Whistleblower Dr. Li Wenliang confirmed dead of coronavirus at 34(scmp.com)
scmp.com
Whistleblower Dr. Li Wenliang confirmed dead of coronavirus at 34
https://www.scmp.com/news/china/society/article/3049411/coronavirus-li-wenliang-doctor-who-alerted-authorities-outbreak
88 comments
> Events like this are a reminder that there is still so much that is beyond the abilities of current medicine
Is it a problem of with current medicine, or a problem with censorious communist dictatorships and cultures obsessed with face-saving?
Is it a problem of with current medicine, or a problem with censorious communist dictatorships and cultures obsessed with face-saving?
Yes
...and yet, we are still so much further ahead than we were even only 20 years ago.
This virus was caught by the early detection mechanisms setup after SARS, and it was DNA sequenced from samples taken from some of the first victims within a couple of weeks - pointing to a near match with a sample collected in 2014 in a cave from bat poop as part of a "preparatory program" also setup after SARS.
New sequencing tech has allowed the global distribution of test kits, allowing us to have thousands of confirmed cases shown to us in real time - globally.
Vaccines are already in development and the FDA is prepared to fast-track their testing under procedures, you guessed it, updated after SARS.
...and yet, this turned into a global outbreak that we're desperately trying to stop from becoming a global pandemic. Sadly, Chinese prosperity has meant prolific Chinese tourist industries which helped spread the disease robustly throughout South-east Asia. And so there's a very real possibility that, unlike SARS, this new Coronavirus will become endemic and return each year like the seasonal flu, possibly causing hundreds of thousands of dead per year until a vaccine is deployed. Based on projected numbers, it seems like it has spread far beyond our ability to contain it.
So while it certainly could have been worse, had we not been as prepared - I like to think that when this happens again 20 years from now, we'll be far better prepared. I'll have to learn to use those three sea shells.
This virus was caught by the early detection mechanisms setup after SARS, and it was DNA sequenced from samples taken from some of the first victims within a couple of weeks - pointing to a near match with a sample collected in 2014 in a cave from bat poop as part of a "preparatory program" also setup after SARS.
New sequencing tech has allowed the global distribution of test kits, allowing us to have thousands of confirmed cases shown to us in real time - globally.
Vaccines are already in development and the FDA is prepared to fast-track their testing under procedures, you guessed it, updated after SARS.
...and yet, this turned into a global outbreak that we're desperately trying to stop from becoming a global pandemic. Sadly, Chinese prosperity has meant prolific Chinese tourist industries which helped spread the disease robustly throughout South-east Asia. And so there's a very real possibility that, unlike SARS, this new Coronavirus will become endemic and return each year like the seasonal flu, possibly causing hundreds of thousands of dead per year until a vaccine is deployed. Based on projected numbers, it seems like it has spread far beyond our ability to contain it.
So while it certainly could have been worse, had we not been as prepared - I like to think that when this happens again 20 years from now, we'll be far better prepared. I'll have to learn to use those three sea shells.
How the hell do you use the three sea shells?
John Spartan, you have been fined 1 credit...
First, condolences to Dr. Li’s family. As we speak of epidemiology and statistics, let’s not forget that every single “case” is an individual with family and friends, and behind each individual are doctors, nurses, and caretakers who risk their own health to help another.
Second, as noted by nkurz the contrast between bacterial and viral treatments is striking. Whereas we expect bacterial infections to be treatable and are alarmed when they aren’t (MRSA), we expect viral infections to simply run their course except for the few instances where they’re treatable (HIV, influenza) or even (gasp!) curable (HCV). We explain away the sad state of antivirals by pointing to the inherent biochemical challenges of fighting viruses [1] but maybe what we really need is a breakthrough — perhaps a miraculous fortuitous “penicillin” moment — so 100 years from now antivirals will also be a matter of course.
[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antiviral_drug#Approaches_by_l...
Second, as noted by nkurz the contrast between bacterial and viral treatments is striking. Whereas we expect bacterial infections to be treatable and are alarmed when they aren’t (MRSA), we expect viral infections to simply run their course except for the few instances where they’re treatable (HIV, influenza) or even (gasp!) curable (HCV). We explain away the sad state of antivirals by pointing to the inherent biochemical challenges of fighting viruses [1] but maybe what we really need is a breakthrough — perhaps a miraculous fortuitous “penicillin” moment — so 100 years from now antivirals will also be a matter of course.
[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antiviral_drug#Approaches_by_l...
I'm concerned about this virus. Most people I talk to (in the UK) think it's being over-hyped but I can't help but think it's being under-played.
The virus seems, in my completely inexpert assessment, to occupy a sort of sweet spot in a terms of virulence, mortality and incubation period, for wreaking maximum damage.
Based on its current trajectory I can't see any reason to believe the whole of the world won't be affected on the same scale as Wuhan at some point this year.
Am I right to be concerned, and if so what should I be doing about it?
The virus seems, in my completely inexpert assessment, to occupy a sort of sweet spot in a terms of virulence, mortality and incubation period, for wreaking maximum damage.
Based on its current trajectory I can't see any reason to believe the whole of the world won't be affected on the same scale as Wuhan at some point this year.
Am I right to be concerned, and if so what should I be doing about it?
The biggest concern is health care capacities being overwhelmed. He died in a place under severe resource constraints, basically a warzone. Fatality inside Wuhan is 5%, the rest of china 0.17% and even lower outside the country. Regardless of how correct the numbers are at this point - available ICU capacity is probably the largest factor for fatality rates for the disease at this point.
Just like the flu, this virus causes number of very serious cases that require intensive care but care capacities in most countries are barely able to cope with a bad flu season before bed appear on hallways - and this year had a particularly bad flu season still ongoing. There are only so many ventilators and artificial lungs available in hospitals and there is limited capacity in the world to deal with a new, highly infectious pathogen hitting a population without any preexisting immunities and people requiring weeks care to recover and become non infectious
China has, for better or worse, sacrificed Wuhan to buy the rest of the country and the world time to shore up capacities and enact procedures to stagger the load that will hit healthcare systems if the virus becomes broadly entrenched. I don't think there is any healthcare system on the planet that won't severely strain if hit by the sudden load of a new, highly infectious virus with long, invisible incubation period.
Just like the flu, this virus causes number of very serious cases that require intensive care but care capacities in most countries are barely able to cope with a bad flu season before bed appear on hallways - and this year had a particularly bad flu season still ongoing. There are only so many ventilators and artificial lungs available in hospitals and there is limited capacity in the world to deal with a new, highly infectious pathogen hitting a population without any preexisting immunities and people requiring weeks care to recover and become non infectious
China has, for better or worse, sacrificed Wuhan to buy the rest of the country and the world time to shore up capacities and enact procedures to stagger the load that will hit healthcare systems if the virus becomes broadly entrenched. I don't think there is any healthcare system on the planet that won't severely strain if hit by the sudden load of a new, highly infectious virus with long, invisible incubation period.
> China has, for better or worse, sacrificed Wuhan to buy the rest of the country and the world
The point is centralized authority is worse. In a democratic country he would have had warned quicker and his life sacrifice would have made more meaningful.
The point is centralized authority is worse. In a democratic country he would have had warned quicker and his life sacrifice would have made more meaningful.
Well it's a good thing then we have a president who is held to account by the people's representatives and firmly rejects autocratic tendencies.
I agree with your assessment. If the virus makes it in scale to populous countries or regions with poor infrastructure; for example India, Africa or Southern America then those places are going to really struggle to cope.
> buy the rest of the country and the world time to shore up capacities
The vaccine and blood product manufacturer CSL had a Zika virus vaccine ready to roll within a few months after the outbreak, done of their own accord, it was an impressive achievement.
The vaccine and blood product manufacturer CSL had a Zika virus vaccine ready to roll within a few months after the outbreak, done of their own accord, it was an impressive achievement.
I think the biggest concern is it seems quite capable of killing people that tend to be in the generally healthy age range.
Diseases that do that often do so by causing (even if indirectly) the person's own immune system to overreact or otherwise go haywire.
I belive SARS had a similar impact.
My son had a situation where his immune system overreacted. We had folks from the local university on call for updates every few hours and etc. Doctors have very few things at their disposal that they can do when that happens and they get really nervous.
My son pulled through but it was an enlightening / scary moment to see doctors that concerned / with few options.
Diseases that do that often do so by causing (even if indirectly) the person's own immune system to overreact or otherwise go haywire.
I belive SARS had a similar impact.
My son had a situation where his immune system overreacted. We had folks from the local university on call for updates every few hours and etc. Doctors have very few things at their disposal that they can do when that happens and they get really nervous.
My son pulled through but it was an enlightening / scary moment to see doctors that concerned / with few options.
For those interested this reaction is called a cytokine storm.
It has been observed in SARS and the 1918 flu virus they resurrected in 2007.
It has been observed in SARS and the 1918 flu virus they resurrected in 2007.
31 year old doctor died from it. That raises some alarms for me when media is saying it is like the flu. Do a lot of 31 year old doctors die from the flu?
I seriously hope China can contain this.
I seriously hope China can contain this.
> I seriously hope China can contain this.
I don't think there's any chance of that. I'm sure that within a month most well connected counties will have multiple cases with no apparent connection to China, and the realisation will have dawned that the cat is well and truly out of the bag.
My only hope is that the infection numbers in China are being massively under reported, i.e. because most carriers have very minor symptoms, and that therefore the mortality rate is not at bad as it currently seems.
But that's a bit of a long shot I fear.
I don't think there's any chance of that. I'm sure that within a month most well connected counties will have multiple cases with no apparent connection to China, and the realisation will have dawned that the cat is well and truly out of the bag.
My only hope is that the infection numbers in China are being massively under reported, i.e. because most carriers have very minor symptoms, and that therefore the mortality rate is not at bad as it currently seems.
But that's a bit of a long shot I fear.
The Lancet article [1] describes smoking as an increased risk factor. I wonder if his lungs were compromised in some way. Tragic.
1. https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6...
1. https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6...
Smoking in general is not exactly helpful with pulmonary diseases.
In a case like this where the virus causes viral pneumonia, shortness of breath, etc, basically all the various diseases you're predisposed to if smoking, so that shortness of breath becomes a lot worse, and the little hairs in your airways have been molested by smoking, so there's not much debris/mucus transport happening out of the lungs. Viral pneumonia will most likely be joined by a bacterial pneumonia when you fail to ventilate your lungs properly.
People worry about Corona virus killing 2-5%, and yet smoking kills about 50%, with an individual risk of dying at about 300% of a non smoker.
In a case like this where the virus causes viral pneumonia, shortness of breath, etc, basically all the various diseases you're predisposed to if smoking, so that shortness of breath becomes a lot worse, and the little hairs in your airways have been molested by smoking, so there's not much debris/mucus transport happening out of the lungs. Viral pneumonia will most likely be joined by a bacterial pneumonia when you fail to ventilate your lungs properly.
People worry about Corona virus killing 2-5%, and yet smoking kills about 50%, with an individual risk of dying at about 300% of a non smoker.
To be fair, a very, very stressed out 31 year old doctor died from it. Stress does truly awful things to the immune system.
We're all going to be pretty stressed if this hits hard.
> what should I be doing about it?
There is currently no vaccine to prevent 2019-nCoV infection. The best way to prevent infection is to avoid being exposed to this virus. However, as a reminder, CDC always recommends everyday preventive actions to help prevent the spread of respiratory viruses, including:
There is currently no vaccine to prevent 2019-nCoV infection. The best way to prevent infection is to avoid being exposed to this virus. However, as a reminder, CDC always recommends everyday preventive actions to help prevent the spread of respiratory viruses, including:
Wash your hands often with soap and water for at least 20 seconds, especially after going to the bathroom; before eating; and after blowing your nose, coughing, or sneezing.
If soap and water are not readily available, use an alcohol-based hand sanitizer with at least 60% alcohol. Always wash hands with soap and water if hands are visibly dirty.
Avoid touching your eyes, nose, and mouth with unwashed hands.
Avoid close contact with people who are sick.
Stay home when you are sick.
Cover your cough or sneeze with a tissue, then throw the tissue in the trash.
Clean and disinfect frequently touched objects and surfaces using a regular household cleaning spray or wipe.
Should I stop eating the free lunch buffet at work?
Yes. And generally avoiding big gatherings of people is not a bad idea.
I don't see it on that list, so I think it's ok.
I completely agree. I fail to see any plausible scenario where this doesn’t become a global pandemic in 2020. It seems like the best case is that it either becomes much less lethal as it spreads, and / or we slow it down enough to develop a vaccine. Failing that, I’m unclear on why any rational person thinks this is no big deal.
There’s no way China goes from 27k infected and it growing 15% per day to zero infections. It’s beyond containment at this point, they can’t stay on lockdown forever. And while it has barely spread beyond China, are we just going to wall off 1.4 billion people from the rest of humanity for the foreseeable future? Unlikely, probably impossible. So it seems like just a matter of time until it spreads globally, just like the flu, but much more deadly. And likely to overwhelm our medical infrastructure for the people who don’t die, many of which end up in critical condition.
I’m not panicking, but I’m concerned. Please, someone smart and well-informed, make the case for why this isn’t that big of a deal. (Hint: if you start by comparing it to total flu deaths instead of flu mortality rate, you’ve disqualified yourself).
There’s no way China goes from 27k infected and it growing 15% per day to zero infections. It’s beyond containment at this point, they can’t stay on lockdown forever. And while it has barely spread beyond China, are we just going to wall off 1.4 billion people from the rest of humanity for the foreseeable future? Unlikely, probably impossible. So it seems like just a matter of time until it spreads globally, just like the flu, but much more deadly. And likely to overwhelm our medical infrastructure for the people who don’t die, many of which end up in critical condition.
I’m not panicking, but I’m concerned. Please, someone smart and well-informed, make the case for why this isn’t that big of a deal. (Hint: if you start by comparing it to total flu deaths instead of flu mortality rate, you’ve disqualified yourself).
I'm not the smart and well-informed someone you seek, but FWIW I suspect that the infection rate is vastly under-reported, simply because mild cases resolve without "official" notice. Deaths on the other hand are nearly always noticed, and although I'll totally buy the theory that the chinese government are under-reporting deaths, I think we'll ultimately find out that a far greater proportion of mild infections has gone unreported.
All that to say, I have hope that this bug is less dangerous than it seems right now.
All that to say, I have hope that this bug is less dangerous than it seems right now.
> Most people I talk to (in the UK) think it's being over-hyped
Not to be too snarky, but most of people in UK though Brexit was a good move.
I am too a bit concerned about corona, but its hard to judge how dangerous it is as long as all info goes through Chinese filter (Chinese gov prevents any outside help so they can have as much control over the PR as they can).
The cases in other countries are still too small to get a definitive answer, if this is something scary or not. All we can do is wait and see.
Not to be too snarky, but most of people in UK though Brexit was a good move.
I am too a bit concerned about corona, but its hard to judge how dangerous it is as long as all info goes through Chinese filter (Chinese gov prevents any outside help so they can have as much control over the PR as they can).
The cases in other countries are still too small to get a definitive answer, if this is something scary or not. All we can do is wait and see.
I think what triggers an enormous amount of panic are the stories from Chinese social media - contradicting official Chinese reports. I cannot tell what's true and what's hyperbole... The government numbers don't seem so bad - but then some of the quarantine measures seem oddly harsh if the numbers were true.
Stories of Tencent "accidentally" leaking numbers online that are 10x what the government is reporting - stories of crematoriums being inundated with corpses - pictures of death certificates omitting the cause - the banning of funerals - videos of women being pulled off the street to be forcibly transported to a quarantine center (that one was particularly concerning) - etc...
The numbers from China are suspect of course - it's statistically hard to imagine such a global contagion last week with the small number of confirmed cases the Chinese gov't was publishing.
I don't want to overreact... but I also don't want to underreact.
Stories of Tencent "accidentally" leaking numbers online that are 10x what the government is reporting - stories of crematoriums being inundated with corpses - pictures of death certificates omitting the cause - the banning of funerals - videos of women being pulled off the street to be forcibly transported to a quarantine center (that one was particularly concerning) - etc...
The numbers from China are suspect of course - it's statistically hard to imagine such a global contagion last week with the small number of confirmed cases the Chinese gov't was publishing.
I don't want to overreact... but I also don't want to underreact.
It's a clear result of the Chinese Communist Party's censorious dictatorship. Believing them a priori is as foolish as believing conspiracy theorists.
The Tencent thing is definitely erroneous. The numbers “leaked” were just a transposition of the number of known cases transposed as “dead”.
I absolutely hate that China’s powers that be decided to hush up the outbreak. Shame on them. But this specific case is just an error magnified by social media (which very fairly doesn’t believe the official party line either).
I absolutely hate that China’s powers that be decided to hush up the outbreak. Shame on them. But this specific case is just an error magnified by social media (which very fairly doesn’t believe the official party line either).
> the banning of funerals
Banning of large public gatherings of people potentially exposed to the virus. Sounds like a reasonable precaution.
Banning of large public gatherings of people potentially exposed to the virus. Sounds like a reasonable precaution.
The quarantines already banned those in heavily infected areas. They specifically mentioned funerals though... which was odd.
I'm not really seeing the "global" aspect to this. A huge majority of the numbers are in Wuhan or Hubei, and then much of the rest is just elsewhere in mainland China. Cases abroad are almost a rounding error by comparison. It's quite weird actually, it's like there's some factor we don't quite understand that has been limiting the virus's spread even before protective measures were taken.
If you look at the maps of infections there are some areas, frequented by Chinese tourists, that are not reporting data.
Thailand, Laos, Vietnam, Cambodia - none have been reporting data because they know that a panic will wreck their tourist industry. The Thai government even admitted that publicly - that they would not release data on the disease.
The "good" news is that Coronaviruses are not great survivors in tropical climates, so when summer comes, the infections will abate - BUT we are still 8 weeks away from warmer weather (with a doubling every 5 days).
The bad news is that if governments do not also stop flights out of Southeast Asia, then there will be a secondary wave of Coronavirus, and it will likely hit the Southern Hemisphere over the summer, and then the entire Northern Hemisphere this winter.
Thailand, Laos, Vietnam, Cambodia - none have been reporting data because they know that a panic will wreck their tourist industry. The Thai government even admitted that publicly - that they would not release data on the disease.
The "good" news is that Coronaviruses are not great survivors in tropical climates, so when summer comes, the infections will abate - BUT we are still 8 weeks away from warmer weather (with a doubling every 5 days).
The bad news is that if governments do not also stop flights out of Southeast Asia, then there will be a secondary wave of Coronavirus, and it will likely hit the Southern Hemisphere over the summer, and then the entire Northern Hemisphere this winter.
It can really go either way. But the numbers in other countries keep growing as well (although very slowly at the moment). But in the same vein you have to think that in China itself it also started as slowly.
We might be screening at airports etc, but the long 2 week incubation period along with the lack of valid information about the virus (regarding its early detectability, spread etc) might be inflating our sense of comfort.
We might be screening at airports etc, but the long 2 week incubation period along with the lack of valid information about the virus (regarding its early detectability, spread etc) might be inflating our sense of comfort.
> Chinese social media has been awash with anger over the death of the whistle-blower
How about going out to protest? Oh wait, you can't...bravo for your virtue signalling.
How about going out to protest? Oh wait, you can't...bravo for your virtue signalling.
The fact that the hospital lied about Dr. Li Wenliang dying goes to show you how absolutely dystopian China is. How afraid (or corrupt) do you have to be to continue to claim someone who died was alive?
Are you referring to this part?
>The announcement capped several chaotic hours in which Chinese media first reported Li’s death, only for the hospital to respond that Li was alive, though in critical condition.
>Li Wenliang has died, Wuhan Central Hospital confirmed early Friday morning, hours after it initially denied reports of his death.
Where here do you see clear evidence or even indication of deceit?
If someone is in critical condition, that does not mean they are dead. Announcing someone dead just hours after saying someone is in critical condition is, actually, super super logical.
I fear your comment might be quite guided by your unfamiliarity with China and xenophobic touch. Please do take some more time to reflect before posting similar comments again. Thank you.
>The announcement capped several chaotic hours in which Chinese media first reported Li’s death, only for the hospital to respond that Li was alive, though in critical condition.
>Li Wenliang has died, Wuhan Central Hospital confirmed early Friday morning, hours after it initially denied reports of his death.
Where here do you see clear evidence or even indication of deceit?
If someone is in critical condition, that does not mean they are dead. Announcing someone dead just hours after saying someone is in critical condition is, actually, super super logical.
I fear your comment might be quite guided by your unfamiliarity with China and xenophobic touch. Please do take some more time to reflect before posting similar comments again. Thank you.
Maybe, but wasn't it also reported that the hospital later admitted to trying to resuscitate him for hours when they knew it wasn't possible.
It's pretty clear the side of history the CPC is on.
You only have to look to their concentration camps and what's been happening in Hong Kong.
They can't be compared to Western democracies, they are closer to Nazi Germany.
You only have to look to their concentration camps and what's been happening in Hong Kong.
They can't be compared to Western democracies, they are closer to Nazi Germany.
Not sure what you are aiming for with this response, what part of my comment did you try to respond to? I'm just trying to wrap my head around this comment and see how I could respond. Thanks!
I was addressing your accusation against the GP.
> your unfamiliarity with China and xenophobic touch.
I would argue that he is very familiar with China and his views are not xenophobic but purely rooted in philosophical differences with the Communist Party of China.
> your unfamiliarity with China and xenophobic touch.
I would argue that he is very familiar with China and his views are not xenophobic but purely rooted in philosophical differences with the Communist Party of China.
[deleted]
The coronavirus is devastating for the Chinese Communist Party.
Basically, the deal with the populace was people gave up their freedom in exchange for competent government and economic growth. In the last several decades, this was seen as a good deal, by a lot of people both inside and outside China. China had massive economic growth and modernization.
Now, however, the handling of coronavirus was a huge blow to the perception of competency of the government, and is likely to have big economic implications as well, thereby threatening the foundations of this deal.
Basically, the deal with the populace was people gave up their freedom in exchange for competent government and economic growth. In the last several decades, this was seen as a good deal, by a lot of people both inside and outside China. China had massive economic growth and modernization.
Now, however, the handling of coronavirus was a huge blow to the perception of competency of the government, and is likely to have big economic implications as well, thereby threatening the foundations of this deal.
I don't know that the populace has ever perceived the government as particularly competent. Powerful and dangerous if you cross them, sure--but competent?
My understanding is that they've been viewed by many of their populace as competent in gaining substantial economic growth. Many other countries have had far less growth than China in the last few decades.
[deleted]
I'm not so sure. Could a western country initiate entire city-wide quarantines at the drop of a hat? Could a western country pull sick people off the streets and forcibly put them into quarantine centers? Unilaterally shut down schools, factories, and transportation at a whim?
Maybe. ...but, to be honest, despite their clear dishonestly about the number of infected/dying, they are also clearly taking some definitive actions to contain this.
Maybe. ...but, to be honest, despite their clear dishonestly about the number of infected/dying, they are also clearly taking some definitive actions to contain this.
The propensity for lying, in order to protect the power structure, results in a major constraint on future options - requiring more lies. It is a vicious cycle that completely obliterates any potential strong-arm advantage a single party system may have. If for no other reason: this is why you don't lie, you have no idea how badly you screw your future self. Also, and I'm looking at you World Health Organization, anyone trying to soften the blowback from lying suffers major damage to their credibility.
I think your point deserves more emphasis. IF in fact 5MM inhabitants of Wuhan fled the city before the lockdown, we can be pretty sure that this was caused, at least in part, by a lack in faith from their government’s handling of the previous outbreaks. The government lied and censored and the people did not forget. This in turn triggers a diaspora at the worst possible time.
The WHO fucked everyone. “No alarm” from WHO is my new “red flag”.
People who think the WHO is somehow corrupted scare me.
They are easily one of the most honest and forthright global organisations around, made up of competing professionals in their field from around the globe. They would be the first to be ringing alarm bells if there was a problem.
The onus is on you to prove they are being dishonest, not the other way around friendly internet commentator.
They are easily one of the most honest and forthright global organisations around, made up of competing professionals in their field from around the globe. They would be the first to be ringing alarm bells if there was a problem.
The onus is on you to prove they are being dishonest, not the other way around friendly internet commentator.
The implication is that they are an incompetent bureaucracy, not corrupted.
The WHO's director-general Tedros A. G. being in the pocket of CCP – being a conspiracy theory – is impossible to prove or disprove. However, his behaviour fits the MO of people confirmed of being nobbled, and aligns with CCP's goals of downplaying the crisis, saving face and continuing as usual, putting business before health and lives.
https://www.sciencealert.com/who-tries-to-correct-wuhan-coro...
Quote from press release: "travel restrictions can cause more harm than good by hindering info-sharing and medical supply chains and harming economies"
----
If you can stomach a particularly uncharitable interpretation, watch "The WHO Belongs to Communist China": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G5VGPYtbTk8
Minutes 1-13 and 37-49 are relevant.
https://www.sciencealert.com/who-tries-to-correct-wuhan-coro...
Quote from press release: "travel restrictions can cause more harm than good by hindering info-sharing and medical supply chains and harming economies"
----
If you can stomach a particularly uncharitable interpretation, watch "The WHO Belongs to Communist China": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G5VGPYtbTk8
Minutes 1-13 and 37-49 are relevant.
Unlike the WHO, this friendly internet commentator hasn't appointed Robert Mugabe as a goodwill ambassador. So you'd be better served appealing to my authority, not theirs.
It was honestly a good move, with all upside and no downside, influence moves in subtle ways. The rabid internet mobs who move from one issue to the next with no concern for the bigger picture made quick work of it though.
I truly wonder if these people reflect on what they did, was it in the interest of human suffering or simply petty signalling?
Was nothing more than a title, much like the CEO's and Senior engineers in startups. Saying this as a code artisan.
Please read the statement on the matter:
https://www.who.int/news-room/detail/22-10-2017-director-gen...
I truly wonder if these people reflect on what they did, was it in the interest of human suffering or simply petty signalling?
Was nothing more than a title, much like the CEO's and Senior engineers in startups. Saying this as a code artisan.
Please read the statement on the matter:
https://www.who.int/news-room/detail/22-10-2017-director-gen...
And snap goes the bear trap. I was a little concerned that the parallels between their political maneuvering with Mugabe and Jinping would be too obvious, but you've clearly missed it. They have a history of this sort of behavior.
> They are easily one of the most honest and forthright global organisations around, made up of competing professionals in their field from around the globe.
They are political actors. You may, most charitably, say that they are pragmatic in pursuit of a great good - but there are two problems with that: loss of trust and misaligned objectives.
> They would be the first to be ringing alarm bells if there was a problem.
Would they? You just admitted that their motives can't be examined without considering the political dimension. This is why you shouldn't lie.
> They are easily one of the most honest and forthright global organisations around, made up of competing professionals in their field from around the globe.
They are political actors. You may, most charitably, say that they are pragmatic in pursuit of a great good - but there are two problems with that: loss of trust and misaligned objectives.
> They would be the first to be ringing alarm bells if there was a problem.
Would they? You just admitted that their motives can't be examined without considering the political dimension. This is why you shouldn't lie.
They demonstrably lost at the very least a whole week due to their censorship of early reports. You can debate how significant it was, but it's pretty obvious that 1. more liberal countries would typically not have lost that week and 2. swift response is essential in this kind of crisis.
Could a western country initiate 100k open plate banquet after multiple cases of virus have been detected?
567 deaths, 1,341 recovered, 28,403 cases.
It's remarkable that humanity can globally track such things.
He was only a few years older than me.
How does the coronavirus kill? I tried searching, but the first five results were all paywalled. I'm curious about what specifically makes the coronavirus deadly compared to the flu.
It's remarkable that humanity can globally track such things.
He was only a few years older than me.
How does the coronavirus kill? I tried searching, but the first five results were all paywalled. I'm curious about what specifically makes the coronavirus deadly compared to the flu.
Studies from patients who died from SARS coronavirus showed the virus caused damage to not only the lungs, but also other organs in the body. Early research suggests the Wuhan coronavirus can also damage other organs, including the kidneys.
The Wuhan coronavirus appears to cause pneumonia in two ways: when the virus takes hold in the lungs, and through secondary bacterial infections, however, the first way appears to be more common.
Although it can be difficult to determine whether organ damage from the Wuhan coronavirus is a result of direct viral infection or indirect “collateral damage” from the immune system, initial reports suggested around 11% of people severely ill with the Wuhan coronavirus experienced sepsis with multi-organ failure.
https://theconversation.com/how-does-the-wuhan-coronavirus-c...
I am not a medical practitioner nor researcher and have no understanding of the virus. I make no representation as to the veracity of this source lacking the means to independently verify it.
The Wuhan coronavirus appears to cause pneumonia in two ways: when the virus takes hold in the lungs, and through secondary bacterial infections, however, the first way appears to be more common.
Although it can be difficult to determine whether organ damage from the Wuhan coronavirus is a result of direct viral infection or indirect “collateral damage” from the immune system, initial reports suggested around 11% of people severely ill with the Wuhan coronavirus experienced sepsis with multi-organ failure.
https://theconversation.com/how-does-the-wuhan-coronavirus-c...
I am not a medical practitioner nor researcher and have no understanding of the virus. I make no representation as to the veracity of this source lacking the means to independently verify it.
It is hard to square 11% “sepsis with multiple organ failure” with only 2% reported fatality rate.
Somebody isn’t telling the truth, and I’d bet it is the Chinese government.
Somebody isn’t telling the truth, and I’d bet it is the Chinese government.
> Of the first 99 people with severe infection, three-quarters had pneumonia involving both lungs. Around 14% appeared to have lung damage caused by the immune system, while 11% suffered from multi-organ system failure, or sepsis.
The 11% with multiple organ failure is referring to the first 99 people with severe infection.
The 2% reported fatality rate is for everyone that acquires the virus.
The 11% with multiple organ failure is referring to the first 99 people with severe infection.
The 2% reported fatality rate is for everyone that acquires the virus.
No - 2% is only for those sick enough to have the test administered. Many are not even being checked because their symptoms don't warrant hospitalization.
"around 11% of people severely ill"
Many of the infected are not "severely ill".
Many of the infected are not "severely ill".
Fascinating. The immune response seems to cause harm, so the logical conclusion might be to try to suppress it somehow. But the article points out that 100 attempts at dampening immune response have all failed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/24581450/
When battling with SARS, large dose of steroids was used as part of the treatment to suppress immune system [0]. But there are many side-effects (e.g. lots of SARS survivors in China need hip replacement [1]).
[0]: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC420028/
[1]: https://www.scmp.com/article/433797/28-sars-survivors-have-b...
[0]: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC420028/
[1]: https://www.scmp.com/article/433797/28-sars-survivors-have-b...
The longer a disease takes to show symptoms means it's had a longer time to multiply inside your body.
Once your immune system detects it, you're going to get the standard flu/cold symptoms (fever, runny nose, etc).
During this period your body is actively losing its protection due to putting so much resources into fighting the viral infection in your body.
Other deadlier diseases can now enter your body and essentially hide behind the fact that your immune system can't respond to everything at once.
So you get more complications as you're sick for longer.
The viral infection itself does have an impact on organs, specifically the lungs, but it's usually secondary complications that kill.
Once your immune system detects it, you're going to get the standard flu/cold symptoms (fever, runny nose, etc).
During this period your body is actively losing its protection due to putting so much resources into fighting the viral infection in your body.
Other deadlier diseases can now enter your body and essentially hide behind the fact that your immune system can't respond to everything at once.
So you get more complications as you're sick for longer.
The viral infection itself does have an impact on organs, specifically the lungs, but it's usually secondary complications that kill.
It directly infects the lungs, it's essentially a viral pneumonia. It can kill by reducing lung function or enabling sepsis or other opportunistic infections that can enter through damaged lung tissue.
For more information the most recent dozen or so videos by John Campbell at https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCF9IOB2TExg3QIBupFtBDxg will take you through material published in peer reviewed medical journals that explain transmission models and an in depth review of some early cases.
For more information the most recent dozen or so videos by John Campbell at https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCF9IOB2TExg3QIBupFtBDxg will take you through material published in peer reviewed medical journals that explain transmission models and an in depth review of some early cases.
The numbers are ridiculous. What gives it away, is that if you plot them onto a graph, they almost exactly match what an algorithm would predict, unchanging regardless of quarantines, blockades, etc. that have been enacted.
The further kicker is that the model it aligns to is quadratic where an actual virus spread is exponential. So, the Chinese are not only making up numbers and following an ideal model exactly but can't even figure out to use a valid ideal model to generate those fake numbers from.
See more here:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=jbvibANxARg
The further kicker is that the model it aligns to is quadratic where an actual virus spread is exponential. So, the Chinese are not only making up numbers and following an ideal model exactly but can't even figure out to use a valid ideal model to generate those fake numbers from.
See more here:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=jbvibANxARg
Right, but that is because there is a lag in the data. Quarantines have only started recently.
Huh? They started quarantining patients on January 1st, and fully quarantined Wuhan on January 22.
And that says nothing for why the data matches up exactly to an ideal model and furthermore that model (quadratic) isn't correct for the spread of viruses (which is exponential).
If you look at data from outside of China, you can see a regular jagged line full of noise which you would expect for real data. The data from China stands out like a mannequin in a lineup.
And that says nothing for why the data matches up exactly to an ideal model and furthermore that model (quadratic) isn't correct for the spread of viruses (which is exponential).
If you look at data from outside of China, you can see a regular jagged line full of noise which you would expect for real data. The data from China stands out like a mannequin in a lineup.
Similar to SARS and the 1918 Flu. Cytokine storms. Basically your immune system suffocates you by sending too many immune cells to the infection.
Interestingly and rarely, instead of covering up or Force deleting the posts, this time the Central government treat this seriously with several investigation announced and official mourning. This news does go viral among Chinese internet and triggered huge criticism of the government so it might be impractical to censor it. All in all, it could be a good thing to CCP since they showed iron hand in the right way this time
Why does this media make such a big deal about a virus with such a low mortality rate?
What threshold of mortality rate do you think should justify media coverage?
It’s not the media coverage itself I am concerned with, it’s the lack of historical context with which the reporting is presented. What impression does it leave if it is presented as simply a communicable disease coming from china?
[deleted]
National mortality rate is 2.1% of confirmed cases.
https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/coronavirus-death-...
What would you consider a high mortality rate? 2% lethality in healthy patients is significant and it is "so far". We don't know the true rate yet.
https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/coronavirus-death-...
What would you consider a high mortality rate? 2% lethality in healthy patients is significant and it is "so far". We don't know the true rate yet.
The swine flu of 2009 had up to a 5% mortality rate in confirmed cases (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3809029/).
SARS was 10% (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Severe_acute_respiratory_syndr...)
MERS is 35% (https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/mers/clinical-features.html)
The bird flu is 60% (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avian_influenza), though there's few cases and estimates of what it would actually be are lower, but still >15% (https://jech.bmj.com/content/62/6/555)
SARS was 10% (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Severe_acute_respiratory_syndr...)
MERS is 35% (https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/mers/clinical-features.html)
The bird flu is 60% (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avian_influenza), though there's few cases and estimates of what it would actually be are lower, but still >15% (https://jech.bmj.com/content/62/6/555)
The denominator currently has a multi day head start vs the numerator. Exponential growth means the fraction will grow.
Not to mention limits of testing and reporting at this point. Regardless, we're not at a point where your method of comparison is meaningful yet.
If we want to err the other way, you could look at deaths over deaths+ recoveries:
638/(638+1341)=32.2%
That, combined with the growth/spread rate and the fact that otherwise healthy 30-somethings are dying, means a potentially nasty outbreak. And that's based on taking the Chinese government at their word.
Not to mention limits of testing and reporting at this point. Regardless, we're not at a point where your method of comparison is meaningful yet.
If we want to err the other way, you could look at deaths over deaths+ recoveries:
638/(638+1341)=32.2%
That, combined with the growth/spread rate and the fact that otherwise healthy 30-somethings are dying, means a potentially nasty outbreak. And that's based on taking the Chinese government at their word.
True. ...but the difference is that millions of people might contract this illness - unlike the other ones you mentioned.
Yeah, it’s just more contagious than the flu, possibly has a mortality rate of 1-3% (20x - 50x higher than the flu), lands another 10-20% in the ICU, has infected tens of thousands of people already (likely many more), has overwhelmed medical infrastructure, and has prompted China to place 100 million people on lockdown and force their economy to grind to a halt to try and stop a global pandemic.
Yeah, it’s clearly nothing. What’s the big deal?
Yeah, it’s clearly nothing. What’s the big deal?
We don't know the mortality rate yet. Most of the confirmed cases are too recent for the illness to have killed the patients, so expressing the mortality rate as (deaths / confirmed cases) is incorrect.
We are also not sure how many people are dying as a result of complications caused by this illness. The current reported death rate is based on people killed as a direct result of the illness.
We are also not sure how many people are dying as a result of complications caused by this illness. The current reported death rate is based on people killed as a direct result of the illness.
Events like this are a reminder that there is still so much that is beyond the abilities of current medicine. As a prominent doctor, he almost certainly got the best care that is currently available, and yet he still died from a simple virus. Our ability to treat viruses today is where our ability to treat bacterial infections was 100 years ago. We knew that germs existed, but penicillin was still a decade away. The standard of care was to keep the patient well hydrated and hope that they don't die.
Similarly, we know today that viruses exist, but in most cases the best care we can offer is to keep the patient hydrated and hope that they don't die. With sufficient luck, in a hundred years we'll have progressed to the point that people look at us and marvel: "They didn't even know the basics! When people contracted a virus, there was nothing they could do but let the disease run its course!"