COVID-19

[North Buffalo]

2 hours ago, Eleven said:

Sheep.

Baa

[Stoner]

27 minutes ago, That Aud Smell said:

Not an encouraging report, albeit there are qualifiers about the study being reported on.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/health/asymptomatic-covid-19-1.5629172

"This suggests that natural infection may not give long-lasting immunity, which is what people have been worried about," she said.

If true, there won't be herd immunity and there won't be "immunity passports." Vaccines or bust.

It makes me wonder if the new surge in cases could be partially explained by people who had Covid-19 or got a positive antibody test taking risks, thinking they are safe.

[Claude_Verret]

3 hours ago, LGR4GM said:

What about a masked person and 6ft? Because the virus is primarily carried in water droplets which are stopped by a mask. 

Masked person at 6 ft or more > unmasked person at 6 ft or more > masked person less than 6ft.

 

 

[That Aud Smell]

46 minutes ago, PASabreFan said:

If true, there won't be herd immunity and there won't be "immunity passports." Vaccines or bust.

It makes me wonder if the new surge in cases could be partially explained by people who had Covid-19 or got a positive antibody test taking risks, thinking they are safe.

I looked again, and the sample size in the study was really, really small (~37?). So, take it with a huge grain of salt. Even so, though: Concerning.

[Weave]

1 hour ago, Claude_Verret said:

Masked person at 6 ft or more > unmasked person at 6 ft or more > masked person less than 6ft.

 

 

I would have to think that more time in an enclosed space moves the bar closer to the masked person regardless of distance.  Thinking relatively stagnant airmass and the super spreader groups like that Seattle choir team.

[Claude_Verret]

11 minutes ago, Weave said:

I would have to think that more time in an enclosed space moves the bar closer to the masked person regardless of distance.  Thinking relatively stagnant airmass and the super spreader groups like that Seattle choir team.

Sure, there are a lot of variables that could slide the scale. For example, indoors or outdoors I'd rather be closer to an unmasked asymptomatic carrier than a masked covid positive patient who is hacking and coughing. I could be wrong though, this is based on my experience on precautions I used when handling and manipulating concentrated influenza stocks. It will take months to years before enough data is collected and vetted on this pandemic before the scientific community can reach a comfortable consensus on what the best balance of evidence is. 

Everyone should be wearing masks and wearing them properly. Many who choose to wear them do so improperly based on my observations. And just wait until a vaccine is released that only gives partial or low protection, then the real craziness can begin.

 

[PerreaultForever]

18 hours ago, Claude_Verret said:

Nearly every aspect of this whole stinking pandemic has been politicized,  by both sides. The fact that we get mixed messages on masks from political leaders, including our President,  along with medical experts is bound to create confusion, obstinance and digging in along party lines. It also doesn't help that its a presidential election year. Everything and anything can and will be politicized during those years.

Well that is the fact where you are but it's simply not a reality in most countries. Here in British Columbia they predicted we would be hit bad with numerous flights and business connections to China and a large travelling Asian population, but we simply turned it over to the experts and did what they said and now our numbers are incredibly low. Nobody played politics with it at all. Our only real fear right now is the U.S. border.

In a health crisis you listen to the doctors, it's as simple as that. You don't, and more people die. That's not Republican, that's not Democrat, that's not freedom, that's not anything political at all, it's just common sense.

[North Buffalo]

14 hours ago, That Aud Smell said:

Not an encouraging report, albeit there are qualifiers about the study being reported on.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/health/asymptomatic-covid-19-1.5629172

"This suggests that natural infection may not give long-lasting immunity, which is what people have been worried about," she said.

That is not quite correct.  The story and Dr. Gupta says the body contains memory cells that can produce antibodies when needed and that they are hard to detect.  So it is unclear how long the body can remain immune.  What is clear from the tests is pre-symptomatic and possibly symptomatic people shed the virus for longer periods periods of time then symptomatic people.

[North Buffalo]

11 hours ago, Claude_Verret said:

Sure, there are a lot of variables that could slide the scale. For example, indoors or outdoors I'd rather be closer to an unmasked asymptomatic carrier than a masked covid positive patient who is hacking and coughing. I could be wrong though, this is based on my experience on precautions I used when handling and manipulating concentrated influenza stocks. It will take months to years before enough data is collected and vetted on this pandemic before the scientific community can reach a comfortable consensus on what the best balance of evidence is. 

Everyone should be wearing masks and wearing them properly. Many who choose to wear them do so improperly based on my observations. And just wait until a vaccine is released that only gives partial or low protection, then the real craziness can begin.

 

The kid in Chappaqua NY was presymptomatic outdoor event (High School graduation)and spread to 8 people because lack of social distancing.

[Claude_Verret]

1 hour ago, North Buffalo said:

The kid in Chappaqua NY was presymptomatic outdoor event (High School graduation)and spread to 8 people because lack of social distancing.

Yep, that's why I said in my scenario all other things being equal. When they aren't equal, and some variables aren't to the naked eye, then the balance can shift. Some asymptomatic people shed more virus than others.

Again, people should wear masks, but i feel there is this underlying presumption that if everyone just does as told then we'll get this thing under control faster. I don't know if that's necessarily true, and neither does anyone else no matter how many credentials follow their name. But I am certain that people in the media, no matter what way they lean, are much, much further back in the darkness on this pandemic than anyone who has a scientific or medical background. 

[LGR4GM]

46 minutes ago, Claude_Verret said:

Yep, that's why I said in my scenario all other things being equal. When they aren't equal, and some variables aren't to the naked eye, then the balance can shift. Some asymptomatic people shed more virus than others.

Again, people should wear masks, but i feel there is this underlying presumption that if everyone just does as told then we'll get this thing under control faster. I don't know if that's necessarily true, and neither does anyone else no matter how many credentials follow their name. But I am certain that people in the media, no matter what way they lean, are much, much further back in the darkness on this pandemic than anyone who has a scientific or medical background. 

Really? So the fact the US has the highest spread in the develop world isn't because of all the randos doing whatever they want? Gonna call bs on that one. Many countries instituted lockdowns and mandatory masks, they are all better off right now than the US. 

[SDS]

18 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

Really? So the fact the US has the highest spread in the develop world isn't because of all the randos doing whatever they want? Gonna call bs on that one. Many countries instituted lockdowns and mandatory masks, they are all better off right now than the US. 

That's probably unnecessarily aggressive when it appears someone is just trying to be diplomatic (while also recognizing it will be true when the science proves it to be true and not relying on anecdotal evidence).

[LGR4GM]

6 minutes ago, SDS said:

That's probably unnecessarily aggressive when it appears someone is just trying to be diplomatic (while also recognizing it will be true when the science proves it to be true and not relying on anecdotal evidence).

I don't think it was aggressive enough considering we are at what? 130k deaths with multiple large scale spikes in several states. We would 100% have gotten this under control already if ppl had done what they were told for 2 months and if we had had a legitimate national response. The evidence is in just about every other country peaking and declining while the US peaks... kinda started a decline... and now is about to peak again. I am just glad the death rate hasn't maintained. 

As always I find this thread problematic. So I will be avoiding it again. 

[nfreeman]

For the record, Belgium, the UK, Spain, Sweden, France and Italy all have higher death rates than the US does, and Ireland and the Netherlands are both pretty close.

https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/data/mortality

 

[Claude_Verret]

24 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

Really? So the fact the US has the highest spread in the develop world isn't because of all the randos doing whatever they want? Gonna call bs on that one. Many countries instituted lockdowns and mandatory masks, they are all better off right now than the US. 

Here's the thing. Science doesn't work that way.  Going tit for tat with people on whatever study or chunk of data du juor that you wish to tout, just isn't how it works in science in general, and it certainly doesn't help when youre still in the middle of a pandemic. 

This novel virus is still less than a year old. The scientific community still doesn't have its arms around this thing, but they are incrementally getting better day by day. The scientific method is expressly designed to weed out inherent human biases.  Its about understanding the best balance of evidence in any field related to this. So the epidemiologists for example will have read and understood the vast literature that has and will be published on this thing and that community eventually come to a reasonable consensus on what went on. Went on. When this pandemic is behind us and all the data is collected. When you're still in the middle of it, you're still guessing and looking at new potential studies to perform to better understand it. The same principles apply to the virologists, practicing physicians etc.

You're certainly free to express your opinions on any of it, but you're still just guessing, and perhaps not based on a complete understanding of all the literature published to date. I know that I certainly don't have the time to read it all.

 

 

[WildCard]

There's the travel ban from the US to the EU made by the EU. Looks like I'll be canceling my European trip scheduled for September 

[Sabres Fan in NS]

39 minutes ago, nfreeman said:

For the record, Belgium, the UK, Spain, Sweden, France and Italy all have higher death rates than the US does, and Ireland and the Netherlands are both pretty close.

https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/data/mortality

 

Yes, but they have pretty much stopped counting.  You guys are still going strong and it would seem it is going to be getting worse still in many locations in the US.

 

[Taro T]

32 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

I don't think it was aggressive enough considering we are at what? 130k deaths with multiple large scale spikes in several states. We would 100% have gotten this under control already if ppl had done what they were told for 2 months and if we had had a legitimate national response. The evidence is in just about every other country peaking and declining while the US peaks... kinda started a decline... and now is about to peak again. I am just glad the death rate hasn't maintained. 

As always I find this thread problematic. So I will be avoiding it again. 

We are approaching 130k dead, but we're also seeing deaths reaching low levels we haven't seen since early/mid-March.  Which is encouraging.  

It also seems that the states where positive tests are rising are in the midst of their own 1st wave.  We've fortunately not seen any 2nd waves ttbomk.   Interestingly, we haven't seen deaths spiking yet & hopefully that remains true.  (They obviously lag positives & hospitalizations, but we're 3+ weeks into those spikes and the deaths had been more on a 10 day lag where things were hit very hard in March.)

The data indicates that the more recent infection spikes are in younger people.  Maybe that's why we aren't seeing spiking death rates?  Is it that healthier people are getting it and getting less severe cases?  Is it that treatments are better?  A combo?  Something else?

If we don't get a vaccine soon &/or the virus doesn't peter out on its own; then we'll need "herd immunity" to keep the more vulnerable safe come the fall/ winter.  Big picture, these rising case rates (provided hospitals don't end up overwhelmed & deaths don't rise) might be a blessing in disguise.  Personally, would prefer not seeing people getting this, but if younger healthy people getting it & recovering prevents another bout of what we saw in NYC then, sadly, bring it on.

[LGR4GM]

43 minutes ago, Claude_Verret said:

Here's the thing. Science doesn't work that way.  Going tit for tat with people on whatever study or chunk of data du juor that you wish to tout, just isn't how it works in science in general, and it certainly doesn't help when youre still in the middle of a pandemic. 

This novel virus is still less than a year old. The scientific community still doesn't have its arms around this thing, but they are incrementally getting better day by day. The scientific method is expressly designed to weed out inherent human biases.  Its about understanding the best balance of evidence in any field related to this. So the epidemiologists for example will have read and understood the vast literature that has and will be published on this thing and that community eventually come to a reasonable consensus on what went on. Went on. When this pandemic is behind us and all the data is collected. When you're still in the middle of it, you're still guessing and looking at new potential studies to perform to better understand it. The same principles apply to the virologists, practicing physicians etc.

You're certainly free to express your opinions on any of it, but you're still just guessing, and perhaps not based on a complete understanding of all the literature published to date. I know that I certainly don't have the time to read it all.

 

 

Never knew that about science. Thank you. 

I'd note there's flaws in your description because science is ever changing but we simply don't do anything because the science isn't settled. Again I take issue with your hypothesis that if ppl had followed the best science advice at the time we still wouldn't have this under control. 

6 minutes ago, Taro T said:

We are approaching 130k dead, but we're also seeing deaths reaching low levels we haven't seen since early/mid-March.  Which is encouraging.  

It also seems that the states where positive tests are rising are in the midst of their own 1st wave.  We've fortunately not seen any 2nd waves ttbomk.   Interestingly, we haven't seen deaths spiking yet & hopefully that remains true.  (They obviously lag positives & hospitalizations, but we're 3+ weeks into those spikes and the deaths had been more on a 10 day lag where things were hit very hard in March.)

The data indicates that the more recent infection spikes are in younger people.  Maybe that's why we aren't seeing spiking death rates?  Is it that healthier people are getting it and getting less severe cases?  Is it that treatments are better?  A combo?  Something else?

If we don't get a vaccine soon &/or the virus doesn't peter out on its own; then we'll need "herd immunity" to keep the more vulnerable safe come the fall/ winter.  Big picture, these rising case rates (provided hospitals don't end up overwhelmed & deaths don't rise) might be a blessing in disguise.  Personally, would prefer not seeing people getting this, but if younger healthy people getting it & recovering prevents another bout of what we saw in NYC then, sadly, bring it on.

The old "some of you may die but that's a chance I'm willing to take" argument. 

Edited June 30, 2020 by LGR4GM

[Taro T]

1 minute ago, LGR4GM said:

Never knew that about science. Thank you. 

The old "some of you may die but that's a chance I'm willing to take" argument. 

No.  Not at all.  If we don't get a vaccine & the virus doesn't fully go away on it's own, what other option is there than to get to herd immunity?  

[SwampD]

Seeing pictures of the Jersey shore last weekend and a holiday weekend coming up,... we’re going to get that second wave.

[LGR4GM]

1 minute ago, Taro T said:

No.  Not at all.  If we don't get a vaccine & the virus doesn't fully go away on it's own, what other option is there than to get to herd immunity?  

Oh you're saying if there's no vaccine. I understand what you mean now. 

[SwampD]

1 minute ago, Taro T said:

No.  Not at all.  If we don't get a vaccine & the virus doesn't fully go away on it's own, what other option is there than to get to herd immunity?  

Stopping the spread.

[LGR4GM]

Again, I am going to bow out of this thread right now. I find it unproductive. 

[nfreeman]

18 minutes ago, New Scotland (NS) said:

Yes, but they have pretty much stopped counting.  You guys are still going strong and it would seem it is going to be getting worse still in many locations in the US.

 

What does this mean?  Those countries are no longer keeping track of virus deaths?  That seems highly unlikely.