My Work in COVID-19
Without getting into the details...my work has thrust me into the middle of this current pandemic. As some might know, I'm an engineer working in the medical industry. Much of my work has focused on epidemiology. I know there's a lot of confusing/conflicting info (or hype) out there on this illness. Just want to share that the thing about this that I find most troubling is how contagious this is. We haven't seen anything like it in our hemisphere in my lifetime. I've pressed on some at the CDC on what I have seen as conflicts in the official narrative. Early on I said I thought this was airborne. I'd, more specifically, now say it's the more airborne flu-like illness I've ever heard of. This makes it very dangerous. I have started to reduce my time in/near crowded areas because of this. Will share some info if I can if anybody has questions. I think my kids were already exposed but didn't get this bug about a month ago. Already gone half-Galt I'm keeping a low profile. But, some of my work may be in the news soon. I'd rather this thing just die off before that, though...
It may help to do your research on the subject.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphi...
The current kits seem to be very specific for SARS-CoV-2 virus, but they may not be as sensitive as we could hope for. Additionally, many viral diseases take a while to output the viral elements into the blood (they are present in the cells, but not in high numbers in the blood yet). It has turned out that if someone is negative 'now' and you test them again in a few days, they may be positive 'then'.
Jan
Did that study with the 3 hour result add anything new to what was already known?
I do think that keeping ones immunity up is the best defense against this virus. Rest, and common sense based staying away from sick people and reducing unnecessary contact with other humans will go a long way to staying alive.
"Coronavirus is airborne: it can survive up to three hours in the environment."
How along a virus can live outside of a host isn't the qualification for an airborne virus vector. It is based on physical properties. Properties that have not been found in any studies. To date, precisely zero SARS-CoV-2 infectious virus has been found aerosolized. Zero. The critical distinction is that for it to be considered airborne the virus has to remain infections after it has become a dried husk - not while it still has moisture.
"That is why masks don't protect against COVID-19."
No, masks don't work because masks don't protect you from catching an airborne droplet virus. They do not protect the eyes, for example, and they are not a sealed device. The latter means that there is still leakage around the sides. Indeed, masks are advised against unless you are sick because the constant fiddling with their positioning causes you to tough your face - especially around nose and mouth - frequently thus increasing the risk of transferral from hands to the parts that matter.
Adding to the problem with masks is that they lack the ability to prevent inbound infiltration through them to your lips, mouth, eats, and nose - basically mucus membranes. Think about it this way: if you put water on the outside mask, will it penetrate it? Yes. With the virus contained in that water, will the virus also penetrate it? Yes.
Surgeons wear masks to protect the patient from the surgeon, not the surgeon from the patient. Indeed, not even for SARS were masks recommended for those who didn't already have it (or something else).
No scientific studies so far indicate airborne transmission - just droplets that can be carried for short times via airborne. hence "airborne droplet". Scientists tend to be a cautious slot and say we haven't ruled it out yet, but that isn't the same as having ruled it in.
By contrast, an actual airborne virus is aerosolized - the carrier fluid is rapidly evaporated and the virus bodies themselves float along in the air. Measles is the prime example here. MERS is another case (and a corona virus) where we did manage to obtain infectious virus husks from air samples.
Further, if SARS-CoV-2 were aerosolized rather than dropletized, the cruise ships would have had far greater infection rates. There is a reason the r0 value of true airborne viruses is an order of magnitude more than those that are droplet based.
If you've got some, by all means link actual studies rather than your assumptions of "probably". Otherwise, you are contradicting all available research. And don't worry if the published data and research is behind a paywall, I have access to a wide array of journals. Chances are that if it is reputable I have access to it.
And there are no scientific indications of it being "manufactured", despite the paranoid or attention seeking ramblings of it by people who don't understand the published science.
MOST people exposed do not get it. Most people who become "Persons under Investigation" do not get it. Most people who are "presumptively/clinically confirmed" do not have it. This can also be seen by the low r0 value of 1.3 to 2.3 - meaning on average (globally) one person will infect 1.3 to 2.3 people. Removing the province where Wuhan is shows a much lower rate. Some work puts that down in the 0.4 to 1.2 range; but let us not take that as fully conclusive just yet either as we are dealing with much smaller levels once you exclude that province.
Unfortunately a lot of the data you're looking for is region specific. The sole common factors that are universal are 1) getting exposed (duh!) and 2) been over 70 years of age. On elf the reasons you want to exclude the data, to some degree, from the Wuhan area is that there is believed to be two transmission factors there: zoonotic (the fish market) and human to human and that is suspected as the reason it grew so fast.
Even within China the rates vary dramatically. For example, in the province Wuhan is in (Hubei), the overall case fatality rate is 2.9. Outside of that province, though still in China, it is 0.4%. We see this happen in the U.S. as well. As I've mentioned elsewhere here, of the 39 deaths in the U.S., 31 are from Washington, and almost all of those from King County, and over half of those from a single nursing home. This kind of thing really messes with attempts to quantify risks.
Another example is the Caribbean Princess ship, which had 2 crew members transfer from the Grand Princess. That ship had 21 cases. Out of over 2400 people aboard. The Diamond Princess (the one EVERYBODY has heard about) the r0 was 2.28. Frankly, given the circumstances, that is not as high as I'd have expected. To add to that, those were the values computed from the early days of the ship outbreak.
Regarding your item (3), again it is complicated. Mostly you have to break it out by pre-existing conditions. Even if you happen to be over 70, if you don't have chronic disease, diabetes, heart or lung problems, or already are sick, the odds are somewhat in your favor.
From the provincial data, around 95% of those who actually went (or were taken) to a facility didn't require hospitalization. Of that remaining 5% the CFR is about 49% - again in the Hubei province.
You can also look at https://www.thelancet.com/journals/la... which, while "small scale" is a rather tight study.
I've summarized the findings there elsewhere on this page, will not repeat them here. ;) Basically out of over 300 people exposed or thought to be exposed, only 1 - the spouse - got it at all.
My apologies for not laying it out as clear and simple as either of us would like, but that is basically where we are at the moment. Also, we've hit the point were more than half of total cases have hit a "recovered state" - and that doesn't include deaths. This may be a sign we're past the bulk of it, but we won't really know for another week or two as we see how things run in the more recent cases.
Vitamin D:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v3pK0...
Vitamin D:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v3pK0...
"The researchers estimate that the pandemic virus caused 201,200 respiratory deaths and another 83,300 deaths from cardiovascular disease associated with H1N1 infections. They also calculate that Africa and Southeast Asia, which have 38% of the world's population, accounted for a disproportionate 51% of the deaths."
"It isn't airborne in the sense that matters, it is airborne droplet - just like H1N1. Containment is fundamentally no different from a process/procedure perspective."
Coronavirus is airborne: it can survive up to three hours in the environment. That is probably how people who did not fall into any category established contacted it. There may have been a super-carrier in the room saturating the air with the virus, that others entered into. That is why masks don't protect against COVID-19.
There is another aspect that is sobering: there are all indications that it is a manufactured virus (HIV DNA in the virus's makeup) and people don't develop immunity against it: there were cases of re-infection.
As for what is the best way to control the epidemic, compare how Cuba handled the HIV epidemic vs the US. Cuba ordered draconian measures, with complete control over the lives of those infected, whereas that was not the case in the us. The results speak for themselves.
Just don't take zinc on an empty stomach. Must be with food.
On parents working, that would be dependent on any interaction with potential increase remote work. Regarding property taxes I'd expect no movement there as districts would likely push for money to provide the home-use computers as well as infrastructure and posy even network access.
Personally, I've seen first-hand that even elementary school grades can be done via remote. My wife used the k12 program for a while and it was just fine. The teachers involved quite liked it in many ways.
I'll also be keeping an eye on urban/suburban migration over the next few years depending on how this plays out. That bit of evidence is undeniable - concentrating people in places increases the chance of infectious disease spreading quickly and broadly.
Hmmmm, "distance learning". If that takes off in a manner to replace brick and mortar primary and secondary education in the future I wonder what impact that will have on both parents having to work, teachers unions, indoctrination, and our property taxes.
Load more comments...