Coronavirus Sars-CoV-2/Covid-19 Megathread

[crazy canuck]

You should read the article - the impact depends very much on how well the infection has been contained.  So, for example, opening schools in the US will be very harmful, and not so much on other countries that have had better outcomes.  ie you can't draw a conclusion from the experience in Denmark, Iceland and Sweden to places that have been markedly worse.

How do you think the US outcome have been markedly worse than Sweden's?

[Valmy]

Ok well that is quite a sad narrative you got there.

Basically I'm in a phenomenally foul mood and hate just about everything. I set a bunch of goals for the year and they are all shot. It was completely arbitrary to shut down low risk outdoor activities, but I hope it made you guys feel better. I think the bulk of you fell for a media induced panic, and continue to do so. That is not to say that there is not a problem--a 1% fatality rate is serious, but it is not nearly 4%. If any single one of us dies this year, it probably won't be from coronavirus - but it could be!

I certainly do not see any problem with doing any outdoors activities so long as social distancing is obeyed...which you probably follow while rock climbing anyway. Probably better there than indoors. But I don't know how or why those kinds of decisions were made in Georgia or wherever. I think I have stated so several times.

I have not panicked at all but I don't know what you mean by "panic". I mean it is just a fact that there has been a considerable loss of life and a serious world wide economic disaster.

But none of that has anything to do with whether it is a good idea to open or close rock climbing parks. None of us have anything to do with that, why are you mad at us about that? None of the rest of us are even rock climbers with the kind of knowledge necessary to make that kind of judgement. That makes no sense.

[Valmy]

By the way it does seem silly to decide to open up bowling alleys and massage shops while closing outdoor parks.

[Barrister]

The reason we can't get a vaccine for HIV is that the human body doesn't recognize HIV as an infection, thus the immune system doesn't respond to HIV. .

I think you are missing the point.  The claim is that with sufficient resources vaccines are developed.  HIV is a very good example of significant resources being invested with no successful vaccine being developed.  In other words vaccines are not guaranteed if sufficient resources are invested.

We haven't ever really needed a human coronavirus vaccine before.  The couple of strains that regularly circulate amongst humans aren't particularly dangerous.  Work was put forward on SARS, but then stopped once the disease was finished.

No.  The research to find a SARS and MERS vaccine continued and has been completely unsuccessful.  A lab at UBC continued the work - the same lab that helped detects SARS back in the day.  Although if there had been more funding there might have been more success world wide.

I hadn't heard of RSV.  It's a disease that almost everyone gets within their first 2-3 years of life, is almost always harmless, but can potentially be dangerous to older adults.  There has been work on a vaccine, but I suspect it hasn't had a lot of resources put towards it

There are a lot of other viruses you have not heard of.  Just because you have not heard of it, and don't really understand its impact, you have assumed it has received little in research resources.  In fact there have been hundreds of millions of dollars invested in trying to find a vaccine.  The Gates foundation is a major funder.  It kills 10s of thousands of children around the world every year - not to mention older people with compromised respiratory systems.

HIV is an exception because it is a retrovirus.  Our immune system doesn't recognize HIV as a threat and thus it generates no immune response.  For that reason a vaccine was always going to be incredibly difficult if not impossible.

For most other diseases, the problem is one of resources.  Making vaccines is difficult and can be very costly and timely.  And unfortunately they're not particularly lucrative for pharmacy companies, since it's a medicine you only ever take once or twice in your life.  Then you throw in the anti-vax movement of the last 20 years vaccine research hasn't been a big priority.  Which is why people like Gates and his foundation are so valuable - he's stepping in to areas that are vitally important but largely being ignored.

[celedhring]

So, apparently since some areas in the border with France have been allowed to reopen bars and cafés, there's now an issue with French people crossing the border ilegally to have a drink in Spain (in some border towns you just have to cross a street).

Since there's a bilateral agreement between Spain and France to police border areas together in particular cases (it was meant for ETA terrorists crossing the border), the gendarmerie will start policing Spanish bars near the border, together with our police, to look for Frenchies sitting at Spanish bars. 

[crazy canuck]

HIV is an exception because it is a retrovirus.  Our immune system doesn't recognize HIV as a threat and thus it generates no immune response.  For that reason a vaccine was always going to be incredibly difficult if not impossible.

For most other diseases, the problem is one of resources.  Making vaccines is difficult and can be very costly and timely.  And unfortunately they're not particularly lucrative for pharmacy companies, since it's a medicine you only ever take once or twice in your life.  Then you throw in the anti-vax movement of the last 20 years vaccine research hasn't been a big priority.  Which is why people like Gates and his foundation are so valuable - he's stepping in to areas that are vitally important but largely being ignored.

I know that is the mantra you want to stick to.  But the claim that vaccines are just a matter of funding is not consistent with reality.  You can try to distinguish HIV all you want, but if it was true that vaccines were simply a function of funding then HIV would have a vaccine.  It has been a major area of both interest and funding.

The fact that you are not aware of other projects doesn't exactly strengthen your claim.

[crazy canuck]

So, apparently since some areas in the border with France have been allowed to reopen bars and cafés, there's now an issue with French people crossing the border ilegally to have a drink in Spain (in some border towns you just have to cross a street).

Since there's a bilateral agreement between Spain and France to police border areas together in particular cases (it was meant for ETA terrorists crossing the border), the gendarmerie will start policing Spanish bars near the border, together with our police, to look for Frenchies sitting at Spanish bars. 

Yeah, that is going to be a real problem between and within countries as we have asymmetrical openings.

[HVC]

HIV is an exception because it is a retrovirus.  Our immune system doesn't recognize HIV as a threat and thus it generates no immune response.  For that reason a vaccine was always going to be incredibly difficult if not impossible.

For most other diseases, the problem is one of resources.  Making vaccines is difficult and can be very costly and timely.  And unfortunately they're not particularly lucrative for pharmacy companies, since it's a medicine you only ever take once or twice in your life.  Then you throw in the anti-vax movement of the last 20 years vaccine research hasn't been a big priority.  Which is why people like Gates and his foundation are so valuable - he's stepping in to areas that are vitally important but largely being ignored.

I know that is the mantra you want to stick to.  But the claim that vaccines are just a matter of funding is not consistent with reality.  You can try to distinguish HIV all you want, but if it was true that vaccines were simply a function of funding then HIV would have a vaccine.  It has been a major area of both interest and funding.

The fact that you are not aware of other projects doesn't exactly strengthen your claim.

But HIV is not comparable. creating a vaccine for a virus that doesn't trigger an immune response is not the same task.

Also, there are several treatments for HIV now, because of all the resources poured into it. It's no longer a death sentence

[Valmy]

Yeah I don't get why the reason given for HIV doesn't distinguish it. Retroviruses are a whole different deal.

But hey I am no doctor. I don't know how to make vaccines beyond just the very general theory behind it.

[Sheilbh]

How do you think the US outcome have been markedly worse than Sweden's?

Because the US outcome has happened by accident and despite lockdowns in most of the country. Sweden's is a result of their strategy, it's planned (and they could be right).

But I agree - Sweden, Switzerland, Netherlands, France, Denmark, Iceland, Australia, Singapore are not a homogenous group that have had the same strategies or outcomes. All of them have either re-opened schools or kept them open without any significant incidents of kids getting sick or increasing wider transmission rates linked to schools

[merithyn]

I hadn't heard of RSV.  It's a disease that almost everyone gets within their first 2-3 years of life, is almost always harmless, but can potentially be dangerous to older adults.  There has been work on a vaccine, but I suspect it hasn't had a lot of resources put towards it.

RSV nearly killed both of my eldest two boys 26 years ago. It put Jackson into respiratory arrest. At the time that they were in the ICU, there were at least half a dozen other infant boys in there, too, for the same thing. (Newborn boys have notoriously weaker respiratory systems than newborn girls.)

It's a cold to anyone over the age of 3. It's a potential death sentence to anyone younger than that or older than 75. Additionally, the after-affects last for, well, at least 26 years that I can account for. Both boys suffer from severe asthma because of the RSV they had as infants.

Still no vaccine.

[merithyn]

Many of you strongly disagreed with me, Fate took me on with a theoretical position of authority (BB said he has become one of our most valuable posters)...and now the data is coming in and he was way off. The projected fatality that people like fate posted when telling me I was wrong has definitely not happened. Tim and Meri have been laughably off base.

We're not even a third of the way through this, and you're already saying everyone was wrong but you.

Basically I'm in a phenomenally foul mood and hate just about everything. I set a bunch of goals for the year and they are all shot. It was completely arbitrary to shut down low risk outdoor activities, but I hope it made you guys feel better. I think the bulk of you fell for a media induced panic, and continue to do so. That is not to say that there is not a problem--a 1% fatality rate is serious, but it is not nearly 4%. If any single one of us dies this year, it probably won't be from coronavirus - but it could be!

Honestly, knowing that this has ruined your day makes it all better for me. Since you want to make this entirely about you, I'm happy to revel in the "hardship" this has put you in.

[Josquius]

I have empathy with corona ruining lives. It's messed up my goals for this year severely too. This week in particular for some reason this has been hitting me.
But if its my futile aims to a achieve the highest % possible out of life or millions of people losing their  lives.... Have to go with the greater good.

[Duque de Bragança]

For most other diseases, the problem is one of resources.  Making vaccines is difficult and can be very costly and timely.  And unfortunately they're not particularly lucrative for pharmacy companies, since it's a medicine you only ever take once or twice in your life.  Then you throw in the anti-vax movement of the last 20 years vaccine research hasn't been a big priority.  Which is why people like Gates and his foundation are so valuable - he's stepping in to areas that are vitally important but largely being ignored.

I pointed it out to an anti-vaxxer/covid-19 mild hoax believer/anti Bill Gates but the Big Pharma straw man is all they need, besides changing the subject when even the Big Pharma "argument" fails to work.

[alfred russel]

Many of you strongly disagreed with me, Fate took me on with a theoretical position of authority (BB said he has become one of our most valuable posters)...and now the data is coming in and he was way off. The projected fatality that people like fate posted when telling me I was wrong has definitely not happened. Tim and Meri have been laughably off base.

We're not even a third of the way through this, and you're already saying everyone was wrong but you.

Lets not make shit up, I didn't say everyone was wrong but me. I said many were wrong, and called out three: Fate, Tim, and  you.

Lets just look at one of the posts you made. This clearly hasn't been reality. There haven't been nearly that many healthcare worker deaths.

Let's face it. The US has failed our people when we needed to step up most. I mean, fuck, at this rate, Fate and his colleagues are looking at 10% of them dying (averaging the Italian (9%) and Spanish (12%) healthcare worker deaths). And we still aren't testing at nearly the necessary rates nor are we producing nearly enough PPEs to improve our circumstances.

You all can bitch and scream and talk about how the US if "finally" stepping up, but the truth of the matter is that it's far too little and far too late. I don't appreciate cc's tone either, especially after his initial reaction to this virus, but he's not wrong. The US isn't going to lead anyone in anything but deaths when this is over.