Just a few quick updates today, as things were busy at work.
(1) The time line for the epidemic keeps getting pushed back further? According to an ABC exclusive report , satellite imagery of parking lots of Wuhan hospitals in October 2019, compared to the same month the previous year, indicate unusual levels of activity. Moreover, internet searches on Baidu at the time supposedly had a number of queries for flu/SARS like symptoms. I am not wholly convinced, but who knows?
(2) An internal German report from “Referat KM4” of the BMI (Federal Interior Ministry), that was strongly critical of the “overreaction” of the German government to the pandemic, was leaked to the press. A PDF of the full text is here: (accompanying provenance info): Powerline has a summary in English. A little googling turned up an organigram in which KM4 shows up as “Schutz kritischer Infrastrukturen” (protection of critical infrastructures), one of six Referate (idiomatically: desks, sub-departments) in the department Krisenmanagement und Bevolkungsschutz (Crisis Management and Population Protection).
The report argues that mortality is a small fraction of the annual all-cause mortality in Germany [of course, this argument is open to the “well, that is so because we took action quickly” argument], and indeed, worldwide excess mortality at the time of writing (May 11) was one-sixth of that during the 2017/8 seasonal flu epidemic.
I haven’t waded through the entire report, which is nearly 100 pages long, but it is preceded by a 2-page Kurzfassung (“short version”, idiomatically “Executive Summary”). Item 3 of the Executive Summary speaks of a “Fehlalarm” (false alarm) and laments:
The fact that the suspected false alarm remained undetected for weeks has a major reason
that the existing framework for action of the crisis unit and the
crisis management in a pandemic do not include appropriate detection tools that
automatically trigger an alarm and initiate the immediate cancellation of measures
as soon as either a pandemic warning turned out to be a false alarm or
it is foreseeable that collateral damage — particularly in terms of destruction of human lives — threatens to become larger than the health consequences and especially the lethal potential of the disease under consideration.
The report explicitly distances itself from economic cost-benefit calculations and, in item 4, argues that collateral damage in lives is larger than the damage of the original epidemic.
Probably the most inflammatory sentence of the executive summary is “One reproach [from the public] might be that, in the Corona crisis, the State has shown itself to be one of the greatest producers of fake news” (Ein Vorwurf könnte lauten: Der Staat hat sich in der Coronakrise als einer der größten fake-news-Produzenten erwiesen.)”
German governmental authorities have tried to dismiss this report as “one person’s opinion”, but — agree with the report or not — it seems to be a good deal more than that.
(3) Dr. Seheult looks at another hydroxychloroquine clinical trial: this time it looks at a prophylactic regime.
A group of about 800 patients who reported high-risk contact (nearer than 6th for more than 10 minutes) with a known COVID-19 carrier was split into two arms. One arm was given a 5-day hydroxychloroquine (HOcq) regimen, the other a placebo. Interestingly, and noted by Dr. Seheult, again no zinc!
The percentage of people who developed COVID19 was somewhat lower in the HOcq arm (11.8%) than in the placebo arm (14.3%), but with this sample size, there is about one chance in three the difference is due to chance. (What he didn’t highlight is that, even with high-risk contacts, the risk of contagion is much lower than you might intuitively expect.)
A fairly large proportion of test subjects in the HOcq arm reported gastrointestinal complaints, but interestingly, no severe adverse events were reported. (HOcq is known to lead to QT-prolongation: in combination with other drugs that do this, such as the macrolide antibiotic azithromycin, the cumulative effect may lead to heart arrhythmias.)
Anyway, let Dr. Seheult explain it himself:
(4) Dr. Mike Hansen discusses differences between autopsy reports of COVID19 deaths and deaths from seasonal flu