• Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
virology blog

virology blog

About viruses and viral disease

TWiV 586: Coronavirus update: wash your hands

9 February 2020 by Vincent Racaniello

In this week’s coverage of the coronavirus epidemic, the TWiV team discusses the fatality rate, China’s initial reaction to the outbreak, conspiracy theories, how long the virus remains infectious on surfaces, and evidence for virus in the intestinal tract.

Click arrow to play
Download TWiV 586 (72 MB .mp3, 119 min)
Subscribe (free): iTunes, Google Podcasts, RSS, email

Become a patron of TWiV!

Show notes at microbe.tv/twiv

Filed Under: This Week in Virology Tagged With: 2019-nCoV, coronavirus, epidemic, ethanol hand gel, handwashing, outbreak response, transmission, vaccine, viral, virology, virulence, virus, viruses, Wuhan

Reader Interactions

Comments

  1. virus watcher says

    9 February 2020 at 4:44 pm

    Interesting new findings from the first large scale (n=1000) clinical study:

    https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.02.06.20020974v1

    Median incubation period only 3 days.
    Previous incubation time estimates were 5-6 days.

    This means, the virus spreads extremely fast, given an R0=3 the case doubling period might be less than 3 days !

    Potentially multiplies 2^10 = 1000 fold in just 4 weeks. Million-fold in two months …

    Also cannot be effectively detected by fever screening:

    “Notably, fever occurred in only 43.8% of patients … such patients may be missed if the surveillance case definition focused heavily on fever detection ”

    Also: 75% manifested as pneumonia, 40% needed oxygen therapy, 5% ICU, ARDS

    This is not the flu. Thats why they called it the “Wuhan PNEUMONIA” in the first place.

    Reassuring: case fatality rate significantly below SARS/MERS. Mild cases might have gone undetected/treated at home.

  2. Vir-acious Reader says

    10 February 2020 at 12:55 am

    After MERS WHO wants to avoid naming the NCoV after a region, country, or city. China has suggested NPC for Novel Pneumonia Cornavirus.
    A “modest proposal” for a name that fits the epidemic history: CPC for Concealed Pneumonia Cornavirus.

  3. Virus Watcher says

    10 February 2020 at 8:22 am

    It’s a pity that we are not able to properly name a virus anymore.

    until 40 years ago it was not a problem at all to simply use the origin location name (Hong-Kong flu, etc. )

    until 20 years ago we used at least salient, “catchy” acronyms like AIDS and SARS.

    But now, all we are able to come by with is a bureuocratic, awkward charcter strings like “2019nCoV”

    I wish this were only a matter of taste, but in reality it is problematic because it hinders the flow of information in the internet, because, e.g., there is not a single unique hash tag or search term to use.

  4. Vir-acious Reader says

    11 February 2020 at 1:40 pm

    “Based on phylogeny, taxonomy and established practice, the CSG formally recognizes this virus as a sister to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronaviruses (SARS-CoVs) of the species Severe acute respiratory syndrome-related coronavirus and designates it as severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2).” https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.02.07.937862v1

    Meanwhile to conciliate the gov’t that concealed so much from citizens and scientists with severe local and global consequences, the WHO leaped into action today with the name COVID-19.

    If a name associated with entire regions (SA, ME) is concerning, let’s wield the brush more accurately and call it CPC Pneumonia Cornavirus or CPC for short.

  5. Vir-acious Reader says

    11 February 2020 at 2:05 pm

    The final thing I’ll say about the SARS-Cov-2 name (that WHO is running from) is that the people of China are not the ones who object to calling things by the most correct name .

    “Around 5 p.m. on December 30th, Li Wenliang, an ophthalmologist at Wuhan Central Hospital, messaged his college-classmates group on WeChat. He told them that “seven confirmed cases of sars” were in quarantine at the hospital, then followed up with a correction: it was an unspecified coronavirus, which later became known as 2019-nCoV.” https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/how-the-coronavirus-has-tested-chinas-system-of-information-control

  6. boolybooly says

    17 February 2020 at 8:18 am

    Regional lethality difference is curious. I had a thought about that.

    While it may be due to environmental differences, its an evolutionary paradigm that pathogens can tend to evolve to be less debilitating for the host because it helps them to spread if the host is mobile and active and therefore alive.

    With so many cases collected in Wuhan could the virus have mutated already?

    If there were two strains in Wuhan, a slower spreading more lethal strain and a faster spreading less lethal strain it would also fit this observation.

    Will people be repeat sequencing the wild viral genome?

Primary Sidebar

by Vincent Racaniello

Earth’s virology Professor
Questions? virology@virology.ws

With David Tuller and
Gertrud U. Rey

Follow

Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, Instagram
Get updates by RSS or Email

Contents

Table of Contents
ME/CFS
Inside a BSL-4
The Wall of Polio
Microbe Art
Interviews With Virologists

Earth’s Virology Course

Virology Live
Columbia U
Virologia en Español
Virology 101
Influenza 101

Podcasts

This Week in Virology
This Week in Microbiology
This Week in Parasitism
This Week in Evolution
Immune
This Week in Neuroscience
All at MicrobeTV

Useful Resources

Lecturio Online Courses
HealthMap
Polio eradication
Promed-Mail
Small Things Considered
ViralZone
Virus Particle Explorer
The Living River
Parasites Without Borders

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.