No not yet but as others have said, one of our concerns going forward will be the large number of obese Americans and how they handle this as well as our senior communities.tysker said:We're not seeing anywhere near a 40-50% hospital admission rate here, correct? It seems obvious that there are underlying complications that enhance the severity. And I assume these complications may be clustered in communities or nations/cultures?AgsMyDude said:
cone said:
obesity is one of the declared comorbidities in Italy
if we let it this will hit us very very hard IMO
gonemaroon said:
Like HOLY **** - and no one's locking down borders, airports, - going into hyperdrive?
Quote:
The push to increase testing in the U.S. for the novel coronavirus that causes Covid-19 has hit a new stumbling block: shortages of key chemicals needed to start up and run the tests.
In particular, one key product, made by the diagnostics testing giant Qiagen, is in dwindling supply. The chemical is used to isolate the virus' genetic material, or RNA, so that it can be tested.
Robert Redfield, the director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, told Politico, which first reported the story, that he is worried about the supplies labs have of the chemicals, known as reagents.
"The availability of those reagents is obviously being looked at," Redfield said Tuesday. "I'm confident of the actual test that we have, but as people begin to operationalize the test, they realize there's other things they need to do the test."
Quote:
A Qiagen spokesperson acknowledged that "extraordinary" demand was limiting the company's ability to supply some products, and said workers at its Hilden, Germany, and Barcelona, Spain, manufacturing sites were moving to work three shifts, seven days a week in order to ramp up production. The company is also bringing on new staff and making better use of a site in Germantown, Md., to try and make the test kits.
Bo Darville said:
That's what I don't understand. If the closings aren't staggered and occur only in the next few weeks whats the point?
cisgenderedAggie said:
They didn't say what the reagent was but I'd guess it's phenol-chloroform solution. FDA and CDC are really going to need to get creative about how to process testing without pre-packaged kits.
How do we know which areas are largely unaffected? We have a distinct lack of testing and cases are showing up in rural South Dakota. It could be anywhere at this point.DTP02 said:Bo Darville said:
That's what I don't understand. If the closings aren't staggered and occur only in the next few weeks whats the point?
Many of the closings are just panic-driven. Institutions that close now due to panic may find that they have to close in the future due to necessity if/when their community begins to hit a critical mass of infection and strain medical resources.
In my mind they aren't helping with containment at this point in areas that are largely unaffected, but only lengthening the impact of major disruptions to our way of life by closing when it's not necessary.
I follow the Olympics pretty closely. I've obviously seen lots of speculation around it. This is the first time I've seen anyone from the organizing committee address it. Rescheduling or delaying the games would be a MAJOR deal.Rapier108 said:They've been discussing it for a while now because they just don't know what will happen by July.CDub06 said:
You know it's serious when they're talking about pushing the Olympics.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-sports-olympics/olympics-official-discusses-possibility-of-postponing-games-one-two-years-idUSKBN20X2L0
Quote:
A California doctor says three men he knows struck down with coronavirus are all in intensive care and are as young as 40 - contradicting claims that the disease only impacts the elderly.
Dr Sam Fink, who is based in the affluent town of Tarzana, began treating two of the men following their return home from a ski trip to Northern Italy late last month. Dr. Fink is friends with a third patient from the trip, who is also now in ICU battling against the virus.
'I have never seen anything like this,' Dr Fink told DailyMail.com on Tuesday.
AggieChemist said:
Worldwide shortage of phenol
IrishTxAggie said:Bo Darville said:
If this thing starts killing smokers en masse I'm going to buy a huge foam #1 finger with Covid19 printed on it.
I quit smoking cigarettes five years ago... But can cigars get an exemption?
Quote:
In 1918, the world was a very different place, even without the disruptive influence of World War I. Doctors knew viruses existed but had never seen one there were no electron microscopes, and the genetic material of viruses had not yet been discovered. Today, however, researchers not only know how to isolate a virus but can find its genetic sequence, test antiviral drugs and develop a vaccine.
In 1918, it was impossible to test people with mild symptoms so they could self-quarantine. And it was nearly impossible to do contact tracing because the flu seemed to infect and panic entire cities and communities all at once. Moreover, there was little protective equipment for health care workers, and the supportive care with respirators that can be provided to people very ill with coronavirus did not exist.
With a case fatality rate of at least 2.5 percent, the 1918 flu was far more deadly than ordinary flu, and it was so infectious that it spread widely, which meant the number of deaths soared.
Researchers believe the 1918 flu spared older people because they had some immunity to it. They theorize that decades earlier there had been a version of that virus, one that was not as lethal and spread like an ordinary flu. The older people living in 1918 would have been exposed to that less lethal flu and developed antibodies. As for children, most viral illnesses measles, chickenpox are more deadly in young adults, which may explain why the youngest were spared in the 1918 epidemic.
Regardless of the reason, it was a disaster for life expectancy, which plummeted. In 1917, life expectancy in the United States was 51 years. It was the same in 1919. But in 1918, it was just 39 years.
The new coronavirus tends to kill older people and those with underlying medical conditions, and it does not seem to kill children. All of which means it will have far less effect, if any, on life expectancy.
Cepe said:
SIAP - I found this article extremely interesting this morning. . .
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/09/health/coronavirus-is-very-different-from-the-spanish-flu-of-1918-heres-how.htmlQuote:
In 1918, the world was a very different place, even without the disruptive influence of World War I. Doctors knew viruses existed but had never seen one there were no electron microscopes, and the genetic material of viruses had not yet been discovered. Today, however, researchers not only know how to isolate a virus but can find its genetic sequence, test antiviral drugs and develop a vaccine.
In 1918, it was impossible to test people with mild symptoms so they could self-quarantine. And it was nearly impossible to do contact tracing because the flu seemed to infect and panic entire cities and communities all at once. Moreover, there was little protective equipment for health care workers, and the supportive care with respirators that can be provided to people very ill with coronavirus did not exist.
With a case fatality rate of at least 2.5 percent, the 1918 flu was far more deadly than ordinary flu, and it was so infectious that it spread widely, which meant the number of deaths soared.
Researchers believe the 1918 flu spared older people because they had some immunity to it. They theorize that decades earlier there had been a version of that virus, one that was not as lethal and spread like an ordinary flu. The older people living in 1918 would have been exposed to that less lethal flu and developed antibodies. As for children, most viral illnesses measles, chickenpox are more deadly in young adults, which may explain why the youngest were spared in the 1918 epidemic.
Regardless of the reason, it was a disaster for life expectancy, which plummeted. In 1917, life expectancy in the United States was 51 years. It was the same in 1919. But in 1918, it was just 39 years.
The new coronavirus tends to kill older people and those with underlying medical conditions, and it does not seem to kill children. All of which means it will have far less effect, if any, on life expectancy.
coastsrs said:
agree the panic closures are going to delay this thing ending on a natural timeline. I expect things to be normal after these places close for 2 weeks. They are getting it out of the way now.
So we have a natural culling of fatties and the unhealthy. Getting a trial version of the zombie apocalypse in worldwide quarantines. Kids are getting an extended spring break. And air fare is dirt cheap.
Is it to safe this is not going to be the end of the world yet? And probably a net positive in the long run for humanity but not individuals.
I've never understood that to be the case. It's used in a lot of ways, sometimes to differentiate between the present and a narrated story/memory, sometime to enumerate a list, etck2aggie07 said:
Well right, but I mean, I thought green text is 4chan for "I'm making this up"
AggieChemist said:
Worldwide shortage of phenol