Big Blue Huddle

This is concerning

QuoteSTURGIS, S.D.

A few thoughts about this:

1) this is the benefit of testing, even if you don't have symptoms

2) At 73, he is in a higher risk group, I hope he will be okay

3) This may seem pedantic but if you are exposed to Covid you are quarantined, if you are infected you are isolated (I am surprise this announcement got that basic wording wrong)

Quote from: Bob In PA on August 06, 2020, 01:32:34 PM
Rich: I don't know either.  I'm just saying sometimes he says stuff to divert attention or to start a fight (for whatever reason). 

I have no idea about this current statement he made.

I do know that he is well aware of the European countries, most of which have gotten their kids back to school with minimal fuss.  As for the results of what they're doing... that remains to be seen.

Bob

The difference between Europe and the US is Europe did it after getting infection rates under control while the US is trying to do it in while the pandemic is still raging in many parts of the country.

Quote from: Bob In PA on August 06, 2020, 01:19:58 PM
Rich: Close enough for me. Thanks. Trump's statement is way more wrong than right. I do still believe, though, he intentionally (at times) forces them to "censor" him (his chief purpose for doing that... I'm not sure). Bob

In my opinion when you are dealing with a public health crisis deliberately saying something that is dangerously incorrect is worse than accidentally saying it.  Considering Trump has many of his followers trained to only believe Trump and no one else, his comments have the potential to cause great harm or death.  If he did it to score political points, I just don't know he lives with himself. 

That said, I believe it's more likely that Trump is repeated what he believed and may have been told.   I could see a scenario where someone was explaining the lower Covid rates in children and Trump saying, "wow, it's like they are practically immune" and the expert agreeing with that claim (who wants to correct the President, and what you say in a briefing is distinctly different than what you say in public as an official/authority.   

Quote from: Bob In PA on August 06, 2020, 12:52:30 PM
Rich: This says children have fewer coronavirus receptors in their noses.     https://edition.cnn.com/world/live-news/coronavirus-pandemic-05-21-20-intl/h_045ff0a5390267f878680c220f539695

This offers reasons why kids are generally less likely to get infected, and less likely to spread it to others.  https://www.mercurynews.com/2020/07/10/coronavirus-why-kids-arent-the-germbags-and-grownups-are/

Yet, "big tech" pulled down Trump's tweet because it supposedly was "in violation of Twitter rules against misinformation"  (query: is what Trump said REALLY misinformation?).  What's the deal?

Bob

There is a cut off around 9 or 10 years of age.  Below that threshold children are less prone to be infected or spread the infection.    Above that age they are pretty much like adults when it comes to spreading the virus, but with the younger age meaning their odds of serious complications or death being much lower. 


As for Trump's comments, he suggested that young children are "practically immune" according to the reports I heard (I did not hear comments first hand).   If he said that, it would be incorrect and dangerous.   

This is a picture of the first day of classes at Paulding County Georgia




The student who posted this has since been suspended by the school

Quote from: Bob In PA on August 04, 2020, 01:13:51 PM
Rich:  I of course will move it to where it belongs.  Here's what I intended to post... a question for you....

Please explain for all of us the difference between deaths per case and deaths per 100,000 (the two different ways of reporting - fairly - what's really happening in various countries, states, etc.).

It's a bit confusing, and I really don't believe in simply reporting the number of cases (as some TV stations do - that, IMO, tells us little of importance).

Bob

PS. Also, which means more to you (of the two mentioned first).  Thanks.

Death per cases is just that how many die per known case.   It will be affected by the quality of care (the better the care the lower the number will be), the populations that are being infected (the more vulnerable the people infected the higher this number goes) and how well testing is identifying cases (the more cases IDed this number goes down)

Deaths per population is more of a measure of how effective measures have been in terms of saving lives.    This number will be affected by the populations being infected (the more vulnerable the population the higher the number), how effective measures to stop the spread are (the less cases will lead to less deaths), and the quality of medical care (the better the care the lower the number).

As someone in public health, the measure that is most meaningful to me is the death per population because ultimately that measures how many lives we failed to protect or how many lives we saved.   

Quote from: Bob In PA on August 04, 2020, 12:51:56 PM
Lenn: If Joe Biden wins, this problem will disappear within a week or two (from the media bubble).    Bob

Quote from: Bob In PA on August 02, 2020, 08:05:08 AM
Notice to all members:

Unless there are serious objections, from now on, posts under this thread should be limited to "pure" health-related issues.   

Politically-tinged posts about covid should be made in the thread entitled.... SENSITIVE TOPICS - Readers Beware!

If you put one here by mistake or before seeing this post, no problem.  I'll move it, hopefully without making a mess.  Thank you all for cooperating.

Bob

PS. It's ok with me (although I don't speak for the other moderators) if you put something borderline here ALONG WITH your reasoning why it belongs here rather than under the other topic.

Quote from: Bob In PA on August 03, 2020, 12:08:28 PM
Rich: In addition, the fact that many people are asymptomatic is not helping.  I mention this because the radio just told me what I already know.... Doug Peterson has it and is asymptomatic.  Yikes.  Bob

Here is another fun thing.   There is no guarantee that the people who end up being completely asymptomatic actually develop immunity.  There is nothing I am aware of that is definitive at this point, but it seems the mild cases may not build up strong immunity.    Again, still early

Quote from: Bob In PA on August 03, 2020, 11:01:35 AM
Rich: Thank you.  I agree with all of it and can see how the "funk" can arise.  You're certainly not alone.  I've read about (and heard from) plenty of people in the health care field who in the same boat.

All I can say is hang in there and continue finding stuff like what you posted above my question, which IMO is an excellent discussion of some of the problems for long-term pandemics.

As for a "definitive treatment" if you hear or read anything I'll look here for it. There may never be one. In fact it's even possible a vaccine (if it ever happens) might precede agreement on definitive treatments for each stage.  There are so many variables, IMO it's hard to talk make generalizations about treatment without laying out the patient's specific age, health status and risk factors. 

Bob

What bothers me is I am not even certain that a vaccine will happen.   I hope it will and I think the odds are still better, than not, that it will, but I am not certain.   What I fear is how long does immunity last.  If the vaccine can't provide at least a year's protection (in my opinion) it will not be as helpful as we need it to be.  I am also worried about getting enough people to take the vaccine to develop herd immunity. 

Quote from: Bob In PA on August 03, 2020, 10:34:12 AM
Rich: The reasons for shutdowns and masks are to minimize the number of cases while simultaneously giving the doctors as much time as possible to discover the "best" ways of treating people who become ill.

The media "conversation" appears to be "stuck" on that stuff and I don't see much reporting about advances and progress in treatment.

I don't want to occupy your time searching for stuff that you don't ordinarily keep track of, so my preliminary question: do you follow developments in treating patients diagnosed with various stages of the disease?

Bob

Treatment isn't really my professional area of focus, but I do try and keep track of the treatments that are out there.   I know we have made considerable strides since the disease hit us back in February/March.   I can tell you that from my vantage point I am not seeing a light at the end of the tunnel in terms of definitive treatment or a definite date of a vaccine.   

It's sort of funny, when this started we were talking about "flattening the cure"  and the idea then was to keep hospitals and EMS from being overwhelmed.   Now as we learn about some of the serious issues related to the disease (such as injury to the heart) we have somewhat morphed into what you are talking about in terms of fighting a delaying action with the hopes of improved treatments and maybe a vaccine.

What I find most troubling is that I think we all hoped that once you got an area under control, you could carefully open up and sort of resume a semi-normal lifestyle without the disease spiking.   Indications are that we may not be able to do that.   That as soon as we start to open things up cases start to rise.   No doubt the Covid fatigue I posted about is playing a big role in this problem as well.   This is especially true of young people who are full of energy and have the list to risk from the disease.


Personally I am in a bit of a funk over this disease.  I am just not seeing the path out of this problem right now.   I can't say that things will be back to normal in 3 months or 6 months or even a year.  The more people I talk to the more I hear people bending or breaking the rules of social distancing.   That is not a good sign.   Plus the mental strain everyone is under has not been good for anyone.     

Bob,

Hopefully, the petty feuds and efforts to prove someone wrong is over.  Feel free to ask your questions.  Here is a good article that describes what could prove to be the most difficult.  In my opinion, this is the biggest problem being faced world-wide.


NEWS | July 7, 2020
"COVID fatigue" is hitting hard. Fighting it is hard, too, says UC Davis Health psychologist
It's time to develop coping skills, which include exercise and talking about our fears and stress.
(SACRAMENTO)

Quote from: philo43 on August 03, 2020, 08:04:43 AM
OK, so now you have given me a choice.

Who do I choose to believe?

Statements from Johns Hopkins University, one of the leaders in the world in medical science, or Rich who works at "xyz" Hospital.

I thought earlier you posted we should listen to the "experts".  Do the experts only count when they agree with you?

WOW!  That was very disingenuous.   You could believe the link your undated John Hopkins article claimed was its source for its/your claim that showed YOU and the anonymous John Hopkins article were wrong.   You could believe the two outstanding links (that are used by public health professionals around the world) that I provided that showed YOU your article were wrong as well.  You are so OBSESSED with your silly little personal feud/agenda that you will literally distort reality.   You don't have to believe me, you just have to look at all the sources including THE ONE YOU PROVIDED that all show you were wrong.    You twisted reality so badly you think all the actual facts were from "ME" rather than from independent sources.     Philo, I think you need to take a break from reading and responding to my posts, as doing so does not seem to be a good thing for your mental health.

Quote from: philo43 on August 02, 2020, 08:43:51 PM
As I said, you have your agenda, stick to it.  The more you post, the more it is evident.

Yes, that agenda is the TRUTH.  and thank you for the compliment.   

Normally, I wouldn't be such a stickler, but when you post false information (like you did with your article which contradicted itself with its own references) people can get hurt or worse die.  Granted I doubt anything we post on our little front porch will be that impactful, but it's hard to turn off the "we must get it right" mindset.

Quote from: philo43 on August 02, 2020, 06:14:25 PM
OK, you have your agenda , stick to it.

Clearly you would rather gnaw off your own foot than admit I was correct and you were mistaken.   Not exactly the sort of good environment for good conversation.   This isn't a competition Philo.  We are all facing the same virus and we are trying to get through it.   You don't need to make yourself more enemies during this, as the virus is a big enough challenge for all of us.  I am not your enemy

Quote from: philo43 on August 02, 2020, 04:33:59 PM
Tables are the defining factor in accuracy?  Wow, just wow - you dismiss one of the leading major organizations  in tracking  COVID 19?


What was the main points not addressed?

This is where you John Hopkins said they got their data

https://ourworldindata.org/coronavirus-testing

Yet the US doesn't lead the world in testing per capita according to the source they cited.   You know what else is flawed with the link you supplied?  It has no date.   In the ever changing world of Covid, no proper article or graph would be left without a date.


As for the main points, it was the part you didn't put in bold.