OT: DAILY COVID-19 THREAD -- 9/14

Status
Not open for further replies.

Richard Schnyderite

Hall of Famer
Staff
Mar 21, 2016
23,891
71,767
113
South Amboy, NJ
Hey everybody we are going to try something new. Instead of having the one big COVID thread, we are going to start a new daily COVID thread every single day and lock it every night around midnight with a new one starting shortly after.

We will be a little lax on the board rules in this thread about political postings as long as it pertains to COVID. However the rest of the board rules are still in full effect, there will be no fighting, no name calling, etc. There are also no warnings in this thread, if you step out of line here or attack others for no reason, a ban will immediately follow.

With that being said, post away.
 

RU85inFla

Heisman Winner
Gold Member
Aug 4, 2003
12,143
7,465
113
It is really sad that the covid thread has come to this. Since the daily threads started, there has been zero useful information.

CE board - dead
Covid thread -dead

Same shit, different day with some folks.
 

RU23

All American
Gold Member
Aug 2, 2010
6,622
2,275
113
It is really sad that the covid thread has come to this. Since the daily threads started, there has been zero useful information.

CE board - dead
Covid thread -dead

Same shit, different day with some folks.
This. I respect the mods decision, and I get that rules are rules, but I disagree vehemently with the disbanding of the CE board and covid threads.

Anyway, let’s hope Pfizer has good trial data by the end of October. They seem to be the slight favorite at the moment.

Any update on Regeneron’s engineered antibodies? I know their timeline kept getting pushed back.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Greg2020

RU848789

Legend
Gold Member
Jul 27, 2001
50,625
25,897
113
Metuchen, NJ
This. I respect the mods decision, and I get that rules are rules, but I disagree vehemently with the disbanding of the CE board and covid threads.

Anyway, let’s hope Pfizer has good trial data by the end of October. They seem to be the slight favorite at the moment.

Any update on Regeneron’s engineered antibodies? I know their timeline kept getting pushed back.

Me too, but I get why they're doing it - by locking every day and loosening the rules a bit, they presumably have to moderate it much less, which is work for them.

Anyway, let's try some science. Thought this academic viewpoint on the "path to immunity" was pretty interesting. We've talked a lot about what constitutes immunity in people who were infected and have recovered, with regard to both antibody levels and T-cell levels (adaptive immunity) and recent research showing that the vast majority of recovered COVID patients look like they'll have at least 6 months of immunity if not more (despite a few rare cases of reinfection but with minor symptoms), as well as the observation that maybe half of people who never have been exposed to the coronavirus (from donor samples pre-COVID) might have some level of immunity (possibly leading to asymptomatic or mildly symptomatic cases) to the virus based on "cross-reactivity" from T-cell recognition of the new virus based on similarities to already circulating human betacoronaviruses (like the common cold). This commentary goes into much more detail on those as well as discusses what these mean for vaccines.


COVID-19 vaccines in development designed to prevent clinical infection, disease severity, or both show the induction of an anamnestic immune response to the spike protein with a second dose7 and can generate high levels of neutralizing antibodies comparable with or greater than those seen in sera samples from patients. The induction of sufficient CD4+ follicular helper T cells and inclusion of vaccine boosts, employed for several other vaccines where circulating antibody levels are critical for protection, may be needed to maintain levels of anti–SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing antibodies. Boosting antiviral CD8+ and TH1 CD4+ T cells recognizing spike and epitopes from other conserved regions of the proteome may also be crucial in limiting replication and disease severity. SARS-COV-2 may well follow the path of previous coronaviruses and become endemic in the population as another common cold virus. Thus, in the few “short” months since recognition of this virus, 2 keys paths to COVID-19 adaptive immunity are being unraveled and vaccines exploiting this knowledge are in rapid development.
 

Yeah Baby

Heisman Winner
Aug 14, 2001
17,172
3,712
113
Good to see the 7 day averages dipping once again. Number of cases also dropping in the US. Still some areas that have not been hit but none that are densely populated.

Vaccine and meds are getting close. People are starting to dip more than their toes in the water.

One thing we still don’t know is why abc gets it and xyz doesn’t.
 
  • Like
Reactions: biker7766 and RU23

goru1869

All American
Nov 16, 2005
5,392
2,459
113
Well the first domino fell against States overreaching on arbitrary restrictions. If there is a 2nd wave expect less restrictions.

Do you mean WE the people will be able to make decisions on how to take care of ourselves and family members instead of some jackass (murphy) in a state capital some where ? FREEDOM !
 
  • Like
Reactions: WhiteBus

Knight Shift

Legend
May 19, 2011
52,962
43,671
113
Jersey Shore
Interesting, but don't have enough time to sort it out. @RU848789 - you might find this interesting as it is about weather and covid-19. I think this website is anti-lockdown though.

 
  • Haha
Reactions: scripts

mikershoein

All American
Gold Member
Dec 5, 2006
6,530
4,544
113
sorry, this thread is with good intentions but it totally BLOWS! open up the CE board and you will have less complaints

In before the lock, same post same thread
 
  • Like
Reactions: T2Kplus10

RU23

All American
Gold Member
Aug 2, 2010
6,622
2,275
113
First post of yours I’ve ever liked/agreed with haha. But 80% seems about right. We have to wait for Phase III trial results. Numbers guy (Derek Lowe) said his best educated guess based on current data was Pfizer’s vaccine to work the “best.” Their CEO said over the weekend they’ll know if it works by end of October.

Lowe also had a good blog about how the waters could be pretty muddy, with multiple trials coming out with data at different times, with some mostly working but it being unclear which is the “best.” Will be interesting:
 

RU848789

Legend
Gold Member
Jul 27, 2001
50,625
25,897
113
Metuchen, NJ
Interesting, but don't have enough time to sort it out. @RU848789 - you might find this interesting as it is about weather and covid-19. I think this website is anti-lockdown though.

Frankly, I think it's very poorly done, from a scientific analysis perspective. First off, the European countries haven't had their death peaks in response to case peaks yet, because there's a 2-4 week lag from case peak to death peak, as we just saw again in wave 2 in the US (I spent countless posts demonstrating that when people kept saying deaths weren't going up and I said they would and when and they did). We should start to see deaths peak in Spain (cases peaked at the end of August) very soon and in France in a few weeks (cases peaking now).

And I would expect their peaks to be even lower than the US peaks were in wave 2 vs. wave 1 - which were lower due to younger/milder cases being discovered in wave 2 vs. wave 1 (due to much better testing), combined with improved medical procedures/treatments being available in wave 2. That part is pretty clear when comparing hospitalizations, which aren't a function of testing (like cases are), vs. deaths. In our wave 2, the hospitalizations were the same as in wave 1 (despite twice as many cases in wave 2 - that illustrates the younger/milder part), but the deaths were about half of wave 1, which illustrates the improved procedures/treatments part.

It's just nutty to try to ascribe decreased deaths vs. hospitalizations to climate. In addition, he has Louisiana as a "late peak" state, which is simply wrong - the peak was greater early on, but because of lack of testing, it wasn't "seen" well, but the deaths were far greater in LA in wave 1, so to call that a late peak state, so it "fits" with his climate hypothesis is poor sleight of hand to me. And his climate map vs. seriousness of the outbreaks is simply childish with too many errors to even list.


Also, trying to say lockdowns don't affect cases or deaths is just stupid. Look at China and New Zealand as cases in point. They both essentially reduced transmissions to zero by harsh lockdowns (harsher than ours). Other countries, like SK, Taiwan, Vietnam, Australia, etc. kept cases far lower than we did by using aggressive testing, tracing and isolating, augmented by distancing/masking, with selected shutdowns of some parts of society, at times, but not like China/NZ. Our stay at home orders, which were not nearly as strict as some others, definitely worked to decrease cases, which is obvious, as cases stopped increasing a couple of weeks after the lockdowns and then deaths stopped rising a couple of weeks after that. As many experts have said (and I said even before our lockdowns), if we had locked down in the NE US 2 weeks earlier, we would've saved 75-90% of the lives lost in wave 1 and the reason we didn't do that, is we had no data showing how bad case growth really was, because we had zero testing until early March.

This isn't hard stuff really. For a novel coronavirus, which most have no defense for, people will simply get infected based on exposure and dose received from an infected person, with the severity likely a function of dose received, also, which is why most of the worst cases appear to be from prolonged contact, indoors, from family members. It doesn't matter whether it's hot or cold for the most part (unless that affects time spent indoors with infected people, which is the fear this fall/winter). Most experts think climate has very little to do with transmissions, directly. Forgive me for not re-finding and reposting a bunch of links, but I got stuff to do...
 

LC-88

All American
Apr 24, 2010
7,147
2,770
113
Interesting, but don't have enough time to sort it out. @RU848789 - you might find this interesting as it is about weather and covid-19. I think this website is anti-lockdown though. Good article btw. thx

why is the US different? We share a border with Mexico.
 

Knight Shift

Legend
May 19, 2011
52,962
43,671
113
Jersey Shore
Frankly, I think it's very poorly done, from a scientific analysis perspective. First off, the European countries haven't had their death peaks in response to case peaks yet, because there's a 2-4 week lag from case peak to death peak, as we just saw again in wave 2 in the US (I spent countless posts demonstrating that when people kept saying deaths weren't going up and I said they would and when and they did). We should start to see deaths peak in Spain (cases peaked at the end of August) very soon and in France in a few weeks (cases peaking now).

And I would expect their peaks to be even lower than the US peaks were in wave 2 vs. wave 1 - which were lower due to younger/milder cases being discovered in wave 2 vs. wave 1 (due to much better testing), combined with improved medical procedures/treatments being available in wave 2. That part is pretty clear when comparing hospitalizations, which aren't a function of testing (like cases are), vs. deaths. In our wave 2, the hospitalizations were the same as in wave 1 (despite twice as many cases in wave 2 - that illustrates the younger/milder part), but the deaths were about half of wave 1, which illustrates the improved procedures/treatments part.

It's just nutty to try to ascribe decreased deaths vs. hospitalizations to climate. In addition, he has Louisiana as a "late peak" state, which is simply wrong - the peak was greater early on, but because of lack of testing, it wasn't "seen" well, but the deaths were far greater in LA in wave 1, so to call that a late peak state, so it "fits" with his climate hypothesis is poor sleight of hand to me. And his climate map vs. seriousness of the outbreaks is simply childish with too many errors to even list.


Also, trying to say lockdowns don't affect cases or deaths is just stupid. Look at China and New Zealand as cases in point. They both essentially reduced transmissions to zero by harsh lockdowns (harsher than ours). Other countries, like SK, Taiwan, Vietnam, Australia, etc. kept cases far lower than we did by using aggressive testing, tracing and isolating, augmented by distancing/masking, with selected shutdowns of some parts of society, at times, but not like China/NZ. Our stay at home orders, which were not nearly as strict as some others, definitely worked to decrease cases, which is obvious, as cases stopped increasing a couple of weeks after the lockdowns and then deaths stopped rising a couple of weeks after that. As many experts have said (and I said even before our lockdowns), if we had locked down in the NE US 2 weeks earlier, we would've saved 75-90% of the lives lost in wave 1 and the reason we didn't do that, is we had no data showing how bad case growth really was, because we had zero testing until early March.

This isn't hard stuff really. For a novel coronavirus, which most have no defense for, people will simply get infected based on exposure and dose received from an infected person, with the severity likely a function of dose received, also, which is why most of the worst cases appear to be from prolonged contact, indoors, from family members. It doesn't matter whether it's hot or cold for the most part (unless that affects time spent indoors with infected people, which is the fear this fall/winter). Most experts think climate has very little to do with transmissions, directly. Forgive me for not re-finding and reposting a bunch of links, but I got stuff to do...
My sense was the climate stuff was whacky.
Question- weren't Gov. Cuomo and Mayor Deblasio saying around March 10-15 that there was no reason to worry? NYC did not lock down until March 22. There was an MIT whitepaper (not sure if it has been confirmed or discredited) that tracked the spread of Covid nationwide (and I think more particularly to the Northeast) to the NYC subway.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RU848789

Greg2020

All American
Jan 25, 2020
7,212
5,193
113
My sense was the climate stuff was whacky.
Question- weren't Gov. Cuomo and Mayor Deblasio saying around March 10-15 that there was no reason to worry? NYC did not lock down until March 22. There was an MIT whitepaper (not sure if it has been confirmed or discredited) that tracked the spread of Covid nationwide (and I think more particularly to the Northeast) to the NYC subway.
Yes, around March 10 but idt as late as the 15th. The white house wasn't sharing their briefings with them on how dangerous it was and publicly was saying it was 15 cases soon to be zero. Additionally the CDC under the white house, only allowed CDC labs and tests to be used, which were not working and refused to allow private labs to test or to buy tests that had already been made in other countries, and only allowed people who had been to China to be tested. Thus, NY couldn't test anyone until it was too late, as the virus was coming in from Europe not China, and didn't have any information on how serious the virus was, or how much it had already seeded in the city.
 

bac2therac

Legend
Gold Member
Jul 30, 2001
160,527
64,098
113
51
Belle Mead NJ
didnt Spain just have the worst one day case per capita that we have ever seen. So much praise for Europe saying they handled it well

Sweden has one death per day for a few weeks now..why? why? no masks?
 
  • Like
Reactions: goru1869

bac2therac

Legend
Gold Member
Jul 30, 2001
160,527
64,098
113
51
Belle Mead NJ
Eh6ezIrWoAAZyCh
 

bac2therac

Legend
Gold Member
Jul 30, 2001
160,527
64,098
113
51
Belle Mead NJ
while the media runs fear mongering about thousands of young people being infected, they ignore that the bulk of anyone sick or deaths are still focused in nursing home and long term care facilities, wonder why they do that
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts