More good news about the Chinese virus, and the Easter Funny

By Christopher Monckton of Brenchley

The good news keeps coming. In the United States and Canada, the weekly-averaged daily compound growth rates of confirmed cases of infection are now about 8%, down from the benchmark values of 23% and 17% respectively that obtained in the three weeks to March 14, when Mr Trump declared the pandemic to be a national emergency.

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 28 to April 11, 2020. A link to the high-definition PowerPoint slides is at the end of this posting.

The daily case-growth rate for the world excluding China and occupied Tibet is down from the benchmark value of almost 20% in the three weeks to 14 March to just 6.1% for the week to 11 April.

The daily compound rate of growth in deaths is a lagging indicator, so it remains rather higher than the case-growth rate. For the world outside China and occupied Tibet, it is 8.1%. In the United States it is 13%, in Canada 16%. Though the overall trend in these death-growth rates is falling slowly, there will be many more deaths before the pandemic subsides.

Daily growth rates in deaths are falling rather more slowly on average than growth rates in total confirmed cases, but the overall trend is downward.

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 April 4 to April 11, 2020.

The Spectator reports that in the town of Gangelt, one of the epicenters of the German outbreak, a random sample of 1000 residents taken by researchers at the University of Bonn found that, though only 2% of the sample showed symptoms, 15% had been infected and showed antibodies. Yet the confirmed cases reported by Germany as a whole to April 11 were just 125,452, or 0.15% of the population of 84 million.

In short, the confirmed cases, which tend to be the more serious ones, appear to undercount the true extent of infection by two orders of magnitude. This came as a surprise to many, but to those who have been following these daily updates it will have been no surprise, because, based on casting back deaths three weeks, I was able to discover that the number of cases of infection was being under-reported by somewhere between 1 and 3 orders of magnitude.

This is good news for two reasons. First, we are much further along the road to population-wide immunity than the confirmed-case counts had suggested. Secondly, the case fatality rate appears to be a great deal smaller than the ratio of deaths to reported cases had indicated. My original rough-and-ready calculations based on casting back deaths in the U.S. population suggested a case fatality rate of 0.34%. The German researchers concluded that it was 0.37%.

In global terms, these figures suggest that, assuming 90%, or 7 billion, of the world’s 7.8 billion population eventually became infected, total worldwide deaths would be about 26 million, making the disease about half as bad as the Spanish flu of 1918-19, which chiefly killed young people and accounted for an estimated 50 million deaths. In the United States there would be 1.1 million deaths. For comparison, in the 2019-20 flu season there are thought to have been 24,000 to 62,000 deaths, according to the Centers for Disease Control.

So the fatalities could still be significant, based on the German study. However, several promising avenues of research into prophylactics, palliatives and cures are being followed worldwide. The sooner some of these are shown to have a significant effect in randomized, prospective, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trials, the smaller the eventual death toll will be.

A happy Easter to everyone. And, by way of an Easter Funny, here is a picture of the personal protective equipment that the fashionable Peer of the Realm is wearing this season.

clip_image006

Original slides here.

301 thoughts on “More good news about the Chinese virus, and the Easter Funny

    • Lockdown causality.
      How can we be sure that lockdowns are responsible for the decrease in deaths? Even if it seems logical that these two variables should be linked
      We cannot ne sure there is a causal link. If epidemics normally limit themselves and we do a lockdown, it will seem like the lockdown caused the limiting. This should be elementary tu week to readers of WUWT, it is just like the hockey stick. Temperature rises for some years at the same time as co2. Does that mean that co2 drives the rise? What if governments in despair started sacrificing one virgin every week and the temperature started falling. We could even make graphs for how many virgins were sacrificed in each country and how temperature went down. If one country decided to not take part in the ritual, we could try to find reasons why the temperature went down for them too. There is an enormous motivation to justify lockdowns now, so any contrary position will be suppressed. Maybe soon we will see 99% of all scientists agree that lockdowns were absolutely necessary.

  1. I like your motorcycle protective wear Christopher…you are not only reducing your odds of contracting the Chinese virus, but also a slip and fall, or worse, getting clobbered over the head by some random thug. But you really need a pair of leather chaps to go with that whole outfit. Happy Easter everyone…most of us are all on our way to being resurrected for another season, being spring and all. Better than it being Halloween time of year for us up here in the NH.

    • Chaps???
      Summer is coming. His ability to maintain a normal body temperature is already comprised. He could become dehydrated going up a few flights of stairs.

      • Try getting into your local bank looking like that and explaining it’s just PPE !!

        the weekly-averaged daily compound growth rates of confirmed cases of infection are now about 8%, down from the benchmark values of 23% and 17% respectively that obtained in the three weeks to March 14, when Mr Trump declared the pandemic to be a national emergency.

        Obviously lower is better but how can we interpret those numbers? At what stage does this metric tell us we are at peak COVID ? Previously you suggested it should go negative, then corrected that statement when I pointed out the error. You then said it needs to get close to zero to know we are “over the worst” but those numbers will only be near zero with the whole shooting match is over, not just peak cases or peak deaths.

        You have also claimed that these graphs prove that confinement is working, yet are unable to say anything more than number are dropping. That will happen in the evolution of any epidemic. (see graph below). There is no feature of your graph which shows where this would differ from a normal epidemic, so there is no proof of that claim.

        Let me help. I have developed an analysis which does show the effect we all expect to be there and does not require post hoc stretching of how long we expect before it shows and effect to an improbably 3 weeks as you previously suggested.

        Here I take simple model of the evolution of an epidemic : the logistics curve and compare to case data. I take the time differential of daily new cases to bring out the rapid changes we are looking for. I fit the model to the early rising part of the data.

        https://climategrog.files.wordpress.com/2020/04/2019-ncov-d-logistic-fit-italy.png

        Here we see a clear drop at just about the right time relative to the confinement order. 5d incubatation, plus 2 or 3 days before symptoms force people to risk their lives by going to a hospital, plus 2d for a PCR result.

        That is not proof but certainly consistent with the expected effect of confinement. Pretty convincing.

        It also shows the price we pay for this strategy: the negative rate of change is much shower DUE TO confinement. This explains why daily cases , having peaked is not dropping as quickly as we would like.

        Another interesting feature is the massive 7d swings since confinement came into force. The trough is on Mon-Tues, and in view of the 10d delay we see at the beginning, this takes the causal date back to about Friday of the previous week.

        Italy and Spain both show this swing. We could possibly derive some useful information if we can determine the cause of that swing.

        Have fun.

          • Mr Goodman continues to be pettily vexatious just for the sake of it. The graphs show the mean daily compound rates of growth in confirmed cases and in deaths. Though Mr Goodman does not like the fact that both are falling, and that the graphs show them both falling, they are falling, because the lockdowns – where they were necessary – are working.

          • Our resident nodding Homer seems unable to answer the most basic questions about his new world class metric.

            I have never stated that I did not like the fact compound rates are falling ( a classic straw man fallacy from someone devoid of a valid argument ). What I have said repeatedly is that the curving over is what happens in the evolution of any epidemic and was happening in most european states before any confinement came into force.
            https://climategrog.files.wordpress.com/2020/04/2019-ncov-log-growth-frisp.png

            Unable to admit his graph reveals nothing but a trivial result and unable to say how this graph will even tell us when a country hits peak cases, he continues to make spurious accusations and lies and misrepresent what I have said without citation.

            Meanwhile I have produced what he failed to produce, an analysis which does appear to show a clear change at about the right time to suggest attribution to clamp down. He prefers to not even comment on that.

            https://climategrog.files.wordpress.com/2020/04/2019-ncov-d-logistic-fit-italy.png

            You messed up. Get over it.

        • “Try getting into your local bank looking like that …”
          Dressed like that it was probably a ‘Village’ bank. 🙂

        • Doesn’t matter what I’m wearing as my local bank is closed to walk in customers. Drive thru, ATMs, and online are all open, though, so I can still get to my money when needed.

          • China’s data is make believe and as useful for analysis as a chocolate teaspoon is for stirring hot tea.

          • Can we be sure that there is a causal link between the RNA strands that the Covid tests are able to pick up and the pneumonias we are seeing. I posed this question yesterday, and Sir Monckton pointed out that we could know this because the tests were associated with specific x-ray and scan pictures. This was immediately refuted by a radiology expert.
            I thought to myself: Seriously, that is the reason for the lockdown? Some RNA strands are associated with a certain type of x-ray, maybe.
            We are wrecking the worlds economy because somebody got the idea that some RNA strands seem to give patients something that gives a certain x-ray image, that might as well be the flu. And most people get these strands and have no problem with them. And the normal soup of mutated flu viruses goes on relieving the oldest and frailest of their suffering.

      • Leather breeks would be better than chaps for walking and motorcycling, but chaps are better than breeks if on horseback.

        • Well, I never heard the term breeks before, but that is one of the things I like about your posts Christopher, since I usually learn a new word from you about something every post. Same for Lord Black, with his dictionary vocabulary. May not agree or even fully understand everything you write but I am glad that we still enjoy this freedom of expression. Over here on this side of the pond, chaps may apply to either a horse or a ‘Hog’.

          • Making up words has a far better history than making up temperatures. Christopher should be commended for it if they seem to be “catchy” and fill a need.

        • and my lord , you have lost weight since the last pic seen of you some time back
          well done;-)
          do you know HOW irritating it is to us females that blokes can lose weight so fast?
          while we battle to remove the 5kg
          lol;-)

    • Try getting into your local bank looking like that and explaining it’s just PPE !!

      the weekly-averaged daily compound growth rates of confirmed cases of infection are now about 8%, down from the benchmark values of 23% and 17% respectively that obtained in the three weeks to March 14, when Mr Trump declared the pandemic to be a national emergency.

      Obviously lower is better but how can we interpret those numbers? At what stage does this metric tell us we are at peak COVID ? Previously you suggested it should go negative, then corrected that statement when I pointed out the error. You then said it needs to get close to zero to know we are “over the worst” but those numbers will only be near zero with the whole shooting match is over, not just peak cases or peak deaths.

      You have also claimed that these graphs prove that confinement is working, yet are unable to say anything more than number are dropping. That will happen in the evolution of any epidemic. (see graph below). There is no feature of your graph which shows where this would differ from a normal epidemic, so there is no proof of that claim.

      Let me help. I have developed an analysis which does show the effect we all expect to be there
      and does not require post hoc stretching of how long we expect before it shows and effect to an improbably 3 weeks as you previously suggested.

      Here I take simple model of the evolution of an epidemic : the logistics curve and compare to case data. I take the time differential of daily new cases to bring out the rapid changes we are looking for. I fit the model to the early rising part of the data.

      https://climategrog.files.wordpress.com/2020/04/2019-ncov-d-logistic-fit-italy.png

      Here we see a clear drop at just about the right time relative to the confinement order. 5d incubatation, plus 2 or 3 days before symptoms force people to risk their lives by going to a hospital, plus 2d for a PCR result.

      That is not proof but certainly consistent with the expected effect of confinement. Pretty convincing.

      It also shows the price we pay for this strategy: the negative rate of change is much shower DUE TO confinement. This explains why daily cases , having peaked is not dropping as quickly as we would like.

      Another interesting feature is the massive 7d swings since confinement came into force. The trough is on Mon-Tues, and in view of the 10d delay we see at the beginning, this takes the causal date back to about Friday of the previous week.

      Italy and Spain both show this swing. We could possibly derive some useful information if we can determine the cause of that swing.

      Have fun.

      • On a high school test in basic statistics you would fail if you thought you could do any meaningful research with “Number of active cases”. We know that this number is based on self selection. Some who are quite sick will not want to be tested, while some are so scared that they will be tested for very mild symptoms. Authorities change the rules about who gets to be tested based on testing capacity. Usually testing capacity increases quite quickly in the beginning. Even testing the dead will depend on testing capacity. If the rules for testing the dead changes, even death numbers are questionable.
        Recording of deaths may also be questionable. It is a lot like temperature measurements in global warming.

  2. I was a bit surprised by the doom and gloom on Lord Monckton’s first post. It’s good to see that he’s been dialling it back a bit since then: We get enough of that crap from the main stream media. Hundreds of millions of people were never going to die. This thing has shot its bolt in my humble opinion: The bodies are just not piling up in the streets. It’s time to get back to work before we hang the economic suicidal noose around our necks and jump off the chair. (Too late for those who have already jumped though…)

    • Jimmy

      The modelling was absurd and after years of looking aghast at the highly defective climate models we should not have believed the 500,000 deaths predicted.

      Action on CV Means it will save some lives at the expense of others, for example fewer dying of flu or car accidents or murder but some will die instead of CV and domestic violence and suicide.

      We have had our freedoms shattered and putting us under house arrest will cause severe damage to our physical mental and financial health, not to mention the shredding of many personal relationships. Of course action was needed but we need to isolate the vulnerable, test and isolate again and get the economy working before its too late

      . A severe reduction in GDP will have immediate impacts on spending on health, defence,social benefits etc as well as the ability of people to spend and keep the economy going.

      Tonyb

      • It really is time for the likes of Mr Haigh and tonyb to stop whining about the lockdowns. They were necessary to ensure that healthcare services were not overrun, as they are already overrun in some parts of the UK because the lockdown was left too late.

        Once intensive-care capacity sufficient to provide advanced and prolonged care to those infected with the Chinese virus, the lockdowns can be – and will be – phased out.

        Responsible governments were rightly not prepared to endure any continuation of the 20% daily growth in cumulative cases that was evident in the three weeks to March 14. Get over it.

        • We built a 2,500 bed hospital in NYC in the Javits Center. It had 255 patients yesterday.
          It will be time to get back to living at the end of April. Life is dangerous, so be careful, but live. Some activities will be severely changed/curtailed for quite awhile. For instance, I’m sure fewer people will want to sit in an aluminum can at 37,00 feet breathing recycled air with 400 people for 14 hours. I won’t be in a hurry to pack into a huge arena with 10,000 strangers for a three hour concert.
          But free people in a free society get to make their own choices and take their chances. The self-appointed Masters Of The Universe will just have to get over themselves and trust us. It will remain By the People, Of the People, For the People. Or else.

        • No one is whining, we are just pointing out that we do not alwayys agree with your figures or your analysis and that there are huge consequences for the actions taken based on exaggerated data

          Amongst those are that a huge drop in our GDP has serious future implications which, according to other experts, will likely result in more deaths such as cancer, suicides etc

          Tonyb

        • https://www.mediterranee-infection.com/covid-19/

          Maybe NHS should be adopting Raoult’s protocol. Of 2500 patients on this treatment he has lost 10 so far. If they did that, they’d need a lot less ICUs and the patients would “get over it.”
          Since invasive intubation seems to be k-i-lling about as many as it saves, they need a new outlook.

          Then we could all stop “whining” .

          I hope that St Bart’s and Exeter are not part of the EU DISCOVERY project which was designed to fail on hcq by NOT using it with the antibiotic and NOT using it at first symptoms as recommended by Raoult.

          https://www.soundhealthandlastingwealth.com/health-news/malaria-vaccine-championed-by-donald-trump-is-trialled-on-nhs-wards/

          St Bartholomew’s Hospital in London and the Royal Devon and Exeter have started handing out hydroxychloroquine in a bid to keep seriously-ill Covid-19 patients alive

          Does not look promising. Too many vested interests.

          • “… a bid to keep seriously-ill Covid-19 patients alive ”

            Pr. Raoult has clearly pointed out that by the time the patient is “seriously ill” the virus is no long the main problem.

            Why doctors who have taken an oath to do no harm, are willfully avoiding doing what a colleague has determined to be the most effective way of using the drug after treating thousand of patients and do the polar opposite is something that needs to be answered.

        • We’ve had 4 days of great numbers out of Sweden, with no lockdown. Sweden appears to be at least as far through the pandemic as the UK, with 90/million dead compared to 160/million.
          (By the way, according to their “Yearbook of Housing and Building Statistics 2007”, 85 % of Swedes live in urban areas.)

        • There are a few things that are not communicated in this pandemic. We are not given any numbers on how many died because they could not get ventilators. For all we know, maybe those who did not get ventilators but oxygen instead survived better. Survival on ventilators is from 2-30 percent, and survivors may be lung damaged for life from high pressure. Personally I would refuse a ventilator , ask for oxygen and know that I would be able to say goodbye with my last breath instead of my family having to decide to pull the plug on my ventilator after two weeks in agony.
          It is a bit like thinking all psychotic patients should have the right to get a lobotomy. The stats for lobotomies is actually better in terms of mortality than ventilators.
          But we don’t get to know how close the health systems were to be overwhelmed, and how many lives were possibly lost because of lack of ventilators. Would we be able to justify lockdowns if there was a good margin? Could we justify lockdown if just oxygen actually is better. Would we be told?

    • So far as I can tell at this, still early moment in the outbreak, the major missing variable has been the number of people who catch the damn thing but have little to no symptoms. Very inconsiderate of them.

      It’s like a bunch of very specialized people spending years and billions of dollars to estimate how soon the Earth will catch fire and then the damn thing not doing it. The new international symbol for science should be the pouty face.

  3. 26 million? I sincerely doubt it.

    The world population at the time of Spanish flu was some 1.8 billion with some 50 million dead, so in today’s terms with a population of 7 billion that would be around an astonishing 150 million which on top of the war deaths must have had a profound effect on future demographics and indeed civilisation

    Tonyb

      • It is very difficult to write mathematical pieces for those who have no mathematics and still less interest in what is objectively true.

        If 90% of a global population of 7.8 billion become infected, and if 0.37% of them die, some 26 million will die. Since 50 million died in 1918/19, this pandemic will cause half the deaths then caused, and that is why I say it is half as bad.

        Do the math.

        • All numbers available are not going in the direction of 0.37%. 0.37% is really optimistic. My guess based on the available numbers is at least 2% maybe even 5% caused by the lag time of open cases versus closed cases.

          For herd immunity that’ll be 60% of 7.8b billion 2% dead = 93.6 millions dead. Great idea… herd immunity by infection is the dumbest idea ever in this context. We need to slow down infection and get a vaccine!

          And the 2% are calculated from 1st world health care systems in a state without being overwhelmed by patient for intensive care. Not for other countries without sufficient intensive care support. That’ll be way worse.

          • “All numbers available are not going in the direction of 0.37%. 0.37% is really optimistic. My guess based on the available numbers is at least 2% maybe even 5% caused by the lag time of open cases versus closed cases.”

            If only 1 in 10 are serious enough to require hospitalisation, your numbers become 0.2 – 0.5%. 0.37% is bang in the middle…

          • 2% of all cases die at the moment. Hospitalization rate is 4-8% depending on the country.

            Why are people so reluctant to just look at the numbers? Puzzles me.

    • I remember reading a post mortum on WW I and it concluded that the war ended because of the Spanish Flu. I 1918 there were more soldiers killed by the flu than by combat. It’s been a long time but that sort of stuck in what’s left of my memory…

      • It’s debatable, but the Great War probably didn’t end because of the flu pandemic. Here’s a recent discussion of the issue:

        https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4181817/

        Even with horrific flu mortality, the infusion of millions of Americans tilted the balance in favor of the Allies. US, British, French and German troops all suffered from the plague on the Western Front, but the Central Powers were simply overwhelmed, even after Lenin took Russia out of the war.

    • Not any where near comparable.
      No Antibiotics or ICUs, less Doctors, less Nurses, weakened from 4 years of war and spread over 2 years.
      Not much like today is it?

    • With lockdowns and social distancing the infection rate is dropping quite dramatically. On the present track we will have a vaccine before those kin=d of numbers are hit. The questions is, what can we do to save the economy without re-accelerating the infection rte?

  4. Alberta Canada Stats as of Friday
    0 to 59 years of age: 1123 cases, 40 hospitalized, 11 in ICU, 3 deaths (all with underlying factors)
    70 years plus: 179 cases, 50 hospitalized, 14 in ICU, 27 deaths

    This number for the under 60 years of age is less deaths than the season flu (16).

    Should we still be in lock down?

        • Klem needs to grow up. Serious governments have to worry about whether their health services can cope with exponential growth in serious cases at a compound rate of 20% per day, which is what was happening before the UK lockdown was introduced. Our health service could not cope with that, so a lockdown was brought in, with near-universal approval and widespread compliance.

          Everyone here knows that HM Government will end the lockdown just as soon as it is safe to do so. Don’t be silly. A more adult approach is needed.

          • A more adult approach is needed.

            Agreed – but will HM Government dismantle the “service” that cannot provide adequate health care on a sunny June day with no nasty viruses in sight?

            Or will they continue to be children, propping up that favored “service,” since it cannot be blamed for the starvation of those who don’t manage to glean enough food from the trash bins behind the establishments of their “betters” in the Soho District?

      • What are the criteria for reducing and/or removing the lockdown?

        When the reduction in tax revenue beings to reduce government salary and expense budgets.

        • In response to Mr Parisot, the criteria for ending the lockdowns were considered in an earlier posting in this series. First consideration is that healthcare services must be able to cope; secondly, vulnerable populations must be protected; thirdly, widespread testing not only for antigens but also for antibodies must be available; and fourthly, large gatherings must be avoided until universal immunity is achieved.

      • Paul. The confirmed cases of the total popualtion is guaranteed to be an underestimation of the total infected. (1) 50% of the infected are asymptomatic. They would therefore NOT seek testing. (2) Ontario ks not randomly sampling its population, as the Germans have done. The Germans understand how critical random sampling is. What is going on in the vast majority lf rhe world is biased and convenience-based sampling.

    • No. Free people should be free. Use of PPE should be encouraged.

      People at the highest risk, over say 70 with one or more risk factors, high blood pressure, diabetes, COPD, etc. should be advised to self isolate, and for those in nursing homes and hospitals, steps should be taken to reduce contagion.

      Schools should reopen.

      Those in communist countries should carry on and assume the normal risk that their government will disappear them, force an abortion, harvest their organs, etc.

  5. @ Chris Monckton

    Your rapid fire posts make you a fast moving target.

    I responded to your response, to my response, to your previous post, but didn’t get a response so I’ll repost here…

    In response to an earlier post of yours comparing London and Stockholm populations densities, I pointed out that the population density of Greater London (4,542 per sq km) was slightly less than that of Stockholm (4,800 per sq km). In a spirit of charity I assume that you haven’t read that since you say “the population density in London is four times that in Stockholm.”

    If your views depend on this wrong assumption, perhaps you should reconsider.

    Also, you say that the UK’s government had to take the decision to lock-down because of the evidence available at that time. This isn’t so for several reasons.

    Firstly, the evidence at that time from China and elsewhere was that mortality was greatest (by a factor of ~100 or so compared to young people) among very old and otherwise vulnerable people. The obvious response to such a situation is to isolate and protect such people while the rest to society continues to function, in part so as to be able to support those at risk.

    Secondly, the lock-down of society is, at best, exchanging lives lost now for a very likely much larger number of lives lost later due to the economic damage. The decision to lock-down has set the value of those”hidden” future deaths very much lower than those due to CV.

    Thirdly, the government’s decision was prompted largely by the results of a single, unverified, unreleased model. No attempt was apparently made to get second, third or fourth opinions before taking what may be the most far-reaching decision taken by a government since WWII. Also no attempt seems to have been made (at least made public) to model alternatives, for example the Swedish “soft” lock-down.

    Fourthly, an alternative – Sweden’s” soft lock-down” – may well have led to a greater, earlier herd immunity than elsewhere, as well as preserving more of the country’s economy. If that’s the case “hard” locked-down countries, such as the UK, will experience a “long tail” of higher death rates than Sweden, perhaps resulting in a greater overall death toll.

    You correctly say that the particularities of the infection would have led to great demands on the NHS if it had been left unchecked. This is however I think the only substantive argument in favour of the lock-down and it could have been met by a combination of protecting vulnerable and old people via isolation – the Swedish method or a variant – and an intensive effort to provide the necessary medical facilities.

    • The fact that it is as widespread as it is indicates that the moderate lockdowns that are happening are going to do almost nothing to slow the disease down to protect the NHS or any other healthcare system around the world.
      Spreads too fast for lockdowns short of absolute to work, not nearly as deadly as promoted, likely the end number will be around 0.05%+/-0.03%, and the people it kills off are rather simply pulled forward a few days to a few months from when they likely would have died anyways, much like a heat wave causes excess deaths during and then after there are reduced death rates making up the difference. The heat wave only sped up the death in other words, it did not directly cause it.
      Even saving 1.1 million lives, that translates to $2,000,000 per life saved using just the stimuless and comes out to about $7,000,000 per life saved when you add in the cost of the shutdown to the economy.
      Not worth the effort, even if one of the lives lost is my own. My wife disagrees and won’t let me go grocery shopping today, but I would not let someone burn $7,000,000 in a fruitless effort to save my life.

      • “and the people it kills off are rather simply pulled forward a few days to a few months from when they likely would have died anyways”
        Complete rubbish, people with Hypertension or Diabetes have decades of life ahead of them, not just days or months.
        Even people with Heart trouble or COPD live for years with their illnesses, but let’s just snuff them out, they don’t matteras they are “dying” anyway with your attitude.
        I doubt their loved ones feel the same way.

    • 1. I wonder about population density in central London and exposures on the underground vs Stockholm. Having spent much time in NYC over the years, I believe there could be nothing in the world worse than the NY subway for spreading a respi virus.

      2. Additional benefit of lockdown and other mitigation: time for medical establishment to:
      a. Accumulate and redistribute resources (masks, gloves, ventilators, drugs)
      b. Refine treatment protocols to optimize patient survival (this virus has unique features that seem to require different ventilator settings, for example)
      c. Develop knowledge and protocols for using various antiviral meds, some of which may help.

      The speed with which the medical technology industry can create important new tests, equipment, and drugs is on the scale of the change seen in the information technology world. Buying some time may markedly change patient outcomes in these next months.

      Just one example: who is hearing often about the current ebola epidemic in the Congo? Answer: almost no one. Reason: there is now an effective ebola vaccine, developed since the terrible epidemic in Sierra Leone a few years ago. The current epidemic is being largely stifled, despite the social/political chaos Still present in parts of the Congo.

      So buying time may be important.

      • kwinterkorn
        I don’t think that anyone is arguing that buying time is bad. The essence of the question is whether social distancing alone, without shuttering commerce, would accomplish as much with less damage.

        • I have already patiently explained to Mr Spencer that HM Government had already tried bare social distancing and isolation of the most vulnerable, but that had not worked. The exponential rate of growth in cumulative confirmed cases continued to be around 20% daily, and, in the absence of any data on how fast the infection was spreading, Ministers simply could not responsibly take the risk of waiting any longer.

          Mr Cuomo in New York went through the same agonizing process, as did the Italian and Spanish Governments, all of whom were faced with high population densities in urban areas, and consequently rapid transmission rates.

          • Then obviously lock down those high density places and let the rest of the world carry on.

            If people want to live in hcigh density citie, that’s their call. There’s a price to pay for everything.

      • @kwinterkorn

        1: I think you may be wrongly assuming that Stockholm doesn’t have an underground.

        2: I believe all those things you outline could be done during a “soft lock-down” of the Swedish type.

      • Kwinterkorn has neatly summarized the reason why Mr Johnson, after weeks of listening to the medico-scientific community arguing among itself about whether to let the old people and sick people die and the health service collapse and the country descend into anarchy, took a command decision to lock the country down.

        The decision has been near-universally supported and quite widely respected. At present, HM Government is working flat-out to develop an exit strategy. However, the continuing non-availability of serological tests for antibodies that are sufficiently specific to distinguish between the Chinese virus and other coronaviridae is preventing finalization of that plan.

        • @ Chris Monckton

          The choice wasn’t either to “let the old people and sick people die and the health service collapse and the country descend into anarchy” or lock-down.” You made that up.

          The choice was between

          – protecting the old and vulnerable while the rest supported them by keeping society running and allowing herd immunity to build or

          – closing large parts of society, removing the support for the old and vulnerable, quite likely leaving the economy while failing to build any herd immunity so CV will more easily strike again.

          The UKm- in something of a panic, as your posts illustrate – choose the second option. Sweden – calmer and more rational – chose a variant of the first. It’ll be interesting to see which leads to better results in the medium to long term.

    • Simon , I am inclined to agree wih most of your points but I have a question to you ( and christopher moncton) concerning population density of London v Stockholm . The view that Christoper showed in earlier posts was the typical view of heavily built up central London , separated by only one water channel, the Thames , (for some of the day just a muddy ditch (23 years a Londoner)). Stockholm by contrast seems to have suburbs separated by considerable stretches of water . So was population density determined as population/ area of solid land or per geographical area? The fact that high densities of population are separated in Stockholm might be a significant factor in controlling the spread of disease , as would the metro or bus system in Stockholm, compared to that in London.

      • @mikewaite

        Quite possibly the detailed street layouts are relevant but I’d be surprised if any effective, credible model operated usefully at such a fine level without real time monitoring of every person. AFAIK, not likely in London or Stockholm, although, from what I read, some approximation may be operating elsewhere.

        As far as I understand Chris Monckton’s claim, he seems to have simply assumed that London has a higher population density than Stockholm. Obviously the density varies from place-to-place so some areas in London are of higher density than Stockholm’s average (and vice versa). But the numbers available on the web seem to clearly show that the average population density of Stockholm is greater than that of Greater London.

      • Mr Anthony knows perfectly well that the population density of London is about five times that of Stockholm, but he deliberately chose to compare the population density of Greater London, which goes all the way out into the countryside beyond Heathrow Airport and into the leafy rural lanes, with that of central Stockholm. He should have compared the population densities of central London with central Stockholm – like for like. But he did not, even after his error had been drawn to his attention by another commenter on a previous article in which he first perpetrated this piece of statistical prestidigitation.

        One must be honest and objective in trying to reach the truth, particularly when there are still so many unknown and currently unknowable unknowns, such as the fraction of the population asymptomatically infected, the true case fatality rate, the numbers who have recovered after being confirmed as infected, etc., etc.

        • Chris Monckton

          Your claim that the population density of London is 5x that of Stockholm is wrong. The average density of Stockholm 4,800 per sq km) is greater than that of Greater London 4,542 per sq km). You are confusing variations of the average value with the the average value itself.

          As I mentioned in another post, it’s true that some areas of London have a higher population density that the average for Stockholm. And it’s also true that areas within Stockholm have a higher population density that the average for London, for example:

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

          each of which is more than 5x the population density of Greater London.

          Rather than insult Chris Monckton, I’ll let people make their own minds up about the numbers.

    • I wonder where your population densities come from. The Wikipedia lists the population of the City of London at 9,401. Probably no exaggeration.

      • @ curious george

        I think you may be mixing up the “City of London” with Greater London. The former is a small area (~3 sq km) within London. Its total population (not population density) is 9,401. Density is therefore ~3,100 /sq km.

        Greater London has an area of ~1,583 sq km and a population of ~7.1M, density ~4,542/sq km.

    • Mr Anthony is, as usual, monkeying with statistics.

      One should compare central London, not greater London, with Stockholm. Central London has about five times the population density of Stockholm. So do several other major British cities. That is why lockdowns were essential here, for otherwise the rate of transmission in cities would have been severe, everyone would have fled to the country and the health services would have been overrun.

      No responsible government could possibly have taken the risk of doing nothing about a virus which was known to be spreading at 20% compound every day. Mr Johnson eventually overruled the “herd immunity” nitwits and took a command decision to back those who pointed out – as the Imperial College research pointed out – that even at a far lower rate of spread than was already evident the health service would have been overrun within days.

      Sweden, on the other hand, with its far lower population density, was able to avoid a strict lockdown because its epidemiologists calculated that the mean person-to-person contact rate would be low enough to prevent so rapid an exponential spread as to overwhelm the hospitals.

      • Chris Monckton, as you again repeat your response, I’ll do likewise

        Your claim that the population density of London is 5x that of Stockholm is untrue. Repeating an untruth won’t make it true no matter how much you might like it do so. The average density of Stockholm 4,800 per sq km) is greater than that of Greater London 4,542 per sq km). You are confusing variations of the average value with the the average value itself.

        As I mentioned in another post, it’s true that some areas of London have a higher population density that the average for Stockholm. And it’s also true that areas within Stockholm have a higher population density that the average for London, for example:

        Sodra Station: 26,900 per sq km,
        Roslagstull: 30,100 per sq km

        each of which is more than 5x the population density of Greater London.

        Rather than respond in kind to Chris Monckton’s unnecessary and rather childish insults, I’ll let people make their own minds up about the numbers.

    • Thank you Simon, I agree with you 100%. I think the ‘lockdown of society and the economy’ was promoted by an irrational fear of emerging viruses. Successful viruses like C-19 and Influenza and 100’s of others, do not kill their host (just the very weak), and are fairly contagious. They run their course with few deaths in the greater society. Unsuccessful ones that kill their hosts peter-out quickly, like SARS.

    • There’s plenty of London with a population density much greater than Stockholm’s 4,800 per sq km or Greater London’s purported 4,542 per sq km.
      Islington for example at 16,000 per sq km
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_English_districts_by_population_density

      As for Sweden, time will tell whether their government has taken the right approach
      https://www.euronews.com/2020/04/12/is-sweden-s-covid-19-strategy-working
      It might preserve the economy but at what cost ? It’s very well if someone else’s grandparents are dying to save the economy but likely different to volunteer up your own.

      An interesting aside is that in 1710 36% of Stockholm’s population died from the plague

      • As I mentioned in another post, it’s true that some areas of London have a higher population density that the average for Stockholm. And it’s also true that areas within Stockholm have a higher population density that the average for London, for example:

        Sodra Station: 26,900 per sq km,
        Roslagstull: 30,100 per sq km

        each of which is more than 5x the population density of Greater London.

    • “…mortality was greatest (by a factor of ~100 or so compared to young people) among very old and otherwise vulnerable people. The obvious response to such a situation is to isolate and protect such people while the rest to society continues to function…”

      It’s not that simple. The very old often require caretakers who are in the “free range” age likely to get infected and then carry it back to the patient.

      • Such possibilities need to be guarded against by repeated, frequent testing of people who have contact with the vulnerable. It would need suitable procedures to be established and monitored (and wouldn’t be 100% successful) but it’s nonetheless perfectly possible to run a reliable system of this kind.

        It certainly seems preferable to make the effort to set up such a system rather than have a blanket lock-down leading to economic damage at a level which I understand the UK Chancellor of the Exchequer has estimated to be up to 30% of GDP for the current quarter. I’m not sure how much it would have cost to test people who have contact with vulnerable people but I’m certain it’s vanishingly small compared to that level of economic destruction.

  6. Good news on Good News day.

    Bad news is the Wuhan virus lab used a Harbor Freight nuclear device that naturally failed to detonate when containment was breached.

    Crichton was a true prophet.

  7. “In global terms, these figures suggest that, assuming 90%, or 7 billion, of the world’s 7.8 billion population eventually became infected,”

    Become infected….all of us at sometime will become infected. It cannot be avoided. It is in the wild across the entire planet; it is now a part of us and we are a part of it. It will become as ubiquitous as the common-cold and flu’s.

    “The sooner some of these are shown to have a significant effect in randomized, prospective, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trials, the smaller the eventual death toll will be.”

    There is no way to do an ethical double-blind randomized test.
    Where are you getting the infected people?
    Are you going to put the high risk people in the test? If not, then it is not randomized. It will stop being blind, double as soon as some patients presents symptoms.
    Will your design test protocols withhold treatment? When virus seems to have the potential causing permanent lung and perhaps even heart damage.
    If any clinical trails are conducted they will be conducted through human analogues i.e. animal testing.

    • It could be that everyone will be exposed to the virus sufficiently to develop immunity. It’s presently unclear if most people simply aren’t susceptible enough to the ChiCom CV to develop COVID-19, or if minor infection confers immunity at viral load levels too low to overburden the immune system.

      The German study, in an area of high reported case incidence, finding that 15% of a random sample tested positive for antibodies, and similar surveys, suggest that perhaps only this share of any population will contract the disease, but most will remain asymptomatic or show mild symptoms. Whether the other 85% will never develop antibodies, despite slight exposure, or not, we can’t say yet. More testing will be required.

      • Yes sir. I’ve talk about the viral loading and general bio-burden as well in some of the previous posts.

        Historically, the only way we made it through the viral out-breaks, epidemics, so-called pandemics in the past is herd immunity. Virus just culled herd; that’s just the blatant reality. It will ultimately be same with this virus. Unfortunately, this path will be spread out over 2-5 years while all the institutions involved will muddy the statistics.

        It is not humane, to basically house arrest, ~99.65% of the population when there is little to no chance that people who actually need a vaccine/therapy will not be around by we get one. As there will be people, are people, that will commit suicides, overdose, have undiagnosed illnesses, untreated illness, etc.

        If you have to go on ventilator with this virus your chances of survival diminish greatly and if you do survive this round of infection potentially both your lungs and heart are comprised and a prime candidate for the viral culling.

        • I would be nice to check the viral load theory on voluntary young and healthy test subjects. They already are testing possible vaccine on people.

        • In response to Jehill, it is necessary to look dispassionately at both sides of the question. HM Government tried voluntary social distancing and self-isolation of the elderly and sick, but it did not work. The hospitals were rapidly being overrun. So Mr Johnson, rightly, took a command decision to lock the country down. Otherwise, the health service would have collapsed. No responsible government was willing to let that happen.

          So far, most of the British people support and honor the lockdown, and all understand that it will be brought to an end just as soon as it is reasonably safe to do so.

    • If 90 pct get infected anyhow might as well do it in a controlled manner. Optimally it is best to infect young and healthy first so they can be quarantined before infecting grandma and grandpa. Ideally all healthy people get it and recover before having interactions with older people.

    • I simply don’t believe 90% infection, much less 100%. There is no historical precedent. What other virus has infected 100% of the population? Spanish flu was estimated to have infected about 27% of world population. Even the Black Death didn’t get much above 50%.

      I’d be surprised if COVID-19 ever reached 50%.

      • Good news indeed. The UK is on course to level out at a cumulative “confirmed positive” figure of about 110,000 from a population of 70,000,000 that is, about 0.16 %. We had a peak rate of around 5000 (2.5 nightingales) new cases per day (not necessarily hospitalised) around 5th April with an average occupancy of 11 days. I don’t know the ratio of hospitalisation to confirmed positive: it’s a bit complicated. Perhaps the number in hospital will start to fall around 20th?
        [1] https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/12/coronavirus-uk-how-many-confirmed-cases-are-in-your-area (updated daily).

        • Suffolkboy:-

          The UK is still deteriorating with deaths at c.1,000/day and new daily cases rising.

          Good news it is not!

          • In response to mardler, I have made it repeatedly plain that the numbers infected and dying will go on rising for some time yet. However, it is necessary to provide some hope, by showing that the daily compound rate of growth in total cases, and in total deaths, is falling.

          • Unless reporting is still off, new cases appear to have peaked yesterday and new deaths will peak in a few days.

          • UK case data seems totally disorganised and useless. I guess they can just about count the bodies but attribution is probably flaky as well.

            Deaths have been below 900 for 6 days and falling for 3, though I would be cautious until that firms up in the next few days, it does seem to have peaked.

            At least CofB now seems to admit his graph serves little use other than to provide a little hope to the masses. Those lines will just dwindle to zero in an amorphous asymptote which tells us nothing more useful.

            He will shortly provide another which shows it will go dark before the nights out.

          • It seems that UK govt figures do not include those encouraged to die at home or those who keel over in a retirement home.

            ie. they are playing the same number massaging they regularly apply to unemployment figures.

        • suffolkboy: I don’t know about the UK, as the “source” of the daily data (a Twitter feed!) doesn’t mention the number hospitalized. I wonder why? (cough). But the Netherlands figures for the whole epidemic are as follows: Positive tests 25,587, hospital admissions 8,582, deaths 2,737. So, since the deaths per confirmed cases ratios are comparable (10.8% Netherlands, 12.5% UK) it would be reasonable to suppose that about one third of those testing positive will be admitted to hospital.

    • JEHill: There is no way to do an ethical double-blind randomized test.
      Where are you getting the infected people?
      Are you going to put the high risk people in the test? If not, then it is not randomized. It will stop being blind, double as soon as some patients presents symptoms.

      Every other method besides double-blind randomized trials prolongs the ignorance of something critically and clinically relevant, and there is no ethical justification for doing that.

      If there are identifiable risk groups, then you randomize the assignment to treatment or placebo within risk groups. Risk factors here include pre-existing conditions like heart arrhythmias, liver disease, lung disease, and other.

      The blinding does not end when symptoms develop, because symptoms can develop in all treatment groups. e.g., if pneumonia is a symptom, it can develop even in people of whom the virus has been completely cured.

      The only reason not to do a double-blind placebo controlled study with random assignment is if all the desired effects and adverse reactions are already known for sure in every risk group to which the treatment will be applied. If you believe that to be the case, you ought to say it straight out. Your objections have all been addressed in many clinical trials.

      • Mr Marler is right: of course it is possible to construct proper clinical trials, and many such trials are already in preparation.

  8. MA wastewater study finds five to 256 times more WuFlu virus infections than reported cases:

    https://www.miamiherald.com/news/coronavirus/article241908771.html

    Confirming similar studies in the Netherlands and Sweden.

    Which implies that ChiCom CV is indeed no more lethal than seasonal flu. It has however torn through nursing homes in Europe and the Americas, if not Asia, carrying off tens of thousands of old and sick people, especially men.

    Here are data on age, sex, ehtnicity and prior health conditions for NY State and City from four days ago.

    https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.whec.com/articles/new-york-releases-data-on-covid-19-deaths-5695809.html

    • Female: 2,131 (38%)
      Male: 3,349 (61%)
      Unknown: 9 (0.2%)

      I guess the 9 unknowns are the non-binaries who can’t make up their minds.

  9. In 2019, in the USA alone, PER DAY — that’s every single day for a year — about 14 motorcyclists were killed.

    No headlines. No daily, hourly, minute, second … updates, day after day, by exuberant news casters. No government shutdowns. No pretty charts or graphs. Kids were going to school, as if nothing like this were happening.

    I suppose we should dig up all those graves now and see weather SARS-Cov-2 is present on the remains, so that we can attribute all those deaths to COVID-19, adding to the tally.

    Sorry, … I’m still not buying the crisis, let alone the shutdown of civilization.

    I need to work on my graphs of alcohol-related fatalities, drug-abuse fatalities, smoking fatalities, and other socially acceptable daily death tallies. I think all these death-causes have a good discrimination case against COVID-19, as they have been the victims of exclusion and marginalization by a toxic male power elite.

    • Alright Bob I think the situation is reaching critical mass here. Now, I’ve already made mention of how worried I (we) am (are) about you. Clearly I was right.

      You can’t equate motorcycles, alcohol, drug-abuse, smoking and other “socially acceptable” daily death tallies that are assuredly the individual motorcyclist, alcoholic, drugaholic, smokaholic’s fault to this virus thing that isn’t.

      That’s a strawman Bob. You’re lost in a sea of logical fallacy brought on by despair. You’re on the ropes. You need some help. Call me.

      • Being obese, having high blood pressure, heart disease, smoking, diabetes, largely revolve round lifestyle choices and those will hugely impact on the likelihood of you dying of covid 19 so bobs point is not really a straw man.

        Tonyb

        • Tony:

          Thanks for your Argument to Ethicality, but we’re trying to remotely psychosemantically heal what ails Bob here. I don’t think that now is the time for you to bring him down with your virtual virtue-signaling do you?

          I mean, you with all your talk about all the crisis of the impact on the likelihood of dying from one’s own lifestyle choices, contrasted with Bob, who is NOT buying the crisis of one’s own lifestyle choices AT ALL?

          I wag my finger at you, Tony. Who’s truly in crisis here? What are you trying to do to this fellow WUTWian and why are you trying to do it???

        • +In response to tonyb, obesity (with the sole exception of morbid obesity, at a BMI >40) is not a cofactor for Chinese-virus outcomes, according to the first proper survey of intensive-care outcomes, conducted recently in the UK and reported here.

          • According to the medical authorities, being overweight is a factor and the more overweight you are the more it becomes a factor. Being overweight is often associated with other problems including high blood pressure and diabetes thereby increasing the susceptibility to covid 19 .

            Tonyb

          • For some reason, blacks in the U.S. are disproportionately represented among the more severe cases. I would guess this is at least somewhat related to poor diet, which leads to obesity and diseases, such as diabetes, heart disease and hypertension.

          • Poor diet also probably means lack of vitamin C and D3, lack of whole grain foods ( zinc ) and generally poor state of health.

            But don’t forget : “poor kids are just as clever as white kids”!

      • Absurd! Of course you can and should make judgements about all behaviors that may result in death. I do every day. It’s a straw man to insist that this virus is any different. I don’t know what the right answer will be but I do know we are fast approaching a point when the cure will be more devastating than the disease. For myself I will always choose personal freedom over government control of my choices

        • Absurd! Of course you can and should make judgements about all behaviors that may result in death. I do every day . . . I will always choose personal freedom over government control of my choices

          DKR – how dare you contradict yourself in front of these fine intellectuals @ WUWT. You can’t insist that something is a straw man while at the same time claiming you don’t know the correct answer about that something. Pshaw!

          Furthermore, think ye that ye hast free will? Nonsense! Try this experiment:

          1) WATTS your favorite color? For 15 seconds, change it to red, then change it back to whatever it was before. If it’s already red, change it to blue and do the same. Were you able to do it? No you weren’t. But if you had free will you should be able to do so.

          2) WATTS your favorite food? For 15 seconds, change it to broccoli, then change it back to whatever it was before. If it’s already broccoli, change it to steak and do the same. Were you able to do it? No you weren’t. But if you had free will you should be able to do so.

          Any number of additional trivial examples will show your argument to free will specious and unworthy of additional consideration by everyone with anyone’s given modicum of common sense ability to think and speak rationally. And as you should know given your obvious term dropping usage of “straw man,” any man who contradicts himself is unworthy of further consideration in argument.

          You’ve been summarily dismissed. I bid you “good day.”

      • How is what I wrote a strawman, sycomputing?

        Explain to me exactly how a death rate from COVID-19 deserves elevated alarm above and beyond the death rates of largely AVOIDABLE, even socially ENABLED, economically SUPPORTED death rates from smoking, alcohol use, traffic crashes, and some heart disease?

        People have the freedom of individual choice to smoke or not, knowing that research solidly supports a 50% chance of dying from smoking. Yet, not only do we allow the means to such choice and ensuing death to continue, we look the other way on the death statistic. That’s not a strawman — that’s outright hiding from a fact, … if you accept the research and the official institutions that endorse it — the same institutions that endorse the COVID-19 statistics.

        Start the count of daily smoking deaths from 120 days ago. Every single one of those days, add the previous day’s tally, and do a pretty graph. I haven’t done it yet, but I will soon, and I can tell you that when I put that graph beside a graph of accumulating deaths from COVID-19, the picture will be truly shocking. The right to make a personal decision to act in the face of knowledge was taken out of the hands of individuals by the government, in the case of COVID-19. Why people are not outright refusing to allow this is beyond me.

        Strawman, … no way.

        Delusion, man! Wake up!

        • Uh oh, you really do mean it don’t you Bob? Here I was thinking you were just horsing around and deliberately misrepresenting the argument but . . . no? Say it isn’t so Bob?

          In that case, you’re sure right. It’s not a straw man. Not when you really mean it. But now I’m convinced your mind is more on the brink of collapse than it ever wasn’t before. What’s going to happen to those super cute fancy little toddler onesies you (used to?) sell on your website I can’t find anymore? I wanted to buy one for my little niece when I, you know, revolt my way up from the proletariat to being able to afford your fracking bourgeoisie priced stuff.

          People have the freedom of individual choice to smoke [drink, gluttonize, etc.] or not . . .

          Well that’s the key to your newest hurdle, Bob. Haven’t you answered your own question, i.e., “how a death rate from COVID-19 deserves elevated alarm above and beyond the death rates of largely AVOIDABLE,” etc., etc?

          Who’s choosing of their own “free” will to die from COVID? Or even to suffer the myriad of effects that don’t include death? Nobody, right? Well surely you’ll agree then that there’s a textbook falsum analogiam in equating these scenarios, yes? (For those of you in Rio Linda, that’s a wholly illegitimate latin term for a legitimate fallacy of propositional logic [un]sumptously called, “False Analogy.”)

          Remember, the wounds of a friend are better than the kisses of an enemy. Call me. We can still talk ‘fore it’s too late.

    • Once the public realizes that this panic and lockdown was the result of just another average flu season, it will be interesting to hear the excuses from politicians.

      Should be worth a laugh.

      • Klem has a closed mind and an open mouth. The truth is that in several European countries the severe excess mortality in recent weeks is attributable to the Chinese virus, which, according to a recent UK study, is considerably more infectious and more fatal than flu, and requires more advanced and more prolonged intensive care in far more cases.

        It would be better if Klem did less shouting and more reading.

    • I am on the same page are you. Isolation did not solve the covid problem.

      …and I hear what you are saying about deaths in general.

      This is a better comparison…

      …As this is problem we could fix for about $.05/person/day and we are ignoring it.

      If it was all about saving lives we could correct our population’s Vitamin D deficiency.

      Vitamin D is not a vitamin, it is a proto hormone that is required by 200 microbiological processes in the body, including the immune system.

      600,000 people die a year in the US from cancer. The current recommended maximum Vitamin D dosage is 1000 UI/day which is odd as research eight years ago showed 4000 UI/day is conservatively safe and would cut deaths (more diseases than cancer) by 50%. With more vitamin D and calcium supplements a reduction of 77% could be attained.

      Twenty years of studies have shown that there is up to a 80% reduction in most of the common cancers if we took vitamin D supplements to raise our 25(OH)D concentration in our blood to 60 ng/ml.

      The vitamin D deficiency problem explains why dark skin people are more likely to get HIV, the flu, and covid. It also explains why people with low blood serum levels of 25(OH)D are more like to get and die from the flu.

      Corvid Vitamin D recommendation base on research with no brainer option.

      https://www.grassrootshealth.net/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/disease-incidence-prev-chart-051317.pdf

      ttps://www.cnn.com/2020/04/12/health/black-americans-hiv-coronavirus-blake/index.html

      The minimum vitamin D required to achieve 60 ng/ml is 4000 UI/day for a small woman.

      This is a link to a women’s movement that found this out and started their own research center. I have followed the research/issue for about 7 years as my wife had breast cancer.

      https://www.grassrootshealth.net/document/cancer-risk/

      https://www.grassrootshealth.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/McDonnell-2018-breast-cancer-GRH.pdf

      https://www.grassrootshealth.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/grh-lappe-cancer-journal.pone_.0152441.pdf

      • William, you wrote, “I am on the same page are you. Isolation did not solve the covid problem”

        Yes, you are right but that is not the reason for quarantine. Isolation did solve the health care system problem experienced in so many other places. After something works, you can’t say, “See, we didn’t need it.”

        • “After something works, you can’t say, “See, we didn’t need it.”

          Good point, Shelly. We’ll be seeing a lot of “monday-morning quarterbacking” like this about these issues as we go forward, unfortunately.

          A lot of people can see what to do,or not to do, after the fact. That’s easy. I guess that’s why a lot of people indulge in after-the-fact criticism.

        • Shelly
          You observed, “After something works, you can’t say, ‘See, we didn’t need it.’” The converse of that is, if an action was not needed, but you did it anyway, then it is impossible to prove it wasn’t responsible. That is why controls on experiments are needed.

    • Mr Kernodle, like some other commenters here, does not appear to understand that the infection was spreading exponentially at 20% compound per day in the three weeks to March 14, and that if that rate had continued the health services of many countries, including Britain, would not have been able to cope. As it is, even with a quite strict lockdown it is proving difficult to provide the advanced, prolonged intensive care that thousands suddenly require.

    • That was making a lot of sense until you got the ” toxic male power elite” bit.

      Strange no one else has spotted that this pandemic was caused by toxic masculinity and the patriarchy.

      Must be all the old white male heterosexual types that hang out here.

      • That was making a lot of sense until you got the ” toxic male power elite” bit.

        Oh you’d argue that “bit” was austere? Really Greg? Oi Vey! But then I get a kick out of comedic hyperbole, i.e., some of us have a sense of humor!

  10. There are many different ways of looking at the value of a human life, and the estimated value depends upon the kind of society we live in. Value in the ‘third’ world is very very low.
    When you take wealth out of society as we in the West are doing today, by closing the economy down, there are other costs than just, hopefully, saving lives. Few lives will actually be saved in the long term. We are just pushing the numbers of dead out as far as we can, but there is a cost to that too.

    Ralph Keeney, an economist in the U.S., has estimated that for every $7.25 million removed from the economy, that about one hypothetical death is the result. That dollar number drops as the economy fails. If we assume that 1 trillion dollars has been lost from the US economy so far, and if we further assume that $5 million removed from the economy translates to the loss of one hypothetical life, then we have already effectively so reduced the value of life and the economy, that 200,000 hypothetical lives will be lost through unemployment and economic downturn. This may not seem very likely, but if the doctors get their way and close things down for longer, it will become very real.
    Average life expectancy will drop as it did in the USSR when that concept failed. How will that number of ‘deaths’, hypothetical as they may be (you can’t say exactly who they will be), compare with the current strategy of spreading deaths out over time, but not saving any number of lives worth speaking of?
    We need to examine much more than Fauci and Birx are capable of, with their single view of things.

    • You are comparing life with a normal economy and more deaths now versus life in a reduced economy with the same deaths spread out over a longer time.
      Choice one is not available. Letting the beast out of its cage too soon, will result in more deaths now, but not a normal economy. The chaos will result in similar economic damage. And the stress to the public will be worse.
      Just think about 15% a day compounding infection rate. Assume we get a little lower rate due to public awareness. Start with 500K infected. Run some calculations and think about 10% needing hospital care. Think about another 10% home sick or quarantined (if we are bothering with that). Think about another 20% too scared to go to work. And add in the bodies pilling up on TV every night.
      Think you will get your economy back on track? Think it will be just like it was, only a few more bodies for someone else to deal with?
      This is a nasty bug. There is no “normal” choice for us right now. Just bad and worse.
      We will open up as soon as possible. And it won’t be up to the doctors. They are advisors not decision makers.

    • Since the economy and GDP has taken such a big hit, it makes sense to adjust the size of government by the same ratio. We must cut government employee paychecks or lay off government employees.

      • Unfortunately it looks like we may not be able to afford the 3 trillion or so to combat climate change so we will just have to grin and bear that disappointment

        Tonyb

        • IMO the big money will now be going into virology. Climatologist pseudo-scientists know their gravy train has just run into the buffers. That is why they are up in arms and deperately trying to create some linkage between COVID and the war on “carbon”.

          This gravy train terminates here. Please disembark and take care not leave any belongs when you leave.

    • The rate of spread in Sweden is roughly the same as it is in the countries which have shut down their economies and put masses of people out of work.

      Didn’t they even have a decline in new cases over the last couple of days?

      • No the exponential rate is Sweden is much lower. They have small numbers and long doubling time. Much of that has nothing to do with their choice of shutdown , they are just ‘lucky’ for other reasons.

        That is why they were totally correct to do what they did ( virtually nothing ). That does not mean it would have worked everywhere but that local conditions need local solutions, not federal central planning or EU directives.

        • Yes. The doubling time in Sweden is high and has remained high there despite a major lack of ‘lockdown’ procedures.

          I’m not sure what your point is, unless you think they have a different disease there? The entire ‘lockdown’ plan was based on the belief that the disease spread rapidly and was possible to spread while people had few, if any, symptoms. Sweden appears to disprove that, as it spread slower there than in countries with ‘lockdowns’.

          • https://climategrog.files.wordpress.com/2020/04/2019-ncov-log-cases-sweden.png

            Doubling time 13.6 days but you are jumping to spurious conclusions based on you bias about confinement.

            There are probably many reasons why Sweden has low figures of cases and deaths, this is pre-existing and nothing to do with restrictions.

            That it has stayed slow but basically still exponential is what is expected in absense of any measures. Numbers are still too low for the usual bending over of the epidemic we saw in EU countries before measures came in.

            It shows Sweden did what was right for Sweden, it does not “prove” what other countries should have done with different circumstances.

            There is sign in the last 5d that it may be leveling out. Now that will be interesting if that firms up.

    • Perhaps, but I’m sure they’ll fudge the numbers to suite their political ends.

      Everybodies doing it.

    • Sweden should modify their immigration policies, but with regard to their response to coronavirus, it does not look like they are FUBAR.

      We’ll know in a day or two if it’s peaked in Sweden. It does look like it though.

      How quickly new cases fall and the extent of herd immunity will be key in judging whether their response was better or worse than that of other nations.

      • How is it possible that they are FUBAR? Right now they are sitting at around 90 deaths per Million. Assuming that it has peaked, they will end this at around 180 deaths per million- just over double last year’s Swedish flu season (80). That’s unfortunate for sure, but that is not a catastrophe. Meanwhile if the US has peaked, we will end up around 150 deaths per Million- 1.5x a bad flue season in the US (101).

        We are talking about a difference of around 30 – 50 deaths per million of population between the hard lockdown of the US and Sweden’s model. While every death is unfortunate, it is not at all absurd to question whether those lives saved justified the economic cost.

  11. Asian Flu, in 1958 killed about 2 million on a population of 3 billion. Equivalent to about 5.5 million on today’s population.
    Global population in 1919 1.8 billion.

  12. South Australia is immolating its people another month of quarantine many will die but not from coronavirus but hunger poverty and isolation

    • Don’t worry. Food producers in North America are shutting down, too.

      The US just lost 5% of its supermarket pork production, for example. Canada has had a meat processing plant shut down as well.

      Another couple of weeks of this nonsense and we’re heading for Mad Max.

    • I have commented elsewhere that some European countries are already breaking out of their self imposed confinement, according to the BBC :
      https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-52226763
      Those that do so early will have a competitive trade adavantage on the laggards (IMO – but not an economist) . The breakout seems to be led by countries whose CV perfornmance is currently no better , indeed arguably worse, than that of Australia.
      In terms of :
      Country :New cases :New deaths: deaths /1million population: (based on worldometer for April 11)
      Australia: 65: 2: 2
      Austria: 139: 13 : 39
      Denmark : 177 : 13 : 45
      Norway: 95: 6: 22
      Italy: 4694: 619: 322
      Spain : 2992: 366: 363
      Bulgaria: 8: 1: 4
      Chechia : 3: 3 12

      I am beginning to suspect that the Australian Civil service , and Police, have developed such a love of the control that they have over the population that they are unwilling to give it up.
      If that seems fanciful , I have experienced it before, growing up with the post war controls and rationing in England that lasted 9 years after the fall of Berlin and long after our former enemies and allies were enjoying a return to normal life ( except of course for those incarcerated by Stalin).
      I wonder how long before certain politicians and journalists comment that the lockdown, supported by most of the population In US and UK, has been so acceptable that it’s continuation for the next 30 years towards zero emission should present no significant problems or public unrest.

    • “… that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.” link If you actually meant what the word means, we’re revoking your poetic license on grounds of excessive hyperbole.

  13. This is a Mockton backdown but it means the guy is intelligent so lets not insult him anymore please. Im very tempted hahahh cheers this will be all over in 2 weeks when we can see who was right or wrong my guess Sweden was right and the rest of the worl was wrong including Trump who followed the incredible stupid advice of Fauci CDC

    • Sweden was certainly right for Sweden. They have very low numbers and slow growth. Seems to be leveling out with very little cost. I’m glad they stuck to their guns and did not allow EU countries to tell them what to do.

      I don’t think Italy or Spain could have allowed them selves the same choice. It would have looked like Monty Python’s “bring out yer dead” scene.

      Now Italy will have to deal with a much longer duration having chosen to “flatten the curve” , they now have long slow decline to work through.

      https://climategrog.files.wordpress.com/2020/04/2019-ncov-d-logistic-fit-italy.png

    • The relentlessly stupid and offensive and insufficiently identified “Eliza” says I have “backed down”. Nonsense. I have simply continue to report what the numbers actually show, having made it explicit from the start that if lockdowns worked the rate of spread would slow markedly. That is what the numbers show, and I have reported it just as I said I would. Don’t be silly.

      • “rate of spread would slow markedly.” That is not a falsifyable claim , it a vague politicians claim which can always be claimed to be correct.

        You have persistently claimed that your graphs prove confinement works but the only grounds for that is the specious claim that everywhere would be a never ending “pure exponential” without it.

        That is patently untrue since most EU show an increase in doubling time before any measures came in. Your disingenuous claims and failure to answer questions is getting tiresome.

        https://climategrog.files.wordpress.com/2020/04/2019-ncov-log-growth-frisp.png
        You messed up. Get over it.

  14. More good news: UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson released from the hospital! God bless his doughty constitution…

      • It seemed to be a fairly rapid recovery from the ICU. No reports as to what treatment(s) were applied but, whatever it was, it worked fast!

        • He probably received high flow nasal cannula, or something similar, and wasn’t intubated, which is probably why he didn’t get worse.

      • Mr Johnson himself has said that when he was moved to intensive care it was, in his words “touch and go”. The statistics on the first 2249 patients in intensive care in the UK showed that just over 50% of closed cases died, and just under 50% recovered. Fortunately, Mr Johnson was among the 50% who recovered.

        • Mr.Johnson was only on oxygen. Do really 50% of patients receiving oxygen die or patients who receive intubation or ECMO? That’s a difference.

          • ECMO’s have not been reported to be killing people who have Wuhan virus. ECMO-type blood treatment might be a solution to the ventilator problem, since it bypasses the lungs.. It was officially recommended as an alternative to a ventilator last week.

  15. Tomorrow is the resurection. Let’s hope that Trump will see that as a good time to announce the resurrection of the US economy.

    • You can’t see the studs in the sunlight, but they are there. The jacket is by Vanson, an excellent U.S. brand, and I’ve had it since I was a lad. Beeswax once a month keeps it in as-new condition.

  16. Yesterday on one my local Facebook sites, somebody posted a picture of the #2 train in NYC. It was the very antithesis of social distancing. People jammed together in typical rush hour fashion with but a handful of masks visible for the 50 people in the shot. That got me thinking and I broke out the Worldometer numbers for the United States to roughly compare the NYC Tri-State (NY, NJ and CT*) area with the rest of the country. The bottom line numbers are quite astonishing.
    Tri-State Population compared to US as a whole: 10%
    Tri-State Cases compared to US as a whole: 47%
    Tri-State Deaths compared to US as a whole: 55%

    We need to agree on the unit of analysis if we are really going to tackle this issue. These numbers argue against a national shut-down.

    • MA ranks just under CT on list of states with highest mortality rates, as of the moment:

      1) NY 478 deaths attributed to COVIC-19 per million population
      2) NJ 265
      3) LA 180
      4) MI 140
      5) CT 138
      6) MA 100
      7) WA 68
      US Ave. 65
      8) RI 60
      9) IL 53
      10) IN 52…
      21) FL 22,,,
      30) CA 16…
      40) TX 10…
      50) WY 0

      The three largest (including urban population) states, CA, TX and FL, are way below the national average; the fourth largest, NY, way above it. The US average comes way down, too, when you take out the NYC metro area. The data do indeed seem to argue for regional rather than national shutdowns.

      • Sunny states seem to have some advantage, especially considering that Florida is home to a lot of old folks.

        • In Chile, the desert north, the driest place on Earth, has practically no deaths, while the cool, moist south is a relative pesthole.

          There does seem to be a climate element. The south however also got lots of vacationers from Santiago in February.

          https://www.minsal.cl/nuevo-coronavirus-2019-ncov/casos-confirmados-en-chile-covid-19/

          The capital of Region Araucania is Temuco. The region has less than a million people, with 17 deaths, while the Region Metropolitana (Santiago) has over seven million, with 35 deaths. Only two deaths attributed to COVID-19 in the five regions of the north. My Valparaiso Region to the west of Santiago, on the coast, has suffered two deaths, with close to two million people.

      • The highest population density areas, with ports, airports, and heavy public transit use, are the natural breeding and fast transmission grounds for these pandemics. Rather than locking up Grandma’s and Grandpa’s across the vast stretches of low population density USA (to protect them, of course!), perhaps we should quarantine and lock down the high population density cities that act as petri dishes for these pandemics to fast breed and vector from. Only essential food, goods, and services would be allowed to move in and out. It would slow the transmission of pandemics from the ‘hotspot’ high population density city cores into the suburban and rural areas, without shutting the whole country-wide economy down.

        Is this ‘unfair’? No more than some of the other proposals I’ve read here on WUWT…. All depends on your perspective.

        • Movement out of NYC has indeed been restricted.

          Alcaldes in my region protested against tourists from Santiago coming to enjoy our beaches here, behaving as if nothing had changed.

    • Good work. Quite enlightening.

      Comparing that to rural states is probably like Sweden vs Italy. One-size-fits-all fits no one ! Any decisions should be taken locally. At least a state level if not county level.

    • The endlessly stupid, infinitely ignorant and insufficiently identified Eliza should not view His High Lordship Mr. Mockton as an ally and certainly not as a peer. Eliza should bow, lick the cow manure from His Lordship’s boots and remain silent.

      I love posh insults and pretentious superiority.

  17. The assumption that 90 per cent of the population will eventually become infected has no basis in evidence but is pure assumption. Look at the evidence. The Diamond Princess where only 17 per cent were infected. The Chinese town where only 15 per cent of the household members of those who had the virus also got it. And now the German town where 15 per cent were infected. Also look at the German test positive proportion which has slowly approached 10 per cent. All the evidence is that this virus only infects about 15 per cent of the population, at least in this wave. The assumption that it will spread exponentially to the whole population is one of the fundamentally dubious assumptions in this pandemic.

    • In response to Mr Jones, such little evidence as is available indicates that, so far, some 15% of those populations that have been tested show antibodies to a coronavirus. However, we are still in the early stages of this pandemic, and insufficient testing has been done to draw any definitive conclusions. A more cautious approach is needed.

      • The 15% are bogus. Don’t rely on them. False positive testing for coronaviridae of cold strains. There is no way they developed a reliable antibody test in that short time frame.

        So far I’ve never posted anywhere that I have a PhD in Molecular Biomedicine and know one of the virology poster boys in Germany Prof. Drosten in person from a former collaboration when he was still the head of the Institute of Virology in Bonn. He received a medal of honor for his achievements for SARS-CoV-1 in 2003. He knows SARS and is not in favor of ending the lockdowns soon.

        But I think it’s time. I see so much misinformation on this site regarding this pandemic it’s making me sick.

        As much as I enjoyed the critical thinking of the community in the context of climate in the past people don’t seem to take the same effort to educate themselves in basic biology and epidemiology to contribute as valuable in the context of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic.

        This shit is awful. This shit is dangerous. This shit is not taking it easy on us if we are lazy. We CAN get it under control but it takes unprecedented effort. Then we can go out of the lockdowns and beat it.

        The earlier we face this unpleasant truth we can agree on and develop solutions. I firmly believe in the capability of our societies to come up with these solutions. Let’s go to work!

        • Ron,
          It’s not clear to me what you are saying. There is supposedly so much misinformation that you’re getting sick, but you don’t identify anything that is misinformation except the 15% number.

          You say that you think it’s time (to end the lockdowns) disagreeing with the German who you say knows SARS and is opposed to your view. You say that the Gangelt data is wrong due to false positives which implies that you believe that the epidemic is not widespread in the population, significantly less than 15%. Then you say that this disease is very bad stuff and we need to take it seriously. (Which apparently we’re not?)

          So that means what exactly? Here’s what I heard: COVID-19 is very serious and hasn’t spread through much of the population. Experts are against opening up soon, so your recommendation is to end the lockdowns.

          Not wishing to be disagreeable, but maybe you could try again to be coherent. If you are in fact an expert, you could add a lot to the discussion.

          • Sorry if I have not been as clear as possible.

            I don’t think it’s time to end the lockdowns if we don’t have any strategy to contain the virus. Like the track and testing system of South Korea. Otherwise we will just see a second wave (or all the effort to get the numbers down would be in vain very shortly). If the virus is capable to spread nearly completely during one evening of a carneval party or one holy mass that means it is highly contagious and not to take lightly.

            I think the virus is underestimated by many people on this site and mistakenly confused with the flu though it has killed more people than the average flu does in 12 month in not even 2 and lead to ERs filled with people, lead to a shortage of ventilators and required the need of mass graves. And that is with lockdowns.

            SARS-CoV-2 did not spread to most of the population yet. Herd immunity is far from 15% even in hot spots. CFR is most likely around 2% maybe even 5% if the lag time of people dying later after extensive treatment catches up with the number of people infected. Numbers from Austria and Germany where closed cases are counted point into the 5% direction. That would be even more unpleasant.

            I don’t claim to be an expert for coronaviridae or epidemiology. But I am a biologist by teaching. I have worked with chloroquine in tissue culture, viruses and I am a cell biologist knowing the limitations of PCR and antibody based techniques. I have participated in developing some so I am familiar with the problems when it comes to specificity.

            And I am still confused that people are rarely seeing the problem of a relatively high CFR and herd immunity. Because the CFR determines how many people will die given the best care possible!

            Flattening the curve is not at all preventing deaths if you are going down the path of herd immunity it is just delaying it. Same number of people will die but just some months later.

            That means aiming for herd immunity will a least kill the amount of people given by the CFR multiplied by 0.6 (for herd immunity) and 328 millions. Nearly 2 millions with 1% CFR! How much earlier people will die than without the virus one doesn’t know and depends on the patient’s history but the overall number of stolen years will be tremendous.

            Only way to prevent deaths in absolute is to contain the virus until its eradication from the population through isolation or until we can achieve herd immunity through vaccination.

            That’s how it is. I wish it would be different. I really do.

            That shit will not leave us anytime soon and we have to be careful to not destroy all progress that was made by the economical sacrifices of the lockdowns by getting overambitious and loosen the restrictions too early and being not honest to the people how they should act to prevent another need for a lockdown.

          • “I think the virus is underestimated by many people on this site and mistakenly confused with the flu though it has killed more people than the average flu does in 12 month in not even 2 and lead to ERs filled with people, lead to a shortage of ventilators and required the need of mass graves. And that is with lockdowns.”

            I heard this morning that the Wuhan virus was second only to smallpox in its infectious rate. I believe the number 5.7 was quoted. I haven’t seen any other mention of this yet.

          • Ok that is at least an internally consistent opinion. I guess you didn’t mean “but I think it’s time”

            I had previously posted a similar gloomy analysis based on 15% being far to low to avoid disastrous second and subsequent waves. Except that I question still (with no confidence) whether the numbers may be underestimated whereas you feel confident that they are overestimated. I hope and do feel confident that no government is going to open up without good evidence that there are substantially more people who will soon have sars-covi2-specific antibodies than you believe to be the case. At some point I still hope that evidence of effectiveness of experimental treatments will be adequate to justify broader use and also limit the death toll.

            As I have consistently said, we need more data and without it, we are only speculating.

    • The estimate that 90% of the population would become infected was made by researchers at Imperial College, London, as part of their report to HM Government on the worst-case transmission of the infection.

      Since that transmission has been decisively interfered with, on the recommendation of the researchers, one can expect that less than 90% will be infected, in the near future at any rate.

      • 90% assumes an R0 of 10. You may estimate the final herd infection proportion as 1-1/R0. Some initial estimates for R0 were around 2.6. This would put the final “do nothing” estimate at 61.5% of population infected if we really were like wild animals.

        But R0 doesn’t work with people, because we’re smart and we react. Once we as a group identify the problem, we might even lock ourselves up to reduce R to a MUCH lower number. We did just that and now we see that as a reduced growth rate, some say close to zero now.

        In my simulations, I get stabilization at a suppression level of as little as 40%. But then you wait a long time for further reductions because the infections are having trouble spreading, and we don’t really see herd immunity end the situation until 2023 or later.

        If we assume that the effect of separation is a known factor, which simply takes Rt from 2.6 down to something more manageable (close to 1, maybe 1.3 or so), the very fact that the growth rate is still diminishing indicates that herd immunity may be the only other factor in play. This would not be a noticeable effect at low infection rates, so this also makes me think that the rate of infection is MUCH higher than we think (orders of magnitude as Christopher suggests), the denominator is much higher, and the CFR is also very low. If so, then the risk of “opening up shop” is much lower, but could probably be estimated. The serology tests really are super critical, but we don’t need to test that everywhere. If we can test New York City to a reasonable level, that’s fine, we have a number and we can stop testing (assuming the number is huge, like 20%). Once you have that estimate, the rest becomes clear. You continue limited suppression (do your best, wear masks, carry on) and re-start everything, because herd immunity is around the corner anyway.

        Now remember, if we are at Rt=1.3 or so, we only need (1-1/1.3) or 23% immunity and we will stay level with our current level of separation. If we begin to ease off, to, say, 1.6, we only need 37.5% immunity. And this sounds reasonable to me. We wash our hands, don’t shake hands, be careful, stay away from each other, and wait for the vaccine, some wear masks. Game over.

        Here’s how I think it could play out. We see the growth rates lowering, and from this can estimate when they reach zero (which only means you’ve seen peak infection rate but by no means that the situation has resolved). Now we decide to reduce separation at some point in time. Instead of it being 60% effective, we take measures with some plus and minus effects that end up at 50% effective. So now we re-start growth (unless we’re well past peak), and just pick up from there. It should be fairly easy to estimate the totals at that point if we consider that herd immunity will carry on as it has.

        Again: The only way for it to be reducing and not staying stable is for us either to be more effective in suppression as we go (possible but doubtful), or herd immunity is active, which means the pool of susceptibles has already been vastly reduced.

        Here are some results from my simulator that estimate suppression needed to meet ICU capacity:

        https://naturalclimate.wordpress.com/2020/03/24/coronavirus-model-what-level-of-suppression-is-enough/

    • The Diamond Princess passengers were in Cabin Isolation from the first cases on.
      That hardly reflects a normal situation, unless your normal includes “lockdown”.
      China’s data cannot be believed for any useful purpose.
      Germanies data also includes lockdown, so what you are actually confirming is that lockdown works.

    • We don’t know how long it will take for the virus to find every available infectable person with or without lockdowns and social distancing. I expect governments everywhere are listening to their public health experts who I expect are cautioning against worst possible scenarios.
      Looking at this rationally, I would think that the best course of action would be to provide maximum protection for vulnerable people and lock them down while allowing the virus to spread to the extent that the health services can handle it. It will find its way to everyone, eventually, barring a vaccine. Perhaps that is what we are doing anyway. The health services seem to be pretty maxed out almost everywhere and it is still spreading. We don’t seem to have done an adequate job of protecting the most vulnerable but for the oldest and most infirm it was in most cases close to the end anyway. My mother passed away at 90 last year and she was ready to go.

    • Its interesting how so many nations in the world have the same solution for this common cold virus.

      Even in hot eqitorial nations, where cvd-19 is not supposed to be a problem. Funny about that, huh?

      And people wonder why gun sales are up.

    • Eliza appears incapable of assessing evidence. This virus is considerably more infectious and considerably more fatal than flu, and, worse still, it requires more costly, more advanced, more skilled, more prolonged intensive-care intervention, with a considerably lesser chance of success, than any pre-existing viral pneumonia. The UK’s intensive-care authority has published a definitive report establishing that this is the case.

      Eliza is out of her depth here.

      • Christopher M B.

        My observation is you rarely argue a point, without resorting to insult and so on.

        It is unnecessary to insult in general when debating or arguing a point. It is counterproductive.

  18. Does anyone remember when Richard Gere ran around Hollywood chanting to free Tibet?

    I wonder how the Chinese clamped down on Richards career since than?

  19. The rest of the lock-down world is still waiting, and some hoping, that Sweden will go up in flames.

    I find it interesting that the IHME projection has Sweden peaking in May. I was told by my “betters” that we need to flatten the curve. By doing so our hospitals would not be overwhelmed and cause more deaths, than the ones that were going to happen no matter what we do. If this is so, then shouldn’t Sweden be peaking now, sooner, since they didn’t institute any draconian social rules?

    Link goes to IHME Sweden

    https://covid19.healthdata.org/sweden

  20. joannenova.com.au/2020/04/finally-coronavirus-random-tests-show-only-1-infected-herd-immunity-is-tiny/
    Lo Nova has a post about a similar study if not the same one but comes to the opposite conclusion about the “herd immunity” prospect.
    Am I reading her post incorrectly?

  21. In short, the confirmed cases, which tend to be the more serious ones, appear to undercount the true extent of infection by two orders of magnitude.

    Thanks Lord Monkton for that. I’ve been bashing my head against the wall of belief in experts with simplistic models fed with shoddy data. Here in Canada, we are not testing enough people to know what the sex ratio is, let alone the real numbers for Wuhan flu.

    Could we paraphrase an ancient wisdom? “Beware experts bearing models”

  22. “making the disease about half as bad as the Spanish flu of 1918-19”

    You predict half of the number of deaths, but the population back then was only about 2 billion, or about 1/4 the size, so the Spanish Flu would have been roughly 2 x 4 = 8 times worse on a per capita basis.

    If this disease is seasonal, then expect the numbers to begin picking up in the Southern Hemisphere soon as they fall in the northern hemisphere.

    I am actually surprised if the under-count is off by 2 orders of magnitude. I expected it would be low by 20 to 30 times, but 100 times or more? That would be surprising to me. I’ll wait for more data before believing it is that high – but it could be. By a factor of 20 times there will have been about 40 million infected by now. If its really 100 or more, then it becomes about 200 million or more – still LOTS of room for this disease to last months more. Herd immunity will take a long while to stop the disease – all we can hope for is for it to start slowing the disease spread down. With such a high R0, Herd Immunity will be higher than for typical Flu.

  23. People held a street party where I lived yesterday with a DJ and a mobile disco drinking alcohol there were a lot of people taking part. I did not see any police trying to break it up and take our liberties away. If it is necessary to take such drastic action against this virus today why has it not been necessary for previous outbreaks such as the “Hong Kong flu” in 1968 which I survived and I am also surviving this outbreak. We are being led to believe that this outbreak is worse or will become worse than any thing that happened before , we will gain immunity to this virus and the death rate will fall rapidly

    • Seasonal flu evolved with humans for as long as there have been humans, evolved to coexist as in parasite and host. The parasite does not evolve to kill the host. Sars cov-2 is zoonotic. It is novel. Humans have not evolved with it. That is the difference.

  24. The use of “population-wide immunity” in place of the equally correct but less delicate ‘herd immunity’ is duly noted.
    An exponential (or any other function) rise in infections means the same function rise in immune count because nearly all survive.
    I wonder how many thousands have died and will die because of the knee-jerk antagonism of the Trump-hating media to a suggested medication that appeared to be and has demonstrated to be effective. It is further noted that the earlier HCQ is used, the sooner the recovery from covid-19.

    • ‘herd immunity’ is fine. They regard us livestock to be corralled and managed, bred and milked for profit. It was freudian slip but at least it let the sheeple know.

      • Using ‘herd immunity’ was not a ‘freudian slip’, regardless of your negative perspectives. Herd immunity is an accepted technical term, as evidenced by definitions available in a host of dictionaries. Here are a couple….

        Medical Definition of herd immunity
        : a reduction in the probability of infection that is held to apply to susceptible members of a population in which a significant proportion of the individuals are immune because the chance of coming in contact with an infected individual is less
        https://www.merriam-webster.com/medical/herd%20immunity

        Def: herd im·mu·ni·ty
        The resistance to invasion and spread of an infectious agent in a group or community, based on the resistance to infection of a high proportion of individual members of the group; resistance is a product of the number susceptible and the probability that susceptibles will come into contact with an infected person.
        https://medical-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/herd+immunity

  25. Unfortunately the CDC Fauci USA is causing millions of unemployed and deaths in the USA Trump wake up get rid of these people PLEASE!!!

    • There seems to be a transcription error somewhere, it’s Dr Faux See.

      These scientists seem to think their field is the only one which matters and they are entitled to lie and exaggerate in order to convince policy makers to do what they, the scientists want.

      This is exactly what has been going on in climatology. Well meaning lefty enviro types think that is the only factor which matters and that it is there job to BS policy makers into giving their perspective overwhelming importance above all else.

      They seem to think that because they have some expertise in a narrow field, that somehow makes them to superior that they are qualified to make policy decisions for the rest of society.

  26. Happy Easter to all

    My thoughts about the German data are that it is very discouraging. To have only 15% positive on antibodies initially looks very grim as it would imply that the virus still has the vast majority of the population available for exponential growth and if accurate, there must be a very long and painful road ahead with second, third, and fourth waves coming. Again, if accurate, it implies that the vulnerable need to be much better isolated than they have been thus far, or we must expect multiples of the number of dead. Unless of course some treatments are effective and more broadly used.

    However, we would be assuming a lot to accept these results at face value. It has been noted that it is difficult to get a covid-19 antibody test with sufficient specificity that it does not yield false positives from other coronaviruses. This implies to me that the test protocol may be tuned to accept a high number of false negatives in order to avoid false positives. Does anyone know if there are validation data showing the false negative rate on the German test?

    Ultimately I would not want to see any decisions made in the US based on testing in Germany. So we are still in the dark, until good testing is done here. But this does not give me hope.

    • —Rich Davis April 12, 2020 at 2:05 pm
      Happy Easter to all

      My thoughts about the German data are that it is very discouraging. To have only 15% positive on antibodies initially looks very grim as it would imply that the virus still has the vast majority …–
      “In response to an infection, such as COVID-19, the body develops an overall immune response to fight the infection. One component of the immune system’s response is development of antibodies that attach to the virus and help eliminate it. The body’s initial immune reaction produces general antibodies that attack many infections, called “IgM” antibodies.”
      https://www.fda.gov/medical-devices/emergency-situations-medical-devices/faqs-diagnostic-testing-sars-cov-2
      And what is important further down:
      “Over time, the body develops a second type of antibody in response to the infection that is more specific to the virus, called “IgG” antibodies. Most antibody tests detect IgG antibodies. On average, IgG antibodies take about 4 weeks to develop,…”

      So, quite simply German can’t even know at this point in time, if did test now. If test now, it’s testing 4 weeks ago. And if German testing didn’t occur within the few days, it was 4 weeks before the time that the blood was drawn for the test. Though the 4 week period is uncertain:
      “… but the time to development may vary substantially, and there is still a lot we do not know about SARS-COV-2. ”

      Btw, I didn’t know this, but your post prompted me to find the answer.
      So, whatever I said before about antibody tests- it now, changes my view about it.

        • Yes, thanks, I saw that, and assuming that the actual cases are 100x the number of confirmed cases in US, it comes to about 17% of the population. At 256x, it would be 44%. Using Massachusetts to extrapolate to the entire US is a dicey idea, so it’s still just so much speculation, I’m afraid. Still waiting on real data.

          • The wastewater studies are data, but obviously testing everybody for antibodies would be better.

            But say that the infection rate is only five times the reported case rate. It’s probably much more than that, but for the sake of argument, let’s specify only five times rather than 256 times. That means about three million cases rather than 600,000. Granted 10,000 deaths, the lethality rate would then be 0.33, or around three times the flu fatality rate, for which disease we have vaccines.

            But more likely, the real infection rate is closer to the 15% found in the German study and other instances, in which WuFlu is indeed on a par with seasonal flu. The bodies piling up in NY, needing refrigerated trucks for storage, then result from the short time during which deaths have occurred, vs the six months of normal flu season.

            And, sure enough, this US flu season has produced only 24,000 deaths so far, with it almost over, as against 61,000 in the terrible season of 2017-18. Shutdown has also reduced death in general, from traffic accidents and murders. Although the latter might pick up with domestic violence if house arrest lasts much longer.

      • Thanks, that’s helpful in the sense that 15% isn’t necessarily accurate. Unfortunately it just informs us that once again we don’t have anything definitive to go on yet.

    • The 15 pct, if true, will slow the new infection rate somewhat. Also consider that those 15 pct are likely to be more social in average than rest of population, which is why they got it earlier on average than others. This fact will also slow infection rate.

      So with a slowed infection rate and some reasonable mitigation the new cases will not overload health system. Not to mention summer is coming which should also help dampen the spread rate.

  27. The Gangelt Study has quickly come under fire.
    Only preliminary results of 500 people were published and no data.
    Furthermore, although people were randomly selected, all persons in the household were tested.This cannot be extrapolated to the total population because the probability of members of a household infecting each other is high and the number of positive persons is no longer representative for the total population.
    Finally Christian Drosten criticized that the antibody tests can also show positive results for antibodies of normal corona (common cold) viruses and it is not clear whether additional tests were carried out to exclude such errors.

    • Absolutely correct.
      Prof. Streeck was even unable to tell which exactly antibody test did he use!

    • Tonyb continues to make the same silly mistake over and over again: comparing a normal flu year with the results for the Chinese virus after widespread and quite strict lockdowns have been instituted. The whole purpose of such lockdowns is to make sure that a virus that is known to be more infectious, costlier to treat and more fatal than flu does not cause more deaths than flu. Even then, the latest figures from the European monitoring agency show significant excess mortality in recent weeks compared with a normal year.

      • More perverse logic from our resident nodding Homer.

        comparing a normal flu year with the results for the Chinese virus after widespread and quite strict lockdowns have been instituted.

        If the figures tonyb cites for flu were not a reason to shut down the country, why were the much lesser figures BEFORE confinement sufficient reason?

        Clearly the extreme figures shot out by Fauxci and Fergie where alarmist hype.

        Even then, the latest figures from the European monitoring agency show significant excess mortality in recent weeks compared with a normal year.

        ie a normal year, not a high flu year like the ones tonyb referred to.

        • Greg

          That was of course my point , as well as highlighting the extraordinary number of flu deaths we seem to take for granted .

          Previously I have argued that if we take these extreme measures for CV then logically we should compulsorily vaccinate citizens for flu and ensure everyone socially isolates and wear masks. Similarly, with some 140,000 ‘avoidable’ deaths each year in the UK then logically we should do much more to avoid them.

          I fear Chris is skimming through the replies rather than seeing their context and regrettably has initiated a high ration of insults to comments.

    • Except they weren’t flu deaths.
      If you had bothered to read past the headlines you would have seen that it was Total Winter Mortality for that week.
      Quote “The mortality level is 14 per cent higher than the average of 13,167 deaths in the corresponding week over the past five years.”
      “The ONS figures deal with the raw numbers of deaths that have been registered and it will be months before there are clear official figures on the causes.”

  28. the confirmed cases, which tend to be the more serious ones, appear to undercount the true extent of infection by two orders of magnitude

    Please use English so we can understand what you mean. Which one of the following is “two orders of magnitude”?

    A. 2 times more (200%)
    B. 4 times more (400%)
    C. 20 times more (2,000%)
    D. 100 times more (10,000%)

    I know “two orders of magnitude” sounds sophisticated and erudite but it doesn’t convey useful information to the reader.

      • maybe he is American, where the magnitudes don’t have an order: inches – feet – yards – miles

        • Joel
          10 inches is an order of magnitude larger than 1 inch. The related units are unimportant.

      • No. Stinkerp wants the erudite and eloquent Lord to dumb down his language to the lowest common denominator, to simple English, such as is comprehensible to the average high school graduate.

        • Yes, if stinkerp doesn’t understand what orders of magnitude means, then s/he doesn’t really have the education to participate here.

          Kind of like attending a concert of classical music and being so self-centered that you interrupt the event to demand that a rap song be performed.

          Do you know how to use that Google thing, stinkerp? Amazing how much an autodidact could learn without disrupting others.

          Yeah look it up and become one.

          Not ashamed to have a vocabulary.

        • As being not natural English speaker I appreciate Lord Moncktons well formulated English articels.

    • Lord Monckton assumes minimal mathematical and scientific literacy among readers here. Two orders of magnitude means on the order of 100 times. An order of magnitude is a power of ten. One order of magnitude is on the order of ten times; two OoM 100.

      Logarithmic rounding occurs at 3.16 (square root of 10) rather than 5, so two orders of magnitude means from 31.6 to 316 times more, centered on 100x.

    • Cut stinkerp some slack.
      There are no stupid questions, only stupid answers.

      Always, always ask if you don’t understand. In most cases you won’t be the only one.
      Could have been more respectfully phrased of course 🙂

  29. –In the United States there would be 1.1 million deaths. For comparison, in the 2019-20 flu season there are thought to have been 24,000 to 62,000 deaths, according to the Centers for Disease Control.

    So the fatalities could still be significant, based on the German study. However, several promising avenues of research into prophylactics, palliatives and cures are being followed worldwide.–

    So, without mitigation 1.1 million deaths in US sounds about right. But you always going to have mitigation or mitigation does not have to be some government action which make the public do things. Or can’t avoid mitigation unless one could have everyone “always in the dark, not knowing anything”. But the sneakiness and speed of the Chinese Flu is factor which reduces any mitigation. So I would not say there ever a chance of 1.1 million deaths directly from Chinese Flu but secondary effects from it, could cause mass confusion and stuff which could result more than 1.1 million deaths. For instance people could try “cures” which resulted in higher death rate. And of course the common Flu doesn’t have this kind of element, or you need a new flu to cause confusion and panic.

    One could say mitigation which slows the the rate of inflection does not effect total death or number which get infected from Chinese flu, but a serious problem related to Chinese Flu is it spreads fast. And part of the fast spreading is an illusion because it’s sneaky- or you don’t see it because remains hidden and then “suddenly everyone is getting sick”.

    For instance I believe that the virus to slowly spreading in various countries for various reason. Countries like India, countries of Africa, and South American, and one can say they have “natural migation efforts”- the environment is causing a mitigation effect. And there a problem in terms detection, or rather than
    just sneaky flu, people getting sick/dying and it’s not made known that was from the Chinese Virus.
    Anyways I think even if Chinese flu is caused by whatever means to transfer slowly is still has the death toll of the “United States there would be 1.1 million deaths” or the US population number gives the 1.1 million deaths, any group of nations adding up to 320 million people will have 1.1 million deaths.

    So in simple terms the chance of getting the Chinese Flu is low and chance to die from it is a low chance. But “getting the Chinese Flu” means getting having effects which are greater than a mild case of common flu. Or one need to be tested to even know you had it.
    Flatten curve is mostly about helping your healthcare system so it’s not overloaded and reducing the deaths of healthcare workers- or not getting sick and/or dying.
    And other factor of flattening curve is buying time. And if bought time is being used to reduce death from Flu. Which includes simply having the medical supplies that the healthcare provider needs, that pretty significant in terms of lower deaths. In terms of Virus war, virus wins war, if it can wipeout the medical workers/soldiers. Or the 1.1 million deaths assumes one has some kind of functioning healthcare system.

    The other aspect is the intensity of virus load that people are exposed to. I think this factor could explain why people can be standing on the street, and simply die, suddenly. And is factor adding toward to 1.1 million deaths.
    Or if no one is in environment with high virus load, one has less total deaths.
    So I mean, someone doesn’t have the virus and walks into environment with a high virus load. But it might also involve someone fighting the virus, and being in environment with a high virus load. And someone could have say a common flu and then going into an environment with high virus load of Chinese flu.
    There also the factor of SARS-CoV-2 having or developing new strains, though there also broadly the “unknown unknown factors”.

    Anyways other getting more treatment options, I think most important thing at the moment is restoring the economy.
    And what will help a lot in this regard is finding out “the immunity” of various populations, particularly New York State in shortest time possible.
    And global finding out the immunity in regions which have a lot international travel.

    And I would say, US needs it’s Baseball.

    • Yes people themselves mitigate if they are aware of the risks. Both my parents and wife’s parents are in mid 70s and pretty paranoid. They have stopped leaving house except for groceries.

    • Baseball:
      –April 7, 2020
      “Thanks to the coronavirus pandemic, the desperation of no sports has led to some insane ideas being tossed around.

      But this idea to start the 2020 Major League Baseball season might take the cake.

      According to the Associated Press and ESPN, the league is possibly looking to quarantine all players and teams in Arizona in May. The idea, apparently, is to relocate all 30 teams to the Phoenix area and keep the players in “relative isolation” according to ESPN’s Jeff Passan.–
      https://news.yahoo.com/baseball-may-back-mlb-considers-160812565.html

      Or I would say, any State {or States} which which allow them to play.
      So, which States could good, in terms of conditions related to virus {not counting/considering the preferred baseball infrastructural which supports it best- which obviously Arizona has}. So what is Arizona like:
      Yesterday:
      Arizona 3,393 total cases +281 new cases and 3,265 active cases death per million: 16
      Today:
      Arizona 3,539 total cases +146 new cases and 3,384 active cases death per million: 17 and total test done in State: 42,109 and 6,062 per million, as per to national average of 8,557 per million.
      California with same deaths per million has 5,196 test per million
      And Florida with 22 deaths per million has 9,007 test per million
      Yesterday, Texas:
      +1,019 new cases +19 new deaths 10 deaths per million
      Today:
      13,640 total cases +435 new cases +11 new deaths, still 10 deaths per million
      124,553 tests 4,467 test per per million

      It seems Texas is pretty good, but Arizona, Florida, and California are all warm southern states which will be getting warmer, soonest. And I think +75 F {24 C} slows spread of virus. And/or lowers potential virus load.
      {Oh, I wonder what air temperature is kept at in basketball arenas- but a packed basketball arena seems like it could have a high virus load regardless of temperature].

      • More on Baseball, re: Yahoo news {above}
        “While the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has said that social distancing is key to flattening the curve of COVID-19, anyone familiar with baseball understands that playing in accordance with the “6-feet” rule is basically impossible.”
        Doesn’t matter if in quarantine- though could matter a bit, depending on what you mean by quarantine. So quarantine each team- if a team member get it, you are screwed. Really, that means your team loses the entire season. And each team you play become part of the team’s quarantine group.
        So if want to play baseball, you got to be certain no team member is infected, and if team players have not “playing safe” before season starts, well, they are losers who will not be able to play, unless they don’t have virus or have immunity to virus.
        Likewise with managers and everyone else involved with playing the game.

        ““Sitting in the empty stands 6 feet apart — the recommended social-distancing space — instead of in the dugout”
        As above not dugout.
        But it seems in open stadium, and if crowd wears mask they could be closer than 6 feet. The better the mask the closer it could be. So could space directly ahead and behind and from side to side, basically 1/2 full stadium. But probably not going to get that much audience or could start 1/4 stadium for couple weeks, and if proves to be a bad idea, then don’t have audience for a few weeks and/or you learn something new about virus or if entire audience has herd immunity/ vaccinated then don’t have a problem.
        One thing one do that could look into, is giving team members plasma transfers from people’s blood who have immunity. I am sure fans would provide blood.

        • With testing, it could be determined whether each baseball player was positive for Wuhan virus or not before each game, and those who are not, could go out on the field and play without much fear of being infected. They would probably need to be tested every day.

          This could work for some businesses, too.

          If we get some kind of cure for the Wuhan virus, and there are dozens of medicines being tested right now, and some look good, then we can go back to work, testing everyone that needs testing and treating those who get the virus.

          If the infection rate is as high as was claimed this morning, then there are probably a very large number of people who are already immune to the disease because they have already had it and don’t know it. All these people can go back to work and eat out and do whatever they want to do, and there may be millions of them right now. We just need to get our testing up to speed, and we can deal with the virus.

    • An interesting article:
      “I started wearing disposable gloves and a mask in early March. Almost everyone was looking at me as if I was some kind of a freak. Today, I don’t wear a mask when I go out and people are looking at me as if I am an idiot.”
      https://finance.yahoo.com/news/100-times-safer-now-early-204833052.html
      Linked from:
      https://pjmedia.com/instapundit/
      I would say if younger than 40, this might be ok, but I am not younger than 40.
      Or it’s always been a low risk and low risk to for the individual has never been the problem/issue. And by doing what he did, he did better than I did, to lower the risk to the public. And doing what he doing at moment is probably a low risk to public. Or if he gets infected, unlikely to die, and hospitals aren’t going to be over crowded when is possibly gets sick that he could need to go to hospital AND they know more about how to treat him.
      And likely he will spread “herd immunity” if nothing- but shouldn’t interact with people who are at high risk {like me}. Or I am going to wear mask for at least more than a week- unless things change.

  30. On a lighter note with regards to statistics and modelling. I was wondering if there has been a study relating the number of deaths with Covid-19 compared to those who have been bitten by a copperhead snake. I have been extremely cautious this past warm period of copperheads and ticks. If those dying with Covid-19 haven’t been bitten by a copperhead then maybe there’s a correlation! Anyway, I’m more concerned about the copperheads as my trusty dogs have passed so I’m on my own now.

    • So, statistically speaking, if no one that has ever been bitten by a copperhead has died with Covid-19 then an argument could be made that we should all be kissing copperheads.

    • Ha! True, that! A good snake dog is worth their weight in beef sirloin! If you plan to pick garden peppers in late summer Arkansas, send in the snake dog first!

    • “Sweden’s rate per capita of confirmed deaths from the coronavirus is higher than the rate of its fellow Scandinavian countries or the US. ”

      Fallacious argument repeated across the anti-Sweden press, that is exactly what you would expect , the payoff comes later since the recovery comes sooner and faster. Come back 3 months and compare again.

      But most Swedes I talked to said they’re unhappy being the world’s guinea pigs at such a dangerous time.

      And how many was that ? Stupid anecdotal comment. Most swedes I’ve spoken to (one) think it’s the right thing to do.

      Remind me why I never bother reading Vox.

      • “And how many was that ? Stupid anecdotal comment. Most swedes I’ve spoken to (one) think it’s the right thing to do.”

        most swedes. there’s some science.

        The thing is even data from Sweden won’t resolve the question. Unless they have good data on how people actually behaved at a local level and unless you really understand the transmission routes.

      • Gerg
        Yes, Sweden is playing the long game. We should be thankful that they are willing to voluntarily act as an experimental control to see which strategy results in the least loss of life and the least damage to the economy.

    • I think Sweden should have done more tests, at moment they say they have
      5,416 per million, if they had 10,000 tests per million it would have been
      better.
      Germany has lower per death per million 36 compared to Sweden’s 89
      Germany tests per million is 15,730
      Generally any country which keeps the death to 100 per million is doing pretty good, and not sure Germany or Sweden will be 100 or less.
      But at this point, Sweden should test for immunity and focus on doing a lot of them. Or what Sweden is doing is trying to get herd immunity and other limiting large crowds, their boat has already sailed in terms trying to “flatten the curve”. So they need to track their progress on getting herd immunity.
      S Korea has 4 deaths per million, and unlikely most countries will match that. Also 514,621 total tests and 10,038 tests per million.
      S Korea would be excellent place to test for immunity, and they should also do this- it’s possible since S Korea did so well, that they could have fewer herd immunity than Sweden {I mean at the moment, and since delayed 4 weeks, one could only know Sweden comparison to S korea in a few weeks from now].

  31. Lockdown is a medicine

    before you test whether lock downs work or not you need a controlled experiment.
    Folk who look at national policies without looking at COMPLIANCE will never
    understand the effect of lockdowns.

    1. some governments impose lockdowns and people dont “take the medicine” failed trial.
    do over.

    2. some people take the medicine Regardless, they isolate when they are not ordered to.
    failed trial. do over

    “Top Swedish officials say that two-way trust is paying off. “It is a myth that life goes on as normal in Sweden. Many people stay at home and have stopped traveling,” Sweden’s Minister of Health and Social Affairs Lena Hallengren told me. “There is no full lockdown of Sweden, but many parts of the Swedish society have shut down.”

    Hallengren offered some data points to make her case. Ridership on public transportation in Stockholm has dropped about 60 percent, she said. Nearly all domestic flights in Sweden have been canceled. All the major ski resorts in the country have closed voluntarily. And local media reports that 85 percent of people who’d planned to travel to Gotland, a popular Swedish vacation island, have canceled their trips ahead of Easter weekend.”

    Now in Korea the government has a “lockdown light” basically guidance to the public.
    And then they track mobility.

    Mobility has dropped about 60% in Korea.

    • The most important thing was travel ban on China {and for US, then travel ban on Europe]
      I don’t know where Sweden is in this regard, but it seems Russia reacted faster {I didn’t know that]:
      All over the world, countries are imposing travel bans on visitors who’ve been to China
      February 2, 2020
      “On almost every continent, countries have taken the dramatic step of closing their borders to most, if not all, flights from China, or to foreign visitors who’ve been to China or certain parts of it. With more than 300 now dead from the Wuhan coronavirus, the US, Israel, and a handful of other nations have imposed stringent restrictions on air travel.”
      Though it didn’t seem to help Italy and Sweden is not one countries on Feb 2.
      Though stopping all air travel or being strict in quarantine of all air travelers
      from China would been what is important. Which US did much later.
      And the WHO quote:
      “These bans run counter to the official advice from groups such as the World Health Organization (WHO). Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, the group’s director-general, spoke out against bans of this sort: “The WHO doesn’t recommend and actually opposes any restrictions for travel and trade or other measures against China,” he said. “If anyone is thinking about taking measures, it’s going to be wrong.””
      So, even thinking about it, was WRONG, and that is from WHO.

      • The US had no travel ban. They had a patchwork set of circumventable restrictions

        1. Travel bans dont work UNLESS they are complete.
        2. They work IF you use the time to prepare.
        3. When you use WEAK travel RESTRICTIONS, then you get the worst
        A) you get complacent
        B) you waste the time.

        There was no check at the USA whether you had been in china 14 days before landing
        in The USA. How do I KNOW? Because I travelled from Beijing to Seoul to USA.
        Zero questions asked by USA.
        Anyone who departed Wuhan before Jan 23rd and travelled to HK could take a flight to
        The USA and even the ban on “Wuhan travellers” would have been circumvented.

        Today China has a travel ban on Foreigners landing in China. That’s a ban.
        1 Flight per week of nationals only.
        Yesterday ~100 nationals landed in China with the virus.

        • “There was no check at the USA whether you had been in china 14 days before landing
          in The USA. How do I KNOW? Because I travelled from Beijing to Seoul to USA.”
          Aren’t glad you didn’t need to be in quarantine for 14 days {or longer like some people had to be}
          Doing as ban as quickly as possible even if not “effective” stops people from going to US to China {because they want return later}, and gives a heads up to Americans in China to leave and return to US.
          There is a method to Trump’s decisions. If did he did way you wanted, it would causes lot of problems.

  32. Lord Monckton-san:

    Regarding your future global Wuhan flu death calculations, you don’t seem to factoring in herd immunity.

    Once the 50~60% herd immunity threshold is reached, the virus naturally dies out.

    The key is to get as many low-risk demographics naturally infected to reach this herd immunity threshold, and to keep the high-risk demographic (people over 70 with comorbidities) sheltered in place and uninflected.

    Also, Wuhan flu deaths are very skewed as many countries (including the US) are counting anyone with Wuhan flu (or even assumed to be infected without testing) as dying from it, even if their actual death was caused by comorbidities: heart failure, cancer, liver/kidney failure, pneumonia, etc.

    Eventually, I think the actual death rate of the Wuhan flu will be be close to the regular flu’s rate of 0.1%.

    I also think the sudden drop in new infections rates is because the Wuhan flu is, thankfully, seasonal and the higher temperatures and humidity rise, the sooner new infections will drop to near zero until the next flu season starts in November.

    We urgently need to restart the global economy or more people will die from a global economic collapse than from the Wuhan flu…

    Stay safe.

  33. My forecast has total cases reaching 10 million with a final fatality rate of 10.4% . Total infected will peak at 1.1 million in late may. By October 31 the total infected will be down to around 100,000

  34. I am most grateful to the author for giving me so much opportunity to waste so much time on a matter concerning which definitive answers will not be available until total figures for deaths in Britain from all causes are issued for April.

    Those figures are available up until 27 March from the British Office of National statistics and show 2020 up to that point to have been a very good one for the aged and vulnerable in comparison to the previous year and the five year average.

    The conclusion to be drawn from that is simply that the lockdown could only have been justified by a model!

    By the end of May, there will be no place to hide for the doomsayers within Britain. I look forward to the hilarity that will greet their claims to have saved the world, in similar fashion to that which greeted the last such claimant.

    Following on from that, the United States Presidential election will no doubt replay this matter ad infinitum. Much more scope for comedy, hilarity.

    So much to look forward to! Enjoy!

    • With so many infected in the US, SARS-Co-2 will kill until mass vaccination. This virus attacks T cells that are in the first line of defense of the body.

      • Acquired immune function shows recognizable changes over time with organismal aging. These changes include T-cell dysfunction, which may underlie diminished resistance to infection and possibly various chronic age-associated diseases in the elderly. T-cell dysfunction may occur at distinct stages, from naive cells to the end stages of differentiation during immune responses. The thymus, which generates naive T cells, shows unusually early involution resulting in progressive reduction of T-cell output after adolescence, but peripheral T-cell numbers are maintained through antigen-independent homeostatic proliferation of naive T cells driven by the major histocompatibility complex associated with self-peptides and homeostatic cytokines, retaining the diverse repertoire. However, extensive homeostatic proliferation may lead to the emergence of dysfunctional CD4+ T cells with features resembling senescent cells, termed senescence-associated T (SA-T) cells, which increase and accumulate with age.
        https://academic.oup.com/intimm/article/32/4/223/5713759

        • The virulence of SARS-Cov-2 is due to the fact that T-cells do not recognize the new virus in people over 65 years of age.

        • Or:

          Analysis shows: Covid 19 victim curve corresponds to “normal” mortality

          Already loving the humour to come; comedy gold……….

        • In the thymus gland, undifferentiated T lymphocytes are formed in young people, which can respond quickly to new viruses.

  35. I wonder if the protective attire worn by lord Monckton is intended to protect him from us, or us from him?

  36. What bike do you ride, out of interest? I picture you on a vintage BMW boxer, or on the more patriotic side, a Triumph Thruxton.

  37. England looks set to be one of the worst affected countries in Europe, possibly even the worst affected!

    Covid 19 being designated a notifiable disease 05 March, but no longer designated a high consequence infectious disease on March 19, but a ‘lockdown worthy’ disease on 23 March, looked to have all bases covered.

    But now:

    ‘This royal throne of kings, this sceptered isle, This earth of majesty, this seat of Mars, This other Eden, demi-paradise, This fortress built by Nature for herself Against infection and the hand of war, This happy breed of men, this little world, This precious stone set in the silver sea, Which serves it in the office of a wall Or as a moat defensive to a house, Against the envy of less happier lands,–This blessed plot, this earth, this realm, this England.’

    Possibly the worst performing country in Europe…….

    ‘Still,’ as Mole said to Ratty ‘Look on the bright side……not the first time….and that’s a fact, and no mistake!’

  38. Prime Minister Boris Johnson has said it “could have gone either way” as he thanked healthcare workers for saving his life after being discharged from hospital.

    Mr Johnson, 55, was taken to London’s St Thomas’ Hospital on Sunday – 10 days after testing positive for Covid-19.

    He spent three nights in intensive care before returning to a ward on Thursday.

    He said in a video on Twitter that he had witnessed the “personal courage” of hospital staff on the front line.

    Mr Johnson said two nurses – Jenny from New Zealand and Luis from Portugal – stood by his bedside for 48 hours at the most critical time and named several other hospital workers who cared for him this past week that he wanted to thank.

    He said NHS workers “kept putting themselves in harm’s way, kept risking this deadly virus”.
    https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-52262012

  39. Sir Monckton, I would ask if you could kindly provide the data for Italy and Sweden in tabular form for my personal research.
    Due credit will of course be given.

  40. ABSTRACT
    The beginning of 2020 brought us information about the novel coronavirus emerging in China. Rapid research resulted in the characterization of the pathogen, which appeared to be a member of the SARS-like cluster, commonly seen in bats. Despite the global and local efforts, the virus escaped the healthcare measures and rapidly spread in China and later globally, officially causing a pandemic and global crisis in March 2020. At present, different scenarios are being written to contain the virus, but the development of novel anticoronavirals for all highly pathogenic coronaviruses remains the major challenge. Here, we describe the antiviral activity of previously developed by us HTCC compound (N-(2-hydroxypropyl)-3-trimethylammonium chitosan chloride), which may be used as potential inhibitor of currently circulating highly pathogenic coronaviruses – SARS-CoV-2 and MERS-CoV.
    https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.03.29.014183v1?fbclid=IwAR12q0EkY2tyBv1WY5TWn5Trh92WJhCEvriR1e3ku1Qn4VeGLN08aXF-6VE

  41. Trend on the mend?

    Daily deaths in the US attributed to COVID-19:

    07 April 1973
    08 April 1943
    09 April 1901
    10 April 2035
    11 April 1830
    12 April 1528

    As deaths are a lagging indicator, the decline may foretell return to freedom sooner.

  42. From the article: “In the United States there would be 1.1 million deaths.”

    The official estimate which began this U.S. shutdown was for the number of deaths to be between one million and 2.2 million, if nothing is done to modify the spread of the virus, and with social distancing, the numbers could be lowered to 100,000 to 240,000 deaths, based on 50 percent of Americans following the social distancing rules.

    So Mr. Monckton’s estimate of 1.1 million is pretty close to the initial estimate’s low end.

  43. “What bike do you ride, out of interest? I picture you on a vintage BMW boxer, or on the more patriotic side, a Triumph Thruxton.”

    I am sure that it won’t be a Harley Ferguson

  44. Real problems with results-

    “A study in the Journal of Medical Virology concludes that the internationally used coronavirus test is unreliable: In addition to the already known problem of false positive results, there is also a „potentially high“ rate of false negative results, i.e. the test does not respond even in symptomatic individuals, while in other patients it does respond once and then again not. This makes it more difficult to exclude other flu-like illnesses’

    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32219885

  45. I have read that the bat virus closest to this comes from bats that live in caves 1000 miles from Wuhan. I have read the biological lab in Wuhan had technicians collect samples from those caves.

    So how did this virus from 1000 miles away get to Wuhan ? It could have infected an animal and the live animal shipped to Wuhan. But I believe equally probable or even more probable the virus got to Wuhan from samples collected.

Comments are closed.