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 22nd April 2020, 10:51 AM   #361
Samson
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 8,825
Originally Posted by Doghouse Reilly View Post
Please cite ypur source for NY hospitals "collapsing". As far as I know, nothing of the sort is happening. I don't believe the current death rate is due to the measures in place, because Sweden has a lower death rate than the UK, with minimal measures implemented.

As for the bet, I give myself a 90% chance of winning.
Sweden's scientific experiment driven by a coterie all educated at the same English institution is knockin' on heavens door. Their Science and Medicine says deny the elderly intensive care and let them die.
If people are betting I will place mine. When this is half over Sweden's death rate will beat UK hands down.
Currently 192 vs 267 per million.
Samson 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 22nd April 2020, 10:54 AM   #362
Doghouse Reilly
Adrift on an uncharted sea
 
Doghouse Reilly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 3,325
Originally Posted by Samson View Post
Sweden's scientific experiment driven by a coterie all educated at the same English institution is knockin' on heavens door. Their Science and Medicine says deny the elderly intensive care and let them die.
If people are betting I will place mine. When this is half over Sweden's death rate will beat UK hands down.
Currently 192 vs 267 per million.
I think you're very mistaken. Even if Sweden's death rate ends up equalling the UK's, it will demonstrate that lockdowns did little to nothing.
Doghouse Reilly 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 22nd April 2020, 10:55 AM   #363
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 81,027
Originally Posted by Doghouse Reilly View Post
That is potentially true, but still means that this is far, far less than it was made out to be. It means we'd max out at 10k deaths in California, roughly, assuming 50% infection rate.
Right because flu always overwhelms EDs and ICUs every year. You'd think by now we'd have had the capacity to deal with such surges.

And Italy ran out of coffins. Couldn't make them fast enough, apparently.

Bodies piling up in refrigerated semi trailers because the funeral homes couldn't take them fast enough, that's a common scene every year.
__________________
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 22nd April 2020, 10:57 AM   #364
Dr.Sid
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Olomouc, Czech Republic
Posts: 2,733
Originally Posted by Doghouse Reilly View Post
I think you're very mistaken. Even if Sweden's death rate ends up equalling the UK's, it will demonstrate that lockdowns did little to nothing.
It doesn't. Actually the situation in Sweden and UK is rather similar. In UK there is lockdown but some people ignore it. In Sweden there is no lockdown but most people are scared and reasonable and stay at home anyway. And in many businesses, being open with few customers is worse then being closed. Really hard to say where it will swing both disease wise and economy wise.
Dr.Sid 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 22nd April 2020, 10:59 AM   #365
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 81,027
Originally Posted by Dr.Sid View Post
So, the hospitals in New York collapsing is just normal every flu season ? Damn US, do something.
Your arguments have several flaws. First you take current death as corresponding to current people infected. They are not. Lot of people now infected will die in next month, and you are not included them. Also just as many people are indeed not registered as 'infected', lot of dead will also not register. And IMHO it does not really matter if they died directly from the virus or just could get the care needed because of health care overload. We will only know how many deaths can we attribute to the virus when it's all over and when we count all deaths above average. 0.1-0.2 for flu is actually value estimated based on anomaly in death rate.
And there is yet another factor .. the current death rate is with all measures in place, unlike flu.

Btw. how do you evaluate your chance for winning the bet now ?
Good points especially given the first death was actually in California months ago and has only now been discovered.
__________________
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 22nd April 2020, 11:00 AM   #366
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 81,027
Originally Posted by TellyKNeasuss View Post
1) I can't tell where your conclusion that as many people have been infected as would have been without mitigation steps comes from.
2) A 0.15% fatality rate combined with a 60% infection rate for herd immunity would result in about 300,000 deaths in the US (which would make for a REALLY bad flu year). That's assuming that an increase in infections would not have resulted in a higher fatality rate due to a strain on medical resources.
3) Given that California has the 6th youngest population of any state in the US, it would be expected to have a lower fatality rate than the US as a whole. And the median age of people in Los Angeles is even less than the median age of California. For New York to have this fatality rate would require 2/3 of the population to have already been infected.
4) Given that California has the 4th lowest per capita number of tests in the US, the undercount in California is likely substantially greater than the US as a whole.
Many more good points.
__________________
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 22nd April 2020, 11:02 AM   #367
Doghouse Reilly
Adrift on an uncharted sea
 
Doghouse Reilly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 3,325
Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
Right because flu always overwhelms EDs and ICUs every year. You'd think by now we'd have had the capacity to deal with such surges.

And Italy ran out of coffins. Couldn't make them fast enough, apparently.

Bodies piling up in refrigerated semi trailers because the funeral homes couldn't take them fast enough, that's a common scene every year.
Correct, most years there are indeed hot spots where ICUs and EDs are overwhelmed. In the vast majority of the world that's not happening. So, it's like every year.

The reasons for bodies piling up has everything to do with the way they are being handled because of fear of the disease and nothing to do with the numbers. Please cite your source for the coffins in Italy. Again, however, even if true, it is not unusual for certain locations to experience things like that. I've already posted numerous stories from past years to back that up.

Last edited by Doghouse Reilly; 22nd April 2020 at 11:14 AM.
Doghouse Reilly 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 22nd April 2020, 11:12 AM   #368
Doghouse Reilly
Adrift on an uncharted sea
 
Doghouse Reilly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 3,325
I have a genuine question. I'm not saying he's wrong, but I don't understand the logic behind this:

Quote:
"There's a possibility that the assault of the virus on our nation next winter will actually be even more difficult than the one we just went through," CDC Director Robert Redfield said in an interview with*The Washington Post.
Why would a second wave be worse, when a very significant portion of the population would have already contracted the virus? What is the rationale behind that belief? Why wouldn't a second wave be weaker?
Doghouse Reilly 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 22nd April 2020, 11:17 AM   #369
JeanTate
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 3,760
Originally Posted by casebro View Post
Originally Posted by DoghouseReilly
That is potentially true, but still means that this is far, far less than it was made out to be. It means we'd max out at 10k deaths in California, roughly, assuming 50% infection rate.
Did you mean10k deaths in L A county? I get a curretn 5% have had covid with 600 deaths. a 50% infection rate would be 10x, 10x the death rate = 6,000 deaths. x6 to get to California's 36M, so 36K Covid deaths in California. Which has somewhere around 280,000 annually now. So probaly worse than the flu, but enough for respiratory illness to bump cancer out of 3rd place.
I ran some numbers: from DR's version of the CA data, applied to a New York city borough, something like 150% of the population has been exposed to SARS-COV-2. Amazing.

Maybe some mistake in number crunching?
JeanTate 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 22nd April 2020, 11:19 AM   #370
marting
Graduate Poster
 
marting's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 1,540
Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
Good points especially given the first death was actually in California months ago and has only now been discovered.
The first two deaths were in Calif. as recently discovered by autopsy. Also interesting is that these two were infected by community spread so it was in CA even earlier. Surprising that CA-NY don't have reversed numbers.

Something's different. Weather reduced R somewhat in CA v NY? Wouldn't take a big change.
__________________
Flying's easy. Walking on water, now that's cool.
marting 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 22nd April 2020, 11:26 AM   #371
Tomboy
Thinker
 
Tomboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 171
Originally Posted by Doghouse Reilly View Post
I have a genuine question. I'm not saying he's wrong, but I don't understand the logic behind this:

Why would a second wave be worse, when a very significant portion of the population would have already contracted the virus? What is the rationale behind that belief? Why wouldn't a second wave be weaker?
Per these two articles referencing the interview in question, the second wave will be worse because it will be directly overlapping with flu season (in the northern hemisphere) rather than starting on the tail end of the flu season when many people were already vaccinated for flu or had already had and recovered from it.

CDC Director Robert Redfield:
Quote:
“We’re going to have the flu epidemic and the coronavirus epidemic at the same time,” he said.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/healt...e-cdcdirector/

Quote:
Redfield said two coinciding respiratory outbreaks would strain the nation’s health care system even further than the current pandemic, which has been marked by shortages of ventilators, test kits and personal protective equipment.
https://thehill.com/policy/healthcar...more-difficult

Since we don't know yet for sure that contracting Covid-19 provides any sort of lasting immunity, we can't assume that those who have had it won't get it again. To be clear, that last sentence is me (possibly incorrectly) reading between the lines and not anything that was stated outright in either article I skimmed.
Tomboy 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 22nd April 2020, 11:27 AM   #372
TellyKNeasuss
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 2,370
Originally Posted by Doghouse Reilly View Post
Why would a second wave be worse, when a very significant portion of the population would have already contracted the virus? What is the rationale behind that belief? Why wouldn't a second wave be weaker?
His rationale is that the second wave might strike at the same time as the flu season.

I don't consider 5 percent to be a "very significant" portion of the population.
__________________
"Facts are stupid things."
Ronald Reagan


TellyKNeasuss 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 22nd April 2020, 11:33 AM   #373
Doghouse Reilly
Adrift on an uncharted sea
 
Doghouse Reilly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 3,325
Originally Posted by JeanTate View Post
I ran some numbers: from DR's version of the CA data, applied to a New York city borough, something like 150% of the population has been exposed to SARS-COV-2. Amazing.

Maybe some mistake in number crunching?
Yes, you definitely made a mistake in your numbers.
Doghouse Reilly 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 22nd April 2020, 11:34 AM   #374
JeanTate
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 3,760
Originally Posted by Doghouse Reilly View Post
I have a genuine question. I'm not saying he's wrong, but I don't understand the logic behind this:



Why would a second wave be worse, when a very significant portion of the population would have already contracted the virus? What is the rationale behind that belief? Why wouldn't a second wave be weaker?
There is a very great deal not yet understood about SARS-COV-2, and covid-19.

I have not (yet) read the WaPo article you are quoting from, but here are some of the things we do not yet know:
- if you have been infected, what is the range of immunity you have (from being re-infected)? Perhaps oddly, some reports suggest that infection may confer only partial immunity
- how long does immunity last? This is a huge question. Already there are reports which suggest it may last mere months, at least in some people
- how is SARS-COV-2 evolving? Several strains already exist, and so far the evolution does not seem to suggest a more virulent strain will arise any time soon. OTOH, some reports suggest that two widely dispersed strains have quite different characteristics, in terms of %-age of asymptomatic cases

Other things:
- the mitigation measures needed to get R below 1 in a second wave may be far more difficult to implement, in the US, given that a significant %-age of the population will have had covid-19
- testing will continue to be woefully inadequate (this includes the widespread use of flawed tests)
- next winter may be particularly bad, flu-wise; a second wave of covid-19 starting late fall, combined with a bad flu season, would make the numbers of covid-19 burials on Hart Island so far look like a mere rounding error.
JeanTate 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 22nd April 2020, 11:35 AM   #375
Doghouse Reilly
Adrift on an uncharted sea
 
Doghouse Reilly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 3,325
Originally Posted by TellyKNeasuss View Post
His rationale is that the second wave might strike at the same time as the flu season.

I don't consider 5 percent to be a "very significant" portion of the population.
First of all, that 5% was already, in the past, and will be far, far higher by then. Second of all, 5% is very significant when it comes to epidemiology.
Doghouse Reilly 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 22nd April 2020, 11:39 AM   #376
Doghouse Reilly
Adrift on an uncharted sea
 
Doghouse Reilly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 3,325
Originally Posted by JeanTate View Post
- the mitigation measures needed to get R below 1 in a second wave may be far more difficult to implement, in the US, given that a significant %-age of the population will have had covid-19
Thank you for the thorough response, I was wondering if you could elaborate on this part? I don't quite understand how this would make mitigation measures more difficult to implement.
Doghouse Reilly 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 22nd April 2020, 11:40 AM   #377
TellyKNeasuss
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 2,370
Originally Posted by JeanTate View Post
I ran some numbers: from DR's version of the CA data, applied to a New York city borough, something like 150% of the population has been exposed to SARS-COV-2. Amazing.

Maybe some mistake in number crunching?
The Bronx, Staten Island, and Queens all have fatality rates greater than 0.15%.
__________________
"Facts are stupid things."
Ronald Reagan


TellyKNeasuss 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 22nd April 2020, 11:46 AM   #378
Doghouse Reilly
Adrift on an uncharted sea
 
Doghouse Reilly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 3,325
Originally Posted by TellyKNeasuss View Post
The Bronx, Staten Island, and Queens all have fatality rates greater than 0.15%.
Correct, fatality rates vary vastly depending on locale, as discussed in the location discrepancies thread. Looks very likely that vitamin D plays a very significant role, which obviously is far less of an issue in California. Also, obesity, etc.
Doghouse Reilly 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 22nd April 2020, 11:53 AM   #379
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 89,131
Originally Posted by sir drinks-a-lot View Post
I'm not DR, but I think it's at least a good question to ask. How long should the lockdown go, and to what extent?
But that's not the question he asked. He asked if it was worth it based on data without explaining how one leads to the other.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... 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 22nd April 2020, 11:54 AM   #380
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 89,131
Originally Posted by sir drinks-a-lot View Post
There is a certain type of moral posturing that people like to engage in where they accuse those wanting a re-opening of aspects of the economy as 'valuing money more than lives' or some such...but it's really just that - moral posturing.
Sorry to split your post in two but I didn't want my previous response to be lost in my response to this: Of course it's nonsense. We value money, or convenience, more than lives all the time. It's silly to pretend that lives are always of the highest value. They're not, and no one would ever think they are.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... 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 22nd April 2020, 11:58 AM   #381
JeanTate
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 3,760
Thanks.

Originally Posted by Doghouse Reilly View Post
Originally Posted by JeanTate
I ran some numbers: from DR's version of the CA data, applied to a New York city borough, something like 150% of the population has been exposed to SARS-COV-2. Amazing.

Maybe some mistake in number crunching?
Yes, you definitely made a mistake in your numbers.
You're right.

It isn't 150%, it's ~133%

And it's not one of the five NYC boroughs, it's Westchester county.

In fact, all but one of the NY downstate counties have, per your methodology, greater than, or close to, 100% infection rates.

BTW, did you miss the discussion, upthread, on the limitations on the LA county study?
JeanTate 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 22nd April 2020, 12:02 PM   #382
JeanTate
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 3,760
Originally Posted by Doghouse Reilly View Post
Thank you for the thorough response, I was wondering if you could elaborate on this part? I don't quite understand how this would make mitigation measures more difficult to implement.
"I don't need to keep 2m away from you, I already had covid-19!"

"I'm just visiting my brother, who broke his leg in a car accident. I can't infect anyone in the hospital he's in because I already had covid-19."

Etc.
JeanTate 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 22nd April 2020, 12:26 PM   #383
The Atheist
The Grammar Tyrant
 
The Atheist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 25,495
Originally Posted by zooterkin View Post
French to test nicotine patches on Covid-19 sufferers since smokers seem to be resistant to the virus. https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...ng-coronavirus
That's going to please the cigarette companies and displease doctors.

It's the second time the point's been noted.

Very peculiar and the exact opposite of what you'd expect.

I think I might have to start a conspiracy theory about Covid being started by a cigarette manufacturer.

Stay healthy, have a cigar!
__________________
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 22nd April 2020, 12:29 PM   #384
crescent
Illuminator
 
crescent's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Colorado
Posts: 3,510
Originally Posted by Doghouse Reilly View Post
I have a genuine question. I'm not saying he's wrong, but I don't understand the logic behind this:



Why would a second wave be worse, when a very significant portion of the population would have already contracted the virus? What is the rationale behind that belief? Why wouldn't a second wave be weaker?
Is it worth pointing out that the second wave of the 1918 flu epidemic was much, much worse than the preceding wave?

1918 Pandemic Influenza: Three Waves

Different theories as to why. Some think it was a different strain of virus than the first wave - people who had contacted the first strain might have been immune, but the second strain was deadlier to those remaining susceptible. Others think that social distancing mitigated the civilian aspects of the first wave, but then the end of social distancing allowed infected people to mingle with the large crowds - there were more infected people than when social distancing had first started, and big crowds celebrating the end of the war.

People in my neighborhood are making tentative plans to throw a block party when the stay at home order expires. I don't think I'll be attending.

I try to be one of those who would rather learn from history....


ETA: another article about second-wave disease spread in 1918:

Photos show how San Francisco emerged from a lockdown too soon during the 1918 Spanish flu pandemic, leading to an even deadlier second wave that rampaged through the city
They even had an "anti-mask league" to oppose the mandatory use of masks during the second wave.

Last edited by crescent; 22nd April 2020 at 12:33 PM.
crescent 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 22nd April 2020, 12:51 PM   #385
portlandatheist
Illuminator
 
portlandatheist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 3,304
Originally Posted by Dr.Sid View Post
It doesn't. Actually the situation in Sweden and UK is rather similar. In UK there is lockdown but some people ignore it. In Sweden there is no lockdown but most people are scared and reasonable and stay at home anyway. And in many businesses, being open with few customers is worse then being closed. Really hard to say where it will swing both disease wise and economy wise.
This thought was on my mind too and is the subject of this article:
https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2020...e-economy.html
If the higher-ups reopen the economy, many of us will still continue just as we are now and refrain from restaurants, movie theaters, etc.
Quote:
Even in Seoul, one of the major world cities most often discussed as a shining example of how to squash the epidemic without totally shutting down the economy, business is light. An upbeat Bloomberg report about the city’s popular cafes and reopened Apple Store also notes that many shops have closed up, with for-rent signs in the windows, and that stores that have reopened often report that sales are way down from precrisis levels.
portlandatheist 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 22nd April 2020, 01:10 PM   #386
Planigale
Illuminator
 
Planigale's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 4,099
Originally Posted by crescent View Post
Is it worth pointing out that the second wave of the 1918 flu epidemic was much, much worse than the preceding wave?

1918 Pandemic Influenza: Three Waves

Different theories as to why. Some think it was a different strain of virus than the first wave - people who had contacted the first strain might have been immune, but the second strain was deadlier to those remaining susceptible. Others think that social distancing mitigated the civilian aspects of the first wave, but then the end of social distancing allowed infected people to mingle with the large crowds - there were more infected people than when social distancing had first started, and big crowds celebrating the end of the war.

People in my neighborhood are making tentative plans to throw a block party when the stay at home order expires. I don't think I'll be attending.

I try to be one of those who would rather learn from history....


ETA: another article about second-wave disease spread in 1918:

Photos show how San Francisco emerged from a lockdown too soon during the 1918 Spanish flu pandemic, leading to an even deadlier second wave that rampaged through the city
They even had an "anti-mask league" to oppose the mandatory use of masks during the second wave.
Yes, as you correctly point out the second wave of the 1918 flu was bigger than the first, and modelling of this pandemic also shows that under certain situations a larger second wave will occur in Autumn / Fall, and with flu co-occuring this will be difficult to manage. Other respiratory viruses causing coughs and cold may increase transmission of Sars-CoV-2.
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 22nd April 2020, 01:22 PM   #387
Bob001
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: US of A
Posts: 10,430
Question: Has anyone here actually had a covid test? It's been described as feeling like the swab is being jammed into your brain. How bad is it really? And how long did it take to get results (I'm not asking what they were)?
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 22nd April 2020, 01:34 PM   #388
Doghouse Reilly
Adrift on an uncharted sea
 
Doghouse Reilly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 3,325
Originally Posted by Dr.Sid View Post
It doesn't. Actually the situation in Sweden and UK is rather similar. In UK there is lockdown but some people ignore it. In Sweden there is no lockdown but most people are scared and reasonable and stay at home anyway. And in many businesses, being open with few customers is worse then being closed. Really hard to say where it will swing both disease wise and economy wise.
No, this is not true and is a gross mischaracterization. Children and young people are being actively encouraged to continue their athletics, schools are open, restaurants are open, parks are open. Meanwhile, here in progressive California, my son isn't even permitted to have his private ballet lessons. In the UK, the police won't even allow people to sunbathe in the park, which is particularly absurd considering the compelling links between vitamin D and Covid-19. No comparison whatsoever.

Last edited by Doghouse Reilly; 22nd April 2020 at 01:48 PM.
Doghouse Reilly 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 22nd April 2020, 01:36 PM   #389
Doghouse Reilly
Adrift on an uncharted sea
 
Doghouse Reilly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 3,325
Originally Posted by Bob001 View Post
Question: Has anyone here actually had a covid test? It's been described as feeling like the swab is being jammed into your brain. How bad is it really? And how long did it take to get results (I'm not asking what they were)?
As mentioned in a previous thread, I had Covid-19, confirmed by a test. That was not my experience at all, but I'm sure it depends on the test and how it's administered. It took several days for the results.
Doghouse Reilly 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 22nd April 2020, 01:48 PM   #390
Dr.Sid
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Olomouc, Czech Republic
Posts: 2,733
Originally Posted by Bob001 View Post
Question: Has anyone here actually had a covid test? It's been described as feeling like the swab is being jammed into your brain. How bad is it really? And how long did it take to get results (I'm not asking what they were)?
Here they are starting large scale antibody tests, followed by PCR test if you are positive. Some of those will be available for anyone interested, and I'm thinking about going, I had some minor cough few weeks back, but I don't hold my hopes too high.
The antibody test is from blood drop and is said to give results in 20 minutes (you are supposed to wait for it). The swab is done for PCR, and I doubt it's too unpleasant. People are known to sneeze after that though.
Dr.Sid 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 22nd April 2020, 01:56 PM   #391
Trebuchet
Penultimate Amazing
 
Trebuchet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Port Townsend, Washington
Posts: 27,075
Originally Posted by Bob001 View Post
Question: Has anyone here actually had a covid test? It's been described as feeling like the swab is being jammed into your brain. How bad is it really? And how long did it take to get results (I'm not asking what they were)?
I had the same type of test last year when I might have had the flu. My usual description was that they insert a swab about 11 feet into your nostril. It's uncomfortable, but momentary. Results on that one took a day or so.
Turned out it wasn't the flu, it was RSV. Never been so sick.
__________________
Cum catapultae proscribeantur tum soli proscripti catapultas habeant.
Trebuchet 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 22nd April 2020, 02:05 PM   #392
Planigale
Illuminator
 
Planigale's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 4,099
Originally Posted by Bob001 View Post
Question: Has anyone here actually had a covid test? It's been described as feeling like the swab is being jammed into your brain. How bad is it really? And how long did it take to get results (I'm not asking what they were)?
Not had it, but done it. To reassure you we do try to avoid swabbing the brain. If the nasal swab does go into your brain (not completely impossible) then the swabbing technique was poor. However we do try and push it as far back in your nose as it will easily go, the important thing is to go backwards, horizontally rather than up into the brain. Then you twiddle it. People do find this rather unpleasant. Throat swabbing is more than sticking it at the back of the throat and making you gag, ideally you rub it over the tonsils to really make you gag.

Probably some false negatives in swabs are due to poor technique. It it is of any consolation the proximity required to swab someone properly with a transmissible potentially deadly disease is not that pleasant for the person doing it, especially when you are staring into the back of their throat when they decide to cough.

The actual testing process is about 4 hours. Add onto that transport to the lab and booking in. Processing the result and sending it out. Then it depends how many runs a day the lab does. Running a 24 hour service they should be outputting six hourly, but they may only report twice a day after a morning and after an afternoon run.
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 22nd April 2020, 02:12 PM   #393
Planigale
Illuminator
 
Planigale's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 4,099
Originally Posted by Dr.Sid View Post
Here they are starting large scale antibody tests, followed by PCR test if you are positive. Some of those will be available for anyone interested, and I'm thinking about going, I had some minor cough few weeks back, but I don't hold my hopes too high.
The antibody test is from blood drop and is said to give results in 20 minutes (you are supposed to wait for it). The swab is done for PCR, and I doubt it's too unpleasant. People are known to sneeze after that though.
That is an odd way round to do it. PCR is positive before the antibody, and indicates infectiousness. The antibody test becomes positive later and depending on the test may mean you are no longer infectious. You can certainly be infectious, PCR positive and antibody negative.

The only rationale for doing antibody test first would be the assumption (currently unproven) that people with antibodies cannot acquire the infection for a second time and cannot be infectious. In any case the people in that scenario you would want to do the PCR on would be antibody negative cases.

Pretty sure you have either got the testing process wrong, or the testing process is wrong.
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 22nd April 2020, 02:23 PM   #394
carlosy
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 255
Originally Posted by crescent View Post


ETA: another article about second-wave disease spread in 1918:

Photos show how San Francisco emerged from a lockdown too soon during the 1918 Spanish flu pandemic, leading to an even deadlier second wave that rampaged through the city
They even had an "anti-mask league" to oppose the mandatory use of masks during the second wave.
And who got blamed back then?

Well, they didn't have twitter I guess...
carlosy 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 22nd April 2020, 02:24 PM   #395
Dr.Sid
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Olomouc, Czech Republic
Posts: 2,733
Originally Posted by Planigale View Post
That is an odd way round to do it. PCR is positive before the antibody, and indicates infectiousness. The antibody test becomes positive later and depending on the test may mean you are no longer infectious. You can certainly be infectious, PCR positive and antibody negative.

The only rationale for doing antibody test first would be the assumption (currently unproven) that people with antibodies cannot acquire the infection for a second time and cannot be infectious. In any case the people in that scenario you would want to do the PCR on would be antibody negative cases.

Pretty sure you have either got the testing process wrong, or the testing process is wrong.
It's not primarily to find asymptotic cases. The main goal is to find how many people already had the disease. So they start with fast and presumably cheap antibody test. But when it's positive, it is possible you are in you presymptomatic phase, so you are good candidate for PCR test.
Dr.Sid 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 22nd April 2020, 02:29 PM   #396
Chris_Halkides
Philosopher
 
Chris_Halkides's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 9,702
exposure to fine particulate matter

18 April 2020 (p. 17) The Economist wrote, "A team of biostatistics researchers at Harvard have pointed out that there is an alarming correlation between. long-term exposure to fine particulate matter--which damages lungs--and county-level death rates from Covid-19, a respiratory illness. An increase of merely one microgram per cubic metre is associated with a 15% increase in Covid-19 fatalities."

I am not sure what to make of this vs. the comments about smoking.
__________________
It is possible both to be right about an issue and to take oneself a little too seriously, but I would rather be reminded of that by a friend than a foe. (a tip of the hat to Foolmewunz)
Chris_Halkides 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 22nd April 2020, 02:35 PM   #397
Dr.Sid
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Olomouc, Czech Republic
Posts: 2,733
Remember this ? https://edition.cnn.com/2020/04/19/e...rnd/index.html

Seems to be more of that .. https://edition.cnn.com/2020/04/22/h...lts/index.html
Dr.Sid 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 22nd April 2020, 03:13 PM   #398
Doghouse Reilly
Adrift on an uncharted sea
 
Doghouse Reilly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 3,325
Originally Posted by JeanTate View Post
Thanks.

BTW, did you miss the discussion, upthread, on the limitations on the LA county study?
Yes, I've been offline for 4 days and haven't caught up, can you do a tl/dr? It's ok if not, obviously not your job to fill me in.
Doghouse Reilly 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 22nd April 2020, 03:14 PM   #399
Doghouse Reilly
Adrift on an uncharted sea
 
Doghouse Reilly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 3,325
Originally Posted by Chris_Halkides View Post
18 April 2020 (p. 17) The Economist wrote, "A team of biostatistics researchers at Harvard have pointed out that there is an alarming correlation between. long-term exposure to fine particulate matter--which damages lungs--and county-level death rates from Covid-19, a respiratory illness. An increase of merely one microgram per cubic metre is associated with a 15% increase in Covid-19 fatalities."

I am not sure what to make of this vs. the comments about smoking.
Do they specify what types of fine particulate? Is that just general city air pollution?
Doghouse Reilly 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 22nd April 2020, 03:22 PM   #400
William Parcher
Show me the monkey!
 
William Parcher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 25,039
Originally Posted by The Atheist View Post
That's going to please the cigarette companies and displease doctors.

It's the second time the point's been noted.
I posted here about cigarettes preventing infection about 2-3 weeks ago.
__________________
Bigfoot believers and Bigfoot skeptics are both plumb crazy. Each spends more than one minute per year thinking about Bigfoot.
William Parcher 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 09:09 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.