Coronavirus may have infected 10 times more Americans than reported, CDC says

[oeb11]

Originally Posted by yitzchak

Covid is like HIV, it lies dormant in the body for up to 10 years, and then suddenly, out of nowhere, it appears.

R E M D E S I V I R

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2007764
remdesivir was beneficial in a study of just over 1K patients - published in NEJM - reference above



It may well be helpful - but is not a cure-all. Perhaps One more weapon in the armamentarium to treat patients severely ill. Not a drug for infected without symptoms patients.



No evidence for the allegation that Wuhan virus is like HIV - That allegation is false regarding the behavior of HIV virus - and no evidence supports that allegation in Wuhan virus.

Y- if you have medical studies to prove that allegation - post them.!

[Tiny]

Originally Posted by Why_Yes_I_Do

Well.. The problem with codswallop is it tastes like cod and is fishy AF. Bunch of pulled from your keester numbers. If you die and happen to test positive for COVID - then you died of COVD is pure bullshit. Being "infected" when you die is no different than saying you died because of the color of your eyes. Let's not forget that hospitals are incentivized to record COVID caused death, i.e. get paid more $$

Notwithstanding, the overall death rate from all causes is relatively flat this year. It would appear there was a large spike, but it is receded. Reality is that both COVID and influenza deaths are typically measured by pneumonia deaths. One could argue that less deaths from normal causes because of lock downs. This seems particularly true in <1 yr olds, who may be foregoing normal vaccinations. But it's only a theory so far. It is also true of school aged children not attending school, which is akin to a festering petri dish of germs. Ramifications of which are not known yet on how it may impact other herd immunity from common germs.

We already saw that "projection" models where utter codswallop and trying to jigger the numbers to make it sound like it's high are fear-porning. The news actually is; the vast majority of people do not even know they have it. Most that do have it - survive unscathed, with little more than rest and fluids. Only the high risk candidates are susceptible to death inducing complications - just like they would be from a litany of other influences, like influenza.

Why are Influenza deaths down this year? What are YoY pneumonia death rates etc.? The sad truth is that many people that that are alleged to have "died" of "COVID" were going to die without COVID. And wash your damned hands.

The only numbers I came up with in this thread are the U.S. population and 70% to get to herd immunity. The 0.5% is from FF's calculation, which is pretty hard to argue with.

And the "projection numbers" I've quoted in other threads were from University of Washington IHME, and they turned out to be way low in terms of the number of deaths in the USA.

The only numbers that came from anyone's keester are yours. More people are dying, the death rate is not flat. Here's a weekly chart of deaths from all causes going back to 2017:

https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/c....htm#dashboard

And the situation is worse than it looks from the CDC graph. Please note that they say only 60% of death records are submitted within ten days of the date of death. That is, the number of deaths for the last few weeks will go up.

And pneumonia deaths are up too, through April 4 anyway. There were undoubtedly pneumonia deaths early on that should have been counted as COVID. I'm not sure about influenza deaths, but there aren't that many anyway:

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019...nchs-data.html

Your conspiracy theories are interesting: many infants are alive who would otherwise be dead because they haven't been vaccinated. And hospitals are faking COVID deaths to get more money.

[oeb11]

Thanks Tiny - couple of points



The % of people infected to reach herd immunity is usually around slightly over 50% in most venues - in very close quarters like NYC it is likely higher.

The % to reach her immunity may vary in different locales and with the particular strain of virus predominate in an area.
You are right - absolute numbers are very difficult to ascertain. Opinions may vary






( i recognize u contributed these as scams)
Infants have little self-immunity - they are protected by maternal antibodies from nursing. No information indicates vaccinations cause an increased mortality to Wuhan virus.



Fake funding requests from hospitals - well - after all the mechanisms developed to jack up hospital bills - I might not be surprised - but I do not think it is a rampant issue -particularly with Federal funds - as violations draw stiff penalties.

[Tiny]

Originally Posted by oeb11

The % of people infected to reach herd immunity is usually around slightly over 50% in most venues - in very close quarters like NYC it is likely higher.

The % to reach her immunity may vary in different locales and with the particular strain of virus predominate in an area.
You are right - absolute numbers are very difficult to ascertain. Opinions may vary

Thanks Oeb, that's another reason why we view this differently, in the terms of the best way to respond to the epidemic. I got the 70% from Googling --

Here are two Johns Hopkins sources that say at least 70%:

https://www.jhsph.edu/covid-19/artic...h-covid19.html
https://hub.jhu.edu/2020/04/30/herd-...9-coronavirus/

Mayo Clinic, estimated 70%:

https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-...s/art-20486808

Apparently, the more infectious the disease is, the higher the % to get to herd immunity. It's estimated to be 94% for the measles.

[oeb11]

Tiny - thanks - I cannot read them all.

They might be correct - or Herd immunity % for Wuhan virus might be 60% or 50%- It is impossible to know with absolute certainty at this point.

Reasonable researchers - reasonable viewpoints - but as the mayo article says - they are "estimates".



Still - it does not change my POV that the wuhan virus is out of the box in America =- impossible to contain - and will move through the population. All the social distancing measures do is slow the progress - it is inexorable.

Which may be a benefit to a slower feed of severely affected patients to hospitals - meaning hospital capacities are not overcome with thousands of infections presenting at once.

[Tiny]

Originally Posted by oeb11

Still - it does not change my POV that the wuhan virus is out of the box in America =- impossible to contain - and will move through the population. All the social distancing measures do is slow the progress - it is inexorable.

Which may be a benefit to a slower feed of severely affected patients to hospitals - meaning hospital capacities are not overcome with thousands of infections presenting at once.

Oeb, What's your view of the graphs in the link below, in particular the one that compares Italy, Florida and Texas?

https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/ar...s-is-explained

The cat got out of the bag in the European Union, and they brought it under control. I don't think you need lockdowns to do this.

Abbott is closing bars tonight and restaurants go back to 50% of maximium capacity on Monday. Combine that with universal masking and I think we could do what the Europeans did with a lot less damage to the economy. I linked sometime back to a paper that showed what happened when several European countries, where the virus had already taken hold, required masks. The number of new cases went down. And then you've got the Asian countries where people wore masks from the start, who were barely hit compared to us.

As to the political implications, if Trump would start wearing a mask from time to time and encourage others to do the same his approval rate might go up 5 points. This is what Abbott is doing.

[farmstud60]

I think there are more than one actual definition of herd immunity. Most I've read about seem to be in the 50% range as that will prevent widespread fast movement of the virus. Some want to effectively kill the virus off, which would be more in the 90% range.


I find it rather ironic that it took them this long to release 10 times number today, it has been obvious since mid April that there were a lot of symptomatic people spreading the virus, with 80% of those testing positive in meatpacking plants test positive for Covid19 but not having any symptoms.

[oeb11]

Originally Posted by Tiny

Oeb, What's your view of the graphs in the link below, in particular the one that compares Italy, Florida and Texas?

https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/ar...s-is-explained

The cat got out of the bag in the European Union, and they brought it under control. I don't think you need lockdowns to do this.

Abbott is closing bars tonight and restaurants go back to 50% of maximium capacity on Monday. Combine that with universal masking and I think we could do what the Europeans did with a lot less damage to the economy. I linked sometime back to a paper that showed what happened when several European countries, where the virus had already taken hold, required masks. The number of new cases went down. And then you've got the Asian countries where people wore masks from the start, who were barely hit compared to us.

As to the political implications, if Trump would start wearing a mask from time to time and encourage others to do the same his approval rate might go up 5 points. This is what Abbott is doing.

i am inherently leery of bloomberg and his Hate for Trump and all things Trump.
Still - it is an indication that masks - which function to reduce infections of others - not so much the wearer, might be fa factor.

would universal mask wearing help- perhaps.

saw something on a news channel today that 90% of adults wear masks outside the home.
That is not true in my area of Texas - more like 50-50 outside. (personal experience and opinion).



Most news cases of Wuhan virus seem to be in younger people - Millenials - so to speak who generally do not have moderate-severe cases - and rare deaths - so they are really not concerned about wuhan virus. and congregate as they choose - and in "defiance' - of course kids never act defiantly to parental authority- now do they?

A segment of society will also reject demands to wear masks - and refuse - on their own beliefs and conscience. Not much to do about that, either.

Anyway - I think a majority of people are so tired of this mess of home rstriction and unemployment - that they are disregarding the medics and authorities in government to re-establish their own lives. and - woe to those who think it wise to try to force Americans in to something they really do not want to do.

Exceptions- taxes and death.

[oeb11]

Originally Posted by farmstud60

I think there are more than one actual definition of herd immunity. Most I've read about seem to be in the 50% range as that will prevent widespread fast movement of the virus. Some want to effectively kill the virus off, which would be more in the 90% range.


I find it rather ironic that it took them this long to release 10 times number today, it has been obvious since mid April that there were a lot of symptomatic people spreading the virus, with 80% of those testing positive in meatpacking plants test positive for Covid19 but not having any symptoms.

fs60- thanks - the definition of her immunity is a given - the question is the number of what % infected in the population is required to reach herd immunity to Wuhan virus.

As you submit - there are different opinions.

[Muy Largo]

I can almost chuckle at the armchair experts who populate this forum. They declare their expertise. They cite their on-point prognostications. I strongly suspect that only five months ago most of this board's headstrong pandemic forecasters and posters knew just about zero when it came to such matters. They couldn't distinguish between a pandemic and endemic. Now they're tossing around figures and declarations and forecasts like they're in the know. The most important thing for those of us who are mere sideline watchers is to listen to those who know much more than we do. Yes, it's important to develop opinions and analyze sources and try to understand motivations behind the various experts. But never lose sight of the fact that you are likely armed with almost no foundational training or experience or education in this field. Why pretend you do?

[oeb11]

Thank u - elitist patronizing person who obviously knows much more than anyone else - In Your own Opinion of yourself - Definitely ego deficiency is not Ur problem.



Since u are so bright - please post the definitions U complain no one else understands .



And - since U are so bright and informed - Please post the definitive answers to the questions in the thrad that cogent adn constructive posters debate - you obviously elite in your own mind and smarter than anyone else - including the CDC and any physician in the world - so plese - contribute Your "Expert" opinions!



Thank - valued poster in One's own mind.

[Tiny]

Originally Posted by Muy Largo

I can almost chuckle at the armchair experts who populate this forum. They declare their expertise. They cite their on-point prognostications. I strongly suspect that only five months ago most of this board's headstrong pandemic forecasters and posters knew just about zero when it came to such matters. They couldn't distinguish between a pandemic and endemic. Now they're tossing around figures and declarations and forecasts like they're in the know. The most important thing for those of us who are mere sideline watchers is to listen to those who know much more than we do. Yes, it's important to develop opinions and analyze sources and try to understand motivations behind the various experts. But never lose sight of the fact that you are likely armed with almost no foundational training or experience or education in this field. Why pretend you do?

I strongly disagree. Back when the CDC was telling people not to wear masks, a Libertarian activist I know who has no medical background was promoting them, as a way to stop the spread of the virus without destroying the economy and without running up the national debt. He's smart. He read a lot of papers. He knew more about the SARS and MERS coronavirus pandemics than most public health experts. And he was right.

And just exactly which experts are you going to listen to? Maybe Anders Tegnell and John Ioannidis, who will tell you to carry on with life like normal, or don't worry about this because it's no worse than the flu? Or how about Neil Ferguson, who says millions and millions will die unless we all stay at home interminably? It does seems to me though that there are those out there who are offering good, balanced advice that we should heed. Despite their initial missteps, Anthony Fauci and Deborah Birx fit this mold. We should do what they tell us to.

So maybe you should, as you say, just stay on the sidelines and blindly do what some of the experts say. Since Trump has a direct pipeline to Fauci and Birx and since you're a great admirer maybe you should do exactly what he says to do.

[yitzchak]

Originally Posted by oeb11

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2007764
remdesivir was beneficial in a study of just over 1K patients - published in NEJM - reference above



It may well be helpful - but is not a cure-all. Perhaps One more weapon in the armamentarium to treat patients severely ill. Not a drug for infected without symptoms patients.



No evidence for the allegation that Wuhan virus is like HIV - That allegation is false regarding the behavior of HIV virus - and no evidence supports that allegation in Wuhan virus.

Y- if you have medical studies to prove that allegation - post them.!

I was just trying to scare you LOL

[oeb11]

Originally Posted by Tiny

I strongly disagree. Back when the CDC was telling people not to wear masks, a Libertarian activist I know who has no medical background was promoting them, as a way to stop the spread of the virus without destroying the economy and without running up the national debt. He's smart. He read a lot of papers. He knew more about the SARS and MERS coronavirus pandemics than most public health experts. And he was right.

And just exactly which experts are you going to listen to? Maybe Anders Tegnell and John Ioannidis, who will tell you to carry on with life like normal, or don't worry about this because it's no worse than the flu? Or how about Neil Ferguson, who says millions and millions will die unless we all stay at home interminably? It does seems to me though that there are those out there who are offering good, balanced advice that we should heed. Despite their initial missteps, Anthony Fauci and Deborah Birx fit this mold. We should do what they tell us to.

So maybe you should, as you say, just stay on the sidelines and blindly do what some of the experts say. Since Trump has a direct pipeline to Fauci and Birx and since you're a great admirer maybe you should do exactly what he says to do.

Tiny - Thank you for a reasoned post. I differ that we should all do what "experts' - including fauci and birx - tell us to do.

Take the recommendations - consider - and after thoughtful consideration - live One's life as One determines best.

I am to the point that i feel Wuhan virus interventions should be put to a special election - and let each State determine what their population thinks of the matter.

many people are fed up with enforced and arbitrary regualtion by elected officials terrified of criticism and afraid to take a stand for the people that is not restrictive and anti-economy.



for example - Texas - Abbott is re-instituting restrictions on bars - all closed. Yet Walmarts and grocery stores are wide open, Deliveries and services are open, and No evidence exists that open bars have any real impact on the rising Wuhan virus rate in Texas.

It is simply opinion - with no factual studies to back up the actions.

The actions are arbitrary and unfounded.

Maybe masks may help slow the spread - and keep hospital admissions in reasonable control - but the spread of wuhan through the population is inevitable - and mostly the severely affected are older people.

younger folks recognize they are not generally severely affected - and are out disregarding restrictions regardless.


Time for State Special elections to decide on a course to save the economies - in each State.
IMHO!


Muy largo is just a patronizing pot stirrer with nothing of value to contribute!!!!

[farmstud60]

Originally Posted by Muy Largo

I can almost chuckle at the armchair experts who populate this forum. They declare their expertise. They cite their on-point prognostications. I strongly suspect that only five months ago most of this board's headstrong pandemic forecasters and posters knew just about zero when it came to such matters. They couldn't distinguish between a pandemic and endemic. Now they're tossing around figures and declarations and forecasts like they're in the know. The most important thing for those of us who are mere sideline watchers is to listen to those who know much more than we do. Yes, it's important to develop opinions and analyze sources and try to understand motivations behind the various experts. But never lose sight of the fact that you are likely armed with almost no foundational training or experience or education in this field. Why pretend you do?

There are a couple things the experts got wrong that was obvious early on. The first one was that the majority of people that were contagious had a fever, and temperature checks would help isolate those infected. The second was the wide variation of incubation time from 2 days to 14 days. It wss obvious that the virus was going to become wide spread in February, but WHO and CDC still were not worried about it spreading.


Now we have the mask issue. The virus is going to spread whether people wear masks or not. It may not spread as fast with masks on, but too many people get careless when removing masks and will catch the virus anyway. It is up for debate as to how restrictive of spreading virus will be a good thing. Covid 19 is not nearly as deadly as they first thought. It may be better for the virus to spread and get closer to herd immunity quicker rather than slower. Well will know more 6 months to a year from now. My guess is that allowing voluntary mask wearing will help the virus spread but help slow it down enough not overwhelm hospitals and reduce the overall length of time we have a problem. I would give my view 60% chance of being right, with those wanting more restrictions 40% chance of being right.