Coronavirus - worldwide breaking news, discussion, stats, updates and more

[weltweit]

BBC News was asking a UK doctor about the higher instance of BAME patients during the epidemic. He confirmed (anecdotally, albeit) that they are seeing a higher proportion of minorities, but pointed out they have no idea what the underlying reasons are, since it could easily be socio-economic or even diet related.

Indeed, although my response that you quoted was about racism in Chinese actions against Africans caught up in China rather than any group being more or less affected medically by the virus.

On that though, the American experience is also that BAME groups have been more affected medically than other ethnicities, it has been noted in NY, Chicago and New Orleans.

 

[weltweit]

Covid-19 tracking apps

EU suggests standardization: This week, the EU began pushing for its 27 nations to develop common standards for coronavirus tracking technologies that would make apps interoperable or even perhaps develop a single app to be used across the bloc
..
Germany and elsewhere are working on mobile phone apps to track people who’ve been exposed to the coronavirus,

..
France is officially working on a smartphone app to slow the spread of COVID-19, by tracking people living in France.
..
Chinese apps from major tech companies like Baidu, WeChat, Alipay and others worked to help people get through the coronavirus crisis by offering statistics, e-medicine, tools for quarantine, e-commerce and tools to check your exposure.

from 11/04/2020 TechCrunch is now a part of Verizon Media


Countries with official tracking apps[edit]

The Chinese government, in conjunction with Alipay, has deployed an app across 200 Chinese cities.[1]

In South Korea, the Corona 100m app has been developed to notify people of nearby cases.[2]

In Singapore, an app called TraceTogether is being used.[3]

Russia has introduced a tracking app for patients diagnosed with COVID-19 living in Moscow, designed to ensure they do not leave home.[4]

Czechia has launched a Singapore-inspired tracking app called eRouška (eFacemask). The app was developed by local IT community, released as open source and will be handed over to the government.[5]
..

Countries considering deployment[edit]

In the United Kingdom, Matthew Gould, chief executive of NHSX, the government body responsible for policy regarding technology in the NHS, said in late March 2020 that the organisation was looking seriously at an app that would alert people if they had recently been in contact with someone testing positive for the virus after scientists advising the government suggested it "could play a critical role" in limiting lockdowns.[6]

from Wikipedia COVID-19 app - Wikipedia

 

[weltweit]

The Wikipedia article goes on to note apps including monitoring and or tracking / tracing apps around the world:

Dedicated apps[edit]

Global

• (Temporary Contact Number) TCN Coalition [31]

Australia[edit]

• Coronavirus Australia[32]

Czech Republic[edit]

• eRouška (contact tracing)[33][5]
• Mapy (contact tracing)[34][35]

Israel[edit]

• Hamagen (COVID-19 tracker app)[36][37]

India[edit]

• Aarogya Setu (official government of India's COVID-19 tracker app)[38][39]
• GoK Direct - (COVID-19 app with direct data and guidelines from Government of Kerala)[40][41]
• Corona Kavach - (COVID-19 tracker app)[42]
• Test Yourself Goa (self diagnostic app)[42]
• Test Yourself Puducherry (self diagnostic app)[42]
• COVID-19 Quarantine Monitor (tracking app in Tamil Nadu)[42]
• Quarantine Watch (tracking app in Karnataka)[42]
• COVA Punjab (coronavirus-tracker app in Punjab)[42]
• Mahakavach (coronavirus Maharashtra government's app)[42]
• COVID19 Feedback (feedback app)[42]

Singapore[edit]

• TraceTogether (contact tracing)[43]

Europe[edit]

• Pan-European Privacy-Preserving Proximity Tracing (PEPP-PT) project[44]

United States[edit]

• NC-19SRIM: COVID-19 Situation Reports & Interactive Map[45][46]
• COVID-19 Apple App[47]
• How We Feel[48]
• Private Kit: Safe Paths[49]

United Kingdom[edit]

• Covid Symptom Tracker[50]

Bangladesh[edit]

• NC-19SRIM: COVID-19 Situation Reports & Interactive Map[45][46]

Multipurpose apps[edit]

• National Health Service (NHS) app (Britain)[50]

 

[2hats]

The Wikipedia article goes on to note apps including monitoring and or tracking / tracing apps around the world:

There are a couple of others in the UK that are still under development and not yet announced (if they ever will be), that aren't on that list.

 

[weltweit]

There are a couple of others in the UK that are still under development and not yet announced (if they ever will be), that aren't on that list.

2hats Can multiple apps operate with each other in the way that a single national app might?

Like there might only best be one waze for example.

 

[weltweit]

The oil industry is seeing its future, a future where increasing use of electric cars will result in much reduced demand for oil, people aren't using petrol or diesel cars at the moment, a preview of the future.

 

[editor]

America, eh?

Death penalty states in the US are stockpiling medicines for lethal injections that could save the lives of hundreds of coronavirus patients were they released for medical use.

A group of prominent medical practitioners and experts has issued an appeal to capital punishment states to release their stocks of essential sedatives and paralytics that they hoard for executions. The drugs are among the most sought after in hospital intensive care units around the country where shortages of the key medicines are putting lives of Covid-19 patients at risk.

Death penalty states urged to release stockpiled drugs for Covid-19 patients

Top health experts sign letter saying badly needed medications used in lethal injections ‘could save the lives of hundreds’

www.theguardian.com

 

[2hats]

2hats Can multiple apps operate with each other in the way that a single national app might?

The ones I have seen would need some rewriting. And probably heads bashing together at the political/admin/bureaucratic level.

 

[two sheds]

I've not been following the technical discussions so apologies if this has been addressed somewhere. But the figure of 80% or even 60% giving herd immunity I'm assuming brings the R0 down to below 1 so eventually the virus dies out.

That's still not going to let vulnerable people actually go out before we get a vaccine or treatment though is it, because the virus is still around and infecting people?

 

[Labourite]

Spain is starting to ease its lockdown measures...

 

[weltweit]

I've not been following the technical discussions so apologies if this has been addressed somewhere. But the figure of 80% or even 60% giving herd immunity I'm assuming brings the R0 down to below 1 so eventually the virus dies out.

That's still not going to let vulnerable people actually go out before we get a vaccine or treatment though is it, because the virus is still around and infecting people?

No technical discussion from me.

My understanding is, if say an area achieved a level of immunity, the non immune (vulnerable) people would likely be geographically remote from one another ( in part or in the main ) so the virus would likely not have a route to infect them as it would have had to jump through perhaps 3 immune people to get to them. And because the virus can't survive outside a host that particular virus would more than likely die out.

And immune people can't be carriers.

Say someone was infected, the majority of people they came into contact with would be immune. Obviously any non-immune people in the vicinity would still be at risk but the large infections of today's outbreak wouldn't be possible.

As to whether vulnerable people could be out and about, I don't know the answer. Obviously there would still be some risk, but it would be less than preseently.

 

[two sheds]

Yes thinking about it the 60 to 80% refers to people who've had it and are immune (although that sounds iffy with people reportedly still being infectious after they've recovered). The 40 to 20% left are people who haven't got it/had it and so also are not infectious.

I'm assuming there will still be enough people out of those 40 to 20% though who have got it to make it not really safe for vulnerable people to go out.

 

[weltweit]

..
I'm assuming there will still be enough people out of those 40 to 20% though who have got it to make it not really safe for vulnerable people to go out.

Well proper vulnerable people, elderly and with other health issues were told I think to isolate for 12 weeks iirc so perhaps that is the answer, they might still be at too much risk - long after the rest of us could have benefited from some easing of the lockdown.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Yes thinking about it the 60 to 80% refers to people who've had it and are immune (although that sounds iffy with people reportedly still being infectious after they've recovered). The 40 to 20% left are people who haven't got it/had it and so also are not infectious.

I'm assuming there will still be enough people out of those 40 to 20% though who have got it to make it not really safe for vulnerable people to go out.

Well first and foremost we need testing to see how many people have had it. If we had reliable numbers as to who's had it and how many might still have it, we could reach a situation where the risk to vulnerable people isn't zero but is within an acceptable range - ie within the same kind of range as other things that vulnerable people run the risk of catching anyway.

 

[2hats]

I've not been following the technical discussions so apologies if this has been addressed somewhere. But the figure of 80% or even 60% giving herd immunity I'm assuming brings the R0 down to below 1 so eventually the virus dies out.

That's still not going to let vulnerable people actually go out before we get a vaccine or treatment though is it, because the virus is still around and infecting people?

Yes, it depends on R0. Herd immunity scales like 1-1/R0. So for SARS-CoV-2 R0 in the UK at present is currently estimated to be somewhere between 2 and 3. This translates to 50-67% of the population developing an adequate immune response for herd immunity to have legs (note: might require more than 50-67% of the population to be exposed). Once that level is reached R0 rapidly drops to 1 and the virus struggles to find new, naive hosts for propagation.

Vulnerable persons would still need to isolate until either the chance of contracting the virus was low enough to be considered an acceptable risk for the person concerned (or they personally adopt other strategies to minimise risk to themselves), or a viable vaccine is widely available.

Also note that achieving herd immunity can generate evolutionary pressure for a virus to adapt; flu does this frequently. At this time we have no data as to whether the same will happen with SARS-CoV-2

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Apologies for the source, but I've followed the links to the studies concerned and the numbers are accurately reported.

COVID antibody test in German town shows 15 percent infection rate | Spectator USA

These findings suggest something possibly important to herd immunity and the point made above about exposure. People in close contact with infected people, whether because they're stuck on a boat together, living in the same household, or in one of the towns with the biggest concentrations of infection in the world, still only had around a 15 per cent chance of catching it. (I'm not proposing a hypothesis as to why that might be.)

Might this provide a link between the Imperial modelling and the Oxford modelling? On the face of it, if one of them is right, then the other must be way off. But what if they both contain a germ of truth - times the Imperial model's infection rate by around 6 and you get the Oxford model's rate.

 

[2hats]

Might this provide a link between the Imperial modelling and the Oxford modelling? On the face of it, if one of them is right, then the other must be way off. But what if they both contain a germ of truth - times the Imperial model's infection rate by around 6 and you get the Oxford model's rate.

The Oxford model is widely held, in the epidemiological community, to be way off. Just looking at the crude CFR alone tells you this but there is growing evidence pointing to the same from other avenues of research (modelling) and data collection (see upthread here, here and here).

 

[elbows]

The Oxford model is widely held, in the epidemiological community, to be way off. Just looking at the crude CFR alone tells you this but there is growing evidence pointing to the same from other avenues of research (modelling) and data collection (see upthread here, here and here).

If the media hadnt reported on that model in a certain way then I would have called it a curiosity that served as a useful reminder that models are only as good as the assumptions they are based on, and that we need serological survey data to test such theories. After all, that was one of the main points of the paper, but that was not the bit that the media and people with agendas that dont like the lockdown policy seized on. At least we have a little bit more data from certain countries to judge it against now (or to be more accurate, certain locations within countries).

Any idea what the epidemiological community think of the IHME models/projections?

 

[two sheds]

Well first and foremost we need testing to see how many people have had it. If we had reliable numbers as to who's had it and how many might still have it, we could reach a situation where the risk to vulnerable people isn't zero but is within an acceptable range - ie within the same kind of range as other things that vulnerable people run the risk of catching anyway.

Not sure there's anything really out there with an acceptable range that will kill me - I've had flu jab and pneumonia jab and not many people around with anthrax . So back to my original plan of calling "I'm not coming out" through the letter box I think.

 

[2hats]

Any idea what the epidemiological community think of the IHME models/projections?

The IHME have revised their model and conclusions several times and they now more broadly agree with the numbers from Imperial, LSHTM, and Kings/UCL (all just under 50K).

The latest IHME update over the weekend now estimates 37,494 (uncertainty interval: 26,149 to 62,519) deaths in the first wave.

 

[miss direct]

Well we will be on full lockdown this weekend again in Turkey. Great.

Not heard of any other country only doing this at the weekend.

 

[Yossarian]

Well we will be on full lockdown this weekend again in Turkey. Great.

Not heard of any other country only doing this at the weekend.

I haven't heard of any other weekend-only lockdowns either - aren't infected people just going to end up infecting their families over the weekends and their co-workers during the week?

 

[miss direct]

Exactly.

A lot of people are working from home or have lost their jobs altogether. The people still going to work are the supermarket workers, healthcare workers, and the desperate (people selling masks on the street, construction workers, etc.)

Here in Istanbul, the population is 15 million plus, and most people live in apartments. Now Spring is here, the typical thing to do at the weekend is to go to the seaside or park and have a BBQ or picnic. It gets so crowded. So I can understand why they've done this in some respects, but after going out to the shops and for a walk today and seeing the way many behave, it all seems pointless

 

[Azrael]

Not sure there's anything really out there with an acceptable range that will kill me - I've had flu jab and pneumonia jab and not many people around with anthrax . So back to my original plan of calling "I'm not coming out" through the letter box I think.

I'd say it's incredible that the Dr. Strangeloves never factored in mass public resistance to their homicidal "herd immunity" plan: but looking at their dead-eyed performances at the pressers, where deaths are just numbers on a page to them, it's not surprising. They don't get people.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

The IHME have revised their model and conclusions several times and they now more broadly agree with the numbers from Imperial, LSHTM, and Kings/UCL (all just under 50K).

The latest IHME update over the weekend now estimates 37,494 (uncertainty interval: 26,149 to 62,519) deaths in the first wave.

I don't get those predictions at all. Really looks like utter bollocks to me. Italy, for instance, passed the total they predicted for 4 August today, four days after they made their prediction. There's something badly wrong with their system.

And while deaths do tail off at the end, they don't tail off like that. Just the people currently in ICU who're going to die will change that. It's all very

 

[elbows]

France offers some clues about the next steps:

France's President Emmanuel Macron has just delivered his third TV address on the coronavirus, announcing the extension of a nationwide lockdown to stem the spread of coronavirus.
The lockdown, Macron said, would be extended until 11 May.
Under the rules, which are enforced by police, anyone who goes outside is required to carry a document stating their reason for leaving home.

• He thanked essential workers in all sectors for “allowing our nation to continue to operate” during the pandemic
• He admitted the French government was not prepared for the crisis, acknowledging shortcomings in delivering medical supplies to hospitals
• France’s borders will remain closed to non-EU countries until further notice
• Restaurants, bars, cinemas and other public venues will remain closed, and festivals cannot be held until mid-July
• The elderly, and those with severe disabilities or suffering from chronic illnesses, must remain confined even after restrictions begin being eased
• Schools, colleges and high schools will gradually reopen from 11 May
• All people with symptoms of coronavirus will be tested from 11 May
• In co-operation with its EU partners, France will ramp up research into developing a vaccine against coronavirus

from 19:43 of BBC live updates page https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/world-52266235

So they aim to test all new cases, once they've got things down to whatever level they manage by May 11th.

 

[Azrael]

Since France is also developing a tracing app, sounds like they're going for a more cautious version of the South Korean strategy for suppression. Unsurprising. Beyond unending lockdown and taking it on the chin, until a country's ready to attempt viral elimination, what else is there?

 

[Anju]

From the FT

"The G20 group is planning to offer lower income countries a moratorium on bilateral government loan repayments as part of an “action plan” to tackle the coronavirus pandemic and stave off an emerging markets debt crisis, a senior G20 official said."

Will be interested to see whether they manage to come to agreement on this, especially given the different levels of lending between members. Only 6-9 month payment holiday at the moment but maybe some debt cancellation being considered as well.

Not sure if there are any potential downsides / hidden dangers to this but it's good to see some international cooperation, though that's also why I wonder about the potential downsides.

Managed to read this from Google news but the link seems to be subscription only - text from article pasted below.

Subscribe to read | Financial Times

The G20 group is planning to offer lower income countries a moratorium on bilateral government loan repayments as part of an “action plan” to tackle the coronavirus pandemic and stave off an emerging markets debt crisis, a senior G20 official said.

The initiative, due to be finalised at a finance ministers’ meeting this week, would see a freeze on sovereign debt repayments for six or nine months, or possibly through to 2021, in line with an appeal last month from the IMF and World Bank.

Wealthy nations and multilateral institutions would use the period of the moratorium to draw up “very clear criteria, country-by-country of what exactly is going to happen. Is it debt relief totally? Is it just a deferment, a rescheduling?” the official said.

“For debt relief to happen it would take time for it to be co-ordinated,” said the official, who did not want to be named because of the sensitivity of the discussions. “But what is immediately needed is to give these people space so they don’t need to worry about the cash flow and debt servicing going to other countries, and they can use that money for their immediate needs.”

Concerns have been mounting about the debt sustainability of many lower income countries that borrowed heavily in the years after the 2008 global financial crisis and now lack the resources to deal with the economic problems caused by the Covid-19 pandemic as they grapple with high debts, fiscal deficits, plummeting revenues and weakening currencies — as well as health crises.

Another official close to the negotiations said the initiative “has strong support”. “Negotiations are still ongoing, and some details remain, but we are confident a solution will be found,” the official said.

The IMF and the World Bank called for debt relief for 76 of the world’s poorest nations that are eligible to receive the bank’s International Development Association funding. But other countries outside that criterion are also struggling with high debts and depleted resources. There are still discussions about who would be included.

Countries receiving bilateral development assistance are estimated to be due to make repayments of about $40bn to external creditors this year. The country-to-country loans are estimated to represent about $18bn.

The Institute of International Finance, an industry association, estimates that lower income nations will make repayments of a further $130bn on domestic debts. But the exact scale of the debt is not clear, given the opacity of some of the lending.

Within the G20 there’s a very clear recognition that a global co-ordinated approach is a must, not a choice

After the IMF and World Bank appealed for debt assistance for poorer nations, there were concerns that some sovereign lenders may be reluctant to suspend repayments if the money saved was diverted to paying other creditors rather than being used to tackle the coronavirus crisis.

Those concerns initially focused on China, the biggest bilateral lender to the IDA countries. Beijing has granted debt relief to creditor countries in the past, but has preferred to do so on a bespoke basis rather than as part of any co-ordinated effort.

China has so far appeared reluctant to change that approach. Its foreign ministry said last week it was willing to talk to low-income countries individually about their debt challenges, while noting that past repayment problems had been resolved bilaterally.

That stance may have changed ahead of this week’s meetings.

The G20 official dismissed speculation that there were differences between G20 members, particularly China, saying that while there were “some details that we are working through, certainly there’s a very clear commitment, including China”.

“Within the G20 there’s a very clear recognition that a global co-ordinated approach is a must, not a choice,” the official said. “I have not seen the spirit I have seen in the last six to eight weeks between the G20 members — there’s a clear understanding the political angles to this are put in a freezer.”

Odile Renaud Basso, chair of the Paris Club, a group of 22 big creditor nations, said any decision should be taken by all creditors together and that China was “participating very constructively” with the G20 negotiations.

“There must be a level playing field so that all creditors agree to the same key parameters,” she said. “But with that in place there is always a need for bilateral discussions between each creditor and debtor nation, and China could work within that framework. They are very much involved and I think they will be part of an agreement.”

There’s now a growing recognition among G20 . . . that it’s a survival game, you cannot fix your own house alone . . . this virus doesn’t know borders

She said several creditor nations, including China, had pressed for the IMF, World Bank and other multilateral lenders to join others in freezing debt repayments.

The IIF, which represents about 450 firms in the global financial services industry, has also called on private creditors “to forbear payment default for the poorest and most vulnerable countries significantly affected by Covid-19 and related economic turbulence for a specified time period, without waiving the payment obligation”.

Ms Renaud Basso said she was confident that a voluntary standstill by private creditors would be agreed.

The G20 official said governments would not pressure private investors to offer poorer nations relief, saying it could distort markets.

“We would welcome any voluntary action by the private holders, but getting into the private holders has a lot of complications and legal ramifications,” the official said. “You cannot force individual investors to waive their rights. That could distort the markets, and could have the negative consequences of liquidity problems. They would not lend if they see any sign that they can be forced to let go of their assets.”

The G20 nations are also discussing how to make further funding available to multilateral institutions, like the IMF, in the knowledge that the current funding will not be sufficient.

“What is available now deals with the immediate needs, there are steps being taken to look at what additional resources we need,” the G20 official said.

The official added that while previously the G20 members considered support to lower income nations as more humanitarian support, “this time it’s different”.

“There’s now a growing recognition among G20 . . . that it’s a survival game, you cannot fix your own house alone . . . this virus doesn’t know borders,” the official said. “So what may be seen as difference of opinions, still issues to negotiate, is not about whether we should or shouldn’t, it’s about what’s the right approach.”

 

[zahir]

A short video on South Korea’s approach.

 

[donkyboy]

Let us all pray covid away