Coronavirus

[bkp_duke]

Well now that you've turned this into a dick swinging contest, here is a Stanford MD + Ph.D.

*Jay Bhattacharya is a Professor of Medicine at Stanford University.

*He directs the Stanford Center on the Demography of Health and Aging.

*Dr. Bhattacharya’s peer-reviewed research has been published in economics, statistics, legal, medical, public health, and health policy journals. He holds an MD and PhD in economics from Stanford University.

I'm gonna guess that your resume doesn't stack up to his.
I side with his approach. He's a very objective and data driven thinker.
But I'm sure you will conjure up some excuse as to why you're superior to him.

Jayanta Bhattacharya's Profile | Stanford Profiles

My PhD is in molecular biology and I have direct experience working with the genomes of viruses (in this case, adenovirus).

In this context, I win the dick swinging contest.

Thanks for playing, you can collect your consolation prize at the door on your way out.

 

[dfwatt]

What is the story on CCR5-delta 32 with regards to COVID-19? ( I am apparently homozygous for this mutation... ) I have heard it puts me at risk of problems from West-nile virus...

Any populations with natural genetic resistance to Covid-19? | Peak Prosperity
Frequencies of gene variant CCR5-Δ32 in 87 countries based on next-generation sequencing of 1.3 million individuals sampled from 3 national DKMS donor centers - ScienceDirect

Without doing a deep dive I suspect the answer is we don't know. Additionally a defective receptor doesn't totally disable the downstream targets of that receptor of because there's always overlap from other signals with at least some probability of a compensatory upregulation - part of the enormous redundancy and recursion in the system. Unclear what a reduced chemokine signal might mean in covid-19. As I'm sure you already know chemokines help targeting and are part of how the immune process gets to the site of the trouble. What does your doctor say?

 

[Daniel in SD]

That was a thought as well, however no such prioritization has been made until this point as it has yet not been necessary (although it is in the plan if necessary) that I've read for ICU cases. Another week will give a better answer for sure, but might be necessary to look on a more regional level than country wide as Stockholm is more affected than other parts as of now hence analyzing from a whole might give the wrong result.

If you tell someone they have a 5% chance of survival, and that they will have permanent lung damage if they do survive, they may chose not to go on a ventilator. It doesn't have to be prioritization or rationing.
I think the only way to explain this data is that most of the people who are dying are not in the ICU. I may be misinterpreting from google translate though. COVID-19 i svensk intensivvård

 

[Daniel in SD]

*Jay Bhattacharya is a Professor of Medicine at Stanford University.

You're listening to a guy who said the mortality rate is 0.01%. It's already killed 0.1% of the NYC population.
I'm not sure what is so shocking about taking the more cautious path when there are unknowns. That seems prudent to me.

 

[dqd88]

My PhD is in molecular biology and I have direct experience working with the genomes of viruses (in this case, adenovirus).

In this context, I win the dick swinging contest.

Thanks for playing, you can collect your consolation prize at the door on your way out.

Here's another Stanford dum dum that you're superior too. Everyone bow down to duke! He's the smartest guy in the world because he has PhD!!!! He's far smarter then Elon Musk because Elon has no PhD ((((
And Bill Gates too... no PhD for Gates... Steve Jobs too.... all so dumb. Big dick duke is here to set the world straight!

 

[bkp_duke]

Here's another Stanford dum dum that you're superior too. Everyone bow down to duke! He's the smartest guy in the world because he has PhD!!!! He's far smarter then Elon Musk because Elon has no PhD ((((
And Bill Gates too... no PhD for Gates... Steve Jobs too.... all so dumb. Big dick duke is here to set the world straight!

Are you trying to make a point? I didn't say I disagreed with Dr. Ioannidis. He makes very good, valid points in that video and he basically says . . . "we need more and better data to make decisions".

Well my reply to that is . . . "no *sugar* dqd88, that's not earth-shattering news."

 

[N5329K]

"All models are wrong...but some are useful."
We should avoid shooting the weatherman if it rains on our picnic. The forecaster did the best they could do with the models in hand, which, as the saying goes, are all wrong but some are useful. What we're seeing here is our sympathies for models, predictions and predictors that best reflect our own views, hopes, opinions. Here's a nice (and short!) essay about data, models and their inherent uncertainties:
Leading with the Unknowns in COVID-19 Models
Robin

 

[TEG]

You might want to keep your fantasies to yourself. All in favor of good, clean, germ-free fun, though.

Seen in front of a restaurant:

 

[TEG]

Without doing a deep dive I suspect the answer is we don't know. Additionally a defective receptor doesn't totally disable the downstream targets of that receptor of because there's always overlap from other signals with at least some probability of a compensatory upregulation - part of the enormous redundancy and recursion in the system. Unclear what a reduced chemokine signal might mean in covid-19. As I'm sure you already know chemokines help targeting and are part of how the immune process gets to the site of the trouble. What does your doctor say?

Thanks... I haven't discussed this with my doctor (who is overloaded with other concerns right now.)
Also, I am getting conflicting info on my own personal genes now that I run the data through different sites, so I am not even sure (anymore) if I have the mutation(s) or not. ( So more reason not to bother my doctor about it. )

 

[dqd88]

Are you trying to make a point? I didn't say I disagreed with Dr. Ioannidis. He makes very good, valid points in that video and he basically says . . . "we need more and better data to make decisions".

Well my reply to that is . . . "no *sugar* dqd88, that's not earth-shattering news."

Note
~50:03
"Since we do not know the level of infection rates in the population at the moment... we really don't know - what is the proportion of infected people who we are locking in along with their elderly parents and [frail] relatives who suffer from chronic diseases"

 

[bkp_duke]

Note
~50:03
"Since we do not know the level of infection rates in the population at the moment... we really don't know - what is the proportion of infected people who we are locking in along with their elderly parents and [frail] relatives who suffer from chronic diseases"

Yep, and your point?

 

[dqd88]

A COVID Reality Check (by another DOCTOR)

 

[TEG]

Map from Washington Post showing CV concentration.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2020/national/coronavirus-us-cases-deaths/

Wow, southwestern Georgia looks bad...

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

I side with his approach. He's a very objective and data driven thinker.

I think it's reasonable to go with the available known data. He did say it is a very dangerous disease!

What we do know with reasonable certainty (though you have previously stated you disagree, I think that's completely contradicted by all available data) is that hospital systems will collapse if the disease is allowed to spread unchecked. So, we can't allow that (as it will result in young people dying in huge numbers for unrelated reasons), so we must pause. So, during this pause, we should be ramping up testing capacity, antibody testing, and hospital capacity to handle surges, and PPE stocks, and other measures described earlier, so that we are ready for when things are unpaused.

For the most part, that is exactly what we are doing, though there is a fair amount of incompetence and distraction being demonstrated at the highest level of government.

We'll have a much better idea of where we stand in a week or two, and then we'll know whether the hypothesis presented (that's all it was in this video, though clearly he has his own priors, and the Hoover Institute has their own objectives) is correct or not. Prevalence in the population is something everyone wants the answer to, for sure!

So far, the limited available data is suggesting fairly low prevalence in most populations (certain hotspots may have quite high prevalence (10-20%?)). But we need a lot more data.

 

[bkp_duke]

What we do know with reasonable certainty (though you have previously stated you disagree, I think that's completely contradicted by all available data) is that hospital systems will collapse if the disease is allowed to spread unchecked. So, we can't allow that (as it will result in young people dying in huge numbers for unrelated reasons), so we must pause. So, during this pause, we should be ramping up testing capacity, antibody testing, and hospital capacity to handle surges, and PPE stocks, and other measures described earlier, so that we are ready for when things are unpaused.

Correct. That is why we are not seeing Italy-level mortality rates is because we (got lucky) and didn't overwhelm the hospital system.

I have a colleague in NYC at Cornell and he says they got really close to be overwhelmed by critical care patients. Much more and they would not have had the resources to properly care for all of them (PPE, vents, even medical staff).

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

That is why we are not seeing Italy-level mortality rates is because we (got lucky) and didn't overwhelm the hospital system.

In addition, a few thousand intrepid New Yorkers apparently took one for the team and decided to ride this thing out at home (unsuccessfully it appears). Probably helped out. My guess is that it was more like 10k people who rode it out, 7k who managed it successfully, probably by lying very, very still. I'm sure we'll hear the stories later.

Wow, southwestern Georgia looks bad...

Days After a Funeral in a Georgia Town, Coronavirus ‘Hit Like a Bomb’

They had a superspreading event relatively early on. Eventually maybe we'll figure out where it came from, but it doesn't really matter at this point.

 

[bkp_duke]

I'm definitely seeing some overcompensating going on with you. Strong Napoleon complex. Very defensive. You really should see a shrink about this. You remind me of those guys who drive the ultra big pickups with oversized tires, only your "pickup" is your academic merits. But same underlying psychological trigger.

You know the virus, on a molecular level. Congrats. That does not mean you understand this issue fully, as it requires a multi-disciplinary effort. You understand one little piece of the whole puzzle my friend. You're not an epidemiologist. You're not an economist. And yes, the financial and economic side is a very important part of the overall equation.

Na, no Napoleon complex. I just have an incredibly low threshold for BS and stupidity.

I haven't practiced in a few years, I got out after the Obamacare / ACA changes made the level of bureaucracy in medicine go through the roof. I was spending less than 25% of my time actually seeing patients and dealing instead with just crap to get stuff for patients.

I run a business now (infinitely better family life), and while I don't have a degree in economics, I do know first hand how this is impacting people. My business partner and I have taken large pay cuts so that we could keep our business open and not have to fire any employees.

 

[bkp_duke]

In addition, a few thousand intrepid New Yorkers apparently took one for the team and decided to ride this thing out at home (unsuccessfully it appears). Probably helped out. My guess is that it was more like 10k people who rode it out, 7k who managed it successfully, probably by lying very, very still. I'm sure we'll hear the stories later.

Will be interesting to see if when they start checking on people if they find virtually no one at home that died, or a lot of people that died because they didn't want to go to the hospital, avoid costs of care, etc.

 

[Norbert]

Tl;dr: "Nobody knows the numbers."

I'm glad you say that because it spares me from watching the rest of the video.

It's the same pseudo-argument as used by some economists on climate change: We don't know anything therefore we shouldn't do anything about it.

 

[dfwatt]

I'm definitely seeing some overcompensating going on with you. Strong Napoleon complex. Very defensive. You really should see a shrink about this. You remind me of those guys who drive the ultra big pickups with oversized tires, only your "pickup truck" is your academic merits. But same underlying psychological trigger.

You know the virus, on a molecular level. Congrats. That does not mean you understand this issue fully, as it requires a multi-disciplinary effort. You understand one little piece of the whole puzzle my friend. You're not an epidemiologist. You're not an economist. And yes, the financial and economic side is a very important part of the overall equation.

Boy that whole statement looks like one massive projection.