Asymptomatic COVID-19 patients aren’t spreading virus

[BookwormTo2]

WHO is now saying that asymptomatic COVID-19 patients aren’t spreading the virus, or at least rarely. https://www.cnbc.com/2020/06/08/asymptomatic-coronavirus-patients-arent-spreading-new-infections-who-says.html

So, no masking for people without COVID-19 symptoms may be done? I hope so, because college life will be much easier for DD.

[melmichigan]

It's a contradictory statement to me, and a poor headline.  They are telling governments where to focus.

Quote

She acknowledged that some studies have indicated asymptomatic or presymptomatic spread in nursing homes and in household settings. More research and data are needed to “truly answer” the question of whether the coronavirus can spread widely through asymptomatic carriers, Van Kerkhove added.

 

Edited June 8, 2020 by melmichigan

[HeartString]

I’ve been seeing this article floating around saying the exact opposite.   Ugh! This is so frustrating! 
 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/time.com/5848949/covid-19-asymptomatic-spread/%3famp=true

In a study published June 3 in the Annals of Internal Medicine, researchers at the Scripps Research Translational Institute reviewed data from 16 different groups of COVID-19 patients from around the world to get a better idea of how many cases of coronavirus can likely be traced to people who spread the virus without ever knowing they were infected. Their conclusion: at minimum, 30%, and more likely 40% to 45%.

 

[EmseB]

The WHO also said in late January that there was no evidence of human-to-human transmission when many people obviously knew better.

[Tanaqui]

I don't often say this about information from the WHO, but I don't believe this for one second.

[BookwormTo2]

I’m not a science person, but it seems to me those in the field of science are always learning new things — new evidence, new tech examining things etc. In this case, what the WHO seems to be saying is that “It’s very rare” for an asymptomatic COVID-19 person to spread COVID-19. They acknowledge more studies are needed, etc. But I think this is pretty interesting and a big development. First we were told we didn’t need masks, then everyone was told to mask and social distance etc. Of course COVID-19 continues to change/mutate  from when it first appeared. Now WHO is saying “it’s very rare” for asymptomatic people to spread COVID-19. I see that CNBC changed their headline to better reflect the WHO statement.

As far as the article saying “She acknowledged that some studies have indicated asymptomatic or presymptomatic spread in nursing homes and in household settings. More research and data are needed to “truly answer” the question of whether the coronavirus can spread widely through asymptomatic carriers, Van Kerkhove added.”

- Scientists need to figure out in nursing homes especially — is it asymptomatic people that spread it the most or is it that the surfaces in nursing homes (and various offices) were/are not cleaned thoroughly? My suspicion is that it spreads via surfaces more than we know, and also in the air (eyes, not just nose/mouth). But what do I know... 😉

I took a look at the Annals of Internal Medicine June 3 article linked above, and it doesn’t seem to be a thorough study like the one done by the WHO.

[Corraleno]

I think defining what symptomatic/asymptomatic even mean in reference to a disease with such incredibly varied symptoms can be problematic. If one study defines "symptomatic" as having a fever over 100 plus at least 2 additional respiratory symptoms, and another study includes in the symptomatic category anyone who tests positive and can retroactively connect a sniffle or a foot rash or loss of smell from two weeks earlier, they're likely to get very different results. If the policy becomes that only "symptomatic" people need to wear masks, I think it's human nature that most people will interpret that in the narrowest way possible, and only people with a severe cough (who should really be quarantining at home anyway!) will wear masks.

[cintinative]

Recalling the WA choir story, how is that even possible if you cannot spread it while asymptomatic? Unless one of them was lying about not having symptoms?

I am with Quill. I find the conflicting information very frustrating. 

Edited June 9, 2020 by cintinative

[Jean in Newcastle]

WHO is often motivated by political reasons for what they said.  We knew from the start that it was helpful to mask but instead of just saying that we should mask but save actual PPE for medical professionals because of shortages, they said not to wear masks.  Now we know that asymptomatic people do in fact spread the virus - what percentage might be still unknown but it's not something that doesn't happen.  But people will want to spread this "news" to suit their agenda of opening, etc. 

[rebcoola]

But their is evidence that pre-symptomatic spread is common.  I thought their was a study showing that the 48hrs before symptoms had the most viral load?  So practically speaking what is the difference to the public and their mask wearing?

[BookwormTo2]

We have gotten a lot of conflicting information re: COVID-19, but I do wonder if the virus has mutated in a good way and if that’s what’s behind the recent WHO statement. I totally agree about WHO being political. Also, singing or being in a building with singing going on could still be a problem; we are still not attending church except for online. The California choir met on March 6. Here we are 3 months later and I wish more good information would come out on scientific findings about COVID-19. 

[Pen]

There have been several clear to me reports of Asymptomatic super-spreaders, so that even if many people who are Asymptomatic are not spreading it, just a few who spread it to many others is a problem.

So if 9 out of 10 Asymptomatic people don’t spread it (and incidentally not all people with symptoms spread it either), but 1 out of the 10 spreads it to 10 others, each of whom on average spreads it to 2 others (some to no one, but some to several people) that’s still a problem, even if “rare”.   And remains so for large group gatherings, schools, etc, even if it is a 1 in a 100 or, imagine a big high school, 1 in 1000  “rare” event. 

 

In addition, there have been presymptomatic super-spreaders. 

 

 

If is not clear that there has been a mutation that would decrease the transmissibility. 

 

(And I do not trust WHO . )

[SKL]

As much as I want this to be true, the "science" reverses on this stuff literally every day.  I will continue to act as though I am a carrier as far as visiting my folks etc.

[Pen]

Detection of cases, isolation, and contact tracing on symptomatic cases is important, yes.  I agree with that.  

But suggestion that we don’t need to be concerned about Asymptomatic (or presymptomatic) cases seems wrong headed, whether that’s what WHO is saying or what the article of this thread etc titles suggest as take away

 

 

2 hours ago, BookwormTo2 said:

WHO is now saying that asymptomatic COVID-19 patients aren’t spreading the virus, or at least rarely. https://www.cnbc.com/2020/06/08/asymptomatic-coronavirus-patients-arent-spreading-new-infections-who-says.html

So, no masking for people without COVID-19 symptoms may be done? I hope so, because college life will be much easier for DD.

 

No. I disagree with you. If only people with clear symptoms could have spread it, we would not have been in the mess we are in now. 

 

 

 

[catz]

I think when one thing comes out like this, you just need to wait and see and see if other studies reveal more.  WHO has the developing world in mind when they make statements and are probably trying to set priorities.   Like their dumb mask statement originally.   
 

I wouldn’t worry about a college student and masking.  They will take their cues from their community when they get there.  And I expect that will vary by campus and what case loads look like in those communities.  ETA I have a rising college sophomore that has worked through lots of sensory quirkinesses over the years.  

Edited June 8, 2020 by FuzzyCatz

[GoodGrief]

If a person is not coughing/sneezing, it makes sense that casual contact with that person carries a low risk of transmission. There are probably factors that compound the risk though: very close physical contact, sharing a small enclosed space, possibly singing or another situation where air is being forcefully exhaled in an enclosed space.

This does not surprise me at all. I've been through two rounds of  (confirmed by testing) diagnosed flu with my teen daughter in the last two years. I am not vaccinated, but have yet to get the flu, even with an active case in the house. We are not a very physical/touchy family though (for better or for worse).

[Ali in OR]

This just doesn't ring true to me. Oregon's coronavirus numbers have skyrocketed this past week, and some of that is an outbreak at Pacific Foods in Newport. They have 124 confirmed cases in a county that's only had ~155 cumulative cases. They're not catching it in the community, they're catching it at Pacific Foods. But they're saying 95% did not report symptoms. I guess that could mean there's a super superspreader in the 5%, but it seems far more likely that asymptomatic people are spreading the disease. I guess we'll see if numbers go up in that community. Here's a clip from the article I read:

In a press release issued today, Pacific Seafood said 376 workers at their five Newport facilities were tested for COVID-19 and 53 Pacific Seafood team members and 71 locally-based contractors have tested positive for a total of 124 confirmed cases.

From the release:

The vast majority, 95 percent, did not report any symptoms and none of our workers have been hospitalized. All international, seasonal workers have tested negative for COVID-19 and have not yet started work in any of the facilities. Oregon Health Authority indicates the risk to the general public is low.

from article found here: https://lincolncityhomepage.com/pacific-seafood-covid-19-outbreak-due-to-out-of-state-workers-former-employees-say/

[TCB]

There is a guy on FB called David Blake Jr who I have been following. He just posted this:

The WHO has announced that contact tracers from multiple places have communicated that COVID-19 transmissions from people who never develop symptoms are rare. These have been reported as asymptomatic people, but that is incorrect. It is never-symptomatic people, and that is an important distinction. Around half the COVID-19 transmission comes from pre-symptomatic people. These people caught the COVID19 and have not developed symptoms yet, but will. It is VERY typical for influenza to have a pre-symptomatic transmissible day. COVID-19 appears to have two. And, some of the highest transmission times are the day before symptoms show up. Also, never-symptomatic people can transmit the virus, it just happens more rarely. A young person in China brought it home where he never developed symptoms, but his grandfather died, in some of the earliest contact tracing published. I don't think this in ANY WAY changes the value of wearing a mask whenever you are near any of the three C's. https://www.cnn.com/2020/06/08/health/coronavirus-asymptomatic-spread-who-bn/index.html

[Pen]

I think you should change the thread title.

If people see it in passing it may add to a subliminal belief that all is well.  Or all is substantially more well than it is.

 

 

[Pen]

@BookwormTo2   

Adding: I don’t trust WHO, but your title goes beyond what WHO has asserted. 

“Rare” vs “aren’t “: not the same thing

 

[sassenach]

3 hours ago, cintinative said:

Recalling the California choir story, how is that even possible if you cannot spread it while asymptomatic? Unless one of them was lying about not having symptoms?

I am with Quill. I find the conflicting information very frustrating. 

On that, the report I read stated that there was someone in attendance who did have mild cold symptoms. (and I believe it was in Washington)

[ktgrok]

I really really hope it is true....but this part stood out to me and seems to bely the headline:

She acknowledged that some studies have indicated asymptomatic or presymptomatic spread in nursing homes and in household settings. 

More research and data are needed to “truly answer” the question of whether the coronavirus can spread widely through asymptomatic carriers, Van Kerkhove added.

[Ausmumof3]

There are some questions over it due to much of the spreading in asymptomatic nursing home patients was in dementia patients meaning they may not have accurately been reporting symptoms.  
 

I think unfortunately overall we need to act as if it does for now because we don’t know for sure. 
 

overall I feel that other than some superspreaders events this virus has proved to be less contagious in some ways than we thought at first (probably not spreading much by contact with surfaces etc, relatively low antibody prevalence).  The success of lockdown measures toward elimination in places that took it seriously early.

[Ausmumof3]

 

disclaimer - I have no clue who this guy is he’s not a scientist.  But seems to be a reasonable summary of the issues with the who statement.

[cintinative]

20 minutes ago, sassenach said:

On that, the report I read stated that there was someone in attendance who did have mild cold symptoms. (and I believe it was in Washington)

 

From the CDC report (https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/mm6919e6.htm): "No choir member reported having had symptoms at the March 3 practice. One person at the March 10 practice had cold-like symptoms beginning March 7. " "In total, 78 members attended the March 3 practice, and 61 attended the March 10 practice (Table 1). Overall, 51 (65.4%) of the March 3 practice attendees became ill; all but one of these persons also attended the March 10 practice. Some members exclusively attended one practice; among 21 members who only attended March 3, one became ill and was not tested (4.8%), and among three members who only attended March 10, two became ill (66.7%), with one COVID-19 case being laboratory-confirmed."

So, in the first practice, no one reported any symptoms. By the second, one person reported cold-like symptoms.  It's hard saying if that person was asymptomatic at the first practice, but people did get sick after the 1st practice that didn't also go to the 2nd. It's interesting that the resulting cases were higher if you attended both practices.

[Ausmumof3]

https://www.acpjournals.org/doi/10.7326/M20-3012
 

Also another study on asymptomatic transmission.  

“Key SummaryPoints

The likelihood that approximately 40% to 45% of those infected with SARS-CoV-2 will remain asymptomatic suggests that the virus might have greater potential than previously estimated to spread silently and deeply through human populations.

Asymptomatic persons can transmit SARS-CoV-2 to others for an extended period, perhaps longer than 14 days.

The absence of COVID-19 symptoms in persons infected with SARS-CoV-2 might not necessarily imply an absence of harm. More research is needed to determine the significance of subclinical lung changes visible on computed tomography scans.

The focus of testing programs for SARS-CoV-2 should be substantially broadened to include persons who do not have symptoms of COVID-19.”

[Jean in Newcastle]

45 minutes ago, sassenach said:

On that, the report I read stated that there was someone in attendance who did have mild cold symptoms. (and I believe it was in Washington)

The choir was in Washington.

The party was in California and had someone with a cough who was joking about probably having COVID 19. 

[sassenach]

46 minutes ago, Jean in Newcastle said:

The choir was in Washington.

The party was in California and had someone with a cough who was joking about probably having COVID 19. 

That's right. But I also read that they identified a primary patient at the choir practice who had mild cold symptoms.

[Pen]

3 minutes ago, sassenach said:

That's right. But I also read that they identified a primary patient at the choir practice who had mild cold symptoms.

 

I have heard it both ways— everyone completely Asymptomatic (Or presymptomatic, as case may be, but anyway with no symptoms.)

Or otoh that someone didn’t recognize mild symptoms at the time, only in retrospect...

 

[ktgrok]

1 hour ago, Pen said:

 

I have heard it both ways— everyone completely Asymptomatic (Or presymptomatic, as case may be, but anyway with no symptoms.)

Or otoh that someone didn’t recognize mild symptoms at the time, only in retrospect...

 

That is a tricky thing. I mean, how many people with say, a headache, are going to realize they might have COVID an isolate, etc? Not many. 

[Pen]

2 hours ago, Ktgrok said:

That is a tricky thing. I mean, how many people with say, a headache, are going to realize they might have COVID an isolate, etc? Not many. 

 

Also a lot of people have things that could be described as “mild cold” symptoms a lot of the time.  A bit of headache, a bit of stuffiness, a slightly scratchy throat, a single sneeze...   maybe it’s a tiny cold symptom, maybe a tiny CV19 symptom, maybe a bit of allergenic dust, or the barometric pressure changing...   and if they don’t themselves know of a clear CV19 contact, might especially not think that they have an illness that has only very minor symptoms but may kill several friends.

 

[cintinative]

11 hours ago, Jean in Newcastle said:

The choir was in Washington.

Corrected my typo!

12 hours ago, cintinative said:

 

From the CDC report (https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/mm6919e6.htm😞 "No choir member reported having had symptoms at the March 3 practice. One person at the March 10 practice had cold-like symptoms beginning March 7. " "In total, 78 members attended the March 3 practice, and 61 attended the March 10 practice (Table 1). Overall, 51 (65.4%) of the March 3 practice attendees became ill; all but one of these persons also attended the March 10 practice. Some members exclusively attended one practice; among 21 members who only attended March 3, one became ill and was not tested (4.8%), and among three members who only attended March 10, two became ill (66.7%), with one COVID-19 case being laboratory-confirmed."

So, in the first practice, no one reported any symptoms. By the second, one person reported cold-like symptoms.  It's hard saying if that person was asymptomatic at the first practice, but people did get sick after the 1st practice that didn't also go to the 2nd. It's interesting that the resulting cases were higher if you attended both practices.

 

I can't speak to if the person noticed something during the 1st practice but it is not mentioned in the CDC report.

[cintinative]

2 hours ago, Happymomof1 said:

I used to think that... Not sure I do now.  The death rate is just so low where I live and that is one thing I don't understand when you look at the chart from John Hopkins

 https://www.cnn.com/interactive/2020/health/coronavirus-us-maps-and-cases/

For Texas is is 6 people that die for every 100,000.  Much less in my area.  But then other places the death rate is much, much higher: NY 156, Louisiana 63.  It feels like from my area that death is very unlikely.  I'm acting like it is still likely, but living with that kind of fear and anxiety. I'm not sure I can do that long term. I'm wondering, worrying and watching right now.  But if in a month, we have not had the tremendous spike that behavior says we should with all of the singing church services, big city protests, then i may be joining the less cautious.  I'm tired of being scared all the time.  Scared friends will die. Scared loved ones will die.  

 

I hear you. At some point our worry takes its own toll on our bodies.  I hear the weariness in what you are saying. I think many, many of us are there. Even those of us that firmly believe that there is a risk.  I am weary. I miss my friends.  I want to go back to church.  Many people here seem to think that since things have opened up, they can just return to normal in every way, and it is very hard to be one of just a few that does not do that. It is hard knowing people see my caution and sometimes judge it. 

Personally, I am less worried about the death aspect than I am about the stories of long stays in the hospital followed by long recoveries. It's very random sometimes who ends up with two months in the hospital and who doesn't. They have interviewed a couple of people on our news pressers who were in the hospital for a month or more (one man was in for two full months) and both had no pre-existing health issues or co-morbidities. One was a pediatrician. He is still struggling to even walk after about three months of being bedridden.   I am *not* saying that death is not a scary outcome or a tragic one.  It absolutely is.  I just feel like in the absence of solid scientific data, we cannot be certain what our outcome will be if we contract COVID.   Everyone has to determine what level of risk they are willing to accept and respect that others may have differing views on this.  Since all the members of my family have some sort of autoimmune condition (my youngest only has mild asthma, but I am counting it), if I were to name my fear at this point, it is that one of us would go through this sort of extended agony of illness that you read about in the news articles.  It may very well be that the risk for that is very low, but no one can say it is zero.  That is the struggle for me with so much of this--the science is not settled, but everyone wishes it was.  

 

 

Edited June 9, 2020 by cintinative

[ktgrok]

1 hour ago, Happymomof1 said:

I used to think that... Not sure I do now.  The death rate is just so low where I live and that is one thing I don't understand when you look at the chart from John Hopkins

 https://www.cnn.com/interactive/2020/health/coronavirus-us-maps-and-cases/

For Texas is is 6 people that die for every 100,000.  Much less in my area.  But then other places the death rate is much, much higher: NY 156, Louisiana 63.  It feels like from my area that death is very unlikely.  I'm acting like it is still likely, but living with that kind of fear and anxiety. I'm not sure I can do that long term. I'm wondering, worrying and watching right now.  But if in a month, we have not had the tremendous spike that behavior says we should with all of the singing church services, big city protests, then i may be joining the less cautious.  I'm tired of being scared all the time.  Scared friends will die. Scared loved ones will die.  

Keep in mind that in many places deaths are not reported until weeks and weeks after the actual death. In my state, you could look at say, yesterday's data, June 9th, and it may say 15 deaths. But in a week from now, if I go back and look at June 9th' data they will have updated it and now it says 50 deaths. And in a month from now if I look it may say 100 deaths. The CDC specifically says that due to the time it takes for death certificates to be released, autopsies, reporting agencies to send things and then process them, etc it can take 2-8 weeks to get accurate (ish) death numbers. And that may never include people that died at home of say, a heart attack or stroke, who were not tested. And some areas are just flat out not reporting - I know some counties in my state won't release that info. 

17 minutes ago, cintinative said:

 

 

Personally, I am less worried about the death aspect than I am about the stories of long stays in the hospital followed by long recoveries. It's very random sometimes who ends up with two months in the hospital and who doesn't. They have interviewed a couple of people on our news pressers who were in the hospital for a month or more (one man was in for two full months) and both had no pre-existing health issues or co-morbitities. 

 

 

This. I'm unlikely to die from it, my husband is higher risk than me but still strong. But we flat out don't have time for him or I to be laid up in the hospital for weeks or months - or for him to be out of work for a month, etc. That's just pretty much disaster territory financially for a lot of people, and a logistical nightmare, etc etc. Not to mention that yes, it is mentally hard to be fearful, or for my kids not to play with their friends, but how much harder would it be on them emotionally to have daddy or mommy in the hospital for weeks and not even be able to visit them? 

I've also, personally, had experience with virus induced heart failure  and kidney damage in my ex husband, and viral induced neurological issues with my son, so perhaps am way more aware or sensitive to the long lasting, but not immediately fatal, effects of viruses. 

[cintinative]

50 minutes ago, Ktgrok said:

 I know some counties in my state won't release that info. 

Could you PM me the names? 

[ktgrok]

17 minutes ago, cintinative said:

Could you PM me the names? 

So it seems it isn't that they don't report them to the state, but that the state and county numbers don't match up, and the state made the counties stop releasing their own numbers. https://www.tampabay.com/news/health/2020/04/29/florida-medical-examiners-were-releasing-coronavirus-death-data-the-state-made-them-stop/

but basically, the death numbers here seem to lag a lot from when the actual death occurs. So I'm not putting much stock in it. 

Also, there is the fact that deaths will lag, even if reported perfectly in real time, 1-2 weeks behind infections. So a spike in infections won't show a spike in deaths for a while. 

I'm honestly pretty scared right now for my area, Orange County, FL. My gut is saying we may be the next Broward/Dade county. Our cases per day doubled, our percent positive numbers went up, and we just opened theme parks, bars, clubs, and now gyms are at full capacity, retail stores are full capacity, restaurants are theoretically at 50% capacity but friends are saying they look full, etc. And masks are not mandatory and shunned by a lot of people. 

I just got unfriended on facebook for pointing out that although I have no idea what schools should do, I do know that they are not just considering the kids, but also have to consider the risk to staff as well. I was told it wasn't "my fight" as a homeschool parent, and that SHE wasn't going to "live in fear" or teach her kids to do that. I pointed out that my sister is a public school administrator with asthma who already had one month long lung infection, my niece with asthma also is in public school, and my husband teaches at the college level and has risk factors, so although I homeschool, I am concerned about what happens in the school system - concerned, but not fighting about it. Apparantly that's crazy talk and she got very angry and unfriended me. That "not living in fear" is the typical attitude here. We have had a record number of cases in the past week, much higher than before, and yet yesterday one neighbor posted about how happy she was to be back at the gym and another was asking for nail salon recommendations. None wear masks. 

So yeah, take that attitude, add in the clubs/bars/theme parks, and people saying they don't care what is happening, they want their kids in school 5 days a week, they don't want masks, or any other safety accomodations, and the death numbers being low isn't comforting. Because I worry they won't stay low. 

(sorry, this kind of went off on a tangent. I'm REALLY frustrated today)

Edited June 9, 2020 by Ktgrok

[Pen]

3 hours ago, Happymomof1 said:

I used to think that... Not sure I do now.  The death rate is just so low where I live and that is one thing I don't understand when you look at the chart from John Hopkins

 https://www.cnn.com/interactive/2020/health/coronavirus-us-maps-and-cases/

For Texas is is 6 people that die for every 100,000.  Much less in my area.  But then other places the death rate is much, much higher: NY 156, Louisiana 63.  It feels like from my area that death is very unlikely.  I'm acting like it is still likely, but living with that kind of fear and anxiety. I'm not sure I can do that long term. I'm wondering, worrying and watching right now.  But if in a month, we have not had the tremendous spike that behavior says we should with all of the singing church services, big city protests, then i may be joining the less cautious.  I'm tired of being scared all the time.  Scared friends will die. Scared loved ones will die.  

 

What’s your known case rate in your area?   (And how much do people travel in and out?)

Maybe in your area it really is so low you can do all your activities without worry?  

 

[DoraBora]

1 hour ago, Ktgrok said:

Keep in mind that in many places deaths are not reported until weeks and weeks after the actual death. In my state, you could look at say, yesterday's data, June 9th, and it may say 15 deaths. But in a week from now, if I go back and look at June 9th' data they will have updated it and now it says 50 deaths. And in a month from now if I look it may say 100 deaths. The CDC specifically says that due to the time it takes for death certificates to be released, autopsies, reporting agencies to send things and then process them, etc it can take 2-8 weeks to get accurate (ish) death numbers. And that may never include people that died at home of say, a heart attack or stroke, who were not tested. And some areas are just flat out not reporting - I know some counties in my state won't release that info. 

If someone dies at home of a heart attack or whatever, why should that be classified a Covid death?  Even if they test positive at the post-mortem, would that count?

 

[Matryoshka]

6 minutes ago, DoraBora said:

If someone dies at home of a heart attack or whatever, why should that be classified a Covid death?  Even if they test positive at the post-mortem, would that count?

Because Covid has been shown to cause strokes and heart attacks in people who would not otherwise have had them.  It seems to be a vascular disease as much (or more?) than a respiratory one, and this is one of the primary ways it kills.  If you die from a stroke or heart attack while infected with Covid (or even after just having 'recovered' from it - there seems to be some lag in some people, where clots and such develop after 'recovering'), Covid is likely the cause, it's not a coincidence.

Edited June 9, 2020 by Matryoshka

[Pen]

1 hour ago, cintinative said:

 

I hear you. At some point our worry takes its own toll on our bodies.  I hear the weariness in what you are saying. I think many, many of us are there. Even those of us that firmly believe that there is a risk.  I am weary. I miss my friends.  I want to go back to church.  Many people here seem to think that since things have opened up, they can just return to normal in every way, and it is very hard to be one of just a few that does not do that. It is hard knowing people see my caution and sometimes judge it. 

Personally, I am less worried about the death aspect than I am about the stories of long stays in the hospital followed by long recoveries. It's very random sometimes who ends up with two months in the hospital and who doesn't. They have interviewed a couple of people on our news pressers who were in the hospital for a month or more (one man was in for two full months) and both had no pre-existing health issues or co-morbidities. One was a pediatrician. He is still struggling to even walk after about three months of being bedridden.   I am *not* saying that death is not a scary outcome or a tragic one.  It absolutely is.  I just feel like in the absence of solid scientific data, we cannot be certain what our outcome will be if we contract COVID.   Everyone has to determine what level of risk they are willing to accept and respect that others may have differing views on this.  Since all the members of my family have some sort of autoimmune condition (my youngest only has mild asthma, but I am counting it), if I were to name my fear at this point, it is that one of us would go through this sort of extended agony of illness that you read about in the news articles.  It may very well be that the risk for that is very low, but no one can say it is zero.  That is the struggle for me with so much of this--the science is not settled, but everyone wishes it was.  

 

 

 

That’s true for me too. The long very debilitating, possibly permanent health damage survival cases worry me more than death. 

Also I view the US CV19 death statistics as being basically whatever the figure is per only two to three months. March something through June something if CV19 arrived in state on early side, April - June if later arrival... 

 

China is just about like a flat line of deaths on the graph below, but North America and some other parts of the world are expanding...

And I would presume that a graph showing long term hospitalizations and long term debilitating symptoms would be similarly growing.

[cintinative]

Multiple people in the "this has all been an overreaction" camp are sharing the WHO news report. 

[Pen]

1 hour ago, Ktgrok said:

So it seems it isn't that they don't report them to the state, but that the state and county numbers don't match up, and the state made the counties stop releasing their own numbers. https://www.tampabay.com/news/health/2020/04/29/florida-medical-examiners-were-releasing-coronavirus-death-data-the-state-made-them-stop/

but basically, the death numbers here seem to lag a lot from when the actual death occurs. So I'm not putting much stock in it. 

Also, there is the fact that deaths will lag, even if reported perfectly in real time, 1-2 weeks behind infections. So a spike in infections won't show a spike in deaths for a while. 

I'm honestly pretty scared right now for my area, Orange County, FL. My gut is saying we may be the next Broward/Dade county. Our cases per day doubled, our percent positive numbers went up, and we just opened theme parks, bars, clubs, and now gyms are at full capacity, retail stores are full capacity, restaurants are theoretically at 50% capacity but friends are saying they look full, etc. And masks are not mandatory and shunned by a lot of people. 

I just got unfriended on facebook for pointing out that although I have no idea what schools should do, I do know that they are not just considering the kids, but also have to consider the risk to staff as well. I was told it wasn't "my fight" as a homeschool parent, and that SHE wasn't going to "live in fear" or teach her kids to do that. I pointed out that my sister is a public school administrator with asthma who already had one month long lung infection, my niece with asthma also is in public school, and my husband teaches at the college level and has risk factors, so although I homeschool, I am concerned about what happens in the school system - concerned, but not fighting about it. Apparantly that's crazy talk and she got very angry and unfriended me. That "not living in fear" is the typical attitude here. We have had a record number of cases in the past week, much higher than before, and yet yesterday one neighbor posted about how happy she was to be back at the gym and another was asking for nail salon recommendations. None wear masks. 

So yeah, take that attitude, add in the clubs/bars/theme parks, and people saying they don't care what is happening, they want their kids in school 5 days a week, they don't want masks, or any other safety accomodations, and the death numbers being low isn't comforting. Because I worry they won't stay low. 

(sorry, this kind of went off on a tangent. I'm REALLY frustrated today)

 

A person I know who like me lives in rural OR, said that a family on her road had a birthday party after county went into phase 1 opening.  The party guests included relatives from a city in our state. No one was known to be sick at party time, but then a city relative started showing symptoms and tested positive for CV19, and now the the rural family is getting symptoms too.  

It doesn’t seem to take much socializing and travel to get it going. 

[Pen]

5 hours ago, Happymomof1 said:

I used to think that... Not sure I do now.  The death rate is just so low where I live and that is one thing I don't understand when you look at the chart from John Hopkins

 https://www.cnn.com/interactive/2020/health/coronavirus-us-maps-and-cases/

For Texas is is 6 people that die for every 100,000.  Much less in my area.  But then other places the death rate is much, much higher: NY 156, Louisiana 63.  It feels like from my area that death is very unlikely.  I'm acting like it is still likely, but living with that kind of fear and anxiety. I'm not sure I can do that long term. I'm wondering, worrying and watching right now.  But if in a month, we have not had the tremendous spike that behavior says we should with all of the singing church services, big city protests, then i may be joining the less cautious.  I'm tired of being scared all the time.  Scared friends will die. Scared loved ones will die.  

 

I looked up death rate for Texas for auto fatalities and got a figure of ~12  per 100,000 per year.  So it looks like CV19 is at about half that for only probably really mostly 2 months, but let’s call it 3 since the virus was around there long enough for fatal cases to run their course from infected presymptomatic to dead.   

So, the death rate per population for CV19 for a whole year for TX (or any state) could be expected to grow from what it is now. 

 I suggest being at least as careful  for CV19 as you are for driving.  Seat belts? Maybe car with air bags?, good brakes?, good tire treads?,  leaving a cushion of stopping distance between you and car ahead?,   Added caution on holidays when people tend to get drunk?, I don’t know, of course, how careful a driver you are, or others in your community. 

 

I am sure you can figure out how to find rough carefulness equivalents for the virus— such as physical distance for the virus in place of stopping distance for braking.  Perhaps masks in place of seatbelts etc. 

[ktgrok]

2 hours ago, DoraBora said:

If someone dies at home of a heart attack or whatever, why should that be classified a Covid death?  Even if they test positive at the post-mortem, would that count?

 

Because Covid causes heart attacks, blood clots, strokes, etc. So if they are not tested we don't know if they had a heart attack from normal reasons or if they had Covid. We'd need testing and an autopsy to look at what was going on. And that isn't happening in a lot of cases, and when it does, that takes time. So death rates will be inaccurate at least in teh short term. 

1 hour ago, Arctic Mama said:

The thing is, it’s so tough to tell what to believe when you have an increasing number of positives and an increasing body of testing, but not an increasing lethality rate with that, or even severe side effects.  And given how many people seem to be testing positive while family and friends are not, I do wonder if it just isn’t as easy to spread outside of vulnerable populations and possibly because of mutation.

I think that is what we are wondering though - IS there not an increasing lethality rate, or is reporting just lagging to the point where we aren't seeing it yet. 

[TracyP]

2 hours ago, DoraBora said:

If someone dies at home of a heart attack or whatever, why should that be classified a Covid death?  Even if they test positive at the post-mortem, would that count?

 

I'm not sure if cases are being classified the same in every state. In my state this would count as a covid death. Also in my state, if someone in a nursing home is dying and they contract covid, their death will be classified as a covid death. The health department claims that this distinction between dying *with covid* versus dying *from covid* is not important right now. They are just trying to be consistent.

[Pen]

 

1 minute ago, Ktgrok said:

I think that is what we are wondering though - IS there not an increasing lethality rate, or is reporting just lagging to the point where we aren't seeing it yet. 

 

What do you mean by increasing lethality rate?

 

afaik the virus is not either more nor less lethal than it was 

There seems to have been a decrease in deaths per day from the highest they were trailing about a month after lock down measures. 

 

Many of us think it will go up again as we “open up”— but maybe not to as high a level as it was in mid April. (Because maybe we have learned some things to help, and maybe more people will still be careful, and more outdoors for summer, and so on.)

that’s not how lethal the virus is, just deaths total and thus death rate per population 

[Pen]

So, currently from chart above, USA has between 500 and 1,000 deaths per da as a rolling average, closer to the 1000 line than the 500, from CV19, down from over 2,500 per day rolling average in mid April.

Compare to something else that we might have more experience with in risk assessment, and I again googled for automobile fatalities per day 

 

“

90 people die

 

More than 90 people die in car accidents everyday. 3 million people in the U.S. are injured every year in car accidents.”

 

 

Car Accident Statistics in the U.S. | Driver Knowledge

 

So currently, CV19 has around  7 - 8 times the fatality of automobiles, down from over 25 times the fatality (for USA, and reflecting past measures to flatten the curve). 

And possibly one could also track and compare non fatal CV19 cases that were like no big deal fender benders, ones that required longer and shorter hospital stays, ones that leave permanent disability etc. 

 

(sorry about bold, it is stuck from the bold on what I copied and pasted) 

 

 

 

[Kassia]

 

WHO backtracks comments on asymptomatic spread of coronavirus

 

https://www.wkyc.com/article/news/health/coronavirus/asymptomatic-spread-of-coronavirus-is-rare-who-official-says/507-f42b12e2-4da5-4c49-85de-06e1f81e399d?fbclid=IwAR1izjeEs59zL4urJoFENvMFaFA5z_DVbmviiCCzdTJMJ9vBRJUv8cKWp7g

[Pen]

2 hours ago, Kassia said:

 

WHO backtracks comments on asymptomatic spread of coronavirus

 

https://www.wkyc.com/article/news/health/coronavirus/asymptomatic-spread-of-coronavirus-is-rare-who-official-says/507-f42b12e2-4da5-4c49-85de-06e1f81e399d?fbclid=IwAR1izjeEs59zL4urJoFENvMFaFA5z_DVbmviiCCzdTJMJ9vBRJUv8cKWp7g

 

Thanks.

in this quote:

“Van Kerkhove said that based on data, when people without symptoms of COVID-19 are tracked over a period of time, there are very few cases of spread.”

 

But I am guessing that means Asymptomatic who tested positive! So people who know they are infected and perhaps are sometimes doing the right thing of quarantine etc?

Which is different than people who don’t know. 

 

(ETA— if it actually means what it says and they are following people who have no symptoms of CV19 and may or may not be positive for it, the exercise seems stupid.  Obviously there will be low spread if they are tracking a random population of people all, many, or most, of whom don’t happen to be infected.  Usually by Asymptomatic, we mean people who are infected but have no symptoms.  But I guess if researchers want spread from Asymptomatic people to look very low, they could include people who are not infected and thus also Asymptomatic in their figures!  And since it’s WHO? Who know what WHO would do.) 

 

Also it seems we just don’t have good figures.

"What I was referring to yesterday in the press conference was a subset of substudies. I also referred to some data that isn’t published," she said. "These are estimates, and there’s a big range from the different models. Some estimates of around 40 percent of transmission may be due to asymptomatic, but those are from models and so I didn’t include that in my answer yesterday."

 

 

 

 

 

Edited June 9, 2020 by Pen

[DoraBora]

4 hours ago, TracyP said:

I'm not sure if cases are being classified the same in every state. In my state this would count as a covid death. Also in my state, if someone in a nursing home is dying and they contract covid, their death will be classified as a covid death. The health department claims that this distinction between dying *with covid* versus dying *from covid* is not important right now. They are just trying to be consistent.

That is interesting.  I wonder when it will become important.

Seems a bit slapdash.