Re: The Coronavirus Thread - Part 3

[Arquitecto]

I sincerely hope they are right. If the vaccine testing can create a weakened version of the virus not to infect you but to produce an immune response, antibody markers can be stimulated to cause the virus cells not attaching to the cell protein spikes.

By then our immune response would destroy the virus.


Ebola took 5 years but I hope this is under 18 months. Unrealistic if so.

[Babun]

Interesting observation in Italy in Germany: the number of infected is decreasing even though the lockdown is more or less over. Some conspiracy theorists use it to declare the lockdowns an unnecessary. Other epidemiologists offer theories which sound more plausible: not every infected spreads the virus in the same way. People who work in public services, transport, night clubs, gastronomy restaurants, socially engaged people, school kids,students etc. are superspreaders by their nature. With the lockdown, exactly those people were taken out of the equation. So for the spread to increase again, the social life has to come back 100% and one or more superspreaders to be infected again. Import from the outside (Brazil for example) is also possible.

[Thimmy]

not every infected spreads the virus in the same way. People who work in public services, transport, night clubs, gastronomy restaurants, socially engaged people, school kids,students etc. are superspreaders by their nature.

This makes sense. There are quite a lot of social animals out there who couldn’t care less about this «just a flu blown out of proportion», though. Teenagers, especially. The best way of restricting their movements is likely the threat of being publically scrutinized for breaking these restrictions. In addition to reducing spreading, a lockdown sends a signal that reaches out to everyone, whether they like it or not.

We celebrated the Norwegian constitutional day here, two days ago. The public celebration was a lot more toned down than it usually is, due to government restrictions, but the message conveyed by the local media seemed to be that we should all celebrate as usual, minus the public fanfare that we usually have on this day. Result was a lot of house parties and a spike in infections.

It was to be expected, I suppose, but if I’ve learnt anything from how we have handled the Covid situation here, it’s that the most careless and outgoing people among us will always look to organize large gatherings of like-minded people as soon as the media signals that things are looking better, and there’s less risk of facing any social backlash from it.

[CBarca]

Interesting observation in Italy in Germany: the number of infected is decreasing even though the lockdown is more or less over. Some conspiracy theorists use it to declare the lockdowns an unnecessary. Other epidemiologists offer theories which sound more plausible: not every infected spreads the virus in the same way. People who work in public services, transport, night clubs, gastronomy restaurants, socially engaged people, school kids,students etc. are superspreaders by their nature. With the lockdown, exactly those people were taken out of the equation. So for the spread to increase again, the social life has to come back 100% and one or more superspreaders to be infected again. Import from the outside (Brazil for example) is also possible.

Robes can speak to this but I imagine a big part of it is that behavior is not ultimately that much different from the lockdown. I mean, sure, people are going out and doing things, but people might still be relatively aware of their actions, cleaning their hands more, wearing masks etc to the point where R nought is not really that high.

When you add that on top of what you've mentioned, I think that paints a picture that makes sense.

Regardless, no place that "opens up" should expect to see a sudden surge of cases. That would require a lot of people to start adapting behavior and psychology that looks pre-pandemic...and that's just not going to happen. That's the same reason why the economy isn't going to make a V-shaped recovery. The behavior will fundamentally change for the majority of people.

The sad part is the minority of people who don't give a shit who might do a lot of harm.

[Nishankly]

India now hitting 6000 cases a day 1.5 months after, we've failed in total but been successful in keeping the virus away from older people and the transmission rate through the early lockdown at total 1000 cases.

Next few weeks key especially since our agenda of locking down early failed, if we open now, old people and co-morbid people will exponentially be exposed to the virus.

Still religion has messed it up again for our country as usual.

[BarrileteCosmico]

1179 dead in a single dead in Brazil. Wow.

[Thimmy]

1179 dead in a single dead in Brazil. Wow.

Wow, indeed. I hope he has life insurance.

[Babun]

1179 dead in a single day in Brazil. Wow.

Brazil has got some 210 million population:

1179/210 = 5,61 deaths per million per day

USA is much better off with 4,73

for UK
545/66,65 = 8,177 deaths per million per day

The way UK handles the epidemic is a disgrace for a developed nation.

[Jay29]

Our former health secretary admitted yesterday the government had prepared only for an outbreak of flu and gave very little consideration to a more serious disease.

The government is also continuing to inflate testing numbers. From the BBC:

Up to 30,000 tests a day which were never intended to diagnose individuals with Covid-19 are distorting the UK’s figures on testing, according to BBC Radio 4's More or Less programme.

Producer Kate Lamble says these tests are carried out by universities and statisticians to study the spread of the disease across the country but the Department of Health and Social Care acknowledges they are not being used to diagnose cases.

With the government aiming to show it can keep daily testing above 100,000, our producer says the tests make it possible for the government to say the target has been hit.

On 15 May, for example, the government reported 136,486 tests but we can only be sure 69,900 were carried out if we discount these non-diagnostic tests and tests posted to people’s homes which were not necessarily returned.

They still haven't hired enough people to do contact tracing and app that's supposed to help hasn't even been released yet despite the government urging schools and certain industries to re-open from June 1st.

We are lead by morons with the wrong priorities. That's the simplest explanation.

You should have seen Johnson in the PMQs today. He was all over the place.

[CBarca]

UK and Brazil are definitely making us look good. One thing this virus has done is brutally expose governments who aren't up to the task.

Our former health secretary admitted yesterday the government had prepared only for an outbreak of flu and gave very little consideration to a more serious disease.

Weird. You would think that if they prepared for the flu, then everything would have been fine, since this is just like the flu...?

[Myesyats]

I think I read somwhere that masks can reduce transmission even up to 75%

don't think covering your face is mandatory in the UK, is it? I think Boris only advised it and did it way too late

[Thimmy]

I think I read somwhere that masks can reduce transmission even up to 75%

don't think covering your face is mandatory in the UK, is it? I think Boris only advised it and did it way too late

I wonder how accurate that claim actually is. I’ve seen exactly one person wear a face mask here, and our infection/spread rate has been relatively low from the start. Hand hygiene has been a priority here.

Washing your hands with soap for at least 20 seconds, supposedly takes the virus apart. It seems rational to me that the hands are a more common source of infection than directly through the eyes, nose and mouth - unless it spreads through the air, in which case we’re all fked.

[Jay29]

There's some thought that the virus spreads considerably more in clusters than it does among much small groups:

https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/05/why-do-some-covid-19-patients-infect-many-others-whereas-most-don-t-spread-virus-all#

The virus' main means of spreading could be during "super spreading" events, so if your country has banned mass gatherings that's going to reduce transmission considerably. It could be that gathering in a group of, say, 5 people isn't all that dangerous so long as you aren't spluttering all over somebody.

The question is, then, would wearing a mask in a big gathering reduce transmission?

(A moot point in the UK because masks are only "advised", even on public transport, because people here are insane).

[BarrileteCosmico]

1179 dead in a single day in Brazil. Wow.

Brazil has got some 210 million population:

1179/210 = 5,61 deaths per million per day

USA is much better off with 4,73

for UK
545/66,65 = 8,177 deaths per million per day

The way UK handles the epidemic is a disgrace for a developed nation.

The US peaked like 2 weeks ago, whereas Brazil is peaking now, so not sure this is the right comparison

We can only compare countries when the dust settles

[sportsczy]

and you have to take into account if and how countries count cases/deaths. I'm very skeptical that Brazil and many others are being transparent.

[Myesyats]

I think I read somwhere that masks can reduce transmission even up to 75%

don't think covering your face is mandatory in the UK, is it? I think Boris only advised it and did it way too late

I wonder how accurate that claim actually is. I’ve seen exactly one person wear a face mask here, and our infection/spread rate has been relatively low from the start. Hand hygiene has been a priority here.

Washing your hands with soap for at least 20 seconds, supposedly takes the virus apart. It seems rational to me that the hands are a more common source of infection than directly through the eyes, nose and mouth - unless it spreads through the air, in which case we’re all fked.

Well, washing your hands is very important nonetheless but I think that if someone has the virus and wears the mask, the chances that they will pass it on to someone else are largely slimmed down.

It won't protect you from the virus per se, but it will help you not to pass it on to anybody around you at the supermarket, post office etc.

[Thimmy]

I think I read somwhere that masks can reduce transmission even up to 75%

don't think covering your face is mandatory in the UK, is it? I think Boris only advised it and did it way too late

I wonder how accurate that claim actually is. I’ve seen exactly one person wear a face mask here, and our infection/spread rate has been relatively low from the start. Hand hygiene has been a priority here.

Washing your hands with soap for at least 20 seconds, supposedly takes the virus apart. It seems rational to me that the hands are a more common source of infection than directly through the eyes, nose and mouth - unless it spreads through the air, in which case we’re all fked.

Well, washing your hands is very important nonetheless but I think that if someone has the virus and wears the mask, the chances that they will pass it on to someone else are largely slimmed down.

It won't protect you from the virus per se, but it will help you not to pass it on to anybody around you at the supermarket, post office etc.

Yeah, I get that, but I wonder how effective a mask is if the virus doesn’t transfer through the air. I mean, it’s better to be safe than sorry, but unless someone somehow sneezes, coughs or spits in your face, I don’t know what else a mask protects you against that warrants the level of priority that I keep reading about in international media.

Masks seem to be held in the highest regard as an anti-Corona measure in the media, and I see people wearing masks on news coverages from Germany, France, South America and Asia. Yet, we have lower infection rates than any of those countries here, despite masks not being a priority. Of course, there are probably several variables that explain why that is, but It makes me wonder why simple hand hygiene doesn’t get at least an equal amount of attention.

The way I see it, hands are the most obvious source of infection. You can’t get around touching things with them, and I personally touch my eyes a lot, which is a bad habit. Washing your hands with soap is a proven virus neutralizer for that part of the body, and I would assume it’s cheaper than mass production of masks so... I think I just realized why people the mainstream media are advocating the use of masks

[Thimmy]

Swedish newspaper, Aftonbladet claim that 9 year old, Melvin has rare symptoms, supposedly due to the Coronavirus. He started complaining that his legs and knees were hurting, and he soon after got an outbreak on his skin. His mother assumed it would simply pass over, but it only got worse. His rash got worse, he started having headaches, and his throat was hurting a little bit. «He told me he felt like his skin was on fire when I gave him a hug» says his mother.

The doctors speculated in several different illnesses, and most of them mentioned Kawasaki disease, but he didn’t get better, and his eyes became red and irritated after he began taking antibiotics. BBC claim that around 100 English children have been affected by the same symptoms of this rare, inflammatory disease, and what they all had in common was that they tested positive for Covid-19.

Seems extremely rare, but it’s quite evident by now that people react differently to Covid, regardless of age. Hell, a 93 year old man in a nearby county recently survived it.

[Jay29]

The weird thing about that inflammatory syndrome in kids is that it seems to occur six weeks after infection, and can affect people as old as 21. They aren't even sure if it's strictly Covid related yet, though it'd be a mighty big coincidence otherwise.

The syndrome doesn't seem to affect the respiratory system and the main symptoms appear to be rashes, aches, and swelling in the hands and feet. Fortunately, most kids seem to recover from it, especially if detected early.

[Warrior]

Did those kids have varicella before

Regardless of that, if this is really connected to covid it's a big wtf. For anyone younger than 70 with no underlying health conditions and still get very sick, could it be a uncommon defense by the immune system that only a small % of people have ?

I have struggles to find the words, hope it's clear what i mean

[Jay29]

A couple of potentially good news stories:

Oxford are beginning Phase II of human trials for their vaccine -
http://www.ox.ac.uk/news/2020-05-22-oxford-covid-19-vaccine-begin-phase-iiiii-human-trials

Phase I took place with 1000 healthy adults in April. Phase II will test 10,000 people with a broader age range. It'll also be happening at the same time as Phase III, which will be testing the vaccine on 18+ year olds.

UK scientists are also trialling a drug called interleukin 7, which boosts T-cell numbers. People with severe Covid have been found to have low T-cell numbers, so it's hoped boosting them will help clear the disease.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-52754280

[rincon]

Some good initiatives here. Stores have opened with restricted amounts of people inside (depending on the store size) and masks are obligatory in most stores. Masks are also obligatory in public transport, which has resumed full functioning.

Brussels region is giving each person 2 reusable/washable mask. Double layered cloth basically, with a fitting for a filter.

[CBarca]

I wonder how accurate that claim actually is. I’ve seen exactly one person wear a face mask here, and our infection/spread rate has been relatively low from the start. Hand hygiene has been a priority here.

Washing your hands with soap for at least 20 seconds, supposedly takes the virus apart. It seems rational to me that the hands are a more common source of infection than directly through the eyes, nose and mouth - unless it spreads through the air, in which case we’re all fked.

Well, washing your hands is very important nonetheless but I think that if someone has the virus and wears the mask, the chances that they will pass it on to someone else are largely slimmed down.

It won't protect you from the virus per se, but it will help you not to pass it on to anybody around you at the supermarket, post office etc.

Yeah, I get that, but I wonder how effective a mask is if the virus doesn’t transfer through the air. I mean, it’s better to be safe than sorry, but unless someone somehow sneezes, coughs or spits in your face, I don’t know what else a mask protects you against that warrants the level of priority that I keep reading about in international media.

Masks seem to be held in the highest regard as an anti-Corona measure in the media, and I see people wearing masks on news coverages from Germany, France, South America and Asia. Yet, we have lower infection rates than any of those countries here, despite masks not being a priority. Of course, there are probably several variables that explain why that is, but It makes me wonder why simple hand hygiene doesn’t get at least an equal amount of attention.

The way I see it, hands are the most obvious source of infection. You can’t get around touching things with them, and I personally touch my eyes a lot, which is a bad habit. Washing your hands with soap is a proven virus neutralizer for that part of the body, and I would assume it’s cheaper than mass production of masks so... I think I just realized why people the mainstream media are advocating the use of masks

The virus does transfer through the air, though. It doesn't just sit there in the air, but via coughing, sneezing, yelling, loud talking etc. and with certain conditions, it may linger.

The case for masks is simple: if you're around someone, you risk transmitting the virus through the air via your mouth. A mask on both individuals reduces the amount of mouth to mouth transmission of particles that come from your mouth (droplets, saliva, mucus and more). This will reduce the chance of transmitting coronavirus.

I think there is still conflicting evidence on the effectiveness of masks (especially cloth...tightly fitting respirators are certainly effective), I haven't kept up to date. However, I think the evidence has largely pointed to them helping.

At the end of the day, putting on a mask is so goddamn easy, and probably helps reduce transmission of coronavirus, that it's stupid for it not be either recommended or required.

For the record, at least the US government I think has been pretty upfront about the importance of wearing a cloth mask or some other easily found mask. N95 respirators or surgical masks -- the types that are "mass produced" are discouraged for consumers to buy since obviously we need them for medical staff and personnel. I assume other governments are similar, so I'm not sure I understand your point about "mass production" being a reason governments are recommending masks.

[The Demon of Carthage]

Speaking of masks, specifically the surgical ones, apparently there's another more effective way of wearing them:

[Thimmy]

I’m referring more specifically to European media and journalism, rather than government advice. There seems to be a high level of emphasis on promoting the use of mass produced masks. It’s better to be safe than sorry, I get it. However, I’ve seen nothing about discouraging this, in order to save them for medical staff or personnel, but I suppose that makes more sense in the more population dense countries.

I’m not claiming a conspiracy theory here, but it does make me wonder why I keep seeing and reading in non-Scandinavian media that «you should definitely wear a mask» everywhere, or «these people didn’t even wear masks» when it makes more sense to inform people of the tried and tested «washing your hands with soap for at least 20 seconds will destabilize the virus». I’ve only seen that last tip in German and Scandinavian newspapers.

[rincon]

Washing you hands with soap and alcohol for X seconds has been on pretty much every single news media everywhere.

Pretty much every store or takeout place here has bottles of hand sanitizers outside, or the security guards carry one for you.

[Sponsored content]