Coronavirus II

[tbhausen]

Want to blame the Chinese? Go ahead, they deserve lots of it, but apparently not for engineering and unleashing the virus. The layman's description of how it invades cells is moderately creepy, perhaps even terrifying:

https://www.foxnews.com/science/the-coronavirus-did-not-escape-from-a-lab-heres-how-we-know

 

[T.Lex]

At the least, they should designate perhaps John Hopkins as the official clearing house for US data.

I just noticed that Johns Hopkins still has Indiana at 3 deaths. If their source is that far behind on a relatively open state... oof.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

Exactly. Many of them are DNR also

I haven’t seen that reported anywhere. That’s a different twist.

 

[HoughMade]

Want to blame the Chinese? Go ahead, they deserve lots of it, but apparently not for engineering and creating the virus. The layman's description of how it invades cells is moderately creepy, perhaps even terrifying:

https://www.foxnews.com/science/the-coronavirus-did-not-escape-from-a-lab-heres-how-we-know

Pfft I had plenty of things to blame the ChiComs for before March of this year.

 

[nonobaddog]

Alcohol-based cleaners disrupt the S-proteins meaning the virus cannot infect someone, but the physical remains of the virus will be there for some time...inert.

The ship had not been cleaned though, so no alcohol-based cleaners.

The test for active corona virus involves identifying the RNA sequence to know that you have found the right virus. The test for inactive corona virus involves identifying the RNA sequence to know that you have found the right virus remains. So the test is an identification test and doesn't say much about active vs inactive. How can you determine the active vs inactive status?

 

[HoughMade]

The ship had not been cleaned though, so no alcohol-based cleaners.

The test for active corona virus involves identifying the RNA sequence to know that you have found the right virus. The test for inactive corona virus involves identifying the RNA sequence to know that you have found the right virus remains. So the test is an identification test and doesn't say much about active vs inactive. How can you determine the active vs inactive status?

The referenced report certainly does not give a clue regarding "active" vs. "inactive" virus, but only whether the RNA was detectable. Other research specifically on how long the virus remains "active" on surfaces remains the best source for that information.

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2020/03/200320192755.htm

And to my original point, when alcohol based cleansers are used, the virus "dies" in literally seconds.

 

[tbhausen]

Want to blame the Chinese? Go ahead, they deserve lots of it, but apparently not for engineering and unleashing the virus. The layman's description of how it invades cells is moderately creepy, perhaps even terrifying:

https://www.foxnews.com/science/the-coronavirus-did-not-escape-from-a-lab-heres-how-we-know

Holy crap! Read the comments to that article. Americans are in no mood to take anything at face value!

 

[chipbennett]

Eh, it's not all that fake. The man's wife who was able to puke up enough of the stuff survived. She said something to the effect that it was Trump's confidence in the cure that caused them to take it. It wasn't just a similarly named chemical. That is the name of the ingredient in the drug. But, to be fair, it's not sane to hear a president praise a drug and take that as an indicator that they should look for every household product that might have the same chemical in it. It's also fair to say that it may be the other things in the fish tank cleaner that killed the man. This is a valid complaint, and I don't want to overstate it, that Trump tends not to understand the weight of what he says as President. Especially for those who believe Trump is almost a god. And it seemed like these folks did when they thought he was saying this chemical would make them invincible against COVID19.

No, it is entirely fake. Chloroquine phosphate as a fish tank cleaning additive is sold as a concentrate, in volumes of 10g. Its intended use as a fish tank cleaning additive is diluted to 40mg per gallon.

A human pharmacological dose appears to be 250mg or 500mg in tablet form, or 50mg/mL as a liquid. And in both cases, those doses are in human-acceptable dosage forms, not pure chloroquine phosphate.

Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. Deciding to ingest household chemicals (even, and especially, as a substitute for a prescribed medicine) is, unquestionably, playing stupid games.

 

[Mongo59]

Greatest idea ever. A true stimulus package

https://www.worldstarhiphop.com/videos/video.php?v=wshhd5u3Ih0gKh08h2dD

sorry I thought we were all working from home so don’t open if u are at work.

A stimulus package that stimulates, who would have thought?

 

[Oldgunfan]

Holy crap! Read the comments to that article. Americans are in no mood to take anything at face value!

I have nothing against Fox News, but their comments sections are always hyperbolic and far from representing the mood of Americans.

 

[qwerty]

So what are you saying here about the surface life of the virus?

The latest "report" does not change the current analysis of the surface life of the virus, the most thorough being published by the New England Journal of Medicine[SUP]1,[/SUP] which sums up the following:

SARS-CoV-2 was more stable on plastic and stainless steel than on copper and cardboard, and viable virus was detected up to 72 hours after application to these surfaces (Figure 1A), although the virus titer was greatly reduced (from 103.7 to 100.6 TCID50 per milliliter of medium after 72 hours on plastic and from 103.7 to 100.6 TCID50 per milliliter after 48 hours on stainless steel).
On copper, no viable SARS-CoV-2 was measured after 4 hours and no viable SARS-CoV-1 was measured after 8 hours. On cardboard, no viable SARS-CoV-2 was measured after 24 hours and no viable SARS-CoV-1 was measured after 8 hours (Figure 1A).

Viruses consist at base three components, the RNA, Protein, and the lipid layer (this is the outer part that is easily compromised by soap and water which causes the virus to basically fall apart[SUP]2[/SUP]). After 17 days, the CDC found the RNA[SUP]3[/SUP] of the virus, which is the "DNA" of the virus, not the virus itself. It is in plain black and white in the report, but the media goes nuts with it. If it bleeds it leads.

There are two things to note from the CDC with regards to the virus on surfaces: 1) "It may be possible that a person can get COVID-19 by touching a surface or object that has the virus on it and then touching their own mouth, nose, or possibly their eyes, but this is not thought to be the main way the virus spreads[SUP]4[/SUP]." But interestingly enough 2) "On the other hand, transmission of novel coronavirus to persons from surfaces contaminated with the virus has not been documented. Transmission of coronavirus occurs much more commonly through respiratory droplets than through fomites."[SUP]5[/SUP]

1. https://www.nejm.org/doi/10.1056/NEJMc2004973
2. https://www.theguardian.com/comment...kills-coronavirus-alcohol-based-disinfectants
3. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4763971/
4. https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/prepare/transmission.html
5. https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/prepare/cleaning-disinfection.html

 

[chipbennett]

Hey qwerty,

Again, thanks for being the official COVID-19 statistician for INGO. I'm using your numbers for my amateur models.

On that note, though, I notice significant discrepancies with the "official" numbers and the various 3rd party internet aggregators. To the point of frustration, frankly. And then, my natural cynicism kicks in and I wonder if the official numbers are being slow-walked or "weighted" so as to try and avoid any big spikes on any given day.

Any thoughts on the accuracy/timing of reported numbers?

I'm jumping in on this thread 17 pages in. So, if this has been discussed/refuted already, feel free to tell me to go back and read.

My theory on reported numbers, and projections, is that they are based on the incorrect baseline. I suspect that COVID-19 has been in the US since December, if not November, 2019 - and has been spreading since then. We haven't been testing since then, and until very recently (if not still currently) have only tested the most severely symptomatic. Thus, two points:

1. Any numbers about transmission rate and mortality rate are over-estimating, because the vast majority of the mildly symptomatic and asymptomatic are simply not tested, and therefore not included in the numbers

2. Because exposure/transmission started months ago - rather than mere days/weeks ago - we are looking not at the base of the bell curve, but rather we are looking near the peak/inflection point of the bell curve. But, projections assume the latter, and therefore are inflated, because they assume an exponential growth yet to come, that has in reality already happened.

I'll be interested to see the statistics if/when we have tests to identify COVID-19 antibodies, that if used across the population at large, will tell us exactly how far this virus actually spread.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

I have nothing against Fox News, but their comments sections are always hyperbolic and far from representing the mood of Americans.

Almost all comment sections of just about any news site or political figure’s site are dumpster fires. I’ve gotten to where I hardly bother to read them anymore, even if I comment on them myself.

 

[jsharmon7]

Can someone explain how they quantify deaths related to this virus? Positive test plus death by respiratory failure?

 

[qwerty]

I just noticed that Johns Hopkins still has Indiana at 3 deaths. If their source is that far behind on a relatively open state... oof.

Yes.. I should have described it a little better...

If the CDC, HHS, or whomever is not going to compile the info, they should direct all reporting to Johns Hopkins since they seem to have a good website to display those numbers and have one location that is as accurate as possible. Currently it is a free for all, and they are just scraping other websites for their data which is not expedient, reliable, or effective.

 

[JettaKnight]

Yes.. I should have described it a little better...

If the CDC, HHS, or whomever is not going to compile the info, they should direct all reporting to Johns Hopkins since they seem to have a good website to display those numbers and have one location that is as accurate as possible. Currently it is a free for all, and they are just scraping other websites for their data which is not expedient, reliable, or effective.

FIFY.

It's a dumb name, and we should make sure we always show that fact.

 

[T.Lex]

I'm jumping in on this thread 17 pages in. So, if this has been discussed/refuted already, feel free to tell me to go back and read.

My theory on reported numbers, and projections, is that they are based on the incorrect baseline. I suspect that COVID-19 has been in the US since December, if not November, 2019 - and has been spreading since then. We haven't been testing since then, and until very recently (if not still currently) have only tested the most severely symptomatic. Thus, two points:

1. Any numbers about transmission rate and mortality rate are over-estimating, because the vast majority of the mildly symptomatic and asymptomatic are simply not tested, and therefore not included in the numbers

2. Because exposure/transmission started months ago - rather than mere days/weeks ago - we are looking not at the base of the bell curve, but rather we are looking near the peak/inflection point of the bell curve. But, projections assume the latter, and therefore are inflated, because they assume an exponential growth yet to come, that has in reality already happened.

I'll be interested to see the statistics if/when we have tests to identify COVID-19 antibodies, that if used across the population at large, will tell us exactly how far this virus actually spread.

Hey chip! You know I'll always encourage you to go back and read.

Of course, I have no refutation of your observations, but I'll (re-)supply my own.

1) The numbers we have are the only numbers we have, basically. There are some assumptions built in to my amateur modeling, such as the idea that the mortality rate has the caveat "among those tested." In a sense, the actual mortality rate doesn't matter because we don't have the actual number of cases. (That ship sailed very early on.) Rather, using the numbers provided we can create a rudimentary prediction of how many deaths will be reported based on the prior reporting.

2) I tend to agree that this was present here before the deaths in China started getting reported. I have no faith in the Chinese numbers, response, or reporting. But, regardless when the actual "start date" was of this, when plotting the graph of the peak/inflection point, the starting point doesn't really matter either (as long as it is "in front of" the peak). By starting the tracking late, we just miss the part of the iceberg below the water line. We can still track the progression relative to the starting point.

(And I'll raise you one....)

3) Eventually, the statisticians and actuaries will figure out that the actual deaths from COVID-19 were way under-reported. Deaths from January-March that were attributed to pneumonia or underlying respiratory conditions were probably COVID-19.

Take care!

 

[JettaKnight]

I have nothing against Fox News, but their comments sections are always hyperbolic and far from representing the mood of Americans.

Their commenters are the worst. I once read some and had to shower afterwards.




And Chip, does your theory about Nov/Dec introduction into the US line up with the situation in Italy and other hard hit locations?

 

[qwerty]

FIFY.

It's a dumb name, and we should make sure we always show that fact.

Thanks, doing this from my phone and auto correct makes it John's or John and I just hit the John without the ' not thinking.

 

[T.Lex]

Can someone explain how they quantify deaths related to this virus? Positive test plus death by respiratory failure?

My understanding is that a death attributed to COVID-19 is chalked up when a previously-identified positive patient dies from complications of the disease. There's a chance that some post-mortem tests are done, but I think that is pretty rare.