ADVERTISEMENT

COVID-19 Pandemic: Transmissions, Deaths, Treatments, Vaccines, Interventions and More...

Status
Not open for further replies.
Here's something worth of a study:Are heavy coffee drinkers more susceptible to the virus?
As an experiment,I checked my blood oxygen levels both before and after I drank 2 cans of Vanilla Coke.
Before:99
After: 95.

Since high oxygen levels in the blood are desirable for recovery from illness-something I just looked up online-wouldn't that make heavy coffee drinking a co-morbidity?
 
Here's something worth of a study:Are heavy coffee drinkers more susceptible to the virus?
As an experiment,I checked my blood oxygen levels both before and after I drank 2 cans of Vanilla Coke.
Before:99
After: 95.

Since high oxygen levels in the blood are desirable for recovery from illness-something I just looked up online-wouldn't that make heavy coffee drinking a co-morbidity?

Highly doubtful
 
so what is the data point where nyc and nj open.......the cases are very small, the deaths almost none, what is going on here...looking to get a good non political discussion

the way it looks to be is that they will never truly open before the end of the year
 
  • Like
Reactions: MulletCork
so what is the data point where nyc and nj open.......the cases are very small, the deaths almost none, what is going on here...looking to get a good non political discussion

the way it looks to be is that they will never truly open before the end of the year

NYC and NJ are worried about a second wave. if they resume normal activities too soon. I think it will take way beyond the end of the year for things to return to normal. Even if a vaccine is approved this year, it will be at least March before it's manufactured in sufficient quantities to even start to make a difference.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Greg2020
NYC and NJ are worried about a second wave. if they resume normal activities too soon. I think it will take way beyond the end of the year for things to return to normal. Even if a vaccine is approved this year, it will be at least March before it's manufactured in sufficient quantities to even start to make a difference.

there is a large gap between closed down and normal. Gyms are still closed in NJ but not in most other states including NY. Have there been outbreaks due to gyms in other states?
 
  • Like
Reactions: bac2therac
Didn't have time to dive into this yesterday, but Regeneron's antibody cocktail showed some strong results in both prevention and treatment for both macaques and hamsters (hamsters are used, too, since macaques don't get nearly as ill from COVID, so hamsters provide good insight into treatment effects). If we see results like these in humans, we're looking at, by far, the most effective treatment to date (a "near cure"), as well as a potentially effective prophylactic for most people. The paper is linked below and the abstract is very nicely done - concise, but gets the key points across. Phase III clinical trials are ongoing and approval could come as early as the end of August. Really need this to work - this has been my pick, since March, to be the best treatment, mostly based on their Ebola success - having done it before counts (being a potential prophylactic would be a bonus).

https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.08.02.233320v1.full.pdf

Abstract: An urgent global quest for effective therapies to prevent and treat COVID-19 disease is ongoing. We previously described REGN-COV2, a cocktail of two potent neutralizing antibodies (REGN10987+REGN10933) targeting non-overlapping epitopes on the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein. In this report, we evaluate the in vivo efficacy of this antibody cocktail in both rhesus macaques and golden hamsters and demonstrate that REGN-COV-2 can greatly reduce virus load in lower and upper airway and decrease virus induced pathological sequalae when administered prophylactically or therapeutically. Our results provide evidence of the therapeutic potential of this antibody cocktail.

However, we just don't know how long something like this might work as a prophylactic, however (probably for at least a few months - not as long as a vaccine, though, based on the Ebola experience, where a similar cocktail was used successfully for treatment, but the Merck vaccine was used for prevention) The other issue is that the large cell culture bioreactors that make these antibodies will only likely be able to make enough for treating moderately ill to worse patients and for prevention in a subset of the population (likely health care workers and those in other high risk occupations and highly vulnerable populations) - at least through the end of the year. The link below is to Derek Lowe's blog on this, which was excellent, as it nicely explains the details of the treatment and prevention studies in both animal species as well as what it all means; the comments also contain some good intel on the manufacturing challenges.

https://blogs.sciencemag.org/pipeli...rons-monoclonal-antibody-cocktail-in-primates

For those who don't recall, the cocktail features two monoclonal antibodies developed to target different parts of the all-important spike protein, which is the key for how the virus connects to and infects cells. The idea was to have dual activity in case some mutation occurred within patients, that could help the virus "get around" just a single antibody, as multiple viral mutations to elude both antibodies was deemed extremely unlikely; see the link below for a discussion of the cocktail approach and all the R&D that went into it (and links to the primary papers on it).

It'a also worth reminding people of the difference between the antibody cocktail approach and a vaccine. A vaccine is supposed to elicit a full immune response to the antigen (RNA/DNA/attenuated virus, etc.), producing a suite of antibodies and T-cells to detect and disable/destroy the virus, while the antibody approach simply is giving examples of antibodies shown to work against the virus, but it's likely not as complete of an "attack" on the virus, since the immune system isn't activated at all (as per the Ebola example). This is a different virus, though, so maybe this can work as well as a vaccine for prevention.

https://rutgers.forums.rivals.com/t...entions-and-more.191275/page-176#post-4609892

Regeneron, whose engineered antibody cocktail I've been high on for months, announced an agreement with Roche today, in which Roche would put their manufacturing capacity behind the Regeneron product, tripling output of the cocktail. As confirmed by my friend, who's pretty high up there, this is a very positive sign that both companies are feeling optimistic about the product, which is being evaluated in phase III trials now both as a treatment for sick COVID patients and as a prophylactic to prevent (or greatly diminish) infections, especially in front line workers and at-risk people.

https://www.fiercepharma.com/manufacturing/roche-regeneron-join-forces-to-more-than-triple-manufacturing-covid-19-antibody
 
Last edited:
I've harped on it in the past, but history has shown us for over a thousand years that when power of this magnitude is obtained (even if initially out of perceived necessity) it is rarely fully rescinded. Once the precedent is set, it becomes significantly easier to curtail freedoms over increasingly smaller issues.
How many of us here were aware of the restrictions in this country during the Spanish Flu?

Of course we are all aware of prohibition. We are seeing the easing of restrictions on marijuana. Gay marriage. Etc. This country is loaded with examples of the easing of gov't restrictions.
 
there is a large gap between closed down and normal. Gyms are still closed in NJ but not in most other states including NY. Have there been outbreaks due to gyms in other states?

There's no way to do a scientific experiment in which a state changes only its treatment of gyms. Given the lack of certainty, and given that people's lives are at stake (not just from the risk of dying, but from the risk of long-term effects), focusing on prevention is the right approach.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Greg2020
Excellent article from a few days ago in the Times, discussing convalescent plasma in more detail. While the 57% mortality reduction calculated from pooling various smaller studies, above, is great, it's still not a single randomized controlled trial (RCT) showing that, so there will always be nagging doubts on its effectiveness until we have such data.

This article at least dives in and explains some reasons why we don't have such data yet, with two key issues emerging: doctors/patients being unwilling to forego plasma vs. possibly getting a placebo (or standard care, which hasn't been that great) as part of a trial, plus outbreaks being greatly reduced in areas where some RCTs were underway. At this point, there are researchers now sending plasma to places like Brazil to try to complete their trials.

In many ways the success of the expanded access program (over 80,000 now have been treated with CP and 1500 patients per day are now being treated across the US) has killed the ability to do these RCTs. In hindsight, it probably would've been better to simply start with an RCT to eliminate any doubts. Assuming the 57% mortality reductions are real, at 1500 patients per day, this would likely be part of the significant reduction in deaths per cases we're seeing in this 2nd wave.

There are parallels to HCQ here, also, where it would've been better to do an RCT before giving the drug to hundreds of thousands of patients without any indication of efficacy. At least CP has a history of being safe and effective in previous viral diseases and has absolutely been shown to be safe in COVID patients. Given its past history and very promising data to date, though, it's clear that the medical community, including our top goverment medical leaders are very supportive of expanding CP use further, as per comments by Drs Birx and Hahn in the article.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/04/health/trump-plasma.html

But the unexpected demand for plasma has inadvertently undercut the research that could prove that it works. The only way to get convincing evidence is with a clinical trial that compares outcomes for patients who are randomly assigned to get the treatment with those who are given a placebo. Many patients and their doctors — knowing they could get the treatment under the government program — have been unwilling to join clinical trials that might provide them with a placebo instead of the plasma.

The trials have also been stymied by the waning of the virus outbreak in many cities, complicating researchers’ ability to recruit sick people. One of those clinical trials, at Columbia University, sputtered to a halt after the outbreak subsided in New York. One of its leaders, Dr. W. Ian Lipkin, looked for hospitals in other hot spots in the United States to continue the work. But he found few takers.


Edit: found my old post with a link to a comment from one of the leads on the plasma program and the quote in the article from 3/25 said, I'd like to know how we missed getting these data early on, before the very promising plasma results started coming in and before we ran out of patients in NYC.

In one of three proposed US trials, Liise-anne Pirofski, an infectious-disease specialist at Albert Einstein College of Medicine, says researchers plan to infuse patients at an early stage of the disease and see how often they advance to critical care. Another trial would enroll severe cases. The third would explore plasma’s use as a preventative measure for people in close contact with those confirmed to have COVID-19, and would evaluate how often such people fall ill after an infusion compared with others who were similarly exposed but not treated. These outcomes are measurable within a month, she says. “Efficacy data could be obtained very, very quickly.”

https://rutgers.forums.rivals.com/t...ventions-and-more.191275/page-34#post-4470810

The FDA put emergency approval of use of convalescent plasma on hold for now. It's an interesting decision, heavily influenced by the fact that 5 months into an expanded access program overseen by the Mayo Clinic in which ~90,000 COVID patients have been treated with plasma, we still don't have a randomized controlled trial (RCT) on this, something I've been complaining about since April.

The data, so far, clearly show the treatment is safe, and numerous analyses from the Mayo folks and other small studies show potentially significant mortality reduction benefits, but these are observational results not RCTs (see my previous post on this, linked above).

One of the reasons the FDA likely didn't provide the emergency use approval is that that would make it even harder to get RCTs completed, plus I think they don't want another HCQ fiasco, where emergency use was approved prematurely and then rescinded. The FDA really needs to put some more effort into completing an RCT on this, as many doctors are convinced that plasma is effective, as it has been in past infectious disease outbreaks/pandemics.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/19/us/politics/blood-plasma-covid-19.html
 
I didn’t realize plasma wasn’t already approved for emergency use, only through trials. Hopefully results from those trials come back soon so they can approve this.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Greg2020
Looks like some additional big, positive antibody news in a paper that came out yesterday (preprint, so not peer-reviewed yet, but looks solid) confirming and extending Dr. Krammer's work at Mt. Sinai, posted above. A Chinese study on 349 of the earliest patients from Wuhan shows ~6 months of generally durable antibody response in the "vast majority" of convalescent patients (who recovered from COVID infections). This is very good news for recovered patients retaining immunity for 6 months or more and for any vaccines able to raise neutralizing antibody responses (which we have seen).

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.07.21.20159178v1.full.pdf

Abstract: Long-term antibody responses and neutralizing activities following SARS-CoV-2 infections have not yet been elucidated. We quantified immunoglobulin M (IgM) and G (IgG) antibodies recognizing the SARS-CoV-2 receptor-binding domain (RBD) of the spike (S) or the nucleocapsid (N) protein, and neutralizing antibodies during a period of six months following COVID-19 disease onset in 349 symptomatic COVID-19 patients, which were among the first world-wide being infected. The positivity rate and magnitude of IgM-S and IgG-N responses increased rapidly. High levels of IgMS/N and IgG-S/N at 2-3 weeks after disease onset were associated with virus control and IgG-S titers correlated closely with the capacity to neutralize SARS-CoV-2. While specific IgM-S/N became undetectable 12 weeks after disease onset in most patients, IgG-S/N titers showed an intermediate contraction phase, but stabilized at relatively high levels over the six months observation period. At late time points the positivity rates for binding and neutralizing SARS-CoV-2-specific antibodies was still over 70%. Taken together, our data indicate sustained humoral immunity in recovered patients who suffer from symptomatic COVID-19, suggesting prolonged immunity.

Conclusion: In conclusion, antibodies appear to have antiviral effects in the early stages of SARS-CoV-2 infection; and the most symptomatic patients with COVID-19 remain positive for IgG-S and exhibit sufficient neutralizing activity at six months after the onset of illness. These results support the notion that naturally infected patients have the ability to combat re-infection and vaccines may be able to produce sufficient protection. Please note, that analyses which terminated their observation earlier than ours and extrapolates the long-term trend based on this contraction phase without considering or determining the consolidation phase, bear the inherent risk to come to wrong over-pessimistic conclusions concerning the durability of humoral immune responses.

More encouraging news on antibodies and T-cells and what they mean for immunity in the latest In The Pipeline blog by Derek Lowe (first link). A couple of more studies have come out showing that recovered COVID patients have durable levels of neutralizing antibodies a few months after infection, in addition to the two studies I had shared back in July (2nd/3rd links). This is excellent news for recovered COVID patients likely having lasting immunity to COVID for at least 6 months and probably at least a year if not more.

https://blogs.sciencemag.org/pipeline/archives/2020/08/18/encouraging-news-about-coronavirus-immunity#comment-326671

Another cool piece of data showing this is likely the case came from a U of Washington study of a fishing boat where all 122 crew members were tested before departure and all were negative for the virus, but 3 had antibodies, meaning a previous COVID infection. Turns out over 85% of the crew became infected on the trip via an outbreak (someone likely had a false negative viral PCR test before departure), but the three with antibodies did not become infected, despite ample opportunity for contact and transmission. As Derek said, "this is about as direct a measure of immune protection as we’re likely to get before the vaccine efficacy trials read out."

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.08.13.20173161v1

Finally, another paper just came out on T-cell responses to the virus as well as T-cell cross-reactivity in people who were never exposed to the virus. Recovered COVID patients had robust levels of various T-cells (white blood cells that kill virus infected cells and white blood cells that have "memory" for pathogens so the body can respond again if needed), which was expected. Probably more importantly, they also confirmed what some other researchers have seen with ~28% of unexposed people having T-cells that respond to SARS-CoV-2 and likely have some level of immunity to the virus. They also showed that a decent percentage of people who were asymptomatic, but exposed to the virus and tested negative for antibodies, tested positive for COVID-specific T-cells, meaning it's possible that antibody population surveys are underestimating how many people have been infected.

With regard to the T-cell response in unexposed people and what that means to immunity, I think it would be very interesting to do a retrospective study of pre-COVID blood donors and evaluate whether the ones with highly active T-cells for CV2 had different outcomes wrt/CV2 (getting it, severity, death, etc.) vs. those with no apparent T-cell cross-reactivity. That might answer the question of the extent of existing immunity, at least epidemiologically, especially if the sample sizes were large enough to ensure a decent percent in each group had been exposed. I asked an immunologist I know if he thought that would be a good experiment and he said absolutely; I also like to get @UMRU's input on questions like this, so paging him. Below is what Derek wrote about this study.

https://www.cell.com/action/showPdf?pii=S0092-8674%2820%2931008-4

𝗧𝗵𝗲𝘆 𝗮𝗹𝘀𝗼 𝗱𝗲𝘁𝗲𝗰𝘁𝗲𝗱 𝗽𝗼𝘁𝗲𝗻𝘁𝗶𝗮𝗹𝗹𝘆 𝗰𝗿𝗼𝘀𝘀-𝗿𝗲𝗮𝗰𝘁𝗶𝘃𝗲 𝗧 𝗰𝗲𝗹𝗹𝘀 𝗶𝗻 𝟮𝟴% 𝗼𝗳 𝗽𝗲𝗼𝗽𝗹𝗲 𝘄𝗵𝗼 𝗵𝗮𝗱 𝗱𝗼𝗻𝗮𝘁𝗲𝗱 𝗯𝗹𝗼𝗼𝗱 𝗯𝗲𝗳𝗼𝗿𝗲 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗽𝗮𝗻𝗱𝗲𝗺𝗶𝗰 𝗲𝘃𝗲𝗻 𝗵𝗶𝘁, 𝘄𝗵𝗶𝗰𝗵 𝗶𝘀 𝗰𝗼𝗻𝘀𝗶𝘀𝘁𝗲𝗻𝘁 𝘄𝗶𝘁𝗵 𝘀𝗲𝘃𝗲𝗿𝗮𝗹 𝗼𝘁𝗵𝗲𝗿 𝗿𝗲𝗽𝗼𝗿𝘁𝘀. 𝟰𝟭% 𝗼𝗳 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗼𝘃𝗲𝗿𝗮𝗹𝗹 𝗽𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗲𝗻𝘁𝘀 𝘄𝗵𝗼 𝘄𝗲𝗿𝗲 𝘀𝗲𝗿𝗼𝗻𝗲𝗴𝗮𝘁𝗶𝘃𝗲 𝗶𝗻 𝗮𝗻𝘁𝗶𝗯𝗼𝗱𝘆 𝘁𝗲𝘀𝘁𝘀 𝘄𝗲𝗿𝗲 𝘀𝘁𝗶𝗹𝗹 𝗽𝗼𝘀𝗶𝘁𝗶𝘃𝗲 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝗧-𝗰𝗲𝗹𝗹𝘀 (𝗖𝗗𝟰+ 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗖𝗗𝟴+ 𝗮𝗹𝗶𝗸𝗲) 𝗮𝗴𝗮𝗶𝗻𝘀𝘁 𝗰𝗼𝗿𝗼𝗻𝗮𝘃𝗶𝗿𝘂𝘀 𝗽𝗿𝗼𝘁𝗲𝗶𝗻𝘀 (𝗦𝗽𝗶𝗸𝗲, 𝗻𝘂𝗰𝗹𝗲𝗼𝗰𝗮𝗽𝘀𝗶𝗱, 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗺𝗲𝗺𝗯𝗿𝗮𝗻𝗲). 𝗧𝗵𝗲𝘆 𝗰𝗼𝗻𝗰𝗹𝘂𝗱𝗲 𝘁𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗧-𝗰𝗲𝗹𝗹 𝗿𝗲𝘀𝗽𝗼𝗻𝘀𝗲 𝗶𝘀 𝗶𝗻𝗱𝗲𝗲𝗱 𝗻𝗼𝗻-𝗿𝗲𝗱𝘂𝗻𝗱𝗮𝗻𝘁 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗮𝗽𝗽𝗮𝗿𝗲𝗻𝘁𝗹𝘆 𝗮𝗻 𝗶𝗺𝗽𝗼𝗿𝘁𝗮𝗻𝘁 𝗽𝗮𝗿𝘁 𝗼𝗳 𝗶𝗺𝗺𝘂𝗻𝗶𝘁𝘆 𝘁𝗼 𝘁𝗵𝗶𝘀 𝘃𝗶𝗿𝘂𝘀, 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝘁𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝘂𝘀𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘀𝗲𝗿𝗼𝗽𝗿𝗲𝘃𝗮𝗹𝗲𝗻𝗰𝗲 (𝗮𝗻𝘁𝗶𝗯𝗼𝗱𝘆 𝗹𝗲𝘃𝗲𝗹𝘀) 𝗮𝘀 𝗮 𝗺𝗮𝗿𝗸𝗲𝗿 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝗲𝘅𝗽𝗼𝘀𝘂𝗿𝗲 𝗶𝗻 𝗮 𝗽𝗼𝗽𝘂𝗹𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝘄𝗶𝗹𝗹 𝗮𝗹𝗺𝗼𝘀𝘁 𝗰𝗲𝗿𝘁𝗮𝗶𝗻𝗹𝘆 𝘂𝗻𝗱𝗲𝗿𝗲𝘀𝘁𝗶𝗺𝗮𝘁𝗲 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗿𝗲𝗮𝗹 𝘀𝗶𝘁𝘂𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻. 𝗧𝗵𝗮𝘁’𝘀 𝗴𝗼𝗼𝗱 𝗻𝗲𝘄𝘀, 𝘀𝗶𝗻𝗰𝗲 𝗶𝘁 𝘄𝗼𝘂𝗹𝗱 𝗺𝗲𝗮𝗻 𝘁𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗺𝗼𝗿𝗲 𝗽𝗲𝗼𝗽𝗹𝗲 𝗵𝗮𝘃𝗲 𝗮𝗹𝗿𝗲𝗮𝗱𝘆 𝗯𝗲𝗲𝗻 𝗲𝘅𝗽𝗼𝘀𝗲𝗱 (𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗮𝗿𝗲 𝘁𝗼 𝘀𝗼𝗺𝗲 𝗴𝗼𝗼𝗱 𝗱𝗲𝗴𝗿𝗲𝗲 𝗶𝗺𝗺𝘂𝗻𝗲) 𝘁𝗵𝗮𝗻 𝘄𝗲 𝘄𝗼𝘂𝗹𝗱 𝘁𝗵𝗶𝗻𝗸. 𝗕𝘂𝘁 𝘁𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗱𝗼𝗲𝘀𝗻’𝘁 𝗺𝗲𝗮𝗻 𝘁𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝘄𝗲 𝗰𝗮𝗻 𝗯𝗹𝗼𝘄 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗮𝗹𝗹-𝗰𝗹𝗲𝗮𝗿 𝘄𝗵𝗶𝘀𝘁𝗹𝗲, 𝗲𝗶𝘁𝗵𝗲𝗿, 𝗮𝘀 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝘃𝗮𝗿𝗶𝗼𝘂𝘀 𝘀𝘂𝗿𝗴𝗲𝘀 𝗶𝗻 𝗶𝗻𝗳𝗲𝗰𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗮𝗿𝗼𝘂𝗻𝗱 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝘄𝗼𝗿𝗹𝗱 𝗵𝗮𝘃𝗲 𝘀𝗵𝗼𝘄𝗻: 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝘀𝗶𝘁𝘂𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗺𝗮𝘆 𝗯𝗲 𝗯𝗲𝘁𝘁𝗲𝗿 𝘁𝗵𝗮𝗻 𝗳𝗲𝗮𝗿𝗲𝗱, 𝗯𝘂𝘁 𝘄𝗲 𝗱𝗼𝗻’𝘁 𝘀𝗲𝗲𝗺 𝘁𝗼 𝗯𝗲 𝗮𝗻𝘆𝘄𝗵𝗲𝗿𝗲 𝗻𝗲𝗮𝗿 “𝗵𝗲𝗿𝗱 𝗶𝗺𝗺𝘂𝗻𝗶𝘁𝘆” 𝗹𝗲𝘃𝗲𝗹𝘀 𝘆𝗲𝘁. 𝗔𝗻𝗱 𝘄𝗲 𝘄𝗼𝘂𝗹𝗱 𝗯𝗲 𝗸𝗶𝗹𝗹𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗼𝗳𝗳 𝗮𝗻 𝗮𝘄𝗳𝘂𝗹 𝗹𝗼𝘁 𝗺𝗼𝗿𝗲 𝗽𝗲𝗼𝗽𝗹𝗲 𝘁𝗼 𝗴𝗲𝘁 𝘁𝗵𝗲𝗿𝗲 𝘄𝗶𝘁𝗵𝗼𝘂𝘁 𝗮 𝘃𝗮𝗰𝗰𝗶𝗻𝗲.
 
Last edited:
NYC and NJ are worried about a second wave. if they resume normal activities too soon. I think it will take way beyond the end of the year for things to return to normal. Even if a vaccine is approved this year, it will be at least March before it's manufactured in sufficient quantities to even start to make a difference.
Worried? When that become part of the equation?
 
  • Like
Reactions: bac2therac
NYC and NJ are worried about a second wave. if they resume normal activities too soon. I think it will take way beyond the end of the year for things to return to normal. Even if a vaccine is approved this year, it will be at least March before it's manufactured in sufficient quantities to even start to make a difference.


and how are the states who are open doing, we have the sunbelt dramatically falling in cases and hospitalizations...we have gyms and restaurants open in PA, CT, etc.

tell me what the end game is...do you want to ruin the economy further by refusing to do what other states have accomplished

there is no vast outbreak among gyms and restaurants being cited right now.

IMO, they want no cases

next we will close down for the flu, at some point you have to open..the refusal to open is mindboggling and not based in science
 
More encouraging news on antibodies and T-cells and what they mean for immunity in the latest In The Pipeline blog by Derek Lowe (first link). A couple of more studies have come out showing that recovered COVID patients have durable levels of neutralizing antibodies a few months after infection, in addition to the two studies I had shared back in July (2nd/3rd links). This is excellent news for recovered COVID patients likely having lasting immunity to COVID for at least 6 months and probably at least a year if not more.

https://blogs.sciencemag.org/pipeline/archives/2020/08/18/encouraging-news-about-coronavirus-immunity#comment-326671

Another cool piece of data showing this is likely the case came from a U of Washington study of a fishing boat where all 122 crew members were tested before departure and all were negative for the virus, but 3 had antibodies, meaning a previous COVID infection. Turns out over 85% of the crew became infected on the trip via an outbreak (someone likely had a false negative viral PCR test before departure), but the three with antibodies did not become infected, despite ample opportunity for contact and transmission. As Derek said, "this is about as direct a measure of immune protection as we’re likely to get before the vaccine efficacy trials read out."

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.08.13.20173161v1

Finally, another paper just came out on T-cell responses to the virus as well as T-cell cross-reactivity in people who were never exposed to the virus. Recovered COVID patients had robust levels of various T-cells (white blood cells that kill virus infected cells and white blood cells that have "memory" for pathogens so the body can respond again if needed), which was expected. Probably more importantly, they also confirmed what some other researchers have seen with ~28% of unexposed people having T-cells that respond to SARS-CoV-2 and likely have some level of immunity to the virus. They also showed that a decent percentage of people who were asymptomatic, but exposed to the virus and tested negative for antibodies, tested positive for COVID-specific T-cells, meaning it's possible that antibody population surveys are underestimating how many people have been infected. Below is what Derek wrote about this study.

https://www.cell.com/action/showPdf?pii=S0092-8674%2820%2931008-4

𝗧𝗵𝗲𝘆 𝗮𝗹𝘀𝗼 𝗱𝗲𝘁𝗲𝗰𝘁𝗲𝗱 𝗽𝗼𝘁𝗲𝗻𝘁𝗶𝗮𝗹𝗹𝘆 𝗰𝗿𝗼𝘀𝘀-𝗿𝗲𝗮𝗰𝘁𝗶𝘃𝗲 𝗧 𝗰𝗲𝗹𝗹𝘀 𝗶𝗻 𝟮𝟴% 𝗼𝗳 𝗽𝗲𝗼𝗽𝗹𝗲 𝘄𝗵𝗼 𝗵𝗮𝗱 𝗱𝗼𝗻𝗮𝘁𝗲𝗱 𝗯𝗹𝗼𝗼𝗱 𝗯𝗲𝗳𝗼𝗿𝗲 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗽𝗮𝗻𝗱𝗲𝗺𝗶𝗰 𝗲𝘃𝗲𝗻 𝗵𝗶𝘁, 𝘄𝗵𝗶𝗰𝗵 𝗶𝘀 𝗰𝗼𝗻𝘀𝗶𝘀𝘁𝗲𝗻𝘁 𝘄𝗶𝘁𝗵 𝘀𝗲𝘃𝗲𝗿𝗮𝗹 𝗼𝘁𝗵𝗲𝗿 𝗿𝗲𝗽𝗼𝗿𝘁𝘀. 𝟰𝟭% 𝗼𝗳 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗼𝘃𝗲𝗿𝗮𝗹𝗹 𝗽𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗲𝗻𝘁𝘀 𝘄𝗵𝗼 𝘄𝗲𝗿𝗲 𝘀𝗲𝗿𝗼𝗻𝗲𝗴𝗮𝘁𝗶𝘃𝗲 𝗶𝗻 𝗮𝗻𝘁𝗶𝗯𝗼𝗱𝘆 𝘁𝗲𝘀𝘁𝘀 𝘄𝗲𝗿𝗲 𝘀𝘁𝗶𝗹𝗹 𝗽𝗼𝘀𝗶𝘁𝗶𝘃𝗲 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝗧-𝗰𝗲𝗹𝗹𝘀 (𝗖𝗗𝟰+ 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗖𝗗𝟴+ 𝗮𝗹𝗶𝗸𝗲) 𝗮𝗴𝗮𝗶𝗻𝘀𝘁 𝗰𝗼𝗿𝗼𝗻𝗮𝘃𝗶𝗿𝘂𝘀 𝗽𝗿𝗼𝘁𝗲𝗶𝗻𝘀 (𝗦𝗽𝗶𝗸𝗲, 𝗻𝘂𝗰𝗹𝗲𝗼𝗰𝗮𝗽𝘀𝗶𝗱, 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗺𝗲𝗺𝗯𝗿𝗮𝗻𝗲). 𝗧𝗵𝗲𝘆 𝗰𝗼𝗻𝗰𝗹𝘂𝗱𝗲 𝘁𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗧-𝗰𝗲𝗹𝗹 𝗿𝗲𝘀𝗽𝗼𝗻𝘀𝗲 𝗶𝘀 𝗶𝗻𝗱𝗲𝗲𝗱 𝗻𝗼𝗻-𝗿𝗲𝗱𝘂𝗻𝗱𝗮𝗻𝘁 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗮𝗽𝗽𝗮𝗿𝗲𝗻𝘁𝗹𝘆 𝗮𝗻 𝗶𝗺𝗽𝗼𝗿𝘁𝗮𝗻𝘁 𝗽𝗮𝗿𝘁 𝗼𝗳 𝗶𝗺𝗺𝘂𝗻𝗶𝘁𝘆 𝘁𝗼 𝘁𝗵𝗶𝘀 𝘃𝗶𝗿𝘂𝘀, 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝘁𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝘂𝘀𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘀𝗲𝗿𝗼𝗽𝗿𝗲𝘃𝗮𝗹𝗲𝗻𝗰𝗲 (𝗮𝗻𝘁𝗶𝗯𝗼𝗱𝘆 𝗹𝗲𝘃𝗲𝗹𝘀) 𝗮𝘀 𝗮 𝗺𝗮𝗿𝗸𝗲𝗿 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝗲𝘅𝗽𝗼𝘀𝘂𝗿𝗲 𝗶𝗻 𝗮 𝗽𝗼𝗽𝘂𝗹𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝘄𝗶𝗹𝗹 𝗮𝗹𝗺𝗼𝘀𝘁 𝗰𝗲𝗿𝘁𝗮𝗶𝗻𝗹𝘆 𝘂𝗻𝗱𝗲𝗿𝗲𝘀𝘁𝗶𝗺𝗮𝘁𝗲 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗿𝗲𝗮𝗹 𝘀𝗶𝘁𝘂𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻. 𝗧𝗵𝗮𝘁’𝘀 𝗴𝗼𝗼𝗱 𝗻𝗲𝘄𝘀, 𝘀𝗶𝗻𝗰𝗲 𝗶𝘁 𝘄𝗼𝘂𝗹𝗱 𝗺𝗲𝗮𝗻 𝘁𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗺𝗼𝗿𝗲 𝗽𝗲𝗼𝗽𝗹𝗲 𝗵𝗮𝘃𝗲 𝗮𝗹𝗿𝗲𝗮𝗱𝘆 𝗯𝗲𝗲𝗻 𝗲𝘅𝗽𝗼𝘀𝗲𝗱 (𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗮𝗿𝗲 𝘁𝗼 𝘀𝗼𝗺𝗲 𝗴𝗼𝗼𝗱 𝗱𝗲𝗴𝗿𝗲𝗲 𝗶𝗺𝗺𝘂𝗻𝗲) 𝘁𝗵𝗮𝗻 𝘄𝗲 𝘄𝗼𝘂𝗹𝗱 𝘁𝗵𝗶𝗻𝗸. 𝗕𝘂𝘁 𝘁𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗱𝗼𝗲𝘀𝗻’𝘁 𝗺𝗲𝗮𝗻 𝘁𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝘄𝗲 𝗰𝗮𝗻 𝗯𝗹𝗼𝘄 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗮𝗹𝗹-𝗰𝗹𝗲𝗮𝗿 𝘄𝗵𝗶𝘀𝘁𝗹𝗲, 𝗲𝗶𝘁𝗵𝗲𝗿, 𝗮𝘀 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝘃𝗮𝗿𝗶𝗼𝘂𝘀 𝘀𝘂𝗿𝗴𝗲𝘀 𝗶𝗻 𝗶𝗻𝗳𝗲𝗰𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗮𝗿𝗼𝘂𝗻𝗱 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝘄𝗼𝗿𝗹𝗱 𝗵𝗮𝘃𝗲 𝘀𝗵𝗼𝘄𝗻: 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝘀𝗶𝘁𝘂𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗺𝗮𝘆 𝗯𝗲 𝗯𝗲𝘁𝘁𝗲𝗿 𝘁𝗵𝗮𝗻 𝗳𝗲𝗮𝗿𝗲𝗱, 𝗯𝘂𝘁 𝘄𝗲 𝗱𝗼𝗻’𝘁 𝘀𝗲𝗲𝗺 𝘁𝗼 𝗯𝗲 𝗮𝗻𝘆𝘄𝗵𝗲𝗿𝗲 𝗻𝗲𝗮𝗿 “𝗵𝗲𝗿𝗱 𝗶𝗺𝗺𝘂𝗻𝗶𝘁𝘆” 𝗹𝗲𝘃𝗲𝗹𝘀 𝘆𝗲𝘁. 𝗔𝗻𝗱 𝘄𝗲 𝘄𝗼𝘂𝗹𝗱 𝗯𝗲 𝗸𝗶𝗹𝗹𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗼𝗳𝗳 𝗮𝗻 𝗮𝘄𝗳𝘂𝗹 𝗹𝗼𝘁 𝗺𝗼𝗿𝗲 𝗽𝗲𝗼𝗽𝗹𝗲 𝘁𝗼 𝗴𝗲𝘁 𝘁𝗵𝗲𝗿𝗲 𝘄𝗶𝘁𝗵𝗼𝘂𝘁 𝗮 𝘃𝗮𝗰𝗰𝗶𝗻𝗲.

First link is broken. Think this is it, really good article though. I think we’re gonna see a lot of success in the Phase 3 vaccine trials

 
  • Like
Reactions: Greg2020
I don't see any indoor dining until next summer or fall 2021.. Until everyone gets a vaccine there is a chance of a grandmother dying. Getting the vaccine will be a long process. No way college basketball gets played with a possibility of a second wave.
 
  • Like
Reactions: biker7766
There's no way to do a scientific experiment in which a state changes only its treatment of gyms. Given the lack of certainty, and given that people's lives are at stake (not just from the risk of dying, but from the risk of long-term effects), focusing on prevention is the right approach.

No but there is contact tracing and many investigations. Focusing on prevention is good, but overly focused on prevention to the point of no value and killing businesses, which has a health effect to the owners and workers is hurting people unnecessarily.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ATIOH
there is a large gap between closed down and normal. Gyms are still closed in NJ but not in most other states including NY. Have there been outbreaks due to gyms in other states?

p.s. there is also a big gap between what NJ/NYC are doing and being "closed down." \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\
and how are the states who are open doing, we have the sunbelt dramatically falling in cases and hospitalizations...we have gyms and restaurants open in PA, CT, etc.

tell me what the end game is...do you want to ruin the economy further by refusing to do what other states have accomplished

there is no vast outbreak among gyms and restaurants being cited right now.

IMO, they want no cases

next we will close down for the flu, at some point you have to open..the refusal to open is mindboggling and not based in science

What you say about the sunbelt dramatically falling in cases is (a) an overstatementpad (b) true only because their cases went through the roof because they re-opened too quickly. We don't need to have a similar experience.

In addition, there is no trade-off between the economy and Covid-19. So long as the disease is prevalent, few people will want to buy products. Dealing with Covid-19 is a prerequisite for ending economic damage.
 
I don't see any indoor dining until next summer or fall 2021.. Until everyone gets a vaccine there is a chance of a grandmother dying. Getting the vaccine will be a long process. No way college basketball gets played with a possibility of a second wave.
Yea sure. 48 states already have in door dining. It will be here by October.
 
No but there is contact tracing and many investigations. Focusing on prevention is good, but overly focused on prevention to the point of no value and killing businesses, which has a health effect to the owners and workers is hurting people unnecessarily.

As I say, you can't do the experiment. And contact tracing isn't very helpful because of the long gap between taking a test and getting a result; you really can't get good answers to questions like, "what were your contacts ten days ago," Think of it this way: there is no major health loss from closing gyms for a while. There sure might be one if they're opened too soon. My guess is that you are a gym user, so you know well how careful a gym user needs to be in any case to avoid infections.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Greg2020
I'm glad that Horowitz noted that Mondays are a "light" reporting day in AZ. Today they posted over 100 deaths.

That guy is equally as bad as the MSM which he continuously bitches about.
He is far worse. Horowitz shouldn't be allowed in this thread.
 
  • Like
Reactions: thegock
How many of us here were aware of the restrictions in this country during the Spanish Flu?

Of course we are all aware of prohibition. We are seeing the easing of restrictions on marijuana. Gay marriage. Etc. This country is loaded with examples of the easing of gov't restrictions.

Specifically I was referring to the acute response in Australia and the suspension of their protected liberties. Youre correct in that there have been general easing of various business as usual restrictions in the US.
 
The FDA put emergency approval of use of convalescent plasma on hold for now. It's an interesting decision, heavily influenced by the fact that 5 months into an expanded access program overseen by the Mayo Clinic in which ~90,000 COVID patients have been treated with plasma, we still don't have a randomized controlled trial (RCT) on this, something I've been complaining about since April.

The data, so far, clearly show the treatment is safe, and numerous analyses from the Mayo folks and other small studies show potentially significant mortality reduction benefits, but these are observational results not RCTs (see my previous post on this, linked above).

One of the reasons the FDA likely didn't provide the emergency use approval is that that would make it even harder to get RCTs completed, plus I think they don't want another HCQ fiasco, where emergency use was approved prematurely and then rescinded. The FDA really needs to put some more effort into completing an RCT on this, as many doctors are convinced that plasma is effective, as it has been in past infectious disease outbreaks/pandemics.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/19/us/politics/blood-plasma-covid-19.html
The phase 2 trial on mild / moderate patients on Leronlimab has been submitted to the FDA for approval or at least EUA. Just submitted either this weekend or on Monday. The severe critical trial has 182 people enrolled and has to get to 195 patients to allow an interim look( need 50% of the original designed 390 patients to take the look ). Likely enrolled by the end of August. Putting plasma on hold because they were not finished with full double blinded placebo trials is not something Leronlimab has to worry about as both trials are full randomized blinded trials.
 
Specifically I was referring to the acute response in Australia and the suspension of their protected liberties. Youre correct in that there have been general easing of various business as usual restrictions in the US.
You made a very general statement and used 1000 years of history as your basis.
 
there is a large gap between closed down and normal. Gyms are still closed in NJ but not in most other states including NY. Have there been outbreaks due to gyms in other states?
Good point that many here continue to dismiss. No state is fully closed. No state ever was. I don't think there is a state in this country that currently doesn't have some sort of restrictions.
 
The phase 2 trial on mild / moderate patients on Leronlimab has been submitted to the FDA for approval or at least EUA. Just submitted either this weekend or on Monday. The severe critical trial has 182 people enrolled and has to get to 195 patients to allow an interim look( need 50% of the original designed 390 patients to take the look ). Likely enrolled by the end of August. Putting plasma on hold because they were not finished with full double blinded placebo trials is not something Leronlimab has to worry about as both trials are full randomized blinded trials.

Have they released efficiency results yet?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Greg2020
so what is the data point where nyc and nj open.......the cases are very small, the deaths almost none, what is going on here...looking to get a good non political discussion

the way it looks to be is that they will never truly open before the end of the year

what do you mean open? Things have been pretty close to normal for about a month.
 
p.s. there is also a big gap between what NJ/NYC are doing and being "closed down." \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\


What you say about the sunbelt dramatically falling in cases is (a) an overstatementpad (b) true only because their cases went through the roof because they re-opened too quickly. We don't need to have a similar experience.

In addition, there is no trade-off between the economy and Covid-19. So long as the disease is prevalent, few people will want to buy products. Dealing with Covid-19 is a prerequisite for ending economic damage.


there is absolutely no difference from PA and NJ right now so all of your arguments are just your opinions...shelter in place as long as you wish and let the rest of us have some sense of normal which includes gyms which there have been zero reports of major outbreaks
 
there is absolutely no difference from PA and NJ right now so all of your arguments are just your opinions...shelter in place as long as you wish and let the rest of us have some sense of normal which includes gyms which there have been zero reports of major outbreaks

Lmao
 
  • Like
Reactions: Greg2020

study on asymptomatic spread.....

Conclusion: In summary, all the 455 contacts were excluded from SARS-CoV-2 infection and we conclude that the infectivity of some asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 carriers might be weak.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT