Coronavirus COVID-19 - Global Health Pandemic #44

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
10ofRods said:
Yes. This has been in the medical literature since almost day 1 of this pandemic. I guess the medical terms or the words of doctors on TV (few as they have been) have not been enough to make this perfectly clear.

This is the reason for social distancing.

Talking, singing, yawning, breathing, sneezing coughing all spread the virus. Virus stays in the air longer in rooms without ventilation. Virus needs water molecules to remain viable until entering a host. Once it hits most surfaces, it starts its deterioration. No one knows exactly how long it lives in air in a closed, still room but the reason for those negative air pressure rooms in hospitals is so that virus-saturated air doesn't escape the room when a carer (with PPE) goes inside.

This is why public transportation is so prone to communicating the virus. Even if everyone were silent, without masks, if they are infected, they are slowly filling the entire vehicle (car, subway, airplane) with their virus. Viral load is real. If just one virion got into your house, you'd likely never notice it and even if you breathed it in, you'd probably be okay (unless very immune compromised). If someone just sneezed near you, you could be surrounded by a crowd of virus, even if several feet away.

But if millions of virions are sitting right outside your face, in the air - well, then, you're going to get a large viral load and become infected. The new Chinese study shows that 80% of people are either asymptomatic or have symptoms just like mine today (cough, no appetite, head congestion).

I have no reason to believe I have CV19, though, as my county has one of the lowest rates in California (95% of the people who presented with symptoms to local hospitals and were tested...are negative for CV19, it was just an ordinary cold).

At this point, in areas where the virus is established in, say 15-20% of the population, who are probably shedding for 2-3 weeks, then places like hospital lobbies and pharmacies and even grocery stores slowly build up a higher viral load. Even if the virus eventually ends up on the floor, denatured and dead, if enough people are in a space (just breathing), the virus will accumulate.

Talking, singing, coughing, yawning - all of these push more of the virus out. Animated talking is not good. Some people take really deep breaths before uttering a string of words, and virus is thereby increased as the deeper part of the lung participates in pushing virus out (that's often where infection is highest anyway).

Wear a mask, stay 6-10 feet away from a conversation partner, keep things brief - especially if that person seems to have a cold.

Also, wear gloves, as door handles, car door handles, credit card machines etc carry a good viral load (until someone disinfects them).
Click to expand...
BBM in red -Virus needs water molecules to remain viable until entering a host.

I think wearing a cotton mask is dangerous for that reason. Person breathes into the mask, making it moist, the virus landing on it can multiply and penetrate the mask since there's no effective filter in the mask, if homemade.

This is why I'm making a few masks made out of reusable grocery bags that is somewhat waterproof.
Make your own face mask—no sewing machine required
 
Opinion | It’s Dangerous to Test Only the Sick

It’s Dangerous to Test Only the Sick
Random sampling is essential to learn the truth about virus spread and deadliness.
By Neeraj Sood
March 15, 2020 12:08 pm ET

[Edited to remove commentary, IMO]

"Testing has two purposes apart from diagnosing individual cases. The first is to obtain accurate information on the virus’s infectivity and mortality rates. If the true rates for the coronavirus are similar to those of the flu, then [edited]. But if they’re much higher, drastic measures are imperative.

Testing only sick or symptomatic patients will not get us to the truth. To see why who we test matters, consider the flu. Its mortality rate is around 0.1%—meaning that of everyone infected with the flu, tested or not, 1 in 1,000 die of it. If we only tested people who are hospitalized with flu-like symptoms, the mortality rate jumps 75-fold. Similarly with the coronavirus, testing only sick and symptomatic people will result in an overestimate of mortality, which would heighten fear and anxiety and worsen their economic effects.

The way to learn the truth is to test a random sample of the population in major cities with an outbreak. Random testing would reveal the true mortality rate and also how many people have the virus, an important factor in determining its infectivity. Authorities need to start conducting random testing now, with statisticians in the coronavirus command center guiding the design.

The second purpose of testing is to avert spread by isolating those who are infected. In this regard, it is unclear that relying exclusively on people who are volunteering for the tests makes sense. These are probably people who are exhibiting symptoms and heeding public-health messages to isolate themselves at home, as they would do for seasonal flu. A study of flu-vaccine strategies (of which I am a co-author) shows that self-selection doesn’t get at the high-risk populations.

A good strategy would be to combine drive-thru tests with targeted testing of high-risk populations to try to catch people who are unwittingly spreading coronavirus.

We don’t need to accept all the fear and anxiety as inevitable. Proper statistical testing can give us the answers."

My 2 cents: I Googled "random testing coronavirus" to find this WSJ article way down the list. Few reputable mainstream media reports cover statistical sampling. That is disturbing to me. I have chosen to read this article as a math lesson regarding statistical sampling - not to be confused with opinion pieces on public policy or the politics/feasibility of implementing random testing. It pains me to add this caveat, but as they say, objective truths are amazing because they are always true. IMO.
 
In the case of Nebraska, who is not a stay at home state, all our counties are under strict orders, yet doctors from a community with increasing cases are asking for it from Gov Ricketts. This is the same community that on March 14th allowed a quinceanera of over 400 people from all over to attend. Now they're worried? They are having an outbreak at a beef packing plant, guess what, if they shut down, so does the food supply chain. Gov Ricketts orders are for all our counties, entire state, yet people are asking to be mandated? WTH, don't they understand restaurants are already closed except for take out, bars are already closed except for take out beverages, beauty salons for the most part are closed when they cannot maintain 6 feet distance, camping at state parks are closed. The only things that are open in our state are businesses that have deemed themselves to be essential. What good is a stay at home order, when people ignore the present orders? Will they only stay at home if we do like China and physically lock their doors? SMH We have 363 cases with 8 deaths, with Iowa, Colorado & Kansas bordering us with larger figures. And 90% of ours have been traced to travel, our first case came from London, followed by travel from other states, Spain. Yes, I'm angry at some communities and some individuals, but I'm just staying at home because I'm sensible, not because I need the government to lock my door.

MOO
 
Hi, I just wanted to note for reference and filing purposes that March 30th’s WHO briefing mostly covered discussion about safety and efficacy of drugs and trials, including chloroquine, for those are specifically interested in this area. This briefing also covered a lot about testing, and most importantly what these test results tell you, meaning, for example, if you’re getting a lot of positives results in one area, chances are you may be missing a lot of cases. If you’re getting a lot of negative results, then chances are you may be looking in the wrong area.

Press briefings
 
10ofRods said:
Yes - Cuomo was very clear about that in this morning's presser - Daily Mail is a day late and a bit skewed in its reporting, I think.

Cuomo used a visual to speak about how they aren't at the apex yet. The reason there was an apparent fall in deaths is due to reporting vagaries. The number of new cases does seem to be falling, but the number of tests being completed daily may vary, so that most public health models still say - April 9 is New York's peak and deaths will be above 800 just before and just after that date.

That's deaths where people have sought medical care and been tested - not all of the deaths.
Click to expand...
Is it also possible that the numbers are peaking now? But they don't want the public to get complacent, so they are stretching it out longer-which makes sense, strategically?
 
MsBetsy said:
I don't get it either. I went out the other day to try to find some things I haven't been able to get yet with no success.

The manager told me they were mostly wiped out of supplies because of all the people coming in from NY and NJ. I had assumed it was local people from PA buying everything but apparently that is not the case.

It doesn't seem fair. So much for people staying home or not travelling between states. No wonder it spread so fast.

Maybe next week I will find some toilet paper.
Click to expand...
I'm having a difficult time finding TP too. I gave up for now. I will think about it tomorrow (Scarlet O'hara)
 
10ofRods said:
I don't believe people who gather in large gatherings have the understanding or wherewithal to self-isolate for 14 days afterwards. In fact, they'll be back at some other large gathering within a week. They will be in your work place if you're an essential business or your state is open for business.

You'll be seeing them at an increasing number of funerals.

But, since most people are asymptomatic, they won't care, they won't get it and they won't change until forced to (and then some will still attempt to do it).
Click to expand...

I disagree that most people are asymptomatic.

"Remember, asymptomatic means no symptoms. On top of the 15.5% to 20.2% or so who may be asymptomatic, there are others who may have just mild symptoms. In some cases, these symptoms may be barely noticeable depending on the person. As you know, different people have different levels of awareness and tolerance of symptoms."​

Study: 17.9% Of People With COVID-19 Coronavirus Had No Symptoms
 
gregjrichards said:
U.K Prime Minister Boris Johnson has been taken to hospital for tests as a precaution. He has been self-isolating after being diagnosed with coronavirus - Source Sky News U.K
Click to expand...

He looked dreadful the last time I saw him speaking on TV - Friday, perhaps? I wonder if, given he is so high profile, this will be what makes the British Covidiots sit up, take notice and finally stay home.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 198 more.
Total: 2,871 (members: 199, guests: 2,672)

Online statistics

Members online
199
Guests online
2,672
Total visitors
2,871
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
599,887
Messages
18,100,911
Members
230,947
Latest member
tammiwinks
Back
Top