COVID-19 Pandemic: Transmissions, Deaths, Treatments, Vaccines, Interventions and More...
- Thread starter Richie O
- Start date
- Status
There are many restaurants doing better in this environment. A few places by me have expanded their capacity by building out their parking lot, and are doing much better than last year. Evolve or die. Nobody said opening a restaurant was risk free.
I don’t think I’ve ever reposted a tweet. I don’t get my news from social media.
Good news on the antibody treatment front. Scale was always a problem, with Regeneron previously saying they were only going to have around 1 million preventative doses. With this partnership, they are now saying they’ll have 4-8 million. Still not enough to go around, but probably a good stopgap solution as the vaccines wind up.
www.fiercepharma.com
Roche, Regeneron join forces to more than triple manufacturing of COVID-19 antibody cocktail
Despite hundreds of potential therapies for COVID-19 looking to make their case, very few have crossed the finish line. | Despite hundreds of potential COVID-19 therapies looking to make their case, very few have crossed the finish line. One promising candidate, Regeneron's two-antibody...
They did release some. On day 3, Leronlimab outperformed placebo 90% to 71% on symptoms score but at Day 14, it was not statistically significant because in the mild to moderate patients, they get better on their own . This is why it is so hard to prove statistically significance, in a small patient sample 56/28 of 2 to 1 Leronlimab to placebo in the mild population. However, when it came to the News score, which is an objective standard and was a secondary endpoint , there was clear statistically significance of 50% to 20 percent with a p value of .02 , under the .05threshold. That is what they will use to try and get approval with the FDA and also submitted to the U.K., the Eu, Phillipines , Israel, and Mexico .
The FDA is either going have them do a Phase 3or give EUA and should actually do both because of Leronlimab safety profile and no severe adverse side effects compared to all the other drugs racing for approval . Decision any day now. The real stark results will be in the severe/ critical trial. Need to get that to 195 enrolled ASAP.
Not sure if you saw my post on this earlier, but the one nugget in there is that my friend, who is very high up at Regeneron, said the announcement says a lot about the optimism surrounding this treatment. Hopefully we get an early read in mid-September. Much depends on enrollment rate.Good news on the antibody treatment front. Scale was always a problem, with Regeneron previously saying they were only going to have around 1 million preventative doses. With this partnership, they are now saying they’ll have 4-8 million. Still not enough to go around, but probably a good stopgap solution as the vaccines wind up.
Roche, Regeneron join forces to more than triple manufacturing of COVID-19 antibody cocktail
Despite hundreds of potential therapies for COVID-19 looking to make their case, very few have crossed the finish line. | Despite hundreds of potential COVID-19 therapies looking to make their case, very few have crossed the finish line. One promising candidate, Regeneron's two-antibody...
Interesting article today in the Times updating antibody testing results from NYC clinics reported on about 6 weeks ago (post above). The data were largely collected by CityMD at various clinics across the City and they show some neighborhoods (with high levels of black/Latino populations that tend to work at high risk jobs and utilize risky mass transit) at 40-55% infected (like Corona - yes Corona - Queens with 52%) and some with as low as 12-15% (you guessed it - rich, white neighborhoods where telecommuting is much more prevalent); see the map. Was also interesting that Corona showed 68% 2 months ago, but with a much smaller sample size, so the 52% is much more likely to be accurate.
https://www.nytimes.com/…/nyregion/new-york-city-antibody-t…
Some of these neighborhoods aren't that far from what most have been thinking would be herd immunity levels (55-80%) for months and if some of the indications of existing T-cell-based immunity is correct, it's possible these neighborhoods are even closer to herd immunity. Here's a point to remember though. If you happen to be from a neighborhood with 50% infected, yes, the chances of being infected in your neighborhood are much lower, but if you travel to areas with active outbreaks (and many less infected) your chance of being infected are just as high as those of other people in that other location.
One other small caveat with regard to the data, which one can see in the last paragraph in the article. These were people who came to a clinic to get tested, so the pool isn't random and likely reflects somewhat greater numbers than actually infected (since people who go to get tested are more likely to be infected); the NY State tests in May and mid-June were almost random (people approached who were out and about) and were a bit lower across the board than these results. For example, the NY study showed 21.6% with antibodies across NYC,while the new data shows 27% - and each borough is several % greater in the "non-random" testing vs. the random testing from June, but they're not so far off as to be unusable at all.
True - I know several restaurants, delis, etc. that are doing better, especially the ones that quickly adapted to providing contact-less takeout, building loyalty for providing good food, safely at a tough time for many. And while it sucked for many of those places to lose wait staff, the restaurants get by with much less staff when it's all takeout, so as long as they maintain volume they can do well (and there are plenty of folks like us, who still tip 20% even without wait service, just out of principle, trying to help out). The places I feel the worst for are bars and entertainment venues that simply aren't going to get much business even once they open in many locations, as people know those are the riskiest places to go.
LOL at restaurants, delis that are doing better outdoor dining then indoor. How much do they pay wait staff ?? $2/hr?? Show me the data that says this. Tell an owner that they are doing better outside than inside and they will kick you in the chops.
Last edited:
This idea that NY had this many deaths while all these restrictions were in place is so disingenuous. The spread of the infection came before the lockdowns were put in place.
People arguing otherwise are either being willfully dishonest or extremely ignorant.
Don't disregard everything China for months and then post some study that is aligned with your thinking as if it has merit.
I really don't know, but I wouldn't be surprised if it is true.
And for the record I would open gyms and indoor dining to some level of capacity.
Still this is different then "these states are open and doing fine, while NJ is closed".
You may not link tweets but political innuendos is your game.
If anyone is looking for a great outdoor dining experience, head to New Brunswick. They've done a wonderful job and George St is totally shaded by late afternoon. Plenty of options and the nights I've been there most places are very busy. It should 100% become a permanent fixture of New Brunswick summers.
I think that Murphy will allow some indoor dining (33-50% capacity?) post Labor Day to prevent shore bars from trying crazy things (see DJais the first weekend outdoor dining was allowed). Or by the latest, late September once we have some data in after schools reopening.
I think that Murphy will allow some indoor dining (33-50% capacity?) post Labor Day to prevent shore bars from trying crazy things (see DJais the first weekend outdoor dining was allowed). Or by the latest, late September once we have some data in after schools reopening.
Not surprisingly this has nothing to do with the point.
Last edited:
Which implies that it is possible we learn something from what China is saying. Which is fine, but that is certainly a reversal for you.
I was in Rochester, NY a few weeks ago. Indoor dining had been open there for quite a while.
Stockholm has less than 10% of the population of Sweden. Even the Stockholm metro area has only about 16%. Next time, look it up before posting.
it's a city, it's urban.
what % of the US population is NYC ?
Next time try contributing to this thread without political motives?
The original statement was: "If you knew anything about Sweden, you'd know that it and NY are very different; one is much more urbanized than the other."
Do you disagree that NYC and Sweden are different? That one is more urbanized then the other?
There is a dive bar in Sayreville I drive by everyday (its the dive bar of dive bars) and they have resorted to putting a couple tables outside in the parking lot so their regulars can sit and drink, while I chuckle at their attempt I feel sorry for the owners who are just trying to get by in life with the rotten cards we've all been dealt. Places that serve food can at least do takeout, but places like this really have no other revenue flow to speak of.
Everyone's business is essential.
When people in charge of the State don't use science and data you get what we are seeing in NJ sadly
People's livelihoods going down the tubes.
While in most other states science is being utilized to make policy.
The curve has been flattened like a pancake.
We were asked for 15 days to flatten the curve, it took a little longer but it's beyond flattened now in NJ.
Widespread testing of healthy people without symptoms is a waste of time and money.
Especially with faulty tests and shakey and shady labs administering the testing.
I was out on Long Island mid-July and although not technically legal, I ate indoors and went to a couple bars. Shocking I know but this is going on. Neither was crowded and tables were distanced, and they kept occupancy down at all. I also survived to tell the tale.
If you could read, you could figure out that the comparison being made was *not* between the U.S. and Sweden, but between NYC and Sweden. As my numbers show, they are very different despite the existence of Stockholm.
And when was the last time *you* posted without a political motive? Everything you write about politics is counterfactual. Stick to sports, OK? At least there you know what you're talking about, at least some of the time.
Trust nothing but keep an open mind and ask a lot of questions
Thats been my approach with the Chinese virus
True. Pittsburgh in the west, Philly in the east, Alabama in the middle.
Not to quibble, but I see it as NY State, not NY City. There are plenty of less urban areas in NY State, just like Sweden.
And I'be been to Sweden and Stockholm is very urban. It's not NY City, of course.
Then why do you only post biased garbage that falls in line with your opinions?
Time for the weekly update in bulleted format. Getting more involved in some work these days, which is why my posting is down. Some will rejoice, others maybe not, lol.
https://covidtracking.com/data#chart-annotations
- Still using 7-day moving averages on a per capita (per 1MM) basis for most of the discussions of cases, hospitalizations and deaths (especially for comparing states), from the Covidtracking site.
- National Stats: cases peaked around 65-68K/day for awhile (~2X the peak from wave 1), but declined the past week or two and have now plateaued again in the range of ~55K cases/day for about the past week. Hospitalizations peaked at about ~60K, which is very close to the peak in the first wave, but if the dynamics were the same as the first wave, this 2nd peak would have also been ~2X what they were in the first wave, not roughly the same, meaning the hospitalization rate is roughly half the rate it was for the first wave (relative to cases). Deaths are up over 2X from their early July low and they've now clearly peaked at a rate of about 1000-1150 per day (7-day MA) over the past 2 weeks, which is about half of the April peak (2100-2250/day in April). So, relatively speaking, a bit of better news, although our current peak death rates are still worse than all but a handful of countries with over 50MM in population (Brazil, Mexico, Colombia and South Africa), per capita. As I've been saying for weeks now, hospitalizations and deaths are likely half of what they were in wave 1 due to the combination of younger patient profile, more testing (per capita vs. NJ) leading to more mild cases, and improved medical procedures/pharmaceutical treatments.
- Cases in AZ/FL/TX/CA: For the 4 states I've been looking at, closely (Florida, Texas, California, as all three spiked and are the 3 largest states, plus Arizona, as it peaked earlier and has a similar population as NJ, the comparator) cases are continuing to decline in AZ and it's now clear that cases are declining in FL/TX and they were in CA, but CA spiked back up to its old peak level the past few days. Another interesting observation is that FL/TX/AZ have all seen major drops (30-60% down from their recent peaks) in reported tests, which is a little disconcerting, as part of the case decrease is very likely due to the major drop in testing, especially given the rises in positive tests seen in all three states. No idea why they'd be reducing testing. As per last week's post, the AZ case peak was about 30% more, per capita (per 1MM people) than the NJ peak (about 3500/day or 400/1MM), while the FL peak was ~50% more, the TX peak was ~10% less and the CA peak was ~40% less.
- Hospitalizations in AZ/FL/TX/CA: AZ's hospitalizations peaked (and are declining) at ~55% of NJ's (which were 8000 total or 900 per 1MM), while FL peaked at about 50% of NJ's per capita rate (and is declining) and TX peaked at ~45% of NJ's rate and is now declining. CA peaked last week at 25% of NJ's peak and have started to decline. As per previous reports, these reductions vs. NJ are likely due to the much younger age of those infected in this wave, combined with far more aggressive testing than during our peak (we had positivity rates of 40-50% due to lack of tests), which is discovering more mild/asymptomatic cases.
- Deaths in AZ/FL/TX/CA: My guesstimate has been that deaths in AZ/FL/TX would likely be about 1/3-2/3 of the peaks of NJ (about 270-300/day or ~31/1MM), partly due to the younger age and milder cases of those infected (as above) and partly due to improved treatments and procedures. AZ peaked at ~40% of NJ's peak and despite having major fluctuations, they're death rates have been declining for about the past week or so, although they spiked up to their 2nd highest daily total today. FL was at about 30% of NJ's peak llast week and seemed like they were starting to decline, but they had their all-time highest death peak yesterday, so it's premature to day they're declining yet. TX looks like they may have peaked at about 1/3 of NJ's peak and might be starting to decline, but again, their fluctuations have been large, so calling it a decline yet is tough. CA's case/hospitalization rates have been well below the other 3 states and their death rate appears to be leveling off at about 12% of NJ's peak, as I've been predicting based on lower case rates per capita vs. the other 3 states. It's quite possible that deaths have been on the low side of my guesstimates given the recent data showing convalescent plasma likely has over a 50% mortality reduction and it's being used heavily in these states. Also, keep an eye on Georgia, whose deaths have been rising quickly; they're already at about 20-25% of NJ's peak.
- Getting back to the big picture, it's good to see that most states are now seeing flat or declining levels of cases, with only a few increasing (most were increasing several weeks ago); however, due to the 2-4 week lag from cases to deaths, deaths are still increasing or flat in many states.
https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/us
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive...rus®ion=TOP_BANNER&context=storylines_menu
Time for the weekly update in bulleted format...in the very big picture, this "wave 2" has featured case peaks that were twice what they were in "wave 1" (although "wave 1" likely was well undercounted, due to lack of testing for much of it and wave 2 featured a much younger/milder infected population) and a hospitalization peak which was about the same as in wave 1 (likely more accurate than cases), but has had a death peak about half what it was in wave 1, which given similar hospitalization numbers, very likely means improved medical procedures and pharmaceutical treatments have had a significant effect.
- Still using 7-day moving averages on a per capita (per 1MM) basis for most of the discussions of cases, hospitalizations and deaths (especially for comparing states), from the Covidtracking site.
- National Stats: After a 2-week peak at 65-68K/day from mid-July until the end of July (~2X the peak from wave 1, although wave 1 was likely well undercounted, due to lack of testing), cases have been slowly declining and the 7-day avg is now down below 50K/day for the first time since the beginning of July, which is good news. Hospitalizations peaked at about ~60K in late July, which is very close to the peak in the first wave, but if the dynamics were the same as the first wave, this 2nd peak would have also been ~2X what they were in the first wave, not roughly the same, meaning the hospitalization rate is roughly half the rate it was for the first wave (relative to cases). As per previous posts, hospitalizations are likely ~1/2 of what they were in wave 1 due to the combination of younger patient profile and more testing (per capita) leading to more mild cases. Deaths are up over 2X from their early July low and they've now clearly peaked at a rate of about 1000-1150 per day (7-day MA) over the past 3 weeks, which is about half of the April peak (2100-2250/day); given similar hospitalization rates, the most obvious reason for 1/2 the death rate is improved medical procedures/pharmaceutical treatments. So, relatively speaking, a bit of better news, although our current peak death rates are still worse than all but a handful of countries with over 50MM in population (Brazil, Mexico, Colombia), per capita.
- Cases in AZ/FL/TX/CA: For the 4 states I've been looking at, closely (Florida, Texas, California, as all three spiked and are the 3 largest states, plus Arizona, as it peaked earlier and has a similar population as NJ, the comparator) cases are continuing to decline in AZ, FL, and TX and they're declining again in CA after a 2nd spike. Another interesting observation is that FL/TX/AZ have all seen major drops (30-60% down from their recent peaks) in reported tests, which is a little disconcerting, as part of the case decrease is very likely due to the major drop in testing, especially given the rises in positive tests seen in all three states. No idea why they'd be reducing testing, although testing in TX did jump back up significantly this past week. As per last week's post, the AZ case peak was about 30% more, per capita (per 1MM people) than the NJ peak (about 3500/day or 400/1MM), while the FL peak was ~50% more, the TX peak was ~10% less and the CA peak was ~40% less.
- Hospitalizations in AZ/FL/TX/CA: AZ's hospitalizations peaked (and continue declining) at ~55% of NJ's (which were 8000 total or 900 per 1MM), while FL peaked at about 50% of NJ's per capita rate (and is declining) and TX peaked at ~45% of NJ's rate and is now declining. CA peaked last week at 25% of NJ's peak and are also declining. As per previous reports, these reductions vs. NJ are likely due to the much younger age of those infected in this wave, combined with far more aggressive testing than during our peak (we had positivity rates of 40-50% due to lack of tests), which is discovering more mild/asymptomatic cases.
- Deaths in AZ/FL/TX/CA: My guesstimate has been that deaths in AZ/FL/TX would likely be about 1/3-2/3 of the peaks of NJ (about 270-300/day or ~31/1MM), partly due to the younger age and milder cases of those infected (as above) and partly due to improved treatments and procedures. AZ peaked at ~40% of NJ's peak and despite having major fluctuations, they're death rates have been slowly declining for the past 2 weeks. FL peaked at about 30% of NJ's peak 2 weeks ago and declined a bit, but jumped back up, so it's premature to day they're declining yet. TX peaked at about 1/3 of NJ's peak and declined a bit since then, but leveled off close to their peak. CA's case/hospitalization rates have been well below the other 3 states and their death rate peaked at about 12% of NJ's peak (and is now declining), as I've been predicting based on lower case rates per capita vs. the other 3 states. In hindsight, deaths in FL/TX/AX were likely on the low side of my guesstimates vs. NJ's mostly because hospitalization rates were lower than I thought they'd be (45-55% of NJ's), whereas I had accounted for improved medical procedures/treatments for people once they were hospitalized, reducing death rates.
- Getting back to the big picture, it's good to see that most states are now seeing flat or declining levels of cases, with only about 10 increasing (most were increasing several weeks ago); interestingly, the ones increasing now are the ones that have been hit the least so far and are some of the least densely populated states (like ND, SD, WY, VT, KS, and ME). Also, due to the 2-4 week lag from cases to deaths, deaths are still increasing or flat in many states.
https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/us
Last edited:
J&J sure got their act together quick. Huge 60k person Phase 3 trial starting in September. Hoping to start emergency use in the beginning of 2021. Only a month or two behind Moderna/Pfizer/AZ.
www.wsj.com
WSJ News Exclusive | For Covid-19 Vaccine, J&J Plans 60,000-Subject Pivotal Trial
Johnson & Johnson plans to start a late-stage trial for the company’s Covid-19 vaccine in late September, and aims to enroll 60,000 subjects.
www.wsj.com
Details from Phase 1/2 of the Pfizer vaccine was released today. Pfizer had 2 candidates they were testing. They previously released data of the one they didn’t pick, this time it’s the detail of the one they are moving forward with. This candidate is more safe and should be more effective, so I guess that’s why they picked this.
www.statnews.com
@RU848789 Your boy Derek Lowe just wrote a piece on it too
Pfizer and BioNTech’s favored Covid-19 vaccine has fewer side effects than their first
Recipients of the vaccine now being tested in a large clinical trial experienced markedly fewer adverse events tied to the vaccine than recipients of an initial version, new data show.
www.statnews.com
@RU848789 Your boy Derek Lowe just wrote a piece on it too
- Status
