As long as everyone in the subway wears a mask the problem is greatly reduced. They have subways in Japan. They have been open and crowded the whole time.
Surgical gloves also help.
That may reduce transmission but I do not see how it helps tracking - which was the issue in post.
Some cities now have a bit of immunity (London 20%).
Added to that, recent research indicated up to 60% of people may already have cross-immunity (cross-reactive T-cells) to COVID 19, as a result of being exposed to certain cold (corona) viruses before 2019.
Added to that, recent research indicated up to 60% of people may already have cross-immunity (cross-reactive T-cells) to COVID 19, as a result of being exposed to certain cold (corona) viruses before 2019.
IMO there is still a bit unknown in terms of what immunity means. A worse case scenario where there is no lasting immunity has to be considered.
That means someone who had a mild case of Covid-19 this year could be reinfected and have a much more severe case of it next year. Of the coronaviruses that can infect humans SARS and MERS do likely provide long term immunity. But the other 4 coronaviruses that can infect people do not provide long term immunity.
Hopefully covid goes into the SARS and MERS group with this.
Added to that, recent research indicated up to 60% of people may already have cross-immunity (cross-reactive T-cells) to COVID 19, as a result of being exposed to certain cold (corona) viruses before 2019.
I'm going to be annoying.
We know the number cannot be very high - nothing like 60%. Why?
Because COVID has high R and 60% immunity is getting near the amount of herd immunity that stops epidemics in their tracks (R < 1). Maybe it is higher some places than others, but it really seems unlikely we have immunity at high levels.
What might be the case is that partial immunity conferred from cross-immunity makes the disease much less severe for 60% of population, so "innoculation" with Common Cold strain would be worth it to make COVID catching not too bad.
What might be the case is that partial immunity conferred from cross-immunity makes the disease much less severe for 60% of population, so "innoculation" with Common Cold strain would be worth it to make COVID catching not too ba
That is called 'dark matter' immunity. (DMI) It exists in a population but is hard to measure. DMI is speculated to be behind the relatively low mortality rate in some populations, it is because the infection rate is lower.
That is called 'dark matter' immunity. (DMI) It exists in a population but is hard to measure. DMI is speculated to be behind the relatively low mortality rate in some populations, it is because the infection rate is lower.
Right, but what is not known is how much this type of partial immunity (which would certainly reduce death rates) also reduces epidemic spread. It could do one but not the other.
Display MoreI'm going to be annoying.
We know the number cannot be very high - nothing like 60%. Why?
Because COVID has high R and 60% immunity is getting near the amount of herd immunity that stops epidemics in their tracks (R < 1). Maybe it is higher some places than others, but it really seems unlikely we have immunity at high levels.
What might be the case is that partial immunity conferred from cross-immunity makes the disease much less severe for 60% of population, so "innoculation" with Common Cold strain would be worth it to make COVID catching not too bad.
Can't argue your logic.
Because COVID has high R and 60% immunity is getting near the amount of herd immunity that stops epidemics in their tracks (R < 1). Maybe it is higher some places than others, but it really seems unlikely we have immunity at high levels.
Herd immunity percentage is all over the map. For vaccinating purposes, the percentage of those required to be 'immune' in order to achieve supposed herd immunity keeps creeping up and up over the years. For instance the WHO now says 93 - 95 percent is required for herd immunity against measles.
The reasons why Richard Horton rushed the Lancet HCQ study to publish are unknown..
but there is circumstantial evidence for a certain political bias..
Also, perhaps Horton hears a WHO?
Herd immunity percentage is all over the map. For vaccinating purposes, the percentage of those required to be 'immune' in order to achieve supposed herd immunity keeps creeping up and up over the years. For instance the WHO now says 93 - 95 percent is required for herd immunity against measles.
Mark U,
Herd immunity rate needed depends on population susceptibility, contact rate, etc. It will be different in cities and isolated country. Measles is a very highly infectious disease. Perhaps you'd like to do a thorough investigation of what WHO said and when, sourcing the scientific papers on which such advice is based? It would be interesting, whereas the comment above is empty but snide rhetoric.
Re COVID however, there is one interesting thing.
Herd immunity is much more effective when those immune are selected to be those with the largest number of contacts. Naturally, this tends to happen in epidemics. It can be made to happen in vaccination programs by identifying high contact workers and vaccinating them first (as will happen with COVID). Even so this is much less effective than the natural process during epidemics. Hence vaccination needs higher levels than natural caught immunity to squash epidemics.
Political bias re medical caution.
A lot of doctors are well aware of the harm done to patients by rolling out bad drugs early in SARS epidemic. It is also a general medical thing - some drugs have been used over the years that have no effect or even an adverse effect. Medicine therefore now is rightly very cautious.
It is a judgement call (emotional, and complex, but not necessarily political) how much you are willing to risk harm for possible gain now on drugs which have no good positive evidence.
Labelling as "political" everyone reasonably concerned at such an unprecedented rush for everyone to take a drug (due to political PR) that is at the moment unproven and possibly overall harmful is over-politicising the issue. People have strong feelings both sides, no politics needed.
In the US it has become highly political - good doctors will still ignore politics (except that political statements change the behaviour of their patients, in possibly non-optimal ways).
That is not true in the Uk, France, etc. In fact in France there was no strong political opposition to HCQ, quite the reverse.
I'd like those here who portray HCQ and anti-HCQ arguments as all political to admit not not everyone is swayed by such things. The advocacy here for HCQ (inasfar as it is strong) may not be political but it is not well grounded in science. At least not that I've seen posted here.
Mild advocacy of HCQ - fine. That admits that the voices who are more cautious and reckon it most likely does more harm than good also have a point.
https://statmodeling.stat.colu…oquine-is-killing-people/
LancetGate : surgisphere the company that provided the data for the study is it serious ?
https://thegaltimes.com/lancet…tudy-is-it-serious/11832/
"Also, when I see a paper published in Lancet, I get concerned, as they have a bit of a reputation for chasing headlines. I’m not saying that it is for political reasons that they published a paper on the dangers of hydroxychloroquine, but this sort of thing is always a concern when Lancet is involved."
Measles is a very highly infectious disease.
Germans did report yesterday that Cov-19 is strongly spreaded by so called super spreaders, that can infect far more than 100 people in one day/event.
I tend to speculate that CoV-19 is much worse in spreading than measles and therefore most of the vulnerable already did contact it. In Sweden, with no lockdown, just the first day with no death passed! This should not happen under "normal virus" models. Switzerland has ended the lockdown 2 weeks ago. Almost nobody is wearing masks inside trains/buses except 20% in the most affected south. We see between 10-20 new infections a day - no increase of the rate.
On the other side dark spreaders (showing no symptoms at all) are the most dangerous. But these will transmit it to fewer people in average. Now all is a matter of knowing the rules. Like ASAP treat/isolate everybody found positive!
A lot of doctors are well aware of the harm done to patients by rolling out bad drugs early in SARS epidemic.
Can you show us some litterature about this?
Display MoreGermans did report yesterday that Cov-19 is strongly spreaded by so called super spreaders, that can infect far more than 100 people in one day/event.
I tend to speculate that CoV-19 is much worse in spreading than measles and therefore most of the vulnerable already did contact it. In Sweden, with no lockdown, just the first day with no death passed! This should not happen under "normal virus" models. Switzerland has ended the lockdown 2 weeks ago. Almost nobody is wearing masks inside trains/buses except 20% in the most affected south. We see between 10-20 new infections a day - no increase of the rate.
On the other side dark spreaders (showing no symptoms at all) are the most dangerous. But these will transmit it to fewer people in average. Now all is a matter of knowing the rules. Like ASAP treat/isolate everybody found positive!
Can you show us some litterature about this?
interesting overview
LancetGate : surgisphere the company that provided the data for the study is it serious ?
I'm not sure who/what/where The Gal Times is. Article is in fractured English ... though all the quoted sources look OK.
This is one of the authors of the Lancet study..
I had some friends who worked for TRT world..
HCQ is political there too.. everything is political in TRT world
Do we even need RCT's with surgisphere?
The youtube subcomments seem to imply a certain lack of due diligence on the part of the Lancet editor..
[ZoneAlarm] Good Israeli spy ware. First given for free. So the Mossad knows everything you do and prevents others to know the same..,.,,.
I doubt it, but frankly I couldn't care less. I never do anything on my computer that I would mind other people seeing. I usually end up publishing anything valuable.
The Nixon administration famously wiretapped the home telephones of people on its enemies list. I was a teenager. I had a friend at school who was in one of the families they tapped. This was reported much later, but in those days you could tell a phone was tapped. Everyone suspected this one was. The father wrote that he pitied the agent who had to listen hour of teenage gab. I doubt the father was stupid enough to say anything consequential on that line.
My father was posted to Russia 1945. He said if you were an American in a hotel and you wanted room service, the best way to get it was to disconnect the phone. Someone would come up in no time. If you wanted to actually make a phone call, that took several minutes at best. Sometimes longer. Once my father and his friends were saying: "Maybe we should call Smith to get together this evening." "Yes, maybe we should." After a while the phone rang. They picked up and someone was saying "Hello? Hello?" It was Smith. His phone had rung too. The wiretap agent and the operator connected them, in a thoughtful gesture.
Even in the 1970s, American diplomats were shadowed, mainly for their own protection, said my father. One that I knew stopped in mid-winter to buy ice cream on the street. They sell ice cream when it is cold, and I have heard it is good. Anyway, he bought two and held one behind him. His shadow came up and took it.
[As long as everyone in the subway wears a mask the problem is greatly reduced. They have subways in Japan. They have been open and crowded the whole time.
Surgical gloves also help.]
That may reduce transmission but I do not see how it helps tracking - which was the issue in post.
I was describing cases that cannot be tracked, from unknown people. There are bound to some like that when the epidemic is widespread. It is no longer widespread in Japan. In the last few weeks there have been ~40 cases a day, and 1 or 2 deaths. Your chances of encountering someone with the coronavirus in Japan are about 1 in 3 million on any given day.
https://www.zerohedge.com/mark…vid-19-global-false-alarm
