Coronavirus Sars-CoV-2/Covid-19 Megathread

[viper37]

Now, back to bad news
It's entirely possible Sweden will be just as fucked as the US will be

Asymptomatic COVID-19 findings dim hopes for 'herd immunity' and 'immunity passports'

A closer look at people who tested positive for COVID-19 but never developed symptoms has found that such asymptomatic carriers have few to no detectable antibodies just weeks after infection, suggesting they may not develop lasting immunity.

There's growing evidence that a significant proportion of people who test positive for COVID-19 never show symptoms, although it's not clear what percentage of people that is and what role they play in spreading the disease.

A Chinese study published this week in Nature followed 37 people in Wanzhou District in China who did not show any outward signs of the disease, despite testing positive when their respiratory tracts were swabbed and being kept in hospital for observation.

Some key findings include:

Levels of antibodies against COVID-19 were significantly lower in asymptomatic carriers than those with symptoms during active infection.
Antibody levels also dropped off far more quickly in people who never showed symptoms, and 40 per cent of them had no detectable antibodies eight weeks after recovery, compared with 13 per cent of symptomatic patients.
Those with asymptomatic infections tested positive for an average of five days longer than people with symptomatic infections — 19 days compared with 14 days — suggesting that they were shedding the virus longer.
The study also found that despite having no outward symptoms, 70 per cent had lung abnormalities detectable in X-rays at some point during infection — mostly spots called "ground-glass opacities," which can indicate inflammation or other signs of disease.
[...]

Trolling aside, this is a potentially disturbing news.  Of course, the sample is very small.  More studies are needed.

If it's confirmed that mask wearing becomes mandatory everywhere, I think I'll just save time and off myself right away.

[DGuller]

It's disturbing on many levels.  It maybe indicate that even among seriously sick immunity won't stick.  If that's the conclusion, then maybe taking it on the chin is the only strategy that will work?

[Sheilbh]

My facts?  I was linking a report.  You guys are so fucked up you think you know better than the people who know how to analyze the data.  That is really the problem with the US isn't it.  Complete distrust of the scientists that have been telling you and the AF's of the world to change your ways.  But nope, rock walls are really really important.

I guess if it's in some report, then it must be unimpeachable, and there is no reason to check its facts.  And for what it's worth, analyzing the data is my day job.  That said, your day job is making arguments that stick, so it's really not a convincing appeal to authority, now that I think of it. 

I don't know how useful it is but it matches the stats here:
https://ourworldindata.org/coronavirus-testing
It may be that it's a seven day rolling average because what's relevant is the situation now not the situation in early April.

But AR is right - the US is a world leader in testing. It's just the rest of the public health stuff (contact tracing, isolation for the infected and generally breaking the chains of transmission) that seems missing. If all yoou needed to do to stop the disease was test the US would have ended it already.

[DGuller]

My facts?  I was linking a report.  You guys are so fucked up you think you know better than the people who know how to analyze the data.  That is really the problem with the US isn't it.  Complete distrust of the scientists that have been telling you and the AF's of the world to change your ways.  But nope, rock walls are really really important.

I guess if it's in some report, then it must be unimpeachable, and there is no reason to check its facts.  And for what it's worth, analyzing the data is my day job.  That said, your day job is making arguments that stick, so it's really not a convincing appeal to authority, now that I think of it. 

I don't know how useful it is but it matches the stats here:
https://ourworldindata.org/coronavirus-testing
It may be that it's a seven day rolling average because what's relevant is the situation now not the situation in early April.

But AR is right - the US is a world leader in testing. It's just the rest of the public health stuff (contact tracing, isolation for the infected and generally breaking the chains of transmission) that seems missing. If all yoou needed to do to stop the disease was test the US would have ended it already.

That is useful, thanks.

[alfred russel]

But AR is right - the US is a world leader in testing. It's just the rest of the public health stuff (contact tracing, isolation for the infected and generally breaking the chains of transmission) that seems missing. If all yoou needed to do to stop the disease was test the US would have ended it already.

At least here, there is no point in contact tracing when there are so many positive tests and things are as open as they are. We had over 11k positive tests in Georgia last week. If you want people to isolate for 2 weeks, and catch only a quarter of cases, we are closing in on 100k cases that we would be following up on currently. That is almost 1% of the population.

Aside from the impossible logistic challenge of following up on so many cases, the contact points seem limitless: bars are open, tourist attractions, restaurants, gyms...

If the idea is to identify cases and have those people lock down as well as the people they have contacted, the answer would be to lock down the whole state rather than track and contact people one at a time.

[viper37]

It's disturbing on many levels.  It maybe indicate that even among seriously sick immunity won't stick.  If that's the conclusion, then maybe taking it on the chin is the only strategy that will work?

on the contrary, it means being careful until there is a vaccine, otherwise, asymptomatic people can be constant carrier of the disease and risk giving it to more vulnerable people.
strict quarantine was useful to stop the spread at first, States that did it are now okayish. States that skimped on the rules are now critical.
Either you take on the chin, knowing you will cause massive death to protect your own happyness, or you again undergoe a stricter, longer quarantine.

[Zoupa]

There are a plethora of other long-terms effects apart from dying. We're getting new information daily about lung scarring, pancreas shutting down, circulation problems etc etc ad nauseam.

Taking it on the chin is a terrible idea. Being careful until the vaccine arrives is the way to go. The US is fucked up either way currently, there is community spread in too many places.

[Sheilbh]

At least here, there is no point in contact tracing when there are so many positive tests and things are as open as they are. We had over 11k positive tests in Georgia last week. If you want people to isolate for 2 weeks, and catch only a quarter of cases, we are closing in on 100k cases that we would be following up on currently. That is almost 1% of the population.

Aside from the impossible logistic challenge of following up on so many cases, the contact points seem limitless: bars are open, tourist attractions, restaurants, gyms...

If the idea is to identify cases and have those people lock down as well as the people they have contacted, the answer would be to lock down the whole state rather than track and contact people one at a time.

Yeah. That's what I mean by not getting why the US even did lockdown. The point of lock down is to buy you time and get the disease back to the beginning. So in the UK it was about using the timeto build up the infrastructure you need, we needed to increase testing a lot. I don't know about other countries but Germany and the UK have also hired about 5 contact tracers per 25,000. So the theory is you lockdown, then get to a low enough point that you can track each case and those people can self-isolate, and at that point your society can go back to some degree of normal because you're able to control outbreaks. As I say the US has chosen a different approach to lockdown, when to lift it and what to do afterwards. At this point I don't know why the US locked down.

And in theory you can use contact tracing evidence to actually make any lockdown measures become more effective - so are bars more risky than restaurants or than gyms. As I say in Europe, unlike the US the indoor settings are opening slower and with far-reduced capacity in lots of places you have to register as well in case there's an outbreak so you can be told to test.

[DGuller]

It's disturbing on many levels.  It maybe indicate that even among seriously sick immunity won't stick.  If that's the conclusion, then maybe taking it on the chin is the only strategy that will work?

on the contrary, it means being careful until there is a vaccine, otherwise, asymptomatic people can be constant carrier of the disease and risk giving it to more vulnerable people.
strict quarantine was useful to stop the spread at first, States that did it are now okayish. States that skimped on the rules are now critical.
Either you take on the chin, knowing you will cause massive death to protect your own happyness, or you again undergoe a stricter, longer quarantine.

If even being sick won't give a lasting immunity, then the logic of flattening the curve is flipped on its head.  Instead of burning out the virus all at once, and giving a temporary herd immunity, you will just keep the virus in circulation indefinitely.  What's the end game then?  Vaccine?  How effective will a vaccine be if being sick isn't effective?

Note that I'm making an argument given the hypothetical, and that is that being sick with Covid does not give you lasting protection.  Right now that's just a hypothetical.

[Zanza]

Without lasting immunity,  "temporary" herd immunity seems a dubious notion. Taking it on the chin is a very risky bet with our current knowledge of the virus.

[The Minsky Moment]

At this point I don't know why the US locked down.

There is no US virus response there are at least 50 US virus responses.

I know why New York locked down - the city hospital system was swamped and needed to stockpile key equipment. The toll would have been much worse otherwise.

There is no national strategy but the state approaches mostly seem at this point being let things open up until the point where there is a threat to the integrity of the health care system.  Stop-go.  It's a nonsensical approach but there is no national coordination worth a damn; Congress is not acting and the President is alternatively AWOL or cheerleading the virus.

The US is basically Brazil now.  It's still a first world economy with first world tech but increasingly third world governance.   Of course that is not a sustainable combination long term.

[celedhring]

Spain has started the pilot test of its contact tracing app. For what I understand (which is probably little) it seems to work similar to Germany's. How's that one working out?

[Zoupa]

How effective will a vaccine be if being sick isn't effective?

Very. Being sick from a disease and getting vaccinated against a disease are two different things.

[The Minsky Moment]

But AR is right - the US is a world leader in testing.

Again it's all state by state.  Texas is a big state having a big outbreak now and is testing around 30K per day. That's about the same as New Jersey and Massachusetts combined (at half the population).  Yes Texas is physically much bigger but still.

The purpose of saying this isn't to out Texas but to make the point this is an inconsistent patchwork response.  Adding up total raw numbers nationwide gives a misleading picture when there is no national response to speak of.

[Threviel]

I never cease to be amazed that Sweden of all countries proved to be europes idiot.

Wait for the epidemic to pass before making judgments,