ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Science, Mathematics, Medicine, and Technology
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags !MOD BOX WARNING! , Coronavirus , diseases

Reply
Old Yesterday, 10:42 AM   #2561
dann
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 10,776
Originally Posted by marting View Post
Sure does. And only 3 symptomatic? Fishy as hell.

Something wrong with the tests they used? How can all of nearly 200 workers get infected? If this is true, and it's a big if, would it be possible they were infected by some other mechanism like food? I recall some women's facility where most were also positive with few having symptoms. Yet, for instance, the outbreak at the Saggit choir practice resulted in 85% of the singers becoming symptomatic. This needs some researchers taking a close look.

And it turns out my somewhat flippant remark about them just continuing to work, they are except for the 3 that are symptomatic.

At one Norwegian nursing home, they had a second wave after having eliminated the virus and introduced new procedures. After they had ruled out person-to-person transmission, they discovered that contaminated PPE had rubbed off on other items of clothing in a staff dressing room.

There have been several cases of large-scale infections in meat plants where they already wear different kinds of protective gear under normal circumstances. Farm workers may not not be as focussed on rules of hygiene as they usually are at meat plants.
The text also talks about migrant farm workers. What do their living quarters look like? Several people sleeping in one room? Bathroom facilities?

More about the Norwegian nursing home.
__________________
/dann
"Stupidity renders itself invisible by assuming very large proportions. Completely unreasonable claims are irrefutable. Ni-en-leh pointed out that a philosopher might get into trouble by claiming that two times two makes five, but he does not risk much by claiming that two times two makes shoe polish." B. Brecht
"The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is required for their real happiness. The demand to give up the illusion about its condition is the demand to give up a condition which needs illusions." K. Marx
dann is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 11:21 AM   #2562
Ulf Nereng
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Location: Norway
Posts: 323
Originally Posted by marting View Post
I remember thinking that a 30% greater mortality rate would have terminated controlled studies with large numbers of participants pretty quickly as it's quite unethical to continue such studies once the adverse statistics show up. OTOH, the report was an observational study. Still, you'd think these treatments would have terminated once people started dying in larger percentages.
Yes, that study looks suspicious now. I did some googling to see if there's an obvious link between US company Surgisphere and US company Gilead Sciences (Remdesivir) but didn't spot any. I don't know how to find out who or what company has made a killing in the stockmarket by buying Gilead stock. Others may have more experience looking for such things.
Ulf Nereng is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 11:22 AM   #2563
marting
Graduate Poster
 
marting's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 1,540
Originally Posted by dann View Post
Farm workers may not not be as focussed on rules of hygiene as they usually are at meat plants. The text also talks about migrant farm workers. What do their living quarters look like? Several people sleeping in one room? Bathroom facilities?
The farm workers, live, eat, sleep, and work at the farm. Sleeping arrangements are described as "dorm" type facilities with bunk beds. Cost control is high and these are temporary workers during the picking season. Likely large numbers with rows of bunk beds like military barracks at boot camp. Also likely common bathroom/eating facilities.

The high infection rate is not at all surprising but 100% of almost 200 people is. The other anomaly is the low severity with only 3 showing symptoms. A number of days had passed before all were tested when the first positive occurred so there should have been a much higher number of symptomatic workers.

This simply doesn't match what we've seen elsewhere. Among other things the test's sensitivity appears to be exceptionally high (no false (or any) negatives in 200 peeps?). SARS-CoV-2 tests aren't known for having a particularly high sensitivity.
__________________
Flying's easy. Walking on water, now that's cool.
marting is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 12:35 PM   #2564
Dr.Sid
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Olomouc, Czech Republic
Posts: 2,734
Originally Posted by marting View Post
This simply doesn't match what we've seen elsewhere. Among other things the test's sensitivity appears to be exceptionally high (no false (or any) negatives in 200 peeps?). SARS-CoV-2 tests aren't known for having a particularly high sensitivity.
How come ? We don't have many cases where everyone in some group was tested. Yes, we had the cruise ships. But those did actually isolation on rooms and other measures.
Dr.Sid is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 12:51 PM   #2565
Myriad
Hyperthetical
 
Myriad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Betwixt
Posts: 16,294
There have been many instances of large numbers of cases among a mixed but cohabiting group, where very few of the cases became severe. The earliest example I noticed was the Pine Street Inn homeless shelter in Boston, over 140 residents positive but only one eventually needed to be hospitalized.

There seems to be some tendency for less-severe (severity in terms of symptoms) infections to spread more less-severe infections. This could be explained by an effect of degree of exposure (hypothesis 1), or as variations in severity between strains (hypothesis 2). Even though neither of those hypotheses have good evidence, it's almost certain that one of them must be happening.

Among other things, this could also explain (and I think, is needed to explain) the shape of the typical "curve" in the first place. At some point in a rising "wave" of infection, the number of infected but not quarantined or hospitalized people reaches some figure x resulting in the curve continuing to rise. When the curve later decreases again, the number must once again at some point reach that same x, but now the curve is declining. This would be easy to explain if a large percentage of the population were becoming immune, but that isn't happening in most places, according to antibody studies. It would also be easy to explain if the first x was reached before lockdown measures were in place, but in many places most of the entire curve took place under the same lockdown measures and the curves have the same shape, rising for weeks after the lockdown and then declining again.

Covid's "waves" (at least, under some degree of social controls whether or not it's total lockdown) seem to work like ocean waves on a beach: they arrive and rapidly spread over the area with a lot of severe cases (deeper inundation), but as they continue to spread and shallow out (cases less severe) they run out of steam. I'd expect it to work more like a fire, able to sustain and even build its spread if it's finding any fuel at all. It seems very peculiar to me. It's a novel virus so no one should be immune. Could hypothesis 3, that the number of people it's actually able to infect is limited in some way we haven't recognized, be at all plausible?
__________________
A zømbie once bit my sister...
Myriad is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 01:51 PM   #2566
The Atheist
The Grammar Tyrant
 
The Atheist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 25,495
Originally Posted by Puppycow View Post
It looks like The Lancet may have been hoodwinked.
And not for the first time.

Something seriously amiss with their processes.

Originally Posted by Myriad View Post
There have been many instances of large numbers of cases among a mixed but cohabiting group, where very few of the cases became severe. The earliest example I noticed was the Pine Street Inn homeless shelter in Boston, over 140 residents positive but only one eventually needed to be hospitalized.
Pretty good advert for the case that healthy living isn't the sole protector!

Or, the thought does occur to me that all the homeless people I[ve ever seen spend their days outside.

Where the sun is shining, and even in the winter, they'd be topping up their vitamin D levels quite nicely...

Originally Posted by Myriad View Post
There seems to be some tendency for less-severe (severity in terms of symptoms) infections to spread more less-severe infections. This could be explained by an effect of degree of exposure (hypothesis 1), or as variations in severity between strains (hypothesis 2). Even though neither of those hypotheses have good evidence, it's almost certain that one of them must be happening.
Or something else, as yet undiscovered. The virus is a mystery on lots of levels, and the more we analyse it, the stranger it looks.

Washington State is an excellent case in point - the virus had been there for weeks, not doing a great deal of harm, then Ka-Blam!, it explodes into death for lots of people.

I do think there's some mileage in the different strain scenario, though - it's mutated in lots of little ways that might be making a big difference.

I find it a little odd that with the data-mining capacity we have in 2020 that more mathematical analysis isn't being made alongside the biochemical work. The answer is there somewhere.

Originally Posted by Myriad View Post
Could hypothesis 3, that the number of people it's actually able to infect is limited in some way we haven't recognized, be at all plausible?
I'll go with highly unlikely.

I mentioned the fall-off of exponential growth pre-lockdown the other day, and thinking about it, Japan might be a good example - wearing masks, staying outside of breath zones, etc. I might be that the people themselves have flattened the curve by consciously or unconsciously staying out of positions where they're more likely to catch it.

Even before we had a case in NZ, some people were wearing masks. In Japan, they've had an almost casual response to the virus in comparison to South Korea, yet their numbers are very similar - SK with 5 deaths/1M & Japan with 7.
__________________
The point of equilibrium has passed; satire and current events are now indistinguishable.
The Atheist is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 02:02 PM   #2567
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 16,915
Originally Posted by marting View Post
The farm workers, live, eat, sleep, and work at the farm. Sleeping arrangements are described as "dorm" type facilities with bunk beds. Cost control is high and these are temporary workers during the picking season. Likely large numbers with rows of bunk beds like military barracks at boot camp. Also likely common bathroom/eating facilities.

The high infection rate is not at all surprising but 100% of almost 200 people is. The other anomaly is the low severity with only 3 showing symptoms. A number of days had passed before all were tested when the first positive occurred so there should have been a much higher number of symptomatic workers.

This simply doesn't match what we've seen elsewhere. Among other things the test's sensitivity appears to be exceptionally high (no false (or any) negatives in 200 peeps?). SARS-CoV-2 tests aren't known for having a particularly high sensitivity.
What about age structure? If many of these workers are in their 20s or 30s, would that go some way to explain the low percentage of symptomous infections?

Also, by testing all 200, the dark field that is usually to be expected is eliminated.
__________________
Thermodynamics hates conspiracy theorists. (Foster Zygote)
Oystein is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 02:46 PM   #2568
marting
Graduate Poster
 
marting's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 1,540
https://www.scientificamerican.com/a...for-a-vaccine/

Quote:
Importantly, the researchers observed a strong T cell response to the “spike” protein the virus uses to bind to and infect cells (and which most vaccine candidates target). They additionally detected a helper T cell response to SARS-CoV-2 in about half of blood samples they examined that had been drawn before the virus began circulating. This observation, they say, hints that exposure to seasonal common cold coronaviruses may confer some protection against the new pathogen.
This sort of thing could explain the vast differences in how serious different groups that are in a common, and close, environment experience covid-19 when a high percentage are infected. They tend to share prior communal diseases such as colds.

Also, interestingly, the 50% of people that exhibited enhanced T Helper cell response corresponds to the Diamond Princess outbreak where 50% were asymptomatic even though it did kill 2% of them (including the asymptomatic but infected) in the end.
__________________
Flying's easy. Walking on water, now that's cool.
marting is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 04:10 PM   #2569
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 81,027
Originally Posted by marting View Post
https://www.scientificamerican.com/a...for-a-vaccine/

This sort of thing could explain the vast differences in how serious different groups that are in a common, and close, environment experience covid-19 when a high percentage are infected. They tend to share prior communal diseases such as colds.

Also, interestingly, the 50% of people that exhibited enhanced T Helper cell response corresponds to the Diamond Princess outbreak where 50% were asymptomatic even though it did kill 2% of them (including the asymptomatic but infected) in the end.
That paragraph is a tad confusing but re the highlighted: People on cruises typically come from multiple localities regardless of other variables.

And, there is not one pathogen that causes "a cold". It's not just posts here, it's the news media as well. Multiple different pathogens cause what is known as 'the common cold'. You can't lump them into one disease.
__________________
Privatize the profits and socialize the losses. It's the American way. That's how Mnuchin got rich. Worse, he did it on the backs of elderly people who had been conned into reverse mortgages. Mnuchin paid zero, took on the debt then taxpayers bailed him out.

Space Force.
Because feeding poor people is socialism.
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 05:21 PM   #2570
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 81,027
Originally Posted by Elaedith View Post
No, sensitivity and specificity are not the same as NPV and PPV. Sensitivity is the proportion of people who have the disease who correctly test positive. Specificity is the proportion of people who do not have the disease who correctly test negative......
This discussion started here:

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
Originally Posted by Giordano
My post, and the link, stated that for a variety of reasons the results of seropositivity tests have to be considered cautiously and are risky for making public health or personal health decisions. These reasons included the lack of knowledge as to the relationship of seropositivity in these tests to protective immunity to the disease, and the math of interpreting even modest false positives in large populations. ... [snipped for brevity] ....
When evaluating the positive results of diagnostic tests like this, you have to consider the risk of the population you are testing.

Say a test has a false positive of 50%.

If you are looking at the result from 100 people in the general population and the rate of the infection in that population is 2%, then if you find 2 people positive, on average, one of them is infected and one isn't.

But if you are looking at a high risk group where 70% in that population is infected, and you test 100 people in that group, your false positive rate is going to be much much lower. This is because the probability of finding false positives in that group is statistically much lower.

This is a real example with hepatitis C antibody testing when you are looking at testing a low risk population or a group of IV drug users.
It veered off topic and I'm sure it's boring people. It needs to get back on track.

Wiki: Sensitivity and specificity: Medical examples
Quote:
Positive and negative predictive values, but not sensitivity or specificity, are values influenced by the prevalence of disease in the population that is being tested.
This would appear to clarify the confusion.

I am talking about predictive values and not specificity. My bad, sorry to cause you so much stress. The point I made, however, in that post, was and still is accurate.

I think it's time to let this rest in this thread.
__________________
Privatize the profits and socialize the losses. It's the American way. That's how Mnuchin got rich. Worse, he did it on the backs of elderly people who had been conned into reverse mortgages. Mnuchin paid zero, took on the debt then taxpayers bailed him out.

Space Force.
Because feeding poor people is socialism.
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 05:22 PM   #2571
marting
Graduate Poster
 
marting's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 1,540
Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
That paragraph is a tad confusing but re the highlighted: People on cruises typically come from multiple localities regardless of other variables.
That was actually my point! That a sample pre-corona virus had 50% helper T's. and that about 50% of the cruise positives were asymptomatic. These people were from diverse regions so one would not expect they would be exposed, or not exposed, as a group.

Quote:
And, there is not one pathogen that causes "a cold". It's not just posts here, it's the news media as well. Multiple different pathogens cause what is known as 'the common cold'. You can't lump them into one disease.
I don't lump them in, nor did the article I quoted. Please note the Sci. Am. article referred to "seasonal common cold coronaviruses".
__________________
Flying's easy. Walking on water, now that's cool.
marting is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 08:40 PM   #2572
Planigale
Illuminator
 
Planigale's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 4,099
Originally Posted by marting View Post
That was actually my point! That a sample pre-corona virus had 50% helper T's. and that about 50% of the cruise positives were asymptomatic. These people were from diverse regions so one would not expect they would be exposed, or not exposed, as a group.



I don't lump them in, nor did the article I quoted. Please note the Sci. Am. article referred to "seasonal common cold coronaviruses".
The problem here is that older people should be most likely to have prior exposure to seasonal corona viruses and young people least. Yet most severe disease is in the oldest and mildest in the youngest. If anything that implies prior exposure may be harmful, certainly not protective.
Planigale is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 09:03 PM   #2573
marting
Graduate Poster
 
marting's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 1,540
Originally Posted by Planigale View Post
The problem here is that older people should be most likely to have prior exposure to seasonal corona viruses and young people least. Yet most severe disease is in the oldest and mildest in the youngest. If anything that implies prior exposure may be harmful, certainly not protective.
No doubt. However, older people tend not to be as exposed recently and some cross activity likely fades over 3+ years. Most kids have colds all the time and their parents are exposed as well.

What's striking is the incredibly large differences in symptomatic ratios in groups that mostly socialize together when they are exposed and most of the group becomes infected. From 2% in the farming and women's prison group to 85% in the choir group. And then you have about 50% symptomatic in the cruise ship's heterogeneous group. It's quite odd and suggestive.


More from the Sci. Am. piece:
Quote:
SETTE: We looked at the COVID-19 patients, and then we looked at a control group. We purposely went after blood donations that were obtained in 2015 to 2018—before any SARS-CoV-2 was around. Surprisingly, in about half of these people, we could see some T cell reactivity. And we looked at the data hard from the left and from the right and convinced ourselves that this was real. We do not know, at this point, exactly what this cross-reactivity means, but it’s reasonable to assume that it is the result of people having been exposed to common cold coronaviruses that are different from SARS-CoV-2 but have some similarity [to it]. This potentially has very strong implications, because one of the things that is unknown and everybody wants to gain more information about is why there is such a spectrum of different COVID-19 outcomes:
__________________
Flying's easy. Walking on water, now that's cool.

Last edited by marting; Yesterday at 09:12 PM.
marting is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 09:33 PM   #2574
Puppycow
Penultimate Amazing
 
Puppycow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 24,931
Japan may be having an uptick already. They ended the state of emergency on 5/25. Might just be a blip in the data but the last 2 days have seen more new cases than any other day since 5/14.

https://toyokeizai.net/sp/visual/tko/covid19/en.html

And the effective reproduction number is over 1 again:

__________________
A fool thinks himself to be wise, but a wise man knows himself to be a fool.
William Shakespeare
Puppycow is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 02:16 AM   #2575
The Atheist
The Grammar Tyrant
 
The Atheist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 25,495
Originally Posted by Planigale View Post
The problem here is that older people should be most likely to have prior exposure to seasonal corona viruses and young people least. Yet most severe disease is in the oldest and mildest in the youngest. If anything that implies prior exposure may be harmful, certainly not protective.
What I've seen suggested recent exposure might be the key, and kids are much more likely to have had it more recently.

Still needs work.
__________________
The point of equilibrium has passed; satire and current events are now indistinguishable.
The Atheist is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 02:49 AM   #2576
The Atheist
The Grammar Tyrant
 
The Atheist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 25,495
Originally Posted by The Atheist View Post
Washington State is an excellent case in point - the virus had been there for weeks, not doing a great deal of harm, then Ka-Blam!, it explodes into death for lots of people.
Interesting coincidence - having written that, as being the current state of thinking, it seems that idea was wrong, and the explosion of cases were a different path of introduction to the state.

The wrong idea ended up causing the right response: https://arstechnica.com/science/2020...an-we-thought/
__________________
The point of equilibrium has passed; satire and current events are now indistinguishable.
The Atheist is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 07:29 AM   #2577
marting
Graduate Poster
 
marting's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 1,540
Originally Posted by The Atheist View Post
What I've seen suggested recent exposure might be the key, and kids are much more likely to have had it more recently.

Still needs work.
Yep. The Sci. Am. piece indicates that it's an area of major interest by researchers. It's an interesting notion. The next few months should see increasing clarity.
__________________
Flying's easy. Walking on water, now that's cool.
marting is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 08:38 AM   #2578
Bob001
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: US of A
Posts: 10,435
More to worry about: If you don't die of covid, you might not recover either.
Quote:
The long-term illnesses that can follow viral infections can be devastating — and are devastatingly common. In 2015, the nation’s top medical advisory body, the Institute of Medicine, estimated that between 800,000 and 2.5 million U.S. residents live with the illness or illnesses awkwardly named myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS). An estimated three-quarters of these cases were triggered by viral or bacterial infections.

Now, as a new pandemic virus is burning through the world and causing many deaths, researchers are raising alarms that the novel coronavirus and the covid-19 disease it causes will also leave in its wake a potentially large population with post-viral problems that could be lifelong and, in some cases, disabling.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/healt...d8d_story.html
Bob001 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 08:49 AM   #2579
alfaniner
Penultimate Amazing
 
alfaniner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 22,313
I predict a spike in the big "protest" cities in 2-3 weeks. Many people were wearing masks, but many were not. I even saw several reporters doing interviews with their regular (not extended) mics and their masks pulled down.
__________________
Science is self-correcting.
Woo is self-contradicting.
alfaniner is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Science, Mathematics, Medicine, and Technology

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:42 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.