Cont: 2019-nCoV / Corona virus Pt 3

[quadraginta]

We have a vaccine for the flu. That helps prevent a flu epidemic every year. Covid-19 uses a new way to attack cells that we haven't been exposed to before. Think of native people when they were first exposed to European diseases.

I'd rather not. Estimates of their fatality rates hover around 90%.

 

[Planigale]

There are different kinds of immunity:



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immunity_(medical)

It is certainly not rare for organisms to develop trough evolution a inherit immunity towards certain viral or bacterial infections, or at least the diseases they cause.

The dictionary quotation given however referred to adaptive or acquired immunity;

being highly resistant to a disease because of the formation of humoral antibodies or the development of immunologically competent cells, or both, or as a result of some other mechanism, as interferon activities in viral infections.

which is how immunity is commonly meant.

I fully accept there is innate immunity, but this is by definition non-specific and does not mean there has been any prior exposure to any similar organism. In general it prevents infection, the skin is part of innate immunity since it presents a barrier to infection. Enzymes in tears that are bacteriacidal are part of innate immunity.

The issue of immunity and morbidity with an infection is complex. Many of the symptoms of an illness are related to the body's developing immune response e.g. fever. The immune response may be both harmful and beneficial. In Dengue second infections are more harmful than the first because of acquired immunity. In Rabies a strong immune response increase pathogenicity. Sepsis and septic shock, the so called cytokine storm are due to an over aggressive immune response. Encephalitis in flu is immune mediated, not due to direct viral cytotoxicity.

 

[quadraginta]

I've been remiss about posting ignorant questions lately, and I need to start up again. Today's question is:
It appears that the DC area is start to ramp up the infection rate. Given that most restaurants, stores, and theaters have been closed for more than 2 weeks, I'm wondering who those who have recently been infected are. Is it primarily:
1) people who are still required to work in a public environment (health care facility, grocery store, warehouse, package delivery service, utility company, etc.)?
2) people doing necessary things like grocery shopping?
3) people who are continuing to go to places where they are crowded together (e.g., beaches, parties [despite being illegal, parties with as many as 60 participants are still taking place])?
4) family members or roommates of people who are infected but aren't sick enough to be hospitalized?
5) random people because almost no one can stay at least 6 feet from everyone else all the time?

For #3 you need to add churches and other places of worship/religious institutions. They seem to be generating an outsized proportion of hotspots.

The attitude is not good. By way of example, Jerry Falwell Jr. wanted the students of Liberty University to come back to campus last week after spring break. He suggested they would be safer there. 1,900 of them did.

Half have since left. But the damage has been done, and now the act of leaving is adding to dispersal of contagion.

Way to go, god-botherers.

 

[William Parcher]

Study documents widespread contamination of the environment near patients with COVID-19

IMPORTANT context about this information: Our findings DO NOT confirm that this virus spreads in an airborne fashion. The identification of genetic material from the virus that causes COVID-19 in air samples found in this study provides limited evidence that some potential for airborne transmission exists. More study is underway to determine if live culturable virus was captured in this study and additional evidence is needed to determine the risk of SARS-CoV-2 transmission via the airborne route. PLEASE EMPHASIZE THIS in all stories generated from this release.


A study by UNMC/Nebraska Medicine/NSRI researchers recently posted on the open pre-publication site BioRxiv, provides new evidence of SARS-CoV-2 environmental contamination in COVID-19 patient care areas. SARS-CoV-2 is the virus which causes COVID-19 disease, which is now a worldwide pandemic.

This rapid response research represents the mission of the Global Center for Health Security to advance efforts to respond SARS-CoV-2. The study found high levels of the virus contamination by PCR on commonly used surfaces and in the air of rooms of COVID-19 patients. Air samplers from hallways outside of rooms where staff were moving in and out of doors were also positive. The study suggests that COVID-19 patients, even those who are only mildly ill, may create aerosols of virus and contaminate surfaces that may pose a risk for transmission.

“Our findings show how important it is for health care workers providing direct care to these patients to take enhanced transmission precautions,” said John Lowe, PhD, vice chancellor for Inter-professional Health Security Training and Education. “That means wearing the proper personal protective equipment, using negative air pressure rooms for these patients whenever possible and being mindful about the method of entering and exiting these rooms.”

During the initial isolation of 13 people confirmed positive with COVID-19 infection, air and surface samples were collected in eleven isolation rooms to examine environmental contamination. Many commonly used items, toilet facilities, and air samples had evidence of the virus, indicating that SARS-CoV-2 is widely disseminated in the environment. These findings indicate that disease might be spread through both direct (droplet and person-to-person) as well as indirect contact (contaminated objects and airborne transmission) and suggests airborne isolation precautions could be appropriate.

“Our team was already taking airborne precautions with the initial patients we cared for,” said James Lawler, MD, infectious diseases expert and director of the Global Center for Health Security at UNMC. “This report reinforces our suspicions. It’s why we have maintained COVID patients in rooms equipped with negative air flow and will continue to make efforts to do so – even with an increase in the number of patients. Our health care workers providing care will be equipped with the appropriate level of personal protective equipment. Obviously, more research is required to be able to characterize environmental risk.”

“Studies like these are needed to understand proper precautions for healthcare workers, first responders and others who care for the ill and are needed to combat this pandemic,” said Joshua Santarpia, PhD, assoc. professor of pathology and microbiology at UNMC and research director for Countering Weapons of Mass Destruction at the National Strategic Research Institute. “This ongoing work will continue to improve our understanding of SARS-CoV-2 transmission and help identify ways to improve safety in the care of patients with this disease.”

The investigative team stresses that careful environmental cleaning and disinfection of surfaces, including those in the bathroom, is important. The CDC and the WHO recommend that appropriate personal protective equipment, including respiratory protection, be utilized in the care of persons known or suspected to be infected with SARS-CoV-2.

A link to the full document is available here.

https://www.nebraskamed.com/COVID/s...f-the-environment-near-patients-with-covid-19

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Interesting info on why the Italian death rate is so high. They had an exceptionally mild flu season, leaving many who would have normally died of flu alive to die of coronavirus.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bl...eason-may-solve-mystery-of-coronavirus-deaths

That's an absurd hypothesis.

 

[Planigale]

There are different kinds of immunity:



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immunity_(medical)

It is certainly not rare for organisms to develop trough evolution a inherit immunity towards certain viral or bacterial infections, or at least the diseases they cause.

You phraseology is a little odd. But it sounds as if you are propagating the Lamarckian concept of inheritance of acquired characteristics?

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

I think the concept is you will already have exposed your household contacts. Your contacts are in isolation for 14 days, if they develop symptoms then they are in isolation for seven days. You are in isolation from the household for seven days. But you cannot freely socialise after that time you are still socially distancing. No association outside of the household (at least not within 2 metres).

This is not something to which anyone has the correct answer.

FWIW I would probably argue for seven days from resolution of symptoms but sadly I am not world dictator and my opinion has no force.

It's a false assumption that everyone in a household of a case is already exposed. Lots of exposed people in their 14 days of isolation have escaped infection. Does Camilla have it yet?

Seven days post symptoms does make more sense.

 

[pipelineaudio]

No, and we know from our ever so capable government that if we unload a lot of people on Guam the island will flip over

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/tipping-point/

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Inherent or inherit? Name one disease where this happens. I don’t get infected by tobacco mosaic virus but that’s not immunity.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Not to wade too deep into that argument but disease resistance is often bred into food crops.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Study documents widespread contamination of the environment near patients with COVID-19


https://www.nebraskamed.com/COVID/s...f-the-environment-near-patients-with-covid-19

From the introduction:

The identification of genetic material from the virus that causes COVID-19 in air samples found in this study provides limited evidence that some potential for airborne transmission exists.

They just don't want to admit we can't rule airborne out. Instead they word it like this:

Our findings DO NOT confirm that this virus spreads in an airborne fashion.

At least they did go this far:

“Our findings show how important it is for health care workers providing direct care to these patients to take enhanced transmission precautions,” said John Lowe, PhD, vice chancellor for Inter-professional Health Security Training and Education. “That means wearing the proper personal protective equipment, using negative air pressure rooms for these patients whenever possible and being mindful about the method of entering and exiting these rooms.”

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

No, and we know from our ever so capable government that if we unload a lot of people on Guam the island will flip over

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/tipping-point/

Nom'd!

 

[Lennart Hyland]

Currently my brother wifes grand father is being treated for Covid19, he is in critical condition. He is 80 years old and suffering from a quite bad diabetes.

Some updated numbers from ISS, Instituto Superiore di Sanita, Italys healthministry:

As of march 30 and 10.026 deaths:
Median age:
Women 82 years
Men 78 years

97.7% had atleast one underlying health condition
51.7% had atleast three.
24.5% had atleast two.

10.026 deaths which 30.8% are women. Average days from first symptom to death is 9 and hospitalized after average 4 days.

Out of 10.026 deaths, 112 (1.1%) where under 50 years old. Where 23 where under 40 years, in the age of 26-39.
15 of those 23 had underlying health conditions.

Reason of death:
"Insufficient breathing" 96.5%
Kidney damage 25.7%
Heart muscle damage 11.6%
Super infection 11.2%

Antibiotics where used in 86% of the cases, antivirals in 54% and steroids in 34%. In 19.3% of the cases all three as been used.

 

[a_unique_person]

This is a good observation. Modelling suggests closing borders, or air flight checks have little effect, but closing borders is definitely seen as doing something. South Korea has not closed its borders and is generally held up as having achieved good control.

Most of Australia's infections have been from people returning from overseas, flying or cruise ship.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

This. Previously in one of these threads there was the suggestion that the nasal swab tests would only show who had been exposed to the virus, but not who "had" the virus. The suggestion was that the antibody tests would show that many people were not actually "getting" the virus.

It does not work that way.

The people who show no symptoms still had some level of infection and would still show up on an antibody test. It is just that their immune system was able to defeat the virus quickly before the virus had replicated as widely as it did in people whose immune systems were less effective.

"Immune" does not mean that one does not get infected. It means that one's immune system beats the infection before any symptoms are apparent.

After a certain amount of time.

Seroconversion Timing in COVID-19

Seroconversion curves were constructed from the data and showed that total antibodies and IgM isotype antibodies were 100% detectable approximately one month after symptom onset. However, in the first week after developing signs of illness, antibodies were present in less than 40% of patients tested. The seroconversion rate and antibody levels rose quickly during the fortnight after symptom onset, and the cumulative seropositive rate was 50% on day 11 and 100% on day 39.

Great for epidemiological studies, not more beneficial for identifying acute cases.

The study does suggest testing antibodies along with RNA improved sensitivity early on.

 

[Capsid]

After a certain amount of time.

Seroconversion Timing in COVID-19

Great for epidemiological studies, not more beneficial for identifying acute cases.

The study does suggest testing antibodies along with RNA improved sensitivity early on.

You might detect IgM within a few days of infection.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Belz...]

I suspect those saying "Covid is going to cause the end of civilization as we know it, we are all going to die" to be the ones buying in to a CT.

I suspect they are figments of your imagination, but it must feel nice to argue against such monsters!

 

[The Atheist]

Study documents widespread contamination of the environment near patients with COVID-19

There's another.

Wash your hands, people!

Some updated numbers from ISS, Instituto Superiore di Sanita, Italys healthministry:

I'll be waiting to see those numbers used again as a reason to let it go.

 

[Belz...]

That's an absurd hypothesis.

Not only that, but it's completely irrelevant.

 

[Planigale]

You might detect IgM within a few days of infection.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I am a bit disappointed they did not look at IgA since this is probably important in future immunity against SARS-CoV 2. The one paper I found on SARS-CoV 1? suggested it developed contemporaneously with IgM (although the same paper seems to show IgG before IgM).

 

[pipelineaudio]

Singing my song.

Not really.

Even if me & he are right and the vast majority of cases are hand-face, you still don't want some pig coughing or sneezing in your face, because you're highly likely it will infect you. Although unless you were wearing goggles as well, I doubt a mask will help you much in that scenario.

So should we be going to the stores as long as we dont put our hands in our faces?