Coronavirus good Uplifting and hopeful news only

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:https://bethesdamagazine.com/bethesda-beat/coronavirus/montgomery-county-has-gone-four-days-without-a-covid-19-death/?fbclid=IwAR0BKYBEULJq6CeXYP72WYuwguMgFODZkqID27H4GMx9nfv6F4PjwYT_dME

Montgomery County has gone four days without a COVID-19 death

TIME TO OPEN SCHOOLS

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Interesting new theory with possible treatments. A Supercomputer Analyzed Covid-19 — and an Interesting New Theory Has Emerged — A closer look at the Bradykinin hypothesis. https://elemental.medium.com/a-supercomputer-analyzed-covid-19-and-an-interesting-new-theory-has-emerged-31cb8eba9d63

That is fascinating. Thanks for posting.

+1. I am amazed and grateful for scientists and researchers, every day.

+2. Very interesting, especially the part about vitamin D.

"Interestingly, Jacobson’s team also suggests vitamin D as a potentially useful Covid-19 drug. The vitamin is involved in the RAS system and could prove helpful by reducing levels of another compound, known as REN. Again, this could stop potentially deadly bradykinin storms from forming. The researchers note that vitamin D has already been shown to help those with Covid-19. The vitamin is readily available over the counter, and around 20% of the population is deficient. If indeed the vitamin proves effective at reducing the severity of bradykinin storms, it could be an easy, relatively safe way to reduce the severity of the virus."

So that means all the people who spent time at the beach this summer, should be well prepared?

It could be a coincidence of geography (i.e., proximity to NY), but it could also explain the difference in case fatality rates between the NE and South/Southwest. CFR has started to tick up a little in some southern states, but remember, people there go outside less in peak summer, when it's so brutally hot.

http://www.91-divoc.com/pages/covid-visualization/?chart=states-normalized&highlight=Florida&show=us-states&y=both&scale=linear&data=mortalityRate&data-source=jhu&xaxis=right&extra=New%20York%2CTexas%2CNew%20Jersey%2CArizona%2CMassachusetts%2CConnecticut%2CMichigan%2CCalifornia#states-normalized

Another study showing that vitamin D deficiency increases the risk of infection by 77%.

https://www.upi.com/Health_News/2020/09/03/Vitamin-D-deficiency-raises-COVID-19-infection-risk-by-77-study-finds/7001599139929/

[Anonymous]

NYT story last weekend (sorry, I thought someone else had already mentioned it). The gist is that the PCR tests most commonly used in the US have a range of calibrations for what counts as positive, and NYT analysis was that 50-90 (!) percent of cases reported as "positive" are likely cases where the viral load is very unlikely to be high enough to make the individual sick or contagious.

The article then reports that the cheaper, faster, less sensitive tests would likely be just as good at detecting cases where the viral load is high enough to be dangerous or contagious.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:NYT story last weekend (sorry, I thought someone else had already mentioned it). The gist is that the PCR tests most commonly used in the US have a range of calibrations for what counts as positive, and NYT analysis was that 50-90 (!) percent of cases reported as "positive" are likely cases where the viral load is very unlikely to be high enough to make the individual sick or contagious.

The article then reports that the cheaper, faster, less sensitive tests would likely be just as good at detecting cases where the viral load is high enough to be dangerous or contagious.

that's not exactly right. the article states that the low-viral load positives could just be early in the course of the infection. the main scientist quoted advocates for repeat testing, not declaring that there are actually 50% fewer cases than we actually think there are.

[Anonymous]

https://www.cnn.com/2020/09/04/health/russia-vaccine-immune-response-intl/index.html

Controversial but it's not bad news.

"Russia's Covid-19 vaccine generated an immune response, study says"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Interesting new theory with possible treatments. A Supercomputer Analyzed Covid-19 — and an Interesting New Theory Has Emerged — A closer look at the Bradykinin hypothesis. https://elemental.medium.com/a-supercomputer-analyzed-covid-19-and-an-interesting-new-theory-has-emerged-31cb8eba9d63

That is fascinating. Thanks for posting.

+1. I am amazed and grateful for scientists and researchers, every day.

+2. Very interesting, especially the part about vitamin D.

"Interestingly, Jacobson’s team also suggests vitamin D as a potentially useful Covid-19 drug. The vitamin is involved in the RAS system and could prove helpful by reducing levels of another compound, known as REN. Again, this could stop potentially deadly bradykinin storms from forming. The researchers note that vitamin D has already been shown to help those with Covid-19. The vitamin is readily available over the counter, and around 20% of the population is deficient. If indeed the vitamin proves effective at reducing the severity of bradykinin storms, it could be an easy, relatively safe way to reduce the severity of the virus."

So that means all the people who spent time at the beach this summer, should be well prepared?

It could be a coincidence of geography (i.e., proximity to NY), but it could also explain the difference in case fatality rates between the NE and South/Southwest. CFR has started to tick up a little in some southern states, but remember, people there go outside less in peak summer, when it's so brutally hot.

http://www.91-divoc.com/pages/covid-visualization/?chart=states-normalized&highlight=Florida&show=us-states&y=both&scale=linear&data=mortalityRate&data-source=jhu&xaxis=right&extra=New%20York%2CTexas%2CNew%20Jersey%2CArizona%2CMassachusetts%2CConnecticut%2CMichigan%2CCalifornia#states-normalized

Another study showing that vitamin D deficiency increases the risk of infection by 77%.

https://www.upi.com/Health_News/2020/09/03/Vitamin-D-deficiency-raises-COVID-19-infection-risk-by-77-study-finds/7001599139929/

Take your vitamin D everyone!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NYT story last weekend (sorry, I thought someone else had already mentioned it). The gist is that the PCR tests most commonly used in the US have a range of calibrations for what counts as positive, and NYT analysis was that 50-90 (!) percent of cases reported as "positive" are likely cases where the viral load is very unlikely to be high enough to make the individual sick or contagious.

The article then reports that the cheaper, faster, less sensitive tests would likely be just as good at detecting cases where the viral load is high enough to be dangerous or contagious.

that's not exactly right. the article states that the low-viral load positives could just be early in the course of the infection. the main scientist quoted advocates for repeat testing, not declaring that there are actually 50% fewer cases than we actually think there are.

That’s not exactly what the article or pp said. The point was that a significant # of people who have been diagnosed have some level of virus in their body, but it is at such low levels that they are not contagious. They should be quarantined, but we shouldn’t be wasting resources on contact tracing with them. We should focus contact tracing on those who are truly contagious. They do also suggest more frequent, less sensitive test for this reason, as better use of resources.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NYT story last weekend (sorry, I thought someone else had already mentioned it). The gist is that the PCR tests most commonly used in the US have a range of calibrations for what counts as positive, and NYT analysis was that 50-90 (!) percent of cases reported as "positive" are likely cases where the viral load is very unlikely to be high enough to make the individual sick or contagious.

The article then reports that the cheaper, faster, less sensitive tests would likely be just as good at detecting cases where the viral load is high enough to be dangerous or contagious.

that's not exactly right. the article states that the low-viral load positives could just be early in the course of the infection. the main scientist quoted advocates for repeat testing, not declaring that there are actually 50% fewer cases than we actually think there are.

That’s not exactly what the article or pp said. The point was that a significant # of people who have been diagnosed have some level of virus in their body, but it is at such low levels that they are not contagious. They should be quarantined, but we shouldn’t be wasting resources on contact tracing with them. We should focus contact tracing on those who are truly contagious. They do also suggest more frequent, less sensitive test for this reason, as better use of resources.

Since I read the Times piece I’ve been curious why there isn’t more talk about this. Seems like 1) it’s good news overall and 2) makes the case for cheaper more accessible rapid testing that people can repeat at home

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The fatality rate at the epicenter of the pandemic is 2%. The people who are most vulnerable are very young children, very old people, and those with underlying health conditions.

I would hope the fatality rate here would be better than in Wuhan, where the health infrastructure is worse.

Where have the “very young” been vulnerable? I have a four month old and our pediatrician has been very reassuring

[Anonymous]

Vaccine rolls out in late November for limited use. About a 54-57 percent efficacy rate with limited side effects. That’s when this is over, for all intents and purposes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Interesting new theory with possible treatments. A Supercomputer Analyzed Covid-19 — and an Interesting New Theory Has Emerged — A closer look at the Bradykinin hypothesis. https://elemental.medium.com/a-supercomputer-analyzed-covid-19-and-an-interesting-new-theory-has-emerged-31cb8eba9d63

That is fascinating. Thanks for posting.

+1. I am amazed and grateful for scientists and researchers, every day.

+2. Very interesting, especially the part about vitamin D.

"Interestingly, Jacobson’s team also suggests vitamin D as a potentially useful Covid-19 drug. The vitamin is involved in the RAS system and could prove helpful by reducing levels of another compound, known as REN. Again, this could stop potentially deadly bradykinin storms from forming. The researchers note that vitamin D has already been shown to help those with Covid-19. The vitamin is readily available over the counter, and around 20% of the population is deficient. If indeed the vitamin proves effective at reducing the severity of bradykinin storms, it could be an easy, relatively safe way to reduce the severity of the virus."

So that means all the people who spent time at the beach this summer, should be well prepared?

It could be a coincidence of geography (i.e., proximity to NY), but it could also explain the difference in case fatality rates between the NE and South/Southwest. CFR has started to tick up a little in some southern states, but remember, people there go outside less in peak summer, when it's so brutally hot.

http://www.91-divoc.com/pages/covid-visualization/?chart=states-normalized&highlight=Florida&show=us-states&y=both&scale=linear&data=mortalityRate&data-source=jhu&xaxis=right&extra=New%20York%2CTexas%2CNew%20Jersey%2CArizona%2CMassachusetts%2CConnecticut%2CMichigan%2CCalifornia#states-normalized

Another study showing that vitamin D deficiency increases the risk of infection by 77%.

https://www.upi.com/Health_News/2020/09/03/Vitamin-D-deficiency-raises-COVID-19-infection-risk-by-77-study-finds/7001599139929/

Take your vitamin D everyone!

People who wear sunscreen block natural vitamin D!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The fatality rate at the epicenter of the pandemic is 2%. The people who are most vulnerable are very young children, very old people, and those with underlying health conditions.

I would hope the fatality rate here would be better than in Wuhan, where the health infrastructure is worse.

Where have the “very young” been vulnerable? I have a four month old and our pediatrician has been very reassuring

Yes I'd also like a source please, OP.
My pediatrician too, has been very assuring and has pointed towards a lot of research and articles showing that kids are not affected as badly as adults

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Vaccine rolls out in late November for limited use. About a 54-57 percent efficacy rate with limited side effects. That’s when this is over, for all intents and purposes.

Sounds like a similar efficacy rate to the yearly flu shot.
Cool...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://bethesdamagazine.com/bethesda-beat/coronavirus/montgomery-county-has-gone-four-days-without-a-covid-19-death/?fbclid=IwAR0BKYBEULJq6CeXYP72WYuwguMgFODZkqID27H4GMx9nfv6F4PjwYT_dME

Montgomery County has gone four days without a COVID-19 death

TIME TO OPEN SCHOOLS

AMENNNNNNN!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Vaccine rolls out in late November for limited use. About a 54-57 percent efficacy rate with limited side effects. That’s when this is over, for all intents and purposes.

Can you please explain your last sentence?
Seems like the efficacy rate of that vaccine isn't high enough to provide herd immunity.

And that's assuming everyone will take it (or even most people).

It's also assuming that there will be enough of the vaccine to go around and not just be rolled out "for limited use"

Just curious to hear your thoughts, thanks!