Virus - the differences we need to pay attention to and why - As I understand it - This is not political.
When we read the stats we are not given the full story.
There are five status:
1 - Infected, a carrier with no symptom (the reason why wide repeated individual testing is important)
2 - Infected, identified, no symptom
3 - Infected, case is active but the person will 'heal' itself
4 - Infected, in the health care system (usually referred to as 'mild')
5 - Infected, critical (the person is in a hospital under constant monitoring)
What we really need to be concerned about is the first one:
- While healthy they still propagate the virus. The only possible way at the moment to deal with that is 'social distancing' and this works only so much meaning it is really a simplistic approach to the issue. As long as there is no test available no cure and no vaccine everyone this is the most pernicious and devastating of all categories.
- Not being identified creates a 'fear of'
- Not being identified make social gathering an issue regardless of intent.
- 'Restarting the economy' with non identified carriers will create more of the same (1~5)
The others 2~5 need to be in strict quarantine. 2~5 are counted in statistics.
Please NO POLITICAL COMMENT, I will report them.
Lottery: When a vaccine is made available, how many (%) will get it? My guess is 72%.
Kraken wrote:
My guess, with trump in charge would be 38% just enough to for his cult base.
What part of "No Political Comments" didn't you get?
I added it after his post. I also reported the first one that prompted his own...
I reported the post (and your as a reaction to his post).
Rongnongno wrote:
I added it after his post. I also reported the first one that prompted his own...
I reported the post (and your as a reaction to his post).
Your right I didn't see the red print when I made my comment, I hope it doesn't affect the outcome you
wanted.
What we need is widespread testing of people with no symptoms. It seems now they are only testing people with symptoms. We need to know what percentage of the population is infected but not showing symptoms yet, or not at all, to be able to consider opening the country again. We can't even know how many 2s there are without testing asymptomatic people.
JohnSwanda wrote:
What we need is widespread testing of people with no symptoms. It seems now they are only testing people with symptoms. We need to know what percentage of the population is infected but not showing symptoms yet, or not at all, to be able to consider opening the country again. We can't even know how many 2s there are without testing asymptomatic people.
But that would require about 328+ million test kits and you don't get those by having Harry wave his wand. Esp since they didn't even know what they needed a test for until a few months ago. I am sure that right now a bunch of FDA and similar bureaucrats are having nervous breakdowns over how fast and "uncontrolled" (read-Don't follow their rules.) the new tests have been developed and are being put into production.
It will take time.
robertjerl wrote:
But that would require about 328+ million test kits and you don't get those by having Harry wave his wand. Esp since they didn't even know what they needed a test for until a few months ago. I am sure that right now a bunch of FDA and similar bureaucrats are having nervous breakdowns over how fast and "uncontrolled" (read-Don't follow their rules.) the new tests have been developed and are being put into production.
It will take time.
I'm not saying to test everyone in the country. Just test a sample of enough asymptomatic people to get some idea what percentage of the population are infected.
Longshadow wrote:
Okay, then what?
Use that knowledge to help guide reopening the country. Also, we need more research to determine whether all recovered people have immunity.
JohnSwanda wrote:
Use that knowledge to help guide reopening the country. Also, we need more research to determine whether all recovered people have immunity.
I wonder if anyone else has thought of that.
DirtFarmer
Loc: Escaped from the NYC area, back to MA
If we can get our testing going (we need more than a billion tests for the USA) and can identify what percentage of people are in category 1, we will be able to make informed decisions on re-opening the economy.
If there are a lot of #1s, we have to maintain social distancing.
If there are not a lot of #1s we can think about opening things up but will have to test for the presence of category 2 in the workplace. Category 3 and up will have to remain in quarantine. (Actual numbers for "a lot" and "not a lot" are subject to future determination by experts).
The problem is that people who are in category 0 (not infected) are susceptible to coming in contact with 1s and 2s. That's why frequent testing will be important (and hence the number of tests gets up to a billion or more).
And that only considers the USA. Remember that we have (had?) a global economy. That model has to be expanded to countries we deal with actively.
And, of course, the next problem is the reports of re-infection (re-activation?) after recovery.
DirtFarmer wrote:
If we can get our testing going (we need more than a billion tests for the USA) and can identify what percentage of people are in category 1, we will be able to make informed decisions on re-opening the economy.
If there are a lot of #1s, we have to maintain social distancing.
If there are not a lot of #1s we can think about opening things up but will have to test for the presence of category 2 in the workplace. Category 3 and up will have to remain in quarantine. (Actual numbers for "a lot" and "not a lot" are subject to future determination by experts).
The problem is that people who are in category 0 (not infected) are susceptible to coming in contact with 1s and 2s. That's why frequent testing will be important (and hence the number of tests gets up to a billion or more).
And that only considers the USA. Remember that we have (had?) a global economy. That model has to be expanded to countries we deal with actively.
And, of course, the next problem is the reports of re-infection (re-activation?) after recovery.
If we can get our testing going (we need more than... (
show quote)
There also is the need for mass antibody testing to see how many have had it and now have great resistance/immunity(?). Some parts of California and Texas there are areas where they had large numbers of travelers to and from China in late 2019 who are suspected of spreading the mild/non-symptomatic version resulting in a suspected large population of people with anti-bodies. But they need 100s of thousands or millions of test kits to verify this suspicion.
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.