Page 258 of 396
RE: OT: Corona virus
Posted: Sat Apr 18, 2020 7:18 am
by Cap Mandrake
I think most of the money for unemployment insurance in "normal" times comes from payroll deductions so, mostly, it IS paid for by employees and employers.
Of course in a disaster of this scale they will likely blast through the funds quickly and the federal bailout bill include wads of taxpayer money to bail out the states..
RE: OT: Corona virus
Posted: Sat Apr 18, 2020 7:20 am
by Cap Mandrake
The $1200 "stimulus checks" are right from the US Treasury (we borrowed the money).
Oddly, the IRS has seemed to have forgotten to send me one.
RE: OT: Corona virus
Posted: Sat Apr 18, 2020 9:03 am
by witpqs
ORIGINAL: Cap Mandrake
Santa Clara County, Calif. prevalence estimate using serologies was between 1.8 and 5.8% (95% CI). The study ended on April 1 so it would presumably be higher now.
In any event, it was 60-80x higher than the reported cases based on nasal swab PCR testing.
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101 ... ht3lBZyMgA
1000 positive by PCR out of about 5000 sailors aboard Roosevelt...that's about 20%
The stuff is contagious as Hell and the mild/asymptomatic cases are HUGE. Why are there so few new cases in Wuhan?
1) Either the Chicoms are lying
2) Everyone there already had the damn thing
3) They have achieved herd immunity
All of the above.
RE: OT: Corona virus
Posted: Sat Apr 18, 2020 9:28 am
by obvert
ORIGINAL: HansBolter
ORIGINAL: obvert
This is interesting. Not peer reviewed. From Stanford.
Actual numbers of cases might be 50 to 85 times more than indicated from testing.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/ ... ly-thought
Just for kicks, if that is true in the US it would be 35,344,000 to 60,084,800 as of today's numbers!!! [X(]
In the UK that would be 5,434,600 to 9,238,820! [X(][X(]
So that Oxford study stating 5 million might have already been infected a few weeks ago might not be as far off as it seemed then.
I don't find this to be in any way as surprising as you seem to.
Aren't something like 80% of cases exhibiting almost no symptoms?
40m people with no symptoms are not gonna freak out over having it.
As far as anyone who is coming up with figures like the 80% exhibiting almost no symptoms, those are known cases.
So using the premise of this study (and others) the total of asymptomatic cases could actually be much, much higher, which would be very surprising, yes.
If the actual cases in the US are 35 million, but we've only got 700k+ known cases from testing, and 80% of the known cases are asymptomatic, what percentage of the "other" unknown cases are asymptomatic? Or do they have different symptoms, like a common cold, or just aches, or just a stomach upset, etc. Would it be 90% asymptomatic? Or more?
The implication would be both positive and negative. Very good if so many had had it already, and the case mortality rate would plummet. Very bad it's so contagious and we can't keep it away from vulnerable groups easily. So we'll all be wearing face masks and not visiting elderly relatives for a good while.
If reliable serology tests can be made in mass quantities, or even if these studies gain some traction from peer review and are shown to be reliabe, it could also mean opening things up more quickly and effectively.
RE: OT: Corona virus
Posted: Sat Apr 18, 2020 9:38 am
by obvert
ORIGINAL: Cap Mandrake
Santa Clara County, Calif. prevalence estimate using serologies was between 1.8 and 5.8% (95% CI). The study ended on April 1 so it would presumably be higher now.
In any event, it was 60-80x higher than the reported cases based on nasal swab PCR testing.
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101 ... ht3lBZyMgA
1000 positive by PCR out of about 5000 sailors aboard Roosevelt...that's about 20%
The stuff is contagious as Hell and the mild/asymptomatic cases are HUGE. Why are there so few new cases in Wuhan?
1) Either the Chicoms are lying
2) Everyone there already had the damn thing
3) They have achieved herd immunity
The French CV was a much higher percentage positive. It had been out about 3-4 weeks, and had 1,081 of the 2,300 positive, or 47%.
But, and this is the case with any closed environment being tested en masse during a short period presumably, there must have been many more cases earlier that were recovered already. Possibly a lot more.
The Chinese really need to get the whole of Wuhan tested serologically, but if the US could do it in NY, or the Italians in Lombardy, or the NHS here in London, it will be a game changer. So it doesn't matter so much whether that is done in China now. We have enough places where we know it moved through a lot of the population before being noticed, and then had a severe outbreak.
It might be better if serological tests were done in these environments where we could be more confident of the numbers, really.
RE: OT: Corona virus
Posted: Sat Apr 18, 2020 9:42 am
by Encircled
The ventilator scandal in the UK summed up perfectly.
Sadly we've completely messed this up and its going to be a long time till we get back to normal in the UK
https://twitter.com/pmdfoster/status/12 ... 9139665920
RE: OT: Corona virus
Posted: Sat Apr 18, 2020 9:54 am
by witpqs
John Barry discusses the more recent work on the 1918 flu pandemic. In recent years the origin has been found to likely not been Kansas and it was probably not a swine flu.
#107 - John Barry: 1918 Spanish flu pandemic—historical account, parallels to today, and lessons
In this episode, John Barry, historian and author of
The Great Influenza: The Story of the Deadliest Pandemic in History, describes what happened with the 1918 Spanish flu pandemic, including where it likely originated, how and why it spread, and what may have accounted for the occurrence of three separate waves of the virus, each with different rates of infection and mortality. While the current coronavirus pandemic pales in comparison to the devastation of the Spanish flu, John highlights a number of parallels that can be drawn and lessons to be learned and applied going forward.
RE: OT: Corona virus
Posted: Sat Apr 18, 2020 11:04 am
by Cap Mandrake
Nearly 1/3rd of Chelsea, Mass residents walking around on the street are serologically positive for COVID[X(]
https://www.bostonglobe.com/2020/04/17/ ... ronavirus/
RE: OT: Corona virus
Posted: Sat Apr 18, 2020 11:26 am
by Olorin
You can blame all this on bad advice from the Imperial college charlatans.
RE: OT: Corona virus
Posted: Sat Apr 18, 2020 11:28 am
by obvert
So another of these showing the numbers are really off the charts, literally, from what we've been thinking.
Read this and it sounds like many of he residents here had to continue to travel to work, and a high proportion work in hospitality in healthcare, so are more exposed.
I'd love to see them do this outside a Safeway or Piggly Wiggly somewhere. Just start picking random grocery store lines and get a blood drop from everyone there. Do about 1,000 in each location and see what happens.
RE: OT: Corona virus
Posted: Sat Apr 18, 2020 11:35 am
by obvert
Well, this is not all bad. I do think to design these from scratch was ambitious and perhaps foolhardy, but at the time they were looking for any and every solution. The existing design also being manufactured have in fact been delivered (100 of them) and the article states 10k is the target for those. So really it's about trying to get all industry involved, going fast and learning what was necessary on the way.
I don't see this as a fiasco, but I also teach design and engineering, and I know prototyping designs and getting things to work from a complex purpose is not going to be easy from the start, and won't likely be quick.
The CPAP has been used a lot too and the F1 team helping to manufacture those seems to be working out.
The fact now is that the curve is flattening so the frantic nature of initial efforts is also flattening into a more reasoned approach to get more trusted models from existing and new manufactures.
RE: OT: Corona virus
Posted: Sat Apr 18, 2020 11:40 am
by Encircled
ORIGINAL: obvert
Well, this is not all bad. I do think to design these from scratch was ambitious and perhaps foolhardy, but at the time they were looking for any and every solution. The existing design also being manufactured have in fact been delivered (100 of them) and the article states 10k is the target for those. So really it's about trying to get all industry involved, going fast and learning what was necessary on the way.
I don't see this as a fiasco, but I also teach design and engineering, and I know prototyping designs and getting things to work from a complex purpose is not going to be easy from the start, and won't likely be quick.
The CPAP has been used a lot too and the F1 team helping to manufacture those seems to be working out.
The fact now is that the curve is flattening so the frantic nature of initial efforts is also flattening into a more reasoned approach to get more trusted models from existing and new manufactures.
The fear was ventilator capacity being overwhelmed though!
If it had been, then this would be much more serious.
But I do take your point
RE: OT: Corona virus
Posted: Sat Apr 18, 2020 11:42 am
by Encircled
ORIGINAL: Olorin
You can blame all this on bad advice from the Imperial college charlatans.
Well, the ultimate responsibility is on the government.
While Europe shut down, we didn't, and that is where the questions are being asked.
RE: OT: Corona virus
Posted: Sat Apr 18, 2020 12:15 pm
by Chickenboy
ORIGINAL: Cap Mandrake
The $1200 "stimulus checks" are right from the US Treasury (we borrowed the money).
Oddly, the IRS has seemed to have forgotten to send me one.
You're probably, like me, one of the 'fortunate' few that are above the income threshhold for consideration. Benefits start getting phased out >$150,000 IIRC. If you make >$175k you get bupkis.
RE: OT: Corona virus
Posted: Sat Apr 18, 2020 12:21 pm
by Chickenboy
ORIGINAL: obvert
The Chinese really need to get the whole of Wuhan tested serologically, but if the US could do it in NY, or the Italians in Lombardy, or the NHS here in London, it will be a game changer.
Disagree. The 'game' is afoot no matter what we test, whom we test, when we test or how we test them. We need to move forward assuming incomplete information, not wait on some novelty finding or curiosity. We cannot wait for serologic findings on a small town or other artificial 'population' to move on.
So let's say you find a higher % seroconverters than you expect from a small town (e.g., Santa Clara, CA or Chelsea, Mass) sampling? How will that affect your decision to move forward? ~33% seroconversion= ~66% susceptible. So what? That doesn't impact my perceptions of the disease process or the societal impact one iota.
RE: OT: Corona virus
Posted: Sat Apr 18, 2020 12:24 pm
by Chickenboy
ORIGINAL: Cap Mandrake
Man there is some good news evolving.
--Remdesivir seems to work for severe cases
--We AREN'T Going to run out of vents
--The number of mild cases means we can achieve some form of herd immunity sooner than expected
--Maybe we can halt the economic damage before we are mud gatherers
[8D]
"Ooh! Denis! There's some lovely filth down here!" [:D]
RE: OT: Corona virus
Posted: Sat Apr 18, 2020 12:29 pm
by Chickenboy
ORIGINAL: obvert
If reliable serology tests can be made in mass quantities, or even if these studies gain some traction from peer review and are shown to be reliabe, it could also mean opening things up more quickly and effectively.
Again, disagree. "Reliable" serology tests
en masse will take months or years. We simply don't have that time to wait. And I deny the applicability of small scale testing to a different 'population' for decision making purposes (e.g., what 'works' for Chelsea, Mass or a French Aircraft carrier doesn't mean anything for San Antonio, TX). We move forward with incomplete information, regardless of how uncomfortable that feels.
RE: OT: Corona virus
Posted: Sat Apr 18, 2020 12:30 pm
by Chickenboy
ORIGINAL: witpqs
ORIGINAL: Cap Mandrake
Santa Clara County, Calif. prevalence estimate using serologies was between 1.8 and 5.8% (95% CI). The study ended on April 1 so it would presumably be higher now.
In any event, it was 60-80x higher than the reported cases based on nasal swab PCR testing.
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101 ... ht3lBZyMgA
1000 positive by PCR out of about 5000 sailors aboard Roosevelt...that's about 20%
The stuff is contagious as Hell and the mild/asymptomatic cases are HUGE. Why are there so few new cases in Wuhan?
1) Either the Chicoms are lying
2) Everyone there already had the damn thing
3) They have achieved herd immunity
All of the above.
Excuse me. I believe you meant to say, "One from column 'A' and one from column 'B'". [;)]
RE: OT: Corona virus
Posted: Sat Apr 18, 2020 12:36 pm
by Chickenboy
ORIGINAL: Alfred
ORIGINAL: Sammy5IsAlive
... I didn't realise that Professor Ferguson had got it so wrong with BSE/CJD - that was definitely a major goof-up on his part.
He has a well established track record of getting it seriously wrong, a fact overlooked by unqualified journalists who just accept any "expert's" mo9delling without looking at the assumptions underpinning any model.
1. 2005, Ferguson claimed bird flu could claim up to 200 million. Result was 282 world wide deaths between 2003 and 2009.
2. 2009, the claim was swine flu had a fatality rate of 0.3 to 1.5%. He/Imperial College settled for a 0.4% rate which fed into a UK government estimate of 65,000 UK deaths. Actual result was 457 UK deaths, a rate of 0.026% 9f those infected.
3. 2001, their modelling of foot and mouth disease led to UK government policy which cost the UK 10 billion pounds. The modelling was strongly criticised as being severely flawed by Michael Thrusfield, professor of veterinary epidemiology at Edinburgh University.
4. 2002, their modelling expected 50 to 50,000 people dying from mad cow disease, increasing to 150,000 if there was also a sheep epidemic. Result is 177 UK deaths.
5. Nor is their current COVID-19 modelling far from being generally accepted as being accurate. Besides the Oxford study which produces quite different results, Professor John Ioamidis of Stanford University has commented that some of the major assumptions and estimated seem to be substantially inflated.
None of this is surprising when it is realised (as disclosed by Ferguson on 22 March 2020) that their model is based on undocumented 13 year old computer code written for an influenza pandemic, not a coronavirus pandemic. IOW the model is not available for peer review nor does it fully incorporate the specific characteristics of the current pandemic.
Alfred
GIGO by any other name?
RE: OT: Corona virus
Posted: Sat Apr 18, 2020 12:49 pm
by Chickenboy
ORIGINAL: obvert
Very good if so many had had it already, and the case mortality rate would plummet.
Technically, the CFR would be about the same as it is now, if one stuck to the conventional definition of what a 'case' is (displaying clinical signs). The IFR (Infection Fatality Rate) or 'if I get this thing, what are the odds that I die from it' would decrease significantly. Semantics? Yes, to an extent. But to the lay audience out there, they're conflating two very different things that are actually represent very different outcomes.