Community Spread in the US
THREAD: On New #COVID19 Diagnosis in California Tonight: We will have community spread of #coronavirus in the U.S. It is likely that we have — right now — more cases that remain undiagnosed but will soon be revealed. We need to keep in mind several key points: 1/n
— Scott Gottlieb, MD (@ScottGottliebMD) February 27, 2020
Trump Admin Incompetence
Alarming new Washington Post report says U.S. workers not wearing protective gear assisted coronavirus evacuees from China. A whistleblower filed a formal complaint. https://t.co/ocJDPbVTgD
— Derick Waller (@wallernyc) February 27, 2020
Iran’s “Screaming Mary” Infected
⚠️#Iran’s VP tests positive for #coronavirus, after other government leaders were found to be infected.
The high number of deaths (26+) relative to reported cases (254) suggests a much larger #CoronavirusOutbreak in Iran than reported.@thespybrief https://t.co/reJg6VYV5F
— Dena Grayson, MD, PhD (@DrDenaGrayson) February 27, 2020
How Many Iranians are Really Infected?
Very likely, #Iran isn’t testing many more who are infected with the #coronavirus, but have milder/no #COVID19 symptoms.#CoronavirusOutbreak https://t.co/fMB28dSOcP
— Dena Grayson, MD, PhD (@DrDenaGrayson) February 27, 2020
Japan to Close All Schools
Futures US Headline?
(13m students)Prime minister Shinzo Abe urged all schools to close — a de facto order from the central government—until the end of the spring break on April 8 in an attempt to reduce social contact and halt the spread of the virus.https://t.co/qBVOkgRzgo
— Jim Bianco (@biancoresearch) February 27, 2020
Let’s Get Those Exports to China Humming
Look at the items the U.S. Commerce department is recommending for export to China. Ventilators, respirators, masks, MASK MANUFACTURING MACHINES…
This is nuts. pic.twitter.com/0bUIooueJ9
— Matt Stoller (@matthewstoller) February 27, 2020
Trump wants to exports masks to China. Hey why not?
Bianco’s Latest Charts
Updated infection charts@chrismartenson @ErikSTownsend @ttmygh @RMKOutFront @freezerohedge @MishGEA @EpsilonTheory @jodigraphics15 @alykhansatchu
(1/6) pic.twitter.com/5Ev3BuSMcC
— Jim Bianco (@biancoresearch) February 27, 2020
Clorox Doing Well
Few winners emerge after brutal stock sell-off
— The Long Game (@7LongGame) February 27, 2020
Cruise Ships and Casinos Not Doing Well
Cruises and casinos getting crushed
Amazing how close all of these drawdowns are to one another
Massive re-pricing of industries all at once pic.twitter.com/YtnkZCzYmw
— Ben Carlson (@awealthofcs) February 27, 2020
ECB Complacency
You have not lost enough money yet.
*LAGARDE SAYS VIRUS NOT YET AT STAGE REQUIRING ECB RESPONSE: FT
— Jim Bianco (@biancoresearch) February 27, 2020
Too Soon For a Rate Cut?
Jay Powell, you’re up!
The market is pricing a 53% chance you cut in March.
Greater than 50% means it is now expected.
Are you listening to the market’s “forward guidance.”
You can trade these odds herehttps://t.co/36oZ9wbTcE@DavidBeckworth @GeorgeSelgin https://t.co/OZxGhNeWQW
— Jim Bianco (@biancoresearch) February 27, 2020
How About a Surprise Rate Cut?
Now a 68% chance the Fed cuts on Mar 18 … this also mean mkts are BEGINNING TO price in an inter-meeting cut BEFORE March 18.
To be clear, inter-meeting is still low, but it is moving off zero. Even yesterday this was an impossible.
When does the emergency Fed meeting start? pic.twitter.com/yxDKp3Fz7F
— Jim Bianco (@biancoresearch) February 27, 2020
Twice in the past week I mentioned the possibility of a surprise rate cut.
If it happens, I won’t be surprised.
All News Must Funnel Through VP Pence
The CDC seems fairly incompetent monitoring over 4,000 people who may be spreading the disease as I type, with only 200 test kits.
But coordinating through Pence is 100% guaranteed to exacerbate the problems.https://t.co/tWsR27jDnH https://t.co/WFsmejnFiC
— Mike “Mish” Shedlock (@MishGEA) February 27, 2020
US Censorship Already
What’s Happening?
- Feb 19: Fed Minutes Highlight Coronavirus Concerns and Uncertainty 8 Times
- Feb 24: Bond Yields Crash and Gold Soars on Pandemic Threat
- Feb 25: CDC Admits Spread of Coronavirus in the US Appears Inevitable
- Feb 25: Lie of the Day: This is Not a Pandemic
- Feb 25: Nearly 50% Odds of “At Least” 3 Rate Cuts by December
- Feb 26: Trump says We are “Very, Very Ready for the Coronavirus, for Anything”
- Feb 27: Useless Act: California Monitors 8,400 People for Coronavirus; 33 Test Positive
- Feb 27: Containment Fails: Coronavirus Tweets of the Day
Rate cuts odds started rising before coronavirus threat materialized on news Largest Global Shipping Decline Since 2009.
In regards to point 6 and Trump’s comment that we are “very, very, ready”, excuse me for pointing out that California is monitoring 8,400 people and has 200 test kits.
And monitoring people in and of itself is useless. By the time anyone show symptoms, they have been a carrier for as long as 19 days.
Mike “Mish” Shedlock
I see that Latkes apparently doesn’t understand the concept of “if it bleeds, it leads”. Poor man. He should be more like Mish and run around with his hair on fire. That’s the only way to be popular here.
mish’s blog is about global macro economics. a (global) pandemic has serious economic repercussions. are you being obtuse intentionally?
“Professor Mackay said if that was the case, “at some point in the coming months or years we’re all going to get infected because we’ve all been infected by these other endemic viruses”.
“We know that they just spread among us,” he said.
The government’s emergency response plan will give sweeping powers to federal and state governments to contain the virus if outbreaks occur, similar to those in Iran, Italy, Japan and South Korea.”
Governments may order mass vaccinations of entire suburbs, cities or groups of people; sports stadia may be sequestered as quarantine sites; and police could be ordered to guard critical medical supplies under Australia’s pandemic health plans.
Under worst-case scenarios being contemplated by state and federal governments, forecasts say a pandemic outbreak could last up to 10 months, and 40% of the country’s workforce could be sidelined by illness or caring for family members. Australia’s GDP could take a 10% hit.
The pandemic plans have not yet been scaled up to their highest levels: Australia remains in containment mode and governments have consistently said that Australia is well-placed to deal with any outbreaks.
Ian Mackay is worth following on Twitter. His comments are informative, friendly, balanced and he is also inquisitive.
Never let a good crisis go to waste.
Both BNO News and Worldometer report that Nigeria has gotten its first case. I cannot find any other news links. NOW do we have a pandemic?
We’ll see if this plays out like Philippines or more like Italy.
Thanks for the link. Yes, I think that this scenario suggests the former. Let’s hope, anyway. That being said, I’m so surprised that any number of African countries with a large presence of Chinese has not seen any outbreaks.
I don’t know who wrote the story on Japan, (Athit Perawongmetha?) but I can say that most families still have the mother staying home with the children all day. This won’t be chaos for working parents. It’s a pretty ethnocentric position.
I do not see how lower interest will help this situation but perhaps others can share their thoughts?
I think that they have no other “tools.”
Like the two old ladies at the restaurant:
“This food is awful!”
“Yeah, and the portions are so small!”
Whether they help the situation as a whole is something else, but they will allow easier borrowing by companies in “temporary distress” due to economic slowdown, will put more money into the hands of government, will cover for loss of trust and therefore liquidity between banks and so on. If there is deflation due to lack of demand or activity, extra supply of money will create re-inflation, meaning the books will be kept in order even if everything else isn’t. How that new liquidity is fed into the market and economy will determine political, business and social realities, something central planners spend their time doing – just to “smooth out difficulty” or to take charge and further format a nation or the world depends on own opinion, not that it is nescessarily sought in advance by those involved, more likely bought if possible.
You’re looking at it backwards.
Lowering interest rates helps those closest to the credit nexus confiscate more resources from those further away.
Virus outbreaks, “recessions”, “pandemics” what have you, are just convenient excuses to speed up and amplify this confiscation. That’s why they are being considered.
No aspect of any real economy, is helped by government forcing something which is already grossly mispriced, to become even more so. But, as always, thieves are helped by easier access to more theft. And that’s the goal, and what matters.
Government’s number one priority, aside from citizen’s health, is keeping people in their homes and ensuring they can eat. Interest rate cuts probably don’t help much toward that goal in the UK, where 3+ year fixed rate mortgages and loans are the norm.
They do, however, go further towards ensuring that people who have retired and are living off their savings are no longer able to do so.
It will boost the stock market and sucker dumb investors back in.
Will it help with the virus? Maybe there are one or two people holding off buying masks until they can borrow the money at a lower rate.
Trump likes loyalist above competency so let me say we are in trouble… A crises is where you prove your worth. Obama inherited a balance-sheet recession and regardless what people think he deliver an OK economy to Trump. Lets see how Trump handles his first real crises. If I were him one of the the things I would do i removing all trade barriers created and coordinate with China and the EU to do the same. That will go farther than a rate cut.
Pence has swung into action! Even now, he’s got a hand on the president’s fat shoulder, eyes squinched up communicating directly with God through His Sacred Orange Antenna that smells of Hamburders. God listens to Pence…. the righteous will be saved, and the heathens shall drown in their own snot! Rejoice! The time fo judgement is at hand!
Hamberders. Misspell it right.
Japan shutting down schools is first time officials attempt to get ahead of the curve rather than respond weeks late after infections already took place.
Chinese health officials previously estimated that the incubation period for the virus ranged from one to 14 days, but recent research suggests it could be as long as 24 days.
Doctors concluded that the woman’s incubation period – the time during which she was infectious – was 19 days.
5 cases over 14 days
Latkes can apologize any time
You have got to be kidding…
You wrote: “By the time anyone show symptoms, they have been a carrier for as long as 19 days.”
And then “Doctors concluded that the woman’s incubation period – the time during which she was infectious – was 19 days.” – that is ONE woman. An outlier.
“5 cases over 14 days” – those are again outliers. Median is much much lower.
It’s a big stretch to go from one outlier, to “anyone”
And you doubled down on that claim, SMH.
As much as you decry people who take the virus too seriously, you’ve played the opposite side and defiantly maintained that this is nothing. As the bad news has rolled in, you’ve been even more steadfast.
I haven’t commented much on this virus issue, but you’ve taken it personally the whole time. It’s strange to watch and your motivations for doing this are unclear. Why are you so eager to die on this particular hill?
If it can happen in 5 out of 6 cases tested it is approximately ZERO stretch to say that it is possible in anyone. Are you trying to prove you are scientifically illiteratre?
See my other comment with the study
I have repeatedly stated that I believe that the infection rate is much higher which would have some obvious implications (see #1)
I have pointed out the SO2-crematory hoax in the comments. I didn’t see anybody apologizing for spreading that nonsense.
Why are you questioning my motivations instead of addressing what is being discussed here right now? Is it OK to apply one outlier to “anyone”?
Why don’t you question the motivations of Mish or Jim Bianco or other doomers? It’s a little odd that any negative information is blown way up, even if it’s out of context or incomplete, while positive information is met with doubt or hostility. I am playing the opposite side of the gloom here. Trying to bring some balance.
How the hell do you know those are outliers?
The fact of the matter is they studied 6 cases and 5 of 6 had periods 14 days or longer
Oh please! There were other studies. Most placed incubation period range to 2 – 14 days. The big one with N over 1000 (not measly 6) set the median at 3 days. It was even posted here in the comments somewhere.
Also, “possible in anyone” does not imply that monitoring 8,400 people for 14 days is useless, especially if “possible” is based on outliers.
Really?
Are you ever planning to retract the ridiculous and debunked claim that “Sudden Rise in SO2 Levels Suggests Huge Cremation Surge”?
Edit: Here you go: link to medrxiv.org
“The median incubation period was 3.0 days (range, 0 to 24.0 days)” – By definition 50% of patients had incubation period at or lower than 3 days. It’s reasonable to assume that vast majority of patients are close to the median.
From what I have seen, there was one case at 24 days, one at 27 days (dubious). The very definition of outliers. 19 days is pretty far from median too.
“Are you ever planning to retract the ridiculous and debunked claim that “Sudden Rise in SO2 Levels Suggests Huge Cremation Surge”?”
He doesn’t have to retract the claim because he did not make it, he reported it, the suggestion originated with inteldotwav, who complained that the daily mail took his SO2 picture without permission to run the same story themselves. There is still serious talk surrounding if there is hidden activity there. The title was suggests, and we all called BS with associated reasons. To use that to discredit another theme does not work – we’re the pit of critical cynics who snap at his heels ready to shred any info he tosses, maybe discuss it sometimes even 🙂 . Only you seem to expect he will provide endless reason and answers ? It’s ok though, because you are asking for your own contribution to be shreded the same way the moment you step into that light, much obliged but we try not to make it personal though no, nor push it that way? Mish’s original phrase was correct btw – up to however many days of incubation ( and probably more). 😉
It was the title of his article, so it’s a stretch to say that he didn’t claim it. I mentioned it to point out the bias.
The phrase wasn’t correct, but I am tired of this BS.
What negative info is blown way up.
All Bianco and I have done is post the cases, charts, and tweets mostly from experts.
I would argue the media downplayed the virus early on, plus “markets” laughed everything off until late last week. People are going to discuss this on forums because they can’t trust the MSM.
We can claim that bloggers like Mish and others played this up just in case it turned out to be a real story, but in this case they’ve been validated. Maybe they get tired of writing the same stuff about rigged markets over and over, because even though it’s true, people want new info.
Your motivations aren’t as clear. Are you cheering for stocks? Do you not want to orange guy to look bad? Are you being a contrarian? It’s difficult to tell.
In the sense that there is panic and there is a real effect on economy, yes, but I agreed with that before. However, panic != truth. There are indications that the mortality rate is vastly overestimated and a lot of political decisions are based largely on panic and not wanting to be seen as doing nothing.
What I write here would have zero effect on both, don’t you think?
I explained my motivations in my previous comment: I am playing the opposite side of the gloom here. Trying to bring some balance.
Now, do you have any comment on the actual topic? Or is attacking me personally enough to “disprove” what I wrote?
At least I got an answer- you’re being a contrarian. Got it.
I’m unhappy out that the virus is turning out to be a big deal because I may have to skip my trip to Japan in April. I’ve never been there and have been looking forward to going for a while, plus I’d have to eat the cost of the plane ticket.
I really wish you were correct, but your position looks worse by the day.
Look at the study I posted in the first comment under this article. Maybe it’s bad, maybe not so much. Politicians and authorities don’t have much choice either way.
I am being a contrarian, yes, but I would also hope that people on the opposite side stop for a minute and consider what else is out there. Too much doom creates tunnel vision.
Several commenters mentioned having trips planned for the next few months. I have plans too and have bought refundable plane tickets. Also stacking up on rice and beans and more. I am taking both sides into consideration.
I’ll weigh in on my perspective, since I’ve been accused of being mild or moderate, or whatever it was. My goal is to understand the risks, and to understand both the need to protect myself and my employees, and how to protect them. From there, I also assess how it will affect the economy, which in turn will affect me. In turn, then, I may also alter some investment choices at times. For example, once the coronavirus broke contain in Korea, Italy, and Iran, it was obvious that the problem would get bigger, and I purchased some RWM at 37.67. Am I trying to get rich from a catastrophie? Hardly. Any gain that I have from the RWM will be far, far smaller than the losses I will take if my business drops dramatically from the coronavirus, which it will. In the long run, the goal is to survive this. Anything that doesn’t kill us makes us stronger, they say.
Thanks, good perspective.
Not wishing to indulge in the arguing, but I am with Carl and Latkes. It is important to take this seriously, but it is also important to understand that there is a lot of contradictory data and to not panic or assume somebody is lying just because they are Chinese.
However, here is perhaps the most salient point:
Northern Ireland now has it, a traveler came from Italy where they were infected and flew to Dublin then on to NI. So it is in Ireland also.
Dublin airport can be densely packed. Chances are there are others now infected. If the infected person came in on one of the cattle flights you can bet it has been spread and that plane could be on a number of different EU routes.
I tuned into CNBC at the close to see how they would handle it. Someone had found a way to get on their studio voice lines. AS the ‘B’ team was assembled and Mohammed El Arian was, somehow, persuaded to to a telephone interview the screams started. El Arian could talk uninterrupted, but as soon as a CNBC clown tried to the ‘screams’ began again. No ‘big shot’ will appear in person live. It is hilarious.
Too bad Davos is over. Could be a cure for most of our diseases.
LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
New “Tweet of the Day”!!!
“The power of our approach lies in the ability to infer epidemiological parameters with quantified uncertainty from partial observations collected by surveillance systems.” This is not what@WHO found when they were on the ground in Hubei province.
Link?
She is a great source of information.
I can’t post the link. Visit@HelenBranswell on Twitter. 8:01 AM on Feb 25th
This? link to statnews.com
It’s an opinion that, according to this article, was immediately countered by an infectious diseases expert that advises WHO.
Thanks, anyway.
Both opinions in the article by Helen Branswell work for or are associated with WHO . It isn’t WHO denying Aylward , and the take home as I read it is that missed cases might be between 0.5% to a multiple of that. Even if it were 10 % it won’t dilute CFR much ( say 4 in 100 vs 4 in 110), it will increase RO, and it will mean unsourced transmission or unnoticed reservoir of virus will increase.
Yes, I know. I thought it was obvious from the context.
Where did Kobinger say that?
Kobinger didn’t. Aylward’s report was 0.5%, Kobinger said much higher. You don’t like 20X higher, OK. Continue guessing, but don’t make out to me you have anything specific to contribute.
So I was right. Not sure what is the problem then.
Read the context again, LB412 pointed out that WHO said something and gave me a reference to the article. I read the article and pointed out that another WHO expert countered the claim (in that same article!). An educated guess was provided in the study that started this thread. You disagree with that, fine.
No, she didn’t mention WHO, you did saying WHO discredited the info she linked to.
I don’t find reason to validate the info in the study that you started the thread with, it is a proposition.
“…Of 320,000 tests performed, just under 0.5% were positive for the virus at the peak of transmission there, he said..”
Not sure what tests Guangdong fever clinics performed, but I really hope, for the sake of “we are prepared” Trump and Newsom, that these 320,000 tests, aren’t the same ones the entire state of California only has 200 of……..
Also, 0.5% of 320,000 is 1600. With the 320,000 seemingly self selected from a population conditioned to worry about viruses, post SARS. If anyone half paranoid could show up at a “fever clinic” and get tested in Cali, wonder how many would turn up positive…. (Unless tests ran out after the first 200 were tested, of course…)
In general, until tests themselves are more standardized, less suspect and more vetted, I wouldn’t extrapolate too far based on them. While no doubt still useful from the POV of deciding on treatment, quarantines etc. on a patient by patient basis, basing large scale, speculative, global outbreak models on them, seems a bit risky.
Data from Wuhan/Hubei itself seems more settled, as they have more corroborating observation than just various versions of initial tests of varying quality. But at the same time, I’m not sure how representative the Wuhan/Hubei outbreak really was, as a model for possible outbreaks further out.
Indicating that we should probably wait for more conclusive data from Iran, Japan, South Korea and Italy, before getting too married to any theories, models or conclusions about how things will unfold elsewhere.
They modelled China epidemiology on returnee Japanese cases, and they admit that there might be bias due to different transmission rate amongst different social groups.
Then they admit more or less that it is as high for China as represented by official figures :
“These findings indicate that the death risk in Wuhan is estimated to be much higher than those in other areas, which is likely explained by hospital-based transmissions.”
So their sum is higher transmissibility than previously estimated, but lower CFR (and IFR) due to comorbidity in hospital transmission accounting for many fatalities in China, which would not occur outside of China.
Well it’s an idea I suppose, but I’m going to wait till we have fuller figures in the west before I draw any sort of conclusion.
They are saying exactly what I am saying all the time – a lot of undocumented cases and a much lower fatality rate.
It’s funny, yet again, that you are “going to wait till we have fuller figures”, which is what many people are saying about any kind of positive news and by itself is a reasonable thing to say… however, people don’t show this kind of restraint when they spread panic and predictions of doom based on this same data and general hysteria.
Ironically, I found this study posted elsewhere with the title “980,000 infections in Wuhan!” and no mention of the low mortality rate. It’s like people wish for this to be as bad as possible.
“It’s like people wish for this to be as bad as possible.”s not “people” wishing that. In social media and TV etc bad news sales ad space just like sex
I am saying that because we don’t have a workable set of reliable figures, and that is why that study knowingly goes deep into hypothetical extrapolations.
Some accept China data, others try to disprove it, I cannot work with it. It does indicate that there is high transmission and fatality, and it will take a clear study using valid real data for me to reject that basic assumption.
“We don’t have a workable set of reliable numbers…”
“I cannot work with it.”
“It does indicate…”
I don’t intend to single you out, but this is a perfect example of what passes for commentary on this subject.
You do not and cannot know anything. All you can do is either believe or disbelieve what you are told.
I have never in my life seen a more perfect real-life enactment of Plato’s Allegory of the Cave than this coronavirus Panic of 2020.
OK, reasonable.
The next time someone makes the claim that this is just like or worse than the Spanish Flu or if someone extrapolates an outlier into a general pattern (like people freaking out about an alleged 24 or 27 day incubation period as if that was the norm), I hope to see you having a reasonable response to that.
“(like people freaking out about an alleged 24 or 27 day incubation period as if that was the norm),”
You are now on very thin ice.
No one is “freaking out” about an alleged incubation period – except YOU.
YOU are the one ignoring evidence and scientific opinions.
I never once said it was the “norm”. Nor did anyone else. It is possible and you have to be a fool to not see it.
I will not tolerate you putting words in my mouth that I never said.
I did not say it was you. If it were you, I would have mentioned your name. There are a lot of people commenting here too.
Any evidence or scientific opinion I provided (like the study above) is dismissed. Talk about ignoring.
I am fine with that, since I have not done such thing.
This virus certainly brings out the “interesting” in people.
Chinese study via scmp says 1% are over 14 days, 24 days was 0.1%. There is one case said at 40 days, though hard to prove not infected later. There are asymptomatic carriers that transmit, people who transmit after being cleared, people who reinfect by themselves and by others, the testing system is dubious also.
Median incubation is taken at around 5 days btw by most, time between symptoms and seeking attention is very variable. In the west median is a couple of days for those who know they might be exposed, but it can be a week or more or never if symptoms are mild. R0 is high, probably well over 5 in normal circumstance, decreasing depending on quarantine level.
Enough please, we are in an unknown circumstance, fatalities are occuring with people of various age groups, some of them known healthy. Let people prepare or be alerted to possible danger, even many governments are taking strong actions they would not if they could help it, if they thought there was little danger or even if they thought they could excuse inaction.
Thanks, hopefully@Mish reads this too.
I would say there is a good chance that the 24 day cases are also hard to prove not infected later.
A link would be nice too. I linked the Chinese study with N over 1000 that set the median incubation period at 3 days.
Links, they cite link to 4.5 days median
SCMP
Thanks, here is the study that mentions 3 days median: link to medrxiv.org
Anyway, 3 days or 4.5 days, both still support the basic argument about the statistical outliers.
Statistical outliers , point is for example they set the parameters of if quarantine will work or not, so in those terms those with 14 days or less incubation are the outliers (they don’t count).
Sure, but a) that is not what was written in Mish’s article (not going to any more into that) and b) practical considerations have to be taken into account – where do you stop – for example would 42 day long quarantine for thousands of people on a ship or in a hotel, locked in their rooms be reasonable?
a) I didn’t read any obvious implication, it came across as a fact (as far as is known) to take into consideration.
b) The possible maximum incubation time is a practical consideration to be taken into account, to whatever degree depending on model or real world ability.
40 days questionable
The asymptomatic transmissions and mild transmitters are well documented. The 38yr old athlete in Italy is critical, a 21 yr old athlete was fatality in Iran. Milan hospital is out if beds, Spain doctors are short of basic masks, the test kit failures I linked previously, lack of coordination, incoherent protocol everywhere – it just says to me we are not prepared for a serious pandemic. People, people can barely comprehend what a serious pandemic would mean.
Like most people, I truly hope it is all exaggerated.
Death rate in Wuhan is likely higher due to lack of supplies, putting sick people together in close proximity in beds next to each other.
We’re guessing though really, opposite arguments have been made, but am not going to tie myself in knots arguing because whatever reasonable set of figures are used the picture is not a happy one.
Not sure if all of those commenting bothered to watch the Aylward interview in full.
“They are out of medical supplies”
Not supported by his comments. Not only do they have more ECMO machines in one hospital than we have in the whole UK, but it was very plainly stated by Aylward that all of the provinces directed medical supplies and personnel (many of whom apparently well motivated volunteers) into Wuhan. And when they arrived they took over entire wards, effectively just overlaying their expertise, PPE, supplies, shift rotas and interpersonal relationships onto a different ward than normal. Hence, they hit the ground running.
“Their tests aren’t good enough”
People turn up at a fever clinic, if they have a fever they get a CT scan, if the CT scan shows pneumonia, they get admitted, if it doesn’t, they don’t.
Aylward made a very telling comment toward the end of that session. He said that people in the west were making a dangerous assumption – that China was screwing this up. In fact, he said they were heavily invested in making people better, that they’d diverted the entire machinery of state to that goal, and that they were super efficient at it. He said they’d avoided 100s of thousands of infections.
Compare and contrast:
Every doctor they spoke to in every hospital was operating to a clinical standard updated just 24 hours before.
In Italy, people weren’t using protective gear when treating patients. In the UK, two chinese people who rocked up with flu like symptoms were made to wait 4 hours in a room full of people (fortunately they were negative). Department of health telling schools with suspected cases to reopen.
What if the fatality rate in Wuhan is the lower bound of what can be achieved with a super efficient, technology driven health initiative?
I think China, with their draconian controls, is a lower bound on the infection rate at the least. We shall see if the free world can control it now.
If we can’t we are going to look very stupid, so expect lots of anti-China propaganda – and probably allegations that those pesky Russians are spreading misinformationa gain.
It’s impossible to determine the fatality rate until the number of cases reaches a steady state. Otherwise you have a numerator that lags a denominator.
Gold down today and the mining stocks got taken out and shot. So much for the safe haven!