General Discussion

Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin

(108,035 posts) Mon Feb 10, 2020, 04:24 PM Feb 2020

40,000 coronavirus cases may be 'tip of the iceberg' as death toll nears 1,000

The death toll from the new virus sweeping across China and surging around the globe closed in on 1,000 Monday amid warnings that the 40,000 known cases may be "the tip of the iceberg."

Chinese health officials said 97 more deaths were reported Sunday, a spike after days of decline that put the global toll at 910. All but two of the deaths have occurred on the Chinese mainland, most in and around the city of Wuhan.

Total reported cases rose to 40,573, more than 40,000 of them in China. Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, director-general of the World Health Organization, warned that the numbers may not tell the entire story.

"There’ve been some concerning instances of ... spread from people with no travel history to China," Tedros said. "The detection of a small number of cases may indicate more widespread transmission in other countries. In short, we may only be seeing the tip of the iceberg."

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/40000-coronavirus-cases-may-be-tip-of-the-iceberg-as-death-toll-nears-1000/ar-BBZQwrq?li=BBnb7Kz&ocid=hplocalnews

2 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

40,000 coronavirus cases may be 'tip of the iceberg' as death toll nears 1,000 (Original Post) Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin Feb 2020 OP

There was an op-ed in the NYT about the corona virus matt819 Feb 2020 #1

Thanks for posting this. Vogon_Glory Feb 2020 #2

matt819

(10,749 posts)

1. There was an op-ed in the NYT about the corona virus

Reply to Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin (Original post)

Mon Feb 10, 2020, 04:38 PM

Feb 2020

Last edited Mon Feb 10, 2020, 05:28 PM - Edit history (2)

I was struck by the writer's reference to trying to calculate mortality rates. He said that the formulas took more than 2 pages and then they had to be entered into the computer, etc. His point, I think, was that it was challenging to calculate mortality rates with incomplete data and moving targets.

That said, 910 dead out of 40,573 cases seems to come to a mortality rate of 2.2%. (Only one calculation, not pages of algebraic formulas, so it may not be as accurate as it could be.) Is that high? Low? I read at the link below that the mortality rate for the 1918 flu epidemic was 2%. That sounds pretty low, but it all depends on how many are affected, I suppose. More recent avian flu incidents have had higher mortality rates, but not as many people caught it.

No real point here, other than it will be interesting top see how all this plays out. What I find interesting from an epidemiology perspective is how widely this coronavirus has spread from its center. Small world and all that.

Here's the piece on virus pandemics/mortality, etc. Interesting, but I don't know if this website is reliable. Seems rational enough: https://www.globalsecurity.org/security/ops/hsc-scen-3_flu-pandemic-deaths.htm

Here's the NYT op-ed: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/10/opinion/coronavirus-china-research.html

Vogon_Glory

(9,118 posts)

2. Thanks for posting this.

Reply to matt819 (Reply #1)

Mon Feb 10, 2020, 05:01 PM

Feb 2020

I’d been wondering how the Corona virus mortality rate compared to that of the “Spanish Flu” pandemic of a century ago.

Reply to this discussion