What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

*** OFFICIAL *** COVID-19 CoronaVirus Thread. Fresh epidemic fears as child pneumonia cases surge in Europe after China outbreak. NOW in USA (7 Viewers)

Status
Not open for further replies.
If you test positive and have very few (and mild) symptoms, is there a general range on how long it would take to test negative?

A coworker said she heard some people can still test positive for up to a month (even when they are long past symptoms).

 
This thread is tl;dr on the whole, so I hope this wasn't asked previously, but I'm curious if anyone has read or hypothesized about why the US seems to lead the world in cases of COVID, but all the new variants and subvariants seem to start overseas.  You'd think with the US representing the majority of the cases, the variants would start here first.  More cases, more of a "playground" for mutation - yet almost every variant I know of started somewhere else (Asia or Europe) and the US was later impacted.

 
Fat Nick said:
This thread is tl;dr on the whole, so I hope this wasn't asked previously, but I'm curious if anyone has read or hypothesized about why the US seems to lead the world in cases of COVID, but all the new variants and subvariants seem to start overseas.  You'd think with the US representing the majority of the cases, the variants would start here first.  More cases, more of a "playground" for mutation - yet almost every variant I know of started somewhere else (Asia or Europe) and the US was later impacted.
Click to expand...
US does not represent the majority of the cases. 73.7m vs 288m. US represents 20% of worldwide cases. When comparing one country to the field, probability-wise it would make sense that most variants come from the field.

 
Fat Nick said:
This thread is tl;dr on the whole, so I hope this wasn't asked previously, but I'm curious if anyone has read or hypothesized about why the US seems to lead the world in cases of COVID, but all the new variants and subvariants seem to start overseas.  You'd think with the US representing the majority of the cases, the variants would start here first.  More cases, more of a "playground" for mutation - yet almost every variant I know of started somewhere else (Asia or Europe) and the US was later impacted.
Click to expand...
The obvious issue is that the US is in a relatively bad place with regard to vaccine uptake.  There is a massive amount of blame to go around on this point, but it all belongs in a different forum.  

More subtly, I strongly suspect to the point of near certainty that the US got pummeled by covid harder than Europe because obesity is a bigger problem here than it is there.  The US population was probably destined for much worse numbers, especially those associated with severe outcomes. 

 
jobarules said:
US does not represent the majority of the cases. 73.7m vs 288m. US represents 20% of worldwide cases. When comparing one country to the field, probability-wise it would make sense that most variants come from the field.
Click to expand...
Sorry - I didn't mean to indicate "majority" as in "more than half," but "majority" as in the "highest instances in any one country" - bad wording on my part.  I get your point - completely.  Flawed logic on my part to not think of it as US vs. All of the World instead of US vs. any other one country.

 
Fat Nick said:
Sorry - I didn't mean to indicate "majority" as in "more than half," but "majority" as in the "highest instances in any one country" - bad wording on my part.  I get your point - completely.  Flawed logic on my part to not think of it as US vs. All of the World instead of US vs. any other one country.
Click to expand...
We did have one, Iota.  But it pretty shortly got overrun by Delta and now Omicron. 

 
Fat Nick said:
This thread is tl;dr on the whole, so I hope this wasn't asked previously, but I'm curious if anyone has read or hypothesized about why the US seems to lead the world in cases of COVID, but all the new variants and subvariants seem to start overseas.  You'd think with the US representing the majority of the cases, the variants would start here first.  More cases, more of a "playground" for mutation - yet almost every variant I know of started somewhere else (Asia or Europe) and the US was later impacted.
Click to expand...
Couple things here:

1.  We have approx 20ish% of the cases.
2.  It's rather shocking to realize that our country SUCKS at stand analysis and detection.  It's embarrassing that a country with our riches is so bad at something so simple.  It wouldn't shock me at all to find out variants started here but were discovered elsewhere.

 
Fat Nick said:
This thread is tl;dr on the whole, so I hope this wasn't asked previously, but I'm curious if anyone has read or hypothesized about why the US seems to lead the world in cases of COVID, but all the new variants and subvariants seem to start overseas.  You'd think with the US representing the majority of the cases, the variants would start here first.  More cases, more of a "playground" for mutation - yet almost every variant I know of started somewhere else (Asia or Europe) and the US was later impacted.
Click to expand...
Probably dumb luck in terms of the ones that really took off.  Delta, Omicron, etc.

The US population is like 5% of the world's (WAG).

 
Cases nationwide have rolled over for 100% certain now -- there are big declines over the last 11 days.  Which is good since we've exceeded the worst week of Delta now, with over 15k dead again in the last week.

Back of the envelop, we should see a peak in fatalities of around 18,000 for the seven days ending 2/3 and then start to see a decline.

And if we can dodge new variants for a bit March probably gets us back to some really low numbers.

 
-fish- said:
Ron Johnson creates a panel of conspiracy theorists and discredited doctors who have been profiting off of the pandemic.
Click to expand...
I only watched a few minutes, but it was pretty gross, with many of the usual alt-covid scientists on the panel. If they really wanted discussion, why not invite mainstream scientists to debate the data?

Ignoring their frequent reliance on anecdotes over peer reviewed literature, the thing that always strikes me are the “Big Pharma” conspiracies. In one breath they talk about using cheap, repurposed drugs as early treatment, but later have no trouble giving expensive monoclonal antibodies. And they also gloss over the fact the mainstay of inpatient covid care is a cheap, generic drug: solumedrol. How did that slip by the pharmaceutical profiteers?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
stbugs said:
Did you read the article at all? It says they studied 15 million people and that Myocarditis was not substantially different following the vaccine as it was in pre-pandemic. That means getting the vaccine was barely different than normal and getting COVID was 17 times the risk of the vaccine/normal rate pre-pandemic. Not sure it could be spelled out more. Yes, the vaccine helps by not getting COVID or also likely not getting it as bad.
Click to expand...
Did you read my post.

 
Ill wear my mask, i just want people to stay 6' (or more) away from me. The pharmacy is a place I hate going prior to the pandemic Every time I go I have to ask people to back the F up when they try and huddle around me at window. 

The 6' or more rule should be forever BTW. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
kylechoffman said:
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2022/01/kids-masks-schools-weak-science/621133/?fbclid=IwAR0AmF9VhhfxoyAufcv8uV6JcvYSDLKVO6XuaA5aRCE4oZ2rzxnWQog3iiQ
Click to expand...


"This isn’t to say that these studies conclusively demonstrate that masks have no benefit in schools, but that any effect they have, if they have one, is tangled up in these other variables."

So... we know masks work in general, but they haven't been proved to work specifically in school age kids because the data in this population, which does show lower COVID incidence for masked students, is confounded by other things.  Seems fair.

But I think I'd like to see some evidence that they don't work in this population before we discard the current guidance. 

 
Dinsy Ejotuz said:
"This isn’t to say that these studies conclusively demonstrate that masks have no benefit in schools, but that any effect they have, if they have one, is tangled up in these other variables."

So... we know masks work in general, but they haven't been proved to work specifically in school age kids because the data in this population, which does show lower COVID incidence for masked students, is confounded by other things.  Seems fair.

But I think I'd like to see some evidence that they don't work in this population before we discard the current guidance. 
Click to expand...
When do you think we should discard masks in schools?

 
Dinsy Ejotuz said:
How about sometime when the annualized COVID fatalities for that day are NOT 700,000+ people a year.  That might be a good start.
Click to expand...


Nathan R. Jessep said:
I'd say whenever there is not a high transmission rate in the particular area would be a good start. 
Click to expand...


Yeah, but clearly there's no middle ground.  We obviously want to keep masks forever!  Or, if we get rid of them, then we can never go back to them if the situation changes.  Or something like all that.

 
Dinsy Ejotuz said:
How about sometime when the annualized COVID fatalities for that day are NOT 700,000+ people a year.  That might be a good start.
Click to expand...
So each school district across the country should be treated the same?

And why should kids bear the brunt of masks when all adults can get a vaccine now?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
jobarules said:
I'm asking specifically when that is. The transmission rate in NY & NJ is the lowest its been since this whole thing started.
Click to expand...
I'm saying "High" according to the published rates. Last I saw, all areas were still in the "High" ranking, but maybe that has changed in the last day or two. If that has changed for your area to "Low", then yeah I'd probably be fine with ditching masks in school there. 

 
In NYC, a judge overturned the governor's mask mandate but the NYC DOE says their mandate was separate and takes precedence so kids still need to wear masks for now. However, supposedly NYC principals were instructed that if kids don't wear a mask they shouldn't discipline them (send them home, etc). Our son is still wearing a mask because we are not Karens but the instant they say masks are optional he will no longer wear one in school.

 
even though the Ro is low and the daily are dropping quickly and positive dropping quickly I would probably still have the kids mask up until the daily is down below 10 per 100k

Thats my first gut instinct.    I don't know if thats sensible or not but that is where I fall currently.

But I admit I flip flop on this issue with my daughter

 
Last edited by a moderator:
belljr said:
even though the Ro is low and the daily are dropping quickly and positive dropping quickly I would probably still have the kids mask up until the daily is down below 10 per 100k

Thats my first gut instinct.    I don't know if thats sensible or not but that is where I fall currently.

But I admit I flip flop on this issue with my daughter
Click to expand...
10/100k is a 0.01% positivity rate, no? That seems too low.

 
Doug B said:
10 positive tests out of 100k total tests would be a 0.01% positivity rate.

10 cases out of 100k people would be unrelated to positivity rate.
Click to expand...
positivity rate is supposed to reflect the general rate per 100k because its impossible to test everyone and there are asymptomatic people not tested.

I understand they are different but they are generally meant to represent how much spread there is in a specific area.

 
jobarules said:
positivity rate is supposed to reflect the general rate per 100k because its impossible to test everyone and there are asymptomatic people not tested.

I understand they are different but they are generally meant to represent how much spread there is in a specific area.
Click to expand...
i was referring to cases

 
After 2 years i finally got  COVID 

Unvaxxed ,feels like a baby flu, mild flu like symptoms .

Day 3 and feel better already.
 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
In AZ state testing sites have been mainly shut down. A private company, Embry Health, has stepped up opening dozens of testing sites across the state. They are a family led company with the head being a nurse practitioner who runs women’s health clinics. Apparently the nursing board is now coming after her claiming that they should only be administered COVID tests to women and not men or children. It’s depressing how much great work during this pandemic is being ignored or downright attacked. AZ currently has a positivity rates in the 30-40% range, we shouldn’t be attacking the people trying to help.

 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

K
Coronavirus prevention
Replies
4
Views
658
JaxBill
JaxBill
nirad3
COVID-19 / CoronaVirus - terms/phrases
Replies
35
Views
2K
Galileo
Galileo
Joe Bryant
Scared to ask but don't have anywhere else - Clay Travis Article?
2
Replies
71
Views
5K
roadkill1292
roadkill1292

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 6 (members: 0, guests: 6)
Back
Top