Continuation The One Covid-19 Science and Medicine Thread Part 2

[Trebuchet]

Originally Posted by Orphia Nay

Someone studying the virus said yesterday that the virus's favourite conditions are low humidity under 10 degrees Celsius.

Which is exactly the opposite of conditions in Houston, one of the USA's worst hotspots.

[marting]

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger

But they didn't "assign" them. They looked back at patients already given the meds.

Unless you read something I didn't.

They didn't give HQ to patients with certain heart issues.

Look at the mortality chart. After 7 days 5% of the HQ patients died while 17% of the standard treatment patients died. Difference is even stronger at 4 days.

Also, the mean age of the HQ patients was 63 v 68. But supposedly the overall risk score was matched. Hmm.

That's just weird. Something doesn't make sense.

[TellyKNeasuss]

Originally Posted by marting

A new observational study in conflict with most previous ones on Hydroxychloroquine showing significant (50%) mortality reduction.

Treatment with Hydroxychloroquine, Azithromycin, and Combination in Patients Hospitalized with COVID-19

https://www.ijidonline.com/article/S...534-8/fulltext

Does it seem a little curious that the mortality rate with hydroxychloroquine alone was lower than with hydroxychloroquine plus an antibiotic? Then I read the CNN report:

Quote:

The combination of hydroxychloroquine plus azithromycin was reserved for selected patients with severe COVID-19

Oh, the treatments weren't selected at random.

Further down in the CNN report, there's this gem:

Quote:

Finally, concomitant steroid use in patients receiving hydroxychloroquine was more than double the non-treated group.

Oh, there was more difference in the treatment than just hydroxychloroquine.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/07/02/healt...udy/index.html

[marting]

Originally Posted by TellyKNeasuss

Oh, there was more difference in the treatment than just hydroxychloroquine.
https://www.cnn.com/2020/07/02/healt...udy/index.html

Quite a few it seems, but they matched up the risk scores! Sure? I find the death curves v days in the hospital just stranger than hell. The immediate reductions in mortality were so astoundingly good they would have created a lot of noise way back when they were first doing this.

Still, might be something there but it strikes me as fishy so not holding my breath.

I'll wait til there's actually multiple controlled studies.

[Oystein]

Originally Posted by Trebuchet

Which is exactly the opposite of conditions in Houston, one of the USA's worst hotspots.

I wonder what role air conditioning might play...

[Skeptic Ginger]

Originally Posted by marting

They didn't give HQ to patients with certain heart issues.

Look at the mortality chart. After 7 days 5% of the HQ patients died while 17% of the standard treatment patients died. Difference is even stronger at 4 days.

Also, the mean age of the HQ patients was 63 v 68. But supposedly the overall risk score was matched. Hmm.

That's just weird. Something doesn't make sense.

It makes sense that they excluded patients given the meds that had heart disease. Remember, it wasn't a clear factor at first.

Patient might die: give hC.

Patients given HC are dying of heart disease. Stop giving HC.


IMO, this is old data rehashed or something.

[TellyKNeasuss]

Originally Posted by marting

A new observational study in conflict with most previous ones on Hydroxychloroquine showing significant (50%) mortality reduction.

Treatment with Hydroxychloroquine, Azithromycin, and Combination in Patients Hospitalized with COVID-19

https://www.ijidonline.com/article/S...534-8/fulltext

This journal also included a letter criticizing the article:

https://www.ijidonline.com/article/S...30-0/fulltext#

Among the interesting observations in the letter was that the fatality rate for the non-treated significantly exceeded the rate at which they were put into the ICU.

[Fast Eddie B]

James Fallows is a contributor to The Atlantic and a private pilot.

Here’s a recent article where he compares analyzing what went wrong with the coronavirus response with what happens when an aircraft accident is investigated.

It’s long, but I think it’s a worthwhile read.

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics...-wrong/613591/

Note: I’m going to cross-post this to a Trump thread as well.

[Ulf Nereng]

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger

But they didn't "assign" them. They looked back at patients already given the meds.

Unless you read something I didn't.

I think he means that patients who had been given HCQ were not selected randomly. It isn't double blind unless neither patient nor doctor know if it is placebo or remedy.

If the doctor knows that he is administering HCQ there can be bias.

[Ulf Nereng]

Originally Posted by TellyKNeasuss

Does it seem a little curious that the mortality rate with hydroxychloroquine alone was lower than with hydroxychloroquine plus an antibiotic? Then I read the CNN report:



Oh, the treatments weren't selected at random.

Further down in the CNN report, there's this gem:



Oh, there was more difference in the treatment than just hydroxychloroquine.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/07/02/healt...udy/index.html

Yes, this doesn't look good.

[Skeptic Ginger]

Originally Posted by Ulf Nereng

I think he means that patients who had been given HCQ were not selected randomly. It isn't double blind unless neither patient nor doctor know if it is placebo or remedy.

If the doctor knows that he is administering HCQ there can be bias.

That is not the point I was making. Blinded has nothing to do with it.

Randomly assigning patients to treatment groups is the issue. They were not randomly assigned.

The researchers attempt to make up for it by ruling out variables in other ways. That's not enough.

[marting]

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger

Randomly assigning patients to treatment groups is the issue. They were not randomly assigned.

Right. And no one, including me, said they were randomly assigned. However, they were selected into 4 groups that were given one, or the other, or both, or neither of two medications. Far from being randomly assigned, grouping was limited based on certain pre-existing conditions.

And as far as I see no part of the study was blinded.

[Myriad]

Aaaand... the USA reclaims the one-day record for new cases, 57,209 on July 3rd, from those upstart Brazilians who tallied 54,771 on June 19th.

To achieve this in a mere two weeks, the U.S. had to reverse its (admittedly meager) earlier declines, and recruit whole additional regions and demographic groups into the effort (since New York and the Northeast didn't want to play any more). An amazing accomplishment.

[Puppycow]

Well, this is nothing yet compared to the USA, but cases are on the rise again in Japan.

http://www.asahi.com/ajw/articles/13515393

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

I wonder how long until they declare another state of emergency.

[Minoosh]

Anecdotal only:

Here on the campus for the elderly where I live with my mom, virus was kept almost completely at bay for 2 months or so. Now, with ramped-up testing, there's a cluster of cases in the nursing home and assisted living parts of campus. Meanwhile "independent living" has just one case. The spread seems to be from people in close contact for an hour or more and it seems to have crept in from the staff (generally young folks).

Independent living - separate apartments - is not struck nearly so hard, leading me to believe that truly casual contact is not a big factor in the spread. Hours in close proximity seems to be required. On the other hand there has been little testing of people in Independent Living, so it may be down to that.

With relatively small numbers and points of restricted access, contact tracing is feasible here and I expect it will be pursued vigorously.

ETA: Air conditioning is continuous use. Not enough evidence to conclude that AC is the culprit but it is does seem to be much worse with shared air. Not quite sure how that works in the apartments.

[Lplus]

Originally Posted by Minoosh

Anecdotal only:

Here on the campus for the elderly where I live with my mom, virus was kept almost completely at bay for 2 months or so. Now, with ramped-up testing, there's a cluster of cases in the nursing home and assisted living parts of campus. Meanwhile "independent living" has just one case. The spread seems to be from people in close contact for an hour or more and it seems to have crept in from the staff (generally young folks).

It seems that locking down the nursing home/assisted living part from the start might have been the only way to avoid it, with the staff inside and all material/food etc fully cleaned/sanitised etc on delivery. Not sure many nursing homes are set up for that sort of lockdown, nor that the staff would be prepared to remain on site for however long it takes.

Originally Posted by Minoosh

Independent living - separate apartments - is not struck nearly so hard, leading me to believe that truly casual contact is not a big factor in the spread. Hours in close proximity seems to be required. On the other hand there has been little testing of people in Independent Living, so it may be down to that.

With relatively small numbers and points of restricted access, contact tracing is feasible here and I expect it will be pursued vigorously.

ETA: Air conditioning is continuous use. Not enough evidence to conclude that AC is the culprit but it is does seem to be much worse with shared air. Not quite sure how that works in the apartments.

It might depend on whether the A/C has any filtration in the system and whether it is fine enough and changed often enough.

[Oystein]

Originally Posted by Lplus

It seems that locking down the nursing home/assisted living part from the start might have been the only way to avoid it, with the staff inside and all material/food etc fully cleaned/sanitised etc on delivery. Not sure many nursing homes are set up for that sort of lockdown, nor that the staff would be prepared to remain on site for however long it takes....

I am a nurse in a senior citizen residence. Early on during Germany's epidemic, there was an option of last resort to quarantine some staff with infected residents in a separate wing. The most difficult practical problem would obviously be that there is no room, and hardly a free bed, to house the staff on site.

Luckily, we were spared the virus, and I have not heard of a house where this has been done.

But this is also proof that you CAN "avoid it" - it takes good governance and a compliant public, which we mostly had.

[Lplus]

Originally Posted by Oystein

I am a nurse in a senior citizen residence. Early on during Germany's epidemic, there was an option of last resort to quarantine some staff with infected residents in a separate wing. The most difficult practical problem would obviously be that there is no room, and hardly a free bed, to house the staff on site.

Luckily, we were spared the virus, and I have not heard of a house where this has been done.

But this is also proof that you CAN "avoid it" - it takes good governance and a compliant public, which we mostly had.

I was talking about locking down the entire nursing home before the virus got in, not quarantening infected patients, and I have heard of it happening in the UK, reasonably local to me.

If you avoided it whilst still changing shifts and having staff come in from outside you were lucky, but yes it can happen.

[The Atheist]

Originally Posted by Myriad

Aaaand... the USA reclaims the one-day record for new cases, 57,209 on July 3rd, from those upstart Brazilians who tallied 54,771 on June 19th.

To achieve this in a mere two weeks, the U.S. had to reverse its (admittedly meager) earlier declines, and recruit whole additional regions and demographic groups into the effort (since New York and the Northeast didn't want to play any more). An amazing accomplishment.

Pathetic achievement.

With just a little effort USA can pass 100k infections a day, easy. Late August would be my guess for when that happens.

I think the only challenger USA might have is India, and since they don't worry about things like testing or death certificates, you wouldn't know.

[The Atheist]

Meanwhile, in Australia, as it grapples with a surge that elsewhere in the world would be seen as a blip, with only a couple of hundred cases outside quarantine, we're able to see some valuable insights into the spread of the disease.

Since they only have one major cluster to deal with, Aussie scientists are giving superb, real-time evidence as to what happens.

The event seems to start with a single* super-spreader employed at a quarantine facility: https://www.nzherald.co.nz/world/new...ectid=12345350

Then, the trouble really starts when it gets to a housing complex of vulnerable people - poor, public housing, likely insanitary conditions, lots of indoor shared spaces, lifts, stairs, etc & people with a variety of health issues. Boom! Suddenly, you have 23 cases in just 12 households.

We need to find out what causes super-spreading asap.

Melbourne also matches what we know from China, Italy & USA - high-density housing is a huge problem. Shared indoor spaces are big trouble.



*If he wasn't single at the start, he will be now, as it looks like intimate physical contact may have been occurring.

[Oystein]

Originally Posted by Lplus

I was talking about locking down the entire nursing home before the virus got in, not quarantening infected patients, and I have heard of it happening in the UK, reasonably local to me.

If you avoided it whilst still changing shifts and having staff come in from outside you were lucky, but yes it can happen.

Same problem, we wouldn't have rooms for staff to live in.

[marting]

Sweden continues to be interesting.

Very high overall death count (.054%) but the daily death rates have been declining nearly continuously and are about 1/10th the peak in early Apr. This differs from the USA where the reduction from peak has only been about 1/4 and has reached a plateau with a very slight decline in deaths overall. Strong decline in areas hard hit early but above R=1 with plateaued deaths in some areas lightly hit like Florida.

The other notable thing about Sweden is that while new cases have increased much of this is from testing, not positive percentages. And new cases continue at a pretty constant rate. But the really big factor is that people 65 and over now account for a very small portion of new cases ( < 10%) . And this is what's causing the nice, and consistent, decline in daily deaths.

Could be their strategy to protect the elderly but let younger people get covid is now working though they have paid a significant price in the .054% of the population that's died, which includes about 1/3 from nursing homes.

[Samson]

Originally Posted by marting

Sweden continues to be interesting.

Very high overall death count (.054%) but the daily death rates have been declining nearly continuously and are about 1/10th the peak in early Apr. This differs from the USA where the reduction from peak has only been about 1/4 and has reached a plateau with a very slight decline in deaths overall. Strong decline in areas hard hit early but above R=1 with plateaued deaths in some areas lightly hit like Florida.

The other notable thing about Sweden is that while new cases have increased much of this is from testing, not positive percentages. And new cases continue at a pretty constant rate. But the really big factor is that people 65 and over now account for a very small portion of new cases ( < 10%) . And this is what's causing the nice, and consistent, decline in daily deaths.

Could be their strategy to protect the elderly but let younger people get covid is now working though they have paid a significant price in the .054% of the population that's died, which includes about 1/3 from nursing homes.

The freedoms for all ages to mix in a carefree manner in New Zealand afford a sense of national unity, and make Sweden look totally insane. Surprisingly it is fashionable to praise Sweden with right wing commentators.

[marting]

Originally Posted by Samson

The freedoms for all ages to mix in a carefree manner in New Zealand afford a sense of national unity, and make Sweden look totally insane. Surprisingly it is fashionable to praise Sweden with right wing commentators.

New Zealand, like for instance S. Korea, was able to control Covid-19. Sweden, the UK, France, Spain, Italy, etc. were not and, with the exception of Sweden, implemented controls that, while not as strong as China were stronger than the lighter ones that Sweden did and produced more societal harm on top of more deaths.

I will start off saying I'm surprised Sweden has dropped its daily death rate so consistently given its policies. I did not expect this.

But it isn't true that Sweden didn't implement controls. Sweden implemented partial school closures, limits on group size, social distancing. Not to the degree in most other places and still resulted in a lot of deaths pretty typical of other locations like France, Spain, Italy, UK, etc.

However, the really large reduction in new cases of older people apparent in the last month is beyond what's seen in other countries. There is obviously a conscious effort to reduce exposure of vulnerable people in Sweden we do not see to the same degree most elsewhere. If they keep this up it's entirely possible they could reach herd immunity with under .1% of the population dying while just letting it rip w/o protecting the vulnerable might kill .4% to .6% of Sweden.

.1% is still a lot of people.

[Myriad]

Originally Posted by The Atheist

Pathetic achievement.

With just a little effort USA can pass 100k infections a day, easy. Late August would be my guess for when that happens.

I don't think that's going to happen. Every time the virus has reached a point where it seemed nothing short of saturation was going to slow it down in some region, it's slowed down. I have no idea why. Not knowing why has been driving me crazy. But it's been a very consistent pattern.

Quote:

I think the only challenger USA might have is India, and since they don't worry about things like testing or death certificates, you wouldn't know.

I agree with you about India.

[Trebuchet]

Originally Posted by The Atheist

Pathetic achievement.



With just a little effort USA can pass 100k infections a day, easy. Late August would be my guess for when that happens.



I think the only challenger USA might have is India, and since they don't worry about things like testing or death certificates, you wouldn't know.

Late August? Late July seems more likely!

[Ulf Nereng]

Originally Posted by marting

Sweden continues to be interesting.

Very high overall death count (.054%) but the daily death rates have been declining nearly continuously and are about 1/10th the peak in early Apr. This differs from the USA where the reduction from peak has only been about 1/4 and has reached a plateau with a very slight decline in deaths overall. Strong decline in areas hard hit early but above R=1 with plateaued deaths in some areas lightly hit like Florida.

The other notable thing about Sweden is that while new cases have increased much of this is from testing, not positive percentages. And new cases continue at a pretty constant rate. But the really big factor is that people 65 and over now account for a very small portion of new cases ( < 10%) . And this is what's causing the nice, and consistent, decline in daily deaths.

Could be their strategy to protect the elderly but let younger people get covid is now working though they have paid a significant price in the .054% of the population that's died, which includes about 1/3 from nursing homes.

It would be good to hear from our Swedish members what, if anything new, has been done recently to get the deaths down. I assume that mistakes that were made early on wrt to care homes are not being repeated, at least. And perhaps the populace have become more conscious of the dangers so that they socially distance better or somesuch?

[marting]

Originally Posted by Ulf Nereng

It would be good to hear from our Swedish members what, if anything new, has been done recently to get the deaths down. I assume that mistakes that were made early on wrt to care homes are not being repeated, at least. And perhaps the populace have become more conscious of the dangers so that they socially distance better or somesuch?

Agreed. I don't claim to understand Sweden, but the USA's populace is highly fragmented. Even in California, there are some areas that take things seriously and other areas that are "What? me worry? Covid-19 is fake" And friends with connections tell me anecdotally that people in the regions spiking cases tend to think Covid-19 is either overblown or outright fake news. My hope is that older people are taking it more seriously. There is some evidence of this.

Quite amazing and our leadership as done squat to create consensus. Quite the opposite. Very frustrating from the POV of someone that just wishes to see the facts and skip the politics.

[The Atheist]

Here's another piece on the long-term effects of Covid: https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/hea...e-experts-warn

Quote:

Early on in the crisis, researchers at King's College London developed a Covid-19 app for people to record their symptoms daily. They report one in 10 people has symptoms lasting for eight to 10 weeks and say symptoms can fade, only to come bouncing back.

10% of patients is a hell of a lot, although it will only symptomatic cases, so 1-2% of the overall number. That's still a lot of people and another very good reason for reducing the number of people infected.

[Myriad]

Originally Posted by The Atheist

Here's another piece on the long-term effects of Covid: https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/hea...e-experts-warn

That matches my own experience of symptoms clearing and then coming back, any tissue or organ that gets stressed in any way seeming to become a target for the virus, and "wow, I'm finally back to normal... wait, I lifted something heavy and now I'm not so sure."

Unfortunately, I can't apply my own experience because I tested negative. Either it was a false negative, or I had something else that happens to have all the same symptoms, or it was all psychosomatic from spending too much time reading about the disease. None of those seem particularly likely, but one of them has to be true.

[Ulf Nereng]

Originally Posted by The Atheist

Here's another piece on the long-term effects of Covid: https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/hea...e-experts-warn



10% of patients is a hell of a lot, although it will only symptomatic cases, so 1-2% of the overall number. That's still a lot of people and another very good reason for reducing the number of people infected.

It's a strong argument against the "herd immunity by infection" idea.

[dann]

Originally Posted by Samson

The freedoms for all ages to mix in a carefree manner in New Zealand afford a sense of national unity, and make Sweden look totally insane. Surprisingly it is fashionable to praise Sweden with right wing commentators.

No reason to be surprised, really. Sweden has been doing all along what right-wingers prefer: Let the virus run its course and kill the people whose immune systems aren't up to the task of saving their lives.
Right-wing commentators in Denmark also advocate the Swedish strategy.
By the way, Sweden's right-wing party of anti-immigrants, Sverigedemokraterna, criticize the ruling Social Democrats and actually advocate wearing masks: Munskydd räddar liv = Masks save lives.
However, I don't think that wearing masks or declining to do so has turned into a political statement in Sweden yet.

[dann]

Originally Posted by marting

New Zealand, like for instance S. Korea, was able to control Covid-19. Sweden, the UK, France, Spain, Italy, etc. were not and, with the exception of Sweden, implemented controls that, while not as strong as China were stronger than the lighter ones that Sweden did and produced more societal harm on top of more deaths.

I will start off saying I'm surprised Sweden has dropped its daily death rate so consistently given its policies. I did not expect this.

Compare Sweden's total corona deaths and their deaths per million to the other Nordic countries - and it's still ongoing. Iceland hasn't had any for months. Denmark, Norway and Finland now have less than one Covid-19 death a day, and they have just a handful of serious/critical cases.

Quote:

But it isn't true that Sweden didn't implement controls. Sweden implemented partial school closures, limits on group size, social distancing. Not to the degree in most other places and still resulted in a lot of deaths pretty typical of other locations like France, Spain, Italy, UK, etc.

Sweden overtook the death toll per million of France a couple of weeks ago and is gaining on Italy while Sweden's senior citizens are cowering in their homes.

Quote:

However, the really large reduction in new cases of older people apparent in the last month is beyond what's seen in other countries. There is obviously a conscious effort to reduce exposure of vulnerable people in Sweden we do not see to the same degree most elsewhere.

Old people in Sweden have been left to their own devices, but some old people have more devices than others. You reduce the exposure of vulnerable people by reducing it in the general population.

Quote:

If they keep this up it's entirely possible they could reach herd immunity with under .1% of the population dying while just letting it rip w/o protecting the vulnerable might kill .4% to .6% of Sweden.

There is no such thing as herd immunity reached in this way. And there are many other vulnerable segments of the population besides old people. Some are more vulnerable to the virus if the get it. Others are more likely to get exposed to it than others. Well-to-do senior citizens in Sweden are much better protected from getting it in the first place than poor people and/or immigrants, for instance:
Rich and poor
Poverty and bad health
And it's a pattern we see all over the world.

Quote:

.1% is still a lot of people.

It is. And it doesn't include the people who are maimed for life.
A month ago or so, some Swedes came up with the slogan that what is needed isn't herd immunity, it's herd humanity.
It's sorely lacking in Sweden.

[dann]

Originally Posted by Ulf Nereng

It would be good to hear from our Swedish members what, if anything new, has been done recently to get the deaths down. I assume that mistakes that were made early on wrt to care homes are not being repeated, at least. And perhaps the populace have become more conscious of the dangers so that they socially distance better or somesuch?

At this point, Sweden has been attempting to do testing, contact tracing and self-isolation/quarantine for a couple of weeks, but some regions still aren't up to it. However, it should already be contributing to bringing down the number of new cases as well as hospitalizations and deaths.
I have no doubt that advocates of the Swedish strategy will contribute the decreasing numbers to the successful implementation of their insane ideas of herd immunity.

[Skeptic Ginger]

Originally Posted by Myriad

That matches my own experience of symptoms clearing and then coming back, any tissue or organ that gets stressed in any way seeming to become a target for the virus, and "wow, I'm finally back to normal... wait, I lifted something heavy and now I'm not so sure."

Unfortunately, I can't apply my own experience because I tested negative. Either it was a false negative, or I had something else that happens to have all the same symptoms, or it was all psychosomatic from spending too much time reading about the disease. None of those seem particularly likely, but one of them has to be true.

If I were seeing you as a nurse practitioner, test results are only one element I would consider. You give a good test a lot of weight, but even then it wouldn't rule out COVID 19 completely. If the symptoms are that distinct, and COVID 19 is in the area and I ruled out things like Rocky Mountain Spotted Fever (did you get any tick bites?) and brucellosis (drink any raw milk?)... I would diagnose it as COVID 19.

[dann]

Originally Posted by Myriad

Originally Posted by The Atheist

With just a little effort USA can pass 100k infections a day, easy. Late August would be my guess for when that happens.

I don't think that's going to happen. Every time the virus has reached a point where it seemed nothing short of saturation was going to slow it down in some region, it's slowed down. I have no idea why. Not knowing why has been driving me crazy. But it's been a very consistent pattern.

There is no reason to assume that it didn't already happen. Consider that we aren't talking about the actual number of new infections. We are talking about the number of registered new infections, i.e. people who have been tested positive. There is no reason to assume that the number of actual new infections isn't already considerably higher than 100,000.
If they ramp up testing, they'll notice that they are already there. Trump knows that, which is why he would prefer that they don't.

[Myriad]

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger

If I were seeing you as a nurse practitioner, test results are only one element I would consider. You give a good test a lot of weight, but even then it wouldn't rule out COVID 19 completely. If the symptoms are that distinct, and COVID 19 is in the area and I ruled out things like Rocky Mountain Spotted Fever (did you get any tick bites?) and brucellosis (drink any raw milk?)... I would diagnose it as COVID 19.

No raw milk, though brucellosis is a pretty good match for the symptoms otherwise. I'm not aware of any tick bites, but there are plenty of ticks around here so Lyme and RMSF are hypothetical possibilities. No rashes, though, and the cough doesn't fit. (I'll probably get tested for all the tick-bornes when I tell my PCP the history, in about a week.)

I'm in MA, which has a low new case rate right now, but five or six weeks ago they were still tapering off in my area. My wife had potential exposure through her retail job, and if she had an asymptomatic case (or nearly asymptomatic; she had some minor coughing, malaise, and an unexpected arthritis flare-up at around that time, but no fever) I'd be practically guaranteed to catch it from her.

That's all a rather ad hoc scenario, though. Overall, it's plausible but improbable. I doubt they'll even do an antibody test because at this point if they don't find something else, it wouldn't really make any difference. Doctors are understandably rather blasé about symptoms you had weeks ago.

[The Atheist]

Originally Posted by Myriad

That matches my own experience of symptoms clearing and then coming back, any tissue or organ that gets stressed in any way seeming to become a target for the virus, and "wow, I'm finally back to normal... wait, I lifted something heavy and now I'm not so sure."

Unfortunately, I can't apply my own experience because I tested negative. Either it was a false negative, or I had something else that happens to have all the same symptoms, or it was all psychosomatic from spending too much time reading about the disease. None of those seem particularly likely, but one of them has to be true.

I'd certainly put you in the "positive through symptoms" pile. In the middle of a pandemic, it's a hell of a lot more likely than any other infection.

Originally Posted by Ulf Nereng

It's a strong argument against the "herd immunity by infection" idea.

Not to mention we have no evidence of how long that alleged herd immunity might last.

[Myriad]

Originally Posted by dann

There is no reason to assume that it didn't already happen. Consider that we aren't talking about the actual number of new infections. We are talking about the number of registered new infections, i.e. people who have been tested positive. There is no reason to assume that the number of actual new infections isn't already considerably higher than 100,000.
If they ramp up testing, they'll notice that they are already there. Trump knows that, which is why he would prefer that they don't.

Well, sure. But at this point "new confirmed cases" under more or less the current testing system has become a de facto comparative measure. As crude as it is, it's what we're using to compare one country with another and one week with another (along with hospitalization, ICU, intubation, and death rates). I don't think that measure is going to double in the U.S. from where it is today.

Sure if you change the measure (e.g. to extrapolated total new cases, or to new confirmed cases under a regimen of much wider testing and test eligibility) the numbers will change.

[marting]

Originally Posted by dann

There is no reason to assume that it didn't already happen. Consider that we aren't talking about the actual number of new infections. We are talking about the number of registered new infections, i.e. people who have been tested positive. There is no reason to assume that the number of actual new infections isn't already considerably higher than 100,000.
If they ramp up testing, they'll notice that they are already there. Trump knows that, which is why he would prefer that they don't.

If the USA didn't have any Covid-19 testing at all there would be no Covid-19 deaths. There would just be excess deaths. Estimates of excess deaths from the Covid-19 pandemic vary from 15% to 50% from one state to another. What's for Trump not to like?

And of course there would have been no shutdown, social distancing, etc. so the actual deaths would have been much higher. But hey, at least no certified Covid-19 deaths.