|
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. |
On August 24 2020 10:03 StalkerTL wrote:Show nested quote +On August 24 2020 04:49 cLutZ wrote:On August 23 2020 16:33 StalkerTL wrote: The situation in places like Florida, California, Texas and Arizona aren't examples of good management. They're textbook examples of states making obvious mistakes seen everywhere else in the world months after everyone else had already made these mistakes.
Its trending down but its still a hideous and embarrassing situation.
As for the claim that I had an axe to grind, no shit I do. Would any reasonable American not be pissed at the current situation in the USA and how our leaders and president still try to downplay the situation and attempt to push whatever miracle solution appears on Twitter? What are the obvious mistakes. They had three different policies. How could they all have made obvious mistakes. Your claim (like most people's claims here) of "obvious mistakes" is unsourced. Thus, again I face a selective demand for rigor. Oh well, I will summit that anyways. All states attempted to resume reopening indoor hospitality, ignoring advice of just about everyone even their own health departments who wanted to slow roll reopening. To the surprise of no one following the cries for reopening, businesses in the US not only pushed governors to reopen but had influence on the rules and regulations.The surge in the South (and SoCal) is largely tied to an obsession with reopening the tourism and hospitality industry as soon as possible, if we remember the timeline a lot of states ramped up reopening the minute the curve looked like it was being flattened. Only that we had states become inundated with cases. Same deal with shit like reopening schools. People are using children as cover but I want the same people show the same amount of energy when the government cuts funding to child services that benefit disadvantaged children. Except the same people do not because it was never about the children but reopening the state funded child care centre that are American schools. There’s a clear disregard for human life if it will interfere with the economy. There’s still a general refusal that in this moment of time we cannot have hospitality operate as it current is, things like encouraging tourism in a time like this is obviously pants on head stupid but a couple states and even federal senators have seriously thought about the idea.
The article successfully documents that there was business pressure to reopen, but why wouldn't there be? The economy and Covid control are two competing interests that politicians must try to successfully weigh against each other. The article does have one decent subsource which includes South Carolina health officials recommending the rollout being more phased, but that doesn't include evidence that had those recommendations been followed and dining was delayed an extra week that you wouldn't get the same increase in cases from reopening dining...just starting a week later.
See, that is kinda the key to the point to what I'm asking for, evidence that you have this knowledge on how to reopen responsibly. Your source merely says that reopening will lead to increases in cases, which is a tautology that no one denies. You can even see the Governor of North Dakota expressing my exact sentiment to his public health employees, they gave him a plan, he implemented it, and they totally screwed up the execution, so he demanded an "actual plan". Which is what I have continued to say is what is lacking.
|
Some new disconcerting information about coronavirus, including the fact that children may actually be transmitting coronavirus (even when asymptomatic) more frequently than adults (sick or not), and the fact that back-to-school checks for fevers and symptoms are not particularly accurate.
Asymptomatic Children Carry Higher COVID-19 Viral Load Than Adults In ICUs, Study Finds
A study released Thursday shows that children may play a larger role in community spread of COVID-19 than previously understood.
The research out of Massachusetts General Hospital and MassGeneral Hospital for Children shows that infected children — even those without symptoms — can have higher levels of virus in their airways than adults hospitalized in intensive care units.
More than a quarter of the 192 children enrolled in the study tested positive for COVID-19. Published in the Journal of Pediatrics, the report says educational settings from daycare to high school should take the new information into account when determining how and whether in-person learning should proceed.
Some kids enrolled in the study went to an urgent care clinic for testing, while others were hospitalized with symptoms of COVID-19 or the related inflammatory illness impacting children, says Lael Yonker, lead author of the study and director of the hospital's Cystic Fibrosis Center.
“What surprised us the most was that children carried very high viral loads in their airway secretions,” she says, “loads that were higher than adults who are hospitalized for their severe COVID illness.”
With respiratory viruses, in general, a higher viral load means the virus is more likely to pass from one person to another because it’s transmitted through droplets, she says.
Testing for the study took place at a centralized COVID-19 screening center that encompassed people from a large geographic and socioeconomic range, she says. But it’s hard to apply these findings to the greater population because children often experience mild symptoms or are asymptomatic when they get sick, which makes it more difficult to realize who’s infected.
One of Yonker’s co-authors notes that kids are not immune to getting sick — which puts to rest President Trump’s contention that children are “almost immune.” At least 97,000 kids tested positive for COVID-19 in the U.S. during the last two weeks of July, marking a 40% surge in the country’s cumulative total of child cases.
The study also looked at multi-organ systemic infections that can occur as kids recover from COVID-19. The disease is linked to an inflammatory response that continues well after the infection clears out and damages the body, Yonker says. Kids can develop cardiac issues or end up in the ICU due to this inflammatory response, which the study finds is related to the body’s antibody response.
“The body's actively fighting, building these immune responses,’ she says. “But the body builds these antibodies in an uncontrolled manner and that seems to be harmful to these kids.”
With kids around the country headed back to school, the study finds temperature and symptom checks are unreliable ways to prevent the spread of the virus.
Only about 50% of the kids who tested positive for COVID-19 reported a fever — and 50% of the children who tested negative also reported a fever, Yonker says. The study also found typical symptoms of a cold or allergies were reported equally by kids who did and didn’t have COVID-19.
Parents who identify symptoms should test and monitor the child early on because the study shows kids’ viral loads are highest in the first two days of illness, she says. Exposure to someone with a confirmed case of COVID-19 should also prompt testing because kids can carry high viral loads without developing symptoms.
The study shows that contrary to initial reports and some popular beliefs, COVID-19 does not spare children and kids can play a significant role in spreading the disease, Yonker says.
“The policymakers, the people who were setting up the rules for how schools will safely be started need to take this into consideration,” she says. “And they need to consider enforcing mask-wearing, social distancing, taking advantage of remote learning when possible — pretty simple measures that can be done to make reentry into schools safer.” https://www.wbur.org/hereandnow/2020/08/20/children-covid-19-transmission?utm_campaign=npr&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_medium=social&utm_term=nprnews&fbclid=IwAR2LE0-f3UlIv5RzmxqSZh0w6Z5KlBiYyCyz07tMT_p4jsaPbOCdLgFN2u0&fbclid=IwAR0XPzyj2RKce6YHfafaWxXc22Pmtj5VzHZjdEtPEj60UWu3BM1yZ-iaurQ
|
Zurich15355 Posts
So my new home Zurich just walked back on their open everything strategy and now introduced mask wearing in shops and businesses (after they introduced mask wearing in public transport some time earlier).
After complete lockdown in April Zurich opened up with no restrictions at all in June. Try to find where they opened everything in this chart:
![[image loading]](https://i.imgur.com/Gd6d5uT.png)
The policy is still somewhat schizophrenic because bars, nightlife, clubs are all open unrestricted. Pretty much every local outbreak has been linked to a night club. Yet people using public transport and now local businesses have to bear the restrictions.
The move only came when Zurich was threatened being designated a risk area by other countries, which would then severely hinder travel and impact business.
|
On August 25 2020 15:47 zatic wrote:So my new home Zurich just walked back on their open everything strategy and now introduced mask wearing in shops and businesses (after they introduced mask wearing in public transport some time earlier). After complete lockdown in April Zurich opened up with no restrictions at all in June. Try to find where they opened everything in this chart: ![[image loading]](https://i.imgur.com/Gd6d5uT.png) The policy is still somewhat schizophrenic because bars, nightlife, clubs are all open unrestricted. Pretty much every local outbreak has been linked to a night club. Yet people using public transport and now local businesses have to bear the restrictions. The move only came when Zurich was threatened being designated a risk area by other countries, which would then severely hinder travel and impact business. Given that the average daily deaths from covid in switzerland are of.... 1 person... is it really reasonable to change policy?
Also, I'm wondering whether the new European norm of around 20-30 cases per Million pop. is not mostly false positives. Even if you did indeed have COVID, you might still test positive weeks or months after symptoms have disappeared and you're no longer infectious. Given that the vast majority of cases were not identified in the first wave, we could just be finding old covid cases and/or false positives by testing the crap out of the population.
|
On August 25 2020 15:47 zatic wrote: The policy is still somewhat schizophrenic because bars, nightlife, clubs are all open unrestricted. Pretty much every local outbreak has been linked to a night club. Yet people using public transport and now local businesses have to bear the restrictions.
The move only came when Zurich was threatened being designated a risk area by other countries, which would then severely hinder travel and impact business.
Those bars and clubs need to be given warnings, and then straight-up shut down if those warnings are not followed.
|
Zurich15355 Posts
On August 25 2020 18:52 warding wrote:Show nested quote +On August 25 2020 15:47 zatic wrote:So my new home Zurich just walked back on their open everything strategy and now introduced mask wearing in shops and businesses (after they introduced mask wearing in public transport some time earlier). After complete lockdown in April Zurich opened up with no restrictions at all in June. Try to find where they opened everything in this chart: ![[image loading]](https://i.imgur.com/Gd6d5uT.png) The policy is still somewhat schizophrenic because bars, nightlife, clubs are all open unrestricted. Pretty much every local outbreak has been linked to a night club. Yet people using public transport and now local businesses have to bear the restrictions. The move only came when Zurich was threatened being designated a risk area by other countries, which would then severely hinder travel and impact business. Given that the average daily deaths from covid in switzerland are of.... 1 person... is it really reasonable to change policy? Also, I'm wondering whether the new European norm of around 20-30 cases per Million pop. is not mostly false positives. Even if you did indeed have COVID, you might still test positive weeks or months after symptoms have disappeared and you're no longer infectious. Given that the vast majority of cases were not identified in the first wave, we could just be finding old covid cases and/or false positives by testing the crap out of the population. I gave the reasoning in my post, it's not local deaths from Covid, which for a country like Switzerland have always been extremely low, but fear of the economic impact a designation as a high risk area by other countries would mean. Which especially for a city like Zurich would be substantial.
On August 25 2020 20:02 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On August 25 2020 15:47 zatic wrote: The policy is still somewhat schizophrenic because bars, nightlife, clubs are all open unrestricted. Pretty much every local outbreak has been linked to a night club. Yet people using public transport and now local businesses have to bear the restrictions.
The move only came when Zurich was threatened being designated a risk area by other countries, which would then severely hinder travel and impact business. Those bars and clubs need to be given warnings, and then straight-up shut down if those warnings are not followed. That's what I was trying to say, there are no restrictions for bars, restaurant, and clubs, so they operate legally without restriction. I was calling out that the Zurich authority's Covid policy is somewhat incongruent by restricting shops but not clubs.
|
On August 25 2020 20:02 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On August 25 2020 15:47 zatic wrote: The policy is still somewhat schizophrenic because bars, nightlife, clubs are all open unrestricted. Pretty much every local outbreak has been linked to a night club. Yet people using public transport and now local businesses have to bear the restrictions.
The move only came when Zurich was threatened being designated a risk area by other countries, which would then severely hinder travel and impact business. Those bars and clubs need to be given warnings, and then straight-up shut down if those warnings are not followed.
Bars and clubs shouldn't be open at all.
|
On August 25 2020 22:58 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On August 25 2020 20:02 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On August 25 2020 15:47 zatic wrote: The policy is still somewhat schizophrenic because bars, nightlife, clubs are all open unrestricted. Pretty much every local outbreak has been linked to a night club. Yet people using public transport and now local businesses have to bear the restrictions.
The move only came when Zurich was threatened being designated a risk area by other countries, which would then severely hinder travel and impact business. Those bars and clubs need to be given warnings, and then straight-up shut down if those warnings are not followed. Bars and clubs shouldn't be open at all. For some people they're essential.
|
Northern Ireland26092 Posts
On August 25 2020 23:10 maybenexttime wrote:Show nested quote +On August 25 2020 22:58 Mohdoo wrote:On August 25 2020 20:02 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On August 25 2020 15:47 zatic wrote: The policy is still somewhat schizophrenic because bars, nightlife, clubs are all open unrestricted. Pretty much every local outbreak has been linked to a night club. Yet people using public transport and now local businesses have to bear the restrictions.
The move only came when Zurich was threatened being designated a risk area by other countries, which would then severely hinder travel and impact business. Those bars and clubs need to be given warnings, and then straight-up shut down if those warnings are not followed. Bars and clubs shouldn't be open at all. For some people they're essential.  I have enjoyed having my local pub open, however I haven’t gone further afield. At least this one the distancing and procedures in place are pretty solid.
I don’t see how clubs can possibly operate safely while still fulfilling expectations of what a club does though.
|
|
|
Something like this? 
![[image loading]](https://cdn.mdr.de/sachsen/leipzig/leipzig-leipzig-land/leipstream-108-resimage_v-variantBig16x9_w-1280.jpg?version=40462)
Also I can't find the picture anymore,with people were in front of a big stage on some kind of metal "platforms" ...
|
|
|
On August 26 2020 22:45 JimmiC wrote:Amri Attaran who is a scientist, lawyer, scholar, advocate for public health, human rights and environmental protection. Basically a amazing human . Description on his education in spoiler. + Show Spoiler +Attaran was born in California to immigrants from Iran.[1] He attended public schools in the Sacramento area.
Attaran earned a B.A. in neuroscience from the University of California at Berkeley, after which he worked in the x-ray crystallography laboratory of Professor Robert Stroud at the University of California at San Francisco on a project to determine the 3-D structure of the nicotinic acetylcholine receptor.[2]
Attaran received a predoctoral fellowship[3] from the Howard Hughes Medical Institute for graduate studies in the biomedical sciences, leading to degrees from Caltech (M.S., 1992) and Oxford University (D.Phil., 1996). At Oxford, he matriculated to Wadham College and studied under Professor David Shotton[4] of the Department of Zoology and Professor Alain Townsend[5] of the Weatherall Institute of Molecular Medicine.[6] His doctoral thesis examined how killer T-cells modify themselves structurally in response to viral infections as a precursor to granulocyte- and apoptosis-mediated cytotoxicity, and is entitled "CTL cytotoxicity and the cytoskeleton: a microscopial study".[7]
While at Oxford pursuing his science doctorate, Attaran simultaneously enrolled in law school at the University of British Columbia in Vancouver. He graduated with an LL.B., was called to the bar in 1999, and has been a barrister and solicitor of the Law Society of Upper Canada since 2005.[8]
From 2000 to 2003, Attaran held a junior academic position at Harvard University in the Kennedy School of Government, where his research focus was on public health law and policy. At Harvard he co-directed the WHO Commission on Macroeconomics and Health in the Center for International Development under Jeffrey Sachs,[9] and researched the influence of patent law on the ability of patients to access life-saving medicines and the human right to health at the Carr Center for Human Rights Policy under Michael Ignatieff.[10] From 2003 to 2005, Attaran taught at Yale University in the School of Public Health, and was a fellow at Chatham House (formerly the Royal Institute of International Affairs) in London, where he researched global development, patent law, and access to essential medicines for neglected diseases such as malaria He has written some opinion pieces for Maclean's and where many say we have done a good job he explains why we have not. I really enjoyed the read. https://www.macleans.ca/opinion/canadian-leaders-botched-mandatory-masking-heres-how-to-fix-it/One of the many great quotes. Show nested quote +Masks work because they are barriers, punctured by microscopic pores that let air pass, but not small droplets (which definitely transmit virus) or smaller aerosols (which might). In the operating room, the staff wears masks to block their germs infecting the cut-open patient on the table. In the infectious disease ward, the staff wears masks to block the coughing patient’s germs infecting them. Both directions. Doubting it is comparably silly as wondering whether another infection barrier, condoms, protect sexual partners in one direction but not the other. There are many links to other articles as well.
He oversimplifies the issue. I guess the end justifies the means (at least for him) but as per usual in medicine the above quote depends on many other factors.
As a comparison if you are doing surgery where infection control is critical (such as joint surgery) the team use surgical masks. But if you are taking care of a patient with an infection that spreads through air/droplets (such as corona) that team wants an N95 masks at minimum.
If there was equal protection both ways why not just use the same mask? Obviously that comparison is not correct either but still...
I'm not against masks at all and as the article points out just issuing washable cloth masks to everyone is dirt cheap compared to everything else being done so if it could have ANY effect at all it feels dumb not do it.
However presenting it as the only thing that needs to be done to fix everything seems irresponsible.
|
For anyone else who is either black or hispanic:
Looking at statistics showing POC die from covid more, is anyone else assuming it is just because we tend to be loud, less educated and hang out in large groups? black and hispanic people aren't entirely the same, but in my experience, both groups have qualities that would make covid way, way worse.
to clarify:
loud: everyone is way more infectious because the louder you speak, you shoot wayyyyyy more particles out
less educated: don't understand mask science or infection stuff well enough to buy into it
large groups: higher % chance to get it, and generally also means cramped spaces, which means higher total viral load per person.
|
On August 27 2020 03:20 Mohdoo wrote: For anyone else who is either black or hispanic:
Looking at statistics showing POC die from covid more, is anyone else assuming it is just because we tend to be loud, less educated and hang out in large groups? black and hispanic people aren't entirely the same, but in my experience, both groups have qualities that would make covid way, way worse.
to clarify:
loud: everyone is way more infectious because the louder you speak, you shoot wayyyyyy more particles out
less educated: don't understand mask science or infection stuff well enough to buy into it
large groups: higher % chance to get it, and generally also means cramped spaces, which means higher total viral load per person. With all the current BLM stuff going on, hope this doesn't rub people the wrong way, but I think any of these could be factors, though impossible to know which one contributes most. Also, take into account that quality of life standard is a bit lower on average, more POC will be living in apartments as opposed to detached houses, and will use shared elevators/stairs and front doors (Covid in Singapore pretty much only showed in immigrant worker's housing, for example).
|
Norway28712 Posts
On August 27 2020 03:20 Mohdoo wrote: For anyone else who is either black or hispanic:
Looking at statistics showing POC die from covid more, is anyone else assuming it is just because we tend to be loud, less educated and hang out in large groups? black and hispanic people aren't entirely the same, but in my experience, both groups have qualities that would make covid way, way worse.
to clarify:
loud: everyone is way more infectious because the louder you speak, you shoot wayyyyyy more particles out
less educated: don't understand mask science or infection stuff well enough to buy into it
large groups: higher % chance to get it, and generally also means cramped spaces, which means higher total viral load per person.
I thought the 'to a greater degree have jobs that don't allow WFH and that involve a lot of personal interactions with different people' was a much better explanation than this, tbh.
|
|
|
Northern Ireland26092 Posts
On August 27 2020 03:20 Mohdoo wrote: For anyone else who is either black or hispanic:
Looking at statistics showing POC die from covid more, is anyone else assuming it is just because we tend to be loud, less educated and hang out in large groups? black and hispanic people aren't entirely the same, but in my experience, both groups have qualities that would make covid way, way worse.
to clarify:
loud: everyone is way more infectious because the louder you speak, you shoot wayyyyyy more particles out
less educated: don't understand mask science or infection stuff well enough to buy into it
large groups: higher % chance to get it, and generally also means cramped spaces, which means higher total viral load per person. It could be a factor in the States, albeit considerably smaller than higher proportions of poverty.
This disparity has been replicated elsewhere, including in the UK with our non-white population, including ones (to generalise) that tend to be quite reserved and subdued culturally, at least in certain environments. Indians and Pakistanis for example.
It is certainly an interesting additional variable but damn this is complicated enough already.
Also if this were the case Finland would have literally zero cases :p Not a slight on the Finns, quite the opposite in fact, they are my spirit people precisely because of their approach to social loudness.
|
On August 27 2020 04:48 Liquid`Drone wrote:Show nested quote +On August 27 2020 03:20 Mohdoo wrote: For anyone else who is either black or hispanic:
Looking at statistics showing POC die from covid more, is anyone else assuming it is just because we tend to be loud, less educated and hang out in large groups? black and hispanic people aren't entirely the same, but in my experience, both groups have qualities that would make covid way, way worse.
to clarify:
loud: everyone is way more infectious because the louder you speak, you shoot wayyyyyy more particles out
less educated: don't understand mask science or infection stuff well enough to buy into it
large groups: higher % chance to get it, and generally also means cramped spaces, which means higher total viral load per person. I thought the 'to a greater degree have jobs that don't allow WFH and that involve a lot of personal interactions with different people' was a much better explanation than this, tbh.
Its not. The effect is much greater than SES disparities would predict.
|
On August 27 2020 04:34 aseq wrote:Show nested quote +On August 27 2020 03:20 Mohdoo wrote: For anyone else who is either black or hispanic:
Looking at statistics showing POC die from covid more, is anyone else assuming it is just because we tend to be loud, less educated and hang out in large groups? black and hispanic people aren't entirely the same, but in my experience, both groups have qualities that would make covid way, way worse.
to clarify:
loud: everyone is way more infectious because the louder you speak, you shoot wayyyyyy more particles out
less educated: don't understand mask science or infection stuff well enough to buy into it
large groups: higher % chance to get it, and generally also means cramped spaces, which means higher total viral load per person. With all the current BLM stuff going on, hope this doesn't rub people the wrong way, but I think any of these could be factors, though impossible to know which one contributes most. Also, take into account that quality of life standard is a bit lower on average, more POC will be living in apartments as opposed to detached houses, and will use shared elevators/stairs and front doors (Covid in Singapore pretty much only showed in immigrant worker's housing, for example).
I think just directly being poor contributes, but black and hispanic culture is also just totally different when it comes to socializing. POC families and events are just a lot more boisterous. And I wouldn't say that is a bad thing, just different. Well, it definitely is a bad thing for covid, but not otherwise.
TBH I think it is also a reason Italy and Spain went so crazy. But Spain and Italy as countries in general have less education and and less money. And so I am saying when you take the cultural component of American POC, then add the fact that they will also suffer due to education and money making those problems worse, it is easy to see this as a matter of behavior rather than genetics. Some diseases harm certain races more than others, but what I am saying is that I think this all comes down to behavior, where it is understood that both culture and economic/education status impact behavior.
|
|
|
|
|
|