2019 Novel Coronavirus
2019-nCoV (first named); COVID-2019 (later- named disease); SARS-CoV-2 (final name of the virus causing COVID-2019):
February 19, 2020 update Part 3
Paul Herscu ND, MPH
Herscu Laboratory
This is the third piece of writing on this current epidemic. Please read
Part 1 and
Part 2 for context and also, please read my other writing on this site for a larger context on the overall topic of public health and epidemics. For this epidemic, I will keep the sections consistent. Also, please be aware that I am keeping the same sequence of comment topics, for ease of read from one installment to the next.
2019 Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV; COVID-2019):
Comments I shared here over the past weeks remain true and are seen in writings coming from across the globe. I want to focus on why this is of outmost importance to you!
Official Numbers: First, I applaud the Chinese government’s response to pressure to recalculate and
reclassify patients to share data that is closer to what is likely the truth of the matter related to incidence of cases. As I mentioned last time, learning the true numbers out of China is always tricky. That said, the number of cases are clearly growing, as Chinese official numbers are approximately 70,000 cases, as we read, with at least 1,800 deaths. These are close to the numbers I mentioned before, 75,000. I still have real questions around this number, but let me pass on that for a moment. And to the more
official numbers from the WHO as of today,
inside China we hear 74,280 infected, with 2,006 deaths, or a mortality rate of 2.7%. If this
were the case, that would be really bad for all of us. However, I think this number is still really wrong, maybe by as much as eight to ten times. From the WHO, as of today, there are 924 confirmed cases in 25 countries
outside of China, with 3 deaths, or 0.32% mortality rate. Please note that what I mentioned 2 weeks ago was a 0.3% fatality rate, which is what we have now
outside of China. A bad number for sure, but MUCH less severe case fatality ratio than a horrific epidemic would have. I think the case fatality number will settle around 0.2% to 0.5%, again much less than what China is reporting.
While I am still not sure what the current
Ro
number is for real, it does seem like we can start to draw a proper epidemic curve and it looks like we might just miss another scary global epidemic here. Let me say, right now, here, that I believe there is good news finally, though not yet reported.
As before, knowing the real number of infected is essential so that descriptive analysis can lead to mathematic modeling of how average or how highly infectious this epidemic is. With this information in hand, better predictions from those infected
outside China can be made. I mentioned that the mortality rate and disease burden
outside China is the one that really matters to science and to us as it is more likely accurate.
