Covid-19 News

    Quote from JedRothwell

    Apparently, slaughtering thousands of people and destroying thousands of lives for no reason is not a bridge too far.


    To be a little more specific, projections show that by October 1, 2020, an additional 1,088 people will die in Georgia because people are not wearing masks. You can guess when a vaccine will be available, and extrapolate how many more people will die on Altar of Stupidity.


    https://covid19.healthdata.org…states-of-america/georgia


    That's just for masks. Gov. Nitwit also refuses to make a serious effort to track, warn and quarantine, which means tens of thousands more people in Georgia will die; tens of thousands more lives will be ruined; and the economy will remained mired in the deepest depression since 1932. This is the cost of turning your back on science, on rationality . . . on sanity, when you come down to it.


    Gov. Nitwit has urged people to wear masks, but he dares not order it. He is terrified of Trump. So much so that he would prefer to kill thousands of people rather than defy Trump and his hard-core supporters. This has to be one of the most craven episodes in U.S. history. It is certainly the most idiotic. Just looking the economy, ignoring the deaths and suffering, here we have a politician who claims his first priority is to "open the state for business" and "get people back to work." Yet he is doing the very opposite of that! In effect, he and Trump are doing all they can to ensure the virus spreads catastrophically for months or years to come, depending on the vaccine. Which means the economy will collapse. It is mind-boggling.

    The page with statidtics was very instructional. Thanks. There is a lot of similarities to swedish statistics. But we track the icu cases and not hospitalisations. The proper graph for deaths is very similar to ours but not the hospitalisations the worry is that the lag is hiding the reality. I got the same feeling looking at this data as the graph over oring temp tests for the challenger accident.

    The U.S. hit a new peak in Daily New Cases today: 51,097. More importantly, the slope of the increase is now a little steeper than it was in March:



    The slope in March was from 0 to 40,000 in ~23 days. It is now from 0 to 40,000 in ~21 days. So, once again we face a catastrophe. If this is not slowed down, we will be seeing 100,000 cases a day as Fauci warned. And then 200,000 and so on. Do you think it will magically stop at 100,000?


    This is exactly what you would expect. We are seeing a gigantic biology experiment. The outcome has been common knowledge since the 18th century. Take a population of mobile animals. Expose them to a new epidemic pathogen. The epidemic will spread at a certain rate, depending on various well-known factors such as how contagious it is, how many members die before they can spread the disease and so on. This is the natural rate of increase.


    In March, in the U.S., the rate of increase was close to the natural rate because no one was doing anything to stop the epidemic. A lockdown and various other steps were taken, and the increase stopped around April 5. In May, the lockdown ended in stages. In most states, nothing more was done, except that some people now wear masks. We put most of the population of the U.S. back in the same conditions it was in previously. So, of course, the epidemic once again began to increase at the same rate. It went back to the natural rate.


    In a human society this rate is not "natural" in the same sense it is with a flock of birds. Social conditions such as whether people live in the countryside or the city make a big difference. Wealth and poverty make a big difference. However, the overall population distribution, the healthcare system, and other social conditions on March 26 will cause some rate of increase, predictable within broad limits. If you return to the conditions of March 26, you will see the same rate of increase. That must happen, just as surely as it will with birds or deer. It must happen unless steps are taken to interrupt the chain of contagination. The only steps that can be taken in this case are testing, case tracking, warning and quarantine. The death rate per case can be reduced somewhat with better therapies, but nothing will change the rate of contagination. And, there is no question, if we see 100,000 or 200,000 new cases a day, the hospitals will be overwhelmed and the quality of care will fall. We can make space in the wards. We can manufacture more masks and more equipment. But we cannot make more doctors and nurses.


    At this point, it is obvious that Trump and Federal government will do nothing to stop the epidemic. No increased testing, no tracking, no pooling of resources, coordination or cooperation. It is clear to me that the governors of Georgia and Florida are certified idiots who don't understand basic arithmetic or logic, and who have no idea what to do or how to do it. They are also incapable of doing anything because they are terrified of their G.O.P. base of voters. These voters have been polled and interviewed. I know what they think. They strongly oppose wearing masks, case tracking, or doing anything to help poor people and minorities, who are disproportionately the victims of the epidemic. So, it is increasingly likely we will do nothing in the South and in many other parts of the country, while the numbers increase exponentially toward the worst disaster in U.S. history. If this scenario seems unlikely -- or surrealistic, or impossible -- ask yourself this: A few months ago, before this started, did you imagine that during the weeks when infections went from 20,000 to 50,000 per day, the vice president and the White House spokeswoman would repeatedly say the epidemic is behind us. It is over. We are seeing only a few "embers." Embers! These people make the officials of Soviet Union and Baghdad Bob seem rational. When every single person in the U.S. can see the graph at any time, and knows that the numbers have doubled, and are increasing exponentially, these people stood in front of the nation and said this isn't happening.

    Quote from JedRothwell

    They are also incapable of doing anything because they are terrified of their G.O.P. base of voters. These voters have been polled and interviewed. I know what they think. They strongly oppose wearing masks, case tracking, or doing anything to help poor people and minorities, who are disproportionately the victims of the epidemic.


    Do the polls distinguish between opposing wearing masks on special situations, opposing wearing masks everywhere in public, and opposing a mandate to wear a mask everywhere? A government mandate to wear a mask everywhere in public is both weird and, frankly, troubling.

    Who would have thought it would be the 'liberals' going all totalitarian on us.

    I know lots of GOP folk - some of the best people I know - who would go out of their way to help in a crisis, because they already help in the community when there isn't a crisis. If they are suspicious of government overreach, welcome to the principles upon which the United States of America was founded.

    Statistics:


    On this thread, at least, I'd expect we can be clear about the statistics for death rates.


    They are highly variable according to how you measure them, so arguing "what is the (real) infection fatality rate?" is a complex question.


    Arguing "What is the case fatality rate?" is an answerable question for a specific place and time but since it is accepted that almost everywhere cases constitute a small proportion of the overall infections, and that varies between 20% and 5% or less (with a few outliers catching near to 100%) it is not helpful.


    The question perhaps everyone wants answered is "How many would die if we let the epidemic continue as we do Flu epidemics" (but not the real zoonotic nasties, which we have so far, except for COVID, managed to suppress).


    Here are the three factors that affect this:

    • Age profile: we have a known dependence of death on age, more extreme than usual disease. Countries with older population have higher death rates. This is the one very large factor helping the developing world with much younger populations.
    • Asymptomatic infection rate: how many people catch COVID enough to have (reasonable) immunity, but not enough to know they have had it or be included in the statistics. The more of these, the lower the (real) IFR, and the lower the number of deaths before the epidemic runs its course. This is a real unknown, but some people here are not accepting that, and some are quoting very partial statistics. It is just not easy to work this one out for a whole load of reasons (need a separate post). Still, we have something like (for a "typical" Western age profile) something between 0.3% and 1% as best guess. Maybe the same again (see below) seriously disabled.
    • Treatment: currently we have Dexamethasone ( v low cost, cuts death rate by 20%). Remdesivir (not clear it cuts death rate). Convalescent plasma. Have not see numbers. Blood thinners. Some hope, given the mechanism of COVID disease you would expect them to be very helpful, again have not seen numbers. Ivermectin? I've not seen any data yet.


    Frankly, what we should be thinking about is not the death rate. It is the large number of people with serious disease who end up very disabled. COVID affects lungs, heart, liver, kidneys, brain when it is severe because the cytokine storm kills everything. I do not have figures for how many people are left seriously and permanently disabled, but my guess would be about the same as the number who die, since serious cases go onto ventilation and maybe 50% of those die. Treatments will help this group, and how much they do that (which we do not know) is just as significant as how they alter the death rate. My father, age 90, for example, would not mind dying, but really does not want to be left heavily disabled.


    THH

    Quote from Mark U

    Do the polls distinguish between opposing wearing masks on special situations, opposing wearing masks everywhere in public, and opposing a mandate to wear a mask everywhere? A government mandate to wear a mask everywhere in public is both weird and, frankly, troubling.

    Who would have thought it would be the 'liberals' going all totalitarian on us.

    I know lots of GOP folk - some of the best people I know - who would go out of their way to help in a crisis, because they already help in the community when there isn't a crisis. If they are suspicious of government overreach, welcome to the principles upon which the United States of America was founded.


    Mark - it is like this.


    Those "best people you know" are valuing everyone's personal liberty to decide not to wear a mask above the large number of extra deaths that such actions result in. No doubt the "best people" will, themselves, wear masks voluntarily. But many do not. In the Uk we had automobile seat belts for a long time - I never wore them. They were made compulsory. No real enforcement, but a clear law. A very few people got fined. Within 12 months everyone was wearing seatbelts and automobile fatalities dropped 50%.


    Not wearing a seatbelt: you kill yourself (or your passengers, if you do not require them to do this). Your choice. I never saw this as a personal moral responsibility until the law changed.


    Not wearing a mask? You kill others. People you have never met. The old, those with chronic disease, and because it strikes randomly a few who are young and healthy. In addition, because all this death is difficult for countries, you increase the level of lockdown and the disruption to the economy.



    Personal freedom? Sure, a good thing. We live with others, and when with others (not socially distanced) our freedom is somone else's death. those US citizens living out in the wilds, in bunkers, need not fear imposition of masks. indeed they do no harm as long as they stay out of contact with others.


    Principles? I've never liked ideologues, nor violent "we'd rather kill others than sacrifice principles". Such things lead to most of humanities ills. You can probably see why in this context I have a very low opinion of any such principles. If the best people you know have such principles (and therefore think it is Ok not wearing masks in a COVID epidemic) then I think something is very wrong with education in the US.

    Quote from JedRothwell

    The slope in March was from 0 to 40,000 in ~23 days. It is now from 0 to 40,000 in ~21 days. So, once again we face a catastrophe. If this is not slowed down, we will be seeing 100,000 cases a day as Fauci warned. And then 200,000 and so on. Do you think it will magically stop at 100,000?


    It will stop - but it is not clear when. That slope is made of lots of different places. NY had a large population, was packed, and dominated the first slope. The second slope will have some similar high density places dominating, with luck they are not as significant, as proportion of total state population, as NY was. That will make health challenges easier. But, looking at projections of ICU beds etc, some places are not looking good now.


    Is there a script that allows the US anti-science brigade to blame the obvious predicted consequences of their actions on someone else now? Perhaps it i all the faulyt of Mexican immigrants, or the Chinese inserting more virulant COVID strains into the US as covert warfare? I don't really get how they think.

    Quote from JedRothwell

    They are also incapable of doing anything because they are terrified of their G.O.P. base of voters. These voters have been polled and interviewed. I know what they think. They strongly oppose wearing masks, case tracking, or doing anything to help poor people and minorities, who are disproportionately the victims of the epidemic.


    I am sorry Jed, but you are way out of line and this is purely political bull shit.


    I can say that elite liberal Democrats care nothing about the poor or minorities. You hear they say nothing about the dozens of black shooting deaths every week in Chicago and other cities. They only start piping up when it is politically advantageous. They are only about control. I can also say the Democrats are socialist, border line communist who think Democratic leaders should control all the money and then re-disperse to everyone because they know best. It is not "fair" that person X has money and person Y does not! Even though person X worked his whole life for his money while person Y set on his ass. Yes, the Dems should be in charge of allocations for sure! They are the only smart and educated of the entire country. Just look at AOC.... the darling of the liberal dems.... she calls for abolishment of police, mandated wealth redistribution, etc. etc. That Democrats supported the Seattle police free zone and the calls to abolish police. That democrats (mass media) stoke and prod sensitive issues to stir up trouble for their own political gain, such as DeBlasio cutting billions from NY police funds!


    Of course I can say this, but I would be wrong. Not all democrats are like this, only a large majority????? :rolleyes:


    Same with your statement, you do NOT know and certainly not all conservatives or "GOP" are anything like what you say. The vast majority are not. This is the worse type of stereotyping to politicize one's view. That is the most political and racist BS I have heard you say yet! Oppose helping poor or minorities? Really? You are so full of BS it is pitiful.


    Moderators, Jed's "protected" status of being a "key LENR" agent is also BS concerning these types of posts! As what has been said before "some are MORE EQUAL than others".....:( This is simply the view and thinking of liberal elitism....

    Quote from Mark U

    Do the polls distinguish between opposing wearing masks on special situations, opposing wearing masks everywhere in public, and opposing a mandate to wear a mask everywhere?


    I have not seen a poll like that. They just ask about masks in general. I have also never seen a mandate that you need a mask "everywhere." The rule in Savannah allows commonsense exceptions. It includes a $500 fine. Right wing opponents say they will not be forced to wear a mask while driving or "in the bath" which is ridiculous. See:


    https://www.wsav.com/news/loca…tate-covid-19-cases-rise/


    QUOTE:


    [Savannah mayor] Johnson said anyone unable to safely wear a face mask due to old age or underlying health conditions, or who is unable to remove the mask on their own, is exempt. Children under the age of 10 will not be required to wear a mask.


    Anyone not complying with the mandatory mask order will be subject to a civil infraction, which is punishable with a fine of up to $500, pursuant to Section 3-3015 of the City Code.

    This does not apply to religious establishments. However, face coverings are highly recommended during religious activity.


    Face coverings are not required in the following circumstances:


    In personal vehicles;

    When a person is alone in enclosed spaces or only with other household members;

    During outdoor physical activity, provided the active person maintains a minimum of 6 feet from other people with whom they do not cohabitate at all times;

    While drinking, eating, or smoking;

    When wearing a face covering causes or aggravates a health condition;

    When wearing a face covering would prevent the receipt of personal services; and

    When a person is 10 years of age or younger.

    The City of Savannah has clarified with News 3 that face coverings will not be required while exercising in indoor facilities, but social distancing must be practiced.


    Quote from Mark U

    A government mandate to wear a mask everywhere in public is both weird and, frankly, troubling.


    No one would impose such a mandate.


    Our ancestors were more sensible, and they obeyed the law more readily, because they understood that science works. This photo from 1918 tells the story. It says: "Wear a mask or go to jail."


    Quote from Bob#2

    I can say that elite liberal Democrats care nothing about the poor or minorities.


    Well, a large number of elite liberal Democrats are minorities, so that's not too logical. I agree that in general wealthy elites of both parties do little for the poor.


    Quote from Bob#2

    Same with your statement, you do NOT know and certainly not all conservatives or "GOP" are anything like what you say. The vast majority are not.


    The polls say otherwise. Who are we going to believe? You or what the GOP members say to poll takers? I am a big fan of public opinion polls. It runs in my family.



    Quote from Bob#2

    I can also say the Democrats are socialist, border line communist who think Democratic leaders should control all the money


    Nope. No one in the Democratic party favors public ownership of the means of production, which is what "socialism" means. You apparently think it means whatever you don't like.

    Quote from THHuxleynew

    Asymptomatic infection rate: how many people catch COVID enough to have (reasonable) immunity, but not enough to know they have had it or be included in the statistics. The more of these, the lower the (real) IFR, and the lower the number of deaths before the epidemic runs its course. This is a real unknown, but some people here are not accepting that


    It is unclear in the U.S., and estimates vary widely. The number of undetected cases is estimated to range from 3 to 10 times the number officially recorded cases. I can't tell at all which is right. However, in China, Japan and Korea they have now done extensive random sample antibody tests, so they know approximately how many cases they missed. I think it is only around 2 times the cases they caught. The death rate for cases they know about in Japan is 5%. That is, 977 deaths divided by 18,934 cases. There have been few cases in recent weeks and most patients are recovered, so those are the final numbers. (For the first wave, anyway; there may be a second wave.) Assuming they only caught half the cases, the fatality rate was around ~2%. That number keeps coming up, so I think that's it. That is for Asian societies and Italy with many elderly people. It may apply to the U.S. because we have many obese people, who are as much at risk as normal-weight people in their 60s.


    The Koreans tested extensively at the height of their epidemic. They later found few hidden cases with antibody tests. Their final numbers are 282 deaths divided by 12,904 cases = 2% case mortality. Claims that it is only 1% in Korea are wrong, I think. It might be ~1% now because there are so few cases they can effectively protect elderly people, so only feckless young people are getting sick. 30 to 50 per day. There are a few deaths per week.


    https://www.worldometers.info/…irus/country/south-korea/


    In Japan, I think most patients are feckless middle aged nitwits who go to late night bars. The numbers are way up, to near 200. They say they will test all bars and karaoke joints. They better do it quickly!

    Quote from Bob#2

    I can say that elite liberal Democrats care nothing about the poor or minorities. You hear they say nothing about the dozens of black shooting deaths every week in Chicago and other cities. They only start piping up when it is politically advantageous. They are only about control. I can also say the Democrats are socialist, border line communist who think Democratic leaders should control all the money and then re-disperse to everyone because they know best. It is not "fair" that person X has money and person Y does not! Even though person X worked his whole life for his money while person Y set on his ass. Yes, the Dems should be in charge of allocations for sure! They are the only smart and educated of the entire country. Just look at AOC.... the darling of the liberal dems.... she calls for abolishment of police, mandated wealth redistribution, etc. etc. That Democrats supported the Seattle police free zone and the calls to abolish police. That democrats (mass media) stoke and prod sensitive issues to stir up trouble for their own political gain, such as DeBlasio cutting billions from NY police funds!


    I look at US politics (again not OT for this thread) in terms of are the political leaders so ill-informed about science that they cannot make political decisions properly informed. I count being informed, but simply not believing what scientists say, as the same as ill-informed.


    Science is all about uncertainty. You don't get definite answers from scientists. And you certainly don't get political decisions. Those can go different ways on the same evidence.


    But leaders, to gain my respect, need to show that they understand the main factual issues and act in accordance with that understanding.


    I'm not informed enough about US politics to know are the democrats or republicans more to blame in this way.


    Trump, however, certainly, is.

    Quote from Bob#2

    I can also say the Democrats are socialist, border line communist who think Democratic leaders should control all the money and then re-disperse to everyone because they know best.


    This is not fair to counter bias with (bias)2! There are no socialists in US politics - only people that talk "politics" bullshit - socialism.. - to gain votes.


    Social means: Strengthen the society. But this is exactly the today state of USA. People, thanks to rotten minded politicians, miss even the most simple social actions to fight CoV-19.


    If you continue to elect almost only members of the outmost greedy FM-mafia into congress/senate then definitely good night USA!

    I just read a report from swedish FHM that in end of maj the fraction of Stockholm people giving blood had around 10% antiboddies. Now the result from the tcell study linked above had 30% stockholm citizens (in may, unknown how the sampling was done) blod donors with tcells for covid-19. The control of blod from last year was zero cases as can be deduced from the preprint. Now the sampling done is not described but it clearly shows that using the antibodies severely underestimates the deadliness of covid with these data suggesting 3 times actually more infections than deduced from antibodies. They speak of up to 2 times in the report and elsewhere on the intertubes. This means maybe 30-40% immunity in Stockholm atm and around 20% in the country if correct which is nice as we actually got something for the high price we paid. We do see that icu cases goes down in Stockholm although there has been a lot of relaxing among the people regarding how to keep distances etc. And this is explained by a help of immunity. This is probably good as we can be relaxed about the vaccine when the big uggly fight start over the first doses and we can await quality and reasonable price of the vaccine. This also means that we can more effectively suppress outbreaks and second waves such as the new wave in USA. What we see in USA now with people not being careful and follow the recomendatins is actually something the Swedish FHM early discussed a lot. They wondered how to close down sweden without people stop following orders and be able to maintain the lockdown (yes we still have a lockdown) for a long long time. And finally no, Sweden is not similar to any of the nordic countries as we had 1/10 of the population going abroad around the beginning of March, and that's more similar to New York than our neighbour countries. This fact is heavily overlooked everywhere in the debate about the Swedish corona strategy. As explained before high numbers of clusters with spread is the key to if a country typically get a lot of cases. This can be achieved in many ways, like late close down, huge traveling exposure, opening up with to many cases in the society.

    Quote from stefan

    I just read a report from swedish FHM that in end of maj the fraction of Stockholm people giving blood had around 10% antiboddies. Now the result from the tcell study linked above had 30% stockholm citizens (in may, unknown how the sampling was done) blod donors with tcells for covid-19. The control of blod from last year was zero cases as can be deduced from the preprint. Now the sampling done is not described but it clearly shows that using the antibodies severely underestimates the deadliness of covid with these data suggesting 3 times actually more infections than deduced from antibodies. They speak of up to 2 times in the report and elsewhere on the intertubes. This means maybe 30-40% immunity in Stockholm atm and around 20% in the country if correct which is nice as we actually got something for the high price we paid.


    Thanks Stefan: This confirms the recent findings (papers) about classic corona cross immunity. If you add all the cases that will not further express a high number of T-cells due to the fact that the last infection happened during the last year then we can add at least 20% or up 40% more immune people to the existing 40%. Classic corona T-cells can last up to 17 years but the match is not perfect to catch CoV-19. So it's, as expected, just a number game. The more virus you get the stronger the reaction - up to get sick despite partial immunity.


    We here had an explosive (10x) growth in positive cases due to a set of super-spreading events - within one week! But no real increase in ICU too.


    In the mean time German Biontech published first vaccination result. 3x more anti bodies than after a regular CoV-19 infection. Thus first two mile stones cleared. Now a larger group has to test for adverse effects and may be the impact of a dirty adjuvant...

    https://www.faz.net/aktuell/rh…on-biontech-16841569.html

    JedRothwell again and again, you base your numbers on the RT-PCR and serological tests whereas it is now proven that the latter miss most cases exposed to the virus. Two independent studies (wonderful studies by the way) both show that the number of people who are exposed to the virus and do not develop any specific anti-SARS-COV-2 antibodies are about 4 times more than those who do:

    https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.05.21.108308v1

    https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.06.29.174888v1

    And note this number is not about the number of undetected cases that you mention because no RT-PCR or serological test was carried out, it is just that these tests miss most cases because they cannot capture the complexity of how the human body stops the virus. Furthermore, there are still other means to stop the virus than those assessed in these two studies and direct neutralization tests carried out in my lab suggest that this factor of 4-5 may actually be underestimated. So no: Korea and China don't know how many cases they missed. Nobody knows exactly. What is known is that the official RT-PCR and serological numbers grossly underestimate the percentage of people exposed to the virus. Something I already alluded to in March but without any strong evidence at that time.


    Wyttenbach and stefan are right on this one: the exposure and immunity are significantly higher than what is suggested by the numbers that you provided. Which is good news from a public health perspective.

    External Content www.youtube.com
    Content embedded from external sources will not be displayed without your consent.
    Through the activation of external content, you agree that personal data may be transferred to third party platforms. We have provided more information on this in our privacy policy.


    A NEW STUDY On Vitamin D


    A very creative study published on April 30th 2020

    “We show that the risk of severe COVID-19 cases among patients with severe Vit D deficiency is 17.3% while the equivalent figure for patients with normal Vit D levels is 14.6% (a reduction of 15.6%)”

    We had a huge event 7th of march with 15000 people in Stockholm. This is assumed to be a mistake by experts but I wonder. They say we had more infected than in the alps at that time. However Saturday 7th is at the end of the sports week holiday in Stockholm so people started to arrive back from the journey abroad at that time and very few are able and would go to an all night event. Also it takes time from infection to start spreading so we are talking about people being infected at the beginning of the sports week with less spread than at the end of the week. We also see from the data that hospital cases starts to climb a few days after the event and there is no increasing peak one week after the event so it looks from the data that it did not have a big effect. We had people coming from Italy the week before week 9, but they was heavily monitored and other regions which has the holiday one or two weeks before Stockholm did not show a spread. In all it was a huge unnecessary risk to take but I do not agree with experts claiming it was a sure mistake.

Subscribe to our newsletter

It's sent once a month, you can unsubscribe at anytime!

View archive of previous newsletters

* indicates required

Your email address will be used to send you email newsletters only. See our Privacy Policy for more information.

Our Partners

Supporting researchers for over 20 years
Want to Advertise or Sponsor LENR Forum?
CLICK HERE to contact us.