J. EDWARD LES, MD -- COVID-19? Rampant misinformation, relentless spin, and wacky thinking amplified by social media hasn’t brought clarity, suffice to say
In the winter of 2017 two 17-year-olds with a
3-D printer created a little spinny thingy called the Fidget360 and promoted it
on social media.
Fidget spinners quickly went viral. And
because there was no patent, dozens of companies hurried to produce knockoffs.
By May of 2017 the little gadgets accounted
for 17% of all online toy sales and had spun their way into every nook and
cranny of the globe. Every kid I tended to in the emergency department of
my hospital was spinning one of the plastic gizmos—and more often than not, so
were their parents.
But then—just as quickly as it started—it was
over. By September of 2017 fidget spinners had vanished, consigned to
trash bins and forgotten corners of toy rooms and closets.
There’s a word we use to describe this sort
of phenomenon, where something spreads quickly throughout an entire country,
continent, or the whole world and affects an exceptionally high proportion of
the population before burning itself out.
That word is pandemic, of course. We use it to
describe massive outbreaks of disease, typically, not outbreaks of fidget
spinners.
It’s a scary term—one that conjures up images
of the Spanish flu, which wiped out up to 100 million people in 1918 (five
percent of the world’s population); or of the bubonic plague, which ravaged the
globe in the 14th century, killing half of Europe’s people and
knocking the world population down to 350 million from 475 million.
... we must acknowledge that stopping this virus is like trying to stop the wind. We must acknowledge what any seasoned epidemiologist can tell you: viral pandemics burn themselves out—but only after millions of people get sick and recover, freshly equipped with powerful antibodies to the virus ...
Not all pandemics are as lethal as the Black
Death or the Spanish flu, mind you. The H1N1 influenza pandemic of 2009,
for instance, killed approximately half a million people—a big number, but
roughly on par with the death toll extracted by the seasonal flu each year.
Another pandemic—COVID-19—now threatens the
world. This time the viral assassin is a novel coronavirus that
originated in China.
How much danger we are in remains a matter of
intense debate. Death toll predictions run the gamut from the ridiculous
to the obtuse, from epic eradication of mankind on the scale imagined by
novelist Stephen King in The
Stand, all the way to: “Nothing to see here, folks, keep calm and
carry on.”
Rampant misinformation, relentless spin, and
wacky thinking amplified by social media hasn’t brought clarity, suffice to
say. U.S. President Donald Trump labeled the coronavirus a Democratic
conspiracy. Paranoid wing-nuts blather on about Chinese bio-weapons.
Some people blame a vengeful God; others warn shrilly (and wrongly) of the risk
of mail from China or of the danger of eating in Chinese restaurants.
I wrote
about the coronavirus outbreak on February 20, seemingly an eternity
ago. At the time I wasn’t overly stressed—just a bit fidgety.
Twelve thousand people were infected and 250 were dead, pretty much all in the
epicentre of Hubei province in China; but it seemed like a drop in the viral
bucket compared to the seasonal flu, which takes out up to 600,000 people
globally per year.
Plus, after initially dismissing the virus as
a threat, the Chinese had reacted with unprecedented measures, locking down
Wuhan and a slew of other cities, cordoning off Hubei province, shutting down
mass transit, closing airports, and confining 60 million people to their
homes—berating those who dared to venture outside with government drones.
It seems to have worked for the
Chinese. Epidemiologic data show that the virus continued to spread
post-lockdown, but primarily among families already infected
pre-quarantine. Community spread was stopped in its tracks.
The number of cases in Hubei province
ultimately crested at around 67,000, with 2900 dead. (Just a smattering
of new cases are being reported.)
By the time the Chinese instituted their
draconian quarantine measures, of course, the viral dandelion had gone to seed:
infectious spores of coronavirus had already blown around the world.
Still, the worst-case scenario for Canada, I
surmised, surely couldn’t be worse than what Hubei endured.
Applying Hubei’s experience—a population
infection rate in that province of only 0.11% (67,000 divided by 60 million)
and a case fatality rate of 4.3%— to Canada’s population of 37 million would
mean roughly 41,000 cases and 1750 dead in Canada.
Bad enough—but seasonal influenza kills 3500
Canadians every year; traffic accidents kill 2000 people.
So not a huge deal, right?
But here’s the problem: Canada is not China.
Neither is the U.S., or any of the other countries where coronaviral spores
have taken root.
In one sense, at least, that’s a good thing:
our air is much cleaner, and far fewer of us smoke cigarettes, leaving us with
lungs presumably less hospitable to invading coronavirus.
However, we are not going to quarantine
entire Canadian cities and provinces (it’s too late for that now anyway).
We’re not going to close airports and shut
down mass transit.
We’re not going to chase our citizens with
drones.
We’re not going to mandate that entire
populations stay in their houses for weeks or months on end.
And we’re certainly not going to be as good
at keeping infected patients alive—not
because we lack the know-how, but because we lack adequate space,
supplies, ventilators, and personnel.
The WHO’s Bruce Aylward, commenting on the
case fatality rate observed in China, had this to say about the regime’s
efforts:
“That’s the mortality in China — and they
find cases fast, get them isolated, in treatment, and supported early. Second
thing they do is ventilate dozens in the average hospital; they use
extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (removing blood from a person’s body and
oxygenating their red blood cells) when ventilation doesn’t work. This is
sophisticated health care. They have a survival rate for this disease I would
not extrapolate to the rest of the world. What you’ve seen in Italy and Iran is
that a lot of people are dying.”
Canada may do better than Italy and
Iran. But our hospitals are already stuffed to the gills (and people
won’t stop suffering from heart attacks and strokes and trauma and cancer just
because COVID-19 is kicking around.)
We can’t, like the Chinese, build enormous
hospitals almost overnight specifically for coronavirus patients. (We
can’t even build a pipeline in this country.)
Does all of the above mean we’re screwed? Not
at all.
Certainly, we can’t do what the Chinese
did. Nor should we try. The Italians are trying, and their country is descending
into unmitigated chaos.
We must adopt a radically different
strategy.
First, we must acknowledge that stopping this
virus is like trying to stop the wind. We must acknowledge what any seasoned
epidemiologist can tell you: viral pandemics burn themselves out—but only after
millions of people get sick and recover, freshly equipped with powerful antibodies
to the virus.
The resulting collective population
immunity—called herd immunity—prevents the virus from hopping from person to
person to person with epidemic speed, and the pandemic dies out.
There are no other options.
Well, there are two, but neither are on the
near horizon: complete eradication of the virus (as mankind did with smallpox),
or the development of an effective vaccine.
We must
let this pandemic burn itself out. But equally importantly, we must control how that
happens.
Those most vulnerable
to the deadly effects of this virus — the elderly and the medically compromised
— must
self-isolate, while we allow the virus to do what it does among the rest of us.
That doesn’t mean we shouldn’t continue to
protect ourselves sensibly, just as we do from the flu: wash your hands, cough
into your elbow, stay home if you are sick, learn the “Ebola handshake”, and
stay away from hospitals and clinics unless truly necessary.
But we must not close the schools, the airports, the
theatres, the restaurants.
We must not
allow the economic infrastructure of the world to be destroyed, and
society completely upended, by a viral pandemic that targets primarily the
elderly and medically compromised.
The novel coronavirus has an R0 value of 2.2,
which means that each person can infect 2.2 others. The case fatality
rate across all of China was 2.3% (it’s higher in Wubei province and outside of
China—it’s over 4% in Italy, for example). Those numbers, ominously,
aren’t much different from the Spanish flu.
... we must shout this message of self-quarantine from the rooftops, loudly and repeatedly, so that the elderly and medically compromised understand that if they do not comply, they stand a high risk of dying ...
Knowing that most of the world cannot
replicate China’s totalitarian lock-down to control viral spread,
epidemiologists estimate that between 30-60% of the world could end up infected
with coronavirus.
Wait a minute, you say: Hubei province
had a population infection rate of only 0.11%!! That’s a far cry from
30%!
Sure. But the Asian elephant in the
room is that China, by its draconian quarantine measures, prevented community
spread—which also very effectively prevented
the development of herd immunity.
When Wuhan and her 15 sister cities are
re-opened -- when the stranglehold on Hubei province is released -- when the
airports re-open and the trains start running and commerce restarts -- we will
see an enormous second wave of infection in China. It cannot be
otherwise—the virus is not
gone. Because the Chinese prevented community spread from
continuing for two months, most of their population is not immune—there is no herd immunity.
It was the second
wave of the Spanish flu, remember, that killed most of the people in that
pandemic. And China is on the cusp of a second wave of COVID-19.
We must not allow this to happen globally
with COVID-19.
If epidemiologists are correct even at the
low end of their estimates—30% of the world’s population infected and a case
fatality rate (also at the low end) of 2.3%—that means 53 million dead: roughly
255,000 of them in Canada (73 times the death toll of the seasonal flu).
Horrific stuff. But the Achilles heel
of the coronavirus is that it primarily kills old people. And we can exploit
that.
The Spanish flu killed across demographics,
disproportionately killing those in the age categories of 20 to 40, over 65,
and younger than five. The high mortality in healthy people was a unique
feature of this pandemic – as was the case with the 2009 H1N1 pandemic.
But that’s not the case with COVID-19: it kills mostly the
elderly and the infirm. The mortality rate in those over 80 is 15%; in
those over 70, eight percent; and in those over 60 it’s just under four
percent. In Italy, where the death toll stood at 366 as of Sunday, the average age of those who have died
is 81.
At younger ages the mortality rate drops off
dramatically – the vast majority of younger people, especially kids, recover
without incident, most of them with mild or no signs of illness.
But—and this is key—even though children (and
healthy adults) may be completely symptomatic or have only mild symptoms after
they acquire coronavirus, they still carry the virus: they are vectors, much
like the rats that spread the bubonic plague in the 14th century.
We are not going to exterminate the children
as we did the rats—but we can take real steps to mitigate the risk of viral
spread.
We must sequester the elderly and the
medically compromised away from the rest of the population. They must
avoid crowds and travel and children—and likely until August or later.
We cannot do this by decree—that will never
work. But we must shout this message of self-quarantine from the
rooftops, loudly and repeatedly, so that the elderly and medically compromised
understand that if they do not
comply, they stand a high risk of dying.
At the same time, it is critical that we
protect heath care workers and those who are medically at-risk in hospitals: we
must enact systems of external triage (a.k.a. drive-through emergency medicine),
external treatment sites, telemedicine, mobile treatment teams, and so on.
These measures are critical to reduce the
death rate, to lessen the coming incredible strain on our health care system,
and to buy time until we either have herd immunity or a new and effective
vaccine.
To be clear, I’m not downplaying the risk of
infection among the young and healthy. Even in young and healthy people
the coronavirus is potentially 10 times more deadly than the flu. But the
risk of serious illness from influenza among the young and healthy is extremely
low—and ten times extremely low is still very, very low.
Our politicians and medical leaders have
dropped the ball on this. They’ve been fidgeting while this virus burns,
spinning confused and garbled messages of half measures and wrong measures.
It’s time to stop the fidgeting, to do away
with the spin, and to lead with strength and clarity.
- We must not allow the world to succumb to chaos.
- There is no need to panic.
- We should remain calm and carry on.
- But nor should we keep our head in the sand.
As Bruce Aylward put it: “Get organized,
get educated, and get working.”
Comments
Post a Comment