Semi-OT: Coronavirus (COVID-19) Discussion Thread

Moderators: Clav, Domejandro, ken6199, bisme37, Dirk, KingDavid, cupcakesnake, bwgood77, zimpy27, infinite11285

User avatar
HollowEarth
Starter
Posts: 2,038
And1: 2,112
Joined: Feb 19, 2017
 

Re: Semi-OT: Coronavirus (COVID-19) Discussion Thread 

Post#501 » by HollowEarth » Fri Apr 17, 2020 5:43 pm

Pointgod wrote:
mademan wrote:
Pointgod wrote:
What is it that you think a vaccine is going to do to you?


Thats an odd question. Im not sitting here coming up with weird, hypothetical future scenarios. Point is, the virus is no where near dangerous enough for me to take a vaccine that has no long term rigorous data to confirm it's safety.


It’s not an odd question. A vaccine is realistically 18 months to 2 years away. And that 18 months to 2 years will be spent in clinical trials assessing the efficacy of the vaccine, identifying side effects and recalibrating the vaccine. That’s why i asked about the negative effects of the vaccine based on the rigorous testing.

In the UK, they're producing vaccines while tests are ongoing to cut time. The idea is that if the vaccine tests ineffective, they toss the whole batch, but if the vaccine works, they'll already have loads of it ready to go by the end of the year. I'm not medically literate enough to know if that's a genius plan or a stupid one, but I'm hopeful that shots will roll out by the end of the year. Schools could then open up for Spring Semester.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-04-17/oxford-vaccine-veteran-lays-out-coronavirus-immunization-plans
HotRocks34
RealGM
Posts: 17,198
And1: 21,129
Joined: Jun 23, 2007

Re: Semi-OT: Coronavirus (COVID-19) Discussion Thread 

Post#502 » by HotRocks34 » Fri Apr 17, 2020 5:49 pm

Triples333 wrote:Does anybody here have a source for the graph (or data list) of daily Covid deaths in the USA/World? Curious about the state of the flattening of the curve over the past few weeks.


Daily USA data, by date:
https://covidtracking.com/data/us-daily

World data (deaths graph a little ways down):
https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/worldwide-graphs/


The CovidTracking site may not have the total "probable" deaths info, but you can see the trends there on data.
For the Worldometer death graph, choose the "logarithmic" version of the graph. It gives you a sense of the trend.
Jokic 31/21/22
Luka & Oscar = 5 x 27/8/8
The Brodie = All-out energy
mademan
RealGM
Posts: 31,984
And1: 31,089
Joined: Feb 18, 2010

Re: Semi-OT: Coronavirus (COVID-19) Discussion Thread 

Post#503 » by mademan » Fri Apr 17, 2020 5:53 pm

Pointgod wrote:
mademan wrote:
Pointgod wrote:
What is it that you think a vaccine is going to do to you?


Thats an odd question. Im not sitting here coming up with weird, hypothetical future scenarios. Point is, the virus is no where near dangerous enough for me to take a vaccine that has no long term rigorous data to confirm it's safety.


It’s not an odd question. A vaccine is realistically 18 months to 2 years away. And that 18 months to 2 years will be spent in clinical trials assessing the efficacy of the vaccine, identifying side effects and recalibrating the vaccine. That’s why i asked about the negative effects of the vaccine based on the rigorous testing.


There are multiple medications that were released and had been in stock for years before we found they were unsafe or caused damage we couldnt predict. Regardless of what the medication does or how it should theoretically work, the only way to know if something is safe long term is to reach the long term. Its a risk. The risk is fine if the vaccine is treating a virus that presents a more dangerous situation today than the possible harm it may have in the future, and people can do that kind of risk/benefit math.

I dont think the possible benefits outweigh the risk for me. And i get im putting myself in the anti-vaxxers group, but there's nothing unscientific about my decision.
Fairview4Life
RealGM
Posts: 70,154
And1: 34,002
Joined: Jul 25, 2005
     

Re: Semi-OT: Coronavirus (COVID-19) Discussion Thread 

Post#504 » by Fairview4Life » Fri Apr 17, 2020 5:57 pm

mademan wrote:
Pointgod wrote:
mademan wrote:
Thats an odd question. Im not sitting here coming up with weird, hypothetical future scenarios. Point is, the virus is no where near dangerous enough for me to take a vaccine that has no long term rigorous data to confirm it's safety.


It’s not an odd question. A vaccine is realistically 18 months to 2 years away. And that 18 months to 2 years will be spent in clinical trials assessing the efficacy of the vaccine, identifying side effects and recalibrating the vaccine. That’s why i asked about the negative effects of the vaccine based on the rigorous testing.


There are multiple medications that were released and had been in stock for years before we found they were unsafe or caused damage we couldnt predict. Regardless of what the medication does or how it should theoretically work, the only way to know if something is safe long term is to reach the long term. Its a risk. The risk is fine if the vaccine is treating a virus that presents a more dangerous situation today than the possible harm it may have in the future, and people can do that kind of risk/benefit math.

I dont think the possible benefits outweigh the risk for me. And i get im putting myself in the anti-vaxxers group, but there's nothing unscientific about my decision.


How long do you need you need a vaccine to be tested to feel comfortable taking it?

What do you think the risks are?
9. Similarly, IF THOU HAST SPENT the entire offseason predicting that thy team will stink, thou shalt not gloat, nor even be happy, shouldst thou turn out to be correct. Realistic analysis is fine, but be a fan first, a smug smarty-pants second.
mademan
RealGM
Posts: 31,984
And1: 31,089
Joined: Feb 18, 2010

Re: Semi-OT: Coronavirus (COVID-19) Discussion Thread 

Post#505 » by mademan » Fri Apr 17, 2020 6:11 pm

Fairview4Life wrote:
mademan wrote:
Pointgod wrote:
It’s not an odd question. A vaccine is realistically 18 months to 2 years away. And that 18 months to 2 years will be spent in clinical trials assessing the efficacy of the vaccine, identifying side effects and recalibrating the vaccine. That’s why i asked about the negative effects of the vaccine based on the rigorous testing.


There are multiple medications that were released and had been in stock for years before we found they were unsafe or caused damage we couldnt predict. Regardless of what the medication does or how it should theoretically work, the only way to know if something is safe long term is to reach the long term. Its a risk. The risk is fine if the vaccine is treating a virus that presents a more dangerous situation today than the possible harm it may have in the future, and people can do that kind of risk/benefit math.

I dont think the possible benefits outweigh the risk for me. And i get im putting myself in the anti-vaxxers group, but there's nothing unscientific about my decision.


How long do you need you need a vaccine to be tested to feel comfortable taking it?

What do you think the risks are?


Probably until i become part of an at risk group or we have a decade+ of data. Like i get all the structural problems that COVID has caused to the world, but on an individual level, the risk of any real harm is extremely low to those young and healthy individuals.
HotRocks34
RealGM
Posts: 17,198
And1: 21,129
Joined: Jun 23, 2007

Re: Semi-OT: Coronavirus (COVID-19) Discussion Thread 

Post#506 » by HotRocks34 » Fri Apr 17, 2020 7:00 pm

Texas is starting to re-open.

https://www.theeagle.com/news/local/texas-gov-greg-abbott-loosens-restrictions-in-effort-to-restart-the-economy-schools-to-remain/article_91edc512-80d2-11ea-8f32-9bcd8c1c886f.html

Gov. Greg Abbott on Friday announced initial steps to begin the process of reopening the Texas economy amid the coronavirus pandemic, including loosening surgery restrictions at medical facilities, allowing all retail stores to provide product pickups and reopening state parks.


Looks like it's going to be a rolling re-opening there.

All schools will remained closed for the current school year, including colleges.
Jokic 31/21/22
Luka & Oscar = 5 x 27/8/8
The Brodie = All-out energy
HotRocks34
RealGM
Posts: 17,198
And1: 21,129
Joined: Jun 23, 2007

Re: Semi-OT: Coronavirus (COVID-19) Discussion Thread 

Post#507 » by HotRocks34 » Fri Apr 17, 2020 8:17 pm

Just a brief wrap-up on something touched upon a few pages ago in this thread. I'm putting this here to shoot down the more radical interpretation of events that was being considered. This is a new report on the investigation of the origins of the virus.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/us-officials-investigation-coronavirus-wuhan-lab

U.S. officials and the intelligence community have confirmed to Fox News that they have taken the possibility of the coronavirus being man-made or engineered inside China as some sort of bioweapon off the table and have ruled it out at this point.

Sources point to the structure of the virus, in saying the genome mapping specifically shows it was not genetically altered. The sources believe the initial transmission of the virus was a naturally occurring strain that was being studied there -- and then went into the population in Wuhan.


So, the bioweapon hypothesis (and, apparently, the "altered virus structure" hypothesis) is now firmly returned to the conspiracy theory corner. It's official.


.
.
.
.


Interesting study out of Stanford (Covid antibody testing in California):
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.14.20062463v1.full.pdf

Summary:
- Number of actual infected persons may be 50-85 times higher than known
- CFR (mortality rate) of Covid (at least in California) may be around .12% to .20%


This data is similar to what a German study found (0.37% CFR):
https://reason.com/2020/04/09/preliminary-german-study-shows-a-covid-19-infection-fatality-rate-of-about-0-4-percent/

It's also not so far off of the current figures in Iceland. Iceland is the most tested nation per capita in the world on the virus. That makes them possibly the best "not antibody researched" study of what the Covid CFR may be.

Iceland ----------> 9 deaths/1754 cases = 0.51% CFR

A virus with a .1% CFR will kill 1 in 1000 people who catch it. A virus with a .5% CFR will kill 5 in 1000 (1 in 200) people who catch it.

As many have suspected, there are likely a lot more people who have, or have had, the virus in the USA than we know about. The current "known" CFR of the virus in the USA is around 4.6% (30,449 deaths from 666,573 cases). Data from here:
https://covidtracking.com/data

Picking a number between 0.1% and 0.5%, let's just say that the virus CFR is 0.3%. That would make the virus about 15 times less deadly than it currently appears to be based on the known numbers. That's a welcome thought.

Of course, the CFR for the virus is a lot higher for certain populations (elderly, those with per-existing conditions).


Comparisons:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pandemic_severity_index#Guidelines
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1957%E2%80%9358_influenza_pandemic
https://www.medicinenet.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=208914

Average flu ----------> 0.1% CFR (or less; kills roughly 291,000 to 646,000 globally per year)
1957 flu --------------> 0.3% CFR (in the UK; killed 1-2 million people globally)
Spanish flu ----------> 2.0%+ CFR or higher (killed 17-100 million globally)
Jokic 31/21/22
Luka & Oscar = 5 x 27/8/8
The Brodie = All-out energy
NBAFan93
RealGM
Posts: 19,792
And1: 14,223
Joined: Dec 04, 2016

Re: Semi-OT: Coronavirus (COVID-19) Discussion Thread 

Post#508 » by NBAFan93 » Fri Apr 17, 2020 8:25 pm

TunaFish wrote:
Bottomsouth wrote:
TunaFish wrote:
They have a test for death?


To confirmed from the virus, yes.


So you are saying that we didn't have a test for Covid-19 two months ago? And if a person dies with all the symptoms but hasn't had the test they shouldn't be counted?


Didn’t New York recently add about 3700 deaths to their numbers for that very thing - people they assumed had COVID that they couldn’t confirm w/ a test?
User avatar
spacemonkey
Lead Assistant
Posts: 5,551
And1: 8,661
Joined: Nov 24, 2004

Re: Semi-OT: Coronavirus (COVID-19) Discussion Thread 

Post#509 » by spacemonkey » Fri Apr 17, 2020 8:35 pm

I mean, I'm not going to bother finding a source, but scientists had on the whole ruled out the engineered bioweapon angle much earlier. Edit: what the hell, here - March 17: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-020-0820-9

Truth is, the whole angle was brought up (again) as merely a political deflection tactic to point heads back at China. The reasons why aren't hard to discern, given how it's going, and the propensity for people to latch onto conspiracy theories (look no further than RealGM for a good sample).

My favorite conspiracy theory was the one where China deliberately infected its own population with a highly virulent disease that can almost certainly be spread asymptomatically, and some evidence is showing it can be spread even after recovery, so they could show the world that, actually, they had tremendous pandemic control measures!

Hmmm... the risk is worth it!!!

Image
nymets1
Head Coach
Posts: 6,671
And1: 1,353
Joined: Apr 18, 2004
Location: Florida
     

Re: Semi-OT: Coronavirus (COVID-19) Discussion Thread 

Post#510 » by nymets1 » Fri Apr 17, 2020 8:38 pm

HotRocks34 wrote:Texas is starting to re-open.

https://www.theeagle.com/news/local/texas-gov-greg-abbott-loosens-restrictions-in-effort-to-restart-the-economy-schools-to-remain/article_91edc512-80d2-11ea-8f32-9bcd8c1c886f.html

Gov. Greg Abbott on Friday announced initial steps to begin the process of reopening the Texas economy amid the coronavirus pandemic, including loosening surgery restrictions at medical facilities, allowing all retail stores to provide product pickups and reopening state parks.


Looks like it's going to be a rolling re-opening there.

All schools will remained closed for the current school year, including colleges.


It doesn't say anything about eliminating the social distancing or stopping the masks.
"Bodysurfing and always drive with the windows down"

"UCF 2017 only undefeated national champions"
NBAFan93
RealGM
Posts: 19,792
And1: 14,223
Joined: Dec 04, 2016

Re: Semi-OT: Coronavirus (COVID-19) Discussion Thread 

Post#511 » by NBAFan93 » Fri Apr 17, 2020 8:41 pm

zimpy27 wrote:
Zenzibar wrote:https://www.texasmonthly.com/news/texas-anti-vaxxers-fear-mandatory-coronavirus-vaccines/

Texas Anti-Vaxxers Fear Mandatory COVID-19 Vaccines More Than the Virus Itself

On Friday, just after Governor Greg Abbott declared a statewide emergency in response to the coronavirus, Sarah posted a worried plea on a local anti-vaccine Facebook group. She worried that the declaration gives the government the right to “force vaccinations” on unwilling Texans.

“If they fast-track some vaccine for coronavirus, how are all of us going to defend ourselves?” she asked. “I’ll let them vaccinate my daughter over my dead body.”

Other members of the group, Tarrant County Crunchy Mamas, chimed in.

“Hide in the floors like they hid the Jews from the Nazis,” one suggested. “Hide them in our gun safe (yes, it’s a big safe and yes, we love our guns),” said another.

Though a COVID-19 vaccine is likely still more than a year away, according to experts, concerns over mandatory vaccinations have spread throughout the anti-vaxxer community in Texas, which is one of the largest in the nation. In recent years, prominent voices in the anti-vaxxer movement have settled in and around Austin, and a vocal Facebook group formed a political action committee, Texans for Vaccine Choice. This school year, nearly 73,000, or 1.35 percent, of Texas students opted out of getting at least one required vaccine for nonmedical reasons, according to the Texas Department of State Health Services. That number does not include home schooled children.

The anti-vaccine community, at large, believes that vaccines are a tool of government control that make big pharmaceutical companies rich and have side effects that can cause lasting damage. Sarah, a Benbrook mom who asked that her last name be omitted over fears her family will be targeted by people who support vaccines, said she’s more scared that she’ll be forced to vaccinate her two-year-old daughter than she is of the virus itself.

“For a vast majority of the population, this is a few days of a high fever and a week of a lingering cough,” she said. “Once you give up rights to your body, the government owns you.”

In Texas, students are required to get a number of immunizations to attend school. But in 2003, the Legislature passed a law allowing kids to claim an exemption for “reasons of conscience, including religious belief,” provided parents sign an affidavit.

Allison Winnike, president and CEO of The Immunization Partnership, a Texas-based nonprofit aimed at eliminating vaccine-preventable diseases, said the state has the authority to make a prospective coronavirus vaccine mandatory, meaning people that don’t get it will be penalized, but notably not physically forced to get it.

There are three levels of vaccine interventions, Winnike said. The first is voluntary, which includes vaccines like the flu and HPV that are recommended but not required. The second is mandatory, for which penalties like fines or barring children from school can be applied. These include the measles, polio, and hepatitis A and B vaccines that kids have to get to attend school.

The last is compulsory, which is the category anti-vaxxers fear most. Such vaccinations occur when an infected person defies voluntary and mandatory interventions and continues to spread disease around the community. A judge can decide if the person should be taken into custody and forcibly vaccinated. Winnike said this occurs most often with tuberculosis patients, and that there’s no precedent for compulsory vaccinations on a widespread level.

Winnike believes that when a COVID-19 vaccine is eventually approved, it will likely fall into the voluntary category.

“Frankly, with COVID-19, the issue is more going to be trying to prioritize who gets to get the vaccine once it’s available because there won’t be enough initially to cover everyone,” she said.

Unfortunately, vaccines only work if enough people get them to create what’s called herd immunity, which slows rapidly spreading diseases and protects the small number of people who are prevented from getting vaccines for medical reasons. When people opt out of vaccination, the community’s collective immunity is weakened.

“This last year when we saw so many measles outbreaks, they were in places where their measles vaccine rates have been declining, and that’s no coincidence,” said Winnike, referring to 22 cases in Texas last year. “It’s hurting all the rest of Texans because now we’re losing our herd immunity status.”

But for anti-vaxxers, it’s a question of individual liberty.

“It’s our human right to be able to decide what is put into our bodies,” said Jessica Davis, a mom of five in East Texas. “I will not sacrifice my family or my body so others can feel ‘safe’ from a virus that is affecting so few people.”

Winnike said the fear that men in masks will start knocking on doors and forcing people to get vaccinated is “an invention” of the anti-vaxxer movement. “It’s part of their fear mongering,” she said. “That’s not how we do public health in the United States.”

Texans for Vaccine Choice, the PAC, posted on Facebook Saturday that they’re not against medical advancements, “as long as they are never, ever at the expense of informed consent, medical privacy, and vaccine choice.”

Reached for comment, the PAC wrote, “It is also our position that the fast-track designation of the vaccine which began human trials today is cause for concern, as essential steps in the safety assessment process will not be undertaken before administering the vaccine to healthy individuals.”

Though several vaccines will be entering the clinical trial phase in the next few months, it will still be at least a year before one is approved for widespread use, according to Dr. Peter Jay Hotez, professor and dean of the National School of Tropical Medicine at Baylor College of Medicine and codirector of the Texas Children’s Hospital Center for Vaccine Development.

Hotez said this is because vaccines have to be rigorously tested to ensure that they’re safe and effective.

“Despite what the anti-vaxxers claim, that vaccines are not adequately tested for safety, in fact, there’s no pharmaceutical that’s tested more for safety than vaccines,” Hotez said.

Still, many remain unconvinced.

Jacqueline Belowsky, 23, said she’s not concerned about the coronavirus and would treat it like she does any other illness, “naturally and not in a panic.”

Her four children, who are mostly unvaccinated, got the flu in December and she said she helped them get over it in three days.

“I will never accept any vaccine no matter how scary the government makes the situation seem,” Belowsky said. “I would refuse no matter what.”



I always wonder if these people are just irrationally afraid of needles and therefore cling to elaborate nonsensical conspiracies.


I’ve known several of them in my life. The ones I know mostly fear adverse reactions to the vaccine - they don’t trust it and the suspicion is enhanced cause it’s “mandatory” in order to go to a public school.

When you have a kid and they give them those vaccines you got to sign releases that list all the possible side effects - and they can be scary on that paper if you actually read them (I think death is listed) - you sit there and think “well everyone does it and I don’t want my kid to get polio or measles”, so you sign it, but it does give you a little bit of a pause. At least when it’s them getting their first set ever it does.

I also know some are of the impression that something in some of the vaccines contribute to autism.
HotRocks34
RealGM
Posts: 17,198
And1: 21,129
Joined: Jun 23, 2007

Re: Semi-OT: Coronavirus (COVID-19) Discussion Thread 

Post#512 » by HotRocks34 » Fri Apr 17, 2020 8:46 pm

spacemonkey wrote:I mean, I'm not going to bother finding a source, but scientists had on the whole ruled out the engineered bioweapon angle much earlier. Edit: what the hell, here - March 17: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-020-0820-9



Fair point. However, had the people officially investigating the matter decided to try to go with a "bioweapon" theory, then we could have been headed towards a full-on "Iraq WMD" situation (and all that it entails, including potential war).

I never bought into the theory, and I'm glad it's now officially junked.
Jokic 31/21/22
Luka & Oscar = 5 x 27/8/8
The Brodie = All-out energy
HotRocks34
RealGM
Posts: 17,198
And1: 21,129
Joined: Jun 23, 2007

Re: Semi-OT: Coronavirus (COVID-19) Discussion Thread 

Post#513 » by HotRocks34 » Fri Apr 17, 2020 8:49 pm

nymets1 wrote:It doesn't say anything about eliminating the social distancing or stopping the masks.


Yeah, it looks like a gradual stepping forward.

Doing social distancing and using masks, IMO, is probably the best way to start things back up. You kind of return to normal, but you're still being cautious.

I don't think it'll be full 'normal' until a vaccine comes.
Jokic 31/21/22
Luka & Oscar = 5 x 27/8/8
The Brodie = All-out energy
User avatar
spacemonkey
Lead Assistant
Posts: 5,551
And1: 8,661
Joined: Nov 24, 2004

Re: Semi-OT: Coronavirus (COVID-19) Discussion Thread 

Post#514 » by spacemonkey » Fri Apr 17, 2020 8:54 pm

HotRocks34 wrote:
spacemonkey wrote:I mean, I'm not going to bother finding a source, but scientists had on the whole ruled out the engineered bioweapon angle much earlier. Edit: what the hell, here - March 17: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-020-0820-9



Fair point. However, had the people officially investigating the matter decided to try to go with a "bioweapon" theory, then we could have been headed towards a full-on "Iraq WMD" situation (and all that it entails, including potential war).

I never bought into the theory, and I'm glad it's now officially junked.


I guess I should preface by saying this is just my opinion, but the US would never go to war with China. I mean, it would be catastrophic. The only 'war' will be a cold war, and it will be driven along technological compatibility lines. Like, do you honestly think that if the US actually suspected some kind of bioweapon of mass destruction in China, that they could just 'send the troops in' like they did in the Middle East?

This lab-made stuff resurfacing was nothing more than timely deflection when things are going bad, was never going to be publicly called a bioweapon (just raising it as a possibility was always going to be enough), and was always going to be eventually 'taken off the table'.

When times are tough, stoke up a little fear, mix it in with a little nationalist and/or racist othering to shift the narrative, move the telescope. It's like, the Politics 101 playbook.
13th Man
General Manager
Posts: 8,936
And1: 6,118
Joined: Feb 12, 2012
 

Re: Semi-OT: Coronavirus (COVID-19) Discussion Thread 

Post#515 » by 13th Man » Fri Apr 17, 2020 8:59 pm

HotRocks34 wrote:Just a brief wrap-up on something touched upon a few pages ago in this thread. I'm putting this here to shoot down the more radical interpretation of events that was being considered. This is a new report on the investigation of the origins of the virus.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/us-officials-investigation-coronavirus-wuhan-lab

U.S. officials and the intelligence community have confirmed to Fox News that they have taken the possibility of the coronavirus being man-made or engineered inside China as some sort of bioweapon off the table and have ruled it out at this point.

Sources point to the structure of the virus, in saying the genome mapping specifically shows it was not genetically altered. The sources believe the initial transmission of the virus was a naturally occurring strain that was being studied there -- and then went into the population in Wuhan.


So, the bioweapon hypothesis (and, apparently, the "altered virus structure" hypothesis) is now firmly returned to the conspiracy theory corner. It's official.


.
.
.
.


Interesting study out of Stanford (Covid antibody testing in California):
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.14.20062463v1.full.pdf

Summary:
- Number of actual infected persons may be 50-85 times higher than known
- CFR (mortality rate) of Covid (at least in California) may be around .12% to .20%


This data is similar to what a German study found (0.37% CFR):
https://reason.com/2020/04/09/preliminary-german-study-shows-a-covid-19-infection-fatality-rate-of-about-0-4-percent/

It's also not so far off of the current figures in Iceland. Iceland is the most tested nation per capita in the world on the virus. That makes them possibly the best "not antibody researched" study of what the Covid CFR may be.

Iceland ----------> 9 deaths/1754 cases = 0.51% CFR

A virus with a .1% CFR will kill 1 in 1000 people who catch it. A virus with a .5% CFR will kill 5 in 1000 (1 in 200) people who catch it.

As many have suspected, there are likely a lot more people who have, or have had, the virus in the USA than we know about. The current "known" CFR of the virus in the USA is around 4.6% (30,449 deaths from 666,573 cases). Data from here:
https://covidtracking.com/data

Picking a number between 0.1% and 0.5%, let's just say that the virus CFR is 0.3%. That would make the virus about 15 times less deadly than it currently appears to be based on the known numbers. That's a welcome thought.

Of course, the CFR for the virus is a lot higher for certain populations (elderly, those with per-existing conditions).


Comparisons:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pandemic_severity_index#Guidelines
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1957%E2%80%9358_influenza_pandemic
https://www.medicinenet.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=208914

Average flu ----------> 0.1% CFR (or less; kills roughly 291,000 to 646,000 globally per year)
1957 flu --------------> 0.3% CFR (in the UK; killed 1-2 million people globally)
Spanish flu ----------> 2.0%+ CFR or higher (killed 17-100 million globally)



Solid post. I think that this is good news all around if all is true.

First off, I agree that it probably wasn't a genetically engineered bio-weapon but more so negligence on the lab's part in keeping their tests secure. If it was a bio weapon, they probably could have made it more lethal if they wanted to. Lol @ the Chinese spokesperson using the WHO as proof that it did not come from the lab, the WHO is incompetent and the CCP has them n their back pockets as far as I'm concerned. China has never had a good reputation for having good quality control so I wouldn't be surprised if it's escaped from their lab and they've been desperately trying to cover it up ever since.

Regarding the true number of infections, this is a good sign, meaning that we are closer to herd immunity than previously thought and also that the lethality of the virus is not as high as previously thought

The question remains if a person can develop immunity to not get re-infected, there have been reports of people in South Korea and China that supposedly have tested positive again after quarantining. The question also remains to whether we'd be able to develop a safe vaccine for this.

These are encouraging signs though if all are true.
13th Man
General Manager
Posts: 8,936
And1: 6,118
Joined: Feb 12, 2012
 

Re: Semi-OT: Coronavirus (COVID-19) Discussion Thread 

Post#516 » by 13th Man » Fri Apr 17, 2020 9:05 pm

spacemonkey wrote:
HotRocks34 wrote:
spacemonkey wrote:I mean, I'm not going to bother finding a source, but scientists had on the whole ruled out the engineered bioweapon angle much earlier. Edit: what the hell, here - March 17: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-020-0820-9



Fair point. However, had the people officially investigating the matter decided to try to go with a "bioweapon" theory, then we could have been headed towards a full-on "Iraq WMD" situation (and all that it entails, including potential war).

I never bought into the theory, and I'm glad it's now officially junked.


I guess I should preface by saying this is just my opinion, but the US would never go to war with China. I mean, it would be catastrophic. The only 'war' will be a cold war, and it will be driven along technological compatibility lines. Like, do you honestly think that if the US actually suspected some kind of bioweapon of mass destruction in China, that they could just 'send the troops in' like they did in the Middle East?

This lab-made stuff resurfacing was nothing more than timely deflection when things are going bad, was never going to be publicly called a bioweapon (just raising it as a possibility was always going to be enough), and was always going to be eventually 'taken off the table'.

When times are tough, stoke up a little fear, mix it in with a little nationalist and/or racist othering to shift the narrative, move the telescope. It's like, the Politics 101 playbook.


I don't think it was a deflection tactic, It's still important to find out the true source of the virus though, whether it was genetically modified or not. There needs to be accountability if the CCP knew of this and have been trying to cover it up. imo they did.
HotRocks34
RealGM
Posts: 17,198
And1: 21,129
Joined: Jun 23, 2007

Re: Semi-OT: Coronavirus (COVID-19) Discussion Thread 

Post#517 » by HotRocks34 » Fri Apr 17, 2020 9:08 pm

spacemonkey wrote:Like, do you honestly think that if the US actually suspected some kind of bioweapon of mass destruction in China, that they could just 'send the troops in' like they did in the Middle East?


No, I don't. But I don't want to find out, either. What could happen, instead, could be some saber rattling, like in the South China Sea, or something like that. Unfortunately, it only takes one mistake for things to escalate from there.

I agree with most of what you wrote. Good posts!
Jokic 31/21/22
Luka & Oscar = 5 x 27/8/8
The Brodie = All-out energy
NBAFan93
RealGM
Posts: 19,792
And1: 14,223
Joined: Dec 04, 2016

Re: Semi-OT: Coronavirus (COVID-19) Discussion Thread 

Post#518 » by NBAFan93 » Fri Apr 17, 2020 9:15 pm

Pointgod wrote:
mademan wrote:not an anti-vaxxer, but i wouldnt blame anyone for not taking the vaccine. I probably wont, and its something i actually thought about. You dont need to be a conspiracy nut to not want to either. There's no long term safety data on a new vaccine and the virus isnt dangerous enough for my demographic to risk that uncertainty.


What is it that you think a vaccine is going to do to you?


I’m sure they’ll have a long list of the possible awful things that can happen that you’ll need to sign a release for when you get it like what they do w/ all the other vaccines.

If you ever take the time to actually read them you’ll see they are quite frightening and they often slip “death” in there too.

With all vaccines there is a weighing of the possible risks of the vaccine versus the risks of the virus it’s going to prevent. However, sometimes the risks of the latter is based more on the overall population’s risks than the individual persons.
HotRocks34
RealGM
Posts: 17,198
And1: 21,129
Joined: Jun 23, 2007

Re: Semi-OT: Coronavirus (COVID-19) Discussion Thread 

Post#519 » by HotRocks34 » Fri Apr 17, 2020 9:17 pm

13th Man wrote:Solid post. I think that this is good news all around if all is true.

First off, I agree that it probably wasn't a genetically engineered bio-weapon but more so negligence on the lab's part in keeping their tests secure. If it was a bio weapon, they probably could have made it more lethal if they wanted to. Lol @ the Chinese spokesperson using the WHO as proof that it did not come from the lab, the WHO is incompetent and the CCP has them n their back pockets as far as I'm concerned. China has never had a good reputation for having good quality control so I wouldn't be surprised if it's escaped from their lab and they've been desperately trying to cover it up ever since.

Regarding the true number of infections, this is a good sign, meaning that we are closer to herd immunity than previously thought and also that the lethality of the virus is not as high as previously thought

The question remains if a person can develop immunity to not get re-infected, there have been reports of people in South Korea and China that supposedly have tested positive again after quarantining. The question also remains to whether we'd be able to develop a safe vaccine for this.

These are encouraging signs though if all are true.



Just to be fair to the mods and stay on task, I'm going to let the China/WHO stuff go. But we can talk about it more in the Off-Topic thread if we want. I just wanted to post that article/quote to let people know that official investigators are taking that hypothesis off the table. Also, I helped bring up the subject (in general) the other day, so I wanted to kind of bookend it and end it now. I think you make good points, I'm just not going to talk about it here, to let the topic stay on track.

Yeah, the data from that Stanford study is promising. Your points on potential re-infection and challenges with a vaccine (if people can be re-infected, etc) are 100% spot on, IMO. Good stuff.

Definitely hoping for some kind of herd immunity on this disease, hopefully before the vaccine (if it comes) comes.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herd_immunity
Jokic 31/21/22
Luka & Oscar = 5 x 27/8/8
The Brodie = All-out energy
bidde
Senior
Posts: 556
And1: 455
Joined: Mar 13, 2020
 

Re: Semi-OT: Coronavirus (COVID-19) Discussion Thread 

Post#520 » by bidde » Fri Apr 17, 2020 9:17 pm

HotRocks34 wrote:Just a brief wrap-up on something touched upon a few pages ago in this thread. I'm putting this here to shoot down the more radical interpretation of events that was being considered. This is a new report on the investigation of the origins of the virus.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/us-officials-investigation-coronavirus-wuhan-lab

U.S. officials and the intelligence community have confirmed to Fox News that they have taken the possibility of the coronavirus being man-made or engineered inside China as some sort of bioweapon off the table and have ruled it out at this point.

Sources point to the structure of the virus, in saying the genome mapping specifically shows it was not genetically altered. The sources believe the initial transmission of the virus was a naturally occurring strain that was being studied there -- and then went into the population in Wuhan.


So, the bioweapon hypothesis (and, apparently, the "altered virus structure" hypothesis) is now firmly returned to the conspiracy theory corner. It's official.


.
.
.
.


Interesting study out of Stanford (Covid antibody testing in California):
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.14.20062463v1.full.pdf

Summary:
- Number of actual infected persons may be 50-85 times higher than known
- CFR (mortality rate) of Covid (at least in California) may be around .12% to .20%


This data is similar to what a German study found (0.37% CFR):
https://reason.com/2020/04/09/preliminary-german-study-shows-a-covid-19-infection-fatality-rate-of-about-0-4-percent/

It's also not so far off of the current figures in Iceland. Iceland is the most tested nation per capita in the world on the virus. That makes them possibly the best "not antibody researched" study of what the Covid CFR may be.

Iceland ----------> 9 deaths/1754 cases = 0.51% CFR

A virus with a .1% CFR will kill 1 in 1000 people who catch it. A virus with a .5% CFR will kill 5 in 1000 (1 in 200) people who catch it.

As many have suspected, there are likely a lot more people who have, or have had, the virus in the USA than we know about. The current "known" CFR of the virus in the USA is around 4.6% (30,449 deaths from 666,573 cases). Data from here:
https://covidtracking.com/data

Picking a number between 0.1% and 0.5%, let's just say that the virus CFR is 0.3%. That would make the virus about 15 times less deadly than it currently appears to be based on the known numbers. That's a welcome thought.

Of course, the CFR for the virus is a lot higher for certain populations (elderly, those with per-existing conditions).


Comparisons:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pandemic_severity_index#Guidelines
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1957%E2%80%9358_influenza_pandemic
https://www.medicinenet.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=208914

Average flu ----------> 0.1% CFR (or less; kills roughly 291,000 to 646,000 globally per year)
1957 flu --------------> 0.3% CFR (in the UK; killed 1-2 million people globally)
Spanish flu ----------> 2.0%+ CFR or higher (killed 17-100 million globally)


People usually differentiate between CFR (case fatality rate) and IFR (infection fatality rate). CFR uses confirmed cases as the denominator, while IFR uses all infected. So you can't really be wrong about the CFR. IFR is the more interesting and difficult question, but scientists believed it to be a lot lower than some of those CFRs for a while. For example the Imperial College Study (the one that predicted 2.2 million deaths in the US without intervention) was published a month ago and assumed an IFR of 0.9% and a study focused on estimating IFR published in late March found a 0.4 %- 1.3% confidence interval for IFR.

As far as the Stanford Study goes, ideally you would want a random sample of a population. But this is how they found their participants:
We recruited participants by placing targeted advertisements on Facebook aimed at residents of Santa Clara County.


The problem with an approach like this is that you might introduce a bias, for example you end up getting more people that are worried about having covid, because they had symptoms. That could lead to the prevalence being overestimated and the IFR being underestimated.

Also, I was kind of shocked to see those CIs on the sensitivity of the used test:
Our estimates of sensitivity based on the manufacturer’s and locally tested data were 91.8% (using the lower estimate based on IgM, 95 CI 83.8-96.6%) and 67.6% (95 CI 50.2-82.0%), respectively. Similarly, our estimates of specificity are 99.5% (95
CI 98.1-99.9%) and 100% (95 CI 90.5-100%).


At this point we can be pretty certain that the IFR is above 0.2% just by looking at the fatalities in NYC and some of the hard hit regions in Italy.


Imperial College Study:https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imperial-college/medicine/sph/ide/gida-fellowships/Imperial-College-COVID19-NPI-modelling-16-03-2020.pdf
Estimates of the severity of coronavirus disease 2019: a model-based analysis: https://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3099(20)30243-7/fulltext

Return to The General Board