EPThttps://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/may/21/hydroxychloroquine-nhs-staff-take-drug-part-global-trial-coronavirus
Coronavirus and You - Page 168
| Forum Index > General Forum |
Any and all updates regarding the COVID-19 will need a source provided. Please do your part in helping us to keep this thread maintainable and under control. It is YOUR responsibility to fully read through the sources that you link, and you MUST provide a brief summary explaining what the source is about. Do not expect other people to do the work for you. Conspiracy theories and fear mongering will absolutely not be tolerated in this thread. Expect harsh mod actions if you try to incite fear needlessly. This is not a politics thread! You are allowed to post information regarding politics if it's related to the coronavirus, but do NOT discuss politics in here. Added a disclaimer on page 662. Many need to post better. | ||
|
iPlaY.NettleS
Australia4356 Posts
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/may/21/hydroxychloroquine-nhs-staff-take-drug-part-global-trial-coronavirus | ||
|
ChristianS
United States3249 Posts
On May 21 2020 22:42 iPlaY.NettleS wrote: NHS staff are now taking part in a hydroxychloroquine trial to see if it can prevent the virus. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/may/21/hydroxychloroquine-nhs-staff-take-drug-part-global-trial-coronavirus As I understand it, there’s been efforts to do something similar here, but NIH never greenlighted it. | ||
|
CuddlyCuteKitten
Sweden2649 Posts
And the results are not exactly great because as we might have suspected by now it's not actually that contagious even outside a lock-down. That is partially good news (even with what little herd immunity has been achieved in Stockholm R is now below 1 and have been like that for a while) but mostly bad news (most of the country haven't actually had it at all and unless the old peoples homes really pull their shit together it would be horrible if they did get it). It could have worked out OK if not because of the complete failure to keep old people safe with care needs safe (~70 % of all deaths) but it didn't. Economically there was some improvement over no lock-down but not that much and the hospital system was never close to be overwhelmed. The above is hard to see as anything but a failure (that should have political consequences) but given the lack of knowledge it is what it is. What is not OK right now is (in my opinion) the choice to make this into a political thing. All I see right now is politicians trying to slowly backpedal on a number of different issues to not lose face while saying that everything is great all around in order to try to not lose the next election. What they should be doing is to switch strategy in the parts of Sweden that right now have almost no infection (most of the country actually). I can understand leaving Stockholm as it is right now showing acceptable numbers. But many regions have excellent numbers for infection and basically no heard immunity at all and it seems completely insane to just leave them as is without disease tracing and testing people with mild symptoms. Just nip it in the bud "just to be safe" instead of doing another gamble on it disappearing on it's own. I mean fool me once the first time it got into the country but now you basically have a second chance in many places and a far better understanding on how it works. My prediction is that Sweden will have a low grade lingering infection months after most countries in Europe have completely dealt with it and have it contained and that the general public (who's lives haven't actually changed yet) will go completely mental when they are not allowed out of Sweden for their annual winter vacation. | ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15723 Posts
On May 21 2020 19:09 iPlaY.NettleS wrote: It's no different than a hundred people being in a supermarket, handling stuff then putting it back on the shelves, waiting in line etc. Here, they cut the number of trains running so people still using them had to cram in more.The same happened in NYC yes? There is no social distancing when they've cut public transport services 85% but social distancing will be adhered to in McDonald's, closing every second table etc. No, it isn't the same at all, because grocery stores don't have drive through. All businesses should be adopting "lowest exposure possible" rather than what they can get away with. That's how you properly deal with a virus. Make all concessions that are possible, whenever possible. Mcdonalds does not need the dining area. | ||
|
warding
Portugal2394 Posts
On May 21 2020 23:22 CuddlyCuteKitten wrote: A couple of weeks ago I took a "wait and see" stance on if Sweden's way of handling the initial lock-down would be a good idea or not. The first goalpost is using antibody tests to check disease progression and compare them to other countries (Spain in this case). And the results are not exactly great because as we might have suspected by now it's not actually that contagious even outside a lock-down. That is partially good news (even with what little herd immunity has been achieved in Stockholm R is now below 1 and have been like that for a while) but mostly bad news (most of the country haven't actually had it at all and unless the old peoples homes really pull their shit together it would be horrible if they did get it). It could have worked out OK if not because of the complete failure to keep old people safe with care needs safe (~70 % of all deaths) but it didn't. Economically there was some improvement over no lock-down but not that much and the hospital system was never close to be overwhelmed. The above is hard to see as anything but a failure (that should have political consequences) but given the lack of knowledge it is what it is. What is not OK right now is (in my opinion) the choice to make this into a political thing. All I see right now is politicians trying to slowly backpedal on a number of different issues to not lose face while saying that everything is great all around in order to try to not lose the next election. What they should be doing is to switch strategy in the parts of Sweden that right now have almost no infection (most of the country actually). I can understand leaving Stockholm as it is right now showing acceptable numbers. But many regions have excellent numbers for infection and basically no heard immunity at all and it seems completely insane to just leave them as is without disease tracing and testing people with mild symptoms. Just nip it in the bud "just to be safe" instead of doing another gamble on it disappearing on it's own. I mean fool me once the first time it got into the country but now you basically have a second chance in many places and a far better understanding on how it works. My prediction is that Sweden will have a low grade lingering infection months after most countries in Europe have completely dealt with it and have it contained and that the general public (who's lives haven't actually changed yet) will go completely mental when they are not allowed out of Sweden for their annual winter vacation. Isn't the reason that other regions of Sweden were spared due to the heterogenous way the virus spreads - simply put, some regions are just way more prone to having a lot more infections than others due to their population density, public transport systems, varying personal contact networks, bigger/smaller houses. It might be that R is simply naturally lower in southern Sweden whereas Stockholm is the most vulnerable. This seems to be true of Portugal, there were basically three centers of infection - greater lisbon, greater porto (and Braga) and the industrial area around Aveiro. 90% of counties have negligible infection rates and have it pretty much under control because they're just way less urbanized. Over here it's now 18 days past the first step towards going back to normal and the infections are pretty much under control. We're stable at 200 new infections per day and 15 deaths, with the numbers being greatly influenced by very localized outbreaks in industrial settings and hostels holding immigrants. | ||
|
SC-Shield
Bulgaria832 Posts
| ||
|
CuddlyCuteKitten
Sweden2649 Posts
On May 22 2020 00:36 warding wrote: Isn't the reason that other regions of Sweden were spared due to the heterogenous way the virus spreads - simply put, some regions are just way more prone to having a lot more infections than others due to their population density, public transport systems, varying personal contact networks, bigger/smaller houses. It might be that R is simply naturally lower in southern Sweden whereas Stockholm is the most vulnerable. This seems to be true of Portugal, there were basically three centers of infection - greater lisbon, greater porto (and Braga) and the industrial area around Aveiro. 90% of counties have negligible infection rates and have it pretty much under control because they're just way less urbanized. Over here it's now 18 days past the first step towards going back to normal and the infections are pretty much under control. We're stable at 200 new infections per day and 15 deaths, with the numbers being greatly influenced by very localized outbreaks in industrial settings and hostels holding immigrants. Southern Sweden is also very densely populated (1,2mn people, fairly small region with the majority of the population on the west coast, 3rd largest city etc). It might be true for other parts of the country which are very sparsely populated but not for Skåne. I think it can also be that after the initial spread measures were taken (either by the government or by people just being cautious) and social distancing alone seem to be able to bring R down towards 1 or even below. And that could be disastrous if people start to relax again and there is no herd immunity or other programs in place. | ||
|
Slydie
1927 Posts
On May 22 2020 00:53 SC-Shield wrote: On Sweden's topic, I don't think they've achieved anything close to herd immunity. They just have 7.3% immunity. It's still surprising why things weren't worse there, but also the herd immunity strategy didn't exactly work. It is a bit curious how Spain has about ~5% across the country, but some regions are close to 15%. Don't forget that Sweden got other advantages of their approach, like the population not going mental because of the lockdown and kids going to school. | ||
|
Doodsmack
United States7224 Posts
On April 24 2020 03:04 LegalLord wrote: Probably mass bankruptcy, along with some increased remote infrastructure for a lot of engineering / professional services. The vast majority of business travel, for example, is quite unnecessary (a teleconference would suffice) and the instinctive fear of respiratory infection will prevent people from doing it needlessly. Maybe remote work, maybe phone calls in place of in-person meetings where the latter isn't necessary. The few restaurants left that haven't gotten on the "to-go orders" train will probably develop that offering. One thing I expect not to catch on, despite seeming like an obvious path forward: telemedicine. My experience is that if you can't talk to a doctor directly in person, whatever medical "advice" they might be able to give is limited in usefulness to just empty talk and prescription refills. Good call. Facebook has now also joined this trend: | ||
|
Simberto
Germany11626 Posts
https://covid19info.live/ Why are the death rates in the UK that high? Especially considering that they are still in the phase of the infection where most of the cases are still active. As we have seen in other countries, the death rate will increase significantly once new infections get under control (because there is no longer a large pool of new infections to dilute the deaths from the older infections at that point) The US is still looking really bad, and Brazil is also not looking good. Pretty much the only country i can see which still looks to be completely exponential Russia is clearly lying about their deaths (1% CFR is completely out of what compared to any other countries stats), so i don't trust any of their stats. Doesn't look good either, though. Most of the EU seems to be getting stuff under control (active cases dropping for a while now), but i am a bit scared that we opened up a bit too early, and will see another rise again. Most people still keep a lot of social distance, so it might not be that bad, though. I am kind of happy about how Germany looks. We seem to be doing something right. | ||
|
LegalLord
United States13779 Posts
Apparently excess death statistics suggest there could be around 70% more dead in Russia than reported: Please use the sharing tools found via the share button at the top or side of articles. Copying articles to share with others is a breach of FT.com T&Cs and Copyright Policy. Email licensing@ft.com to buy additional rights. Subscribers may share up to 10 or 20 articles per month using the gift article service. More information can be found at https://www.ft.com/tour. https://www.ft.com/content/77cd2cba-b0e2-4022-a265-e0a9a7930bda Russia’s national death toll from coronavirus could be 70 per cent higher than the government’s official data show, as the Kremlin struggles to curb the spread of Covid-19 despite a seven-week long lockdown. The Financial Times’ analysis of all-cause mortality data in Moscow, the capital, and St Petersburg, Russia’s second-largest city, found 2,073 more deaths in April relative to the historical average of the previous five years. Official Covid deaths in the two cities came to just 629 for the same period, leaving 1,444 deaths in excess of normal mortality levels unaccounted for. If added to the reported national figure of 2,009 Covid deaths as of Monday morning, this would mean a 72 per cent increase in Russia’s national death toll. That'd bring the actual death toll to a number that folks might find a little more feasible, though it still looks pretty good as a basis of comparison given that excess death is pretty close to an upper bound estimate of death (whereas "official" is closer to the lower bound). A lower death count than nations with a pretty middling performance like Canada, let alone a pretty awful one like the US or the cluster of European poor performers. | ||
|
Lmui
Canada6215 Posts
I lost some brain cells watching trump talk about his test results, so I think others should join me. User was warned for this post | ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15723 Posts
On May 22 2020 10:25 Lmui wrote: https://twitter.com/kylegriffin1/status/1263518696309313537?s=21 I lost some brain cells watching trump talk about his test results, so I think others should join me. Wow. This is definitely above average garbage for him. | ||
|
IgnE
United States7681 Posts
On May 22 2020 12:54 Mohdoo wrote: Wow. This is definitely above average garbage for him. "above average garbage" sounds quite positive. by that i mean negative. positively negative. | ||
|
Slydie
1927 Posts
On May 22 2020 09:01 Doodsmack wrote: Good call. Facebook has now also joined this trend: https://twitter.com/levie/status/1263493428316262401 As long as schools and other institutions are open, working from home is a very good solution for many. One of my neighbors is living alone and works for a major enterprise. He was miserable when he had to return to work. The safety measures around lunch breaks, wearing masks all day etc. destroyed what could have been a nice break from being inside all the time, and he even felt he got more done from home, working with social media marketing. | ||
|
Jockmcplop
United Kingdom9716 Posts
On May 22 2020 09:34 Simberto wrote: Why are the death rates in the UK that high? Especially considering that they are still in the phase of the infection where most of the cases are still active. As we have seen in other countries, the death rate will increase significantly once new infections get under control (because there is no longer a large pool of new infections to dilute the deaths from the older infections at that point) This study has a model which explains the UK death rate. We entered lockdown too late. https://bskiesresearch.wordpress.com/2020/05/12/the-human-cost-of-delaying-lockdown/ | ||
|
farvacola
United States18838 Posts
| ||
|
warding
Portugal2394 Posts
On May 22 2020 09:34 Simberto wrote: So, i just took a loot at the statistics here: https://covid19info.live/ Why are the death rates in the UK that high? Especially considering that they are still in the phase of the infection where most of the cases are still active. As we have seen in other countries, the death rate will increase significantly once new infections get under control (because there is no longer a large pool of new infections to dilute the deaths from the older infections at that point). Beyond testing (more testing -> lower CFR, less testing -> more CFR), one of the big factors is how effectively the authorities are able to protect the vulnerable populations. That requires a healthy and effective articulation between different public and semi-private and private entities. One of the discussions in the UK was that some entities managing care homes were accusing the NHS of discharging infected patients and sending them back to care homes who were not getting adequate support from the government. Since it seems that around 50% of deaths seem to come from care homes, that might be a big element. I've read somewhere that countries that have traditionally mixed healthcare systems were able to ramp up testing and articulate between the national health service and all other private entities in care homes. That was certainly the case in Portugal where I believe half of the testing capacity comes from the private sector. Another might be exposure to pollution. I am kind of happy about how Germany looks. We seem to be doing something right. It seems that all european countries that are opening up are managing to keep infections low. Is it a summer effect, are we just more careful and testing+tracing is keeping things at bay, or what's happening? | ||
|
LegalLord
United States13779 Posts
| ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15723 Posts
Dudes, you can buzz it. Don't be insecure. Your appearance does not mean to other people what you think it does. | ||
| ||
