COVID-19 News

[florduh]

Bring Covid to heel? What are you talking about?

Which other diseases are you going to end this week?

See Tranq, this is where you would generally start moaning about strawmen. You don't need to "end" COVID to bring it under control enough that a return to normalcy is possible. To me, it seems pretty obvious that a cheap rapid test would make that possible. If you can test most people daily and get results in minutes, isolating the infected becomes much easier. We probably wouldn't need any lockdowns for the general populace.

But I guess if we can't totally eliminate EVERY disease, then we shouldn't put this common sense solution into place. Just let this thing slowly burn through, killing and maiming thousands more in the richest country on earth. Oh, and pray we don't have a resurgence once the weather turns this Fall and Winter. That's something "diseases just do" sometimes too.

 

[Tranquility]

See Tranq, this is where you would generally start moaning about strawmen. You don't need to "end" COVID to bring it under control enough that a return to normalcy is possible. To me, it seems pretty obvious that a cheap rapid test would make that possible. If you can test most people daily and get results in minutes, isolating the infected becomes much easier. We probably wouldn't need any lockdowns for the general populace.

But I guess if we can't totally eliminate EVERY disease, then we shouldn't put this common sense solution into place. Just let this thing slowly burn through, killing and maiming thousands more in the richest country on earth. Oh, and pray we don't have a resurgence once the weather turns this Fall and Winter. That's something "diseases just do" sometimes too.

I agree perceived risk is important. As the opinion report said:
According to our study, political affiliation is as powerful as age in predicting whether someone would be likely to eat at a restaurant indoors; Democrats have roughly the same willingness to eat in a restaurant at 25% capacity as Republicans do in a restaurant at full capacity. Individual risk from COVID-19 depends on age and health, but perceived risk depends on one’s politics— and it’s perceived risk that drives behavior. Conversely, previous Gallup research has found that Republicans have been less likely to accept public health guidelines like wearing a mask, regardless of the local rate of infection—again evidence that partisanship plays an important role.

I guess the real question is, how much do I have to work at convincing you? It would be great if you overcame your perception of the risk and got going on building again. If more testing were to do that it would be a good thing. But, the main benefit would be convincing you and not the actual results of the tests.

 

[EmDeemo]

I guess the real question is, how much do I have to work at convincing you? It would be great if you overcame your perception of the risk and got going on building again. If more testing were to do that it would be a good thing. But, the main benefit would be convincing you and not the actual results of the tests.

What? Its not your job to convince anyone of anything? Thats the real question? The main benefit of testing would be to convince someone, not the outcome of the tests?

A report on the differences between democrats and republicans willingness to eat at restaurants? What a crock of nonsense.

 

[Tranquility]

What? Its not your job to convince anyone of anything? Thats the real question? The main benefit of testing would be to convince someone, not the outcome of the tests?

A report on the differences between democrats and republicans willingness to eat at restaurants? What a crock of nonsense.

Nonsense?

No, SCIENCE! (Reg. U.S. pat office)

 

[EmDeemo]

No, SCIENCE! (Reg. U.S. pat office)

I think that shows about the limit of thinking here. US patent office science. Dems vs Repubs science.

 

[florduh]

I guess the real question is, how much do I have to work at convincing you?

I'm aware my individual risk is low. I've never claimed otherwise. But I've discovered this amazing fact that I'm not the only person in the universe. And while if/when I get COVID, I almost certainly won't die... I also don't know I'll be "fine". 78% of "mild" cases saw cardiac damage. Scientists are alarmed by lingering systemic effects. I know people my age who have been waylaid for months.

There are still a lot of unknowns about this disease. It's "not just the flu". So my personal risk assessment is... I'm probably not going to eat inside at a packed restaurant for a while. I'll still eat out occasionally when there's outside seating available. But way less than before. I'll do as much shopping online as possible. I won't travel as much as I did in 2019. Even if conferences and conventions were operating, I'd probably avoid them until there aren't millions of infections across the country.

Sorry, none of that is crazy. Small price to pay to reduce my risk of catching a novel, not very well understood disease that could possibly damage my body either now... or decades down the road.

Also, when did we decide that everyone over a certain age is just expendable? That notion seems to be floating around out there.

It would be great if you overcame your perception of the risk and got going on building again.

I haven't stopped working, but thanks for the condescension. Part of the reason I don't want to catch this disease is, I'd be screwed if I was bedridden for weeks or months. Unlikely, I know. But if I can reduce my risk of experiencing that by cutting back on trips to Applebees, I'd be fuckin stupid not to.

If more testing were to do that it would be a good thing. But, the main benefit would be convincing you and not the actual results of the tests.

LOL, no the main benefit would be fewer dead or maimed people. A secondary benefit would be reducing the number of active cases from the millions, down to thousands. Maybe hundreds. Like other Big Boy countries have managed to do. And yes. Once that happens, I'm sure more people would feel comfortable eating at a packed restaurant.

A report on the differences between democrats and republicans willingness to eat at restaurants?

One of my friends is an executive at Disney in Cali. According to her, these "throw caution to the wind" Republicans sure aren't flocking to Disney World in Florida. Attendance is still so bad that permanent layoffs are coming fast. Why don't people want to pack themselves in a steel tube for a few hours, then spend a week in an amusement park with thousands of strangers?

 

[yogurtsauce]

Just because you don’t test doesn’t mean it’s not there. That’s like basic baby common sense with peekaboo. Cmon dude.

 

[Tranquility]

It seems everyone is on board opening up. Awesome!

(By the way, at some point, you have to understand "you" does not necessarily refer to florduh but to those who take florduh's position as well. For some reason, I always assumed you (florduh) were not forced to sit at home during the pandemic.)

I agree that Disney has problems and is probably why they're going in so big on China. The amusement park business is unlikely to be the same ever again. Travel too. Maybe not. In Wuhan a few days ago:

But, we have to recognize there is some phenomenon going on with the charts. We're getting data that is indicating herd immunity with no where near the seropositive result in the community we would have expected.

The key model for herd immunity limited those catching the disease at about 70%. That is, when 70% of the people have caught a disease or are otherwise immune, the [R naught] value goes below 1 and the disease incidence decreases. We seem to be getting such a result now when we're only having 5% to 20% of the population with antibodies. How can this be?

This is where the T-cell theories are important. Even though we don't have a high-level of antibodies in the population, the T-cell immunity may explain how it looks like herd immunity even though it is not.

Have we decided the Swedes were idiots or geniuses yet?

Just because you don’t test doesn’t mean it’s not there. That’s like basic baby common sense with peekaboo. Cmon dude.

Dude...I understand the theory of testing. That it is there in the population in the numbers it is is the problem. When we're getting case numbers in the levels we're getting through some of the top testing-level countries (https://www.statista.com/statistics/1104645/covid19-testing-rate-select-countries-worldwide/), what do you do with that data?

 

[yogurtsauce]

It seems everyone is on board opening up. Awesome!

(By the way, at some point, you have to understand "you" does not necessarily refer to florduh but to those who take florduh's position as well. For some reason, I always assumed you (florduh) were not forced to sit at home during the pandemic.)

I agree that Disney has problems and is probably why they're going in so big on China. The amusement park business is unlikely to be the same ever again. Travel too. Maybe not. In Wuhan a few days ago:

But, we have to recognize there is some phenomenon going on with the charts. We're getting data that is indicating herd immunity with no where near the seropositive result in the community we would have expected.

The key model for herd immunity limited those catching the disease at about 70%. That is, when 70% of the people have caught a disease or are otherwise immune, the [R naught] value goes below 1 and the disease incidence decreases. We seem to be getting such a result now when we're only having 5% to 20% of the population with antibodies. How can this be?

This is where the T-cell theories are important. Even though we don't have a high-level of antibodies in the population, the T-cell immunity may explain how it looks like herd immunity even though it is not.

Have we decided the Swedes were idiots or geniuses yet?


Dude...I understand the theory of testing. That it is there in the population in the numbers it is is the problem. When we're getting case numbers in the levels we're getting through some of the top testing-level countries (https://www.statista.com/statistics/1104645/covid19-testing-rate-select-countries-worldwide/), what do you do with that data?

You clearly do not understand hers immunity. Herd immunity STARTS to work at 70% but hardly.
Let’s take deer for example. You have 100 deer. 99 of them are good, but one of them is sick. Evolution has allowed for animals to recognize sick animals. The other 99 deer WILL NOT interact with the sick deer. The sick deer can only infect a certain amount. Now I we had two sick deer, the infection rate is doubled. Now add another, and it’s increased by 50%. The more sick deer you have, the more easy it is to spread it through the herd. Measles is a great example. Everyone is vaccinated against it, with the exception of those who can’t, and antivaxers. Let’s say that 90 deer are vaccinated. 3 deer can’t be vaccinated or else they will die. There are 7 deer left able to be vaccinated but choose not to. If 97 deer were vaccinated, the 3 who can’t be vaccinated are 100% safe from the disease. But let’s say 1/7 of the deer get infected. Now the herd immunity is broken. If that deer spreads it to the other 6/7, then there’s more disease; however, there are 3 deer that can’t be vaccinated. Now they have a chance to get the disease and die because 7 deer chose not to vaccinate.
But if those 10 deer die, then herd immunity is alive again because everyone is vaccinated.

HERD IMMUNITY FOR HUMANS IS ONLY FOR THOSE THAT HAVE HEALTH IMPLICATIONS THAT WILL KILL HEM SHOULD THEY GET VACCINATED. IT ONLY WORKS WHEN EVERYONE IS VACCINATED. It will absolutely not work without a vaccine, especially because we don’t know if you can catch covid multiple times

It is not our job to understand covid stats data. It’s our job to provide it. There are data scientists out there analyzing the fuck out of everything.

also it’s not R naught lmao. It’s R0. Naught is the little 0 that goes under R.

 

[florduh]

"Herd immunity" is the right strategy, if you don't mind how many people die. Going by the official numbers, about 2% of the US population getting infected killed 175,000 people. What happens when 20,30,50% get the virus if a small fraction of those numbers killed 175,000?

We don't know for sure how immunity works with this thing either. Another unknown.

 

[yogurtsauce]

Another scale is that the biggest attack on America was 9/11. 2,977 people died. And over 6000 people were injured.

This number is literally insignificant compared to covid, which could’ve been prevented.

also keep in mind, that just because you don die from covid, doesn’t mean that you weren’t affected. Plenty of people are getting permanent body damage. Not only those that have bad health are at risk. They just have the highest chance of dying. Those with asthma are fucked.

R0 is also impossible to find for covid as well because of the asymptomatic people. R0 is also higher because of the untested people.

And just because you don’t understand the scientific process, doesn’t mean that scientists don’t. Other countries have test data. But why would you use another countries data when you can collect your own ACCURATE FOR UOUR COUNTRY data? Each country is different. There are so many variables. Population, density, age, so so so so many things.
Things that we can learn from the info: correlations. THERE ARE ALWAYS NEW THINGS TO LEARN OR DISPROVE IN SCIENCE. THERE IS AND NEVER HAS BEEN SUCH A THING AS TOO MUCH DATA EVER IN THE HISTORY OF SCIENCE. EVER.

Here’s a fun correlation; everyone who drinks water dies. But realistically, we know it wasn’t the water that killed them. That’s what we call correlation vs causation. Yes everyone who drinks water dies, but that is not the causation of death, usually.

Like honestly dude, if you’re going to argue, you need to bring up stuff. And you can’t back up your stuff by dismissing others’ points and saying that your stuff is right because others’ are wrong. You should try to understand the scientific process before you argue about it. It makes it a little less embarrassing for you when I can see through the cracks of your argument

 

[RUDE BOY]

Another scale is that the biggest attack on America was 9/11. 2,977 people died. And over 6000 people were injured.

Along with the fact that more Americans have died from covid since February 29 2020 than in all US military actions from 1950 to today. . .

 

[Tranquility]

Actually other than the difficulty of R[subscript]0, I'm not sure y'all even understand the basics of testing. Here's a primer on why the data can be problematical even with SCIENCE!

Test, Test, Test; Lessonslearned from experience with mass screening programmes: AdviceNote for Independent SAGE

Part of the issue I keep asking when y'all bring up testing, what testing are you talking about? What is the goal? You see, there are MANY reasons to test. Some provide valuable data for the community and some for the individual. The method of the testing and the reason for the test can point to how to mitigate problems for false positives and negatives.

Here's how we tried to up the number of people screened in a timely manner. It still seems a good idea to me, but, apparently, not so much.
Why Pooled Testing for the Coronavirus Isn’t Working in America.

More of the problems, and benefits, of testing. It's a mixed bag that you have to decide your goals first.
Linking Statistics With Testing Policy to Manage COVID-19 in the Community

 

[yogurtsauce]

Along with the fact that more Americans have died from covid since February 29 2020 than in all US military actions from 1950 to today. . .

An article. Think about all of the hippies and musicians that wanted the Vietnam war to stop because so many American lives were being lost for no reason. Now this disease has killed more people. The Beatles would be disappointed.

Actually other than the difficulty of R[subscript]0, I'm not sure y'all even understand the basics of testing. Here's a primer on why the data can be problematical even with SCIENCE!

Test, Test, Test; Lessonslearned from experience with mass screening programmes: AdviceNote for Independent SAGE

Part of the issue I keep asking when y'all bring up testing, what testing are you talking about? What is the goal? You see, there are MANY reasons to test. Some provide valuable data for the community and some for the individual. The method of the testing and the reason for the test can point to how to mitigate problems for false positives and negatives.

Here's how we tried to up the number of people screened in a timely manner. It still seems a good idea to me, but, apparently, not so much.
Why Pooled Testing for the Coronavirus Isn’t Working in America.

More of the problems, and benefits, of testing. It's a mixed bag that you have to decide your goals first.
Linking Statistics With Testing Policy to Manage COVID-19 in the Community

Now you’re just pointing out the incompetence of the POTUS. Everything you said is a result of him. Just because the president is incompetent, doesn’t make it a fact that testing is irrelevant and wrong. Just the way our incompetent president wants it is wrong. Now you’re just unearthing deep systemic issues which directly resulted in 173k Americans dead because of one incompetent person. Do not mistake trump for science.

All data collection is useful. We can simply discard data we don’t need. We cannot simply gather data from thin air. Just like how you can add more salt to food but you can’t take it out.

Once again, you defend your statements by saying ours is wrong instead of justifying why yours is right. I don’t even know why you’re trying to argue about data collection. There are literally people out there whose job is to make sense of this data. It is absolutely not your job. If you don’t understand it, there are people out there that do.

Another thing you aren’t getting through your head is that science goes both ways. Proving things and disproving things. Failing in science is good. Because now you know what doesn’t work. Now you have one more variable to remove from the equation in order to get the result that you’re looking for.

But my final note. Stop using the President’s incompetence to defend your arguments and maybe use your brain instead. Slow testing is not a result of testing. It’s the result of the president.

There’s literally someone in the White House whose job it is to tell America the procedures on what to do next in scientific epidemics. The president completely ignored him and now we are.

You point out the failures in UK as if they are bad. They’re good because now they and the rest of the world have something to learn from. This is how humans have adapted in the world. Each failure is a step in the right direction.

 

[florduh]

Part of the issue I keep asking when y'all bring up testing, what testing are you talking about? What is the goal? You see, there are MANY reasons to test.

Well, the article I had to post more than once about the sort of rapid testing @vtac first posted about is pretty clear about the goal of cheap, saliva rapid tests: if most people are being tested weekly (or even more often), you can more easily isolate the infected. That tamps down on the spread of the disease.

Under the current testing regime, tests normal people can get have a several day or several week lag time. That's fairly useless for stopping the spread.

 

[macbill]

Nebraska
Seven cases of COVID-19 tied to Sturgis rally; three possible exposure sites announced

Seven cases in the Panhandle have been tied back to the Sturgis motorcyle rally, Panhandle health officials said Thursday.
=========================================================================================
How does immunity against the coronavirus work? New research shows how antibodies can block it.

When a coronavirus outbreak on a Seattle trawler in May infected more than 100 crew members, three fishermen with antibodies were spared, according to a new study, providing encouraging evidence about our immunity from the contagion.

Those three were the only people with antibodies aboard the ship out of 122 people who had let scientists collect blood samples before they set sail. After 18 days at sea, the virus had swept across 85% of the boat’s crew but did not sicken those three, hinting at immunity, researchers wrote.
=========================================================================================
Coronavirus infections are rising in Europe and vacationers may be partly to blame
With coronavirus cases rising after an early-summer ebb, governments across the continent are abruptly rethinking the wisdom of an open Europe, while reinstituting quarantines and other border controls.
The changes reflect a sense that travel — and the attempt to reboot the Mediterranean’s tourism economy — has undercut Europe’s fight to control the virus.

 

[ClearBlueLou]

You clearly do not understand hers immunity. Herd immunity STARTS to work at 70% but hardly.
Let’s take deer for example. You have 100 deer. 99 of them are good, but one of them is sick. Evolution has allowed for animals to recognize sick animals. The other 99 deer WILL NOT interact with the sick deer. The sick deer can only infect a certain amount. Now I we had two sick deer, the infection rate is doubled. Now add another, and it’s increased by 50%. The more sick deer you have, the more easy it is to spread it through the herd. Measles is a great example. Everyone is vaccinated against it, with the exception of those who can’t, and antivaxers. Let’s say that 90 deer are vaccinated. 3 deer can’t be vaccinated or else they will die. There are 7 deer left able to be vaccinated but choose not to. If 97 deer were vaccinated, the 3 who can’t be vaccinated are 100% safe from the disease. But let’s say 1/7 of the deer get infected. Now the herd immunity is broken. If that deer spreads it to the other 6/7, then there’s more disease; however, there are 3 deer that can’t be vaccinated. Now they have a chance to get the disease and die because 7 deer chose not to vaccinate.
But if those 10 deer die, then herd immunity is alive again because everyone is vaccinated.

HERD IMMUNITY FOR HUMANS IS ONLY FOR THOSE THAT HAVE HEALTH IMPLICATIONS THAT WILL KILL HEM SHOULD THEY GET VACCINATED. IT ONLY WORKS WHEN EVERYONE IS VACCINATED. It will absolutely not work without a vaccine, especially because we don’t know if you can catch covid multiple times

It is not our job to understand covid stats data. It’s our job to provide it. There are data scientists out there analyzing the fuck out of everything.

also it’s not R naught lmao. It’s R0. Naught is the little 0 that goes under R.

It is A FACT that covid can be caught multiple times: I personally know two people who have had confirmed infections TWICE...and both officially recovered from the first before the reinfections occurred. Each has described it to me as the sickest they’ve ever been. UPDATE: both are young, healthy, vigorous - or were...

 

[Tranquility]

The flu is hard to vaccinate because the virus has such a short lifespan that it evolves so quickly. Each generation leads to a chance of a trait being passed on that allows the virus to have a higher chance of living, evolution. Measles has no evolved because it never had to chance to. It was eradicated until recently. The people currently with measles have a chance to evolve it, possibly allowing it to evolve past the vaccine and infecting those who are vaccinated. Measles vaccine 100% effective rate. Flu ~30%.

Stop comparing covid to anything. Because nothing is covid, only covid is covid. Period.

100% effective for measles? No. Even if we use the term "some effect" rather than "effective", we're still a little short of 100% on measles. (Also, we will assume full vaccination of two doses spread over time.) But, that "some effect" is a problem too. Just because a vaccine develops some level of antibodies does not make a person immune.

How Effective is Measles Vaccine?

Measles, Mumps, and Rubella (MMR) Vaccination: What Everyone Should Know

9 reasons you can be optimistic that a vaccine for COVID-19 will be widely available in 2021

Here is where the current research stands, where I think we will be in five months and why you can be optimistic about the delivery of a COVID-19 vaccine.

In an odd circumstance, the first vaccine is often the worst vaccine.

The reason why gets to how Phase III trials are ended. In a double blind study on vaccine, the end point comes when a certain number of people catch the virus. Once that level is reached, the trial is ended and the identities of parties who got the vaccine and the parties who got sick from the virus are unmasked and we see how successful the vaccine is.

So, if we assume all the trials are started at the same time, earlier reaching of the end phase than others means that either the vaccine was not that effective or the incidence of the virus the test subjects were subjected to were high for some reason. This is why we saw the recent news about a creating of the virus for testing. Some trials are getting worried they'll never get to an end point if there is not enough incidence in the population of the virus. Vaccine makers are looking to get phase III with introduction of the virus if they can't get the required number infected through normal living. Only if the incidence of disease is very high can a vaccine with a large effect be known quickly. Otherwise, you have to wait.

 

[macbill]

Mounting US deaths reveal an outsize toll on people of color

As many as 215,000 more people than usual died in the U.S. during the first seven months of 2020, suggesting that the number of lives lost to the coronavirus is significantly higher than the official toll. And half the dead were people of color — Blacks, Hispanics, Native Americans and, to a marked degree unrecognized until now, Asian Americans.

The new figures from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention highlight a stark disparity: Deaths among minorities during the crisis have risen far more than they have among whites.

 

[Marlon Rando]

 

[ClearBlueLou]

Troubling figures today: over 90,000 new cases today, over 2500 deaths.

So far.

 

[macbill]

How does coronavirus spread at a concert? Germans do a test


August 2020, Saxony, Leipzig: Test persons of a large-scale experiment of the University Medicine Halle/Saale are standing at the entrance in front of the Arena Leipzig. Around 2200 visitors take part in the experiment entitled "Restart-19", in which pop singer Tim Bendzko will perform. The scientists want to use sensors and other aids to monitor walking paths and fluorescent disinfectant is to make visible which surfaces are often touched. They also want to trace the flight of aerosols - the smallest mixtures of particles that could carry the virus. The aim is to develop a mathematical model with which the risk of a corona outbreak after a major event in a hall can be assessed.

 

[macbill]

More COVID cases linked to Maine wedding reception, totaling 53 cases so far

More cases of COVID-19 have been linked to a Maine wedding reception that violated attendance limits.

Maine state health officials said Saturday that so far, 53 cases of the virus have been traced back to the Aug. 7 reception in Millinocket. One person has died, according to a local hospital.

The new couple will be able to look back fondly on those they killed.

 

[florduh]

How much longer until the US economy is back to normal? This new index shows we have a long way to go

The US economy remains far from normal. That's the bottom line. Based on the Back-to-Normal Index that we constructed, the US economy was operating at only 78% of normal as of August 19. "Normal" for our purpose is the economy as it stood prior to when the pandemic struck in early March. Economic activity nationwide is down by almost one-fourth from its pre-pandemic level — far from normal."

As bad as that is, it is substantially better than the darkest days of the pandemic in mid-April, when we were unsure how contagious or virulent the virus was. Nonessential businesses in much of the country were shut down, and most of us were sheltering in place. Our Back-to-Normal index hit its nadir of just 59% on April 17.

The economy rallied between mid-April and mid-June as businesses reopened, but it is clear they opened too quickly and reignited the virus. The economy has gone more-or-less sideways ever since. It's not difficult to connect the dots between the pandemic and the economy's performance. Some states had to backtrack on reopenings, and businesses and households everywhere have turned more skittish.

 

[Gunky]

How much longer until the US economy is back to normal? This new index shows we have a long way to go

The US economy remains far from normal. That's the bottom line. Based on the Back-to-Normal Index that we constructed, the US economy was operating at only 78% of normal as of August 19. "Normal" for our purpose is the economy as it stood prior to when the pandemic struck in early March. Economic activity nationwide is down by almost one-fourth from its pre-pandemic level — far from normal.
Economic activity nationwide is down by almost one-fourth from its pre-pandemic level — far from normal."

As bad as that is, it is substantially better than the darkest days of the pandemic in mid-April, when we were unsure how contagious or virulent the virus was. Nonessential businesses in much of the country were shut down, and most of us were sheltering in place. Our Back-to-Normal index hit its nadir of just 59% on April 17.

The economy rallied between mid-April and mid-June as businesses reopened, but it is clear they opened too quickly and reignited the virus. The economy has gone more-or-less sideways ever since. It's not difficult to connect the dots between the pandemic and the economy's performance. Some states had to backtrack on reopenings, and businesses and households everywhere have turned more skittish.

It's very frustrating because we ended up with the worst of all possible outcomes: we paid a terrific price for shutting down and then, because we jumped the gun on re-opening, we did not bring the number of infections down to a level where they could be practically tested, traced, and brought under control. So here we are many months later with a large reserve of daily new cases bouncing around the country, far too many to follow up on each and every contact and stamp out every ember. We paid the price and got zilch, unlike most of our peers. Possibly we should listen to the scientists and doctors and not ignorant fools who tweet about liberating states, opening schools before the guidelines have been met, deploying vaccines that haven't been properly tested () etc.