COVID-19 (Con’t)

[Joe Beamish]

Originally Posted by Dirk Hofman

That's not federal regulation, that's lack of disaster planning at the federal level. No question there's been more than enough of that. Disbanding the agency which was responsible for preparing for disasters would be exhibit A.

We need both systems to be operating in unison to have the appropriate response.

I didn’t limit my comments to federal regulations. I simply said that just about everyone in a position of authority screwed this up. Which is understandable. But since you mention it, here are some more sources on the federal government regulation screwing up testing:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nyt...demic.amp.html

“Across the government, they said, three agencies responsible for detecting and combating threats like the coronavirus failed to prepare quickly enough.“

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.axi...20c73774d.html

“Some of the nation’s best academic laboratories wanted to begin developing their own coronavirus diagnostic tests early last month, but were blocked by federal rules about test development.“

[upsidedown]

Originally Posted by Joe Beamish

Big topic, but let’s start with masks. Did we have them? Nope. As a matter fact, it was the federal government that said masks would not be helpful to the general public, remember that? What about tests? Did we have tests at the ready like South Korea did? Nope.

Who is now providing both tests and masks? Primarily private companies.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.pol...tration-156327

No mention in that article to private companies providing tests or masks.

[BrunoBlack]

There’s a very interesting article published in the New Yorker: How Does the Coronavirus Behave Inside a Patient, by Siddhartha Mukherjee. He is a terrific author. He wrote the Books - Gene and Emperor of All Maladies. Pretty interesting article with good insights that are presented in a very accessible manner.

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2...side-a-patient

[cmd612]

Originally Posted by Haasome

There’s a very interesting article published in the New Yorker: How Does the Coronavirus Behave Inside a Patient, by Siddhartha Mukherjee. He is a terrific author. He wrote the Books - Gene and Emperor of All Maladies. Pretty interesting article with good insights that are presented in a very accessible manner.

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2...side-a-patient

Thanks for posting this! I really enjoyed Emporer of All Maladies, and just skimming the first couple of paragraphs of this article, it looks like he addresses something I've been wondering about: whether the severity of illness w/ this disease is dose-dependent. Off to read it now. . . .

[Dirk Hofman]

Originally Posted by Joe Beamish

I didn’t limit my comments to federal regulations. I simply said that just about everyone in a position of authority screwed this up. Which is understandable. But since you mention it, here are some more sources on the federal government regulation screwing up testing:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nyt...demic.amp.html

“Across the government, they said, three agencies responsible for detecting and combating threats like the coronavirus failed to prepare quickly enough.“

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.axi...20c73774d.html

“Some of the nation’s best academic laboratories wanted to begin developing their own coronavirus diagnostic tests early last month, but were blocked by federal rules about test development.“

Yes, agreed, good follow up. Thanks.

[220volt]

Italy’s mortality rate right now is 11%. That’s higher than 2002 SARS which was pretty terrifying. Germany’s death rate despite having similar elderly population as Italy is 0.7%. That’s a gap of gargantuan proportions. Something doesn’t add up. It would be very useful to see how each country records their death causes. For example:
If a person dies of cardiac arrest, but he was infected by Corona as well, is the cause of death Corona or Cardiac Arrest? How much did Corona contribute to his heart failure?
Would he survived is he did not have Corona?
What is the percentage of those who would have died anyway with or without corona?
Does Germany records their dead differently than Italy?

I've read in Financial Times: “Only 12 per cent of death certificates have shown a direct causality from coronavirus,” said the scientific adviser to Italy’s minister of health last week.

[upsidedown]

Originally Posted by Dirk Hofman

Yes, agreed, good follow up. Thanks.

Yes, thanks for the links. Here's a puzzling quote from the NYT article you linked: "Dr. Stephen Hahn, 60, the commissioner of the Food and Drug Administration, enforced regulations that paradoxically made it tougher for hospitals, private clinics and companies to deploy diagnostic tests in an emergency."


Then, further down "Instead, under his leadership, the F.D.A. became a significant roadblock, according to current and former officials as well as researchers and doctors at laboratories around the country.

Private-sector tests were supposed to be the next tier after the C.D.C. fulfilled its obligation to jump-start screening at public labs. In other countries hit hard by the coronavirus, governments acted quickly to speed tests to their populations. In South Korea, for example, regulators in early February summoned executives from 20 medical manufacturers, easing rules as they demanded tests.

But Dr. Hahn took a cautious approach. He was not proactive in reaching out to manufacturers, and instead deferred to his scientists, following the F.D.A.’s often cumbersome methods for approving medical screening."

More top down failure.

[tbeltrans]

Here is all we need to know...

Unfortunately, playback on other web sites is disabled so you will have to follow the link...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OxOJ7hh3H-I


Trying to be helpful in trying times...

Tony

[Joe Beamish]

Originally Posted by upsidedown

No mention in that article to private companies providing tests or masks.

Regulations have been clearing to allow the big labs to generate tests.

This stuff is easy to Google -- but, as I'm discovering on my phone, sometimes you hit a pay wall that wan't there before. I probably need to clear cookies or something. Will see when I get back to my laptop.

https://www.dailyherald.com/business...for-use-by-fda

"The U.S. has been trying for weeks to ramp up coronavirus testing after a series of problems with the initial government-designed test. The nation's daily testing capacity has been increasing as more diagnostic makers and large laboratories have developed tests."

[Joe Beamish]

Originally Posted by 220volt

Italy’s mortality rate right now is 11%. That’s higher than 2002 SARS which was pretty terrifying. Germany’s death rate despite having similar elderly population as Italy is 0.7%. That’s a gap of gargantuan proportions. Something doesn’t add up. It would be very useful to see how each country records their death causes. For example:
If a person dies of cardiac arrest, but he was infected by Corona as well, is the cause of death Corona or Cardiac Arrest? How much did Corona contribute to his heart failure?
Would he survived is he did not have Corona?
What is the percentage of those who would have died anyway with or without corona?
Does Germany records their dead differently than Italy?

I've read in Financial Times: “Only 12 per cent of death certificates have shown a direct causality from coronavirus,” said the scientific adviser to Italy’s minister of health last week.

Totally agree. Bewildering discrepancies everywhere. As you point out, some of it is likely due to different definitions of data collection.

And, while I realize these are only individual data points, I do notice cases of really, really healthy people, reportedly with no other health issues, dying like this good man, active and fit in his mid 40s from Texas:

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/it...ve/ar-BB11MQIg

While others (thank God) like Tom Hanks, who has type II diabetes in his mid-60s, sailing through with mild symptoms.

I realize these are merely individual data points. But they nag.

[cmd612]

Originally Posted by Joe Beamish

Totally agree. Bewildering discrepancies everywhere. As you point out, some of it is likely due to different definitions of data collection.

And, while I realize these are only individual data points, I do notice cases of really, really healthy people, reportedly with no other health issues, dying like this good man, active and fit in his mid 40s from Texas:

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/it...ve/ar-BB11MQIg

While others (thank God) like Tom Hanks, who has type II diabetes in his mid-60s, sailing through with mild symptoms.

I realize these are merely individual data points. But they nag.

Also just individual data points, but reading one news story after another about doctors and nurses who were young, otherwise healthy, and have died from COVID-19 got me wondering whether the dose of the virus - how many virus particles one is exposed to - has some effect on the severity of the disease if one gets infected. Maybe these healthcare workers are so sick because they've gotten extremely high doses, or repeated doses, of the virus while working with patients. In contrast, someone who gets just a little bit of exposure from someone nearby for a short time might be less sick? (It's one of the questions addressed in the Mukherjee article linked by Paul above; his answer is essentially "maybe, but we don't really know yet.")

[wrbriggs]

Originally Posted by cmd612

Also just individual data points, but reading one news story after another about doctors and nurses who were young, otherwise healthy, and have died from COVID-19 got me wondering whether the dose of the virus - how many virus particles one is exposed to - has some effect on the severity of the disease if one gets infected. Maybe these healthcare workers are so sick because they've gotten extremely high doses, or repeated doses, of the virus while working with patients. In contrast, someone who gets just a little bit of exposure from someone nearby for a short time might be less sick? (It's one of the questions addressed in the Mukherjee article linked by Paul above; his answer is essentially "maybe, but we don't really know yet.")

"Viral load" is a well-known factor in the severity of some viral infections. While there isn't specific evidence, research on previous types of Coronavirus have shown that the initial viral load can impact your body's ability to mount an immune response; the higher the viral load, the worse the outcome. Health care workers are constantly exposed, despite the use of personal protective equipment and contact / droplet precautions, and so it is consistent with previous evidence that they would be some of the hardest-hit victims of this disease.

[Peter Wilcox]

Originally Posted by HodgdonExtreme

Also, the antibody test to determine if you've been sick and are recovered - getting that rolled out and ramped up is huge. I think there is a HUGE chunk of people that have unknowingly recovered from this plague. Those people will be extremely beneficial to us, assuming they in fact have immunity.

Here it comes from South Korea:

http://investor.henryschein.com/node/21961/pdf

http://sdbiosensor.com/xe/product/7662

"STANDARD Q COVID-19 IgM/IgG Duo Test Kit is a rapid immunochromatography test designed for the qualitative presumptive detection of specific IgM and IgG to SARS-CoV-2 in humoral fluid.

Rapid testing for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies within 10 minutes
Just 10ul of specimen : Whole blood, serum , plasma
Suitable for Point of Care Testing. No need for extra equipment"

I should add, as it states at the bottom of the spec sheet, that the test may detect antibodies to other coronaviruses also, so not completely specific to the SARS-CoV-2 virus.

[AX17609]

Some perspective:

https://public.flourish.studio/visualisation/1712761/

[robj144]

Death toll is more than 700 already today in the US and the number of cases per day is still increasing.