Coronavirus

[Oil4AsphaultOnly]

Technically premiums are exactly the same. The difference is that the employee is paying 100% of the premiums.

That is only technically true from the insurance provider's perspective, a viewpoint that is completely irrelevant when we're talking about the loss of healthcare for the recently unemployed. Losing perspective is how these arguments never get resolved.

 

[bkp_duke]

But wouldn't a serology test that measures IGG vs. IGM discriminate the folks who are asymptomatic but still shedding viral load? My understanding is that IGM disappears and IGG increases when someone has achieved clearance of the pathogen for at least a couple weeks, yes? Or no?

That's the classic teaching, yes. But given how long COVID-19 lasts in some people, I would not be surprised that IgG is present in some and they are still shedding (3+ weeks). Remember, IgG is not a marker of viral clearance per-se, it's just the next step down the chain in the production of antibodies.

 

[SageBrush]

CDC Guidelines on when to Discontinue Home Isolation without testing:

What do you guys think of these CDC guidelines?

Change 'improved' to 'GONE' and I'm good with them. These are generic instructions that cover the large majority of infectious illness, including Covid-19. Just be aware that you can go through all these motions completely unrelated to Covid-19.

 

[SMAlset]

My employees would be in sticker shock if they knew how much their premiums actually were. We cover 100% for the employee, and 75% for family members, and I don't think any of them have ever asked how much the actual cost is.

Why don't you tell them?

I mean it, why not send out a mail every year once you know your cost for the following year's benefits.
Without any evaluating comments, just FTI?

I agree, tell them. That sounds pretty generous to me. My husband’s company has felt it important for their employees to know the value and contribute to some degree. They get a decent range of choices for their plan in provider services and plan options to better fit their needs and budget. People I think have no idea how expensive insurance is in reality and should know the value of what their benefits are.

I read a later post you made OP and understand your thinking. As for single people not getting as much in their coverage isn’t that kind of expected though. Heck you file your IRS forms and notice the extra deductions families get to take. Just saying. You sound like a nice guy to work for who appreciates and retains employees.

 

[dhanson865]

New York is currently at 212 — on track to surpass Italy and Spain soon, unfortunately.

If you use the yesterday tab to keep those numbers in the same time fram NY was at 182 at GMT +0 (this morning in the US). That they've moved up that noticably per capita is showing a rather large number of deaths per day.

Yesterdays NY deaths was 630, so far 594 today.

also for those that didn't notice that is for NY state, meaning NY city is off the charts high per capita.

 

[bkp_duke]

CDC Guidelines on when to Discontinue Home Isolation without testing:

What do you guys think of these CDC guidelines?

Given how long some people are shedding the virus, I think those guidelines are out of date. But I haven't put much thought into what would replace them, especially given that people in the US are not even following those.

 

[sparcs]

Change 'improved' to 'GONE' and I'm good with them. These are generic instructions that cover the large majority of infectious illness, including Covid-19. Just be aware that you can go through all these motions completely unrelated to Covid-19.

Ah ok. So there is nothing specific we have to do for this virus compared to any other virus when it comes to home isolation? Most of us will be home isolating without any testing so that's why I wanted to understand the guidance.

 

[bkp_duke]

How do we know when someone stops shedding? My county is already claiming 6 recovered, the first confirmed cases coming in only a week and a half ago, responding with and I quote (directly from their county health page)-

"For those that have asked, a person is considered recovered if:
It has been a minimum of 7 days after symptom onset
AND
It has been 72 hours without a fever (without use of fever reducing medications)
AND
They are no longer symptomatic"

I also asked if they were still being quarantined and did not get a response.... I understand the day their test came back positive could be well after they were infected, but I feel like they just aren't being cautious enough with this.

My "off the cuff" answer is you would get 95+% of people if you told them to continue to self-isolate for 14 days after their LAST symptoms (not fever, but any symptoms). Probably the best you could ask for.

 

[dhanson865]

CDC Guidelines on when to Discontinue Home Isolation without testing:

What do you guys think of these CDC guidelines?

I think a ton of people are taking fever reducers without thinking about it and will go out while still infectious if they go by temp and "without the use medicine that reduces fevers" as far as they know.

>What you may not realize is that more than 600 medications, both prescription and over-the-counter (OTC), contain the active ingredient acetaminophen to help relieve pain and reduce fever.

and hey acetamenophen isn't the only common fever reducer in the average home medicine cabinet.

 

[SageBrush]

But wouldn't a serology test that measures IGG vs. IGM discriminate the folks who are asymptomatic but still shedding viral load? My understanding is that IGM disappears and IGG increases when someone has achieved clearance of the pathogen for at least a couple weeks, yes? Or no?

No and No.

IgM to IgG is an Isotype switch within the same B cell. There is a lot of variation by specific bug but the general description is IgM early, followed by IgG for months to years; but always while the infection is present.
The tests about to be foisted on the public are combined IgG/IgM detectors. Are you familiar with generic ELISA tests ? The capturing layer is a mixture of anti-IgM and anti-IgG *

* The C(H) portion, if you want to be pedantic

 

[NikolaACDC]

Do we want a nation where the Federal Government has unlimited power over the states when the Fed deems it necessary outside of a foreign war? We are still battling the whole marijuana thing, and the Fed surrendered the 55 mph national speed limit. But they do have unlimited power of seizure without due process, so we are certainly going in that direction.

ie - Do you want THIS president to have unlimited power? Congress doesn't. The courts don't, the states don't. Laws are like hand grenades, they can easily cause collateral damage.

But it's not even power or orders that are needed.
If the federal leader(s) would show leadership, set good examples and voice strong recommendations it would make more state (and below) governments re-think their stance.

Case in point
Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis cites Trump's changed 'demeanor' in issuing stay-at-home order

 

[MXLRplus]

I think a ton of people are taking fever reducers without thinking about it and will go out while still infectious if they go by temp and "without the use medicine that reduces fevers" as far as they know.

>What you may not realize is that more than 600 medications, both prescription and over-the-counter (OTC), contain the active ingredient acetaminophen to help relieve pain and reduce fever.

and hey acetamenophen isn't the only common fever reducer in the average home medicine cabinet.

The jury is still out on which fever reducers are safer with C19:

Are Advil, Motrin, and Tylenol Bad for Coronavirus (COVID-19) Symptoms? - GoodRx

 

[SageBrush]

Ah ok. So there is nothing specific we have to do for this virus compared to any other virus when it comes to home isolation? Most of us will be home isolating without any testing so that's why I wanted to understand the guidance.

Exactly.

Exceptions will pop up*, but they seem to be rare in the case of Covid.

* meaning long term, asymptomatic shedders after acute illness. Immunocompromised people should be antigen tested again to prove complete viral clearance.

 

[Oil4AsphaultOnly]

My employees would be in sticker shock if they knew how much their premiums actually were. We cover 100% for the employee, and 75% for family members, and I don't think any of them have ever asked how much the actual cost is.

no they wouldn't, unless you decided to change how much of it you cover? how much you cover is a decision that _you_ decide (factoring its impact on employee morale and retention), to which your employees have zero control. Most companies cover some/most of the premiums as a method of acquiring and retaining good employees.

In your case specifically, thanks to your generous coverage, expecting cobra to cover them in case they get laid off (regardless of the cause), is unrealistic. I only bring this up, because you liked Daniel in SD's comment, which means you're still blind to the plight of wage-earners.

 

[Daniel in SD]

That is only technically true from the insurance provider's perspective, a viewpoint that is completely irrelevant when we're talking about the loss of healthcare for the recently unemployed. Losing perspective is how these arguments never get resolved.

Well, I think that we should have single payer with limited coverage and a large deductible based on income.
I don't think I'm losing perspective, health care is incredibly expensive. I don't think having an employer based system that hides the true cost from people is a good idea. I also think that the structure of our health care system is irrelevant to this pandemic. The only time you should be going to a hospital for COVID-19 is if you're having difficulty breathing and I don't see any evidence that people are being turned away from emergency rooms.

 

[MXLRplus]

But it's not even power or orders that are needed.
If the federal leader(s) would show leadership, set good examples and voice strong recommendations it would make more state (and below) governments re-think their stance.

Case in point
Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis cites Trump's changed 'demeanor' in issuing stay-at-home order

While your location says Planet Earth, it must have been from a previous era. Our Federal Leaders tried to stop 430,000 people from flying into the US from China when the outbreak started. Nope:
430,000 People Have Traveled From China to U.S. Since Coronavirus Surfaced

 

[30seconds]

It's a drug decades out of patent. Don't allow companies to buy up drug production rights for out-of-patent drugs and you don't have this problem. It's a simple, small molecule. Any drug manuf could crank it out by the tens of millions of doses per month.

What are drug production rights for out-of-patent drugs? Once out of patent any manufacturer can make, up to them if they choose to do so or not.

 

[dhanson865]

The jury is still out on which fever reducers are safer with C19:

Are Advil, Motrin, and Tylenol Bad for Coronavirus (COVID-19) Symptoms? - GoodRx

You missed the point of my post then. It's not about if they are safe to take, it's about them reducing fever without the user realizing it and thus lulling them into thinking they can leave the house because they don't have a fever.

Doesn't matter what the fever reducer is. It matters that people take it without knowing they are taking it.

the line in question was

>You have had no fever for at least 72 hours (that is three full days of no fever without the use medicine that reduces fevers)

but people take medicines all the time for pain or swelling or congestion or runny nose or any of a hundred different reasons and don't think "hey, I'm taking a fever reducer".

 

[SageBrush]

"The president was hunkered in the White House on Sunday with no plans for a daily briefing, watching cable news and tweeting."

I suppose any day he is not making things worse is an improvement. Sounds like Fauci told him to sit in a corner with a dunce hat.

 

[Daniel in SD]

no they wouldn't, unless you decided to change how much of it you cover? how much you cover is a decision that _you_ decide (factoring its impact on employee morale and retention), to which your employees have zero control. Most companies cover some/most of the premiums as a method of acquiring and retaining good employees.

In your case specifically, thanks to your generous coverage, expecting cobra to cover them in case they get laid off (regardless of the cause), is unrealistic. I only bring this up, because you liked Daniel in SD's comment, which means you're still blind to the plight of wage-earners.

Companies provide generous employee coverage because there's a huge tax advantage to doing so, especially for high income employees (i.e. employees with a high marginal tax rate). Employer contributions to health care are tax deductible but employee contributions are not. So a company can pay some if its employee's "wages" as health insurance tax free.
Maybe @bkp_duke liked my comment because it is factually correct.
When you lose your job you can also buy subsidized insurance on Obamacare exchanges.