Coronavirus COVID-19 - Global Health Pandemic #70

Welcome to Websleuths!
Click to learn how to make a missing person's thread

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
Thanks for the link. It's good to do a refresher on the different masks.

One thing that I noticed from reading about the masks worn during the 1918 Influenza pandemic, is that people were making their masks out of gauze. I expect this is the light, loosely woven fabric that is used in some bandaging material. Even when masks were made of gauze, they were effective enough that they immediately reduced the spread of influenza. As soon as mask wearing orders were lifted, cases rose. This was repeated a few times.

So, if gauze masks could make a difference, how much more will masks make a difference when they are made with better material.

This is mentioned in the wonderful pictoral link about the Spanish Flu that was posted yesterday. I'll see if I bookmarked it, and add the link if I can find it.

As early as the Middle Ages, nuns were wearing face coverings in their hospital work. It was common for upper and middle class women to wear veils, which were loosely woven fabric, when outdoors.

Also interesting is that nurse-nuns were often silent and "suffering in silence" was encouraged as a form of devotion.

Both practices (veils and not speaking) would have slowed an airborne pathogen. Art from the period often shows women with their face coverings pulled down or aside, but it's clear that what we now call "hajib" was a custom in pre-modern Europe as well.

Many essential market place functions were taken over by monks at the height of Medieval pandemics (growing food, drying beans, distributing food, etc) and they developed really interesting rules for who could and couldn't be "public-facing" so that the monks who actually grew and preserved the food were protected from local epidemics.
 
But it does spread. Contact tracing commences immediately upon a positive result. Delays in test results means all the contacts of that positive case have 3, 5, 8 days to potentially infect others. It's a serious problem. jmo

Yeah, a lot of people may not realize just how short that window of opportunity is.

In one course I took, Johns Hopkins iirc, it’s says that 50% of people develop symptoms within 5 days. You back 48 hours to determine their infectious period, and there you only have 3 days. It’s hard to explain in one post, and I’m short on time, but it’s a race against time. Add the aspect of asymptomatic transmission, long testing turnaround times and this makes for an absolute disaster.

CDC / Contact Tracing
 
Last edited:
You are now the second person who has mentioned members of Congress not following procedures but nobody wants to name them or provide a link for some reason. It is very difficult to comment if we cannot see all the information or know who posters are talking about.
The disconnect may be down to the fact you are in the UK. Here in the US we have a 24 hour news cycle that shows endless press conferences, congressional meetings and so on. We literally see our officials on the daily, many, many of whom do not mask.

I think US posters are speaking to what we personally see on a daily basis that others outside the US may not be privy to. jmo
 
It goes fast, but it indicates the infections over the course of 143 days the U.S. has seen infections. Note what the map looked like up until 30 days ago and what it looks like now. No wonder people were convinced this was some kind of hoax! It makes me shiver to wonder what this map will look like in 30 days! (this is a very cool map!!)

https://www.corona-per-capita.com/v...oe-Qc00elXBBSsErC8V7b4FqUzSSQue__duLeAzcCmWrs

Valid point wrt the mindset 30 days ago.
Not solely the Paul Reveres and Patriots who considered the possibility.
 
You are right - it's not unreasonable to shift these resources if its more effective to do so. I don't know if it is or isn't more effective yet. What is concerning, is the statement that they want to to slow down testing, coupled with contention with the GOP over new funding, and just the fact that we are behind on testing, allowing the virus to spread as people wait for tests.

People should be quarantining if they're waiting on test results.
 
Our DD is an Army nurse and yesterday she talked with a friend who has been deployed to a Texas hospital. Her friend said the hospital is all Covid and “every PT is proned, intubated, sedated and circling the drain “

This is heartbreaking and reminds me of those horrible scenes in Italy all those months ago. How are they so unprepared this far down the line, with all the hindsight and advice from other nations and states.
 
That is covered near the end of this article.

What Happens Next? COVID-19 Futures, Explained With Playable Simulations

But here's the scarier question:

What if there's no vaccine for years? Or ever?

To be clear: this is unlikely. Most epidemiologists expect a vaccine in 1 to 2 years. Sure, there's never been a vaccine for any of the other coronaviruses before, but that's because SARS was eradicated quickly, and "the" common cold wasn't worth the investment.

Still, infectious disease researchers have expressed worries: What if we can't make enough? What if we rush it, and it's not safe?

Even in the nightmare "no-vaccine" scenario, we still have 3 ways out. From most to least terrible:

1) Do intermittent or loose R < 1 interventions, to reach "natural herd immunity". (Warning: this will result in many deaths & damaged lungs. And won't work if immunity doesn't last.)

2) Do the R < 1 interventions forever. Contact tracing & wearing masks just becomes a new norm in the post-COVID-19 world, like how STI tests & wearing condoms became a new norm in the post-HIV world.

3) Do the R < 1 interventions until we develop treatments that make COVID-19 way, way less likely to need critical care. (Which we should be doing anyway!) Reducing ICU use by 10x is the same as increasing our ICU capacity by 10x:

How does it play out if a vaccine has 80% effectiveness.
 
Yeah, a lot of people may not realize just how short that window of opportunity is.

In one course I took, Johns Hopkins iirc, it’s says that 50% of people develop symptoms within 5 days. Then you go back 48 hours to determine their infectious period, and there you only have 3 days. It’s hard to explain in one post, and I’m short on time, but it’s a race against time. Add the aspect of asymptomatic transmission, long testing turnaround times and this makes for an absolute disaster.


This virus is a complete disaster. Many improvements in how we are handling and treating the virus are needed, but we are making progress. Let’s give ourselves some credit.
 
Our DD is an Army nurse and yesterday she talked with a friend who has been deployed to a Texas hospital. Her friend said the hospital is all Covid and “every PT is proned, intubated, sedated and circling the drain “
I'm hearing the same from many colleagues that are still practicing. It's horrifying.:(
 
Some masks are better than others.

And many thanks to @jjenny and @JaneEyre for their constant encouragement in understanding and making masks.

Thanks for the link. It's good to do a refresher on the different masks.

One thing that I noticed from reading about the masks worn during the 1918 Influenza pandemic, is that people were making their masks out of gauze. I expect this is the light, loosely woven fabric that is used in some bandaging material. Even when masks were made of gauze, they were effective enough that they immediately reduced the spread of influenza. As soon as mask wearing orders were lifted, cases rose. This was repeated a few times.

So, if gauze masks could make a difference, how much more will masks make a difference when they are made with better material.

This is mentioned in the wonderful pictoral link about the Spanish Flu that was posted yesterday. Photos show how San Francisco had to convince its 'mask slackers' to wear masks after many defied the law while the 1918 Spanish flu pandemic seized the city

I was happy to see at the mask link that the fabric masks I bought online recently are likely quite good. They are two layers of cotton batik fabric with a layer of chiffon in between, plus they have a pocket to add another filter if desired. I bought them at an Etsy store.
 
Men, Canadians aged 45 to 59, most likely to not wear masks indoors, poll finds

“Men are significantly less likely to wear masks compared to women,” the Abacus Data poll surveying 1,500 Canadians found — with 51 per cent of men reporting that almost always wore masks indoor compared to 59 per cent of women. Masks were also more common for younger Canadians, with most resistance to wearing the masks in the 45 to 59 age group.

Political views only had a minor impact on whether respondents wore masks in indoor settings like retail stores or public transit, the poll found.

[...] “It seems your willingness to wear a mask is related to your perception of risk,” he told the Star. “Those living in rural or smaller communities where the density is lower and it's easier to self-distance, the perceived value of wearing a mask goes down.”

Time to blast that testicular report all over SM.
 
I'm hearing the same from many colleagues that are still practicing. It's horrifying.:(

This is something which I feel is continuously undermined. It’s like some people don’t even realize or care about all these people in hospitals fighting for their lives, and the people treating them sacrificing their lives. When you see health workers talking, there is undeniably a somber and serious tone with all of them.
 
“Several states have been reporting record numbers this week, contributing to a surge in the national death rate. The seven-day rolling average for daily new deaths has risen 34% from two weeks ago, while the case count in that period shot up 43%.“

[...]

“To cope with the pandemic's fallout, the United Nations said it is increasing to $10.3 billion its appeal for humanitarian aid.“

Military medics deploy in California, Texas as virus surges
July 17
 
I hope so. It is terrible how long it takes for testing turnaround in some parts of the US. How can a virus be contained and managed when some people have to wait days and days for their results?

Exactly. I was tested on Saturday (started feeling feverish Thursday night) and was told results would take 6 to 10 days. The subsequent anxiety of waiting is the worse 'symptom' for me so far. This is rural South Carolina.

ETA: Catching up on this thread has made me realize - I have got to stop reading here for a while. It just feeds my anxiety. I'm in my 50s, overweight, with type A blood and I don't want to die. I'm not in great shape to begin with and I feel like I'm exactly the kind of patient that ends up "circling the drain." OMG. :(
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
75
Guests online
1,589
Total visitors
1,664

Forum statistics

Threads
606,893
Messages
18,212,479
Members
233,992
Latest member
gisberthanekroot
Back
Top