From Flu Wiki 2

Forum: Probability of A1918-like Pandemic Extremely Low-2

01 October 2006

Monotreme – at 12:59

Part 1

Probability of a 1918-like Pandemic Extremely Low - 2

Monotreme – at 13:04

First thing, let’s refrain from personal attacks. I always assume when someone launches one against me, it means the person who has launched it realizes that their arguments have failed. Personalizing a debate is a last-ditch attempt to change the subject from the facts to personalities.

Most of us know who anonymous is. I don’t think he is a troll or an agent for any government. He is very interested in financial markets and might have a conflict there. But then again, we all have agendas which may or may not be praiseworthy.

So, let’s stick to the facts and have a substantive debate on this issue.

moeb – at 13:11

ZZZZzzzzzzz

Monotreme – at 13:17

On Experts

I have never bought the idea that I should blindly trust any “expert” on any subject whatsoever. I make an unpleasant patient because I ask detailed questions about my treatment, research all the alternatives and ask my physicians to justify their choices. Same goes with how I treat plumbers, electricians, etc. Some people have a different view and prefer to find someone with a good, or at least well-known reputation, and trust that person completely. They follow that persons instructions without question. This is perhaps a matter of personal philosophy.

I certainly don’t expect anyone to take anything I say on faith. I have tried to make this point many times and in many ways but I find it is necessary to repeat it here. I do not regard myself as an expert on pandemic flu. I do regard myself as an intelligent layman who is capable of reading and analyzing information for myself. I provide links to support my opinions and read the links provided by others. I think this is true of most people who participate in this forum.

As regards to financial experts, I don’t think these people have any expertise in virology at all. Further, many don’t even have enough expertise to know which scientist that should get advice from. The gulf is too great. Now, if they spent some time on Flu Wiki and educated themselves they would be in a better position to pick scientific experts to talk to. It does sound as if some financial institutions are making progress in risk assessment, but I think they all have a ways to go. Note, once they properly understand the relevant variables, I think they will do a good job of anticipating the consequences on the financial markets, which is what they are on experts on.

Tom DVM – at 13:18

anonymous – at 12:28 Hope this formats correctly.

In that you love numbers so much though I would give you some.

Index case contacts the disease in Indonesian and starts the spread of a true Human to Human H5N1 influenza.

It takes 48 hours (2 Days) before they start to shed virus. They shed virus for 48 hours (2 days) before they show symptoms and no longer infect any one else after 24 hours of showing symptoms. (They only infect others for 3 days and that pattern holds true for all cases). With a rate of infection (RO) of 1.5 (current US government standard) the entire world is infected in 46 days. At an RO of 3 (first US government standard) total world infection in just under 30 days. With an RO of 5 (most likely standard) total world infection in 25 days. Note the curves, it starts very slow in the beginning and then explodes.

Days RO = 1.5 RO = 3 RO = 5 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 3.00 2.50 4.00 6.00 4.00 4.00 7.00 11.00 5.00 6.75 18.00 40.00 6.00 11.75 38.00 94.00 7.00 19.38 88.00 288.00 8.00 33.00 195.00 747.00 9.00 55.31 441.00 2,147.00 10.00 93.06 988.00 5,788.00 11.00 156.66 2,223.00 16,235.00 12.00 263.25 4,992.00 44,428.00 13.00 442.92 11,220.00 123,456.00 14.00 744.73 25,208.00 339,808.00 15.00 1,252.46 56,645.00 940,853.00 16.00 2,106.31 127,277.00 2,595,465.00 17.00 3,542.08 285,992.00 7,176,274.00 18.00 5,956.82 642,615.00 19,813,791.00 19.00 10,017.48 1,443,946.00 54,754,308.00 20.00 16,846.39 3,244,514.00 151,227,798.00 21.00 28,330.53 7,290,360.00 417,823,064.00 22.00 47,643.30 16,381,287.00 1,154,148,263.00 23.00 80,121.61 36,808,421.00 3,188,509,275.00 24.00 134,740.16 82,707,768.00 8,808,022,792.00 25.00 226,592.04 185,842,671.00 26.00 381,058.99 417,584,688.00 27.00 640,825.45 938,304,280.00 28.00 1,077,673.77 2,108,350,576.00 29.00 1,812,319.90 4,737,420,745.00 30.00 3,047,771.57 10,644,887,785.00 31.00 5,125,425.96 32.00 8,619,409.54 33.00 14,495,228.59 34.00 24,376,571.34 35.00 40,993,988.26 36.00 68,939,435.73 37.00 115,935,189.53 38.00 194,967,771.78 39.00 327,876,567.81 40.00 551,388,789.75 41.00 927,268,451.94 42.00 1,559,383,864.80 43.00 2,622,409,974.90 44.00 4,410,096,982.34 45.00 7,416,443,492.74 46.00

Tom DVM – at 13:20

Sorry, That last post was by ANON-451 from the other thread. It was posted after Monotreme closed it…Thanks

treyfish – at 13:28

gs then.fine.

Orlandopreppie – at 13:31

I haven’t been on the wiki since last winter so I don’t know who this “gs” is, but I’ve read this thread from the beginning. I don’t feel the need to list my credentials. I shouldn’t have to. After five months of being on this board, daily, I have built a very healthy respect for Monotreme, Tom DVM, BB, Anon_22 and most others. What they say jives with my own extensive research. At some point one has to incorporate new information into their own operating system…it is called “learning”. There is also a process each human completes around age 3, where we internalize a sense of external authority. That is, they learn that they have to “listen” to someone who actually knows better…when that doesn’t happen a human can develop one of a few “oppositional disorders”. That may be what’s happening here, I don’t know.

What I do know, is that anyone who tries to convince me to not rely on myself in any circumstance, or potential circumstance, is not working in my best interest. This includes financial or otherwise. It sounds alot like an argument I heard frequently when I was young and volumptuous. “Don’t worry baby, I’ll pull out”. Oh goody, I’ll trust my future on that. Not. I did not mean to offend anybody with the previous statement. I think you get my point.

Tom DVM – at 13:37

Orlandopreppie. Thank was a heck of a piece of writing…Thanks!!

Monotreme – at 13:44

Orlandopreppie – at 13:31

Thanks for the first paragraph, and LOL for the second.

Anon_451 – at 13:51

It did not format correctly. It was a chart showing Infection rates and spead of infection.

With an RO of 1.5 Index case would infect a total of 4.5 people who over a 46 day period would infect the entire world.

With an RO of 3, the index case would infect a total of 9 people with a total world infection in 30 days.

With an RO of 5, the index case would infect a total of 15 people with a total world infection in 25 days.

This would assume that everyone is suspessable to the diease.

Do you still want to invest in an insurance policy that you may never collect on.

Tom DVM – at 14:03

“Like the Spanish flu, if (the bird flu is) going to acquire transmissibility, it has been estimated it will take something like 10 critical mutations,” Webster said.

“So with its huge distribution in the world,” Webster said, the virus could become transmissible “anytime.”

Worse yet, Webster said, “We know surprisingly little of what constitutes the ability of the virus to transmit” human to human.

These comments were made by Dr. Webster at a conference this weekend.

Crofsblog today

Scaredy Cat – at 18:04

question for anonymous,

Are you considering 1918 a worst case or not-so-bad scenario? Your title is unclear to me.

Assuming you consider a 1918-like pandemic worst case, what evidence, other than financial market predictors (forgive my ignorance with the lingo), can you provide to support your view that a bad pandemic is unlikely?

I’d like to understand your point of view, really I would. It seems to provide you with some assurance that an H5N1 pandemic won’t be so bad, while to me it seems too narrow, too rigid to be of much use.

KimTat 20:22

Just saw this article/book release from April, may have been mentioned before and I missed it, didn’t see another place to really put this thing.

If people read this what do you expect, my jaw dropped in amazement http://www.proliberty.com/observer/20060312.htm

cactus – at 20:44
 Wow!!

 I couldn`t get through all that authors gatbage,just sorta skimmed. What a crock.
Anon_451 – at 20:46

KimT – at 20:22 I have read this information before at another site (I do not remember the name or author of the article). If we were not seeing the cases in Indo that we have seen and the use of Tami Flu in the area I may have given it some credence. However, based on the science as we know it today, I currently hold the view expressed by the author close to the Tin Hat area, HOWEVER; if sufficient data comes out to support her theory, it would be all over the news as one of the biggest scandals to ever hit the planet. IMHO

Anon_451 – at 20:46

KimT – at 20:22 I have read this information before at another site (I do not remember the name or author of the article). If we were not seeing the cases in Indo that we have seen and the use of Tami Flu in the area I may have given it some credence. However, based on the science as we know it today, I currently hold the view expressed by the author close to the Tin Hat area, HOWEVER; if sufficient data comes out to support her theory, it would be all over the news as one of the biggest scandals to ever hit the planet. IMHO

Anon_451 – at 20:47

Sorry for the double post

treyfish – at 20:57

In short,eat veggies,buy my book!

02 October 2006

anonymous – at 03:30

SC, the title is as quoted from S&P. I prefer if you always read:”1918 or worse” (i.e. more deaths in % of population in USA)

anonymous – at 04:11

I searched the web a bit more about the rating companies and their virological background and I’m disappointed. No mention of any vorological expert who consulted S&P or the other groups. All that I found is Ferguson for RMS. There is also a report from Finch, another rating company from March which is full of nonsense. (no h2h etc.) S&P,Milliman could point to David Ingram
http://www.zoominfo.com/people/ingram_david_127012708.aspx
But I couldn’t find any connection to WHO,CDC,virology, epidemiology experts. I really wonder, what these people are knowing about alpha2–6 receptors and cleavage sites and whether they think, this is not important for estimating the panflu-risk.


So what to do ? Urge your town/state/government to sell mortality bonds as long as prices are good. Buy life insurance, but from companies who are not so much engaged in life-insurance. The latter half of the table on page 20 of US-insurer fall 2006. Some Chinese companies are offering bird flu insurance. Mint Canadian Specialty Underwriters has started to test panflu insurances for companies. Are there US-companies to offer some kind of panflu insurance to privates yet ?

anonymous – at 14:48
DaysRO = 1.5RO = 3RO = 5
1.001.001.001.00
2.001.001.001.00
3.002.504.006.00
4.004.007.0011.00
5.006.7518.0040.00
6.0011.7538.0094.00
7.0019.3888.00288.00
8.0033.00195.00747.00
9.0055.31441.002,147.00
10.0093.06988.005,788.00
11.00156.662,223.0016,235.00
12.00263.254,992.0044,428.00
13.00442.9211,220.00123,456.00
14.00744.7325,208.00339,808.00
15.001,252.4656,645.00940,853.00
16.002,106.31127,277.002,595,465.00
17.003,542.08285,992.007,176,274.00
18.005,956.82642,615.0019,813,791.00
19.0010,017.481,443,946.0054,754,308.00
20.0016,846.393,244,514.00151,227,798.00
21.0028,330.537,290,360.00417,823,064.00
22.0047,643.3016,381,287.001,154,148,263.00
23.0080,121.6136,808,421.003,188,509,275.00
24.00134,740.1682,707,768.008,808,022,792.00
25.00226,592.04185,842,671.00 
26.00381,058.99417,584,688.00 
27.00640,825.45938,304,280.00 
28.001,077,673.772,108,350,576.00 
29.001,812,319.904,737,420,745.00 
30.003,047,771.5710,644,887,785.00 
31.005,125,425.96  
32.008,619,409.54  
33.0014,495,228.59  
34.0024,376,571.34  
35.0040,993,988.26  
36.0068,939,435.73  
37.00115,935,189.53  
38.00194,967,771.78  
39.00327,876,567.81  
40.00551,388,789.75  
41.00927,268,451.94  
42.001,559,383,864.80  
43.002,622,409,974.90  
44.004,410,096,982.34  
45.007,416,443,492.74  
46.00   
a’Akova – at 14:52

Oops, that was me. BTW, the table formatting codes are shown under the “text formatting rules” just under the “post” button.

enza – at 15:29

I totally agree with the title of this thread. The prob. of a1918 type pandemic is extremly low. Based on what I’m seeing in Indo, 1918 is going to look like a 24 hour cold.

Average Concerned Mom – at 15:55

I read that article on the proliberty site (osteopath dr. interviewed in March 2006; author of FOWL). It was interesting, and I actually can agree a lot with some of her points. I think Tom DM would too — she is saying not to rely on vaccines to combat flu; and that poor animal husbandry practices contribute to the spread of infectious diseases, etc.

However, her point that there have been toxins/chemicals in Vietnam and that THAT is the reason chickens there are overly susceptible to H5N1 doesn’t make sense…. what chemicals/toxins does she think were responsible for the Spanish Flu? I mean, I know chem warfare was used in WW1, but the pandemic hit everywhere, not just the soldiers.

Anyhow, notice the interview was in March. In my opinion everyone’s opinion seemed to change after May and the Karo cluster. Even the really big naysayers seemed to clam up after that. Maybe they aren’t out promoting “Pandemic Prep” but they do seem to have stopped saying it is all a conspiracy to sell vaccines. Which it might be. What do I know? But seems to me there isn’t a huge profit margin in vaccines, so why bother?

ducksoup – at 16:28

I think the table showing exponential growth of infected as a function of RO makes a useful point: we haven’t seen a takeoff in the # of cases yet. Note also that with exponential growth, the medium-term trend isn’t very sensitive to RO (i.e., for RO=1.5 takes 45 days to go global vs RO=5 in 24 days). This means that the absence of an explosion of new cases indicates that infectivity is low currently, RO<1. We’ve watched cases popping up all over Indonesia for the last 2 months, but no runaway pandemic, so there’s been plenty of time for this thing to explode. It hasn’t. So far, so good. If and when the virus adapts to us, we’re screwed, but we’re not screwed yet.

Pixie – at 17:04

Ducksoup - the R0 of the index cases in Indonesia seem to be closer to 2 on average. But the R0 of those secondary cases appears to be R0<1. When that changes, we will have a problem. Until that changes, it may continue to be a contained local event.

Tom DVM – at 21:14

One day in the future…hopefully in the long and distant future but my intuition tells me sooner rather than later…we are going to wake up and the world will have changed, fundamentally…After the length of time that we have chased the dragon, we will have to give our heads a couple shakes to come to terms with the fact that we are now looking at a dragon head on…things we have only imagined have, in an instant, come true…

…at that point mild or severe…we are in for a life-changing event or for the first time in many of our lives, we will be on the precipice of history.

I hope I can handle the shock of recognition…I hope we can handle the shock of recognition…and I hope each of us reaches the other side…so to speak…

…and then we will have one hell of a party!! /:0)

03 October 2006

bgw in MT – at 00:20

“anonymous – at 04:11I searched the web a bit more about the rating companies and their virological background and I’m disappointed. No mention of any vorological expert who consulted S&P or the other groups. All that I found is Ferguson for RMS. There is also a report from Finch, another rating company from March which is full of nonsense. (no h2h etc.) S&P,Milliman could point to David Ingram http://www.zoominfo.com/people/ingram_david_127012708.aspx But I couldn’t find any connection to WHO,CDC,virology, epidemiology experts. I really wonder, what these people are knowing about alpha2–6 receptors and cleavage sites and whether they think, this is not important for estimating the panflu-risk.”

>>>Good for you, anonymous, good for you! I’m so glad you went back and checked on them and passed the news along. I appreciate that! It shows maturity.

anonymous – at 02:30

I think, we should write email to S&P,Moody’s,Fitch,Milliman,SOA and ask for clarification, ask them to elaborate. They have a responsibility for the world’s health here too, it’s not only a normal economical rating. Some additional care and effort seems justified. I wished also the virologists would jump in and discuss and give their estimates.

05 October 2006

a’Akova – at 18:27

If you want to know how good the financial markets are at predicting natural disasters and how it values that risk, an instuctive example might be futures contract prices for natural gas and crude oil prior to hurricanes Katrina and Rita.

anonymous – at 21:28

predicting hurricanes is not controversy such as predicting panflu. Most experts would agree on the odds for hurricanes due to historical data.

06 October 2006

Scaredy Cat – at 18:42

anonymous,

In your post at 21:28 you say panflu predictions are controversial and imply that most experts would not agree on the odds. So then I’m wondering why you focus so much on estimates. If it’s the sole basis for your prepping (or lack thereof), it doesn’t seem like a very sound one.

And what were the futures contract prices for natural gas, etc. prior to Katrina and Rita? Were they useful in terms of prediction?

a’Akova – at 22:38

Shouldn’t it be easier to predict hurricanes ? How good a job did the market do ?

anonymous – at 22:55

when the experts don’t agree on the odds, then it’s useful to have several of their opinions. That they don’t agree doesn’t mean it’s useless. Unless their estimates were randomly and uniformly scattered. But this doesn’t seem to be the case.


the hurricane future-contracts are probably not very interesting, they would reflect exactly the predictions of the hurricane centers. The hurricane centers do give these probabilities in form of “hitting-prediction-cones”(?) and the insurances offer contracts and the bookmakers offer bets. E.g. intrade.com offers contracts in which state a hurricane makes landfall.

anonymous – at 23:05

once I found my probability as the average of expert estimates, then it doesn’t matter for me how much these estimates did spread.
E,g, 17%,15%,17%,16%,15% as estimates for a hurricane or
40%,10%,5%,20%,5% as estimates for a pandemic\\ would both make my estimate 16% for either event no additional information could be gathered from the spread of the estimates. Only that in the former case you can stop after a few estimates while in the latter you would like to have many optinions.

12 October 2006

anonymous – at 10:31

bump

Closed - Bronco Bill27 December 2006, 13:58

Closed to maintain server speed

Retrieved from http://www.fluwikie2.com/index.php?n=Forum.ProbabilityOfA1918-likePandemicExtremelyLow-2
Page last modified on December 27, 2006, at 01:58 PM