Coronavirus - Travel impact

[Teacher Terry]

Considering that the death rate in China is 10x’s what’s being reported and I am in a high risk group not anxious to find out.

[NW-Bound]

To be fair, the fatality rate in Wuhan is high because they are overwhelmed with the number of patients. They have good medical care in Wuhan too.

If the US has this kind of outbreak in NYC, or SF, there are not enough hospital beds for tens of thousand of patients overnight. We would not be able to do better.

It's better to slow down the contagion. Gotta make people take turn getting sick, so we can take care of them better, and do not run out of drugs and supplies.

One at a time, please.

[NYEXPAT]

Quote:

Originally Posted by NW-Bound As the Japanese couple who came back from Hawaii with the virus showed, you do not have to go to China. You can get it from infected fellow travelers in the plane, or even at the airport. Again, "That which does not kill us makes us stronger." -- Friedrich Nietzsche They now say up to 60% of the world population will eventually get this virus. Might as well get it out of the way, and live out the rest of your life in peace. The rest of your life may be as short as a couple of weeks though. And it is not peaceful either, with all the feverish coughing and wheezing.

A 80 year old friend of mine was on that flight, travelling first class and did not see any Asians around him.

[NYEXPAT]

We have decided to put our move back to the USA on hold for awhile. So far the Border Wall seems to have contained this and we feel much safer where we are.

On a separate note think about this in your future travels:

This looks like a good case for moving to digital currency.........."People’s Bank of China representatives said at a press conference on February 15 that currency deposited at banks must be disinfected with ultraviolet light and then held for a week or longer before being released back into the wilds of the economy. The Chinese central bank will provide new bills worth 600 billion yuan to banks. (Some of the currency will be destroyed.)"

[Marc]

20% fatality rate? Closer to 2%; then if you include all the new cases where no symptoms found; maybe the infection rate is higher but the fatality rate far below 1%. This may end up being, in the words of Shakespeare - Much Ado About Nothing.

Marc

[tmm99]

I would like to know if those asymptomatic people will eventually get symptoms (or they have already started getting symptoms), or they are going to be carriers who will never have symptoms.

[brewer12345]

Quote:

Originally Posted by tmm99 I would like to know if those asymptomatic people will eventually get symptoms, or they are going to be carriers who will never have symptoms.

So would everyone else.

[6miths]

The case fatality rate is definitely not 20%. Currently my understanding is that it is being given as about 2%. Typically the rate will wind up lower than this due to the number of cases that are not identified because they are sub-clinical.

[NW-Bound]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marc 20% fatality rate? Closer to 2%; then if you include all the new cases where no symptoms found; maybe the infection rate is higher but the fatality rate far below 1%. This may end up being, in the words of Shakespeare - Much Ado About Nothing. Marc

How's the fatality rate of 1% compared to other causes of death? Here's a comparison.

In 2020, the mortality rate in the US of all causes has been estimated as 0.83%. This is of course not counting this virus.

Now, if the entire population of the US gets infected in one year, then this would roughly double the total death rate. Hospitals, the morgues, and crematoriums will be quite busy, but I think the country can survive this.

Ah, and it kills a lot more people who are over 60 and that includes a lot of retirees, so that the work force is not impacted as much. The economy will do fine.

Now, once a person is infected, is he immunized forever, or will he still get sick in the future by a new strain of mutated virus? People do not get immunized from cold or the flu.

If we sustain the 1% extra death each year, this is going to shrink the population. And fewer and fewer old people will stay around to collect SS and Medicare.

Wow! This can be a real game changer.

[explanade]

A good percentage of people who've died have been under 40.

Like that whistleblower doctor, 36, with no preexisting conditions.

And I believe young people are among the critically sick.

Even if mortality rate drops well under 1%, hospital utilization could go way up, as well as lost productivity due to people being sick or having to self-quarantine.

I imagine companies will insist on sick people not coming into work, unless we discover that it's not as infectious as it seems to be now.

[tulak]

Quote:

Originally Posted by NW-Bound 20% chance of death if you catch the virus. Is that good or bad? I prefer not to catch the virus to find out if I am in the 80% group or the 20% one. Thank you.

It's my understanding that only 20% show symptoms and for a smaller percentage it will fatal. Maybe around 2%?

So 80% nothing, 18% you feel like you're dying, and 2% you're dead.

Of course, we really don't know yet. That's why they're trying to buy time.

[NW-Bound]

Quote:

Originally Posted by explanade A good percentage of people who've died have been under 40. Like that whistleblower doctor, 36, with no preexisting conditions. And I believe young people are among the critically sick. Even if mortality rate drops well under 1%, hospital utilization could go way up, as well as lost productivity due to people being sick or having to self-quarantine. I imagine companies will insist on sick people not coming into work, unless we discover that it's not as infectious as it seems to be now.

Yes, some of the patients are young. The doctor who died, Li Wenliang, was actually only 33.

But the data from Wuhan shows that 80% of the fatalities are over 60.

And I showed in a post on another thread that western countries including the US have an older population than China.

Quote:

Originally Posted by NW-Bound It is now widely recognized that the most virus deaths are older people. Someone on the Web points out that not too many children are hospitalized either. In fact, even some younger adults are able to shake off the virus like a common cold or flu. Given the above observations, one has to ask "What countries have more old people". Here's the median age for some countries. Vietnam 30.5 China 37.4 USA 38.1 South Korea 41.8 Germany 47.1 Japan 47.3 Monaco 53.1

[tulak]

Quote:

Originally Posted by NW-Bound To be fair, the fatality rate in Wuhan is high because they are overwhelmed with the number of patients. They have good medical care in Wuhan too.

They do have good medical care in Wuhan. There was an article - probably referenced in this thread - about what it was like to be infected with this virus. This was from someone in China - I think Wuhan - who had access to antiviral medications.

With the amount of people that are infected, I was impressed that he was able to get medications. I figured there would be shortages, or general difficulties getting to hospital/doctor, but apparently that's not the case.

Found it: https://time.com/5783838/coronavirus...uhan-survivor/

Yes, he was from Wuhan.

Quote:

Originally Posted by explanade A good percentage of people who've died have been under 40. Like that whistleblower doctor, 36, with no preexisting conditions.

Source?

From what I've read, most people that have died have been older. The only case that I've heard about that was younger was the doctor in China. Maybe there are more?

It is disturbing that he died, since he was young. I've haven't read anything that says if had preexisting conditions or not, but I would assume that he must have had something or else he'd still be with us. If you know otherwise, I'd love to see a pointer to an article.

Edit to add: just saw NW-Bound's post. 80% >60. I wonder about the 20%, ages, if there are any underlying health issues, etc. This might be harder to figure out.

[luckydude]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marc 20% fatality rate? Closer to 2%; then if you include all the new cases where no symptoms found; maybe the infection rate is higher but the fatality rate far below 1%. This may end up being, in the words of Shakespeare - Much Ado About Nothing. Marc

The fatality rate may or may not turn out to be far below 1%, but the virus has proven to be highly infectious (certainly much more so than the flu); the incubation period is much longer; there's no vaccine; and effects on those infected appear to be high variable and unpredictable, ranging from asymptomatic to death.

There was a report from the Chinese media yesterday that the virus killed a noted local film producer (age 50), his sister, his mother and his father, wiping out the entire family. Either this family was extremely unlucky statistically speaking, or the virus is way worse than the official Chinese government numbers would have us believe.

Lucky Dude

[BeachOrCity]

Watch what people do more than what they say.

No way would Chinese govt shut down a huge part of their economy over something that is just a normal flu like illness.

This time it is different.

I have a trip if a lifetime coming in April. Not to China but if this thing is spreading heavily in other geos by then will need to cancel and take the financial hit.

[Nemo2]

Quote:

Originally Posted by BeachOrCity Watch what people do more than what they say.

+1

[fh2000]

The latest number of infected people on Diamond Princess cruise in Japan has risen to 542 out of 3711 passengers and crew. That is 14.6%.

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/#countries

US has evacuated more than 300 yesterday. There are 14 known infected on board. Another 44 are currently in Japanese hospital receiving treatment.

Japan said they have now tested all the remaining people on board, and the results will be available by 2/21. Some can start leaving on 2/19 if their results are negative.

This is really troubling. Why did Japan not segregate everyone on board in a more effective method so they do not infect each other?

[Gumby]

Quote:

Originally Posted by fh2000 This is really troubling. Why did Japan not segregate everyone on board in a more effective method so they do not infect each other?

I would think it almost impossible aboard a ship. Long ago, when I was a sailor, the whole crew would be sick for about the first two weeks of our deployment, as we worked through the various viruses that people carried on board. After that, we would be remarkably healthy, until we got home to face a new round of disease. Admittedly, a cruise ship is not a submarine, but the quarters are still tight for the crew. If the crew were delivering food to passengers in every stateroom, they were likely delivering the virus too. Not to mention potential transmission via the ventilation system. All in all, I'd say it was a rash decision by Japanese authorities to try it.

[tmm99]

Quote:

Originally Posted by fh2000 This is really troubling. Why did Japan not segregate everyone on board in a more effective method so they do not infect each other?

I heard that the crew members continue to share meals (communal dining) although they're also supposedly quarantined, which makes absolutely no sense. I've also seen many photos of people out in their balconies with no masks on. Sure it's good to get air, but there is just a small divider between the cabins and how smart is it to go out there without their masks on and start talking (especially when there's some breeze like you see here)

2020-02-05t233931z_1266777376_rc2nue9k8gxj_rtrmadp_3_china-health-japan-ship.jpg

[Nemo2]

We haven't cancelled our (small deposits paid) two back-to-backs in the Adriatic/Eastern Med, etc, in late October.....but we haven't purchased flights (yet) either.