Jump to content

Formerly DT: COVID-19 - Featuring Lots of Politics, now CR because political talk not going away

InkaUtexas

By InkaUtexas
in Cloak Room

 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 58.2k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • atomheartbevo

    2461

  • dcar00

    1722

  • Cheeseweasel

    1552

  • MNLonghornFUKM

    1324

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

Uncle Boobs
Uncle Boobs

Against my better judgment and several beers deep, I have taken you up on this, potentially ending my streak of totally worthless posts. I have done 3 and 7 day averages only on the Worldometer data. 

Brisketexan
Brisketexan

Daughter’s home. A little PTSD, we’re picking up Whataburger to help.

Coelenterate Fuccboi
Coelenterate Fuccboi

Just try and imagine GreenspointTexas being the person to intubate you as you fight for your life against COVID-19. You’re laying there gasping for air while he chastises you for all the things you li

Posted Images

B00M

B00M 6,433

Posted
Posted
8 hours ago, Anastasis said:

The WHO is less competent than the most competent sooner we know. 

That's a higher bar than the WHO deserves. Imagine the dumpster fire this thread would've been without our finest resident sooner, chitown, bringing first hand expertise. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
bullzak

bullzak 422

Posted
Posted
13 hours ago, ChiTownDoc said:

There's no way asymptomatic people spread as much as symptomatic people...now how big is the difference?  That's obviously the million dollar question.

We need to resolve this for schools to reopen I think. Having kids wear masks all day is never going to work. 

We need to establish rare asymptomatic spread, and that kids in particular do not spread easily. 

Not sure that has really happened yet. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bullzak

bullzak 422

Posted
Posted

Anybody ever look at this guys Twitter? Cant tell if he legit or not. Looks like a deep dive into the numbers daily. At any rate his point about testing and cases stands. MSM is all over cases with no context, rendering same useless as a metric. 

Reading his thread he says this is over already in the states and the numbers will verify as we go. 

https://twitter.com/EthicalSkeptic/status/1270019034113859584?s=20

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Cheeseweasel

Cheeseweasel 26,438

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, bullzak said:

Anybody ever look at this guys Twitter? Cant tell if he legit or not. Looks like a deep dive into the numbers daily. At any rate his point about testing and cases stands. MSM is all over cases with no context, rendering same useless as a metric. 

Reading his thread he says this is over already in the states and the numbers will verify as we go. 

https://twitter.com/EthicalSkeptic/status/1270019034113859584?s=20

The devil is in the details. What are the "new cases"? Asymptomatic? Hospitalizations? Age? 

Twitter is the worst for "drive by" commentary used to inflame. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
JBJ

JBJ 3,664

Posted
Posted
14 minutes ago, bullzak said:

We need to resolve this for schools to reopen I think. Having kids wear masks all day is never going to work. 

We need to establish rare asymptomatic spread, and that kids in particular do not spread easily. 

Not sure that has really happened yet. 

The bigger problem is the couple of days someone is presymptomatic but shedding.

Truly asymptomatic spread appears to be rare.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bullzak

bullzak 422

Posted
Posted
7 minutes ago, Cheeseweasel said:

The devil is in the details. What are the "new cases"? Asymptomatic? Hospitalizations? Age? 

Twitter is the worst for "drive by" commentary used to inflame. 

Understood. Unfortunately the intake on those stats just isn't consistent at state and CDC level. 

Twitter sucks in general but at least this guy is putting his analysis out there. I maybe understand about half of it. Would be interested to see a stat monster take it on. 

I tend to favor the specific over the general so think this is at least interesting. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JBJ

JBJ 3,664

Posted
Posted

It's hard to make a firm statement either way.  Increased testing should produce both more cases and a lower case rate.  It's the degree that matters and there's no comparison to be made to say if it's a good sign or bad sign.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
BradInATX

BradInATX 9,208

Posted
Posted
27 minutes ago, bullzak said:

Anybody ever look at this guys Twitter? Cant tell if he legit or not. Looks like a deep dive into the numbers daily. At any rate his point about testing and cases stands. MSM is all over cases with no context, rendering same useless as a metric. 

Reading his thread he says this is over already in the states and the numbers will verify as we go. 

https://twitter.com/EthicalSkeptic/status/1270019034113859584?s=20

That dude is awfully wordy to say that looking at cases is misleading and we should focus on hospitalizations and deaths, which a lot of people have been saying for quite awhile.

I don't really buy that "it's over" in the US. I haven't looked at any other states but at best Texas has been mostly holding steady and we're seeing an increase this week. The only way it's "over" is if it's basically eradicated before the weather starts getting colder.

  • Fuck You 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Anastasis

Anastasis 23,481

Posted
Posted
6 hours ago, justhookit said:

Just going by the beach thing opening, you’d expect to see a similar increase in Nueces County (which includes Port A). We are flat, I think, if you remove the meat packing cases. @Anastasis? Now the 2 problems with that are that it’s hard to separate Corpus from PA, and it wouldn’t account for anyone getting covid here and then taking it back home and testing positive there. Still sitting at 7 actual cases in PA, the last of which was about April 1st and they were all travel related to a case in Costa Rica.

I don't think that Port A is updating their cases, they have been stuck at 7 forever.  I watch the Corpus dashboard, which shows the zip 786373 at 8 cases (was also stuck at 7 for a long time). Looks like the broader region saw a bump in mid may but relatively flattened back out.  You might be on to something with people travelling back home and showing up positive there.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
babysdaddy

babysdaddy 2,725

Posted
Posted

Watch the video of the WHO lady talking about asymptomatic spread.  She seemed pretty confident about her answer regarding asymptomatic spread and how they were getting that data from places doing contract tracing.

 

I need some information that I'm struggling to find and I'm hoping the surl can come through.  I've got an important trip in about 45 days however I've got a newborn at home and wife is concerned about dangers to infants.  The data that I've seen on the CDC about deaths and cases seem to be that the risk to infants is effectively nil.  She is worried about this study (https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/mm6914e4.htm) that ultimately points out 62% of infants ended up hospitalized.    Pediatrician has not been very helpful and is effectively saying 'any risk is too big of a risk'.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Lurch

Lurch 5,931

Posted
Posted
Watch the video of the WHO lady talking about asymptomatic spread.  She seemed pretty confident about her answer regarding asymptomatic spread and how they were getting that data from places doing contract tracing.
 
I need some information that I'm struggling to find and I'm hoping the surl can come through.  I've got an important trip in about 45 days however I've got a newborn at home and wife is concerned about dangers to infants.  The data that I've seen on the CDC about deaths and cases seem to be that the risk to infants is effectively nil.  She is worried about this study (https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/mm6914e4.htm) that ultimately points out 62% of infants ended up hospitalized.    Pediatrician has not been very helpful and is effectively saying 'any risk is too big of a risk'.  


Username checks out
  • Like 3
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
babysdaddy

babysdaddy 2,725

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, babysdaddy said:

Watch the video of the WHO lady talking about asymptomatic spread.  She seemed pretty confident about her answer regarding asymptomatic spread and how they were getting that data from places doing contract tracing.

 

I need some information that I'm struggling to find and I'm hoping the surl can come through.  I've got an important trip in about 45 days however I've got a newborn at home and wife is concerned about dangers to infants.  The data that I've seen on the CDC about deaths and cases seem to be that the risk to infants is effectively nil.  She is worried about this study (https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/mm6914e4.htm) that ultimately points out 62% of infants ended up hospitalized.    Pediatrician has not been very helpful and is effectively saying 'any risk is too big of a risk'.  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Newdoc

Newdoc 3,448

Posted
Posted
18 minutes ago, babysdaddy said:

She is worried about this study

I think that states that 62% of the hospitalizations are infants, with total pediatric hospitalization percentage being quite low AND a large chunk of them have some underlying pulmonary condition. AND there are a bunch of kids with Covid who have not received testing because they have no or mild symptoms. Covid is very much an old persons with chronic illness disease and data suggest the one-off healthy patients dying from this approaches flu like fatality numbers.

Frankly, if she is freaked out at all about Covid infection in infants and is not more so freaked about RSV and flu in infants then her fear is irrational. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
babysdaddy

babysdaddy 2,725

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, Newdoc said:

I think that states that 62% of the hospitalizations are infants, with total pediatric hospitalization percentage being quite low AND a large chunk of them have some underlying pulmonary condition. AND there are a bunch of kids with Covid who have not received testing because they have no or mild symptoms. Covid is very much an old persons with chronic illness disease and data suggest the one-off healthy patients dying from this approaches flu like fatality numbers.

Frankly, if she is freaked out at all about Covid infection in infants and is not more so freaked about RSV and flu in infants then her fear is irrational. 

I'll be sure to tell her she is irrational.   Pediatrician has been less than helpful as well.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
dcar00

dcar00 14,318

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, babysdaddy said:

I'll be sure to tell her she is irrational.   Pediatrician has been less than helpful as well.  

the pediatrician is basically in CYA mode.  can't say I wouldn't do exactly what he is doing given the circumstance.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
JBJ

JBJ 3,664

Posted
Posted (edited)
26 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

WHO already trying to walk it back.  What a fucking dumpster fire.

https://www.axios.com/who-asymptomatic-coronavirus-69c56ce3-41e0-4ea7-ab2a-de866713b4cf.html

 

WHO is more worried about people taking it the wrong way than being correct.  The lady in the video lays out the current understanding very well.

Truly asymptomic spread is rare.  These are people with no symptoms ever.  That's completely different than saying you can spread the disease when don't have symptoms  at the time - which is common.

Edited by JBJ
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
utee94

utee94 15,835

Posted
Posted
25 minutes ago, JBJ said:

WHO is more worried about people taking it the wrong way than being correct.  The lady in the video lays out the current understanding very well.

Truly asymptomic spread is rare.  These are people with no symptoms ever.  That's completely different than saying you can spread the disease when don't have symptoms  at the time - which is common.

Yeah, the distinction between asymptomatic and presymptomatic seems to be key here.  

I think there's GOT to be a pretty good chunk of presymptomatic spread, because I don't think ALL spread is 100% attributable to sick people just saying eff it and wandering around town anyway.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
washparkhorn

washparkhorn 9,939

Posted
Posted
14 hours ago, ChiTownDoc said:

Check out the graphic in this article.  See why AB is most susceptible and O the least.  

https://www.news-medical.net/news/20200603/Blood-group-type-may-affect-susceptibility-to-COVID-19-respiratory-failure.aspx

4C1DB1B2-7EFB-46C0-BAC2-035E3D36FE45.png

Thanks. Now do one for those positive with rhesus monkey blood. Long live RH-negative peoples!

 

(tongue firmly implanted in cheek)

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
JBJ

JBJ 3,664

Posted
Posted (edited)
28 minutes ago, utee94 said:

Yeah, the distinction between asymptomatic and presymptomatic seems to be key here.  

I think there's GOT to be a pretty good chunk of presymptomatic spread, because I don't think ALL spread is 100% attributable to sick people just saying eff it and wandering around town anyway.

 

Here is the current understanding:

Pre-symptomatic: ~A typical case will be infectious for 14 days.  The first two days you don't have symptoms and 40% of the spread occurs during these two days.  The other 60% of the spread occurs over the next 12 days after having symptoms.~   Preventing much of the 60% of the spread should be possible in schools that implement symptom screens.  The other 40% is what WHO is saying is remains a risk regardless.

Asymptomatic: We've traced at least one case where a person claims to never have had any symptoms and appears to have spread it to others.  This is out of thousands of people participating in contract tracing studies.  Asymptomatic cases themselves are not rare, so we should expect them to show up more often if this example wasn't spurious or exceptionally rare.

Edited by JBJ
  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites
justhookit

justhookit 4,191

Posted
Posted
6 hours ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

Port A is in the top 3 searched tourist destinations? Come on. If it’s being searched it’s only because it made the news when crowds were at the beach. Few people are going to travel to Texas to visit port a. Hell I lived in Rockport, and it wasn’t worth driving 30 minutes to port a.

Is this sarcasm? People have few places they can go right now.

https://www.dallasnews.com/business/economy/2020/06/08/airbnb-sees-surge-in-summer-rentals-with-texas-port-aransas-among-top-us-destinations/

Link to comment
Share on other sites
justhookit

justhookit 4,191

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, Anastasis said:

I don't think that Port A is updating their cases, they have been stuck at 7 forever.  I watch the Corpus dashboard, which shows the zip 786373 at 8 cases (was also stuck at 7 for a long time). Looks like the broader region saw a bump in mid may but relatively flattened back out.  You might be on to something with people travelling back home and showing up positive there.  

Port A has been updating. We were truly stuck on 7 cases for two months. And right on cue, we just officially announced our 8th case today. I should know the details fairly soon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ABSR

ABSR 5,320

Posted
Posted
16 hours ago, Anastasis said:

What is the potential mechanism for blood type as far as infectiousness and severity?

Let me help with some  analogies:

Do you remember the old meme where there was a Vegan support group flyer posted and then next to it was a picture of a T-Rex, and the T-Rex flyer said carnivores don't need support groups?   Well people with type O are awesome carnivore T-Rex's and all you other blood types need Vegan support meetings.

Or you can think of Type O as the G.I. Joe with the Kung Flu Grip that everyone loved and wanted and the other blood types as the plastic green army men, but with the base broken off so you have to dig his feet into the dirt or sand to get him to stay a little upright.  And he is the crappy guy with the radio.

I'm sure other Type O's can help out as well....

 

The Blood Type wars, begun they have.

  • Like 5
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
G650

G650 14,272

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, ABSR said:

Let me help with some  analogies:

Do you remember the old meme where there was a Vegan support group flyer posted and then next to it was a picture of a T-Rex, and the T-Rex flyer said carnivores don't need support groups?   Well people with type O are awesome carnivore T-Rex's and all you other blood types need Vegan support meetings.

Or you can think of Type O as the G.I. Joe with the Kung Flu Grip that everyone loved and wanted and the other blood types as the plastic green army men, but with the base broken off so you have to dig his feet into the dirt or sand to get him to stay a little upright.  And he is the crappy guy with the radio.

I'm sure other Type O's can help out as well....

 

The Blood Type wars, begun they have.

We Os shall inherit the Earth.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Cheeseweasel

Cheeseweasel 26,438

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, ABSR said:

Or you can think of Type O as the G.I. Joe with the Kung Flu Grip that everyone loved and wanted and the other blood types as the plastic green army men, but with the base broken off so you have to dig his feet into the dirt or sand to get him to stay a little upright.  And he is the crappy guy with the radio.

no kings look up GIF by P.O.S.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dahobbs

Dahobbs 17,627

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, dcar00 said:

trying to raise the IFR but got called out on it.

IFR isn't defined by the rate of spread rate or whether pre-symptomatic or completely asymptomatic individuals can infect others, so this discussion shouldn't impact it all.  Why do you think otherwise?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
dcar00

dcar00 14,318

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

IFR isn't defined by the rate of spread rate or whether pre-symptomatic or completely asymptomatic individuals can infect others, so this discussion shouldn't impact it all.  Why do you think otherwise?

if asymptomatic people can't spread, then the "estimates" of number of infections/cases will be deemed/assumed to be lower when the equation/range folks get to work.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dahobbs

Dahobbs 17,627

Posted
Posted
16 minutes ago, dcar00 said:

if asymptomatic people can't spread, then the "estimates" of number of infections/cases will be deemed/assumed to be lower when the equation/range folks get to work.

Why? This is not about the number of asymptomatic or presymptomatic individuals, just whether they can spread it. There isnt any contradiction in believing that both 50+% of infections (example number only) are asymptomatic while also believing that those 50% are unlikely to spread it to other people. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
LurkingHorn

LurkingHorn 1,066

Posted
Posted

My company provided antibody tests today and two people on my floor tested positive and were sent home immediately. Maybe my understanding is off, but doesn't the test show you had exposure to this thing in the past? This isn't a viral test so that means they do not necessarily have it currently, correct?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...