COVID-19

[ACamp1900]

Going into my meeting on what to expect and how to handle it in 15.... could be interesting, or it could be a giant nothing burger... so,...

 

[Rogue219]

Our local St. Patrick's Day parade got cancelled, and after having been out in public for it last year, I'm not losing any sleep over that.

I'm guessing something is going to happen with the basketball state tournanment soon enough. Sectionals here are this weekend.

 

[FightingIrishLover7]

I hope I never live to see an actual, dangerous, virus breakout.

Can't imagine what kind of hysteria there would be then.
(assuming people aren't desensitized by then)

 

[Wild Bill]

I hope I never live to see an actual, dangerous, virus breakout.

Can't imagine what kind of hysteria there would be then.
(assuming people aren't desensitized by then)

I think most people, my included, have little faith in the masses when something bad happens. However, it seems like Americans really do step up when something catastrophic happens - usually natural disasters of some sort.

I'm not so sure people would react the same to a medically related outbreak but it does give me some hope.

I think it's fair to say some people are overreacting right now but I'm not so sure it's a bad thing. If we're being more cautious, even if it's unreasonable, it'll prevent it from spreading to some extent. Keeping the numbers low here is the goal and a slight panic probably helps.

 

[317Irish]

I hope I never live to see an actual, dangerous, virus breakout.

Can't imagine what kind of hysteria there would be then.
(assuming people aren't desensitized by then)

Maybe this is the forced fire drill before the real fire? Somewhat joking there, but it feels like it doesn’t take Americans much to be desensitized to something.

 

[GowerND11]

I think most people, my included, have little faith in the masses when something bad happens. However, it seems like Americans really do step up when something catastrophic happens - usually natural disasters of some sort.

I'm not so sure people would react the same to a medically related outbreak but it does give me some hope.

I think it's fair to say some people are overreacting right now but I'm not so sure it's a bad thing. If we're being more cautious, even if it's unreasonable, it'll prevent it from spreading to some extent. Keeping the numbers low here is the goal and a slight panic probably helps.

Agreed. While it sucks, I'd rather deal with an overreaction than being totally lazy and ill prepared.

 

[FightingIrishLover7]

How does "freezing" normal life control the numbers?

At some point, people are going to have to return to their normal lifestyles. The virus is already here. It won't just "go away". It is destined to be here, just as influenza is.

This is not something that can be "waited out".

 

[ACamp1900]

How does "freezing" normal life control the numbers?

At some point, people are going to have to return to their normal lifestyles. The virus is already here. It won't just "go away". It is destined to be here, just as influenza is.

This is not something that can be "waited out".

I thought about this today too... if nothing else you're biding time for a vaccine or med of some sort?? But yeah...

 

[IrishLax]

I thought about this today too... if nothing else you're biding time for a vaccine or med of some sort?? But yeah...

It’s all about not overloading the healthcare system. Vaccine is still at least a year away.

 

[BeauBenken]

How does "freezing" normal life control the numbers?

At some point, people are going to have to return to their normal lifestyles. The virus is already here. It won't just "go away". It is destined to be here, just as influenza is.

This is not something that can be "waited out".

They are trying to limit the infection rate, slow down the amount circulating in and out of hospitals (which hasn't become bad, yet), and keep this from becoming endemic (or reappear yearly) as you describe in your post.

Also if people go on quarantine those already infected can likely find out that they are infected and then self-quarantine while everyone else returns to normal.

 

[ACamp1900]

It’s all about not overloading the healthcare system. Vaccine is still at least a year away.

In that case then isn't a bit of robbing Peter to pay Paul... at some point it'll get overloaded prior to the vaccine.

 

[Pops Freshenmeyer]

How does "freezing" normal life control the numbers?

At some point, people are going to have to return to their normal lifestyles. The virus is already here. It won't just "go away". It is destined to be here, just as influenza is.

This is not something that can be "waited out".

China and South Korea have reversed upward trends; China by draconian quarantines which aren’t possible here.

South Korea, OTOH, has done it with aggressive and broad screening. I have read this virus, unlike flu, may not be contagious until people experience symptoms. So rolling out large scale testing to rapidly identify infected people can work without a widespread shutdown.

The US is more rural (making it harder to implement) and doesn’t have that kind of testing capacity and won’t in the near future. But there is a reason to hope we won’t turn into Italy or South China. However, it kind of depends on buying more time with containment measures.

 

[Old Man Mike]

The fate of viral outbreaks is another case (of many) where street-corner smarts do not usually apply. Yes. Many viruses DO "burn out" and become almost non-existent after a period of time --- at least as any serious human health threat.

Viruses are not eternals. They aren't even "alive." They are complex macro chemical recipe machines composed of nucleic acids and protein "coats" to put it simply. When exposed to light (especially Sunlight), heat and water/moist-environments, they break down and become inactive.

Viruses have a good time only when within animal hosts. Our cells and blood streams treat them relatively nicely other than the immune-system warriors we send against them. A percentage of human systems effectively kill them. When a virus kills a human, those viruses also de-activate by decomposition. Viruses spread only by finding hosts "in the middle" of Death by decomposition and Death by Immune attack. The combination of limiting these carrier hosts and the environment getting hotter, sunnier, and wetter will, typically, "burn out" an outbreak.

So, no. most viruses are not just sitting out there host-less waiting their shot (a few can go into their protein shell and tough it out). Our medical scientists aren't that dumb. Give them some credit for knowing their science and trying to mitigate the damage to all our citizens.

 

[FightingIrishLover7]

The fate of viral outbreaks is another case (of many) where street-corner smarts do not usually apply. Yes. Many viruses DO "burn out" and become almost non-existent after a period of time --- at least as any serious human health threat.

Viruses are not eternals. They aren't even "alive." They are complex macro chemical recipe machines composed of nucleic acids and protein "coats" to put it simply. When exposed to light (especially Sunlight), heat and water/moist-environments, they break down and become inactive.

Viruses have a good time only when within animal hosts. Our cells and blood streams treat them relatively nicely other than the immune-system warriors we send against them. A percentage of human systems effectively kill them. When a virus kills a human, those viruses also de-activate by decomposition. Viruses spread only by finding hosts "in the middle" of Death by decomposition and Death by Immune attack. The combination of limiting these carrier hosts and the environment getting hotter, sunnier, and wetter will, typically, "burn out" an outbreak.

So, no. most viruses are not just sitting out there host-less waiting their shot (a few can go into their protein shell and tough it out). Our medical scientists aren't that dumb. Give them some credit for knowing their science and trying to mitigate the damage to all our citizens.

You have to account for the virulence factors, and their differences, for respective viruses. Comparing virus to virus trends is fruitless.

Generally speaking, (overly simplified)
High virulence means = very deadly, but not good at spreading because kills host too fast
Low virulent means = not deadly, but lingers in host for a long time - more likely to spread

There's a multitude of other factors to consider as well.

 

[Irish#1]

Spoke to a coworker. His son's in-laws are Chinese and live in Hunang(sp?). They are 1,000 miles away from the outbreak and have been on home lockdown since January.

Interesting interview by Joe Rogan with Michael Osterholm who is a "medical detective". He's spent his career tracking and analyzing infectious diseases.


<iframe src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/E3URhJx0NSw" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" width="560" height="315" frameborder="0"></iframe>

 

[SouthSideChiDomer]

I haven’t researched it at all, but are their stores staying stocked with supplies? My logic was that if more businesses implement the “stay at home if possible” model, supply shipments will slow, and shortages would occur.

As I understand it, people who cannot work from home are still going in to work. So as of right now, the supply lines are working normally (or at least the parts of it not coming from China).

How does "freezing" normal life control the numbers?

At some point, people are going to have to return to their normal lifestyles. The virus is already here. It won't just "go away". It is destined to be here, just as influenza is.

This is not something that can be "waited out".

In that case then isn't a bit of robbing Peter to pay Paul... at some point it'll get overloaded prior to the vaccine.

As other have said, its not about waiting out the entire virus, its about containment. One of the biggest problems with this virus seems to be the asymptomatic spread during the week of incubation. By the time someone gets symptoms and tests positive, they could have already spread it when they were in public. By quarantining for a few weeks, medical personnel can catch up to the virus because anyone who is sick can have their contacts traced more easily. It will not stop the virus, but by slowing the spread down, hospitals are better able to handle the number of patients. This is especially important because if they cannot handle all the patients, then these can be people who are sick but not quarantined who are spreading the virus where they wouldn't be if the hospitals had space. This leads to a downward spiral of spread and hospital overrun. If we stop it early, we can handle all of the cases and prevent further increases. We do not need to stop every case, just keep it below what the hospitals can handle.

 

[gkIrish]

https://ivyleague.com/news/2020/3/1...ents-through-the-remainder-of-the-spring.aspx

Ivy League cancels all sports rest of the year. Lacrosse teams are going to be pissed.

 

[RDU Irish]

Can I go somewhere to get it so I can go on quarantine on my own time and not have to deal with it in a month on spring break?

 

[gkIrish]

I think ND just cancelled all extracurricular activities. Anyone know if this includes sports?

 

[ACamp1900]

As I understand it, people who cannot work from home are still going in to work. So as of right now, the supply lines are working normally (or at least the parts of it not coming from China).



As other have said, its not about waiting out the entire virus, its about containment. One of the biggest problems with this virus seems to be the asymptomatic spread during the week of incubation. By the time someone gets symptoms and tests positive, they could have already spread it when they were in public. By quarantining for a few weeks, medical personnel can catch up to the virus because anyone who is sick can have their contacts traced more easily. It will not stop the virus, but by slowing the spread down, hospitals are better able to handle the number of patients. This is especially important because if they cannot handle all the patients, then these can be people who are sick but not quarantined who are spreading the virus where they wouldn't be if the hospitals had space. This leads to a downward spiral of spread and hospital overrun. If we stop it early, we can handle all of the cases and prevent further increases. We do not need to stop every case, just keep it below what the hospitals can handle.

I get all this, my point is everything is not going to be shut down and closed off for months on end,... is ~2-3 weeks enough to do anything but just push back the inevitable if that is the main concern... that's all.

 

[Legacy]

Why Is Italy's Coronavirus Outbreak So Bad?

In short, because the virus spread undetected. Deaths attributed to the flu may have been due COVID 19.

Another source:

Covid-19 — Navigating the Uncharted (NEJM)
List of authors.
Anthony S. Fauci, M.D., H. Clifford Lane, M.D., and Robert R. Redfield, M.D.

The efficiency of transmission for any respiratory virus has important implications for containment and mitigation strategies. The current study indicates an estimated basic reproduction number (R0) of 2.2, which means that, on average, each infected person spreads the infection to an additional two persons. As the authors note, until this number falls below 1.0, it is likely that the outbreak will continue to spread. Recent reports of high titers of virus in the oropharynx early in the course of disease arouse concern about increased infectivity during the period of minimal symptoms.6,7

Every outbreak provides an opportunity to gain important information, some of which is associated with a limited window of opportunity. For example, Li et al. report a mean interval of 9.1 to 12.5 days between the onset of illness and hospitalization. This finding of a delay in the progression to serious disease may be telling us something important about the pathogenesis of this new virus and may provide a unique window of opportunity for intervention. Achieving a better understanding of the pathogenesis of this disease will be invaluable in navigating our responses in this uncharted arena. Furthermore, genomic studies could delineate host factors that predispose persons to acquisition of infection and disease progression.

 

[SouthSideChiDomer]

I get all this, my point is everything is not going to be shut down and closed off for months on end,... is ~2-3 weeks enough to do anything but just push back the inevitable if that is the main concern... that's all.

2-3 weeks can be enough to stop the exponential spread. It takes 4-5 days for people to show symptoms but they still transmit before they show symptoms. Freezing everything for 2 weeks means that all the sick people have time to show symptoms and then we can trace everyone they came in contact with because its a much smaller group because of the shut down.

 

[zelezo vlk]

No fans at NCAA tourney games

 

[loomis41973]

wow..why not just cancel the shit then?

 

[nvirish]

Total over reaction to this virus.

 

[ACamp1900]

wow..why not just cancel the shit then?

 

[GATTACA!]

Spoke to a coworker. His son's in-laws are Chinese and live in Hunang(sp?). They are 1,000 miles away from the outbreak and have been on home lockdown since January.

Interesting interview by Joe Rogan with Michael Osterholm who is a "medical detective". He's spent his career tracking and analyzing infectious diseases.


<iframe src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/E3URhJx0NSw" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" width="560" height="315" frameborder="0"></iframe>

This is a good pod. Sam Harris has also released two episodes now within the last 48 hours about covid speaking with two different experts. Highly recommend those too.

 

[loomis41973]

Total over reaction to this virus.

Amen.

 

[loomis41973]

Not even close.

It's TV $$$$$

 

[NDdomer2]

Not even close.

It's TV $$$$$

And it just went up big time