’re saying that this is exactly like the flu in its order of magnitude and overall impact on society – the panic is self induced and not from the virus itself.

    We’re also not saying that this novel virus will have the exact same death rate as decades old viruses where most have antibodies and for which there are vaccines. How about comparing this to the 1957-58 influenza outbreak, that would be apples to apples. That single virus was estimated to have killed over 100,000 US citizens and millions worldwide, same for the 1968 novel influenza virus. So far SARS-COV2 is just shy of 90,000 deaths worldwide (with many more hosts available now) and we’re approaching the time of year when these things dwindle on their own – anyone want to make bets whether this will reach the numbers of the 58 or 68 influenza pandemics? I don’t remember a complete shutdown of society then. And as far as the 2009 H1N1 strain, it didn’t take nearly as many lives as the previous influenza pandemics and that is attributed to an estimated 60% of the population already having the antibodies to fight it, something they probably wouldn’t have had if global shutdowns had been the modus operandi of the past.

    We’re saying that the Chicken Little approach is not intelligent or wise in the long run. The repercussions from a global depression could be far worse than this novel virus. It’s going to survive us quarantining ourselves despite the hopeful delusions of some “experts” so ultimately we are replacing short term bad times and replacing them with long term negative consequences. Some of the negative consequences of the Great Depression are stuck with us to this day.

  42. Nature culling the herd.

    You can dodge a great many of nature’s bullets for a long while but sooner or later the one with your name will show up.

    • The trick is to write your own name on bullets you use. That way there’s less chance of there being another bullet with your name on…

  43. “But governments cannot afford to make policy on the assumption, perhaps a little too carelessly made by some commenters here, that the virus is no more dangerous and no more infectious than flu.”

    Even worse to make disastrous policies based on bad/incomplete/unknown data on advice from a tiny cabal of ‘experts’ and ‘modelers’ with an appalling history of being completely wrong.

    The virus is probably more infectious than flu, that does not make it dangerous. We simply do not know how dangerous it is because nobody knows the true extent of asymptomatic infections. If as suspected that is exceptionally high, then it is clearly not that dangerous – and the vast majority of deaths would have occurred anyway very shortly – thousands of people are not being robbed of years of healthy life.

    There is STILL little evidence of a massive uptick in mortality rates overall.

    Sniff test says there has been a massive and disastrous over reaction.

  44. I am one of those who currently believe that it is not dissimilar to flu. I hold this belief from following the Total Mortality stats alone, as I believe that the infected cases data and the reported ‘Covid deaths’ are too unreliable to use in calculations.

    I would not be surprised to find that Covid makes people more ill on average than a ‘standard’ flu – no one will have any residual immunity to this virus, and there will be less experience of treating it. But I would see this as a ‘one-off’ impact. And note that flu is not a benign disease – it kills many people every year. Saying that Covid is ‘ like flu’ should not be construed to me an that it will not kill horribly.

    I will estimate its similarity on the basis of mortality figures alone. If it is truly 6 times worse than flu, we should see some major death rates. At the moment I do not see these – even the worst-affected places seem to be showing Total Mortality comparable to a flu outbreak.

    • “I will estimate its similarity on the basis of mortality figures alone. If it is truly 6 times worse than flu, we should see some major death rates.”

      No, because the quarantines will cut deaths from accidents and ordinary flu dramatically. That cut must be added back in to get the true lethality of Covid-19.

    • “I will estimate its similarity on the basis of mortality figures alone. ”

      Wrong, because the quarantines will halve the ordinary death rates from accidents and everyday flu. That halving must be compensated for to compute the true legality of Covid-19.

  45. It is like a flu. It is like a flu that we have no natural immunity to in the general population. All the other flu strains circulate in the population and this one doesn’t, because it has primarily been circulating only in Intermediate Horseshoe Bats. So if you happen to be a bat, you will be fine. If not, then when you are exposed, you will be infected.
    This makes it very contagious, and it will create local problems, where so many people are sick at once that the system cannot provide care for some, or many. So far we have managed this because the cities create a good environment for spreading the disease. But they also have more hospital resources in total. They don’t have enough for letting everyone get sick at once.
    We are prepared for what we see regularly. This is not what we see regularly. It would be better if we could round up those that are vulnerable to bad outcomes, and isolate them from the public. We have no ability to do that safely. Without isolation from this virus they will die in large numbers. So a decision was made. It is the choice of two bad choices.
    When you are not prepared for a rare event you have to do the best you can and live with the consequences. I think we have to be cautious because there are too many unknowns. And saturating the medical system, and letting people die without care is the likely cause of letting this run it’s course. I don’t think anyone knows how manageable or chaotic that would be. If we chose that path we would be stuck with it. It would be a roller coaster where you have no ability to change course until the ride stops.
    We better find out, because we don’t know if the origin of this virus is natural, accidental, or criminal.

    • Rounding up people sounds like a bad idea.
      This is the opposite of a quarantine or isolation.
      One infected person involved in the roundup infects one of the people, who are then all kept in one place?
      Bad idea.
      Keep people separate and isolated.

      • I didn’t phrase that as clear as I should. Many elderly are already in living arrangements dedicated to older people. They have staff that is working there that is not living there. There would need to be greater care on who came in contact with them, but it is manageable.
        Many elderly, or older people with health issues are living in communities where they are in daily contact with younger people and/or healthier people. That is the group that you cannot protect if you let this virus burn through the public. And I am NOT advocating rounding anyone up. I am thinking about how difficult any plausible solution would be. And there are no solutions that make more sense than what we are currently doing.
        If we were prepared, I think we could have made it possible for most businesses to stay open. Taiwan, Japan and South Korea are the models for this. They got hit harder by SARS and were better prepared, and more alert to threat.

        • Yeah, nursing homes are a special case.
          I have no idea what to say about that.

          The whole situation is a huge mess.
          One thing that has occurred to me is…a lot of places have wound up with similar restrictions, and yet there are many that are looking at what is happening where they live as if someone or some group of someones has made a huge mistake.
          That may be, but it seems like a lot of people have made the same mistake if true.
          I do not see how any businesses could conduct business as usual even if they wanted to.
          Every time someone tests positive it seems they need to send everyone home and disinfect the building.
          That could be endless, fatally disruptive, and not help in the end. Ad the how long before business owners get sued?
          I am now waiting for another shoe to drop.
          Seems like something has to happen.

    • Er…that’s what flu does. Don’t think that flu is benign – it’s one of the biggest killer diseases in the world….

      It’s just that most people are fairly immune to most strains of it, so the people it kills are usually the old. Regularly each winter it kills millions of old folk. The point is that we’ve got used to that, so we never report it, or even think about it…

  46. oh dear lord:

    The claim “it’s no worse than the flu” did not start out to mean that the disease doesn’t hurt worse, or kill differently, than any of the asian flues. It meant that covid-19 mainly kills/hurts the people who would otherwise be at high risk fro the flu. Look a the numbers through the lens of hospital program funding and you see that almost every covid-19 death is matched by a reduction in death due to flu or co-morbidity factors. Thus “no worse than the flu” now means that total national death rates are not unusually high.

  47. I do appreciate Christopher Monckton’s position on this subject and I do not take it lightly. This is a very serious situation in the world for which we must take action. The other side of the argument is best supported by Willis Eschenbach’s post yesterday. The Bayesian analysis of the situation based upon all of the data comes down to the cost/benefit of shutting down the economy. I will leave that for others to assess but with the following observations and as an individual tax payer, I have no power and no control upon the whole situation and can only comment.

    The CDC budget for infectious disease prevention, foreign disease prevention, and other factors associated with a pandemic response is roughly 4 Billion Dollars a year. Additionally, each state carries a similar budget item. Worldwide, who knows how much has been spent on pandemic preparedness over the last 10 years. I will call it 1/2 Trillion dollars as a rough estimate. I don’t know, I’m just throwing a number out. Given that expense, the world seems completely unprepared for COVID-19. So, throw that cost out the window.

    As Willis pointed out, the cost of shutdown of the economy in California is a Trillion dollars. Some have argued that all is not lost, so call it ½ Trillion dollars. Throw that out the window.

    Bailouts in the US will probably be in the 4 Trillion dollar neighborhood. Completely magic money that comes from nowhere since we are already at a 1Trillion dollar deficit every year. But, given the cost of bailout over 2 months, you have to add in the loss of GDP during that period. Call it another ½ Trillion dollars above California’s as a guess.

    So lots and lots of losses/costs worldwide. The benefit is that maybe a lot of lives were saved. Those lives saved are in the majority non-producers based upon the data of who is dying from COVID-19. If a proper pandemic response was in place in the majority of places, perhaps a full shutdown might have been avoided. Perhaps.

    This I hope will never happen like this again. We all individually should be better prepared and the governments in charge of this area of preparedness should be held accountable, perhaps with an annual report on readiness. Perhaps businesses should have disaster plans in place to transition to a pandemic response economy. I don’t know, just my opinion.

    Thank you Christopher and Willis for your wonderful additions to this subject. I enjoy hearing from both of you. I think Christopher’s analysis on feedback sensitivity to CO2 doubling is right and should be on the forefront of the Climate discussion. Unfortunately, when an influential person makes comments such as the Pope has, God bless him, tying the presence of the virus to global warming, we all have much more work to do.

  48. • Monckton of Brenchley April 8, 2020 at 3:40 am
    “In response to Mr Nelson, I do not advocate lockdowns.”
    Above post: “That is why, for the time being, governments will be keeping lockdowns in place. It would be irresponsible to do otherwise.”

    I twice submitted the following for the April 8 post but it never appeared.
    I always appreciate Lord Monckton’s contribution and usually find his arguments persuasive. IMHO this lockdown is downright wrong.
    A lockdown is an “extreme action and extreme actions require extreme proof.” Data supporting the claim that COVID-19 is an extreme virus are mostly based on assumptions and, gasp, computer models. Extreme consequences, E.G deaths, not infections, seem a more appropriate criteria for extreme action. On average, the communicable disease tuberculosis , kills 1,100,000 people every year. What is the threshold in lives per year, for taking extreme action? I would hope that whatever number is chosen is higher than 1,100,000.

    In his April 4th post, Lord Monckton said “The Chinese virus is considerable more infections and more fatal than HIV,” which kills 770,000 every year. While arguable that statement may be accurate, I don’t think there is sufficient data to know.
    In the US, arguments for a lockdown were based on “flattening the curve,” not saving lives. It is my understanding (misunderstanding?) that, barring a vaccination or other medical interventions, the virus will be around for a long time and sooner or later 60-80% will be infected. Although my crystal ball is cloudy, as of April 9, worldwide, less that 100,000 have died. I think a better argument can be made that substantially less than 1M will die than over 1.1M will die. Whatever the number, there will be arguing for years about how effective the lockdown has been vs. other actions.

    The argument “Would it not be better to allow everyone to acquire immunity, and to accept the resulting loss of life,” is a strawman argument. It is not an either/or choice. As South Korea and Sweden have shown, you can still do targeted quarantines, social distancing, testing, and take other remedial action without a lockdown. Taking your comment “…governments will be keeping lockdowns in place. It would be irresponsible to do otherwise” literally, Sweden and South Korea seem to qualify as being “irresponsible.”

    Calls for a lockdown are from those least effected. I doubt those who live paycheck-to-paycheck or customer-to-customer concur that a lockdown is a good tradeoff. In the US the estimates are that up to 20M people will lose their income. Many will lose their home and family, will not be able to afford going to a doctor, will turn to crime or drugs, or commit suicide. Arguable, poverty is the #1 cause of death. The cost to those most effected by the lockdown must be considered in addition to the benefits to those of us who are least effected.

    I do find this series of posts to be very informative and helpful and I thank Lord Monckton for his work.

  49. With the Chinese virus, however, only 27% are female and 63% are male.

    Is it 27-73 or 37-63?

  50. From personal experience this is worse than the flu or pneumonia. Treat it with 19th century medicine. Go to bed immediately and sleep round the clock and sweat it out until 2 weeks after you think you are cured.

  51. If the US peaks this week, total deaths will end up around 30-40K. Which will put us below the 2017/2018 flu season, which was 40K above average.

    The testing we need right now is antibody testing. Since NYC has kept their subways open, I suspect that they are approaching herd immunity. Only way to confirm is with the tests.

  52. Here’s how I look at it. Whether it is or is not worse than seasonal flu does not matter for most of the population. My prediction is that in ten years we will look back at this and find the mitigation measures in the US were mostly ineffective and the at risk people perished or were saved mostly by their own preventative measures, not silly half cocked quarantine directives from bureaucrats. Also, I suspect we will find there was a huge psychological and economic toll on working class people. A toll that cannot justify the results. Anyone advocating for a continued lock down is someone without worry about putting food on the table and keeping a roof over their heads. This being the very wealthy and the non working poor.

    On a lighter note, I think we all have some good laughs over the stupidity of some of these actions. For instance, where I live they shut down the beaches two weeks ago. Prior to the shutdown you’d find family groups spread out all over the very large areas. Now when you go beachside, you find large groups of people huddled up along the boardwalk. So they were pushed off the large open space and relegated to the narrow, cramped area. So what did the beach closure accomplish?

  53. “So don’t dismiss it lightly. Not any more. Wash hands often. Wear full-face masks when out of doors or away from home. Take Vitamin D3 daily. Be safe.”

    Their Doubt is deadly.

  54. Well whatever you believe about the stats or do about avoiding Covid19 you should at least ensure your household has a reliable body thermometer and an inexpensive fingertip pulse oximeter. At least then you can triage yourself with rhinovirus, coronavirus, laryngitis, pharyngitis and influenza infection symptoms you may possibly be afflicted with amongst Covid19 ones perhaps. That’s because you want to be able to detect fever and falling haemoglobin oxygen levels. Otherwise you’ll be flying blind and and panicking bothering very busy medicos unnecessarily with every sniffle cough and wheeze.

    • I’d say that this is one time when the hypochondriacs are avoiding hospitals, which is a good thing. I’d hate to see how much time and money is wasted on people who just want a little attention. Can’t they learn to eat Tide Pods, like the cool kids?

    • Fever is too non-specific, pyrexia may indicate: Measles, Rubella, Scarlet fever, Chickenpox (before spots appear), Tonsillitis, Covid19, influenza, cellulitis, ear infection, sepsis
      Temperature 95% for non-COPD – slightly more specific than temperature
      Low saturations is a red flag could indicate sepsis, heart failure, pneumonia, covid 19
      If person unable to complete long sentences then red flag
      If person has audible wheeze or stridor then red flag
      Sats probe also measure pulse: >90 is a yellow flag (occurs as a result of any infection) > 130 is a red flag

      See: https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ng51/resources/algorithms-and-risk-stratification-tables-compiled-version-2551488301

  55. Just my opinion but it seems to me that for some the possibility of a killer global virus emerging in modernity was remote. Others are not familiar with the statistics of death (all death not those that a political useful) Those that have a passing knowledge of the history of pandemic disease/viruses and can google global morality rates have context for the coronavirus. Those that solely rely on predictive models and the assessments of Heath Inc. (public and private) are at a disadvantage

    • Anything including the K-word will get moderation. S-K-I-L-L is illegal here.

      Likewise the name of the late 20th c. British PM Tony B. L-I-AR will fail. Never say you are famili-a-r with a certain subject.

      These filters really need looking at but that request gets ignored.

  56. “…..there are approximately three times as many serious Chinese-virus cases than all other viral pneumonias combined, including those caused by flu, in a typical year, and at least twice as many of these will die than with other serious viral pneumonia cases. Thus, the Chinese virus is six times more fatal than pre-existing viral pneumonias, including those caused by flu….”

    This looks like a testable prediction. The problem is that there are no ‘typical flu years’. There are bad years, moderate ones and mild ones. You can get from 1000 to 30,000 (round estimates) deaths in the UK from flu in a year, and there are probably even more extreme outliers.

    So 6000 could be 6 times worse than flu, and yet would be considered mild. 180,000 dead would certainly be a major pandemic – assuming we are half-way through the course that would be equivalent to the total world deaths. I wonder which 6x is meant here?

    • “The problem is that there are no ‘typical flu years’. There are bad years, moderate ones and mild ones.”

      Bingo.

      Most people with the “its just flu”, are also in the “flu is really a bad cold anyway” folder (which can be filed in the circular bin), and are probably vaguely remembering a mild season, spread over 6 months and the entire planet.

      • Rough guess is that respiratory issues (flu) are responsible for about 1/4 of all deaths? Probably matching cancer?

        It’s odd that people think ‘it’s just flu’, and not ‘it’s just cancer’….

  57. In a world population of 7.8 billion, 1,544,078 have caught corona and 91,000 died.

    In the last 5 months the world’s population has increase 20 million.

  58. Wait until this virus hits the underdeveloped world .
    It will be catastrophic .
    If they are actually able to test or record the numbers .
    The flu is seasonal and already has semi-immunity and vaccines .
    This virus is unstoppable apart from draconian self isolation or a vaccine /cure is found .
    Economies are stuffed worldwide and that could end up being far worse for all than trying to combat this.

  59. 1) Flu does not often lead to SARS (which is a list of symptoms and measurements). SARS is more serious than most bacterial pneumonia.
    2) COVID-19 is in addition to the flu.
    3) With the flattened curve each city’s or region’s spike can be handled.
    We need published information by all the expert epidemiologists showing expected death-rate if you get it. Those in my age group are old, not stupid. We know enough to isolate until the risk of even getting it at all in our area is low. Right now when there is little growth nearby it is safe enough for me; similar to the flu risk each season. It might not be safe enough for someone else my age. I am libertarian enough to want to give the entire population to make individual decisions better than any level of government.
    Government’s role? Provide all the consensus, yes, and, importantly, air the alternatives and why that person thinks it’s best.
    With #antibody testing we could even all who have the antibodies to go back to work even if they wouldn’t have taken the risk untested. No certificate needed.

  60. In keeping my own rough tally, I’ve found that so far in New York State, the number of deaths there attributed to COVID-19 are 35% higher than the average ANNUAL deaths attributed to flu/pneumonia and 30% higher than the HIGHEST number of deaths from this cause over the past five years. These residuals give a rough idea of the virulence of COVID-19 vs. routine influenza infections. Note, that we are only into the 14th week of the year, whereas the averages are annual figures.

  61. There’s a lot of confusion about this virus and whether it is Cold or Flu. Well, there is no absolute and definitive scientific definition. It’s worth mentioning at this point that the W.H.O. chart for the differences between Coronavirus, Cold and Influenza show 3 distinct profiles and that is not to say we are all fans of W.H.O.

    Colds are basically a disruption of the hundred plus bacteria and virus that exist in every human mouth, and they exist in some degree of harmony and perhaps symbiotically until a volatile pathogen upsets the balance. The resulting upset causes a ‘head cold’ and the body tries to expel the newcomer. This can be replicated by rapidly changing hot to cold weather conditions which also upsets the balance. This also explains the Meningitis outbreaks that often occur at start of term in Universities where new students introduce new pathogens , meningococcal bacterium is another common resident of the mouth .

    Influenza is more associated with feeling dreadful with some aches and pains in the limbs, perhaps more still with fever.

    So it is possible that Covid19 is neither cold nor flu.

      • As I said, changing temperatures can change the balance and induce a cold. No newcomer is required, just an imbalance of the resident bacteria and virus.

  62. A better title would be:

    ‘It should be worse than flu, but is it?’

    ‘Unexpectedly Higher Morbidity and Mortality of Hospitalized Elderly Patients Associated with Rhinovirus Compared with Influenza Virus Respiratory Tract Infection’

    International Journal of Molecular Sciences Feb 2017

  63. It’s not the flu… but it’s not a scarlet letter, either.

    (Yes, I like Mr. Monckton’s personal protection, however, in some states, you theoretically can’t even ride a motorcycle.)

    The response to it should be decentralized because different localities are subject to different dynamics (New York City is different from rural Wyoming, as is London from say, the north of Scotland.).

    If you are in a vulnerable population (old with underlying health conditions) it’s smart to take suitable precautions such as self-isolation.

    Several states do not have any lock-down and the infection rate is tolerable, other states have permissive orders where generally many businesses are open, except specific, numerated businesses, which are ordered closed (restaurants & bars), other states have restrictive orders where theoretically nothing is allowed except specific, numerated businesses deemed essential and you can’t even go outside unless you have essential business to conduct.

    In the U.S.A., the death rate has been way over predicted, many times over. In fact, comparing our average total death rate for the last four years for March, it turns out we had roughly 15,000 less deaths this March than in the four proceeding Marches.

    Quite possibly, that has something to due with social distancing decreasing the number of deaths from flu-like symptoms.

    It’s not clear what the death rate is from the Hubie province, Wuhan city virus.

    In some locals it is, in my opinion, appropriate to open businesses and practice social distancing at the same time (without having large gatherings like sporting events or crowded festivals).

    We can walk & chew gum at the same time without wrecking our economy.

    I wouldn’t call myself a libertarian, I’d call myself a realist that balances competing interests based on local conditions.

    In my neck of the woods, I say, “Open the economy, get people working again!”

    In London or New York City, the answer is different.

    Again, it’s not the flue, but it’s not a scarlet letter, either.

  64. I see this as a situation of acceptable risk. Not to downplay the relative lethality of this virus, it appears as though the usual demographics are most vulnerable. Therefore, shutting down entire economies; ordering all non-county residents to leave or face heavy fines and imprisonment; fining surfers and stand-up paddlers who are maintaining not just feet, but yards if not hundreds of yards, of social distancing; jailing backcountry skiers, and fining anybody who is caught outside without a facemask; seems to me to be massive overreaction, not to mention police state-like. Taking reasonable precautions, shopping for the elderly and infirm, exercising, and taking commonsense steps to minimize your exposure or unintentionally transmitting the virus to others, seems to me like the best steps to take. Living with a degree of acceptable risk which, honestly, is the way we all live anyway, seems a lot smarter for everybody than shuttering entire countries or imposing draconian edicts on large populations. And not taking into account the regional diversity, as in Wyoming versus Manhattan, when deciding who can and can’t do what, is in my opinion insane.

  65. And of course, no “study” would be complete without injecting the race card into it.

    “The report also considers ethnicity. About four-fifths of the UK population is White, but only two-thirds of the critical cases to date are Whites. Blacks, in particular, are three times over-represented in intensive care: they represent one case in seven, but are only one in 20 of the population.

    Body mass index was also studied, but the number of cases in the below-normal, normal, overweight, obese and morbidly obese categories is not far out of line with the general population, two-thirds of whom are overweight or obese. Some 72% of intensive-care Chinese-virus cases are overweight or obese.”

    Which raises the question of multicollinearity….for example, in the U.S. Blacks have a considerably higher obesity rate. So in a true color blind world, the race card wouldn’t be played…..but the obesity rate would.

    But you can bet that the media in the western world will be ringing the “racist” bell for all its worth.

    • “Which raises the question of multicollinearity….for example, in the U.S. Blacks have a considerably higher obesity rate. So in a true color blind world, the race card wouldn’t be played…..but the obesity rate would.

      But you can bet that the media in the western world will be ringing the “racist” bell for all its worth.”

      Yes, some elitist NYT columnist (sorry for the redundancy) posted (then retracted) a map that showed when people stopped travelling more than 2 miles.

      Someone else quickly laid over map of “food deserts”, i.e., where you have to go further afield for better food, and access to private cars.

      Yeah…pretty much the same maps.

  66. Austria, Norway, Denmark, the Czech Republic Announce Plans to Reopen at Least Parts of Their Economy — Sweden Remains Open — USA looks to reopen on May 1….if the statistics are accurate, locking down economies did not make a difference as Sweden’s rates are just as good as the others. Did we destroy the world’s economy for NOTHING?

  67. Wow! Fox news is no longer transmitting Cuomos rantings and is beginning to realize that HERD IMMUNITY a phenomenom that occurs EVERY year in cold countries may be the cause of declining hospitalizations. I think you will see Fausci et al dissappear soon as Trump will replace the current coronavirus task force. So from 2000000 deaths we are now predicting 50000 USA less than the flu. We see the warmistas coronavistas conveniently dont mention Belarus, Sweden ect with no lockdown and similar incidence and mortality. Willis is correct Monckton is wrong. We shall however, confirm this in the next week or so. A lot of heads will roll if I am correct, otherwise I will have to eat my straw hat cheers!

  68. An ER Doc’s description of how it differs from serious flu:

    The more patients I treat, the more I hate this virus. It is brutal, it is capricious and unpredictable, a patient is fine one minute than trying to die the next. Pulmonary and hemodynamic pathophysiology truisms seem not to apply.

    Another clinical vignette

    Healthy 47-year-old man suffering at home for 7 days, was improving, took a turn or the worse. Came in by ambulance with very low oxygen levels (72%, normal > 92%) and obvious respiratory distress and needed to be put on a ventilator. Picture the most out of breath you have ever been X 3 gasping like a gold fish out of the water. Getting a patient on a vent is something every emergency doctor has done myriad times and most can do it blindfolded. COVID is way different though because intubating (putting in the breathing tube) can cause the virus to become an aerosol making the whole room filled with COVID 19 mist. So, the patient sits in the stretcher goldfishing as we prepare ourselves and our equipment. Maybe 10 minutes but 10 minutes is a long time to be awake, gasping thinking you are going to die. Total body PPE; space suit, bring in the equipment, get ready. Normally, we would want to get the patients oxygen level as high as possible before doing this because the process requires making him unconscious and paralyzed to put the tube it. During that time, he can’t breathe. Normally, if anything goes wrong for any reason after we have paralyzed the patient, we can breathe for them with a mask before the tube goes it. Not here because of the aerosol. After the tube goes in, you also use a bag but not here because of the deadly aerosol. We begin. Low oxygen level, medicines take a few minutes to work, oxygen level goes lower and lower, open the patients mouth to clear his airway. Normally a little spit or mucous, maybe some blood. Something about COVID. The mucous looks like Elmer’s glue, is hard to suction, stringy, almost gooey. Oxygen level is near zero, heart rate begins to slow down, tube goes in, lots of Elmer’s glue funneling out, hook him up to one of the precious ventilators and oxygen level begins to very slowly come up, heart rate comes up. Then down. The Elmer’s glue. Change the setting on the precious ventilator so the more pressure stays in the lungs and pushes the glue and finally, his oxygen level increases. Now we take off the PPE very carefully so that 1. We don’t infect ourselves with COVID and 2. We need to reuse it because PPE is just as precious.

    I finished training 25 years ago, I have intubated thousands of patients, this is different

    You do not want this. Young healthy people get this and die. We need time to figure this out and only you can give us time. Social distancing, stay at home, wash your hands. Do your part.

    • “I finished training 25 years ago, I have intubated thousands of patients, this is different”

      What a nightmare!

      Our medical people really do deserve combat pay.

      I see where the charitable foundation TunnelsToTowers is starting a fund to help pay the mortgage and help the family of any healthcare worker who dies from the Wuhan virus because of their profession, and because they are standing there defending all of us with their own lives.

      Tunnels to Towers has an excellent idea.

  69. The CDC budget for infectious disease prevention, foreign disease prevention, and other factors associated with a pandemic response is roughly 4 Billion Dollars a year. Additionally, each state carries a similar budget item. Worldwide, who knows how much has been spent on pandemic preparedness over the last 10 years. I will call it 1/2 Trillion dollars as a rough estimate. I don’t know, I’m just throwing a number out. Given that expense, the world seems completely unprepared for COVID-19. So, throw that cost out the window.

    We should be demanding some response for this. What has the CDC been doing with that money, and why weren’t they “ready”? What were they working on, instead, and how do they justify their diversion of the money to (apparently) the entirely wrong thing?

    Reports vary on NYC, for example, the State didn’t buy replacement Respirators, did buy them, then auctioned them, or used the money for other purchases. This reminds me of everybody “suddenly” learning that NOLA had not been maintaining their dykes, but had been wasting the money on God knows what, instead. Once again, there is no responsibility for these failures, which should be ringing the alarm bell in all our heads.

    So lots and lots of losses/costs worldwide. The benefit is that maybe a lot of lives were saved. Those lives saved are in the majority non-producers based upon the data of who is dying from COVID-19. If a proper pandemic response was in place in the majority of places, perhaps a full shutdown might have been avoided. Perhaps.

    It does seem likely that a focused approach would have been better for the majority. A report from MIT today shows that hundreds of thousands of people in Mass. may be shedding the virus, compared to the 400+ cases they have in hospitals (this is a study of sewage, https://www.bostonherald.com/2020/04/08/massachusetts-sewage-suggests-more-than-100k-coronavirus-cases-in-state-mit-lab/), in which case, to me, says that most of us have had it, and don’t even know. Yes, bad for those we may have infected, if they were sensitive, but it also means the herd is nearly immune, and many of us can go back to work, school, etc. after an overactive disruption.

    This I hope will never happen like this again. We all individually should be better prepared and the governments in charge of this area of preparedness should be held accountable, perhaps with an annual report on readiness. Perhaps businesses should have disaster plans in place to transition to a pandemic response economy. I don’t know, just my opinion.

    I think we also need to examine a number of bureaucratic roadblocks that have impeded our responses, FDA, CDC and other groups seem to have mined the road to quick response, but when days count, weeks of delay are a crime in themselves. A quick board should convene, to go through studies and tests from RELIABLE health groups in other countries (1st world countries, like S. Korea, France, and others) to see what is working for them, and hopefully, why. Chloroquine is a premium example, plenty of other countries had success treating with it, but the CDC and/or FDA dragged their feet on it. Our approval system is slow as hell, and I’m not personally convinced that it’s for our safety, I’m sure there are more than a few payoffs in the system, we need to root that out. The crap CDC test was another example, and now they’ve admitted that a 20 year old testing system can identify the virus in a patient in about 45 minutes. Really? Why weren’t they looking at that system (as I say, 20 years old, and previously used for HIV, SARS, MERS and other viral infections) first? The sensible world wonders.

      • Much like asking those who complain about “over” population what the population SHOULD be, or climate scolds what the temperature SHOULD be, I think the answer will be either silence, or muddled logic, or some combination.

  70. Sir, i am indeed a liberartian, and i think no government should have the power to put on house arrest entire nations whatever the reason, but this is completely beside the point.
    the reasoning i hear from the curfew supporters goes as follows: without lockdown there would have been hundreds of thousands of deaths.
    this is not demonstrated at all and it has not happened even where lockdowns have not been imposed.
    as you should and do know, correlation is not causation, and available data does not show that the curfew work. data shows that at some random time after curfews, new cases start to decrease.
    but there is no proof that the decrease in cases is due to the collective house arrest and not to other reasons. like for example that the virus has ran out of usable targets (people with weak immune systems), or that testing policies have been changed (and we still have no denominator).
    no effort whatsoever has been done to understand the vast differences between finland and UK, or new zealand and italy. all just repeat the mantra, stay home.
    i also find peculiar the stubborn refusal to introduce serological tests. maybe afraid of the results (lots of people is already immune, and that is the reason for the decrease in cases, not the curfew)

    in my opinion the curfew has the sole purpose of covering up the gross inadequacies of government run healthcare systems, filled to the brim with bureacrats awarding themselves rich salaries.
    i read that UK has less than 1000 ICU beds.
    http://covid19.healthdata.org/united-kingdom
    switzerland has as many, with a 8.6 mln population. “protect the NHS”, indeed.

    but lets assume the lockdown folks are correct. house arresting entire populations stops contagion. then what? keep everybody (except government agents of course, those are immune to virus thanks to magic uniforms) at home until a vaccine is available on a large scale?
    because you cant have it both ways. if curfew works, then contagion will restart as soon as it is lifted.
    or maybe governments know curfew doesnt work and do it because, well, they can, and it is functional to their fixations with power and to show they are doing something.

    the collective cost of these lockdowns will be enormous and long lasting, the reward minuscule, in the order of 2-3 hours of life saved per capita.

    • “no effort whatsoever has been done to understand the vast differences between finland and UK, or new zealand and italy”

      Of course there has been.
      Population Density of Finland 18 people per square Km.
      New Zealand 18 people per square Km & terrific Quarantine, track & trace.
      275 people per square Km for the UK and 206 for Italy.

  71. Christopher
    You comment:

    The red curve shows the case growth rate for the world excluding China. If the 8% daily growth rate were to continue, yesterday’s 1,430,919 confirmed cases … would have risen to nearly 8 million by the end of April, and more than 80 million by the end of May.

    It is important, therefore, to ensure that the now well established downtrend is maintained. That is why, for the time being, governments will be keeping lockdowns in place. It would be irresponsible to do otherwise.

    Obviously, an 8% daily growth rate is undesirably high. However, all the countries (except South Korea) are tracking similarly, (3% – 13%). Clearly, lockdowns have widely varying results. But, what you haven’t addressed is that Sweden has an 8% rate, right in the middle of the pack! That is, they are doing no worse than half of the countries using lockdowns! Now if Sweden were an outlier at 20 or 30% (where everyone started) then I would say the evidence was compelling that lockdowns were effective. However, that isn’t the case. To be convincing that lockdowns actually work better than just social distancing, you have to explain Sweden.

    • Clyde, population density, first case date all make a major difference.
      Let’s see where Sweden are in 3 weeks, but before then they will also be in lockdown.
      Compare Sweden to Czechia where they where face masks, Sweden spread is 50% higher than Czechia.
      Check out Stockholm’s rates where the density is comparable.

      • You cannot compare population density in a country like Sweden with UK. In Sweden 65%of the territory is forrest and 60% of the territory is in the north region where there is hardly anybody, 10% of the population.

        Stockholm with 10% of the population has a density of more than 5.000 inhabitants/ km²
        Great Stockholm is at 350 inhabitants/km²

        Goteborg is 1200 inh./km² and great Goteborg is at 240…

    • I am wondering how they are actually behaving, vs how people in other places are behaving?
      If everyone else has restricted travel, at least that part is moot for them. No one can leave there or come from somewhere else…if I understand correctly.
      Have all countries banned travel between countries?
      IDK…to much to keep up with.
      If in some places some percentage of people, say 50%, have isolated themselves except for going to get groceries now and then, then it seem to me the pool of people that might pass it around is now half as big.
      If people stop close talking, hugging, shaking hands, etc, and just in general act like everyone else might have something on them that they do not want to get themselves, that would seem pretty likely to me to slow down the spread.
      Are they still going to movies, having concerts, ballgames, parties, crowding onto buses and trains, etc?
      If not, they may not be calling it a lock down, but people are basically doing the same stuff as anyplace else.
      And…I find it impossible to believe that there are not just about as many people who have decided they do not want to get this virus and are simply staying home all the time as much as possible.
      But I do not know.
      What matters is how people are behaving that is different, not what they call it or whether it is an official policy.

    • In response to Clyde Spencer, in several postings I have fairly pointed out the Swedish anomaly. I am about to do some calculations to see whether there has been increased under-reporting of cases in Sweden, whose public-health authorities are coming under increasing pressure to introduce a lockdown.

      In any event, each country had to decide for itself whether it had sufficient hospital capacity to allow the virus to continue to spread at the daily 20% compound rate that prevailed in the three weeks to March 14. In Britain, we did not have anything like enough capacity, so the do-nothing brigade were overruled and a lockdown was introduced. As a result, we bought ourselves time to increase intensive-care capacity.

      The alternative would have been mass deaths, a complete breakdown of the healthcare system and social disorder.

      • People in Sweden are very likely doing more than the no lock down and business as usual assertion for that country that I have seen in media reports.
        The wikipedia page just above from A C Osborn describes people working from home, being advised to take precautions, etc.
        There may not be all that much difference in how people are actually behaving.
        As you have noted elsewhere, the general public appears to have a good deal of common sense after all, at least regarding such matters as personal survival when danger is perceived.

  72. Lord Monckton, if you ride your bike a lot you probably inhale so much garbage that you’re immune to everything.

  73. at any rate, they must be throwing huge parties at the CCP

    first they managed to cover up for weeks the leak of a deadly virus, with the complicity of WHO
    then they come up with the lockdown idea, and start a propaganda campaign to show that it brings down the contagion rate to ZERO. sure. the magic of total control over communication.
    then they manage to successfully export the lockdown model to the whole world, killing the entire occidental industry without one single shot.
    then they pose as the saviours of the planet, delivering millions of masks and tests and thousands of ventilators that they have magically produced during a massive epidemic with total lockdown of entire regions. they must be real industrial geniuses to have different regions completely indipendent from each other for industrial production.
    what can i say. a stroke of genius like very few in history. who needs cannons and bombers, when you have governments so efficient in destroying their own countries?

  74. “4759 patients with non-COVID-19 viral pneumonia, most of them caused by flu, over the three complete years 2017-2019.”

    You cannot know that these patients had non-COVID-19 pneumonia – SARS-CoV-2 tests did not exist in 2017-2019.

  75. The results given in this article, from the data provided by the Intensive Care National Audit and Research Centre in London, seem to reinforce conclusions already drawn in the paper below:

    ‘Rhinovirus infection in the adults was associated with significantly higher mortality and longer hospitalization when compared with influenza virus infection.’

    ‘More patients in the rhinovirus group developed pneumonia complications (p = 0.03), required oxygen therapy, and had a longer hospitalization period (p < 0.001), whereas more patients in the influenza virus group presented with fever (p < 0.001) and upper respiratory tract symptoms of cough and sore throat (p < 0.001), and developed cardiovascular complications (p < 0.001).'

    'Unexpectedly Higher Morbidity and Mortality of Hospitalized Elderly Patients Associated with Rhinovirus Compared with Influenza Virus Respiratory Tract Infection'

    International Journal of Molecular Sciences Feb 2017

    But, without any idea of what other prior health problems the various most unfortunate patients in the respective groups may have suffered from, it seems difficult to draw any other conclusions than those given in International Journal of Molecular Sciences Feb 2017, as above, which doesn't really move us forward.

  76. COVID-19 in Proportion?
    By the end of this week in England and Wales, around 5,893 people have died “with” COVID-19. If 2020 follows the pattern of 2018, a bad year for flu, then in the same time period…

    around 33,630 people will have died from Flu/Pneumonia
    COVID-19 will be linked to around 3% of total deaths which number 187,720data updated 2020-04-09

    http://inproportion2.talkigy.com/

  77. I live in a state which was “locked down” by our Governor two weeks ago. My state will remain locked down for at least another two weeks.

    Why?

    Because to date 103 mostly old/infirm individuals have died from/with Covid-19.

    In other words, our Governor locked down our state for a month — causing untold economic and psychological harm to virtually all state citizens — because to date .00177% of the state’s population has died of this “scourge.”

    Am I the only one in the room that sees the absurdity of the situation?

  78. Hayward, CA … 6 dead, 59 cases of ChiCom-19 Virus at ONE Nursing Home!!

    https://www.mercurynews.com/2020/04/08/covid19-six-dead-at-hayward-nursing-home-cases-there-jump-to-59/

    Why is NOBODY asking WHY? … WHY? … there have been so many outbreaks of The WuHan virus at Nursing Homes? Is it because all Answers are “ugly”? That it is all traceable to Chinese National Doctors, Nurses, and staff? And that Elder Care homes are notoriously FILTHY places? Yeah, yeah call me a “racist” … and put up a WALL of Political correctness to examining the TRUE cause. Is this a systemic case of Elder-abuse?

    We all know this is not an isolated incident, but rather a systemic problem with Elderly care homes ACROSS America (and the world). Yes, old people should be DYING at a higher rate … but why the elevated infection rate? For all intents and purposes these Elder care nursing homes are ALREADY socially distanced from most of the public. They are visited and operated by a small subset of the general population. Why aren’t we curious about this, and looking for solutions?

    • My reading would be that these infections are iatrogenic. It’s the doctors who visit the care homes who carried the infection into them.

  79. bad form … major strawman … nobody is claiming that it is less infectious than the flu …
    and you know it …

    • There are some people saying that, and other sorts of things that are clearly untrue.

  80. It is inappropriate to use seasonal flu as a metric as here in the UK the most vulnerable have the option of inoculation, as do NHS staff, and hence the mortality rate is somewhat reduced (these are the very same groups who are susceptible to CoViD19); it is comparing apples and oranges.

    More significant is probably the mortality rate of sepsis.

    134000 people across the world die each day from sepsis. (20% of all deaths)
    53000 die each year in the UK from sepsis more than bowel and breast cancer combined.
    1,700,000 people contract sepsis each year in the USA with a mortality of 270,000

    https://www.nigms.nih.gov/education/fact-sheets/Pages/sepsis.aspx
    https://www.dw.com/en/sepsis-a-common-cause-of-death-from-coronavirus/a-52758193
    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6970225/

    Another comparison would be TB:
    In 2018 there were almost 1.5 million deaths cross the world

    London has the highest rate of pulmonary TB in the UK
    The UK mortality rate for TB is 5 times higher than the USA and is second highest in Western Europe
    and in parts of East London it is comparable with India
    The UK rate in 2012 was 12 per 100,000 in 2018 this was 8 per 100000, whilst the US in 2018 had 3 per 100,000.

    https://statistics.blf.org.uk/tb
    https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/tuberculosis
    https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/mm6911a3.htm

  81. You have to make tough decisions when the cure is worse than the disease. Poverty is said to indirectly kill more people than anything except old age. Avoiding #19 will not make it go away. Only antibody/herd immunity and yet to be developed vaccine will spare individuals unless they are self vigilant or lucky. I think it should be left up to the individual how much precaution they want to take in their own defense of the virus. It has already been proven that being locked up in an aged care environment …. seemingly a safe place with minimal social contact …. is most deadly. At the sake of being pedantic, being more deadly doesn’t preclude #19 from being another flu.

  82. Saying that CoV-19 is not any worse than the Flu is a non-statement – which Flu?

    Flu seasons vary and U.S. death rates can vary from a few thousand to 60,000 depending on the strain and how novel it is. And this probably under counts the actual deaths, just like CoV-19 deaths had been under-counted in Italy. So a really bad Flu season is nothing to sneeze at (sorry, Puns just happen).

    SARS-CoV-2 is extremely novel, highly infectious, and very dangerous. There was no known immunity in the “herd”when this all started, making this a very dangerous disease unlike Flu, where there is usually some amount of at least partial immunity present. When I first extrapolated death rates (partially based on flawed China data) I came up with a maximum of 120,000 deaths in the U.S – so a really bad Flu season. I now think that number was low if we hadn’t taken steps to slow the spread down.

    My wife works in a hospital in a lab and agrees – hospitals in at least some areas were set to be overrun with cases they could not properly treat had we not slowed down the spread, and the death rate would have been much higher for those cases. But delaying non-critical surgery also likely saved lives – the best place to go to catch a disease is a hospital – sorry but true. Workers just get careless over time no matter how much training you give them.

    I am not happy with the damage we have done to the economy – there has to be better ways to combat pandemics, but so far no one has offered up any workable alternative. Perhaps more tightly locking down highly infected areas (no travel without antibody testing or quarantine for example) and then keeping the rest of the country working would have worked, but now we are stomping all over people’s rights (worse then the lock-down already has). There is a risk-cost to mega-cities – they are the perfect breeding grounds for infectious diseases.

    Rather then complaining about what DID happen, we should focus on what SHOULD happen. How do we prepare better for a future pandemic? How can we keep from ripping the throat out of our economy while in a pandemic? We need to get through this episode, learn from our mistakes, and work on being prepared for the next wave.

    Some suggestions, cleaner environments in large offices with air scrubbers that cut down on infectious particles, higher partitions that better separate workers, policies to require temperature measurements at the door and send home workers who are sick (always in force), better preparation in stockpiles and hospitals, less dependency on widely flung supply chains, localizing the manufacturing of critical goods such as drugs. There are a million things we can do…I wonder if we will do any of them?

    • The USA was not helped by being visited by half a million Chinese before they locked down, nor were the rest of the world.
      By then it is too late for proper quarantine to work.

  83. I posted the following note earlier on another thread, where it is in moderation.

    This alleged Covid-19 pandemic is difficult to analyze, because much of the data is suspect and/or incomplete, a moving target. Regardless, it is prudent, especially for older people, to limit our exposure to this new virus – nobody should assume it is not dangerous, it is – especially to those over ~65.

    I have already taken a guess as to a probable outcome, but I have little confidence in a tentative conclusion based on such poor data. In any case, we will have lots of data to analyze in a few months, and will be much wiser. In the meantime, stay safe, especially us older folks – we still have something to contribute.

    Best, Allan
    _________________________________

    Reportedly, Sweden is not following the full lock-down model and has only moderate precautions for Covid-19. It will be interesting to see how Sweden’s full-country-scale test compares to the full lock-down, kill-the-economy model of the USA, Canada, etc.

    I think we will learn much about the greater picture of contagion with this exercise. We will also see some changes is social practices.

    Customary greetings like face-kissing and even handshakes will probably become much less commonplace after Covid-19 has passed.

    It is interesting to me that Total Winter Deaths are ‘way down this year, despite the alleged Covid-19 pandemic.

    It is also interesting that here in Calgary hospitals have deferred elective surgery to make way for the anticipated flood of Covid-19 patients, and as a result hospitals and staff are not at all busy – yet.

    The big questions remain:

    Is Covid-19 is really a catastrophic pandemic, or a huge over-reaction to one-more-seasonal-virus.

    Was the full lock-down that has harmed our economy and financially destroyed so many young people and small businesses really necessary, or was it like swatting a fly on a glass table… with a sledgehammer?

    We should know much more in a month or two. Fasten your seatbelts. Faites vos jeux.

    • It’s like swatting a fly on a glass table with a sledgehammer. In the 2018-2019 flue season, there were 35,000 deaths from the flue in the US – for which they presumably had vaccines. To date, there are roughly 16,000 deaths from corona virus – say 17,000 – from the first wave of the flu season – with no vaccines. So if there are total of 18,000 deaths from all flu deaths during the second wave of the flu season starting in roughly in October, then the number of flu deaths would be on par with the flu deaths from the 2018-2019 flu season. Maybe a vaccination is just a placebo.

      • cinaed
        The CDC estimated that there were 80,000 seasonal-flu deaths during the 2017-2018 season! And, the MSM said nothing, and no extraordinary measures were taken to suppress it.

  84. Maybe the rest of Europe can simply emulate Hamburg?

    ‘This virus affects our lives in a completely exaggerated way. This bears no relation to the danger posed by the virus. And the astronomical economic damage now arising is not commensurate with the danger posed by the virus. I am convinced that corona mortality will not even make itself felt as a peak in annual mortality. So far, not a single person with no previous illnesses had died of the virus in Hamburg: everyone we have examined so far has had cancer , chronic lung disease, were heavily smokers or obese, had diabetes, or had cardiovascular disease. Covid-19 is a deadly disease only in exceptional cases.’

    Professor Klaus Püschel, head of Hamburg forensic medicine

    ‘The Free and Hanseatic City of Hamburg had recently, contrary to the requirements of the Berlin Robert Koch Institute, started to differentiate between deaths with and with coronaviruses, which led to a decrease in Covid 19 deaths.’

    Hamburger Abendblatt 02 April 2020

  85. We simply don’t know What the Chinese flu death rate is because we don’t yet know what the denominator is.

    Dr. Bendavid of Stanford is conducting an antibody test in California with the results to be announced tomorrow.

    Once these results are known, we’ll have an excellent idea of how many people were infected by Chinese flu and were asymptomatic, and then we’ll know what the real denominator is and the real death rate.

    In the meantime, let’s not destroy the world economy any more than it already has until we know what the actual death rate is.

    By the end of March, about 60,000 Americans have died from the regular flu and about 13,000 from the Chinese flu….

    Everyone just needs to wash their hands, wear masks, and people over 65 with comorbidity need to shelter in place as much as possible.

    Hydroxychloroquine, Azithromycin and zinc also need to be widely prescribed to those infected with the Chinese flu as the efficacy of this drug combination is extremely promising.

    We also need to restart the economy ASAP and try to fix the extensive damage already inflicted once the true death rate is knOWN, which should have been determined well before The US passed $2.2 trillion in Chinese flu spending, and committed the Fed printing another $4 trillion)

    The US economy has essentially been mortally wounded, likely for no good reason.

    Stay safe.

  86. What is the difference between Covid-19 disease and ordinary flu? Ask those who have experienced this disease. I think that only such comparisons are reliable.

  87. The report also considers ethnicity. About four-fifths of the UK population is White, but only two-thirds of the critical cases to date are Whites. Blacks, in particular, are three times over-represented in intensive care: they represent one case in seven, but are only one in 20 of the population.

    That’s bad statistics. It’s looking at the wrong population.

    Blacks may be only one in 20 of the UK (England ad Wales?) population. But the outbreak has been first and foremost in London.

    I think you will find the ethnic mix of London is far more diverse than the nation as a whole.

  88. The following statements from Chris M’s article gave me pause to ponder:

    Therefore, the case fatality rate for closed cases where ventilation was required is more than 67%, compared with only 16% for non-COVID viral pneumonia cases requiring ventilation.

    … advanced respiratory support for Chinese-virus cases is typically maintained for between 4 and 9 days (average 6 days), while it is not needed at all in non-COVID-19 viral-pneumonia cases, which require only basic respiratory support, and require it only for 2-4 days (average 3 days).

    Notice: non-COVID-19 viral pneumonia cases requiring ventilation appears as 16%, while COVID-19 respiratory-syndrome cases requiring ventilation appears as 67%, and duration of ventilation for non-COVID cases averages 3 days, while duration of ventilation for COVID cases averages 6 days (twice as long).

    Might this give rise to the question whether or not the ventilation protocol for this syndrome is correct? — pointing to the possibility that the the long duration of ventilation or the ventilation protocol itself might be causing the deaths?

    Being put on a ventilator carries risk:

    https://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/health-topics/ventilatorventilator-support

    ___________________________________________________________

    What Are the Risks of Being on a Ventilator? – Ventilator/Ventilator Support
    Infections

    One of the most serious and common risks of being on a ventilator is pneumonia. The breathing tube that’s put in your airway can allow bacteria to enter your lungs. As a result, you may develop ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP).

    The breathing tube also makes it hard for you to cough. Coughing helps clear your airways of lung irritants that can cause infections.

    VAP is a major concern for people using ventilators because they’re often already very sick. Pneumonia may make it harder to treat their other disease or condition.

    VAP is treated with antibiotics. You may need special antibiotics if the VAP is caused by bacteria that are resistant to standard treatment.

    Another risk of being on a ventilator is a sinus infection. This type of infection is more common in people who have endotracheal tubes. (An endotracheal tube is put into your windpipe through your mouth or nose.) Sinus infections are treated with antibiotics.
    Other Risks

    Using a ventilator also can put you at risk for other problems, such as:

    Pneumothorax (noo-mo-THOR-aks). This is a condition in which air leaks out of the lungs and into the space between the lungs and the chest wall. This can cause pain and shortness of breath, and it may cause one or both lungs to collapse.
    Lung damage. Pushing air into the lungs with too much pressure can harm the lungs.
    Oxygen toxicity. High levels of oxygen can damage the lungs.

    These problems may occur because of the forced airflow or high levels of oxygen from the ventilator.

    Using a ventilator also can put you at risk for blood clots and serious skin infections. These problems tend to occur in people who have certain diseases and/or who are confined to bed or a wheelchair and must remain in one position for long periods.

    Another possible problem is damage to the vocal cords from the breathing tube. If you find it hard to speak or breathe after your breathing tube is removed, let your doctor know.
    ________________________________________________________________

    Given theses normal risks of being put on a ventilator, and given the prolonged use of the ventilator on people with weakened respiratory systems already, how is it known now that the ventilators are not the problem in the treatment of this syndrome? Is the wrong protocol being used on a large scale? Are doctors expecting too much of it? At least one doctor has been asking such questions.

    This stands beside the issue that other people keep raising — data quality — I too am not convinced that current data is good quality data — it has a limited view — possibly biased by other variables, which are not being taken proper account of.

    • I suppose that instead of going on a ventilator you could just let the patient die!

      Is that your alternative?

      • Steve R,

        I surely was not suggesting any alternative. But think about it: if the patient dies ON the ventilator, how are you distinguishing that from death off the ventilator. The ventilator really did not prevent death, did it? So, again, I am raising the question, “Could the ventilator merely delay the inevitable?” If a doctor did NOT ventilate, causing death, and ventilating caused death too, then I suppose the value of ventilating would be feeling good that an effort was made. But is this good feeling justified? [I don’t know]. Is a life being prolonged that maybe should not have been? [I don’t know — I’m raising the question.]

        • Supportive care is the hallmark of treatment for such conditions as have no specific cure.
          The idea is to give the patient as much time as possible to overcome the infection and begin to recover.
          Patients generally do not come in with the outcome of their illness stamped on their foreheads, so given that some will have the time and the strength to pull through, and some will not, the fact that many die while on a ventilator just means that everything possible was being done for them until they recovered or died.

  89. If we attribute all deaths to Covid-19 the epidemic will never end. That would be the strategy of those who wish to prolong the misery.

  90. Contrary to what some people think, this infection does not improve population resistance because it damages internal organs in patients.

  91. 900,000 were hospitalized and 80,000 died in the 2018 us flu season. Hospitals were nearly overwhelmed and supplies dangerously low.
    Nothing was shut down.

    • Steve Oregon should perhaps read the head posting, where he will find the clearest and most authoritative hard evidence that the Chinese virus is far more serious, and has a far heavier impact on hospital services, than flu. Does he seriously think that governments across the world have been building emergency hospitals as fast as they could if they have not worked out that this pandemic could have been – and may yet be – one of the worst of its kind?

      If the pandemic had been allowed to run unchecked, the 80,000 figure he mentions would have been overtopped in the U.S. in weeks. It will probably still be overtopped in months, unless the daily case growth rate can be brought down.

  92. I have a few comments:

    1. It is one thing to claim that Covid19 is far worse than the flu. It’s another thing to say we shouldn’t compare the two. Obviously, if these people are right, we should compare the two. In fact, they do compare the two, in order to conclude that we shouldn’t compare the two.

    2. Does anyone believe that in the year 2020, Covid19 will kill more people in the US than the flu? Surely not. But if it doesn’t kill more this year, there will never be a year (and probably never a month) where it does kill more. By this simple measure, Covid19 can’t be as bad as the flu.

    3. A lot of these numbers are pretty meaningless, because we don’t have any empirical measure of how many people have been infected with SARSCov2 and have recovered. Current tests do not identify these people. They can be identified by a serological test for antibodies. This only needs to be done for a representative sample of the population, say five hundred subjects. If ten percent of the population, or less, have been infected (including those who have recovered), then it suggests that Covid19 is a lot worse than the flu. If fifty percent have been infected, or more, then it suggests that the flu is a lot worse than Covid19. We should have an answer in a month or two.

    4. Two years in the future, no one will give a toss for Covid19. It will be a historical footnote, at most like swine flu or avian flue. But everyone will be preoccupied with the ongoing world slump, deliberately created by government lockdown policies. Needless to say, the world slump will kill more people than Covid19, and more people than Colvid19 ever could have killed.

    • Mr Ramsay Steele does not believe that this year the Chinese virus will kill more people than the flu does. If lockdowns had not occurred, it would have done just that. In the two weeks from 7 to 21 March, the mean daily compound growth rate in deaths was 40%. Do the math.

  93. Mosh and the Lord know nothing about viruses it will be proven over time I totally respect mosh for his uncovering of the president of the union of concenced scientist global warming scam but apart these people have no clue about how viruses operate

  94. WUWT will have to seriously reconsider who can publish serious climate stuff here I think Watts Spencer ect know what they are saying Mockton and Mosh should be allowed to reply at most but not post they have beeen wrong nearly 100% are are damaging peoples lives.

  95. WUWT needs to not to allow Mocktons Moshers to post here anymore at least for a couple of days they are doomsayres and havent got a clue abut how virures work please allow them back in 2 weeeks they can say what they want

    • You do know what the first W stands for in WUWT, right?

      Create your own blog and stop telling the owner what he can and can’t do.

    • Eliza should know that I have carried out epidemiological modeling on behalf of HM Government: I wrote one of the earliest working models of the HIV pandemic, and predicted that if carriers were not identified and isolated at the earliest stage the virus would spread worldwide and kill tens of millions. And there was shrieking and howling when I said that, because everyone who had not actually modeled the pandemic thought they knew better. But they didn’t. Depending on whose count one relies on, there have been 30 million to 50 million deaths worldwide, and hundreds of millions more are living with the infection and being treated – expensively – for it.

      The graphs in the head posting are a straightforward presentation of the available data for the territories listed. They show, like it or not, that the compound daily mean growth rate in total confirmed cases is falling, though it has a long way further to fall before we can declare the emergency to be over.

      One realizes that people will be somewhat panicky and hysterical at this difficult time, and one does one’s best to make allowances. But Eliza must accept that it is the advice of such as me, rather than the opinions of such as she, that governments are heeding – and, if she would only open her mind, with very good reason.

    • Disagree, Eliza. There are articles posted on the site arguing the case that COVID-19 is not a danger warranting extreme measures. These articles also have comments sections. Nowt wrong with giving the mainstream argument space. This is a controversial subject – controversy is public disagreement, and here it is in all its glory.

      Pretty much always true: the best solution to bad speech is more speech.

    • Most grateful to Alex for this useful confirmation that in England, France, Spain and Italy there is severe excess mortality, related to the Chinese-virus pandemic.

  96. I’m not sure who is saying that covid-19 is no worse than the flu, in terms of how it impacts a critically ill patient or our heroes in the hospitals. I certainly don’t endorse that view. It seems like another straw man argument being advanced.

    Some have argued that excess deaths this season have been no worse than seen in recent years. Some have argued that lockdown protocols have not substantially changed the number of new cases. I don’t agree with them that they have any solid evidence that social distancing has failed to flatten the curve, but it’s hard to argue that total deaths have exceeded prior flu seasons. This could be evidence of the success of social distancing, and it isn’t prudent to deny that without stronger evidence such as antibody testing.

    The real question in my mind is why, given the very valid concerns that intubating cannot be done safely in a timely manner (unsafe for medical personnel due to aerosolization, unsafe for the patient due to lengthy delays while medical staff suit up), why is there so much resistance to administering a relatively benign drug, HCQ, that has had so many positive results? And why would they wait to do that until the situation deteriorates to the point where both patient and medical personnel are in dire risk? Why would they resist this option although the survival rate of those put on the ventilator is 50% or worse? Even if it only helps 10% of the patients who would otherwise die, why resist it? A patient who could get by with high flow nasal cannula oxygen therapy and proning might recover sufficiently on HCQ-Zn to avoid the need for a ventilator.

    Why is common sense banned? What is the hidden agenda?

    • Treatment must be started very early when the lungs are not yet powdered. It seems that this is no later than 6 days after the onset of symptoms.

      • Perhaps you missed my rhetorical question above:

        And why would they wait to do that until the situation deteriorates to the point where both patient and medical personnel are in dire risk?

    • Where is it banned?
      I thought this is what is happening in a lot of places?
      Oh…wait…is it banned in UK?
      Did we not hear they banned the export of it at the outset?
      Why do that and then refuse to use it?
      CMB said they have the same rules about doctor discretion for off label usage there as here in the US.
      All anyone needs to do is find a doctor willing to give it to someone who asks.

      This set of guidelines from Belgium was first posted way back in the fist part of March…maybe around the tenth.
      So it has been almost a month if not more.
      Why no revisions to guidance on something they must have given to many patients by now?

      There is a new revision as of the 7th:
      https://epidemio.wiv-isp.be/ID/Documents/Covid19/COVID-19_InterimGuidelines_Treatment_ENG.pdf

      • Sorry if my phrasing was poor and confused anybody. I didn’t mean to imply that HCQ has been banned. I meant why are policymakers not using common sense (as if common sense is a bad thing that has been banned).

        • Rich,
          Thanks for the follow up.
          You are correct, I took your meaning to be saying something you did not actually say.
          And I also thought I had read that the hospitals in UK were instructed to give nothing but oxygen.
          It has become more difficult than usual to be able to parse the exact details on all of this stuff, especially because so many are more or less forced to take a seat of the pants approach to so many aspects of the entire situation.
          I think I can answer why many doctors may be very reluctant to jump in on a treatment that has no scientifically verifiable confirmation of efficacy, particularly since the stuff is not so innocuous as is being widely asserted.
          I for one am not going to be judgmental about this…I can see it from both directions.
          But I can say I have never in my life been so anxious to read the results of a clinical trial, not even back in the pre Hep C cure years when I hung on every word of every study and every possible new treatment.
          There were many.
          The truth was very hard to get at, regarding the chances of a cure, the possible side effects and harms and the frequency and severity thereof.
          And that is not the only time.
          Happy surprises are far from common when it comes to new drugs or old drugs being used to treat something new.
          I cannot really think of any drugs that were pleasant surprises re the outcome of clinical trials.
          Usually it is a matter of how much less effective something is than what was hoped or thought to be the case.
          Often it was difficult to even discern whether of not something was helpful.
          In other cases, one had to think long and hard amount how many adverse events were acceptable for a positive but unclear amount of therapeutic value.
          FenPhen. Vioxx. Telepravir. Just the ones that come to mind as standouts that seemed like they were great until major harms were revealed down the road. Actually the first two were notable for not being particularly advantageous when compared to other drugs that did the same thing, in retrospect at least.

          But, nothing about any experience with anything else will predict how something new will turn out. It only provides a reason for cautious optimism until direct comparisons in outcome are known for equivalent cohorts that only differ in one way of how they were treated.

          I also hope very much the studies are all done very carefully with excellent protocols in place.
          Poorly designed studies can and have made unclear situations even murkier.

    • HCQ in the doses described by Drs. Zelenko in NY and Rebout (sp?) in Paris are >2x (500 mg daily) the typical RA dose (250mg). And there are known side effects at the RA dose: retinopathy in about 25% of patients, tachycardia. So the key is your statement, “relatively benign”.

      There are studies happening right now in NYC: 1100 patients. 1/3 HQC, 1/3 HQC plus azithromyin, 1/3 HQC plus zinc gluconate. We will know results in a few days. That is good medical common sense. There is no hidden agenda.

      I have high confidence the US economy will reopen May 1. Two reasons. First, the curve was bent in places like NYC to meet all the emergency measures like Javits Center and USNS Comfort. It still needs to be in Detroit. Worked many other places so far like south Florida and LA. Some, but not all, state governors over-reacted. Second, it appears likely that there will be at least one therapy, HQC plus something, and possibly two with remdesivir.

      And, as posted in a comment to Willis, the economic cost is not nearly as high has posited. Look up the California GDP composition (Wiki has a nice chart from BEA data). Most of the sectors will not only bounce back, they will with minimal net losses by yearend. These include finance, insurance, real estate, government, manufacturing, most agriculture, infotech, construction… Only two won’t: travel and entertainment (airlines, restaurants, movies), and some professional services (beauty parlors, cleaning services). Other professional services just have deferred demand (tax prep, legal) so no big net loss by yearend. So the true economic cost of a brief shutdown (45 days) is relatively small.

      Put differently, 16 million temporarily unemployed out of ~160 million is ~10% for 45 days, covered at least partly by unemployment insurance and the CARES PPP.

      Temporary pain? Yes. Unbearable? No, compared to images of body bags stacked high into refrigerated trucks using fork lifts like in NYC right now.

      • Thanks for your reply. Do you mean Didier Raoult?

        You are far more qualified to comment than I am, to be sure. But I would like to opine anyway, that if I were several days into symptoms with shortness of breath and a positive covid test, I would make the informed decision to request HCQ-Zn therapy without hesitation. Maybe I am mistaken, but retinopathy is reversible after ending treatment. Tachycardia is obviously a risk in a patient with hypoxia as I’d likely be, but if I’m not mistaken there are meds to mitigate that as well. In any case, dead people generally need not be overly concerned with visual accuity I’d guess and don’t suffer from a rapid heartrate either.

        As for agendas let me be explicit lest I’m misunderstood on that as well. I believe it’s abundantly apparent that many Trump opponents care more about not letting it appear that Trump championed a life-saving therapy than they are concerned about people dying. I do not imply that “big pharma” wants to quash this to push profitable alternatives.

        I’m on the same page as you on the lockdowns. Not a depression if we reopen in May. Clearly was prudent approach.

  97. We won’t know until there is time to perform full autopsies and viral-testing on their bodies as to the exact cause of death — whether they died of Covid-19 or any one of the influenzas or a combination of many viruses and bacterial respiratory infections. The subsequent testing of past influenza deaths shows that despite declarations on death certificates, the actuality of cause of death is far different. John Ioannidis made this point recently here.

    There is no doubt that Covid-19 is very serious for older folks (like me and my wife) in general — as all all the other influenzas — and particularly for those with co-morbidities such as high blood pressure, heart problems, lung problems and obesity (especially, combinations of “all of the above”).

    In the US, according to a study just released by the CDC over 89% of all adult Covid-19 hospitalizations are of those with one or more co-morbidities – those with undelying conditions.

    As Monckton points out, ventilators are not a cure, and for MOST, they do not result in a saved life. Far more than 50% requiring a ventilator die anyway.

    36 of the 50 US states have infection rates of LESS THAN 1 per 100,000.

    Covid-10 is NASTY for old folks — and can carry away seemingly healthy younger people, but not very many.

    We will not know, really, until the smoke clears — probably months to a year before we have anything but preliminary numbers. There is great danger in forming opinions or making pronouncements based on these preliminary numbers — we really have no idea how many people have been infected with Covid-19 — thus both hospitalization and mortality rates are unknown.

    The symptoms to look out for are cough — fever/chills — and shortness of breath. (often found in common flus as well)

    Note: What is not on the list is: Runny Nose — Sore Muscles — Headache — and intestinal problems (Diarrhea or vomiting). These are all common flu symptoms though. The common flu has carried away 24,000 – 63,000 Americans so far this flu season. Covid-19 about 16,000 so far.

    The WHO is carrying out nationwide trials of treatments — and we should have some preliminary data on what works (if anything) by the end of this month.

    Believers and non-believers alike can join in an international day of Fasting and Prayer tomorrow on Good Friday.

    • There are more and more reports that an early sign is loss of sense of smell and of taste, Kip.
      I think you are voicing the same sorts of feelings and thoughts I am having about jumping to conclusions.
      There is no shame in uncertainty, and just saying so when more information is needed.

      I think there needs to be a series of conferences of doctors all around the world to discuss working out treatment protocols based on what works best and when.
      I bet there are some doctors in some of the earliest hard hit places that can help tremendously with this.

      The gold standard for treatment efficacy is all cause mortality after some period of time. A longer period of time than anyone can think we can afford to wait to make some decisions on treatments.

      Whatever else happens, there is an opportunity to move medical knowledge forward. That has to be the goal on an ongoing basis.

      A couple of weeks ago, I saw a story about a group of ER doctors and researchers who were travelling from Wuhan to Italy to advise and assist with treatment there, to pass along the benefit of their experience.
      But I have not heard anything more on that, or whether this is being done in other locations.

      • The Woeld Health Organization has established a treatment trial called “LinkText Here”>“Solidarity” clinical trial for COVID-19 treatments” — it is a distributed trial — very simple — doctors record the treatment tried (out of the four) or no treatment and record the result.

        We’ll know something as a result in a few weeks (preliminary results scheduled for the end of April).

        One or more (or none) of the treatments might be found effective.

        • First data is published today on Remdesivir compassionate use, article by Gilead on some 53 patients treated between February and March.
          They expect to have much more data including the first clinical trials soon:

          https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2007016

          These results need to be looked at carefully…they may be more encouraging than a glance would indicate.
          Only 18% of patients on a ventilator died.
          Less than 5% of patients on just oxygen died…one out of 19.

  98. Pure arrogance this virus is very different from flu it seems to be clustered in certain areas while other areas are hardly affected at all if this was a mutated flu virus the whole country would be affected equally .This virus had to be brought into the UK by people travelling into our major airports other wise we would not have the virus in the UK. The clusters are around the major airports and we could have stopped the virus getting into the UK.

  99. Look at today’s graph. “… outside China and occupied Tibet, where the numbers are unreliable.”

    Sorry Viscount, ALL numbers EVERYWHERE are EXTREMELY unreliable. Every last bureaucrat is lying to maintain the hype.

    If you have PROOF that the “numbers” anywhere are “reliable” please provide it. Of course, I won’t believe you anyway since the vast majority of the bureaucrats are in this to INCREASE their power and control.

    • Note that nobody here was able to cite any medical fact more strongly established than the fact the hep B vaccine causes MS (a fact not radiation related; the relationship of radiation with cancer is perhaps even more strongly established).

      Yet all these bureaucrats deny that undeniable link.

      As do many commenters on WUWT.

    • In response to BlueCat57, no data from the Chinese Communist regime about the Chinese virus can be trusted at all. In a future posting I shall spell out some of the unprecedented manipulation of data of which the regime is guilty in the present case. Mr Xi is likely to find himself in front of the International Criminal Court on charges of crimes against humanity, together with his poodle the dreadful Ghebreyesus of the World Death Organization. See the Henry Jackson Society’s draft indictment, and numerous others like it.

      The likely defects in the data from countries other than China and occupied Tibet have been discussed fairly in the head postings. Notwithstanding those shortcomings, some conclusions can be drawn from the data. Not the least of these is that, at the rate of spread that prevailed in the three weeks before Mr Trump announced a state of national emergency, there would have been very large numbers of deaths worldwide unless firm action to prevent mass loss of life had been put in place.

  100. The image posted with this article appears to be using 1970 technology. Even if I magnify the image, I still can’t read the printing on the image.

    • In response to Cinead, I do supply the graphs as a .pptx file to be linked from the article, but the moderators didn’t link to the graphs today. I’m sure they will do so tomorrow: the .pptx slides are very clear indeed.

    • In response to Cinead, I did send the original images with the article, in the form of high-quality .pptx slides, and they ought to have been – but were not – linked so that they could be downloaded.

      In the next update, I shall remind our kind hosts to put up the link.

  101. Days pass like weeks in a crisis. Much has changed since the patient with chest pains unwittingly loosed an unseen virus to war on Lisa Ewald. The Henry Ford Health System now houses more than 700 covid-19 patients. Nearly a third of them are in critical condition. And though all staff and visitors now wear masks, nearly 750 hospital employees have tested positive for the virus. (At Beaumont Health, the largest hospital system in Detroit, the number is twice as high: Some 1,500 employees have tested positive for covid-19.)
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/04/07/lisa-ewald-was-soldier-who-didnt-really-have-chance-fight/?arc404=true

  102. Most of the comments relate to water under the bridge. Now that most countries are in isolation mode none will risk releasing shackles early. Its now about lessons learnt and how to get back to prosperous economies.

    Lessons learnt? Governments world wide need to stash away emergency funds to cover rainy days. Take Norway (population 5,5 mill) :

    “It [Norway] has over US$1 trillion in assets, including 1.4% of global stocks and shares, making it the world’s largest sovereign wealth fund. In May 2018 it was worth about $195,000 per Norwegian citizen. It also holds portfolios of real estate and fixed-income investments.”

    All (shock horror) acquired through sales of oil and gas

    By Comparison the US: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_by_sovereign_wealth_funds

    WUWT: Please find an economist to contribute as an author. There is a big gap in this debate

    M

    • I wonder how many younger people are going to hospital just because they test positive and have been convinced by the media they will die. They have a little trouble breathing and convince themselves they will suffocate to death. In reality there is no major problem and going to the hospital will actually increase their chance of death by picking up a bacterial infection in hospital.

    • Lessons learnt? Governments world wide need to stash away emergency funds to cover rainy days. Take Norway (population 5,5 mill) :

      “It [Norway] has over US$1 trillion in assets, including 1.4% of global stocks and shares, making it the world’s largest sovereign wealth fund.

      This is not the economist you are looking for, but I can see a logical fault with that. Those 1.4% of global stocks and shares just took a massive (hopefully temporary) hit. That’s what tends to happen in global emergencies. Those are not the sort of funds you need to cover an emergency. Those are funds for long term returns.

      Governments can always gain emergency funding: print money or borrow money. Those cover emergencies nicely. The headache comes later.

  103. The official data is suspect and deaths in the US are overstated because of very loose guidelines from the CDC. The models are wrong and the experts here are frequently wrong, but we’re still letting them set policy (with disastrous results).

    If we listened to government experts, the actual death count might match the models because these geniuses insist people should not use HCG until after it’s proven by clinical trials. These experts don’t know that 20% of our prescriptions are for off-label use. Thousands of lives saved despite expert advice.

    Further, we’re setting policy without cost/benefit analysis. Nobody at the CDC will be held accountable for the egregiously disaterous state, local and federal lock down policies. The cure is worse than the disease and we can’t keep everyone at home long enough to let the infections die out.

    So yes, I have yet to see any evidence this is worse than a very bad flu season. When I have facts that show it is worse, I will change my mind.

    Yes, I’m a born skeptic and contrarian. I not only live in Missouri, I’m from Missouri. So show me Covid-19 is as bad as our very fallible government beaureacrat experts claim.

    • Let me add the data shown here does not support my belief. I will keep an open mind and if other data closely matches and supports the conclusion, then I will admit being wrong and change my opinion.

    • Do you think you might be biased? Just a bit? NY today is reporting 36 deaths per 100,000 people. Missouri is 2 per 100,000 people. Would you be saying the same thing if Missouri was reporting 36 deaths per 100,000 people?

    • If Jeffery P were to read the head posting, he would see very clear evidence that this pandemic is worse than a typical flu season. And he has failed to allow for the fact that the pandemic has not yet peaked, so that saying it is not as bad as a typical flu season is not useful.

      Governments cannot afford to be so cavalier in their abuse of statistics.

    • Dead doctors, dead medical workers, and half a police force infect is a typical flu season.

      Here’s the fact. the FLU data is the sketchy data. its the FLU data that you should not trust
      because it is largely MODELLED.

  104. “Consider the Imperial College predictions for the UK without lockdown, or the McKinsey predictions for New York without lockdown, and then compare them with what these graphs show.”
    Consider what the ‘models’ say about Climate Change!

  105. We (US) average about 7,900 deaths daily. How does 2020 year-to-date compare to the last, oh let’s say, last10 years?

    If this virus is as bad as the author says, we should be seeing a spike in deaths due to Covid-19. What does the data say?

  106. “That mantra is that the Chinese virus is no more infections or no more fatal than flu, and that if we had allowed everyone to acquire immunity by catching the infection and throwing it off all would be well.”

    I probably have had the flu several times, but I never had it tested in order to know what kind of virus the flu was.
    And maybe I never had the flu. But I have sicknesses, and the one I didn’t like at all, involved lots of vomiting.
    So if had sickness which involved vomiting or feeling like very close to vomiting- I would call it, the flu. But maybe someone would correct me and say it was the stomach flu. Let’s look it up:
    How many stomach flu viruses are there?
    Viruses that most frequently cause it include norovirus, rotavirus, and adenovirus. The norovirus alone causes up to 21 million cases of the stomach bug in the United States each year.
    Now if I eat something which wrong/bad which has happened a few times in my life, I feel like going to throw up and I might. I don’t call that a flu. And same applies if I were to drink a lot alcohol. Anyhow I have not ever had bad case of food poisoning.
    I have never been to doctor or hospital because I thought I had to the flu, but my general understanding was that, I could get a flu that is bad enough that I should seek medical care- but it has not happened, yet.
    And I have not stomach flu quite while, maybe 10+ years.
    I get what I would call a “cold” of varying degrees and rarely do I get a fever. I probably had serious fevers when a child- but remember any of it, mostly due the fuss about taking my temperature. Colds and fevers were almost good because one could skip school. But vomiting with flu was is not good way to get out of school- I was ok with school and I would wish to have it, rather than lots of vomiting.

    Anyways, I have had viruses, but I don’t what viruses they were, but read recently an article about someone who wanted to find out what virus they had- and cost hundreds of dollars and took way too long to get the test results.
    And my impression is it’s probably a mistake for anyone to try to get test for what virus they have.
    It seems to me to get a test {or many tests} one has to been stuck in a hospital bed- and I have yet to have that particular pleasure.

    So, my question is, generally do doctors only do tests when “they need help” to determine what is wrong with you. And/or whenever they trying to figure out what flu is happening in all the hospitals. And once have test done, they know symptoms associated with virus. And rather than give a test {which takes to long to get result] they evaluate a patient symptoms, and guess what treatment to give.
    Anyhow:
    Severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) is a viral respiratory illness caused by a coronavirus called SARS-associated coronavirus (SARS-CoV). SARS was first reported in Asia in February 2003. The illness spread to more than two dozen countries in North America, South America, Europe, and Asia before the SARS global outbreak of 2003 was contained.

    Since 2004, there have not been any known cases of SARS reported anywhere in the world. The content in this website was developed for the 2003 SARS epidemic.
    https://www.cdc.gov/sars/index.html

    The global outbreak may have been contained, but how could we know it’s gone-
    could it stop being a problem for number of reasons. And if it’s not regarded as a hospital problem, you don’t waste time and money doing the test for it.

    Anyhow, hopeful this pandemic, will engage the private sector, so that we get a fast and cheap test for at least one virus.
    But it’s crazy way to do this.

    • This all goes ditto for me and everyone I know and my family: Never go to hospital or doctor office for cold, flu, or throwing up.
      I have had strep throat a few times, and if it is bad I get an antibiotic which sometimes required a office visit. Strep throat, as I have always called it, is when you wake up one morning, no head cold symptoms, but intense pain on swallowing, that lasts for day after day.
      Sometimes other symptoms arrive over time.
      But colds, flu, vomiting…I know doctors can do little for these conditions, so going is a waste of their time and mine, and plus the best thing to do is just stay in bed and rest…not go somewhere.

  107. I went to a website called “The Covid Tracking Project”, located at …… https://covidtracking.com/

    I clicked to the appropriate data page for my home state, North Carolina, and tabulated data from when NC started recording all Covid-19 tests. I won’t show the data here, but the gist is that, at the start of this specific data tabulation period by my state (03-18-2020), the number of Covid-19 tests completed was 1,850. Now, as of this writing (04-09-2020), the number of Covid-19 tests completed stands at 47,809.

    So, in just 22 days, the number of completed Covid-19 tests has gone from 1,850 to 47,809 in my state alone.

    That’s well over a 2000% (two thousand percent, or 2484%, to be more precise) increase in the number of tests. And tests are the only means by which cases are confirmed. Explain to me how this indicates the true extent of the virus into the whole population?

    As more tests are completed, more cases are recorded — this merely shows that case numbers track completed tests, and I do not see how any deeper conclusions can be drawn than that.

    Go to the website, and tally the history of testing in your own state.

    And, data gurus who have far better kung fu skills with those figures than moi, tell me what you think.

  108. Interesting stat –

    Sweden with no lock down has a slightly lower amount of cases than Israel. Israel has a smaller population.

    Sweden has had more deaths.

    • What would really be interesting is knowing how Sweden assesses cause of death vs how Israel assesses cause of death, and how Sweden confirms a “case” vs how Israel confirms a “case”.

      • “In a world first, the Swedish government has announced that it is going to officially distinguish between deaths „by“ and deaths „with“ the coronavirus, which should lead to a reduction in reported deaths. Meanwhile, for some reason, international pressure on Sweden to abandon its liberal strategy is steadily increasing.
        The Hamburg health authority now has test-positive deaths examined by forensic medicine in order to count only „real“ corona deaths. As a result, the number of deaths has already been reduced by up to 50% compared to the official figures of the Robert Koch Institute”

      • Robert
        And to make comparisons, we need to know the average age and percentage of elderly in each country. It also helps to know the population densities.

  109. comparing deaths isn’t fair comparison. ie: people dying from the flu, on average are younger.

    if you compare death years left to life, the difference isn’t as large.

    • In response to Mr Rady, governments cannot afford to consign their elderly and infirm people to the scrapheap. They have to look after all their citizens. It was necessary to prevent the utter collapse of healthcare systems swamped by patients requiring – but not obtaining – intensive care. The fact that the patients are chiefly elderly is neither here nor there, which is why arguments such as that of Mr Rady were given very short shrift indeed by governments.

  110. Lessons learnt? Governments world wide need to stash away emergency funds to cover rainy days. Take Norway (population 5,5 mill) :

    “It [Norway] has over US$1 trillion in assets, including 1.4% of global stocks and shares, making it the world’s largest sovereign wealth fund.

    This is not the economist you are looking for, but I can see a logical fault with that. Those 1.4% of global stocks and shares just took a massive (hopefully temporary) hit. That’s what tends to happen in global emergencies. Those are not the sort of funds you need to cover an emergency. Those are funds for long term returns.

    Governments can always gain emergency funding: print money or borrow money. Those cover emergencies nicely. The headache comes later.

    • Sorry, this detached comment is meant in reply to Michael Carter April 9, 2020 at 1:20 pm.

      Happy for deletion.

  111. Christopher Monckton of Brenchley,

    I think your detailed comparisons of influenza and COVID-19 were valuable. Likely to be revised with better data in the future, but really enhancing our perspective now.

    That mantra is that the Chinese virus is no more infections or no more fatal than flu, and that if we had allowed everyone to acquire immunity by catching the infection and throwing it off all would be well.

    I have not seen that anywhere, except as here, quoted ironically or in mockery. What I have seen are comparisons to other serious health problems, like influenza, polio, measles, auto accidents, diphtheria, pertussis, cancer; and the question, is this really so much worse than those that these extremely costly measures are worth the cost? Should we not give more weight to the Japanese example, especially now that we have more quantitative information, where complete shut down within the nation was not necessary, and the masks seem to have worked?

    Even if the lockdown has been effective, as I think it has (agreeing with you), it is extremely difficult to show in the data because so many people started “self lockdowns” before lockdowns were ordered: people cancelled travel plans, professional organizations cancelled annual meetings (local and national), business started to restrict job-related travel, and so on. In no country state or province (except maybe the city of Wuhan and the province of Hubei) was there a sudden onset of “social isolation”.

    I appreciate your responses to some of your critics.

    • I am most grateful to Mr Marler for his characteristically thoughtful comment. In the UK, doctors at the front line, in intensive care units, are in absolutely no doubt whatsoever: the lockdown was absolutely essential, for otherwise the entire healthcare system would have been brought down.

      As it is, all elective surgeries have had to be canceled nationwide; a dozen massive emergency intensive care units have had to be built; and even these steps have not proven enough in some areas, where intensive-care capacity is fully taken up.

      The lockdown in the United Kingdom will be brought to an end just as soon as possible – but not before.

      To understand why lockdowns work, it is necessary to understand the epidemiology of transmission of pathogens, which depends upon two factors: the infectiousness of the pathogen and the average number of people with whom each infected person interacts in a day. Since the first cannot yet be controlled, for we have no vaccine and no sufficiently tested prophylactic or palliative, the only option is to address the second.

      Cellphone data show that person-to-person contact has been reduced by 85-95% through lockdowns. The effect on the rate of transmission is self-evident.

      The graphs I publish here each day do not in themselves provide a formal demonstration that lockdowns work. They do suggest that lockdowns are working, since the compound daily case growth rate has been falling rapidly, though it remains dangerously high.

      But the graphs also show results for Sweden, Taiwan and, above all, South Korea, where there have been no strict lockdowns and yet the case growth rate is small. In the far eastern countries, they were ready for yet another virus to emerge from the filth that is China; in Sweden, I am not yet sure what is going on, but I suspect that there was far greater intensive-care capacity in the hospitals from the outset, allowing a more relaxed view to be taken.

      I am also looking at indications that the number of confirmed cases is being more and more undercounted. And two days ago Sweden had the greatest daily case growth rate in deaths anywhere, even though I use weekly smoothing. Some 2000 doctors in Sweden have signed a petition begging the government to introduce a lockdown, which suggests that all may not be as well there as the official figures indicate.

  112. DEATHS PER MILLION (ascribed to COVID-19) as of 07 Apr. 20

    Britain 79 lockdown
    ITALY 273 lockdown
    SPAIN 295 lockdown
    FRANCE 137 lockdown

    SWEDEN 47 no lockdown
    BRAZIL 3 small lockdown
    SOUTH KOREA 4 small lockdown
    JAPAN 0.7 no lockdown

    Deaths as of 09 Apr. 20
    Britain locked down 3 weeks: 7,998
    Sweden NO lockdown: 793
    Taiwan NO lockdown: 5

    Unlike the lockdown countries, Japan, Taiwan and South Korea have a flight lockdown i.e. you need permission to fly into the country and on arrival you can expect a strict quarantine.

    Meanwhile…the lockdown countries are destroying their economies at a rate of 10% per month

    If lockdown continues in Britain for all of March + April + May = 25% of economy dead; 5 million unemployed; thousands of small businesses bankrupted; and a possible massive rash of mental breakdowns and suicides.

    People will die of the virus, but lots of people will also be killed by the lockdowns the longer they continue. People get other diseases and they cannot be properly treated if the lockdowns go on and on. Health check-ups are skipped, long-promised operations cancelled and illnesses like cancers left undiagnosed until it is too late. There are also the serious mental health implications, and this is not just about the effect of the job losses and poverty that will follow, but the fact that staying at home is a living hell for some people.

    Not all people are wealthy politicians, royals and celebrities who live in big houses and have millions in their bank accounts. There are lots of people that wont be killed by the virus itself directly, but by extensive lockdowns. Also the approach of the media headlines that sadistically enjoy people’s imprisonment amounts to criminal activity towards the more fragile.

    There is little point in saving someone’s life only to make their lives a living hell. With no economy, who will pay the social workers that play a part in making sure people who come out of hospital have a home to go to and someone to care for them? With a dead economy and no other country in the world remaining to borrow from, it just won’t happen. People will die, and this fancy lockdown and “stay home save lives” campaign will have been for nothing.

    Coronavirus could be exterminated – if lockdowns are lifted

    “What people are trying to do is ‘flatten the curve.’ I don’t really know why.”

    The unprecedented policy of mass quarantine to “flatten the curve” is only prolonging the coronavirus pandemic. If people were allowed to lead normal lives and the vulnerable were sheltered until the virus passes, says Knut Wittkowski, Ph.D., the former head of the Department of Biostatistics, Epidemiology and Research Design at the Rockefeller University, New York.

    “What people are trying to do is flatten the curve. I don’t really know why,” he said in an interview with The Press and The Public Project that was featured by The College Fix. “But, what happens is if you flatten the curve, you also prolong, to widen it, and it takes more time, and I don’t see a good reason for a respiratory disease to stay in the population longer than necessary.”

    Wittkowski explained that the only thing that stops respiratory diseases is herd immunity – when a large percentage of a population becomes immune to an infectious disease, which stops its spread: “About 80% of the people need to have had contact with the virus, and the majority of them won’t even have recognized that they were infected, or they had very, very mild symptoms, especially if they are children. So, it’s very important to keep the schools open and kids mingling to spread the virus to get herd immunity as fast as possible.”

    At the same time, the elderly should be separated and the nursing homes closed. After about four weeks, with the virus dead, their children and grandchildren can return.

    The standard cycle of respiratory diseases is two weeks, after which “it’s gone.”

    “Social Distancing” is Useless

    Even with “social distancing,” the epidemiologist said, the virus find ways to spread, albeit more slowly. “You cannot stop the spread of a respiratory disease within a family, and you cannot stop it from spreading with neighbors, with people who are delivering, who are physicians — anybody. People are social, and even in times of social distancing, they have contacts; and any of those contacts could spread the disease. It will go slowly, and so it will not build up herd immunity, but it will happen. And it will go on forever unless we let it go.”

    Wittkowski was asked his opinion of Dr. Anthony Fauci, the key medical expert on the White House coronavirus task force who has promoted the mass quarantine strategy. “Well, I’m not paid by the government, so I’m entitled to actually do science,” he replied. Why is this virus being handled differently than others, such as the swine flu in 2009? One factor, he said, is the growth of the internet, which spreads news quickly, whether true or false, fueling panic. “These stories are circulating the world and contributing to chaos and to people being afraid of things they shouldn’t be afraid of,” he said.

    https://ratical.org/PerspectivesOnPandemic-II.html

    https://www.thecollegefix.com/epidemiologist-coronavirus-could-be-exterminated-if-lockdowns-were-lifted/

    https://www.cdc.gov/flu/images/about/burden/influenza-burden-chart2-960px.jpg

    • Sasha has not, perhaps, understood the urgency of the situation that faced governments as the Chinese virus began to spread. It became apparent early on, and is now confirmed by the data referred to in the head posting, that patients in intensive care would require more advanced treatment than those with other respiratory infections, and for longer, and with a less favorable outcome.

      There was a real danger that, particularly in cities with much high-rise accommodation, the infection would overwhelm hospital services unless emergency action were taken to inhibit transmission. The purpose of that inhibition was to give the health authorities time to make the necessary additional provision.

      Of course it would have been better if all nations had been as well prepared as South Korea or Taiwan, in which event no lockdowns would have been necessary. But in Britain, where there was no spare intensive-care capacity, emergency measures were regrettably inevitable.

      Of course the economic consequences are costlier. They would have been costlier still if the entire healthcare system had collapsed, leading inexorably to a breakdown of social order. As it is, the lockdown in the United Kingdom is being very widely supported by the population. The Government will, of course, bring the lockdown to an end just as soon as it can.

      Already, several very large intensive-care hospitals have been created out of nothing within weeks. Capacity is growing daily, and is – for now at any rate – just about outstripping demand in most places, though not all.

      The British Government’s approach had nothing to do with the internet and everything to do with listening carefully to both sides of the scientific debate and then taking a command decision in the nick of time.

  113. “Occupied Tibet”. Monkton have you the first clue about what was the most odious regime on the Planet? The Dalai of the day and his awful Priesthood sending out lists of body parts required for certain rituals or the mutilations for the slightest infractions, the slavery,starvation and misery those people were held under?

    Then of course one recalls the privileged upbringing and class mores you were raised within and surprise gives way to a weary understanding of your position on such matters.

    The tedious anti China trope you continue to raise is of interest though as my understanding of history as perceived by an individual as poorly educated as I was that the Opium Wars had ceased some while back.

    • In response to Mr Hartley, one should not be an apologist for the brutality and aggression that is Chinese Communism. I can assure Mr Hartley that the suffering people of Tibet, if given a choice between the Dalai Lama’s administration and that of his ideological bedfellows in Peking, whose predecessors occupied Tibet by brute military force and hold it to this day in the same ugly fashion, would expel their cruel Chinese occupiers in a heartbeat.

      The Communists have even redrawn the map of Tibet to conceal just how much territory they stole. It is time to set Tibet free.

      • The Tibetans were mown down by the Maxim guns as they fled. “I got so sick of the slaughter that I ceased fire, though the general’s order was to make as big a bag as possible”, wrote Lieutenant Arthur Hadow, commander of the Maxim guns detachment. “I hope I shall never again have to shoot down men walking away”

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_expedition_to_Tibet

        Hardly a position from which to take self-righteous stance viz-a-viz anyone’s treatment of Tibet.
        As to brutality and oppression can I say that most of us locked in our homes because of the overwhelmed NHS and Dr’s and Nursing staff on the frontlines watching the NHS staff have the easiest few weeks of their lives with Hospitals not only empty of routine appointments but of elective surgery appointments would also welcome some of that freedom at the moment.
        The Worldwide filming of empty Hospitals and the false footage, no doubt some of those countries would welcome some freedom from oppressive Government.

        For all your statistical models are worthless with the misreporting misattribution of the true fatality count. Gash in Gash out. For sure they may/may not work with good data but the CDC and NHS are obviously massaging the figures shall we say to be kind. We’d like freedom from that. Plus other posters are questioning you on the efficacy of your models so there’s no axe to grind on my side.

      • Had to add another comment MoB as I left out the fact that you did not directly address the brutality of the Llamist’s obscene Feudalism of physical mutilations and serfdom that applied to 90% of the population, give or take a statistical %age point or two.

        • Allow me to add my condemnation of the Communist Chinese theft of Tibet. And let me also condemn all those in the world who cowtow to China’s leaders and refuse to show Tibet as a separate nation. Cowards! You know who you are.

          Some bad people committed brutality in the past, so that prevents us from condemning brutality in the present? I don’t think so.

          Free Tibet! Maybe that Karma Thing will come to their aid. There certainly aren’t many human beings coming to their aid.

          China’s leaders are going to overstep their bounds one of these days. Their Wuhan virus attack on the world is not going to be well received.

    • In response to Richard, the report from the intensive care cases in the UK shows that the Chinese virus is more lethal than previous coronaviridae. One reason is that the S-proteins have mutated in such a way as to give easier access to cells: that is why the Chinese virus jumps between species so readily.

      • The NHS response is always overwhelmed-
        UK
        “In December of 2019 the NHS had to implement “emergency temporary beds” in 52% of its hospitals to account for their regular “winter crisis”. Most of those hospitals still had temporary beds operating from the previous winter.

        Last November experts were publishing reports warning that the NHS was under too much pressure to deal with the seasonal flu’

        Spain-

        n Spain, flu collapses hospitals almost every year.

        “In 2017 the Spanish-language Huffington Post site asked “Why does the flu mean collapse in Spanish hospitals?”.

        In the 2017/18 flu season, hospitals all over the country were in a state of collapse.

        Last March, hospitals were at over 200% patient capacity.

        In 2015 patients were sleeping in corridors”

  114. “Countries without lockdowns and contact bans, such as Japan, South Korea and Sweden, have not experienced a more negative course of events than other countries. This may call into question the effectiveness of such far-reaching measures’

    • There is no doubt that Japan and Sweden must be studied and contrasted with nations that selected stricter isolation measures.

      Regarding Sweden; the jury is most definitely out, as case loads and mortality continues to rise.

      Have lived in Japan for five years, I can say that Japan is unique in many respects.

      – obesity ( a major morbidity factor) is much lower than the international average.

      – Likewise, with diabetes and heart disease.

      – Japan is still a closed society comprised of several islands. A curtailment of travel likely limited exposure.

      – Japanese place a premium on hygiene and wear masks at the first sign of illness.

      – Citizens feeling unwell will automatically self-isolate, as cultural norms place society over individuals.

  115. For those arguing that this no worse than the average flu consider this. The US death toll for the two weeks ending this Friday will likely be equal to a normal flu season for a year when we get the vaccine right and that April will probably be the most lethal single month since October 1918. And that is with restrictive measures in place. Covid-19 might not be the black death but it is not anything like a seasonal flu.

    • “For those arguing that this no worse than the average flu consider this. The US death toll for the two weeks ending this Friday will likely be equal to a normal flu season for a year when we get the vaccine right…”
      But we don’t normally get it “right”

      And obviously we don’t have any vaccine for Chinese Flu (SARS-CoV-2).

      And obviously WHO screwed up, and Chinese government caused WHO screw up {but if WHO was led a by honest and competent leadership, then Chinese govt couldn’t have caused WHO to screw up as badly as they did}.
      So Chinese govt (and Poo Bear) + WHO screwed up the world.
      And I guess most people don’t expect WHO to screw up as bad as they did.
      I did. I don’t expect much from WHO -or the UN.

      ” and that April will probably be the most lethal single month since October 1918. And that is with restrictive measures in place. Covid-19 might not be the black death but it is not anything like a seasonal flu.”
      April is tail end of flu season in Northern Hemisphere. And:
      Posted on March 10, 2019
      Historically, flu activity peaks around February each season and then quickly drops off. But not this year. According to a nationally representative sample of U.S. prescription fills for the flu treatment, Tamiflu (oseltamivir), this year’s flu season reached a peak last month—and the disease is continuing to spread.”
      Has a graph:
      https://www.goodrx.com/blog/how-bad-is-flu-season-2018-2019-tamiflu-prescription-fills/

      But I think the Chinese flu is just starting in South America- in temperate zone and a lot population lives in high elevation regions {with cool temperatures year around}. It seems to spread slowly in warm region and regions with Malaria- India and Africa. I don’t think India will have a problem, if they continue to closely monitor it.
      And seems Europe was very hit hard, but it seems to be winding down, now.

    • Vitamin D is more than just one vitamin. It’s a family of nutrients that shares similarities in chemical structure.

      In your diet, the most commonly found members are vitamin D2 and D3. While both types help you meet your vitamin D requirements, they differ in a few important ways.

      Research even suggests that vitamin D2 is less effective than vitamin D3 at raising blood levels of vitamin D.

      This article sums up the main differences between vitamin D2 and D3.

      https://www.healthline.com/nutrition/vitamin-d2-vs-d3

  116. Nice gear in the pic old sot. Do /did you ride motorbikes?
    Stay safe as you are in the high risk group.

    By the way have you (or Willis for that matter) thought about comparing countries with lockdown vs those without? I think Belarus would be a prime “control” as would Taiwan.

    • I used to ride a Ducati 996SS, an Aprilia RSV Mille, a Suzuki GSXR1100 streetfighter and a Honda SP2, covering about 40,000 miles a year all over Europe. I miss those days.

      In the daily graph, I am tracking Sweden, Taiwan and South Korea, none of which has a strict lockdown.

  117. “Among those requiring ventilation, two-thirds die by the end of their critical care and only one-third survive. Therefore, the case fatality rate for closed cases where ventilation was required is more than 67%, compared with only 16% for non-COVID viral pneumonia cases requiring ventilation.”

    There is mounting evidence that this could be due to improper ventilator treatment due to misdiagnosis of symptoms. Patients are being blanket protocol treated for ARDS (acute respiratory distress syndrome) with ventilators set to high pressure and low oxygen. However the actual symptoms are presenting more like HAPE (high-altitude pulmonary edema) where the lung muscles work fine but the patient is simply not getting enough oxygen leading to hypoxia. They need low pressure and high oxygen. The improper treatment is causing lung damage and increased deaths while on ventilators.

  118. With all due respect to the fine gentleman author,

    GIVE people the f’ing cure (malaria cocktail)!!!!!!!!!

    All this analysis would be meaningless if the government wasn’t withholding the treatment options.

    Secondly. I have not met a non-American that understands the freedom gene in Americans.

  119. Can you really overestimate death toll by orders of magnitude by probably the same flawed models that model climate then when it doesn’t happen declare lock downs successful? This whole thing is absurd. This isn’t the black death for God’s sake.

  120. 52 deaths here in Australia, and less than 5% of our ICU beds currently in use for COVID patients, as we now plunge head first into a full blown ‘police state’ situation with authoritarian threats, checkpoints, massive fines, possible detainment and threats of 6 months imprisonment. Helicopters and drones patrol overhead, whilst neighbours dob in neighbours. On the flip side, Australia experienced between 2,500 and 3,000 deaths last year due to the ‘flu’. To a professional scientist who has a risk-based approach entrenched in my working career, this simply does not add up.

    We’ve never considered a risk-based approach to this – never ever once thought about quarantining the at-risk demographics. I still see kids walking into nursing homes to see Grandma, yet I can’t go for a drive on my own in my car in the countryside. I can get fined $1,600 for eating a sandwich in a park with 2 other people, yet I can freely go into a hardware warehouse with 150 other people to buy a freakin’ pot plant!

  121. In terms of model of prediction of total US death from Chinese Flu, I hear that lowest prediction is something like 60,000 deaths {and mostly within the next few months]. I don’t believe it. But not going to argue with that or whether it’s could be higher.
    Right now US total is 16,691
    And 4 States with highest cases is:
    Spain which has 15,447
    Italy: 18,279
    Germany: 2,607
    France: 12,210
    And the total of these four States is: 48,543‬
    And total population of these 4 states is less than US population,
    And it’s near certainty that these 4 State will total within a week
    {or More or Less than week] more than 50,000
    And it seems to me it’s less certain the US will have more than 60,000.

    Scott Adams roughly said, US should find a way get out lockdown
    but one has to accept some possibility of more US death occuring after
    limiting and/or getting out of lock down, whether it’s 10 or 1000 or some higher number.
    And one needs plans of how this will be done, whether it’s a 1 day, 1 week, or 1 month.
    And basis of plan is don’t do anything if it’s going result in the total US being
    more than 50,000 US death from Chinese Flu.
    So, 50,000 – 16,691 = 33,309 more US deaths.

    Now, before US started it’s lockdown, you could have had a same goal- we will take measures to try to deaths to be less than 50,000 and then we could done what did, and this point, we could weigh the measures of lock down vs chance of
    preventing more than 33,309 deaths.
    So, if you thought removing all US governmental lockdown measure would not
    increase the US total deaths by 33,309 then you would remove all lockdown measures in US, tomorrow.
    If you had more uncertainty, you wouldn’t, you keep lockdown and over time if it even got worst, then you add more lockdown type stuff.

    But it seems one should have different measures in the different states {and we currently do have measure measures in different state. And rather the total of 33,309 we give the number by million: 33,309 / 320 million pop is 104 per million. So depending on population of the State, the number a state must keep the number lower than is millions of State time 104.

    So California has population of 39.56 million, times 104 = 4114 death
    So California starts measures so that by time it’s completely out lockdown
    it will have not added 4114 death in the coming few months.
    California current total death is 559 and so by summer it’s total deaths will not
    be 4114 + 559 = 4673.
    Now, it might make sense not to get anywhere near adding 4114 deaths,
    You do things one thinks will only going add as much as 500 within a week and in week it proves you are wrong, you go back to kind of lockdown that you released.
    California has 61 deaths yesterday and 61 times 7 days is 427 deaths. And if you think it’s going be higher average over week than 61 per day, say as much as 80 per day, then you don’t remove any kind of lockdown measure.
    But maybe in week’s time, it looks like it’s going to less than 500 in week.
    But one should not think it free to keep lockdown down forever and some point in time one has to try things to get out of lockdown, and governors {politicans} should realize the public will judge how do, with benefit of hindsight, ie, “You left the lockdown remain for too long.” AND there will be stats which prove you caused additional deaths, because left the lockdown remain for too long.
    A good measure of deaths in near term number of patients in critical condition- lockdown or no lockdown will not change outcome in near term.
    And what is related to lockdown or no lockdown is “new cases” but there will be a lag to any uptick because changes in lockdown, but should be quite apparent within 1 week time.
    So example of releasing a lock down measure may be to start school up again. and first week could have 1/2 classes, so school kid goes to school 2 1/2 days of the week and that might last for say 2 weeks before deciding to have 5 days a week.
    And large part school is getting homework and gearing up to finish the school year.
    But if gets worst in coming week and looks like it’s going to higher than 50,000 deaths in total, then one should added more lockdown type stuff, particularly where it’s looking the worst.

  122. From a guest commentary by Prof. Dr. med. Dr. h.c. Paul Robert Vogt in the Swiss newspaper Mittelländische about the comparison of SARS-CoV-2 and influenza:

    “The pure statistically view on this pandemic is immoral. You have to ask people at the front lines.
    None of my colleagues – of course myself included – and none of the health caretaker staff has memories that in the last 30 or 40 years we have faced a situation in that

    1. whole hospitals were filled with patients who had all the same diagnose
    2. whole intensive care stations where filled with patients who had all the same diagnose
    3. 25-30% of the health care staff acquire the same disease as the patients they are taking care of
    4. there were not enough ventilators
    5. there was need for patient selection not out of medical reasons but just because out of their sheer numbers and lack of equipment
    6. all severe affected patients shared the same – a uniform – number of symptoms
    7. the cause of death of patients who died in intensive care was all the same
    8. the supply of drugs and medical equipment is running low”

    https://www.mittellaendische.ch/2020/04/07/covid-19-eine-zwischenbilanz-oder-eine-analyse-der-moral-der-medizinischen-fakten-sowie-der-aktuellen-und-zuk%C3%BCnftigen-politischen-entscheidungen/

    This shit is dangerous.

    • Yeah, but the US isn’t South Korea.

      South Korea’s largest and primary ethnic group is Korean, at about 99%, making them one of the most homogenous nations in the world.

      https://study.com/academy/lesson/south-korea-ethnic-groups.html

      This homogenity alone makes controlling the population a much simpler task.

      The US is 61% white, 14% black, 17% Hispanic, 6% Asian, 1% native, and 1% other.

      The culture of SK is vastly different, they live in a virtual police state, and they move as one. The US is an enormous area, with many layers of authority and culture. Comparing SK and the US is comparing apples and oranges. South Korea has a population of 51.47 million and an area of 38,691 mi², the US has a population of 327.2 million and an area of 3.797 million mi². This gives a population density of 503 people per square kilometer for SK and 35.77 per square kilometer in the US.

      The US is unique. It resembles no other country. It requires unique solutions.

  123. Thanks for this very thoughtful and informative article. Is there a typo in the following paragraph?
    ———–
    In the past three years, some 46% of viral-pneumonia cases were female and 54% male. With the Chinese virus, however, only 27% are female and 63% are male.
    ———–

    It seems the last phrase should be either “27% are female and 73% male” or “37% female and 63% male”. The former is a much more significant difference from the viral-pneumonia pattern than the latter.

  124. Excellent analysis Christopher Monckton of Brenchley!
    Easily the best and most open analysis I’ve read since January.

    Though, I must warn you that some of the alleged conservative news sites are very sensitive to COVID-19 reality discussions.
    The Gateway Pundit banned me and erased my comment/likes/dislikes history there for pointing out TGP’s stating COVID-19 is less deadly than the flu is incorrect.
    No warnings. No corrections. No advice to tone the comments down; just a leap to full tyrannical censorship.

    Requests for an appeal review were flatly ignored.
    There is no such thing as the First Amendment at “The Gateway Pundit”.

    Recent studies about the infectiousness of COVID-19 support the supposed the more outrageous claims about infection rates.
    In regards to researchers demonstrating COVID-19 is highly infectious from the moment the infection starts for at least eight days while the throat infection progresses.
    Patients remain infectious as long as the virus remains active in the patient’s lungs.

    The saving grace appears to be significant portions of the population who were exposed to a less deadly coronavirus recently; greatly preventing pre-exposed populations from getting seriously sick during their COVID-19 infection.

    • The saving grace appears to be significant portions of the population who were exposed to a less deadly coronavirus recently; greatly preventing pre-exposed populations from getting seriously sick during their COVID-19 infection.

      This is interesting, do you have any more details?

  125. Monkton, with your stated love of WHO (/sarc), is there a reason why they named CoViD-19 as a “Disease” containing two viruses rather than calling out the virus that is causing the deaths? Its full code name is SARS-CoV-2. Coronavirus is the infectious common cold that is milder than influenza, but COVID-19 has an attached virus called Sudden Acute Respiratory Syndrome. Asia (SARS 2002) and the Middle East (MERS 2012 which should be called ME-SARS) are already aware of the procedures needed to limit casualties.

    Can the coronavirus part of COVID-19 infect without SARS or are some already immune to SARS? Are they testing for SARS/COVID-19 or only coronavisus?

    • I mentioned to my neighbors that it is SARS that is killing people. They gave me that “fake news” look because it has not been mentioned in news they are watching.

  126. My friend who has been tested for the “virus” and is now on day 13 of ventilator, waiting for tracheotomy said before he went into ICU and was induced to sleep that he “Would not wish this on anyone.” However, he added that he thought it was wrong for the Vermont state government to protect us. He believed it was our choice if we wanted to self-isolate or take the risk of becoming infected. Most will survive, some will die, and the chances of my friend surviving are about 33%. I am sure he would still insist that government does not have the right to protect us from our own selves.

    The statistics don’t matter regarding the lockdown. Freedom is what matters: for what is life without freedom? What is life if we live in fear?

    Regards
    AK in VT

    • If he was in my family I would try to get him into remdesivir expanded usage trials.
      Only 18% of patients getting it died who were on a mechanical ventilator.
      The average time for all patients in the study was 12 days…not so different from your friend.
      Best of luck to him.

  127. Given that this virus originated in a US biodefence facility, why are you calling it ‘chinese’, is that some latent racism?
    Google ‘mysterious vaping lung disease’, I guess they don’t have that anymore because now it is called ‘chinese virus’? The ‘vaping disease’ predated the ‘chinese’ disease, and the ‘vaping disease’ is clearly the same thing, so clearly it originated in the USA and was taken to China by Americans.

    • “so clearly it originated in the USA and was taken to China by Americans.”
      Sounds quite unlikely, but let’s say it’s true. It still spread all over the world from China – hence it’s the Chinese Flu.
      I blame Chinese govt and WHO.
      If you want to call it the WHO flu, that sounds ok with me.
      Or the party which one might expect to be responsible is WHO.
      If are actually expecting CCP to be responsible, you have serious delusional problems.

Comments are closed.