[evan_au]

as we know red cross workers had caught covid at some time before December when they had routine blood tests.

I missed the link to this story. What country was it in?

It is known that people who live near bat caves often have antibodies to bat viruses, especially if they visit the caves.
- But most bat viruses are not very transmissible in humans, so occasional deaths are not noticed, and the survivors have antibodies.
- That is the message of the WHO belated visit to China this month - the investigation team should have been on the ground in early January 2020, doing tests and interviews to trace the source of the outbreak. A year later, it's much harder to find out what happened.

It is believed that at least six countries could have an ongoing bioweapons program. These include: Iraq, Iran, Libya, China, Russia and North Korea.

More countries will have biodefence programs.

That means looking for potential diseases that might affect agriculture, wildlife and/or humans.
- Investigating how they cause disease
- In case of risk, it may involve developing detection and treatment methods (eg vaccines), or recommending culling if the disease cannot be treated.
- In some cases, it has included "Gain of Function" studies, where they see what mutations it would take to make the disease more transmissible

The difference between defence and offence is that defence research deals with small quantities of the pathogen, and does not look at mass production and deployment techniques.
- But because pathogens are self-multiplying, even a small amount of an infectious pathogen is a dangerous thing!

see a doctor...may well have been misdiagnosed as Flu

We have quite good diagnosis of flu.
- And there is an international cooperation run through WHO keeping watch for new flu strains; this surveillance feeds into the annual flu vaccination program.
- So when people start turning up with a flu-like disease which isn't flu, alarm bells should start ringing.

[Bored chemist]

Why do you ignore what is actually said and keep on trolling.

What was actually said was

Yet atleast 15 counties all have bio weapons laboratories and are still developing biological warfare agents.

You said it.

And 7 is still not 15.

They would spotted at 6 months when the amount of infected people reached over a 1000 maybe.

No again you are not reading properly patent 0 in month one infects at an R0 of 2,

Is that a sensible value for R?
This would have been back when nobody realised that there was anything wrong. Nobody being careful, no compulsory masks no lockdown.
So, just like the early days of the Wuhan outbreak.

So the sensible value for R is the value of R for the first stages of the epidemic in Wuhan.
Let's have a look at that data.
It's here
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-020-79063-x


Wuhan R .jpg (25.58 kB . 506x336 - viewed 2020 times)

It varies significantly but, in the early stages it's about 7.

So, please redo your calculation with R=7

You don't know when covid first came to the country.

Yes we do.
We know what plane he arrived on.
"On 23 January - the day patient A landed in the UK with the student's father - "
From
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-55622386

And we know roughly how it spread from there- quite quickly, even though people were on the lookout for it and being cautious. Nobody  would have been being cautious about it before anyone knew about it for example, in Spain, months earlier.

Read what Is actually written for once, I.was talking about a 2 week incubation not a month.

That's the time we get people to quarantine for. It's the upper limit to how long it takes to transmit.
The average time is about 4 days.

So please redo your calculation of how fast an outbreak grows in the early stages based on a 4 day mean time to infection and an R value of 7.

Then tell us all how they missed it for 3 months.

It has where you been.

Where is the evidence of a mass outbreak in Spain triggered by those cases that must have been there in March 2019 in order for it to be found in the sewer?

(No, I don't mean the outbreak that everyone saw in 2020, I mean the one which you are implying in 2019, but which nobody noticed.)

Sorry you'll have to wait for the peer review like the rest of us.

Actually, I don't.
I am a peer.
I can do my own review based on my professional knowledge.
And I know that it's much more likely that there's a glitch in the analysis - which is quite a common occurrence, than that a virus sat waiting in Spain and then suddenly went to China and became massively infectious.

Actually, I don't really need to be a peer to do that, do I?
A lab error is more likely than something impossible, isn't it?

I wasnt basing on the slowest or the fastest I was basing in between the two, a middle speed pay attraction.

No, you were not.
The modal speed is about 4 days, not two weeks.

[Jolly2 (OP)]

Why do you ignore what is actually said and keep on trolling.

What was actually said was

Yet atleast 15 counties all have bio weapons laboratories and are still developing biological warfare agents.

You said it.

And 7 is still not 15.

They would spotted at 6 months when the amount of infected people reached over a 1000 maybe.

No again you are not reading properly patent 0 in month one infects at an R0 of 2,

Is that a sensible value for R?
This would have been back when nobody realised that there was anything wrong. Nobody being careful, no compulsory masks no lockdown.
So, just like the early days of the Wuhan outbreak.

So the sensible value for R is the value of R for the first stages of the epidemic in Wuhan.
Let's have a look at that data.
It's here
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-020-79063-x


Wuhan R .jpg (25.58 kB . 506x336 - viewed 2020 times)

It varies significantly but, in the early stages it's about 7.

So, please redo your calculation with R=7

You don't know when covid first came to the country.

Yes we do.
We know what plane he arrived on.
"On 23 January - the day patient A landed in the UK with the student's father - "
From
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-55622386

And we know roughly how it spread from there- quite quickly, even though people were on the lookout for it and being cautious. Nobody  would have been being cautious about it before anyone knew about it for example, in Spain, months earlier.

Read what Is actually written for once, I.was talking about a 2 week incubation not a month.

That's the time we get people to quarantine for. It's the upper limit to how long it takes to transmit.
The average time is about 4 days.

So please redo your calculation of how fast an outbreak grows in the early stages based on a 4 day mean time to infection and an R value of 7.

Then tell us all how they missed it for 3 months.

It has where you been.

Where is the evidence of a mass outbreak in Spain triggered by those cases that must have been there in March 2019 in order for it to be found in the sewer?

(No, I don't mean the outbreak that everyone saw in 2020, I mean the one which you are implying in 2019, but which nobody noticed.)

Sorry you'll have to wait for the peer review like the rest of us.

Actually, I don't.
I am a peer.
I can do my own review based on my professional knowledge.
And I know that it's much more likely that there's a glitch in the analysis - which is quite a common occurrence, than that a virus sat waiting in Spain and then suddenly went to China and became massively infectious.

Actually, I don't really need to be a peer to do that, do I?
A lab error is more likely than something impossible, isn't it?

I wasnt basing on the slowest or the fastest I was basing in between the two, a middle speed pay attraction.

No, you were not.
The modal speed is about 4 days, not two weeks.

If you are just going to troll there is no point in discussing

[Jolly2 (OP)]

as we know red cross workers had caught covid at some time before December when they had routine blood tests.

I missed the link to this story. What country was it in?

In America 106 red cross workers from 9 different states.
https://nypost.com/2020/12/01/covid-19-was-likely-in-us-weeks-earlier-than-thought-study/

From Patient 0 to 106, takes a while.  That they caught the virus sometime before December,  means America and China had outbreaks at the same time.

It is known that people who live near bat caves often have antibodies to bat viruses, especially if they visit the caves.
- But most bat viruses are not very transmissible in humans, so occasional deaths are not noticed, and the survivors have antibodies.
- That is the message of the WHO belated visit to China this month - the investigation team should have been on the ground in early January 2020, doing tests and interviews to trace the source of the outbreak. A year later, it's much harder to find out what happened.

Agree

It is believed that at least six countries could have an ongoing bioweapons program. These include: Iraq, Iran, Libya, China, Russia and North Korea.

More countries will have biodefence programs.

It's a contradiction in terms they first produce a bio.weapon to then build defenses. And aggressive and defensive program are identical. Hence should all be banned.

That means looking for potential diseases that might affect agriculture, wildlife and/or humans.
- Investigating how they cause disease
- In case of risk, it may involve developing detection and treatment methods (eg vaccines), or recommending culling if the disease cannot be treated.
- In some cases, it has included "Gain of Function" studies, where they see what mutations it would take to make the disease more transmissible

Gain of function research should be banned under the restrictions of biological warfare. They are either acting criminally or using loop holes.

The difference between defence and offence is that defence research deals with small quantities of the pathogen, and does not look at mass production and deployment techniques.

Mass production is the only difference,  the programs are the same.
So should be banned.

- But because pathogens are self-multiplying, even a small amount of an infectious pathogen is a dangerous thing!

Agree, a scientist in England committed suicide after a case of small pox was found in the hospital his research lab was in, it had escaped from his laboratory.

see a doctor...may well have been misdiagnosed as Flu

We have quite good diagnosis of flu.

Evan I am speaking about before Covid was Identified in China.

- And there is an international cooperation run through WHO keeping watch for new flu strains; this surveillance feeds into the annual flu vaccination program.
- So when people start turning up with a flu-like disease which isn't flu, alarm bells should start ringing.

If they have samples taken, in the first few months after patient 0, not so many cases would be present, it would shere luck if a person going with flu like symptoms got sampled.
I have never been asked for a sample when going to the doctor about flu.

I calculate with an R0 of 2 with a 2 week incubation period.  Takes 6 months for you to have  just over 2000 infections. With 80% asymptomatic, it's hardly anyone presenting symptoms, after 6 months its  400 people with severe symptoms, maybe 3 deaths.

And that's not 400 all at the same time,  that's 400 spaced out over the 6 months with the 3 deaths also spaced out over the 6 months.

With the R0 number we have good figures and with incubation also.

But for the mortality rate, it's based on known infections and deaths. We dont have complete data on actual infections only data on people tested therefore the mortality rate is definitely lower, but by how much isnt clear.

[Bored chemist]

Evan I am speaking about before Covid was Identified in China.

We have had quite good diagnoses of flu since SARS

If you are just going to troll there is no point in discussing

Pointing out the actual R value for the correct scenario- citing a paper in nature to do it is not trolling.

Pretending the R=2 and that nobody gets covid in under a fortnight is either stupid or dishonest.
That really is trolling.

it would shere luck if a person going with flu like symptoms got sampled.

This is a disease that hospitalises quite a lot of people.

It's a contradiction in terms they first produce a bio.weapon to then build defenses. And aggressive and defensive program are identical. Hence should all be banned.

Not every country is signed up to the treaty (which, incidentally the UK wrote) Nor have all those who signed up, ratified it. It is therefore perfectly legal for some countries to develop bioweapons if they see fit.
It's stupid, but that's a different question.
Now, given that some countries are working on these things, do you think that we should abandon our defences against them?

Do you want to put the people of the UK at risk of attack by some foreign power?

I calculate with an R0 of 2 with a 2 week incubation period.  Takes 6 months for you to have a few 1000 infections. With 80% asymptomatic, it's hardly anyone presenting symptoms.

Why brag about using the wrong numbers to get meaningless answers?

Gain of function research should be banned

It is impossible to distinguish between, for example "gain of function" research and research to look at what potential variations of the covid virus might do in terms of virulence and immunity.
Do you really want to ban research into how we might treat then next variant?

The people who wrote the legislation had thought this through properly.
Have you?

[Bored chemist]

In America 106 red cross workers from 9 different states.

"The presence of these serum antibodies indicate that isolated SARS-CoV-2 infections may have occurred in the western portion of the United States earlier than previously recognized or that a small portion of the population may have pre-existing antibodies that bind SARS-CoV-2,”
Which would surprise nobody since coronaviruses aren't rare.

[Jolly2 (OP)]

In America 106 red cross workers from 9 different states.

"The presence of these serum antibodies indicate that isolated SARS-CoV-2 infections may have occurred in the western portion of the United States earlier than previously recognized or that a small portion of the population may have pre-existing antibodies that bind SARS-CoV-2,”
Which would surprise nobody since coronaviruses aren't rare.

"OR" learn to read and stop trolling.

[Bored chemist]

In America 106 red cross workers from 9 different states.

"The presence of these serum antibodies indicate that isolated SARS-CoV-2 infections may have occurred in the western portion of the United States earlier than previously recognized or that a small portion of the population may have pre-existing antibodies that bind SARS-CoV-2,”
Which would surprise nobody since coronaviruses aren't rare.

"OR" learn to read and stop trolling.

I didn't just read it, I quoted it.

[Jolly2 (OP)]

In America 106 red cross workers from 9 different states.

"The presence of these serum antibodies indicate that isolated SARS-CoV-2 infections may have occurred in the western portion of the United States earlier than previously recognized or that a small portion of the population may have pre-existing antibodies that bind SARS-CoV-2,”
Which would surprise nobody since coronaviruses aren't rare.

"OR" learn to read and stop trolling.

I didn't just read it, I quoted it.

Yeah really, wow, quoting doesn't require reading. Stop wasting my time.

[Bored chemist]

In America 106 red cross workers from 9 different states.

"The presence of these serum antibodies indicate that isolated SARS-CoV-2 infections may have occurred in the western portion of the United States earlier than previously recognized or that a small portion of the population may have pre-existing antibodies that bind SARS-CoV-2,”
Which would surprise nobody since coronaviruses aren't rare.

"OR" learn to read and stop trolling.

I didn't just read it, I quoted it.

Yeah really, wow, quoting doesn't require reading. Stop wasting my time.

And I even bolded it.
What claim are you trying to make about me reading it; I obviously did read it, so you are talking trash.

[Bored chemist]

current data

is wrong because currently people are trying their damnedest not to catch it.
That's why the correct data is the stuff from the early days of Wuhan.
And that's about 7

So, with R = 7 then by day 4 you have 7 people, by day 8 you have about 50.

About 2 million in a month.
Rather a lot in 3 months

[Jolly2 (OP)]

current data

is wrong because currently people are trying their damnedest not to catch it.
That's why the correct data is the stuff from the early days of Wuhan.
And that's about 7

You either prove evidence or go away and stop trolling.

What does the evidence show for the Covid 19 R.0 and its incubation period?

And spare me and everyone  else data on the new variants.

So chemist the R0 for covid is between what and what number?

And the incubation period is between what and what time in days?

[Bored chemist]

You either prove evidence

I Quoted it already.
You lied about me trolling.

[Jolly2 (OP)]

You either prove evidence

I Quoted it already.
You lied about me trolling.

You have to give a number not post a load of information from some spurious site.

Either give a number or stop wasting my time.

[Bored chemist]

You have to give a number not post a load of information from some spurious site.

The journal, Nature, is not "some spurious site".
Learn to read.

[Jolly2 (OP)]

as we know red cross workers had caught covid at some time before December when they had routine blood tests.

I missed the link to this story. What country was it in?

It is known that people who live near bat caves often have antibodies to bat viruses, especially if they visit the caves.
- But most bat viruses are not very transmissible in humans, so occasional deaths are not noticed, and the survivors have antibodies.
- That is the message of the WHO belated visit to China this month - the investigation team should have been on the ground in early January 2020, doing tests and interviews to trace the source of the outbreak. A year later, it's much harder to find out what happened.

It is believed that at least six countries could have an ongoing bioweapons program. These include: Iraq, Iran, Libya, China, Russia and North Korea.

More countries will have biodefence programs.

That means looking for potential diseases that might affect agriculture, wildlife and/or humans.
- Investigating how they cause disease
- In case of risk, it may involve developing detection and treatment methods (eg vaccines), or recommending culling if the disease cannot be treated.
- In some cases, it has included "Gain of Function" studies, where they see what mutations it would take to make the disease more transmissible

The difference between defence and offence is that defence research deals with small quantities of the pathogen, and does not look at mass production and deployment techniques.
- But because pathogens are self-multiplying, even a small amount of an infectious pathogen is a dangerous thing!

see a doctor...may well have been misdiagnosed as Flu

We have quite good diagnosis of flu.
- And there is an international cooperation run through WHO keeping watch for new flu strains; this surveillance feeds into the annual flu vaccination program.
- So when people start turning up with a flu-like disease which isn't flu, alarm bells should start ringing.

Evan please do some calculations yourself.

Patient 0.

Choose an R0 current data suggests it somewhere between 1.4 and 2.5 I choose 2, it's a middle ground.

Incubation periods are anywhere between 1 and 27 days.

I choose 14 again as a middle ground,  to try and balance the shorter and longer incubation periods.

Death rate doesn't really matter for the calculation.

Its R0 and incubation time that will discern, the rate/amount of transmission over time.

I calculate 4 million active infections after 11 months.

See what you get.

[Kryptid]

Incubation periods are anywhere between 1 and 27 days.

I choose 14 again as a middle ground,  to try and balance the shorter and longer incubation periods.

The average seems to be 5 days: https://www.webmd.com/lung/coronavirus-incubation-period#1

[Jolly2 (OP)]

Incubation periods are anywhere between 1 and 27 days.

I choose 14 again as a middle ground,  to try and balance the shorter and longer incubation periods.

The average seems to be 5 days: https://www.webmd.com/lung/coronavirus-incubation-period#1

To.qoute the article

"Most people with symptoms had them by day 12."

Incubation is from time of contact to onset of symptoms that suggests 12.
Then there is this
"Researchers estimate that people who get infected with the coronavirus can spread it to others 2 to 3 days before symptoms start"

That takes it to 10 day incubation period for some not all.

[Bored chemist]

Choose an R0 current data

Current data is wrong.
The big factor in R is how people behave.
So you need to look at the value of R measured when people didn't know there was a plague.
Why can't you understand that?

[Bored chemist]

"Most people with symptoms had them by day 12."

And everyone else on the planet now knows what "asymptomatic transmission" means.
Why don't you?
Also, "by day 12", rather than "on day 12".