Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Tywin Manderly

Who Pays the Coronaman? - Covid #8

Recommended Posts

6 minutes ago, Fragile Bird said:

Good grief, the Japanese have only done 27,000 tests, in a country of 125 M.

Sounds like they were doing a Trump-like bury-your-head-in-sand stunt. Now that the Olympics have been postponed they are going to do a lockdown and start testing. There may be a brutal public emergency in Japan....

Think of their aged population too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Fragile Bird said:

Good grief, the Japanese have only done 27,000 tests, in a country of 125 M.

Sounds like they were doing a Trump-like bury-your-head-in-sand stunt. Now that the Olympics have been postponed they are going to do a lockdown and start testing. There may be a brutal public emergency in Japan....

Not necessarily. If the 27K tests were done early enough to isolate all contacts of the imported cases, it would be enough -- especially on an island nation. The easy way to tell that there is not enough testing is hospitals (and especially intensive care units) being overwhelmed by demand. If this is not happening in Japan, then they'll probably be fine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Other articles say the “reinfected” patients in China weren’t really reinfected just discharged too early because of lack of space in hospitals. But who the hell knows what’s true anymore? 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Ran said:

They are not wrong, exactly. The WHO's standard focus on systematic mass testing really is motivated by the question of resources available to care for people who are not accurately or certainly diagnosed (or diagnosed early) but present a burden to the health care system when ill. Countries that have the capacity to care for many ill people really don't have to test as widely so long as their capacity is not outstripped by cases.

The issue, of course, is the uncertainty about the rate and spread of the illness. But part of the problem is that the current testing regimen is potentially too broad in its findings -- it detects the RNA of the disease but that can be present in people who have already had it in the past but are no longer ill. This is the theory behind how some countries (Sweden, for example) are approaching it, that the tactics used by, for example, South Korea and Germany are a sledge hammer rather than a razor because the testing is too unspecific. 

We'll see how it plays out over the next couple of weeks, especially as antibody testing begins to ramp up.

 

Good points Ran. My issue is, she is dishonest and lying. She could have said: „We took the WHO recommendations into consideration but decided to follow a slightly different strategy.“ 
 

She is lying. Blatantly lying. She speaks as a politician, not as a medical professional. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Rippounet said:

I didn't really have any fever (just one bad night of shivers, which was one of the very first symptoms). Coughing otoh... yeah I did have coughing fits some days, but really nothing major, and not continuously through the two-ish weeks that the whole thing lasted.

From what I understand (and from what doctors told me), symptoms vary widely from one individual to another. The one constant seems to be respiratory trouble. Though the last doctor I saw yesterday did tell me my case was very typical of Covid-19. To be specific:
1) A bad day/night of shivers (and/or fever) signaling initial contamination.
2) Sore throat (and a blocked or runny nose) (around +2/+3 days). Also, general fatigue.
3) Respiratory troubles (with aching/burning/tickling sensations in the lungs) starting around +3/+4 days and lasting for about a week.
4) A distinct improvement (around +10days).
5) A last bad couple of days (with some wheezing in my case) before being in the clear (at around +14/+15 days).

 

Thank you very much for the detailed response. This is very helpful! 

I wonder though why I do get so detailed and important information on a fantasy board and not on the media which should inform the public... ?:wacko:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just read in the Guardian that first planes from China arrived in New York, carrying medical supplies. I wonder how Fox News and the many very intelligent right wingers in the US will try to spin THAT story...

We live in a new era. The age of US hyperpower is over. For good or for bad we will see. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I saw this video on how the virus spreads. Extremely informative.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We have 408 cases (+65 since yesterday). And I finished up the first bottle of Matusalem of today. This morning I was feeling especially awful about the world and I was telling my mother that I thought the dinosaurs were better off with their meteorite, then again, they didn’t have booze, so I hereby retract that opinion. 

I also let go of attempting to make sense of this situation. The news are completely unreliable and nobody really has any idea what the correct course of action is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Ran said:

They are not wrong, exactly. The WHO's standard focus on systematic mass testing really is motivated by the question of resources available to care for people who are not accurately or certainly diagnosed (or diagnosed early) but present a burden to the health care system when ill. Countries that have the capacity to care for many ill people really don't have to test as widely so long as their capacity is not outstripped by cases.

The issue, of course, is the uncertainty about the rate and spread of the illness. But part of the problem is that the current testing regimen is potentially too broad in its findings -- it detects the RNA of the disease but that can be present in people who have already had it in the past but are no longer ill. This is the theory behind how some countries (Sweden, for example) are approaching it, that the tactics used by, for example, South Korea and Germany are a sledge hammer rather than a razor because the testing is too unspecific. 

We'll see how it plays out over the next couple of weeks, especially as antibody testing begins to ramp up.

 

The WHO's recommendation is a containment strategy that is designed to minimize the numbers of people that get infected.  It only works when the number of infected is low.  When the number of infected is high, you do not have the resources to perform enough tests or to do the contract tracing, which is very labor and resource intensive.  Many countries have way too many cases to use this approach right now.

The viral RNA is only detectable when the patient is shedding the virus, which is during infection and for a short period of time after you've recovered while your body sheds dead virus.  You shouldn't be able to detect viral RNA after all the dead virus has been cleared by the body.  I think this can take up to a week or two, but I'm not sure.  There is probably quite a bit of variability that depends on things like the severity of the infection (severe infection means more virus to clear which takes longer).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 3/28/2020 at 11:15 AM, Maithanet said:

Continuing my series, Here's an update on the number of coronavirus test results by day in the US.

3/23 - 54k

3/24 - 64k

3/25 - 74k

3/26 - 97k

3/27 - 107k 

3/28 - 109k

However, I was looking more carefully at this dataset, and it is pretty disheartening.  The biggest caveat is that the 109k includes all the negatives for Maryland and Missouri in the past two weeks, which accounts for 21k negative tests that day.  Take those out and the number goes down to 88k.  But there were several states that didn't give an update (CT), states that updated the positive cases but not the total cases (AL, AZ, DE, HI, ME, MS, OH) or inexplicably that updated only NEGATIVE cases (WTF are you doing Michigan?)  Anyways, I remain incredibly frustrated both that testing is going up so slowly AND that states are not prioritizing keeping the public informed. 

Because of this, you get people making inferences from bad data like this:

Which sounds encouraging, but is almost total crap, because on 3/27 we the only state that didn't update positive cases was SC, whereas on 3/28 it was CT and MI (two states with exploding numbers of cases).  Those states have both updated since then, and together would put the 3/28 total over 20k.  Which destroys the whole thesis that positive cases are "leveling off".  AT BEST they're increasing a bit less quickly.  And even that might be a function of fewer tests (because of the MO/MD problem above), rather than actually fewer cases.

Edited by Maithanet

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
6 minutes ago, Maithanet said:

"snip"

Which sounds encouraging, but is almost total crap, because on 3/27 we the only state that didn't update positive cases was SC, whereas on 3/28 it was CT and MI (two states with exploding numbers of cases).  Those states have both updated since then, and together would put the 3/28 total over 20k.  Which destroys the whole thesis that positive cases are "leveling off".  AT BEST they're increasing a bit less quickly.  And even that might be a function of fewer tests (because of the MO/MD problem above), rather than actually fewer cases.

Every time I see some blowhard comment on a NYT article that "China's numbers can't be trusted" I point out the US numbers can't be trusted. Oh, the fury that causes!

Edited by Fragile Bird

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Fragile Bird said:

Every time I see some blowhard comment on a NYT article that "China's numbers can't be trusted" I point out the US numbers can't be trusted. Oh, the fury that causes!

That's the point, BIRD! No one can trust the numbers. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

That's the point, BIRD! No one can trust the numbers. 

Yep. It’s in a very cynic way almost funny. Stalin was right (one death a tragedy etc). For example, in Italy, France (and likely the UK) only those that died in hospital are statistically counted. Those that died at home or nursing home don’t go into the statistic. IRRC @fez posted an interesting hard data empirical analysis. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

That's the point, BIRD! No one can trust the numbers. 

I think my point was the naivete being shown by the posters. It is pretty funny, in a cynical way. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Maithanet said:

3/28 - 109k

However, I was looking more carefully at this dataset, and it is pretty disheartening.  The biggest caveat is that the 109k includes all the negatives for Maryland and Missouri in the past two weeks, which accounts for 21k negative tests that day.  Take those out and the number goes down to 88k.  But there were several states that didn't give an update (CT), states that updated the positive cases but not the total cases (AL, AZ, DE, HI, ME, MS, OH) or inexplicably that updated only NEGATIVE cases (WTF are you doing Michigan?)  Anyways, I remain incredibly frustrated both that testing is going up so slowly AND that states are not prioritizing keeping the public informed. 

Because of this, you get people making inferences from bad data like this:

Which sounds encouraging, but is almost total crap, because on 3/27 we the only state that didn't update positive cases was SC, whereas on 3/28 it was CT and MI (two states with exploding numbers of cases).  Those states have both updated since then, and together would put the 3/28 total over 20k.  Which destroys the whole thesis that positive cases are "leveling off".  AT BEST they're increasing a bit less quickly.  And even that might be a function of fewer tests (because of the MO/MD problem above), rather than actually fewer cases.

Yes, what we need to also know is how large is the backlog of tests waiting to be tested.  I still read that turnaround time is generally five or more days.  Senator Rand's test took 6 days to process.  This means there's still a huge backlog of samples to be tested, and that testing capacity is still not enough to meet demand yet, which will only get worse as the number of infected increases.

I think our number of infected numbers are counted when the results come in.  It would be more useful if it was counted based on when the sample was collected, along with showing the numbers of samples from that day which are still awaiting results.  It would be much easier to determine whether the infection rate was actually leveling off if it was presented this way.  Right now with the way the data is presented, it's impossible to tell.

Edited by Mudguard

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
41 minutes ago, Arakan said:

Yep. It’s in a very cynic way almost funny. Stalin was right (one death a tragedy etc). For example, in Italy, France (and likely the UK) only those that died in hospital are statistically counted. Those that died at home or nursing home don’t go into the statistic. IRRC @fez posted an interesting hard data empirical analysis. 

Interesting if true. And just that line of thought in and of itself shows what I'm saying. Who knows if your info is good either? This fucker moves to quickly, and we have far from the best people in charge in many places. 

Also, it's cynical, but your English is far better than my German. Only took one semester in college. I had an A going into the last couple of weeks of the year, but dropped it to get into a program heading to Argentina. It didn't help that most of the audio exercises where street conversations, because you could only hear two-thirds of the dialogue and Germans make up words on the fly! 

Edited by Tywin et al.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pretty remarkable video -- with the obvious caveat of data quality. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The numbers however that can be trusted: the number of shipments / trucks with massive amounts of medical supplies of every kind to Florida, three so far, another coming -- with little to nothing to New York, New Jersey, Maine, Michigan, Connecticut.  New Jersey received a one-day supply shipment. Once. 

Florida news is trumpeting headlines that all their medical supplies have been diverted to New York. This cannot be ... trusted . . . .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, Fragile Bird said:

I think my point was the naivete being shown by the posters. It is pretty funny, in a cynical way. 

To follow up from above, you've got schadenfreude all over your feathers! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...