- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) ***W.H.O. DECLARES A GLOBAL PANDEMIC***
Posted on 5/23/20 at 11:55 am to WaWaWeeWa
Posted on 5/23/20 at 11:55 am to WaWaWeeWa
Twitter baw mentioned T-cells this morning (he also noted that the CDC all cause numbers were mostly back filled for last week):
This would also indicate that there will not be enough hosts left for a noticeable second wave.
quote:
Importantly, pre-existing SARS-CoV-2-crossreactive T cell responses were observed in healthy donors, indicating some potential for pre-existing immunity in the human population."
This could explain the intrinsic convex decline curve at a 10.8% seroprevalence.
This would also indicate that there will not be enough hosts left for a noticeable second wave.
2
Posted on 5/23/20 at 1:12 pm to Ronaldo Burgundiaz
After SARS-1 they found that T cells lasted 4-6 years. It’s much longer than antibody immunity.
Posted on 5/23/20 at 1:29 pm to Ronaldo Burgundiaz
The key really is do people with previous T cell immunity create detectable antibodies? I’m thinking they don’t.
Take for instance kids, they have the strongest T cell responses of anyone and they arent getting sick and aren’t spreading the virus and as far as we know don’t have antibodies.
Now we can speculate that kids are exposed to more coronaviruses but not to the levels that we see this hold true (near 100%). So I think strong T cell response is allowing people to defeat the virus without making significant antibodies And thus these people that have essentially beaten the virus or are resistant to infection aren’t seen in the antibody studies and therefore aren’t calculated in the models that say where herd immunity is.
Interesting that Ethical Skeptic is now on this. If everyone was paying attention we were on this a couple weeks ago. And it was obvious something else was at play when all the curves started going down around the same range.
Take for instance kids, they have the strongest T cell responses of anyone and they arent getting sick and aren’t spreading the virus and as far as we know don’t have antibodies.
Now we can speculate that kids are exposed to more coronaviruses but not to the levels that we see this hold true (near 100%). So I think strong T cell response is allowing people to defeat the virus without making significant antibodies And thus these people that have essentially beaten the virus or are resistant to infection aren’t seen in the antibody studies and therefore aren’t calculated in the models that say where herd immunity is.
Interesting that Ethical Skeptic is now on this. If everyone was paying attention we were on this a couple weeks ago. And it was obvious something else was at play when all the curves started going down around the same range.
This post was edited on 5/23/20 at 1:31 pm
Posted on 5/23/20 at 1:58 pm to Ronaldo Burgundiaz
quote:
"We may not be able to find enough virus to run vaccine trials"
I get more confident every day that we will virtually eliminate COVID-19 this summer. I really liked these quotes from this new preprint about seasonality:
quote:
The weekly human coronavirus incidence of hospital admissions was either zero or greater than a 99% reduction point at the end of April and into early May and was sustained from June to September in the 8–year study period
quote:
the laws of physics regarding droplet transmission and viability should apply to similar viruses
Zing! It's really a good preprint. The biggest takeaway is that the turning off of heating units in our big northern cities results in higher indoor relative humidity, which in turn significantly impedes droplets.
It's pretty wild that there are still attempts made to assert that there won't be any seasonality with the virus. This study was hugely flawed by specifically excluding the places that COVID-19 spread the fastest to. But it's the basis of excluding seasonality from models such as this one.
Posted on 5/23/20 at 3:36 pm to frankthetank
Link for updated Rt for each state. If already posted....my bad. Kind of interesting
LINK
LINK
This post was edited on 5/23/20 at 3:37 pm
Posted on 5/23/20 at 4:15 pm to Sasquatch Smash
quote:
“You could say that Japan has had an expert-led approach, unlike other countries,” Tanaka said
Posted on 5/23/20 at 5:33 pm to WaWaWeeWa
quote:
people with previous T cell immunity
Don't hurt me -- 1) what is a t-cell and 2) how do I know if I have them??
Posted on 5/23/20 at 5:37 pm to tigerskin
tigerskin, I thought that the last time I saw this (a few days ago at most) we were #7 from the bottom. Now we're 25 or 26. And I'm sorry but how do they determine this?? (I do feel so dumb sometimes.)
Posted on 5/23/20 at 7:01 pm to tigerskin
quote:
Link for updated Rt for each state. If already posted....my bad. Kind of interesting
I think it's a good model, because it accurately shows most of the country getting rid of the virus. I've seen some terrible models recently that have shown a R value above 1.
tiger91, if you scroll down the bottom of the page, you can find their links for their formulas, but you'd need to know more coding and math than I do to figure it out. Oh, and Louisiana will look better after they include today's numbers.
I looked at the national numbers, and we're still getting rid of COVID-19 at a decent rate. Has the national "reopening" slowed our progress a little? Yes. Are we about to waste our progress and see numbers go back up? No.
For the past seven days, the average daily number of new cases was 22,078 out of 389,611 tests. The week before this one, we saw an average of 22,513 new cases out of 335,607 new tests.
So, we still are seeing fewer new cases while the number of tests has gone up significantly. Overall, 5.7% of the tests this week were positive, compared to 6.8% for the week before.
Masks, more tests and contact tracing, and higher temperatures mean that we can likely continue to reopen more and more and still keep getting rid of COVID-19.
This post was edited on 5/23/20 at 7:02 pm
Posted on 5/23/20 at 7:21 pm to GOP_Tiger
quote:
Masks
Getting people to wear them however....
Posted on 5/23/20 at 7:22 pm to GOP_Tiger
The confusing thing is that some states have recently added antibody tests into their overall tests (I believe Texas, Georgia and Pennsylvania specifically and I think Virginia and Vermont did recently but are now separating them).
That can make looking at raw test numbers even more unreliable.
Posted on 5/23/20 at 7:42 pm to wm72
I have a question regarding the NYT front page tomorrow.
How many of the “nearly 100k” deaths would have died had covid not existed? With the majority of these people being old and/or having pre-existing conditions, how many would have caught the flu or pneumonia and died? How many were likely to die by other causes? Basically, while the 100k number is “significant,” it’s not the true impact of covid.
There are other issues with the number as well: 1) What is actually counted as a covid death. 2) 40% are from just 2 states: NY and NJ. 3) 100k deaths over a 6 month period (been here since December) isn’t actually significant at all.
How many of the “nearly 100k” deaths would have died had covid not existed? With the majority of these people being old and/or having pre-existing conditions, how many would have caught the flu or pneumonia and died? How many were likely to die by other causes? Basically, while the 100k number is “significant,” it’s not the true impact of covid.
There are other issues with the number as well: 1) What is actually counted as a covid death. 2) 40% are from just 2 states: NY and NJ. 3) 100k deaths over a 6 month period (been here since December) isn’t actually significant at all.
Posted on 5/23/20 at 7:46 pm to ell_13
quote:
How many of the “nearly 100k” deaths would have died had covid not existed? With the majority of these people being old and/or having pre-existing conditions, how many would have caught the flu or pneumonia and died? How many were likely to die by other causes? Basically, while the 100k number is “significant,” it’s not the true impact of covid.
It’s way too early to tell. Like 50% of these deaths are older than the average life expectancy. Were they just moved up in the “death timeline” by 6 months? We may see a lower than expected death number of the next 6 months. We just don’t know. Looking at excess mortality isn’t the gotcha that some of these people think it is. Maybe it would be if the average age of death is 25. Then we could say with confidence those people weren’t likely to die in the next year.
Posted on 5/23/20 at 7:47 pm to heatom2
quote:
Getting people to wear them however....
A recent poll indicated that 83% of Americans wore a mask at least once in the last week. We were never going to get to 100% masking, but we're masking enough to make a difference, and it's becoming more and more of a cultural norm.
Posted on 5/23/20 at 7:49 pm to tiger91
quote:
Don't hurt me -- 1) what is a t-cell and 2) how do I know if I have them??
You have different types of immunity (defense), a few of which are B cells and T cells.
B cells make antibodies. The antibodies go out and neutralize the invader
T cells directly attack the invader.
It’s just another form of defense that isn’t commonly tested for. It’s easier to test for antibodies and with most other diseases we are just looking for evidence that the patient has been infected before. There has been no need to consider T cell immunity.
Posted on 5/23/20 at 7:58 pm to GOP_Tiger
A new study out of Brazil today comparing spread in different cities says that for places where the average temperature was under 78 degrees F, each degree F that temperature increased resulted in a 2.7% decrease in spread.
LINK
That would suggest that the US would see a 22% decline in our R value from warmer temperatures this summer. That's basically in line with the recent model which projects a 28% drop.
LINK
That would suggest that the US would see a 22% decline in our R value from warmer temperatures this summer. That's basically in line with the recent model which projects a 28% drop.
Posted on 5/23/20 at 8:01 pm to GOP_Tiger
quote:
each degree F that temperature increased resulted in a 2.7% decrease in spread
So, according to my calculations, that means, in South Louisiana, a large percentage of the population will unhave it.
It is fricking hot.
Posted on 5/23/20 at 8:06 pm to AmosMosesAndTwins
Like fricking soup outside today
Posted on 5/23/20 at 8:40 pm to heatom2
quote:
Getting people to wear them however....
Once something becomes political, political types tend to ignore or denigrate other views.
Page 1118 of 1190
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News