Page 28 of 41 FirstFirst ... 19202122232425262728293031323334353637 ... LastLast
Results 406 to 420 of 605

Thread: Will SARS make a come back?

  1. #406
    Turbanator Senior Contributor Double Edge's Avatar
    Join Date
    11 Sep 10
    Location
    Bangalore
    Posts
    10,917
    Quote Originally Posted by Oracle View Post
    Attachment 48465

    It has reached everyone in India through Whatsapp. I didn't have to check WHO's website to understand this is fake.
    Hah, so the guy who told me this was quoting a whatsapp forward : )

  2. #407
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    05 Sep 06
    Posts
    4,582
    Grand-Est is seeing its hospitalizations and ICU cases slowly level off, flattening the curve so to speak...

    Name:  grand.jpg
Views: 39
Size:  111.6 KB

    ... except what is actually happening is that they simply ran out of capacity regarding beds.


    Grand Est originally had about 380 ICU beds and has tripled this number in the current crisis. The entire growth in ICU beds as well as half the previous capacity is taken up by Corona patients, with "ten candidates for every freed-up bed".
    Actual number of deaths so far is probably somewhere around 3,400 - it's a bit hard to get numbers now. As of two days ago, since then probably another 300. About 20-25% of all Corona deaths in France occur in Grand Est, with 8.5% of the population. Lockdown restrictions are such that in Strasbourg they're now offering live-streamed burial ceremonies so the family can still mourn the deceased in some way...

    Forget case numbers as a metric there. Haut-Rhin, the hardest hit county in Grand Est, has probably somewhere around 1,100 deaths alone by now - on a population of 760,000. And for a scale of problem: They have started deplyoing test booths for the general public in Colmar, the capital of Haut-Rhin ... today. Because up to now their testing capacity was restricted to those hospitalized as well as medical and care staff. And "general public" for the new drive-by booths doesn't mean a mass test campaign - it only means those showing symptoms and having a prescription from a doctor, similar to the testing regime in Germany.

  3. #408
    Turbanator Senior Contributor Double Edge's Avatar
    Join Date
    11 Sep 10
    Location
    Bangalore
    Posts
    10,917
    Quote Originally Posted by Oracle View Post
    Attachment 48465

    It has reached everyone in India through Whatsapp. I didn't have to check WHO's website to understand this is fake.
    Here it is anyway

    https://www.who.int/india/emergencie...ake-news-alert

  4. #409
    Turbanator Senior Contributor Double Edge's Avatar
    Join Date
    11 Sep 10
    Location
    Bangalore
    Posts
    10,917
    Quote Originally Posted by kato View Post
    Forget case numbers as a metric there. Haut-Rhin, the hardest hit county in Grand Est, has probably somewhere around 1,100 deaths alone by now - on a population of 760,000.
    That's a pretty high death count per million. Over three times the Spanish average. Any idea why its so high.

    Name:  deaths per million top countries.jpg
Views: 39
Size:  63.3 KB


    Quote Originally Posted by kato View Post
    And for a scale of problem: They have started deplyoing test booths for the general public in Colmar, the capital of Haut-Rhin ... today.

    Because up to now their testing capacity was restricted to those hospitalized as well as medical and care staff

    And "general public" for the new drive-by booths doesn't mean a mass test campaign - it only means those showing symptoms and having a prescription from a doctor, similar to the testing regime in Germany.
    What ? i thought Germany was going much more aggressive with testing.

    You just described what is done in India. Can get tested only if a doctor prescribes it.
    Last edited by Double Edge; 09 Apr 20, at 21:10.

  5. #410
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    05 Sep 06
    Posts
    4,582
    Quote Originally Posted by Double Edge View Post
    What ? i thought Germany was going much more aggressive with testing.
    You just described what is done in India. Can get tested only if a doctor prescribes it.
    In order to get tested in Germany you have to have symptoms (evaluated by a doctor) or you have to have been in contact with a positive person.

    Quote Originally Posted by Double Edge View Post
    That's a pretty high death count per million. Over three times the Spanish average. Any idea why its so high.
    This is the reason:

    Name:  porte.jpg
Views: 38
Size:  171.4 KB

    The Porte Ouverte Chretienne (an evangelical christian church styled as a US-like "megachurch"), which is headquartered in Haut-Rhin, held a religious convention in mid February with over 2,000-2,500 people attending. It basically acted as a superspreader incubator for the region.

    From a statistics view you can assume that at least 30% of the people attending got infected - about 1% of them died within the next four weeks; Mulhouse, where the church is from, at that point had 13% of all Corona deaths in France. Contact tracing of people who attended and returned from it has tracked infections from it over into all of France, into nearby Switzerland and as far as French Guyana across the Atlantic in South America.
    Last edited by kato; 09 Apr 20, at 22:14.

  6. #411
    Turbanator Senior Contributor Double Edge's Avatar
    Join Date
    11 Sep 10
    Location
    Bangalore
    Posts
    10,917
    Quote Originally Posted by kato View Post
    Did i say that?
    Can't find where but i got the impression that Germany was testing at a high rate like Korea. So doing sentinel testing all over the country.

    Quote Originally Posted by kato View Post
    In Germany you only get tested if you have both:
    - definitive symptoms AND
    - have been in proven contact with a positive person or have been in a high-risk zone.
    OK, so you have tested all those who are suspects. Approaching six figures.

    India has not tested that many but quarantined as many already.

    Quote Originally Posted by kato View Post
    Symptoms evaluated for whether a person should be tested are the ones recommended by WHO for differentiation between corona, common cold and influenza. Basically one needs to run a fever and have a dry cough, but should not have migraines, aches in joints or be overly tired.
    Right, same thing in India.

    Quote Originally Posted by kato View Post
    Italy, Spain, France for lack of capacity now only test people who are hospitalized with severe acute respiratory infections. That's of course a rather tighter constraint set than in Germany, but it doesn't mean Germany tests with mild symptoms.
    Why is the German recovery rate nearing 50% then ? I mean that's good but i do not see this high a rate with other countries.

    There can be reporting lags here.

    Quote Originally Posted by kato View Post
    This is the reason:

    Name:  porte.jpg
Views: 38
Size:  171.4 KB

    The Porte Ouverte Chretienne (an evangelical christian church styled as a US-like "megachurch"), which is headquartered in Haut-Rhin, held a religious convention in mid February with over 2,000-2,500 people attending. It basically acted as a superspreader incubator for the region.

    From a statistics view you can assume that at least 30% of the people attending got infected - about 1% of them died within the next four weeks; Mulhouse, where the church is from, at that point had 13% of all Corona deaths in France. Contact tracing of people who attended and returned from it has tracked infections from it over into all of France, into nearby Switzerland and as far as French Guyana across the Atlantic in South America.
    heh, why am i not surprised

    I guess we can expect a similar spike to happen this week end in some countries because of Easter Sunday
    Last edited by Double Edge; 09 Apr 20, at 23:58.

  7. #412
    Turbanator Senior Contributor Double Edge's Avatar
    Join Date
    11 Sep 10
    Location
    Bangalore
    Posts
    10,917
    Quote Originally Posted by Oracle View Post
    It has reached everyone in India through Whatsapp. I didn't have to check WHO's website to understand this is fake.
    The WHO part is fake. It's a misattribution.

    There is a maths modelling paper that discusses this.

    Age-structured impact of social distancing on the COVID-19 epidemic in India | arXiv | Mar 26 2020

    Name:  lockdown.png
Views: 32
Size:  101.8 KB

    we investigate the effect of social distancing measures and find that the three-week lockdown that commenced on 25 March 2020 is of insufficient duration to prevent resurgence.

    Alternative protocols of sustained lockdown with periodic relaxation can reduce the infection to levels where social contact tracing and quarantining may become effective
    Options (c) & (d) get us down.

    (c) & (d) are smashing the curve. Wuhan locked down for 76 days.

    Nice quote they have at the end : )

    To quote G.P.Box, “Since all models are wrong the scientist must be alert to what is importantly wrong. It is inappropriate to be concerned about mice when there are tigers abroad”
    Last edited by Double Edge; 11 Apr 20, at 01:12.

  8. #413
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    05 Sep 06
    Posts
    4,582
    Quote Originally Posted by Double Edge View Post
    Can't find where but i got the impression that Germany was testing at a high rate like Korea. So doing sentinel testing all over the country.
    Sentinel testing is performed as part of the regular influenza watch. These are basically random spot checks on a limited number of samples (a few hundred per week) which show current prevalence of particular virii.

    Germany is currently performing about 50,000 SARS-CoV2 tests per day. The required capacity for mass testing would be 4-5 times that.
    We also do quarantine large numbers of people without testing them. Basically waiting with the test until they show symptoms.

    Quote Originally Posted by Double Edge View Post
    Why is the German recovery rate nearing 50% then ?
    For a simplification of the algorithm used by RKI you just take the reported caseload of 11 days prior, apply the hospitalization rate (85%) and add the percentage of those hospitalized who are recovered without death (which is around 2% of all cases or 13% of those hospitalized). The algorithm gets a bit refined over time especially with regard to the recovery rate of those hospitalized - which is going down btw. For April 9th you take the caseload of March 29th published March 30th (57,298) and with a 0.87 factor get 49,849. The published number of "estimated recovered" on April 9th was "about 49,900".

    In my state's health agency the algorithm applied takes those not hospitalized plus those released from hospital the same amount of days ago. The problem is that here they also just changed the timeframe they're working with (from 11 days to 14 days) which just made the recovery rate go from 13% on Tuesday to 57% on Wednesday to 38% on Thursday...

  9. #414
    Turbanator Senior Contributor Double Edge's Avatar
    Join Date
    11 Sep 10
    Location
    Bangalore
    Posts
    10,917
    German researchers have come up with interesting findings that challenge our conventional understanding of how this virus spreads.

    How German scientists hope to find coronavirus answers in country's worst-hit spot | Local.de | Apr 02 2020

    Can you get infected with coronavirus after using a shopping trolley in the supermarket? What about by touching a door handle in the office, or a remote control?

    These are questions that many people have been asking since the coronavirus outbreak began.

    Researchers have so far come to different conclusions on how long the virus can survive on surfaces. But now a team of scientists in Germany are trying to find answers.

    "So far, no transmission of the virus in supermarkets, restaurants or hairdressers has been proven," explained Bonn virologist Hendrik Streeck on the ZDF Markus Lanz talk show.

    Instead, the major outbreaks have been the result of close get-togethers over a longer period of time, he said.

    That's demonstrated in, for example, outbreaks that have stemmed from après-ski parties in Ischgl, at football matches in Bergamo or at carnival celebrations in the municipality of Gangelt in the Heinsberg district of North Rhine-Westphalia.

    Streeck, who is director of the Institute of Virology at Bonn University, said he was able to detect coronavirus by swabbing remote controls, washbasins, mobile phones, toilets or door handles.

    However, it has not been possible to cultivate the virus in the laboratory on the basis of these swabs. "This means that we have detected the RNA (or ribonucleic acid, which carries the virus’s genetic information) of 'dead' viruses," Streeck said.

    According to his previous research results, he believes "that a door handle can only be infectious if someone has actually coughed in their hand and then reached for it.

    "After that, you have to reach for the door handle yourself and touch your face," he said. It is not yet possible to say how long the virus can remain on a door handle because not enough studies have been carried out.

    Streeck added: "We were in a household where many highly infectious people lived, and yet we did not manage to detect a living virus from any surface."

    Virologist Christian Drosten of Berlin's Charité hospital had also previously pointed out in an NDR podcast that coronaviruses are extremely sensitive to drying out. They are also transmitted by droplet infection and must be inhaled.

    Therefore, according to the virologist, there is little chance of transmission by contact with notes or coins, for example.
    They are saying the virus cannot be spread by contact. The virus does not stay viable when on surfaces.

    Heinsberg is considered the epicentre of the corona outbreak in Germany after a couple infected with Covid-19 attended carnival celebrations there in February, leading to a large spread in the Gangelt area.

    Figures from April 2nd for Heinsberg, which has a population of around 250,000, show the total number of confirmed cases at around 1,400 and 39 deaths. More than 690 people have recovered from the illness so far.

    Streeck and a team of medical students have now set up a pioneering study in this area in a bid to shed light on how coronavirus spreads, and how it can be contained.

    Called the “Covid-19 case cluster study” and launched on Tuesday March 31st, the study will follow 1,000 people chosen because they are representative of the German population.

    The scientists plan to go into homes, schools and hospitals and examine how the virus impacts everyday life, researching, for example, how it is spread through surfaces, mobile phones, door handles or TV remote controls.

    Streeck said: "The Heinsberg district represents an ideal situation to find answers for the rest of Germany."
    Gangelt is Germany's Bhilwara

    The Gangelt studies will form the basis of how to deal with the virus in Germany like Bhilwara informed how to contain a hotspot in India.

    Experts from the US Institute of Health NIH and the CSC, the epidemic control agency, however, had come to the conclusion that the coronavirus can survive for up to three days on plastics or stainless steel, 24 hours on paper and up to three hours in aerosols.

    The Robert Koch Institute points out, however, that scientific studies on this topic are carried out under experimental conditions and don't reflect the realistic risk of transmission in everyday life.
    Interesting, i've heard that aerosol thing for a few weeks and then the Indian medical council said it was not air borne because other wards in the hospital were not infected by patients in one ward.

  10. #415
    Turbanator Senior Contributor Double Edge's Avatar
    Join Date
    11 Sep 10
    Location
    Bangalore
    Posts
    10,917
    Quote Originally Posted by kato View Post
    Sentinel testing is performed as part of the regular influenza watch. These are basically random spot checks on a limited number of samples (a few hundred per week) which show current prevalence of particular virii.

    Germany is currently performing about 50,000 SARS-CoV2 tests per day. The required capacity for mass testing would be 4-5 times that.
    We also do quarantine large numbers of people without testing them. Basically waiting with the test until they show symptoms.
    Take a look at this. Germany has performed twice the tests per thousand population as Korea. And this info is from five days ago which means Germany's test count today is higher.

    Click the graphic to get the interactive chart

    Name:  tests per thousand.jpg
Views: 26
Size:  74.5 KB


    How many tests did Germany do by Apr 05 ? 1.32 million

    Name:  total tests.jpg
Views: 26
Size:  73.1 KB

    How many confirmed cases in Germany by Apr 05 ? 91k

    Name:  total cases.jpg
Views: 26
Size:  55.2 KB

    Over ten times the number of tests per affected case found

    That means 1 in 14 is positive or 13 out of 14 are negative.

    A high degree of negatives means you are testing people with mild symptoms i would have thought.

    Not just people with definitive symptoms

  11. #416
    Turbanator Senior Contributor Double Edge's Avatar
    Join Date
    11 Sep 10
    Location
    Bangalore
    Posts
    10,917
    Article that questions Neil Ferguson, the scientist at Imperial college, London, who convinced the UK govt to shut the country down on the basis of his models. For all we know other govts too.

    Burning Question : How accurate was the science that led to lockdown ? | Daily Telegraph | Mar 28 2020

    Professor Neil Ferguson predicted Britain was on course to lose 250,000 lives during the coronavirus epidemic

    By Katherine Rushton and Daniel Foggo
    28 March 2020

    The scientist whose calculations about the potentially devastating impact of the coronavirus directly led to the countrywide lockdown has been criticised in the past for flawed research.

    Professor Neil Ferguson, of the MRC Centre for Global Infectious Disease Analysis at Imperial College in London, produced a paper predicting that Britain was on course to lose 250,000 people during the coronavirus epidemic unless stringent measures were taken. His research is said to have convinced Prime Minister Boris Johnson and his advisors to introduce the lockdown.

    However, it has now emerged that Ferguson has been criticised in the past for making predictions based on allegedly faulty assumptions which nevertheless shaped government strategies and impacted the UK economy.

    He was behind disputed research that sparked the mass culling of farm animals during the 2001 epidemic of foot and mouth disease, a crisis which cost the country billions of pounds.

    And separately he also predicted that up to 150,000 people could die from bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE, or ‘mad cow disease’) and its equivalent in sheep if it made the leap to humans. To date there have been fewer than 200 deaths from the human form of BSE and none resulting from sheep to human transmission.


    Mr Ferguson’s foot and mouth disease (FMD) research has been the focus of two highly critical academic papers which identified allegedly problematic assumptions in his mathematical modelling.

    The scientist has robustly defended his work, saying that he had worked with limited data and limited time so the models weren’t 100 per cent right – but that the conclusions it reached were valid.

    Michael Thrusfield, professor of veterinary epidemiology at Edinburgh University, who co-authored both of the critical reports, said that they had been intended as a “cautionary tale” about how mathematical models are sometimes used to predict the spread of disease.

    He described his sense of “déjà vu” when he read Mr Ferguson’s Imperial College paper on coronavirus, which was published earlier this month.

    That paper - Impact of non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) to reduce COVID19 mortality and healthcare demand – warned that if no action were taken to control the coronavirus, around 510,000 people in Britain would lose their lives.


    It also predicted that approximately 250,000 people could die if the Government’s conservative approach at the time was not changed. The research, which was based on mathematical models, was key in convincing the Prime Minister that “suppression” - and subsequently a lockdown - was the only viable option to avoid huge loss of life and an NHS meltdown.

    This week, a second paper authored by Mr Ferguson and the Imperial team further predicted that 40 million people worldwide could die if the coronavirus outbreak was left unchecked.

    But scientists warned last night about the dangers in making sweeping political judgments based on mathematical modelling which may be flawed.

    In 2001, as foot and mouth disease (FMD) broke out in parts of Britain, Ferguson and his team at Imperial College produced predictive modelling - which was later criticised as “not fit for purpose.”

    At the time, however, it proved highly influential and helped to persuade Tony Blair’s government to carry out a widespread pre-emptive culling which ultimately led to the deaths of more than six million cattle, sheep and pigs. The cost to the economy was later estimated at £10 billion.

    The model produced in 2001 by Professor Ferguson and his colleagues at Imperial suggested that the culling of animals include not only those found to be infected with the virus but also those on adjacent farms even if there was no physical evidence of infection.

    “Extensive culling is sadly the only option for controlling the current British epidemic, and it is essential that the control measures now in place be maintained as case numbers decline to ensure eradication,” said their report, published after the cull began.


    The strategy of mass slaughter – known as contiguous culling - sparked revulsion in the British public and prompted analyses of the methodology which has led to it.

    A 2011 paper, Destructive Tension: mathematics versus experience – the progress and control of the 2001 foot and mouth epidemic in Great Britain, found that the government ordered the destruction of millions of animals because of “severely flawed” modelling.

    According to one of its authors - the former head of the Pirbright Laboratory at the Institute for Animal Health, Dr Alex Donaldson - Ferguson’s models made a “serious error” by “ignoring the species composition of farms,” and the fact that the disease spread faster between some species than others.

    The report stated: “The mathematical models were, at best, crude estimations that could not differentiate risk between farms and, at worst, inaccurate representations of the epidemiology of FMD.”

    It also described a febrile atmosphere – reminiscent of recent weeks – and claimed that this allowed mathematical modellers to shape government policy.

    “The general impatience that met the wait for the full extent of infections to become apparent, accompanied by an ever increasing number of outbreaks and piles of carcasses awaiting disposal, was perceived as a lack of success of the traditional control measures and provided the opportunity for self-styled ‘experts’, including some veterinarians, biologists and mathematicians, to publicise unproven novel options,” the researchers said.


    An earlier report, in 2006, Use and abuse of mathematical models: an illustration from the 2001 foot and mouth epidemic in the United Kingdom, identified Professor Ferguson’s modelling as having been the biggest driver of government policy.

    The paper said that “the models were not fit for the purpose of predicting the course of the epidemic and the effects of control measures. The models also remain unvalidated. Their use in predicting the effects of control strategies was therefore imprudent.”

    On Friday, Professor Thrusfield said: “When we wrote those two review papers, we thought it would be a cautionary tale for the future if foot and mouth disease struck again. We didn’t think it would be a cautionary tale for a new plague in the human population – but of course the cautionary tale is fully valid.

    “This is déjà vu. During the [FMD] epidemic there was quite vocal opposition from members of the vet profession – especially those who had their hands soaked in blood, killing perfectly healthy cattle.

    “There was also a major economic and emotional impact on those involved, [because] the slaughter of these animals that were perfectly healthy. This was serious stuff. This was farmers losing their livelihoods. They need not have been slaughtered but they were because the predictions were wrong.”

    Last night, Dr Paul Kitching - lead author of Use and abuse of mathematical models, and the former chief veterinarian of Canada’s British Columbia province - raised fears over the modelling being done on coronavirus.

    “The basic principles on modelling described in our paper apply to this Covid-19 crisis as much as they did to the FMD outbreak.

    “In view of the low numbers of Covid-19 tests being reported as carried out in affected countries, it is difficult to understand what informs the current models. In particular the transmission rate. How many mild and sub clinical infections are occurring?”

    “The model driven policy of FMD control resulted in tragedy. Vast numbers of animals were slaughtered without reason. Untold human and animal suffering was the result - not to mention the financial consequences.”

    However, Sir David King, who was the Chief Scientific Advisor to the government in 2001, said that criticism of the epidemiological modelling was “misplaced.”

    He said: “I would agree there was some unnecessary culling taking place, but this is simply because there wasn’t a unity in the way the thing was being handled.”

    Professor Ferguson said of his modelling for FMD: “A number of factors going into deciding policy, of which science – particularly modelling – is only one. It is ludicrous to say now that our model changed government policy. A number of factors did.

    “We were doing modelling in real time as the other groups were in 2001 – certainly the models weren’t 100% right, certainly with limited data and limited time to do the work. But I think the broad conclusions reached were still valid.”


    Of his work on BSE, in which he predicted human death toll of between 50 and 150,000, Professor Ferguson said: “Yes, the range is wide, but it didn’t actually lead to any change in government policy.”

    Others have directly criticised the methodology employed by Ferguson and his team in their coronavirus study.

    John Ioannidis, professor in disease prevention at Stanford University, said: “The Imperial College study has been done by a highly competent team of modellers. However, some of the major assumptions and estimates that are built in the calculations seem to be substantially inflated.”

    Professor Ferguson said anyone who thought the coronavirus was akin to seasonal flu was “living in cloud cuckoo land.”

    He defended the conclusions reached "in terms of the overwhelming demand on healthcare systems imposed by this virus."

    “It is ludicrous, frankly, to suggest that the severity of this virus is comparable to seasonal flu – ludicrous and dangerous. People who are doing so have not analysed the data in any level of detail.”
    The UK Government’s four part coronavirus strategy
    The government is currently in phase two of this strategy, accepting that the virus will eventually spread more widely.

    1) Contain
    Attempt to prevent the spread of the Sars-CoV-2 pathogen by quarantining infected people, along with identifying and tracking anyone who may have been in contact with a carrier. Those deemed to be at high risk of infection may be asked to self-isolate.

    2) Delay
    Attempt to slow down the rate of infection – possibly with crowd controls and cancelling big public events. Respiratory infections are less likely to spread in the warmer months of the year, plus hospitals are under more pressure during winter. This will facilitate the two further phases below.

    3) Research
    Use the time before a pandemic is well-established to research further ways to combat the disease, such as developing a vaccine.

    4) Mitigate
    Prevent the healthcare system from being overwhelmed by avoiding large numbers of people falling ill at the same time. Also allocate further resources to boost the NHS’s resilience to such stresses.
    Last edited by Double Edge; 11 Apr 20, at 01:59.

  12. #417
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    05 Sep 06
    Posts
    4,582
    Quote Originally Posted by Double Edge View Post
    That means 1 in 14 is positive or 13 out of 14 are negative.
    "Tests performed" isn't the same as "people tested". Three tests are performed per person in Germany. That's why there is that note on the bottom of that chart.

    The default positive rate for Covid-19 positive among those with severe acute respiratory infection (SARI) symptoms is about 20-21%, and that holds true about everywhere in Europe. In Germany too.

    Generally it's more of an indication of the prevalence of Covid-19 versus influenza virii, which is also why it might differ in other parts of the world with the same testing threshold.
    Last edited by kato; 11 Apr 20, at 06:48.

  13. #418
    Turbanator Senior Contributor Double Edge's Avatar
    Join Date
    11 Sep 10
    Location
    Bangalore
    Posts
    10,917
    Quote Originally Posted by kato View Post
    "Tests performed" isn't the same as "people tested". Three tests are performed per person in Germany. That's why there is that note on the bottom of that chart.

    The default positive rate for Covid-19 positive among those with severe acute respiratory infection (SARI) symptoms is about 20-21%, and that holds true about everywhere in Europe. In Germany too.
    Ah that might be the reason the test rate is so much higher. If only 1 in 5 with SAR's symptoms is a positive.

  14. #419
    Turbanator Senior Contributor Double Edge's Avatar
    Join Date
    11 Sep 10
    Location
    Bangalore
    Posts
    10,917
    The ruthless containment model. Basically Wuhan for hotspots



    What impresses me is 850 teams, conducting surveys of 56,025 houses of 280,937 people in a town of 3.5 million

    This is no easy task and they stemmed the outbreak by hunting it ruthlessly within a week. Random samples taken to ensure community transmission does not occur. So Stage 3 never happened. Intensive contact tracing of those found positive.

    6,645 people in home quarantine. Out of circulation. I keep pointing out that India's relatively low number of tests does not tell the full story.

    Between Mar 22 & 27, nearly half a million homes and over 2 million people surveyed. How do they do that many so fast ??

    What's notable about Bhilwara is the initial positive cases were all doctors.


    Human resource intensive which makes me wonder whether it can be scaled up for more hot spots as they come up around the country. Six months from now we should not still be playing whack a mole.

    The idea is to identify and quarantine those areas so as to free up the rest of the country
    Last edited by Double Edge; 11 Apr 20, at 16:23.

  15. #420
    Senior Contributor Oracle's Avatar
    Join Date
    12 Jul 13
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    6,211
    ^ Bhilwara model is getting a lot of attention these days.

    Madhya Pradesh: Youth who scoffed at masks in viral TikTok videos tests positive for coronavirus

    Allah didn't save him from the virus. It's upto docs now.
    Politicians are elected to serve...far too many don't see it that way - Albany Rifles! || Loyalty to country always. Loyalty to government, when it deserves it - Mark Twain! || I am a far left millennial!

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 125
    Last Post: 21 Jun 08,, 04:33
  2. A nation's blunt refusal to back down to terror
    By Ray in forum International Politics
    Replies: 27
    Last Post: 01 May 07,, 13:39
  3. History and War: An Interview With Eliot Cohen
    By Shek in forum The Field Mess
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 27 Mar 07,, 22:50
  4. Marines Not Returning Fire Back, Is It A Good Strategy ?
    By troung in forum The Middle East and North Africa
    Replies: 36
    Last Post: 24 Oct 06,, 12:26

Share this thread with friends:

Share this thread with friends:

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •