Jump to content

Menu

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, square_25 said:

 

I'd say that's right, but the point here isn't that they are pessimistic or optimistic -- rather, they try to use human behavior to predict what happens, which means that if you change the behavior, the predictions become wildly off. 

I haven't heard that about the infection rate -- that's interesting. I'll keep an eye out. 

I haven't seen anything like what he's saying on the hospitalization front, either, so I'm rather skeptical. From what I've seen, the disease is rather binary: either you're in trouble, or you're not. As we've known for a while, most people won't be in trouble. It's just that they really don't know what to do with the ones that are, and there's a fairly sizable chunk of those (10%, I'd guess, although those don't all die, of course.)

And we don’t know who they are.  There are pre existing conditions that raise the risk but there seems to be something else unexplained going on that makes some people far more Susceptible for some reason.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 16.7k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Ausmumof3

    3226

  • Pen

    2457

  • Arcadia

    1337

  • prairiewindmomma

    305

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

DS got home 3 hours ago!  ❤️❤️

Update-  my youngest is not only short of breath, coughing, dizzy, nausaues, and with headache-  she is also confused.  I called our doctor and talked with him and she is going to be going to the ER.

That's not a blanket right.  If my religion required human sacrifice, I can't practice it.  If my religion required sexual assault, I can't practice it. Freedom of religion isn't a blanket right

Posted Images

1 minute ago, Ausmumof3 said:

Does that mean R0?  Is that infection rate?
 

I was starting to have the opposite impression that it was maybe less contagious but more lethal than we thought but I haven’t seen recent estimates. 

Yes, the R0 is what he's talking about.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, square_25 said:

 

I'd say that's right, but the point here isn't that they are pessimistic or optimistic -- rather, they try to use human behavior to predict what happens, which means that if you change the behavior, the predictions become wildly off. 

I haven't heard that about the infection rate -- that's interesting. I'll keep an eye out. 

I haven't seen anything like what he's saying on the hospitalization front, either, so I'm rather skeptical. From what I've seen, the disease is rather binary: either you're in trouble, or you're not. As we've known for a while, most people won't be in trouble. It's just that they really don't know what to do with the ones that are, and there's a fairly sizable chunk of those (10%, I'd guess, although those don't all die, of course.)

What you said in your last paragraph seems right on. But at the same time *average* hospital stays could be shorter than they originally thought. And a smaller percentage of cases could be turning severe than they originally thought. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Ausmumof3 said:

https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/26/7/20-0282_article?deliveryName=USCDC_333-DM25287
 

this study supposedly has it at 5.7 but it’s based on Hubei data which is a bit questionable.  I don’t have the mental energy to read the whole thing right now.

He said his info is coming from Mayo clinic, CDC, and the data coming out of other states. But he didn't clarify what's what...

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, square_25 said:

 

That's the part I'm not seeing -- we definitely have the expected number of severe cases (and deaths 😞) in NY. Our countrywide CFR is not low so far, as you'd expect given the fact that we didn't prepare super well and the parts of the country that are hit hard are fairly overwhelmed. 

Yeah, he also said that they are basically ignoring data from any hotspot. Once an area gets to that point, the numbers are no longer reliable.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, square_25 said:

 

Oh, I see. In that case, I think there isn't new information, either -- South Korea had fairly promising data at the very beginning, and so does Germany now. I think it's been known for months that if you do NOT overwhelm the healthcare system, you get much better results. But that's no surprise. 

Perhaps that is the difference? Maybe early on in this they were looking at places like Italy and they have now realized that just isn't reliable? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, MissLemon said:

In the San Antonio area, there was no social distancing until maybe 2 weeks ago. Even up until last week, people were still clogging up the parks and griping that restaurants were not open. 

My husband's employer found out that a worker in the UK office was positive for COVID-19 on Monday, March 9.  Employer announced that they'd do a trial run of working from home for 70% of the staff that Thursday March 12, and then 100% of the staff the following Tuesday, "just in case" they needed to send everyone home.  By the time they completed the Thursday trial run, they'd found out that 2 workers in the Austin office had been exposed to COVID-19 cases AND had been in the San Antonio office recently. Employer never even bothered doing the 100% trial run the following week. They sent everyone home on the 13th and said they were working from home for at least a month, and then extended that out to two months.  I don't expect husband to be back in the office until July, truthfully. 

My husband's employer was one of the first to shut things down in the area, from what I can tell.  I'm really relieved they did that instead of waffling around. About 10 days after husband had been working at home, his boss emailed everyone to say there had been 2 positive COVID-19 cases from San Antonio employees. If husband's employer had not acted quickly, it would have been much, much worse.     

 

Is your husband's office Dell?

That is local to us (my husband used to ride his bike when he worked there briefly) and I remember they were doing a trial run of working from home then suddenly everyone was working from home.  And on March 12 (the last day my daughter went to soccer practice) one of the other parents told me that a Dell employee who was overseeing her son's special class at Pflugerville High School had gone over to Asia and been exposed to COVID-19 and it was unclear to me if he'd been back at the high school since returning from that trip or not.  I was actually surprised to NOT hear of confirmed cases in our little city until much later.

Austin has multiple times thanked SXSW for going ahead and cancelling when they did. Otherwise we would have had people from all over here March 13 for the festival!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Google translate of a German preliminary study.  Bearing in mind I don’t think it’s published or peer reviewed properly yet?  Not sure about tbat. 
serology testing in one area showed about 15percent of the population had antibodies to the virus.  About 2 of had active infection Cfr on that basis was around .37 per cent.  It’s also based on one location so hard to know if it’s just a pocket with a higher infection rate.
 

Prof. Dr. Hendrik Streeck (Institute of Virology)
Prof. Dr. Gunther Hartmann (Institute for Clinical Chemistry and Clinical Pharmacology, Spokesman for the Cluster of Excellence ImmunoSensation2)
Prof. Dr. Martin Exner (Institute for Hygiene and Public Health)
Prof. Dr. Matthias Schmid (Institute for Medical Biometry, Computer Science and Epidemiology)
University Hospital Bonn, Bonn, April 9, 2020
Background: The municipality of Gangelt is one of the most affected places in Germany by COVID19 in Germany. The infection is believed to be due to a carnival session on February 15, 2020, as several people tested positive for SARSCoV2 after this session. The carnival session and the outbreak of the session are currently being examined in more detail. A representative sample was drawn from the community of Gangelt (12,529 inhabitants) in the Heinsberg district. The World Health Organization (WHO) recommends a protocol in which 100 to 300 households are sampled depending on the expected prevalence. This sample was coordinated with its representativeness with Prof. Manfred Güllner (Forsa).
Aim: The aim of the study is to determine the level of the SARS-CoV2 infections (percentage of all infected) that have been undergoing and are still occurring in the Gangelt community. In addition, the status of the current SARS-CoV2 immunity is to be determined.
Procedure: A form letter was sent to approximately 600 households. A total of around 1000 residents from around 400 households took part in the study. Questionnaires were collected, throat swabs were taken and blood was tested for the presence of antibodies (IgG, IgA). The interim results and conclusions of approx. 500 people are included in this first evaluation.
Preliminary result: An existing immunity of approx. 14% (anti-SARS-CoV2 IgG positive, specificity of the method>, 99%) was determined. About 2% of the people had a current SARS-CoV-2 infection determined using the PCR method. The overall infection rate (current infection or already gone through) was approximately 15%. The mortality rate (case fatality rate) based on the total number of infected people in the community of Gangelt is approx. 0.37% with the preliminary data from this study. The lethality currently calculated by the Johns-Hopkins University in Germany is 1.98% and is 5 times higher. Mortality based on the total population in Gangelt is currently 0.15%.

Preliminary conclusion: The 5-fold higher lethality calculated by Johns-Hopkins University compared to this study in Gangelt can be explained by the different reference size of the infected. In Gangelt, this study includes all infected people in the sample, including those with asymptomatic and mild courses. The proportion of the population that has already developed immunity to SARS-CoV-2 is about 15%. This means that 15% of the population in Gangelt can no longer become infected with SARS-CoV-2, and the process has already been started until herd immunity is reached. This 15 percent share of the population reduces the speed (net reproduction number R in epidemiological models) of a further spread of SARS-CoV-2.
By adhering to stringent hygiene measures, it can be expected that the virus concentration in the event of an infection in a person can be reduced to such an extent that the severity of the disease is reduced, while at the same time developing immunity. These favorable conditions do not exist in the event of an unusual outbreak event (superspreading event, e.g. carnival session, apres ski bar Ischgl). With hygienic measures, favorable effects with regard to all-cause mortality can also be expected.
We therefore strongly recommend implementing the proposed four-phase strategy of the German Society for Hospital Hygiene (DGKH). This provides the following model:
Phase 1: Social quarantine with the aim of containing and slowing down the pandemic and avoiding an overload of the critical care structures, in particular the health care system
Phase 2: Beginning withdrawal of the quarantine while ensuring hygienic framework conditions and behavior.
Phase 3: Abolition of the quarantine while maintaining the hygienic framework
Phase 4: State of public life as before the COVID-19 pandemic (status quo ante).
(DGKH statement can be found here:
https://www.krankenhaushygiene.de/ccUpload/upload/files/2020_03_31_DGKH_Einl adug_Lageeinschaetze.pdf)
Note: These results are preliminary. The final results of the study are published and presented to the public

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Ausmumof3 said:

One thing that’s frustrating is it seems like chloroquine is now being politicised because trump recommended it and then someone took it and died.  Politics aside I hope that doesn’t interfere with decent studies on it.

but I think the reason the info is confusing is because it’s new and no one actually knows.  Every new development can make a significant difference in outcomes.  We’re trying to extrapolate from a limited amount of poor quality data so we’re going to be changing tack constantly.

Are you talking about the man in Arizona that took fish aquarium cleaner? Because that really shouldn’t factor in at all. 

  • Like 9
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Cindy in FL. said:

Are you talking about the man in Arizona that took fish aquarium cleaner? Because that really shouldn’t factor in at all. 

Lol yeah I agree.  Not a trump fan but I think you can’t really blame him for that.  People are doing all kinds of weird dumb stuff.  But it seems like somehow it’s turned into a political thing.  I guess it’s not likely to affect other countries outside US.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

I just saw that 100 docs have died so far in Italy.  That number is astounding, and I am truly fearing for docs in New York.  I'm curious, I've seen several of you talk about not counting results from New york or Italy because they are somehow different and skew results.  Can someone explain that a little bit more. 

  • Like 1
  • Sad 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, square_25 said:

Well, first of all, they are not finding any but the most serious infections, because they won't test people with mild symptoms (testing capacity isn't enough to meet the overall need). So that messes with the denominator of the fraction

(people who died from COVID-19)/(total number of people who had COVID-19).

But we also have healthcare overwhelm, which means that people are stretched thin, and patients aren't getting optimal treatment. That messes with the numerator of the fraction. Both of those inflate the numbers. 

So how does that relate to rural Texas where we are barely testing?  So many numbers and I do not know what to do with them all.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Happymomof1 said:

So how does that relate to rural Texas where we are barely testing?  So many numbers and I do not know what to do with them all.

The thing is epidemiologists don’t like to calculate case fatality rate till the end.  Anything up until then is somewhat of a guess.  Which isn’t much fun for the rest of us trying to figure out our lives.  

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, square_25 said:

Just looked up the population distribution of Gangelt, where they ran the antibody study: 

https://www.citypopulation.de/en/germany/nordrheinwestfalen/heinsberg/05370008__gangelt/

Looks pretty reasonable to me -- not young or anything :-). So the fatality rate of a third to a half of a percent seems like a reasonable estimate! That seems good. Now we just need to know how long immunity lasts... 

Hmm good to have that extra info.  I agree that study seems to be assuming that immunity will last.  I understand for other coronaviruses they think it’s only about 1-2 years.  I don’t know how flu compares.

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, calbear said:

This is just anecdoctally speaking from CA (San Diego area). Even before the SIP order was announced, there were plenty of social distancing actions being taken prior to this. We were seeing large events, field trips, competitions, etc. being cancelled well before the first SIP orders went into effect - like Bay Area 3/15. The state wide order to avoid large gatherings >200 was on 3/12.  I know within the Asian communities, there was plenty of pull back in unnecessary outside activities well before this because we were paying attention to what was happening in Asia. Enough that it was noticeable by other people, and they started to take notice as well. My thinking is that there were social behavioral changes happening locally already - enough that it may have had a significant difference in CA versus NY outcomes. 

@Arcadia were you seeing similar in the Bay Area? Other CA folks, do you recall what you were seeing? My friends and relatives in the Bay Area were pulling back already prior to the SIP order. My family was essentially SIP since 3/5.

 

 

9 hours ago, lovelearnandlive said:

I’m in CA. Our last day of school was March 13. Last day at the dance studio March 14 (hard to believe that was almost 4 weeks ago).There had been changes for at least the previous week though. Students were not allowed to come to school with *any* signs of illness. At the dance studio, parents and siblings weren’t allowed to hang out, it was drop off/pickup only. Barres, door handles, etc. were being wiped down between classes. I would say from the beginning of March people were being more cautious. 

It seems like it was sometime around the beginning of March, after the first death and the cruise ship incident, that people started taking this seriously state-wide. They had already been taking things seriously in certain areas since February.

Here is a nice timeline for CA’s response:

https://calmatters.org/health/coronavirus/2020/04/gavin-newsom-coronavirus-updates-timeline/

We (my fam) were just remarking yesterday on how quickly things shifted. On Feb 13 we sent dd to a cheer competition in LA. Plane, convention center filled with 15k people, Disneyland... not one moment of hesitation. It never even came up. She came home, got pretty darn sick, I brought her in the week of the 24th and by then things were starting to percolate. By March 3rd, the hospital that I do my nursing clinicals in had called off students. The week of March 9th I told my kids that I thought that would be their last week of school, and indeed it was. I never imagined that the rest of the year would be toast. It took me another week for that reality to set in. 

Looking back, it really is wild how things so quickly unfolded in my own understanding of the situation. 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus·

“Today marks 100 days since WHO was notified of the first cases of what we now call #COVID19 in Over 1.3M people have been infected & almost 80K have lost their lives. This pandemic is much more than a health crisis. It requires a whole-of government & society response.”

100 days!  So much happened in such a short time

Edited by Ausmumof3
  • Like 2
  • Sad 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Mainer said:

One thing I hope happens as a result of this horrific situation is that people will finally understand the value of a national health care system. I see the Brits cheering their NHS, the prime minister praising the NHS... and I just really want to have that here, too. 

When this is over, we can compare how the NHSs in developed countries fared - what worked and what didn't and what didn't make a difference.  Many of the worst hit countries have NHS.

Edited by SKL
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Ausmumof3 said:

Google translate of a German preliminary study.  Bearing in mind I don’t think it’s published or peer reviewed properly yet?  Not sure about tbat. 
serology testing in one area showed about 15percent of the population had antibodies to the virus.  About 2 of had active infection Cfr on that basis was around .37 per cent.  It’s also based on one location so hard to know if it’s just a pocket with a higher infection rate.
 

Prof. Dr. Hendrik Streeck (Institute of Virology)
Prof. Dr. Gunther Hartmann (Institute for Clinical Chemistry and Clinical Pharmacology, Spokesman for the Cluster of Excellence ImmunoSensation2)
Prof. Dr. Martin Exner (Institute for Hygiene and Public Health)
Prof. Dr. Matthias Schmid (Institute for Medical Biometry, Computer Science and Epidemiology)
University Hospital Bonn, Bonn, April 9, 2020
Background: The municipality of Gangelt is one of the most affected places in Germany by COVID19 in Germany. The infection is believed to be due to a carnival session on February 15, 2020, as several people tested positive for SARSCoV2 after this session. The carnival session and the outbreak of the session are currently being examined in more detail. A representative sample was drawn from the community of Gangelt (12,529 inhabitants) in the Heinsberg district. The World Health Organization (WHO) recommends a protocol in which 100 to 300 households are sampled depending on the expected prevalence. This sample was coordinated with its representativeness with Prof. Manfred Güllner (Forsa).
Aim: The aim of the study is to determine the level of the SARS-CoV2 infections (percentage of all infected) that have been undergoing and are still occurring in the Gangelt community. In addition, the status of the current SARS-CoV2 immunity is to be determined.
Procedure: A form letter was sent to approximately 600 households. A total of around 1000 residents from around 400 households took part in the study. Questionnaires were collected, throat swabs were taken and blood was tested for the presence of antibodies (IgG, IgA). The interim results and conclusions of approx. 500 people are included in this first evaluation.
Preliminary result: An existing immunity of approx. 14% (anti-SARS-CoV2 IgG positive, specificity of the method>, 99%) was determined. About 2% of the people had a current SARS-CoV-2 infection determined using the PCR method. The overall infection rate (current infection or already gone through) was approximately 15%. The mortality rate (case fatality rate) based on the total number of infected people in the community of Gangelt is approx. 0.37% with the preliminary data from this study. The lethality currently calculated by the Johns-Hopkins University in Germany is 1.98% and is 5 times higher. Mortality based on the total population in Gangelt is currently 0.15%.

Preliminary conclusion: The 5-fold higher lethality calculated by Johns-Hopkins University compared to this study in Gangelt can be explained by the different reference size of the infected. In Gangelt, this study includes all infected people in the sample, including those with asymptomatic and mild courses. The proportion of the population that has already developed immunity to SARS-CoV-2 is about 15%. This means that 15% of the population in Gangelt can no longer become infected with SARS-CoV-2, and the process has already been started until herd immunity is reached. This 15 percent share of the population reduces the speed (net reproduction number R in epidemiological models) of a further spread of SARS-CoV-2.
By adhering to stringent hygiene measures, it can be expected that the virus concentration in the event of an infection in a person can be reduced to such an extent that the severity of the disease is reduced, while at the same time developing immunity. These favorable conditions do not exist in the event of an unusual outbreak event (superspreading event, e.g. carnival session, apres ski bar Ischgl). With hygienic measures, favorable effects with regard to all-cause mortality can also be expected.
We therefore strongly recommend implementing the proposed four-phase strategy of the German Society for Hospital Hygiene (DGKH). This provides the following model:
Phase 1: Social quarantine with the aim of containing and slowing down the pandemic and avoiding an overload of the critical care structures, in particular the health care system
Phase 2: Beginning withdrawal of the quarantine while ensuring hygienic framework conditions and behavior.
Phase 3: Abolition of the quarantine while maintaining the hygienic framework
Phase 4: State of public life as before the COVID-19 pandemic (status quo ante).
(DGKH statement can be found here:
https://www.krankenhaushygiene.de/ccUpload/upload/files/2020_03_31_DGKH_Einl adug_Lageeinschaetze.pdf)
Note: These results are preliminary. The final results of the study are published and presented to the public

Just to add after seeing some extra twitter discussion the 0.37pc rate is apparently the IFR (infection Fatality Rate) not (case fatality rate) - confusion is something to do with the German.  I think the difference is infection fatality rate refers to how many people who are infected overall die whereas case fatality rate only calculates based on cases that are significant enough for medical attention.  I’m sure there’s someone else here who knows more about the difference.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I saw an article this morning that said South Korea was now also seeing people test positive for a second time. I know other places have mentioned it happening as well so I wonder if that is going to be a common occurrence and if it will cause issues with a possible vaccine.

  • Sad 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, square_25 said:

It’s a pretty academic distinction though :-). It’s the number we’re interested in, either way — the average chance of dying from it.

FWIW If I calculated right in Italy it’s something roughly like 1:3500 Covid deaths per person (total population).  

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, square_25 said:

It’s a pretty academic distinction though :-). It’s the number we’re interested in, either way — the average chance of dying from it.

I guess it’s useful when comparing to something like the flu.  We can’t compare the infection fatality rate from one disease to the case fatality rate from another.  I’d expect there would be a reasonable difference between the two except in cases where widespread testing is picking up most cases.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, square_25 said:

Well, that’s not the right statistic, since it includes people who were never infected, right?

Yes.  Just for my own interest to think what my likelihood of actually personally knowing someone who was both infected and died in that scenario if that makes sense?  It’s not a cfr or ifr or anything like that.  Of course there’s also the fact that different areas are affected disproportionately 

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, calbear said:

This is just anecdoctally speaking from CA (San Diego area). Even before the SIP order was announced, there were plenty of social distancing actions being taken prior to this. We were seeing large events, field trips, competitions, etc. being cancelled well before the first SIP orders went into effect - like Bay Area 3/15. The state wide order to avoid large gatherings >200 was on 3/12.  I know within the Asian communities, there was plenty of pull back in unnecessary outside activities well before this because we were paying attention to what was happening in Asia. Enough that it was noticeable by other people, and they started to take notice as well. My thinking is that there were social behavioral changes happening locally already - enough that it may have had a significant difference in CA versus NY outcomes. 

@Arcadia were you seeing similar in the Bay Area? Other CA folks, do you recall what you were seeing? My friends and relatives in the Bay Area were pulling back already prior to the SIP order. My family was essentially SIP since 3/5.

 

 

On March 6th (a Friday), I wrote a post on FB called, "The week of living dangerously," where I detailed that we went on 3 field trips that week. I titled the post that way because I knew it would be the last week that we would be taking any field trips, or basically going out at all. Sure enough, it was (and I was already feeling nervous about going out that week in early March, so we took extra precautions). So, even outside of Asian communities, that was the last time the boys went to any of their extracurriculars or other activities (including their charter schools) in San Diego. And, I agree that just that two weeks of difference is huge in looking at the stats between CA and NY.

Edited by SeaConquest
  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, square_25 said:

Do you mean that you figure it started here a few weeks earlier than in CA?

 

No, I mean that more Californians (even outside of Asian communities that were in touch with friends and relatives who knew more about what was going on in China) were socially distancing and isolating earlier than people in NY. California and the PNW are just more connected overall IMHO to the pan-Pacific region at large vs NY, which is more connected to Europe, and you can see that in the genome of the virus. De Blasio was late in closing schools vs Newsom, who has taken bold action and not pussyfooted around in making decisions that affected 40 million people (which is just a crazy number of people). When the Bay area was looking like a hot spot, it was locked down stat, with the rest of the state quickly following behind. 

  • Like 6
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Forgive me if this was posted already.

The CDC has traced Chicago's coronavirus outbreak to just *two* family gatherings.

The new case study, one of the most detailed looks at how CV19 moves through communities, shows how just one person can set off a chain reaction of infections.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/2020/04/08/funeral-birthday-party-hugs-covid-19/?fbclid=IwAR0WrLEz0aTwOiGQfNfbKBmfZaSYfkGGNClvBvDxgQ4aA6a0hnP66qyzzN8

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1
  • Sad 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, SKL said:
22 hours ago, Mainer said:

 

When this is over, we can compare how the NHSs in developed countries fared - what worked and what didn't and what didn't make a difference.  Many of the worst hit countries have NHS.

I’m curious how it will effect the economy once this over.  I anticipate that here in the US we’ll see bankruptcies spike from the medical bills families are incurring. A lot of people are losing their job, which means no insurance.  Even with good insurance a 2-3 week hospital stay could easily bankrupt a family, especially if it comes after a prolonged job loss.  Before settling on bankruptcy most families will struggle to pay those bills, which will mean less money going into the economy.   
The staggering medical bills at the end of this will be a uniquely American phenomenon. 
 

ETA: I’m not making a political point one way or the other.  I just think it will be a natural experiment that will give economists something to write papers about for a long time.  

Edited by Cnew02
  • Like 8
Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, Joker said:

I saw an article this morning that said South Korea was now also seeing people test positive for a second time. I know other places have mentioned it happening as well so I wonder if that is going to be a common occurrence and if it will cause issues with a possible vaccine.

The article that I read said that when checking for antibodies, some people  who had experienced mild symptoms (no ICU stay) didn't show enough to keep them from being reinfected although they'd tested positive and most did have some antibodies. (There was a small percentage that did not have enough antibodies to register on their test.) The article then said that the low levels of antibodies made the researchers concerned that the vaccine wouldn't be enough to trigger the immune response necessary to make the person immune to infection.

Article might have been linked in this thread already:

https://amp.scmp.com/news/china/science/article/3078840/coronavirus-low-antibody-levels-raise-questions-about?

A team from Fudan University analysed blood samples from 175 patients discharged from the Shanghai Public Health Clinical Centre and found that nearly a third had unexpectedly low levels of antibodies.

In some cases, antibodies could not be detected at all.

The researchers said they were surprised to find that the antibody “titer” value in about a third of the patients was less than 500, a level that might be too low to provide protection.

“About 30 per cent of patients failed to develop high titers of neutralising antibodies after Covid-19 infection. However, the disease duration of these patients compared to others was similar," they said.

The team also found that antibody levels rose with age, with people in the 60-85 age group displaying more than three times the amount of antibodies as people in the 15-39 age group.

“Vaccine developers may need to pay particular attention to these patients,” Huang said. If the real virus could not induce antibody response, the weakened version in the vaccine might not work in these patients either.

  • Sad 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, square_25 said:

Do you mean that you figure it started here a few weeks earlier than in CA?

 

Also, not to get too political, but the genome of the virus on the east coast clearly shows that it was coming from Europe. And closing the border to people from China and the CDC testing protocols (testing only people coming back from China) clearly left NY (and other regions, particularly on the East coast) very exposed. The virus was seeded in our country under this false sense of security because of these inadequate protocols. People coming back from Europe carrying the virus were allowed entry willy-nilly.

Edited by SeaConquest
  • Like 8
Link to post
Share on other sites

OT, but just wanted to say... Last night's seder themes of freedom, physical and mental hardship, plagues, fear of the unknown, faith in G-d, Spring rebirth and renewal, redemption, and gratitude took on extra meaning in this season of Covid 19. While we gathered around our seder table -- just the four of us this year -- I felt truly fortunate to have a roof over my head, a comfortable couch to lounge in while I drank my 4 cups of wine, enough money to afford a feast of food with which to fill my belly, surrounded by a healthy family, and safe in my home. Sometimes, perspective is truly everything. Chag Sameach to all who celebrate. Wishing my Jewish Hive friends a truly joyous Passover. Thank you all for sharing your wisdom in this thread.

Edited by SeaConquest
  • Like 26
Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.wired.com/story/we-need-a-covid-19-vaccine-lets-get-it-right-the-first-time/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=onsite-share&utm_brand=wired&utm_social-type=earned&fbclid=IwAR3cnTjPVn97uhgrAUKXI1RIGLWMaJ9ZXQO2KR9fuZ-7zS0ygxmuIAS4Uj0

An interesting article on vaccine history from past pandemics:

 

We Need a Covid-19 Vaccine—Let’s Get It Right the First Time

The flu shot campaigns of 1976 and 2009 offer key lessons for how (and how not) to distribute, monitor, and communicate about vaccines. But will anyone listen?
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, SeaConquest said:

 

No, I mean that more Californians (even outside of Asian communities that were in touch with friends and relatives who knew more about what was going on in China) were socially distancing and isolating earlier than people in NY. California and the PNW are just more connected overall IMHO to the pan-Pacific region at large vs NY, which is more connected to Europe, and you can see that in the genome of the virus. De Blasio was late in closing schools vs Newsom, who has taken bold action and not pussyfooted around in making decisions that affected 40 million people (which is just a crazy number of people). When the Bay area was looking like a hot spot, it was locked down stat, with the rest of the state quickly following behind. 

I wonder if the NY explosion was partly from not closing schools right away - so that children who were asymptomatic were spreading it to more of the population? 

Also - a question about the genome and China vs. Europe.  Wasn't the European virus also from China? 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Jean in Newcastle said:

I wonder if the NY explosion was partly from not closing schools right away - so that children who were asymptomatic were spreading it to more of the population? 

Also - a question about the genome and China vs. Europe.  Wasn't the European virus also from China? 

NY virus was unique when compared to the Washington state virus, which is because the European virus had mutated, and it  entered NY, so it is different from China version (which west coast has).

As for precautions in the bay area: my neighbors, coworkers and friends are first generation chinese immigrants whose families were traveling back to china for Christmas breaks, Chinese New Year etc. and the whole area was generally more aware and paranoid of the virus spreading since January. My son took hand sanitizer bottle to his sports practices every day starting in January and we had him wear masks in public starting in Feb, stopped eating in crowded restaurants in Feb and cancelled all his outside activities on March 1st and we are not in the minority to do so. We isolated since late february, all the big employers (with several thousand tech workers) asked them to informally work from home whenever possible and to stop using conference rooms, shaking hands and to wipe down their desks and computers every few hours in Feb, all trade conferences were cancelled and business travel halted around 1st week of march. Hoarding started in the 1st week of march though I could still get hand sanitizers then, but shelves were empty around March 10th which means that people were in lockdown mode at that point. Now, my busy city is Ghost Town and people just stay inside and it seems that suburbs are strictly following SIP guidelines.

Edited by mathnerd
  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Jean in Newcastle said:

 

Also - a question about the genome and China vs. Europe.  Wasn't the European virus also from China? 


Governments worldwide was only screening people from hotspot countries, not thinking about the European countries that the Grand Hyatt super spreader case and other infected people spread to. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok I keep seeing people talking about inflating covid #s through death certificates. The whole dying with it vs dying from it point. I know the history with how the CDC tracks the flu. They are saying anyone the dies with suspected covid should have covid as the cause on their death certificate tested or not? If that’s not the most ideal way to track this? What is? A covid checkbox? What’s the deal here? I can’t keep up with what is a conspiracy theory and what is political? 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, mathnerd said:

 

. We isolated since late february, all the big employers (with several thousand tech workers) asked them to informally work from home whenever possible and to stop using conference rooms, shaking hands and to wipe down their desks and computers every few hours in Feb, all trade conferences were cancelled and business travel halted around 1st week of march. Hoarding started in the 1st week of march though I could still get hand sanitizers then, but shelves were empty around March 10th which means that people were in lockdown mode at that point. 

I couldn’t get toilet paper and hand sanitizers since late February/early March. People literally clean off the shelves on the Feb 29th weekend of toilet paper. We went to East Bay to get our toilet paper and canned goods. Safeway restock house brand toilet paper for first week of March and then they sold out. The San Jose area’s grocery outlet stores were kind of the last to be cleared off toilet paper and canned goods, just before shelter in place started. 
 

My nearest Safeway sells Burpee seeds so we grab some packets for fun gardening while grabbing milk. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

@Plum@mathnerd@TCB

Bavaria, Germany put all the early positive cases to hospital to learn how to treat. 

https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/world/covid-19-germany-munich-cluster-italy-coronavirus-spread-12625210

“They are based in Stockdorf, a German town of 4,000 near Munich in Bavaria, and they work at car parts supplier Webasto Group.

The company was thrust under a global microscope after it disclosed that one of its employees, a Chinese woman, caught the virus and brought it to Webasto headquarters.

There, it was passed to colleagues - including, scientists would learn, a person lunching in the canteen with whom the Chinese patient had no contact.

The Jan 22 canteen scene was one of dozens of mundane incidents that scientists have logged in a medical manhunt to trace, test and isolate infected workers so that the regional government of Bavaria could stop the virus from spreading.

That hunt has helped Germany win crucial time to build its COVID-19 defences.

The time Germany bought may have saved lives, scientists say.

Its first outbreak of locally transmitted COVID-19 began earlier than Italy's, but Germany has had many fewer deaths. Italy's first detected local transmission was on Feb 21. By then Germany had kicked off a health ministry information campaign and a government strategy to tackle the virus which would hinge on widespread testing.

In Germany so far, more than 2,100 people have died of COVID-19. In Italy, with a smaller population, the total exceeds 17,600.

"We learned that we must meticulously trace chains of infection in order to interrupt them," Clemens Wendtner, the doctor who treated the Munich patients, told Reuters.

Wendtner teamed up with some of Germany's top scientists to tackle what became known as the Munich cluster, and they advised the Bavarian government on how to respond. Bavaria led the way with the lockdowns, which went nationwide on Mar 22.

...

Now known as Germany's Case #0, the Shanghai patient is a "long-standing, proven employee from project management" who Engelmann knows personally, he told Reuters.

The company has not revealed her identity or that of others involved, saying anonymity has encouraged staff to co-operate in Germany's effort to contain the virus.

The task of finding who had contact with her was made easier by Webasto workers' electronic calendars – for the most part, all the doctors needed was to look at staff appointments.

"It was a stroke of luck," said Wendtner, the doctor who treated the Munich patients. "We got all the information we needed from the staff to reconstruct the chains of infection."

...

Between Jan 27 and Feb 11, a total of 16 COVID-19 cases were identified in the Munich cluster. All but one were to develop symptoms.

All those who tested positive were sent to hospital so they could be observed and doctors could learn from the disease.

Bavaria closed down public life in mid-March. Germany has since closed schools, shops, restaurants, playgrounds and sports facilities, and many companies have shut to aid the cause.”

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, square_25 said:

That seems like a reasonable way to go, to have a record of "assumed COVID" separate from the record from "confirmed COVID." I assume it'd be optimal to have both. 

I don't agree with this since the majority of sick, symptomatic people tested for COVID are testing negative.

  • Confused 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

There were delays in social distancing in NYC as the local politicians (or at least some of them) were recommending that people act like things were pretty normal.

Another possible factor - and this is where my state's 3rd case was traced to - people who attended the AIPAC conference March 1-3 were definitely exposed.  We know some national politicians got it there.  From our county, a bus load of Jewish people went there, and before long it was all around our largely Jewish zip codes.  New York City has the largest Jewish population in the world, so I would assume multiple folks brought the virus from DC to NYC.

I think it's without doubt that the virus spread in schools, so the date of school closings was most likely a factor.  Our state closed schools when the 4th case was discovered, the first case believed to be "community spread."  NYC had hundreds of known cases before it closed schools.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, square_25 said:

I really don’t think that’s going to be a huge determiner. Canada is doing fine, and so is South Korea. NYC is not, even though it actually has really excellent healthcare normally.

The rapidity if response, density, and relative isolation from places where cases are exploding seem useful here. Type of health system much less so.

 

1 hour ago, Cnew02 said:

I’m curious how it will effect the economy once this over.  I anticipate that here in the US we’ll see bankruptcies spike from the medical bills families are incurring. A lot of people are losing their job, which means no insurance.  Even with good insurance a 2-3 week hospital stay could easily bankrupt a family, especially if it comes after a prolonged job loss.  Before settling on bankruptcy most families will struggle to pay those bills, which will mean less money going into the economy.   
The staggering medical bills at the end of this will be a uniquely American phenomenon. 
 

ETA: I’m not making a political point one way or the other.  I just think it will be a natural experiment that will give economists something to write papers about for a long time.  

 

I think it's going to cause two problems.  People who are mildly ill won't go to the doctor if they don't have insurance and might even wait too long if they are seriously ill, and people who might have been able to be treated will die.   Then, with the  unemployment numbers, most of those people are probably losing their health insurance and most probably won't be able afford COBRA or individual plans.  That is going to be HUGE for many people.

A pandemic is not the time to have millions of people without health insurance of any kind. 

  • Like 6
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Where's Toto? said:

I think it's going to cause two problems.  People who are mildly ill won't go to the doctor if they don't have insurance and might even wait too long if they are seriously ill, and people who might have been able to be treated will die.   Then, with the  unemployment numbers, most of those people are probably losing their health insurance and most probably won't be able afford COBRA or individual plans.  That is going to be HUGE for many people.

A pandemic is not the time to have millions of people without health insurance of any kind. 

And it will cascade to cause more rural hospital closures as people don't pay the bills.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, SeaConquest said:

 

Also, not to get too political, but the genome of the virus on the east coast clearly shows that it was coming from Europe. And closing the border to people from China and the CDC testing protocols (testing only people coming back from China) clearly left NY (and other regions, particularly on the East coast) very exposed. The virus was seeded in our country under this false sense of security because of these inadequate protocols. People coming back from Europe carrying the virus were allowed entry willy-nilly.

True, but I think the fact that Europe, and especially Italy, has/had a huge amount of Chinese people working in sweatshops for the fashion industry there and the US kind of overlooked that initially as a source of outbreak is...not political. Italy didn't want to sacrifice their cheap labor and it was bad timing  with the holiday travel to and from Asia.. And, again, any cutting off of travel from Asia or Europe in time to protect the US would have looked extreme. It looked extreme when we did do it and that was clearly too late.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, square_25 said:

The problem is all the numbers are nonsense. NYC really probably had hundreds on March 1st, when they found their first case, and had no clue.

We closed a week later than San Francisco, but at the beginning of that week, we didn’t even look ahead in cases. That’s the issue — they had literally a week from the first discovered case to when they figured out things were dire. No one had adjusted. 

I’m sure closing earlier would have been a good idea. I’m just not sure it was politically feasible given the available info.

Honestly the bolded was true everywhere.  Some states did it anyway.  Trust me, nobody was jumping for joy when it happened here.

Link to post
Share on other sites

🇬🇧 https://www.bbc.com/news/business-52215606

“Modern day ‘land army’

UK growers recently launched a recruitment drive, calling for a modern-day “land army” to prevent millions of tonnes of fruit and vegetables going to waste.

Mr Bridgeman told the BBC there were "encouraging signs" of people coming forward following this recruitment campaign "because they want to work, and they understand the need - we need to get the food onto the shelves this summer".

Farmers need about 70,000 workers to cover the jobs usually carried out by seasonal migrants, according to the British Growers’ Association. 

Travel and movement restrictions caused by the coronavirus pandemic left a "serious labour shortage" ahead of this picking season, the association said.

There have been calls for those working in the entertainment, hospitality or tourism industries to fill the vacancies and “pick for Britain”.

Several schemes have been set up to recruit new workers. 

The charity Concordia, for example, usually helps young people organise experiences abroad, but it has signed up more than 10,000 people to its Feed the Nation scheme to help with picking. About 70% of them have never worked on a farm before.

They are mainly students but also carpenters, chefs and former service personnel. As new people arrive, they will have to self-isolate for seven days before they are allowed to start work.

Another scheme is being put together for fruit pickers by industry bodies British Summer Fruit and British Apples and Pears.”

  • Like 11
Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, square_25 said:

It’s not that we should have had travel restrictions, it’s that we should have tested people coming in from Europe!! 

I think we should have had both. But I really don't know how that could have been accomplished given what we knew and when and given the way our FDA approves things like new diagnostic tests combined with the fact that WHO tests didn't meet US guidelines. Also considering just sheer volume of people coming into the eastern US from Europe every day. You would have had to restrict travel anyway if you wanted to test people coming in.

Link to post
Share on other sites

🇬🇧 https://www.marketwatch.com/story/uks-boris-johnson-out-of-intensive-care-as-condition-improves-2020-04-09

“LONDON (AP) — British Prime Minister Boris Johnson has been moved out of intensive care, his office said Thursday.

In a statement, a spokesman at 10, Downing Street said Johnson “has been moved this evening from intensive care back to the ward, where he will receive close monitoring during the early phase of his recovery.”

Johnson had been in intensive care for three days after his symptoms for coronavirus worsened. He tested positive for the virus two weeks ago and at first had only “mild” symptoms.”

  • Like 9
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...