OT: Corona virus

[Sammy5IsAlive]

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

From Worldometers today:

[sarcasm mode engaged]
Luxembourg has tested >60,000/M people for the virus! They're doing a great job! South Korea only 11,000/M! By comparison they don't know WTF they're doing! They really need to up their testing game just looking at the raw numbers. I'd say that they should quintuple their testing program at the very least before we have enough information to say whether their efforts have been successful. MORE TESTING! [8|]
[/sarcasm mode disengaged]

At least in terms of Europe I think there may be a big distinction between proactive testing and reactive testing. In terms of deaths/M some EU countries are doing far better than others. Luxembourg is one of them. Germany is probably the one that has had the most attention. Portugal is another country doing really well - worthy of mention given that Luxembourg and Germany are two of the richest countries in the EU whereas Portugal is the poorest in Western Europe (i.e. west of the old communist bloc).

I think that much of their success may be due to them testing in large numbers early on, isolating pockets of the virus, and slowing the spread amongst the wider national population. As opposed to Spain/Italy/France where you have high numbers of tests per capita but I would suggest that this is because they have lots of people who are sick that they are then testing.

Would you say that that approach will only work very early in the spread of the virus and that the ship has passed for the US and for European countries like Italy/Spain/France/UK?

[Sammy5IsAlive]

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

ORIGINAL: Sammy5IsAlive

A question for those of you with science/medical backgrounds (which I don't have)

One of the things that concerns me looking at what is going on in Europe is the amount of healthcare professionals (also in the UK apparently public transport workers) who are getting sick.

Is this the following a possibility?
1) An immune system, once it is up and running in response to the virus has a 'carrying capacity' of the amount of virus it can remove over X amount of time.
2) Thinking optimistically - for most healthy people this carrying capacity is above the increase in levels of virus over the same amount of time - both in terms of the virus multiplying inside of the body and, potentially also in terms of continued 'intake' of the virus from outside the body.
3) But there will still be a time lag of the immune system response to get up and running - so potentially when you test these people they will still have a level of infection Y despite showing no symptoms. This level of infection will test positive.
4) Some people will not have this balance - either because their immune system is not able to remove the virus quicker than it is spreading inside their body or because their circumstances (whether it be because they are a healthcare professional or because by some other quirk of their circumstances) they are getting repeated exposures higher than the norm. So these people will see their level of infection increase until it reaches a point where they become symptomatic - for the sake of argument 4Y.

That is one proposition.

But there might follow a more worrying possibility. That would be that absent social distancing measures individuals are gradually shedding/transmitting more virus than the 'community' carrying capacity is able to deal with. If that were the case you could potentially have a situation where large parts of the community are gradually getting more and more infected until as a community they start reaching that 4Y point where they become sick and you suddenly see precipitous rises in cases and deaths.

Is that way off beam? For me the other more basic explanation for high proportion of medical professionals dying is that they are all exhausted both in general terms and in terms of their immune systems.

Sammy,

Sorry I didn't see this post the other day. It got buried.

Since you asked for my opinion, I'll give you a quick one:

I think it's more of an exposure risk than anything else. Lots of sick people exhaling / spitting up / coughing / defecating lots and lots of viruses. Good and widespread disposable PPE lowers this risk, but there are still lots of unknowns. Healthcare workers are only human and it only takes one mistake when you're dealing with novel respiratory pathogens. When combined with the fact that few hospitals have a really-o truly-o purpose built "isolation" facility and that facility is crammed in some cases beyond reasonable capacity, it's a wonder that *all* healthcare workers aren't exposed.

What you're proposing is plausible (re: immune system variations between people). But my money is still on the 'the dose makes the poison' volume of virus that they're exposed to every day.

Thanks for the answer [:)] much appreciated

[Lowpe]

ORIGINAL: Sammy5IsAlive


I think that much of their success may be due to them testing in large numbers early on, isolating pockets of the virus, and slowing the spread amongst the wider national population.

Would you say that that approach will only work very early in the spread of the virus and that the ship has passed for the US and for European countries like Italy/Spain/France/UK?

I am not sure flattening the curve & social distancing is actually a proven scientific method for dealing with a virus at least as performed in the US. I have a friend in Paris, and even with their much stricter rules I doubt it is effective. This comes from knowing and reading information from biomedical statisticians.

If you are interested here is a half hour podcast interview of a biomedical statistician:

https://www.iheart.com/podcast/269-john ... -61236219/

[MakeeLearn]

Coronavius has built a lot of bases. And these are just the ones recon has found.

24Apr.20
Confirmed cases of Covid-19 in the US

Confirmed cases 886,047
(Today: +16,877)

Deaths 50,775
(Today: +821)

[Chickenboy]

ORIGINAL: Sammy5IsAlive

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

From Worldometers today:

[sarcasm mode engaged]
Luxembourg has tested >60,000/M people for the virus! They're doing a great job! South Korea only 11,000/M! By comparison they don't know WTF they're doing! They really need to up their testing game just looking at the raw numbers. I'd say that they should quintuple their testing program at the very least before we have enough information to say whether their efforts have been successful. MORE TESTING! [8|]
[/sarcasm mode disengaged]

At least in terms of Europe I think there may be a big distinction between proactive testing and reactive testing. In terms of deaths/M some EU countries are doing far better than others. Luxembourg is one of them. Germany is probably the one that has had the most attention. Portugal is another country doing really well - worthy of mention given that Luxembourg and Germany are two of the richest countries in the EU whereas Portugal is the poorest in Western Europe (i.e. west of the old communist bloc).

I think that much of their success may be due to them testing in large numbers early on, isolating pockets of the virus, and slowing the spread amongst the wider national population.

Would you say that that approach will only work very early in the spread of the virus and that the ship has passed for the US and for European countries like Italy/Spain/France/UK?

Yes! Exactly so! [&o]

There is scant correlation between the number of tests/M and Deaths/M for endemic viruses.

I've been trying to make the point that testing is a decision making tool. Those that had tests early and used them early to make effective decisions early were capable of sidestepping the initial wave and better controlling their index cases. If this was combined with prescient personal sanitation directives (e.g., wearing masks, handwashing and social distancing) before the virus was widespread they get extra bonus points. South Korea is an excellent example of that.

Chasing a virus testing numbers game after the virus is endemic may be necessary to identify patients for medical triage, but only if that testing doesn't delay treatment. At some point you have to yield to the understanding that the virus is endemic and ubiquitous. And this is a problem that you can't 'test your way out of' once you're in it up to your eyeballs.

Fauci said it pretty well back on March 23: "Testing is important,” he said. “But let’s not conflate testing with the action that we have to take. Whether or not you test, do this. I’m not putting down testing as an important issue, but people seem to link them so much that if you don’t have universal testing, you can’t respond to the outbreak. You really can.”

[Lowpe]

Not sure of the scale, or really what is being show on the image, but the classical way to beat a virus is herd immunity.

[MakeeLearn]

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

Not sure of the scale, or really what is being show on the image, but the classical way to beat a virus is herd immunity.

Confirmed cases of Covid-19 in the US

[MakeeLearn]

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

And this is a problem that you can't 'test your way out of' once you're in it up to your eyeballs.

To me it seems the main reason people are touting for testing is to get a understanding of the lethality of CV19. The Death Rate?

Thus, if it justifies what we have done to our societies.

[Chickenboy]

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

Not sure of the scale, or really what is being show on the image, but the classical way to beat a virus is herd immunity.

Only if the virus doesn't beat you first. In the case of COVID-19, large portions of nursing home populations won't have the opportunity to develop herd immunity if they die en masse from a point source introduction. One of the most frustrating things about this disparity in clinical disease/mortality is how young carriers of the agent are entirely unaffected while the most susceptible die with alarming alacrity. Nasty wicked problem.

[Lowpe]

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

Only if the virus doesn't beat you first. In the case of COVID-19, large portions of nursing home populations won't have the opportunity to develop herd immunity if they die en masse from a point source introduction. One of the most frustrating things about this disparity in clinical disease/mortality is how young carriers of the agent are entirely unaffected while the most susceptible die with alarming alacrity. Nasty wicked problem.

Did you see Switzerland's studies were children can not carry enough of the virus to actually pass it on someone else?

[Chickenboy]

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

Only if the virus doesn't beat you first. In the case of COVID-19, large portions of nursing home populations won't have the opportunity to develop herd immunity if they die en masse from a point source introduction. One of the most frustrating things about this disparity in clinical disease/mortality is how young carriers of the agent are entirely unaffected while the most susceptible die with alarming alacrity. Nasty wicked problem.

Did you see Switzerland's studies were children can not carry enough of the virus to actually pass it on someone else?

No. Didn't see the study. Link?

By 'younger', I was mostly thinking of 'younger than they-residents of nursing homes-are' (e.g., nursing home workers / caregivers)

[MakeeLearn]

Walmart store in Colorado shuts down after coronavirus deaths
Fri April 24, 2020

https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/24/business ... index.html


"New York (CNN Business)Public health officials in Aurora, Colorado, ordered a Walmart supercenter to shut down Thursday after a 72-year-old Walmart worker, her 63-year-old husband, and a 69-year-old third-party security contractor for the company died from coronavirus.
Six additional employees at the store tested positive for coronavirus, the Tri-County Health Department in Colorado said Thursday. Three other workers were suspected of having the virus and were awaiting lab results."

""The department said it closed the store after receiving complaints from employees and shoppers about the "lack of social distancing, too many people in the store at one time, and employees not wearing masks or face coverings." "

[Sammy5IsAlive]

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

Only if the virus doesn't beat you first. In the case of COVID-19, large portions of nursing home populations won't have the opportunity to develop herd immunity if they die en masse from a point source introduction. One of the most frustrating things about this disparity in clinical disease/mortality is how young carriers of the agent are entirely unaffected while the most susceptible die with alarming alacrity. Nasty wicked problem.

Did you see Switzerland's studies were children can not carry enough of the virus to actually pass it on someone else?

I think the thing with children and with schools in particular is that even if an individual child can't pass on the virus, a class of 20 of them could be enough to give it the teacher and then all the adults they then come into contact with in the week before they start developing symptoms.

[Lowpe]

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

Only if the virus doesn't beat you first. In the case of COVID-19, large portions of nursing home populations won't have the opportunity to develop herd immunity if they die en masse from a point source introduction. One of the most frustrating things about this disparity in clinical disease/mortality is how young carriers of the agent are entirely unaffected while the most susceptible die with alarming alacrity. Nasty wicked problem.

Did you see Switzerland's studies were children can not carry enough of the virus to actually pass it on someone else?

No. Didn't see the study. Link?

By 'younger', I was mostly thinking of 'younger than they-residents of nursing homes-are' (e.g., nursing home workers / caregivers)

I personally haven't seen it, only referenced to by Swiss officials for one of the reasons they are re-opening their schools. I thought perhaps you or Makee had?

Pre-covid, I was at a nursing home 4 days a week or more, caregivers there get pretty darn young, all the way down to the 20s I guess.

[MakeeLearn]

True or False: Children are not the drivers of the coronavirus pandemic
4/23/2020 2:39:13 PM


https://menafn.com/1100073966/True-or-F ... s-pandemic


"A day after the government announced the re-opening of primary schools, set for May 11, Daniel Koch clarified his position on the role played by children in transmitting the novel coronavirus.

'Children are most certainly not the drivers of this epidemic,' Koch, a key figure in the government's response to the crisis , said on April 17. "

[MakeeLearn]

COVID-19: Is the Swiss government engaged in false news and not doing its job?
April 20, 2020

https://www.global-geneva.com/covid-19- ... g-its-job/


"At a press conference on 16 April, 2020, the Division’s head, Daniel Koch, spread misleading information about the infection of children, which could put our elderly and vulnerable at an elevated risk of death. According to Koch, “we can say so far any advice about children is: not only do they not get sick, but they’re not infected, so they’re really not vectors of this disease.

And if there’s anything good in this epidemic, it’s this news: That the children really aren’t affected.” A day later, after much public outcry, he was forced to make a statement recommending that children not mix with their grandparents (or older parents and relatives) because the young ones can still be infected but without symptoms. "

[Lowpe]

Thanks Makee...

Not sure if anyone finds local Pennsylvania covid reporting interesting, but a few pages back I posted a link to the reduction of deaths in PA from a relatively right wing rural paper.

Here is the story from a relatively left wing big city paper:

https://www.inquirer.com/health/coronav ... 00423.html

[MakeeLearn]

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

Thanks Makee...

Not sure if anyone finds local Pennsylvania covid reporting interesting, but a few pages back I posted a link to the reduction of deaths in PA from a relatively right wing rural paper.

Here is the story from a relatively left wing big city paper:

https://www.inquirer.com/health/coronav ... 00423.html

"Pa. removes more than 200 deaths from official coronavirus count as questions mount about reporting process, data accuracy"

-------------


Since Cv19 kills men more than women, I now identify as "Anastasia" a Ukrainian peasant woman.
Sorry my hair looks so disheveled. Iam having a bad hair day.

[Sammy5IsAlive]

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

Thanks Makee...

Not sure if anyone finds local Pennsylvania covid reporting interesting, but a few pages back I posted a link to the reduction of deaths in PA from a relatively right wing rural paper.

Here is the story from a relatively left wing big city paper:

https://www.inquirer.com/health/coronav ... 00423.html

My impression of the day-to-day US state figures is that they are all over the place, particularly in terms of deaths. Worldometers has Louisiana going from 126 deaths yesterday to 2 today. I am now just looking at the overall US figures and in terms of individual states the comparison between total reported deaths and the predicted total figures for that day from the Washington models. They seem much more stable and seem to be suggesting that their national model is pretty robust for the most part but with some state level departures in terms of some states that don't appear to have passed the predicted peak, some that are 'recovering' more slowly than predicted, and others that seem to be consistently doing better than predicted.

[MakeeLearn]

ORIGINAL: Sammy5IsAlive

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

Thanks Makee...

Not sure if anyone finds local Pennsylvania covid reporting interesting, but a few pages back I posted a link to the reduction of deaths in PA from a relatively right wing rural paper.

Here is the story from a relatively left wing big city paper:

https://www.inquirer.com/health/coronav ... 00423.html

My impression of the day-to-day US state figures is that they are all over the place, particularly in terms of deaths. Worldometers has Louisiana going from 126 deaths yesterday to 2 today. I am now just looking at the overall US figures and in terms of individual states the comparison between total reported deaths and the predicted total figures for that day from the Washington models.

Exactly. So using this map, taking into account mobility, accessibility, randomness...

Confirmed cases 886,047
(Today: +16,877)

A starting point..

I'd say ~x8 higher of infected people.