• Member Statistics

    15,844
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    maley.chris78@gmail.com
    Newest Member
    [email protected]
    Joined
moneypitmike

Coronavirus

Recommended Posts

Just now, winterwx21 said:

Young healthy people are dying, but they're very rare cases. I know that no one is completely immune, but the statistics show that most young people that die from this also have underlying health conditions. And this is a point that Cuomo keeps hitting during his press conferences. The overwhelming majority of people that end up dying are people that have underlying health conditions. This virus is great at attacking people with weaker immune systems and weaker lungs. So I didn't get anything wrong as Weathafella claimed. I was just making the point that young healthy people need to be very careful  about spreading it to people that have underlying health conditions. That's why this social distancing is so important. So many people have this and don't even realize it, so everyone needs to be very careful.

I didn't disagree with your point about the vulnerability of some people and the role of young people in spreading the virus to them.  My point is that I don't think Cuomo and others should be pointing out that young people are relatively safe from death.  In fact I think he should be making the exact opposite point, because it is young people who I see most often not practicing safe physical distancing.  It looks like somewhere between 5-10% of cases in people under 40 require hospitalization.  And between 2 and 10% of those patients die.  It's not THAT rare.  If hospitals are overwhelmed, that number will rise for everybody.

If people think they are individually at risk they will be A LOT more careful.  Stop talking about the safety of our parents and grandparent.  Talk about our safety.  We are all at risk.  Soon, we might not even be able to get medical attention if we get into a car accident (at least in some places).  That's what happened in Wuhan, in northern Italy, in parts of Spain...

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Hoth said:

Even if my chance of death is low as a fit 35 year old, I'd still rather not face greater risk of requiring ventilation, intubation or having so much fluid in my lungs I'm turning blue and secreting a pink bloody foam, as is apparently often the case in that 15-20% of cases requiring hospitalization. Panic no, but very conservative behavior minimizing interaction with people, yes.

As Iceland showed by testing asymptomatic people, a large percentage of people that test positive get no symptoms. This tells us that there are a ton of unreported cases that are not going into the statistics, so the real hospitalization rate is nowhere near 15-20%. I don't know what the exact number would be if everyone got tested, but it certainly would be much lower than 15%. If you are young and healthy, the chance of ending up in the hospital is extremely tiny.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People are getting ancy, you'll see a lot more people breaking the social distancing stuff soon, especially since most people don't know anyone who has it.

People in areas with not a lot of cases have just about had it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe a stats major can help me, isn't testing like political polling.  So Mass has 40k tested with 5k positive, can't you extrapolate that to the entire state .Mass has a population of 7 million so roughly 11 percent have it 770,000 of those 1% will die so 7700 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Hoth said:

Even if my chance of death is low as a fit 35 year old, I'd still rather not face greater risk of requiring ventilation, intubation or having so much fluid in my lungs I'm turning blue and secreting a pink bloody foam, as is apparently often the case in that 15-20% of cases requiring hospitalization. Panic no, but very conservative behavior minimizing interaction with people, yes.

Exactly.  Moderate symptoms from COVID are pretty scary... especially when medical care may or may not be available.  And a sizable percentage of young, healthy people are getting moderate or worse symptoms... and even pneumonia.  Underestimating the risk to younger people is not helping us.  And even if it's statistically true (as with almost all diseases), it's a counter productive message.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Ginx snewx said:

Maybe a stats major can help me, isn't testing like political polling.  So Mass has 40k tested with 5k positive, can't you extrapolate that to the entire state .Mass has a population of 7 million so roughly 11 percent have it 770,000 of those 1% will die so 7700 

I wouldn't do that personally, this isn't political polling. You're testing people that theoretically have a higher chance of having the virus. 

It would be interesting to just randomly test though. Take a subset of 500 or 1000 random people across MA and see how many tested positive. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Ginx snewx said:

Maybe a stats major can help me, isn't testing like political polling.  So Mass has 40k tested with 5k positive, can't you extrapolate that to the entire state .Mass has a population of 7 million so roughly 11 percent have it 770,000 of those 1% will die so 7700 

Heavily biased sample though

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, OSUmetstud said:

I wouldn't do that personally, this isn't political polling. You're testing people that theoretically have a higher chance of having the virus. 

From a statistical point of view though? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Ginx snewx said:

From a statistical point of view though? 

See my post above, I edited it. I would want to see a random sample. Not one that biased towards people who have a higher chance of having it theoretically. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, radarman said:

Heavily biased sample though

So what would the bias offset be. I mean people have Doctorates in this stuff they must have some idea based on data

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, eduggs said:

I didn't disagree with your point about the vulnerability of some people and the role of young people in spreading the virus to them.  My point is that I don't think Cuomo and others should be pointing out that young people are relatively safe from death.  In fact I think he should be making the exact opposite point, because it is young people who I see most often not practicing safe physical distancing.  It looks like somewhere between 5-10% of cases in people under 40 require hospitalization.  And between 2 and 10% of those patients die.  It's not THAT rare.  If hospitals are overwhelmed, that number will rise for everybody.

If people think they are individually at risk they will be A LOT more careful.  Stop talking about the safety of our parents and grandparent.  Talk about our safety.  We are all at risk.  Soon, we might not even be able to get medical attention if we get into a car accident (at least in some places).  That's what happened in Wuhan, in northern Italy, in parts of Spain...

That 5-10% of people under 40 requiring hospitalization is only the reported cases. This is the point that so many people keep forgetting. There are TONS of unreported cases because the disease is so mild for most people. Iceland tested a large part of their population, and 50% of positive cases reported no symptoms at all. You have to take into account that there are tons of mild/asymptomatic cases that are not going into the statistics, so there's no way the hospitalization rate for people under 40 is 5 to 10 percent. The hospitalization and death rates for this virus are much lower than what's being reported because we're not testing asymptomatic people.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, kdxken said:

People who know they are infected stop spreading it.  If they aren't tested, they can't know

What makes you believe these folks who are intentionally risking lives will change their tune with a positive test??

Some of them won't, but many will, which definitely helps.  Widespread testing has been a critical component of mitigation in all places where the "curve was flattened."  And of course you could pair testing with forced isolation to ensure it works.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Ginx snewx said:

So what would the bias offset be. I mean people have Doctorates in this stuff they must have some idea based on data

How would we know the bias offset though? We have no idea how much of the general population has it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From Reddit

March 23, 2020
 
To all medical professionals around the world:
 
My name is Dr. Zev Zelenko and I practice medicine in Monroe, NY. For the last 16 years, I have cared for approximately 75% of the adult population of Kiryas Joel, which is a very close knit community of approximately 35,000 people in which the infection spread rapidly and unchecked prior to the imposition of social distancing.
 
As of today my team has tested approximately 200 people from this community for Covid-19, and 65% of the results have been positive. If extrapolated to the entire community, that means more than 20,000 people are infected at the present time. Of this group, I estimate that there are 1500 patients who are in the high-risk category (i.e. >60, immunocompromised, comorbidities, etc).
 
Given the urgency of the situation, I developed the following treatment protocol in the pre-hospital setting and have seen only positive results:
 
1.  Any patient with shortness of breath regardless of age is treated.
2.  Any patient in the high-risk category even with just mild symptoms is treated.
3.  Young, healthy and low risk patients even with symptoms are not treated (unless their circumstances change and they fall into category 1 or 2).
 
My out-patient treatment regimen is as follows:
 
1.  Hydroxychloroquine 200mg twice a day for 5 days
2.  Azithromycin 500mg once a day for 5 days
3.  Zinc sulfate 220mg once a day for 5 days
 
The rationale for my treatment plan is as follows. I combined the data available from China and South Korea with the recent study published from France (sites available on request). We know that hydroxychloroquine helps Zinc enter the cell. We know that Zinc slows viral replication within the cell. Regarding the use of azithromycin, I postulate it prevents secondary bacterial infections. These three drugs are well known and usually well tolerated, hence the risk to the patient is low.
 
Since last Thursday, my team has treated approximately 350 patients in Kiryas Joel and another 150 patients in other areas of New York with the above regimen.
 
Of this group and the information provided to me by affiliated medical teams, we have had ZERO deaths, ZERO hospitalizations, and ZERO intubations. In addition, I have not heard of any negative side effects other than approximately 10% of patients with temporary nausea and diarrhea.
 
In sum, my urgent recommendation is to initiate treatment in the outpatient setting as soon as possible in accordance with the above. Based on my direct experience, it prevents acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), prevents the need for hospitalization and saves lives.
 
With much respect,
 
Dr. Zev Zelenko

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, DavisStraight said:

More people have to take it serious, they're starting to now but definitely not a lot were at the start. Now that there has been some young, healthy people succumbing and not just older and those with underlying issues Im seeing more people take precautions.

I have noticed the same thing here. Initially young people (say 25 and under) were not taking it seriously, but that has changed dramatically, at least based on my circle of family and friends, based on Facebook posts, etc. I would not know firsthand, because I'm literally not leaving my house for the time being.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, eduggs said:

Exactly.  Moderate symptoms from COVID are pretty scary... especially when medical care may or may not be available.  And a sizable percentage of young, healthy people are getting moderate or worse symptoms... and even pneumonia.  Underestimating the risk to younger people is not helping us.  And even if it's statistically true (as with almost all diseases), it's a counter productive message.

Having had "it" and having had pneumonia a few times before, it is pretty bad. when the pain of breathing makes you not want to breathe, and when you try for a breath it is incomplete

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, OSUmetstud said:

How would we know the bias offset though? We have no idea how much of the general population has it. 

I understand Iceland tested an entire country and SK tested hundreds of thousands.  There has to be enough cumulative data for the super smart to figure out how many theoretically are infected based on data. Falcons 21 Patriots 3 at the half

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Dr. Dews said:

Having had "it" and having had pneumonia a few times before, it is pretty bad. when the pain of breathing makes you not want to breathe, and when you try for a breathe and it is incomplete

Were you tested?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Ginx snewx said:

So what would the bias offset be. I mean people have Doctorates in this stuff they must have some idea based on data

It'a not just a stats issue, you'd have to have a good read on just who was getting tested and why... And even that is not necessarily a fixed policy across the board.  Moreover we have hotspots that may not be perfectly correlated with overall population density.

Maybe the best read one could have would be among the wealthy or politicians that may have had access to tests regardless of condition... But even that would likely have self selection bias and geographic bias.  It's a tough problem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Lava Rock said:

From Reddit

March 23, 2020
 
To all medical professionals around the world:
 
My name is Dr. Zev Zelenko and I practice medicine in Monroe, NY. For the last 16 years, I have cared for approximately 75% of the adult population of Kiryas Joel, which is a very close knit community of approximately 35,000 people in which the infection spread rapidly and unchecked prior to the imposition of social distancing.
 
As of today my team has tested approximately 200 people from this community for Covid-19, and 65% of the results have been positive. If extrapolated to the entire community, that means more than 20,000 people are infected at the present time. Of this group, I estimate that there are 1500 patients who are in the high-risk category (i.e. >60, immunocompromised, comorbidities, etc).
 
Given the urgency of the situation, I developed the following treatment protocol in the pre-hospital setting and have seen only positive results:
 
1.  Any patient with shortness of breath regardless of age is treated.
2.  Any patient in the high-risk category even with just mild symptoms is treated.
3.  Young, healthy and low risk patients even with symptoms are not treated (unless their circumstances change and they fall into category 1 or 2).
 
My out-patient treatment regimen is as follows:
 
1.  Hydroxychloroquine 200mg twice a day for 5 days
2.  Azithromycin 500mg once a day for 5 days
3.  Zinc sulfate 220mg once a day for 5 days
 
The rationale for my treatment plan is as follows. I combined the data available from China and South Korea with the recent study published from France (sites available on request). We know that hydroxychloroquine helps Zinc enter the cell. We know that Zinc slows viral replication within the cell. Regarding the use of azithromycin, I postulate it prevents secondary bacterial infections. These three drugs are well known and usually well tolerated, hence the risk to the patient is low.
 
Since last Thursday, my team has treated approximately 350 patients in Kiryas Joel and another 150 patients in other areas of New York with the above regimen.
 
Of this group and the information provided to me by affiliated medical teams, we have had ZERO deaths, ZERO hospitalizations, and ZERO intubations. In addition, I have not heard of any negative side effects other than approximately 10% of patients with temporary nausea and diarrhea.
 
In sum, my urgent recommendation is to initiate treatment in the outpatient setting as soon as possible in accordance with the above. Based on my direct experience, it prevents acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), prevents the need for hospitalization and saves lives.
 
With much respect,
 
Dr. Zev Zelenko

Wow

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Ginx snewx said:

I understand Iceland tested an entire country and SK tested hundreds of thousands.  There has to be enough cumulative data for the super smart to figure out how many theoretically are infected based on data. Falcons 21 Patriots 3 at the half

Iceland didn't test the whole country, they tested 3.5 percent. SK did 320K tests as of last week, and only about 10K have come back positive. In NL, we've done about 2K tests about 135 have come back positive. I think there's significant arguments against this virus being super widespread in the population. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Lava Rock said:

From Reddit

March 23, 2020
 
To all medical professionals around the world:
 
My name is Dr. Zev Zelenko and I practice medicine in Monroe, NY. For the last 16 years, I have cared for approximately 75% of the adult population of Kiryas Joel, which is a very close knit community of approximately 35,000 people in which the infection spread rapidly and unchecked prior to the imposition of social distancing.
 
As of today my team has tested approximately 200 people from this community for Covid-19, and 65% of the results have been positive. If extrapolated to the entire community, that means more than 20,000 people are infected at the present time. Of this group, I estimate that there are 1500 patients who are in the high-risk category (i.e. >60, immunocompromised, comorbidities, etc).
 
Given the urgency of the situation, I developed the following treatment protocol in the pre-hospital setting and have seen only positive results:
 
1.  Any patient with shortness of breath regardless of age is treated.
2.  Any patient in the high-risk category even with just mild symptoms is treated.
3.  Young, healthy and low risk patients even with symptoms are not treated (unless their circumstances change and they fall into category 1 or 2).
 
My out-patient treatment regimen is as follows:
 
1.  Hydroxychloroquine 200mg twice a day for 5 days
2.  Azithromycin 500mg once a day for 5 days
3.  Zinc sulfate 220mg once a day for 5 days
 
The rationale for my treatment plan is as follows. I combined the data available from China and South Korea with the recent study published from France (sites available on request). We know that hydroxychloroquine helps Zinc enter the cell. We know that Zinc slows viral replication within the cell. Regarding the use of azithromycin, I postulate it prevents secondary bacterial infections. These three drugs are well known and usually well tolerated, hence the risk to the patient is low.
 
Since last Thursday, my team has treated approximately 350 patients in Kiryas Joel and another 150 patients in other areas of New York with the above regimen.
 
Of this group and the information provided to me by affiliated medical teams, we have had ZERO deaths, ZERO hospitalizations, and ZERO intubations. In addition, I have not heard of any negative side effects other than approximately 10% of patients with temporary nausea and diarrhea.
 
In sum, my urgent recommendation is to initiate treatment in the outpatient setting as soon as possible in accordance with the above. Based on my direct experience, it prevents acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), prevents the need for hospitalization and saves lives.
 
With much respect,
 
Dr. Zev Zelenko

All well and good except we don't know if these people simply would have recovered from conventional treatment.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

CBS News Journalist Maria Mercader Dies at 54 After Testing Positive for Coronavirus

 
 
  • This is an absolute joke, you can Google the story and see why the media sucks in this country. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, kdxken said:

All well and good except we don't know if these people simply would have recovered from conventional treatment.

yeah, but it's something. at least he's got a protocol down. would love to see a follow up one 3/31 and 4/7.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, winterwx21 said:

That 5-10% of people under 40 requiring hospitalization is only the reported cases. This is the point that so many people keep forgetting. There are TONS of unreported cases because the disease is so mild for most people. Iceland tested a large part of their population, and 50% of positive cases reported no symptoms at all. You have to take into account that there are tons of cases that are not going into the statistics, so there's no way the hospitalization rate for people under 40 is 5 to 10 percent. The hospitalization and death rates for this virus are much lower than what's being reported because we're not testing asymptomatic people.

Yeah one hope has been that actual cases are much higher than detected and therefore the majority of cases are mild.  We saw that with the statistics from China where a similar percentage (~40-50% had no or very minor symptoms).  But China also tested widely and reported a relatively high hospitalization rate.  Italy is also testing like crazy and they are experiencing extremely high death rates (>10%) and very high rates of hospitalization, even among younger people.  Similar stats are being reported in France and Spain.

So it seems like, yes, most cases are mild and it skews heavily towards the older and vulnerable populations.  But at the same time, hospitalization rates are also very high, and this includes (percentage wise) cases in younger people as well.  The virus attacks the lungs.  So in the small percentage of people who don't fight it off easily, a lot of them need respiratory support.  This has been observed since January and was the reason why people paying attention called for an increase in ventilators and training even back then.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Drop the Trough said:

CBS News Journalist Maria Mercader Dies at 54 After Testing Positive for Coronavirus

 
 
  • This is an absolute joke, you can Google the story and see why the media sucks in this country. 

 

I don't really see a problem here. Everyone knows those with underlying conditions are more likely to die from this thing. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, kdxken said:

All well and good except we don't know if these people simply would have recovered from conventional treatment.

What is conventional treatment of covid-19?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

New numbers for Massachusetts:

Massachusetts has recorded four additional deaths linked to COVID-19 and reported 698 new positive cases, according to health officials.

The Bay State’s total number of fatal cases is now at 48, and the number of positive cases climbed to 4,955.

According to the Massachusetts Department of Public Health, two of the fatal cases did not have a known preexisting condition.

Those cases included a man in his 80s from Essex County, and a woman in her 70s from Norfolk County.

 

The two other fatal cases that did have preexisting conditions according to DPH included a woman in her 90s from Middlesex County, and a woman in her 80s from Berkshire County.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...