What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

*** OFFICIAL *** COVID-19 CoronaVirus Thread. Fresh epidemic fears as child pneumonia cases surge in Europe after China outbreak. NOW in USA (21 Viewers)

lod001 said:
IvanKaramazov said:
My university is no longer using the term "mask."  It's now a "face covering."  Sadly, I'm seeing the exact same euphemism at other schools too.

Can we please just stick with English, people?  It's called a mask.  It's always been called a mask.  Just use the short, concise, universally-understood word that already exists.
Click to expand...
I'm sure someone got offended by the term mask. 
Click to expand...
Or maybe they are trying to make it clear that all sorts of face coverings are sufficient and it doesn't need to be an actual mask.

 
parasaurolophus said:
I find it unlikely that just a couple people at a prison could infect 500. But i also dont know how such a prison is scheduled for eating, recreation, library, etc. But i also have no idea about the follow up. So did like 25 people end up sick? 

I think it is pretty conclusive that presymptomatic people are spreaders. 

I am not so sure about people that never developed symptoms. 
Click to expand...


Not sold.

These to me spell out a pattern where one person can spread it very widely:

https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/26/8/20-1274_article

But they go on:

The role of asymptomatic COVID-19 case-patients in spreading the disease is of great concern. Among 97 confirmed COVID-19 case-patients in this study, 4 (4.1%) remained asymptomatic during the 14-days of monitoring. This rate is lower than the 30.8% rate estimated in previous modeling (4). A case-patient series from Beijing, China, indicated that asymptomatic case-patients accounted for 5% (13/262) of patients transferred to a designated COVID-19 hospital (5). Our data might represent the likely proportion of asymptomatic COVID-19 infections in the community setting. We also found that, among 17 household contacts of asymptomatic case-patients, none had secondary infections. Previous reports have postulated that SARS-CoV-2 in asymptomatic (or presymptomatic) case-patients might become transmissible to others (6); however, given the high degree of self-quarantine and isolation measures that were instituted after March 8 among this cohort, our analyses might have not detected the actual transmissibility in asymptomatic COVID-19 case-patients. Robust mass testing of all suspected case-patients might have prevented asymptomatic transmission because asymptomatic persons were given information about their possible infection and therefore might have self-isolated from their household members.

I think this is exactly where I'm at.  I feel like that the data and postulation that there is asym transmission is spotty, at best.  With better contact tracing we need to find situations where we can conclusively say that people that developed symptoms/tested positive never came in contact with a symptomatic person.  

A lot of this thought process is contained here:

Caveat, there is a lot of skepticism of this news source. As always, please wear gloves and mask when navigating outside this website.

https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/02/paper-non-symptomatic-patient-transmitting-coronavirus-wrong

The German cluster does reveal another interesting aspect about the new virus, Drosten says. So far most attention has gone to patients who get seriously ill, but all four cases in Germany had a very mild infection. That may be true for many more patients, Drosten says, which may help the virus spread. “There is increasingly the sense that patients may just experience mild cold symptoms, while already shedding the virus,” he says. “Those are not symptoms that lead people to stay at home.” 
Click to expand...
My thought process is that as we communicate that any cold symptoms should be treated at CV and tested as such we can reduce transmission which is NOT happening without symptoms.  Poke holes.

 
Doug B said:
If you mean current COVID hospitalizations and not cumulative COVID hospitalizations, I agree with you that it's a helpful metric.
Click to expand...
IMHO it should be current covid hospitalizations/(current covid ICU hospitalizations+free ICU space) to give an idea of how close to capacity the hospital(s) is(are) running.

Potentially in free ICU space you could include short term additional capacity that could be brought online wirthin say 72 hours

Reason for ICU capacity is that I'd expect that to be more of a bottleneck that general hospital beds

 
Last edited by a moderator:
IvanKaramazov said:
My university is no longer using the term "mask."  It's now a "face covering."  Sadly, I'm seeing the exact same euphemism at other schools too.

Can we please just stick with English, people?  It's called a mask.  It's always been called a mask.  Just use the short, concise, universally-understood word that already exists.
Click to expand...
Your university is correct, and using an accurate term instead of less accurate word is proper English.   Hope you're not teaching languages.  

 
JbizzleMan said:
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/he-thought-coronavirus-was-fake-crisis-then-he-contracted-it-n1209246
Click to expand...
I'm not a fan of publishing stories based solely on something that the reporter saw on Facebook.

I mean, it looks like all the reporter did here was copy the guy's Facebook posts. There was no corroboration and no follow-up. Very lazy, very unprofessional.

That's the kind of "reporting" that you expect to see on Medium or Heavy.com, not a mainstream outlet like NBC.

 
:kicksrock:   

The U.S.-Canada border restrictions will be extended for another 30 days as both countries continue to combat the coronavirus pandemic, Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau announced Tuesday. 
Click to expand...
https://thehill.com/policy/international/498501-us-and-canada-extend-border-restrictions-to-june-21

ETA- just saw this at the bottom of that article which leaves me VERY unsure of it opening even in June:

The administration is reportedly working to unveil a new order that would indefinitely extend border restrictions amid the coronavirus outbreak, according to The New York Times. 

The move, which is reportedly being reviewed by several government agencies, would keep legal points of entry shuttered and restrict nonessential travel through Mexico and Canada until the director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention determines that the coronavirus no longer posed a threat to public health.
Click to expand...

 
Last edited by a moderator:
parasaurolophus said:
I dont understand this paragraph. 
Click to expand...
I am challenging the assertion that this virus spreads from asymptomatic carriers.  

In admittedly, a semi-exhaustive search, I can find no direct evidence for this assumption or assertion which has taken hold of the media and our policy.    

I would put forward a theory that you need to be symptomatic to spread this disease and those that are symptomatic are exceptionally contagious.  Moreso than we think possible, and can infect dozens upon dozens of people in a controlled environment.  

Our defense mechanisms need to be built smartly around this.  We should treat every cough and fever as a code red.  Testing those people, quickly, will help isolate the infected and bring down the community spread.

 
Doug B said:
Well, even hospitalizations ... that always accumulates, too. But most COVID-19 patients are discharged eventually.

If you mean current COVID hospitalizations and not cumulative COVID hospitalizations, I agree with you that it's a helpful metric.
Click to expand...
I don't care about totals.  To me, that's just sensationalizing the numbers.   They're completely meaningless.  Current is the key.  The most important things we should be interested in are:

  • Are hospitalizations rising? 
  • What is available hospital capacity?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
culdeus said:
I would put forward a theory that you need to be symptomatic to spread this disease and those that are symptomatic are exceptionally contagious.  Moreso than we think possible, and can infect dozens upon dozens of people in a controlled environment.
Click to expand...
We know the bolded to be true. See the first super spreader in korea who infected 60+ people in a couple of visits to church and the recent case of one guy infecting at least 23 at one disco in Seoul in one night. But you don't need to be "exceptionally contagious" for that. The R number is an average, afterall.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
IvanKaramazov said:
My university is no longer using the term "mask."  It's now a "face covering."  Sadly, I'm seeing the exact same euphemism at other schools too.

Can we please just stick with English, people?  It's called a mask.  It's always been called a mask.  Just use the short, concise, universally-understood word that already exists.
Click to expand...
This feels like a micro aggression.  I’m (subconsciously) offended.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
IvanKaramazov said:
My university is no longer using the term "mask."  It's now a "face covering."  Sadly, I'm seeing the exact same euphemism at other schools too.

Can we please just stick with English, people?  It's called a mask.  It's always been called a mask.  Just use the short, concise, universally-understood word that already exists.
Click to expand...
https://www.fanatics.com/face-coverings/c-3479951518+z-909602-2361973230?ab={wt-static_graphic}{dm-FDC}{pt-home}{al-SubA_spot}{ct-FACE_COVERINGS}

 
msommer said:
We know the bolded to be true. See the first super spreader in korea who infected 60+ people in a couple of visits to church and the recent case of one guy infecting at least 23 at one disco in Seoul in one night. But you don't need to be "exceptionally contagious" for that. The R number is an average, afterall.
Click to expand...
Which loops back.   Our fundamental understanding of disease doesn't usually have super spreaders.  So we try to explain this with things we do understand.  Like asymptomatic spread (HIV).  

 
culdeus said:
Which loops back.   Our fundamental understanding of disease doesn't usually have super spreaders.  So we try to explain this with things we do understand.  Like asymptomatic spread (HIV).  
Click to expand...
The term super spreader just refers to someone who through one thing or another have passed to disease on to a bunch of other people. It's not that some inherently are more contagious than others. You could become a super spreader by coughing in a filled elevator. Had you instead coughed after you left the elevator you wouldn't be.

 
glock said:
I'm going to go out on a limb here and guess that these non-mask wearing/no distancing types are all about "I'm not wearing no mask/distancing 'cuz I'm not afraid."

They still don't get that wearing a mask is a courtesy to others in case that they themselves have the 'rona. Not enough PSAs out there on this? :wall:
Click to expand...
Much like the person we all work with who brags about never taking a sick day and powering through their illnesses.

 
msommer said:
SK results in contact tracing would indicate otherwise
Click to expand...
Absolutely.  And their tracing you find very little (if any) asym spread.  I only say if any because I haven't seen a 100% compiled list of these reports   And secondarily you find no symptomatic spread below age 20.   

 
Last edited by a moderator:
[scooter] said:
I'm not a fan of publishing stories based solely on something that the reporter saw on Facebook.

I mean, it looks like all the reporter did here was copy the guy's Facebook posts. There was no corroboration and no follow-up. Very lazy, very unprofessional.

That's the kind of "reporting" that you expect to see on Medium or Heavy.com, not a mainstream outlet like NBC.
Click to expand...
The erosion of journalistic standards is a great tragedy.  You ever try to read The Oregonian now?  It's awful.  It's a couple of poorly written headlines and then "Ask Amy" or "Ask Carolyn"....so bad.

 
[scooter] said:
"Face covering" has been the CDC description since the directive was introduced on April 3rd.

It seems like it's their way of making a distinction between PPE (which should be prioritized for front-line workers) and non-medical-grade equipment.

edit: and also to underscore the fact that you can use a bandana, gaiter, baklava, or other non-mask item.
Click to expand...
The tastiest of face coverings

 
culdeus said:
Absolutely.  And their tracing you find very little (if any) asym spread.  I only say if any because I haven't seen a 100% compiled list of these reports   And secondarily you find no symptomatic spread below age 20.   
Click to expand...
Thanks for bringing this up. Interesting topic.

 
culdeus said:
And secondarily you find no symptomatic spread below age 20.   
Click to expand...
This is news to me. 

This article would seem to say yutes are less contagious, not incapable of symptomatic spread

She said that her research had shown that there was a much lower level of symptomatic infection in those under 20 years-old - perhaps as little as 20% of infections showing clinical symptoms.

“We think that children are less likely to get it so far but it is not certain,” she said. “We are very certain that children are less likely to have severe outcomes.
Click to expand...
More further down:

John Edmunds, a member of Britain’s Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (SAGE), told the same science committee hearing that it was striking how children did not seem to play much of a role in spreading the novel coronavirus.

“It is unusual that children don’t seem to play much of a role in transmission because for most respiratory viruses and bacteria they play a central role, but in this they don’t seem to,” said Edmunds, a professor at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine.

“There is only one documented outbreak associated with a school - which is amazing; you would normally expect most of the outbreaks to be associated with schools but yet in global literature there is only one documented study,” Edmunds said, citing a study of a French secondary school. “It is pretty remarkable.”

He said that, more broadly, the evidence of transmission from asymptomatic individuals - which may be about 30 or 40 percent of adults - was not clear.
Click to expand...

 
Are we equating asymptomatic to presymptomatic?

And people under 20 don't spread it they only get it?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
belljr said:
Are we equating asymptomatic to presymptomatic?

And people under 20 don't spread it they only get it?
Click to expand...
If we are trying to carve up words. I would say symptomatic is a binary response.  You either are or are not symptomatic, there is no will be.

And I would also assert people under 20 do not spread this.  Period.  

Edit to say that there is nearly no evidence that people under 20 spread this, the fact that they tend to be asymptomatic when they do catch it is important.  Because they are testing positive for antibodies, albeit at half the rate of adults, but they are certainly getting infected.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
culdeus said:
If we are trying to carve up words. I would say symptomatic is a binary response.  You either are or are not symptomatic, there is no will be.

And I would also assert people under 20 do not spread this.  Period.  
Click to expand...
So they just catch it?

I'm just trying to understand the discussion

 
belljr said:
Are we equating asymptomatic to presymptomatic?

And people under 20 don't spread it they only get it?
Click to expand...
This is an important distinction.

I dont find a hypothesis that asymptomatic people aren't really spreaders to be unreasonable.

I do find a hypothesis that presymptomatic people don't spread it to be a little far fetched. There is solid data that viral load peaks right near symptom onset. Seems unlikely it would go zero to 60 right after symptom onset. 

 
culdeus said:
If I had one wish in all this I wish the media would stop reporting Sunday and Monday case and death counts.  It promotes a huge amount of misinformation.  Not Georgia level misinformation, but it does allow data doctors the chance to make a false narrative.  

Gathering the cumulative count on Tuesday and reporting EOD Tuesday seems the best way forward.  
Click to expand...
If I had one wish...

 
I had to get COVID tested today.  I am having an endoscopy on Friday and the Dr's require I be COVID negative before the procedure.  Drive-up test, no problem whatsoever.  the swab up my nose wasn't so bad.

What they didn't tell me is I should self-quarantine until my procedure.  So now I'm involuntary WFH and holed up in my basement until Friday.

 
culdeus said:
If we are trying to carve up words. I would say symptomatic is a binary response.  You either are or are not symptomatic, there is no will be.

And I would also assert people under 20 do not spread this.  Period.  
Click to expand...
You are correct that there is either symptomatic or asymptomatic.

But the issue is that many times when a survey is done and it's claimed that there are X number of asymptomatic people, many of them eventually get symptoms and move into the symptomatic category.  

 
msommer said:
What you are asserting is your own hypothesis, right?
Click to expand...
Absolutely, but if there was evidence for this it would start to emerge.

Here's a wall of links on the topic that seems fair in perspective with information on both sides:  https://fullfact.org/health/covid-19-in-children/

I think it's fair to say at this point that we have no cases among the millions upon millions where we can say 100% a child brought COVID into a home, exclusively.  That matters for our ultimate response here, and matters for reopening of schools and the economy.  

 
Elderly woman across the street from me passed away today. I don't think she left the house ever because u saw neighbors bringing her food throughout the crisis. Not sure if covid related but detectives were there investigating for awhile. Im sure they'll chalk it up as covid. 

 
culdeus said:
Absolutely, but if there was evidence for this it would start to emerge.

Here's a wall of links on the topic that seems fair in perspective with information on both sides:  https://fullfact.org/health/covid-19-in-children/

I think it's fair to say at this point that we have no cases among the millions upon millions where we can say 100% a child brought COVID into a home, exclusively.  That matters for our ultimate response here, and matters for reopening of schools and the economy.  
Click to expand...
Are there any cases anywhere where we know 100% for certain how the person contracted it?  If there are, the percentage has to be so tiny as to be meaningless.

 
Rich Conway said:
Are there any cases anywhere where we know 100% for certain how the person contracted it?  If there are, the percentage has to be so tiny as to be meaningless.
Click to expand...
Yes, quite a bit in fact.  SK has done boatloads of work on this, and the CDC where they can directly trace infections has published reports, several are here.  

Several serological studies are due out very soon that will shed some light on this topic also.

 
culdeus said:
Yes, quite a bit in fact.  SK has done boatloads of work on this, and the CDC where they can directly trace infections has published reports, several are here.  

Several serological studies are due out very soon that will shed some light on this topic also.
Click to expand...
No link on the "here".  Admittedly, I haven't done a lot of research on this, but it seems to me that we can't know with 100% certainty how a person contracted this without ruling out asymptomatic spread (plus a whole lot more assumptions that vary by case).  But we can't rule out asymptomatic spread unless we know with 100% certainty how people have contracted it.  Seems like circular logic.

 
Rich Conway said:
No link on the "here".  Admittedly, I haven't done a lot of research on this, but it seems to me that we can't know with 100% certainty how a person contracted this without ruling out asymptomatic spread (plus a whole lot more assumptions that vary by case).  But we can't rule out asymptomatic spread unless we know with 100% certainty how people have contracted it.  Seems like circular logic.
Click to expand...
CDC is posting the ones that are interesting, the most famous so far has been here:  https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/26/7/20-0764_article

Other similar contact trace reports will be hosted https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/spotlight/coronavirus  

My understanding is the CDC will be posting several more similar reports in partnership with the British and other governments late this week.  

They have recently changed their spread guideline, perhaps even today (yesterday?) going so far as to say surfaces aren't a great way to catch this so it's moving quickly now.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

K
Coronavirus prevention
Replies
4
Views
324
JaxBill
JaxBill
nirad3
COVID-19 / CoronaVirus - terms/phrases
Replies
35
Views
623
Galileo
Galileo
Joe Bryant
Scared to ask but don't have anywhere else - Clay Travis Article?
2
Replies
71
Views
3K
roadkill1292
roadkill1292

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 22 (members: 0, guests: 22)
Top