Covid-19 discussion and humor thread [Was: CDC says don't touch your face to avoid Covid19...Vets to the rescue!

[LB3]

Update. Test came back negative.

[The Dean]

1 hour ago, LB3 said:

Update. Test came back negative.

 

 

Great to hear, LB3.

 

Pretty quick turn around, compared to what I'm hearing from others. That's good news, too.

Edited August 22, 2020 by The Dean

[Hapless Bills Fan]

3 hours ago, shoshin said:

The CDC made a reopening plan that any region could follow. Only NY mostly adopted it. The other governors, no matter their political leanings, did not follow it. Leaving reopening to the governors, who all have their own health departments not versed in world pandemics like the Centers for friggin Disease friggin Control is, was poor leadership from the federal AND state levels. 
 

The utter lack of good leadership in this started at the top but it trickled down. Could we have prevented 170K deaths? No. Could we have had fewer deaths and a much more predictable recovery? Yes. 
 

That’s the past. Take it up with politicians in November and future Novembers. What we need now is to stem the tidal wave of ancillary fallout from Covid and get back to being open. 

 

Agree on most points.    Not just NY, but NJ, NE for the most part, PA - adopted the CDC plan and are still following it.  And it shows.  Newsom caved to political pressure.  And it shows.

 

The CDC has for years run a training program called "Epidemic Intelligence School" or something of that sort (EIS).  A number of Public Health Departments feature eminent graduates of EIS, including the NYS and NYC Department of Health.  I had heard (and seen rumors of this in print but can't find right now) that before DiBlasio and Cuomo shut NYC and NYS down about a week after they should have ....their key Public Health doctors threatened to resign loudly and publicly for not having their advice taken.  At which point Cuomo and DiBlasio said "OK, OK.  Listening now." and decided to follow their advice.  In justice to C and DiB, the NY DPH was hamstrung by lack of testing preventing them from getting hard evidence of community spread to present to the politicians.  They needed the support of a "rogue lab" like Washington State had at U of W that tested samples anyway and said "oh, whups, sorry! we'll stop then!" AFTER they got the evidence.

There are EIS graduates all over the country, including in most state and most large city DPH.  They are a bit like a fraternity, in the positive sense of "anything for my sisters and brothers" - they have their own email and group chats, they talk to each other, they share information and learnings, and they are more than willing to reach out to other public health department collegues who are not EIS graduates.   The problem is, that most of them have been widely squelched rather than empowered.  They have been fired, subjected to threats of firing, or subjected to just plain threats from constituents.  Several have resigned after having their families and themselves threatened by the public and feeling inadequate support or steps to protect them.

So the problem is not that the Governors lacked good public health advice, equivalent to the advice of the CDC.  It's that the political climate and the mixed messages from the Federal government  led governors and local leaders to regard their DPH advice as "optional" and to disregard.

[shoshin]

1 hour ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

Agree on most points.    Not just NY, but NJ, NE for the most part, PA - adopted the CDC plan and are still following it.  And it shows.  Newsom caved to political pressure.  And it shows.

 

Only NY followed the gated approach from the CDC where you meet several requirements, open a little more, wait, then go to the next gate. None did that through the objective gating and PA 100% did NOT do that. PA Gov. Wolf set a ridiculous standard of cases/100K population to move to the "yellow" phase. Some counties (the smaller ones) met that. Philly took so long to meet it that he eventually waved a magic wand when it was clear Philly was doing fine (hospitalizations were incredibly low, the protests had come and nothing was happening) and Philly got to go to Yellow. Green phase was made based on literally zero objective evidence or rule, but some sort of fiat around "Things look good." 

 

Wolf then left it to the counties to open or not, so cities like Philly are still not open for indoor dining because yet another regional power has blocked it. 

 

When Pittsburgh spiked up in the last month (PGH never got hit initially and was already at the "green" level), it was not shut down or moved backwards in the progression at all. 

 

At no point during PA's reopening--except for the small counties initially--were there objective gating criteria. I will 100% vote against Wolf for his handling of this. He was cautious. He was not cautious. He said he'd be objective. He was not objective. He threw his hands up in the air and ceded authority to county commissioners. A total leadership cluster-F. 

 

Quote

So the problem is not that the Governors lacked good public health advice, equivalent to the advice of the CDC.  It's that the political climate and the mixed messages from the Federal government  led governors and local leaders to regard their DPH advice as "optional" and to disregard.

 

The problem in PA appeared to be that they didn't want to follow the CDC's guidelines and did things their own way. It was no mixed message that kept PA closed for so long. It was an arrogance that PA DOH knew better. And I'm sure the same thing happened in Florida. It was an utter failure of leadership starting in DC, but at the state level too. 

Edited August 22, 2020 by shoshin

[Figster]

This is an example of the kind of pressure Tom Wolfe is under from state Rupublican leaders as the PA Governor rolls with the punches of Covid 19.

 

https://www.foxnews.com/us/pennsylvania-gov-wolf-coronavirus-restrictions

 

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/governor-wolf-imposes-new-mitigation-efforts-in-pennsylvania/ar-BB16Mwwa

 

Myself personally, in comparison to other states in the US I feel fortunate to be living in PA.

 

 

 

 

[Hapless Bills Fan]

3 hours ago, shoshin said:

 

Only NY followed the gated approach from the CDC where you meet several requirements, open a little more, wait, then go to the next gate. None did that through the objective gating and PA 100% did NOT do that. PA Gov. Wolf set a ridiculous standard of cases/100K population to move to the "yellow" phase. Some counties (the smaller ones) met that. Philly took so long to meet it that he eventually waved a magic wand when it was clear Philly was doing fine (hospitalizations were incredibly low, the protests had come and nothing was happening) and Philly got to go to Yellow. Green phase was made based on literally zero objective evidence or rule, but some sort of fiat around "Things look good." 

 

Wolf then left it to the counties to open or not, so cities like Philly are still not open for indoor dining because yet another regional power has blocked it. 

 

When Pittsburgh spiked up in the last month (PGH never got hit initially and was already at the "green" level), it was not shut down or moved backwards in the progression at all. 

 

At no point during PA's reopening--except for the small counties initially--were there objective gating criteria. I will 100% vote against Wolf for his handling of this. He was cautious. He was not cautious. He said he'd be objective. He was not objective. He threw his hands up in the air and ceded authority to county commissioners. A total leadership cluster-F. 

 

 

The problem in PA appeared to be that they didn't want to follow the CDC's guidelines and did things their own way. It was no mixed message that kept PA closed for so long. It was an arrogance that PA DOH knew better. And I'm sure the same thing happened in Florida. It was an utter failure of leadership starting in DC, but at the state level too. 

 

Thanks for the gouge on what went down in PA (lack of gating criteria etc).  I *thought* that MA, RI, CT, and NJ followed the same gating criteria as NYS.

 

Before I point at the Pennsylvania DOH being the ones who "knew better" and were arrogant, I would need to understand that it was indeed, their advice and decision - and that they didn't provide whatever advice they did provide "under the political gun" so to speak.

[Figster]

Possible help perhaps by way of antibody drugs.

 

https://www.msn.com/en-us/health/medical/antibody-drugs-aim-to-fill-covid-19-treatment-gap/ar-BB18h9Rz?ocid=xboxntp

Edited August 23, 2020 by Figster

[GaryPinC]

@HaplessBillsFan

"Ok, this one has me scratching my head.

 

CDC travel guidelines have changed.  They have dropped the recommendation to quarantine for 14 days when you return from travel:

You may have been exposed to COVID-19 on your travels. You may feel well and not have any symptoms, but you can be contagious without symptoms and spread the virus to others. You and your travel companions (including children) pose a risk to your family, friends, and community for 14 days after you were exposed to the virus. Regardless of where you traveled or what you did during your trip, take these actions to protect others from getting sick after you return:

•  

Given this, and the fact that the CDC notes returning travelers pose a risk to those close to them for 14 days, the focus on "outside the home" and "other people who are not from your household" while removing the advice to quarantine, is puzzling to understand. 

 

The revision is from last week and has received relatively little press coverage.  I could not find any interviews giving a scientific rationale for the change.

Gentle reminder that if you're moved to discuss or expostulate, please copy the link to this post and discuss in discussion thread."

 

 

I can't say exactly why, but I do know here in Ohio from someone who contracted Covid the DOH told her she could be spreading asymptomatically up to 48 hours before her first symptoms appeared and focused only on that time frame.  It was interesting to me because they seemed to assume if you contract you will show symptoms up to 48 hours later.   I've never seen any science behind this, so feel free to correct me, but if this is accepted practice it could partly explain why CDC is dropping the 14 day quarantine. 

[The Dean]

6 hours ago, Figster said:

Possible help perhaps by way of antibody drugs.

 

https://www.msn.com/en-us/health/medical/antibody-drugs-aim-to-fill-covid-19-treatment-gap/ar-BB18h9Rz?ocid=xboxntp

 

Quote

“Today if you get Covid, you will have a wave of fear of biblical proportions,” said Myron Cohen

 

I expect someone named Myron Cohen to be a bit funnier.

 

 

 

 

Then again, maybe not.

[SlimShady'sSpaceForce]

So, the Plasma treatment appears to work thus far on Covid people in serious heath issues? 

 

If it's a miracle ......  

How the hell are 300 million people going to be able to get a Plasma treatment?  

[shoshin]

2 hours ago, SlimShady'sSpaceForce said:

So, the Plasma treatment appears to work thus far on Covid people in serious heath issues? 

 

If it's a miracle ......  

How the hell are 300 million people going to be able to get a Plasma treatment?  

 

It's helpful for at risk and later stage patients for now. 

 

For most people, it wouldn't be necessary. 

[SlimShady'sSpaceForce]

50 minutes ago, shoshin said:

 

It's helpful for at risk and later stage patients for now. 

 

For most people, it wouldn't be necessary. 

 

with the wide ranging unproven solutions out there 

 

who knows when it would be suggested.   Maybe it was just forward thinking 

 

[Hapless Bills Fan]

10 hours ago, SlimShady'sSpaceForce said:

with the wide ranging unproven solutions out there

who knows when it would be suggested.   Maybe it was just forward thinking

 

No one is gonna be giving convalescent plasma to people who aren't ill enough to require hospitalization

 

[BillsFan4]

https://www.pressherald.com/2020/08/22/maine-cdc-reports-32-cases-of-coronavirus-one-death/
‘Maine CDC now links 53 COVID-19 cases to Millinocket wedding reception‘
 

Quote

The number of COVID-19 cases connected to a wedding reception in Millinocket continues to climb, with state health officials saying on Saturday that they could trace 53 confirmed cases of coronavirus to the reception. That’s up from 32 confirmed cases on Friday.

 

The Maine Center for Disease Control and Prevention said Saturday that investigators identified secondary and tertiary transmission of the virus, which means that it has spread to people who did not attend the Aug. 7 wedding reception but had close contact with individuals who were present at the event (secondary cases) and close contacts of the secondary cases.

 

The wedding reception had 65 people. Those affected range in age from 4 to 98 years old, with a median age of 41.

 

Quote

A woman who did not attend the reception died on Friday after contracting COVID-19 from a person who did attend the event, health authorities said. They did not identify her, nor the guest she came into contact with.

 

[Punching Bag]

Damn she died from pass on from wedding rather than pass on from sporting event as many on main board advocate.

[muppy]

[Hapless Bills Fan]

3 hours ago, Muppy said:

 

Brilliant!

[BillsFan4]

https://www.cnn.com/2020/08/25/health/covid-19-superspreading-boston-study/index.html
‘Covid-19 superspreading event in Boston may have led to 20,000 cases, researcher says‘
 

They’re talking about the BioGen conference at the end of February in Boston and how it could have caused 20k total cases since then and led to sustained community transmission in numerous places in MA. It also mentions that some of the event participants took covid back with them to numerous different states and a couple countries.

Link to the paper (it’s not peer reviewed yet): https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.08.23.20178236v1.full.pdf+html

 

its an interesting read. They also looked at a breakout at a skilled nursing facility. There were multiple introductions of covid into the facility but 1 specific one led to roughly 90% of the cases at the facility.

[716er]

New CDC guidelines advise people without symptoms probably do not need to be tested even if they have been in close contact with an infected person.

 

Scientifically, what is the logic in this? I would love to believe it has nothing to do with politics.

 

 

Edited August 26, 2020 by 716er

[LB3]

Emperor Cuomo is none too happy with the CDC.

https://www.syracuse.com/coronavirus/2020/08/ny-will-not-follow-indefensible-cdc-change-on-quarantines-cuomo-says.html

[716er]

1 hour ago, LB3 said:

Emperor Cuomo is none too happy with the CDC.

 

Nor is every scientist/healthcare professional commenting on the CDC changes.

 

I have been trying to find since I learned of the changes this afternoon... what is the scientific rationale for not testing potential asymptomatic cases?

Edited August 26, 2020 by 716er

[TBBills]

 

[Figster]

52 minutes ago, 716er said:

 

Nor is every scientist/healthcare professional commenting on the CDC changes.

 

I have been trying to find since I learned of the changes this afternoon... what is the scientific rationale for not testing asymptomatic cases?

Asymptomatic case describes someone having Covid 19 without displaying symptoms.

 

Trying to test someone who is not showing any indication they have Covid 19 is a test and time better spent on someone showing symptoms wouldn't you agree? Coming into close contact for over 15 minutes with someone who now has Covid 19 from a testing stand point is not enough reason IMO.

Edited August 26, 2020 by Figster

[716er]

 

3 minutes ago, Figster said:

Trying to test someone who is not showing any indication they have Covid 19 is a test and time better spent on someone showing symptoms wouldn't you agree? 

 

I think mass testing regardless of symptoms (If there are not enough tests, that's another story) is the best way to trace and isolate all positive cases.

 

 

[Figster]

2 hours ago, 716er said:

 

 

I think mass testing regardless of symptoms (If there are not enough tests, that's another story) is the best way to trace and isolate all positive cases.

 

 

 If you think you may have Covid 19, quarantine. Its not the cold or flu season.  If everyone would just isolate themselves when they have it the world would be a safer place.

 

 

Edited August 26, 2020 by Figster

[716er]

7 minutes ago, Figster said:

 If you think you have it Covid 19 quarantine. Its not the flu or cold season and If everyone would just isolate themselves when they have it tthe world would be a safer place.

 

 

 

Of course.

 

Asymptomatic patients spread the virus as well, correct? The same CDC who changed the recommendations today claims that ~40% of the cases are asymptomatic. The more of those cases that are not caught, traced, and isolated, the more cases the country will have in general from spread.

 

Maybe I'm reading the whole thing wrong? 

Edited August 26, 2020 by 716er

[Figster]

30 minutes ago, 716er said:

 

Of course.

 

Asymptomatic patients spread the virus as well, correct? The same CDA who changed the recommendations today claims that ~40% of the cases are asymptomatic. The more of those cases that are not caught, traced, and isolated, the more cases the country will have in general from spread.

 

Maybe I'm reading the whole thing wrong? 

We're talking about two different things here. The CDC doesn't want to test someone who has not shown symptoms.  Asymptomatic case or patient refers to someone who has Covid 19 without displaying symptoms. If you follow what I'm saying.

Edited August 26, 2020 by Figster

[716er]

10 minutes ago, Figster said:

We're talking about two different things here. The CDC doesn't want to test someone who has not shown symptoms vs Asymptomatic patient/case.  Asymptomatic case or patient is someone who has tested positive without displaying symptoms. If you follow what I'm saying.

 

I got it - thanks for the clarification - I could have worded it much better. I updated my previous post to try and make it more clear.

 

I guess I am trying to understand the scientific rationale from the CDC's perspective to stop testing those who have not shown symptoms, especially when tests are readily available. 

[Figster]

32 minutes ago, 716er said:

 

I got it - thanks for the clarification - I could have worded it much better. I updated my previous post to try and make it more clear.

 

I guess I am trying to understand the scientific rationale from the CDC's perspective to stop testing those who have not shown symptoms, especially when tests are readily available. 

Naturally getting the test results back ASAP is of the most importance. Much more so for people who are sneezing and coughing/ spreading  the virus. Slowing everything down with people not showing symptoms doesn't make much sense IMO

Edited August 26, 2020 by Figster

[BillsFan4]

8 hours ago, 716er said:

New CDC guidelines advise people without symptoms probably do not need to be tested even if they have been in close contact with an infected person.

 

Scientifically, what is the logic in this? I would love to believe it has nothing to do with politics.

 

 

 

good!

Edited August 27, 2020 by BillsFan4

[BillsFan4]

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/even-with-a-vaccine-the-economy-could-take-many-months-to-return-to-normal/
‘Even With A Vaccine, The Economy Could Take Many Months To Return To Normal‘
 

Quote

Once we find a COVID-19 vaccine, our lives can return to normal, right? Economists don’t think so.

 

Even if the vast majority of the population become immune to the coronavirus tomorrow, leading economists think it could take six months or more before our economy is back to where it was before the pandemic hit. And if a smaller share of the population became immune, economists think returning to economic normalcy would likely take more than a year.

 

[Warcodered]

9 hours ago, 716er said:

New CDC guidelines advise people without symptoms probably do not need to be tested even if they have been in close contact with an infected person.

 

Scientifically, what is the logic in this? I would love to believe it has nothing to do with politics.

 

 

I don't really get this it's like you're just giving up on containing this at all.

[716er]

9 hours ago, Warcodered said:

I don't really get this it's like you're just giving up on containing this at all.

 

Still waiting for the scientific explanation behind it.

The fact that Fauci was under anesthesia during the meeting this policy was decided in is pretty fishy.

[Figster]

8 hours ago, 716er said:

 

Still waiting for the scientific explanation behind it.

The fact that Fauci was under anesthesia during the meeting this policy was decided in is pretty fishy.

The scientific explanation is obvious IMO. No symptoms, then why test? You are asking thousands of people that don't feel sick to get tested. People are reluctant enough to get tested when they are sick. You can't force people to get tested.  If you want to test people without symptoms wouldn't it make better sense to monitor people on the front lines serving our community? 

 

My home state of Pa by way of example has tested almost a million and a half citizens to find a little under 127,000 confirmed cases. Seems like an excessive amount of testing right?  It works out to about 1 in every 12 people have tested positive. Its not the cold or flu season. Covid 19 symptoms are fairly obvious. So why did we have so many people testing negative for Covid 19?  Testing people without symptoms was not helping the situation IMO.

 

 

Edited August 27, 2020 by Figster

[The Dean]

3 hours ago, Figster said:

The scientific explanation is obvious IMO. No symptoms, then why test?

 

 

Because unsymptomatic people (pre-symptomatic and those who never show symptoms) who are Covid positive are THE MOST DANGEROUS of all, when it comes to the spreading of the virus. That's why!

[Figster]

52 minutes ago, The Dean said:

 

 

Because unsymptomatic people (pre-symptomatic and those who never show symptoms) who are Covid positive are THE MOST DANGEROUS of all, when it comes to the spreading of the virus. That's why!

We're not talking about people that have Covid 19 and don't show symptoms. We're talking about people who came into contact with a confirmed Covid 19 carrier for 15 minutes or longer. A big percentage of which never catch the virus. 

 

I also tend to disagree with someone who has Covid 19 without symptoms being the most dangerous. They don't sneeeze, they don't cough and If all the guidelines are followed. Social distancing, mask wearing, I'm not sure how from a general public standpoint it makes them any more dangerous then your typical carrier displaying all the symptoms. 

 

With all due respect Dean

Edited August 27, 2020 by Figster

[716er]

2 hours ago, Figster said:

We're not talking about people that have Covid 19 and don't show symptoms. We're talking about people who came into contact with a confirmed Covid 19 carrier for 15 minutes or longer. A big percentage of which never catch the virus. 

 

I also tend to disagree with someone who has Covid 19 without symptoms being the most dangerous. They don't sneeeze, they don't cough and If all the guidelines are followed. Social distancing, mask wearing, I'm not sure how from a general public standpoint it makes them any more dangerous then your typical carrier displaying all the symptoms. 

 

With all due respect Dean

 

A third of the country has allergies and is going to be sneezing non-stop for the next few months.

3 hours ago, The Dean said:

 

 

Because unsymptomatic people (pre-symptomatic and those who never show symptoms) who are Covid positive are THE MOST DANGEROUS of all, when it comes to the spreading of the virus. That's why!

 

Agree with this 

[Hapless Bills Fan]

On 8/26/2020 at 1:30 PM, Figster said:

Asymptomatic case describes someone having Covid 19 without displaying symptoms.

 

Trying to test someone who is not showing any indication they have Covid 19 is a test and time better spent on someone showing symptoms wouldn't you agree? Coming into close contact for over 15 minutes with someone who now has Covid 19 from a testing stand point is not enough reason IMO.

 

No, I would not agree.  More to the point neither does eminent scientist and former CDC head Tom Frieden

https://threader.app/thread/1298652748347564036

https://www.medicaldaily.com/experts-critical-cdc-changes-covid-testing-guidelines-455636

One could argue if someone has symptoms, they know they should isolate until symptom free then beyond for a specified length of time.

The problem of covid-19 transmission is the asymptomatic person who has a risk of having covid-19 - they had close contact with a diagnosed person for a significant amount of time - but they may be infected without knowing because no symptoms.  They need to be tested and isolated if infected to break the transmission chains.

 

Also, for the CDC to discuss and implement a significant policy change while Dr Fauci is literally under general anesthesia having surgery is chickenshit beyond belief.

[Hapless Bills Fan]

3 hours ago, Figster said:

We're not talking about people that have Covid 19 and don't show symptoms. We're talking about people who came into contact with a confirmed Covid 19 carrier for 15 minutes or longer. A big percentage of which never catch the virus. 

 

I also tend to disagree with someone who has Covid 19 without symptoms being the most dangerous. They don't sneeeze, they don't cough and If all the guidelines are followed. Social distancing, mask wearing, I'm not sure how from a general public standpoint it makes them any more dangerous then your typical carrier displaying all the symptoms. 

 

With all due respect Dean

 

First of all, sneezing is not a typical symptom of covid-19

Coughing is a symptom in about 60-70% of symptomatic patients - meaning it's not a symptom in 30-40% of symptomatic patients

 

But that's a sidepoint.

 

One need not sneeze nor cough to propel droplets and aerosols.  One does so when one talks, sings, shouts, even exhales forcefully as when running.

 

So then the question is: do asymptomatic or presymptomatic people have as much or more viral titer than symptomatic people such that they would be able to expel infectious particles by talking, singing, shouting, exhaling forcefully as when breathing hard (running) or sure, coughing?

 

The answer is Yes. Yes, they do.

 

If you have symptoms, the Cluebird may land and tell you "Stay Home! Get tested!".  If you're asymptomatic, you literally have No Clue.  Testing asymptomatic people day 3-5 post exposure to a covid-19 positive contact is the only way to identify these people and break the transmission chains.

Asymptomatic and presymptomatic transmission are literally the reason covid-19 is so much more difficult to contain than a disease that basically flattens everyone who's contagious

 

14 hours ago, 716er said:

 

Still waiting for the scientific explanation behind it.

The fact that Fauci was under anesthesia during the meeting this policy was decided in is pretty fishy.

 

Apparently Fauci, Tom Frieden, and others join you in still waiting for that scientific explanation.

[Hapless Bills Fan]

3 hours ago, Figster said:

We're not talking about people that have Covid 19 and don't show symptoms. We're talking about people who came into contact with a confirmed Covid 19 carrier for 15 minutes or longer. A big percentage of which never catch the virus.

 

Right, but to break the transmission chain, you must identify those who do