• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

NON_POLITICAL China Coronavirus THREAD

Page 259 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Roger Wilco

Golden Member
Mar 20, 2017
1,255
796
136
None of the news seems to be covering reinfection. If people are able to easily get reinfected, herd immunity will be largely irrelevant, and then we really would have to wait for a vaccine before life starts to return to normal. Once the future vaccine has been administered, how long will immunity last? Could reinfections be more acute than initial infections?
 

pmv

Diamond Member
May 30, 2008
9,214
4,026
136
Covid-19 is showing how plenty of so-called "advanced nations" have failed to guarantee adequate health care for its citizens. Of course it was evident beforehand, but by now it should be more clear. Furthermore:


You can split hairs about how money is spent in the United States or who winds up with said money, but you can't argue that we've somehow failed to address the issue of medical care! We spend more than any other nation per capita. Our problem is that we spend too much money on too many procedures, too many scans, and too many drugs. Our lifestyles are (in general) quite unhealthy. Our over-reliance on insurance - both private AND public - drives up costs by reducing the number of people that pay out of pocket on the spot for medical care.

I have no problem with emergency spending to tackle Covid-19 so long as we are committed to paying back those who have lent us money to undertake this effort. Sadly, I fear we will be making nothing but interest payments for a long time . . . or until our government collapses under debt.
But that's not news. It's very well-known that the US spends a heck of a lot compared to other countries, and gets pretty poor results for it. That's why so many think the system needs major changes.


The average age of the infected in Germany is almost 20 years younger than France, Spain, and Italy.

Germany also has far less smokers than those European nations.

The health, fitness, and obesity rates between France and Germany are about the same.

So it goes back to less old people getting Covid in Germany. And less smokers.

That and Germany has a unique system where they have people doing daily house calls on the sick. They admit Covid patients to the hospitals far earlier than other countries. They feel earlier intervention helps. If the person starts their decline outside of the hospital they are more likely to die than if they are already in the hospital when the decline starts to happen.
I'm not entirely convinced Germany is counting deaths in the same way that France is, though I haven't found good information about that. I do wonder whether Germany might have more existing social (and geographical) separation between young and old, than is the case in some other countries. I find I think of young Italians being much more likely to hug their grandparents, than are young Germans...but that is entirely based on stereotypes!
 

brianmanahan

Lifer
Sep 2, 2006
21,927
3,535
126
None of the news seems to be covering reinfection. If people are able to easily get reinfected, herd immunity will be largely irrelevant, and then we really would have to wait for a vaccine before life starts to return to normal. Once the future vaccine has been administered, how long will immunity last? Could reinfections be more acute than initial infections?
maybe it'll just be like the black death and we'll end up getting it for centuries
 

K1052

Lifer
Aug 21, 2003
37,837
12,583
136
None of the news seems to be covering reinfection. If people are able to easily get reinfected, herd immunity will be largely irrelevant, and then we really would have to wait for a vaccine before life starts to return to normal. Once the future vaccine has been administered, how long will immunity last? Could reinfections be more acute than initial infections?
This is one of the big reasons to rush forward with finding and developing effective drug therapies in an organized way. The length of immunity is a major unknown right now. Could be a few months or could be years.
 

CZroe

Lifer
Jun 24, 2001
24,190
852
126
A dose of common-sense criticism for our flip-flopping mask policies:

he said he read that someone get attacked for wearing one

oh yeah that's a good idea, just cover with something else
That was in a subway about a month ago. They say it was actually racially motivated.

Evidence for this claim? "Lots" is a ridiculously vague word to base a policy on anyway.

Evidence for this (highly dubious) claim?

So you need a lot more testing, then, otherwise how do you know who those 'active cases' are?
They are now saying that the asymptomatic cases may be as high as 25% of all infections. Since those people will almost never get tested/confirmed the way things are now, well... that's a lot of asymptomatic cases out there.
 
Last edited:

Tweak155

Lifer
Sep 23, 2003
11,419
244
106
None of the news seems to be covering reinfection. If people are able to easily get reinfected, herd immunity will be largely irrelevant, and then we really would have to wait for a vaccine before life starts to return to normal. Once the future vaccine has been administered, how long will immunity last? Could reinfections be more acute than initial infections?
Can't remember what video I saw it in, but it was some doctor questioning Dr Fauci about his concerns with this. They both agreed that it's extremely unlikely and would go against all science to date with this type of virus. They thought it was more likely they were faulty tests - either they were not infected the first test that showed positive, or the 2nd test was a false positive.
 

brainhulk

Diamond Member
Sep 14, 2007
9,418
453
126
Can't remember what video I saw it in, but it was some doctor questioning Dr Fauci about his concerns with this. They both agreed that it's extremely unlikely and would go against all science to date with this type of virus. They thought it was more likely they were faulty tests - either they were not infected the first test that showed positive, or the 2nd test was a false positive.
maybe there is a reservoir in the trigeminal ganglia. it is the plague that keeps on plaguing...
 

Muse

Lifer
Jul 11, 2001
31,788
4,167
126
Wow... in Connecticut, they actually had to institute a "one shopper only" policy to keep people from doing that. No idea if it's actually working, though.
Los Angeles mayor yesterday lays down edict you can't go into an essential business without wearing a mask, also that employees have to wear masks. I like these measures. I figure one at a time and quotas/store based on square feet make sense too. Enforcement of social distancing. These will all help flatten the curve.
Can't remember what video I saw it in, but it was some doctor questioning Dr Fauci about his concerns with this. They both agreed that it's extremely unlikely and would go against all science to date with this type of virus. They thought it was more likely they were faulty tests - either they were not infected the first test that showed positive, or the 2nd test was a false positive.
I saw that info. I think prevailing expert opinion is that recovery is bestowing immunity for now. How persistent it is say a year out is to be determined. Could be good for years, they just don't know at this point. Meantime, they have approved using recovering person's blood to produce plasma to be used to boost immunity of hospitalized covid-19 patients who are struggling.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: killster1

pmv

Diamond Member
May 30, 2008
9,214
4,026
136


That was in a subway about a month ago. They say it was actually racially motivated.


They are now saying that the asymptomatic cases may be as high as 25% of all infections. Since those people will almost never get tested/confirmed the way things are now, well... that's a lot of asymptomatic cases out there.
OK, but I don't see that's very new. They've said since the start that a majority of cases would be mild or even asymptomatic, and maybe 20% would be very bad. Guesses at the death rate seem to have varied quite a lot, and I suppose it won't be known till the whole thing is over.

I just don't see what the point being made is, though. From what I've seen, even in Italy nowhere near enough people have been infected and recovered to get near 'herd immunity'. In other countries the spread of infection is at a still earlier stage, with the vast majority not infected yet.
 
Nov 8, 2012
20,778
4,752
136
A dose of common-sense criticism for our flip-flopping mask policies:


That was in a subway about a month ago. They say it was actually racially motivated.


They are now saying that the asymptomatic cases may be as high as 25% of all infections. Since those people will almost never get tested/confirmed the way things are now, well... that's a lot of asymptomatic cases out there.
Honestly, I understand the criticism of wearing masks.

The people arguing for masks are simply saying "It's better than nothing!" and running with that as-if it's a valid argument. It's not. There at this point is zero evidence of it having any beneficial effects. Likewise, there is no evidence that it does not in the case of virus'.

1. There is zero scientific evidence that it is helpful in the prevention (Non N95 masks)
2. There is logical probable reasons to think that it could result in more harm than good (see below).

Off the top of my head: People in general are stupid. The concept of doing things like properly cleaning/sanitizing the mask before repeated uses... if they aren't properly cleaning it and just repeatedly using it, it's going to continue to increase your chances of getting the virus.
#2 - just by having a mask on people's face, I guarantee plenty of people are more likely to be touching their face in general simply because there is something on their face that they are not used to.
 
Last edited:
  • Haha
Reactions: killster1

CZroe

Lifer
Jun 24, 2001
24,190
852
126
Honestly, I understand the criticism of wearing masks.

The people arguing for masks are simply saying "It's better than nothing!" and running with that as-if it's a valid argument.

1. There is zero scientific evidence of that
2. There is logical probable reasons to think that it could result in more harm than good.

Off the top of my head: People in general are stupid. The concept of doing things like properly cleaning/sanitizing the mask before repeated uses... if they aren't properly cleaning it and just repeatedly using it, it's going to continue to increase your chances of getting the virus.
#2 - just by having a mask on people's face, I guarantee plenty of people are more likely to be touching their face in general simply because there is something on their face that they are not used to.
That's incorrect. Even the CDC's statement in January noted the efficacy of N95 masks. They have proven effective for reducing droplet transmission of respiratory viruses for decades.

Also, you were expected to replace with a new mask often before the China-induced shortages so the recommendation against them had little to do with re-wearing dirty masks. Even if you reuse masks, viruses don't live forever on a dirty mask. They typically live hours.

Endorsing masks does not mean endorsing bad hygiene. If someone takes their mask off and contaminates their face in the process then, well, that's not the mask's fault. Wash your hands and don't touch your face still apply, especially after handling a mask. Despite all the morons out there wearing their masks wrong, it's not a hard concept to convey to people along with recommendations to wear them. At the same time, they can teach these morons to wear their masks over their mouth AND nose, FFS.

Also, "criticism?" The CDC and Surgeon General weren't criticising people for wearing them. They were baselessly advising against wearing them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Muse and killster1

KMFJD

Lifer
Aug 11, 2005
23,284
25,943
136


If unconstrained and if the virus behaved as in China, up to four-fifths of Britons could be infected and one in a hundred might die, wrote the scientists, members of an official committee set up to model the spread of pandemic flu, on March 2. Their assessment didn’t spell it out, but that was a prediction of over 500,000 deaths in this nation of nearly 70 million.
Yet the next day, March 3, Prime Minister Boris Johnson was his cheery self. He joked that he was still shaking hands with everyone, including at a hospital treating coronavirus patients.


¯\_(ツ)_/¯ who knew?
 

DrMrLordX

Lifer
Apr 27, 2000
18,206
7,099
136
None of that supports the claim you made.
It really does, though the granularity of data isn't great yet. A highly-contagious disease has been spreading in multiple parts of the country for two months now. Two months! ~80% of the people who contract it require no medical care whatsoever. Take a look at your hospitalization rates in the worst states (with the most testing) and start extrapolating.

Nor does it support the claim that 'there are lots of asymptomatic carriers out there'.
How many asymptomatic carriers do there have to be before you can accept that the number of those is greater than those who have tested positive for the disease? What would you consider to be "lots" of carriers, either past or present? There's got to be at least 2 million of them by now, and I suspect there are more.

I'm kind of thinking May for mass serology testing.
There is a lab one county over that converted from drug testing to serology testing. 10 minutes in a drive-through, $50. $150 for the standard virus test if you test positive for antibodies and want to know if it's still in your system.
 

Red Squirrel

No Lifer
May 24, 2003
61,173
9,200
126
www.uovalor.com
Logically anything is better than nothing. If you are going to war and have no bullet proof vest but have access to sheet metal, would you not try to make a shield out of the sheet metal? It might not stop the bullets but it might, better to try it than to not. Of course if you also have the choice of staying home, then that is still better. :p
 
  • Like
Reactions: Muse and killster1

K1052

Lifer
Aug 21, 2003
37,837
12,583
136
There is a lab one county over that converted from drug testing to serology testing. 10 minutes in a drive-through, $50. $150 for the standard virus test if you test positive for antibodies and want to know if it's still in your system.
I mean for the whole country which was what we're going to need. The only real way I can get any COVID test around here is to be on deaths door and be taken to the hospital for one before I'm admitted.

Eventually we'll even see them in the home like HIV tests but it's going to take a bit to ramp up to the many millions of kits required.
 

DrMrLordX

Lifer
Apr 27, 2000
18,206
7,099
136
I mean for the whole country which was what we're going to need.
I know, but what I'm saying is, if some little podunk lab in a "city" of under 100k can convert in this fashion, there's a lot of little corporate labs that do drug testing for hiring services/HR departments that can make similar conversions.
 

BudAshes

Lifer
Jul 20, 2003
13,213
2,200
136
121
Logically anything is better than nothing. If you are going to war and have no bullet proof vest but have access to sheet metal, would you not try to make a shield out of the sheet metal? It might not stop the bullets but it might, better to try it than to not. Of course if you also have the choice of staying home, then that is still better. :p
No.

Even body armor can make you heavier and slower and more likely to get shot. If the mask is dirty and not properly cleaned it could potentially infect you more than not having a mask at all.
 

K1052

Lifer
Aug 21, 2003
37,837
12,583
136
I know, but what I'm saying is, if some little podunk lab in a "city" of under 100k can convert in this fashion, there's a lot of little corporate labs that do drug testing for hiring services/HR departments that can make similar conversions.
I know but it's *checks calendar to remember what century it is* the 8th of April already. It is still going to take weeks to stand up widespread antibody testing up and start turning out results. Local health officials aren't likely to let up a ton until they have a lot of data about what the infection looks like in their areas and can surveil effectively.
 

brianmanahan

Lifer
Sep 2, 2006
21,927
3,535
126
Even body armor can make you heavier and slower and more likely to get shot. If the mask is dirty and not properly cleaned it could potentially infect you more than not having a mask at all.
i honestly cannot wait until completely self-contained body armor is technologically viable

i would never go outside without wearing a completely sealed system
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Muse

Ichinisan

Lifer
Oct 9, 2002
28,298
1,230
136
No.

Even body armor can make you heavier and slower and more likely to get shot. If the mask is dirty and not properly cleaned it could potentially infect you more than not having a mask at all.
Consider that whatever is on the mask (droplets from someone else coughing, etc) would already be directly on the face of the wearer if the mask wasn't used.

At the very least, it reduces the viral load of an exposure.

A mask is better than nothing. Period.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Muse

Ichinisan

Lifer
Oct 9, 2002
28,298
1,230
136
Logically anything is better than nothing. If you are going to war and have no bullet proof vest but have access to sheet metal, would you not try to make a shield out of the sheet metal? It might not stop the bullets but it might, better to try it than to not. Of course if you also have the choice of staying home, then that is still better. :p
Certainly an inadequate sheet metal shield would still be able to deflect some shots that come at an angle. Even with straight-on shots, it would slow the projectile and reduce its body penetration power somewhat.
 

brianmanahan

Lifer
Sep 2, 2006
21,927
3,535
126
If unconstrained and if the virus behaved as in China, up to four-fifths of Britons could be infected and one in a hundred might die, wrote the scientists, members of an official committee set up to model the spread of pandemic flu, on March 2. Their assessment didn’t spell it out, but that was a prediction of over 500,000 deaths in this nation of nearly 70 million.
Yet the next day, March 3, Prime Minister Boris Johnson was his cheery self. He joked that he was still shaking hands with everyone, including at a hospital treating coronavirus patients.
 
  • Like
Reactions: KMFJD and pmv

pmv

Diamond Member
May 30, 2008
9,214
4,026
136
It really does, though the granularity of data isn't great yet. A highly-contagious disease has been spreading in multiple parts of the country for two months now. Two months! ~80% of the people who contract it require no medical care whatsoever. Take a look at your hospitalization rates in the worst states (with the most testing) and start extrapolating.



How many asymptomatic carriers do there have to be before you can accept that the number of those is greater than those who have tested positive for the disease? What would you consider to be "lots" of carriers, either past or present? There's got to be at least 2 million of them by now, and I suspect there are more.
I think that rolling out antibody testing would be a very big deal precisely because it would tell us who might already be immune, and that would be good for getting at least some bits of the economy moving again, and of course for the health care system. But 'lots' I would take to mean something significant when it came to herd immunity. What I've read suggests it's still nowhere near that level. There's a long, long way to go yet, it seems to me.

But if you are saying we need to be testing as much as possible, and that having that information would be hugely useful, I don't disagree.
 

Ichinisan

Lifer
Oct 9, 2002
28,298
1,230
136
I have no idea how much significance to attach to a not-yet-peer-reviewed study, but this doesn't sound great


I've heard that some of the reported "reinfections" were likely due to pressure from CCP to report lower infection numbers and higher recovery numbers. Also there are a *lot* of faulty tests from China.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY