Korea anti-body test in highly infect Daegu city shows 27x more people with antibodies than reported infections!
Why the exclamation point? That is not surprising. That is what you expect from a city that had many infections before testing was ramped up. That means many people were infected but they were not tested. Most of them probably self-quarantined and recovered on their own.
An article at CNN described why case tracking is becoming difficult:
https://www.cnn.com/2020/07/22…irus-wednesday/index.html
With the high transmission levels of the virus, traditional contact tracing --- which health officials once said would be key in controlling the spread of the virus if cases were at manageable levels --- has now become "impractical and difficult to do," California Health Secretary Mark Ghaly said.
The state is working to refine strategies and continue to work with counties to build up their "tracing army," but Ghaly warns that "even a very robust contact tracing program will have a hard time reaching out to every single case." [MY COMMENT: There is no need to reach every single case, and that is not possible even in Korea or Japan.]
Contact tracing is now harder all over the nation while testing results take days, according to the country's leading expert on infectious diseases, Dr. Anthony Fauci. Quest Diagnostics, a leading commercial testing lab, said in a news release Monday that for some patients, testing results can take up to two weeks.
"The time frame from when you get a test to the time you get the results back is sometimes measured in a few days," Fauci said Tuesday.
"If that's the case, it kind of negates the purpose of the contract tracing because if you don't know if that person gets the results back at a period of time that's reasonable, 24 hours, 48 hours at the most ... that kind of really mitigates against getting a good tracing and a good isolation." . . . .
See also:
https://www.cnn.com/2020/07/22…texas-covid-19/index.html
East coast states now have the coronavirus under control, using the same techniques as the EU, Japan and Korea. The U.S. is dividing into two countries:
States like New York and Massachusetts with a few hundred cases and few deaths. Massachusetts recorded 17 deaths yesterday and zero the day before. See: https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/usa/massachusetts/
States with out-of-control epidemics, thousands of new cases per day, hospitals overwhelmed and hundreds of people dying. See: https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/usa/texas/
This is what happens when you ignore science and you denigrate experts. You end up back in the 19th century. You end up with a terrible burden of death, misery, lifelong suffering and economic catastrophe, which could easily be avoided at a tiny fraction of the cost of ignoring it. We have turned our backs on science and the enlightenment. This modern trend began with the rejection of cold fusion, then the rejection of vaccinations, and now the rejection of facts and reality in favor of lunatic ideology and grotesque ignorance. We have political leaders who think you should inject disinfectants, and who think wearing masks should be up to individuals. Why not make stop lights optional, while we are at it? Why not let people crap in the streets, or piss on your lunch at a fast food restaurant? If we are going let people spread a deadly disease just because they feel like it, we should let them drive at 60 mph on quiet neighborhood streets. It isn't like likely they will hit anyone, after all. People will learn to jump out of the way.
See:
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/0…-northeast-governors.html
In just over two months, the Northeast has gone from the country’s worst coronavirus hot spot to its most controlled. “It’s acting like Europe,” one expert said.
. . . Along the East Coast, from Delaware through Maine, new case reports remain well below their April peak. As of Wednesday, six of the country’s 11 states with flat or falling case levels are in that Northeastern corridor.
“It’s acting like Europe,” Dr. Ashish Jha, the director of the Harvard Global Health Institute, said of the Northeastern United States.
Like Europe, the Northeast suffered a devastating wave of illnesses and deaths in March and April, and state leaders responded, after some hesitation, with aggressive lockdowns and big investments in testing and tracing efforts. Residents have largely followed rules and been surprisingly supportive of tough measures, even at the cost of economic pain.
Dr. Jha said the difference in regional trajectories was so pronounced that, by the time flu season rolls around in the late fall, “I would not be surprised if what we have is two countries, one which is neck-deep in coronavirus, its hospitals overwhelmed, and another part of the country that is struggling a little, but largely doing OK with their economy.” . . .
. . . It is also true that the Northeast remains the corner of America that has suffered most from the virus.
New Jersey, New York, Connecticut, Massachusetts and Rhode Island have reported the country’s most deaths per capita over the course of the pandemic, with more than 61,000 combined. And the economic wounds from prolonged shutdowns are deep: Massachusetts’s unemployment rate in June climbed to 17.4 percent, the worst in the country, according to federal data released on Friday.
But polls, so far, suggest that voters in the Northeast are prepared to tolerate prolonged economic pain in order to stop the spread of the virus. Governors from the states that were hit early in the pandemic have sustained the highest approval ratings in the country.
And in May, when a poll by Suffolk University Political Research Center asked Massachusetts residents how long they could endure the hardships of a shutdown, 38 percent of those surveyed answered “indefinitely.”
“This isn’t an economic policy, this is life or death,” said David Paleologos, the center’s director. “That is at the core of why people are saying, ‘I’ll do whatever it takes.’”
The crisis has drawn out key regional differences in how Americans view the role of government in their lives, said Wendy J. Schiller, chair of the political science department at Brown University in Providence, R.I. The Northeast, she said, with its 400-year tradition of localized, participatory government, has been less affected by decades of antigovernment rhetoric. . . .
. . . [T]he responses were aggressive. Charlie Baker, the Republican governor of Massachusetts, decided after a late-night phone call with Jim Yong Kim, co-founder of the nonprofit Partners in Health, to budget $55 million for contact-tracing programs that would recruit and train a corps of 1,900 newly minted public health workers. The program was up and running within weeks.
“I certainly felt under the gun — and I know many of my colleagues did — to make decisions with less than perfect information,” Mr. Baker said.
By this month, tracers were able to reach 90 percent of contacts within 24 hours, new cases had fallen so steeply that the corps was reduced to 500. . . .
By this month, tracers [in Massachusetts] were able to reach 90 percent of contacts within 24 hours, new cases had fallen so steeply that the corps was reduced to 500. . . .
The 7-day moving average in Massachusetts has been stable at ~230 since June 15. So, 500 case trackers is enough to track ~230 cases. Two case tracking people for each case. That is what I have read elsewhere. It takes 2 or 3 people per case.
So, for the U.S. as a whole we need ~140,000 to 210,000 trackers. That would cost a lot of money, but probably thousands of times less than letting the disease kill people, destroy lives, and destroy the economy. Unfortunately, the Trump administration opposes spending any more on testing or case tracking, so it is up to the states. States such as Georgia, Florida and Texas are not making a serious effort to track cases, and their testing is so far behind it is now taking days or even weeks to learn the result, which is useless. You might as well not test if it is going to take that long. It is too late to be of any use. You have probably stopped spreading the disease after a week. After 2 weeks you have probably recovered, or died.
The 7-day moving average in Massachusetts has been stable at ~230 since June 15. So, 500 case trackers is enough to track ~230 cases. Two case tracking people for each case. That is what I have read elsewhere. It takes 2 or 3 people per case.
So, for the U.S. as a whole we need ~140,000 to 210,000 trackers. That would cost a lot of money, but probably thousands of times less than letting the disease kill people, destroy lives, and destroy the economy. Unfortunately, the Trump administration opposes spending any more on testing or case tracking, so it is up to the states. States such as Georgia, Florida and Texas are not making a serious effort to track cases, and their testing is so far behind it is now taking days or even weeks to learn the result, which is useless. You might as well not test if it is going to take that long. It is too late to be of any use. You have probably stopped spreading the disease after a week. After 2 weeks you have probably recovered, or died.
people are most infectious 2 days before symptoms, which are typically in 5 days after infection. So basically you need to get all the contacts within a day or two. One week testing is pretty useless, unless you ask everyone to isolate before test comes back positive.
I'm not actually sure what different places do?
Korea anti-body test in highly infect Daegu city shows 27x more people with antibodies than reported infections!
https://www.theislanderonline.…es-very-high-study/?cs=12
for googling "South Korean survey Daegu city recorded 6886 coronavirus cases"
https://www.bbc.com/news/health-53248660
"For every person testing positive for antibodies, two were found to have specific T-cells which identify and destroy infected cells."
"This could mean a wider group have some level of immunity to Covid-19 than antibody testing figures,"
"More analysis needs to be done to understand whether these T-cells provide "sterilising immunity", meaning they completely block the virus, or whether they might protect an individual from getting sick but not stop them from carrying the virus and transmitting it."
I'm not actually sure what different places do?
Neither am I. Epidemiologists at Johns Hopkins are in charge of the east coast joint initiatives in New York, New Jersey and Connecticut. I have heard they have elaborate models and protocols, but I don't know the details. They are in charge of training the case trackers. An interesting mix of people who are good at tracking. They include retired nurses and doctors, social workers, librarians and ministers. They have to be friendly, outgoing, non-judgemental and empathetic. Not my line of work!
I saw extensive interviews on NHK with the top people in the Japanese case tracking team. I did not write down the details and it has been a few months. They emphasized the need for speed. They have people there 24 hours a day. Not many people in all. I think 30 or 40 per shift, but those are the analysts. They look at the flow of data coming in nationwide from field workers. The field workers call patients, and they call the people who may have been exposed. It has to happen quickly, within hours.
The situation in Japan is not good. The numbers are starting to spiral out of control again. This shows you cannot let up. You have to stay on top of it. Suppressing the pandemic this week is no guarantee it will stay suppressed next week, or next month. It will continue to dog the whole human race until there is a vaccine.
A friend of mine works for CalTrans, the transportation agency for the state of California US, as an engineer. He was recently asked by his manager if he would be OK being reassigned to Covid contact tracing.
My gym is planning to open up next week, and I will try to go swimming.
UPDATE: My civil engineer friend was not tasked with being a contact tracer as he here in California on a visa and they did not want to mess that situation up.
Also, I never made it to the gym. The pool was full-up at 5AM.
Quercetin is likely working as an Ionophore for Zinc similiar to HCQ (https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/jf5014633) .
Onions contain quite a lot Quercetin, and eating onions resulting in a high bioavailbility of Quercetin in the blood, while eating pills possibly not so much (https://opus.bibliothek.uni-wu…/docId/96/file/graefe.pdf, https://www.sciencedirect.com/…cle/pii/S0014579397013677).
Onion soup is easy and delicious, and hot, with cheese and toasted French bread on top, mmm, it's even better!
Onion soup is easy and delicious, and hot, with cheese and toasted French bread on top, mmm, it's even better!
This was the baseline in the german doctoral thesis: They boiled 500g of onions in the morning and fed them to the test persons and found this is the best way of increasing Quercetin levels in the blood.
My take on this: In case you have symptoms, and you don't have access to HCQ or are worried about side effects, eat 500g onions (or your onion soup) and take 200mg of Zinc a day for a couple of days.
Unlikely you still like onion soup after one week of this diet though.
My take on this: In case you have symptoms, and you don't have access to HCQ or are worried about side effects, eat 500g onions
and stay home
Compare these two quotes:
Contact tracing is now harder all over the nation while testing results take days,
By this month, tracers were able to reach 90 percent of contacts within 24 hours, new cases had fallen so steeply that the corps was reduced to 500
The second quote shows what is essential: speed. Reaching the contacts quickly, before they become contagious. When it days days for test results to come back, contact tracing becomes useless. You might as well not even do it. Bill Gates said the only thing a week-old result is good for is, "You call your friend and say 'sorry I infected you.'"
It is not necessary to reach more than 90%. Actually, 60% would be great. You want to reduce the R0 infection rate to below 1. Of course, the more you reach, the better, but even with the best tracing you will miss many contacts. Speed is more important than a high percent of contacts. It is better to move quickly on the today's cases than it is track down contacts from three days ago.
Another interesting and counterintuitive aspect of this is that you should concentrate case tracking on geographic districts with fewer infections, rather than the highest number of infections. You will probably stop more infections and do more good that way. It is a form of triage. If you have enough people to cover all cases, then by all means track them all. But if there are more cases than you can handle, concentrate on the ones from districts where the infection rate is lower.
The 7-day moving average in Massachusetts has been stable at ~230 since June 15. So, 500 case trackers is enough to track ~230 cases. Two case tracking people for each case. That is what I have read elsewhere. It takes 2 or 3 people per case.
So, for the U.S. as a whole we need ~140,000 to 210,000 trackers. That would cost a lot of money, but probably thousands of times less than letting the disease kill people, destroy lives, and destroy the economy. Unfortunately, the Trump administration opposes spending any more on testing or case tracking, so it is up to the states. States such as Georgia, Florida and Texas are not making a serious effort to track cases, and their testing is so far behind it is now taking days or even weeks to learn the result, which is useless. You might as well not test if it is going to take that long. It is too late to be of any use. You have probably stopped spreading the disease after a week. After 2 weeks you have probably recovered, or died.
Jed,
You’re starting to sound like CNN,
Give it a rest
https://www.thelancet.com/jour…0(20)30208-X/fulltext#%20
"However, in our analysis, full lockdowns and wide-spread COVID-19 testing were not associated with reductions in the number of critical cases or overall mortality,” the researchers added."
"However, full lockdowns ...... were significantly associated with increased patient recovery rates."
……….
The study found two factors that were significantly associated with increased coronavirus mortality rate: the prevalence of obesity among the population, and a higher per capita gross domestic product.
…..
I will leave it to others here to "evaluate" the study and the difference in mortality rates and recovery rates.
published Tuesday in The Lancet medical journal
I will leave it to others here to "evaluate" the study and the difference in mortality rates and recovery rates.
Makes no sense to me. Does remind me of the old saying "shit in-shit out". Lots of data out there, and not all of it good. Much of it tainted by political bias. The pandemic is still playing out, and I think it will take some time to sort this all out. When it is all over, the dust settles, politics no longer a factor, then maybe the scientists can be scientists, and come to a consensus as to why one country, or population subset, did worse than others.
I think overall, the Swedes said it best at the very beginning when they opted for the controversial herd immunity approach: "let's wait 3 years, and then see what policies worked best". Who knows, maybe one day they will decide government policies did not matter much in the long run. That the virus was going to get to the vulnerable sooner, or later. That in an interconnected world, a stricter policy only served to put off the inevitable.
Much of it tainted by political bias.
yes, but the Lancet is usually a good "respectable" journal. But, yes, I think the virus will mutate and change and eventually get most people and everywhere. I was seeing (https://www.sciencemag.org/new…it-getting-more-dangerous)
where it spreads more easily but is less lethal. If you were a virus, that is what you would want.
(along with contagion before symptoms).
I figure it is just a matter of time before this old guy gets it. - I might already have.
You’re starting to sound like CNN,
Give it a rest
CNN gets it is coronavirus info from experts. Experts quoted on CNN are as reliable as experts anywhere else. There is no reason to doubt this source of information. A doctor in Texas or some guy at the Harvard Medical School is not going to trash his own reputation by lying on CNN or any other major media outlet.
I think overall, the Swedes said it best at the very beginning when they opted for the controversial herd immunity approach: "let's wait 3 years, and then see what policies worked best"
The mortality rate in Sweden is one of the highest in the first world, right up with the UK. It is 561 per 1 M. The U.S. is 441 per 1 M, although we will catch up at this rate. They "said it best" in what sense? They killed lots people for no reason and destroyed their economy.
The best way to respond to a pandemic and a public health crisis is to do what doctors and public health experts tell you to do. Also, learn best practices from other countries. It is not a good idea to pretend you are an expert, wing it, or hope that your population is biologically different from the rest of the human race.
That in an interconnected world, a stricter policy only served to put off the inevitable.
If it puts it off until a vaccine is deployed, nothing is inevitable. There is no reason to think the populations of Greece, Japan or New Zealand will be infected.
Experts quoted on CNN
But the problem is they, like most news outlet, do not broadcast a full range of "experts" but instead select them based on some editor chief's desires. Getting news from only one outlet is not as good as getting an array of information form multiple sources.
"hominem unius libri timeo" ("fear the man of one book") Thomas Aquinas
Onion soup is easy and delicious
Thanks Ruby ...Definitely.. delicious depends on the recipe
My memories of onion soup at Cambridge U in the seventies were of an insipid milky fluid with a fancy French name..
The recipe at Reading U probably has more taste. .. you can make it in batches and freeze it..
There are Q-rich onions..apparently.. the brown onions( chartreuse) have more Q than red onions..
On average only about 2% of the ingested Q gets into the plasma..... fat may improve/prolong absorption..
https://www.cambridge.org/core…_in_man_a_pilot_study.pdf
"
Batches of..high- and low-quercetin onions (Femia et al. 2003)
were used to prepare high- and low-quercetin onion soups.
The soups were prepared in the same manner on the same
day in one batch and then frozen.. For each person,
chopped onions (500 g, equivalent to approx. three mediumsized onions)
were added to 500 ml boiling water and blanchedfor 2 min.
The onions were then drained (retaining the blanching
liquid) and added to a large saucepan containing 25 g butter and
7·5 ml refined olive oil before being fried for 10 min
until they started to brown.
Meanwhile, 1·5 rounded teaspoons of Swiss Vegetable Bouillon Powder
(Marigold Health Foods, London, UK) was added to the blanching liquid to make a stock,
and this was then added to the fried onions.
The saucepan was then covered and left to simmer for 30 min.
The soup was left to cool and then liquidised;..
