COVID-19 and extinction of human species

Nurses COVID

Published

I predict that in 3-4 weeks time there will be significant discussion brought to light by academic epidemiologists on Twitter about COVID-19 as a possible extinction event. I could be wrong, but let's look at the numbers. We have a contagious disease that is as deadly as the 1918 pandemic with all of modern medicine being thrown at it. In 1918, the 5% of critically ill covid-19 cases would surely have died - excluding those rare minor miracles. A higher percentage of patients requiring admission, but not intubation, would also surely pass away.

Nobody is certain that we will be able to keep up a sophisticated level of care, and in that case you're looking at a significant jump in mortality rate as critically and moderately ill patients cannot be treated due to the overwhelming surge.

COVID-19 is not showing many signs of being susceptible to weather. Hot and humid locations across our own country are seeing their own exponential outbreaks. Any flattening of the curve will only last until social distancing measures are lifted. Nobody can be absolutely certain that active immunity (antibodies made after an infection) will last long enough to prevent yearly reinfection, and so there is the possibility that we'll see this return year after year.

Unless we develop a vaccine, we will have an endemic virus that infects 50-70% of our population and has a mortality rate that is 2-5x that of the spanish flu and will cripple a healthcare system that doesn't find a way to grow itself by 3-400% whilst protecting the workers.

The birth rate is only 1.8% folks. Essentially, we'll be spending 7% our of money and only getting 1.8% back in returns. The principle won't last forever and the human race will eventually go out of business.

Thoughts?

11 minutes ago, NICU Guy said:

This is not occurring in an overwhelmed and defunct healthcare system. Outside of NYC, the rest of the country's hospitals are not overwhelmed. We are in the age of modern medicine. What is your point?

Quite frankly, it is very concerning that you can't recognize that what is happening in NYC will soon be replicated across our country. You don't even need to recognize this, experts and governments officials are literally spelling this out.

On 3/31/2020 at 2:03 AM, DannyBoy8 said:

Everyone, finally, we have an authority!

Facepalm back at you, big boy.

covid-19 is expected to be endemic.....so that means reinfection year after year and 10-20% of those infected dead each wave; year after year.........without a vaccine.

It does not take much to out pace the birth rate.

That being said, I'm sure we'll have a largely effective vaccine in 2020 or 2021. But if this was pre-vaccine.....covid-19 would surely threaten our species.

Well, I'm 5'6 112lb F. But I kind of like the sound of being called big boy, I have to admit. ? Kidding, not kidding. Also, I scrolled further this time and found the facepalm emoji so I'm pleased about that too.

Listen, DannyBoy. I'm gonna be a big boy about this and tell you to calm ** down. Then I'm going to mansplain this *****to you in case you haven't noticed the other responses that have already explained why this is not even close to an extinction level event and would still not be even if we had no modern functioning health care system or vaccines. Here's why - it primarily kills old people. Period. Even if immunity is short term (which is very possible, maybe even probable), it doesn't matter. If it ran its course unchecked, it'd wipe out a lot of old people and people w/ underlying conditions annually. Countries that are doing mass testing of all citizens are finding a very sizable portion of infections are completely asymptomatic. And they're young, healthy reproducing people.

Specializes in Tele, OB, public health.
27 minutes ago, MunoRN said:

China only included symptomatic cases in their CFR calculations because that's what a CFR is, asymptomatic presumed cases are included in the IFR not the CFR.

Like all CDR data, we consider it in the context of the reliability of the data, China's CFR data for instance is considered in the context that they're reported total deaths appears to be about a tenth of it's actual deaths.

I assume your scolding at the end is misstated or that your mistakenly forgot to add that a CFR calculation must be considered in the context of the reliability of the data that went into the calculation, this is just as true now as it is a year out from a pandemic. All data has limitations based on the data that went into it, that doesn't mean we don't calculate the data, we just consider how to view the data based on the context. A CFR of 1% for instance might be far more concerning than a CFR of 10% for instance; if the CFR of 10% was based on a total number of cases in the US of 100 over the course of a year, whereas the CFR of 1% came from a rapidly spreading pathogen that affects half the population and 1% of cases have already died when most of the cases have not yet reached the stage of the course of the illness where death is likely to occur.

It of course would be absurd not to analyze CFR data very early in an evolving pandemic, even though this data might bear little resemblance to the data we'll have long after the pandemic is over. This is the data that drives containment measures, which is far more useful than the much more reliable data we get after it's all over.

You are correct I misspoke. I meant to rant about risk ratio at the end.

Specializes in NICU, PICU, Transport, L&D, Hospice.
On 3/30/2020 at 5:20 PM, Kittypower123 said:

While I agree that this has the potential to be incredibly devastating to world's population, I don't quite see the extinction of mankind. Even if 20% of the population died, that still leaves 80%, many of whom can and will have children. Am I missing something?

So...if we assume that an effective vaccine can be developed and we learn that long term immunity can be achieved after vaccination or exposure...probably not extinction level.

But...if, like other coronavirus, vaccines are difficult and not very effective, and there is no acquired immunity...it could be very problematic.

It is very contagious. It's 's going to be with us forever...

37 minutes ago, eerrmm said:

Well, I'm 5'6 112lb F. But I kind of like the sound of being called big boy, I have to admit. ? Kidding, not kidding. Also, I scrolled further this time and found the facepalm emoji so I'm pleased about that too.

Listen, DannyBoy. I'm gonna be a big boy about this and tell you to calm ** down. Then I'm going to mansplain this **** to you in case you haven't noticed the other responses that have already explained why this is not even close to an extinction level event and would still not be even if we had no modern functioning health care system or vaccines. Here's why - it primarily kills old people. Period. Even if immunity is short term (which is very possible, maybe even probable), it doesn't matter. If it ran its course unchecked, it'd wipe out a lot of old people and people w/ underlying conditions annually. Countries that are doing mass testing of all citizens are finding a very sizable portion of infections are completely asymptomatic. And they're young, healthy reproducing people.

Don't mean to bust your bubble, but Germany, one of the most liberal nations when it comes to covid testing, has 6% mortality rate in resolved cases. Countries with liberal testing are finding that 30% of cases are asymptomatic, this is not the lofty number you espouse and has been worked into the models for some time.

Furthermore, 60% of our population lives with a comorbid condition. It might hit the elderly hardest, but it's impact on 25-44 is not insignificant.

You're staring at a lifted off space shuttle and convincing yourself that it will suddenly change course and fall back to earth. It just might, but most don't.

Sounds like you live on the Isle of denial located off the coast of 'can't wrap my head around data' istan. Any vacancy where you are, seems like paradise?

Specializes in Tele, OB, public health.
1 hour ago, MunoRN said:

China only included symptomatic cases in their CFR calculations because that's what a CFR is, asymptomatic presumed cases are included in the IFR not the CFR.

Like all CDR data, we consider it in the context of the reliability of the data, China's CFR data for instance is considered in the context that they're reported total deaths appears to be about a tenth of it's actual deaths.

I assume your scolding at the end is misstated or that your mistakenly forgot to add that a CFR calculation must be considered in the context of the reliability of the data that went into the calculation, this is just as true now as it is a year out from a pandemic. All data has limitations based on the data that went into it, that doesn't mean we don't calculate the data, we just consider how to view the data based on the context. A CFR of 1% for instance might be far more concerning than a CFR of 10% for instance; if the CFR of 10% was based on a total number of cases in the US of 100 over the course of a year, whereas the CFR of 1% came from a rapidly spreading pathogen that affects half the population and 1% of cases have already died when most of the cases have not yet reached the stage of the course of the illness where death is likely to occur.

It of course would be absurd not to analyze CFR data very early in an evolving pandemic, even though this data might bear little resemblance to the data we'll have long after the pandemic is over. This is the data that drives containment measures, which is far more useful than the much more reliable data we get after it's all over.

However I stand by my comment of what How China counted infected as problematic because we do not know what their standard for “symptomatic” was

38 minutes ago, DannyBoy8 said:

Don't mean to bust your bubble, but Germany, one of the most liberal nations when it comes to covid testing, has 6% mortality rate in resolved cases. Countries with liberal testing are finding that 30% of cases are asymptomatic, this is not the lofty number you espouse and has been worked into the models for some time.

Furthermore, 60% of our population lives with a comorbid condition. It might hit the elderly hardest, but it's impact on 25-44 is not insignificant.

You're staring at a lifted off space shuttle and convincing yourself that it will suddenly change course and fall back to earth. It just might, but most don't.

Sounds like you live on the Isle of denial located off the coast of 'can't wrap my head around data' istan. Any vacancy where you are, seems like paradise?

Please explain what you mean by "mortality rate in resolved cases" and cite your sources. All credible sources that I've seen put the COVID-19 mortality rate in Germany around 0.5-0.9% with full acknowledgment that despite their far better testing rates than just about every other country - even they aren't able to test enough people to have reliable numbers of the actual infection rates. So the mortality rate is still skewed high. Please tell me what I'm missing while I'm staring up in space on paradise island.

Just now, eerrmm said:

Please explain what you mean by "mortality rate in resolved cases" and cite your sources. All credible sources that I've seen put the COVID-19 mortality rate in Germany around 0.5-0.9% with full acknowledgment that despite their far better testing rates than just about every other country - even they aren't able to test enough people to have reliable numbers of the actual infection rates. So the mortality rate is still skewed high. Please tell me what I'm missing while I'm staring up in space on paradise island.

I'm not your mother and this isn't a paper. You don't need to dig very deep to find academic sources that report in real time the number of resolved cases (dead or healed) in every single country. You're blindsided by 'mortality of resolved cases?' That's surprising for someone who is trying to sound awfully informed on a topic.

You talk about data being imperfect or incomplete, then cite that other countries are testing more comprehensively, and then try to leg sweep said county's reported data when it doesn't align with your position. You're like a petulant child saying 'but', 'but', 'but', 'but'.

Specializes in OR.
14 hours ago, anewmanx said:

It was my understanding that the deaths are predominantly the elderly and people like myself with serious preexisting conditions.

As awful a reality as it is, a large portion of diabetics, hypertensive, elderly, obese, etc. individuals dying would actually reduce medical costs in the long run.

Also, herd immunity will come into play as the young survive the virus and it loses its ability to spread. This is a promising path based on its slow rate of mutation. 

I still have my hopes for a vaccine relatively quickly. There are something like 6 being developed right now and I believe at least two are in trials.

WOW!. The virus is putting all ages of people in the ICU on ventilators...for weeks, if they don't die. The ones that do survive have lasting lung damage, will drastically changed pulmonary function from the weeks before when they were healthy. There are many who have no co-morbidities, and some of them are dieing, too.

This virus is acting globally, just like the Spanish Fle Pandemic 1917-19. Like that pandemic, many downplayed it's severity until bodies started piling up.

Yes, they didn't even know viruses existed then, but they started a mad push for one, and touted that 'a vaccine has been found' every time they concocted something they thought would work...part of scientific trial and error, just like what is going on now.

I'm hoping that I've already had a mild version of the virus and show antibodies when they finally get around to doing those tests across the country. Don't hold your breath on vaccine, they've been trying to formulate one for HIV for YEARS, still 'recalculating...'. This virus has segments of HIV RNA in it, so good luck with THAT.

1 hour ago, toomuchbaloney said:

So...if we assume that an effective vaccine can be developed and we learn that long term immunity can be achieved after vaccination or exposure...probably not extinction level.

But...if, like other coronavirus, vaccines are difficult and not very effective, and there is no acquired immunity...it could be very problematic.

It is very contagious. It's 's going to be with us forever...

Well put and I think the appropriate perspective. These folks who are convinced that covid-19 is nothing more than spanish flu are fooling themselves and getting so bent out of shape by me trying to start an informed dialogue on the matter.

Specializes in OR.
1 hour ago, eerrmm said:

. Here's why - it primarily kills old people. Period.\

The pics of the three nurses I've seen to date that have died are not 'old'.

4 minutes ago, 11blade said:

I'm hoping that I've already had a mild version of the virus and show antibodies when they finally get around to doing those tests across the country. Don't hold your breath on vaccine, they've been trying to formulate one for HIV for YEARS, still 'recalculating...'. This virus has segments of HIV RNA in it, so good luck with THAT.

Interesting point about the genetic makeup of this virus. That's getting pretty deep into vaccinology. Won't pretend to have an informed perspective on that matter.

+ Add a Comment