Corona Virus Updates Part 6

originally posted by: Observationalist
a reply to: MonkeyBalls2
People react to headlines and don’t read critically and they hide inside and not go outside. What if study comes back and says it spreads the virus more, and can cause a deadly secondary effect. So this way of suppressing virus spread is found not effective.

We already know a lot about transmission. We have been fighting viruses for a long time. Why is this virus undoing what we knew as settled science. Have the scientists been wrong all these years? If so, could they be wrong now?

Ummm... we've never really fought viruses that way...

And it has long been known that isolation, both from each other and from fresh air and sunshine, has detrimental, even disastrous effects on health.

originally posted by: celltypespecific
How do we plan for the FALL!!!!? How do we plan for the coming SECOND WAVE!!!

Start boosting your immune system and the immune systems of loved ones who are at risk that you are responsible for or have influence with.

Buy plenty of the necessary supplements, enough for a couple of years for 4 times the people you know that will need it, so you have enough.

Modify living wills and power of attorneys to include demand for high dose IV Vitamin C in case of severe illness requiring hospitalization, and be prepared to make the demand yourself if you ever find yourself in that position.

originally posted by: celltypespecific
It would be really useful for someone to start a thread on planning/prepping for the coming SECOND WAVE in fall.

We should all stay one step ahead of the sheep. The fall will be a living hell....its Flu...Cold...and Covid19 season..

You can get all three at the same time....or sequentially....

How do we plan for the FALL!!!!? How do we plan for the coming SECOND WAVE!!!

I'm already making plans, including thinking strategically about changing the nature of my gigs (I'm a gig-economy worker). It was easy enough to see (several weeks back) that the meat industry was going to have severe problems so I'm collecting more vegetarian recipes. I've got 4 masks (so backups) and a set of clothes that could actually be trashed if I couldn't clean them (water supply problems, though that scenario is low in this area.)

We've made our wills, set up power of attorney, resuscitation orders (his is a DNR, mine is "I'm fighting this thing all the way down") etc.

Basically, I've been reading a lot of the scenario papers, particularly the economic ones and sociological ones and asking myself "how will I deal with..."

Take a deep breath. Believe it or not, we went through this (including quarantines) with polio back in the 1950's (3 of my friends were stricken with polio). You can over-worry and over-prepare. We really didn't do a lot of prepping back then and we did get through it (Salk's vaccine turned the corner for us.)

The world will change, but humans are a feisty and innovative lot.

originally posted by: Observationalist
a reply to: MonkeyBalls2

Because non-peer reviewed information about possible transmission of the Virus isn't dangerous.

Getting transmission right is just as important as getting treatments right. Being indoors has been a known factor in virus spread, Also viruses thrive in cold temperatures.

This is a *novel* coronavirus. So although it's in the same family, we are still learning about it.

People react to headlines and don’t read critically and they hide inside and not go outside. What if study comes back and says it spreads the virus more, and can cause a deadly secondary effect. So this way of suppressing virus spread is found not effective.

The quarantine method (which has been used for thousands of years) cuts off the virus from its victims. With no new victims to infect, the virus dies off. The trick is finding out who has the virus and keeping them away from others until they recover or die.

We already know a lot about transmission. We have been fighting viruses for a long time. Why is this virus undoing what we knew as settled science. Have the scientists been wrong all these years? If so, could they be wrong now?

It is a "novel" virus, which means it's a new virus. Not all viruses act the same, just as not all people think the same or act the same. Also, human beings are very different. My husband and I both have high blood pressure, but we are on different drugs for this condition (because of differences in the medications we take and in our conditions.) There will not be a "give this shot and do this one thing" answer for the virus. Instead they have to develop treatments for "babies who catch it" and "Black teenage boys who catch it" and "Asian women over 50 who catch it" and so on and so forth.

Since we don't have hospitals labeled "this place is only for Italian men between age 20 and 40 who have high blood pressure" we are scrambling around in the data, trying to make sense of this. It will take more than a year to come up with better recommendations.

originally posted by: Byrd

originally posted by: Observationalist
a reply to: Byrd

Why post this? Not peer reviewed? If a potential cure is not peer reviewed and posted here it’s tossed out and not worth considering.

Ah. I see that you missed my initial statements about what I was doing. I'm pulling papers from the medical and scientific publishing queues. These are papers that have been accepted as possibly being publishable (they're called "preprints"), pending peer review and so forth. Some have been reviewed, some are pending review, some are in the process of being reviewed.

Yet you post a hypothetical fear based scenario and you want us to consider it.

Ah. I see you skimmed over the post, perhaps? It's a GIS analyst ...well, analyzing captured data. There's no hypothetical about it and it's just data.

Data can't be fearful. It's just numbers.

I understand that you're alarmed and possibly overwhelmed with the information (I don't post and comment on most of them. While "Ivermectin Adjuvant to Hydroxychloroquin and Azithromycine in COVID19 Patients" is interesting, there's not enough there for ATS readership to relate to or dig into (and frankly, explaining all that is more than I want to take the time for.) When the information seems to be too overwhelming, people often find it useful to step away and take a deep breath.

Be at peace. We'll get through this, but it won't be quick.

Well dang then, Let’s just make a fruit salad full of handpicked studies, and data, we can call it uncertainty.

I appreciate your concern for my sanity. But it’s not needed.

I’m just trying to point out how information your Injecting into these threads can shows a bias.
I sense a bias to the anti Trumpers.

No big deal, we all have a bias of sorts. I obviously have mine. I just though it was ironic that my post about effectiveness of UV light was tossed out, not worth considering. Yet your equally unverified heat and humidity post was something to consider. I probably could have formed a better response than my little rant. It’s a shame the scientists can’t get a handle on this thing.

I would have thought by now treatments and transmission would be well known, or know enough to ensure the public that they are pursuing a new viable plan. But it still mask, ventilators and shutdowns. Don’t forget about uncertainty, we still have reports from Surfrider foundation saying it could be in the recreation water and even salt water. Can’t that be verified with some simple tests.

originally posted by: celltypespecific
It would be really useful for someone to start a thread on planning/prepping for the coming SECOND WAVE in fall.

We should all stay one step ahead of the sheep. The fall will be a living hell....its Flu...Cold...and Covid19 season..

You can get all three at the same time....or sequentially....

How do we plan for the FALL!!!!? How do we plan for the coming SECOND WAVE!!!

I am planning for the fall, pretty much like I planed for this in Jan., and even before.

I am going to assume that we will have another round of lock downs. I hope that does not happen though.

I must have well over estimated the food we would consume. I had it all calculated out, 1.6 million calories, family of 6 (including my elderly mother), would take us out 6+ months. We have been in pretty strict lock in since March 13th. I only hit the store once since then to pick up my mothers meds. The pharmacy is part of the store, so I risked picking up some fresh fruits and vegies. So almost 2 months into this thing, and we have barely touched the emergency food.

When things calm down, and the cases are low enough to risk it (mid May or early June), I will go out and top off dry goods for the fall. If the cases are low, we will go back to weekly shopping and such until it appears things are picking up.

Numbers Update for Europe (w/o France) and Elsewhere (No BNO Still) :







www.worldometers.info...

Financial Times Graphs, more at the link.
Some were updated earlier than usual.

originally posted by: Byrd

originally posted by: Observationalist
a reply to: MonkeyBalls2

Because non-peer reviewed information about possible transmission of the Virus isn't dangerous.

Getting transmission right is just as important as getting treatments right. Being indoors has been a known factor in virus spread, Also viruses thrive in cold temperatures.

This is a *novel* coronavirus. So although it's in the same family, we are still learning about it.

People react to headlines and don’t read critically and they hide inside and not go outside. What if study comes back and says it spreads the virus more, and can cause a deadly secondary effect. So this way of suppressing virus spread is found not effective.

The quarantine method (which has been used for thousands of years) cuts off the virus from its victims. With no new victims to infect, the virus dies off. The trick is finding out who has the virus and keeping them away from others until they recover or die.

We already know a lot about transmission. We have been fighting viruses for a long time. Why is this virus undoing what we knew as settled science. Have the scientists been wrong all these years? If so, could they be wrong now?

It is a "novel" virus, which means it's a new virus. Not all viruses act the same, just as not all people think the same or act the same. Also, human beings are very different. My husband and I both have high blood pressure, but we are on different drugs for this condition (because of differences in the medications we take and in our conditions.) There will not be a "give this shot and do this one thing" answer for the virus. Instead they have to develop treatments for "babies who catch it" and "Black teenage boys who catch it" and "Asian women over 50 who catch it" and so on and so forth.

Since we don't have hospitals labeled "this place is only for Italian men between age 20 and 40 who have high blood pressure" we are scrambling around in the data, trying to make sense of this. It will take more than a year to come up with better recommendations.

We have learned from the failed models that this is acting more like the seasonal flu. We do not have full hospitals, they turned the boats back, and we now have extra ventilators. We also have doctors having success with traditional treatments and therapies. These are not exotic, Hippies, mad scientists ideas that have no merit. They revolve around how we would traditionally treat the flu outbreaks. I know I’m not a doctor but I would suspect that we know more about this virus than we think.

Why does everything need to be a miracle cure for everyone. Vaccines are not effective for everyone and they are dangerous to some. Yet we pursue it regardless. If you had two adults drowning and you had one junior life jacket. Would you tell them tough luck this jacket isn’t approved for you.

a reply to: Observationalist

I don't think the models failed, they looked to be quite accurate with no mitigation done.

The numbers are so significantly lower because of social distancing, masks, and other mitigations. If those had not been done, hospitals would have been overwhelmed, and the death toll would have been much higher because of higher infection numbers, and lack of health care.

From Guardian Live Feed at 9.02pm :

" Nearly 70 residents of a single home for military veterans in the US state of Massachusetts have died, local officials have said. "

While the death toll at the state-run Holyoke Soldiers’ Home continues to climb, federal officials are investigating whether residents were denied proper medical care while the state’s top prosecutor is deciding whether to bring legal action.

“It’s horrific. These guys never had a chance,” said Edward Lapointe, whose father-in-law lives at the home and had a mild case of the virus.

According to the Associated Press, officials said 66 residents who tested positive and the cause of another death is unknown. Another 83 residents and 81 staff have tested positive.

An interesting article in Nature :Whose coronavirus strategy worked best? Scientists hunt most effective policies

There's a couple of items there of interest to modelers here...

First thing that caught my attention was the databases that they're using:

Efforts to tackle these questions will get a boost in the coming weeks from a database that brings together information on the hundreds of different interventions that have been introduced worldwide. The platform, being prepared for the World Health Organization (WHO) by a team at the LSHTM, gathers data collected by ten groups already tracking interventions — including teams at the University of Oxford, UK, the Complexity Science Hub Vienna (CSH Vienna), and public-health organizations and non-profit organizations such as ACAPS, which analyses humanitarian crises.

That's a chunk-load of data! (as a former programmer, I can just imagine all the tangle trying to match up data fields from the different institutions!) They'll be using a "stringency index" that they've developed to give some idea of "kinds of measures used by countries."

And for you modelers, the data WILL be available for anyone.

Agencies such as the WHO routinely track control measures used in a disease outbreak, but for COVID-19 the picture is complicated by pandemic’s speed and scale, says Grundy. The LSHTM has recruited an impressive corps of 1,100 volunteers to work on cleaning and combining the information. The data set will be open for anyone to use and will be improved in future releases, says Grundy. Speed is of the essence, he says. “Days make a difference right now.”

An interesting early observation about severity:

Early findings from the Oxford team also suggest that poorer nations tended to bring in stricter measures than did richer countries, relative to the severity of their outbreaks. For example, the Caribbean nation of Haiti enforced lockdown on confirming its first case, whereas the United States waited until more than two weeks after its first death to issue stay-at-home orders. That might be because lower-income countries with less-developed health-care systems act more cautiously, says Anna Petherick, a public-policy researcher at Oxford. It could also reflect the fact that the outbreak reached these nations later, giving them longer to learn from others, she says.

So, something new to look forward to for those of us who love exploring the data. Hopefully there'll be a link soon so we can start looking at it.

SNIP
"We need to stay at home for another month."
Think of the Children!
There's no we. You can stay at home forever if you have phobia of bugs and enough money.
What you want is as many sick and healed people as possible without glutting the last hospital.
There is no stopping a cold virus. Stupid gypsies are sneezing like children. You cant quarantine them all. It's always there, waiting inside of humans for another cold season. Everyone will get it. Wear a hazmat suit if you want

originally posted by: MrRCflying
a reply to: Observationalist

I don't think the models failed, they looked to be quite accurate with no mitigation done.

The numbers are so significantly lower because of social distancing, masks, and other mitigations. If those had not been done, hospitals would have been overwhelmed, and the death toll would have been much higher because of higher infection numbers, and lack of health care.

I thought it was clear those numbers had mitigation built into them. They wanted us to do more, remember.

originally posted by: Observationalist

originally posted by: MrRCflying
a reply to: Observationalist

I don't think the models failed, they looked to be quite accurate with no mitigation done.

The numbers are so significantly lower because of social distancing, masks, and other mitigations. If those had not been done, hospitals would have been overwhelmed, and the death toll would have been much higher because of higher infection numbers, and lack of health care.

I thought it was clear those numbers had mitigation built into them. They wanted us to do more, remember.

The original estimates of 1.6 to 2.1 million deaths in the US, was without any mitigation.

originally posted by: PapagiorgioCZ
I see, this thread is reserved for covidiots.
"We need to stay at home for another month."
Think of the Children!
There's no we. You can stay at home forever if you have phobia of bugs and enough money.
What you want is as many sick and healed people as possible without glutting the last hospital.
There is no stopping a cold virus. Stupid gypsies are sneezing like children. You cant quarantine them all. It's always there, waiting inside of humans for another cold season. Everyone will get it. Wear a hazmat suit if you want

Let's see how Georgia makes out in the next few weeks.

Yeah the lab level is really worrying, and also that the outcome of these types of experiments apparently doesn't give the scientists the answers they were looking for - so what is the point really?
a reply to: Arbitrageur

This is concerning. I wonder if we are only a step away from this entering the food chain? If that is the case what repercussions will that have? I know we discussed the potential for that way back in previous threads, but it feels closer to a reality at this point.
a reply to: MonkeyBalls2

originally posted by: Observationalist

originally posted by: MrRCflying
a reply to: Observationalist

I don't think the models failed, they looked to be quite accurate with no mitigation done.

The numbers are so significantly lower because of social distancing, masks, and other mitigations. If those had not been done, hospitals would have been overwhelmed, and the death toll would have been much higher because of higher infection numbers, and lack of health care.

I thought it was clear those numbers had mitigation built into them. They wanted us to do more, remember.

The models showed both predictions for mitigation and non-mitigation.

It may depend on what models you saw. The ones I saw showed both curves.

a reply to: cirrus12

No, not really. (Yet)
Only certain animals are susceptible to be infected, and they aren't in our food chain (Yet).
Even then, it wouldn't be transferred through the food, unless we ate it raw, and unwashed.
We'd more likely get it from transferral, hand to mouth/nose etc.