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 (20 Viewers)

My son has been playing baseball for weeks. There is zero social distancing or masks worn by anyone.
If local "background radiation" levels of the virus are low enough, youth baseball in your area is probably reasonably safe. You're on Staten Island if my notebook is correct. Still, with the experience NYC had with COVID-19, you'd think at least some people in the stands would have on face coverings ... unless they're not sitting shoulder-to-shoulder or something.

The players and umps on the field should be OK. Dugouts are likely OK, depending on how the ambient air moves in and around them. For youth baseball around here, dugouts are just covered benches at ground level surrounded on three sides by chain-link fence ... breezes can pass right through.

Would the baseball parents and/or the local community be in a position to know if anyone attending games, coaching kids, etc. came down with COVID-19?

 
If family units are sleeping in their own campers/tents what's wrong with this? 

I get what you're saying though.  So many people not doing their part. For example I see tons of posts on Facebook about people and their kids ball tournaments how they took 2nd place over the weekend (baseball, softball, basketball).  Not sure how I feel about it as I guess it's ok if they take proper precautions then I see the team photos with their medals around their nexts.  Or groups of kids arms around each other posing for pictures...no masks anywhere.  Come on people :wall:
When I see the pics on facebook lets just say social distancing does not appear to be a priority. Group selfies, sitting right next to each other. Sharing food, drink pitchers etc etc.  

 
If local "background radiation" levels of the virus are low enough, youth baseball in your area is probably reasonably safe. You're on Staten Island if my notebook is correct. Still, with the experience NYC had with COVID-19, you'd think at least some people in the stands would have on face coverings ... unless they're not sitting shoulder-to-shoulder or something.

The players and umps on the field should be OK. Dugouts are likely OK, depending on how the ambient air moves in and around them. For youth baseball around here, dugouts are just covered benches at ground level surrounded on three sides by chain-link fence ... breezes can pass right through.

Would the baseball parents and/or the local community be in a position to know if anyone attending games, coaching kids, etc. came down with COVID-19?
I personally think the kids on the field are fine. I think the families watching should be wearing masks if they can't social distance. They're the ones who are gonna screw it up for the kids.

 
Fatigue is really going to set in at some point.

One of my son's friends basically hasnt been allowed out of the house for three months. Obviously his parents decided to say screw it because all of a sudden he can go literally anywhere. 
That’s the biggest problem. I do most of the shopping and food pickup because I’ve been out working through it all. My wife and kids have been at home almost exclusively and there have been several times where she has just wanted to give up and just go live life.

There needs to be a balance and we’ve tried to do that by doing little things that can be safely done without increasing our risk much. I took a little bit of flack because she went out and got a massage. That’s something that typically should be safe if they take the precautions they’re supposed to. It’s not the greatest thing but it keeps the cabin fever down a bit.

The problem is that even though she’s super paranoid of getting COVID, she prone to making bad choices like not leaving her massage when the employee refused to wear a mask or eating inside at the bar of a sushi restaurant instead of on the patio. Obvious choices for most but not always for people not in those situations daily.

Like everything, moderation is key. We will never have zero risk and for sanity sake, we have to continue to live a bit and there are ways to do that safely. If we continue to go from one extreme to the other, we will continue to see outbreaks like what’s happening in the south and west. I’m already starting to see people post about the big parties that they’re gonna throw ‘once this is over’.

 
When I see the pics on facebook lets just say social distancing does not appear to be a priority. Group selfies, sitting right next to each other. Sharing food, drink pitchers etc etc.  
I personally have done the same. Even shaken hands OMG

numbers are real low here so I personally feel its safe.

We have to live life at some point. I agree in states where numbers aren't low, more precautions need to be taken. But where i am in Staten Island, we have had 20 or so positive tests a day for weeks now. Outdoor gatherings,  family parties, friends hanging out, kids activities, etc all seem pretty safe when numbers are low and staying low.

 
Would the baseball parents and/or the local community be in a position to know if anyone attending games, coaching kids, etc. came down with COVID-19?
I personally think the kids on the field are fine. I think the families watching should be wearing masks if they can't social distance. They're the ones who are gonna screw it up for the kids.
That's the kind of thing I wonder about in communities that, culturally, kind of deny that COVID-19 is much of a risk.

If a parent in your kid's league caught COVID ... I am expecting them to "hide out" and just quit attending games but also to feel social pressure to keep it a secret from other parents. Maybe that's an unfair assumption on my part, expecting that admitting to a COVID infection is a sign of weakness in your neck of the woods.

Or something. I am admittedly a little perplexed about communities that don't have a healthy (not panicky) 'fear' of COVID-19. 

...

To the part in red -- Can they socially distance in the stands? Are there stands, or do people spread out lawn chairs at ground level in foul territory?

 
That's the kind of thing I wonder about in communities that, culturally, kind of deny that COVID-19 is much of a risk.

If a parent in your kid's league caught COVID ... I am expecting them to "hide out" and just quit attending games but also to feel social pressure to keep it a secret from other parents. Maybe that's an unfair assumption on my part, expecting that admitting to a COVID infection is a sign of weakness in your neck of the woods.

Or something. I am admittedly a little perplexed about communities that don't have a healthy (not panicky) 'fear' of COVID-19. 

...

To the part in red -- Can they socially distance in the stands? Are there stands, or do people spread out lawn chairs at ground level in foul territory?
Yes its possible 

 
I personally have done the same. Even shaken hands OMG

numbers are real low here so I personally feel its safe.

We have to live life at some point. I agree in states where numbers aren't low, more precautions need to be taken. But where i am in Staten Island, we have had 20 or so positive tests a day for weeks now. Outdoor gatherings,  family parties, friends hanging out, kids activities, etc all seem pretty safe when numbers are low and staying low.
The way to keep the numbers that low is by continuing to take basic precautions even when it doesn’t seem like you need to. If you wait for the numbers to go back up, it’s probably too late. Your area is gonna be high risk for rebound spikes because people around the US in hotspots see the low numbers and that makes it a popular travel destination.

It’s the same reason why when Arizona was opening up a couple months ago and everyone was relaxing their precautions, I was doing the opposite. Not saying to not live your life but do it smartly and safely so that the numbers stay low.

 
What is the reason we don't have a rapid test yet?
We do -- results can come back in less than two hours, maybe faster than that. The real question is "Why isn't it deployed far and wide, and produced in vast quantities?" That, I don't know. Maybe it's a manufacturing limitation, maybe it's a professional limitation on the number of available personnel to conduct tests ... I don't know.

Centralizing testing probably saves a lot of money ... but can also lead to procedural bottlenecks.

EDIT: Read more here.

Provider-administered swab tests for coronavirus

Molecular tests typically involve inserting a 6-inch long swab into the back of the nasal passage through one nostril and rotating the swab several times for 15 seconds. This process is then repeated through the other nostril. The swab is then inserted into a container and sent to a lab for testing. 

Alternative testing methods have recently been introduced, including rapid diagnostic tests that can be analyzed where the sample is collected at point-of-care (e.g., clinic or doctor’s office), and results are available in minutes. There are currently four authorized rapid point-of-care diagnostic tests, including ID NOW by Abbott, Xpert Xpress by Cepheid, Accula by Mesa Biotech, and Cue COVID-19 Test by Cue Health, Inc.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
That's the kind of thing I wonder about in communities that, culturally, kind of deny that COVID-19 is much of a risk.

If a parent in your kid's league caught COVID ... I am expecting them to "hide out" and just quit attending games but also to feel social pressure to keep it a secret from other parents. Maybe that's an unfair assumption on my part, expecting that admitting to a COVID infection is a sign of weakness in your neck of the woods.

Or something. I am admittedly a little perplexed about communities that don't have a healthy (not panicky) 'fear' of COVID-19. 

...

To the part in red -- Can they socially distance in the stands? Are there stands, or do people spread out lawn chairs at ground level in foul territory?
And for kids it’s also more likely that they’re only going to have mild symptoms, making it easy for parents to write it off as being a cold or allergies. Without regular testing, outbreaks in schools will only be discovered when the parents get sick.

 
I mean all those trips were cancelled on you, there was no realistic option to do any of those post about March 17th.  I'm not sure exactly what you are saying here relative to that.

I mean tbh most outdoor focused activities and vacations can be quite safe.  This partially explains the boom in camper sales.  
Only the Cayman Islands and Hawaii would've been technically cancelled without me having a say in it. Slopes were still open when we cancelled our ski trip. Could've easily still had my son's b-day party. Road trip to West Coast - no problem. Camping - no problem.

 
Like everything, moderation is key. We will never have zero risk and for sanity sake, we have to continue to live a bit and there are ways to do that safely. If we continue to go from one extreme to the other, we will continue to see outbreaks like what’s happening in the south and west. I’m already starting to see people post about the big parties that they’re gonna throw ‘once this is over’.
Thankfully, I have a rather precocious 7 year old. He is missing his friends but he completely understands the situation even though he doesn't like it. My wife has more issues than he does and she is constantly asking if we are doing the right thing by not hanging out with a bunch of other families. We've been playing a ton of games: Ticket to Ride, Settlers of Catan, Axis and Allies, Clue, Munchkin, and random sports around the house. My son has also probably memorized 1/2 of the Hamilton musical. The hardest thing has been limiting screen time whether that be TV, iPad, laptop etc. etc. We've pretty much thrown in the towel regarding that. 

 
We do -- results can come back in less than two hours, maybe faster than that. The real question is "Why isn't it deployed far and wide, and produced in vast quantities?" That, I don't know. Maybe it's a manufacturing limitation, maybe it's a professional limitation on the number of available personnel to conduct tests ... I don't know.

Centralizing testing probably saves a lot of money ... but can also lead to procedural bottlenecks.

EDIT: Read more here.
I came across a Harvard epidemiologist on twitter, and he is advocating for a change in how we do testing. He is suggesting using tests that may be less sensitive, but are inexpensive and can be done at home. The idea being is you could test yourself daily, and you may get a false negative one day, but when your viral load increases you would test positive the next day. Below is an opinion piece written in the NY Times, and here is a great video that explains how these tests could work. 

Simple at-home tests for the coronavirus, some that involve spitting into a small tube of solution, could be the key to expanding testing and impeding the spread of the pandemic. The Food and Drug Administration should encourage their development and then fast track approval.

One variety, paper-strip tests, are inexpensive and easy enough to make that Americans could test themselves every day. You would simply spit into a tube of saline solution and insert a small piece of paper embedded with a strip of protein. If you are infected with enough of the virus, the strip will change color within 15 minutes.

Your next step would be to self-quarantine, notify your doctor and confirm the result with a standard swab test — the polymerase chain reaction nasal swab. Confirmation would give public health officials key information on the virus’s spread and confirm that you should remain in quarantine until your daily test turned negative.

E25Bio, Sherlock Biosciences, Mammoth Biosciences, and an increasing number of academic research laboratories are in the late stages of developing paper-strip and other simple, daily Covid-19 tests. Some of the daily tests are in trials and proving highly effective.

The strips could be mass produced in a matter of weeks and freely supplied by the government to everyone in the country. The price per person would be from $1 to $5 a day, a considerable sum for the entire population, but remarkably cost effective.

Screening the population for infection, however, is different from determining whether someone is infected.

The Food and Drug Administration has recently approved group P.C.R. testing to screen large numbers of people. (Group testing, which is used in other countries, assays multiple swab samples at once and if the virus is found, individuals are tested.) So there is reason to hope that the F.D.A. will also approve paper-strip tests as a way to find out where the virus has spread.

Hope needs to be replaced with surety. Biotech companies are reluctant to take these tests to market for fear that the F.D.A. will disparage them for being less sensitive than the nasal swab tests. The nasal swab test can detect extremely small quantities of viral particles.

But the problem with the nasal swab tests is their cost, which ranges from $50 to $150. They also require laboratory assessment, which can take days. That is why, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reports, nine of 10 infected Americans never get tested. It’s also why those who do get tested, generally are tested only once.

Clearly, if you’re infected and never tested, you can unwittingly spread the virus. And if you are tested, but just once, and the test comes back negative, you may still later become infectious. Finally, if your polymerase chain reaction swab is positive, but it takes five days to learn the result, you may spend those days transmitting the disease.

Group testing can dramatically lower nasal-swab-testing costs for universities and large companies. But absent federal coordination, it can’t be used routinely to test all Americans.

We need the best means of detecting and containing the virus, not a perfect test that no one can use. That is where paper-strip testing would have the advantage. Their ability to be used more frequently would trump the nasal swab test’s higher sensitivity. Paper-strip testing would also sharply improve diagnosis as those with a positive paper-strip test would still be given a nasal swab test.

Would everyone take a paper-strip test every day? Here market incentives will surely help. Once they are provided to all, employers would likely require their workers to take time-dated pictures of their negative test results before coming to work. Colleges would require students to do the same before coming to class. Restaurants could accept reservations only if accompanied by negative-test pictures. In short, everyone will have an incentive to test themselves daily to participate fully in the economy and return to normal life.

Once paper strips’ efficacy is definitively proved and they are cleared by the F.D.A., Congress can quickly authorize the production and distribution, for free, of a year’s supply to all Americans. Then we’ll have not only a true day-to-day sense of Covid-19’s path. We’ll also have a far better means to quickly contain and end this terrible plague.
 
Have you BEEN camping with multiple families?
Yes.  Not that difficult to social distance even doing things like sitting around a campfire.  Like others have said outside in fresh air the transmission is extremely low so no different than ball teams sharing a bench for example.    Now if this was a Man in the Yellow Hat camping trip...well that's completely different.

 
I came across a Harvard epidemiologist on twitter, and he is advocating for a change in how we do testing. He is suggesting using tests that may be less sensitive, but are inexpensive and can be done at home. The idea being is you could test yourself daily, and you may get a false negative one day, but when your viral load increases you would test positive the next day. Below is an opinion piece written in the NY Times, and here is a great video that explains how these tests could work. 

Simple at-home tests for the coronavirus, some that involve spitting into a small tube of solution, could be the key to expanding testing and impeding the spread of the pandemic. The Food and Drug Administration should encourage their development and then fast track approval.

One variety, paper-strip tests, are inexpensive and easy enough to make that Americans could test themselves every day. You would simply spit into a tube of saline solution and insert a small piece of paper embedded with a strip of protein. If you are infected with enough of the virus, the strip will change color within 15 minutes.

Your next step would be to self-quarantine, notify your doctor and confirm the result with a standard swab test — the polymerase chain reaction nasal swab. Confirmation would give public health officials key information on the virus’s spread and confirm that you should remain in quarantine until your daily test turned negative.

E25Bio, Sherlock Biosciences, Mammoth Biosciences, and an increasing number of academic research laboratories are in the late stages of developing paper-strip and other simple, daily Covid-19 tests. Some of the daily tests are in trials and proving highly effective.

The strips could be mass produced in a matter of weeks and freely supplied by the government to everyone in the country. The price per person would be from $1 to $5 a day, a considerable sum for the entire population, but remarkably cost effective.

Screening the population for infection, however, is different from determining whether someone is infected.

The Food and Drug Administration has recently approved group P.C.R. testing to screen large numbers of people. (Group testing, which is used in other countries, assays multiple swab samples at once and if the virus is found, individuals are tested.) So there is reason to hope that the F.D.A. will also approve paper-strip tests as a way to find out where the virus has spread.

Hope needs to be replaced with surety. Biotech companies are reluctant to take these tests to market for fear that the F.D.A. will disparage them for being less sensitive than the nasal swab tests. The nasal swab test can detect extremely small quantities of viral particles.

But the problem with the nasal swab tests is their cost, which ranges from $50 to $150. They also require laboratory assessment, which can take days. That is why, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reports, nine of 10 infected Americans never get tested. It’s also why those who do get tested, generally are tested only once.

Clearly, if you’re infected and never tested, you can unwittingly spread the virus. And if you are tested, but just once, and the test comes back negative, you may still later become infectious. Finally, if your polymerase chain reaction swab is positive, but it takes five days to learn the result, you may spend those days transmitting the disease.

Group testing can dramatically lower nasal-swab-testing costs for universities and large companies. But absent federal coordination, it can’t be used routinely to test all Americans.

We need the best means of detecting and containing the virus, not a perfect test that no one can use. That is where paper-strip testing would have the advantage. Their ability to be used more frequently would trump the nasal swab test’s higher sensitivity. Paper-strip testing would also sharply improve diagnosis as those with a positive paper-strip test would still be given a nasal swab test.

Would everyone take a paper-strip test every day? Here market incentives will surely help. Once they are provided to all, employers would likely require their workers to take time-dated pictures of their negative test results before coming to work. Colleges would require students to do the same before coming to class. Restaurants could accept reservations only if accompanied by negative-test pictures. In short, everyone will have an incentive to test themselves daily to participate fully in the economy and return to normal life.

Once paper strips’ efficacy is definitively proved and they are cleared by the F.D.A., Congress can quickly authorize the production and distribution, for free, of a year’s supply to all Americans. Then we’ll have not only a true day-to-day sense of Covid-19’s path. We’ll also have a far better means to quickly contain and end this terrible plague.
This is solid. Daily, accurate testing would go a long way in stamping out the virus. 

 
Yes.  Not that difficult to social distance even doing things like sitting around a campfire.  Like others have said outside in fresh air the transmission is extremely low so no different than ball teams sharing a bench for example.    Now if this was a Man in the Yellow Hat camping trip...well that's completely different.
You know Steve is a super spreader for sure. 

 
I came across a Harvard epidemiologist on twitter, and he is advocating for a change in how we do testing. He is suggesting using tests that may be less sensitive, but are inexpensive and can be done at home. The idea being is you could test yourself daily, and you may get a false negative one day, but when your viral load increases you would test positive the next day. Below is an opinion piece written in the NY Times, and here is a great video that explains how these tests could work. 

Simple at-home tests for the coronavirus, some that involve spitting into a small tube of solution, could be the key to expanding testing and impeding the spread of the pandemic. The Food and Drug Administration should encourage their development and then fast track approval.

One variety, paper-strip tests, are inexpensive and easy enough to make that Americans could test themselves every day. You would simply spit into a tube of saline solution and insert a small piece of paper embedded with a strip of protein. If you are infected with enough of the virus, the strip will change color within 15 minutes.

Your next step would be to self-quarantine, notify your doctor and confirm the result with a standard swab test — the polymerase chain reaction nasal swab. Confirmation would give public health officials key information on the virus’s spread and confirm that you should remain in quarantine until your daily test turned negative.

E25Bio, Sherlock Biosciences, Mammoth Biosciences, and an increasing number of academic research laboratories are in the late stages of developing paper-strip and other simple, daily Covid-19 tests. Some of the daily tests are in trials and proving highly effective.

The strips could be mass produced in a matter of weeks and freely supplied by the government to everyone in the country. The price per person would be from $1 to $5 a day, a considerable sum for the entire population, but remarkably cost effective.

Screening the population for infection, however, is different from determining whether someone is infected.

The Food and Drug Administration has recently approved group P.C.R. testing to screen large numbers of people. (Group testing, which is used in other countries, assays multiple swab samples at once and if the virus is found, individuals are tested.) So there is reason to hope that the F.D.A. will also approve paper-strip tests as a way to find out where the virus has spread.

Hope needs to be replaced with surety. Biotech companies are reluctant to take these tests to market for fear that the F.D.A. will disparage them for being less sensitive than the nasal swab tests. The nasal swab test can detect extremely small quantities of viral particles.

But the problem with the nasal swab tests is their cost, which ranges from $50 to $150. They also require laboratory assessment, which can take days. That is why, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reports, nine of 10 infected Americans never get tested. It’s also why those who do get tested, generally are tested only once.

Clearly, if you’re infected and never tested, you can unwittingly spread the virus. And if you are tested, but just once, and the test comes back negative, you may still later become infectious. Finally, if your polymerase chain reaction swab is positive, but it takes five days to learn the result, you may spend those days transmitting the disease.

Group testing can dramatically lower nasal-swab-testing costs for universities and large companies. But absent federal coordination, it can’t be used routinely to test all Americans.

We need the best means of detecting and containing the virus, not a perfect test that no one can use. That is where paper-strip testing would have the advantage. Their ability to be used more frequently would trump the nasal swab test’s higher sensitivity. Paper-strip testing would also sharply improve diagnosis as those with a positive paper-strip test would still be given a nasal swab test.

Would everyone take a paper-strip test every day? Here market incentives will surely help. Once they are provided to all, employers would likely require their workers to take time-dated pictures of their negative test results before coming to work. Colleges would require students to do the same before coming to class. Restaurants could accept reservations only if accompanied by negative-test pictures. In short, everyone will have an incentive to test themselves daily to participate fully in the economy and return to normal life.

Once paper strips’ efficacy is definitively proved and they are cleared by the F.D.A., Congress can quickly authorize the production and distribution, for free, of a year’s supply to all Americans. Then we’ll have not only a true day-to-day sense of Covid-19’s path. We’ll also have a far better means to quickly contain and end this terrible plague.
Yeah I linked the video last week, seems to make sense.  Test alot with cheap not as sensitive tests.

 
Yes.  Not that difficult to social distance even doing things like sitting around a campfire.  Like others have said outside in fresh air the transmission is extremely low so no different than ball teams sharing a bench for example.    Now if this was a Man in the Yellow Hat camping trip...well that's completely different.
Except for the fact that - and know I'm going out on a limb here- I'm betting that families that are willing to go on a multi family camping trip at this point  in time are less the one's overly concerned about coronaprotocol...and more the ones with an itch that "needs" scratching. IMHO of course.

(done just about every kind of camping)

 
Some relatively good news from Florida. 

Florida Reports 8,892 New Coronavirus Cases, Smallest Increase in 20 Days

>>  Another 77 Florida residents were confirmed to have died COVID-related deaths, according to the figures released Monday. The death toll increase reported Monday and Sunday were the lowest numbers in two weeks. Newly confirmed death numbers tend to be relatively low over weekends.

The virus-related death toll in the state now stands at 5, 931.

But even looking at seven-day averages, it appears the impact of the virus has leveled off across the state, although it remains at relatively high levels. <<
:tinfoilhat:

Are these CDC numbers or WH reported numbers

 
We do -- results can come back in less than two hours, maybe faster than that. The real question is "Why isn't it deployed far and wide, and produced in vast quantities?" That, I don't know. Maybe it's a manufacturing limitation, maybe it's a professional limitation on the number of available personnel to conduct tests ... I don't know.

Centralizing testing probably saves a lot of money ... but can also lead to procedural bottlenecks.

EDIT: Read more here.
Just read an article on this. The problem appears to be that there are only a handful of labs making the test kits to run on a handful of machines. EVERYTHING is automated in the US, and while there is plenty of capacity on the actual machines hospitals and labs have on hand, there is a huge shortage of the disposable parts (plastic trays, chemical test kits, etc.) that go with them for a specific test. All the chemical and disposable parts kits are proprietary to the specific machines....creating a huge bottleneck. (Kind of like printer cartridges...the crap inside might be the same for a thousand models, but only one actually fits your home printer). It;s stupid.....and should be no surprise because...America...profits above all else. This system lets supply companies make huge money on kits while hospitals and labs spend less on people and the training to run tests. IN many other places (esp. Asia) they use multi step analytical tests that utilize more generic chemicals more easily acquired (and cheaper), but more specialized training for the people doing the testing

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I personally have done the same. Even shaken hands OMG

numbers are real low here so I personally feel its safe.

We have to live life at some point. I agree in states where numbers aren't low, more precautions need to be taken. But where i am in Staten Island, we have had 20 or so positive tests a day for weeks now. Outdoor gatherings,  family parties, friends hanging out, kids activities, etc all seem pretty safe when numbers are low and staying low.
It has to start somewhere. Hawaii’s new cases were under three per day for a month. While still nowhere near NYC, we’ve had record numbers three of the last four days, including our highest of 73 on Saturday.

A single superspreader may infect over 50+ people.

There appear to be many infected people who aren’t tested during their period of contagion.

With all that in mind,  how do you determine what constitutes “safe”? What is a “real low” case burden?

 
We do -- results can come back in less than two hours, maybe faster than that. The real question is "Why isn't it deployed far and wide, and produced in vast quantities?" That, I don't know. Maybe it's a manufacturing limitation, maybe it's a professional limitation on the number of available personnel to conduct tests ... I don't know.

Centralizing testing probably saves a lot of money ... but can also lead to procedural bottlenecks.

EDIT: Read more here.
University of Illinois will do 24 hr rapid saliva testing on students. Not sure if that is exactly rapid, but faster than some I've read about that take weeks. I think the U of I saliva test is something they developed so not sure what other schools are doing, but if large schools are going to test 50,000 students regularly get ready for a huge new case increase in the fall.

 
We do -- results can come back in less than two hours, maybe faster than that. The real question is "Why isn't it deployed far and wide, and produced in vast quantities?" That, I don't know. Maybe it's a manufacturing limitation, maybe it's a professional limitation on the number of available personnel to conduct tests ... I don't know.

Centralizing testing probably saves a lot of money ... but can also lead to procedural bottlenecks.

EDIT: Read more here.
There are 15 minute rapid tests, but there just aren’t enough of them, the reagents to process them, or people to analyze the results.

 
The way to keep the numbers that low is by continuing to take basic precautions even when it doesn’t seem like you need to. If you wait for the numbers to go back up, it’s probably too late. Your area is gonna be high risk for rebound spikes because people around the US in hotspots see the low numbers and that makes it a popular travel destination.

It’s the same reason why when Arizona was opening up a couple months ago and everyone was relaxing their precautions, I was doing the opposite. Not saying to not live your life but do it smartly and safely so that the numbers stay low.
No one is coming to Staten Island for vacation. Lol

 
Had a family member test positive Friday. We were at their house the previous weekend. She started feeling bad a couple days after that and went to the doc on Tuesday. Tested negative for Covid, but they wanted her to come back in 5 days for a retest. She did Friday and was positive. She's fine, relatively speaking. Says it's just flu-like symptoms and fatigue. My kids and I feel fine, but I'm keeping them at home for this week (it's been 8 days since we were around her). I'm back to working from home for this week and will be social distancing on a remote beach next week. 🍺 

 
It has to start somewhere. Hawaii’s new cases were under three per day for a month. While still nowhere near NYC, we’ve had record numbers three of the last four days, including our highest of 73 on Saturday.

A single superspreader may infect over 50+ people.

There appear to be many infected people who aren’t tested during their period of contagion.

With all that in mind,  how do you determine what constitutes “safe”? What is a “real low” case burden?
Real low is dependent on each location and their hospital capacity. On Staten Island, there are over 450k residents and 3 hospitals which only have a few covid patients in each. Id say 20ish per day is very low.

What constitutes "safe" IMO is masks indoors, visit people outdoors, wash hands, and don't go anywhere if you are sick. Also keep your circle of friends and family smaller than usual. Maybe this is not the best time to visit your aunt who you see once a year. Also, stay local. No out of state trips or out of state visitors.

I know the above isn't foolproof but its the amount of risk and relative safety balance i am willing to take.

 
Just read an article on this. The problem appears to be that there are only a handful of labs making the test kits to run on a handful of machines. EVERYTHING is automated in the US, and while there is plenty of capacity on the actual machines hospitals and labs have on hand, there is a huge shortage of the disposable parts (plastic trays, chemical test kits, etc.) that go with them for a specific test. All the chemical and disposable parts kits are proprietary to the specific machines....creating a huge bottleneck. (Kind of like printer cartridges...the crap inside might be the same for a thousand models, but only one actually fits your home printer). It;s stupid.....and should be no surprise because...America...profits above all else. This system lets supply companies make huge money on kits while hospitals and labs spend less on people and the training to run tests. IN many other places (esp. Asia) they use multi step analytical tests that utilize more generic chemicals more easily acquired (and cheaper), but more specialized training for the people doing the testing
Yep, worked for one of these companies for a couple years.  Very much like the home printer market.  Give away the machines, make bank on the consumables.

 
Someone should be held responsible for these utter bull#### stories.

The headline is embarrassing, the hospital is embarrassing, the quotes are embarrassing.  All around people should be ashamed.

What in the actual ####?  
 Meh. Of all the misleading pandemic stories, this is pretty low on the outrage scale. Doctors in many medical centers were briefed on the possibility of emergency triage due to scarcity of resources, including not treating those who would otherwise be treated. It happened at my hospital, and we have far fewer cars than hotspots in TX.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
 Meh. Of all the misleading pandemic stories, this is petty low on the outrage scale. Doctors in many medical centers were briefed on the possibility of emergency triage due to scarcity of resources, including not treating those who would otherwise be treated. It happened at my hospital, and we have far fewer cars than hotspots in TX.
Calling this facility a hospital is a farce... I'll eat my shorts if that place had 50 beds when I was last there.  They don't even have an ICU (unless that crap hole built one in the last year).

Sending people home to die?  How about 30 minutes down the road to a real hospital?  I loved the quote about having to send them 1000's of miles away.

Texas hospital forced to set up 'death panel' as Covid-19 cases surge ... seriously, the media has no shame.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Been down at the beaches in Florida.    Going great.   Wearing masks at the grocery store and inside at restaurants.    All is fine.   Seems pretty normal to me.   Been going down here for a decade and I can't tell much of a difference not counting masks.  Alot of people are wearing masks which is good even though the dumb state has not said they have to

 
Last edited by a moderator:
The stadium headline utterly ridiculous.  Why not a death panel in a stadium?  I mean #### it right?

NPR needs to give themselves a gold star.  Imagine that.. reporting facts without hyperbole. :thumbup:

eta - granted the "record setting" stuff is still hyperbole and misleading (cumulative).. but whatever.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Can't figure out why my family doesn't have this already.

Both nextdoor neighbors just tested + with symptoms (not serious), all 3 of the families we hang out with on weekends have tested positive for antibodies, my wife appears to be the only one in her boot camp class that didn't get it, wife's office had 2 positives, both kids have played sports with kids/parents that tested positive in the last couple weeks, I'm in and out of hospitals every day. 

I took a second antibody and wife took first last week... negative. 

Waiting.... :kicksrock:

 
Calling this facility a hospital is a farce... I'll eat my shorts if that place had 50 beds when I was last there.  They don't even have an ICU (unless that crap hole built one in the last year).

Sending people home to die?  How about 30 minutes down the road to a real hospital?  I loved the quote about having to send them 1000's of miles away.

Texas hospital forced to set up 'death panel' as Covid-19 cases surge ... seriously, the media has no shame.
A fifty bed hospital is still a hospital....And transporting isolated patients during a health crisis, when ambulances and larger facilities are also busy, isn’t as easy as you think.

’Death panel’ is a political buzzword, and definitively fodder for mouth-breathing hysteria among certain segments of the population. But the idea of limiting care based on bed availability has been discussed in hospitals of all shapes and sizes. While you’ll never get the true story, I’m willing to bet some of the inflated case fatality rates in places like NYC is a direct result of rationing beds.

 
San Antonio with under 400 cases for the 2nd day in a row, and the first day with no deaths in awhile! Yet hospitalizations, ICU and respirator use all went up, and by quite a bit. An odd combo.

Pediatric cases now up to 12% of the total. Does not bode well for opening schools. And it a totally shocking development, the majority of positive cases in the 20-29 crowd. Though I guess that is a good place for it to fall. If only it wasn't due to idiotic behavior, we could probably really get this thing back under control

 
People not taking this virus even remotely seriously, for whatever the reason, is why the U.S. is handling this so poorly. Doubt that it’s because of headlines, but what’s embarrassing is our outcomes and where we are at the end of July compared with other countries. It’s the cavalier attitudes on display that have me concerned, not the “headlines”. 

 
San Antonio with under 400 cases for the 2nd day in a row, and the first day with no deaths in awhile! Yet hospitalizations, ICU and respirator use all went up, and by quite a bit. An odd combo.

Pediatric cases now up to 12% of the total. Does not bode well for opening schools. And it a totally shocking development, the majority of positive cases in the 20-29 crowd. Though I guess that is a good place for it to fall. If only it wasn't due to idiotic behavior, we could probably really get this thing back under control
It’s weekend reporting. Deaths and cases almost always dip on Sundays and Mondays. And if Texas is anything like Arizona, hospital numbers are current because they’re coming directly from hospitals, not delayed by testing times.

But even with that a drop in cases isn’t likely to show a drop in hospitalization for quite a few days. It’s a sign that they’re turning in the right direction but I’d wait until Wednesday before reading too much into the trend.

 
Been down at the beaches in Florida.    Going great.   Wearing masks at the grocery store and inside at restaurants.    All is fine.   Seems pretty normal to me.   Been going down here for a decade and I can't tell much of a difference not counting masks.  Alot of people are wearing masks which is good even though the dumb state has not said they have to
Only thing thats bad is my ##### wife who wants to take pictures when we should be making dinner so we all eat 3 hours late but hey family memories right.  Wrong 

  F that dumb woman.   Cook food when  your hungry please

 
People not taking this virus even remotely seriously, for whatever the reason, is why the U.S. is handling this so poorly. Doubt that it’s because of headlines, but what’s embarrassing is our outcomes and where we are at the end of July compared with other countries. It’s the cavalier attitudes on display that have me concerned, not the “headlines”. 
It seems to be acceptable that people are willing overreact and make harmful choices because they find the media to be too sensational. If a news station runs an over-the-top story about shark attacks off a beach in San Diego, does that justify someone swimming in those waters if they are attacked by a shark?

Quit trying to justify people’s stupidity to take a shot at the media. If you want to blame someone, look to the people constantly trying to downplay it.

 
People not taking this virus even remotely seriously, for whatever the reason, is why the U.S. is handling this so poorly. Doubt that it’s because of headlines, but what’s embarrassing is our outcomes and where we are at the end of July compared with other countries. It’s the cavalier attitudes on display that have me concerned, not the “headlines”. 
You may be right, but when so many people no longer trust the media to present facts......

 
People not taking this virus even remotely seriously, for whatever the reason, is why the U.S. is handling this so poorly. Doubt that it’s because of headlines, but what’s embarrassing is our outcomes and where we are at the end of July compared with other countries. It’s the cavalier attitudes on display that have me concerned, not the “headlines”. 
You are getting our "outcomes" from the same sources that are feeding you these ridiculous headlines.  From sources that rely on "total cases" (cumulative instead of active) as some sort of benchmark... because the numbers look worse.

Headlines better found on an SNL skit breed cavalier attitudes imo.  You can't feed people this crap then ask them to listen to anything else you have to say.

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Users who are viewing this thread

Top