| Author | Message | ||
     Aesquire |
Blake, how do protests in Texas cause a spike, but not in New York? I'm not disputing your post, it's a serious question raised by that chart. If I was guessing, pure speculation, the Hydra imported rioter/agitators are bused in from different areas and thus different infected levels. Re: lung damage in asymptomatic cases. I know lots of "tough it out" guys & some gals who only to go the doctor after they get really sick. Long after the "huh, that's not right" early warnings. I'd mock them, but I've been the same way, and am trying to improve. It's not unusual to see guys get permanent kidney damage and other illnesses when they hold off until they can't take it & give in to usually family urging them to get help. I haven't been interviewed so I don't know the questions asked of folk who test positive. But it's not unusual to forget that in February you had a mild case of pneumonia or serious respiratory flu months later. I know that sounds nuts, but "tough it out" types can just ignore/forget the colds and flu they had and kept working. I'm guilty of that a lot. The USPS had a 48 hour limit on "I got a cold and call in sick" before they demand a Doctor's note. There's a form, of course. So even though the smart thing is to take 3-4 days to rest & not spread, to keep their jobs... Still, you'd think any illness that scars the lungs wouldn't be ignored... Whatever ( Char ) probably understands this better. | ||
| 1313 |
Whoopie! We're all gonna die! Eventually, that is true... | ||
| Ratbuell |
But if the "tough it out" people are the ones with lung damage....they aren't asymptomatic, are they? Asymptomatic = nothing to tough out, by definition. asymptomatic ā″sĭmp-tə-măt′ 1;k► adj. Neither causing nor exhibiting symptoms of disease. adj. showing no symptoms of disease. adj. Not exhibiting any symptoms of disease. If you don't have any symptoms....you don't have to "tough anything out". If you "tough it out", you HAVE symptoms, but you're ignoring them. Difference. So, where's this lung damage coming from, if it is truly in asymptomatics? (Which, by the way, I seriously doubt is happening). Unless it's due to something like emphysema, smoking, asthma, etc. (Message edited by ratbuell on July 21, 2020) | ||
| Ourdee |
Breakfast with a Bueller this morning. I sit at Cracker Barrel waiting. I watched a lady with dark hair and a matching mask walk by. It looked like she had a beard. Welcome to 2020. | ||
| Crusty |
Ducks; yas, yas. I'm assuming you're in Wisconsin. | ||
| Whatever |
Thanks Blake! I can't answer any of your questions. I am on the side of operations peripherally doing pharmacy waste pickup. I am in environmental compliance and we were to be off of going into patient rooms, but we got stuck with it for a few reasons. We had already assumed the risk before it was too late... right when I was hired. Also, a tremendous amount of resources were spent in figuring out the PPE decontamination process, of which my institution was able to pull of with an emergency FDA approval, which is extremely impressive. Look up "hydrogen peroxide decontamination of n95 respirators", and you'll get the picture. A lot of the hospital- health care side is public knowledge... just have to know what you're looking for... and actually care to find it. (Message edited by Whatever on July 21, 2020) | ||
| Aesquire |
Asymptomatic = nothing to tough out, by definition. Well, yeah. That's why it's puzzling. Either there are people who don't notice the Cytokine Storm that appears to be the big killer, or there's another lung damage mechanism, or the asymptomatic lung damage cases are not reporting/attributed to "getting sick". https://www.health.com/condition/infectious-diseas es/coronavirus/cytokine-storm The first seems unlikely even with overly macho culture tough guy types. ( But that stupid/foolish/ignorant exist ) The second might be that ventilators often cause lung damage, but I don't see how you count a patient on a ventilator as asymptomatic! Or some other damage cause? The third, poor or false information for various reasons, is, uh, most likely? Which sucks. Both because accurate information is important to treatment and policy decisions, and that a politician will lie and not give a darn who dies as long as he or she stays in power to keep getting richer from bribes and whatever evil ideological reasons... | ||
| Ratbuell |
Re: the cytokine storm article? The third paragraph in, has this sentence...which is all too common when dealing with this virus: it’s reasonable to assume that the condition's responsible for at least some of the coronavirus-related fatalities we’ve seen ASSUME. Again - where's the science? There's too much "assuming" and "speculating" going on here...we should have a better handle on this thing by now. WTF? | ||
| Blake |
Patrick, Exactly, why no surge in NY? You've no idea why that might be? That's the question I'm raising and it is the same for Italy, Spain, France, Belgium, Sweden, the UK, everywhere that the pandemic was very severe. The accelerating trajectories are only happening in states that had very mild epidemics. Why might that be? Places were LOTS of people got sick are now doing well. Places where few people got sick, are seeing a surge. | ||
| Ratbuell |
Because the virus has a course to run, and without medication available it will do just that - sooner, or later. States that surged early...are done. States that didn't...SLOWED the curve ("flattened" it, to use the publicity term)....but the virus is still there and it will still run its course. All we did was slow it down. Delayed it. "So hospitals won't be overwhelmed". The fact that places hit hard in the beginning, are not surging again, is another sign that once you have the virus...you don't re-infect. And another argument that we should just let the damned thing run its course, be done with it, and get things opened back up and return to some sense of normalcy. Especially considering the new information that shows the true CFR is most likely less than one percent, and considering that we now know what consitutes a "high risk" person and are able to decently protect them, while allowing the REST of society to get back to real life. (Message edited by ratbuell on July 21, 2020) | ||
| Aesquire |
I'd be very happy if having the antibodies meant you'd had a mild case and cannot get re-infected. That's been a question I've heard both ways. That doesn't mean you are immune to the next mutation of cold or flu. In layman's terms, Covid-19 is a super-cold. If you compare common cold deaths per million to Covid-19 it's terrifyingly bad. Comapred to "average" flu, it's much worse, twice? And just because we get the yearly flu plague like clockwork, we ignore how bad it is, how many die, unless it's someone close. Ratbuell has it right that slowing the curve delayed cases, for months. Mission accomplished! ( on the save the hospitals from being overwhelmed ) But the Media doesn't seem to have prepared the country for the inevitable rise after relaxation of social distancing & precautions. ( like masks and hand washing ) I and everyone not biased knew we'd get this increase. Now we have to ease this spike to below overload. And again in other states... States that surged early...are done. That I don't agree with. It'd be nice, but the States opening restrictions later will get a spike later. ( I think, I could be wrong. Want to be wrong. ) | ||
| Aeholton |
Exactly, why no surge in NY? You've no idea why that might be? That's the question I'm raising and it is the same for Italy, Spain, France, Belgium, Sweden, the UK, everywhere that the pandemic was very severe. The accelerating trajectories are only happening in states that had very mild epidemics. Why might that be? Places were LOTS of people got sick are now doing well. Places where few people got sick, are seeing a surge. Possibly an indication that those areas have developed herd immunity. | ||
| Ratbuell |
That doesn't mean you are immune to the next mutation of cold or flu. True, but more and more evidence is building that this does not mutate like cold or flu. I believe it was Greg's article posted above the other day, that talked about it being fairly "rigid" in its construction, and not readily mutating - meaning after we get this year under control, we are very UNlikely to have annual "covid seasons" like we do for the rapidly-mutating influenza and colds. But the Media doesn't seem to have prepared the country for the inevitable rise after relaxation of social distancing & precautions. Didn't? Or was instructed NOT to? Because, you know, preparing people for this would damage The Message Of Lockdown Being The New Normal. the States opening restrictions later will get a spike later Riots and marches and demonstrations all happened at the same time. Where's the spikes? I highly doubt opening some hair salons and restaurants and gyms, caused the spikes we're seeing. More likely it was thousands upon thousands of demonstrators, packed like sardines into the streets (and riots, and businesses that were being looted), with zero distancing, screaming, throwing spittle, and touching/rubbing any number of other people while doing it. But, that's the scientific aspect - the political aspect, on the other hand, will tell you EXACTLY the opposite. | ||
| Ebutch |
Remember (AT ANY COST)    | ||
| Tpehak |
Where I can buy this? | ||
| Crusty |
I bet they give you a free bowl of soup with one. | ||
| Hootowl |
| ||
| Aesquire |
Possibly an indication that those areas have developed herd immunity. Yeah, that's the optimistic view, I'm just not there, yet. Didn't? Or was instructed NOT to?... I'd go with #2 there, in SOOOO many ways. ..."rigid" in its construction, and not readily mutating ... That word "construction" seems to be too appropriate. Poor practices & selling lab animals to the wet markets, or deliberate doesn't matter to the science. That's an international policy factor, and best discussed on the Are You a Patriot thread where I'm posting other acts of war and slavery by the Xi regime. ...Where's the spikes? ... Yeah. Why Texas & not New York? I agree the riots/disruptions are far more likely to cause the spikes we are seeing than opening hair salons. It's not the PC version, but the smart guess. The other factor that seems to be dominant is tourism. New York hasn't opened up as much, and it's not the same numbers of tourists, any year, as Texas & Florida & Arizona, and even more so this year. You can account for a lot of the southern vacation state's increases simply by counting the number of folk from New York & New Jersey who go there. Maybe even enough that the Party Disruption Riots are lost in the noise, but I don't think so. There are factors I don't understand here, and this is a subject of some interest to me in my studies of history. The 2 biggest changes from the days of Rome are: Transportation. from horse & camel caravans & sailing ships to Airbus. The plagues that reached Italy in 541 AD. took months and maybe even well over a year to get there from China. This one took one day after the Chinese New Year celebrators boarded 747s by the thousands to return to their work in the Leather & other hand work industries. Germ theory. We now know how to protect against plague, and the answers are not that different than a thousand years ago. Isolation. We are theoretically better at the hygiene aspects, with much better soap. Also, we can now communicate the news and warnings much faster than newspapers from before the telegraph. | ||
| Aesquire |
https://www.armstrong.edu/history-journal/history- journal-the-death-toll-of-justinians-plague-and-it s-effects-on-the | ||
| Tpehak |
Soap and hand sanitizer kill only germs and bacteria, it won't kill viruses. All those products do nothing with viruses. With same success you can rinse your hands in water. (Message edited by TPEHAK on July 21, 2020) | ||
| Zac4mac |
From Sciencealert.com - Soap and water are your first line of defence to remove the virus from surfaces. Soap interferes with the fats in the virus shell and lift the virus from surfaces and this is then rinsed off by water. | ||
| Hootowl |
“germs and bacteria, it won't kill viruses.” What, in your estimation, is the difference between a germ and a bacterium? What is a germ, in your mind? Also, you’re wrong about hand sanitizer’s efficacy against viruses. | ||
| Aesquire |
Hoot's correct. Alcohol based hand sanitizer "kills"viruses just fine. And to be pedantic, you can't kill a virus, it's not alive when it's not reproducing... kinda. You just break it. Like self replicating robots. It's a program. A trick to be sure you've washed your hands enough is to sing a little song to yourself. https://www.health.harvard.edu/newsletter_article/The_handiwork_of_good_health n studies, washing hands with soap and water for 15 seconds (about the time it takes to sing one chorus of "Happy Birthday to You") reduces bacterial counts by about 90%. When another 15 seconds is added, bacterial counts drop by close to 99.9% (bacterial counts are measured in logarithmic reductions). Few of us wash our hands that long — 5 seconds is more like it. One reason you're supposed to use cool or lukewarm water is to increase the chances you'll wash them a little longer. Hot water is also more damaging to skin. Soap and water don't kill germs; they work by mechanically removing them from your hands. Running water by itself does a pretty good job of germ removal, but soap increases the overall effectiveness by pulling unwanted material off the skin and into the water. In fact, if your hands are visibly dirty or have food on them, soap and water are more effective than the alcohol-based "hand sanitizers" because the proteins and fats in food tend to reduce alcohol's germ-killing power. This is one of the main reasons soap and water is still favored in the food industry. plus some decent practical advice on washing. Here's a popular science magazine version. https://www.discovermagazine.com/health/soap-duration-and-water-temperature-what-matters-and-what-doesnt-when-it Soap is essential. Many pathogens, including the coronavirus, have an outer membrane made of a double layer of fatty molecules (a lipid bilayer) that is studded with proteins they use to infect cells. Soap can break down this membrane, killing bacteria and deactivating viruses (they can’t technically be killed, since they’re not alive to begin with). At the same time, soap works to trap and remove pathogens, along with oils and other debris, from the skin’s surface. “The pure act of getting your hands sudsed up and really scrubbing them — it’s a physical act,” explains Kristen Gibson, University of Arkansas System Division of Agriculture microbiologist who specializes in the transmission of food-borne pathogens like norovirus.  | ||
| Aesquire |
Btw... An EMT teaching CPR told my class that a steady rhythm is important to chest compressions, both to keep a steady flow, and to reduce fatigue. He suggested "Another One Bites The Dust" by Queen. But not if there are relatives present. Then "Staying Alive" by the Bee Gees is recommended. Dragon Force is NOT a good choice. | ||
| Ratbuell |
I think the reason we're seeing hotspots in travel destinations is, people FROM places like NY...who, let's face it, HAVE the virus (keep in mind how many people are projected, at this point, to have the virus run its course through their systems totally undetected/asymptomatically...), travel to places where people, by and large, do NOT have the virus. They go there on purpose. To get AWAY from the hotspot. These people are coming FROM a place where either a) the virus has run its course through lack-of-delay and simple exposure, or b) there is a form of herd immunity, because of a). Going TO a place where they put a) and b) on hold, by distancing. Therefore, still fully susceptible to the virus. Thereby exposing the population of the destination, to the virus that they have, to that point, been avoiding and thus have no resistance to. And the reason there aren't spikes in the origination locale (NY, for example) is because the virus has ALREADY done its thing there, and the population already has antibodies from either a) or b) above. I've said all along - it IS "that" contagious - which means LOTS more people have had it than anyone knows, and there have been multiple tests to that effect (which everyone seems to discount because they aren't "fully vetted" or some shit). That means the CFR is exponentially lower than all these "studies" and "models" say. If you KNOW ten people have had it, and nine died...that sounds bad. And that's what the press is reporting - case counts (10), and body counts (9). But what about another 1,000 people who you DON'T know? What if THEY had it...and beat it...and nobody even knew? Then you go from 9 out of 10 dead...to 9 out of 1,010 dead. See how that changes things? That's a CFR going from 90%...to 0.9%. With the exact same number of actual bodies - the ONLY piece of hard data we have at this point. And even THAT is suspect, given the unknown number of "if it looks like covid, you don't have to test for it, just call it covid on the death certificate" bodies - which means, out of those 9 bodies, only....maybe...8? 7? 5? are ACTUAL covid deaths, changing the CFR yet again, from 90% down to...possibly...0.5%. Or less. Or more. Until we get our shit straight about reporting, and testing, and documenting...we're just pissing up a rope and NONE of these numbers mean shit. And, perspective is altered through social media. Per Greg's article link above, social media has reduced life on earth from (I think, I'd have to read the article again to be sure) the widely-popularized six degrees of separation (only six acquaintance links separate any two people on earth), down to something like 3.2 - so, it SEEMS like "everybody knows somebody who's died from it". Even if you've never met them, laid eyes on them, or even been in their home COUNTRY. And the media preys on that, to stoke the fear. As for the riots...if a place such as Bumfuck, Indiana, has managed to "flatten the curve" to a decent extent, and the virus simply hasn't taken a hold in that micro-environment (as opposed to, say, NY) due to overall isolation, there's a good chance that rioters from within that same micro-environment don't have anything to give to each other in the first place when they mill around, protest, and riot. (If Hydra imports rioters, though...all bets are off here as well...) Which is another example of "one size does NOT fit all" when it comes to mitigation - every environment is different. Every population is different. And, every mitigation action has to be different. National lockdowns are not the answer. Let clean areas stay free. Let hotspots - like NY - stay in NY until the virus runs its course. Which would ALL be more important, if this thing actually WAS the death sentence it was purported to be at the beginning. But, as we are seeing more and more...it simply is not. Dangerous to some, yes. Dangerous to all? Nope. Not by a long shot. Even the CDC has published numbers to that effect - fractions of a single percentage point. One size does not fit all. | ||
| Blake |
If NYC with its almost universally frequented subway system, and it's socially close culture suffering the most severe outbreak of the pandemic isn't close to herd immunity, why/how the heck not? Let's do some math: In round numbers, on account of I'm lazy, if the infection fatality rate (IFR) is 0.2%, and there have been 20,000 cv deaths in NYC, then the total number of infected would be 20,000/0.002=10,0000,000, which is greater than the total 8.4 million population of the city. Gee. So maybe IFR is 0.5%, that still puts the number of infected at 4,000,000, near herd immunity for NYC, certainly near enough to manifest effects, especially with high risk folks staying our of harm's way as best they can along with the other mitigation efforts people are doing. Why is this not news? PS: The actual number of deaths is right near 23,000 for NYC as of this posting. RE: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/nyregion/ new-york-city-coronavirus-cases.html | ||
| Blake |
A quick web search yielded the following: "To be sure, these estimates still have some uncertainty. The actual figure could be as low as 0.1 percent or as high as 0.4 to 0.5 percent, though treatment advances should mean it will trend lower over time. Even at 0.26 percent, the rate is still significantly higher than influenza most years, more comparable to a bad flu strain like the 1968 Hong Kong flu." from: https://nypost.com/2020/06/25/getting-realistic-ab out-the-coronavirus-death-rate/ and... "the current estimates of between 0.2 to 1% are better as well. The CDC suggests that an IFR of 0.65% is the current best estimate." from: https://theconversation.com/how-deadly-is-the-coro navirus-the-true-fatality-rate-is-tricky-to-find-b ut-researchers-are-getting-closer-141426 Why isn't this being reported? | ||
| Blake |
What do you think Sifo? Re the possibility of NYC herd immunity? | ||
| Aesquire |
Unfortunately for us Upstate, legally subject to Emperor Cuomo's whims, we absolutely DO NOT have herd immunity. On the one hand... Except for the Nursing Home Slaughter created by the Governor, we've been hit fairly lightly, compared to the Big Apple and New Jersey, the numbers improving abruptly outside the NYC bedroom communities. The numbers are worse than rural Oklahoma, but roughly half the deaths outside the NYC area are from the Governor Ordered nursing home slaughter. On the other hand... Population in New York State outside the Greater New York City zone is like a string of beads from the Hudson to Lake Erie. The Albany-Syracuse-Rochester-Buffalo Thruway ( a century ago, Erie canal ) corridor. The beads have lots of cases, but the rest of flyover country has had few. As you'd expect if you aren't an idiot. I'd like to believe that there's been millions of unreported Covid-19 cases and the plague is dying off here, but I've seen no reliable data to indicate that. On the contrary, the rise in cases locally is pretty much as expected. Remember "New York" numbers and reporting is totally dominated by the Big Apple. Except for the rioters trying to throw the statue of Fredrick Douglas in the river, you might not know Rochester exists. ( a city proud of it's Abolitionist past, and often Murder Capitol of NY ) On the gripping hand... I've a Doctor's appointment in a few weeks, and hope to get the antibody test. That will be non-anecdotal evidence of a suspicion I have the the pandemic was here back in January, and that Blake may be correct that there are many unreported cases skewing the numbers. ( my Brother in law's family was very sick for a week in January with respiratory distress, possibly this year's flu, & I was exposed early in their illness at a high infection risk time. ) | ||
| Aesquire |
A Higher Truth! https://babylonbee.com/news/study-finds-most-peopl e-just-wearing-masks-to-avoid-judgmental-looks |
