Co-vid 19: What Is and Isn't Known, Discussion and Debate

[Calm]

51 minutes ago, bluebell said:

Does it look like singing and talking are no different in terms of spreading germs?  And does this mean that if a person isn't opening their mouth (or sneezing obviously) that no germs spread?  If so, then breathing through your nose and refraining from opening your mouth would be as effective at stopping spread as wearing a mask, correct?  

If you can't get people to wear masks maybe you can get them to keep their mouths shut at least.

The singing and talking plates may be due to droplets moving further (furthest? iirc what Pogi posted earlier) with singing. It would depend on whether the agar was held up in front of the face or placed on a table in front of the individual, I am guessing. 

Added:  there were two pictures in the first one, he is holding the dish up in front, so have no clue why in this case singing didn’t show more...unless the issue is not that it makes a difference with how much virus gets out there but how far it goes?  Perhaps Pogi can clarify  

The nose can spread germs, but maybe not as many droplets.  Will ha e to check if Pogi doesn’t get to it first. 
 

I am a mouth breather myself, too many allergies. 

Edited June 30, 2020 by Calm

[Calm]

Larger droplets with mouth breathing:

Quote

 Exhaled droplets from human subjects performing four respiratory actions (mouth breathing, nose breathing, coughing, talking) were measured by both an optical particle counter (OPC) and an analytical transmission electron microscope (AEM). The OPC indicated a preponderance of particles less than 1 mu, although larger particles were also found. Measurements with the AEM confirmed the existence of larger sized droplets in the exhaled breath. In general, coughing produced the largest droplet concentrations and nose breathing the least, although considerable intersubject variability was observed.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/10168531/

[Calm]

For some reason can’t include the distance Twitter screenshot, shows with and without at 2, 4, and 6 feet. Go to link if you want the whole thing or a video version. 

[rodheadlee]

12 hours ago, Meadowchik said:

I wonder how much the opinions against masks have been impacted by shortages. This article isn't so much a thorough study of the importance of masks in infection as an opinion piece on supply concerns.

 

The construction supply houses, paint supply houses and automotive paint supply houses ran out of N95 masks in mid January, in Southern California. We use them all the time and I had a small supply of them on my boat.

Quote

 

 

[Meadowchik]

1 hour ago, rodheadlee said:

The construction supply houses, paint supply houses and automotive paint supply houses ran out of N95 masks in mid January, in Southern California. We use them all the time and I had a small supply of them on my boat.

 

I'm not at all surprised! China started lockdown measures weeks before that.

Edited July 1, 2020 by Meadowchik

[Rain]

17 hours ago, Calm said:

https://mobile.twitter.com/richdavisphd/status/1276629360212979712
 

I went looking for this a couple of days ago, but didn't have much time at the moment to look into it.  There are some concerns with it - that it was done before covid or before it hot to big, that we don't know much about the person.  

It may be that everything from it applies here and is reliable, but it would be a good thing to look at it further.

[Calm]

1 hour ago, Rain said:

There are some concerns with it - that it was done before covid or before it hot to big, that we don't know much about the person.  

I am not sure why the first would be an issue. It is showing how droplets pass, not Covid. Those could be a simple explanation/demonstration on why doctors etc wear masks in general.  What applies to Covid applies to all.  The only question I can think of would be how much Covid is transmitted by droplets, which was not known for sure at the beginning and is now better understood. 
 

It is not claiming to use Covid or even mentions it as viruses wouldn’t work in agar cultures. It is a bacterial growth rather than a viral one.  What the agar plate is showing is the destination of droplets containing the guy’s normal, hopefully mostly healthy bacteria and how the droplets are caught when he wears a mask. Where droplets fall, bacteria grow. The point is not what the growth is, but demonstrating how many droplets get through a mask in a similar fashion to the video that is all dark and only the droplets hitting a glass in front of the talker/cougher/etc are lit. 
 

So there is a possibility the guy is lying and putting up fake info about masks, but it is consistent with other demonstrations about masks and droplets I have such as the video I mention above. 
 

If you go to the Twitter link itself and click on the picture to bring forward the written part it explains that it shows bacteria as a standin for any microbes and that smaller aerosols such as exist in cases of certain viruses may be travel farther and stay airborne longer. 
 

I think I am going to delete the screenshots as the link is better in giving full info plus it may resolve my tech issue with links now. 

Edited July 1, 2020 by Calm

[JAHS]

A recent poll in California. Split right down the middle.

[Calm]

JAI....can’t decide if this falls into my political category or not, I am thinking not because it shows commitment to wearing masks to some extent...but maybe yes because there will be those willing to wear them for themselves but don’t think it is right to fine, so not actually giving us info on mask wearing behaviour. 
 

So deciding no request for deletion, but if any want to discuss it, please stay off of the political issue side and focus on medical implications...like it likely means a significant majority of Californians are committed to wearing masks and that is likely to help curb the spreading. 

[Calm]

Fascinating article about findings in autopsies:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/2020/07/01/coronavirus-autopsies-findings/?fbclid=IwAR3VOpVbA-adWCwMP5EHKJ-DhqGvemh1MpNhOoTRKDiNBkW2lYp9GfLc5mA
 

Quote

He found snippets of virus in only some areas, and it was unclear whether they were dead remnants or active virus when the patient died. There were only small pockets of inflammation. But there were large swaths of damage due to oxygen deprivation. Whether the deceased were longtime intensive care patients or people who died suddenly, Solomon said, the pattern was eerily similar.

“We were very surprised,” he said.

When the brain does not get enough oxygen, individual neurons die, and that death is permanent. To a certain extent, people’s brains can compensate, but at some point, the damage is so extensive that different functions start to degrade.

On a practical level, Solomon said, if the virus is not getting into the brain in large amounts, that helps with drug development because treatment becomes trickier when it is pervasive, for instance, in some patients with West Nile or HIV. Another takeaway is that the findings underscore the importance of getting people on supplementary oxygen quickly to prevent irreversible damage.

Solomon, whose work was published as a June 12 letter in the New England Journal of Medicine, said the findings suggest the damage had been happening over a longer period of time, which makes him wonder about the virus’s effect on people who are less ill. “The big lingering question is what happens to people who survive covid,” he said. “Is there a lingering effect on the brain?”

 

Edited July 2, 2020 by Calm

[Calm]

More on long term effects:

Quote

Post-viral syndromes have been associated with numerous viruses in the past, but until the pandemic, they were considered relatively rare. In the case of covid-19, researchers are unsure whether people with extended symptoms are simply facing a long recovery — or whether their illness will come to resemble something like myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome, a complex illness characterized by profound exhaustion and sleep problems, or other conditions that can last for years, or a lifetime.

“Covid is a totally different animal,” said Bruce Farber, chief of infectious diseases at Northwell Health, New York State’s largest health system. “You see that with very few respiratory diseases. Even with influenza for the most part, you live or die."

The virus also involves so many parts of the body — from the brain to the toes — that some symptoms may be due to damage to different organs that have not repaired themselves. Patients describe everything from a decrease in lung function to a persistent loss of taste and smell.

“It’s a pretty bad infection even in mild cases,” said Avindra Nath, clinical director of the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke at the National Institutes of Health.

Some patients with long-tail illness are testing positive, then negative and positive again for the coronavirus. Many scientists believe the tests are likely picking up dead virus — in studies, it has only been active nine to 11 days. But a few autopsies have shown the virus lurking in puzzling place like the spleen, creating continuing uncertainty. Nath, who is launching a study on the long-term trajectories and persistent symptoms of some covid-19 survivors, said he hopes to answer some of these questions in the coming months as research begins to yield results.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/2020/06/11/coronavirus-chronic/?arc404=true&itid=lk_inline_manual_69

[Calm]

Good news, possible vaccine, of course very preliminary:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/2020/07/01/pfizer-reports-encouraging-early-covid-19-vaccine-data/

[Calm]

Bad news, children are dying from Covid, including those without health issues:

https://kutv.com/news/coronavirus/1-year-old-girl-dies-from-covid-19-a-day-after-being-checked-into-hospital

[Tacenda]

9 hours ago, Calm said:

Good news, possible vaccine, of course very preliminary:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/2020/07/01/pfizer-reports-encouraging-early-covid-19-vaccine-data/

Good news as well...the virus will just disappear.

[smac97]

A few items:

1. LA Mayor Garcetti admits 'connection' between coronavirus outbreak and protests, after downplaying link

Quote

Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti said Wednesday that public protests are likely causing the number of citywide coronavirus cases to spike, just two days after claiming there wasn't "any conclusive evidence" showing a connection between the two.

Garcetti ... was speaking at a press conference concerning the recent Black Lives Matter protests in Los Angeles when he was asked if the demonstrations were contributing to the spread of COVID-19.

He claimed he'd consulted with Dr. Barbara Ferrer, LA County's director of public health, and determined the protests were in fact contributing to the spread of the virus.

...

This clashed with statements made by Garcetti during the Tuesday press conference, however, where he called the idea a hypothesis and minimized the potential impact mass public demonstrations were having on the number of COVID-19 cases in the city.

"We follow the data closely," he said, according to Fox 11. "There's no evidence yet that the protests led to much spread though it's something that Doctor Ferrer has hypothesized, but we haven't seen any conclusive evidence there."

2. Another experimental covid-19 vaccine has shown promising early results

Quote

The news: An experimental covid-19 vaccine being developed by Pfizer and BioNTech provoked immune responses in 45 healthy volunteers, according to a preprint paper on medRXiv. The levels of antibodies were up to 2.8 times the level of those found in patients who have recovered. The study randomly assigned 45 people to get either one of three doses of the vaccine or a placebo. But there were side effects like fatigue, headache, and fever—especially at higher doses. The researchers decided to discontinue with the highest dose, 100 micrograms, after the first round of treatments.

Some caveats required: It’s promising news,but this is the first clinical data on this specific vaccine, and it hasn’t been through the process of peer review yet. Higher antibody levels in patients who’d received the vaccine are a useful proxy for immunity to covid-19, but we don’t yet know for sure that they guarantee immunity. In order to find out, Pfizer will start conducting studies in larger groups of patients, starting this summer. It says its goal is to have 100 million doses of a vaccine available by the end of 2020.

3. CA Gov Newsom Shuts Down Majority of State’s Wineries for 4th of July – But Not His Own

Quote

California {} Gov. Gavin Newsom issued an unprecedented shutdown order, effective immediately and lasting for at least three weeks, for food and entertainment-related businesses in 19 counties on his coronavirus “watch list.” The closures affect approximately 70 percent of the state’s residents, covering the entirety of Southern California except for San Diego County, most of the Central Valley, and suburban counties between San Francisco and Sacramento.

...

Napa County, where Gov. Gavin Newsom’s business, PlumpJack Wines, operates four wineries – wineries with tasting rooms that are open all weekend long and booked solid.

Well, isn’t that convenient.

4. Hydroxychloroquine lowers COVID-19 death rate, Henry Ford Health study finds

Quote

A Henry Ford Health System study shows the controversial anti-malaria drug hydroxychloroquine helps lower the death rate of COVID-19 patients, the Detroit-based health system said Thursday.

Officials with the Michigan health system said the study found the drug “significantly” decreased the death rate of patients involved in the analysis.

The study analyzed 2,541 patients hospitalized among the system’s six hospitals between March 10 and May 2 and found 13% of those treated with hydroxychloroquine died while 26% of those who did not receive the drug died.

5. Mask Wars: While facemasks can’t hurt in the fight against Covid-19, the outrage directed at skeptics is excessive.

Quote

As states begin to reopen and America tries to recreate normalcy, masks have replaced social distancing as the new moral statement. Just as adherence to lockdowns was framed by many as a sign of virtue—with some arguing that those who refused to abide by the lockdown orders should forfeit medical care for Covid-related indications—masks have become a face-borne signal of righteousness. As a virologist, I find this perplexing, considering the limited evidence in favor of masks.

More than anything, the scientific rationale behind masks appears to be that wearing them does little harm. Countervailing benefit need not be particularly significant to justify a public-health intervention. Indeed, a veritable cottage industry of homemade and custom masks has sprung up in the wake of Covid-19, many of questionable quality and efficacy. The viral particles that spread Covid-19 are tiny bundles of proteins and nucleic acids, about 0.1 micron in size—or one hundred-thousandth of a centimeter. The CDC generously describes the evidence in favor of cloth face masks’ efficacy as “emerging,” but by the standards we use to assess clinical interventions, the efficacy of masks, especially nonsurgical masks, is undetermined. Clearly, reducing the speed and pressure of droplets from sneezing or coughing that spread infections, as those of the coronavirus responsible for Covid-19 do, is likely to have some effect, but how much remains to be seen.

Understanding of the mask issue has been considerably clouded by unreliable and badly presented evidence—especially a paper by Renyi Zhang for the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, contributed to PNAS by Mario Molina, who won the Nobel Prize in chemistry for the discovery of the effect of chlorofluorocarbons on the ozone layer. Molina and Zhang are atmospheric scientists with no background in epidemiology, virology, or the propagation of infectious diseases. Within the wider epidemiological community, their paper, which makes wild assertions about the effectiveness of masks while almost completely discounting the effect of other non-pharmacological interventions—and does so based on an unfounded comparison of Wuhan, Italy, and the United States—has drawn largely critical responses, with several noted epidemiologists calling for PNAS to withdraw it.

The paper fails not only in its scientific methodology but also in its fundamental grasp of facts and evidence, alleging, among other claims, that, as of April 17, the only difference between New York City and the rest of the United States was a mask mandate in the former. This is demonstrably false, ignoring the vast diversity of public-health responses around America (many of which were just as strict as New York’s, including mandatory mask use indoors), while assuming that an order to wear masks equates to immediate and broad social compliance and that the absence of such an order equates to people generally not wearing masks. Clearly, this is not the case, as people have many motivations to wear face shields, masks, and other personal protective equipment. By late April, mask usage was nearly universal in public spaces within the hardest-hit states.

Yet the Zhang paper was not only the basis for ordering universal mask use in public; it was also twisted into a strange moral argument. The Washington Post, for instance, editorialized on June 16 that “by discouraging mask wearing, [President] Trump [was] condemning many of his supporters to illness.” Masks likely remain a useful tool in curbing transmission potential where social interactions are unavoidable, and even cloth masks, though much less effective than surgical masks and N95 respirators, may have some benefit. As an epidemiologist, all too aware of the microbial multitudes that we all contain, I’ve been carrying a pair of gloves and an N95 respirator in my backpack for years and agree with the general approach of using whatever preventive measures are appropriate as states open up.

Yet the evidence is hardly strong enough to elevate mask-wearing into the epitome of moral behavior. Doing so reflects a greater preoccupation with the psychological effect of masks—perhaps as a restoration of control in the face of an unseen and often perplexing enemy with no cure and no prophylaxis—than with their scientific reality. Americans should demand evidence-based decision-making and policies driven by soundly attested facts, not assumptions or psychological palliatives.

6. Modelers Were ‘Astronomically Wrong’ in COVID-19 Predictions, Says Leading Epidemiologist—and the World Is Paying the Price (emphases added) :

Quote

Dr. John Ioannidis became a world-leading scientist by exposing bad science. But the COVID-19 pandemic could prove to be his biggest challenge yet.

Ioannidis, the C.F. Rehnborg Chair in Disease Prevention at Stanford University, has come under fire in recent months for his opposition to state-ordered lockdowns, which he says could cause social harms well beyond their presumed benefits. But he doesn’t appear to be backing down.

In a wide-ranging interview with Greek Reporter published over the weekend, Ioannidis said emerging data support his prediction that lockdowns would have wide-ranging social consequences and that the mathematical models on which the lockdowns were based were horribly flawed.

Ioannidis also said a comprehensive review of the medical literature suggests that COVID-19 is far more widespread than most people realize.

“There are already more than 50 studies that have presented results on how many people in different countries and locations have developed antibodies to the virus,” Ioannidis, a Greek-American physician, told Greek Reporter. “Of course none of these studies are perfect, but cumulatively they provide useful composite evidence. A very crude estimate might suggest that about 150-300 million or more people have already been infected around the world, far more than the 10 million documented cases.”

Ioannidis said medical data suggest the fatality risk is far lower than earlier estimates had led policymakers to believe and “is almost 0%” for individuals under 45 years old. The median fatality rate is roughly 0.25 percent, however, because the risk “escalates substantially” for individuals over 85 and can be as high as 25 percent for debilitated people in nursing homes.

...

In March, in a widely read STAT article, Ioannidis said it was uncertain how long lockdowns could be maintained without serious consequences.

“One of the bottom lines is that we don’t know how long social distancing measures and lockdowns can be maintained without major consequences to the economy, society, and mental health,” Ioannidis wrote. "Unpredictable evolutions may ensue, including financial crisis, unrest, civil strife, war, and a meltdown of the social fabric.”

Nearly three months after that interview, the world has seen unemployment levels unseen since the Great Depression, mass business closures, spikes in suicide and drug overdose, and social unrest on a scale not seen in the US since the 1960s.

“I feel extremely sad that my predictions were verified,” Ioannidis said. He continued:

Quote

“Major consequences on the economy, society and mental health” have already occurred. I hope they are reversible, and this depends to a large extent on whether we can avoid prolonging the draconian lockdowns and manage to deal with COVID-19 in a smart, precision-risk targeted approach, rather than blindly shutting down everything. Similarly, we have already started to see the consequences of “financial crisis, unrest, and civil strife.” I hope it is not followed by “war and meltdown of the social fabric.” Globally, the lockdown measures have increased the number of people at risk of starvation to 1.1 billion, and they are putting at risk millions of lives, with the potential resurgence of tuberculosis, childhood diseases like measles where vaccination programs are disrupted, and malaria. I hope that policymakers look at the big picture of all the potential problems and not only on the very important, but relatively thin slice of evidence that is COVID-19.”

Ioannidis did not spare modelers who predicted as many as 40 million people would die, or those who claimed the US healthcare system would be overrun.

“The predictions of most mathematical models in terms of how many beds and how many ICU beds would be required were astronomically wrong,” Ioannidis said. “Indeed, the health system was not overrun in any location in the USA, although several hospitals were stressed.”

Conversely, he added, these actions had detrimental effects on the US health care system, which was “severely damaged” because of measures taken.

Only time will tell if Ioannidis is proven correct in his assessments. But if he’s even half right, it would suggest that the experts did indeed fail again.

There’s little question that the lockdowns have caused widespread economic, social, and emotional carnage. Evidence that US states that locked down fared better than states that did not is hard to find.

7. The Real Reason Behind Allowing the Protests During COVID-19

Quote

One of the apparent enigmas of our political moment is the behavior of countless governors and mayors who are allowing mass protests to erupt and persist in the midst of an infectious pandemic. Ordinary people everywhere are being compelled to wear masks; families, businesses, institutions and churches are in various stages of enforced lockdown; and social distancing is the order of the day. Yet thousands of protestors, demonstrators, vandals and rioters all across the nation are permitted to gather in close quarters, ostensibly on the grounds that the pursuit of (a fictitious) “social justice” and the fight against (an illusory) “systemic racism” outweigh every other consideration, including “flattening the curve” of viral casualties. On the face of it, such a phenomenon makes no sense at all. 

But as many commentators have noted and ordinary citizens are aware, the reason is quite simple: November 3.

Thanks,

-Smac

[pogi]

1 hour ago, smac97 said:

4. Hydroxychloroquine lowers COVID-19 death rate, Henry Ford Health study finds

Great news, but it is still preliminary and there is a lot of unanswered questions after reading the article.

They attributed the findings which differed from other studies which found hydroxychloroquine ineffective, in part to a "combination of interventions" that were done in supportive care patients.  In other words, the results can't necessarily be attributed to Hydroxychloroquine alone.  They also stated that they found that steroids helped. Were they using a combo of steroids and hydoxychloroquine?

Of note:

Quote

"Zervos cautioned against extrapolating the results for treatment outside hospital settings and without further study."

In other words, don't be an idiot and take it preventively, it still needs further study. 

Just to be clear, the FDA never said it didn't work for treatment of Covid.  They revoked the fast push of the emergency authorization of the drug for use with Covid.  There simply was not enough evidence to support it.  They stated back in early June, before this study was published,  “We’ve made clear throughout the public health emergency that our actions will be guided by science and that our decisions may evolve as we learn more about the SARS-CoV-2 virus, review the latest data, and consider the balance of risks versus benefits of treatments for COVID-19."

I am only pointing this out because I can foresee people making accusations of contradiction, when there isn't any. 

[pogi]

3 hours ago, smac97 said:

6. Modelers Were ‘Astronomically Wrong’ in COVID-19 Predictions, Says Leading Epidemiologist—and the World Is Paying the Price (emphases added) :

Quote

Ioannidis said medical data suggest the fatality risk is far lower than earlier estimates had led policymakers to believe and “is almost 0%” for individuals under 45 years old. The median fatality rate is roughly 0.25 percent, however, because the risk “escalates substantially” for individuals over 85 and can be as high as 25 percent for debilitated people in nursing homes

"a broad range of 0.25%–3.0% probably should be considered."
https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/26/6/20-0320_article

"Roughly around 0.25%", huh?  That is an interesting way to report the range. 

One should also consider the following:

Quote

"The number of excess all-cause deaths was 28% higher than the official tally of COVID-19–reported deaths during that period," the report said. "In several states, these deaths occurred before increases in the availability of COVID-19 diagnostic tests and were not counted in official COVID-19 death records. There was substantial variability between states in the difference between official COVID-19 deaths and the estimated burden of excess deaths."

The study adds that it's a common practice to assess the increases in death rates when trying to estimate the mortality burden of a new infectious agent, especially when there is a lack of comprehensive testing. 

"The excess deaths methodology has been used to quantify official under-counting of deaths for many pathogens, including pandemic influenza viruses and HIV," the report says. 

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/new-study-estimates-coronavirus-death-rate-28-higher-than-reported-count

In regards to the risk of death under 45 years old - On April 11 alone (just 1 day in America during the pandemic):

Age 0-24 years old: 27 deaths

Age 25-34: 104 deaths

Age 35-45: 291 deaths

No biggie, right?

Let's not consider hospitalizations though, because that age group takes the cake there. 

Quote

“Indeed, the health system was not overrun in any location in the USA, although several hospitals were stressed.”

That is the understatement of a lifetime.  Do you have any idea how many volunteers were needed to keep New-York health system afloat?  It was completely overrun and would have swamped if it wasn't for the 10's of thousands of volunteers.  Many healthcare systems are being extremely stressed as we speak, to the point of being overrun.

Quote

 Evidence that US states that locked down fared better than states that did not is hard to find.

Right, because shutting down with stay at home orders wont reduce the spread of disease at all. 

Any chart will show you a flattening of the curve after shut downs, and a huge spike after reopening.  You can see it in every state and in national graphs. 

Edited July 3, 2020 by pogi

[Teancum]

3 hours ago, smac97 said:

A few items:

1. LA Mayor Garcetti admits 'connection' between coronavirus outbreak and protests, after downplaying link

2. Another experimental covid-19 vaccine has shown promising early results

3. CA Gov Newsom Shuts Down Majority of State’s Wineries for 4th of July – But Not His Own

4. Hydroxychloroquine lowers COVID-19 death rate, Henry Ford Health study finds

5. Mask Wars: While facemasks can’t hurt in the fight against Covid-19, the outrage directed at skeptics is excessive.

6. Modelers Were ‘Astronomically Wrong’ in COVID-19 Predictions, Says Leading Epidemiologist—and the World Is Paying the Price (emphases added) :

7. The Real Reason Behind Allowing the Protests During COVID-19

Thanks,

-Smac

Nice cherry picking there Smac. Do these all reflect your opinions?

[smac97]

1 hour ago, Teancum said:

Nice cherry picking there Smac. Do these all reflect your opinions?

No.

[Calm]

Smac, please be more careful next time not to include political articles in your posts.  I will try and make it clearer and easier for you and anyone else confused by drawing the line at if it doesn't impact our medical awareness of how the virus works, what it may do and what it may not do, then err on the cautious side and don't post it.  The wineries article, for instance, was focused on the fact the Governor didn't close his own winery.  That tells us about the Governor and not the virus.

If there is something very important or new info medically speaking in an article, then make sure not to include political info in the quoted material.  If it is just repeating what we already know medically, don't post at all please.  The Mask Wars quote is massive for example and much does not contribute to the task of helping us evaluate whether masks are helpful or not, but instead examines what it sees as discrimination against skeptics.

The other one I find inappropriate for this thread is "the real reason behind...".  

I didn't intend to be this strict at the beginning, intending to let posts that blended mostly politics with medical be posted, but I am seeing that as opening the door too much to primarily political articles now and not seeing that as contributing enough to what I want the thread to be...a clearinghouse of medical info about the virus to help us make decisions about how to act and to be able to evaluate medical claims better.

I am hoping this thread can last for months, so don't want political clutter or derailments.  (Though when it gets up to 25 pages, will probably start a new one).  This way if posters remember vaguely seeing some medical info but don't remember when or who posted it, they will know what thread it most likely is in.

Edited July 4, 2020 by Calm

[Calm]

Damn.  Just reported a worker at my mom's assisted living place is hospitalized with Covid.  Full quarantine back in effect.

[Rain]

1 minute ago, Calm said:

Damn.  Just reported a worker at my mom's assisted living place is hospitalized with Covid.  Full quarantine back in effect.

Oh no.  Hope mom is ok.

[Calm]

2 hours ago, Rain said:

Oh no.  Hope mom is ok.

Sister said she was in a good mood, but TV isn’t working so she will have a quiet weekend. Hopefully maintenance man back on Monday can fix it. 
 

Need to plan now for if she gets sick. Does the hospital allow visitors or not?

(they do at this point if the patient needs it to be safe apparently, with Mom’s dementia she needs it.  My sister who is a teacher and single with no kids is insisting she be the one.  She is very healthy and least disruption to her life and she would come out here anyway, so that is the plan...stick her in a Residence Inn with “no cleaning sign” and the rest of us shopping for her.)
 

That is if they don’t ban people from Colorado....my daughter just brought up that possibility  

Added:  it is a resident who is sick, not a worker. They have tested all residents now and are in the process of testing workers. I would feel so bad if I was a worker who tested positive thinking “I started it”.  

Edited July 4, 2020 by Calm

[USU78]

2 hours ago, Calm said:

Damn.  Just reported a worker at my mom's assisted living place is hospitalized with Covid.  Full quarantine back in effect.

I haven't seen my son since Valentine's Day.

[webbles]

Apparently Utah doesn't have as high of antibody spread as other places in the US.  Per https://www.ksl.com/article/46772985/utah-researchers-findings-show-most-residents-highly-susceptible-to-covid-19-infection

Quote

From May 4 to June 10, field workers collected antibody samples from 8,500 randomly selected Utahns, age 12 and older, from Davis, Salt Lake, Summit and Utah counties. The results, Alder said, were a bit surprising and the number of people who have been infected with the virus is “lower than anticipated.”

While officials with the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention have said there may be as many as 10 undetected cases of COVID-19 for every one case that is detected, that is not the case in Utah.

Study results show that for every case detected so far in Utah, there are probably about 2.4 additional cases that have gone undetected.