quote:

ORIGINAL: balto

Gilmer, you are golden if you had Corona. Corona symptoms are identical to the flu.., and of course you survived as does everyone with decent health. Go out and party everywhere because you are now immune.

quote:

ORIGINAL: TulliusDetritus
China [...] will soon be sending to the rest of the world equipment, experience, doctors and nurses... stay tuned [;)]

quote:

3. How does not touching your face help against the virus?

Respiratory infections such as pneumonia or the flu, can spread through droplets in the air when someone sick coughs, sneezes or talks near an uninfected person, according to the Association for Professionals in Infection Control and Epidemiology (APIC). This runs similar to how the CDC believes COVID-19 spreads.

"Respiratory infections can be caused by many different bacteria, viruses, and other disease-causing germs," according to the APIC. "When you touch your face with dirty, unwashed hands, germs can take up residence in your mucus membranes which can lead to an infection."

Respiratory infections can not only spread through respiratory droplets, but through contact as well.

quote:

Hong Kong University pathology professor John Nicholls said that he suspected three factors would potentially kill the virus, according to the transcript of a private conference call in early February.

"Three things the virus does not like: 1. Sunlight, 2. Temperature and 3. Humidity," Nicholls said in remarks that were leaked on social media. "The virus can remain intact at 4 degrees Celsius (39 degrees Fahrenheit) or 10 degrees C (50 F)...But at 30 degrees C (86 degrees F) then you get inactivation."

The CDC has cautioned that not enough is known about the virus to say for sure that weather will affect the spread, but a spokesperson said, "I’m happy to hope that it [the threat] goes down as the weather warms up."

quote:

ORIGINAL: Erik Rutins

Someone was wondering earlier how it does on surfaces and how to disinfect. Here's some info:

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0195670120300463



[image]local://upfiles/9/ECB63D7A3EC149808CAE6CA40B01D2D9.jpg[/image]

quote:

The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) recommends using a 1:10 solution for disinfecting surfaces and objects that may have been tainted by contagions. Be sure to follow these steps exactly to make a safe and effective bleach solution.

quote:

Using Cleaning & Sanitizing Products

First, wash surfaces with soap and warm, clean water to remove dirt and debris. Next, sanitize surfaces with household bleach.

It is critical to read and follow the safety instructions on any product you use. Below are the most important safety guidelines when using sanitizing products:

Never mix bleach with ammonia or any other cleaner.
Wear rubber or other non-porous boots, gloves, and eye protection.
Try not to breathe in product fumes. If using products indoors, open windows and doors to allow fresh air to enter.

quote:

ORIGINAL: z1812

https://nypost.com/2020/02/16/chinese-bank-to-destroy-cash-in-areas-hit-by-coronavirus/

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

Something I think missing from most breathless news coverage is relative risk. In the United States, 34,000-44,000 people die annually from influenza and complications from influenza. Probably that number times 100 are clinically affected, but recover. Other countries have similar incidence/case fatality rate per unit of population.

My guess is that those individuals that tested positive for the Wuhan Coronavirus were *not* screened or reported for co-pathogens or factors that could substantially influence co-morbidity. For example, how many of the reported deaths "due to Coronavirus" were also screened for influenza or other causes of bacterial pneumonia? What number of the coronavirus-ascribed mortality were elderly with pre-existing conditions related to respiratory failure? I haven't seen any reports of insight into the effects that mundane features / causes of respiratory disease are being screened and weighed relative to their importance.

The Wuhan Coronavirus (2019) is an interesting development that bears watching. But let's not lose sight of the forest for the trees. It's still a novel respiratory pathogen that is unlikely to be a pandemic or even a major WHO health concern.

Take a deep breath. Remember the tendency of media towards the salacious: see SARS, Ebola (outside of West Africa) and any number of other novel health developments. Outside of the central nidus of viral origin, none of these 'outbreaks' bore out the drama that media heaped upon them at the time.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

Something I think missing from most breathless news coverage is relative risk. In the United States, 34,000-44,000 people die annually from influenza and complications from influenza. Probably that number times 100 are clinically affected, but recover. Other countries have similar incidence/case fatality rate per unit of population.

My guess is that those individuals that tested positive for the Wuhan Coronavirus were *not* screened or reported for co-pathogens or factors that could substantially influence co-morbidity. For example, how many of the reported deaths "due to Coronavirus" were also screened for influenza or other causes of bacterial pneumonia? What number of the coronavirus-ascribed mortality were elderly with pre-existing conditions related to respiratory failure? I haven't seen any reports of insight into the effects that mundane features / causes of respiratory disease are being screened and weighed relative to their importance.

The Wuhan Coronavirus (2019) is an interesting development that bears watching. But let's not lose sight of the forest for the trees. It's still a novel respiratory pathogen that is unlikely to be a pandemic or even a major WHO health concern.

Take a deep breath. Remember the tendency of media towards the salacious: see SARS, Ebola (outside of West Africa) and any number of other novel health developments. Outside of the central nidus of viral origin, none of these 'outbreaks' bore out the drama that media heaped upon them at the time.

Just wanted to keep it real. In the third post on this thread (from January), I poo-pooed the possibility of this becoming a major disease issue or the WHO declaring this a pandemic. While much of what I thought would happen with this disease has happened, I understated the contagious nature of this disease to spread globally. I was wrong. Mea culpa and all that.

quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

Something I think missing from most breathless news coverage is relative risk. In the United States, 34,000-44,000 people die annually from influenza and complications from influenza. Probably that number times 100 are clinically affected, but recover. Other countries have similar incidence/case fatality rate per unit of population.

My guess is that those individuals that tested positive for the Wuhan Coronavirus were *not* screened or reported for co-pathogens or factors that could substantially influence co-morbidity. For example, how many of the reported deaths "due to Coronavirus" were also screened for influenza or other causes of bacterial pneumonia? What number of the coronavirus-ascribed mortality were elderly with pre-existing conditions related to respiratory failure? I haven't seen any reports of insight into the effects that mundane features / causes of respiratory disease are being screened and weighed relative to their importance.

The Wuhan Coronavirus (2019) is an interesting development that bears watching. But let's not lose sight of the forest for the trees. It's still a novel respiratory pathogen that is unlikely to be a pandemic or even a major WHO health concern.

Take a deep breath. Remember the tendency of media towards the salacious: see SARS, Ebola (outside of West Africa) and any number of other novel health developments. Outside of the central nidus of viral origin, none of these 'outbreaks' bore out the drama that media heaped upon them at the time.

Just wanted to keep it real. In the third post on this thread (from January), I poo-pooed the possibility of this becoming a major disease issue or the WHO declaring this a pandemic. While much of what I thought would happen with this disease has happened, I understated the contagious nature of this disease to spread globally. I was wrong. Mea culpa and all that.

warspite1

Hindsight is a wonderful thing. Good of you to say it but frankly what you thought was understandable given the previous scares.

quote:

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe

quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

Something I think missing from most breathless news coverage is relative risk. In the United States, 34,000-44,000 people die annually from influenza and complications from influenza. Probably that number times 100 are clinically affected, but recover. Other countries have similar incidence/case fatality rate per unit of population.

My guess is that those individuals that tested positive for the Wuhan Coronavirus were *not* screened or reported for co-pathogens or factors that could substantially influence co-morbidity. For example, how many of the reported deaths "due to Coronavirus" were also screened for influenza or other causes of bacterial pneumonia? What number of the coronavirus-ascribed mortality were elderly with pre-existing conditions related to respiratory failure? I haven't seen any reports of insight into the effects that mundane features / causes of respiratory disease are being screened and weighed relative to their importance.

The Wuhan Coronavirus (2019) is an interesting development that bears watching. But let's not lose sight of the forest for the trees. It's still a novel respiratory pathogen that is unlikely to be a pandemic or even a major WHO health concern.

Take a deep breath. Remember the tendency of media towards the salacious: see SARS, Ebola (outside of West Africa) and any number of other novel health developments. Outside of the central nidus of viral origin, none of these 'outbreaks' bore out the drama that media heaped upon them at the time.

Just wanted to keep it real. In the third post on this thread (from January), I poo-pooed the possibility of this becoming a major disease issue or the WHO declaring this a pandemic. While much of what I thought would happen with this disease has happened, I understated the contagious nature of this disease to spread globally. I was wrong. Mea culpa and all that.

warspite1

Hindsight is a wonderful thing. Good of you to say it but frankly what you thought was understandable given the previous scares.

I still think that you are still correct about co-pathogens and other factors. Apparently the older men in China who tended to smoke tobacco have a much higher mortality rate than women of the same age who tended not to smoke. Also other factors such as heart disease, diabetes, obesity, et al are not usually found in the children who catch it and shrug it off.

Italy also has a much higher rate of cigarette smoking as well.

quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1

quote:

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe

quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

Something I think missing from most breathless news coverage is relative risk. In the United States, 34,000-44,000 people die annually from influenza and complications from influenza. Probably that number times 100 are clinically affected, but recover. Other countries have similar incidence/case fatality rate per unit of population.

My guess is that those individuals that tested positive for the Wuhan Coronavirus were *not* screened or reported for co-pathogens or factors that could substantially influence co-morbidity. For example, how many of the reported deaths "due to Coronavirus" were also screened for influenza or other causes of bacterial pneumonia? What number of the coronavirus-ascribed mortality were elderly with pre-existing conditions related to respiratory failure? I haven't seen any reports of insight into the effects that mundane features / causes of respiratory disease are being screened and weighed relative to their importance.

The Wuhan Coronavirus (2019) is an interesting development that bears watching. But let's not lose sight of the forest for the trees. It's still a novel respiratory pathogen that is unlikely to be a pandemic or even a major WHO health concern.

Take a deep breath. Remember the tendency of media towards the salacious: see SARS, Ebola (outside of West Africa) and any number of other novel health developments. Outside of the central nidus of viral origin, none of these 'outbreaks' bore out the drama that media heaped upon them at the time.

Just wanted to keep it real. In the third post on this thread (from January), I poo-pooed the possibility of this becoming a major disease issue or the WHO declaring this a pandemic. While much of what I thought would happen with this disease has happened, I understated the contagious nature of this disease to spread globally. I was wrong. Mea culpa and all that.

warspite1

Hindsight is a wonderful thing. Good of you to say it but frankly what you thought was understandable given the previous scares.

I still think that you are still correct about co-pathogens and other factors. Apparently the older men in China who tended to smoke tobacco have a much higher mortality rate than women of the same age who tended not to smoke. Also other factors such as heart disease, diabetes, obesity, et al are not usually found in the children who catch it and shrug it off.

Italy also has a much higher rate of cigarette smoking as well.

warspite1

May have been noted before, but apparently Italy has the oldest population in Europe. Almost a quarter over 65.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Zorch

Yes, some of them can even remember HMS Warspite.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Orm

quote:

ORIGINAL: Zorch

Yes, some of them can even remember HMS Warspite.

Yes, with horror. They use true stories about HMS Warspite to scare children. And to teach them to never mess with the Royal Navy again.