Coronavirus - Modelling Aspects Only

[zico]

There is the curious point that the regions with the most restrictions now also have the most hospital admissions. Whether making people stay at home more results in more infections in the circumstances is true I cannot say. It would be surprising.

It worries me that the media are starting to report that lockdown isn't working because the numbers are continuing to increase, which is a fallacy. What's actually happening is that the current lockdown measures aren't strong enough to stop the increase. To use an analogy, if you're sliding down a snow-covered mountainside, you might not be able to stop yourself by digging your fingers in, but using an ice-axe will work.

It seems pretty clear that re-opening universities has unsurprisingly been a bit of a disaster. Sending young people from all over the country to live together in small one-room apartments with narrow corridors and shared kitchens and communal spaces, while also telling them they have a much lower risk of serious illness due to their age. Obviously there are going to be lots of parties and gatherings, with the virus spreading like wildfire, and probably from the student community outwards to the local community.

[johnhemming]

What's actually happening is that the current lockdown measures aren't strong enough to stop the increase.

We don't really have enough information to know whether or not that is also a fallacy.

If you have read my posts and remember anything about them you will know my view that the weather is an important part of this part of the process.

Taking everything into account one would expect the number of hospital admissions followed by possibly 20% of deaths to rise as the weather changes, peak and then gradually come down.

To what extent any generalised lockdowns have any effect iis unclear.

Within my relatively close family we have two vulnerable people we are protecting. Some of my nephews (not clear how many, but some have a positive PCR) actually have it at the moment. Their father is isolating in a different house because he is particularly vulnerable as is my mother (92) who we are protecting.

It is blazingly obvious that we would like everyone else who might actually have this virus without impact to have it tomorrow so they cannot give it to someone who may die.

However, there are idiots around who think it is best to maintain this uncertainty for months and possibly years.

[swill453]

It is blazingly obvious that we would like everyone else who might actually have this virus without impact to have it tomorrow so they cannot give it to someone who may die.

Well if you could identify those who would have it without impact you would be the quickest billionaire or Nobel prizewinner the world has ever seen. Alternative view - that's a bit of a content-free statement.

However, there are idiots around who think it is best to maintain this uncertainty for months and possibly years.

Not sure what you mean. What is certain is that the virus will be around for years.

Scott.

[johnhemming]

It is blazingly obvious that we would like everyone else who might actually have this virus without impact to have it tomorrow so they cannot give it to someone who may die.

Well if you could identify those who would have it without impact you would be the quickest billionaire or Nobel prizewinner the world has ever seen. Alternative view - that's a bit of a content-free statement.

This virus has a a different impact on people depending upon primarily their age so this is quite easy.

[servodude]

What's actually happening is that the current lockdown measures aren't strong enough to stop the increase.

We don't really have enough information to know whether or not that is also a fallacy.

If you have read my posts and remember anything about them you will know my view that the weather is an important part of this part of the process.

Taking everything into account one would expect the number of hospital admissions followed by possibly 20% of deaths to rise as the weather changes, peak and then gradually come down.

To what extent any generalised lockdowns have any effect is unclear.

Are you basing this only on UK data?
I could proffer several examples of where a generalised lockdown has had a proven effect; start with Melbourne's figures (choose your own source for them)
- its quite clear that curtailment of interaction suppresses transmission; the problem is with the cost

However, there are idiots around who think it is best to maintain this uncertainty for months and possibly years.

If maintaining uncertainty is their goal then they might well be idiots; I doubt that is their intent
As pointed out way back at the start of this: you'll only be certain of your strategy's outcome if you don't do enough
- if things go well you'll always be subject to claims you intervened too much
-sd

[johnhemming]

Are you basing this only on UK data?

I am particularly looking at England as part of this second phase which is obviously partially seasonal. Because it kicked off with the cold weather, but actually before the schools opened I think that shows the seasonality, but the schools opening is I think more likely to have an effect than universities or indeed anything else. The impact of the first phase lockdowns is quite clear.

I say that as a parent of 5 children knowing how many viruses come from schools. I had another virus last week which almost certainly came from one of my school age children.

I think probably the strength of the Swedish approach is that they kept the schools open thereby spreading the disease and getting immunity amongst younger people whilst protecting older people.

[servodude]

Are you basing this only on UK data?

I am particularly looking at England as part of this second phase which is obviously partially seasonal. Because it kicked off with the cold weather, but actually before the schools opened I think that shows the seasonality, but the schools opening is I think more likely to have an effect than universities or indeed anything else. The impact of the first phase lockdowns is quite clear.

I say that as a parent of 5 children knowing how many viruses come from schools. I had another virus last week which almost certainly came from one of my school age children.

I think probably the strength of the Swedish approach is that they kept the schools open thereby spreading the disease and getting immunity amongst younger people whilst protecting older people.

Specifically I was interested in why you'd have the option

To what extent any generalised lockdowns have any effect iis unclear

- can't see many examples that refute their effect

I do think the seasonal aspect will prove to be true
- not because of weather per-se but because of how seasons affect behaviour; holiday travel, mixing among families, moving indoors, mixing with new cohorts
- temperature just hasn't correlated with the way the pandemic has spread globally (RH might have a slight effect on outdoor transmission but that's almost negligible anyway)

I don't think Sweden protected older people, it was almost euthanizing them with incredibly loose application of palliative care guidelines for COVID patients in care homes (https://www.pkc.sll.se/globalassets/ver ... v-vard.pdf)
- morphine for a cough?
- that's why their health service wasn't over run with old people

-sd

[johnhemming]

Specifically I was interested in why you'd have the option

To what extent any generalised lockdowns have any effect iis unclear

- can't see many examples that refute their effect

I do think the seasonal aspect will prove to be true
- not because of weather per-se but because of how seasons affect behaviour; holiday travel, mixing among families, moving indoors, mixing with new cohorts
- temperature just hasn't correlated with the way the pandemic has spread globally (RH might have a slight effect on outdoor transmission but that's almost negligible anyway)

If you don't think that weather matters then we clearly disagree on that point.

My query is one as to for this second at least partially weather based phase of the pandemic it is unclear what impact generalised restrictions are having. They cannot have that big an effect as most infections go on in the home between family members and that will continue for some weeks anyway.

We cannot really say at the moment. Restrictions have some effect. The 10pm curfew may increase infections. Making people drink at home rather than in pubs is unclear. The police cannot handle lots of people having small drinking sessions in their homes with friends.

If people are not as happy about complying because they are tired of it (there are ertstwhile lockdown enthusiasts who have changed their view) then some restrictions can be counter productive.

[servodude]

RH might have a slight effect on outdoor transmission but that's almost negligible anyway

that was from reading: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/tbed.13766
- we're trying to work out whether it's better to humidify the air in an NIV for COVID treatment (which you do normally in biLevel CPAP for comfort treating sleep apoea)
- but drier air might be better in this case

-sd

[servodude]

If you don't think that weather matters then we clearly disagree on that point

Only really in so much as it affects behaviour: see the link in my last post
- consider that Darwin has a flu season in its "winter" same as Brisbane, Melbourne, Hobart, London, Cairo, Inverness
It's certainly "seasonal" but that's the local changes in weather affecting what people do...not how the virus acts
-sd

[johnhemming]

It's certainly "seasonal" but that's the local changes in weather affecting what people do...not how the virus acts
-sd

OK whereas I think the fact that in warmer environments (remembering about air conditioning) the virus does not last as long is relevant from the perspective of both infection and viral load.

https://www.news-medical.net/news/20200 ... -rate.aspx

Temperature changes have an effect on the COVID-19 infection rate, influencing it at the rate of 13-16 cases a day per 1°C rise in temperature, the study said.

An earlier study first reported that the SARS virus becomes inactive at higher temperatures and in high humidity. Similarly, recent studies report that the virus spreads in cold climates within 30-50o N at temperatures of 5 oC to 11 oC, and not in tropical or arid zones.

Another study observed a decline in transmission by 10% with each 1oC increase in temperature above 5oC. Based on these, the authors state, "these reported studies 88 provide substantial evidence that the climatic conditions can regulate the transmission of the 89 rapidly spreading novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2."

At a temperature below zero Celsius, the epidemic growth rate is constant but begins to decrease at temperatures above this.

The researchers postulate that all the countries which suffered substantial infection rates, in particular the USA, Italy, Spain, and China, exhibited a temperature gradient which was less than 15oC. On the other hand, countries that reported lower infection and death tolls like India, Africa, and Australia, had temperatures higher than 15oC.

Malaysia, Indonesia, and Australia seemed to be exceptions. The study hypothesized that this could be because of their difference in elevation, or seasonal location changes.

[johnhemming]

https://www.kcl.ac.uk/news/covid-19-wor ... er-weather

An international collaboration of researchers from Europe and China have found that temperature and humidity in the environment have an effect on the severity of COVID-19 symptoms. Comparing outcomes from more than 40,000 COVID-19 patients over the course of the pandemic suggests that the disease is more severe in colder months than warmer ones, and that dry indoor air may encourage the spread of the disease.

I think one of the factors that makes the disease worse in Northern England than the South is previous infection. Another could be that it is colder. That would, of course, imply that things get worse going in to December.

[Lootman]

https://www.kcl.ac.uk/news/covid-19-worse-in-colder-weather

An international collaboration of researchers from Europe and China have found that temperature and humidity in the environment have an effect on the severity of COVID-19 symptoms. Comparing outcomes from more than 40,000 COVID-19 patients over the course of the pandemic suggests that the disease is more severe in colder months than warmer ones, and that dry indoor air may encourage the spread of the disease.

I think one of the factors that makes the disease worse in Northern England than the South is previous infection. Another could be that it is colder. That would, of course, imply that things get worse going in to December.

The fact that colds, coughs and flu are more common in winter is so well known that I'm surprised that anyone would question it.

One can quibble about the reason for that however. Is it because people huddle together in unventilated places more in winter? Do the bugs flourish more at lower temperatures? Or are we just more run down in winter and so more susceptible to bugs? Maybe all these factors to some extent.

But winter is called "the flu season" for a reason and hospital admissions (and the tediously predictable annual "NHS winter crisis") do not lie.

[servodude]

It's certainly "seasonal" but that's the local changes in weather affecting what people do...not how the virus acts
-sd

OK whereas I think the fact that in warmer environments (remembering about air conditioning) the virus does not last as long is relevant from the perspective of both infection and viral load.

https://www.news-medical.net/news/20200 ... -rate.aspx

I'm pretty sure you'll see it spread quite well in the UK during winter and that will be mostly done indoors (where we know the virus spreads better)
- where the temperature will be independent of the weather, aside from it causing people to keep the windows shut (a behavioural change)

-sd

[Itsallaguess]

https://www.kcl.ac.uk/news/covid-19-wor ... er-weather

An international collaboration of researchers from Europe and China have found that temperature and humidity in the environment have an effect on the severity of COVID-19 symptoms. Comparing outcomes from more than 40,000 COVID-19 patients over the course of the pandemic suggests that the disease is more severe in colder months than warmer ones, and that dry indoor air may encourage the spread of the disease.

I think one of the factors that makes the disease worse in Northern England than the South is previous infection. Another could be that it is colder. That would, of course, imply that things get worse going in to December.

Are you happy that your theory that Northern England has been affected more in recent weeks 'due to previous infections and colder weather than the South' is something that also explains why places like Paris are seeing a resurgence of high infection numbers?

I think they had large numbers of infections in the earlier phase, and they are presumably warmer again than even Southern England, so I would like to hear if your ideas in this area satisfy what seems on the face of it to be a glaring disparity regarding somewhere like Paris?

Cheers,

Itsallaguess

[servodude]

But winter is called "the flu season" for a reason

Indeed!
And it is done so everywhere in the world; irrespective of the absolute weather

-sd

[Lootman]

But winter is called "the flu season" for a reason

Indeed! And it is done so everywhere in the world; irrespective of the absolute weather

Are you saying that there is more flu in Australia in December, January and February, even though that is summer there?

Otherwise I am not sure what point you are making.

[johnhemming]

Are you happy that your theory that Northern England has been affected more in recent weeks 'due to previous infections and colder weather than the South' is something that also explains why places like Paris are seeing a resurgence of high infection numbers?

I am looking at the figures across England and comparing those. It is quite clear that the North is suffering to a greater extent than the South when you compare this to earlier in the year.

I don't have figures to compare various regions in France. However, the weather today in Paris is ranging from 11-14 C. London is 8-13, Birmingham is 8-11. Manchester 10-13.

I would not say with those figures that Paris is substantially warmer than the UK cities.

I would like to get some good recent temperature data to compare to hospital admission rates. There is a well evidenced hypothesis that there will be correlation. It is not likely to be the only factor, but it may be behind the fact that admission rates have plateaued for about a week and then started back on an upward trend. However, I don't currently have a good source of information.

[johnhemming]

https://www.healthline.com/health-news/ ... of%20cases.

But they may be able to take some solace from what’s been happening in the Southern Hemisphere.

The flu season there was relatively mild.

In places south of the equator, the flu season generally runs from April to October with a peak usually occurring in August.

Like ... er ... its the weather.

[servodude]

But winter is called "the flu season" for a reason

Indeed! And it is done so everywhere in the world; irrespective of the absolute weather

Are you saying that there is more flu in Australia in December, January and February, even though that is summer there?

Otherwise I am not sure what point you are making.

Autumn/Winter is flu season all over the world.
The winter is at different times depending on where you are
One place's Winter might be closer to another's Summer.
It's not the absolute weather that causes the flu to spread better in winter: it's what the people do that does

-sd