Coronavirus Vaccines May Not Work for the Elderly—and This Lab Aims to Change That

https://www.scientificamerican…-lab-aims-to-change-that/

Quote from seven_of_twenty

Idiot:

https://www.foxnews.com/politi…ted-drugs-for-coronavirus

It may or may not work but this moron is interfering directly with the doctor-patient relationship. I doubt that this ban will stand up in court.

The Michigan governor (Republican?!) is also following suit:

https://news.yahoo.com/michiga…-prescribe-024111454.html

Most notably in California, state legislation is allowing state officials to flag doctor decisions and override doctor discretion.

http://theconversation.com/cal…tions-over-control-123563

Quote from oldguy

The Minister of Health said that.

You did too.

Anyone who looks at the graph will say that. The curve may go up again, but for the past several days it has been stable. Let us hope it stays that way, and then declines. See:

Daily New Cases in Italy

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/italy/

These are cases recorded by hospitals and reported to the government Health Ministry. The actual totals are much larger than this, because many patients do not go to the hospital, so their cases are not recorded. However, this is a consistent metric. Whatever percent of the total it may be, it is probably proportional to the actual total. It is very unlikely the hidden cases are increasing while the daily total of known new cases remains stable.

Corona Virus; How to understand the death toll.

I found this illuminating article on the BBC that helps to put into perspective the much debated stats on the Corona virus death toll vs the economic cost of the shutdown.

The economic hit is something University of Bristol researchers have now looked at. Their conclusion? Trashing the economy costs lives.

They found the benefit of a long-term lockdown in reducing premature deaths is outweighed by the cost in terms of lost life expectancy from a prolonged economic dip.

And the tipping point is a 6.4% decline in the size of the economy - on par with what happened following the 2008 financial crash - which leads to a loss of three months of life on average across the population because of factors from declining living standards to poorer health care.

Quote from JedRothwell

Daily New Cases in Italy

Quote from JedRothwell

Anyone who looks at the graph will say that.

I guess I am not anyone since it does not look stable right now to me. Yesterday it clicked up. I expect it to click down just a little to day but still higher than the day before yesterday. If I saw such a graph in my lab data, I would not stay it was "stable" or at equilibrium.

lenr-forum.com/attachment/11755/

Quote from ZenoOfElea

The economic hit is something University of Bristol researchers have now looked at. Their conclusion? Trashing the economy costs lives.

They found the benefit of a long-term lockdown in reducing premature deaths is outweighed by the cost in terms of lost life expectancy from a prolonged economic dip.

Again let me ask: How can anyone prevent a lock-down? Are you going to tell people: "Please go to the mall. Please spend money and go to work. You may die. You will endanger your relatives, and cause millions of extra deaths, but the economy is more important than your life."

WHO WOULD DO THAT? Where will you find crazy people who will risk their lives & health to help avoid a recession?

This notion that we have a choice about whether to lock down or not is a total fantasy! You cannot force people to leave their houses and go out when the police are erecting temporary morgues in New York City. People may be stupid, and they may not have grasped what was coming, but the disaster is here, now, and they know it.

Quote from oldguy

I guess I am not anyone since it does not look stable right now to me.

It is not going up at the rate of 1.3 times every day. New cases per day not doubling every 3 days. Do you see that?

If you don't see, use your finger and trace where it would be if it had continued to rise the same rate it was from March 2 until last week. Do the arithmetic. You will see there would be twice as many cases by now.

That is not "stable" . As a physics/scientist I think of "stable" meaning that after a perturbation a system returns to its original state. Clear you don't think that if they lifted the lockdown that things would return to what it was before. There is a difference between conditions improving or cases or deaths not moving up as quickly and it being "stable".

What is stable to you, just not getting worse as quickly?

8 strains of the coronavirus are circling the globe. Here's what clues they're giving scientists.

https://www.usatoday.com/story…ains-mutation/5080571002/

note: only 11 base pair changes out of about 30,000

" So far even in the virus's most divergent strains scientists have found only 11 base pair changes."

"They also say it does not appear the strains will grow more lethal as they evolve. "

Quote from oldguy

That is not "stable" . As a physics/scientist I think of "stable" meaning that after a perturbation a system returns to its original state.

When the Minister of Health and I say it is stable, we mean it is not increasing exponentially. On March 21 the number of new cases per day peaked at 6,557. The numbers following that are fairly close to 6,000. Whereas if the trend had continued, the number would have doubled, and then doubled again. That's:

6,557*2=

13,114*2=

~26,228

Do you understand? They would have 26,000 new cases per day. Instead, they have 5,909. That is a much smaller number than 26,000. It is much closer to the peak of 6,557. That makes a huge difference.

Actually, daily new cases would have more than doubled, to ~32,000. The total number of cases would have increased to 162,000 by now. Instead, it has increased to 86,498.

Is there something about this you still do not understand? Or are you being deliberately obtuse?

Coronavirus updates: Italy records deadliest day with nearly 1,000 dead

Italy on Friday reported 969 COVID-19 deaths over a 24-hour period, marking the deadliest single-day for the country since the global outbreak began, according to data from the Health Ministry.

https://www.axios.com/coronavi…10-a219-7d1d1dcb6b44.html

Mystery In Wuhan: Recovered Coronavirus Patients Test Negative ... Then Positive

"Based on data from several quarantine facilities in the city, which house patients for further observation after their discharge from hospitals, about 5%-10% of patients pronounced "recovered" have tested positive again.

Some of those who retested positive appear to be asymptomatic carriers — those who carry the virus and are possibly infectious but do not exhibit any of the illness's associated symptoms — suggesting that the outbreak in Wuhan is not close to being over."

https://www.npr.org/sections/g…st-negative-then-positive

U.S. new cases today increased by a factor of 1.1. That is much better than 1.3, which has been the factor for most of this month. In absolute numbers it was 18,691 where as 1.3 increase would have been 22,391. It is only one day. Let us hope it is the same or better tomorrow.

Most experts say the number of cases reported in Worldmeters for the U.S. is much smaller than the actual number of cases. However, the numbers probably mirror the actual cases. They are probably some fixed percent of the actual numbers. These numbers mainly come from state Public Health departments. I believe this is the number of cases cases reported by doctors and hospitals. They have a legal obligation to inform the authorities. (They do not have to inform the authorities about less serious diseases.) I think it is safe to assume that the percent of total patients who seek medical help and are diagnosed and reported probably does not vary much over time. I do not know if 10% report, or 20%. I have seen both estimates. Whatever the percent is, you can still see the overall trend, the growth rate, the states with the highest numbers of patients, and so on, in the numbers reported here.

The numbers for Japan, on the other hand, are close to the actual numbers. We hope.

Quote from Shane D.

After putting a dollar value on lives saved by the various government measures available, they also put a price on the lives lost by those very same measures. Then they look at all the various combinations, and give guidance as to the best option to save the most lives.

Great! Now tell us: How will these Ivory Tower Professors persuade members of the public to leave their houses, go to restaurants, and go back to work, knowing that might kill them. How will they implement this "guidance." Who would be guided by this? People with a death wish?

I'll bet those professors do not intend to risk their lives to follow their own suggestions. They will stay safe in their tower, wondering why the rest of us are not keen to risk our lives in service of their spreadsheet theories.

Violence erupts in China as people try to leave coronavirus-stricken Hubei province

https://www.theglobeandmail.co…ave-coronavirus-stricken/

A recent study has shown that patients treated by Hydoxychloroquine (HCQ) are 40% more likely to develop atrial fibrillation.

This just means, that this drug is perfectly safe for short term usage (i.e. treatment of coronavirus). Rheumatic patients are taking it for years, yet this connection was revealed quite recently (after fifty years of HCQ at the market). And 40% is not so much, it merely blurs with background (the immunosuppressed patients are taking often antibiotics, which induce palpitations too). I'd affraid of azithromycine more in this connection, being Trump.