COVID-19/Coronavirus thread

[caulfield12]

https://www.cnn.com/videos/world/2020/08/10/israel-coronavirus-covid-19-pandemic-schools-outbreaks-gotkine-pkg-intl-ldn-vpx.cnn

Speaking of inside, an Israeli school re-opened for fall semester and one child infected 25+ teachers.

Uh-oh.

[Soxbadger]

2 minutes ago, illinilaw08 said:

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/daily-life-coping/deciding-to-go-out.html

CDC says inside is riskier than out.  

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/09/health/virus-aerosols-who.html

WHO on how long the virus can linger inside.

I think there's a false equivalence in your post - that if nothing is safe then everything is equally risky.  Everything I have read recently is that inside is riskier than out - that doesn't mean outside + crowds isn't risky, but the virus spread is worse inside.  

All things being equal, outside is safer than inside.

But all things arent equal and that is why you compare facts. There isnt going to be a way of testing "100 people at beach no social distancing"  vs "10 people in restaurant in 2 groups of 5 seated 10 feet apart."

I personally feel the latter is safer, but that doesnt mean you cant feel the former is. Ultimately we have to make our own decisions, but I absolutely understand why in this specific situation, Montrose Harbor, why people were legitimately upset about a large crowd gathering in a small space. Especially given that there was plenty of other space very nearby that was completely unused. 

[Balta1701]

1 minute ago, illinilaw08 said:

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/daily-life-coping/deciding-to-go-out.html

CDC says inside is riskier than out.  

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/09/health/virus-aerosols-who.html

WHO on how long the virus can linger inside.

I think there's a false equivalence in your post - that if nothing is safe then everything is equally risky.  Everything I have read recently is that inside is riskier than out - that doesn't mean outside + crowds isn't risky, but the virus spread is worse inside.  

If everything else is equal it's riskier inside than out that's absolutely for certain, because the virus lingers there for longer, the air is less turbulent, and it is sheltered from UV radiation and things like that. That's why nearly all super-spreader events are inside. 

The trick is that everything isn't always equal. If the population density outside is 3x what it is inside, then there's more likely to be an infected person nearby. If people inside are wearing masks more consistently than a group outside, then there's less likely to be substantial virus in the air. 

So, there are places where outside could be an issue. If you're in a crowd of 60,000 college football fans, you're probably going to get some spreading. Each infected individual may not infect 100, but it won't be 0.

[he gone.]

I think all you have to do is read this message board and one can see why this isn't going away. 

[Texsox]

Which lobby is bigger? The restaurant lobby or the beach lobby? Which one donates more to political campaigns? Which one generates more tax revenue?

As Deep Throat famously said "follow the money". 

[caulfield12]

5 hours ago, Texsox said:

Which lobby is bigger? The restaurant lobby or the beach lobby? Which one donates more to political campaigns? Which one generates more tax revenue?

As Deep Throat famously said "follow the money". 

 

And when restaurants aren't lobbying for those things themselves, their trade associations are doing it: The National Restaurant Association, an industry advocacy group, spent more than $4.2 million last year lobbying on the restaurant industry's behalf. Lobbying has been successful in some cases.    2016年3月17日

[caulfield12]

Georgia school district reports 826 students in quarantine since opening

From CNN’s Jamiel Lynch and Jennifer Henderson 

The Cherokee County School District in Georgia reported Monday that 826 students are in quarantine due to possible exposure to Covid-19.

The school returned to in-person learning on Aug. 3.

According to a chart from the district, 42 staff members are in quarantine.

Thirty-eight students and 12 staff members have been tested positive for the virus, according to the district's website.

The district said it has approximately 42,500 students.

 

 

Expert says children may be able to spread coronavirus like they spread the common cold

From CNN Health’s Lauren Mascarenhas

Children may be able to spread Covid-19 just as easily as they spread another type of coronavirus -- the common cold, said William Haseltine, a former professor at Harvard Medical School.

“There’s every reason to suspect that this virus, even though it can kill you, behaves pretty much like a cold virus, in terms of transmission. Who drives colds? Children drive colds,” Haseltine told CNN’s Anderson Cooper Monday.
“And that's true of almost all respiratory diseases, including the colds that are caused by coronaviruses. And this is one of those cousins,” he added. “It even uses the same receptor in the nasal passages as one of the cold viruses. It just happens to be a cold virus that also kills.”

 

 

 

The President's claims that it is safe for every kid to go back to class are being challenged by a new report published by the American Academy of Pediatrics and the Children's Hospital Association that found that more than 97,000 children tested positive for the coronavirus in the last two weeks of July. The study showed a 40% increase in child coronavirus cases in states and cities during those two weeks. While children are far less likely to suffer complications from the virus, some have died. And the report will fuel fears that children could make teachers sick, will carry the virus home from school and infect their parents and other relatives and that schools could turn into super spreader locations.

Asked about the study, Trump again insisted that since most children didn't get seriously ill it was fine to open schools and without evidence said children do not transmit the virus to other people.

"It's a tiny fraction of death, a tiny fraction and they get better quickly," Trump said in the White House Briefing Room.

Edited August 11, 2020 by caulfield12

[bmags]

12 hours ago, Texsox said:

Which lobby is bigger? The restaurant lobby or the beach lobby? Which one donates more to political campaigns? Which one generates more tax revenue?

As Deep Throat famously said "follow the money". 

Really not that malicious to advocate that your businesses not be forced to shut down without compensation. I don't have a problem with restaurants following the rules to try and survive, I have a problem with our officials trying to make public health messaging solve economic and supply problems.

Them telling people not to wear masks in March was using a public health justification to solve a supply chain and production issue.

Refusing to provide accurate risk assessment on different settings is using public health messaging to solve an economic issue, where we are refusing to step up to the plate and compensate businesses who have been forced to shut down and so we act like their modified openings are safe.

The public health depts should say what need to be done, and the other govt functions should align to make that possible. It should not be other depts saying what's possible to public health, and then public health making up messaging to make that seem safe.

[caulfield12]

1 hour ago, bmags said:

Really not that malicious to advocate that your businesses not be forced to shut down without compensation. I don't have a problem with restaurants following the rules to try and survive, I have a problem with our officials trying to make public health messaging solve economic and supply problems.

Them telling people not to wear masks in March was using a public health justification to solve a supply chain and production issue.

Refusing to provide accurate risk assessment on different settings is using public health messaging to solve an economic issue, where we are refusing to step up to the plate and compensate businesses who have been forced to shut down and so we act like their modified openings are safe.

The public health depts should say what need to be done, and the other govt functions should align to make that possible. It should not be other depts saying what's possible to public health, and then public health making up messaging to make that seem safe.

And why would we expect ANY of those things to change?

The ONLY way it happens is if one of his advisors convinces Trump that doing so is the key to winning re-election...that's just not happening, certainly not on a sustained basis.  For today's purposes, Priority #1 involves going back and forth between utilizing the WHITE HOUSE or GETTYSBURG NATIONAL MILITARY PARK as the setting for his RNC speech on the 27th of AUG.

 

[JUSTgottaBELIEVE]

Better them than us

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.com/news/amp/world-europe-53735718

[StrangeSox]

Good breakdown on TWiV this week of all the possible 'morbidities' that COVID can cause--it's not just a binary live/die disease. Hair loss, rashes, "covid toes," neurological impacts (confused, delusion, GBS), long-term concentration and attention span issues, acute and long-term myocardial issues, pulmonary issues and others.

 

[illinilaw08]

5 hours ago, bmags said:

Really not that malicious to advocate that your businesses not be forced to shut down without compensation. I don't have a problem with restaurants following the rules to try and survive, I have a problem with our officials trying to make public health messaging solve economic and supply problems.

Them telling people not to wear masks in March was using a public health justification to solve a supply chain and production issue.

Refusing to provide accurate risk assessment on different settings is using public health messaging to solve an economic issue, where we are refusing to step up to the plate and compensate businesses who have been forced to shut down and so we act like their modified openings are safe.

The public health depts should say what need to be done, and the other govt functions should align to make that possible. It should not be other depts saying what's possible to public health, and then public health making up messaging to make that seem safe.

This.  Restaurants, bars, breweries, etc. need a bailout badly.  State and local governments need a bailout badly (because the pandemic is crushing tax revenues).  Without either of those things, state and local governments are going to continue to operate as if dining indoors is safe, and the hospitality industry is going to continue to operate indoors with distancing.

The reason the US can't get on top of this thing is because on policy, the party in power is more concerned with getting people back to work than they are with providing the resources for industries that are not safe to operate - and the people employed by those industries - to stay home until it is safe to reopen.

This issue is only going to get worse when winter hits.  Nothing in the last 6-months gives me any hope that we won't see major flare ups this winter.  And I don't see many people wanting to eat and drink outside in December in Chicago.  

[JUSTgottaBELIEVE]

1 hour ago, illinilaw08 said:

This.  Restaurants, bars, breweries, etc. need a bailout badly.  State and local governments need a bailout badly (because the pandemic is crushing tax revenues).  Without either of those things, state and local governments are going to continue to operate as if dining indoors is safe, and the hospitality industry is going to continue to operate indoors with distancing.

The reason the US can't get on top of this thing is because on policy, the party in power is more concerned with getting people back to work than they are with providing the resources for industries that are not safe to operate - and the people employed by those industries - to stay home until it is safe to reopen.

This issue is only going to get worse when winter hits.  Nothing in the last 6-months gives me any hope that we won't see major flare ups this winter.  And I don't see many people wanting to eat and drink outside in December in Chicago.  

Unless Putin comes to the rescue

[southsider2k5]

1 hour ago, illinilaw08 said:

This.  Restaurants, bars, breweries, etc. need a bailout badly.  State and local governments need a bailout badly (because the pandemic is crushing tax revenues).  Without either of those things, state and local governments are going to continue to operate as if dining indoors is safe, and the hospitality industry is going to continue to operate indoors with distancing.

The reason the US can't get on top of this thing is because on policy, the party in power is more concerned with getting people back to work than they are with providing the resources for industries that are not safe to operate - and the people employed by those industries - to stay home until it is safe to reopen.

This issue is only going to get worse when winter hits.  Nothing in the last 6-months gives me any hope that we won't see major flare ups this winter.  And I don't see many people wanting to eat and drink outside in December in Chicago.  

This has definitely seemed to follow the indoors crowd.  During the late spring, the north got it the worst.  During the summer, the south has actually gotten in the worst.  I would imagine we will see a pretty big detioration of the numbers as temps drop and people crowd back indoors more in the north.

[southsider2k5]

 

[Balta1701]

51 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said:

This has definitely seemed to follow the indoors crowd.  During the late spring, the north got it the worst.  During the summer, the south has actually gotten in the worst.  I would imagine we will see a pretty big detioration of the numbers as temps drop and people crowd back indoors more in the north.

FWIW, I think this is entirely a coincidence of government policy and entry points.

1. It Entered in New York, and reached Chicago and the Northeast rapidly via travel routes. New York's cases started in Early February.

2. There were limited entries in the South, tracing to New York, but those were happening right around March 10 as New York's cases were exploding, 4-6 weeks after spreading began. Then Rudy Gobert happened, and so much travel and business was shut down that explosions of cases were prevented.

3. The South, Arizona, some of the Red counties in California re-opened everything, blocked all restrictions, and the virus exploded 4-6 weeks later exactly on queue. 

[Balta1701]

 

 

 

[caulfield12]

2 hours ago, Balta1701 said:

 

 

 

Emphasizing your point to make sure everyone gets it?    Good luck!

[Texsox]

https://news.gallup.com/poll/317018/one-three-americans-not-covid-vaccine.aspx

Vaccine isn't going to be a savior. 

[JUSTgottaBELIEVE]

52 minutes ago, Texsox said:

https://news.gallup.com/poll/317018/one-three-americans-not-covid-vaccine.aspx

Vaccine isn't going to be a savior. 

And even with a vaccine, there are doubts it will be 100% effective. It’s effectiveness will likely be similar to the flu shot from what I’ve read recently. We’re going to have to learn to live with this for the rest of our lives most likely.

[NWINFan]

If my daughter was grade school age, I'd tell Trump I will decide when she goes back to school and otherwise he can just shove it.

[StrangeSox]

1 hour ago, JUSTgottaBELIEVE said:

And even with a vaccine, there are doubts it will be 100% effective. It’s effectiveness will likely be similar to the flu shot from what I’ve read recently. We’re going to have to learn to live with this for the rest of our lives most likely.

It'll depend on how long-lasting either naturally acquired or vaccine-induced immunity turns out to be, but it could basically become a "childhood" disease like roseola. The liklihood of it being completely eliminated from people and animal reservoirs is very, very low, but if it's just a thing that infants and toddlers catch that barely does anything at all to them, that's not such a big deal.

The flu vaccines aren't very effective because influenza viruses mutate like crazy. They have to make a guess months ahead of time what the most prominent strains will be and what they might mutate into over the course of a flu season. This virus so far seems to be pretty stable overall, and coronaviruses in general are much more stable than influenza ones.

 

2 hours ago, Texsox said:

https://news.gallup.com/poll/317018/one-three-americans-not-covid-vaccine.aspx

Vaccine isn't going to be a savior. 

This is a key part of the question, imo:

35% of Americans would not get free, FDA-approved vaccine if ready today

 

If the FDA were to somehow suddenly approve and distribute a vaccine today, I'd be very, very skeptical of exactly what was behind that approval. How many of us are eager to get the Russian government-approved vaccine right now? When you ask a question like that, it's not easy to get to the root of why people might be answering the way they're answering. So if you asked me that question, I might be part of the "no," and if not I'd be part of the "maybe." If instead you asked me about a vaccine available in, say, early January, I'd be a cautious "yes."

[StrangeSox]

UIUC has pioneered a saliva-based rapid test. Everyone who needs to be on-campus will be tested twice a week. And now they're making the technology available nationally. 

https://blogs.illinois.edu/view/7815/1904934500
T

Quote

 

he Executive Committee of the University of Illinois Board of Trustees on Monday created a new university-related organization as part of a broad effort to expand the reach of saliva-based testing pioneered by U of I researchers that supports widespread testing with rapid results to limit spread of the COVID-19 virus.

Known as Shield T3, the new organization will make the technology available nationally and was established in response to inquiries from universities and institutions across the country. Interest surged after researchers in Urbana-Champaign unveiled the technology to promote safety when on-campus instruction resumes later this month. Since then, it has been expanded to the U of I System’s universities in Chicago and Springfield.

Along with the new university-related organization, the U of I System has already created a new internal unit that is working to make the tests available in Illinois. The unit, known as SHIELD Illinois, will continue building current testing capacity, and hopes to ultimately offer testing to institutions and entities across the state.

The new initiatives grew from the breakthrough SHIELD program developed by Urbana-Champaign researchers. The name is a reference to their efforts to shield the campus community from the COVID-19 virus.

It features a saliva-based test that is easy-to-administer, scalable, sensitive and specific to SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19. The test produces rapid results, at costs significantly below current alternatives such as nasal swabs. Results are available within 2-6 hours rather than three to four days or more.

The quick turnaround time for test results is a key in curbing the virus, allowing isolation early enough to limit spread of the infection as well as narrowing down past exposure to allow more-effective contact tracing. It also identifies and isolates people with asymptomatic cases who would otherwise spread the virus unknowingly.

SHIELD gave rise to the new university-related organization created Monday, Shield T3, which will take the program nationwide. The name is a reference to the strategy’s three-part approach – targeting, testing and telling – and the new organization will operate independently from the statewide SHIELD Illinois program.

Shield T3 will operate as a limited liability company, and will be governed by a nine-member board of managers. Board members will be designated by the U of I Board of Trustees based on recommendations from the system president and the Urbana and Chicago chancellors. Staff will be named promptly after the entity is officially formed.

The statewide program, SHIELD Illinois, is already working to increase current testing capacity to serve institutions and entities in Illinois that have expressed interest in the new technology.

 

 

This test only costs $10 per, only needs some kind of test tube-like receptacle and a plastic ziploc type bag to seal it in, doesn't require any expensive or hard to get reagents, can be run in a high school science lab (they repurposed a vetmed lab at this university to exclusively run tests), and if you know how to spit in a tube you can self-administer in a matter of minutes, which reduces the need for PPE for collectors to gloves and masks. If this can become the new standard (its 88.9% accurate, retest of samples brings it up to 100%, which is better than the nasal swab) we could really speed up testing and get a handle on how widespread it really is.

Without cheap, rapid, point-of-care or at-home testing, we can't safely reopen schools or other large gathering places. If we can get enough testing in place, we can. Getting to millions of tests per day isn't an easy hurdle, and we wasted the last four months doing essentially nothing at the national level to get there, but we still have a chance to greatly improve our public health safety.

[NWINFan]

3 hours ago, JUSTgottaBELIEVE said:

And even with a vaccine, there are doubts it will be 100% effective. It’s effectiveness will likely be similar to the flu shot from what I’ve read recently. We’re going to have to learn to live with this for the rest of our lives most likely.

You're probably right about the vaccine although I would hope it would be of significant help. Learning to live with this will be and has been the hard part. First of all, the debate and discussion around the vaccine hasn't been healthy. Too much on the political side and too much on the out-and-out wacky side. All kinds of challenges lay ahead, and the simple act of coping remains the biggest challenge. 

[StrangeSox]