[aslyfox]

as far as I know, and I am not a medical professional, the infection is survivable regardless of the age of the person infected

age and condition does play a role however and thus not all will survive an infection

but as I say, it isn't a disease such as Ebola where an infection has such a high rate of causing death

I, too, am in the higher risk category, 63, with several distinct " underlying " prior conditions

[Rondec]

Does anyone happen to know how many individuals without an underlying health condition have died as a direct result of this virus ? I have only heard of one in the UK so far, although I am not following news updates with any regularity.

In the meantime, I too am in the Stone Age - cataloguing my vinyl LPs, audio cassettes and 78 rpm shellac discs (Elvis on blue HMV, anyone ?).

BTW, I am 70, have COPD - and still am at a higher risk of a lightning strike than anything else !

I don't think anyone knows. Quoted stats are that 99 percent of people who die from it have some underlying medical condition that makes them more susceptible to it. That said, of course if enough people get it you are going to have "healthy" individuals who get really sick and even die with it.

[aslyfox]

I don't think anyone knows. Quoted stats are that 99 percent of people who die from it have some underlying medical condition that makes them more susceptible to it. That said, of course if enough people get it you are going to have "healthy" individuals who get really sick and even die with it.

I wonder

are they more susceptible to being infected

or to succumbing to the infection and any subsequent complications such as pneumonia ?

does infection always lead to pneumonia ?

[beholder3]

Does anyone happen to know how many individuals without an underlying health condition have died as a direct result of this virus ?

Nobody can say, simply because nobody (even the medical experts) would be able to define what a relevant "underlying health condition" is.
"Overweight, BMI>25" or "hypertension" generally are considered "health conditions". Half of the degenerated industrialized world has "health conditions" sadly.

I would assume the 34 year old Chinese physician whistleblower who died weeks ago was without "underlying health conditions".

Overall it can be assumed that national life expectancies are a robust mirror of national health conditions:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_life_expectancy

Japan and Italy are right at the top. Germany is a poor #27 only.

---------- Post added 28th Mar 2020 at 11:36 ----------

As far as the rural communities, if they do nothing they will still get viral infections, the rate of doubling though won't be nearly as fast as in NYC where it is doubling every three to four days. Honestly, very urbanized areas are more similar to a cruise ship situation than we realize.

It is a double edged sword. Remote areas will be the last to get infections but those who do, will experience usually more hardship finding good treatment (distance to next hospital; number of beds etc).

---

Last edited by beholder3; 03-28-2020 at 03:34 AM.

[Rondec]

Nobody can say, simply because nobody (even the medical experts) would be able to define what a relevant "underlying health condition" is.
"Overweight, BMI>25" or "hypertension" generally are considered "health conditions". Half of the degenerated industrialized world has "health conditions" sadly.

I would assume the 34 year old Chinese physician whistleblower who died weeks ago was without "underlying health conditions".

Overall it can be assumed that national life expectancies are a robust mirror of national health conditions:
List of countries by life expectancy - Wikipedia

Japan and Italy are right at the top. Germany is a poor #27 only.

---------- Post added 28th Mar 2020 at 11:36 ----------



It is a double edged sword. Remote areas will be the last to get infections but those who do, will experience usually more hardship finding good treatment (distance to next hospital; number of beds etc).

Right. The whole point of interventions though is to "flatten the curve." Not so much to prevent infections (although maybe some are prevented through vigorous self isolation), but to spread them out over a longer period of time so that the health care workers in a given area aren't totally overwhelmed. As you say, it takes much less to overwhelm the health care system in a rural community where maybe there are a couple of docs and a nurse practitioner and minimal protective gear available.

I guess my hope is that people see the devastation in New York and Italy and decide to be more careful. This really could slow the spread to rural communities. But I still see people posting articles on Facebook (dated a week and a half ago) where some "expert" claims that the revised death toll in the UK will only be about 20,000. I want to be optimistic but it is tough in this sort of environment. People seem to look for articles that affirm their not so great behavior.

[Serkevan]

Does anyone happen to know how many individuals without an underlying health condition have died as a direct result of this virus ? I have only heard of one in the UK so far, although I am not following news updates with any regularity.

In the meantime, I too am in the Stone Age - cataloguing my vinyl LPs, audio cassettes and 78 rpm shellac discs (Elvis on blue HMV, anyone ?).

BTW, I am 70, have COPD - and still am at a higher risk of a lightning strike than anything else !

Does anyone happen to know how many individuals without an underlying condition are there?

BTW 50 people are struck by lightning each year (on average) in the UK and three of them die... COVID-19 has so far killed about two centuries worth of lightning strikes. I would take my odds in a storm; it will be lonely (but don't)

[Digitalis]

I am guessing that testing in most poorer countries is limited meaning that we don't have any idea about the scope of things. The US has run roughly 700,000 tests, but I don't imagine most poorer countries can nearly that many. I question too, the numbers out of Iran. Indications are that it was far more severe with a very high body count, but we just don't have real data. People died without testing and were buried quickly and that was that. The same will be true in other parts of the world.

I think that is a pretty safe assumption, there are going to be a lot of people who slip through the cracks in the body count. Like every other plague that has struck humanity we will never truly know the full human impact, perhaps only decades after the fact. And there are some fools who only count losses in terms of economic growth, without enough people the economy will irreparably collapse.

The bigger thing was that we had hoped that warm weather would spell a slow down of the virus in the Northern Hemisphere, but by all indications, it seems to spread regardless of the temperature and humidity.People in rural areas are probably going to be least affected -- that is places where population density is really low -- but it also wouldn't take much of an outbreak in rural Idaho or Wyoming to outstrip the medical resources that are available to the people who live there.

I wouldn't rely on the weather to bring any reprieve from the escalating pandemic, if anything it might give people a false sense of security and if people start doing the wrong thing and act as if they are safe..that would be a potentially deadly mistake. As for those living in areas of low population density - I can see how that would work: The greater degree of separation from others, the lower the chance of getting sick conversely it also means that getting needed supplies and medical support in such remote locations can be difficult.

[photoptimist]

There was a post on Reddit a week ago with tens of thousands of comments of young people angry at their parents, because said parents insisted that it was a flu and they were going to do whatever.

The young should stay quiet -- they'll enjoy an early inheritance and lower taxes if 10%-20% of retirees disappear.

[photoptimist]

Unfortunately, I am guessing that testing in most poorer countries is limited meaning that we don't have any idea about the scope of things. The US has run roughly 700,000 tests, but I don't imagine most poorer countries can nearly that many. I question too, the numbers out of Iran. Indications are that it was far more severe with a very high body count, but we just don't have real data. People died without testing and were buried quickly and that was that. The same will be true in other parts of the world.

The bigger thing was that we had hoped that warm weather would spell a slow down of the virus in the Northern Hemisphere, but by all indications, it seems to spread regardless of the temperature and humidity.

People in rural areas are probably going to be least affected -- that is places where population density is really low -- but it also wouldn't take much of an outbreak in rural Idaho or Wyoming to outstrip the medical resources that are available to the people who live there.

Rural areas are safe as long as people avoid churches, diners, other gatherings, and any travel to the next town over or to a nearby city for supplies. Distancing is a community affair. It only takes one person to bring the disease into the community where it spreads to their household and then to all their friends, neighbors, fellow church members, etc.

It is true that rural communities do have a higher chance of escaping this. And it's also true that if it reaches the community, it spreads slower than in a city where people live on top of each other.

I've a friend with a summer house on Monhegan Island (12 miles off the coast of Maine). The island has zero medical resources so they've sealed themselves off from the world. No one, not even absent property owners, can come now.

[Riggomatic]

We had our first official case reported in the county of DeKalb, Indiana, earlier in the week.


By the actions of most people that I've seen, when I go on my run, It won't take long to spread around here.
A lot of the neighbors are treating this like a big block party.

[photoptimist]

I wonder

are they more susceptible to being infected

or to succumbing to the infection and any subsequent complications such as pneumonia ?

does infection always lead to pneumonia ?

Given the seemingly high rate of people who test positive for having the virus but who are not symptomatic, it seems that everyone is susceptible (even children).

How sick they get varies a lot. The Chinese data suggested that about 80% have mild symptoms and 20% end up in the hospital with a 25% of those (5% of the total) needing ICU.

It's worth noting that COVID-19 can cause pneumonia directly and also cause severe scarring of the lungs. Pneumonia vaccines (which reduce the chance of bacterial pneumonia) won't prevent COVID-induced pneumonia. (In general, pneumonia is a lung condition with many causes and pneumonia vaccines only address a couple of those causes.)

The biggest caveat with all of the percentage data is the lack of frequent universal testing to really track what's going on. Lots of people might have COVID-19 (and possibly be spreading it) without knowing it. Lots of people are now sick with COVID-19 (and spreading it) with out getting tested because they don't meet the criteria for testing, And then there's the delay between someone getting sick, getting tested, getting the results of the test, and the government getting the data. Thus the "official" number only count a tiny fraction of the cases. There's even the issue that COVID deaths are now under-counted due to delays in paper work and lack of testing of people who die at home (or in nursing homes).

[Digitalis]

The young should stay quiet -- they'll enjoy an early inheritance and lower taxes if 10%-20% of retirees disappear.

I nearly spat out my kahlula when I read that. A brutally mercenary way of looking at things...I approve.

Rural areas are safe as long as people avoid churches, diners, other gatherings, and any travel to the next town over or to a nearby city for supplies. Distancing is a community affair. It only takes one person to bring the disease into the community where it spreads to their household and then to all their friends, neighbors, fellow church members, etc.

All it takes is one asymptomatic CoViD-19 carrier to make a mess of that rural Idyll.

Lots of people are now sick with COVID-19 (and spreading it) with out getting tested because they don't meet the criteria for testing

This is perhaps the most frustrating thing about CoViD-19 the phenotypical expression of the infection varies, thus it is very difficult to nail down and separate the infectious from the un-infected.

On a happier note, Monoclonal antibodies derived from the blood of survivors of the virus are going into testing. Unsurprisingly, there is a shortage of mice that are susceptible to CoViD-19, so testing which antibodies will pack the most punch will be a sluggish affair.

[savoche]

The whole point of interventions though is to "flatten the curve." Not so much to prevent infections (although maybe some are prevented through vigorous self isolation), but to spread them out over a longer period of time so that the health care workers in a given area aren't totally overwhelmed.

I wish more people could get this into their heads.

I'm still baffled by the number of people who're seemingly unable to grasp "exponential growth".

Edit:
This graph from worldometer should be clear enough, shouldn't it?

[bertwert]

I'm still baffled by the number of people who're seemingly unable to grasp "exponential growth".

Lack of basic maths understanding. Especially in America.

[Digitalis]

I'm still baffled by the number of people who're seemingly unable to grasp "exponential growth".

Lack of basic maths understanding. Especially in America.

I was going to say exponential has too many syllables in it. I think you were aiming too high when to took aim at lacking arithmetic.