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.
Please tell me how the president in your timeline handled covid19. Can you give us stats? Do you have any idea how your timeline compares to all the ones where she is president?
Obviously, no one has stats for a scenario which didn't occur.

However, what is abundantly clear, from his own statements as well as actions, is that DJT has an extreme and unusually high level of trust in his own instincts and seat-of-the-pants judgement. He trusts this more than the advice of experts, whom he considers part of the 'deep state'. So when the experts including Peter Navarro, intelligence agencies, and economists were telling him back in January that we should take this seriously, he blew them off. Add to that, his having disbanded the pandemic response people a couple of years ago.

Anyone can see that DJT is an unusual president, for this some people love him and others despise him. But it's not a stretch by any means to say that almost any other candidate, or former president, would have handled this differently, likely for the better.
 
As far as what you hear from physician friends, I will take results of what appears to be a well-done survey over anecdotal reports.

Will you take a STRONG warning from the American Heart Association, American College of Cardiology, and the Heart Rhythm Society?
Caution recommended on COVID-19 treatment with hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin for patients with cardiovascular disease

How about a warning from Infectious Disease Experts and Epidemiologists, passed on by the Dr. Fauci?
Coronavirus: Dr. Anthony Fauci warns Americans shouldn't assume hydroxychloroquine is a 'knockout drug'

Just read the comments about PHYSICIANS IN THIS THREAD - none of us are impressed by HCQ.
 
That means it catches 85 out of 100 cases. The other 15 get a green armband and go breathe on everyone.
85/100 seroconversions are identifiied

A seroconversion can either be a person actively infected, or it can be a person who is recovered.
It then follows that this Ab test during the epidemic has to be paired with an Ag test
But if the Ag test is performed, the utility of the Ab test is very limited.
 
I responded to your post because of your statement that Montana and North Dakota are heavily tested states. They are not. Clarifying that is important.

Definitely that was the wrong way (for me) to phrase what I was saying. Did not mean to imply that they were sufficiently tested. It was an offhand remark in a larger post, that I did not elaborate on sufficiently. North Dakota is more tested than most. Again, in the context of my prior posts it is pretty clear where I stand on testing. They are heavily tested (particularly ND) relative to other states. Strangely, California is actually one of the least tested states - hopefully that turns out to be ok, but it is concerning.

I do think time will show that prevalence is lower in ND and MT than other states. Again, Dr. Birx (FWIW) is using this data. There’s every reason to believe that prevalence will correlate with positivity rate. All states should be aiming to get below 2% positivity with test rates of at least 1% of the population per day.

It’s one of the reasons I think they want to allow states to make their own decisions (not that I really agree with that - it’s pretty clear that one case is probably too many unless you have tons of other surveillance in place) - clearly prevalence varies greatly from state to state.
 
Last edited:
Moving along ..... This seems promising

(Net New Hospitalizations = New Hospitalized - Discharged).

EVajnKdXYAEYyNP

Charlie Bilello on Twitter
 
Will you take a STRONG warning from the American Heart Association, American College of Cardiology, and the Heart Rhythm Society?
Caution recommended on COVID-19 treatment with hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin for patients with cardiovascular disease

How about a warning from Infectious Disease Experts and Epidemiologists, passed on by the Dr. Fauci?
Coronavirus: Dr. Anthony Fauci warns Americans shouldn't assume hydroxychloroquine is a 'knockout drug'

Just read the comments about PHYSICIANS IN THIS THREAD - none of us are impressed by HCQ.
True. The road of drug development and research of medical treatments is littered with interventions that had promising preclinical and early non-randomized or observational studies, only to completely fail when subjected to well-conducted randomized trials. Some of them even end up being harmful.

Dr. Fauci, the AHA, ACC, and other experts understand this.
 
I think religious freedom is a great thing as long as their "freedom" does not impose on "mine". They should be free to gather but forced to quarantine. Test each going in and at the end of the quarantine. Would make an interesting study, especially if the choir is there and they are all singing hymns.

I know, easier said than done.
Yes - or better still, they can get their own private commune or island.
 
Will you take a STRONG warning from the American Heart Association, American College of Cardiology, and the Heart Rhythm Society?
Caution recommended on COVID-19 treatment with hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin for patients with cardiovascular disease

How about a warning from Infectious Disease Experts and Epidemiologists, passed on by the Dr. Fauci?
Coronavirus: Dr. Anthony Fauci warns Americans shouldn't assume hydroxychloroquine is a 'knockout drug'

Just read the comments about PHYSICIANS IN THIS THREAD - none of us are impressed by HCQ.

The warning from the AHA is for patients with cardiac disease (not all patients), and their recommendation is for increased monitoring NOT a recommendation against use of HCQ.

“Given the potential for increased risks related to combinations of medications that prolong the QT interval, we urge careful consideration to ensure patients with cardiovascular disease or others at increased risk can be monitored appropriately,”
Fauci cautioned against assuming HCQ was a knockout drug w/o clinical trial data. I assume the physicians surveyed in the report I cited (and anyone with a lick of sense) would agree.

Too bad a scientific/medical issue has been turned into a political holy war, but I was encouraged by the survey results which suggest most doctors are taking a rational approach.
 
Can you translate your terms into those used in immunology ?

I'm guessing by 'adaptive' you mean humoral, but I have no idea what 'innate' means.

Both our innate immune system (using genetically coded Pattern Recognition Receptor systems (like TLR (Toll like receptors), NOD receptor, and RIG receptors, and cytosolic DNA sensors – all of which evolution tuned an exquisitely to the DNA, lipid and glycoprotein signatures of various pathogens), on the one hand and adaptive immunity, on the other hand, using antibodies and other forms of learned tagging of pathogens) have both what we traditionally think of cellular and humoral (blood-born) aspects. TLR lead directly via an fairly standard chain of signals/interactions to immediate production of cytokines. No learning is needed.

Adaptive immune system requires a mediating 'handoff' from class of macrophages referred to as dendritic cells which present antigens to T cells which in turn act sometimes as generals but also as foot soldiers so to speak in the adaptive immunity process. T cells promote B cells, which ramp up antibody production. (See graphic below)

Aging is relevant into this as it appears to reflect a disinhibition of the innate immune system as a partial but ultimately not very adaptive compensation for the age-related down regulation of adaptive immunity, which is multifactorial but principally a decline in naïve T cells which means that the system is a sluggish learner. If you pair that with a dis-inhibition of the inflammatory process that is intrinsically tied to innate immunity And that is less targeted and capable of destroying our own tissues en mass, I believe you may have an explanation for why a higher percentage of folks die from this disease who are older. They have a poorer transition from innate to adaptive immunity, a disinhibited and more destructive pro-inflammatory response, and if you consider that many so-called 'comorbid' conditions are actually themselves associated with upregulated systemic inflammatory signals (For sure heart disease, cancer, and type II diabetes at a bare minimum). These conditions may index poor regulation of what you might call the 'background tone' in the Innate immune system (Metaphorically it's kind of like having your senile fire department go out and break down doors and hose down houses just in case there might be a fire there), I believe you begin to approach an explanation for the differential mortality of Covid 19. This is just one person's moderately informed speculation.

I came by these concepts as an Alzheimer's disease clinician for 30+ years, during which time i was also a chronic research consumer and reviewer, and editor for Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience. This problem (referred to as "inflammaging" by an Italian researcher) may clarify at least some dimensions of significant risk for AD. It took me years to undo the damage early in my training associated with the most unfortunate concept of the brain as "an immune privileged site". Never quite understood how the most important organ in the whole system was "immune-privileged," but I didn't have enough confidence in my skepticism when I was in training in the early 80s to say "no way that made any sense." I've since learned to listen to my skepticism better.

The Wikipedia entry on the immune system is not bad as a overall summary around these issues, although it mixes up a few things.But I recommend it to folks who want a mid-level semi technical treatment of these issues.


Dendritic-cells-link-innate-to-adaptive-immunity.jpg


immuno.innate-vs-adaptive4.jpg


Hope that's helpful.
 
Last edited:
It takes about 3 weeks to go from trump:no big deal to hospitals:we are stuffed
Not a good plan.

Random testing of a sample of the population to gauge infection prevalence has some merit. Do that once a week or so.
We only need study groups of 500 - 1000 per locale.

I don't mean that instead of everything else. I mean that we may need that much testing together we other measures, to find any way out of it at all, without vaccine. I don't think "study groups" will do.
 
Both our innate (using genetically coded Pattern Recognition Receptor systems (like TLR (Toll like receptors), NOD receptor, and RIG receptors, and cytosolic DNA sensors – all of which evolution tuned an exquisitely to the DNA, lipid and glycoprotein signatures of various pathogens), on the one hand and adaptive immunity, on the other hand, using antibodies and other forms of learned tagging of pathogens) have both what we traditionally think of cellular and humoral (blood-born) aspects.
Uggh.

Foreign Ag exposure leads to clonal expansions of restricted Th, Ts and B cell populations. Cytokines are modulators
 
Definitely that was the wrong way (for me) to phrase what I was saying. Did not mean to imply that they were sufficiently tested. It was an offhand remark in a larger post, that I did not elaborate on sufficiently. North Dakota is more tested than most. Again, in the context of my prior posts it is pretty clear where I stand on testing. They are heavily tested (particularly ND) relative to other states. Strangely, California is actually one of the least tested states - hopefully that turns out to be ok, but it is concerning.

I do think time will show that prevalence is lower in ND and MT than other states. Again, Dr. Birx (FWIW) is using this data. There’s every reason to believe that prevalence will correlate with positivity rate. All states should be aiming to get below 2% positivity with test rates of at least 1% of the population per day.

It's all cool, Alan. And I agree, the prevalence of human infections with the SARS-CoV-2 virus in Montana and ND will likely be lower than in the rest of the country. But we could have made that prediction based on prior influenza data alone. The uniqueness, unknowns, and novel aspects of the COVID-19 disease process is the reason I suggest more than the usual caution when making predictions. Meaning a flexible open mind is more useful for solving problems.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HG Wells