OT: What changes are you and family making to your lifestyle due to coranavirus?

[Rocktheworld]

Cough into your damn elbows you sick mofos

Your shoulder actually

 

[kemba]

I thought that this was interesting:

Fauci offers more conservative death rate in academic article than in public virus briefings

You’ve probably heard that COVID-19 is far deadlier than the flu. But it could turn out to be more akin to a severe flu season. Surprisingly, both of those assessments come from the same authority at the same time: Dr. Anthony Fauci, the nation's chief infectious disease specialist.

Fauci, the director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, has repeatedly cited more jarring figures in public. For instance, Fauci declared in March 11 congressional testimony that the current coronavirus “is 10 times more lethal than the seasonal flu,” which would be about 1 percent. His testimony generated news headlines that blared across the internet and television news, and it remains frequently cited today.

But among his learned colleagues in academia, he has provided the more conservative analysis.

“[T]he case fatality rate may be considerably less than 1%,” Fauci wrote in an article published in the New England Journal of Medicine on March 26. “This suggests that the overall clinical consequences of COVID-19 may ultimately be more akin to those of a severe seasonal influenza (which has a case fatality rate of approximately 0.1%) or a pandemic influenza (similar to those in 1957 and 1968) rather than a disease similar to SARS or MERS, which have had case fatality rates of 9 to 10% and 36%, respectively.”

I would think that has much more to do with changing information and estimates than public vs. private

 

[Palatine]

LOL it’s not even a controlled study. The guy is describing his anecdotal experience with no comparison group. Both of them making some pretty hyperbolic claims that go completely against well documented clinical course data from all over. Symptoms going away in a few hours after starting treatment is just pure rubbish

Can’t assess statistical significance if there’s no two groups to compare possible treatment effects.

not saying they won’t turn out to be useful, but this is not the way we determine effectiveness.

It is not a clinical trial. But if 699 people walk into the same hospital with the same disease and are given the same treatment all survive that statistically significant. It is comparable to dropping a hammer 700 times from six feet ( with no group to compare it to) and it hits the floor very time. It may not prove cause/effect but it is a strong correlation at a statistically significant level.

 

[ctchamps]

This is what’s really pissing me off about how this disease is being managed. First it was a droplet disease. Then it was briefly considered an airborne disease that is “aerosolized”. Then it was back to droplet for a while but stay 6 feet away because small droplets can travel in a cough/sneeze. Now it’s airborne again??

You have to take information with a grain of phlegm. Coughing is fluid.

 

[Rocktheworld]

I know ex-Navy who is still very much getting all updates. There are 200+ confirmed cases on the USS Roosevelt. A former chief of hers has died at 42. There are multiple 20 year olds on ventilators at the naval hospital.

 

[Kitaman]

Cough into your damn elbows you sick mofos

Is coughing/sneezing the only way? Other than those who speak with spittle, can breathing on someone transmit it? Asking because 'airborne' is not necessarily flying particles of droplets, I assume its got to be lighter than that.

 

[Rocktheworld]

Is coughing/sneezing the only way? Other than those who speak with spittle, can breathing on someone transmit it? Asking because 'airborne' is not necessarily flying particles of droplets, I assume its got to be lighter than that.

If it can survive in the open air for hours, I have to figure it’d be classified as “airborne”. And thus, yes, only an N95 is 100% effective at preventing transmission. But we do know there is a droplet component, with the studies they’ve done regarding length of survival on different surfaces

 

[brasssbonanzaa]

I know ex-Navy who is still very much getting all updates. There are 200+ confirmed cases on the USS Roosevelt. A former chief of hers has died at 42. There are multiple 20 year olds on ventilators at the naval hospital.

Ships are the *worst* place to be in a situation like this.

 

[Rocktheworld]

Ships are the *worst* place to be in a situation like this.

And the navy is forcing them to stay aboard for 90 days. That length of time with the opposite of “social distancing” going on will cause an abject nightmare.

 

[Kitaman]

Ships are the *worst* place to be in a situation like this.

Submarines being the worst of the worst.

 

[Chin Diesel]

I know ex-Navy who is still very much getting all updates. There are 200+ confirmed cases on the USS Roosevelt. A former chief of hers has died at 42. There are multiple 20 year olds on ventilators at the naval hospital.

Ships are the *worst* place to be in a situation like this.

Some info about the Teddy Roosevelt.

First boat I stepped foot on in the Navy.

Theodore Roosevelt captain makes urgent plea for individual quarantine sites as COVID-19 cases multiply

Current efforts to combat COVID-19 are inadequate, according to the Roosevelt’s commanding officer Capt. Brett Crozier.

www.militarytimes.com

 

[ctchamps]

I stopped listening to the NY doctor's interview after he stated there was 100 percent improvement in the French study. The French presenters claimed it was not a study but a clinical trial. I read that paper. Here is the link:

Hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin as a treatment of COVID-19: results of an open-label non-randomized clinical trial

The good news: after five days of receiving hydorxychloroquine 13/20 (65%) were nasopharyngeal negative compared to 3/16 (18.8%) in the control group.

THE BAD NEWS: THERE WERE FOUR PATIENTS ORIGINALLY IN THE GROUP GIVEN MEDICATION. TREATMENT WHO WERE NOT INCLUDED IN THE FINAL RESULTS. THREE WERE REMOVED FROM THE TRIAL'S RESULTS BECAUSE THEY WERE TRANSFERRED TO AN INTENSIVE CARE UNIT. A FOURTH DIED ON DAY 3 POST INCLUSION BUT WAS PCR NEGATIVE ON DAY 2. There is no information to know if they received only hydorxychloroquine or the combination of medications. To be fair the group receiving medication had a higher percentage of patients with LRTI than the control group. The URTI rate was statistically insignificant between the two groups.

The Really bad news: A patient who was given both medications and was tested negative at day 6 was tested positive with a low titer on day 8. WHY IS THIS REALLY BAD. TWO BRITISH SCIENTISTS THEORIZE THAT HYDROXYCHLOROQUINE RAISES INTRACELLULAR PH (MAKES IT MORE ALKALINE) AND THIS KEEPS THE VIRUS IN A CAPSULE PREVENTING IT FROM GETTING INTO CELLULAR DNA AND SUBVERTING OUR CELLS MACHINERY. MY CONCERN (FULL DISCLOSER: HAVEN'T SEEN ANY OTHER PEOPLE CONCERNED) IS WHAT WILL HAPPEN TO THESE POSTULATED INTRACELLULAR ENCAPSULATED VIRUSES WHEN HYDROXYCHLOROQUINE MEDS ARE STOPPED.

China had a small number of people who were tested negative after recovering but later tested positive. The assumption was the post testing was inaccurate. I'm wondering if these were the patients that were given the medicines by the Chinese researchers who put out the original paper which the French ran with.

 

[ctchamps]

Is coughing/sneezing the only way? Other than those who speak with spittle, can breathing on someone transmit it? Asking because 'airborne' is not necessarily flying particles of droplets, I assume its got to be lighter than that.

You decide:

A choir decided to go ahead with rehearsal. Now dozens of members have COVID-19 and two are dead

 

[jostar1]

Is coughing/sneezing the only way? Other than those who speak with spittle, can breathing on someone transmit it? Asking because 'airborne' is not necessarily flying particles of droplets, I assume its got to be lighter than that.

Coronavirus does spread through the air and lingers in rooms long after patients have left, study finds

The killer coronavirus can spread through the air and remain contagious for hours, another study has suggested.

US scientists found high levels of the bug lurking in the air in rooms long after patients had left.

What's more is that traces of the coronavirus were also discovered in hospital corridors outside patients' rooms, where staff had been coming in and out.

The University of Nebraska researchers behind the study say the finding highlights the importance of protective clothing for healthcare workers.

It follows a wealth of studies that have suggested the highly contagious disease does not just spread via droplets in a cough or sneeze.

The latest study, which has not been peer-reviewed by other scientists yet or published in a scientific journal, took samples from 11 patients' rooms after they had been placed in isolation following a diagnosis.

The researchers found viral particles in the air both inside the rooms and in the hallways outside of the rooms.

Their finding suggests people may be able to contract the bug without ever being in direct close proximity to an infected person.

The study's authors said this highlights the importance of wearing personal protective equipment (PPE).

The researchers also found traces of the bug on commonly used items such as toilets, adding to the theory that the virus can spread on surfaces.

England's chief medical officer has warned people can get infected by touching any contaminated surfaces and then touching their face.

Professor Chris Whitty said the coronavirus can stay contagious on hard metal or plastic surfaces like door handles or handrails for as long as three days.

Coronavirus does spread through the air and lingers in rooms, study

University of Nebraska scientists found high levels of the bug lurking in the air inside infected patients' rooms. Traces of the virus were also discovered in the hospital corridors.

www.dailymail.co.uk

 

[CL82]

Chinese researchers isolated deadly bat coronaviruses near Wuhan animal market

Steven W. Mosher, a China specialist with the Population Research Institute, said China for years has been doing research, detailed in scientific journals, on horseshoe bat coronaviruses that could be harmful to humans. “They write about collecting SARS-like coronaviruses from horseshoe bats and proving that, like the SARS virus itself, some of these other naturally occurring coronaviruses could infect human beings directly,” Mr. Mosher said. “They write about genetically engineering new and deadly viruses capable of infecting human lung tissue — just like the Wuhan flu does.”

A lot of interesting stuff in this article. Apparently, they are reopening the market and still allowing the sale and slaughter of small animals on site, including bats

 

[mussels]

This is what’s really pissing me off about how this disease is being managed. First it was a droplet disease. Then it was briefly considered an airborne disease that is “aerosolized”. Then it was back to droplet for a while but stay 6 feet away because small droplets can travel in a cough/sneeze. Now it’s airborne again??

Pretty much supports my current strategy of remaining on the floor in fetal position paralyzed with fear.

I've tried to be very conscious of keeping my distance when I go out and walk for exercise. I live about a ten minute walk from a large university, and with the kids being away, its an excellent site for a low traffic walk. So I was walking around the athletic fields, and there was a guy standing around about 80 yards from me. Good right?

Well I could instantly tell he was smoking a joint from 80 yards away, so that means that smoke which had been in his lungs, was entering mine. And that's 80 yards! Got me thinking about what really would be a safe distance if someone were to sneeze?

 

[NJHusky]

I stopped listening to the NY doctor's interview after he stated there was 100 percent improvement in the French study. The French presenters claimed it was not a study but a clinical trial. I read that paper. Here is the link:

Hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin as a treatment of COVID-19: results of an open-label non-randomized clinical trial

The good news: after five days of receiving hydorxychloroquine 13/20 (65%) were nasopharyngeal negative compared to 3/16 (18.8%) in the control group.

THE BAD NEWS: THERE WERE FOUR PATIENTS ORIGINALLY IN THE GROUP GIVEN MEDICATION. TREATMENT WHO WERE NOT INCLUDED IN THE FINAL RESULTS. THREE WERE REMOVED FROM THE TRIAL'S RESULTS BECAUSE THEY WERE TRANSFERRED TO AN INTENSIVE CARE UNIT. A FOURTH DIED ON DAY 3 POST INCLUSION BUT WAS PCR NEGATIVE ON DAY 2. There is no information to know if they received only hydorxychloroquine or the combination of medications. To be fair the group receiving medication had a higher percentage of patients with LRTI than the control group. The URTI rate was statistically insignificant between the two groups.

The Really bad news: A patient who was given both medications and was tested negative at day 6 was tested positive with a low titer on day 8. WHY IS THIS REALLY BAD. TWO BRITISH SCIENTISTS THEORIZE THAT HYDROXYCHLOROQUINE RAISES INTRACELLULAR PH (MAKES IT MORE ALKALINE) AND THIS KEEPS THE VIRUS IN A CAPSULE PREVENTING IT FROM GETTING INTO CELLULAR DNA AND SUBVERTING OUR CELLS MACHINERY. MY CONCERN (FULL DISCLOSER: HAVEN'T SEEN ANY OTHER PEOPLE CONCERNED) IS WHAT WILL HAPPEN TO THESE POSTULATED INTRACELLULAR ENCAPSULATED VIRUSES WHEN HYDROXYCHLOROQUINE MEDS ARE STOPPED.

China had a small number of people who were tested negative after recovering but later tested positive. The assumption was the post testing was inaccurate. I'm wondering if these were the patients that were given the medicines by the Chinese researchers who put out the original paper which the French ran with.

Thx for the info...question from a non medical person.

Wouldn't extending the chloraquine longer give the body's immune system more time to continue to build antibodies? why the rush to stop the chloraquine? thought it was used as a malaria preventative....meaning it's safe to take for an extended period of time

 

[ctchamps]

Thx for the info...question from a non medical person.

Wouldn't extending the chloraquine longer give the body's immune system more time to continue to build antibodies? why the rush to stop the chloraquine? thought it was used as a malaria preventative....meaning it's safe to take for an extended period of time

I'm making a leap based on the statements of two British researchers. They postulate that there might be two modalities in which the med works.

The first postulation is that the med might be binding to a sugar molecule on the cell membrane which is the binding site of the virus. That keeps the virus from binding and infecting. Here is a link to how our bodies defend against a virus. Immune Defenses It's amazing how many defenses we have to keep us healthy.

Most likely the body probably will react to the free floating virus and begin making antibodies. The question is whether cell destruction by the virus would elicit a better immune response and with it a longer immunity. I'm sure that will be debated. There is evidence that an over active immune response might be a major contributor to why some people are becoming severely ill. Several studies are underway to find medications to lesson the over reaction.

My concern is the second modality. After binding with the membrane the virus is encapsulated as it passes through and enters the cell. The British researchers postulate hydroxychloroquine elevates the ph of the cell fluid preventing the virus from exiting the capsule preventing it from taking over the cells DNA. That seems good but the virus is still in the cell not getting destroyed.

If this is the case, and that's a big if, the cells are keeping the body from developing an immune response by sequestering them (talk about ironies). When the medication is discontinued the ph will return to normal resulting in the virus taking over the cell. They cause the cell's machinery to make large numbers of them. They then rupture the cell releasing themselves to infect adjacent cells. When enough cells get destroyed and a person sneezes, coughs or talks the virus is release into the environment.

If I'm correct (and I hope I'm not) giving this medicine to infected people will incubate the virus during the entire time the patient is on the medicine (because of this sequestering). Once those individuals get off the medication they become infectious to others. These drugs have some toxicity so we won't want to keep people on the meds indefinitely. And given that no one is discussing the possibility I'm describing I'm concerned we are creating a large group of infectious people who will reinfect us just as the pandemic appears to be getting under control.

 

[mussels]

As long as it's question time: yesterday in an interview with NPR, Dr Robert Redfield from the CDC offered up this tidbit: "And finally, of those of us that get symptomatic, it appears that we're shedding significant virus in our oropharyngeal compartment, probably up to 48 hours before we show symptoms."

So does "shedding significant virus in our oropharyngeal compartment" mean "exhaling a gruntload of virus?"
(its a serious question - does shed virus mean external to the person, or external to the invaded cell, but still inside the person)

Thank you.

 

[Dream Jobbed 2.0]

I was listening into CCMC’s town hall today. One of their officials said he believed “Connecticut has entered its peak.”

 

[87Xfer]

I'm making a leap based on the statements of two British researchers. They postulate that there might be two modalities in which the med works.

The first postulation is that the med might be binding to a sugar molecule on the cell membrane which is the binding site of the virus. That keeps the virus from binding and infecting. Here is a link to how our bodies defend against a virus. Immune Defenses It's amazing how many defenses we have to keep us healthy.

Most likely the body probably will react to the free floating virus and begin making antibodies. The question is whether cell destruction by the virus would elicit a better immune response and with it a longer immunity. I'm sure that will be debated. There is evidence that an over active immune response might be a major contributor to why some people are becoming severely ill. Several studies are underway to find medications to lesson the over reaction.

My concern is the second modality. After binding with the membrane the virus is encapsulated as it passes through and enters the cell. The British researchers postulate hydroxychloroquine elevates the ph of the cell fluid preventing the virus from exiting the capsule preventing it from taking over the cells DNA. That seems good but the virus is still in the cell not getting destroyed.

If this is the case, and that's a big if, the cells are keeping the body from developing an immune response by sequestering them (talk about ironies). When the medication is discontinued the ph will return to normal resulting in the virus taking over the cell. They cause the cell's machinery to make large numbers of them. They then rupture the cell releasing themselves to infect adjacent cells. When enough cells get destroyed and a person sneezes, coughs or talks the virus is release into the environment.

If I'm correct (and I hope I'm not) giving this medicine to infected people will incubate the virus during the entire time the patient is on the medicine (because of this sequestering). Once those individuals get off the medication they become infectious to others. These drugs have some toxicity so we won't want to keep people on the meds indefinitely. And given that no one is discussing the possibility I'm describing I'm concerned we are creating a large group of infectious people who will reinfect us just as the pandemic appears to be getting under control.

I'm pretty sure I thank you for that. But could you distill it a fraction for those of us not medically inclined? (I'm just an engineerd and finance guy. My medical knowledge comes from House - EVERY condition requires a lumbar puncture.)

 

[Dream Jobbed 2.0]

This is what’s really pissing me off about how this disease is being managed. First it was a droplet disease. Then it was briefly considered an airborne disease that is “aerosolized”. Then it was back to droplet for a while but stay 6 feet away because small droplets can travel in a cough/sneeze. Now it’s airborne again??

The whole thing is incredibly frustrating. Each piece of information seems to contradict the information before it. Tomorrow we’ll find out it is also spread through food.

 

[glastonbury50]

Pretty much supports my current strategy of remaining on the floor in fetal position paralyzed with fear.

I've tried to be very conscious of keeping my distance when I go out and walk for exercise. I live about a ten minute walk from a large university, and with the kids being away, its an excellent site for a low traffic walk. So I was walking around the athletic fields, and there was a guy standing around about 80 yards from me. Good right?

Well I could instantly tell he was smoking a joint from 80 yards away, so that means that smoke which had been in his lungs, was entering mine. And that's 80 yards! Got me thinking about what really would be a safe distance if someone were to sneeze?

Sounds like some pretty good bud.

 

[Kitaman]

Here's a sobering article how one sick man attended a funeral and infected perhaps hundreds. The repass had food served, tears, sneezing and noses blowing everywhere, hands to face touching galore, etc..

Could happen anywhere, but here is rural America:

Days After a Funeral in a Georgia Town, Coronavirus 'Hit Like a Bomb'

 

[ctchamps]

I'm pretty sure I thank you for that. But could you distill it a fraction for those of us not medically inclined? (I'm just an engineerd and finance guy. My medical knowledge comes from House - EVERY condition requires a lumbar puncture.)

Theory one: bad guys try to get into a house but can't because all the entry ways (sugar molecules on cell membranes) have guards (hydroxychloriquine). Meanwhile cops (immune cells) are patrolling the area, see the bad guys, cuff them (bind to them) and dump them to, using British history, Australia (remove them from body through our feces or urine). All the bad guys are identical to one another. The cops leave drones in the area that have facial recognition of only those bad guys so when they reappear (as opposed to other bad guys or other viruses) they are targeted well before they get to the entry ways (immunity).

Theory two (the one that frightens me): The bad guys made it into the entryway of the house. Cops (hydroxychloroquine) are sent to the area because of suspicious activity. Bad guys hide in the house and can't be detected (encapsulation). Cops see nothing, are withdrawn from the area (stopping the medication), bad guys make thousands of copies of themselves, destroy the house (infected cell), and invade the neighborhood (adjacent lung cells) without detection (infection). They destroy that neighborhood and want to destroy more. They find planes and trains (small droplets, air parachutes) to other locals (people in contact without immunity).

What frightens me is that in theory two our medical community might believe this group of people are cured instead of carriers. Instead of isolating them until a vaccine could be made or making sure they take medication until a vaccine is made, we may be inadvertently allowing them to infect people who never had the disease. With all the hype over this treatment we could be creating tens of thousands of viral delivery systems.