Coronavirus COVID-19 - Global Health Pandemic #58

[Sundog]

Canadian article on the use of hydroxychloroquine in Canada and their manufacturing of the drug in Canada, including their supply chain in India -"the world's pharmacy" - and how India cut off export of the drug at one point. Gives some insight on the supply chain and the hydroxychloroquine clinical studies taking place across Canada at this time.

The incalculable rise of hydroxychloroquine - Macleans.ca

 

[CharlestonGal]

So .27% of the U.S. Population of approx. 330,000,000, comes to 891,000 Dead once everyone has been infected.

Yeah. That's bad enough and it doesn't even account for the as yet incalculable indirect deaths. I tried to do the math based on excess mortality rates, but it made my head hurt.

 

[Simply Southern]

If there is no hope of recovery, there is no reason to give an unproven drug with known dangerous cardiovascular side effects. And by the way, read the article. Patients given the drug died at a higher rate than patients not given the drug. That CAN NOT be blamed on the virus alone.

This was not a control study. It is a group of researchers who looked at 96k patients with limited information, World Wide. During the heat of the crisis, we knew nothing to little about the virus. Most of our information was based on what China told us, and we know how that worked out.

The article does not qualify who or what type of patient, and underlying diseases, no mention of countries, or stage of illness.

MOO... Such limited/sketchy information on a "look back" study makes we wonder why bother.

Currently, we know much more, from our own medical experience in the US, the drug does work in certain situations. We now better know who and not to give, who benefits and not, and at what stage in illness to prescribe. What pre-existing conditions do not benefit or could be harmful to use.

Large study finds hydroxychloroquine Covid-19 treatments linked to greater risk of death and heart arrhythmia

Seriously ill Covid-19 patients who were treated with hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine were more likely to die or develop dangerous heart arrhythmias, according to a large observational study published Friday in the medical journal The Lancet.

Researchers analyzed data from more than 96,000 patients with confirmed Covid-19 from 671 hospitals. All were hospitalized from late December to mid-April, and had died or been discharged by April 21.

Here is the actual study. It appears to me the MSM article referenced left a lot of pertinent information out, that would reflect a different perspective from the researchers.


https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)31174-0/fulltext

The mean age male was 58 yo and female was 46y and only 3% females were used in the study. Wonder why so few females were included?

96k patients from 671 hospitals over 6 continents. Wonder what countries and how reliable the data? How much came from China?

Moo...Respectfully this is not a study I would bet a life threatening decision on.

 

[shotgun09]

In a more perfect world, the government would create a fund for completely revamping air circulation within nursing homes. This would be costly but a huge step forward. The harder part is testing employees, but if there are 15 minute tests available, perhaps these could be centralized and workers tested daily. It wouldn't make things perfect, but it would dramatically reduce transmission in care homes.

Same for hospitals.

Tremendously expensive, but so is care for CoVid. I predict it will not happen in either the US or the UK, and I hope I'm wrong.

We certainly need a vaccine. When it does role out, I think healthcare workers will be the first to get it and I hope each nation realizes it must include all care home workers.

Valid statements. My issue along with the CoVid issue is the abuse of patients that is evident (see video) in government funded centers. Staff these places with people who will care for, and not abuse our vulnerable and elderly. The whole long term care systems need to be revamped!

 

[CharlestonGal]

Great post. In the utopia of my imagination, here's how reopening of schools could work:

1. All students are tested prior to resuming school.
2. All positive cases are isolated.
3. All contacts of positive cases are traced and tested.
4. Positive cases can go back to school when tested negative x2.
5. All students are tested weekly.
6. If positive, go to step 2.

Outside of this utopian fantasy land, we're realistically in some deep .

 

[anneg]

I know. If there is one thing that I hope for, it is a nationwide network of top-notch child care and elder care. So many people will be out of jobs as a result of other jobs becoming telework. Social services is not for everyone, but can I dream of a world where these are well-paid, high benefits, highly screened and highly trained jobs that the most competent jobseekers would compete for? A super-compassionate heart is a huge plus, but that can develop in the right individual, provided they are conscientious about doing any job well, including service to others.

Just IMO and a pipe dream, as I think about how much I relied on childcare all those years ago.

This post made me think of Atul Gawande's excellent book Being Mortal. He focuses on end-of-life issues. Definitely worth reading, IMO. I should find my copy and read it again.

 

[The Night Watchman]

Yes, there is only a small percentage that understand R0 vs. RT. R0 is if everyone is susceptible without any measures to prevent, and 100% are not immune.

Many here understand, but I don't think the general population is understanding as MSM hasn't educated nor has anyone that I've seen in pressers.

As more folks are infected, the person to person declines the R0, as social distancing and measures happen that also declines the Ro. Both move it to an RT... what it is in real time including the measures.

Many of the models were done just on the R0.. no measures, no social distancing, no decrease from the 100% that were susceptible. That was done for preparation as to what measures to take and potential scenarios if nothing done. MOO. Yet MSM keeps attacking. And as models are done, MSM doesn't look at what considerations are being done in the models and understanding they are just scenarios to juxtaposition for understanding impact.

I do wish that there was a MSM report (2 hour one perhaps) explaining how just minor changes can have, and DID have, a significant reduction in the RO. We see reports in MSM that if shutdown had been done 1 week earlier, there would be so many less deaths. Yeah... It's exponential so they just can go back one week on today's numbers and say those reports... But there is more to it.

I just don't think that most folks can grasp as I keep seeing such again and again as slams against models without understanding what the focus was when the were developed.

It's very saddening to me as MSM keeps doing misunderstanding reports on such...

FACT MOO... even slight changes in who has been infected so far.. that decreases the Rt for the future (well, MOO, that is a fact).

Changes in social distancing decreases the Rt (well MOO, that is a fact)

Think of it this way. Many folks don't understand exponential transmission. That was VERY hard for even top folks that had no science background to understand.

And now... still talking about R0 and how it's irrelevant when we should be talking about Rt.... jeez.... my guess is above most folks understanding which I am seeing all around.

ETA: ha! forgot my disagreement comment that the herd immunity is 10-20! Nope. MOO.

Excellent post and explanation, and yes the concept of Ro is butchered in the media, and I believe intentionally- the same as misquoting high death rates from CV-19, using deaths per confirmed cases.

Having a lowered Rt from fractional immunity when the second wave hits in the fall will be important in minimizing the damage. NYC may have 35% or more of the population with immunity by fall, and my guess is they will be hit least by a future outbreak. Their infection rates are amazingly low right now for a highly dense urban environment, with 25% of the population having antibodies.

Is the current low infection rate partially due to a significant portion of the population having immunity? I think so.




COVID-19: Data Summary - NYC Health

 

[dmac55]

Arizona-

Attorneys: State unlawfully withholding COVID-19 information, using false facts
Attorneys: State unlawfully withholding COVID-19 information, using false facts

 

[TMAN2014]

Trump press conference coming up with update guidance on reopening churches.

Methinks this will be good news for the churches.

 

[The Night Watchman]

Confession:

I went on amazon after a few drinks in what I would describe as a panicked state after I could not get toilet paper or tissue via instacart.

So I found some tissues which I thought was a big box and paid out the yingyang for it.

Well apparently the image looked a lot “bigger” on the website...

I received it and it’s basically it’s a small box with three rolls. I paid $30 for it!

Lesson, don’t go on amazon to buy toilet paper if you’ve been drinking.


ETA:
I was hunting and hunting I think I finally just go so desperate and frustrated I hit “order”.

If a year ago, you could look into future and see what you wrote today, you would seriously question your sanity!

Play it out in your head from that perspective, it reads pretty funny...

 

[Simply Southern]

The CDC has finally come out of the shadows to state actual estimates of COVID-19 death rates.

Their best estimate = 0.27%.

In new guidance for mathematical modelers and public health officials, the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention is estimating that about a third of coronavirus infections are asymptomatic.

The CDC also says its "best estimate" is that 0.4% of people who show symptoms and have Covid-19 will die, and the agency estimates that 40% of coronavirus transmission is occurring before people feel sick.

The agency cautions that those numbers are subject to change as more is learned about Covid-19, and it warns that the information is intended for planning purposes. Still, the agency says its estimates are based on real data collected by the agency before April 29.

The numbers are part of five planning scenarios that "are being used by mathematical modelers throughout the federal government," according to the CDC. Four of those scenarios represent "the lower and upper bounds of disease severity and viral transmissibility."

CDC says 35% of coronavirus infections are asymptomatic - CNN

Thanks for the update.

I'm a bit for numbers and how we derive at a conclusion or projections. So, hopping over to the actual CDC article I discovered, this is dated information based on March 1, 2020 thru March 31, 2020.


§Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19)

Estimates only include onset dates between March 1, 2020 – March 31, 2020 to ensure cases have had sufficient time to observe the outcome (hospital admission or death).

¶ Estimates only include hospital admission dates between March 1, 2020 – March 31, 2020 to ensure cases have had sufficient time to observe the outcome (hospital discharge or death).

** Estimates only include death dates between March 1, 2020 – March 31, 2020 to ensure sufficient time for reporting.

 

[anneg]

This was not a control study. It is a group of researchers who looked at 96k patients with limited information, World Wide. During the heat of the crisis, we knew nothing to little about the virus. Most of our information was based on what China told us, and we know how that worked out.

The article does not qualify who or what type of patient, and underlying diseases, no mention of countries, or stage of illness.

MOO... Such limited/sketchy information on a "look back" study makes we wonder why bother.

Currently, we know much more, from our own medical experience in the US, the drug does work in certain situations. We now better know who and not to give, who benefits and not, and at what stage in illness to prescribe. What pre-existing conditions do not benefit or could be harmful to use.

Large study finds hydroxychloroquine Covid-19 treatments linked to greater risk of death and heart arrhythmia

Seriously ill Covid-19 patients who were treated with hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine were more likely to die or develop dangerous heart arrhythmias, according to a large observational study published Friday in the medical journal The Lancet.

Researchers analyzed data from more than 96,000 patients with confirmed Covid-19 from 671 hospitals. All were hospitalized from late December to mid-April, and had died or been discharged by April 21.

Here is the actual study. It appears to me the MSM article referenced left a lot of pertinent information out, that would reflect a different perspective from the researchers.


https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)31174-0/fulltext

The mean age male was 58 yo and female was 46y and only 3% females were used in the study. Wonder why so few females were included?

96k patients from 671 hospitals over 6 continents. Wonder what countries and how reliable the data? How much came from China?

Moo...Respectfully this is not a study I would bet a life threatening decision on.

BBM: That's not correct. Females were 46.3% of the patients. I'm guessing the way the article shows the period threw you off.

 

[Simply Southern]

Link to the Lancet article: https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)31180-6/fulltext

Sorry, I reposted didn't see your link.

Interesting how the press I interpreted this.

 

[24Roses]

Iowa news today: May 22: Iowa reports 18 additional COVID-19 deaths, 454 more cases (WATCH Gov. Reynolds)
454 new confirmed cases and 18 more have passed away. We now have a total of 16,408 confirmed cased and 418 have passed away. 8,804 have recovered.
Exclusive: Iowa hospital uses unique method to keep COVID-19 patients off ventilators
Coronavirus impact: Everything opening, and still closed, in Iowa today
ETA-3 new TestIowa sites to open, 2 to close
* Have a safe and healthy holiday weekend! Not sure if Iowa will have alot of updates over the weekend, as the covid website will be down for maitenance from Sat. morning until Mon. morning.

 

[Simply Southern]

No big surprises here, but care home deaths continues to be a huge problem (and tragedy) all over the world.

Interesting to note that 17 US states have not yet included care home deaths in their figures, hopefully this will be amended so that the country stats show a true reflection.

Across the world, figures reveal horrific toll of care home deaths

I raise my hand for Virginia.

Can't wait for the CDC reporting starting the end of May.

 

[CharlestonGal]

I wonder what will happen in the fall/winter when people are infected with influenza and SARS-COV2 at the same time.

 

[The Night Watchman]

Thanks for the update.

I'm a bit for numbers and how we derive at a conclusion or projections. So, hopping over to the actual CDC article I discovered, this is dated information based on March 1, 2020 thru March 31, 2020.


§Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19)

Estimates only include onset dates between March 1, 2020 – March 31, 2020 to ensure cases have had sufficient time to observe the outcome (hospital admission or death).

¶ Estimates only include hospital admission dates between March 1, 2020 – March 31, 2020 to ensure cases have had sufficient time to observe the outcome (hospital discharge or death).

** Estimates only include death dates between March 1, 2020 – March 31, 2020 to ensure sufficient time for reporting.

Nice followup. So the data timeline is dated, but as noted, there has to be a delay to makes conclusions so the outcome can be defined.

The last sentence refers to- Mean number of days from death to reporting (standard deviation) under Parameter Values Related to Healthcare Usage for the Pandemic Planning Scenarios. I think this is a modeling input parameter and does not impact the death rate value of 0.27% (if I read it correctly). I believe the death/discharge outcomes of the March cases were noted until he end of April.

** Estimates only include death dates between March 1, 2020 – March 31, 2020 to ensure sufficient time for reporting.

 

[firebird]

Gee, ya think?

"Stay-at-home orders intended to curb the spread of the coronavirus could end up causing “irreparable damage” if imposed for too long, White House health advisor Dr. Anthony Fauci told CNBC on Friday.

“I don’t want people to think that any of us feel that staying locked down for a prolonged period of time is the way to go,” Fauci said during an interview with CNBC’s Meg Tirrell on “Halftime Report.”


He said the U.S. had to institute severe measures because Covid-19 cases were exploding then. “But now is the time, depending upon where you are and what your situation is, to begin to seriously look at reopening the economy, reopening the country to try to get back to some degree of normal.”"

Dr. Anthony Fauci says staying closed for too long could cause 'irreparable damage'

 

[weepingangel]

I wonder what will happen in the fall/winter when people are infected with influenza and SARS-COV2 at the same time.

It’ll be fine
Kidding

two words. Flu Shot.
and stay home if you’re sick

 

[firebird]

Arizona-

Attorneys: State unlawfully withholding COVID-19 information, using false facts
Attorneys: State unlawfully withholding COVID-19 information, using false facts

The information the State is allegedly withholding only has to do with the names of ltc facilities and their number of cases. From the link:

The news organizations filed a joint lawsuit against the state in early May for refusing to release the names of long-term care facilities with COVID-19 cases and deaths.

So far, data released by Maricopa County shows that more 73 percent of coronavirus deaths in the Valley are residents of long-term care.

Arizona officials have used a series of shifting reasons for why they won’t disclose the facility names and number of cases."