Levitt, Nobel laureatte: No evidence of large loss of life

World famous biophysicist Michael Levitt: information suggests that  this is not a particularly bad year for [virus /flu] deaths.

https://www.rnz.co.nz/national/programmes/sunday/audio/2018743210/no-evidence-that-covid-19-is-causing-huge-loss-of-life

 

Pre-eminent intl’ epidemiologist: protect only the old and frail

Extraordinary interview with Prof. Johan Giesecke at Unherd.

  • UK policy on lockdown and other European countries are not evidence-based
  • The correct policy is to protect the old and the frail only
  • This will eventually lead to herd immunity as a “by-product”
  • The initial UK response, before the “180 degree U-turn”, was better
  • The Imperial College paper was “not very good” and he has never seen an unpublished paper have so much policy impact
  • The paper was very much too pessimistic
  • Any such models are a dubious basis for public policy anyway
  • The flattening of the curve is due to the most vulnerable dying first as much as the lockdown
  • The results will eventually be similar for all countries
  • Covid-19 is a “mild disease” and similar to the flu, and it was the novelty of the disease that scared people.
  • The actual fatality rate of Covid-19 is the region of 0.1%
  • At least 50% of the population of both the UK and Sweden will be shown to have already had the disease when mass antibody testing becomes available

Swedish expert: why lockdowns are the wrong policy

 

Australia and NZ: Compared

Australian chief medical officer Professor Brendan Murphy talks to NZ’s Epidemic Response Select Comittee on how long term vigilence, without lockdown, is suppressing virus impact.

https://www.facebook.com/NZParliament/videos/255297012184000

https://www.newstalkzb.co.nz/news/national/aussie-health-chief-on-where-nz-got-lucky-around-covid-19/

Australia and NZ: Compared.

Castalia finds that although Australia’s “activity-based” approach allows a wider range of activity to continue than New Zealand’s “bubble” approach, which constrains activity, the epidemiological results of Covid infection cases and death are similar.

Comparing the New Zealand and Australian states’ responses to COVID-19

Population-level Study: COVID-19 mortality risk for non-elderly individuals overall or without underlying diseases in pandemic epicenters

Study led by John P. A. Ioannidis, Stanford University, finds people <65 years old have very small risks of COVID-19 death even in the hotbeds of the pandemic and deaths for people <65 years without underlying predisposing conditions are remarkably uncommon. Concludes that strategies focusing specifically on protecting high-risk elderly individuals should be considered in managing the pandemic.

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.05.20054361v1

 

World Data map

Data and case – world map. Updated.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/11/coronavirus-world-map-which-countries-have-the-most-cases-and-deaths

 

Scientists halve WHO mortality estimate

A study, led by Professor Joseph Wu of the University of Hong Kong, and colleagues at Harvard University analysed published data on 425 early confirmed cases and 41 fataliites in Wuhan.

They found that overall, the proportion of patients that died was 1.4 per cent 

The World Health Organization said in early March the death rate was 3.4 per cent.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8130815/Death-rates-coronavirus-HALF-initial-estimates-world-health-chiefs.html

Scientists confirm low mortality rate

A scientific paper by experts in Medicine, Epidemiology and Statistics, estimates actual death rate 0.04%-0.12%

A paper, Early epidemiological assessment of the transmission 1 potential and virulence of coronavirus disease 2019 2 (COVID-19) in Wuhan City: China, January-February, 2020, found a death rate much lower than estimated by the WHO when New Zealand considered lockdown.

We also found that 50 most recent crude infection fatality ratio (IFR) and time–delay adjusted IFR is estimated 51 to be 0.04% (95% CrI: 0.03%–0.06%) and 0.12% (95%CrI: 0.08–0.17%), which is 52 several orders of magnitude smaller than the crude CFR estimated at 4.19%.

The paper was published by Kenji Mizumoto, Katsushi Kagaya, and Gerardo Chowell.

Dr. Mizumoto is a Professor at the Graduate School of Advanced Integrated Studies in Human Survivability, Kyoto 7 University Yoshida–Nakaadachi–cho, in Sakyo–ku, Kyoto, Japan/

Drs. Mizumoto and Kagaya, are also researchers at the Hakubi Center for Advanced Research, Kyoto University, Yoshidahonmachi, in Sakyo–ku,Kyoto, Japan.

Drs. Mizumoto and Chowell teach at the Department of Population Health Sciences, School of Public Health, Georgia State 11 University, in Atlanta, Georgia, US.

Dr. Chowell is a researcher at Seto Marine Biological Laboratory, Field Science, Education and Reseach Center, 13 Kyoto University,  in Shirahama–cho, Nishimuro–gun, Wakayama, Japan.

 

Ioannidis says emerging data suggest COVID19 doesn’t warrant extreme reaction

https://youtu.be/QUvWaxuurzQ?t=2
April 3. John Ioannidis explains that emerging data on COVID-19 suggests the disease does not warrant the extreme Western response.

Ioannidis: Not enough data for big decisions

https://www.statnews.com/2020/03/17/a-fiasco-in-the-making-as-the-coronavirus-pandemic-takes-hold-we-are-making-decisions-without-reliable-data/
March 17: John P.A. Ioannidis, professor of medicine, epidemiology, and population health, at Stanford University School of Medicine, says the public health response could be a fiasco because big decisions are being made without enough data.