Rate of infection 50 times higher?
- Thread starter afm199
- Start date
GAJ
Well-known member
So is this a sign that the tests aren't accurate or that a vaccine will not work?
https://www.politico.com/news/2020/...velt-sailors-test-positive-coronavirus-261873
https://www.politico.com/news/2020/...velt-sailors-test-positive-coronavirus-261873
WoodsChick
I Don't Do GPS
:laughing
tuxumino
purrfect
you really have to take any media "reports" with a grain of salt, their looking for clicks so they sensationalize the headlines, both on the right and left.
We're very early on in a global pandemic and if the Spanish flu is any indicator than we have a couple more years of this.
Keep your wits about you, avoid crowds and gatherings, be careful when you return to work and practice good hygiene.
If the antibodies don't impart immunity then this really is a different event then we've ever had before but it's more probable that we have along way to go in understanding this virus and the recovery of persons that got infected and than test positive again means something different than you can be reinfected.
Yakoo752
USN
I sat on a call yesterday with several healthcare/pharmaceutical consulting groups, learned a lot of the how and why this vaccine will be fast tracked.
They’re embedding the FDA directly into the study. The FDA is onsite daily reviewing outcomes and data. This will streamline the process significantly. Likely shaving off 1/2 the time to develop as it removes the redundant time.
There are about 8 vaccines right now that are promising. The one at Madera is the most promising. So promising that Faucis group is embedded as well.
They believe in the first “year” on release they will be able to manufacture about 6 million or so. This will go to front line workers exclusively. Then the next round to at risk members and so forth.
What needs to be determined is if this is a multi round vaccine aka boosters. It sounds like it will be necessary.
They’re embedding the FDA directly into the study. The FDA is onsite daily reviewing outcomes and data. This will streamline the process significantly. Likely shaving off 1/2 the time to develop as it removes the redundant time.
There are about 8 vaccines right now that are promising. The one at Madera is the most promising. So promising that Faucis group is embedded as well.
They believe in the first “year” on release they will be able to manufacture about 6 million or so. This will go to front line workers exclusively. Then the next round to at risk members and so forth.
What needs to be determined is if this is a multi round vaccine aka boosters. It sounds like it will be necessary.
Snaggy
Well-known member
I’m off on a tangent Budman, so can’t find the best reference, but consensus is that positive RNA tests in recovered individuals just reflects residual viral RNA fragments that haven’t been eliminated completely. Unless there’s a complete viral genome and intact viral structure, that’s just wreckage, debris left on the battlefield. In a few studies, they’ve looked for evidence that recovered individuals with positive tests have infected others and just haven’t found it. Certainly understand the caution by USN, though. A good antibody test would be reassuring here, almost everybody who recovers will have detectable antibody 2 weeks or so after symptoms develop.
Last edited:
Snaggy
Well-known member
Stanford antibody test does have a little shady backstory.
https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/stephaniemlee/stanford-coronavirus-neeleman-ioannidis-whistleblower
As you recall, the test suggested that large numbers of people had already worked their way through infection, implying the virus was less lethal than supposed, and re-opening was safe.
The chief researcher’s credibility is gravely damaged I think, and that's all you got in science. Failure to disclose financial interests is a horrible sin in medical research, let alone turning out a bad test.
https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/stephaniemlee/stanford-coronavirus-neeleman-ioannidis-whistleblower
As you recall, the test suggested that large numbers of people had already worked their way through infection, implying the virus was less lethal than supposed, and re-opening was safe.
The chief researcher’s credibility is gravely damaged I think, and that's all you got in science. Failure to disclose financial interests is a horrible sin in medical research, let alone turning out a bad test.
Last edited:
DannoXYZ
Well-known member
Note that New York has conducted their own study with similar results.
Well, it hasn't killed 650 000 people yet. Which is how many die from regular common cold/flu each winter. About 60-90 MILLION are infected every year. So I would consider coronavirus less lethal than that.
Heck, my 101-yr old grandmother in Montreal caught it from visiting nurse who didn't wear facemask. She was sick for couple weeks and have recovered just fine. I think I may have caught it in Jan on my trip through Hong Kong and Viet Nam. They were definitely taking it more serious than us back then ("Fake News"). Face-masks were given to everyone, everywhere: airports, hotels, restaurants, gas-stations, grocery stores, malls, etc. They were taking everyone's temperatures at airport, if you had a fever, that's it, you're not going anywhere. Instant quarantine, probably in kennel.
Media has whipped everything into frenzy. And showcasing idiot celebrities as experts instead of real scientists and doctors is simply irresponsible. All media stories should have to pass peer-review before being broadcasted!
Well, it hasn't killed 650 000 people yet. Which is how many die from regular common cold/flu each winter. About 60-90 MILLION are infected every year. So I would consider coronavirus less lethal than that.
Heck, my 101-yr old grandmother in Montreal caught it from visiting nurse who didn't wear facemask. She was sick for couple weeks and have recovered just fine. I think I may have caught it in Jan on my trip through Hong Kong and Viet Nam. They were definitely taking it more serious than us back then ("Fake News"). Face-masks were given to everyone, everywhere: airports, hotels, restaurants, gas-stations, grocery stores, malls, etc. They were taking everyone's temperatures at airport, if you had a fever, that's it, you're not going anywhere. Instant quarantine, probably in kennel.
Media has whipped everything into frenzy. And showcasing idiot celebrities as experts instead of real scientists and doctors is simply irresponsible. All media stories should have to pass peer-review before being broadcasted!
Last edited:
Climber
Well-known member
He engaged in the behavior, and worse, that he was accusing other scientists of doing. Don't look at me, look over there! That's the problem. :thumbdown
At least his shenanigans are exposed.
https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/#countries
93,858 covid-19 documented deaths in the US and 326,242 documented world wide. There's been enough evidence to suggest that there has been underreporting as well. This is all during worldwide social distancing, mask wearing, hygiene protocols, and SIP around much of the globe, including the US. Stuff we don't follow during an average flu season, and stuff that has caused a decline in the numbers we would see without measures.
You are entitled to your own opinion, but not your own facts. You are spreading fake news.
EDIT: I see you've changed your number and you are talking about worldwide flu stats.
https://www.medicinenet.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=208914
Even at that, seems like you're embellishing the numbers a bit by giving a number a little higher than the highest range estimate. A more accurate single number estimate would be 500,000.
Last edited:
DannoXYZ
Well-known member
There's probably over-reporting as hospitals have financial incentive to declare cause of death as COVID-19. So even if you've had chronic-bronchitis and pneumonia and it tips you over that last 5%, you would still be considered a victim. Deaths are known quantities.
What's not known are actual infections and that denominator number is most likely much larger since not everyone who've contracted it develops symptoms. And fewer of those actually come in for testing.
What's not known are actual infections and that denominator number is most likely much larger since not everyone who've contracted it develops symptoms. And fewer of those actually come in for testing.
Last edited:
Yakoo752
USN
Snaggy has addressed this numerous times.
Correct, we don't know actual infections because asympts don't get tested.
Last edited:
Snaggy
Well-known member
OK, this is the latest and best on "reinfection"
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/newsliverpool/recovered-patients-who-test-positive-again-are-not-contagious/ar-BB14mnqa
People that had positive tests well after being infected still did not pass the disease on to anyone else AND active/contagious viral particles could not be isolated from them.
The virus is kinda like a floppy disk. It comes in an envelope, has some plastic structural stuff, which would be proteins in the virus, and it has CODE.
You could chop that floppy up, dump in in the trash with hundreds of other shredded disks, and you could still recover code, probably for centuries. That's what viral infection tests detect, a fragment of the viruses RNA, or genetic code. You could even identify what the original content of the disk was if you bothered to read the fragments and put it back together by the overlaps. But you couldn't glue the disk back together and run it in a floppy drive. A virus is just executable malware for cells and it can't run unless it's intact, packaged, downloaded and unzipped. A fragment won't do it.
Last edited:
Smash Allen
Banned
love the floppy disk analogy snaggy, thank you 
GAJ
Well-known member
Archimedes
Fire Watcher
Wait, the 'reinfection is possible, there's no way to stop it, we're all gonna die!!!!' story that I read on CNN yesterday wasn't accurate? Strange. Particularly given everything Snaggy said above was publicly available information over a month ago when the very first potential 'reinfections' were highlighted. Nobody's being reinfected, they either never fully recovered or they're just showing remnants of the virus. But I'm sure we'll see that same story regurgitated every few weeks when another poorly researched anecdote bubbles to surface somewhere and the media needs to produce its daily dose of fear.
Snaggy
Well-known member
Speaking for myself, but I think most doctors would do the same, but in your example I absolutely would sign that off with Covid as a "Due to". No hesitation. I'm not sure I can explain it, maybe we just think differently about it, but what tipped the boat is important. If metastatic colon cancer were also present, I would list it further down, with "other conditions contributing". I think that's the standard, though I've posted before that death certificate entries are subjective.
I even think there are regional variations. I signed DC's in 2 other states before I moved to CA, no problems, but I had the coroner in SF reject mine and I had to do them over on multiple occasions until I figured out what they wanted.
Sometimes I wonder if there's international variation, to the point where stats for a particular disease are collected differently enough to be comparing apples to oranges across borders.