But is the growth of the #CoronaVirus pandemic really exponential?

By Christopher Monckton of Brenchley

Let us begin with today’s good news. The mean daily compound case-growth rates of Chinese-virus infections (Fig. 1) and of deaths (Fig. 2) continues to fall just about everywhere. It is these case-growth rates that governments chiefly use in determining how severe the control measures to manage the pandemic need to be, and how long they need to last, and whether, if they are relaxed, they can be relaxed some more or must be tightened again.

clip_image002

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 9, 2020. PowerPoint slides showing high-quality images are here. [Mods, please link]

It is encouraging that in all the territories studied here, the daily compound growth rate of total confirmed cases is heading downward. But the mean daily rate for the world excluding China and occupied Tibet is still 7.2%. At that rate, the 1,521,745 confirmed cases up to yesterday would become 6.5 million over the next three weeks to the end of April, and 50 million by the end of May.

It is the daily case growth rate, more than any other number, that will decide whether governments introduce, maintain, modify, end or reintroduce lockdowns. During the early phase of the pandemic, it is the crucial number that governments and epidemiologists follow, which is why the seven-day average daily case growth rates are shown in these daily graphs.

clip_image004

Fig. 2. Mean compound daily growth rates in reported COVID-19 deaths for the world excluding China (red) and for several individual nations averaged over the successive seven-day periods ending on all dates from March 23 to April 8, 2020.

Those who support ending all lockdowns, allowing the old and the sick to die in large numbers and risking the general population’s health by overloading the healthcare system are prone to overlook, and even to try to argue against, the salient fact of any pandemic: that in its early stages its growth is strictly exponential. One multiplies each day’s total cases by the observed growth factor to obtain the next day’s total.

That exponential growth factor will not diminish except in one of four circumstances:

1. Decisive public-health measures control its transmission. South Korea is the prime example: if one acts soon enough to identify all cases, trace their contacts and isolate all those infected the rate of spread can be contained for long enough to permit testing and intensive-care capacities to be increased in good time, and one can avoid strict lockdowns. Even then, caution is needed: Singapore, which followed much the same approach as South Korea and initially with success, has now introduced the world’s strictest lockdown, because a second wave of infection has appeared.

2. An environmental factor (such as warmer summer weather) temporarily reduces the growth rate of the infection. With a new pandemic, one may hope that warmer weather will help, but responsible governments must be prepared in case it does not.

3. There are no more susceptible people to infect, whereupon the population has either died or acquired general immunity. At the time of writing, there are 1.6 million reported cases worldwide. Suppose that there are in fact 100 times as many cases as those that have been reported (for the truth is that we do not yet know, and the reported cases could indeed understate the true rate of spread by two orders of magnitude). In that event, just 2% of the global population is infected, leaving 98% still susceptible. Even if only one case in 1000 has been reported, 80% remain uninfected. So responsible governments cannot act on the basis that general immunity has been achieved. It has not been.

4. A vaccine is found. Even then, testing it for safety takes a year to 18 months, and we still have no vaccine against the common cold.

Governments cannot responsibly sit and wait for items 2 to 4. In particular, they cannot take the risk that summer weather will do their job for them. It may, or it may not.

The most important step, where a new pathogen is spreading and is proving fatal to some, is that the public authorities should act determinedly and at the very earliest possible moment to hinder the exponential transmission that is characteristic of any pandemic in its early phase.

For those who find it difficult to get their head around exponential growth, here, plotted to scale by worldometers.info, are the daily cumulative total confirmed cases outside China and occupied Tibet for the three weeks to March 13, the day before Mr Trump declared a national emergency.

clip_image006

Fig. 3. Cases of COVID-19 from January 22 to March 13, 2020 (worldometers.info)

Now, was the near-20% daily compound growth in reported cases over that period strictly exponential? Let us provide a visual demonstration. Fig. 3, showing cases in thousands, shows the graph derived from the exponential-growth equation shown on the slide. The equation is derived from the numbers of confirmed cases on January 22 and March 13, and the daily number of cases is then obtained from the equation and plotted:

clip_image008

Fig. 4. Cases of COVID-19 from January 22 to March 13, 2020 (calculated)

Figs. 3 and 4 are scaled and drawn to the same aspect ratio. The blue borders of the two graphs will align neatly with the edges of 16 x 9 PowerPoint slides. Download today’s slide-set from the link in the caption to Fig. 1. Now you can use a technique originally developed by astronomers to find moving satellites or planets in successive images of a field of fixed stars: the blink comparator. PowerPoint is a superlative blink comparator. Go to display mode and flick rapidly backwards and forwards between slides 3 and 4.

You will at once see just how very close, at all points, the curve of the actual, real-world data plotted to scale in Fig. 3 is to the idealized exponential-growth curve calculated and plotted in Fig. 4.

Information presented like this that is useful when briefing public authorities to show them that, based on the data, the case growth rate during the early stages of this pandemic, like that of any pandemic, is necessarily and quite strictly exponential.

For no small part of the spy’s dilemma that I discussed yesterday – how an agent in the field with no specialist knowledge can find ways of reaching the truth so as to give sound intelligence to his superiors – involves assessing the available data, weighing its reliability, verifying it, cross-referencing it with other available data or known information, working out what it means and, no less importantly, presenting the conclusions in a form that the politicians will be able to appreciate, and on the basis of which they can take sound decisions.

Governments cannot afford to act on any assumption other than that the daily rate at which the total cases will grow is likely to continue on the exponential-growth curve for a month or two yet unless one of the reasons 1-4 discussed earlier comes into play.

Why does exponential growth occur during the early stages of a pandemic? The reason is that each infected person will, roughly speaking, pass the infection on to the same number of uninfected people, who will, roughly speaking, acquire or resist the infection to the same degree, and pass it on in their turn to approximately the same number of people each.

I shall end today’s posting by briefly considering the situation in Sweden, which has not imposed a strict lockdown and yet shows much the same case growth rate as countries that have imposed lockdowns. In fact, Sweden is currently coincident with the global mean.

It is tempting to assume that because Sweden got away without lockdowns we could have gotten away without them too. This is where the dispassionate advisor will think very carefully. Herb Mayer, the deputy director (intelligence) of the CIA, with whom I worked during my time with HM Government, used to say that 99% of the work of any intelligence officer, and of his agency, is handling, storing, assessing, cross-indexing, processing and, above all, thinking about information hard and dispassionately, regardless of one’s own opinion.

How might the Chief of the Joint Intelligence Committee (whose office was just along the corridor from mine at 10 Downing Street) advise HM Government, which would very much like to bring the current lockdown to an end, about why Sweden has (so far, at any rate) gotten away without the economically-crippling lockdowns Britain has adopted?

One clue – again using a visual aid – is the difference between the population densities of the major cities. Here is Stockholm from the air: low-rise, and low-density.

clip_image010

And here is London from the air: high-rise, and very high density.

clip_image012

The rate at which an infection transmits is the product of two vital quantities: the infectiousness of the pathogen and the average number of people an infected person can be expected to meet over a given time.

That is why those in London and New York who have modelled the spread of the Chinese virus recommended lockdowns: the populations there are dense enough to ensure a very much higher mean contact rate, and thus compound rate of transmission, than in Stockholm.

And that is why one cannot point to the lack of a lockdown in Stockholm and deduce that, therefore, no lockdowns were or are needed in cities where far larger populations are crammed in and piled high at far greater population densities.

The UN’s Agenda 2030 policy of cramming everyone into ever-more-densely-packed cities is a recipe for disaster in any pandemic. It is asking for trouble. We are going to have to make sure that the environmental extremists who have until now dominated policymaking among innumerate governments are no longer heeded in this as in many other respects.

Today’s sudden Singapore lockdown is a warning that, even when our own lockdowns end, they must be ended cautiously, or a second wave of infection will emerge. In Singapore, which resisted lockdown but has now been compelled by events to introduce it, any breach of the stay-indoors, keep-your-distance rules incur a fine of $10,000 and/or six months in prison for a first offense, and double those values for a second offense. Several thousand citizens were given police warnings on the first day of the lockdown.

I shall end today’s update with an image from the European mortality monitoring agency. It shows excess mortality in various European countries for the past week. It gives the lie to the suggestions made by some commenters here that there will be no excess mortality from the current pandemic. As ever, keep safe. On the data, it is those who take more precautions than the rest who are more likely to survive the pandemic unscathed.

clip_image014

Fig. 5. Excess mortality in England, France, Spain, Switzerland, Italy and the Netherlands for the 14th week of 2020.

Ø So as not to make this website too coronacentric, I shall be providing the graphs of case-growth and death-growth rates daily, but shall only write these commentaries with additional information twice a week.

Link to PPTX file of diagrams.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
432 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Vuk
April 10, 2020 10:03 am

CV-19 UK’s today’s (Friday) update:
http://www.vukcevic.co.uk/UK-COVID-19.htm
It doesn’t appear to be.

Greg
Reply to  Vuk
April 10, 2020 1:54 pm

More deception and misdirection from incompetent visount.

That exponential growth factor will not diminish except in one of four circumstances:
…..
3. There are no more susceptible people to infect, whereupon the population has either died or acquired general immunity.

You do not have to wait until there are ” no more susceptible people ” for the growth factor to diminish. This is a continual process.

This happens straight away but is so small it is not noticeable. After some time , well before peak it becomes noticeable. All countries being discussed here started to see a reduction in growth rate before confinement laws came into force. His constant insistence about “purely exponential” growth is simply ignorant. As with the bode plot farce, he learns a couple of tricks and then gets the impression he has a greater understanding than anyone else and they’ve all made a great mistake and he is qualified to lecture the world.

The kind of hubris typically seen in a freshman undergrad.

This would not be so bad if he had the humility and self-awareness to at least accept the possibility he may be wrong and take council from others. Sadly to peer review a peer you need to member of the British aristocracy. He is apparently convinced that he has no peers, so no one of sufficiently elevated position to merit consideration. The ignorant surfs should stop “whining” and bow before their Lord and master.

I wish this was a parody but the correlation with observational data over several years has an R2 of > 0.98 .

Yesterday I took heart at the first time he has made an attempt at dialogue to outline some of the issues and mistakes in his work and make helpful suggestions.
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2020/04/09/but-is-it-really-no-worse-than-flu/#comment-2960826

He has yet to make the slightest comment and continues to push the same flawed claims and mistaken inferences about what his spaghetti graph shows.

Since he chooses not to show his working , nor provide his calculations above a cursory and imprecise verbal account we are left guess at what he’s actually doing. It seems to be this.

https://www.got-it.ai/solutions/excel-chat/excel-tutorial/average/how-to-calculate-average-growth-rate

Percentage Growth Rate = (Ending value / Beginning value) -1

So the value he is plotting is the 7day running mean (yuk)

The last two Situation Reports from WHO shows Spain went from around 146k to about 152k total cases. About 4%. The average of the last 7 days is probably about 5% seen on the graph. Now since he is looking at cumulative sums: total cases, when it is done and new cases falls to ZERO this calculation will asymptotically trend to zero.

But in his last post he tells us:

For now, I shall point out that the pandemic will not have reached its peak until the daily compound confirmed-case growth rate becomes negative. At present, it remains strongly positive, though trending in the right direction.

HE HAS TOTALLY LOST TRACK OF WHAT HE IS DOING.

Obviously this Percentage Growth Rate can only fall to zero. It will never be negative unless we are invaded with COVID mutant Zombies !

If he is waiting for it to go negative and worse, thinks the zero value indicates the “peak”, he will have us in eternal house arrest praying for the end of time !

Now seriously this is enough of this incompetent buffoonery.

If he had been willing to explain and discuss this mess could have been cleared in the first post instead polluting the generally well founded articles we enjoy here on WUWT.

… but shall only write these commentaries with additional [dis]information twice a week.

TFFT.

richard
Reply to  Greg
April 10, 2020 2:48 pm

and cherry picks data.

Monckton of Brenchley
Reply to  richard
April 10, 2020 4:13 pm

In response to the thick-as-two-short-planks, furtively anonymous Richard, the data I use are those that are published daily. I do not cherry-pick: I simply report that, to the fury of the dense Richard and the other furtively pseudonymous trolls who infect this site, the once-exponential rate of growth is tailing off, and doing so far more rapidly than would be expected at this early stage of an epidemic if lockdowns did not work. They do work – get over it.

Nicholas McGinley
Reply to  Monckton of Brenchley
April 10, 2020 6:15 pm

First results of remdesivir published today in NEJM.
Tentative data from 56 compassionate use patients.
Hard to parse, but like Ebola trials, appears giving it late is not helpful.
Much more data needed, including actual clinical trials of all experimental treatments.
As I had come to suspect, results are mixed, not spectacular, and include some who seem to have been helprd, and some who were apparently not.
https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2007016
Reading it now myself, wanted to post immediately for all to see.

Nicholas McGinley
Reply to  Monckton of Brenchley
April 10, 2020 6:53 pm

First thing to note is the quality of the report and large amount of patient data, and the excluding of those lost to follow up.
And no sugar coating or blandishments or expansive claims.
Just the facts. Lots of them.

Clinical trial data will be even more detailed and complete.
There will be no questions re methodology or initial condition of patients, etc.

max
Reply to  Monckton of Brenchley
April 10, 2020 7:08 pm

That Which Is Seen, and That Which Is Not Seen

Between a good and a bad economist this constitutes the whole difference — the one takes account of the visible effect; the other takes account both of the effects which are seen and also of those which it is necessary to foresee. Now this difference is enormous, for it almost always happens that when the immediate consequence is favorable, the ultimate consequences are fatal, and the converse. Hence it follows that the bad economist pursues a small present good, which will be followed by a great evil to come, while the true economist pursues a great good to come, at the risk of a small present evil.

Patrick MJD
Reply to  Monckton of Brenchley
April 10, 2020 7:16 pm

“Monckton of Brenchley April 10, 2020 at 4:13 pm

In response to the thick-as-two-short-planks, furtively anonymous Richard,…”

Was it necessary to stoop to the level of infantile insults?

Nicholas McGinley
Reply to  Monckton of Brenchley
April 10, 2020 8:13 pm

Remdesivir appears to substantially improve survival even in patients who are in the worst condition when it is given.
It may be that the people who died despite getting it were in the throes of a secondary condition, perhaps bacterial infection, perhaps cytokine release syndrome-like effects, etc.
Some of these might have been saved with administration of and IL-6 blocker or other immunomodulating drugs.

Many people in very bad shape on ventilators were extubated and sent home.
Note the average duration of symptoms at the time of remdesivir being initiated was 12 days.
Of patients only getting oxygen at the time of treatment, only one died.
People getting ECMO, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, at the time of starting remdesivir all survived.

Of those getting invasive ventilation at the time of treatment, 18% died.
Of those getting noninvasive oxygen support, 1 of 19, or about 5%, died.
This would appear to be a huge improvement over other cohorts of patients in the advanced stage of disease and hospitalized on oxygen or ventilation.

As the discussion points out, it is impossible to know if such comparisons are valid without a controlled procedure of randomization, but it seems encouraging to me.

Your April 8th post details how as many as two thirds of patients on ventilation ultimately died, although it is not clear of the cohorts were in any way equivalent.
Still, 82% of those on ventilators still being alive 28 days after treatment sounds like an improvement.
“It is notable that 17 of 30 patients (57%) who were receiving invasive mechanical ventilation were extubated, and 3 of 4 patients (75%) receiving ECMO stopped receiving it; all were alive at last follow-up.”

Nicholas McGinley
Reply to  Monckton of Brenchley
April 10, 2020 10:35 pm

I believe Gilead may have pushed this result out despite it including only 28 days of follow up because they have now seen the raw data from at least the first two trials of remdesivir vs placebo, and it is encouraging although not a grand slam.
If I had to guess, I would say that remdesivir + IL-6 monoclonal antibody drugs + a careful look at all patients for secondary bacterial infections, and possibly treating with an antibiotic just in case, may wind up being the best that we have available right now for those presenting with moderate to severe symptoms.
Methods of delivering oxygen that are not invasive would seem to be preferable except when there is no way for the patient to survive without a ventilator.
ECMO sounds like a better idea than intubation, but it may have it’s own dangers not revealed by a look at small sample.
But that is not something that is likely to be available for large numbers of people in one hospital.
ECMO is how they keep people alive during heart surgery, cardiopulmonary bypass surgery, etc. Remove blood, pass it through a machine and return to patient.

My understanding it is usually given as more or less a last resort, so all four people on ECMO surviving, and 3 of 4 being removed from breathing support, seems possibly very significant.

richard
Reply to  Monckton of Brenchley
April 11, 2020 12:56 am

you missed out Japan in the above for starters which has few cases and deaths.

richard
Reply to  Monckton of Brenchley
April 11, 2020 12:57 am

Knight, as you seem to need it.

Greg
Reply to  Monckton of Brenchley
April 11, 2020 1:36 am

Richard, I don’t see any cheerypick. Dumb unsubstantiated claims are not helpful.

and doing so far more rapidly than would be expected at this early stage of an epidemic if lockdowns did not work. They do work – get over it.

CofB, Dumb unsubstantiated claims are not helpful.
You have NOT shown the slightest evidence of what would be expected and how the current data is changing quicker. You assume they do not even understand your own graphs and metrics.

I gave you a polite, detailed comment showing your mistakes and suggest some things to look at which you totally ignored ( once again ). Apparently you have your usual hubristic attitude that a classics degree from Cambridge means you are so smart you can do anything and no one can tell you anything, so it’s not even worth listening.

The metric you are using will asymptote to zero as numbers rise. The fact that it is falling means nothing except the normal progression of any epidemic following a typical logistic curve. You goofed up – get over it.

You will need a much more sensitive metric to detect the change we all expect to be there and to estimate it’s magnitude. So far you have contributed ZERO to our understanding of the issue and you are probably doing nothing more than your usual macheavellian social manipulation.

Best regard, your loyal whine surf.

Greg
Reply to  Monckton of Brenchley
April 11, 2020 1:45 am

Encouraging.

Of course the media machine will not sack this early release in the systematic way they attacked and continue to attack Raoult for his initial release of data on similarly small and statistically meaningless number of subjects.

In fact they will probably do an about face and declare it a massive breakthough.

It would be very interesting to know what treatment was give to Bojo, who thankfully seems to be out of danger.

Greg Goodman
Reply to  Monckton of Brenchley
April 11, 2020 5:11 am

Here is something which may actually show the effect of confinement rather than assuming it.

comment image

The logistic curve ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logistic_distribution ) and its cumulative distribution is the typical S-curve of total infections.

Here I’ve plotted the time derivative both data and model since this makes any changes apparent more rapidly. I’ve attempted to fit the curve the early rise before confinement came into force. This is very approximative with large uncertainty due to noisy data. It’s a first shot.

This does show a drop about 10d after confinement with the data dropping clearly below the model. Such a delay is consistent with 5d incubation, plus a couple of days where folks cope with initial infection at home before the desperate measure of going to A&E where they know many will come out in a box, plus a couple of days for PRC result. The timing is about right for a tentative attribution to what we *expect* to see happening.

The method needs a lot of refinement but could potentially provide means of assessing how much difference confinement makes and following as closely as possible the effects of progressively releasing restrictions. This must be done as quickly as possible. It is already likely that the effects of economic self-immolation will be far worse than the virus itself.

Kneel
Reply to  richard
April 11, 2020 8:45 pm

It is also pertinent to consider that it is an epidemiological observation from empirical data that lethalaty and transmissibility are inversely related – that is, it seems that for most infections, the more fatal they are, the less transmissible they are. In general.

Nor do we have much, if any, data on prevalence of infection in the general population, nor the specificity of the tests in use (the latter may be available, but is not widely propagated). This lack means the error margin on epidemiological predictions is rather larger – certainly 1, and perhaps 2 orders of magnitude. That is, lethallity may be 0.05% to 5% based on currently available data. The higher end is, without doubt, extremely alarming, while the lower end is half of the typically quoted influenza percentage. Furthermore, there is no “most likely” value possible, nor any distribution that can realistically be used to make such an estimate – we simply lack sufficient data to pin the numbers down better.

One thing of value that may come from this whole affair is that we may be able to deduce at which point on the asymptotically converging model prejections to actual data comparison that we can have sufficient information to make an informed choice.

And one last note – “The Boy Who Cried Wolf” is relevant here as well. We do not wish to desensitise the population to a potentially fatal pandemic by over-reacting this time.

Robert of Ottawa
Reply to  Greg
April 10, 2020 3:06 pm

He was talking if no confinement laws were in place,
BTW Confiement laws are terribly inefficient. They confine the uninfected, which is most of the population, and destroy the economy, without sdignificantly changing the course of the epidemic.

Monckton of Brenchley
Reply to  Robert of Ottawa
April 10, 2020 4:17 pm

Robert of Ottawa is incorrect. I have made it explicit that lockdowns are in place, and are working, as the graphs show. Without lockdowns, and without a willingness on the part of the public, who are generally better informed than some commenters here, to reduce their social interactions, the epidemic would at this stage be near-perfectly exponential in its growth.

No amount of screeching by incompletely self-identified commenters here is going to deter responsible governments from protecting their peoples. Lockdowns will generally continue until enough information becomes available to permit gradual removal of restrictions on movement and association. Get over it.

Monckton of Brenchley
Reply to  Greg
April 10, 2020 4:11 pm

The pathetic, hate-filled, furtively anonymous Greg yet again demonstrates himself to be incapable of reading the head posting, incapable of elementary arithmetic, entirely uninterested in the objective truth, and pettily determined to derail the comment thread. What a sad life is his! What a feeble-minded, cretinous, cackling nitwit. And no, none of this is a personal attack, for Greg is too much of a cringing, trembling poltroon to reveal his identity.

If Greg will get his kindergarten mistress to read the head posting to him, he will see that it is he, not I, who is the incompetent buffoon, but he, unlike me, is malicious.

Yes, of course, the case growth rate cannot fall below zero. A careless error of drafting on my part. But the hate-filled Greg makes far too much of it.

I had originally written an introductory piece explaining the mathematics behind the daily graphs, but it was not published. It is not as naive as the hate-filled Greg would have us imagine.

And if he does not want to read further pieces, let him go and get a life. His hatred is wasted on me.

As the head posting carefully explains, the infection only stops when all are immune. But, in the early stages, when nearly all are uninfected, the transmission is necessarily near-perfectly exponential. There is no point in Greg’s trying to deny that this is the case, or to equivocate, or to sneer. He is an intellectual pigmy.

Carlo, Monte
Reply to  Monckton of Brenchley
April 10, 2020 4:56 pm

I agree, CMoB, his posts aren’t worth the time required to read them.

Greg Goodman
Reply to  Monckton of Brenchley
April 11, 2020 2:04 am

I have frequency posted as Greg Goodman and did not get any more consideration, that’s an irrelevant petty distraction.

Yes, of course, the case growth rate cannot fall below zero. A careless error of drafting on my part. But the hate-filled Greg makes far too much of it.

Finally a recognition that you are actually reading. Thank you for at least recognising the mistake. However, it is not an ‘error or drafting’ that’s like saying someone “mis-spoke” when they lied. You mis-insterpreted what you are plotting, something I have been pointing out since day one and you have been obstinately trying to ignore. You goofed – get over it.

Some small progress there then.

I have not bothered with your misleading analysis in this post since, like the climatologists who you are so deftly imitating, there comes a point once credibility and honesty is shot that there is little point in rebutting the tidal flow of misleading, pseudo-scientific claims one by one.

Suffice it to say that were you to look at daily change rather than cumulative totals, (whose banal featureless curve would be fitted with innumerable models,) you would have a more informative plot.
comment image

As you can readily see this NOT a straight line at any point and NEVER WAS “purely exponential”.

Greg Goodman
Reply to  Greg Goodman
April 11, 2020 2:58 am

I have frequency posted as Greg Goodman and did not get any more consideration from CofB, that’s an irrelevant petty distraction.

Yes, of course, the case growth rate cannot fall below zero. A careless error of drafting on my part. But the hate-filled Greg makes far too much of it.

Finally a recognition that you are actually reading. Thank you for at least recognising the mistake. However, it is not an ‘error or drafting’ that’s like saying someone “mis-spoke” when they lied. You mis-interpreted what you are plotting, something I have been pointing out since day one and you have been obstinately trying to ignore. You goofed – get over it.

Some small progress there then.

I have not bothered with your misleading analysis in this post since, like the climatologists who you are so deftly imitating, there comes a point once credibility and honesty is shot that there is little point in rebutting the tidal flow of misleading, pseudo-scientific claims one by one.

Suffice it to say that were you to look at daily change rather than cumulative totals, (whose banal featureless curve would be fitted with innumerable models,) you would have a more informative plot.
comment image

As you can readily see this NOT a straight line at any point and NEVER WAS “purely exponential”.

A C Osborn
Reply to  Greg Goodman
April 11, 2020 10:49 am

Greg likes to plot his graphs as log growth.
Here are hte values for France for 36 days from the 25th of February.
Plot than as an Excel Graph and add an Exponential Trend Line and then you will know for yourself whether it looks like Exponential Growth up until week 31.
Closures of large meeting started on the 28th of February, by the 14th of March all large meeting, Football, Musuems etc were closed. On the 23rd of March lockdown occurred, ie day 28.
Here are the values
13 5 20 19 43 30 61 21 73 138 190 366 177 286 372 497 595 785 838 924 1210 1097 1404 1861 1617 1847 2230 3176 2446 2931 3922 3809 4611 2569 4376 7578
Plot them yourself.

A C Osborn
Reply to  Greg Goodman
April 11, 2020 11:15 am

Here are the UK numbers, plot them and see, add exponential trend lie.
27 Feb 3
28 Feb 5
29 Feb 3
1 Mar 12
2 Mar 4
3 Mar 12
4 Mar 36
5 Mar 29
6 Mar 48
7 Mar 45
8 Mar 69
9 Mar 43
10 Mar 61
11 Mar 78
12 Mar 136
13 Mar 202
14 Mar 342
15 Mar 251
16 Mar 152
17 Mar 407
18 Mar 676
19 Mar 643
20 Mar 714
21 Mar 1,035
22 Mar 665
23 Mar 967
24 Mar 1,427
25 Mar 1,452
26 Mar 2,129
27 Mar 2,885
28 Mar 2,546
29 Mar 2,433
30 Mar 2,619
31 Mar 3,009
1 Apr 4,324
2 Apr 4,244
3 Apr 4,450
4 Apr 3,735
5 Apr 5,903
6 Apr 3,802
7 Apr 3,634
8 Apr 5,492
9 Apr 4,344
10 Apr 5,706

suffolkboy
Reply to  Greg
April 10, 2020 4:38 pm

I agree. He is usually both colourful and accurate. This time he is colourful and totally wrong. I don’t know what came over him. (There was a parallel case a year or so ago in these very columns when some medical paper describing a model was published and then somebody politely pointed out that if a model is predicting a decline in cumulative deaths it implies that bodies are coming back to life!)

Nick Hill
Reply to  Greg
April 11, 2020 1:04 am

‘Serfs’: ignorant serfs.
Although some of the ignorant do surf!
“Ya’ll ain’t from around here, are you, boy?”
Otherwise, a top notch response. Thank you for helping me understand how data can be manipulated to suit an agenda.
Monkton troubles me: how can he be so on point with AGW, yet so awry with COVID-19?
Any thoughts?

Greg Goodman
Reply to  Nick Hill
April 11, 2020 2:17 am

Damn, what an ignorant surf I am ! LOL.

I think he is equally manipulative all the time. It’s just that when he was on the “right side” of the climate debate most people just applauded because we all agreed on the issue.

I have criticised his attitude here before and questioned his competence about his “Bode analysis” paper and his lack of ability or willingness to consider criticism of those with more experience and knowledge than himself.

I don’t think there is any change on CofB, it is a change in perception when we agree or disagree with someone.

Scissor
Reply to  Vuk
April 10, 2020 2:24 pm

Both cases and deaths are no longer growing exponentially. Cases precede deaths, so cases are further off and that is why the deaths are slower to decline relative to cases.

Monckton of Brenchley
Reply to  Scissor
April 10, 2020 4:19 pm

Scissor is of course right that deaths lag cases, a point that I have already made in these posts. And indeed the growth is no longer exponential, because lockdowns are working and, even where there are no lockdowns, people have learned that taking elementary precautions is not only safer for them but safer for those they might otherwise infect.

amirlach
Reply to  Monckton of Brenchley
April 10, 2020 7:12 pm

Japan could be a good example of taking elementary precautions. Which could be more successful due to their culture of self sacrifice for the Nation. “Dr. Ali Mokdad of IHME refused to explain why Japan had so few Coronavirus cases despite no lockdowns like the US every time Martha MacCallum asked. https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/04/ihme-rep-dodges-questions-low-coronavirus-cases-japan-despite-no-across-country-lockdowns-like-us-video/

As more and better data comes in, it could well be that Governments over reacted, but if they didn’t react and millions died, but your freedoms were not encroached on for a few months? Would that be preferable? Even if they were wrong they saved lives.

“The German study found that around 15% of the population in the Gangelt had the coronavirus antibodies and were infected at some point. Using this data the researchers concluded that the coronavirus mortality rate was 0.37%.”

https://www.tagesschau.de/regional/nordrheinwestfalen/corona-studie-heinsberg-101.html

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/04/numbers-150-americans-date-no-pre-existing-conditions-died-coronavirus-0-9/

Nick Hill
Reply to  Monckton of Brenchley
April 11, 2020 1:27 am

Come on, your Lordship: lockdowns working? Really?
In previous similar cases, newly introduced vaccines were said to be doing their job, in respect of the disease targeted, despite clear evidence the rate of growth had already passed its peak and was naturally declining, in accordance with all known laws of epidemiology.
The best analogy I can think of is the ‘goal hanger’ in football (soccer). He waits on the opponents’ goal line until the ball rolls his way; it was going in anyway, but he applies the final touch and then hurtles off around the pitch, arms aloft, taking all the credit.
See my point?

Greg Goodman
Reply to  Nick Hill
April 11, 2020 2:28 am

Growth ( rate of change ) never was “purely exponential”. Not straight on a log plot. And if rate of change is not exponential neither is the cumulative sum , the difference is just less clear since you persist in using the more uninformative metric.

comment image

If you were less concerned with pushing your agenda, the last days could have been spent working collectively to advance the analysis. But listening to other with more s-k-ill and experience has never been your forte , has it.

Yes confinement should be making an impact. Working collectively to quantifying it would be more useful that promoting false claims and mis-reading your own graphs.

Greg Goodman
Reply to  Monckton of Brenchley
April 11, 2020 2:27 am

Growth ( rate of change ) never was “purely exponential”. Not straight on a log plot. And if rate of change is not exponential neither is the cumulative sum , the difference is just less clear since you persist in using the more uninformative metric.

comment image

If you were less concerned with pushing your agenda, the last days could have been spent working collectively to advance the analysis. But listening to other with more skill and experience has never been your forte , has it.

Yes confinement should be making an impact. Working collectively to quantifying it would be more useful that promoting false claims and mis-reading your own graphs.

Robert of Ottawa
Reply to  Vuk
April 10, 2020 3:00 pm

I maintain these graphs are useless to inform any future action. They sample sick people only.

Reply to  Robert of Ottawa
April 10, 2020 3:13 pm

We are 4 to 8 weeks out of having useful seroprevalence studies and will be able to stop all the guessing.

Monckton of Brenchley
Reply to  Charles Rotter
April 10, 2020 4:23 pm

Mr Rotter is quite right. Until proper data are available to give us an idea of how many are in truth infected, governments are being compelled to take precautions that may – or may not – prove to have been unnecessary.

Nicholas McGinley
Reply to  Monckton of Brenchley
April 10, 2020 6:39 pm

And as you have said, in the meantime sensible individuals everywhere are and have been doing what they can to protect themselves.
This is true in Sweden and everywhere else.
As well, some people have been less than sensible, and still others have not been able to take sufficient precautions due to personal circumstances.
Obviously anyone who stays away from other people, or who employs effective barrier and sanitary protections, will have far less chance of being infected…zero chance in the case of isolated individuals.
Which will logically and necessarily reduce the transmission rate.
Ending such measures while substantial percentages remain unexposed, and thus vulnerable, will alter the transmission rates.
How anyone can doubt such self evident truths is baffling.

JohnM
Reply to  Monckton of Brenchley
April 11, 2020 3:30 am

You’ll have to wait a while in the UK then…..MPs’ are being tested, healthcare staff on the front line may be tested, and private clinics are already purchasing the tests. The men, women and children on the “street” are unlikely to see much testing for a month, or more; unless they are hospitalised.

Steven Mosher
Reply to  Charles Rotter
April 10, 2020 6:27 pm

Germany 15%
China 6%
Santa Clara will be done next week 3500

No matter how many serology tests are done, people will still argue.

they will deny data or question data to the end

Nicholas McGinley
Reply to  Charles Rotter
April 10, 2020 6:27 pm

Agree 100%.
We need blood tests, coupled with some method of random sampling on a large scale.
Only that can tell us who and how many have been exposed.
Right now everyone is trying to do the best that can be inferred with incomplete info.

Monckton of Brenchley
Reply to  Robert of Ottawa
April 10, 2020 4:22 pm

In response to the incompletely self-identified Robert of Ottawa, the graphs are based on not only those who are infected but also those who have died. He is entitled to his characteristically unconstructive opinion, but if he does not find the graphs useful he can always go and get a life rather than whining here. Trolling is a sad and pathetic activity.

JimB
Reply to  Vuk
April 10, 2020 3:49 pm

Semi log graph always flatten the curve iirc.

Nick Hill
Reply to  JimB
April 11, 2020 1:45 am

‘Serfs’: ignorant serfs.
Although some of the ignorant do surf!
“Ya’ll ain’t from around here, are you, boy?”
Otherwise, a top notch response. Thank you for helping me understand how data can be manipulated to suit an agenda.
Monkton troubles me: how can he be so on point with AGW, yet so awry with COVID-19?
Any thoughts?

Monckton of Brenchley
Reply to  Vuk
April 10, 2020 4:00 pm

In response to Vuk, the whole point of these graphs is to show how the once-exponential rate of growth is declining. It still has some way to go before this infection is defeated. And, as the head posting shows, the rate of growth was strictly exponential in the weeks to mid-March.

Greg
Reply to  Monckton of Brenchley
April 11, 2020 3:08 am

the rate of growth was strictly exponential in the weeks to mid-March.

You never looked at the rate of growth, you looked at the height of the tree.

Had you actually looked at the rate of growth you would have seen instantly that it NEVER WAS “purely exponential” and this whole article would be been unnecessary.
comment image

We could have been discussing something pertinent, instead of endlessly trying to correct your incompetent posts, which WUWT is tolerating out of a misguided sense of openness continues to publish despite your refusal to address any technical issues.

Vuk
Reply to  Monckton of Brenchley
April 11, 2020 5:19 am

Sir, thank you for your comment.
I was only referring to the UK infections data (only hospital tested), it has a progressively decreasing exponent, hence it may not be considered to be truly exponential function.

Michael S. Kelly
Reply to  Monckton of Brenchley
April 11, 2020 2:00 pm

I’ve been plotting the data from the Virginia Department of Health for new infections in Manassas (where we live), Prince William County (where Manassas lives), and the whole state for some time now. After a while, I started adding trendlines. At first I tried exponentials, and while the R^2 value was over 0.9, it didn’t look like a very good correlation to me (shape of the curve is wrong, and only crosses the actual data plot in two places) However, a parabola fits each data set eerily well, with R^2 of 0.99+ every time. In fact, overlaying the plots sometimes looks as if VDH is just generating the day’s data from an equation.

Ian
Reply to  Michael S. Kelly
April 12, 2020 1:39 am

Try using the Gompertz curve, a standard form used in biology and for the Covid 19 data in Wuhan.

It’s an S shaped function that tends to a saturation level, the final point, and allows forward projection with reasonable accuracy for maybe a week (based on daily data), when it should be rerun.

If the situation were stable it would forward project with accuracy, but since lockdown the transmission rates are constantly falling so the situation is dynamic.

Geo Rubik
Reply to  Vuk
April 10, 2020 10:00 pm

Can I get this up top? NO IT”S NOT!

jbfl
Reply to  Vuk
April 11, 2020 12:22 pm

I submit the number of COV cases is HIGHLY correlated with the number of tests done and that number is much more likely to appear exponential.

John Tillman
April 10, 2020 10:11 am

We don’t have a vaccine for the common cold because it’s caused by over 200 different serotypes of viruses, including widely different species.

Vaccines exist against animal coronaviruses, so it’s not impossible.

In any case, we can reasonably expect treatments to emerge from ongoing trials.

Keith Minto
Reply to  John Tillman
April 10, 2020 7:16 pm

This is something that intrigues me.

Prof Ian Frazer (of cervical cancer vaccine fame) in an interview said that as CV is respiratory (throat to lungs) and not blood born, then a blood born vaccine is impossible.

I would like some clarity on that, grim news if true.

ozspeaksup
Reply to  Keith Minto
April 11, 2020 5:09 am

if that were correct then there’d be no pneuminia vaccines
or TB

and Aus is trialling the tb vax right now in nurses etc to see if it boots the immune system enough to withsatnd the covid
how they plan to challenge? is a bit of a mystery
assuinig those who got the jab and didnt get covid isnt exactly proof

and sa for Frazer?
his overpriced overhyped vax.. isnt required in multiple doses at all and one base jab is now shown to ramp immune response ot all variants of HPV
repeat doses and even singles of the ramped up versions caused a high amt of serious adverse events
claims it Cured…cervical cancer are WAY out of line as the timespan from start to finding is more than 15yrs most women are 40+ and usually 50s when it hits
and MERK admit on their webpage on it IF a woman HAS any of the HPV strains and IS vaccinated it actually Doubles her risk of GETTING cervical cancer.

oddly its like the Dengue vax in a similar/but differing result
if you have had dengue youre ok if you havent? the vax is likely to Harm not help.

ozspeaksup
Reply to  John Tillman
April 11, 2020 5:00 am

the animal ie dog corona vax is for the bowel affecting variant that dogs get
its not the same

April 10, 2020 10:15 am

Epidemiology is not my expertise, and I am also uncomfortable with the poor quality of most Covid-19 data:
– “Number of Covid-19 cases” primarily reflects the frequency and location of testing and may significantly underestimate the actual number of those infected, especially since many are asymptomatic.
– “Covid-19 deaths” are reportedly being inflated by including deaths from other causes – that is, “Dying with Covid” vs. “Dying from Covid”.
– It is unusual that seasonal deaths from all causes to date are reportedly much less that previous years – but this is changing.
– All this data is “a moving target” and the case and mortality projections by “experts” vary widely

Based on the data from South Korea to 10Apr2020, where the data is more credible and containment is strong, one can draw these tentative conclusions:
https://www.cdc.go.kr/board/board.es?mid=a30402000000&bid=0030
1. 503,051 tests have been run, concentrating on high-incidence areas, in a country population of 51.3 million (1.0% of South Korea’s population has been tested).
2. 10,450 patients have tested positive for the Covid-19 virus (2.1% of tests were positive of Covid-19 virus).
3. 7117 patients have been discharged (68% of tested-positive patients have been discharged).
4. 3125 patients are in quarantine (30% of tested-positive patients are in quarantine).
5. 208 deaths have been attributed to Covid-19 (2.0% of tested-positive patients have died).

European data shows a sharp increase in Total Deaths From All Causes in week 14:
“The latest pooled estimates from the EuroMOMO network show a marked increase in excess all-cause mortality overall for the participating European countries, related to the COVID-19 pandemic. This overall excess mortality is driven by a very substantial excess mortality in some countries, primarily seen in the age group of 65 years and above, but also in the age group of 15-64 years.”
https://euromomo.eu/
This increase in total deaths is concentrated in the following European countries: Belgium, France, Italy, Netherlands, Spain, Switzerland and England.
Sweden, which is not locking-down its population, showed a small increase.
The latest spike in total deaths indicates that deaths in the over-65 age group are ~2.5 times deaths in the 15-64 age group. Under-14 age group deaths show little or no increase to date.

Unless an effective medical treatment is administered, mortality in the general population will total about 2% of those infected, but deaths will be concentrated in those over ~65 and younger people with other serious health problems – this group will have much higher mortality rates.

This latest data reinforces the need to stay safe and avoid infection, and this is especially true for older people.

My post below of 24Mar2020 reflects my skepticism in the early days of the Covid-19 illness arriving in the western world. Global deaths attributed to Covid-19 are significant at ~100,000 to date, but still total less than 5% of the >2 million global Excess Winter Deaths in an average year. One of the major causes of Excess Winter Deaths is excessively high fuel costs, caused by global warming/climate change hysteria. This suggests that much more attention should be focused on rational energy strategies that are not corrupted by scientifically false fears of runaway global warming and human-made climate change.

A RATIONAL ENERGY STRATEGY FOR AMERICA (Rev.1)
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2020/03/28/food-prices-and-ethanol-mandates/#comment-2951681
____________________________________________________

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2020/03/23/covid-19-tests-the-non-fake-news/#comment-2945438

Excess Winter Deaths in the USA average about 100,000 per year from all causes, including influenza. When Joe D’Aleo and I wrote our paper about Excess Winter Deaths in 2015, nobody cared.
Now, we are supposed to be terrified by 582 deaths to date in the USA caused by the corona virus.

In the UK in just England and Wales, Excess Winter Deaths (“EWD”) totaled 50,100 souls in Winter 2017-2018. That is THREE TIMES the average per capita EWD rate of the USA and Canada, in part due to excessively high energy costs in the UK, where fracking of shales is banned for no good reason. When we reported this startling statistic, nobody cared.
Now, we are supposed to be terrified by 335 deaths to date in the UK caused by the corona virus.

In 2016 I reported an extremely dangerous situation at a sour gas project close to Calgary that almost killed 300,000 people. When it was mentioned in the news media, nobody cared.
Now, we are supposed to be terrified by 24 deaths to date in Canada caused by the corona virus.

SO LET ME GET THIS STRAIGHT: WE ARE SUPPOSED TO PANIC WHEN A FEW HUNDRED PEOPLE DIE, BUT NOT WHEN A FEW HUNDRED THOUSAND DIE, OR ALMOST DIE. OK. GOT IT.
_____________________________________________

COLD WEATHER KILLS 20 TIMES AS MANY PEOPLE AS HOT WEATHER SEPTEMBER 4, 2015
by Joseph D’Aleo and Allan MacRae
https://friendsofsciencecalgary.files.wordpress.com/2015/09/cold-weather-kills-macrae-daleo-4sept2015-final.pdf
__________________

ACTIONS THAT PREVENTED A POTENTIALLY CATASTROPHIC SOUR GAS DISASTER AT THE MAZEPPA PROJECT NEAR CALGARY

In May 2016, Allan MacRae, as an uninvolved citizen, became aware of unsafe operating procedures at the Mazeppa critical sour gas project near Calgary. At some personal risk, he investigated, consulted with trusted colleagues, and following the Code of Conduct of Alberta’s Professional Engineers (APEGA), he reported his concerns to the Alberta Energy Regulator (AER), and followed up to ensure proper compliance.

The AER quickly shut down the Mazeppa project, and canceled all 1600 operating licenses of the parent company, which was placed in receivership and bankruptcy. The Managing Director was fined and sanctioned. This was the most severe reprimand of a company in the history of the Alberta energy industry. A 2005 analysis of Mazeppa wells by the Alberta ERCB concluded that an uncontrolled sour gas release would affect an area within a 15km radius and could kill 250,000 people. By 2016 that total increased to 300,000 people.

jorgekafkazar
Reply to  ALLAN MACRAE
April 10, 2020 12:46 pm

Allen: I’d never heard of the Mazeppa case. Can you please provide a link to more details on your initial investigation and the operating procedures?

Reply to  jorgekafkazar
April 10, 2020 5:59 pm

FYI Jorge:

THE MAZEPPA SOUR GAS STORY

I received an award in March 2018 from the Society of Petroleum Engineers (SPE) for averting a potential major sour gas disaster in SE Calgary.

The new foreign owners of the Mazeppa project were producing 40% H2S critical sour gas from ~12 wells within one mile of populous SE Calgary suburbs, and to save money they had ceased the required monthly injection of anti-corrosion chemicals into the pipelines seven months earlier. This was extremely dangerous, because sour gas is highly corrosive to the steel pipelines that carry the gas to the processing plant.

Fortunately, I was familiar with the project from decades ago – I was GM of Engineering for the company that formerly owned this project and about 20 others, and a friend called me with this vital information. The remarkable coincidence is my informant did not know of my history with this project – he just wanted to talk to someone about his corrupt foreign bosses.

The staff at the project were afraid to report the dangerous situation because they feared physical retaliation from the foreign owners, who they believed were violent thugs.

H2S is heavier than air and hugs the ground, and a 0.1% concentration is instantly fatal. I investigated, reported the matter to the Alberta Energy Regulator, followed-up to ensure compliance and the project was shut down and was made safe. I later learned that some of the sour gas pipelines had already experienced minor perforations and leaks.

A safety study done in 2005 estimated the kill radius at 15km, so potential loss of life in a major discharge of H2S in 2016 could have totaled up to 300,000 people, wiping out the SE quadrant of Calgary.

To put this near-miss in perspective, that 300,00 potential fatalities is equivalent to one hundred 9-11’s, six Hiroshima’s, four Nagasaki’s. or about three Covid-19’s to date. Calgary didn’t dodge a bullet; we dodged a nuke.

The press reported the problem with some inaccuracies, but were generally adequate. The Alberta Energy Regulator tried to act like they were on top of the situation and aware of the danger, but they were not.

The total reprimand against the foreign owners is the most severe in Alberta history.

– Allan MacRae
____________________________________________

Selected References to the Mazeppa Sour Gas Threat
The reporters got a few minor facts wrong – but no matter.

A. AER SUSPENDS MAZEPPA PLANT OPERATIONS AMID CONCERNS
High River Times, August 27, 2016
Previously at http://www.highrivertimes.com/2016/08/25/aer-suspends-mazeppa-plant-operations-amid-concerns

B. WATCHDOG TAKES UNPRECEDENTED STEP OF FORCING OIL AND GAS PRODUCER INTO RECEIVERSHIP
Calgary Herald, March 21, 2017
http://calgaryherald.com/business/energy/watchdog-takes-unprecedented-step-of-forcing-oil-and-gas-producer-into-receivership

C. LEXIN RESOURCES AND THE DARK SIDE OF ALBERTA’S DOWNTURN
CBC, April 24, 2017
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/lexin-resources-what-went-wrong-1.4038838

D. IN REVERSAL, LEXIN ADMITS TO BREAKING ENVIRONMENTAL, INDUSTRY RULES
Calgary Herald. July 10, 2017
http://calgaryherald.com/business/energy/lexin-agrees-it-breached-environmental-industry-rules

E. ERCB DECISION 2005-060 RE COMPTON PETROLEUM CORP. APPLICATION TO DRILL SIX CRITICAL SOUR GAS WELLS – SE Calgary area 22 June 2001)
http://elc.ab.ca/Content_Files/Files/NewsBriefs/EUBgiveconditionalgreenlight-Vol20-3.pdf
[excerpt]
For Compton’s well applications, the calculated EPZ radius was 11.94 km during the drilling phase and 14.97 km during the completion phase. It was estimated that more than 250,000 people lived and worked within the calculated 14.97 km EPZ.
_________________________________

Janedrew
Reply to  ALLAN MACRAE
April 14, 2020 3:27 pm

Kudos!
Had no idea!
Always wished when I was doing instrumentation in oil and gas they’d make it easier to whistle blow. There are a small percentage of truly negligent companies making the rest look bad.

Reply to  ALLAN MACRAE
April 15, 2020 10:35 pm

Typo:
300,000 not 300,00

To put this near-miss in perspective, that 300,000 potential fatalities is equivalent to one hundred 9-11’s, six Hiroshima’s, four Nagasaki’s, or about three Covid-19’s to date. Calgary didn’t “dodge a bullet”; we dodged a nuke.

Reply to  ALLAN MACRAE
April 18, 2020 6:54 am

On another topic, for those who like conspiracy theories, there is the persistent rumour that the “severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2” (SARS-CoV-2) originated at the Wuhan bioweapons lab, the “Wuhan Institute of Virology”. That is a definite possibility – I have no opinion.
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2020/jan/26/coronavirus-link-to-china-biowarfare-program-possi/
[excerpt]
“The laboratory is the only declared site in China capable of working with deadly viruses. Dany Shoham, a former Israeli military intelligence officer who has studied Chinese biological warfare, said the institute is linked to Beijing’s covert bio-weapons program.”

Closer to home, there is a remarkable lack of curiosity as to the details of the Mazeppa Sour Gas near-miss that could have wiped out the SE quadrant of Calgary. Why would anyone save a few nickels by stopping the use of anti-corrosion chemicals in the sour gas pipelines? This is an insane risk to take to save a tiny amount of money – and it effectively destroyed the pipeline system and thus the entire Mazeppa project.

Care to guess the nationality of the owners of Mazeppa? Not sure if they spoke Cantonese or Mandarin.

Best, Allan

Reply to  ALLAN MACRAE
April 10, 2020 1:37 pm

Allen, when did you write this???? “582 deaths”–its 1700 and will soon explode!

Reply to  Shelly
April 10, 2020 5:06 pm

Shelly – I wrote that post on 24Mar2020 – 583 deaths in the USA attributed to Covid-19 to that date.

Renaud
Reply to  ALLAN MACRAE
April 10, 2020 3:00 pm

Dear Allan, it is an intelectual pleasure to read you, knowing that you will open new doors and push me in my thinking.

May I suggest Iceland on top of South Korea (in fact I can only find 4 countries providing details data every day about positive, death , cured, UCI, tested, these are South Korea, Iceland and Italy, and the USA)

So for Iceland, so far 34.125 tested, 1.675 positives so 4.9% of the tested, 7 persons died (the 7th today) so 0.4% of the tested, and 751 recovered already, so 0,9% of the persons out of that sickness have died. showing that once testing is intensive (like in Korea, Iceland and Diamond Princess, then death is around the 1%), finally 917 people are positively infected, but this has reduced by more than 15% since the 06th of April.

Monckton of Brenchley
Reply to  Renaud
April 10, 2020 4:31 pm

In Iceland, closed-case analysis indicates that 7 of 758 have died – a case fatality rate of more like 1% than the 0.4$ of total positives. During the early stages of a pandemic, closed cases are the least unreliable guide we have.

Reply to  Renaud
April 10, 2020 6:59 pm

Thank you Renaud for your kind words. A caution – as I said above, epidemiology is not my expertise. I am much more confident in energy and climate matters. I also co-authored a paper on Excess Winter Mortality in 2015.

I should point out that my previously-calculated 1.1% Covid deaths/infections has now increased to 2.0% for South Korea and is probably about the same for the Diamond Princess cruise ship. These are moving targets and are least reliable in the early days of an epidemic, since deaths lag infections. The calculated deaths/infections in Iceland will probably also increase unless patients can be treated with effective medicines.

This 2% Covid deaths/infections figure may also be too high, because we do not know how many more people are infected within the total population – there could be many more infected who are asymptomatic.

As Samurai mentioned on this page,
“Germany just released a COVID19 antibody test on 1,000 randomly selected people and found 15% had already been infected with COVID19 and ALMOST ALL were asymptomatic…”
https://spectator.us/covid-antibody-test-german-town-shows-15-percent-infection-rate/
This could be very significant, especially if a large percentage of a population has already been infected – then the virus would prove to be much less deadly than current estimates.

Repeating, these numbers are moving targets and even the experts are all over the map in their predictions of future mortality. The next month or two will tell the tale. Faites vos jeux.

Reply to  ALLAN MACRAE
April 11, 2020 9:21 am

Following are anecdotal stories about a very important parameter.

We need more antibody data to determine how widespread exposure to Covid-19 really is.

Flu season resumes in the Northern Hemisphere in about September – will herd immunity be developed by then or will there be a Round 2?

BLOOD TESTS SHOW 14% OF PEOPLE ARE NOW IMMUNE TO COVID-19 IN ONE TOWN IN GERMANY
Antonio Regalado
https://www.technologyreview.com/2020/04/09/999015/blood-tests-show-15-of-people-are-now-immune-to-covid-19-in-one-town-in-germany/

How many people have really been infected by the coronavirus? In one German town a preliminary answer is in: about 14%.

The municipality of Gangelt, near the border with the Netherlands, was hard hit by covid-19 after a February carnival celebration drew thousands to the town, turning it into an accidental petri dish.

Now, after searching blood from 500 residents for antibodies to the virus, scientists at a nearby university say they have determined that one in seven have been infected and are therefore “immune.” Some of those people would have had no symptoms at all.

Their brief report (PDF), posted online in German, has big implications for how soon that town, and the rest of the world, can come out from lockdown.

“To me it looks like we don’t yet have a large fraction of the population exposed,” says Nicholas Christakis, a doctor and social science researcher at Yale University. “They had carnivals and festivals, but only 14% are positive. That means there is a lot more to go even in a hard-hit part of Germany.”

Here’s why the true infection rate in a region matters: the bigger it is, the less pain still lies ahead. Eventually, when enough people are immune—maybe half to three-quarters of us—the virus won’t be able to spread further, a concept called herd immunity.

But the German town isn’t close to that threshold yet, and to Christakis the preliminary figure is “unfortunate” because it means the virus still has more damage to do.

The German report is among the first to survey a population for evidence of prior infection, data that scientists need to determine how far the pandemic has spread, what the real death rate is, and how many people show no symptoms at all.

“It’s very preliminary, but it’s the kind of study we desperately need,” says Christakis, who believes the US should test as many as 200,000 people, from big cities like New York to small towns in the Midwest. “This is crucial to quantify a host of basic parameters.”

Globally, the official case count of covid-19 is more than 1.5 million people, but that reckoning mostly includes people who seek medical help and get tested. The true number of people infected, including those without symptoms and who don’t get tested, is far higher.

More data from “sero-surveys” should be available soon; sources include US hospitals. On April 6, Stanford Medicine announced it had launched its own serology test and had begun screening doctors, nurses, and others for antibodies.

“The test will enable us to determine which health-care workers might be at low risk for working with covid-19 patients, as well as understanding disease prevalence in our communities,” said spokesperson Lisa Kim.

Early results from hospitals are already circulating among some experts, says Christakis, who thinks these data will get us “closer to the truth” about how far the infection has spread in US cities. “If you see 5% positive in your health-care workers, that means infection rates probably aren’t higher than that in your city,” he says.

The survey in Germany was carried out by virologist Hendrik Streeck and several others at the University Hospital in Bonn, who say they approached about 1,000 residents of Gangelt to give blood, have their throats swabbed, and fill out a survey.

They found that 2% of residents were actively infected by the coronavirus and a total of 14% had antibodies, indicating a prior infection. This group of people, they say, “can no longer be infected with SARS-CoV-2,” as the virus is known to scientists.

As the virus spreads, it sends a certain percentage of people to the hospital and a few of those to ICUs; a portion of those will die. One of the biggest unanswered questions is exactly what percentage of infected people the coronavirus is killing.

From the result of their blood survey, the German team estimated the death rate in the municipality at 0.37% overall, a figure significantly lower than what’s shown on a dashboard maintained by Johns Hopkins, where the death rate in Germany among reported cases is 2%.

The authors explain that the difference in the calculations boils down to how many people are actually infected but haven’t been counted because they have mild or no symptoms.

The presence of previously infected people in the community, Streeck and colleagues believe, will reduce the speed at which the virus can move in the area. They also outline a process by which social distancing can be slowly unwound, especially given hygienic measures, like handwashing, and isolating and tracking the sick. They think if people avoid getting big doses of the virus—which can happen in hospitals or via close contact with someone infected—fewer people will become severely ill, “while at the same time developing immunity” that can help finally end the outbreak.

—with reporting by James Temple

CHICAGO PHLEBOTOMIST: CORONAVIRUS ANTIBODIES FOUND IN 30-50% TESTED FOR COVID-19
https://www.breitbart.com/health/2020/04/10/chicago-phlebotomist-coronavirus-antibodies-found-in-30-50-tested-for-covid-19/
[excerpt]

A phlebotomist working at a Chicago hospital said Thursday that 30 to 50 percent of those tested for coronavirus have antibodies, and 10 to 20 percent of those tested are actual carriers of the virus.

Nicholas McGinley
Reply to  Renaud
April 10, 2020 7:48 pm

Has there been any antibody testing in Iceland?
Saw a guy from Germany on CNBC yesterday who reported that a test of people in one location in that country indicated that a large number of people already have antibodies to the disease.
Another report in Breibart today reports on the account of a phlebotomist in the Chicago area who works at a hospital drive by testing facility.
She says of people tested there, 30-50% have antibodies, and 10-20% have virus.
No confirmation or other sorts of details. (I have been spending as much time as I can sleeping, which is known to be the best way to strengthen immunity, or perhaps more correct to say lack of sleep can render other steps to boost immunity useless)

So I think this is very interesting and lends credence, albeit very tentatively so and with not a huge amount of confidence, that perhaps this virus has been in circulation longer than is being supposed. Or perhaps Jim Steele got it right that multiple strains are circulating, at least one of which is very mild.
Whatever the case may be, we need more information and we need it as fast as possible.
These are isolated reports and may be erroneous or not indicating what was implied, or inferred at first glance. But we need to know.
The truth is often the first casualty of a war, and if we are going to call the fight against this virus a war, that maxim would seem to apply. Does not necessarily mean people are lying, just that info is sparse and unreliable, word of mouth accounts tend to add and delete details as they propagate, etc.

Reply to  Renaud
April 13, 2020 5:14 am

This post filed yesterday seems to have disappeared in moderation. Apologies if it is duplicated.

I’ve emailed Iceland and will share their reply if it is helpful.
__________________________

Thank you Renaud.

Iceland data here:
https://www.icelandreview.com/ask-ir/whats-the-status-of-covid-19-in-iceland/
https://www.icelandreview.com/sci-tech/icelands-coronavirus-testing-global-pandemic-response/

Updated every day at 13:00
COVID-19 in Iceland – Statistics
– Information on this page is obtained from the database at midnight.
Total figures to 10Apr2020

841 in isolation

36 hospitalised

10 intensive care

1.689 confirmed infections

15.498 quarantine completed

841 recovered

3.080 in quarantine

34.635 samples

Of those diagnosed with COVID-19, eight have died. All but one death were people over 60.

GATHERING BAN
Icelandic authorities have banned gatherings of over 20 people from March 24 until May 4. Grocery stores and pharmacies may still allow up to 100 people inside at once, provided space allows for a 2-metre distance between individuals.
Authorities ordered the closure of swimming pools, gyms, bars, clubs, slot machines, and museums as of midnight on March 23. Operations and services that require close contact between individuals or risk close contact are also prohibited. This includes sports clubs, hairdressers, beauty salons, and massage parlours.
All stores, public buildings, and other frequented indoor spaces must be cleaned as often as possible. Hand sanitizer must be available at all entrances and in more frequented spaces such as checkouts in stores.
Universities and junior colleges (menntaskólar) are closed during this period, while PRIMARY SCHOOLS AND PRESCHOOLS REMAIN OPEN, but are subject to stricter measures, including limiting class sizes and maintaining space between students. These measures mean limited services and hours in many primary schools and preschools.
Gatherings smaller than 20 individuals are also subject to strict guidelines, primarily ensuring that there are two metres of space between attendees. Workplaces and institutions are charged with applying and enforcing the regulation themselves.
The measures do not affect international airports, ports, planes or ships.
__________________________
Iceland Total Tests to 10Apr2020 ~34,602
Population of Iceland 341,250
Total Tests/Population 10.1%

Cumulative number of total confirmed cases (total active cases + recovered cases) is increasing but decelerating (flattening).
Containment is strong except PRIMARY SCHOOLS AND PRESCHOOLS (aka the Plague Wards) REMAIN OPEN.

8 deaths/1.689 confirmed infections = 0.47% – this 0.5% will probably increase, but is still much lower than the 2% mortality elsewhere – this may be a function of the early stage of the illness in Iceland, but could also reflect other factors.

It would be helpful to learn what medical treatments are being applied to patients in Iceland, if in fact they are experiencing lower mortality rates than other countries.

Reply to  ALLAN MACRAE
April 13, 2020 6:44 am

BAD CALL – END THE LOCKDOWNS ASAP.

https://www.bbc.com/news/health-51674743
“The UK government’s scientific advisers believe that the chances of dying from a coronavirus infection are between 0.5% and 1%.”

I believe this Covid-19 estimated mortality range “between 0.5% and 1%” (deaths/infections) is ~correct for a typical country’s population distribution , and my hunch is “closer to 0.5%” – that is not very scary except if you are in the “high risk” group – over 65 years of age or otherwise high-risk (with other medical problems) – Covid-19 deaths are heavily concentrated in the high-risk group.

I still think my ~mid-March assessment of this situation was the correct one:
“Isolate people over sixty-five and those with poor immune systems and return to business-as-usual for people under sixty-five.
This will allow “herd immunity” to develop much sooner and older people will thus be more protected AND THE ECONOMY WON’T CRASH.
If tests prove positive, use chloroquine and remdesivir or other cheap available drugs ASAP as appropriate.”

With rare exceptions, we have not seen the “tsunami of cases overwhelm our medical systems”, and we have trashed our economies and severely harmed hundreds of millions worldwide who live from paycheck to paycheck. Considering the pro’s and con’s, the full lockdown was a bad call.

Regards, Allan

https://rosebyanyothernameblog.wordpress.com/2020/03/21/end-the-american-lockdown/comment-page-1/#comment-12253

Hi Willis,

I posted the following yesterday on wattsup – similar ideas.

This full-lockdown scenario is especially hurting service sector businesses and their minimum-wage employees – young people are telling me they are “financially under the bus”. The young are being destroyed to protect us over-65’s. A far better solution is to get them back to work and let us oldies keep our distance, and get “herd immunity” established ASAP – in months not years. Then we will all be safe again.

Regards, Allan

ALLAN MACRAE March 21, 2020 at 10:22 pm
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2020/03/21/to-save-our-economy-roll-out-antibody-testing-alongside-the-active-virus-testing/#comment-2943724

This brief data analysis is far from comprehensive, but here are my preliminary conclusions:
CORONAVIRUS – STRONG CONTAINMENT (3% INFECTED IN S. KOREA) VS POOR CONTAINMENT (21% INFECTED ON THE CRUISE SHIP).
1% FATALITIES OF THOSE INFECTED IN BOTH CASES.
ON THE CRUISE SHIP, ALL DEATHS WERE PEOPLE OVER 70 YEARS OF AGE.
REPORTEDLY DEATHS TYPICALLY OCCURRED TO PATIENTS WITH POOR HEALTH AND POOR IMMUNE SYSTEMS.
REPORTEDLY YOUNGER INFECTED PEOPLE OFTEN HAVE MILD OR NO SYMPTOMS.

LET’S CONSIDER AN ALTERNATIVE APPROACH, SUBJECT TO VERIFICATION OF THE ABOVE CONCLUSIONS:
Isolate people over sixty-five and those with poor immune systems and return to business-as-usual for people under sixty-five.
This will allow “herd immunity” to develop much sooner and older people will thus be more protected AND THE ECONOMY WON’T CRASH.
If tests prove positive, use chloroquine and remdesivir or other cheap available drugs ASAP as appropriate.

Best, Allan

JimB
Reply to  ALLAN MACRAE
April 10, 2020 3:53 pm

“Almost die” is not the same as “die”.

ghalfrunt
Reply to  ALLAN MACRAE
April 10, 2020 4:06 pm

Funny thing is I don’t remember seeing plague pits being dug over the last few years

“A plague pit is the informal term used to refer to mass graves in which victims of the Black Death were buried. The term is most often used to describe pits located on Great Britain, but can be applied to any place where bubonic plague victims were buried.”

https://www.npr.org/sections/coronavirus-live-updates/2020/04/10/831875297/burials-on-new-york-island-are-not-new-but-are-increasing-during-pandemic
(not quite the same but a worrying trend)

sycomputing
Reply to  ghalfrunt
April 10, 2020 8:29 pm

not quite the same but a worrying trend

Really ghalfrunt?

“In a series of tweets and later at a press conference, New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio acknowledged that the number of burials on the island has increased, but said the only people being buried there are those who have not been claimed by a family member or loved one.”

“But many of the Hart Island burials, captured by drone Thursday, are likely related to COVID-19, given the sheer number of deaths in the city from the virus.”

“many of the . . . burials”? “likely related”?

HOW many and ARE they related or not?

“As de Blasio said, some of the burials happening now could also be for people who died of unrelated causes, and whose remains have been sitting in the city’s morgues for days, or even weeks, unclaimed.”

ghalfrunt
Reply to  sycomputing
April 11, 2020 5:13 am

If these are normal burials of the unclaimed then why are the workers dresses in protective equipment? Coffins seem to be 3 deep unless there is a other layers underneath. This seems a very uncontrolled burial site – no markers – are there records of the deceased? Why not cremate?

Does this seem like a civilised burial method?

http://www.maidstone.gov.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0011/227000/Public-Funeral-Health-Policy-October-2018.pdf

sycomputing
Reply to  ghalfrunt
April 11, 2020 7:31 am

I guess it could just be me, but if 6 of the 13 people in the pic are wearing street clothing with simple gloves and masks, then I’m thinking I don’t have much cause to declare these are “plague pits.” Further, none of the people in this picture are in full hazmat gear, not even close. Of those that look like they’re in “protective gear,” it looks more like supped up hospital gowns over street clothes if you ask me. Something you might see people wearing who had the job of burying the dead in a mass grave. You’d think these guys would insist on full hazmat suits unless their risk for infection is low. I know I would, wouldn’t you?

From your own source material, it’s pretty clear this can’t be an “uncontrolled burial site” given your assumptions. E.g., there are “records of the deceased,” since these poor souls are individuals “who have not been claimed by a family member or loved one.” You can’t NOT have been claimed by a family member or loved one unless the authorities first know who you are to notify someone, isn’t that true? I imagine some are John Doe’s, but what can you do in that case? Why NY doesn’t cremate I can’t know for sure, but I suspect it has everything to do with expense. As to markers, why would you expect the State to mark your grave in the first place? You’re dead, i.e., no longer able to pay taxes and thus no longer useful to them (I know, I know, by my own admission I’m cynical).

What I can know is NY has been doing burials of unclaimed individuals this way for a good long time, i.e., with simple masks and gloves, not marking and not cremating, much like, it would seem, your own Maidstone Borough Council.

Thus, I’m thinking the NPR article is pushing the envelope of journalistic integrity just a teeny bit, what say you?

As to the civility of burials at Maidstone, I’m not exactly sure what’s necessarily uncivilized about it, but I didn’t read all 5 pages, my apologies.

Monckton of Brenchley
Reply to  ALLAN MACRAE
April 10, 2020 4:28 pm

Mr McRae is not making sufficient allowance for the fact that there are many, many more deaths to come before this pandemic begins to come under control. Comparing deaths so far with total annual deaths from other causes is, therefore, not a proper comparison.

Furthermore, it should by now be apparent to him that the numbers of deaths now are far higher than when he said they were too few to matter a few weeks ago.

Reply to  Monckton of Brenchley
April 11, 2020 1:20 am

Hello Lord Monckton and thank you for your work on this subject.

I was well aware when I wrote the subject comments that the number of Covid-19 cases and deaths would grow – that is elementary. The following was published on 19Mar2020.

My point is that far greater causes (and much more avoidable) of death have been ignored for decades, especially those due to fuel poverty caused by false global warming alarmism.

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2020/03/17/an-effective-treatment-for-coronavirus-covid-19-has-been-found-in-a-common-anti-malarial-drug/#comment-2941409
[excerpt]

Here is my complaint:

I’ve been writing since 2002 about the failure of green energy to provide useful (dispatchable) electrical power, due to intermittency and diffusivity.

Since then, tens of trillions of dollars have been squandered by incompetent/corrupt politicians on green energy scams – that are not green and produce little useful energy.

Excess winter deaths in the United Kingdom total up to 50,000 per year, often triple the per capita rates of Canada and the USA, because of needlessly high energy costs and poor housing insulation, etc.

We are now seeing a huge reaction to the Coronavirus scare, and rightly so – schools closing, sports and cultural events cancelled, restaurants closed, etc.

So how is it that the green energy scam, propelled by the global warming/climate change scam, has been allowed to continue? Is it that 50,000 needless Excess Winter Deaths don’t count, but the risk of dying of coronavirus is serious? Maybe it‘s because everyone of a certain age is at risk from the coronavirus, but only the elderly-and-poor die from energy poverty – the inability to heat their homes due to excessively high energy costs caused by wind-and-solar-power scams.

Yes I’m grumpy, but with good reason. Deaths are deaths – it doesn’t matter if you are killed by the coronavirus or by the phony green actions of incompetent and corrupt politicians.

Reply to  ALLAN MACRAE
April 11, 2020 7:54 am

typo:
My point is that far greater (and much more avoidable) causes of death have been ignored for decades

Nick Hill
Reply to  ALLAN MACRAE
April 11, 2020 1:43 am

Superb post: faultless reasoning IMHO.
My only quibble is with what you said about fracking in the UK. Many communities in the North East of England have been fighting those who would frack their neighbourhood tooth and nail, for some time. I would trust the residents of an area to know what’s really going on, over the bullish, profit-motivated claims of corporate controlled scientists, every time.

Reply to  Nick Hill
April 11, 2020 7:47 am

Nick,
You are wrong. Anti-fracking groups are being organized and paid, probably by foreign parties who want to harm the UK economy and its people.

Vivian Krause discovered this scam in Canada, and the government of Alberta has tracked over $600 million of foreign money that has been paid to leftist groups and their hired demonstrators to sabotage our economy.

VIVIAN KRAUSE DOCUMENTARY, OVER A BARREL, RELEASED
https://www.alaskahighwaynews.ca/business/vivian-krause-documentary-over-a-barrel-released-1.23983003

The makers of the documentary Over a Barrel, about foreign funding of Canadian oil and gas opposition, have temporarily removed the cost to view after being “inundated by pleas for the film to be made freely available.”

The 32-minute film distills the findings of well-known researcher VIVIAN KRAUSE, WHO HAS TRACKED $600 MILLION FLOWING FROM U.S. GROUPS LIKE THE TIDES FOUNDATION AND THE ROCKEFELLER BROTHERS FUND TO SUPPORT PROGRAMS LIKE THE “TAR SANDS CAMPAIGN” TO LANDLOCK CANADIAN OIL.

March 3, 2018
HOW CANADA ENDED UP WITH JUSTIN TRUDEAU
https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2018/03/how_canada_ended_up_with_justin_trudeau.html
[excerpt]

In 2017, the National Post reported that TRUDEAU GOT ELECTED AFTER A MASSIVE INFLUX OF ILLEGAL FOREIGN FUNDS, MOSTLY FROM THE U.S.-BASED LEFT-WING TIDES FOUNDATION, writing:

Foreign money funnelled towards Canadian political advocacy groups affected the outcome of the 2015 federal election, according to a document filed last week with Elections Canada and obtained in part by the Calgary Herald.

The 36-page report entitled: Elections Canada Complaint Regarding Foreign Influence in the 2015 Canadian Election, alleges third parties worked with each other, which may have bypassed election spending limits – all of which appears to be in contravention of the Canada Elections Act.

The Canada Elections Act states that “a third party shall not circumvent, or attempt to circumvent, a limit set out … in any manner, including by splitting itself into two or more third parties for the purpose of circumventing the limit or acting in collusion with another third party so that their combined election advertising expenses exceed the limit.”

“Electoral outcomes were influenced,” alleges the report.

Well, they certainly were. And the scope of this has brought some bitter consequences to Canada. Trudeau, like the leftists in the U.S., has resisted all efforts at electoral reform, despite campaigning on that platform. Obviously, it’s a corrupt system that has been good for him. There isn’t much we Americans can do about it in Canada, but it highlights two points here: 1) that the Russians and their supposed meddling does not shine a candle to the other kinds of meddling that can be taking place and 2) that electoral reforms, to ensure the integrity of elections, make for one of the most important missions left to be finished by the Trump administration. Lefties, once in power, will never undertake this mission; the system as it is too good for them.

Canada’s disaster in its prime minister’s office shows just how bad it can be.

Read more: https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2018/03/how_canada_ended_up_with_justin_trudeau.html#ixzz6FEWxrWkt

April 10, 2020 10:18 am

COVID-19 is big, but not as big as the other 20 worldwide causes of death. Tally on the major causes of death. Of the more than 16 MILLION deaths to-date in 2020 from all causes, COVID-19 is about 100 thousand. For the world’s population approaching 8 billion, here’s the real time tally on the 20 major causes of the more than 16 MILLION deaths so far in 2020.
https://www.worldlifeexpectancy.com/live-world-death-totals

Monckton of Brenchley
Reply to  Ronald Stein
April 10, 2020 4:33 pm

It is astonishing how many commenters have made the same mistake as Mr Stein, comparing deaths to date with annual death rates for other diseases. Deaths are still rising very rapidly, so it is far too early to make such comparisons. That is why governments have had to take the uncomfortable and expensive precautions that many have taken.

Steven Mosher
April 10, 2020 10:24 am
William Astley
Reply to  Steven Mosher
April 10, 2020 11:57 am

Steve,

Covid-19 is different than Spanish flu. People died from Spanish flu due to loss of water and electrolytes.

Deaths from covid-19 are due to our immune system’s response to the evolved bat virus portion of the covid-19 which causes excess fluids in the lungs which causes the death of some of the lung and difficulty in breathing.

Covid-19 attacks the throat first with few symptoms and then uses the bat virus portion which has been evolved from bat to human which enables the virus to attack our lungs effectively starting with patient zero. This delayed attack on the lung enables the virus to spread very effectively.

We need to protect against covid-20/21/22A/22B

Covid-22A could cause paralysis. Covid-22B neurological damage in a specific region of the body.

This is a different kind of problem. This is not a fight. We need to work together to stop what is happening.

https://www.breitbart.com/news/40-of-people-with-severe-covid-19-experience-neurological-complications/

40% of people with severe COVID-19 experience neurological complications

http://darwins-god.blogspot.com/

tetris
Reply to  William Astley
April 10, 2020 1:00 pm

You’re omitting a clinical cause that’s showing up ever more often: a cytokine storm triggered by the patient’s immune system.
Once triggered, a cytokine storm is invariably terminal.

Scissor
Reply to  tetris
April 10, 2020 2:34 pm

Also, supposedly, there is a virus glycoprotein that is causing iron in hemoglobin to dissociate from the molecule.

gringojay
Reply to  tetris
April 10, 2020 3:16 pm

Hi tetris, – The Pluristem Co. placenta based treatment showing fantastic results in limited Israel cases of “compassionate use” has the FDA interested in works; it works on the cytokine problem.

The action is via “PLX … allogenic mesenchymal cells … w/ immuno-modulatory properties ….” This uses the own body’s immunological regulatory T2 & M2 macrophages to hold down the kind of immune reactions leading to pneumonia/pneumonitis.

Flavio Capelli
Reply to  tetris
April 11, 2020 12:12 am

There is not yet published research from Italy showing that actually the lethal mechanism of Wuhan coronavirus is blood clotting, known as CID, in multiple organs.

This explains lung damage and pretty much all other observed kind of damage. But this is also good news, because we know how to treat this. It seems treatment with cortisone and/or heparin and/or hydroxychloroquine is giving good results.

My statement is based on private conversations and you are entitled not to believe me without verification.

kwinterkorn
Reply to  Flavio Capelli
April 11, 2020 7:26 am

Flavio C
I have heard similar comments directly from a physician on the front lines in Brooklyn NY: autopsies are showing an unusual pattern of small clots throughout the body, but specifically not the pattern called DIC (disseminated intravascular coagulation) which is often seen in other conditions of generalized infection or sepsis and sometimes in malignancies. This is in addition to, or may be somehow interactively related to, the “cytokine storm” condition this virus triggers in severe cases.

This is very anecdotal information and should trigger questions, not beliefs. The response of our bodies to this virus appears to be unusually complicated and will require much research over time to sort. Just as with “climate change”, the scientific attitude must be grounded with skepticism.

Doctors on the front line, however, (and I am one), must make decisions right now for the patients in front of them. This gets into the whole issue of doing the best you can, guided by principle, with inadequate information.

Nicholas McGinley
Reply to  tetris
April 11, 2020 10:30 am

Not true that cytokine release syndrome, CRS, is NOT invariably fatal.
Many treatments have existed for many years.
IL-6 blockers are a type of monoclonal antibody that arrests CRS
Do some research before spreading FUD.
This is the internet…two minutes of self checking would have made you change your mind about posting that comment.
And me from having to dispute it.
One more time: Cytokine release syndrome, aka cytokine strom, is not irreversible and not invariably fatal.
It is not even always fatal without immunomodulating drugs.

Scissor
Reply to  William Astley
April 10, 2020 2:36 pm

Some believe that high doses of aspirin caused fluids to build up in the lungs in the case of Spanish flu.

Steven Mosher
Reply to  William Astley
April 10, 2020 6:41 pm

Not my point.

examine the arguments

“By mid-September, the Spanish flu was spreading like wildfire through army and naval installations in Philadelphia, but Wilmer Krusen, Philadelphia’s public health director, assured the public that the stricken soldiers were only suffering from the old-fashioned seasonal flu and it would be contained before infecting the civilian population.

When the first few civilian cases were reported on September 21, local physicians worried that this could be the start of an epidemic, but Krusen and his medical board said Philadelphians could lower their risk of catching the flu by staying warm, keeping their feet dry and their “bowels open,” writes John M. Barry in The Great Influenza: The Story of the Deadliest Pandemic in History.

As civilian infection rates climbed day by day, Krusen refused to cancel the upcoming Liberty Loan parade scheduled for September 28. Barry writes that infectious disease experts warned Krusen that the parade, which was expected to attract several hundred thousand Philadelphians, would be “a ready-made inflammable mass for a conflagration.”

Krusen insisted that the parade must go on, since it would raise millions of dollars in war bonds, and he played down the danger of spreading the disease. On September 28, a patriotic procession of soldiers, Boy Scouts, marching bands and local dignitaries stretched two miles through downtown Philadelphia with sidewalks packed with spectators.

Just 72 hours after the parade, all 31 of Philadelphia’s hospitals were full and 2,600 people were dead by the end of the week.”

get it?

notice the similar arguments

Robert B
Reply to  Steven Mosher
April 10, 2020 7:52 pm

And if they cancelled the parade? By the end of the winter, would there have been just as many fatalities?

While we would all like to get in as many days as we can before we die, it wasn’t as big a disaster as it looks by concentrating on that one week.

ChrisC
Reply to  William Astley
April 12, 2020 8:45 am

Wonder why you didn’t include this from your cited Breitbart article:

“However, the majority of those complications are are also relatively common in people with severe pneumonia and viral infections in hospital intensive care units,”

jorgekafkazar
Reply to  Steven Mosher
April 10, 2020 12:48 pm

Thanks, Steven.

Steven Mosher
Reply to  jorgekafkazar
April 10, 2020 6:44 pm

yes these guys refuse to study the actual numbers from historical cases showing when and how interventions work

Beeze
April 10, 2020 10:33 am

Sorry to say, but this is alarmism 101.

The excess mortality chart is deceptive. If you look at it over time you will see that the excess mortality is not higher than most flu seasons, and Italy and Spain are not worse than any place particularly hard hit by a bad flu in any given year.

As for the exponential rise in cases: That is to be expected when you have an exponential rise of testing in an already infected population.

These measures cannot control a spread that has already occurred.

https://www.euromomo.eu/index.html

Monckton of Brenchley
Reply to  Beeze
April 10, 2020 4:36 pm

In response to Beeze, during the benchmark period from 22 February to 14 March there was far too little testing to cause case counts to rise significantly. The growth was true exponential growth at a rate of close to 20% per day compound. That is why governments had to be cautious.

Now that lockdowns are working, and people are taking the disease more seriously even in countries without lockdowns, the rate of increase in new cases is slowing. But it is still dangerously high.

Beeze
Reply to  Monckton of Brenchley
April 10, 2020 6:18 pm

It’s not about the number of tests, it’s about the rate of increase in the number of tests performed.

The US started testing late, but once they did the amount of testing very rapidly increased exponentially.

That’s the *only* reason you saw an exponential increase in positive. Given the latency period, a very high proportion of the population had probably were probably already positive when the first test was done or had already cleared it from their system.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/03/17/us/coronavirus-testing-data.html

Glen Ferrier
Reply to  Monckton of Brenchley
April 10, 2020 9:20 pm

Lord Monckton of Brenchley: Thank you for all of your efforts, I am most impressed even though I fall into the Willis camp. I don’t have much to add to this discussion except to remind all posters that they should remain civil and that they should be careful to state caveats.

I will state the following in response to this statement… “Now that lockdowns are working”; be very careful to state your caveats, correlation is not causation! We do not know whether lockdowns are having any effect, it is simply an assertion made by many experts (Dr, Mann is an expert). Ouch. 🙂

It seems rather likely (no, I cannot support this) that the virus is very widespread amongst the worlds population, the growth in known cases tends to support this contention but it is weak. I beleive we are destroying trillions of dollars in wealth to prevent millions of dollars in lives lost. Would it not be more advisable to protect those at increased risk (maybe billions $) than to devistate entire populations through poor economic policies like lockdowns.

Cheers,

Speed

April 10, 2020 10:35 am

Christopher, are you deaf? As I wrote to a commenter on your last thread:

Spain – peaked on 29th March, now down to 75% of peak.
Italy – peaked on 23rd March, now 72% of peak.
Germany – peaked on 30th March, now 82% of peak.
Switzerland – peaked on 22nd March, now 67% of peak.
Austria – peaked on 25th March, now 40% of peak. They seem to be the country to follow.
Portugal – peaked on 31st March, now 88% of peak.
Norway – peaked on 26th March, now 56% of peak. Second best after the Austrians.

Joao Martins
Reply to  Neil Lock
April 10, 2020 11:18 am

Right!
You got the same dates that I did. I used the old simple logistic equation, which fits almos exactly to the data of all countries that I have examined (about two dozen).
With this simpme technique, the UK has already peaked on 5 or 6 April and is since in a kind of plateau. Minimal daily new cases (1 digit?) by 27 April.

Monckton of Brenchley
Reply to  Joao Martins
April 10, 2020 4:43 pm

It would be good news if Mr Martins’ forecast of single-digit new infections in the UK by as soon as the end of this month were to come to pass. But that is not a likely outcome, unfortunately. I should be happy to be shown to be wrong about that, though.

Reply to  Monckton of Brenchley
April 11, 2020 2:17 am

I too don’t think the UK will be anywhere near single-digit figures inside a month. The new cases are still going up – a new record yesterday. Even in Austria, cases seem to be declining at only about half the rate they went up, and everywhere else it is slower than that.

But the testing rate has finally started to ramp up. 316,836 tests done up to yesterday, as opposed to 282,074 up to 3 days ago. That is, 11% of all the tests reported in the UK so far have been reported in the last 2 days. Of those, 37% proved positive. That is a higher average than for the epidemic so far – the overall cases per test has gone up from 21% to 23%. I don’t know who is being tested with the highest priority, but I’d be testing first everyone who works in hospitals, followed by all doctors, care home workers and everyone else whose work brings them into regular contact with sick people. (That’s just what the Dutch are doing).

worldometers doesn’t seem to give you access to historical figures of number of tests, so I’m going to be looking to capture all the data each day, until I have enough (a week?) to start doing some more serious playing with these numbers.

JohnM
Reply to  Neil Lock
April 11, 2020 3:45 am

You cannot take daily figures literally…..look at the weekend UK figures….delays in reporting cases due to admin staff not being at work and frequently delays of several days in reporting….a lot of admin are working at home….and IT systems are coping badly.

Reply to  Neil Lock
April 11, 2020 5:55 am

It’s actually worse than that, JohnM. The French test numbers went up by 50 per cent over the same 2 days! Obviously, such a big batch being delayed will have a major effect on this ratio. I don’t trust the French data, anyway.

But on the assumption that delays in test reporting are days rather than weeks, it makes sense to collect the cumulative confirmed and tested numbers each day, and see how the ratio evolves. With just the two days I have (2 days apart), the ratios are going up in all but three of the countries I am looking at. That’s not very good. The ratios are only coming down in Italy, Austria and Norway. Time will tell.

Reply to  Neil Lock
April 10, 2020 11:18 am

Germany – peaked on 30th March, now 82% of peak.
Yes, but on April 2 they came near by again, as on April 1st too.

From peak date:

7.470
4.860
6.794
7.009
6.371
4.455
4.410
1.782
5.652
4.321
3.744
4.101

Monckton of Brenchley
Reply to  Krishna Gans
April 10, 2020 4:44 pm

Governments cannot yet assume that the pandemic has peaked. One would need at least a week or two of falling case numbers before that conclusion could safely be relied upon.

Reply to  Monckton of Brenchley
April 11, 2020 2:30 am

Yes, I would agree that falling numbers for at least two whole cycles of the virus (about 12 days) would be necessary before you can reasonably conclude the pandemic has peaked. That is true for Spain, Italy, Switzerland, Austria and Norway. Germany has eight days of decline so far. (I am using weekly averaged data). It’s not yet true for Belgium and Netherlands, which both recorded new highs today, or for Portugal which is close to the same.

Reply to  Monckton of Brenchley
April 11, 2020 6:37 am

Actually, there is another measure which might give us a handle on where the pandemic has really peaked and where it has not. I was looking into the ratio of total confirmed cases to total tests over the course of the epidemic. In most of the affected countries, including some (Germany, Spain, Switzerland) in which confirmed cases per day have started to go down, this ratio/percentage is still going up, and significantly. This seems counter-intuitive; I would have expected that, as you move testing emphasis away from people in hospital and out towards the general population, this proportion should go down. I’d guess this rise may be a result of targetting testing on people who work with sick people, starting with hospital workers and working out to GPs, care homes etc. They will be far more at risk than the general population, and will also be dangerous as spreaders. So to do that (as the Dutch are) is good strategy.

However, if cases have peaked AND the ratio of confirmed to tested is also going down, that would seem to mean the country has basically got the bug beaten, and lockdowns can be lifted. That seems to be happening now in Italy, Austria and Norway. Also in Iceland, which never had a lockdown at all (except in one small area).

Reply to  Monckton of Brenchley
April 11, 2020 7:52 am

My intend wasn’t to accept the peak on March 30.
We certainly will have a new peak after Easter weekend, as a lot of people are outside b’caue of weather and visits to shop centers for the weekend, as Monday is a holiday too here in Germany.

Kurt
Reply to  Neil Lock
April 10, 2020 11:21 am

Niel, are you Stupid? 🙂
The peak you are speaking of is in the number of new daily infections. They are still growing, just that the rate of growth is now slowing.
This is the point, the social distancing measures are working.

Greg
Reply to  Kurt
April 10, 2020 2:05 pm

What other peak are you looking for ? The peak in the cumulative sum happens on the day the person in the world is diagnosed with it. Not really first thing to worry about.

Instead of calling others stupid, think before posting.

Christopher, are you deaf?

None so deaf as those who will not listen.

Monckton is so sure of his own innate superiority he does not listen to what anyone tells him.

He posted that we need to wait until these growth rates to negative ! Since he is dealing with cumulative totals of declared cases that is mathematically impossible.

He wants to keep us under eternal house arrest : praying for the end of time !

richard
Reply to  Greg
April 10, 2020 3:09 pm

I have said before there is a circling of the wagons to justify the lockdown.

Mr Monckton has not been able to produce numbers for-

1 Average age of cases
2 How many were already ill when they died.
3. How many died “with” Corona and died “by” Corona.

Monckton of Brenchley
Reply to  richard
April 10, 2020 4:48 pm

The incompletely self-identified Richard should do his own homework if he wants to know the answers to his questions. I can help him out with no. 2, though. All were already ill when they died, or they would not have died.

Loydo
Reply to  richard
April 10, 2020 7:44 pm

“died “with” Corona and died “by” Corona.”

This is a bit of a myth. You can die of old age “with” a chronic disease like Prostate Cancer which can take decades to be terminal. Corona virus is ACUTE, 99/100 you don’t die with it you die of it.

Nicholas McGinley
Reply to  richard
April 10, 2020 11:11 pm

Richard,
Is someone with mild to hypertension who takes an small dose of an ACE inhibitor considered ill?
How about being a few pounds, or even ten or more pounds, overweight, which is generally anyone who is not skinny AFAICT…is that an “illness”?
Few would say so.
People with these conditions include world class athletes and long distance runners and swimmers.
Calling them comorbidities may be medically defensible, but these are not people who are at much risk of dying if they get seasonal influenza or such.

Monckton of Brenchley
Reply to  Greg
April 10, 2020 4:54 pm

Moderators, I am beginning to wonder whether the furtively anonymous Greg should be allowed any further to publish gratuitous insults. Some years ago I invited Anthony to change site policy to allow such postings to be deleted, but recently there has been a resurgence in hate-speech by commenters cowering behind incomplete self-identification. In my submission, the above post from Greg should be deleted.

Steven Mosher
Reply to  Monckton of Brenchley
April 10, 2020 6:42 pm

it’s a mosh pit, hit or be hit

Greg Goodman
Reply to  Monckton of Brenchley
April 11, 2020 2:34 am

I have frequently posted as Greg Goodman and that did not get any more consideration from CofB. That is a meaningless distraction.

Now we see his true colours even more clearly displayed. Rather than addressing any of the criticisms of his flawed analysis and spurious claims , like any honest person would, he now calls for censorship of those able to point out his blunders.

It is amazing how the authoritarian viscount resembles more and more those in the climate debate who are so convinced of their own position they call for the silencing of others.

Nick Hill
Reply to  Greg Goodman
April 11, 2020 2:38 am

Haha! Yes, he seems to have shot himself in both feet simultaneously, with just one gun.
Now, that is what I call a magic bullet!

Greg Goodman
Reply to  Monckton of Brenchley
April 11, 2020 2:55 am

Oddly CofB seems more concerned of whether I include by surname when posting than in addressing any of the technical issues I have been raising for the last week.

Many there should be a site policy that they will not post any articles from people who are not prepared to enter into honest discussion of any issues raised with the content of their work.

So far Monckton has been given free reign to repeatedly contribute lengthy articles, the subject of which has great social importance, while continuously refusing to address any critique of his faulty methods.

That must stop.

sycomputing
Reply to  Greg
April 10, 2020 10:35 pm

Hi Loydo:

Well today’s the day according to the calendar:

This is NY in two weeks, LA in 3.

Thus saith Loydo here: https://wattsupwiththat.com/2020/03/27/friday-funny-or-not-so-funny/#comment-2948944

Just interested in what your thoughts are now, since, well, THAT prediction flew the coop . . .

Loydo
Reply to  sycomputing
April 11, 2020 1:22 am

What? NY was worse than Madrid and LA while not as bad is yet to peak and the US deaths have surged past every other country.

My thoughts are the same: Trump is responsible for a month delay in taking the virus seriously = thousands of dead.

He’s tried blaming everyone else, its a matter of time for even Fauci to be in the cross-hairs. Its also a matter of time before Trump begins calling the US death toll fake news: rewriting history will be his only defense.

sycomputing
Reply to  sycomputing
April 11, 2020 5:26 am

My thoughts are the same:

But that doesn’t make any sense, Lloydo. It’s been two weeks. No one is being denied a respirator in NY. They certainly aren’t going to be denied a respirator in LA by the end of next week. Doctors aren’t being forced to choose between life or death for COVID patients due to lack of anything, anywhere, in any hospital, in either city. At least as far as I can tell.

That IS what you were predicting with your linked video, no?

What happened?

Reply to  sycomputing
April 11, 2020 8:04 am

@Loydo
It may help to read some facts about “by / with Corona”
You may also know about RKI downplaying Corona for a long time, even as Trump closed airports for Eurpeans, as “we” were still laughing or lamenting about.

sycomputing
Reply to  sycomputing
April 12, 2020 9:00 am

Hi Loydo:

That IS what you were predicting with your linked video, no?

Ok well I guess THAT query doesn’t deserve an answer. Let’s move on these new predictions:

He’s tried blaming everyone else, its a matter of time for even Fauci to be in the cross-hairs. Its also a matter of time before Trump begins calling the US death toll fake news: rewriting history will be his only defense.

So what do you think, another 2 or 3 weeks maybe? Let me know what say you so I can calendar a date for these new prophecies. You know what they say, “You’ll know a prophet of YHWH by how true are his predictions.”

Monckton of Brenchley
Reply to  Kurt
April 10, 2020 4:45 pm

Kurt is correct: social-distancing measures work, for well-understood reasons of elementary epidemiology.

Hivemind
Reply to  Monckton of Brenchley
April 10, 2020 8:48 pm

And they work better if your real goal is to destroy your economy.

Reply to  Neil Lock
April 10, 2020 11:25 am

The last number is wrong, it’s from todaay still not complete.

Reply to  Krishna Gans
April 10, 2020 1:59 pm

Actualaised it’s now 5.522 early evening

Reply to  Neil Lock
April 10, 2020 11:54 am

Certainly after the easter week-end with nice, sunny and warm weather we will see growing number of cases, that what officiels fear.

Scissor
Reply to  Krishna Gans
April 10, 2020 3:01 pm

We’re going to have record cold and snow on Easter in Colorado. Still, officials will fear growing number of cases.

Reply to  Scissor
April 11, 2020 7:53 am

That will start here on Monday…

Steven Swinden
Reply to  Neil Lock
April 10, 2020 11:56 am

Please. What peaked? if you are referring to confirmed cases, then none of those countries know how many cases there have been.
And if Austria is the country to follow, then don’t live in a city of more than 5 million.
Simplistic views don’t cut it.

Monckton of Brenchley
Reply to  Steven Swinden
April 10, 2020 4:51 pm

Mr Swinden is correct: it is far too early to imagine that the infection has peaked. There have been repeated attempts by various posters and commenters here to claim that a peak has been reached, only for the number of confirmed cases and the number of deaths to continue to rise inexorably.

Naive optimism is inappropriate when dealing with a pandemic of this kind. That is why responsible governments have had to take precautions.

Reply to  Steven Swinden
April 11, 2020 4:02 am

I am indeed referring to confirmed cases. They may be poor quality data, I grant you. But until we have a handle on how many people have had the disease but not been tested for it (e.g. because they had no symptoms, or because they had it mildly but before the virus was known to be in their country), we have no better figures.

If you were in charge with deciding when to lift the various lockdowns in a country, what figures would you use? Or would you keep the lockdowns, and all the economic damage they are causing, in place until you are certain of the figures you are working with?

suffolkboy
Reply to  Neil Lock
April 10, 2020 1:05 pm

He seems to have ignored or was sincerely oblivious to the way the daily data peaked (or more accurately, the best-fit curves through the data peaked) in the last week of March. He then presented linear (instead of logarithmic) vertical axis curves of exponentials, which made it difficult to visualise changes in rate. It’s like drawing one’s savings account if the interest rates were 3% PER DAY but falling. He then may have erred by arguing that an interest rate which is positive but declining must nevertheless lead to arbitrarily high accumulated savings. I suspect a real mathematician (rather than myself) could sort this mess out in a few days. Not up to his usual standard. D-.

james fosser
Reply to  Neil Lock
April 10, 2020 2:08 pm

COVID-19 cases in the world are following a sigmoid curve (an S curve). The start of the disease follows an exponential part of the curve followed by a linear climb then the curve at the top of the S that flattens out.

Monckton of Brenchley
Reply to  james fosser
April 10, 2020 4:59 pm

In response to Mr Fosser, the epidemic curve does not decay appreciably from the exponential curve until a sufficient fraction of the susceptibles have been infected. However, even if one assumes that confirmed cases undercount true infections by two orders of magnitude, 98% of the global population remains unifected and thus susceptible.

Accordingly, it is not particularly likely that the decay away from exponential growth that has become apparent is attributable to significant diminution of the available susceptibles.

Greg
Reply to  james fosser
April 11, 2020 1:21 am

Which is why it is pointless to look at cumulative totals if you are trying to spot critical change, you have no detail on the S-curve. You need to be looking at the logistic distribution ( cases / day ) not the logistic function.

On the pure logistic S-curve you are looking for the point of inflection on what is basically a straight line. Hardly the most sensitive of accurate way to approach it.

Just one reason why Monckton’s graphs are nonsense, apart form the fact he does not even understand what he is looking at and drawing false conclusions ( or willfully deceiving because he thinks he is a superiour being, knows what needs to be done and it’s his job persuade the lower classes to obey orders ).

Monckton of Brenchley
Reply to  Neil Lock
April 10, 2020 4:40 pm

Mr Lock is entitled to make his own calculations, on whatever basis he likes. Responsible governments, however, will concentrate on the daily compound growth rate in cumulative total confirmed cases, for that is the best guide to the course of the infection over the coming weeks.

As the case growth rates continue to fall, as a result of lockdowns in those countries that have them and greater care on the part of the populations of those who do not, it will become possible for governments to allow life to return step by step to normality.

A C Osborn
Reply to  Neil Lock
April 11, 2020 12:03 pm

Neil, Norway Total Population is half that of New York at 5.8M, but only 15 people per Square Km.
Austria Total Population is almost that of New York at 8.8M, but only 104 people per Square Km.
For comparison New York have 10,947 people per Square Km.
With those sorts of numbers in those 2 countries it is far easier to get it under control.
New Zealand with only 18 people per Square Km have done even better.

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/new-zealand/

Simon Anthony
April 10, 2020 10:43 am

Population density of Stockholm: 4,800 per sq km

Population density of Greater London: 4,542 per sq km

Care to think again?

Reply to  Simon Anthony
April 10, 2020 2:59 pm

Population density of inner London us about four times that…do your research!
e.g. Islington: 16,000 per sq km
London has a tube system
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_English_districts_by_population_density is very instructive: deaths seem to be exactly where density is highest

Clyde Spencer
Reply to  Leo Smith
April 10, 2020 4:32 pm

I suspect that mass transit plays a key role in spreading the virus in high-density cities. If the people are working or shopping, you can’t socially distance effectively with a finite number of trains/trams because people won’t be able to get home if they don’t cram into the conveyances. There might not be an alternative to lockdowns in cities dependent on mass transit. On the other hand, many, if not most areas in the US, people travel alone in their cars and are not at risk of being infected until they get to where they are going. Once there, they can keep their distance and wear masks.

Frederick Michael
Reply to  Clyde Spencer
April 10, 2020 11:15 pm

Elevators too.

Simon Anthony
Reply to  Leo Smith
April 11, 2020 2:16 am

Population density of Stockholm areas

e.g. Sodra Station: 26,900 per sq km,
Roslagstull: 30,100 per sq km etc.

Stockholm also has an underground system.

What was that about doing your research?

JohnM
Reply to  Leo Smith
April 11, 2020 3:54 am

Covid cases UK 10-April-2020

Birmingham: 1,604

Hampshire: 1,416

Kent: 1,252

Surrey: 1,238

Essex: 1,232

Lancashire: 1,226

Hertfordshire: 1,179

Sheffield: 1,095

Cumbria: 1,023

Brent: 912

Croydon: 853

Barnet: 837

Southwark: 826

Lambeth: 794

Staffordshire: 760

Liverpool: 702

Newham: 684

Birmingham: 1,604

Hampshire: 1,416

Kent: 1,252

Surrey: 1,238

Essex: 1,232

Lancashire: 1,226

Hertfordshire: 1,179

Sheffield: 1,095

Cumbria: 1,023

Brent: 912

Croydon: 853

Barnet: 837

Southwark: 826

Lambeth: 794

Staffordshire: 760

Liverpool: 702

Newham: 684

Bromley: 658

Oxfordshire: 653

Wandsworth: 650

Lewisham: 644

Northamptonshire: 626

Ealing: 624

Derbyshire: 603

Harrow: 574

Nottinghamshire: 566

Warwickshire: 513

Manchester: 512

Worcestershire: 508

Leeds: 504

Gloucestershire: 496

Newcastle upon Tyne: 493

Norfolk: 486

County Durham: 482

Hackney and City of London: 470

Walsall: 461

Leicestershire: 449

Sandwell: 448

Tower Hamlets: 448

Westminster: 444

Merton: 440

Redbridge: 436

Enfield: 434

Hillingdon: 434

Greenwich: 432

Hounslow: 416

Lincolnshire: 392

Buckinghamshire: 391

North Yorkshire: 390

Wolverhampton: 388

beng135
April 10, 2020 10:44 am

Now I understand why the neo-marxists want to pack people into flimsily-built, tightly-packed high-rise apartments.

jorgekafkazar
Reply to  beng135
April 10, 2020 12:37 pm

Oh, it’s “sustainable.” It will end any housing shortage, given enough time and epidemics. Makes it easy to find dissenters. With the new “Insta-Gulag™” portable concrete-and-barbed-wire barriers, any ghetto can be turned into a concentration camp in a day. The benefits go on and on. Hooray for globalism! Viva Calizuela!

/s

Zig Zag Wanderer
Reply to  beng135
April 10, 2020 12:49 pm

Just add some nice flammable insulating cladding, to reduce power usage because unreliables, dontcha know, and you can easily achieve your goals…

Matthew Schilling
April 10, 2020 10:44 am

It seems to me that, though the US is testing more and more, with well over 100,000 tests done per day, our death rate keeps creeping upward. As of this moment, it sits at 3.67%. This virus is a stone cold killer.

Derg
Reply to  Matthew Schilling
April 10, 2020 12:14 pm

Mathew are they dying from COVID or with COVID?

Reply to  Derg
April 10, 2020 2:34 pm

You know Derg, I wonder about that distinction. Let’s say you have a perfectly healthy individual, then you have a cancer victim who just had chemo, and finally you have a COPD patient–all three cross the street. The healthy individual is hit by a car because he didn’t notice the car turning the corner. The cancer victim was weak and the chemo made it worse and he was hit because he didn’t scramble out of the way–but he would have died anyway in a week from cancer. Our CPOD person just didn’t have the energy to jump back. All three die. It is reported that they all died being hit by a car. No one says, the cancer guy would have died anyway so he did not die “from” the car hitting him but “with” the car hitting. Or the CPOD–they died “with” the car, not “from” the car.

Does it make sense that if Covid is the deciding factor that we would deny that it killed them? Just because they would have died anyway shortly?

Derg
Reply to  Shelly
April 10, 2020 3:57 pm

In your car accident scenario if all of them had Covid then did they die with Covid or from Covid?

Monckton of Brenchley
Reply to  Derg
April 10, 2020 5:03 pm

Derg should not be silly. The car accident was the cause of death. Likewise, whether or not someone has a pre-existing comorbidity, if that person would be likely to have lived were it not for the Chinese-virus infection then it was the Chinese virus that killed him.

Loydo
Reply to  Derg
April 10, 2020 7:49 pm

Corona virus is an ACUTE illness – you die of it not with it.

whiten
Reply to  Derg
April 11, 2020 6:44 am

Loydo
April 10, 2020 at 7:49 pm

Corona virus is an ACUTE illness – you die of it not with it.
———————————–

Very true Loydo,
but can you do a favor and ask the silly brigade camaraderie there that they put in death certificates only ones that died due to the diagnosed confirmed “ACUTE illness”, please.
If that not much to ask.

Very helpful, to you and the camaraderie, to keep it simple, before you all lose it.

cheers

Derg
Reply to  Derg
April 11, 2020 6:47 am

Monckton of Brenchley and that is the crux of the issue…the likeliness to live and for how long.

beng135
Reply to  Derg
April 11, 2020 7:45 am

Loy-dud, as Reagan would say, there you go again. Even your own propagandist media has admitted that many who get it are asymptomatic or barely symptomatic.

Scissor
Reply to  Matthew Schilling
April 10, 2020 2:56 pm

Most people don’t get that sick and don’t get tested. The rate of growth of cases is slowing relative to the rate of growth of deaths. This also makes the death rate appear larger than it is in actuality.

Earl Rodd
April 10, 2020 10:54 am

In the excess death charts, is the data based upon looking only at total deaths ignoring cause and comparing to the statistically expected number deaths for the date, or by counting deaths attributed to COVID-19 and how much that adds to the base death rate?

Earl Rodd
April 10, 2020 10:56 am

In the excess death rate chart, is the data compiled by measuring actual death numbers regardless of cause and comparing it to the statistically expected death numbers for the date or by taking deaths attributed to COVID-19 and seeing how much that is compared to the expected background death rate?

Monckton of Brenchley
Reply to  Earl Rodd
April 10, 2020 5:05 pm

Mr Rodd will find the answers to his questions at the European mortality monitoring website. Just google Euromomo.

Alan Tomalty
April 10, 2020 10:58 am

https://ca.news.yahoo.com/coronavirus-simulation-particles-spread-supermarket-101442223.html

Shocking simulation shows how one cough can spread coronavirus through supermarkets. This proves that shutdowns don’t work unless you are willing to close grocery and food stores and thus starve your people to death.

Izaak Walton
Reply to  Alan Tomalty
April 10, 2020 11:22 am

Alan,
shutdowns do work. Look at Australia and New Zealand. Both are liberal western
democracies where the population normally have a healthy disdain of authority
but have decided to stay at home and not let the infection spread.

Simon
Reply to  Izaak Walton
April 10, 2020 12:33 pm

The leader of NZ Jacinda Ardern’s response and handling of this epidemic could not be more different than Trumps. She has been honest with the people from day one. When she addresses the nation, she doesn’t grand stand and ask for appreciation, she doesn’t fight with the media, or use the events as a chance to tell the nation how wonderful she is. She doesn’t blame the Chinese or the WHO. She doesn’t sugar coat the issue or downplay what is ahead. And has taken advice from those who know and understand the complexity of epidemics from day one .

Trump on the other hand has done pretty much what you would expect him to do….. Look after Trump and blame everyone he possibly can, for his mistakes. In a tweet in 2013 he wrote “Leadership: Whatever happens, you’re responsible. If it doesn’t happen, you’re responsible….” it is a pity he hasn’t taken his own advice on this issue….

Russ R.
Reply to  Simon
April 10, 2020 1:45 pm

Well good for you. Sounds like you got a real high quality politician that really knows how to spread the manure. If she was a dog she would be a Bichon Frise.
Too bad they don’t keep the scum bags from stealing your stuff.
We got tired of that and got a Pit Bull. Not very politically astute, or friendly with the scum bags, but the thievery is way down.

Joel Snider
Reply to  Russ R.
April 10, 2020 2:41 pm

All for pigs like Simon, who ROLL in that manure.

Joel Snider
Reply to  Simon
April 10, 2020 2:40 pm

Simon – with his daily slime. No. Simon – that’s what you and your ilk are doing.

He’s actually being very responsible in his leadership, as opposed to you progressive lowlifes, who unerringly exploit everything for your own ends.

THAT’s the pity – and it’s disgusting.

Period.

Simon
Reply to  Joel Snider
April 10, 2020 3:53 pm

So three comments attacking me personally, not one actually saying what I said was untrue. Hmmm…. It seems the “Bichon Frise” is out doing the “pit bull” when it comes to managing this serious issue. Trump still to learn that sometimes you don’t need a blowtorch to kill a fly.

Russ R.
Reply to  Joel Snider
April 10, 2020 5:48 pm

Simon you are equating NZ and USA. The GDP of NZ is $206 B.
That would fall between Oregon and South Carolina, in our state rankings.
Which means it would be 26th state by rank pushing SC to 27.
Which is a whopping 1.2% of the countries GDP!!
And it is an island, or two, or more…who even knows?

You are comparing a Bishon Frise (avg 9 pounds) to the largest grizzly bear ever recorded: 750 lbs = 1.2%
Yeah…Bishon Frise vs Grizzly Bear that has bowel movements that big…Not really the same thing.

Simon
Reply to  Joel Snider
April 10, 2020 6:20 pm

“Simon you are equating NZ and USA”
No I am comparing the competence and qualities of the leaders of the two countries in a crisis….

Russ R.
Reply to  Joel Snider
April 10, 2020 7:40 pm

And I am saying Trump is the Grizzly Bear, and you and your Bishon Frise is the bowel movement after a good day at the fishing stream.
No one cares if you got a woody for a middle aged bureaucrat.
We got who we want in office, and if you don’t like it, that is more confirmation that we made the right choice.

Latitude
Reply to  Simon
April 10, 2020 6:39 pm

The news media reporting her responses couldn’t be any different either…

..they are not playing a constant “gotcha” game with her…twisting and editing what she says to make what they report as fake news…..

Think of it this way Simon…if Hillary had won….you could be blaming her for exactly the same things right now

peyelut
Reply to  Simon
April 10, 2020 8:53 pm

Methinks Jacinda Ardern has not been hunted like an animal since prior to her election by an unhinged and maniacally partisan “Progressive” propaganda combine.

YallaYPoora Kid
Reply to  Simon
April 10, 2020 11:04 pm

NZ also does not have a political construction as the USA. Ms Ardern has no ‘Governators’ to contend with who refuse and defuse national aims and actions.

Russ R.
Reply to  Alan Tomalty
April 10, 2020 11:31 am

You can chose to starve. I think the better solution is to ask people in public to wear a mask, and check temperatures before entry to public spaces. If we have sick people who are alone, food can be delivered to them.

Heckler in back row, Globe Theatre
Reply to  Alan Tomalty
April 10, 2020 11:31 am

Gee, I wonder what the viral droplet simulation would show if the miscreant was wearing:
A crude mask
A moderately good mask
A top flight mask

Probably not so hysterically scary. Notice no masks mentioned. Funny how you are asked to cover coughs and sneezes but masks of any type are useless. SCIENCE has spoken.

John Finn
Reply to  Alan Tomalty
April 10, 2020 11:36 am

We can’t stop transmission entirely . The lockdowns are about reducing contact to an absolute minimum. This will slow the rate of infection considerably.

Derg
Reply to  John Finn
April 10, 2020 12:15 pm

John what is the acceptable rate of infection?

John Finn
Reply to  Derg
April 10, 2020 1:31 pm

South Korea still has new infections. Until a vaccine (or cure/therapy) is found than that will probably continue. The virus might spontaneously die out but I wouldn’t bet on it.

The rate of infection needs to at least be low enough to ensure that the health care system is not overwhelmed. It’s up to individual countries what they consider to be acceptable after that.

Derg
Reply to  John Finn
April 10, 2020 3:40 pm

Have you heard of an acceptable rate?

Clyde Spencer
Reply to  John Finn
April 10, 2020 4:24 pm

This news is definitely a fly in the Korean ointment:

https://www.yahoo.com/news/south-korea-reports-recovered-coronavirus-151951968.html

Steve Richards
Reply to  Derg
April 11, 2020 1:56 am

A rate that allows your health system to cope.
A rate that gives you time to test various treatments
A rate that increases the chance that a vaccine is delivered before everyone is infected with this virus.

The vast majority of people will be infected eventually.

rbabcock
Reply to  Alan Tomalty
April 10, 2020 11:54 am

How many virions are released in a cough or sneeze and how many do you have to inhale to develop the disease. Kind of makes a difference on just how bad it is.

Scissor
Reply to  Alan Tomalty
April 10, 2020 3:06 pm

Why would naked people shop, especially without carts? Where do they keep their money or credit cards?

Monckton of Brenchley
Reply to  Alan Tomalty
April 10, 2020 5:07 pm

Mr Tomalty appears not to understand how it is that lockdowns inhibit the transmission of infections. They do not prevent all transmission: they prevent most transmission.

To avoid infecting people when going shopping, wear a mask and gloves.

Eliza
April 10, 2020 11:02 am

My lord This is the incidence of this flu to date remember its now nearing 5 months = 2.285714285714286e-4 calculated from 1,6 millions cases NOT DEATHS / 7billion worlds population. The number is so small I can’t see the decimal point behind the zeros!. Now 90000 deaths worlwide OVER 5 MONTHS??? lets divide 90000/7billion = 1.285714285714286e-5= mortality rate. So again 170000 mostly old people with diseases die worldwide EVERY DAY! Again as Einstein stated human stupidity is infinite. I’d bet that already the lockdowns per se se are causing more deaths from suicide and hunger in poor countries than the virus which is the cold flu because there are zillch nada cases in the Southern hemisphere or warm tropical subtropical countries. This will go down as the biggest con job by WHO ect in the history of the world fanned by the Internet. So 90000 have died worlwide for the last 5 months (150 days) so 90000/150days = 600 deaths per worlwide . If this had occurred without an internet it would not even be on the last Page of the Guardian or Daily Mail. Everybody will get this virus like they do every year and mortality rates will be exactly the same wait for next winter, except that the lockdows will probably kill millions more. I rest my case. cheers and enjoy life!

Josie
Reply to  Eliza
April 10, 2020 12:56 pm

Haha thx. Ppl. and flu seems to be a terrible combi. They should stay under the blanket and just sweat it out. This site is getting boring btw. A bit more of this and I’ll start to believe in AGW. ttfn

Reply to  Eliza
April 10, 2020 2:42 pm

Eliza–please. Stop the hysterics–no one is dying of hunger that wouldn’t already be or, in the case of China, being welded into their apartments. The death rate is going up and maybe you consider that small, but many don’t, that doesn’t make them stupid. I am as concerned about the crush on the health care system as anything–if I have a heart attack, I want to be able to get help here–not sit and die of a heart attack because people were too selfish to take it seriously and wear masks and stand 6 feet apart and low the progression–

FranBC
Reply to  Eliza
April 10, 2020 4:50 pm

The numbers here in BC Canada do not seem to add up. According to StatsCan, the mortality rate for 2018 for those 65+ is 83/day for a total population of just over 5 M, presumably more in winter and less in summer. Yesterday a solemn health minister announced 2 more deaths, bringing the total to 50 in the 4th week of the ‘lockdown’ . Quebec, much worse hit had 41, for a total of 216 deaths in a population of 8.5M. In the over 65 group, 155/day occurred in 2018.

Assuming similar mortality statistics for New York State, an average of 330-odd deaths per day would be expected. Their death rate does seem to be elevated. The high number of ‘CoV’ deaths in New York state seem to result in a large number of ‘unclaimed’ bodies. In regular times they bury them in a mass grave once a week and are now up to 5 days a week. This suggests that many of the victims are in marginal and floating populations.

Until the data for this epidemic are integrated into overall mortality statistics, we have no way of knowing how bad things really are in NY or here. The clinical picture for the worst affected seems to frighten medical staff in a way that a person dying from a heart attack does not. What we can be sure of is that the economic and social ramifications of the lockdown are going to be pretty horrendous.

Monckton of Brenchley
Reply to  Eliza
April 10, 2020 5:13 pm

Eliza appears not to understand that this pandemic has not yet peaked; that, therefore, making comparisons with annual totals for other infections is inappropriate and futile; that the UK’s monitoring of intensive-care cases shows that this disease is much more serious than flu; and that all those who have tried to say that the pandemic has peaked have been proven wrong time and again as numbers infected and numbers dying continue to rise inexorably.

Though the case counts in the countries tracked in the graphs are beginning to show a more modest daily compound growth rate, in most countries the infection has not really begun to grow yet.

Responsible governments would not dream of making such comparisons between the Chinese virus and existing diseases this early in the pandemic.

Greg Goodman
Reply to  Monckton of Brenchley
April 11, 2020 3:19 am

Eliza appears not to understand that this pandemic has not yet peaked;

China yes, Korea yes , most EU countries yes; UK US not yet peaked.

There are (now largely separated) populations at different stages of the epidemic. Confounding them into one group blurs any understanding of evolution and detection of the effect of controlling factors.

nobodysknowledge
April 10, 2020 11:02 am

Excess deaths in Italy. From a study of The Italian Institute of Statistics (ISTAT).
“It is quite shocking to notice that most of the town’s colours tend toward a very high increase of deaths in 2020 compared to 2019 with peaks of over 1000%.”

Tim Bidie
April 10, 2020 11:05 am

1. No-one has any idea how many people worldwide have been infected.

2. Numbers of lives adversely affected, even lost (modelled possibly as high as 150,000 in the United Kingdom), as a consequence of lockdowns features nowhere in this analysis.

3. The absence of any lockdown in Sweden, with very little difference in outcome to Denmark, its most similar neighbour, is a constant reproof to lockdown proponents.

4. Healthcare has to be paid for, contingency plans resourced; impossible without a functioning economy

5. Given that rhinoviruses, of which there are over 160 which infect humans, have similar effects to coronaviruses on elderly and vulnerable people, this kind of panic could very well occur every year, certainly every other year.

Lockdowns of this scale may very well be part of the problem, certainly not the solution.

John Tillman
Reply to  Tim Bidie
April 10, 2020 12:33 pm

Sweden presently has suffered 86 deaths per million vs. 43 in Denmark. Are twice as many fatalities per million a significant difference? US figure is 54 at the moment.

Scissor
Reply to  John Tillman
April 10, 2020 3:12 pm

We’ll have to wait until all is said and done. Sweden could be close to herd immunity and the cases and deaths could decline quickly.

John Tillman
Reply to  Scissor
April 10, 2020 4:04 pm

True.

Especially if, as the German random sample and other instances have found, infection rate is 15%.

Monckton of Brenchley
Reply to  John Tillman
April 10, 2020 5:19 pm

My own estimate, based on casting back deaths by three weeks, is that in the U.S. some 45 million, or about 15% of the population, are infected. But we do not yet know how many of those currently infected will die. So it would not be wise to assume that the case fatality rate is small enough not to worry about.

More information is needed before responsible governments can assume that this infection is insignificant.

Monckton of Brenchley
Reply to  Tim Bidie
April 10, 2020 5:16 pm

Mr Bidie has not, it seems, ever had to take life-or-death decisions in government. if he had, he would be far less cavalier about allowing the uncontrolled transmission of a new pathogen of unknown characteristics.

Steven Mosher
Reply to  Monckton of Brenchley
April 10, 2020 6:53 pm

yes. it is a trolly problem

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trolley_problem

with this complication.

we dont know how many people are on each track

on one track are people whoo will die from the disease
on the other are people who will be ruined economically by the cure.

A moral dilemma with incomplete information.

A challenge to non authoritarian forms of governance

Tim Bidie
Reply to  Monckton of Brenchley
April 10, 2020 11:46 pm

Patronising comments rarely indicate strength of argument.

The story of post war government in the United Kingdom is not a happy one.

The likely effects of this coronavirus infection have been known about for some time, similar as they are to those of rhinovirus/coronavirus infections routinely taking place every winter in Britain.

The aged and vulnerable need protecting from these infections every winter. This contingency and, indeed, other epidemics have been planned for many times but never properly resourced. We now see the results of this incompetence: panic.

That is an indictment of all governments of whatever political hue in the United Kingdom in the post war era.

If the cap fits…….

Russ R.
Reply to  Tim Bidie
April 12, 2020 10:28 am

Governments are simply not able to prepare for all possible bad events. They have to weigh the probability versus severity of all possible bad occurrences, and this is one that is rare.
Most societies have found that relying on government solutions for public problems is a bad strategy. They have advantages in the short term that are less over the long term than their inherent disadvantages. Some problems morph into worse problems if you wait too long for adequate solutions.
Indicting everyone equally is what the guilty party wants. It lessens their culpability. In any crime their are active participants, passive participants, and non participants. Only a fool would say they are all equally “indicted”.
China has a responsibility for this that will not fade. I would distance myself from the stench of their behavior. No amount of propaganda can obfuscate the smell of death from their actions.

Mark Negovan
April 10, 2020 11:07 am

I believe that there is an error here. The compound daily growth rate in new cases is trending downward, around 5% based upon the slope of the spaghetti chart. The 6.5 Million and 50 Million new cases that have been extrapolated ( Modeled ) do not take this downward trend into account. Assuming it is a 5% reduction per day in the day to day percentage, for example 7.2% becomes 6.84% on the second day and so on, then the total number of new cases in 3 weeks is only 3.75 Million and the end of May it is only 5.5 Million.

So sometime in the very near future, before May, the number in hospital should diminish. But I haven’t tried to model it.

It seems that Christopher has taken the 7.2 % as the daily percentage of new cases and used that for the whole period. ((1+.072)^21)*1.5M and ((1+.072)^40)*1.5M

SAMURAI
April 10, 2020 11:07 am

Germany just released a COVID19 antibody test on 1,000 randomly selected people and found 15% had already been infected with COVID19 and ALMOST ALL were asymptomatic….

If those test results hold true for the US, as many as 50,000,000 Americans could have already been infected with COVID19, so with just 15,000 deaths to date, the COVID19 death rate could be as low as 0.03%, which is 3.3 times LESS deadly than the regular flu.

WHO and CDC Initially predicted the COVID19 death rate could be as as high as 3%, which could be 100 TIMES more lethal than what this German antibody study shows.

Yes, each country must urgently run more extensive antibody tests, but it now seems likely we utterly destroyed our economy for absolutely no reason whatsoever…

https://spectator.us/covid-antibody-test-german-town-shows-15-percent-infection-rate/

Russ R.
Reply to  SAMURAI
April 10, 2020 12:18 pm

The flu is manageable because the deaths happen over the course of a season, roughly six months. And you are comparing at stat of infections, which is caused by infections roughly 3 weeks ago, which is how long this disease takes to cause death.
So your numbers are way off. Not because you did them wrong, but in a rapidly moving infection numbers need to be synced up, to have meaning. Or just wait until the end and tally the results.
It is good to be skeptical of governments grabbing liberties from the public. In this case it was done reluctantly, not enthusiastically ( with the exception of a few states – you know who I mean JB ! ).

Russ R.
Reply to  Russ R.
April 10, 2020 3:39 pm

Botched up my post 🙁 I meant ” And you are comparing the number of deaths based on the number of infections”.
The ratio of deaths per number of infections, needs to synchronized to the number of infections when the people dying today got infected.
If we compare today’s deaths, to infections, it needs to be the number of infections 2 to 3 weeks ago, roughly when the people dying today were infected.
This is why you see the current death rate somewhat independent of the current infection rate for several weeks.

Dodgy Geezer
Reply to  SAMURAI
April 10, 2020 12:28 pm

“……but it now seems likely we utterly destroyed our economy for absolutely no reason whatsoever……….”

That would be no reason for recrimination. People MUST take decisions depending on the best information they can acquire at the time. If later this found to be incorrect, then that is a shame – but it is how life is.

In hindsight no mistakes would ever be made, and we would all be multi-billionaires. But if there is a credible threat of death, with inadequate data it would always be sensible to err on the side of caution.

SAMURAI
Reply to  Dodgy Geezer
April 10, 2020 1:23 pm

Dodgy-san: Fauci said he only wanted to concentrate COVID19 testing on the sick, however these antibody test kits were available around 1 month ago..

There is finally an antibody test being done by Stanford University, and I think the results will be available next week.

Had we known COVID19’s death rate could be even less than the regular flu, there is no way Trump would have committed to wasting $6 trillion on this scam and shutting down the US economy…

Jeffery P
Reply to  Dodgy Geezer
April 10, 2020 1:28 pm

Yes, decisions based upon the best information available at the time. But when new data contradicts the old, isn’t it time to stop what you’re doing and adjust our response to what we currently know?

I’ve argued against public policy without a cost/benefit analysis. There are a lot of unknowns about the virus but we could have relatively easily estimated the cost of our lock-downs and restrictions. It’s easy to project the economic consequences of millions out of work and many businesses going bankrupt. From there, we could estimate the additional deaths due to an economic depression and weigh that against Covid-19 projections.

It’s not too late to do this.

Edim
Reply to  Dodgy Geezer
April 10, 2020 10:41 pm

“People MUST take decisions depending on the best information they can acquire at the time. If later this found to be incorrect, then that is a shame – but it is how life is.”

It was the best information according to them, just like the climate change alarmists claim to have the best information.

davidgmillsatty
Reply to  SAMURAI
April 10, 2020 12:32 pm

How do you know what the actual death rate of the flu is? It’s death rate is estimated as well. Most people who get it never see a doctor, much less get tested for it. It could easily be orders of magnitude higher than estimates.

One thing the flu has not done very often, is scare the absolute shit out of the health care industry. Health care workers do not usually go to work during flu season, wondering about whether exposure to it is going to kill them or members of their family if they bring it home.

Maybe we need some statistics on health care workers: flu versus covid 19.

Clyde Spencer
Reply to  davidgmillsatty
April 10, 2020 4:41 pm

davidgmillsatty
Certainly the number infected with the flu is modeled because many never see a physician. However, when bodies are found lying around, there is always an inquiry as to why. Even if the body is in their own bed, authorities will ask family or friends if they have any idea why the person died. The death ‘estimate’ is therefore more accurate than infections, in countries that issue death certificates.

Brian Bellefeuille
Reply to  SAMURAI
April 10, 2020 12:38 pm

I live in the SF Bay Area, and I believe that my household has already been hit by the Kung Flu. Mid January my oldest daughter had a nasty cough and fever, lasting 3-4 days. She also complained of loss of taste and smell which at the time we thought was odd, but have come to find out that this is a CoVID symptom. Both of my G-daughters (7 & 8) both had low fevers and cough in early Feb. Late February I got hit with a horrible fever and chills, a dry cough that felt like I had broken glass in my chest. Wound up getting pneumonia 3 days later that was treated with antibiotics. And I have several friends that complained of similar flu symptoms going back as far as late Dec, early Jan. It’s anecdotal at best, but seems like there are a lot of people out there that have had it already. I’m just waiting for the anti-body test to find out for sure.

Randle Dewees
Reply to  Brian Bellefeuille
April 10, 2020 1:59 pm

Climb on the band wagon, there are plenty of us already riding it!

Randle Dewees
Reply to  Brian Bellefeuille
April 10, 2020 10:16 pm

Thanks Sycomputing, that is interesting. I live near Ridgecrest, this town in the north Mojave has some 8000 people working more or less directly for the Naval Air Warfare Center (China Lake). There is a LOT of business travel. We started noticing a strange virulent flu like crud hitting us in Dec. I came down with it just after Christmas. I totally relate to Brian’s experience. While my symptoms did not seem to include fever I never took my temp, so I don’t know. What did happen was a week of absolute misery, followed by a week of pretty bad, followed by a month of gradual return to normal. My lungs felt pretty roasted.

So, I’m wondering, are we seeing an upward curve here simply because of increased testing? Ridgecrest Regional Hospital got their first positive test case in late March. The total is now up to 4, has been 4 for the last few days. This hospital serves a population of about 30,000. If the crud we had was CV19, then I think our peak was around the New Year.

sycomputing
Reply to  Randle Dewees
April 10, 2020 11:43 pm

Maybe you’ll be able to shed some light on this as time goes on. As I understand it, albeit so far anecdotally, not an insignificant number of individuals in CA experienced similar symptoms during the fall 2019 flu season, but chalked it up to a “bad” flu.

Hopefully Stanford will be able to confirm.

See - owe to Rich
Reply to  Brian Bellefeuille
April 11, 2020 1:56 am

Me too, in the UK, starting on January 3rd would you believe! I thought, what is this debilitating cold in which my appetite has gone because food is virtually tasteless? I’m hoping I’m immune from the UK epidemic, but I’d pay good money to get an antibody test.

Rich.

Scissor
Reply to  SAMURAI
April 10, 2020 3:20 pm

Germany seems to have a couple of days headstart on explosive growth, so that 50,000,000 estimate is probably high for the U.S.

Lowell
Reply to  SAMURAI
April 10, 2020 7:51 pm

That German study of 1,000 randomly selected individuals implied a .37% mortality rate in one German town.
Assuming the same mortality rate in the US
Assuming todays death total reflects the cases we had two weeks ago
Then the 18,693 deaths in the US on 4/10 become
18,693/ .37% = 5,052,162 active and recovered infections two weeks ago.

I suspect that when we start counting all that had this infection that the death toll will be less than 1% maybe somewhere between .4% and .8%. One of the problem with this disease is that half the people who catch it don’t even know their sick. Which is a powerful argument on why even the ones that think they are healthy should wear a mask. Not to keep you from getting sick but to protect the people around you.

Nick
April 10, 2020 11:11 am

But most of the U.K. is not as densely populated ads London. Most U.K. cases are in London. Most US cases are in NY/NJ – lockdown in areas outside these hotspots is not warranted. More people will die from economic fallout in these places than covid.

John Tillman
Reply to  Nick
April 10, 2020 2:32 pm

Detroit and New Orleans are also hotspots. Seattle area was. Only a handful of states suffer from deaths per million above the national average. Many have death per million rates in single digits. WY’s is still zero.

John Tillman
Reply to  Nick
April 10, 2020 4:08 pm

Current deaths per million:

NY 400
NJ 218
LA 162
MI 129
CT 125
MA 88
WA 66
US 56

NY and states bordering it are the epicenter, with three separate lesser centers. WA is fading fast, after its early lead.

In all cases, nursing homes are being ravaged. The virus should soon run out of vulnerable victims.

Monckton of Brenchley
Reply to  Nick
April 10, 2020 5:21 pm

The problem with locking down only cities is that city-dwellers flee to the country, carrying the infection with them. That is why lockdowns only really work if they are nationwide.

John Tillman
Reply to  Monckton of Brenchley
April 10, 2020 8:53 pm

United States used their police to keep MY refugees out of their jurisdictions.

Clearly, without a national federal lockdown, dozens of states have avoided the fate of the NY metro area.

sycomputing
Reply to  Monckton of Brenchley
April 11, 2020 9:46 am

. . . city-dwellers flee to the country, carrying the infection with them.

To where would they flee, if you mean en masse?

nobodysknowledge
April 10, 2020 11:11 am

And Netherlands, excess deaths
Netherlands: 2000 more deaths than average,
The Dutch Statistics Netherlands reports that 2000 more people died in the Netherlands in week 14 in 2020 than is usual during this period. That’s what the Dutch newspaper Telegraaf writes. The total number of deaths is about 5,100 people. A standing share of the dead are older people over 80 years. The statistics deal with all types of deaths. Last week, the Central Bureau of Statistics (CBS) estimated that more than 1,600 more people died in the second half of March than average. Of these, 603 are determined to be due to coronavirus. The statisticians give no theories as to why the number of deaths is so much higher than has been the case.

Ben Vorlich
April 10, 2020 11:17 am

How does the UK’s excess for CV19 compare with 2017-18 Flu deaths, and the previous Hong Kong and Asian Flu of the 1960s and 1950s?

Newminster
Reply to  Ben Vorlich
April 10, 2020 1:13 pm

I suggest you look at the ONS website which will provide all the data you need. I could download them but it would be quicker to do it yourself. The link is:
https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/deaths/datasets/weeklyprovisionalfiguresondeathsregisteredinenglandandwales.

xls files cover weekly death figures going back several years including 2018. Figures for the first 12 weeks of 2018 for respiratory deaths are considerably in excess of the equivalent this year!

nobodysknowledge
Reply to  Ben Vorlich
April 11, 2020 1:53 am

Week 13:
1000 more deaths than usual. And just the beginning of the UK pandemi.
Same week reported about 500 deaths from corona.

April 10, 2020 11:17 am

The issue still comes down to finding the best possible balance between countering harm on both sides- harm to vulnerable segments of the population from these diseases (elderly, compromised) and harm to the general population from these total shutdown approaches. Obviously, every year we should take common sense protective measures to combat the annual common flu death totals that are still far worse than this virus (average 389,000 worldwide, up to 100,000 children). But there is mounting evidence of serious harm to the general world population from the total lockdown approaches. Could Moncton include the other side in his analyses?

Monckton of Brenchley
Reply to  Wendell Krossa
April 10, 2020 5:26 pm

In response to Mr Krossa, until I began contributing these pieces the only commentaries on the Chinese virus here were in favor of ending lockdowns. Therefore, for the sake of balance, I have given the other side of the story, which is that governments cannot take the risk of allowing their healthcare systems to be overwhelmed. As soon as it is clear that the case counts are falling, governments will revisit the question whether lockdowns are appropriate.

Ron
April 10, 2020 11:18 am

“2. An environmental factor (such as warmer summer weather) temporarily reduces the growth rate of the infection. With a new pandemic, one may hope that warmer weather will help, but responsible governments must be prepared in case it does not.”

You are totally right. MERS was very resilient against heat so it would be very careless of governments to assume otherwise.

davidgmillsatty
Reply to  Ron
April 10, 2020 1:24 pm

http://www.yourdestinationnow.com/2020/04/summer-wont-curb-spread-of-coronavirus.html

Study done by Chinese scientists:

Summer WON’T curb the spread of the coronavirus: Study debunks claims that warmer weather will halt the pandemic

“Our analysis suggested that ambient temperature has no significant impact on the transmission ability of SARS-CoV-2,’ the researchers said.

‘It is premature to count on warmer weather to control COVID-19, and relying on seasonality to curb this pandemic can be a dangerous line of thought.’

‘Changing seasons may help but are unlikely to stop transmission,’ the team added.

‘Urgent policies or interventions — such as community travel bans and school closures — are needed to help slow transmission.'”

Scissor
Reply to  davidgmillsatty
April 10, 2020 3:33 pm

Sunshine might help by boosting peoples ability to fight infection as well as destroying the virus outside.

GregK
Reply to  Ron
April 10, 2020 9:22 pm

“An environmental factor (such as warmer summer weather) temporarily reduces the growth rate of the infection.”

Possibly not. Brazil looks like catching up with Europe and Indonesia has only just started.

It may be that in cooler countries warmer weather allows people to get out a bit and practise a bit more separation. Countries with lower population densities seem to have lower ionfection rates.

Accepting that there is probably a huge difference between the number of identified infections and actual infections, as various commentators have pointed out, we won’t know how it hapenned until it’s over.

Nick Schroeder
April 10, 2020 11:19 am

No, it is most emphatically NOT exponential!!! It’s second order.
Attached are my latest ECDC graphics for 4/10/20.
https://www.linkedin.com/posts/nicholas-schroeder-55934820_covid19-pandemicresponse-climatechange-activity-6654385501195259904-JRFz
I thought this week was CoVid-19’s Pearl Harbor.
Looks more like CoVid-19’s Bay of Pigs.
The daily deaths have held fairly flat and steady for several days now, not exponential at all.
And don’t suggest that our economic self-abuse and social distancing clown show are responsible.
It’s easy to flatten a curve – THAT’S ALREADY FLAT!!!
For the greenhouse effect to perform as advertised the surface of the earth must radiate as an ideal black body.
For the CoVid pandemic to perform as advertised it must spread in an exponential manner.
What do these two assumptions have in common?
They are both WRONG^3, not so, incorrect-o-mundo, booguuusss!
But that’s what one gets from amateurs and bureaucrats doing science and math.

Scissor
Reply to  Nick Schroeder
April 10, 2020 3:38 pm

We know that false climate science is knowingly promoted. I wonder whether some in positions of authority knowingly exaggerated the threat of this virus.

Monckton of Brenchley
Reply to  Scissor
April 10, 2020 5:28 pm

In response to Scissor, it was essential that governments took precautions to prevent their healthcare systems from becoming overloaded. The sight of mass graves being dug in New York should perhaps give pause for thought.

Russ R.
Reply to  Nick Schroeder
April 10, 2020 5:25 pm

Nick are you saying that a virus has the same ability to infect others, whether the infected person is sitting at home watching tv, or maybe at a birthday party. Because mathematically when one person infects multiple others, and those people infect multiple others, that is exponential.
Here is a nice example for you:
https://www.foxnews.com/us/how-coronavirus-spread-through-a-birthday-and-a-funeral-in-chicago
If that person stayed home, instead of going out, it is not exponential!! So you are showing that social distancing (first) followed by “stay at home” directives flattens the curve. It logically cannot be anything else. We are just arguing about what the value of the exponent is, for each stage of the contagion, based on what the public is doing, both to avoid getting the virus, and avoid spreading it.

Here is a study for you to think about how bad it can get if we let it ride:
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.02.07.20021154v1.full.pdf

This is a highly infectious disease. Unless you live in China. There it can be contained by proclamation. And crematoriums running at full capacity. And government monitoring the movements of everyone at all times.

monckton of brenchley
Reply to  Nick Schroeder
April 10, 2020 5:30 pm

Mr Schroeder is incorrect. In the early stages of a pandemic, the transmission is near-perfectly exponential. The fact that the compound daily growth rate is now falling is attributable to the various control measures that have been implemented worldwide.

Russ R.
April 10, 2020 11:20 am

The relevant value that needs to be quantified better is R0 (R-naught). Without that value all others are speculative. It is the dog that wags all other effects from trivial to catastrophic.
The current estimation for R0 in urban environments it ~6. That means with every infected person will infect 6 more. Who will infect 6 more, who will infect 6 more, until there is a shortage of uninfected people.
Under “stay at home’ policy that number is estimated at ~1.5.
At 6 we have no options but to ride it out, and suffer the consequences. The only option is to lock up people so we can come back later to collect the bodies.
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.02.07.20021154v1.full.pdf

jorgekafkazar
Reply to  Russ R.
April 10, 2020 1:02 pm

Which is apparently the tactic used in China.

Russ R.
Reply to  jorgekafkazar
April 10, 2020 1:21 pm

I think it needs a name:
CCP Uniform Lock Down (CULD)

R Taylor
April 10, 2020 11:22 am

I have been looking at daily growth in cumulative deaths for countries including Belgium, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Netherlands, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, UK and USA. If you plot the values beyond the early scatter (e.g. once cumulative deaths exceed 3 per million), the values for each of these countries fit well to a linear trend with negative slope. The slopes are -0.8 for the UK, -0.9 for France, -1 for Italy, -1.1 for Switzerland, and Canada, -1.3 for Germany and the US, -1.4 for the Netherlands and Sweden, -1.6 for Spain and -2.1 for Belgium.

The downward slope (decrease in growth rate) seems to have little to do with legal restraints on social activity, but has strong and inverse correlation to the initial value of the trend. This suggests to me that the pandemic is running its natural course, and the most effective things that authorities can do is disinfect public spaces and supply N95-type masks to everyone. The worst thing might be impose universal restraints that shatter social and economic confidence.

Scissor
Reply to  R Taylor
April 10, 2020 3:40 pm

Sounds reasonable.

Monckton of Brenchley
Reply to  R Taylor
April 10, 2020 5:33 pm

Unfortunately Mr Taylor’s analysis is not correct. The compound daily growth rates in both cumulative cases and deaths in nearly all countries remain dangerously high. While that continues to be the case, it would not be responsible to end lockdowns.

Mike Monce
April 10, 2020 11:24 am

Plotting *cumulative* cases of course is going to be exponential, but is not saying anything about how the epidemic is changing. Total cases doesn’t account for recovery and death. I’ve been plotting (from worldometer data) active cases only since March 1. It initially showed exponential growth through the end of March. Since then, the growth has been linear and is fit well with a sigmoid function.

jorgekafkazar
Reply to  Mike Monce
April 10, 2020 1:05 pm

I’ve seen numerous mentions of the Keeling Curve as exponential, too, but lately it’s clearly linear. Obviously, some people would like it to be exponential.

Monckton of Brenchley
Reply to  jorgekafkazar
April 10, 2020 5:36 pm

The Keeling curve is not linear.

Monckton of Brenchley
Reply to  Mike Monce
April 10, 2020 5:36 pm

Mr Monce should be aware of the dangers of curve-fitting. Even if the true numbers infected are 100 times the confirmed-case count, 98% of the population remain uninfected, in which event there is no basis for an appreciable decay from pure exponentiality towards the sigmoid profile. The apparent curve-fit to the sigmoid function is an artefact caused by the fact that – though some commenters here do not like it – lockdowns work.

gian
April 10, 2020 11:28 am

“Those who support ending all lockdowns, allowing the old and the sick to die in large numbers and risking the general population’s health by overloading the healthcare system ”
Sir, that is a very dishonest thing to say on several levels.
firstly, those who support ending lockdowns do not want old and sick to die. those who support ending lockdowns want the HEALTHY part of the population to be allowed to go on with their life.
these are the people who produce the wealth that is used to pay for healthcare itself. keeping these on house arrest will ultimately jeopardize the capacity of the healthcare system to exist at all.
secondly, those who support ending lockdowns do not wish to prevent old, frail, or anyone else to confine themselves to their house if they feel inclined to do so. in fact, i advise old and frail people to avoid contacts with potential sources of contagion, but i surely would not try to do that by force.
thirdly, if the healthcare system shows to be totally inadequate to deal with an epidemic, this is hardly a good reason for removing all personal freedoms.
forcing people to buy services they do not necessarily want at a price they cannot negotiate, and then preventing them to use such services at gunpoint is usually called mafia.
i often hear the argument that people should confine themselves to their house in order to not expose others to risks of some sort. this is completely unacceptable in any free country. of course, we no longer live in free countries. we live in collectivist dictatorships disguised as “democracies”, where absurd principles like “potential risk” are routinely used to remove all personal freedoms

davidgmillsatty
Reply to  gian
April 10, 2020 12:45 pm

Baloney. The law of quarantine preexisted the Constitution by so many centuries I have no idea how many that was. The Constitution clearly allows Congress under Article I Section 8 to provide for the general welfare. And that includes quarantine where warranted.

So there is nothing new about this quarantine that lessons the civil rights of Americans. Your liberties are not being jeopardized and it is the province of government to regulate the economy. Don’t like what the government did? Elect a new one.

Clyde Spencer
Reply to  davidgmillsatty
April 10, 2020 4:55 pm

davidgmillsatty

You said, “The law of quarantine preexisted the Constitution …” However, an important difference is that those who were sick were the ones who were quarantined, not the healthy. That is, those who were a danger to others were isolated. The state didn’t isolate those who were at risk, for their own safety.

Strictly speaking, the Constitution does not give the federal government the power to regulate the economy under the umbrella of “general welfare.” They have the power to regulate interstate commerce to protect consumers from unscrupulous commercial activities such as shipping unhealthy food, or engaging in unfair business practices. Although, weights and measures are typically monitored by state agencies.

ChrisC
Reply to  davidgmillsatty
April 12, 2020 9:34 am

“So there is nothing new about this quarantine that lessons the civil rights of Americans. Your liberties are not being jeopardized”

Ah, so the fact that I cannot meet a group of friends (freedom of assembly), cannot attend church (freedom to practice religion), or even leave my house (liberty) doesn’t mean that my civil rights are lessened nor that my liberties are being jeopardized?

You *may* want to rethink that.

Monckton of Brenchley
Reply to  gian
April 10, 2020 5:39 pm

Gian has completely missed the point of these postings, which is that when a new and fatal pandemic appears there is a real danger that healthcare systems and hospitals will be overwhelmed. This has already happened in the UK, where tens of thousands of elective surgeries have had to be canceled to make way for Chinese-virus patients. The result of failing to control transmission is not only that the old and the sick die – for they are dying already – but also that younger people die, even if they do not have the virus, because they cannot get elective surgery.

rbabcock
April 10, 2020 11:29 am

You forgot
5. One or more effective treatments are found to reduce both the severity and length of infection. This reduces both the number of deaths (especially among the older/infirm), the number of hospitalizations and the time a person is infectious.

This also changes the virus from a 1918 style flu to the common, everyday flu which still kills 10’s of thousands, but that’s ok.

rbabcock
Reply to  rbabcock
April 10, 2020 4:13 pm
Earthling2
April 10, 2020 11:30 am

When I read what Willis Eschenbach describes, it makes perfect sense to me, but so does what the good Christopher Monckton of Brenchley writes as well and I am grateful to have both sides presented in such excellent description, which is what science should be all about. Thank you WUWT for presenting different views and hosting comment and honest debate.

Doing harm to the economy that will affect all the healthy youngsters for years to come seems to be an over reach of common sense. But then reading what Christopher Monckton says also makes sense, within reason, that we aggressively limit transmission of the Wuhan virus so as to not overload health facilities and/or limit the pre-mature death of Grandma whom we all love and cherish. Both are right but at what point are we cutting off our nose to spite our face? What is a poor pleb like me to think? I do know that there are huge lessons to be learnt from this, especially for climate science and on the reliance of experts and how we formulate public policy going forward.

TC in the OC
Reply to  Earthling2
April 10, 2020 1:20 pm

I have also enjoyed the various takes on this topic from Christopher, Willis and Rud and do appreciate their attempts to explain what is happening.

However here is another wrinkle and I am not sure who’s point it helps.

My daughter is an emergency room doctor and works for a major trauma hospital network in a large great lakes area city. She works a variety of shifts usually around 20 a month with 6-8 being overnights. My wife and I will get to chat with her while she is driving in for the overnights. Several weeks ago as all this was unfolding and the lock downs just commencing she would comment on how slow it had been at work and we would joke with her about people being afraid to go in and catching the virus even if it was an injury they would normally go to the ER for. That was 3-4 weeks ago. Last night same comment on how slow the ER has been and how she knows other ER doctors and nurses around her area or across that US that are being sent home, having hours or shifts cut, quarterly bonuses being reduced etc.

In one of Willis’s post he was showing how the demand for beds and ICU beds was being meet in most areas of California and the same can be said for my daughter’s state and I would venture most of the US where the virus isn’t going off the charts.

I think that when the decision makers started panicking about a shortage of beds, supplies etc. they failed to take into consideration the impact of how the lock down would reduce the need that is normally there for the hospitals. Instead of needing x beds normally and then adding y beds for the virus the lock down has made it 1/2 x + y beds not x+y beds. So I guess what I am saying is that by locking everyone down that did provide the resources that were needed to keep from overwhelming the hospitals. However where the virus isn’t out of control it is now hurting the hospital workers also…possibly too much of a good thing.

Scissor