I started to observe the corona virus outbreak around Jan. 24, when I read the (infamous) Feigl-Ding tweet mentioned here:
[url]https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2020/01/china-coronavirus-twitter/605644/[/url]

Now some useless numbers (hello retina):
At that point, there were roughly 1000 confirmed cases and 50 deaths. That was around 70 days ago.

Today the world has more than 1.000.000 confirmed cases and 50.000 deaths. If we assume that the growth continues as before, then by Jun. 12 we will have 1.000.000.000 cases and 50m deaths worldwide. These numbers are near to the estimates for the "Spanish flu" from 1918.
[url]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_flu[/url]

Another parallel with the Spanish flu is that the origin of the pandemics is disputed, see [url]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_flu#Hypotheses_about_the_source[/url]. The german wikipedia page states "Ungeachtet des irreführenden Namens, der auf zeitgenössische Zeitungsmeldungen zurückgeht, gehen die meisten Wissenschaftler heute davon aus, dass die Pandemie ihren Ursprung in den USA hatte" (my translation: despite its misleading name originating from contemporary news reports, today most scientists act on the assumption that the pandemics had its origin in the USA)
[url]https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanische_Grippe[/url]

Yet another possible parallel: "To maintain morale, World War I censors minimized early reports of illness and mortality in Germany, the United Kingdom, France, and the United States"
[url]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_flu[/url], second paragraph.

[QUOTE=Till;541688]If we assume that the growth continues as before, then by Jun. 12 we will have 1.000.000.000 cases and 50m deaths worldwide.[/QUOTE]We might already have 1B cases, just that we haven't tested enough people yet to see if that is so.

[url=https://scopeblog.stanford.edu/2020/04/02/whats-a-virus-anyway-part-1-the-bare-bones-basics/]What's a virus, anyway? Part 1: The bare-bones basics[/url] - Stanford Medicine

This is interesting - why soapy washing works well to remove some viruses but not others:
[quote]Some viruses also wear greasy overcoats, called envelopes, made from stolen shards of the membranes of the last cell they infected. Influenza and hepatitis C viruses have envelopes, as do coronaviruses, herpesviruses and HIV. Rhinoviruses, which are responsible for most common colds, and polioviruses don't. Here's a practical takeaway: Enveloped viruses particularly despise soap because it disrupts greasy membranes. Soap and water are to these viruses what exhaling garlic is to a vampire, which is why washing your hands works wonders.[/quote]

The link to Part 2 at bottom of the article is missing, here is that:

[url=https://scopeblog.stanford.edu/2020/04/03/how-coronaviruses-infect-us-how-infectious-viruses-created-us/]What’s a virus, anyway? Part 2: How coronaviruses infect us — and how viruses created us[/url]

Thanks for the informative links. :smile:

Coronavirus: Potential vaccine generates enough antibodies to fight off virus, first peer-reviewed study suggests:

[url]https://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/coronavirus-vaccine-pittsburgh-university-lancet-study-covid-pandemic-a9442536.html[/url]


Hmm this sounds too good to be true, but lets hope it is just exactly good enough to be true.

[url=https://science.sciencemag.org/content/early/2020/03/30/science.abb6936]Quantifying SARS-CoV-2 transmission suggests epidemic control with digital contact tracing[/url] | Science Magazine

[i]"We conclude that viral spread is too fast to be contained by manual contact tracing, but could be controlled if this process was faster, more efficient and happened at scale. A contact-tracing App which builds a memory of proximity contacts and immediately notifies contacts of positive cases can achieve epidemic control if used by enough people."[/i]

Estimates R[sub]0[/sub] ~= 2.0, and breaks said estimate down into 4 additive subcomponents, whose individual R[sub]0[/sub] values are listed in square brackets:

1. Pre-symptomatic [0.9]: infections resulting from contact with infectees who have not yet begun showing symptoms, but will go on to do so;

2. Symptomatic [0.8]: infections resulting from contact with infectees who are showing symptoms;

3. Environmental [0.2]: infections resulting from contact with virus in the environment (e.g. on surfaces);

4. Asymptomatic [0.1]: infections resulting from contact with infectees who never show any symptoms.

Now, if we consider pre-symptomatic as a kind of asymptomatic transmission - after all, checking people for visible symptoms will miss this cohort - then fully *half* the transmission occurs asymptomatically. That seems huge to me.

The world's mine Oyster. I like oysters but do not personally recommend supplements.

[url]https://www.cnet.com/news/zinc-supplements-wont-protect-you-from-the-coronavirus/[/url]

[URL="https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-52161995"]Mr Geisel said the diversion of masks from Berlin amounted to an "act of modern piracy", urging the Trump administration to adhere to international trading rules.[/URL]

[url]https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/02/world/coronavirus-earth-seismic-noise-scn-trnd[/url]

[QUOTE=ewmayer;541728]
Estimates R[sub]0[/sub] ~= 2.0, and breaks said estimate down into 4 additive subcomponents, whose individual R[sub]0[/sub] values are listed in square brackets:
..
Now, if we consider pre-symptomatic as a kind of asymptomatic transmission - after all, checking people for visible symptoms will miss this cohort - then fully *half* the transmission occurs asymptomatically. That seems huge to me.[/QUOTE]Missing two categories:
5) Contact with an infectee that remains asymptomatic and undiagnosed. Random testing in multiple studies have shown 33 to 46% of those infected fall in this category.
6) Airborne transmission, which a recent study or two has indicated is occurring, in addition to droplet or surface modes.
[URL]https://www.vox.com/2020/2/20/21143785/coronavirus-covid-19-spread-transmission-how[/URL] (with numerous links to New England Journal of Medicine, The Lancet, etc.)

These are I think the basis for the recent US shift from no mask use for the general populace, toward mask use. And now N95 or PM2.5 masks are very scarce at retail. (See online searches for various retailers.)

The digital contacts tracing perhaps ought be cross posted in the threads regarding intrusive surveillance.

It wouldn't surprise me if environmental transmission is more common than indicated. The virus can survive on surfaces for some time. If someone who is "shedding virus" -- whether symptomatic or not -- touches a surface, then, a bit later an uninfected person touches that surface, then touches his or her face -- boom! They've got it. That video I posted a link to a while back indicates that airborne transmission isn't all that easy. As to environmental transmission, something happened recently that made me think.

The other day, I was on a walk, and saw an exterminator's truck standing near a house that had some black boxes with red flags I'd noticed before. I asked the guy if those were his bait boxes. Yes. Poison bait for voles. Ah! I had a neighbor who had voles tearing up the back lawn. The guy gave me his card. I took it and put it in my pocket.

As I walked home, I realized what I had just done, and what I had to do. First, "Don't touch your face!" When I got home, I got my wipes, and wiped my hands, my door knobs and handles, the handle of my walking stick, and the card. I then called my neighbor, who asked me to put the card in their mail box. The shirt went into the wash not long after.

Touching surfaces or handling objects that might have been recently touched by others is something we hardly think about. IMO we had better.

Masks may indeed be protective, partly for preventing the dispersal of infected aerosol, but also because they help stop you from touching your face, thus inhibiting environmental transmission.