wuhan - coronavirus

[Ausmumof3]

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.05.24.20110346v2.full.pdf
 

Another preprint study that appears to show that although there’s lots of virus on surfaces they don’t seem to be able to be cultured meaning most likely not infectious.   Feeling better about relaxing disinfection protocols somewhat.

[Ausmumof3]

Increasing community transmission in Vic

“Community transmission of coronavirus in Victoria remains, with 18 new cases recorded taking the state’s total to 1780.

Of the 18 new cases, six are return travellers are in hotel quarantine.

Of the remaining cases, one is linked to a known outbreak, eight to community testing and three under investigation.”

[ktgrok]

7 minutes ago, Ausmumof3 said:

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.05.24.20110346v2.full.pdf
 

Another preprint study that appears to show that although there’s lots of virus on surfaces they don’t seem to be able to be cultured meaning most likely not infectious.   Feeling better about relaxing disinfection protocols somewhat.

Good news, but isn't it hard to culture some viruses to start with? Like, aren't there issues with doing that in general compared to actual human transmission? not sure if that is the case here, but that makes me hesitant. 

This was their conclusion, making me think that not being able to culture it doesn't mean what we think it does? Because if they are saying that neither the air nor the surfaces contained live virus, then how is it spreading and why would they warn of the risk and the importance of PPE, distance, hand hygiene? It must mean something I'm not understanding. Conclusions: Our findings of extensive viral RNA contamination of surfaces and air across 55 a range of acute healthcare settings in the absence of cultured virus underlines the potential risk from environmental contamination in managing COVID-19, and the need for effective 57 use of PPE, physical distancing, and hand/surface hygiene

Edited June 18, 2020 by Ktgrok

[TCB]

I've been thinking about the big political rally that is to take place. I hope what I'm saying isn't political. I think it's just about virus transmission, but I'll delete it if not. I read that those attending have to sign a waver releasing the organizers from liability if they get sick. If you are holding a rally I would assume you would think it wasn't risky and if so why the need for a waiver. I think it will be risky so good idea about the waiver, but then why would you hold it and cause the risk? Also, it seems like many of those that would go may not perceive risk to themselves, so may not have been taking precautions, and may therefore be much higher risk for having and spreading the virus. If a huge outbreak were to occur from this, would that not be detrimental to the cause of the organizer?

[ktgrok]

3 minutes ago, TCB said:

I've been thinking about the big political rally that is to take place. I hope what I'm saying isn't political. I think it's just about virus transmission, but I'll delete it if not. I read that those attending have to sign a waver releasing the organizers from liability if they get sick. If you are holding a rally I would assume you would think it wasn't risky and if so why the need for a waiver. I think it will be risky so good idea about the waiver, but then why would you hold it and cause the risk? Also, it seems like many of those that would go may not perceive risk to themselves, so may not have been taking precautions, and may therefore be much higher risk for having and spreading the virus. If a huge outbreak were to occur from this, would that not be detrimental to the cause of the organizer?

They will jsut say that the person got it somewhere else, I'm sure. 

And I'm sure the waiver is a "hey, just a formality, our lawyers made us do this...you know how lawyers are" type thing. I mean, people sign waivers all the time for stuff they think is unlikely to actually happen. If I take my kid to the local pumpkin patch at a church and they want to go in the bounce house I have to sign a waiver not to sue if they get hurt in the bounce house. People are used to waivers. 

 

[TCB]

So if they can just say they got it somewhere else then again why the waiver? Not trying to be argumentative but it just doesn't make sense to me.

Edited June 18, 2020 by TCB

[TCB]

9 minutes ago, Ktgrok said:

They will jsut say that the person got it somewhere else, I'm sure. 

And I'm sure the waiver is a "hey, just a formality, our lawyers made us do this...you know how lawyers are" type thing. I mean, people sign waivers all the time for stuff they think is unlikely to actually happen. If I take my kid to the local pumpkin patch at a church and they want to go in the bounce house I have to sign a waiver not to sue if they get hurt in the bounce house. People are used to waivers. 

 

Sorry forgot the quote in my post above so you'd know what I was talking about.

[Ausmumof3]

16 minutes ago, Ktgrok said:

Good news, but isn't it hard to culture some viruses to start with? Like, aren't there issues with doing that in general compared to actual human transmission? not sure if that is the case here, but that makes me hesitant. 

This was their conclusion, making me think that not being able to culture it doesn't mean what we think it does? Because if they are saying that neither the air nor the surfaces contained live virus, then how is it spreading and why would they warn of the risk and the importance of PPE, distance, hand hygiene? It must mean something I'm not understanding. Conclusions: Our findings of extensive viral RNA contamination of surfaces and air across 55 a range of acute healthcare settings in the absence of cultured virus underlines the potential risk from environmental contamination in managing COVID-19, and the need for effective 57 use of PPE, physical distancing, and hand/surface hygiene

I don’t know - you probably know more from your vet studies?  I did see some epidemiologists saying something along the lines of this being an issue.  

they did say this 

“We did not identify viable virus on any surface or air sample. Few studies have attempted to culture SAR-CoV-2 from healthcare environments, and no viable virus was detected.[10, 14] Our laboratory study of the viability of virus dried on surfaces helps to qualify our findings and the findings of others, suggesting that Ct values of >30 are unlikely to be culturable. Bearing in mind that the viral RNA detected in the hospital setting might have been deposited more than two hours previously, we cannot differentiate whether our inability to culture virus from the samples is explained by the low RNA levels or the length of time since deposition or both. It is also possible that virus was infectious but not culturable in the laboratory.”

 

[Pen]

1 hour ago, Ausmumof3 said:

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.05.24.20110346v2.full.pdf
 

Another preprint study that appears to show that although there’s lots of virus on surfaces they don’t seem to be able to be cultured meaning most likely not infectious.   Feeling better about relaxing disinfection protocols somewhat.

 

I think you might be able to feel better about it based on (apparently)  low numbers of infected people in your part of Australia. But I don’t think this study is grounds for concluding that viruses on surfaces aren’t infectious. And that disinfection of surfaces is not needed. That certainly wasn’t the conclusion given in the study.  They instead suggest areas to disinfect more, like the alcohol gel dispensers themselves. 

 

1) the surfaces they were sampling from had considerable disinfection,

 

“
All inpatient wards were fully occupied by patients with COVID-19 at the time of sampling, apart from the Emergency Department. In the part of the Emergency Department dedicated for patients with confirmed or suspected COVID-19, two of the cubicles were occupied and one patient was in the ambulatory wait area at the time of sampling. These areas were disinfected daily using a combined chlorine-based detergent/disinfectant (Actichlor Plus, Ecolab), with an additional twice daily disinfection of high touch surfaces using the same detergent/disinfectant.”

(Bold added—probably more frequent, extensive, and stronger disinfectants than most of us use at home.) 

 

2) there’s no way to know if the sampled virus was from before or after the last disinfection 

3) even if the viral RNA, or some of it, arrived after the last disinfection and before sampling,  it may be that the frequent disinfection not only inactivated virus already present, but perhaps also inactivated virus that arrives on it after disinfection (I don’t think tests have been done on this, but I think it’s possible that residual chlorine etc might have some effect still) 

 

“We did not identify viable virus on any surface or air sample. Few studies have attempted to culture SAR-CoV-2 from healthcare environments, and no viable virus was detected.[10, 14] Our laboratory study of the viability of virus dried on surfaces helps to qualify our findings and the findings of others, suggesting that Ct values of >30 are unlikely to be culturable. Bearing in mind that the viral RNA detected in the hospital setting might have been deposited more than two hours previously, we cannot differentiate whether our inability to culture virus from the samples is explained by the low RNA levels or the length of time since deposition or both. It is also possible that virus was infectious but not culturable in the laboratory.”

 

If there were actually no viable virus on surfaces nor in air, it would not be spreading as it is, afaik. 

 ETA- I’d take the study to indicate that the hospital’s disinfection procedures already in place were doing a fairly good job and should continue, plus additional areas to pay attention to...

Edited June 18, 2020 by Pen

[Frances]

53 minutes ago, TCB said:

I've been thinking about the big political rally that is to take place. I hope what I'm saying isn't political. I think it's just about virus transmission, but I'll delete it if not. I read that those attending have to sign a waver releasing the organizers from liability if they get sick. If you are holding a rally I would assume you would think it wasn't risky and if so why the need for a waiver. I think it will be risky so good idea about the waiver, but then why would you hold it and cause the risk? Also, it seems like many of those that would go may not perceive risk to themselves, so may not have been taking precautions, and may therefore be much higher risk for having and spreading the virus. If a huge outbreak were to occur from this, would that not be detrimental to the cause of the organizer?

Because they don’t care? Because their incredible insatiable need to feed their ego makes all reason go out the window?
 

[Pen]

1 hour ago, TCB said:

I've been thinking about the big political rally that is to take place. I hope what I'm saying isn't political. I think it's just about virus transmission, but I'll delete it if not. I read that those attending have to sign a waver releasing the organizers from liability if they get sick. If you are holding a rally I would assume you would think it wasn't risky and if so why the need for a waiver. I think it will be risky so good idea about the waiver, but then why would you hold it and cause the risk? Also, it seems like many of those that would go may not perceive risk to themselves, so may not have been taking precautions, and may therefore be much higher risk for having and spreading the virus. If a huge outbreak were to occur from this, would that not be detrimental to the cause of the organizer?

 

I don’t think it is at all a good idea with regard to virus transmission, unless maybe everyone gets a rapid test (alas reliability is an issue, but it would help) before being allowed to attend, and wears a mask too for helping control false negatives. 

I don’t think the waiver part is all that relevant. 

[ktgrok]

1 hour ago, TCB said:

So if they can just say they got it somewhere else then again why the waiver? Not trying to be argumentative but it just doesn't make sense to me.

To avoid the cost of lawsuits. They (those suing) would be unlikely to win, but the expense and time of that many lawsuits could be a big PIA. 

[Pen]

14 minutes ago, Ktgrok said:

To avoid the cost of lawsuits. They (those suing) would be unlikely to win, but the expense and time of that many lawsuits could be a big PIA. 

 

I agree. 

[Teresa in MO]

2 hours ago, TCB said:

I've been thinking about the big political rally that is to take place. I hope what I'm saying isn't political. I think it's just about virus transmission, but I'll delete it if not. I read that those attending have to sign a waver releasing the organizers from liability if they get sick. If you are holding a rally I would assume you would think it wasn't risky and if so why the need for a waiver. I think it will be risky so good idea about the waiver, but then why would you hold it and cause the risk? Also, it seems like many of those that would go may not perceive risk to themselves, so may not have been taking precautions, and may therefore be much higher risk for having and spreading the virus. If a huge outbreak were to occur from this, would that not be detrimental to the cause of the organizer?

I had to sign a waiver when I took my son to the orthodontist yesterday.

[Ausmumof3]

1 hour ago, Pen said:

 

I think you might be able to feel better about it based on (apparently)  low numbers of infected people in your part of Australia. But I don’t think this study is grounds for concluding that viruses on surfaces aren’t infectious. And that disinfection of surfaces is not needed. That certainly wasn’t the conclusion given in the study.  They instead suggest areas to disinfect more, like the alcohol gel dispensers themselves. 

 

1) the surfaces they were sampling from had considerable disinfection,

 

“
All inpatient wards were fully occupied by patients with COVID-19 at the time of sampling, apart from the Emergency Department. In the part of the Emergency Department dedicated for patients with confirmed or suspected COVID-19, two of the cubicles were occupied and one patient was in the ambulatory wait area at the time of sampling. These areas were disinfected daily using a combined chlorine-based detergent/disinfectant (Actichlor Plus, Ecolab), with an additional twice daily disinfection of high touch surfaces using the same detergent/disinfectant.”

(Bold added—probably more frequent, extensive, and stronger disinfectants than most of us use at home.) 

 

2) there’s no way to know if the sampled virus was from before or after the last disinfection 

3) even if the viral RNA, or some of it, arrived after the last disinfection and before sampling,  it may be that the frequent disinfection not only inactivated virus already present, but perhaps also inactivated virus that arrives on it after disinfection (I don’t think tests have been done on this, but I think it’s possible that residual chlorine etc might have some effect still) 

 

“We did not identify viable virus on any surface or air sample. Few studies have attempted to culture SAR-CoV-2 from healthcare environments, and no viable virus was detected.[10, 14] Our laboratory study of the viability of virus dried on surfaces helps to qualify our findings and the findings of others, suggesting that Ct values of >30 are unlikely to be culturable. Bearing in mind that the viral RNA detected in the hospital setting might have been deposited more than two hours previously, we cannot differentiate whether our inability to culture virus from the samples is explained by the low RNA levels or the length of time since deposition or both. It is also possible that virus was infectious but not culturable in the laboratory.”

 

If there were actually no viable virus on surfaces nor in air, it would not be spreading as it is, afaik. 

 ETA- I’d take the study to indicate that the hospital’s disinfection procedures already in place were doing a fairly good job and should continue, plus additional areas to pay attention to...

Ok thank you.  I will put disinfect surfaces back on my list of to dos if we get active cases again.  To be honest part of the reason I tend to believe it’s not surface related is because almost every case here seems to have been able to be linked to close contact with an active case but we haven’t had many so we may just have been lucky. 

[itsheresomewhere]

Thought a few of you might find this interesting-  I took DS to his yearly specialist appointment.  The office staff was discussing the difficulty of getting some of their disinfectants that they use.  Since the office was shut down and didn’t order regularly like they normally do, they can’t get new orders.  Other small practices are having issues too as the suppliers are fulfilling hospital/large practice orders first and what is left ( if any) goes to small practices.  

[Pen]

39 minutes ago, Ausmumof3 said:

Ok thank you.  I will put disinfect surfaces back on my list of to dos if we get active cases again.  To be honest part of the reason I tend to believe it’s not surface related is because almost every case here seems to have been able to be linked to close contact with an active case but we haven’t had many so we may just have been lucky. 

 

I think the initial belief that it came from ? Bat ? Animal? From wet market led us astray as to primary routes of infection,  (I presume no one was thought to have been in a cuddly face to face extended respiratory sharing situation with a food bat.) as presumption was  that it was gotten by handling or eating the infected animal.  Which is possible. But it’s seeming now that handling as long as skin is intact and thoroughly washed after, and even possibly eating the virus is much less risky than breathing it. 

I think if we presume it to be initially from a lab and basically a virus primarily transmitted by droplets and /or aerosol but also possibly from surfaces, fecal matter, etc etc as additional possible ways that we are on a better track. 

So many viruses are able to be transmitted via surfaces that I would not assume it isn’t one unless proven that it isn’t.  But I think apparently less high risk plus low local cases, you could ease off some on disinfecting everything. 

Edited June 18, 2020 by Pen

[Frances]

In response to rising cases, masks will now be required in some Oregon counties. Previously, they were only required for employees in customer facing businesses and for everyone on public transportation. The most populated county will also be allowed to enter Phase 1, the last to do so. It will be interesting to see the level of compliance.
 

https://www.oregonlive.com/coronavirus/2020/06/oregon-gov-kate-brown-requires-masks-in-indoor-public-places-in-7-counties-as-of-june-24.html

[Pen]

Under Armor UA sportswear company made a $30 mask specially for athletes supposed to be comfortable for all day wear, and comfortable even for sports like active running.

It sold out in one hour.  They are making more. 

[Ausmumof3]

https://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2020-06-18/why-are-so-many-indonesian-children-dying-from-coronavirus/12356444
 

estimated 160 children have died from coronavirus in Indonesia.  It’s unclear why they are more affected than other countries.  It’s possible that it’s linked to malnutrition or a much bigger outbreak than it seems by the testing figures.

[Pen]

1 hour ago, Ausmumof3 said:

https://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2020-06-18/why-are-so-many-indonesian-children-dying-from-coronavirus/12356444
 

estimated 160 children have died from coronavirus in Indonesia.  It’s unclear why they are more affected than other countries.  It’s possible that it’s linked to malnutrition or a much bigger outbreak than it seems by the testing figures.

 

I noticed that As they went into the start of the article it was making a comparison of child deaths in VietNam and other places and saying “no one under 18 has died in” Vietnam.   

 

No one of any age has died of CV19 in Vietnam. It is one of the great CV19 success stories of the world thus far!

[MEmama]

6 hours ago, Pen said:

Under Armor UA sportswear company made a $30 mask specially for athletes supposed to be comfortable for all day wear, and comfortable even for sports like active running.

It sold out in one hour.  They are making more. 

Thanks for posting this!
XC practices (distanced but still) are slated to begin soon and DS will want to mask. Hopefully it will be mandatory! 

[TracyP]

8 hours ago, Ausmumof3 said:

Ok thank you.  I will put disinfect surfaces back on my list of to dos if we get active cases again.  To be honest part of the reason I tend to believe it’s not surface related is because almost every case here seems to have been able to be linked to close contact with an active case but we haven’t had many so we may just have been lucky. 

Yes, and I have heard the same from U.S. doctors - that not a single case can be linked to surface transmission. Having said that, the general belief is that transmission via surfaces is possible. So everybody needs to do what makes them comfortable. I'm (always) a stickler for hand washing when anybody is out and about, but I'm not disenfecting surfaces any more than normal. If someone in my home were sick, I would make disinfecting surfaces a priority just to be on the safe side. Otherwise, the evidence seems to keep mounting that surface transmission is fairly unlikely, so I'm comfortable not giving it too much thought. 

 

[Pen]

Just now, MEmama said:

Thanks for posting this!
XC practices (distanced but still) are slated to begin soon and DS will want to mask. Hopefully it will be mandatory! 

Adidas also has a mask. 

I don’t think they’re supposed to be anywhere near as good as UA though for coolness and comfort, and a 3 layer design to move moisture away from nose/mouth . 

 

[TracyP]

2 minutes ago, MEmama said:

Thanks for posting this!
XC practices (distanced but still) are slated to begin soon and DS will want to mask. Hopefully it will be mandatory! 

I don't know. 2 boys died in China when wearing masks during phy ed. Maybe the UA mask addresses this potential problem? If not, I would not want to see it become mandatory.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.walesonline.co.uk/news/uk-news/warning-over-serious-risks-wearing-18428246.amp

Without the face mask on, her concentration of oxygen was 19.5%. With the face mask on, her oxygen levels dropped to 17% - the equivalent of exercising at 1,500 metres.

She said: “Any further decreases in oxygen concentration – by exercising longer or harder – would have a large effect on the physiological responses to exercise, causing altitude-sickness symptoms such as dizziness or headache.”

She added: “With gyms looking to reopen and sports clubs wanting to resume, before anyone recommends wearing a face mask, research urgently needs to be undertaken to ensure the safety of the sporting community, regardless of any underlying conditions.”

[Pen]

Surface transmission question:

How would it be possible to link a case to a surface? 

A complete (except for mail delivery) hermit who gets sick? 

Edited June 26, 2020 by Pen

[TracyP]

11 minutes ago, Pen said:

Surface transmission question:

How would it be possible to link a case to a surface? 

A complete hermit who gets sick? 

Yeah, I think that is why the possibility needs to remain open. Because the source of infection is unknown for so many cases it is certainly possible. However, my understanding is that every case where they do know the source, it is in person to person contact. And not just person to person contact but typically contact that lasts for 10-15 min or more.

I do know one older couple and one older man who are literally not interacting with people at all. I'm sure they aren't a very big group, but they are out there. And I think a fairly large number of people lived this way at the start of the outbreak. Had any of them gotten sick with covid it would definitely show a higher likelihood of surface transmission than what seems to be currently understood.

[Wheres Toto]

11 hours ago, Frances said:

Because they don’t care? Because their incredible insatiable need to feed their ego makes all reason go out the window?
 

Wow, you got ALL the reactions to that one.  🙂

[ScoutTN]

15 hours ago, Pen said:

Under Armor UA sportswear company made a $30 mask specially for athletes supposed to be comfortable for all day wear, and comfortable even for sports like active running.

It sold out in one hour.  They are making more. 

Made in China? 

[Pen]

1 hour ago, ScoutTN said:

Made in China? 

 

Idk.

They have manufacturing in many countries.  

 

In addition to homemade masks, I bought some supposedly USA fair wage labor etc, made masks from LA Apparel, which I like a lot!  And my son prefers to my homemade ones.  However,  they are not specifically designed for being able to do sports in—though they are actually very comfortable imo. 

Personally I am currently double layering the bought masks with salt on outer layer, Which I think probably gives a lot of protection for me, not just others, esp if I add a face shield .   Or I am using a homemade triple layer mask for indoor in public. Single layer plain for outdoors distanced. 

 

But I am not trying to run track or cross country. 

 

I think as much as high school and college sports will be a problem during meets and practices, travel to meets and events (school busses, planes etc) is likely to be a problem. 

And I would think up close and personal sports like wrestling could be especially risky. 

 

 

Edited June 18, 2020 by Pen
More Clarity

[EmseB]

Just heard on the news that California is now mandating masks in public.

[73349]

A nearby town is now mandating masks, but with no penalty for failing to comply. 🙃 They did send out an email.

This is in contrast with the announced-at-the-last-minute curfew when the protests were going on, which had a thousand-dollar fine for being out of one's domicile between 8 PM and 5 AM, which did not, evidently, merit an email, much less something like reverse 911.

They will text you if they're changing your trash pick-up day, though!

Edited October 2, 2020 by Carolina Wren

[73349]

Teachers in TX are reacting in horror as the state announces that schools will open in person, on time (read: July or August, depending on your district), with no mask requirement.Way to make it clear who's expendable.

They're saying they'll offer some online instruction if parents want it. However, I'm told the state is not paying districts for the online instruction from March-May after saying they would, so there's not necessarily any reason for districts to believe the state that they'll get money for students attending online.

Edited October 2, 2020 by Carolina Wren

[Joker]

https://news.iu.edu/stories/2020/06/iupui/releases/17-fairbanks-isdh-second-phase-covid-19-testing-indiana-research.html?fbclid=IwAR1Nt42Rz_NKxpTAjNAL_8W9UBPD9KJB0ZsyicxzWQJjntfvpQNqjLfPkUc

I wasn't sure where to put this. I know the phase 1 info that Indiana did has been shared previously and this is phase 2. I don't know if any other state is doing it. The results showed the virus spread has definitely decreased across Indiana and still showed that more than 40% of those with the virus are showing no symptoms.

[Arcadia]

@Quill@Pen@Ausmumof3@mathnerd

Italy https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/world/coronavirus-already-in-italy-by-december-waste-water-study-finds-12852218

“ROME: The coronavirus was already present in two large cities in northern Italy in December, over two months before the first case was detected, a national health institute study of waste water has found.

That suggests the virus appeared in Italy around the same time it was first reported in China.

Researchers discovered genetic traces of SARS-CoV-2 - as the virus is officially known - in samples of waste water collected in Milan and Turin at the end of last year, and Bologna in January, the ISS institute said in a statement seen by AFP on Friday.

Italy's first known native case was discovered mid-February.

The results "help to understand the start of the circulation of the virus in Italy," the ISS said.

They also "confirm the by-now consolidated international evidence" as to the strategic function of sewer samples as an early detection tool, it added.”

[Arcadia]

Chicago

https://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/national-international/unique-coronavirus-strain-found-in-chicago-northwestern-study/2312337/

“Northwestern University researchers have discovered Chicago has a unique COVID-19 virus strain that appears to be directly linked from the early outbreak in China, the university said in a news release Thursday. 

Another variant discovered in Chicago COVID-19 patients, which happens to be the predominant variant worldwide, and in the U.S. is centered in New York, generates more of the virus in the upper airways than the Chicago version. 

“This is the first clear evidence that genetic differences in the viruses are associated with differences in the characteristics of the infections that they cause,” said Dr. Egon Ozer, an assistant professor in infectious diseases at Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine and a Northwestern Medicine physician.

U.S. & World

Ozer, along with other researchers, are studying whether genetic mutations translate into functional differences. 

"These differences might help us understand where a vaccine might be most effective, because they show where these proteins are under selective pressure," he said. "That could indicate where you might get the most bang for your buck in the potential vaccine.”

Ozer said that because Chicago is a transportation hub, the city is a melting pot for different variants of the virus.

To perform the study, which has not been peer-reviewed, researchers collected residual specimens from COVID-19 tests performed on 88 Northwestern Medicine patients. The viruses were then whole-genome sequenced from these specimens, the news release stated. 

The genome sequences were compared to each other to look for genetic differences and group the viruses by genetic similarity.“

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Arcadia said:

@Quill@Pen@Ausmumof3@mathnerd

Italy https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/world/coronavirus-already-in-italy-by-december-waste-water-study-finds-12852218

“ROME: The coronavirus was already present in two large cities in northern Italy in December, over two months before the first case was detected, a national health institute study of waste water has found.

That suggests the virus appeared in Italy around the same time it was first reported in China.

Researchers discovered genetic traces of SARS-CoV-2 - as the virus is officially known - in samples of waste water collected in Milan and Turin at the end of last year, and Bologna in January, the ISS institute said in a statement seen by AFP on Friday.

Italy's first known native case was discovered mid-February.

The results "help to understand the start of the circulation of the virus in Italy," the ISS said.

They also "confirm the by-now consolidated international evidence" as to the strategic function of sewer samples as an early detection tool, it added.”

I still don’t really understand how this is possible. But I guess we’ll see what gets figured out. 

[EmseB]

11 minutes ago, Quill said:

I still don’t really understand how this is possible. But I guess we’ll see what gets figured out. 

My first thought is that China was either not sure what they were dealing with or covering this up for a long time before they couldn't any longer. Or a combination of those two things.

[Pen]

1 hour ago, Quill said:

I still don’t really understand how this is possible. But I guess we’ll see what gets figured out. 

 

I would think the reports that say it started in China in August or October (?) are correct.  

[mumto2]

3 hours ago, Arcadia said:

@Quill@Pen@Ausmumof3@mathnerd

Italy https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/world/coronavirus-already-in-italy-by-december-waste-water-study-finds-12852218

“ROME: The coronavirus was already present in two large cities in northern Italy in December, over two months before the first case was detected, a national health institute study of waste water has found.

That suggests the virus appeared in Italy around the same time it was first reported in China.

Researchers discovered genetic traces of SARS-CoV-2 - as the virus is officially known - in samples of waste water collected in Milan and Turin at the end of last year, and Bologna in January, the ISS institute said in a statement seen by AFP on Friday.

Italy's first known native case was discovered mid-February.

The results "help to understand the start of the circulation of the virus in Italy," the ISS said.

They also "confirm the by-now consolidated international evidence" as to the strategic function of sewer samples as an early detection tool, it added.”

I think it was in England in December.........Someone I know looked through The Telegraph (UK)for the start of January and there are reports saying numbers for flu hospitalizations were 3x the normal for December.  After I saw that I stopped being sad we didn’t go to England for Christmas. 

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Pen said:

 

I would think the reports that say it started in China in August or October (?) are correct.  

If that’s true, it is logical to believe there really *is* a possibility people on the east coast of the US (like my son, who was sick in December) could have had COVID last winter. But it’s really difficult for me to understand how it could have been here and go unnoticed until February when we *officially* recognized 3 people here who were sick with it. And then the count began. 

I really wish ds had been living here when he got sick because I did not get to observe him sick; he was at college. But he maintains that he has never been so sick in his life and he also had another round of “the flu” a couple of weeks after that “flu.” Which is exactly what some people describe with COVID, though I guess there is still some debate about whether this is re-infection or a flare-up. I just know that that has never, ever happened to him in his life. It has never, ever happened to me, either. Anytime I have gotten very sick with the flu or a FLI, I’m good for years. 🤷🏻‍♀️

[Ausmumof3]

https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2020/06/19/politics/uss-roosevelt-investigation/index.html?__twitter_impression=true

@Sneezyone

captain crosier may be fired after all?

Edited June 20, 2020 by Ausmumof3
Oops wrong link

[Pen]

4 hours ago, Quill said:

If that’s true, it is logical to believe there really *is* a possibility people on the east coast of the US (like my son, who was sick in December) could have had COVID last winter. But it’s really difficult for me to understand how it could have been here and go unnoticed until February when we *officially* recognized 3 people here who were sick with it. And then the count began. 

I really wish ds had been living here when he got sick because I did not get to observe him sick; he was at college. But he maintains that he has never been so sick in his life and he also had another round of “the flu” a couple of weeks after that “flu.” Which is exactly what some people describe with COVID, though I guess there is still some debate about whether this is re-infection or a flare-up. I just know that that has never, ever happened to him in his life. It has never, ever happened to me, either. Anytime I have gotten very sick with the flu or a FLI, I’m good for years. 🤷🏻‍♀️

 

Yeah, I guess so. Maybe there are sewage water samples they can test here too. 

[Sneezyone]

32 minutes ago, Ausmumof3 said:

https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2020/06/19/politics/uss-roosevelt-investigation/index.html?__twitter_impression=true

@Sneezyone

captain crosier may be fired after all?

Predictable given the current administration but sad nonetheless.

[Melissa in Australia]

numbers in Victoria again increased 25 in the last 24 hours. restrictions are being tightened up again . can only have 5 people visiting  at your house, outdoor gatherings of no more than 10. lifting of restrictions that was to happen on Monday will be delayed

[SoCal_Bear]

Researchers are finding internal organ damage in asymptomatic cases. 

https://www.kpbs.org/news/2020/jun/14/scripps-asymptomatic-coronavirus-patients-organ/?fbclid=IwAR0bxc9nd47ILXJNwOG4eUOFasAyfslH42fHpc3bYq1XLRPx8dTILM7qATw

 

[ktgrok]

“If these younger people, who are less likely to get sick mounted a successful immune response, then [the virus] shifting to a younger age group would be good, because by the time they got older, everything would be better because they’d be more resistant to it,” she said. “Unfortunately, with this disease, we don’t mount a long-lasting immune response. We never have mounted a very good immune response in any of the other six coronaviruses.”

 

And despite their higher odds of survival, young people still can suffer damage to their health or die from the disease.

 

“They can still get very sick, they can still get hospitalized, and they can still spread it to other people,” said Prins, of the University of Florida. “As you see it spreading in the younger age group, they are still spreading it to older people in their lives.” https://www.sun-sentinel.com/coronavirus/fl-ne-coronavirus-florida-younger-20200620-zdbyrk6h25cwxak5h74cchirke-story.html

[ktgrok]

https://www.the-scientist.com/news-opinion/studies-report-rapid-loss-of-covid-19-antibodies-67650

“One of the studies found that 10 percent of nearly 1,500 COVID-positive patients registered undetectable antibody levels within weeks of first showing symptoms, while the other of 74 patients found they typically lost their antibodies two to three months after recovering from the infection, especially among those who tested positive but were asymptomatic...These reports highlight the need to develop strong vaccines, because immunity that develops naturally during infection is suboptimal and short-lived in most people,” Akiko Iwasaki, a viral immunologist at Yale University who was not involved in either study, tells The New York Times. “We cannot rely on natural infection to achieve herd immunity.”

[EmseB]

1 hour ago, calbear said:

Researchers are finding internal organ damage in asymptomatic cases. 

https://www.kpbs.org/news/2020/jun/14/scripps-asymptomatic-coronavirus-patients-organ/?fbclid=IwAR0bxc9nd47ILXJNwOG4eUOFasAyfslH42fHpc3bYq1XLRPx8dTILM7qATw

 

What does this phrase mean, "significant subclinical lung abnormalities"?

[ktgrok]

14 minutes ago, EmseB said:

What does this phrase mean, "significant subclinical lung abnormalities"?

I will look it up to be sure, but my understanding is it means there are significant abnormalities on the imaging, but without symptoms strong enough to be seen on physical exam. Some illnesses are diagnosed clinically - with exam/history, some are diagnosed with labs and imaging. 

Edited - yup. 

sub·clin·i·cal

/ˌsəbˈklinik(ə)l/

Learn to pronounce

 

adjective

MEDICINE

 

1. relating to or denoting a disease which is not severe enough to present definite or readily observable symptoms.

Edited June 21, 2020 by Ktgrok