Some positive news on the treatment front
- Thread starter lawpoke87
- Start date
Looking at not being prepared. Although they are different types, the last super major epidemic to hit the US was in 1918-19. Over 120 years ago. There was no warning (thanks China) and no coronavirus before had been this easily transmitted nor as fatal. There was no reason to believe one was coming this year or any year.
Try asking Congress for trillions of dollars worth of ventilators, hospital grade masks, surgical gowns and money for the unemployed when it hasn't happened yet. People would have said that money could be used to help poor neighborhoods or to fly to Mars. The other party, be it republican or democrat would have howled at the idea of 8 trillion dollars that the Senate Majority Leader asked for...after the fact.
In fact, how medically prepared are we for nuclear war? Less than we were prepared for Pearl Harbor. How prepared are we for a meteor? I'll catch hell for this, but it is absolutely true.
Try asking Congress for trillions of dollars worth of ventilators, hospital grade masks, surgical gowns and money for the unemployed when it hasn't happened yet. People would have said that money could be used to help poor neighborhoods or to fly to Mars. The other party, be it republican or democrat would have howled at the idea of 8 trillion dollars that the Senate Majority Leader asked for...after the fact.
In fact, how medically prepared are we for nuclear war? Less than we were prepared for Pearl Harbor. How prepared are we for a meteor? I'll catch hell for this, but it is absolutely true.
Last edited:
I would argue we were well prepared for this pandemic...or as well prepared as one can be expected. We were able to acquire more than enough life saving equipment (vents) as well as other medical equipment. I do believe we will maintain a larger number of these items in hand going forward but in the end we had enough equipment.
I do believe we will take a critical look at the WHO and CDC. We will look at government run testing versus private testing and find a way to more quickly ramp up development and production.
I do believe we will take a critical look at the WHO and CDC. We will look at government run testing versus private testing and find a way to more quickly ramp up development and production.
Not to be doom and gloom, but I thought I'd toss this out here. The model that Dr. Birx cited that predicts 60,000 has a website. The model is a four month prediction, and the FAQ is here: http://www.healthdata.org/covid/faqs
From that FAQ:
Initially, only Wuhan city had progressed far enough through its outbreak for this to be used in our model. An additional 7 locations have since reached or passed the peak of daily deaths (see updates April 5th) – many in less time than was observed for Wuhan city – and this broader evidence base is now used to forecast the date of the peak in daily deaths for each US state and countries in the EEA. The model includes the effects of social distancing measures implemented at the “first administrative level” (in the US this generally means the state level). We classified social distancing measures using the New Zealand Government alert system Level 4 and then assumed that locations that have instituted fewer than three of these measures will enact the remaining measures within seven days. With each model update, the assumption of full implementation of social distancing measures is reset; any delay will be reflected in the number of deaths, the timing of the peak of daily deaths, and thus the burden on hospital systems that the model estimates. The model does not yet explicitly address when or whether social distancing measures could be lifted.
So... It assumes that the isolation practices that we are now going through continue uninterrupted for at least four months, and also that all locations in the US that do not currently have stay at home orders issue one within the next 7 days. I hope this model is accurate (who knows?), but 4 months locked indoors is not appealing.
From that FAQ:
Initially, only Wuhan city had progressed far enough through its outbreak for this to be used in our model. An additional 7 locations have since reached or passed the peak of daily deaths (see updates April 5th) – many in less time than was observed for Wuhan city – and this broader evidence base is now used to forecast the date of the peak in daily deaths for each US state and countries in the EEA. The model includes the effects of social distancing measures implemented at the “first administrative level” (in the US this generally means the state level). We classified social distancing measures using the New Zealand Government alert system Level 4 and then assumed that locations that have instituted fewer than three of these measures will enact the remaining measures within seven days. With each model update, the assumption of full implementation of social distancing measures is reset; any delay will be reflected in the number of deaths, the timing of the peak of daily deaths, and thus the burden on hospital systems that the model estimates. The model does not yet explicitly address when or whether social distancing measures could be lifted.
So... It assumes that the isolation practices that we are now going through continue uninterrupted for at least four months, and also that all locations in the US that do not currently have stay at home orders issue one within the next 7 days. I hope this model is accurate (who knows?), but 4 months locked indoors is not appealing.
My assumption is the quarantines will be slowly lifted on the local level based on health data (very similar to how the quarantines were put in place). The model your post is referring to show near zero corona activity across the country as of June 1. I’ve believed for sometime now that June 1 would be close to the “life quarantine” date for most places. Some areas a little sooner and some a little later.
Might I add that taking any data you’re receiving from Wuhan and extrapolating that into any model is likely problematic to begin with.
Might I add that taking any data you’re receiving from Wuhan and extrapolating that into any model is likely problematic to begin with.
I'd like to see someone attempt to model what a new outbreak looks like after we open things up. I think that has been an assumption from the beginning, so I think presenting the full picture of what life looks like and how many lives are lost under this solution (repeated cycles of shutting everything down) would be a bit more honest. I think people are more or less ok with this now because they assume it will be over in a couple months and they'll get their jobs back, but I don't think that's realistic.
Without a large majority of the country vaccinated I don’t anticipate the virus going away. Thus you could shut down until say November (not feasible) and due to international travel or Asymptomatic people see a return in spots. We need lots of quick tests available and a uniform protocol for dealing with hot spots. I assume that is exactly what we will see btw.
Well, yeah, and they commented on that. Until recently, it was all they had, but now there are 7 other cities worth of data that are incorporated.
Yeah, but that aspect is really difficult to model. I agree it is optimistic to assume that we can open things up in June. Even if we get to zero cases in the US, it is still going to be all over the world and it will just keep coming back. It will only end when we can rapid test everyone coming into port and/or we have a vaccine.
They commented on that too, if you dig a little more on their website. They basically say that there will be multiple waves but they can only really model one wave at a time. So, if the first wave is over by mid-May, then maybe we can start trying to figure out what the next one will look like.
I will also note that the current model is heavily biased by New York, because that is where the bulk of the US cases are. You could make a strong argument that this model is really predicting when the first wave in New York will end, and not necessarily the rest of the US.
It would be reasonable (but controversial) to first reopen the Northern Plains plus Montana and Wyoming but not reopen anything international. Then reopen other states as they clear of the disease. Still nothing international. When we get past hot spot states reopen the US and still only other countries who are well controlled and successful. Throwing in all the states and the World at once would almost assure that we would have more waves.
Last edited:
I don’t see how eliminating future waves is possible without closing the borders and international flights for the next year plus. Even then I’m not sure you can eliminate every case in a country of 340M people. We’re going to have to live with this thing until a large part of the population is vaccinated. Might as well accept that fact. Jump in hotspots and limit the spread.
Anyone have a better plan? Keeping the economy closed down for the next year isn’t a reasonable plan btw.
Well, there's no knowing what brought on the condition that caused death in many of them so it's easier to say COVID related, AIDS related, flu related. The actual virus doesn't kill you but the physical conditions brought on as a reaction to the virus might. Most with COVID have died from severe cases of pneumonia, but it is not out of the realm of possibility that fighting off the virus could send someone into cardiac arrest. Now, was that person probably in poor cardiac health already? Maybe.
I agree with much of your post. But I'm not proposing we keep the economy shut down for the next year. We should open a number of states at a time as the show control. This also provides a encouragement for compliance with the guide lines. One of the problems that this task force has is that it seems to have an all or nothing approach and by making the extinction until April 30, everyone is hoping that BOOM normal returns May 1.
I've also read that this virus seems to be linked with cardiovascular events and increased risk of sudden heart attack. But I think there is a lot that we don't know about this virus, and it may not be clear for some time.
A lot of anecdotal evidence out there about things like this. It could be that the virus is actively causing heart attacks in some people. Or it could be that those people were one flight of stairs away from a heart attack anyway, and the virus just pushed them over the edge. Or it could be the anxiety the whole country is going through right now is independently causing a spike in cardiovascular issues. It is going to take a lot of time to get enough reliable data to properly study this stuff.
EDIT:
I will note that with decreased lung capacity due to pneumonia and low oxygen saturation, your heart will work harder to keep the oxygen going, sort of like if you are at high altitude. Try walking up a flight of stairs at sea level and then again the next day at 10,000 feet and see which has your heart racing faster. As an analogy, flat landers coming up here to the mountains and having a heart attack while skiing is a known phenomena. Happens a lot more often than advertised, it even happened at our tiny little mom-and-pop ski hill here this winter. Should we count those deaths as skiing-related? I dunno, but FWIW those are not usually reported as skiing-related deaths.
Last edited:
The Fed’s won’t decide when and where to open back up. These decisions will be made on a local level and will be different across the country not only in timing but extent. The Fed’s can give a recommendation but the ultimate decisions are made locally. As they should be since every area of the country is unique. I don’t believe you will see May 1st btw. Maybe in a select few areas but June 1st appears to be a much more realistic date. This obviously all depends on what transpired over the next 3-6 weeks. The models thus far have been unreliable at best.
^This. But when these things are happening now and the patient has tested positive for COVID-19, it is considered a COVID related death. My wife's parents just lost a friend in St. Louis. He was 80+ in age, had some diabetic related health issues which had him hanging on as it is. They believe he contracted COVID-19 waiting to see a doctor for another issue. He was put in the hospital over the weekend and passed away late Tuesday/early Wednesday. His death will be considered COVID-19 related although there were a bunch of other things he was battling.
I keep hearing all of the issues in NYC. Almost 800 deaths in the last 24 hours. I am not hearing about what is happening in LA as much. Is it because Newsom was much quicker to put CA on lockdown?
Also, it is believe that the 1st case in NYC was contracted by someone who had comeback from Europe, not China. Freaking Lindsey Graham spouting off how we should sue China and make them pay for everything. Just stupid. And racist.
Dr. Fauci today said he believes once you contract COVID-19 and recover then you will have a built up immunity. Let's hope so. There are many places developing fast Ig tests to see if you have the anitbodies in your system. Contrary to that, a news report out of South Korea who was very aggressive in trying to head off the pandemic, is now finding patients who previously tested positive for COVID-19 and recovered, are now showing symptoms again and tested positive a 2nd time. If this is true that is freaking scary. If it's a residual positive, meaning they never tested a 2nd time after recovery to show the virus gone, that is easier to deal with. The first scenario would be devastating to the world.
Deaths are going to lag cases by quite a bit. Cuomo said today that hospital admits were way down compared to a week ago. The deaths should start going down there in the next week or so.
California was quicker to shut things down when the virus was discovered there. They also don't have the huge mass transit system of NY.
They don't know where the first Covid patient in NYC came from but they apparently believe more of the cases can be traced to Europeans. I'm not sure how they know this since the virus came from China but I assume they do. In the end it really doesn't matter if the first patient was European traveler who caught it in China or someone of Chinese decent. There were almost certainly infected people coming to a place like NYC from China and Europe.
I'm hoping those were false positive tests. Many of the tests being used overseas aren't extremely reiliable.
It is stupid to think China will pay us. It is also stupid to say it is racist. Our dislike of China is not based on race but on Communism. Communist is not a race. And most Chinese like most everyone else would rather not be communist. There are many Chinese in this country who are brilliant and hard working. One is a doctor that I go to.
Last edited:
Lol and many of the Chinese undergraduate students that TU was getting a while back were dishonest and lazy. I think we weren't exactly getting the cream of the crop as far as Chinese sponsored students though.
In my eyes there are very few things that separate the US from China or Russia in terms of the corruption that our federal government uses to benefit the people at the top and maintain the status quo for the workers. I might normally argue that the US has more upward mobility, but China saw a huge rise in that in the last 20 years as their middle class erupted.
I feel like America's biggest strength is that it has mastered the illusion of choice. You can choose your party, but they don't actually represent you. You can choose your insurer, but you can only afford the one that your company provides for you. You can choose your doctor, but you can't afford to see one anyway. I don't think the majority of Americans would notice much of a difference if they were born in China. We're all told that OUR WAY is the best way and those other people are the enemy, when in reality it's a couple thousand people at the top of every society that are really the problem.
I don't think the majority of Americans would notice much of a difference if they were born in China.
What an odd statement! Think about it for a few minutes. If they were born in China they wouldn't be Americans until they were naturalized. Your statement that TU Chinese students were dishonest and lazy, at least on the surface of the statement, makes it looks like your are prejudice against Chinese people.
If I was born in China, I would have no memory of how things are here. Unless you believe in reincarnation. I could go on, but your statement pokes logic in the eye.
Lol. I don’t think that ALL Chinese people are lazy and dishonest. Just that quite a few of the ones at TU when I was there were. Grad students tended to be better to be fair.
I’m just saying that the middle classes of both countries probably have relatively similar lives. The communist vs democracy doesn’t have much of an effect in today’s capitalistic China. The media lies to you in both places. The government is insincere about taking care of you and there’s essentially nothing any of us can do about it unless we all band together to change it communally.
Grad students from China tend to be very good, but a big part of that s because there are so many dishonest rink-a-dink schools over there that cheat for their students to make themselves look better. They get students into a good American school and use it to recruit. It is not uncommon to have a student with a perfect 800 GRE score on the English section show up and not hardly speak the language. Because of that, the vast majority of applications from China get thrown in the waste basket immediately, save students from a handful of known reputable and very good schools. So the side effect of all the cheating is that their schools are so distrusted we only take their cream of the crop.
Sure. We just kill our muslims' relatives in the middle east while China kills theirs on their own western border.
It’s a fact that TU under Stead’s leadership intentionally lowered the English proficiency score below the US industry accepted minimum in order to attract full paying students of Chinese elites. You can be a bigot while stating facts, but it doesn’t mean it isn’t a fact. Here’s some other facts:
It is my understanding, that TU either accepts, or has accepted in the past, money from organizations and entities with close ties to the Chinese Communist Party as part of research projects. We also operate a Chinese cultural literacy project at the University School which must use a curriculum that is approved by entities with close ties to the Chinese Communist Party.
Dr. Clancy repeatedly made statements publicly supporting portions of Chinese state policy that are now widely associated with human rights abuses and Chinese religious oppression. His unexplainable and indefensible comments in the TU strategic plan about a “model city” named Karamay being a visionary project, when it is located not far from a system of detention camps holding up to one million people solely on the basis of their ethnic background and religious beliefs, reveals that either TU or Clancy, or both, are desperate, naive, or bought or all three.
See page 4, under the Paragraph “Retail”
https://35ht6t2ynx0p1ztf961h81r1-wp.../2017/12/utulsa-strategic-plan-2017-10-12.pdf
Here’s Dr. Clancy being featured in the newspaper owned and operated by the Communist Party of China.
http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/m/xinjiang/karamay/2016-09/18/content_26818031.htm
Perhaps most insidious is the recent agreement to have a joint project to expand humanities education for students participating in the partnership. Who wants to bet that includes an NDA about how much TU is paid and the right to censor books and lectures critical of the Chinese. And we are locked in until 2025 according to the article.
So don’t tell me these two things:
1. The Chinese aren’t looking for financially vulnerable schools to exploit since its a lot cheaper to buy our prestige than it is to build a school and wait 30 years until it has credibility.
2. People armed with facts about Chinese oppression and human rights abuses should not be intimidated from speaking out in this country by partially informed individuals who are losing a debate and think it’s ok to accuse someone of being racist just to win the argument.
That’s what’s happening in this country every day, the virus is just the latest high profile example. The same people who are holding hearings about the Chinese having a monopoly on our access to medical equipment and antibiotics are the same people that six months ago thought it’s ok for them to buy our cellphone and internet systems and install monitoring capability. And they were/are doing that because they need to take their money and they are afraid of being unelected after being called a bigot.
It is my understanding, that TU either accepts, or has accepted in the past, money from organizations and entities with close ties to the Chinese Communist Party as part of research projects. We also operate a Chinese cultural literacy project at the University School which must use a curriculum that is approved by entities with close ties to the Chinese Communist Party.
Dr. Clancy repeatedly made statements publicly supporting portions of Chinese state policy that are now widely associated with human rights abuses and Chinese religious oppression. His unexplainable and indefensible comments in the TU strategic plan about a “model city” named Karamay being a visionary project, when it is located not far from a system of detention camps holding up to one million people solely on the basis of their ethnic background and religious beliefs, reveals that either TU or Clancy, or both, are desperate, naive, or bought or all three.
See page 4, under the Paragraph “Retail”
https://35ht6t2ynx0p1ztf961h81r1-wp.../2017/12/utulsa-strategic-plan-2017-10-12.pdf
Here’s Dr. Clancy being featured in the newspaper owned and operated by the Communist Party of China.
http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/m/xinjiang/karamay/2016-09/18/content_26818031.htm
Perhaps most insidious is the recent agreement to have a joint project to expand humanities education for students participating in the partnership. Who wants to bet that includes an NDA about how much TU is paid and the right to censor books and lectures critical of the Chinese. And we are locked in until 2025 according to the article.
So don’t tell me these two things:
1. The Chinese aren’t looking for financially vulnerable schools to exploit since its a lot cheaper to buy our prestige than it is to build a school and wait 30 years until it has credibility.
2. People armed with facts about Chinese oppression and human rights abuses should not be intimidated from speaking out in this country by partially informed individuals who are losing a debate and think it’s ok to accuse someone of being racist just to win the argument.
That’s what’s happening in this country every day, the virus is just the latest high profile example. The same people who are holding hearings about the Chinese having a monopoly on our access to medical equipment and antibiotics are the same people that six months ago thought it’s ok for them to buy our cellphone and internet systems and install monitoring capability. And they were/are doing that because they need to take their money and they are afraid of being unelected after being called a bigot.
Last edited:
Without a doubt, otherwise they wouldn't sign off on it, and it wouldn't happen.
Watu3 hacked your account? Sounding more and more like him with every post.
Sounds like it might be an avenue to explore in trying to find a new viral treatment using some of the same attributes of this antiviral. But the final paragraph makes me leary, that they had so many with a severe reaction possibly linked to it. Certainly seems like it is not advisable if you have prexisting renal problems.
17 out of 30 patients being extubated, and 3 of 4 being removed from ECMO is excellent performance. It may not work for everyone or be a panacea, but those numbers are very encouraging and will hopefully lead to a class of drugs which works well on this.
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/14/nyregion/new-york-coronavirus-deaths.html?smid=tw-share
To your point, NYC just added 3,700 to it's count by counting those "presumed" to have died from it but never tested positive. This doesn't seem any more reasonable than counting none of them at all considering there are any number of respiratory illnesses that could have led to pneumonia, but again hopefully at the end of this a decent estimate is produced independent of what any state is under or over counting. I would think excess deaths unrelated to crime or car accidents would be a decent starting point, but what do I know.
Last edited:
That decision seems to go against all medical and scientific procedure which demands trials and proof before coming to conclusions. I would understand the CDC including or considering those in their final estimate of deaths but for NY to conclusively state COD as covid-19 is odd.
NYC mayor just said they will now count people who died “indirectly” from Covid-19 as Covid-19 deaths. Assume that means deaths from cancer, etc.. will be counted as covid deaths if present in the system. At least I believe I now understand the motive.
NYC mayor just said they will now count people who died “indirectly” from Covid-19 as Covid-19 deaths. Assume that means deaths from cancer, etc.. will be counted as covid deaths if present in the system. At least I believe I now understand the motive.
Last edited:
Latest posts
-
-
-
🏈 Recruiting Antai picks Tulsa over offers from OSU, TCU, K-State and Cal
- Latest: Chris Harmon
-
