Coronavirus (Seite 11)

[Spatz123]

Antwort auf Beitrag Nr.: 62.555.768 von Adminwatch am 02.02.20 01:51:46

Deine Antwort dass der Vergleich mit dem Grippevirus voellig deplaziert ist ist auch voellig deplaziert. Spielst dich hier ja wirklikc als der absolute Schlaumeier auf. Bist wohl einer mehr von denen hier im Forum. Die restlichen Fakten die Du praesentierst sind dagegen gut.

Da es ja noch nicht so klar ist wo man das Coronavirus seiner Gefaehrlichkeits wegen einzustufen hat, wie das folgende Analyse Bild in der New York Time aufzeigt, sind solche Vergleiche im Moment noch sehr wohl angebracht.



Den Link zu dem Artikel habe ich schon geposted in der letzten Posting von mir unter: Fakten.

[niesad89]

Wird 3M-Aktie durch Coronavirus angetrieben werden?

https://www.chinaboerse.de/3m-aktie-wird-coronavirus-die-akt…

[Spatz123]

Hier auch noch ein paar Faketen aus der New York Times:

How Bad Will the Coronavirus Outbreak Get? Here Are 6 Key Factors
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/world/asia/china-co…

Und folgend noch ein Link zum abspeichern. Zeigt ein paar Zahlen auf die wichtig sind in dem Zusammenhang. Auch sind die vermerkt die wieder gesund wurden. Sind offizielle Zahlen:

2019-nCoV Global Cases by Johns Hopkins CSSE (each point is updated as new cases are identified)
https://gisanddata.maps.arcgis.com/apps/opsdashboard/index.h…

[borazon]

Och bütte keine Belehrungen solcher Art.
Daß es sich insgesamt um einen exponentiellen Anstieg handelt, ist klar.

[Adminwatch]

Du hast nicht verstanden was ich geschrieben habe!
Aktuell haben wir in Deutschland etwa 10 Fälle. Sollten sich die Fallzahlen beispielsweise jede Woche verdoppeln DANN haben wir ein Problem. Sollte wir stattdessen nur eine Zunahme um 10 Personen für jede zukünftige Woche sehen besteht wenig Grund zur Besorgnis.
Es geht somit also um den Anstieg der Steigung der immer steiler wird und nicht um die nominale Zunahme.
linearer Anstieg = kein Problem
exponentieller Anstieg = sehr problematisch

[borazon]

"Sollten die Fallzahlen in Deutschland aber auch weltweit deutlich und beschleunigt ansteigen besteht Grund zur Sorge. Das Augenmerk ist dabei auf die Beschleunigung des Anstiegs zu richten und weniger auf die nominale Zunahme der Zahlen. Findet diese exponentielle Zunahme nicht statt, besteht weniger Grund zur Besorgnis."

Das sind schier unfassbare Lebensweisheiten
Entweder kommt es so oder anders.
"Charttechniker" würden formulieren:
"Fällt der DAX unter 12000, könnte es weiter Richtung 11000 gehen.
Steigt er über 14000, könnte er 15000 erreichen."

[Adminwatch]

Antwort auf Beitrag Nr.: 62.553.311 von Spatz123 am 01.02.20 15:33:53

Coronavirus: Sterbequote 6,5 % (Universität Beijing)

Es gibt einige Menschen die der Meinung sind das Thema wird von den Medien unnötig gepusht.
Im Moment würde ich der Berichterstattung eher das Prädikat "Story-pushing mit Beruhigungspflaster" verleihen.

Wie sich die Situation weiter entwickeln wird, ist gegenwärtig sicher nicht abschließend zu beurteilen. Allerdings ist der Vergleich mit dem Grippevirus völlig deplatziert.
Entscheidend für eine abschließende Beurteilung sind zwei Kennzahlen: die Letalitätsrate und der Verbreitungsfaktor.

In den Medien wir häufig eine Letalitätsrate von etwa 1-2% genannt, die aber auch deutlich darunter liegen könnte. Das Verhältnis zu aktuell erfassten Infizierten zu Verstorbenen gibt aus zwei Gründen wenig Aufschluss:

Gründe weshalb die Letalitätsrate deutlich geringer sein könnte:
Die Todesrate gibt wenig Auskunft, da die Menschen mit sehr milden Verläufen nicht vorstellig werden und somit auch nicht erfasst sind. Weiterhin fehlen gegenwärtig die Mittel alle Personen mit Verdacht auf eine Infektion auch zu testen. Die Personen am Beginn der Infektion weisen noch keine Symptome auf und können somit auch nicht Teil der erfassten Infizierten sein.
Die Anzahl der Infizierten wird also immer unterschätzt.
Mathematisch lassen sich somit die deutlich höheren abgeleiteten Zahlen tatsächlich begründen.
Falls die Zahl der tatsächlich Infizierten etwa 100 000 betragen sollte, wäre die Letalitätsrate bei falscher Berechnungsmethodik (Siehe unten) bei ca. 0,25%.

Gründe weshalb die Letalitätsrate deutlich höher sein könnte:
Allgemein ist es in China üblich bei Grippetoten bei denen Vorerkrankungen existierten als Todesursache die Vorerkrankung zu diagnostizieren auch wenn diese letztendlich den Krankheitsverlauf nur verschlimmert hat. In Deutschland würde man in einem solchen Fall die Grippe als Todesursache eintragen.
Dieser Sachverhalt erklärt auch warum in China immer deutlich weniger Grippetote als anderswo auf der Welt gezählt werden.
Wichtig ist allerdings der Zeithorizont bei der Betrachtung der Fallzahlen.
Falls der Patient mit positivem Virustest verstirbt, so vergehen zwischen Diagnose und Letalität im Durchschnitt etwa 14 Tage.
Um die Letalitätsquote zu berechnen ist es deshalb falsch die Anzahl der diagnostizierten Infektionsfälle mit den Todesfällen in Relation zu setzen.

Eine wissenschaftliche Herangehensweise wäre es die HEUTIGEN Infektionsraten mit einem Korrekturfaktor auf die tatsächlich Infizierten hochzurechnen. Diese Zahl müsste man dann mit den Virustoten IN 14 TAGEN ins Verhältnis setzen.

Bedenklich finde ich die Tatsache, dass ein Land wie China in dem ein Menschleben wenig Wert besitzt den wirtschaftlichen Schaden in Kauf nimmt und 60 Millionen Menschen unter Quarantäne setzt.
Nie in der Menschheitsgeschichte gab es ähnlich drastische Maßnahmen, deshalb sollte man deren Anwendung sehr sorgsam bewerten.

Ein Pandemie-nCoV Szenario mit dem Namen "Event 201" wurde bereit theoretisch bearbeitet.
Auch wenn es sich in diesem Szenario um ein ähnliches Virus handelt und im Ergebnis weltweit 65 Millionen Tote zu erwarten waren, muss gesagt werden dass die Parameter natürlich nie der zukünftigen Realität entsprechen. Inwiefern sich also diese Daten auch nur ansatzweise auf die heutige Situation übertragen lassen, ist deshalb höchst fragwürdig.
Nähere Informationen zu "Event 201":
http://www.centerforhealthsecurity.org/event201/


Eine erste wissenschaftliche Abhandlung zur aktuellen Epidemie wurde kürzlich von der Universität in Beijing veröffentlicht:
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.01.27.20018952v…
Hierbei handelt es sich nicht um ein Szenario, sondern um eine wissenschaftliche Beurteilung der gegenwärtigen Situation in China.

Sollten die Daten verlässlich sein, so liegt ein ernsthaftes Problem vor.
Die Sterblichkeitsrate liegt bei 6,5%. Damit würde die Krankheit für jeden 15ten tödlich verlaufen.
Der Ausbreitungsfaktor liegt bei 4,08.

Auch wenn es mir gegenwärtig nicht möglich auch die Quelle für die Geschlechterdifferenz anzufügen, sei erwähnt, dass falls die obere aktuelle Studie korrekt sein sollte, die Krankheit für etwa jeden zehnten Mann und etwa für jede zwanzigste Frau vermutlich letal enden würde, falls eine Infizierung vorliegt.

Falls die Möglichkeit besteht, dass einige Personen nun schwer beunruhigt sind, möchte ich Nachfolgendes ergänzen:
Der Ausbreitungsfaktor in China insbesondere in einer Großstadt ist durch die überfüllten Züge und Busse ausgesprochen hoch. In Deutschland wäre der Ausbreitungsfaktor somit geringer.

Der Ausbreitungsfaktor kann ebenfalls durch FFP3-Schutzmasken und Augenschutz deutlich herabgesetzt werden. Soziale Isolierung führt zur maximalen Reduktion.

Zurzeit arbeiten weltweit viele Institute an der Herstellung eines Impfstoffes der wahrscheinlich bereits schon in drei Monaten vereinzelt zur Verfügung stehen kann.

Selbst wenn die oben erwähnte Studie valide Daten lieferte, könnte durch geeignete Maßnahmen die Ausbreitung stark reduziert werden, bis ein Impfstoff Verwendung finden kann.
Auch der mögliche Erfolg von antiviralen Medikamenten in Bezug auf die Letalität findet keine Beachtung. Ob es gegenwärtig Impfstoffe mit Kreuzwirksamkeiten gibt ist ebenfalls nicht bekannt.

Der „Weltuntergang“ fällt also aus. Allerdings könnte der Virus in Afrika oder Indien deutlich stärkere Schäden anrichten. Die Folgen für die Weltwirtschaft aber auch das Finanzsystem wären schwerwiegend.







Prognosefähigkeit des Verlaufes und Ableitungen:

Sollten die Fallzahlen in Deutschland aber auch weltweit deutlich und beschleunigt ansteigen besteht Grund zur Sorge. Das Augenmerk ist dabei auf die Beschleunigung des Anstiegs zu richten und weniger auf die nominale Zunahme der Zahlen.
Findet diese exponentielle Zunahme nicht statt, besteht weniger Grund zur Besorgnis.
Die Zukunft wird die offenen Fragen zeitnah beantworten.

[borazon]

Oder es läuft wie die Spanische Grippe damals.
Nur mit dreifacher Weltbevölkerung und vielfach erhöhten Kontakten.
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanische_Grippe

Das Leben ist eine sexuell übertragene Krankheit, die für Mehrzeller immer tödlich endet.

[faultcode]

New York Times: "In those weeks, the authorities silenced doctors and others for raising red flags."

1.2.2020
As New Virus Spread, China’s Old Habits Delayed Fight
At critical turning points, Chinese authorities put secrecy and order ahead of openly confronting the growing crisis and risking public alarm or political embarrassment.
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/01/world/asia/china-coronavi…

...
WUHAN, China — A mysterious illness had stricken seven patients at a hospital, and a doctor tried to warn his medical school classmates. “Quarantined in the emergency department,” the doctor, Li Wenliang, wrote in an online chat group on Dec. 30, referring to patients.

“So frightening,” one recipient replied, before asking about the epidemic that began in China in 2002 and ultimately killed nearly 800 people. “Is SARS coming again?”

In the middle of the night, officials from the health authority in the central city of Wuhan summoned Dr. Li, demanding to know why he had shared the information. Three days later, the police compelled him to sign a statement that his warning constituted “illegal behavior.”

The illness was not SARS, but something similar: a coronavirus that is now on a relentless march outward from Wuhan, throughout the country and across the globe, killing at least 259 people in China and infecting more than 11,700.

The government’s initial handling of the epidemic allowed the virus to gain a tenacious hold. At critical moments, officials chose to put secrecy and order ahead of openly confronting the growing crisis to avoid public alarm and political embarrassment.

A reconstruction of the crucial seven weeks between the appearance of the first symptoms in early December and the government’s decision to lock down the city, based on two dozen interviews with Wuhan residents, doctors and officials, on government statements and on Chinese media reports, points to decisions that delayed a concerted public health offensive.

In those weeks, the authorities silenced doctors and others for raising red flags. They played down the dangers to the public, leaving the city’s 11 million residents unaware they should protect themselves. They closed a food market where the virus was believed to have started, but told the public it was for renovations.


Their reluctance to go public, in part, played to political motivations as local officials prepared for their annual congresses in January. Even as cases climbed, officials declared repeatedly that there had likely been no more infections.

By not moving aggressively to warn the public and medical professionals, public health experts say, the Chinese government lost one of its best chances to keep the disease from becoming an epidemic.

“This was an issue of inaction,” said Yanzhong Huang, a senior fellow for global health at the Council on Foreign Relations who studies China. “There was no action in Wuhan from the local health department to alert people to the threat.”

The first case, the details of which are limited and the specific date unknown, was in early December. By the time the authorities galvanized into action on Jan. 20, the disease had grown into a formidable threat.

...

On the last day of 2019, after Dr. Li’s message was shared outside the group, the authorities focused on controlling the narrative. The police announced that they were investigating eight people for spreading rumors about the outbreak.

That same day, Wuhan’s health commission, its hand forced by those “rumors,” announced that 27 people were suffering from pneumonia of an unknown cause. Its statement said there was no need to be alarmed.

“The disease is preventable and controllable,” the statement said.

Dr. Li, an ophthalmologist, went back to work after being reprimanded. On Jan. 10, he treated a woman for glaucoma. He did not know she had already been infected with the coronavirus, probably by her daughter. They both became sick. So would he.

...

Hu Xiaohu, who sold processed pork in the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market, sensed by late December that something was amiss. Workers were coming down with nagging fevers. No one knew why but, Mr. Hu said, several were in hospital quarantine.

The market occupies much of a block in a newer part of the city, sitting incongruously near apartment buildings and shops catering to the growing middle class. It is a warren of stalls selling meats, poultry and fish, as well as more exotic fare, including live reptiles and wild game that some in China prize as delicacies. According to a report by the city’s center for disease control, sanitation was dismal, with poor ventilation and garbage piled on wet floors.

In hospitals, doctors and nurses were puzzled to see a cluster of patients with symptoms of a viral pneumonia that did not respond to the usual treatments. They soon noticed that many patients had one thing in common: They worked in Huanan market.

On Jan. 1, police officers showed up at the market, along with public health officials, and shut it down. Xinhua news agency reported that the market was undergoing renovation, but that morning, workers in hazmat suits moved in, washing out stalls and spraying disinfectants.

It was, for the public, the first visible government response to contain the disease. The day before, on Dec. 31, national authorities had alerted the World Health Organization’s office in Beijing of an outbreak.

City officials struck optimistic notes in their announcements. They suggested they had stopped the virus at its source. The cluster of illnesses was limited. There was no evidence the virus spread between humans.

“Projecting optimism and confidence, if you don’t have the data, is a very dangerous strategy,” said Alexandra Phelan, a faculty research instructor in the department of microbiology and immunology at Georgetown University.

“It undermines the legitimacy of the government in messaging,” she added. “And public health is dependent on public trust.”

Nine days after the market closed, a man who shopped there regularly became the first fatality of the disease, according to a report by the Wuhan Health Commission, the agency that oversees public health and sanitation. The 61-year-old, identified by his last name, Zeng, already had chronic liver disease and a tumor in his abdomen, and had checked into Wuhan Puren Hospital with a raging fever and difficulty breathing.

The authorities disclosed the man’s death two days after it happened. They did not mention a crucial detail in understanding the course of the epidemic. Mr. Zeng’s wife had developed symptoms five days after he did.

She had never visited the market.

...

About 20 miles from the market, scientists at the Wuhan Institute of Virology were studying samples from the patients checking into the city’s hospitals. One of the scientists, Zheng-Li Shi, was part of the team that tracked down the origins of the SARS virus, which emerged in the southern province of Guangdong in 2002.

As the public remained largely in the dark about the virus, she and her colleagues quickly pieced together that the new outbreak was related to SARS. The genetic composition suggested a common initial host: bats. The SARS epidemic began when a coronavirus jumped from bats to Asian palm civets, a catlike creature that is legally raised and consumed. It was likely that this new coronavirus had followed a similar path — possibly somewhere in or on the way to the Huanan market or another market like it.

Around the same time, Dr. Li and other medical professionals in Wuhan started trying to provide warnings to colleagues and others when the government did not. Lu Xiaohong, the head of gastroenterology at City Hospital No. 5, told China Youth Daily that she had heard by Dec. 25 that the disease was spreading among medical workers — a full three weeks before the authorities would acknowledge the fact. She did not go public with her concerns, but privately warned a school near another market.

By the first week of January, the emergency ward in Hospital No. 5 was filling; the cases included members of the same family, making it clear that the disease was spreading through human contact, which the government had said was not likely.

No one realized, the doctor said, that it was as serious as it would become until it was too late to stop it.

“I realized that we had underestimated the enemy,” she said.

At the Institute of Virology, Dr. Shi and her colleagues isolated the genetic sequence and the viral strain during the first week of January. They used samples from seven of the first patients, six of them vendors at the market.

On Jan. 7, the institute’s scientists gave the new coronavirus its identity and began referring to it by the technical shorthand nCoV-2019. Four days later, the team posted the genetic sequence of the new virus on a database of sequences of nucleotides, the molecules that are basic units of DNA.

That allowed scientists around the world to study the virus and swiftly share their findings. As the scientific community moved quickly to devise a test for exposure, political leaders remained reluctant to act.

...

As the virus spread in early January, the mayor of Wuhan, Zhou Xianwang, was touting futuristic health care plans for the city.

It was China’s political season, when officials gather for annual meetings of People’s Congresses — the Communist Party-run legislatures that discuss and praise policies. It is not a time for bad news.

When Mr. Zhou delivered his annual report to the city’s People’s Congress on Jan. 7 against a backdrop of bright red national flags, he promised the city top-class medical schools, a World Health Expo, and a futuristic industry park for medical companies. Not once did he or any other city or provincial leader publicly mention the viral outbreak.

“Stressing politics is always No. 1,” the governor of Hubei, Wang Xiaodong, told officials on Jan. 17, citing Mr. Xi’s precepts of top-down obedience. “Political issues are at any time the most fundamental major issues.”

Shortly after, Wuhan went ahead with a massive annual potluck banquet for 40,000 families from a city precinct, which critics later cited as evidence that local leaders took the virus far too lightly.

As the congress was taking place, the health commission’s daily updates on the outbreak said again and again that there were no new cases of infection, no firm evidence of human transmission and no infection of medical workers.

“We knew this was not the case!” said a complaint later filed with the National Health Commission on a government website. The anonymous author said he was a doctor in Wuhan and described a surge in unusual chest illnesses beginning Jan. 12.

Officials told doctors at a top city hospital “don’t use the words viral pneumonia on the image reports,” according to the complaint, which has since been removed. People were complacent, “thinking that if the official reports had nothing, then we were exaggerating,” the doctor explained.

Even those stricken felt lulled into complacency.

When Dong Guanghe developed a fever on Jan. 8 in Wuhan, his family was not alarmed, his daughter said. He was treated in the hospital and sent home. Then, 10 days later, Mr. Dong’s wife fell ill with similar symptoms.

“The news said nothing about the severity of the epidemic,” said the daughter, Dong Mingjing. “I thought that my dad had a common cold.”

The government’s efforts to minimize public disclosure persuaded more than just untrained citizens.

“If there are no new cases in the next few days, the outbreak is over,” Guan Yi, a respected professor of infectious diseases at the University of Hong Kong, said on Jan. 15.

The World Health Organization’s statements during this period echoed the reassuring words of Chinese officials.

It had spread. Thailand reported the first confirmed case outside China on Jan. 13.

...

The first deaths and the spread of the disease abroad appeared to grab the attention of the top authorities in Beijing. The national government dispatched Zhong Nanshan, a renowned and now-semiretired epidemiologist who was instrumental in the fight against SARS, to Wuhan to assess the situation.

He arrived on Jan. 18, just as the tone of local officials was shifting markedly. A health conference in Hubei Province that day called on medical workers to make the disease a priority. An internal document from Wuhan Union Hospital warned its employees that the coronavirus could be spread through saliva.

On Jan. 20, more than a month after the first symptoms spread, the current of anxiety that had been steadily gaining strength exploded into public. Dr. Zhong announced in an interview on state television that there was no doubt that the coronavirus spread with human contact. Worse, one patient had infected at least 14 medical personnel.


Mr. Xi, fresh from a state visit to Myanmar, made his first public statement about the outbreak, issuing a brief set of instructions.

It was only with the order from Mr. Xi that the bureaucracy leapt into action. At that point the death toll was three; in the next 11 days, it would rise above 200.

In Wuhan, the city banned tour groups from visiting. Residents began pulling on masks.

Guan Yi, the Hong Kong expert who had earlier voiced optimism that the outbreak could level off, was now alarmed. He dropped by one of the city’s other food markets and was shocked by the complacency, he said. He told city officials that the epidemic was “already beyond control” and would leave. “I hurriedly booked a departure,” Dr. Guan told Caixin, a Chinese news organization.

Two days later, the city announced that it was shutting itself down, a move that could only have been approved by Beijing.

In Wuhan, many residents said they did not grasp the gravity of the epidemic until the lockdown. The mass alarm that officials feared at the start became a reality, heightened by the previous paucity of information.

Crowds of people crushed the airport and train stations to get out before the deadline fell on the morning of Jan. 23. Hospitals were packed with people desperate to know if they, too, were infected.

“We didn’t wear masks at work. That would have frightened off customers,” Yu Haiyan, a waitress from rural Hubei, said of the days before the shutdown. “When they closed off Wuhan, only then did I think, ‘Oh, this is really serious, this is not some average virus.’”

Wuhan’s mayor, Zhou Xianwang, later took responsibility for the delay in reporting the scale of the epidemic, but said he was hampered by the national law on infectious diseases. That law allows provincial governments to declare an epidemic only after receiving central government approval. “After I receive information, I can only release it when I’m authorized,” he said.



The official reflex for suppressing discomforting information now appears to be cracking, as officials at various levels seek to shift blame for the government’s response.

With the crisis worsening, Dr. Li’s efforts are no longer viewed as reckless. A commentary on the social media account of the Supreme People’s Court criticized the police for investigating people for circulating rumors.

“It might have been a better way to prevent and control the new coronavirus today if the public had believed the ‘rumor’ then and started to wear masks and carry out sanitary measures and avoid the wild animal market,” the commentary said.

Dr. Li is 34 and has a child. He and his wife are expecting a second in the summer. He is now recovering from the virus in the hospital where he worked. In an interview via text messages, he said he felt aggrieved by the police actions.

“If the officials had disclosed information about the epidemic earlier,” he said, “I think it would have been a lot better. There should be more openness and transparency.”



(FC: Format)

[Spatz123]

Ich oeffen den Thread mal hier in diesem Teil des Forums,, da hier viele User in diesem Teil des Forums unterwegs sind und wahrscheinlich auch keine Lust und Zeit haben den ganzen Tag das ganze Forum abzuklappern nach was immer. Das Thema ist aktuell und wird sicherlich auch auf dem Sofa Zuhause mit der Familie besprochen. Sollte die Moderation das Gefuehl haben den Thread wo anders zu plazieren ist dies natuerlich akzeptiert.

Die Medien, wie immer, puschen das Thema hoch als ob es DIE Krankheit im Moment ist. Ein paar Fakten dazu die man einfach mal durchlesen muss und auch auf dem Sofa mit den Kindern durchbesprechen kann: Dazu ein paar Hinweise ueber wirklich grosse, andere grasierende Krankheiten in der Welt. Krankheiten ueber die man nie mehr viel hoert.

Grippevirus und Coronavirus
https://www.stuttgarter-nachrichten.de/inhalt.vergleich-grip…

Welt-Lepra-Tag: "Lepra - nicht das, was du denkst"
https://www.br.de/nachrichten/wissen/welt-lepra-tag-lepra-ni…

Global tuberculosis report 2019
https://www.who.int/tb/publications/global_report/en/

1,2 Millionen Opfer pro Jahr Malaria tötet viel mehr Menschen als angenommen
https://www.spiegel.de/wissenschaft/medizin/1-2-millionen-op…

Weitere Fakten und vor allem keine Verschwoerungstheorien sind in diesem Thread herzlich willkommen.