Slitherine

quote:

ORIGINAL: geofflambert

I also heard today but I'm not sure it is true, that the chloroquinone dose used in the case of malaria is one half of a fatal dose. If that's true we don't need any cowboys promoting its use except under careful supervision by medical professionals. We all know there's going to be people looking to buy the stuff on line. In my case I'm allergic to quinine so even a much smaller dose might be lethal. Plus, it is only being discussed as a treatment for symptoms, not as a cure.

quote:

Between Feb. 25 and March 2, the price paid for a single 25-gram bottle of chloroquine phosphate rose from $9.99 to over $500.

On March 18, eBay’s tracking indicated that one seller had sold 84 lots of the substance in 24 hours. By that afternoon, all sizes were sold out save for 100 gram lots, which were being listed for $519 each.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kull

quote:

ORIGINAL: geofflambert

I read about a week ago in regards to the meaning of the numbers out there, in particular in the US, that the test the US is using (I believe as opposed to China and Germany and some others) only identifies people who are shedding virus at the time of the test. Other tests being used elsewhere identify people who at some point had the virus and have recovered. So, particularly in China, where the number of active cases has been brought down substantially, considerable weight can be given to them, and at this point the mortality rate there is 4.4%. In the US, not only has very little testing been done compared to some other countries, but these tests cannot identify recovered cases after the fact. So we can't really rely on the US numbers for much.

Not true. Everybody is using some variety of PCR testing (read the "Test methods" section in the linked document), which only looks for active infections. I remember reading (but can't find the link) that China started off using an old SARS test which could sort of do both, but gave a high rate of false readings. The original US CDC test was not only slow, but had an inaccurate sub-test that made the whole thing invalid. That has long since been corrected. In general, everyone is now using PCR tests, all have high reliability, and all are designed to look only for active infections.

quote:

Using an antibody test developed by the Duke-NUS Medical School that relies on blood samples, the Singapore Ministry of Health has been successful in identifying two people who were infected with the novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) and have since recovered. The antibody test can be used for detecting people infected with novel coronavirus but are asymptomatic or exhibit only mild symptoms. The Singapore Ministry of Health announced this during a press conference on Tuesday.

quote:

ORIGINAL: obvert

About the interpretation of the number tested per thousand, which is Lombardy in up to 381/1000 positive, how do we interpret this stat?

Does this probably mean nearly half of the people in the region are positive (considering those not tested or asymptomatic)?

I'm curious as these numbers are all over the place in various countries and regions, with Spain at a whopping 572/1000!

We know they're not testing a lot, but also that they're getting a LOT of positives.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

*gasp*

He ran out of things to post!

Edit: Never mind. He edited his post after finding something with a large colorful font and vivid background.

quote:

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kull

quote:

ORIGINAL: geofflambert

I read about a week ago in regards to the meaning of the numbers out there, in particular in the US, that the test the US is using (I believe as opposed to China and Germany and some others) only identifies people who are shedding virus at the time of the test. Other tests being used elsewhere identify people who at some point had the virus and have recovered. So, particularly in China, where the number of active cases has been brought down substantially, considerable weight can be given to them, and at this point the mortality rate there is 4.4%. In the US, not only has very little testing been done compared to some other countries, but these tests cannot identify recovered cases after the fact. So we can't really rely on the US numbers for much.

Not true. Everybody is using some variety of PCR testing (read the "Test methods" section in the linked document), which only looks for active infections. I remember reading (but can't find the link) that China started off using an old SARS test which could sort of do both, but gave a high rate of false readings. The original US CDC test was not only slow, but had an inaccurate sub-test that made the whole thing invalid. That has long since been corrected. In general, everyone is now using PCR tests, all have high reliability, and all are designed to look only for active infections.

February 26, 2020

quote:

Using an antibody test developed by the Duke-NUS Medical School that relies on blood samples, the Singapore Ministry of Health has been successful in identifying two people who were infected with the novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) and have since recovered. The antibody test can be used for detecting people infected with novel coronavirus but are asymptomatic or exhibit only mild symptoms. The Singapore Ministry of Health announced this during a press conference on Tuesday.

https://www.thehindu.com/sci-tech/science/singapore-develops-antibody-test-to-detect-novel-coronavirus-infection-disease/article30920499.ece

quote:

ORIGINAL: MakeeLearn


"A 1921 investigation into Spanish Flu, in The American Journal of Hygiene, reported ethnic differences in mortality from the virus, commenting that, in comparison to other immigrants, the death rate was “enormously high among Italians” but “lower than would be expected among persons of Irish, English and German stock,” presumably based on the mortality rate that poverty would predict [Influenza: An Epidemiologic Study, by Warren Taylor Vaughan, American Journal of Hygiene, 1921]."

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kull
You can get some on eBay right now! If it's safe for fish, lizards should be just fine.

quote:


In this episode, Dr. Peter Hotez M.D., Ph.D., Dean for the National School of Tropical Medicine Baylor College of Medicine, returns to continue the conversation on COVID-19. Dr. Hotez informs us on how we can gauge the number of infected people, behaviors to reduce the probability of becoming infected, and the inconsistency of hospitalizations among young adults between different countries. Dr. Hotez underscores the continued uncertainty in many virus-related developments, but ends with some points of optimism.

Disclaimer: This is information accurate as of March 19, 2020, when it was recorded.

quote:

ORIGINAL: alanschu
The last time there was changes of 10%+ was February 14th when global exposure was much, much less and death rates themselves much lower

quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs

A few weeks ago I saw an article (I mentioned it here and might have posted a link) which stated a researcher believes he found that a certain gene pool, most prevalent in sub-Saharan Africa, might either be immune or resistant to this virus.

quote:

ORIGINAL: obvert

quote:

ORIGINAL: MakeeLearn

More than 70% of Coronavirus deaths in Italy are men and scientists admit they are 'mystified' by the disparity between genders


https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8135211/More-70-coronavirus-deaths-Italy-men.html


"At least 3,400 people in Italy have died of the devastating disease - it yesterday announced it had a higher death toll than China - but less than 1,000 of them have been women"

I use to joke that "they" would release a virus that would kill just men.

I'd guess this is more of a social gender difference with men covering more territory, spending more time out of the home, and seeing more people. There may also be the bravado/carelessness that they wouldn't be affected. In general when you hear or see of those now breaking curfew, the majority are men.

This is mostly old men, but men in general are more risk-taking than women.

quote:

The X chromosome and X-linked variants have largely been ignored in genome-wide and candidate association studies of infectious diseases due to the complexity of statistical analysis of the X chromosome. This exclusion is significant, since the X chromosome contains a high density of immune-related genes and regulatory elements that are extensively involved in both the innate and adaptive immune responses. Many diseases present with a clear sex bias, and apart from the influence of sex hormones and socioeconomic and behavioural factors, the X chromosome, X-linked genes and X chromosome inactivation mechanisms contribute to this difference.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ian R

quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs

A few weeks ago I saw an article (I mentioned it here and might have posted a link) which stated a researcher believes he found that a certain gene pool, most prevalent in sub-Saharan Africa, might either be immune or resistant to this virus.

Nigeria, the DRC, and Ethiopia have >400 million combined population, so that is good news. Without adding it up precisely I started counting in other countries and got to over 600 million without much difficulty. What is the per-capita occurrence of the gene?

quote:

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe

There is a test that China is using to find them. If nothing else, if they are immune then those people should not have to be quarantined. But just try to arrange that.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ian R

quote:

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe

There is a test that China is using to find them. If nothing else, if they are immune then those people should not have to be quarantined. But just try to arrange that.

If a test costs US$100 (includes materials, lab costs, medical fees etc) then it's a bit of a stretch to test 100 million working people. If you could somehow reduce the price to US$1 then it survives costs/benefit analysis - you get back the costs in taxes because people are working & spending*.

*Although if the lockdowns are going to diminish the US taxation revenue by $10billion, they may as well pay the $100 per head and get on with it.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ian R

An interesting pie chart follows. At least 1/3 of cases in Oz are returning travelers, with possible more of the same in so far undetermined origin cases. The majority of Australian confirmed cases acquired overseas had a recent history of travel to Europe or the Americas, predominately the United States of America.

What this suggests (I do not say it is 'evidence') is that C19 has been circulating in Europe and Nth America for longer than current wisdom accepts. It is also possible that people have been exposed to a carrier (the RO of 2.5 is higher than flu at 1.5) and may well have acquired the virus, but had such minimal symptoms they didn't even notice... and recovered.

There really should be a test kit put out in massive numbers to find these people, so that they can go back to work, and the world staves off the impending global economic disaster.