Posted on

Thailand sees apparent success treating Coronavirus with drug cocktail

Bangkok: A Chinese woman infected with the new coronavirus showed a dramatic improvement after she was treated with a cocktail of anti-virals used to treat flu & HIV, Thailand’s health ministry said Sunday. The 71-year-old patient tested negative for the virus 48 hours after Thai doctors administered the combination, doctor Kriengsak Attipornwanich said during the ministry’s daily press briefing.

“The lab result of positive on the coronavirus turned negative in 48 hours,” Kriengsa said.

“From being exhausted before, she could sit up in bed 12 hours later.”

The doctors combined the anti-flu drug oseltamivir with lopinavir and ritonavir, anti-virals used to treat HIV, Kriengsak said, adding the ministry was awaiting research results to prove the findings.

The news comes as the new virus claimed its first life outside China — a 44-year-old Chinese man who died in the Philippines — while the death toll in China has soared above 300.

Thailand so far has detected 19 confirmed cases of the virus believed to have originated in the central Chinese city of Wuhan, which is under lockdown.

That is the second highest number of cases outside of China, with Japan recording 20.

So far, eight patients in Thailand have recovered and returned home, while 11 remain in hospital.

In a video released Sunday, health minister Anutin Charnvirakul visited a patient from Wuhan who had recovered from the coronavirus, chatting with her amicably in Mandarin as she thanked him and the medical staff.

Thai authorities are trying to balance screening of inbound Chinese visitors with the economic needs of its tourist sector, which is heavily reliant on arrivals from the mainland.

Messages of support saying “Our hearts to Wuhan” in English, Chinese and Thai were plastered on a Bangkok mall popular with tourists.

The bulk of confirmed cases have been Chinese visitors to Thailand, but on Thursday the kingdom recorded its first human-to-human transmission when a Thai taxi driver was diagnosed with the disease.

The taxi driver had not travelled to China, but may have had contact with tourists.

Thailand’s government is also battling public criticism that it has been slow to evacuate scores of its citizens from Hubei province, at the centre of the outbreak.

Anutin said evacuation would happen on Tuesday, and the returnees would be quarantined for 14 days. (AFP) IND

Posted on

Tracking coronavirus: Map, data and timeline

The table below shows confirmed cases of coronavirus (2019-nCoV) in China and other countries. To see a distribution map and a timeline, scroll down. There are currently 17,393 confirmed cases worldwide, including 362 fatalities.

We need your help. Click here to join Patreon to support our work.

Last update: 3 February 2020 at 1:48 a.m. ET

MAINLAND CHINACasesDeathsNotesLinks
Hubei province
(including Wuhan)
11,1773501,223 serious, 478 criticalSource
Zhejiang province724048 serious, 12 criticalSource
Guangdong province683057 serious, 20 criticalSource
Henan province566230 serious, 14 criticalSource
Hunan province521058 seriousSource
Anhui province40804 criticalSource
Jiangxi province391034 seriousSource
Chongqing300223 serious, 6 criticalSource
Jiangsu province27102 seriousSource
Sichuan province255*19 criticalSource
Shandong province246016 serious, 1 criticalSource
Beijing191110 criticalSource
Shanghai20317 serious, 6 criticalSource
Fujian province179013 serious, 7 criticalSource
Shaanxi province12801+ seriousSource
Guangxi Region12705 serious, 3 criticalSource
Yunnan province10907 serious, 3 criticalSource
Hebei province113112 seriousSource
Heilongjiang province118215 seriousSource
Liaoning province7306 seriousSource
Hainan province71110 seriousSource
Shanxi province6605 seriousSource
Tianjin56015 serious, 3 criticalSource
Gansu province5104 serious, 1 criticalSource
Guizhou province4606 serious, 4 criticalSource
Ningxia Region3104 seriousSource
Inner Mongolia3401+ seriousSource
Jilin province3104 serious, 1 criticalSource
Xinjiang2406 serious, 2 criticalSource
Qinghai province1301 serious, 7 stableSource
Tibet10StableSource
TOTAL17,2073612,296 serious
475 recovered
21,558 suspected

REGIONSCasesDeathsNotesLinks
Hong Kong150Source
Taiwan100Source
Macau80Source
TOTAL3300 serious

INTERNATIONALCasesDeathsNotesLinks
Japan20*0Source
Thailand1907 recoveredSource
Singapore180All stableSource
South Korea150Source
Australia122 recoveredSource
Germany100Source
Malaysia80StableSource
United States110Source
Vietnam801 recoveredSource
France602 seriousSource
UAE50StableSource
Canada40Source
England20Source
Russia20Source
Philippines21Source
India30StableSource
Italy20Source
Nepal10Source
Cambodia10Source
Sri Lanka101 recoveredSource
Finland10Source
Sweden10Source
Spain10Source
TOTAL15312 serious

Notes

  • The number of cases in Sichuan province, China, includes 1 asymptomatic case. This case is not included in the government’s official count.
  • The number of cases as counted by the Japanese government does not include 5 asymptomatic cases.
  • 1 suspected case in Botswana is still under investigation. (Source)

Timeline (GMT)

3 February

  • 06:48: 1 new case in India. (Source)
  • 06:42: 4 new cases in Yunnan province, China. (Source)
  • 06:40: 10 new cases in Shanghai. (Source)
  • 05:11: 3 new cases in Liaoning province, China. (Source)
  • 05:10: 2 new cases in Tianjin, China. (Source)
  • 03:16: 1 new case in Vietnam. (Source)
  • 03:15: 20 new cases in Fujian province, China. (Source)
  • 02:33: 7 new cases in Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region, China. (Source)
  • 02:25: 6 new cases in Tianjin, China. (Source)
  • 02:13: 12 new cases in Shaanxi province, China. (Source)
  • 02:09: 3 new cases in Ningxia Hui Autonomous Region, China. (Source)
  • 02:07: 3 new cases in Hainan province, China. The other cases in the press release were previously reported. (Source)
  • 01:30: 2 new cases in Qinghai province, China. Two other cases in the press release were previously reported. (Source)
  • 01:23: 58 new cases in Hunan province, China. (Source)
  • 01:18: 51 new cases in Guangdong province, China. The other cases in the press release were previously reported. (Source)
  • 01:16: 23 new cases in Heilongjiang province, China. (Source)
  • 01:10: 59 new cases in Jiangxi province, China. One previous case was discarded. (Source)
  • 01:04: 63 new cases in Zhejiang province, China. (Source)
  • 01:02: 3 new cases in Xinjiang Region, China. (Source)
  • 01:01: 16 new cases in Shandong province, China. (Source)
  • 01:00: 35 new cases in Jiangsu province, China. (Source)
  • 00:59: 8 new cases in Jilin province, China. (Source)
  • 00:58: 23 new cases in Sichuan province, China. (Source)
  • 00:57: 73 new cases in Henan province, China. (Source)
  • 00:56: 68 new cases in Anhui province, China. (Source)
  • 00:55: 2 new cases in California, United States. (Source)
  • 00:33: 8 new cases in Guizhou province, China. (Source)
  • 00:06: 9 new cases in Hebei province, China. (Source)
  • 00:00: 16 new cases in Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region, China. (Source)

2 February

  • 23:57: 11 new cases in Shanghai. (Source)
  • 23:54: China’s National Health Commission reports 593 new cases across the mainland. Their locations have not yet been disclosed. (Source)
  • 23:35: 25 new cases and 1 new death in Chongqing, China. (Source)
  • 23:05: 10 new cases in Shanxi province, China. (Source)
  • 22:08: 2,103 new cases and 56 new deaths in Hubei province, China. (Source)
  • 21:34: 1 new case in California, United States. (Source)
  • 16:04: 11 new cases in Gansu province, China. (Source)
  • 14:55: 1 new cases in Liaoning province, China. (Source)
  • 13:38: 1 new case in Hong Kong. (Source)
  • 10:18: 6 new cases in Yunnan province, China. (Source)
  • 10:03: 2 new cases in Germany. (Source)
  • 08:51: 13 new cases in Chongqing, China. (Source)
  • 08:50: 5 new cases in Liaoning province, China. (Source)
  • 08:44: 5 new cases in Shandong province, China. (Source)
  • 08:41: 8 new cases in Beijing. (Source)
  • 08:30: 28 new cases in Guangdong province, China. (Source)
  • 06:57: 6 new cases in Hainan province, China. (Source)
  • 06:51: 6 new cases in Jilin province, China. (Source)
  • 06:44: 4 new cases in Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region, China. (Source)
  • 06:32: 15 new cases in Beijing. (Source)
  • 06:25: 15 new cases in Shaanxi province, China. (Source)
  • 06:06: 15 new cases in Fujian province, China. (Source)
  • 06:05: 5 new cases in Shanghai. (Source)
  • 06:00: 7 new cases in Tianjin, China. (Source 1Source 2)
  • 05:44: 1 new case in Macau. (Source)
  • 05:15: 2 new cases in Qinghai province, China. (Source)
  • 05:10: 8 new cases in Yunnan province, China. (Source)
  • 05:00: 74 new cases in Hunan province, China. (Source)
  • 04:50: 2 new cases in Ningxia Hui Autonomous Region, China. (Source)
  • 04:49: 15 new cases in Heilongjiang province, China. (Source)
  • 04:48: 62 new cases in Zhejiang province, China. (Source)
  • 04:47: 47 new cases in Jiangxi province, China. (Source)
  • 04:46: 69 new cases in Guangdong province, China. (Source)
  • 04:45: 43 new cases in Anhui province, China. (Source)
  • 04:44: 34 new cases in Jiangsu province, China. (Source)
  • 04:43: 19 new cases in Shandong province, China. (Source)
  • 04:42: 24 new cases in Sichuan province, China. (Source)
  • 04:41: 3 new cases in Xinjiang Region, China. (Source)
  • 04:40: 1 new case in Vietnam. (Source)
  • 03:48: 1 new case in India. (Source)
  • 02:37: 1 new case, a fatality, in the Philippines. This is the first death outside China. (Source)
  • 00:55: 3 new cases in South Korea. (Source)
  • 00:32: 71 new cases in Henan province, China. (Source)
  • 00:29: 9 new cases in Guizhou province, China. (Source)
  • 00:02: 8 new cases in Hebei province, China. (Source)
  • 00:00: 11 new cases in Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region, China. (Source)

For the full timeline, click here.

Charts

Posted on

CoronaVirus – FAQ, misconceptions, information, from a statistical perspective

Hi, I am in the statistics field and have been working directly on the nCoV-2019 outbreak with local and international teams for the last 2 weeks. I’m based in the US but speak to local doctors, administrators, WHO advisory teams, and academics all around the world on the virus. I haven’t had time to really do this post until now since it’s been pretty much nonstop 18 hour days for most of us since the outbreak started (also because of the time difference).

First the disclaimer: This is not medical advice. I am not a medical doctor or virologist (though I work side by side with teams of both). I will not reveal any non-public information, both for privacy and legal reasons. I am not acting in any official capacity. Any views I may present are my own, based on my work in the space, and may not be peer-reviewed or condoned by official bodies. I will not engage in any political discussions.

Now I’ve seen a lot of very common misconceptions about nCoV. Partially this is due to the media distorting, misinterpreting, and cherry-picking data to fit a narrative. Partially this is due to polarization of the “doomsday” crowd and the “it’s ok” crowd. Mostly it is due to the general public having not enough understanding of medicine and statistics, and lacking the tools to interpret the data/news. I want to clear some of these common questions up and provide some good resources and charts.

Final Edit: I didn’t know this excellent thread was going on while I was writing this. Please consult that as well, as it contains excellent responses from many, many more experts!

Common questions/concerns/misconceptions FAQ:

1) What is the incubation period? Why do I keep hearing 14 days? Is this scary?

The incubation period so far shows a period of 2-7 days with a 95% confidence interval, with median cases at 4.8 days[1] The 14 day limit is the current maximum theorized incubation period from a Zhejiang case study. The exact maximum is difficult to know because this is based on patient survey and contact reconstruction and prone to error, but 14 days is the “safe” upper bound so far. This figure is similar to the ~5 day incubation for SARS. [2] There is no need to panic about this as it’s very normal viral behavior.

2) But what about asymptomatic transmission? Is this worth worrying over?

So to be clear, so far over 95% of patients in most studies do eventually display symptoms. [3] However, transmission during the asymptomatic incubation stage above has also been confirmed by local and international studies. I believe the US decision to vastly heighten travel restrictions on China last night was largely due to this German confirmation. Ironically US CDC previously did not believe Chinese warnings this was happening.

While confirming asymptomatic transmission is important, it is not rare viral behavior, especially in the latter stages of incubation where viral load is high. Currently, we have no statistical evidence that there is a major risk from asymptomatic spreading. The incubation period is short enough that if this were a major dynamic, the end patients would have already shown up in the statistics.

3) What about super-spreaders? Why do I hear this has spread to 14 people from one infected?

Actually this is one of the positives about this virus so far. Unlike SARS, we have had no evidence of super-spreading occurring rapidly. What has been confirmed so far is 1 case of a “super spreader” which in epidemiology means a carrier that has infected at least 8 people. [4]

Now let’s study this one case so far. It was honestly a VERY special case. Several rare factors all compounded to create the conditions for him to “superspread” nCoV to 14 healthcare professionals:

  1. He lied about having had lots of exposure to the Wuhan Seafood market
  2. He was admitted to the hospital because of pre-existing conditions requiring neurosurgery, before the danger and extent of the nCoV outbreak was known to the staff there. So proper quarantine procedures weren’t followed
  3. He required sputum suction, tracheotomy and tracheal intubation, which all unfortunately expose medical staff to a LOT of his body fluids.

So in the current opinion of the epidemiology community looking at nCoV cases, this is a fairly rare instance and unlikely to be repeated outside of a very specialized setting. There is no need to be worried about this vector yet.

4) What is the R0? Is it 2? 5? 12? What does this mean for the viral evolution?

Since popular media (Contagion, Pandemic) really brought the concept of R0 into public focus, there’s a lot of confusion about this simplification of statistical methods. Put simply, R0 is a variable used in theoretical epidemiology analysis, derived from the data through various mathematical methods. It is not an intrinsic property of the virus, nor is it set in stone – R0 will change as properties of the outbreak, and our containment efforts, adjust it. There’s a good further discussion of R0 here, but generally, without understanding the underlying methods that led to the calculation of a specific R0, you shouldn’t overly focus on this number, nor compare it or make conclusions based purely on it.

As best as our models can tell, the R0 of the virus was well above 2-3 in the beginning, where it was infecting people in Wuhan through the Seafood market and across many vectors before broad awareness. This was from Dec of last year to maybe early January. Since increasing awareness and containment factors, the R(t) has likely declined to below 2, and optimistically will head below 1. We are awaiting data from Chinese New Year containment to see the lagged reporting data, but current extreme measure will have a major effect on the outbreak, but is unrealistic to maintain for long. The plan is to identify, treat, and isolate the vast majority of cases before life and travel normalizes.

Edit: to be clear here, I am not suggesting that R0 is currently 1 or anything like that. I am trying to communicate the point that R(t) is not fixed over time, but a function of our response to the virus. I am hoping that current containment measures will be enough to bring the R(t) to 1 or below, as is the case with any epidemic once it’s under control and declining.

5) Why is the official case count so low? Why do I keep hearing larger numbers of infected? Is there a government cover-up?

The official “confirmed cases” number is not meant to be a “live” count of the # of infected or even identified infected individuals, and the professional community understands this. This number is exactly what it says on the tin, eg, this is the official number we have been able to test and confirm to our satisfaction. In our current fast-response information-driven society, we are used to having access to immediate, live data, and we expect such. The fact we have any confirmation at all at this point is actually a miracle. Back in the days of SARS, no accurate testing existed for many months after the outbreak, so ALL numbers were estimates!

Now due to Chinese bureaucracy and how the confirmations work in China, lack of supplies and personnel when Wuhan hospitals were overwhelmed last week, and difficulty producing the test kits, there is a lag time of up to 12 days to someone being suspected and able to be tested in Wuhan. I think this week they’re working hard on bringing that lag down, and the lag is a lot shorter in other provinces due to still-functioning logistics, but it’s still about 5 days at least in almost all of China, due to the multiple bureaucratic checks they force it to go through before it’s deemed “confirmed enough”. There’s a trade-off between accuracy (yes, they wouldn’t want to make an embarrassing mistake misdiagnosing or mistaking identity) and speed.

In the rest of the world, the delay can be very fast, ~1 day response to 3 or 4 days as well, depending on the country’s infrastructure and availability of test kits/proximity to CDC center that’s stocking it.

So really the way to think about the number of confirmed cases in China is, this is the number of cases that we can confirm from about 7-10 days ago. This is how we’re roughly working with the data. I think most laypeople are just assuming this is a “live” number which is just not the case, it takes time from patient intake to screening to testing to confirmation to double checking.

6) What about deaths? Have a lot of people died? Why is the official death rate so low? Is there a cover-up?

It is true that the death rate reported by China is heavily misleading. But this is NOT due to an active cover-up. There are 2 main structural reasons:

  1. This is primarily due to the structural method of how China records deaths on their certificate. It is established policy/practice in China to record the final cause of death, rather than all existing conditions and overlapping factors.

For example, if a (say 85 yo) patient in the US with diabetes and an existing heart condition gets nCoV, is admitted in the hospital, is confirmed with nCoV, then dies of heart failure, he is recorded as dying of nCoV AND heart failure with other complications. However if the same patient dies in China, he would only be recorded of dying by heart failure.

This is a well-known issue with China and co-morbid diseases. I don’t agree with it, I wouldn’t do it, but I don’t run China. But this is not a new method they made up to try to hide deaths here, it’s just the way it’s done. This has led to jokes in the epidemiology community that “it’s impossible to die of flu in China”, because they basically don’t record any deaths where the patient has flu. See here this recent article from the Global Times, which is one of China’s state-sponsored newspapers.

This is not something even China is really trying to hide. They just tell us, sorry, our doctors just do things this way, we have no interest in changing it.

2) The other reason is, right now if a patient is awaiting test results (turnaround can be 3-5 days in China still), and passes away in the meantime, they are not recorded as nCoV. I guess this I can understand, I think similar policies in US, we don’t like to go back and edit death certificates because it’s a huge hassle.

Ok so – definitely, the death count is too low. We all agree there. But before you freak out, there’s a bright spot. We CAN also put an upper bound with a fair amount of certainty on the general death rate. How? Because there have been enough cases reported globally already, and enough data from the patients OUTSIDE of China, that we can tell the death rate is NOT anywhere near 10% with a strong degree of certainty (many patients have recovered, and are just awaiting the viral test all-clear before they can be discharged. Most other patients are in stable and recovering condition).

Edit: I’m going to take out the actual back of the envelope illustration I was using here, because it’s been rightfully criticized as being over-simplistic to the point of misleading. I still believe that the fact that global death rates remain very low is encouraging and can be used to remove extremely high death rate arguments, however, even adjusted for quality of care and health of the traveling population.

7) Great, so we don’t know the number infected or the number of fatalities. Why am I refreshing the number repeatedly?

Well, it’s ok that we don’t know all the exact specifics of a virus while we’re fighting it. It’s the same as every past pandemic. However as long as we can keep making good approximations, we can get closer and closer to the truth with each iteration and develop the best methods for fighting it. It’s important for professionals to understand the limitations, systematic errors, and other adjustments in the data so we can best utilize it. Laypeople shouldn’t pay too much attention to the data releases, but if you are still curious, there are some cool novel ways researchers are using to get to the number approximations.

8) <Removed>

Edit: I’m taking this out under good advisement. I was clearly going for an optimistic skew by this point in the writing, but better to provide no data than provide flimsy data that could be misleading.

9) I’m still not convinced, I hear there’s a huge government cover-up, mass graves, people dropping dead on the street, invisible super-carriers and we are days away from complete anarchy!

That’s not a question, but if you are still worried, just remember the basic law of conspiracies: The more people involved, the less likely it is to keep secret. Currently the outbreak is being carefully scrutinized by thousands of professionals across the world, as well as about a billion very worried Chinese citizens. The simple fact is that extreme assumptions about deaths and coverups just don’t fit with the most basic math of the distributed data we have seen in the international population. By now, if the apocalyptic assumptions were true, we would be either seeing a LOT more international infections, and/or a LOT more deaths. Unless you believe that the entirety of global response efforts are “in” on the deception and trying to kill the world.

10) Fine, I’m not going to buy a fallout shelter yet, but what can I do?

If you are not in China, there’s not much to do. Keep an eye on the news, but don’t panic or make drastic decisions. This and this are nice articles about how to keep safe. If you’re unsure, seek help from a healthcare professional. Overall, how much preventive care depends on what level of risk you are personally comfortable with. If you’re most comfortable doing a little more prevention, that’s ok too. There’s no one-size fits all answer for how much you should react.

11) This is all well and good, but surely something worries you and other professionals too? There’s more draconian responses announced every day, surely it’s in response to a real risk?

While I can’t speak to the policy response choices of every country, generally it’s become politically difficult to resist a harsher response, because of the fear and attention the virus has generated. While the economic damage is real, the tail risks from a perceived lack of response is too politically damaging, so most countries are responding with forceful measures. From a disease control viewpoint this is great, because it means the virus is that much more likely to be contained.

What I’m most worried about now is still whether self-sustaining infection locales are being propagated in Chinese cities outside of Wuhan. This data is still inconclusive as of now, and bears a lot of attention. Most CDC policy is watching this, because if the virus was not contained in Hubei, then the next easiest border is to contain it in China, but doing so is an order of magnitude harder.

If you’re still with me after all those links and math – take a breather. From an epidemiological data standpoint, the virus is still in its infancy days. The fast information and news flow has allowed the coverage to ramp up much faster than any other outbreak, which is a double-edged sword for the public. There are thousands and thousands of professionals around the globe working on the dangers around the clock, often risking life and infection. Rest assured they do have your health interests in mind.

I will try to be around to answer questions as my schedule permits.