The Coronavirus Thread

[JimC]

Only 2 new cases reported in Victoria, and no new deaths. Hopefully, some major easing of restrictions on Sunday. Even die-hard government supporters are starting to get a little restless...

[laklak]

Y'all were the last ones to go in On the Beach, too.

[JimC]

I'm waiting for the pills to be issued...

[rainbow]

W.JPG (21.2 KiB) Viewed 1637 times

Wir doomed!

[Tero]

Milwaukee running out of hospital rooms. WI has about 1000 patients in hospitals.



Patients must be between 18 and 70 years old and have been hospitalized for at least 48 hours before they can be transported to the medical station.

The patients also must have vital signs that are close to normal, fevers below 100 degrees and must be able to walk on their own or with the assistance of one other person.

The patients treated at the facility may need oxygen therapy, additional rest or medication, Standridge said. The patients typically will stay about three to six days.


Should people who suspect they have COVID-19 go to the field hospital?
No, walk-up patients will not be admitted. Those who will be treated at the hospital have been transported from other hospitals.

People should still contact their doctor or go to their regular hospital if they need medical attention.

Who is working at the State Fair Park hospital?
The medical station is staffed with health care workers from across the state and the country.

The staff includes physicians, nurses, pharmacists and social workers.

How many patients can be treated at the field hospital?
The medical station initially will have 50 beds, Standridge said. But the number of beds can be doubled quickly, she said.

The state has said the field hospital could hold as many as 530 beds.

Will patients have to pay for being treated at the field hospital?
The cost of transferring patients to the field hospital will be paid for by the state with federal money allocated through the CARES Act.

The state will not bill health plans or patients for the care provided at the field hospital.

[NineBerry]

The John Snow Memorandum:

https://www.johnsnowmemo.com/

It's named after the historic epidemiologist. But I see the allusion to Game of Thrones (Winter is Coming)

[L'Emmerdeur]

I'd have trouble whistling past this one even with the preexisting condition, but maybe with plenty of practice I'd manage it.

'Dutch researchers report first death from COVID-19 reinfection'

An elderly woman in the Netherlands has died after getting COVID-19 a second time, researchers reported on Monday. It’s the first time a death has been reported from reinfection with coronavirus.

The patient was an 89-year-old woman who was being treated for Waldenström’s macroglobulinemia, a rare type of white blood cell cancer which is treatable but incurable. The findings were published in the Oxford University Press.

The researchers said the woman arrived at the emergency department earlier this year while suffering from a fever and severe cough. She tested positive for coronavirus and remained hospitalized for 5 days, after which her symptoms subsided completely, except for persisting fatigue.

Nearly 2 months later, just two days after starting a new round of chemotherapy, she developed a fever, cough, and dyspnea. When she was admitted to hospital, her oxygen saturation was 90 percent with a respiratory rate of 40 breaths per minute. She again tested positive for coronavirus while tests for antibodies were negative at days 4 and 6.

“At day 8, the condition of the patient deteriorated. She died two weeks later,” the researchers said.

The team had access to test samples from both infections and confirmed that the genetic makeup of each virus was different to a degree which cannot be explained through in-vivo evolution. This supports the finding that the woman was suffering from a reinfection with coronavirus.

[pErvinalia]

Dutch reinfections are the best reinfections.

[Brian Peacock]

I'd have trouble whistling past this one even with the preexisting condition, but maybe with plenty of practice I'd manage it.

'Dutch researchers report first death from COVID-19 reinfection'

An elderly woman in the Netherlands has died after getting COVID-19 a second time, researchers reported on Monday. It’s the first time a death has been reported from reinfection with coronavirus.

The patient was an 89-year-old woman who was being treated for Waldenström’s macroglobulinemia, a rare type of white blood cell cancer which is treatable but incurable. The findings were published in the Oxford University Press.

The researchers said the woman arrived at the emergency department earlier this year while suffering from a fever and severe cough. She tested positive for coronavirus and remained hospitalized for 5 days, after which her symptoms subsided completely, except for persisting fatigue.

Nearly 2 months later, just two days after starting a new round of chemotherapy, she developed a fever, cough, and dyspnea. When she was admitted to hospital, her oxygen saturation was 90 percent with a respiratory rate of 40 breaths per minute. She again tested positive for coronavirus while tests for antibodies were negative at days 4 and 6.

“At day 8, the condition of the patient deteriorated. She died two weeks later,” the researchers said.

The team had access to test samples from both infections and confirmed that the genetic makeup of each virus was different to a degree which cannot be explained through in-vivo evolution. This supports the finding that the woman was suffering from a reinfection with coronavirus.

I think you'll find that she was immuno-surpressed and old, so she was going to die anyway. Therefore #FAKENEWS.

[Scot Dutchy]

How many cases like this occur with first time infection? That is never recorded.

[NineBerry]

Regarding the Great Barrington Declaration.

The Great Barrington Declaration

The Great Barrington Declaration – As infectious disease epidemiologists and public health scientists we have grave concerns about the damaging physical and mental health impacts of the prevailing COVID-19 policies, and recommend an approach we call Focused Protection.

Coming from both the left and right, and around the world, we have devoted our careers to protecting people. Current lockdown policies are producing devastating effects on short and long-term public health. The results (to name a few) include lower childhood vaccination rates, worsening cardiovascular disease outcomes, fewer cancer screenings and deteriorating mental health – leading to greater excess mortality in years to come, with the working class and younger members of society carrying the heaviest burden. Keeping students out of school is a grave injustice.

Keeping these measures in place until a vaccine is available will cause irreparable damage, with the underprivileged disproportionately harmed.

Fortunately, our understanding of the virus is growing. We know that vulnerability to death from COVID-19 is more than a thousand-fold higher in the old and infirm than the young. Indeed, for children, COVID-19 is less dangerous than many other harms, including influenza.

As immunity builds in the population, the risk of infection to all – including the vulnerable – falls. We know that all populations will eventually reach herd immunity – i.e. the point at which the rate of new infections is stable – and that this can be assisted by (but is not dependent upon) a vaccine. Our goal should therefore be to minimize mortality and social harm until we reach herd immunity.

The most compassionate approach that balances the risks and benefits of reaching herd immunity, is to allow those who are at minimal risk of death to live their lives normally to build up immunity to the virus through natural infection, while better protecting those who are at highest risk. We call this Focused Protection.

Adopting measures to protect the vulnerable should be the central aim of public health responses to COVID-19. By way of example, nursing homes should use staff with acquired immunity and perform frequent PCR testing of other staff and all visitors. Staff rotation should be minimized. Retired people living at home should have groceries and other essentials delivered to their home. When possible, they should meet family members outside rather than inside. A comprehensive and detailed list of measures, including approaches to multi-generational households, can be implemented, and is well within the scope and capability of public health professionals.

Those who are not vulnerable should immediately be allowed to resume life as normal. Simple hygiene measures, such as hand washing and staying home when sick should be practiced by everyone to reduce the herd immunity threshold. Schools and universities should be open for in-person teaching. Extracurricular activities, such as sports, should be resumed. Young low-risk adults should work normally, rather than from home. Restaurants and other businesses should open. Arts, music, sport and other cultural activities should resume. People who are more at risk may participate if they wish, while society as a whole enjoys the protection conferred upon the vulnerable by those who have built up herd immunity.

On October 4, 2020

A video worth 15mins of anyone's time - whether you agree with the declaration or are for or against masks and other mitigation measures, or not...

Look at these cunts, applauding each other and celebrating with champagne

[Hermit]

From Science-Based Medicine
14 October 2020

Those of you sharing the "Great Barrington Declaration" as "proof" that scientists favor a herd immunity strategy to deal with the COVID-19 pandemic, please realize that this "declaration" is nothing more than a science denialist technique known as "magnified minority." Basically, the tactic involves finding a scientist or two (or three) who hold an opinion FAR outside the mainstream, make a bogus "open letter" or "petition" (or, in this case, "declaration"), get it signed by a couple of crackpots with legitimate credentials, and then round out the “list of scientists” with a bunch of ideologues with unrelated degrees. The idea is to give the impression that the crackpot view is mainstream and worthy of consideration and that there is a legitimate scientific controversy about it. This is a technique that's been used by creationists to attack evolution, climate science deniers to attack the conclusion that human activity is the primary driver of global climate change, HIV/AIDS denialists, and even 9/11 Truthers.

In this case, a right wing free market fundamentalist think tank worked with these three scientists, who are either useful idiots or who are down with the whole right wing "open the economy at all costs" thing, to write up the declaration and publicize it to Fox News and the right wing media and social media ecosystem to convince people that this is a reasonable approach, even though the vast majority of epidemiologists agree that it's impossible to protect the elderly and vulnerable if COVID-19 is spreading unchecked among the lower risk young population. Don't fall for this propaganda technique.

And from Rowland Manthorpe at Sky News:

A widely-circulated open letter calling on governments to pursue herd immunity is counting homeopaths, therapists and fake names among its "medical" signatories, leading to accusations that it falsely represents scientific support for the controversial position.

The Great Barrington Declaration, a letter organised by prominent advocates of herd immunity, claims to have been signed by more than 15,000 scientists and medical practitioners, as well as more than 150,000 members of the general public.

Yet Sky News found dozens of fake names on the list of medical signatories, which anyone can add to if they tick a box and enter a name. These included Dr. I.P. Freely, Dr. Person Fakename and Dr. Johnny Bananas, who listed himself as a "Dr of Hard Sums".

One medical professional on the list gives his name as Dr Harold Shipman, a general practitioner in the United Kingdom.

A GP called Harold Shipman killed more than 200 of his patients before he was arrested in 1998.

Other famous names included Dominic Cummings, who is described as "PhD Durham Univercity".

Sky News also found 18 self-declared homeopaths listed on the open letter as medical practitioners, despite the fact that homeopathy has no scientific underpinning or clinical evidence to support its use.

In addition, the letter has been signed by well over 100 therapists, including massage therapists, hypnotherapists, psychotherapists and one Mongolian Khöömii Singer who describes himself as a "therapeutic sound practitioner".

Public health experts accused the letter, which has been used as evidence for the idea of a rift in the scientific community, of misrepresenting the level of support for the controversial concept of herd immunity.

Professor Martin McKee, Professor of European Public Health at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, said it reminded him of "the messaging used to undermine public health policies on harmful substances, such as tobacco".

As advocates of herd immunity have become more vocal, media reports have described scientists as "divided".

Yet although herd immunity has some prominent backers, and the Great Barrington Declaration has been signed by many respected scientists and medical professionals, the vast majority of specialists in the field reject the approach.

Professor McKee added: "Leaving aside the powerful arguments against this declaration on grounds of science and feasibility, we have consistent evidence that a clear majority of the British public support necessary measures to reduce the spread of the virus or would go even further.

"Yet the campaign behind this declaration promotes a completely different picture."

The letter, called the Great Barrington Declaration after the United States town where it was written, was initiated by Professor Martin Kulldorff, Professor Jay Bhattacharya and Professor Sunetra Gupta.

It calls on governments to allow younger and less vulnerable people to catch coronavirus, thereby encouraging "herd immunity" among the population, while people who would be hit especially hard by the virus are given "focused protection".

Professor Bhattacharya, professor of medicine of Stanford University, told Sky News: "We do not have the resources to audit each signature, especially given the incredible interest that the Great Barrington Declaration has drawn. It is unfortunate that some people have abused our trust by adding false names, but I suppose it is inevitable.

"Still - given the volume of correspondence I have received from medical and public health professionals, as well as scientists and epidemiologists, it is clear that a very large number of experts resonate with the message of the declaration and its call for a focused protection policy."

[NineBerry]

[Brian Peacock]

How many cases like this occur with first time infection? That is never recorded.

I don't know. How many?

[Scot Dutchy]

How many cases like this occur with first time infection? That is never recorded.

I don't know. How many?

My whole point. But never mind.