[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.

Kryptid the article suggests 10 day incubation not 5.

[Kryptid]

Kryptid the article suggests 10 day incubation not 5.

Actually:

On average, symptoms showed up in the newly infected person about 5 days after contact.

[Bored chemist]

You took an arithmetic mean when a geometric mean is likely to be less wrong.

[Jolly2 (OP)]

Kryptid the article suggests 10 day incubation not 5.

Actually:

On average, symptoms showed up in the newly infected person about 5 days after contact.

Therefore the article is contradicting itself.

The average was 5 yet.

Most people showed symptoms by day 12.
Evidence showed they were contagious 2 to 3 days before.

Cant be both.

[Kryptid]

Therefore the article is contradicting itself.

No, it isn't.

Most people showed symptoms by day 12.

Yes, and?

Cant be both.

Why not?

[Bored chemist]

Kryptid the article suggests 10 day incubation not 5.

Actually:

On average, symptoms showed up in the newly infected person about 5 days after contact.

And it is known that they are infectious  a day or two before there are symptoms

Which mean that we are talking about R is about 7 and the time scale from one generation to the next is about 4 days.
That's 7.5 "generations" in a month (30 days/ 4 days ) and with R = 7 you get 7^7.5 cases in a month
2,178,889.9
And in Jolly's fairy tale world where nobody notices for 3 months you get (with an absurdly simple model)
10,344,414,165,316,372,973 cases.
which is massively  more than the population of the planet.
But somehow he thinks people might not notice.

[Bored chemist]

Therefore the article is contradicting itself.

No, it isn't.

Most people showed symptoms by day 12.

Yes, and?

Cant be both.

Why not?

We are waiting, I think, for Jolly to understand this

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".

[Kryptid]

Here's another source with some more exact details on the numbers (it backs up the approximated 5 day average): https://www.news-medical.net/health/Coronavirus-Incubation-Period.aspx

[Jolly2 (OP)]

Which mean that we are talking about R is about 7 and the time scale from one generation to the next is about 4 days.
That's 7.5 "generations" in a month (30 days/ 4 days ) and with R = 7

Supporting evidence? I've never seen any suggesting an R0 of 7

[Kryptid]

Um, I never said that.

[Jolly2 (OP)]

Here's another source with some more exact details on the numbers (it backs up the approximated 5 day average): https://www.news-medical.net/health/Coronavirus-Incubation-Period.aspx

Awesome thanks for the link.


I would therefore base a doubling per week rather then fortnight.

[Jolly2 (OP)]

Um, I never said that.

Its alright I cleaned it up.

What's your position on the R0 kyrptid?

[Bored chemist]

Which mean that we are talking about R is about 7 and the time scale from one generation to the next is about 4 days.
That's 7.5 "generations" in a month (30 days/ 4 days ) and with R = 7

Supporting evidence? I've never seen any suggesting an R0 of 7

Well, learn to read.
I posted it earlier today.

[Kryptid]

What's your position on the R0 kyrptid?

I haven't looked into it, so I really can't provide an informed comment.

[Bored chemist]

What's your position on the R0 kyrptid?

I haven't looked into it, so I really can't provide an informed comment.

How about this ?
If you are trying to model how fast "the first outbreak" would spread, does it make sense to use a current value of R - which is based on people who know there's a virus doing the rounds, or would it be better to use the value of R from the early days of the Wuhan outbreak?

Which would you say was a more appropriate  value?

[Kryptid]

How about this ?
If you are trying to model how fast "the first outbreak" would spread, does it make sense to use a current value of R - which is based on people who know there's a virus doing the rounds, or would it be better to use the value of R from the early days of the Wuhan outbreak?

Which would you say was a more appropriate  value?

The early days, of course.

[Jolly2 (OP)]

How about this ?
If you are trying to model how fast "the first outbreak" would spread, does it make sense to use a current value of R - which is based on people who know there's a virus doing the rounds, or would it be better to use the value of R from the early days of the Wuhan outbreak?

Which would you say was a more appropriate  value?

The early days, of course.

Well the WHO lists

"The WHO puts the R0 of COVID-19 at 2 to 2.5."

The early information from China suggested an R0 of 3. Actually 3.28

http://www.sci-news.com/medicine/covid-19-reproduction-number-08132.html

[Jolly2 (OP)]

Ok getting somewhere.


Weekly incubation period and an R.0 of 3.

Past infections .  current infections

Patient 0
Week 1.  1              ,   3
Week 2   3              ,   9
Week 3   9              ,  27
Week 4   27            ,  81
Week 5   81            ,  243
Week 6 243            ,  729
Week 7  729           , 2,187
Week 8 2,187         , 6,561
Week 9 6,561         , 19,683
Week 10 19,683     , 59,049
Week 11 59,049     , 177,147
Week 12 177,147   , 531,441
Week 13 531,441   , 1,594,323
Week 14 1,594,323 , 4,782,969

Ok so that's  over 4 million  infections in 3 and half months from patient 0.

Compared to over 4 million infections in 11 with the first data set.

And for the first 2 months basically  way under 2000 except for the last week

[Jolly2 (OP)]

Ok getting somewhere.


Weekly incubation period and an R.0 of 3.

Past infections .  current infections

Patient 0
Week 1.  1              ,   3
Week 2   3              ,   9
Week 3   9              ,  27
Week 4   27            ,  81
Week 5   81            ,  243
Week 6 243            ,  729
Week 7  729           , 2,187
Week 8 2,187         , 6,561
Week 9 6,561         , 19,683
Week 10 19,683     , 59,049
Week 11 59,049     , 177,147
Week 12 177,147   , 531,441
Week 13 531,441   , 1,594,323
Week 14 1,594,323 , 4,782,969

Ok so that's  over 4 million  infections in 3 and half months from patient 0.

Compared to over 4 million infections in 11 with the first data set.

And for the first 2 months basically  way under 2000 except for the last week

So with 80% asymptomatic.

In week 10 you would see about 4000 people with more severe symptoms, deaths at 10 per 1000 gives 40 deaths.

But it's all relative to who has the virus.

So under those numbers, China starts seeing deaths in December.

That pushes back patient 0 to mid September.


https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_the_COVID-19_pandemic_in_2019
Well that's funny.
"During the 2019 Military World Games in Wuhan (18-27 October, 2019), a large number of athletes from different International delegations had fallen ill with serious symptoms of which some of those athletes have attributed to COVID-19,"

With a week incubation, athletes would have got sick at the end of the games if they caught it there.

And those athletes would then all carry covid 19 back to their own nations.  Supper spreader event.

As they are all military that passes it through all world government establishments first.

[Jolly2 (OP)]

Ok getting somewhere.


Weekly incubation period and an R.0 of 3.

Past infections .  current infections

Patient 0
Week 1.  1              ,   3
Week 2   3              ,   9
Week 3   9              ,  27
Week 4   27            ,  81
Week 5   81            ,  243
Week 6 243            ,  729
Week 7  729           , 2,187
Week 8 2,187         , 6,561
Week 9 6,561         , 19,683
Week 10 19,683     , 59,049
Week 11 59,049     , 177,147
Week 12 177,147   , 531,441
Week 13 531,441   , 1,594,323
Week 14 1,594,323 , 4,782,969

Ok so that's  over 4 million  infections in 3 and half months from patient 0.

Compared to over 4 million infections in 11 with the first data set.

And for the first 2 months basically  way under 2000 except for the last week

So with 80% asymptomatic.

In week 10 you would see about 4000 people with more severe symptoms, deaths at 10 per 1000 gives 40 deaths.

But it's all relative to who has the virus.

So under those numbers, China starts seeing deaths in December.

That pushes back patient 0 to mid September.


https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_the_COVID-19_pandemic_in_2019
Well that's funny.
"During the 2019 Military World Games in Wuhan (18-27 October, 2019), a large number of athletes from different International delegations had fallen ill with serious symptoms of which some of those athletes have attributed to COVID-19,"

With a week incubation, athletes would have got sick at the end of the games if they caught it there.

And those athletes would then all carry covid 19 back to their own nations.  Supper spreader event.

As they are all military that passes it through all world government establishments first.

So then we either have patient 0 in China in September, leading to an outbreak at the wuhan games.

Or a soldiers from America bringing it to the wuhan games from fort Detrick from a leak in July. Using the above numbers, fort Detrick is closed mid july, two and half months later is the Beginning of October with expected infections of arround 20,000 moving to 60,000, with arround 12,000 people showing symptoms.

It's interesting we saw so many politicans all over the world catching the virus early on, that certianly implies links to spread through the military.