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

Status
Not open for further replies.

RU-05

All American
Jun 25, 2015
5,184
3,944
113
he said it in the video plain and clear, it only took him until last week to clear it up..sorry he takes a huge amount of blame...and remember he wasnt wearing masks at the press conferences at all
I watched the video, you should go back and watch the whole thing with an open mind. Leave the agenda out of it.
 

RU848789

Hall of Famer
Jul 27, 2001
45,737
19,269
113
Metuchen, NJ
a different take on mask wearing from an expert

https://www.city-journal.org/reality-of-wearing-masks#.Xvu3pzhdAfM.twitter

Chris von Csefalvay is an epidemiologist specializing in bat-borne viruses. He is currently VP of Special Projects at Starschema.

I agree with some of his criticisms of the Zhang paper (they overdid the NY comparisons, IMO), but the paper was still pretty good, IMO, making an excellent scientific case for masks. And I'd put the credentials of those authors up against this guy, who has not, apparently published anything, as far as I can tell. His "article" was also weak, where he said that the paper was used to drive universal masking - the paper came out as a preprint in mid-May, while the CDC came out with their guidance recommending mask/face covering use in early April (which was still late). His other whiff is he only talks about the native virus particles being 0.1 micron, which is true, but the vast, vast majority of viral particles are expelled by infected people as virus-laden droplets of various sizes, almost all greater than 0.1 micron and the masks keep most of these droplets in from the infected person and keep some of the droplets out for the "receiver." You're really reaching if you're citing this guy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RU-05 and Greg2020

Greg2020

Senior
Gold Member
Jan 25, 2020
1,844
1,719
113
Deaths are increasing in each of the states that people highlight as being the current major concerns.

We can also go through the timeline of the covid deniers.

First it was: These states have been opened yet cases are not rising.
Then it went to: Cases are rising, but positivity is still low.
Next was: Cases are up, positivity is up, but hospitalizations are not rising.
Then: Cases are up, positivity is up, hospitalizations are up, but deaths are not up.
Unfortunately we have reached the point where the deaths are rising in those states as well.

Last night the argument turned to yeah deaths are up but the numbers are not significant.

Well you can be sure those deaths will continue to rise until we do something. Hopefully we do something before those fatality numbers become significant.
It seems that the people we argue with think that all of the spread can be stopped on a dime. As soon as hospitals are overwhelmed you lock down and no one else needs to come into the hospital. What they fail to realize is at that point it's already so deeply seeded, and all the current sick people still at home will now infect their family who will infect other people and you still have 4-6 weeks of continuing high levels of infection.
 

RU-05

All American
Jun 25, 2015
5,184
3,944
113
oh i did, im still shocked

we had that and then we had the WHO consistently saying dont wear masks if you are healthy....that woman made yet another strong statement in May until all of us sudden the next day the WHO totally flipped the script..quite odd
Don't shift the goal posts, I have no intentions of defending the WHO. I'm talking Fauci.
 

bac2therac

Legend
Jul 30, 2001
147,027
48,871
113
50
Belle Mead NJ
I agree with some of his criticisms of the Zhang paper (they overdid the NY comparisons, IMO), but the paper was still pretty good, IMO, making an excellent scientific case for masks. And I'd put the credentials of those authors up against this guy, who has not, apparently published anything, as far as I can tell. His "article" was also weak, where he said that the paper was used to drive universal masking - the paper came out as a preprint in mid-May, while the CDC came out with their guidance recommending mask/face covering use in early April (which was still late). His other whiff is he only talks about the native virus particles being 0.1 micron, which is true, but the vast, vast majority of viral particles are expelled by infected people as virus-laden droplets of various sizes, almost all greater than 0.1 micron and the masks keep most of these droplets in from the infected person and keep some of the droplets out for the "receiver." You're really reaching if you're citing this guy.

well we should get more studies out then...lets prove it unequivocally
 

bac2therac

Legend
Jul 30, 2001
147,027
48,871
113
50
Belle Mead NJ
Don't shift the goal posts, I have no intentions of defending the WHO. I'm talking Fauci.

Malachi, i know what he said so Fauci doesnt have credibility to me, in addition the guy has said every possible thing under the sun covering all bases, so he can never be wrong, of course he can be right either.
 

RU848789

Hall of Famer
Jul 27, 2001
45,737
19,269
113
Metuchen, NJ
Interesting ethical conversation regarding the future vaccine:

Researchers Debate Infecting People on Purpose to Test Coronavirus Vaccines

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/01/health/coronavirus-vaccine-trials.html

The technique, called a human challenge trial, has been used to evaluate other vaccines.

One way to quickly see if a coronavirus vaccine works would be to immunize healthy people and then deliberately expose them to the virus, some researchers are suggesting.

Proponents say this strategy, called a human challenge trial, could save time because rather than conducting tests the usual way — by waiting for vaccinated people to encounter the virus naturally — researchers could just infect them.

Challenge trials have been used to test vaccines for typhoid, cholera, malaria and other diseases. For malaria, volunteers have stuck their arms into chambers full of mosquitoes to be bitten and infected. But there were so-called rescue medicines to cure those who got sick. There is no cure for Covid-19.

For both ethical and practical reasons, the idea of challenge trials for a coronavirus vaccine has provoked fierce debate.
Great post and have been a proponent of the human challenge approach for years, but especially after reading RU's own Dr. Eyal's great paper on this back in April in relation to COVID. It could cut a few months off development/approval timelines and that's critical right now.

https://rutgers.forums.rivals.com/t...ventions-and-more.191275/page-79#post-4521358

https://dash.harvard.edu/bitstream/handle/1/42639016/jiaa152.pdf?sequence=4&isAllowed=y
 

RU-05

All American
Jun 25, 2015
5,184
3,944
113
I agree with some of his criticisms of the Zhang paper (they overdid the NY comparisons, IMO), but the paper was still pretty good, IMO, making an excellent scientific case for masks. And I'd put the credentials of those authors up against this guy, who has not, apparently published anything, as far as I can tell. His "article" was also weak, where he said that the paper was used to drive universal masking - the paper came out as a preprint in mid-May, while the CDC came out with their guidance recommending mask/face covering use in early April (which was still late). His other whiff is he only talks about the native virus particles being 0.1 micron, which is true, but the vast, vast majority of viral particles are expelled by infected people as virus-laden droplets of various sizes, almost all greater than 0.1 micron and the masks keep most of these droplets in from the infected person and keep some of the droplets out for the "receiver." You're really reaching if you're citing this guy.
In general can the virus travel through the air person to person without a water droplet as a vehicle?
 

ArminRU

Heisman Winner
Gold Member
Aug 5, 2008
10,234
10,617
113
Interesting ethical conversation regarding the future vaccine:

Researchers Debate Infecting People on Purpose to Test Coronavirus Vaccines

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/01/health/coronavirus-vaccine-trials.html

The technique, called a human challenge trial, has been used to evaluate other vaccines.

One way to quickly see if a coronavirus vaccine works would be to immunize healthy people and then deliberately expose them to the virus, some researchers are suggesting.

Proponents say this strategy, called a human challenge trial, could save time because rather than conducting tests the usual way — by waiting for vaccinated people to encounter the virus naturally — researchers could just infect them.

Challenge trials have been used to test vaccines for typhoid, cholera, malaria and other diseases. For malaria, volunteers have stuck their arms into chambers full of mosquitoes to be bitten and infected. But there were so-called rescue medicines to cure those who got sick. There is no cure for Covid-19.

For both ethical and practical reasons, the idea of challenge trials for a coronavirus vaccine has provoked fierce debate.
I didn’t think this was a question and that they were doing this. Pay people to do this and be done with it. Hundreds of thousands of people who would do this.
 

bac2therac

Legend
Jul 30, 2001
147,027
48,871
113
50
Belle Mead NJ
Deaths are increasing in each of the states that people highlight as being the current major concerns.

We can also go through the timeline of the covid deniers.

First it was: These states have been opened yet cases are not rising.
Then it went to: Cases are rising, but positivity is still low.


Next was: Cases are up, positivity is up, but hospitalizations are not rising.
Then: Cases are up, positivity is up, hospitalizations are up, but deaths are not up.
Unfortunately we have reached the point where the deaths are rising in those states as well.

Last night the argument turned to yeah deaths are up but the numbers are not significant.

Well you can be sure those deaths will continue to rise until we do something. Hopefully we do something before those fatality numbers become significant.

did we not drop 90 deaths today from yesterday, asking for a friend
 

MADHAT1

Heisman Winner
Apr 1, 2003
19,945
6,348
113
did we not drop 90 deaths today from yesterday, asking for a friend
From what I found :
Wednesday’s totals include one fewer new death and 38 fewer new cases than were reported Tuesday in New Jersey.
 

RU-05

All American
Jun 25, 2015
5,184
3,944
113
From what I found :
Wednesday’s totals include one fewer new death and 38 fewer new cases than were reported Tuesday in New Jersey.
He's noting the countries overall decline in deaths to hide the fact that certain states are increasing as predicted.

I forgot to include this tactic on the covid denial timeline.
 

RU848789

Hall of Famer
Jul 27, 2001
45,737
19,269
113
Metuchen, NJ
no i am not trolling, i am asking questions because questions need to be asked

this is also disrespectful from you..ive seen this before from you when dealing with other posters you disagree with, you call them trolls...hey guess what, its a pandemic..you have been wrong, fauci has been wrong, trump has been wrong, murphy has been wrong, i have been wrong. Maybe you can check your ego here at the door. You do provide a lot of great stuff here yet your bias on everything and hubris toward other posters challenging your thoughts.....if you knew everything then why arent you working for the pandemic team today.

we need to challenge what we were are told, we have been told a hundred different things this started, i am not blaming anyone, yet everyone is to blame. Trust is another issue. Tough to trust..thats why questions need to be asked


for one I work for a living so I am not here to post all day

2ndly where are the multiple published studies. This guy who is an expert on bat borne illnesses is saying the data is very flimsy and not what science would nornally use...and he does actually support mask wearing in general

lets get back to discussing things instead of looking down on posters and calling them trolls. This is thread is open to all on the board and all opinions.
Continuing to question the effectiveness of masks, which have been unequivocally shown to greatly reduce transmission, as I painstakingly outlined in my review post earlier with links to several posts, which all include links to scientific papers backing them up, is trolling IMO, especially when you've been asking the same kind of "doubting" questions for weeks. If If this was the first time you were questioning mask use effectiveness I'd have far more patience. And as I addressed in a separate post, your bat expert wrote a very weak criticism of masks.

There are tons of other topics to debate where there are huge questions (like vaccines, cross-reactivity, immunity, medical interventions, various drug treatments, rying to predict what's going to happen in states that are spiking, how far we should go in reopening, etc.), but debating whether masks are effective is like debating whether having testing available early on would've helped. It doesn't mean masks are 100% effective and there isn't more to learn about them, but I don't think there are any experts left who don't think masks are at least very effective.
 

RU-05

All American
Jun 25, 2015
5,184
3,944
113
AZ. TX, and FL's combined 7 day moving average for fatalities.

June 1st-67
July 1st-109

It's a 66% increase in a month.

Is it a significant number yet? Over 3000 people a month over 3 states? Maybe not, but that # is growing.
 

RU848789

Hall of Famer
Jul 27, 2001
45,737
19,269
113
Metuchen, NJ
I didn’t think this was a question and that they were doing this. Pay people to do this and be done with it. Hundreds of thousands of people who would do this.
No, it's not being done yet and isn't being planned yet, although some countries/companies have discussed it, as per the Times article T linked. Many feel we should only do these if we had solid life-saving treatments to "save" anyone who might get very ill from being infected (I think we will with the antibody cocktails at the end of the summer).
 
  • Like
Reactions: Greg2020

RU848789

Hall of Famer
Jul 27, 2001
45,737
19,269
113
Metuchen, NJ
AZ. TX, and FL's combined 7 day moving average for fatalities.

June 1st-67
July 1st-109

It's a 66% increase in a month.

Is it a significant number yet? Over 3000 people a month over 3 states? Maybe not, but that # is growing.
Is it 44 more per day cumulatively for the 3 states (which would be 1320/month more) or is it 44 more per day per state or 3960/month more?
 

RU848789

Hall of Famer
Jul 27, 2001
45,737
19,269
113
Metuchen, NJ
In general can the virus travel through the air person to person without a water droplet as a vehicle?
Good question. I think the issue is that a small fraction of coughs/sneezes would be very small fine virus-laden water droplets that probably are not much larger than the 0.1 micron native virus particles, but would think that one's breath likely contains a much greater percentage of fine droplets with viruses (but breath is far less of a risk unless someone is very close to someone else, unlike sneezes/coughs, which travel much further). I don't think there are too many "dry" virus particles coming from humans. They can dry out on surfaces, though, but the dose from a surface is far less than from a person, which is why surface transmission is considered a very minor route. I know I've posted links to all of this before, but don't have time right now (I'm 99% sure I have this mostly correct).
 

ArminRU

Heisman Winner
Gold Member
Aug 5, 2008
10,234
10,617
113
No, it's not being done yet and isn't being planned yet, although some countries/companies have discussed it, as per the Times article T linked. Many feel we should only do these if we had solid life-saving treatments to "save" anyone who might get very ill from being infected (I think we will with the antibody cocktails at the end of the summer).
If people sign off on it, I don’t see the problem. Especially for the young healthy cohort. Totally worth it if it shaves off a few months. Surprised this is not part of the plan.
 

bac2therac

Legend
Jul 30, 2001
147,027
48,871
113
50
Belle Mead NJ
Using the decreasing fatalities in states like NJ and PA and NY to hide the fact that deaths in AZ, FL and TX are rising?

Yet you want to act like this is an honest discussion?

worldometer had us dropping from 764 to 676 deaths

1. Az
2. Cal
3. Fla
4. Tx
5. NJ
6. PA
 

RU848789

Hall of Famer
Jul 27, 2001
45,737
19,269
113
Metuchen, NJ
Deaths are increasing in each of the states that people highlight as being the current major concerns.

We can also go through the timeline of the covid deniers.

First it was: These states have been opened yet cases are not rising.
Then it went to: Cases are rising, but positivity is still low.
Next was: Cases are up, positivity is up, but hospitalizations are not rising.
Then: Cases are up, positivity is up, hospitalizations are up, but deaths are not up.
Unfortunately we have reached the point where the deaths are rising in those states as well.

Last night the argument turned to yeah deaths are up but the numbers are not significant.

Well you can be sure those deaths will continue to rise until we do something. Hopefully we do something before those fatality numbers become significant.
It seems that the people we argue with think that all of the spread can be stopped on a dime. As soon as hospitals are overwhelmed you lock down and no one else needs to come into the hospital. What they fail to realize is at that point it's already so deeply seeded, and all the current sick people still at home will now infect their family who will infect other people and you still have 4-6 weeks of continuing high levels of infection.
Well said. It's why NY/NJ could only shut down, really, to slow the spread, since we were in the midst of the most explosive exponential growth seen so far on the planet for this virus - which is also why, despite shutdowns, it took several weeks to flatten the curve and several more to finally bring deaths down, as there's a significant lag. The people in the states with fast rises now, needed to already take action and most haven't other than CA making masks mandatory.
 

Joey Bags

Junior
Gold Member
Sep 21, 2019
883
791
93
According to worldodometers the 7 day moving average for deaths country-wide is still decreasing.

We’re now in the window for potential death growth.

Are there any sources for discussing the potency of the current outbreak? I keep seeing the “younger people are affected so this isn’t as bad” nonsense which tells you nothing.

Are the symptoms of the current southern surge consistent with what was experienced in the northeast or are people experiencing milder, more cold-like symptoms?
 

RU848789

Hall of Famer
Jul 27, 2001
45,737
19,269
113
Metuchen, NJ
An update from McKinsey on choosing the right path to unlock economies of countries, given where they are now with some really good insight on what these means for individuals and companies. As in McKinsey's earlier deep analysis of the situation 6 weeks ago (my post on that is linked below), they repeat the mantra that the surest way back to anything resembling normal is to greatly reduce the uncertainty around the risks of this virus.

https://www.mckinsey.com/business-f...71&hdpid=f569a613-3d57-40cd-ab0f-3e1e3dc16b5c

This means controlling the virus to as low a level as possible, so people have confidence in returning to some version of a mostly normal life, even if it means universal masking and testing/tracing/isolating to control flareups. Some countries have already done this, either via mostly controls (masks/testing/tracing etc.), like South Korea and Taiwan or via lockdowns and smart reopening, like New Zealand, China, and Switzerland. Others are struggling mightily, like the US and the UK and now many other countries being hit hard in South/Central America and elsewhere.

Lots of other really good insights into things that have been learned both scientifically and socially, such as the incredible worldwide scientific collaborations on understanding the virus and developing treatments and vaccines or how people can approach education and the workplace in different ways that might be better at least in some ways. Worth a read.

https://rutgers.forums.rivals.com/t...entions-and-more.191275/page-115#post-4562473

 

Greg2020

Senior
Gold Member
Jan 25, 2020
1,844
1,719
113
According to worldodometers the 7 day moving average for deaths country-wide is still decreasing.

We’re now in the window for potential death growth.

Are there any sources for discussing the potency of the current outbreak? I keep seeing the “younger people are affected so this isn’t as bad” nonsense which tells you nothing.

Are the symptoms of the current southern surge consistent with what was experienced in the northeast or are people experiencing milder, more cold-like symptoms?
Hospitalizations are rapidly rising in FL, TX, AZ, GA, and NC if people didn't have severe symptoms I doubt they would be rising like this.
 

RU848789

Hall of Famer
Jul 27, 2001
45,737
19,269
113
Metuchen, NJ
According to worldodometers the 7 day moving average for deaths country-wide is still decreasing.

We’re now in the window for potential death growth.

Are there any sources for discussing the potency of the current outbreak? I keep seeing the “younger people are affected so this isn’t as bad” nonsense which tells you nothing.

Are the symptoms of the current southern surge consistent with what was experienced in the northeast or are people experiencing milder, more cold-like symptoms?
There's no doubt there are a higher percentage of milder cases and a higher percentage of younger people being infected currently, so that even though case rates per capita may end up being similar to rates in the NE US (with more testing now finding more cases probably cancelled out by some distancing/masking and reduction in public activities; those didn't occur in NY/NJ until the outbreak was already through the roof, since there was little to no testing going on), I'd expect hospitalization and death rates per capita to be less than in the NE US. In addition, we now have better medical procedures and treatments, so I would think death rates per capita would be further decreased vs. the NE US, to maybe 1/2-2/3 of what we saw for a given cases per capita. This is a guesstimate. Let's compare AZ and NJ.

For example, AZ is about to reach the cases per 1MM that NJ was at at its peak, with about 3200 cases/day vs. NJ's peak off about 3600 cases/day, but AZ has 88% of the population of NJ (7.3MM vs. 8.9MM), so we're close on that; however, if they keep climbing well past NJ's peak cases per capita, I'd have to change the estimates below. So if we were about the same in cases per capita, I'd expect AZ to be at 1/2-2/3 our death rate per capita.

NJ's death rate peak was about 300/day, which would be about 260/day for AZ at the same per capita death rate, so at 1/2-2/3 NJ's per capita rate that would be maybe 130-170/day and AZ just hit 88 deaths yesterday, although that's a single data point and the 7-day average is near 40. My guess is they'll get to 130/day and maybe even over 170/day, but I wouldn't expect them to reach NJ's equivalent rate of 260/day, but even 130-170 per day would be horrible. We'll see.

Hospitalization rate reporting has been sketchy for AZ, but would be helpful if accurate; I've seen reports of 1000 hospitalizations in a day in AZ, which sounds way high vs. NJ's peak of 400-500 new hospitalizations per day, so not believing that number for now, since I've also seen reports of cumulative hospitalizations increasing by ~100 per day, which might mean 200 new hospitalizations per day (since some leave). If hospitalization rates per capita were similar, then I'd up the death rate estimates to closer to 3/4 of what NJ saw, since the main potential difference would then only be treatments/procedures not severity of patients, since presumably patients entering hospitals in NJ and AZ would have been fairly similarly ill.

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/usa/arizona/
https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/usa/new-jersey/







 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Joey Bags

wisr01

All American
Apr 13, 2006
7,491
2,325
113
The 7dma on June 18th was 30. Yesterday it was 38. more then a 25% increase in less then 2 weeks.
Which is less than 39 on June 2nd. For the last month the 7DMA has fluctuated between 30 and 39. Did the Sunday/Monday reporting bias the 7DMA? LOL

More importantly, the 7DMA was 43 when FL started to reopen.
 
Last edited:

RU-05

All American
Jun 25, 2015
5,184
3,944
113
Is it 44 more per day cumulatively for the 3 states (which would be 1320/month more) or is it 44 more per day per state or 3960/month more?
Cumulative.

The 7dma for each is currently in the 30's Given the size of each state that obviously a worse sign for AZ. AZ has also had the highest increase. They were at 16 on June 1st. 36 on July 1st.

Texas was 23 on June 1st, 35 on July 1st.

Florida, has not been near as dramatic going from 30 to 38. But as we talked about the other day, I think they are just further behind the curve. Their new case 7dma was right about 2000 midway through June, they have more then tripled that in 2 weeks, and currently average 7141 new cases a day. Unless they are the anamoly, I fear their fatalities will be increasing at a higher rate as well.
 
Last edited:

brad1218

All American
May 4, 2003
8,606
536
113
No, he's trolling now and has been for the past few pages asking questions about things that have all been explained before.
I don’t understand why anyone even responds to bac. I hate being mean to someone but he is simply not very intelligent. Please just stop responding to his ridiculous posts and let’s focus on the point of this thread.
 
  • Like
Reactions: thegock

wisr01

All American
Apr 13, 2006
7,491
2,325
113
Cumulative.

The 7dma for each is currently in the 30's Given the size of each state that obviously a worse sign for AZ. AZ has also had the highest increase. They were are at 16 on June 1st. 36 on July 1st.

Texas was 23 on June 1st, 35 on July 1st.

Florida, has not been near as dramatic going from 30 to 38. But as we talked about the other day, I think they are just further behind the curve. Their new case 7dma was right about 2000 midway through June, they have more then tripled that in 2 weeks, and currently average 7141 new cases a day. Unless they are the anamoly, I fear their fatalities will be increasing at a higher rate as well.
If you picked June 2nd it went down from 39 to 38.

Over the last 6 weeks Florida's 7DMA has averaged about 35 with error bars of +/- 5.
 

King of S

Senior
Sep 20, 2017
1,572
1,009
113
I don’t understand why anyone even responds to bac. I hate being mean to someone but he is simply not very intelligent. Please just stop responding to his ridiculous posts and let’s focus on the point of this thread.
You’re way off. BAC is the king of stats and if you ever read his March Madness analyses you would know what I’m talking about. Death rates have been going down for 8 weeks and will continue to do so to the point that the media will have to address. Better treatments, less severe cases, mutation of virus severity all playing a role in this drop.
 

RU-05

All American
Jun 25, 2015
5,184
3,944
113
Which is less than 39 on June 2nd. For the last month the 7DMA has fluctuated between 30 and 39. Did the Sunday/Monday reporting bias the 7DMA? LOL

More importantly, the 7DMA was 43 when FL started to reopen.
1)The 7dma did jump on June 2nd, it was lower prior to that, and it dipped again after that day. Was this due to a backlog in reporting? Perhaps, the June 2nd total is the highest for FL in nearly two months. The 7dma has been rising again since June 18th. Now you seem to be pointing to June 2nd as an indication that FL's fatalities will not continue to increase? That the fluctuation is standard? Time will tell but I doubt that.

2)And yes the 7DMA was higher prior to them opening. Then it decreased, due to the mitigation efforts put in place weeks prior, then as those mitigation efforts were eased we have seen the deaths begin to increase again. You don't see the results of these efforts immediately, they take time to show themselves. This lag is the norm.
 

RU-05

All American
Jun 25, 2015
5,184
3,944
113
You’re way off. BAC is the king of stats and if you ever read his March Madness analyses you would know what I’m talking about. Death rates have been going down for 8 weeks and will continue to do so to the point that the media will have to address. Better treatments, less severe cases, mutation of virus severity all playing a role in this drop.
Yes the countries death totals are decreasing no one is disputing that.

The death totals in states that have seen recent spikes in cases is increasing. People are disputing that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: thegock
Status
Not open for further replies.