I have thought asymptomatic transmission was a major factor in C19's spread - WHO's denial confirms it for me.
Bingo. The WHO is in China’s pocket, now more so as the US is threatening to defund them. What better way for a China if their goal is to weaken the US as much as possible than to use propaganda to convince people the virus is a hoax or they’re safe from contracting it so that they act in a manner to maximize the spread.Wait, I thought the WHO were in China pocket??
2% dangerousAsymptomatic or not, the honey badger virus is accelerating in its spread again: https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/
2% dangerous
98% mild
90% recovered
While I dont want to make it sound like I believe it is more deadly than it is, one thing that has been a bit misrepresented is the definition of "mild". Mild just meant "We dont have to put you in the hospital." The few people I have known to have had the virus describe it as nearly a month of living hell. So "mild" isnt necessarily "I just had a wee cough for a few days and was fine..." it is up to weeks of being bedridden.
While I dont want to make it sound like I believe it is more deadly than it is, one thing that has been a bit misrepresented is the definition of "mild". Mild just meant "We dont have to put you in the hospital." The few people I have known to have had the virus describe it as nearly a month of living hell. So "mild" isnt necessarily "I just had a wee cough for a few days and was fine..." it is up to weeks of being bedridden.
But the narrative behind the lockdown was OMGGGGG THE HOSPITALSSSSSS
98% mild cases aren't overwhelming the US medical system. 90% recovery rate means this is no Spanish Flu.
Lift the restrictions on healthy and asymptomatic people, because the data and science isn't supporting it.
But the narrative behind the lockdown was OMGGGGG THE HOSPITALSSSSSS
98% mild cases aren't overwhelming the US medical system. 90% recovery rate means this is no Spanish Flu.
Lift the restrictions on healthy and asymptomatic people, because the data and science isn't supporting it.
No doubt, never said it was. But there is a common theme amongst people that "mild case" means "like having a bad cold" when that isnt true. Its spending a month just slightly not sick enough to need a hospital.
For some, for sure. There are also accounts out there that it was like a cold for them. Different people, different immune systems, different initial virus loads, maybe even different strains all mean different experiences. Like lots of other diseases. Some people have a hard time. Some don’t. And everything in between.
If I took all cases we've seen and graphed them, outpatient and inpatient, it would be a skewed curve. People with the truly "mild" (as in a cold or URI) are younger, and the symptoms last shorter. But even if younger and worse-than-"just mild", the symptoms last longer. The people we've seen that are in the "like a bad cold" are the minority; most, regardless of age, had significant symptoms for 3 weeks to over a month. The people hospitalized? Horrible symptoms. Very rough.
And again, I dont disagree, nor doubt that. Just commenting that to many "mild" doesnt mean "almost needing hospitalization".
Do you think there is some, maybe even a lot of skewing there by people with milder symptoms not going to the hospital? I know I would have to feel like death warmed over before I went to the doctor, much less a hospital. I’ve always been that way and I know a lot of men (and my wife) are like me in that regard.
Don't forget that the after effects, such as diminished lung capacity, can be long lasting if not permanent.No doubt, never said it was. But there is a common theme amongst people that "mild case" means "like having a bad cold" when that isnt true. Its spending a month just slightly not sick enough to need a hospital.
Out of curiosity, how has the science of treatment changed, if at all, over the last several months? Initially the thought was that people needed mechanical ventilation but they started realizing that it was more of a clotting disorder and that ventilating put a lot of pressure on the left ventricle and rather anticoagulants (heparin ?) may help. Then there is the whole hydroxychlorquine versus Remdesivir debate. The idea of medical science coming down to political and financial gain is sickening. Same question for @ChuckmanFrom what I'm seeing, a month is about how long it runs in bad cases as well. We've had some otherwise healthy people spend over 30 days in an ICU bed before we could get their oxygen requirements low enough to send them home.
Treatment hasn't changed very much that I can see.
The hydroxy/remdesivir debate is not a debate at all. At least in critical patients (which is all I'm seeing) neither of these drugs are having any effect, save for some deleterious ones from hydroxychloroquine. I can't honestly say how viable these might be for someone on day 1 of symptoms, but in full blown infections, they aren't the silver bullet Fox news is claiming they are.
A lot of the real debate when it comes to care I'm seeing among pulmonologists and critical care doctors right now is when to actually intubate a patient. In patients who will likely have poor outcomes with mechanical ventilation, they're throwing as much o2 therapy at them as they can trying to keep them from going on a vent. I've seen both good and bad results from this. Generally, we can keep these patients on the low side of acceptable for oxygenation, but their respiratory rate and work of breathing can catch up with them. You can only breath 40 times a minute for so long before you or your heart wears out. What it comes down to is a case by case scrutiny of the patient from literally minute to minute.
I am not seeing that this is a clotting disorder at all, save for a single patient who had a stroke during their course in the hospital. That patient was receiving anticoagulants, as they were at risk of that outcome without Covid's help anyway. That's not a tally mark for a clotting disorder.
It's a complex morass of numbers and values when you start talking about how ventilation affects cardiac output. This usually has to do with the high peep pressures that are required to ventilate and oxygenate some of these people on the ventilator. It's really more a problem for hemodynamically unstable patients, and you will see their BP tank as the pressure go up.
The only real take away I can give is that we still don't know anything concrete. Why does a seemingly healthy 30 or 40 year old spend a month dieing and an elderly person with tons of comorbidities present with no symptoms at all? I've seen both of these types of patients several times already.
It all seems entirely random. There's something we haven't picked up on yet that is a determining factor between those who get hit hard and those who don't, and I don't think it's viral load.
For example, as a cross section of what I'm talking about, we had two patients present from the same workplace on the same day. About the same age. The one who had a couple pre-existing medical conditions went home after a couple days. The other with no conditions, died shortly thereafter.
I don't want Covid. If you guys are smart, you'll do what you can to ensure you don't get it. You can parade out all the mortality percentages you want, but that means diddly squat when you win the bad lottery. You might be miserable for a month and survive, you might be miserable for a month and die. You might be miserable for a month and go home with wrecked lungs and on oxygen for the rest of your days. You might get supremely lucky and have minimal or no symptoms. I don't want to roll the dice if I don't have to.
I'm afraid his name is not Mr. Fire Marshal. And there is no capacity limit.Lying bunch of donkey poo. Think long and hard about this....just by chance this happened or just a really really bad flu for people who were already very sick. How many loved ones died alone. People will pay for this when the world ends. What is the fire marshals capacity limit in hell?
The UN entity for coordinating leadership on health concerns globally. They spiked the football on Smallpox, and released (or looked the other way) on several other viruses like H1N1, SARS, MERS, and now SARS-COV-2 (CoVid-19). They also failed on HIV as well.Does anyone on this board know what the World Health Organisation's role globally? Who will raise there hand first??
Winner! This is a subject that hardly anyone knows anything about.
So Pandemic bonds rings a bell then? Right?