Coronavirus Pandemic (COVID-19) (SARS-CoV-2) [2020]

[McHuj]

Can someone explain to me what will happen in a month or so?

I don't think the lockdowns are really sustainable beyond that point so if they start getting eased up, will the cases just spike again and the virus will spread like crazy? I guess I don't fully understand this, but it just seems like delaying the inevitable. I assume this just buys time for the medical professions to stock up and get infrastructure ready.

 

[nutball]

I think the theory is that it slows the spread, in order to keep the peak infection rate at or below the capacity of the health services to deal with it. Big difference between 100k patients turning up in one week, and turning up spread over several months.

 

[Mariner]

It would be helpful if more treatments other than ventilation became available for the most serious of cases. China used anti-inflammatories with some success in the most severe cases and the Italians have done the same. Let's hope doctors all over the world have access to these drugs, even if they aren't licensed for that particular usage.

 

[Arwin]

Yes doctors in Australia seem to have good results with HIV inhibitors and Chloroquine, the main issue is that countries haven’t been very efficient in pooling their research and findings it seems ...

 

[green.pixel]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1239908972456534019

Rachel Clarke @doctor_oxford

THREAD/ I am sharing this testimony at the request of an A&E doctor in the north of England, who writes:

“It is absolute carnage in A&E. Utter chaos. We don’t have any proper PPE [protective gear]. We are being given crappy paper masks, not the FFP3 masks we need.” (1/n)

“And not everyone even gets those. Literally the doctors seeing the sickest patients, the ones with suspected heart attacks, PEs, sepsis – all they have to protect themselves is a bit of paper across their mouth as if that would ever do anything to protect them.” (2/n)

“There are all the Covid patients but then there are also all the other severely sick patients. People aren’t stopping having RTAs and heart attacks and strokes and broken hips, are they? It’s all here and it’s utter carnage.” (3/n)

“I am in shock. I feel like we are being thrown to the wolves here. Some of us are going to die. We know some will die.

And the government just clearly doesn’t give a s*** about us, do they? I mean, we’ve known since January this was coming. WE ALL KNEW IT.” (4/n)

“But the herd immunity plan was always going to end up with 1000s of sick, infectious people swamping the hospitals.

Did no-one actually think about the doctors and nurses who are going to die because of this plan? Did no-one think to start stockpiling PPE in January?” (5/n)

“Matt Hancock is totally deluded if he thinks ventilators are what’s key here. What’s the point of ventilators if the doctors and nurses who need to use him are already dead?

How can they not be protecting the very people they are asking to look after the patients?” (6/n)

“I mean even if they don’t give a s*** about NHS staff – and clearly they don’t – don’t they actually want a healthy workforce to care for the patients? Who looks after the patients when the doctors start dying?” (7/n)

“I feel betrayed, I feel scared, I feel like we are basically lambs to the slaughter. Paper masks and plastic aprons. What a f***** betrayal.” (8/8)

 

[Deleted member 2197]

Coronavirus: UK changes course amid death toll fears
March 17, 2020

Change course or a quarter of a million people will die in a "catastrophic epidemic" of coronavirus - warnings do not come much starker than that.

The message came from researchers modelling how the disease will spread, how the NHS would be overwhelmed and how many would die.

The situation has shifted dramatically and as a result we are now facing the most profound changes to our daily lives in peacetime.

This realisation has happened only in the past few days.

However, it is long after other scientists and the World Health Organization had warned of the risks of not going all-out to stop the virus.

The crucial piece of evidence came from the scientists at Imperial College London who first realised the scale of the problem in China and whose advice is heavily influential in government.

They assessed three strategies:

• 
  
  • Suppression - break chains of transmission, effectively trying to stop the epidemic in its tracks, and bring cases down as low as possible, as China has done
  • Mitigation - accept you cannot stop the coronavirus so slow its spread and prevent a massive peak in cases that would overwhelm the NHS while trying to protect those most at risk of severe disease, which appeared to be the UK strategy last week
  • Do nothing - and let the virus rip through the population

...
The modelling projected that if the UK did nothing, 81% of people would be infected and 510,000 would die from coronavirus by August.

The mitigation strategy is better, but would still result in about 250,000 deaths and completely overwhelm intensive care in the NHS.

The report concludes "suppression is the only viable strategy at the current time". It is hoped deaths could be limited to the thousands or tens of thousands.

The government has always said it is following the science and the science has changed profoundly.

Hence, we should be waving goodbye to pubs, clubs and theatres, work from home and isolate whole households if any one person becomes sick.

https://www.bbc.com/news/health-51915302

 

[Deleted member 13524]

The way info is presented currently, it sounds like young people walk around without symptoms and all old people suffer horribly. Is that true? Are some old people asymptomatic also?

There are young and old people asymptomatic. So regardless of your age, if your genetics tell the virus to go away then it doesn't affect you.
Older people just have weaker lungs, heart and immune system. So in the case of showing symptoms there's a larger chance of it evolving into viric pneumonia, which in turn makes the system unable to provide enough oxygen to the body, which in turn may cause a heart attack.
That's not to say a bunch of younger people don't suffer too, meaning everyone should be avoiding it. There's quite a bunch of people aged 30-50 that have died.
It's not like the virus looks at your birthday date and decides to attack accordingly.

Yes, median incubation time is mere 5 days and most cases fall within 14 days limit, but that's not all the cases.

And those fringe cases are what will keep a steady infection rate, to eventually achieve herd immunity.

So how did China manage to cut its infection rate to near zero?

First you'll have to believe China is saying the truth, then you have to consider that an authoritarian communist dictatorship can do whatever the fuck they want to their 2 billion slaves. Including closing people in their apartments and leaving them to die of starvation.

Yes doctors in Australia seem to have good results with HIV inhibitors and Chloroquine, the main issue is that countries haven’t been very efficient in pooling their research and findings it seems ...

In Porto, Portugal, the doctors have been treating the more critical patients with Malaria drugs, with a fair amount of success. There's been only one death in Portugal (so far, most probably there will be more), and it was a 80-year-old with a long history of other problems.

 

[green.pixel]

Meanwhile we have peer reviewed studies which show that SARS-CoV(-1) originated from 'wet markets' aka chinese markets where all kinds of different wild, illegally hunted animals are kept in close proximity without any care for hygiene and absolutely everything points to that SARS-CoV-2 following the suite. This has nothing to do with agriculture or capitalism or whatever.

It says in the article:

The focus on the market misses the origins of wild agriculture out in the hinterlands and its increasing capitalization. Globally, and in China, wild food is becoming more formalized as an economic sector. But its relationship with industrial agriculture extends beyond merely sharing the same moneybags. As industrial production–hog, poultry, and the like–expand into primary forest, it places pressure on wild food operators to dredge further into the forest for source populations, increasing the interface with, and spillover of, new pathogens, including Covid-19.

 

[eloic]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1239908972456534019

Rachel Clarke @doctor_oxford

THREAD/ I am sharing this testimony at the request of an A&E doctor in the north of England, who writes:

“It is absolute carnage in A&E. Utter chaos. We don’t have any proper PPE [protective gear]. We are being given crappy paper masks, not the FFP3 masks we need.” (1/n)

“And not everyone even gets those. Literally the doctors seeing the sickest patients, the ones with suspected heart attacks, PEs, sepsis – all they have to protect themselves is a bit of paper across their mouth as if that would ever do anything to protect them.” (2/n)

“There are all the Covid patients but then there are also all the other severely sick patients. People aren’t stopping having RTAs and heart attacks and strokes and broken hips, are they? It’s all here and it’s utter carnage.” (3/n)

“I am in shock. I feel like we are being thrown to the wolves here. Some of us are going to die. We know some will die.

And the government just clearly doesn’t give a s*** about us, do they? I mean, we’ve known since January this was coming. WE ALL KNEW IT.” (4/n)

“But the herd immunity plan was always going to end up with 1000s of sick, infectious people swamping the hospitals.

Did no-one actually think about the doctors and nurses who are going to die because of this plan? Did no-one think to start stockpiling PPE in January?” (5/n)

“Matt Hancock is totally deluded if he thinks ventilators are what’s key here. What’s the point of ventilators if the doctors and nurses who need to use him are already dead?

How can they not be protecting the very people they are asking to look after the patients?” (6/n)

“I mean even if they don’t give a s*** about NHS staff – and clearly they don’t – don’t they actually want a healthy workforce to care for the patients? Who looks after the patients when the doctors start dying?” (7/n)

“I feel betrayed, I feel scared, I feel like we are basically lambs to the slaughter. Paper masks and plastic aprons. What a f***** betrayal.” (8/8)

I'm sorry and I know that what I'm going to say is not popular, but all that seemed a bit exaggerated, to me. She's speaking like many many doctors and nurses are going to die, so who's going to take care of the ill. Day after day we're seeing the numbers: the death rate is still very, VERY low, so can we please calm the fuck down just a little bit? Again, I'm not saying we should act carelessly! But I don't think this kind of alarmism helps, either.

 

[green.pixel]

First you'll have to believe China is saying the truth, then you have to consider that an authoritarian communist dictatorship can do whatever the fuck they want to their 2 billion slaves. Including closing people in their apartments and leaving them to die of starvation

Cmon mate, you can't be that much misinformed and brainwashed, can you?

 

[Shifty Geezer]

There are young and old people asymptomatic. So regardless of your age, if your genetics tell the virus to go away then it doesn't affect you.
Older people just have weaker lungs, heart and immune system. So in the case of showing symptoms there's a larger chance of it evolving into viric pneumonia, which in turn makes the system unable to provide enough oxygen to the body, which in turn may cause a heart attack.

That's info I think is important to publicise as scientific data. At the moment, all old people are being led to believe in the worst. In reality, are 50+% of them not even going to experience much of a cold, let alone shortness of breath?

There's really two metrics on concern - likelihood to develop symptoms, and likelihood of those symptoms going on to become problematic. The first metric isn't much mentioned, and I've seen a report in early March suggesting asymptomatic infections was <2%.

If it's a case of the population being separable into at risk and not, perhaps there are genetic keys for resistance to SARD to help find those at risk ahead of an epidemic?

 

[Deleted member 13524]

In reality, are 50+% of them not even going to experience much of a cold, let alone shortness of breath?

Well 50/75% of chance of not developing any symptoms isn't really a number that puts people at ease...

 

[Shifty Geezer]

It's more easing than hearing fever and trouble breathing and 15% at risk with 5+% dying without any counter-point.

 

[Deleted member 13524]

It's more easing than hearing fever and trouble breathing and 15% at risk with 5+% dying without any counter-point.

There would be more toilet paper in the shelves, of that we can agree.

 

[HBRU]

It's going towards 10%

 

[eloic]

It's going towards 10%View attachment 3661

Something just doesn't add up. That percentage is way too off in comparison to other parts of the world. And I insist, how can we account for the (possibly) thousands of people who didn't even know that were infected (since we've seen massive examples of people not knowing)?

 

[BRiT]

I'm still a bit amazed at how long it's taken to be able to find Toilet Paper at the stores without the persistent checking.

 

[BRiT]

Today's daily update from Ohio government, number of positive cases is 67, with 31 being in Cuyahoga County (immediate Cleveland Area). Yesterday's numbers were 50 and 24 from Cuyahoga County.

A good percentage of those in line in their cars at the drive-up Testing at Cleveland Clinic didn't have the needed doctor referral. Who knows how many with a doctor's referral were put off from testing yesterday because of the longer than expected lines.

Unfortunately, I'm resigned to seeing significantly higher numbers by the end of the week.

 

[MfA]

But that doesn't explain why more women are diagnosed with having the coronavirus. Surely smoking doesn't make you less likely to catch it? Perhaps it does - but then you're much more at risk if you do get the virus!

Why would it be a surprise to have women be symptomatic more often than men? Women are more frail in general, relatively smaller organs and menstruation more frequently causes deficiencies on the same diet.

 

[Kaotik]

Why would it be a surprise to have women be symptomatic more often than men? Women are more frail in general, relatively smaller organs and menstruation more frequently causes deficiencies on the same diet.

But their immune system is stronger than mens, which would suggest the opposite.