There's already a bunch of other COVID-19 threads. The Divide&Conquer/Matthew principle means that they don't get as much attention as the main (this) one, so perhaps whatever you're looking for already exists. I'd personally prefer it if they were all combined, but feel free to start another one. Any such attempts suffer from the "librarian problem" in that whatever division seems like a good idea now will be outdated a couple of months from now.
Getting rid of the moralizing/opinionating would require fixing humanity. I don't think that can be done. All I aim to do is to keep the tone civil and steering the conversation towards primarily using adult--adult ego-states.
COVID-19
Re: COVID-19
My hair salon sent me an email they are reopening June 1st. Like normal business, but with precautions.
Meanwhile Wuhan is planning on testing 11 million people to root this out.
The contrast is hurting my brain. I cannot see going out myself until there is that sort of testing here (another year the way it is going??)
Meanwhile Wuhan is planning on testing 11 million people to root this out.
The contrast is hurting my brain. I cannot see going out myself until there is that sort of testing here (another year the way it is going??)
-
Mister Imperceptible
- Posts: 1669
- Joined: Fri Nov 10, 2017 4:18 pm
Re: COVID-19
Gail Tverberg
https://ourfiniteworld.com/2020/05/13/u ... edicament/
“World governments cannot print resources. What they can print is debt. Debt can be viewed a promise of future goods and services, whether or not it is reasonable to believe that these future goods and services will actually materialize, given resource constraints.
We are finding that using shutdowns to solve COVID-19 problems causes a huge amount of economic damage. The cost of mitigating this damage seems to be unreasonably high. For example, in the United States, antibody studies suggest that roughly 5% of the population has been infected with COVID-19. The total number of deaths associated with this 5% infection level is perhaps 100,000, assuming that reported deaths to date (about 80,000) need to be increased somewhat, to match the approximately 5% of the population that has, knowingly or unknowingly, already experienced the infection.
If we estimate that the mean number of years of life lost is 13 years per person, then the total years of life lost would be about 1,300,000. If we estimate that the US treasury needed to borrow $3 trillion dollars to mitigate this damage, the cost per year of life lost is $3 trillion divided by 1.3 million, or $2.3 million dollars per year of life lost. This amount is utterly absurd.”
https://ourfiniteworld.com/2020/05/13/u ... edicament/
“World governments cannot print resources. What they can print is debt. Debt can be viewed a promise of future goods and services, whether or not it is reasonable to believe that these future goods and services will actually materialize, given resource constraints.
We are finding that using shutdowns to solve COVID-19 problems causes a huge amount of economic damage. The cost of mitigating this damage seems to be unreasonably high. For example, in the United States, antibody studies suggest that roughly 5% of the population has been infected with COVID-19. The total number of deaths associated with this 5% infection level is perhaps 100,000, assuming that reported deaths to date (about 80,000) need to be increased somewhat, to match the approximately 5% of the population that has, knowingly or unknowingly, already experienced the infection.
If we estimate that the mean number of years of life lost is 13 years per person, then the total years of life lost would be about 1,300,000. If we estimate that the US treasury needed to borrow $3 trillion dollars to mitigate this damage, the cost per year of life lost is $3 trillion divided by 1.3 million, or $2.3 million dollars per year of life lost. This amount is utterly absurd.”
Re: COVID-19
@MI:
In “The 5 Stages of Collapse@, Dmitri Orlov suggests that the order would be:
1)Financial
2)Commercial
3)Political
4)Social
5) Cultural
So, suddenly deciding that it is culturally okay to fill refrigerator trucks with old people, as long as the markets are still functional is getting it backwards. It’s not the value of those years of life that need to be accounted for, it’s the value of the culture that underlies, acts as foundation for, the Social, Political, Commercial, and Financial system that needs to be considered. IOW, you can’t maintain trust/contract between distant strangers if you can’t maintain essential cultural trust.
In “The 5 Stages of Collapse@, Dmitri Orlov suggests that the order would be:
1)Financial
2)Commercial
3)Political
4)Social
5) Cultural
So, suddenly deciding that it is culturally okay to fill refrigerator trucks with old people, as long as the markets are still functional is getting it backwards. It’s not the value of those years of life that need to be accounted for, it’s the value of the culture that underlies, acts as foundation for, the Social, Political, Commercial, and Financial system that needs to be considered. IOW, you can’t maintain trust/contract between distant strangers if you can’t maintain essential cultural trust.
-
Mister Imperceptible
- Posts: 1669
- Joined: Fri Nov 10, 2017 4:18 pm
Re: COVID-19
My guess is the US is about 60-75 years removed from Peak Trust.
Re: COVID-19
@MI:
I don’t disagree. However, I think a lot of that has to do with the commodification of essential cultural and social services, so a wee bit of downsizing of the ready measurable GDP due to old-fashioned return to home production might go some way towards reestablishment.
I might also suggest that some of those most eager to return to the highly commodified status quo are those who are least comfortable with not being able to buy their way out of providing services for their own families. As in buying a house in a good school district is one thing but actually having to help your kid with his schoolwork is another.
I don’t disagree. However, I think a lot of that has to do with the commodification of essential cultural and social services, so a wee bit of downsizing of the ready measurable GDP due to old-fashioned return to home production might go some way towards reestablishment.
I might also suggest that some of those most eager to return to the highly commodified status quo are those who are least comfortable with not being able to buy their way out of providing services for their own families. As in buying a house in a good school district is one thing but actually having to help your kid with his schoolwork is another.
-
ZAFCorrection
- Posts: 357
- Joined: Mon Aug 14, 2017 3:49 pm
Re: COVID-19
I believe it was the NYT who recently estimated that about a third of coronavirus deaths have come from nursing homes, and the hardest-hit areas have often had the bright idea to send coronavirus patients there to take the strain off hospitals. So I think the refrigerator trucks have already been getting filled despite protestations to the contrary.
-
classical_Liberal
- Posts: 2283
- Joined: Sun Mar 20, 2016 6:05 am
Re: COVID-19
On a separate note, now you can pay for your own antibody tests through reputable labs. Cost is around $130. Or you can get your provider to order it and your health insurance (if you've got it) will cover it.
Edit: for content
Edit: for content
Last edited by classical_Liberal on Fri May 15, 2020 1:07 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Re: COVID-19
@classical_liberal
I considered it, but most of them are too inaccurate to be worth it IMO. The new Roche one is more accurate, and I'm definitely interested in getting once it's available
NYC update:
So a nice summary of all of the IFR estimates is here:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/ ... c/htmlview
As of today, NYC has 20,306 confirmed + probable deaths. Which at the median IFR of 0.36 means that 5,640,555 residents have been infected. Out of 8,398,748 total people in NYC, that means 67% have been infected.
Two ways we'll be able to confirm:
1.) If the Roche serology test is accurate and scalable, AND someone uses it for a statical sample of NYC residents
2.) If NYC opens up and has no second wave (assuming herd immunity occurs around two-thirds)
Not sure which one will happen first.
I considered it, but most of them are too inaccurate to be worth it IMO. The new Roche one is more accurate, and I'm definitely interested in getting once it's available
NYC update:
So a nice summary of all of the IFR estimates is here:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/ ... c/htmlview
As of today, NYC has 20,306 confirmed + probable deaths. Which at the median IFR of 0.36 means that 5,640,555 residents have been infected. Out of 8,398,748 total people in NYC, that means 67% have been infected.
Two ways we'll be able to confirm:
1.) If the Roche serology test is accurate and scalable, AND someone uses it for a statical sample of NYC residents
2.) If NYC opens up and has no second wave (assuming herd immunity occurs around two-thirds)
Not sure which one will happen first.
Re: COVID-19
@c_L:
My doctor told me they are only ordering antibody tests for those who previously tested positive. I might be willing to throw down $130 myself.
Anyways, I agree that almost everybody is getting serious ant in the pants at this juncture. Even me, lying here, weak as a fetal chicken, in recovery from feverish dysentery and/or Covid Toe and Butt disease, would like to go outside and do stuff ( in theory.)
However, I will let you know that I saw real fear/ serious concern in the eyes of your fellow nurses who are staffing the Covid-suspect area of the emergency room in my realm where the death rate is already over .1% of general population. One nurse stood way over in the corner of the room while the doctor examined me. Another kind of yelled when I auto-pilot almost took my mask off so I could swallow the pills she handed me before she left the room.
OTOH, if I did somehow manage to be exposed to this virus given my level of seclusion, then I think it will be almost impossible for anybody to avoid exposure. So...?
My doctor told me they are only ordering antibody tests for those who previously tested positive. I might be willing to throw down $130 myself.
Anyways, I agree that almost everybody is getting serious ant in the pants at this juncture. Even me, lying here, weak as a fetal chicken, in recovery from feverish dysentery and/or Covid Toe and Butt disease, would like to go outside and do stuff ( in theory.)
However, I will let you know that I saw real fear/ serious concern in the eyes of your fellow nurses who are staffing the Covid-suspect area of the emergency room in my realm where the death rate is already over .1% of general population. One nurse stood way over in the corner of the room while the doctor examined me. Another kind of yelled when I auto-pilot almost took my mask off so I could swallow the pills she handed me before she left the room.
OTOH, if I did somehow manage to be exposed to this virus given my level of seclusion, then I think it will be almost impossible for anybody to avoid exposure. So...?
-
classical_Liberal
- Posts: 2283
- Joined: Sun Mar 20, 2016 6:05 am
Re: COVID-19
@JL13
I have a healthshare, so I pay for my own health maintenance labs. The company I use states their COVID test has 99% specificity. That's pretty good IMO, and I have no reason to disbelieve them as they have a large established business and not a "fly by night" COVID profiteer. I'n not sure where their test source is though.
I just dont know if it's worth it because it probably wouldn't change my behavior at this point. Now that we have some better data wrt mortality/hospitalization rates, I'm not too scared for myself. Rather I just don't wanna be a douchebag who infects others if I'm shedding virus and don't realize it. So I've basically turned real life into the hospital setting now, being very careful to wear a mask when needed, wash hands, and distance. I'm still much more scared of infecting others than getting infected, even though my nursing contract is done and I have much less contact with at risk people. I think this will be a new normal.
If/when we determine folks with antibodies can't get reinfected to the point of being contagious again(or it's a very low probability), then I see the benefit because it'll change my behavior. The whole idea of an immunity passport type thing is a bit scary, but I'd get it to remain free in an unfree world.
@7WB5
The hospital setting is where it's spreading the most. I was a rule stickler while working as well. I know many coworkers/friends who have tested positive. People are scared everywhere, so that doesn't surprise me. Even living in the heart of Midwest reopen territory, there is some very strong tendency towards self isolation. While it means no V-shaped economic recovery, it's probably a good thing to keep the caseload more steady.
I agree though, if someone like you, somehow ends up infected, I'm not even sure if home isolation policies are worth while at all. In fact, at this point, given the rate of infections, I think this will mostly sweep through before any vaccine in 12-18 months. I think the key to success is to take extreme precautions with people we know, for sure, are at high risk of poor outcomes. If we are going to spend energy and resources, this is where it will be most effectively spent, vs less intense policies protecting everyone equally. Mass antibody screening would give us better data though, so I hope it gets underway.
I have a healthshare, so I pay for my own health maintenance labs. The company I use states their COVID test has 99% specificity. That's pretty good IMO, and I have no reason to disbelieve them as they have a large established business and not a "fly by night" COVID profiteer. I'n not sure where their test source is though.
I just dont know if it's worth it because it probably wouldn't change my behavior at this point. Now that we have some better data wrt mortality/hospitalization rates, I'm not too scared for myself. Rather I just don't wanna be a douchebag who infects others if I'm shedding virus and don't realize it. So I've basically turned real life into the hospital setting now, being very careful to wear a mask when needed, wash hands, and distance. I'm still much more scared of infecting others than getting infected, even though my nursing contract is done and I have much less contact with at risk people. I think this will be a new normal.
If/when we determine folks with antibodies can't get reinfected to the point of being contagious again(or it's a very low probability), then I see the benefit because it'll change my behavior. The whole idea of an immunity passport type thing is a bit scary, but I'd get it to remain free in an unfree world.
@7WB5
The hospital setting is where it's spreading the most. I was a rule stickler while working as well. I know many coworkers/friends who have tested positive. People are scared everywhere, so that doesn't surprise me. Even living in the heart of Midwest reopen territory, there is some very strong tendency towards self isolation. While it means no V-shaped economic recovery, it's probably a good thing to keep the caseload more steady.
I agree though, if someone like you, somehow ends up infected, I'm not even sure if home isolation policies are worth while at all. In fact, at this point, given the rate of infections, I think this will mostly sweep through before any vaccine in 12-18 months. I think the key to success is to take extreme precautions with people we know, for sure, are at high risk of poor outcomes. If we are going to spend energy and resources, this is where it will be most effectively spent, vs less intense policies protecting everyone equally. Mass antibody screening would give us better data though, so I hope it gets underway.
Re: COVID-19
@C_L
Don't forget to ask about sensitivity too.
https://www.evaluate.com/vantage/articl ... ic-problem
Don't forget to ask about sensitivity too.
https://www.evaluate.com/vantage/articl ... ic-problem
-
jennypenny
- Posts: 6858
- Joined: Sun Jul 03, 2011 2:20 pm
Re: COVID-19
The WHO confirmed today that the early research shows that the MMR vaccine, specifically the double dose version, offers protection from COVID (mentioned upthread).
In the US, the double dose didn't start until the late 70s, explaining the upturn in complications @age 50. Other examples they gave ... Belgium (with a high complication/death rate) didn't implement the double dose MMR until 1995, and Madagascar (no deaths reported) immunized everyone with an MMR booster last year.
They confirmed it's the rubella component that confers protection. They said it might also explain the emerging Kawasaki disease cases since people who are genetically predisposed to Kawasaki also tend to have a diminished immune response to the MMR vaccine.
So ... check on what kind of MMR vaccine you received and check any genetic testing you've had done to see if Kawasaki was mentioned.
In the US, the double dose didn't start until the late 70s, explaining the upturn in complications @age 50. Other examples they gave ... Belgium (with a high complication/death rate) didn't implement the double dose MMR until 1995, and Madagascar (no deaths reported) immunized everyone with an MMR booster last year.
They confirmed it's the rubella component that confers protection. They said it might also explain the emerging Kawasaki disease cases since people who are genetically predisposed to Kawasaki also tend to have a diminished immune response to the MMR vaccine.
So ... check on what kind of MMR vaccine you received and check any genetic testing you've had done to see if Kawasaki was mentioned.
-
jacob
- Site Admin
- Posts: 16002
- Joined: Fri Jun 28, 2013 8:38 pm
- Location: USA, Zone 5b, Koppen Dfa, Elev. 620ft, Walkscore 77
- Contact:
Re: COVID-19
@jp - Any WHO mention of any difference between the vaccine and having had the actual diseases? (Perhaps the positive side-effects of the MMR vaccine were unrelated to having had the actual diseases, that is, a latent factor in the vaccination.) My [Danish] cohort (1975) was too old to to get more than the second half of the double-dose vaccine, but almost everybody had already had the actual diseases, mumps, rubella, and measles before that happened. The second dose was just administrated as a blanket recommendation (couldn't hurt).
Re: COVID-19
@jp
Thanks for posting that. My doctor, btw, was pretty dang snippy in her response back to me weeks ago when I mentioned this. I'm wondering if I should send her the information just as an FYI. I'm more concerned about getting my parents boosters at this point, than risking a visit for a titer myself.
Also, that doctor should thank me. Grr.
@jacob
I grabbed the information when I saw JP's post and found a few articles. None mentioned prior disease that I saw, but I'm also sleep-deprived atm and pretty much skimmed.
Edit: I just realized the announcement links to the paper itself. I'll leave it to someone else to analyze right now.
Here are the links I found:
Announcement:
https://www.globenewswire.com/news-rele ... ation.html
Paper:
https://www.researchgate.net/publicatio ... opulations
Thanks for posting that. My doctor, btw, was pretty dang snippy in her response back to me weeks ago when I mentioned this. I'm wondering if I should send her the information just as an FYI. I'm more concerned about getting my parents boosters at this point, than risking a visit for a titer myself.
Also, that doctor should thank me. Grr.
@jacob
I grabbed the information when I saw JP's post and found a few articles. None mentioned prior disease that I saw, but I'm also sleep-deprived atm and pretty much skimmed.
Edit: I just realized the announcement links to the paper itself. I'll leave it to someone else to analyze right now.
Here are the links I found:
Announcement:
https://www.globenewswire.com/news-rele ... ation.html
Paper:
https://www.researchgate.net/publicatio ... opulations
Re: COVID-19
@Augustus:
Remember I did test negative. Also I live in a very large apartment complex in a zip code that has probably reached 10% saturation quite quickly. So, more possible to contract it through surface or other less likely means of contact. So, keeping the active case saturation level low might still be worthwhile or even key to avoiding casual contraction.
Remember I did test negative. Also I live in a very large apartment complex in a zip code that has probably reached 10% saturation quite quickly. So, more possible to contract it through surface or other less likely means of contact. So, keeping the active case saturation level low might still be worthwhile or even key to avoiding casual contraction.
Re: COVID-19
@Augustus:
I know. I am really going to be slammed if I catch It in my current condition. The real mystery is how I contracted anything with my recent isolation/ sanitation routine.
I know. I am really going to be slammed if I catch It in my current condition. The real mystery is how I contracted anything with my recent isolation/ sanitation routine.
Re: COVID-19
Interesting if true on the MMR effect. I had the vaccine as a child and then again at 17 (1990) before I enrolled at college because my parents couldn't find a record of my original vaccination, and the college I went to required proof of vaccination to enroll.
Re: COVID-19
Thanks for sharing that, JP. Fascinating. I've been wondering how the virus could so selectively affect older people, and this would go a long way towards explaining it. I imagine it could also have a huge effect on the herd immunity calculations.