Covid-19 Prophylaxis

[maldorf]

Meanwhile after the virus spread from their country and hiding the spread from the world, China has been hoarding PPE and now selling it for profit. They went from being a net exporter of PPE to a net importer, leaving the rest of the world defenseless. Now they are sitting on it and making huge profits. Fifty cent masks being sold for $8.

Peter Navarro: China 'cornered' the personal protective equipment market and 'is profiteering' during coronavirus outbreak

White House Trade Adviser Peter Navarro said during an exclusive interview on “Sunday Morning Futures” that China "cornered" the personal protective equipment (PPE) market during the coronavirus outbreak and “is profiteering.”

www.foxnews.com

160,000 people dead now world wide.

 

[danieltx]

One thing that is frustrating to me is this idea that mass testing is going to significantly slow the spread. I just don't see it. A doctor was just talking about it and with the supply chain we have it would take 2 years to test every American once. It would work ok if you only had to test each person once, but what happens when a person that previously tested negative goes out and contracts the virus.? It could be as soon as the day after they got tested. The test is only a snapshot of the day they were tested, nothing more.

The whole idea of 'slowing the spread' is ridiculous as is starting to show in the initial antibody studies - one study in California and another in the midwest both had similar findings, that 50-80 times MORE people have been infected with coronavirus than we know about. This thing is likely way more widespread than we realize, way less lethal than the medical / scientific community portrays it to be, and way more people have recovered or never even became symptomatic at all.

https://www.yahoo.com/gma/antibody-...avirus-may-far-more-widespread-155200568.html

 

[beverast]

Can you please explain what the number of unreported cases has to do with the necessity of lowering the reproduction rate R as much as possible, at least in initial stages? If you get over it without any symptoms and nobody knows you've ever had it until an antibody test is done, good for you.

The whole reason we needed this whole "flatten the curve" affair was to not overload hospitals, or rather ICU and ventilations capacities. So what if there's been a billion unreported cases, what happens when you let it spread uncontrollably can be seen in Spain, Italy, and NYC.

 

[muscle96ss]

One thing that is frustrating to me is this idea that mass testing is going to significantly slow the spread. I just don't see it. A doctor was just talking about it and with the supply chain we have it would take 2 years to test every American once. It would work ok if you only had to test each person once, but what happens when a person that previously tested negative goes out and contracts the virus.? It could be as soon as the day after they got tested. The test is only a snapshot of the day they were tested, nothing more.

I agree; I was for mass testing in the beginning but now realize that it has nothing to do with how fast is going to spread. Testing is necessary for those individuals who think they may have the virus; so they know whether they have it or something else in order to be treated properly. Antibody testing is also necessary in order to decipher who has had the virus and who hasn't; not only to know who may be safe from getting it, but to better understand the true prevalence of the disease. That data is needed for true death rates and other important statistics.

But to think that testing is going to have any effect on the spreading of the disease is ridiculous. If I think I have the disease, whether I have a positive test or no test at all, is irrelevant; I should still avoid contact with others and we are still in a quarantine. And as was pointed out, the test only points out what is happening at the exact time of the test. So if you test everybody in the country today; they could be exposed 10 minutes after the test and it is worthless. You would literally need to test everybody everyday for it to have meaning in asymptomatic people.

 

[muscle96ss]

Can you please explain what the number of unreported cases has to do with the necessity of lowering the reproduction rate R as much as possible, at least in initial stages? If you get over it without any symptoms and nobody knows you've ever had it until an antibody test is done, good for you.

The whole reason we needed this whole "flatten the curve" affair was to not overload hospitals, or rather ICU and ventilations capacities. So what if there's been a billion unreported cases, what happens when you let it spread uncontrollably can be seen in Spain, Italy, and NYC.

I think what he is saying is that the disease is much more prevalent than we realize because we only know about the cases that were serious enough to be reported. In other words, it may still be spreading faster than we thought, even with the quarantine, but may not be nearly as serious as we first thought; and thus overreacting.

 

[maldorf]

I agree; I was for mass testing in the beginning but now realize that it has nothing to do with how fast is going to spread. Testing is necessary for those individuals who think they may have the virus; so they know whether they have it or something else in order to be treated properly. Antibody testing is also necessary in order to decipher who has had the virus and who hasn't; not only to know who may be safe from getting it, but to better understand the true prevalence of the disease. That data is needed for true death rates and other important statistics.

But to think that testing is going to have any effect on the spreading of the disease is ridiculous. If I think I have the disease, whether I have a positive test or no test at all, is irrelevant; I should still avoid contact with others and we are still in a quarantine. And as was pointed out, the test only points out what is happening at the exact time of the test. So if you test everybody in the country today; they could be exposed 10 minutes after the test and it is worthless. You would literally need to test everybody everyday for it to have meaning in asymptomatic people.

The only way testing will make people safer is to run the country like a police state. Nobody is allowed to go out unless you have had a positive antibody test. That would wipe out the virus fast, but not many would support such a thing.

 

[muscle96ss]

The only way testing will make people safer is to run the country like a police state. Nobody is allowed to go out unless you have had a positive antibody test. That would wipe out the virus fast, but not many would support such a thing.

Then you would have people getting the virus on purpose just to get out. In addition, we don't know how much of the antibodies are necessary to prevent a person from getting re-infected. But. it's all irrelevant because as you pointed out, our society would never tolerate that and there would be a huge rebellion and protests. We are seeing that people are already at their limits now.

 

[maldorf]

Then you would have people getting the virus on purpose just to get out. In addition, we don't know how much of the antibodies are necessary to prevent a person from getting re-infected. But. it's all irrelevant because as you pointed out, our society would never tolerate that and there would be a huge rebellion and protests. We are seeing that people are already at their limits now.

Yeah, I had the coronavirus party thing in the back of my mind and forgot to mention that.

Funny thing, about 2 days before all he'll broke lose, I was at the gym and over heard a guy talking on the phone. He was saying that he wanted to throw a Corona party so they could just get it out of the way.
Won't work like chick pox though, I'm pretty sure that coronaviruses mutate enough so that it's impossible to have permanent immunity. We wouldn't get seasonal flu shots otherwise.

 

[johnjuanb1]

The whole idea of 'slowing the spread' is ridiculous as is starting to show in the initial antibody studies - one study in California and another in the midwest both had similar findings, that 50-80 times MORE people have been infected with coronavirus than we know about. This thing is likely way more widespread than we realize, way less lethal than the medical / scientific community portrays it to be, and way more people have recovered or never even became symptomatic at all.

https://www.yahoo.com/gma/antibody-...avirus-may-far-more-widespread-155200568.html

This

 

[muscle96ss]

Yeah, I had the coronavirus party thing in the back of my mind and forgot to mention that.

Funny thing, about 2 days before all he'll broke lose, I was at the gym and over heard a guy talking on the phone. He was saying that he wanted to throw a Corona party so they could just get it out of the way.
Won't work like chick pox though, I'm pretty sure that coronaviruses mutate enough so that it's impossible to have permanent immunity. We wouldn't get seasonal flu shots otherwise.

I would like to hear more from scientific community on the ability to mutate like the flu. I know it was mentioned early on from some scientists, that there was something about the structure that they thought would protect it from that kind of mutation. But I would not take that as fact without a ton of further research. As we know, the flu shot is very ineffective many years and if this virus were similar in mutation, it would make the vaccination not the panacea that everyone is talking about.

 

[nidnoy]

Just the thought of not allowing someone to go into society based on a test is scary, not because of the corona virus, it may be a good thing to help stop it, but it’s precedent and potential for abuse. If there is one thing human history teaches it is greed and power corrupt and the thirst for it is never quenched. There is no such thing as a benevolent ruler or government. I don’t say that cynically, it is a product of who we are as humans.

 

[maldorf]

I would like to hear more from scientific community on the ability to mutate like the flu. I know it was mentioned early on from some scientists, that there was something about the structure that they thought would protect it from that kind of mutation. But I would not take that as fact without a ton of further research. As we know, the flu shot is very ineffective many years and if this virus were similar in mutation, it would make the vaccination not the panacea that everyone is talking about.

I would not say that the flu shot is ineffective. If it doesn't stop someone from getting the flu it at least makes the illness not as severe and that would save lives with something like Covid-19. I think most years that it helps people by either preventing the flu or reducing how long and how sick they get.

 

[muscle96ss]

I would not say that the flu shot is ineffective. If it doesn't stop someone from getting the flu it at least makes the illness not as severe and that would save lives with something like Covid-19. I think most years that it helps people by either preventing the flu or reducing how long and how sick they get.

The flu vaccine is made as a guess based on research of what strains are expected to be prevalent that coming year. So some years it is quite effective and others not so effective; it varies from year to year.

 

[maldorf]

The flu vaccine is made as a guess based on research of what strains are expected to be prevalent that coming year. So some years it is quite effective and others not so effective; it varies from year to year.

Yes, and most of the time it is rated quite good afterwards. I can only remember one year where it came out that it was terrible.

Some may think that the shot is useless, im not picking on you here. There is a reason the medical community tells people with health risks to get the vaccine each year, and its not because of the pharmaceutical lobby or some conspiracy.

 

[danieltx]

I really hope the lasting thing that comes out of this is the body positivity movement gets shut down permanently, people take their individual health MUCH more seriously, and the United States sees reductions in obesity, diabetes, and other chronic health conditions. If the nationwide deaths, hospitalizations, long-term effects, etc., from this don't motivate people to, I truly can't see anything doing it. A healthy society would've weathered the virus better, avoided such strict lockdowns, and likely had much less economic damage due to it.

Outside of age, obesity is the biggest risk factor for being hospitalized due to coronavirus (https://www.businessinsider.com/cor...-after-age-driving-nyc-hospitalization-2020-4). In my metro, 30% of patients admitted are diabetics. We know that high blood pressure, high inflammation, and other chronic health conditions make people more like to have severe cases of it.

In 2010, 35.7% of the US was obese - add in just overweight and it's well over 50%, and those numbers have only gone up in the last 10 years (https://web.archive.org/web/20130514043549/http://www.cdc.gov/obesity/adult/index.html). The obesity, the comorbidities that come with it - nobody should be surprised with what's happened in the US.

 

[Swifto]

If a vaccine is made, will you take it?

 

[MyNameIsJeff]

If a vaccine is made, will you take it?

Hell no. I'm already hesitant to take vaccines that have a long track record and low reported incidence of side effects. But to take a brand new vaccine that was rushed to market with lots of shortcuts taken in safety testing? No fucking way! Even if there was enough time for testing, do I really trust the WHO and Bill Gates funded organizations when they deem it 'safe'? The same guys who lied to people about the effectiveness of masks, the effectiveness of travel bans, etc...

 

[Reload]

Swifto and Jeff...do you think it would be possible to intentionally infect an individual with a very small (live) viral load of Covid 19 to gradually build an immune response towards immunity similar in effect to allergy desensitization?

 

[maldorf]

Swifto and Jeff...do you think it would be possible to intentionally infect an individual with a very small (live) viral load of Covid 19 to gradually build an immune response towards immunity similar in effect to allergy desensitization?

The nasal vaccinations they give have live virus in them, if I am not mistaken. Because of this, they don't want people with health problems getting that and they should get the injection instead since the virus is not alive.

 

[waterscholar]

Hell no. I'm already hesitant to take vaccines that have a long track record and low reported incidence of side effects. But to take a brand new vaccine that was rushed to market with lots of shortcuts taken in safety testing? No fucking way! Even if there was enough time for testing, do I really trust the WHO and Bill Gates funded organizations when they deem it 'safe'? The same guys who lied to people about the effectiveness of masks, the effectiveness of travel bans, etc...

Yikes :/

It's too bad that many don't trust the scientific community. I'm curious, what would make you trust researchers more? I do hope you know that majority are trustworthy and ethical people