Coronavirus

[AlanSubie4Life]

single use N95 mask, glasses/shield, gown, gloves

If it is good enough for them, good enough for me. The single use makes sense in an environment where there is a lot of COVID. I don’t worry about it too much but I do always store my P100 mask in a bag and I treat it as filthy and clean my hands thoroughly with IPA (not the beer variety) after touching it. And try to avoid contamination of the inside of the mask.

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

https://twitter.com/trvrb/status/1351210605731045379?s=21

Analysis of transmissibility of B.1.1.7

and a nice explanation of the mutations and speculation about why they might result in increased transmissibility (clear cookies if you have access problems):

Inside the B.1.1.7 Coronavirus Variant

The good news here is that it seems that the transmission advantage may be due to a better ability to bind to the receptor, so perhaps that means that more likely to become infected for a given inoculum. So that suggests that it may not be due to more virus wandering around in the airways (though that may also be the case, it is not clear). So, if we can completely prevent contamination by the virus, through robust and consistent respirator use, we should be able to crush this version of the virus too (or maybe we could do things right for the first time).

We have about 5-6 weeks in the US before it gets really bad. Biden may not be so lucky after all. We’ll see. Gotta get that vaccine into arms, quickly.

Need to get cases to zero, in any case, and not rely on the vaccine.

 

[TheTalkingMule]

Conclusions: Individuals discharged from hospital following COVID-19 face elevated rates of multi-organ dysfunction compared with background levels, and the increase in risk is neither confined to the elderly nor uniform across ethnicities. The diagnosis, treatment and prevention of PCS require integrated rather than organ- or disease-specific approaches. Urgent research is required to establish risk factors for PCS.
-------------------------
More proof that it's a good idea not to get it, even if you're in a low risk group.

Where does this indicate there's an increased risk of serious impact or death if you're low risk and healthy? Seems the headline is trying to paint an narrative of healthy young people getting covid19, going home, and dropping dead in the hospital 140 days later. It's my understanding that almost never happens.

When a group of people mean age 65 contract covid19 and are hospitalized, I would be surprised if 29.4% of them weren't readmitted to the hospital half a year later and 12.3% dying of aggravation to respiratory or heart issues. An 80 year old male coming off the stress of 3 weeks in the ICU doesn't have great odds to avoid major heart/stroke/respiratory events.

 

[JRP3]

Where does this indicate there's an increased risk of serious impact or death if you're low risk and healthy? Seems the headline is trying to paint an narrative of healthy young people getting covid19, going home, and dropping dead in the hospital 140 days later. It's my understanding that almost never happens.

“What we believed before about the relative harmlessness of COVID-19 among younger adults has simply not been borne out by emerging data.”

Doctors warn that young people dying at ‘historic rates’ from COVID-19 | Boston.com

Dying Young: The Health Care Workers in Their 20s Killed by COVID-19
Data reveal deadliness of COVID-19, even in young adults
'Wrecked our lives': Families of 3 young adults who died from COVID-19 share heartbreaking stories
These Conditions Put Young People at Higher Risk for COVID-19

 

[madodel]

The new platinum level card everyone (at least if you're sane) wants. My wife has hers.
What is a COVID-19 vaccine card, and do you need to keep it?

 

[TheTalkingMule]

Doctors warn that young people dying at ‘historic rates’ from COVID-19 | Boston.com

Dying Young: The Health Care Workers in Their 20s Killed by COVID-19
Data reveal deadliness of COVID-19, even in young adults
'Wrecked our lives': Families of 3 young adults who died from COVID-19 share heartbreaking stories
These Conditions Put Young People at Higher Risk for COVID-19

I believe I posted "low risk and healthy". Why can't we just live in reality? IMO that's scary enough.

Under 55 healthy people aren't getting hospitalized with covid, going home, and then dying in the hospital 140 days later as these headlines would have you believe. Our most vulnerable are going through a physical stress that's killing them via stroke/heart attack/respiratory failure weeks and months after "recovery" from covid. It's nobody's job to exaggerate an already horrendous situation and scare people into healthier protocol.

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

Under 55 healthy people aren't getting hospitalized with covid, going home, and then dying in the hospital 140 days later as these headlines would have you believe.

I mean, this particular situation may never have happened. But it’s abundantly obvious at this point that this is a very dangerous disease for young people (just ~100x less dangerous than it is for old people) - it’s raising the death rate in these young groups - they have elevated excess mortality!

Similarly, undoubtedly there will be sequelae amongst these age groups, again, with substantially lower frequency than in other age groups, but it may be non-negligible.

And there is no question that healthy low-risk young people have died and have been hospitalized by the disease. It doesn’t happen all that much, but it does happen incredibly often, for a respiratory virus - considerably more often than it does with the flu.

I’d love for you to be right, of course, and say there is no risk to young people. But the fact is it is dangerous for ALL age groups (including the healthy ones in those groups), except possibly for children (very limited sample), and particularly so for older people (risk increases exponentially with age as we all know very well at this point). But when talking about risk, you have to talk about relative risk, not absolute. Meaning: without COVID, young people, in general, do not die from transmissible diseases.

. It's nobody's job to exaggerate an already horrendous situation and scare people into healthier protocol.

I kind of disagree. It’s not exaggerating to tell young people that this is an unpleasant and dangerous disease for them. Young people getting infected has been an important driver in the growth of the pandemic. We need to encourage excellent mitigation practices in these groups. And the government should be telling them that while it likely won’t kill them, it may, and contracting the disease will substantially increase their annualized risk of death and hospitalization. It’s difficult to calibrate that message correctly, but at this point we have abundant data to provide the correct guidance, based on science and the evidence.

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

Under 55 healthy people aren't getting hospitalized with covid, going home, and then dying in the hospital 140 days later as these headlines would have you believe.

Again, not the situation you describe at all, but this article might be worth a read. I did not have an issue with the paywall for this particular article (so clearing cookies should work if you do):

https://www.washingtonpost.com/loca...d28c98-43e6-11eb-a277-49a6d1f9dff1_story.html

Nelson was 36.

This sort of thing is rare for age 36, probably having happened only hundreds of times in the US (maybe low thousands?) during this pandemic, noticeably increasing death rates in these age groups. But it certainly happens.

 

[goinfraftw]

Question from someone not in healthcare:

- People outside of healthcare tell me the pandemic is "done" in 6 months
- Few inside of healthcare tell me this is going to the new normal

With Biden leading the effort, it certainly won't be anarchy and, likely instead, a good response. I think its going to be much quicker in terms of going back to good, but not normal.

With that said, lets say a variant mutates and comes back (how likely is this?) in winter time again this year. What do you think happens with Biden as president in terms of response to a new/variant pandemic?

 

[bkp_duke]

Question from someone not in healthcare:

- People outside of healthcare tell me the pandemic is "done" in 6 months
- Few inside of healthcare tell me this is going to the new normal

With Biden leading the effort, it certainly won't be anarchy and, likely instead, a good response. I think its going to be much quicker in terms of going back to good, but not normal.

With that said, lets say a variant mutates and comes back (how likely is this?) in winter time again this year. What do you think happens with Biden as president in terms of response to a new/variant pandemic?

In healthcare here, and a scientist that has worked on viruses in the past.

Few observations first - it is states that are determining their own vaccine administration plans, not the federal gov. Biden MIGHT be able to make more vaccine available to the states (but really that is up the manufacturers and how fast they can scale production, and tossing money at it doesn't make that much of a difference in the short term).

Now, to the scientific questions - the pandemic is "done" when we get to herd immunity and R drops below 1 (i.e. each infected person then infects less than 1 person). Herd immunity can happen either because "everyone got it" (we're not even close) or because the bulk of the population gets vaccinated.

There is a non-zero chance that SARS-CoV-2 (i.e. the "coronavirus" as we know it) is around with us for decades. It has mutated, and will continue to do so (and the more people that are infected, the faster it will mutate). Usually viruses mutate so that they can infect more easily (i.e. what we see with the B.1.1.7 strain of the virus), and so that they are less lethal (i.e. killing your host is bad news for continuing propagation). We have not really see any of the later, but certainly have see a lot of the former.


From a "medical history" perspective, this is one of the mildest and shorter lived pandemics known in the past 1000 years. I know that is not much consolation for those that have been infected and/or lost loved ones, but this could have been 10X more deadly and lasted 5+ years.



My best "educated" guess is that life in the US and other 1st world countries is somewhat back to normal by the fall. 2nd and 3rd world countries could take up to 18 months.

 

[JRP3]

From a "medical history" perspective, this is one of the mildest and shorter lived pandemics known in the past 1000 years.

I like the optimism but isn't it a bit early to call it "shorter lived"?

 

[bkp_duke]

I like the optimism but isn't it a bit early to call it "shorter lived"?

Care to bet a TSLA share?

I don't make bets or pick fights unless I know for certain I will win.

 

[JRP3]

I don't make bets or pick fights unless I know for certain I will win.

Me either.

 

[bkp_duke]

Me either.

But on this one, this is my sandbox. Care to take the bet?

 

[JRP3]

I thought the implication was clear since I obviously don't know the outcome.

 

[TheTalkingMule]

Again, not the situation you describe at all, but this article might be worth a read. I did not have an issue with the paywall for this particular article (so clearing cookies should work if you do):

https://www.washingtonpost.com/loca...d28c98-43e6-11eb-a277-49a6d1f9dff1_story.html

Nelson was 36.

This sort of thing is rare for age 36, probably having happened only hundreds of times in the US (maybe low thousands?) during this pandemic, noticeably increasing death rates in these age groups. But it certainly happens.

Someone so malnourished through adolescence that they chew buttons off remote controls should 100% be considered immunocompromised with a virus that just needs a marginal amount of respiratory inflammation and a suppressed immune system to kill.

I hardly want to be fighting on the "it's no big deal" side, it's been quite clearly a big deal since day 1. I'd just like to keep it in perspective and focus on facts. With "hundreds or maybe even thousands" of young people dying, the math states they must be essentially immunocompromised outliers. Far too many millions of young people have been infected for the math to state otherwise. We'd have 1M+ dead young people if that were the case.

As of a couple weeks ago, CDC had deaths at:

Under 1 year 34
1–4 years 21
5–14 years 55
15–24 years 510
25–34 years 2,196
35–44 years 5,742
45–54 years 15,558
55+......340k or so.

The key is, we need to remember that's everybody. Cancer patients, genetic heart disease, severe asthmatics. I don't say this as if we should just toss their corpses into the river and move on, I'm saying it's important to identify actual risk to dictate mitigation.

So far, many more Americans under 35 died in the Swine Flu pandemic of 2009. We should have been doing a better job of isolating males over 75, females over 80, and anyone immunocompromised until a vaccine became available. Instead, all the idiots took the death march to the Thanksgiving table.

No idea where I'm going with this. I'd just like to see us worry about the actual threats.

As a side note......the known cases in my limited circle have never been higher. I know of nearly 10 people infected none hospitalized, two I'm seriously concerned about. There's a lot of chatter about cases leveling off, not from my perspective. IMO the Christmas peak has not fully hit yet.

 

[TEG]

For anyone following my personal saga... I am still asymptomatic, and would expect to show symptoms about now if my wife got me infected at the end of last week when she was coming down with it and we didn't know. I just took a PCR test, should have results by Friday.

My wife, who has serious pre-existing conditions continues to have ongoing 101 fever and light cough. No real breathing trouble, but light headed and O2 sats low enough (90-92) range that she asked me to give her supplemental oxygen. (I got an oxygen generator from ebay). Her sats went up to 98% and the light headedness improved, so we are going to discuss that with her doctor tomorrow.
Based on typical timeline I expect the next 5 days are going to be critical to find out if she starts to improve or heads to the hospital...

In terms of actual prescribed medicines, they only one she has been given so far is hydroxychloroquine.
No mention (yet) of Dexamethasone, Remdesivir, or Regeneron. I am going to ask her doctor about those.

 

[bkp_duke]

Someone so malnourished through adolescence that they chew buttons off remote controls should 100% be considered immunocompromised with a virus that just needs a marginal amount of respiratory inflammation and a suppressed immune system to kill.

I hardly want to be fighting on the "it's no big deal" side, it's been quite clearly a big deal since day 1. I'd just like to keep it in perspective and focus on facts. With "hundreds or maybe even thousands" of young people dying, the math states they must be essentially immunocompromised outliers. Far too many millions of young people have been infected for the math to state otherwise. We'd have 1M+ dead young people if that were the case.

As of a couple weeks ago, CDC had deaths at:

Under 1 year 34
1–4 years 21
5–14 years 55
15–24 years 510
25–34 years 2,196
35–44 years 5,742
45–54 years 15,558
55+......340k or so.

The key is, we need to remember that's everybody. Cancer patients, genetic heart disease, severe asthmatics. I don't say this as if we should just toss their corpses into the river and move on, I'm saying it's important to identify actual risk to dictate mitigation.

So far, many more Americans under 35 died in the Swine Flu pandemic of 2009. We should have been doing a better job of isolating males over 75, females over 80, and anyone immunocompromised until a vaccine became available. Instead, all the idiots took the death march to the Thanksgiving table.

No idea where I'm going with this. I'd just like to see us worry about the actual threats.

As a side note......the known cases in my limited circle have never been higher. I know of nearly 10 people infected none hospitalized, two I'm seriously concerned about. There's a lot of chatter about cases leveling off, not from my perspective. IMO the Christmas peak has not fully hit yet.

Sorry, but the entire premise of your argument centers around being able to properly isolate at-risk individuals, while still being able to provide them proper services.

When the virus is this widely spread, that horse has LONG since left the barn. 1 in 6 transmissions of SARS-CoV-2 as of 2 months ago was healthcare workers or their families. The people that one would expect to be the most careful.

This is a raging wildfire now, and it cannot be contained by contact tracing, etc.



The other thing - the young are NOT protected from the long-term consequences of COVID-19. Just google "Covid long hauler". Just because you fight off the infection and don't "die" doesn't mean that you have a normal, healthy life ahead of you.

We will be paying the consequences of this virus for decades to come.

 

[bkp_duke]

For anyone following my personal saga... I am still asymptomatic, and would expect to show symptoms about now if my wife got me infected at the end of last week when she was coming down with it and we didn't know. I just took a PCR test, should have results by Friday.

My wife, who has serious pre-existing conditions continues to have ongoing 101 fever and light cough. No real breathing trouble, but light headed and O2 sats low enough (90-92) range that she asked me to give her supplemental oxygen. (I got an oxygen generator from ebay). Her sats went up to 98% and the light headedness improved, so we are going to discuss that with her doctor tomorrow.
Based on typical timeline I expect the next 5 days are going to be critical to find out if she starts to improve or heads to the hospital...

Best wishes and prayers to you and your wife.

 

[TEG]

From "Citizen" app: