Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

Coronavirus

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
Exactly. Without some extremely robust data, I would not want to administer any kind of immunosuppressant to a patient infected with COVID-19. My gut instinct is that the harm would outweigh the benefits.

Well we would need to have clear metrics for cases in which that would harm vs help. And we don't have those biomarkers yet. I suspect we will at some point though.
 
Well we would need to have clear metrics for cases in which that would harm vs help. And we don't have those biomarkers yet. I suspect we will at some point though.

Possibly, but bear in mind that historically, we don't do a lot of immune suppression for infectious diseases. We do with things where the immune system has become out of balance and become autoimmune and causing damage that way.
 
Possibly, but bear in mind that historically, we don't do a lot of immune suppression for infectious diseases. We do with things where the immune system has become out of balance and become autoimmune and causing damage that way.

I think we're witnessing a sea change on our view of inflammation. At least in relationship to things like diseases of aging particularly Alzheimer's disease. Conventional older wisdom was to leave immune activation alone in AD as it might remove amyloid, but now there's more and more evidence that a transition in the glial phenotype from a neurotrophic/surveillance to a neuro predatory/pro-inflammatory phenotype is driving neurodegeneration. I believe in that comment by I've forgotten which famous immune researcher who said this but the immune system in aging is simultaneously your best friend and your worst enemy.

But as always in science . . . time will tell. My prediction is that we will see at some point the ability to identify a subset of covid-19 patients where restraining some aspects of pro inflammatory activation will be protective. If science is advanced in part by risky predictions, that's my risky prediction. Of course it's falsifiable but we will see.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: Fact Checking
Korea did not lock down, instead they fanatically traced contacts and tested. When they did quarantine people, they enforced it vigorously. Singapore, Taiwan and Hong Kong have also been fanatical in testing (especially inbound arrivals) and enforcing individual quarantines, with good results.

China had to lock down 60m people and semi-lockdown a billion more because it was burning out of control. Italy is there now.

It's too late for the US to catch it at the border, but we can still test and trace if we have the willpower. And enought #$%@ tests!

Yup, either lose freedom of movement (kept indoors like in China and Europe) or privacy (geotracking with monetary fines like in Korea).

Cant be doing this half hearted attempt in the US.
 
Yup, either lose freedom of movement (kept indoors like in China and Europe) or privacy (geotracking with monetary fines like in Korea).

Cant be doing this half hearted attempt in the US.
The US response is beyond moronic centered on trumpish xenophobia but it does not have to be 100% China or 100% S Korea. China started out with Hubei in full fledged epidemic mode while S. Korea started out with the Christian cult. So they are different examples of extreme cases. I view each country as outstanding examples of how certain tools can be used effectively in those situations.
 
Ok...but...is the "cure"...sorry poor attempt. Let's call it the "plan" worse that doing what we should always do (practice common sense hygiene)

Despair caused by long term job losses in flyover states led directly to the opioid epidemic that kills tens of thousands every year.
More people driving more so more fatalities on the road.
Suicide rates rising do to economic ruin.

I could go on.
Perhaps this tweet puts things into perspective. It is the obituaries from February 9th and March 13 compared in Bergamo.

David Carretta on Twitter
 
You are now on ignore for the duration.

I don't agree with that approach.

Lots of us that are reading the thread don't have a solid medical background, and we're using this thread to help us understand risk factors.

The belief that that eyes were a reasonably high risk area of exposure wasn't limited to just the person you were arguing with. I wondered about the same thing myself. So the exchange, and especially the follow ups from others helped my own understanding of the risk factor.

By acting hostile to people you actually dissuade others from sharing their perspectives. There are so many people involved in this thread that if a single person does post something wrong it eventually gets thoroughly dissected. Where it likely helps a lot of people who aren't actively talking.

In this case that's exactly what happened.

Plus overall the exchange strengthened what you wanted in the first place. You wanted people to wear masks, and the result of that exchange the mask wearing side won.

I say this as someone who isn't opposed to masks (when wearing one would make sense), but as someone who doesn't think masks are viable at this stage because of the lack of availability. Like it would be great if New Yorkers would wear masks on public transportation, but I can't blame them for not because they aren't available.
 
Last edited:
Yup, either lose freedom of movement (kept indoors like in China and Europe) or privacy (geotracking with monetary fines like in Korea).

Cant be doing this half hearted attempt in the US.

I think where people really understand the epidemiology they are (mostly) doing responsible things. Where they don't or where they obfuscate that or where it's been obfuscated for them by others, then they don't. The biggest problem to responsible management in the United States is that we don't know who's already infectious and spreading the disease because we've had a catastrophic failure of testing and early ID of people who might then become unwitting transmission vectors. They may be minimally ill, but those in high risk groups they infect will not be.
 
Data to support the cytokine storm hypothesis please.

Many of the newer vaccines are against very specific protein fragments, not the entire virus as we did in the past (i.e. live attenuated viruses). This gives a very specific immune response that can be tailored to remove any potential component that causes an undesired reaction (i.e. like cytokine storm). The downside is that if the virus mutates and changes the key expressed protein fragment used in the vaccine, the effectiveness of the vaccine drops. In live attenuated vaccines, you still have coverage.

Basically:
protein fragment vaccine - very specific immune response that generates a limited spectrum of antibodies
traditional vaccine - broad immune response that generates a wide array of antibodies

You can guess which one provides decades-long protection vs. a few years

No data, just seemed logical to me based on my antiquated understanding of vaccines. :oops:

TIL that much of the virus is not present in a modern vaccine, so I suspect the chance for a cytokine storm should not be higher than usual.

I.e. I was talking nonsense, just disregard that part. :D
 
  • Funny
Reactions: kbM3
2020-03-15.jpg
 
"I'm probably, from a years of education standpoint, the most educated person you will probably ever meet. And I strongly identify as "Conservative" (not Republican)."

One would hardly call Trump uneducated but look how that worked out. Education greatly enhances intelligent people. But I would prefer to work with a lesser educated intelligent person that an unintelligent educated person. Bragging about one's education is more of a red flag to me than a respect earner.
 
now, a serious question or two. lots of 'zinc' things are sold out, like 'cold-eeze'.

- is zinc really worth over-spending for? (a $6 box is now $18 or more)

- is zinc == zinc? there are zinc this and zinc that; are certain formulations 'key' or is it generic? I see zinc in multivitamins. good enough or not?
 
As of tomorrow all schools, restaurants, pubs and gyms in The Netherlands will be closed for a minimum of three weeks. Shops can still stay open, but that will probably not last long.

One of the main reasons for closing the pubs and restaurants was the fact that this weekend thousands of Belgians, where they are already closed, crossed the border to eat and (especially) drink here. An utterly stupid bunch of alcoholics :confused:

That was after a lot of Belgians had Corona-parties to drink up al the open beer barrels because our government gave us a day notice for the closure. The Dutch government learned from that and gave 1 hour notice. Well done!