Help the Fight Against COVID-19

Status
Not open for further replies.
Source please?

Perhaps they are still low-level infected - were they ever tested to be negative after testing positive the first time?
Could have been false positives to begin with?
Please be careful with misleading information like that. First, no, these are not "recovered" cases. They are cases that tested positive a second time after testing negative in-between. In some cases these were asymptomatic the first time or are now asymptomatic. There's a huge difference between that and your implication that one can get sick again. Second, it's almost impossible that someone who was sick a few weeks ago could get sick again so quickly. If that was so, they never would have recovered in the first place.

https://www.npr.org/sections/goatsa...onavirus-patients-test-negative-then-positive
 
That article posits a few theories for the second positive test and says it is unlikely is that the people are reinfected. And, none of the people mentioned in the article are showing symptoms. Also, it contradicts your figures.
Figures got it from another article but cant seem to find it. If this behavior of the virus keeps up, we are doomed X2
 
I found this video very informative about trying to sort thru all of the data/charts/graphs we are all seeing everywhere these days and making sense of it all. It gave me a bit of clarity surrounding all the stats, exponential growth, what to look for in data regarding the 'flattening of the curve', etc. and I liked how they showed caveats for their graph/explanation too.

 
This is how much distance I'm putting between me and the rest of civilization. It was eerily quiet out here today. A single small plane went over at one point but otherwise there wasn't a manmade sound to be heard.

That's awesome; I took a drive to the middle of nowhere today too.

I read you were into photography on an old forum post; doing any out there these days?
 
Another interesting video showing the math and insights into "exponential growth" and demonstrates the great effect on slowing/flattening the curve that preventative measures can have; it's a very sensitive parameter in that small changes in this value have a very large effect on the overall rate of change and getting to 'the inflection point' where the exponential growth starts to curve down...it's wild how the predictions of infection rates are that sensitive to that value. Gives a small sense of relief that some of the mega numbers some predictions/data are making can be drastically reduced if we continue to be diligent.

"What you end up with is a kind of fractal pattern, where communities themselves function like individuals..." :cool:

 
Last edited:
It’s going to grow for a while even under the best of circumstances. At least to 1M infected I wouldn’t worry too much. That’s your yearly flu haul. If it goes beyond 1M, there maybe some reason for concern.
 
It’s going to grow for a while even under the best of circumstances. At least to 1M infected I wouldn’t worry too much. That’s your yearly flu haul. If it goes beyond 1M, there maybe some reason for concern.

No reasons for concern at this moment? 😮

No vaccine, collapsed hospitals, sick medical staff, people's economies struggling, families unable to visit their elders while they are sick or being buried, a whole generation dying in Spain and Italy, additional suffering for countries under USA embargo...

Where are you living?
 
Last edited:
The head of the German Robert-Koch Institute commented this morning (source). I consider this an expert opinion.

  • "we need to expect that capacity of the health system will be insufficient, very clearly"
  • explains the fairly low German mortality rate in Germany with the high number of tests. Further states that the early cases were mostly people not at risk because the infection was brought in e.g. from skiing holidays. Expects this to change, once more infections occur in nursing homes and hospitals.
  • warns that a situation as in Italy is possible
  • warns that "Germany is still at the beginning of the wave" and states that from a medical point of view, he wishes to practice social distancing for as long as possible. People should take the pandemic "very very seriously".
 
I'm ashamed to say I made the same mistake in the beginning of the outbreak.
There were about 3000 deaths in China.
At the same time, there were already 90000 deaths from the flu.
And there were 25000 deaths daily through starvation.
So it's easy to draw the wrong conclusions.

I think that, if they would let the virus just run its course without taking any measures, we would see a whole different picture.
Since then, we've learned that the virus:
  • is far more contagious than the flu
  • people are a lot longer contagious before showing any symptoms
  • the effects are far more severe than the common flu
  • it's at least ten times deadlier than the flu

So I keep wondering what would have happened, if no measures, to try and slow down or contain this virus, were taken.
 
Last edited:
To understabd the 2nd infections right:
We need to differentiate between infections and infectious diseases.

The tests used worldwide identify infections, which means that they find viruses on the surface of a person.
They don't check if the virusrs are in the cells/ in the blood of these persons.

And that's two different things. There's many bacteries that live on and in humans, without causing a disease.

The scientists try to find better testing for the disease.
 
Apparently Sweden is not taking any measures either and counting on the good sense of its population.
That may be. Now I'd think twice about comparison with folks who don't do ice bucket challenge but cut a hole into the frozen lake for swimming. Yes, take that one with a grain of salt but they have e.g. 600000 summer cottages for 10 million inhabitants and an attitude that's been striking fear into the rest of Europe since the middle ages. Ok, take that one with a grain of salt, too.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom