[QUOTE=tServo;552904]ISOPROPYL ?!?!?!?

Dear Mr Hughes,
Are you aware this is poisonous? Especially when exposed to mucous membranes which will get it into your bloodstream much quicker than drinking.
You are better off with the cheap vodka.[/QUOTE]Ethanol is also poisonous, though not quite as much as are the propanols.

In my opinion, the major problem with 2-propanol[SUP]*[/SUP], is that it gives a much nastier hangover and not so pleasant an intoxication.

* based entirely on a study of the literature, of course...

I have pointed out before in this thread that these posts should be removed. They are highly irresponsible. I just heard on the news that 4 people have died and a few more gone blind for drinking hand sanitizers. Many are recalled for containing wood alcohol. And if you think rubbing alcohol is necessarily safe, see this story from way before Covid-19:
[url]https://technology.inquirer.net/47069/rubbing-alcohol-brand-recalled/amp[/url]

These posts are reachable by billions of people with differing levels of intelligence and will linger on various internet caches for centuries if not longer.
Alas the mods on this board are in a class of their own to put it politely.

[QUOTE=tServo;552904]ISOPROPYL ?!?!?!?

Dear Mr Hughes,
Are you aware this is poisonous? Especially when exposed to mucous membranes which will get it into your bloodstream much quicker than drinking.
You are better off with the cheap vodka.[/QUOTE]

Looks like I picked the wrong week to quit sniffing glue.

[QUOTE=a1call;552921]I have pointed out before in this thread that these posts should be removed. They are highly irresponsible. I just heard on the news that 4 people have died and a few more gone blind for drinking hand sanitizers. Many are recalled for containing wood alcohol. And if you think rubbing alcohol is necessarily safe, see this story from way before Covid-19:
[url]https://technology.inquirer.net/47069/rubbing-alcohol-brand-recalled/amp[/url]

These posts are reachable by billions of people with differing levels of intelligence and will linger on various internet caches for centuries if not longer.
Alas the mods on this board are in a class of their own to put it politely.[/QUOTE]The differently-clued will reach their own conclusions regardless of what we contribute. The amount of input from MF to their thought processes is way down in the noise even assuming that they read it. Such an assumption is questionable in my opinion..

I love your usage of the quaint term "board". You are showing your age, as am I in being able to recognize it instantly without having to look it up.

[QUOTE=xilman;552942]The differently-clued will reach their own conclusions regardless of what we contribute. The amount of input from MF to their thought processes is way down in the noise even assuming that they read it. Such an assumption is questionable in my opinion..

I love your usage of the quaint term "board". You are showing your age, as am I in being able to recognize it instantly without having to look it up.[/QUOTE]

Well you are not the 1st person to have noticed my dictation excellence.
You are correct in that it is age related but probably not for the correct mechanics,
I use Phone's google keybored (Swipe feature) to communicate on this board and proof reading with aged vision is not foolproof. Of course, if i were to actually spell everything myself it would come across as gibberish as I could not spell anything properly at any age.:smile:

ETA I just noticed that I proofread Bulletin=Bored wrong again. My apologies. It's difficult to be funny on purpose when you are old.

[QUOTE=a1call;552921]I have pointed out before in this thread that these posts should be removed. They are highly irresponsible. I just heard on the news that 4 people have died and a few more gone blind for drinking hand sanitizers.[/QUOTE]

Fewer than 5 drops of diluted-to-35% alcohol up one's nose != equate to drinking multi-ounce servings of hand sanitizers. 5 average-sized drops ~= 0.25 ml, thus we're talking < 0.1g of alcohol. If someone posts credible data comparing the toxicity of that amount of isopropyl alcohol to drinking straight ethanol showing that it's more toxic than, say, 50g of the latter, I'll be happy to add a loud "IF YOU TRY THIS, USE ETHANOL ONLY" warning to my above posts.

Oh, [url=https://www.healthline.com/health/isopropyl-alcohol]lookee here[/url] - isopropanol is absorbed readily not just through mucus membranes, but through skin, so make sure to sue your doctor next time he or she uses a standard rubbing-wipe on your skin prior to giving you a shot:
[quote]Your body can handle small amounts of IPA. In fact, your kidneys remove approximately 20 to 50 percent of IPA from your body. The rest is broken down into acetone by enzymes known as alcohol dehydrogenases. This acetone is filtered out of your body through your lungs or kidneys.

However, when you ingest more IPA than your body can manage (which occurs around 200 milliliters for an adult), poisoning can occur.[/quote]
Got that last bit? *Hundreds* of ml, on the order of 1000 times the amount I may have used.

So, yes, as with all non-FDA-approved self-dosage regimens caution is warranted, but as with all health-related matters, [b]cautions should be grounded in reality[/b]. Telling people mask-wearing (and doing so properly) is not a must, as many health experts did in the early months of the pandemic, *that* is highly irresponsible, based simply on the precautionary principle.

You want irresponsible? Here's an example from early February, someone citing their nation's health minister making evidence-free claims about lack of asymptomatic transmission and doing a bit of national-pride chest-thumping to boot:
[QUOTE=a1call;536533]Canadian Health Minister States that asymptomatic people do not transmit the virus.

[url]https://globalnews.ca/video/rd/e17a62ee-449f-11ea-aa37-0242ac110003/?jwsource=em[/url]

Makes you kind of proud to be a Canadian and not to give in to unjustified panic like most of the rest of the world.:smile:[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=xilman;552942]I love your usage of the quaint term "board". You are showing your age, as am I in being able to recognize it instantly without having to look it up.[/QUOTE]
All together now: ATDT...

[QUOTE=Nick;552965]All together now: ATDT...[/QUOTE][SPOILER]Hayes modem commands![/SPOILER]

:mike:

[QUOTE=Nick;552965]All together now: ATDT...[/QUOTE]

Many times did I ATDT my favorite 300 baud BBS: The Sanctuary in Oklahoma City.

EDIT: Even had a 2nd phone line installed in my house for it!

[QUOTE=PhilF;552982]EDIT: Even had a 2nd phone line installed in my house for it![/QUOTE]

Yup.

After been yelled at by my sister for preventing her friends from calling her (escalated up to Momzie for extra serious screaming), I had a second phone line installed for my two years of University.

I'll never forget the sweet sweet sound of training tones (went from 300 baud for year one, to 2400 baud for year two)... :smile:

I think Ernst has been responsible in describing his prophylactic nasal rinse.

I also disapprove of wildly exaggerated fear mongering. The Forum may indeed be "reachable" by billions of people, but I don't think the actual number of visits comes anywhere close. Further, the specialized nature of many of the Forum's topics, heralded by the name "Mersenne Forum," and manifest by its link from GIMPS, would tend to raise the proportion of people visiting the site who have the critical thinking skills needed to take stated cautions seriously.

As to folks who don't take COVID-19 seriously, and don't accept the wisdom of wearing a mask in public, or decry it as "the government taking away our freedoms," I suggest they discuss it with Herman Cain. And if they continue to act recklessly, perhaps they will be doing so soon.

[QUOTE=Dr Sardonicus;553024]...As to folks who don't take COVID-19 seriously, and don't accept the wisdom of wearing a mask in public, or decry it as "the government taking away our freedoms," I suggest they discuss it with Herman Cain. And if they continue to act recklessly, perhaps they will be doing so soon.[/QUOTE]

As the majority of us know, the large chain-stores have enacted mask requirements. Walmart. There are very few who do not know what this is. There is one just about a mile from where I live. 1.6 kilometers for those not accustom to the non metric distances. Everyone is wearing their masks to get in. Once inside and people get back into the aisles, things change. One in three, more or less, will pull them below their noses, below their chins, or remove them completely. As far as I can determine, store employees say nothing to these people. This needs to change. The portion of patrons not wearing masks properly defeats the purpose of anyone wearing them.

[QUOTE=storm5510;553031]As far as I can determine, store employees say nothing to these people. This needs to change. The portion of patrons not wearing masks properly defeats the purpose of anyone wearing them.[/QUOTE]

To share, I'm really proud with how Barbados has handled this whole thing.

We locked-down early, and while there was some complaining and whining, overall everyone did the social distancing and mask-wearing thing diligently.

If you go into a shop here, someone meets you at the door, takes your temperature, and ensures you use the hand-sanitizer at the door. ~98% of people are wearing their mask correctly (although a few seem to believe that their nose doesn't need to be covered).

We've had no community spread for months. The only cases we've seen are imports from "away"; and all of these were already in enforced self-quarantine.

[QUOTE=chalsall;553032]To share, I'm really proud with how Barbados has handled this whole thing.
...
We've had no community spread for months. The only cases we've seen are imports from "away"; and all of these were already in enforced self-quarantine.[/QUOTE]
The community/island mentality at play in the best way. You are literally all in it together much more than others.

[QUOTE=Uncwilly;553040]You are literally all in it together much more than others.[/QUOTE]

Thanks for the words, but I respectfully disagree with your last sentence.

Earth's biosphere is in many ways a closed system, with lots of interconnection.

We're ***ALL*** in this together.

Sadly, it seems that some don't really care all that much about the greater good (for many, many profoundly stupid reasons).

[QUOTE=chalsall;553032]If you go into a shop here, someone meets you at the door, takes your temperature, and ensures you use the hand-sanitizer at the door. ~98% of people are wearing their mask correctly (although a few seem to believe that their nose doesn't need to be covered).

We've had no community spread for months. The only cases we've seen are imports from "away"; and all of these were already in enforced self-quarantine.[/QUOTE]Exactly the same happens here (La Palma) with exactly the same consequences.

It's just plain out-of-control here in the U.S. This country really doesn't seem like a country anymore. It's more like a collection of 360-million individuals who care nothing about anyone else except themselves. The only thing they have in common is the language. Many believe wearing a mask infringes on their rights, so they don't do it. I fear it may take something really drastic to get the infection rate to drop. Maybe even martial law.

[QUOTE=storm5510;553126]Many believe wearing a mask infringes on their rights, so they don't do it. I fear it may take something really drastic to get the infection rate to drop. Maybe even martial law.[/QUOTE]They are the "sheeple" that they claim others are. Even the death of a noted politician from an infection gotten at a political rally (Herman Cain) doesn't seem to have an impact. The Prez is being vary forked tongued about masks.

[QUOTE=Uncwilly;553130]The Prez is being vary forked tongued about masks.[/QUOTE]

Those of us in less developed nations are observing what's been done in the "Great US of A" as "evolution in action".

It's a bit like watching a train wreck in slow motion in real-time. :sad:

I want to die peacefully in my sleep, like my grandfather.

Not screaming and shouting like the others in the car that he was driving at the time.

[QUOTE=Uncwilly;553170]I want to die peacefully in my sleep, like my grandfather.

Not screaming and shouting like the others in the car that he was driving at the time.[/QUOTE]

I once asked my Mother if she could prove she wasn't in a dream.

"Yes!", she immediately answered. "You're here, and therefore this is a nightmare.

[quote=Uncwilly;553130][QUOTE=storm5510;553126]Many believe wearing a mask infringes on their rights, so they don't do it. I fear it may take something really drastic to get the infection rate to drop. Maybe even martial law.[/QUOTE]They are the "sheeple" that they claim others are. Even the death of a noted politician from an infection gotten at a political rally (Herman Cain) doesn't seem to have an impact. The Prez is being vary forked tongued about masks.[/quote]

Well said, Sir! "The pandemic is just a hoax, so the Government can take away our rights." Yeesh. It's the Zombie Apocalypse, I tell you!

Of course, the deaths of 160,000 fellow-citizens doesn't seem to have had an impact, either.

One could question whether Mr. Cain contracted his fatal COVID-19 infection at the Tulsa rally, but it seems likely enough. Lots of people not wearing masks, and he became ill 9 days later -- well within the incubation period.

But -- martial law? Under [i]this[/i] Administration? No, thanks! "We have to cancel the election..."

[QUOTE=chalsall;553157]Those of us in less developed nations are observing what's been done in the "Great US of A" as "evolution in action".

It's a bit like watching a train wreck in slow motion in real-time. :sad:[/QUOTE]
No argument. Nothing like a bit of distance to improve perspective, but is grim from this end, too.

A war-correspondent during WWII, named [URL="https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&q=robert+sherrod"]Robert Sherrod[/URL], made a statement questioning the Marines willingness to fight. I will have to paraphrase. He said something like, "I wonder if these men can make the transition from the delights of peace to the horrors of war?"

Sherrod saw a lot in places like Tarawa, Saipan, Iwo Jima, and Okinawa. He remarked later that they died by the thousands and never quit for an instant. Take the same group of 18 to 21 year-olds now, well, we would just be totally screwed. They would want timeout, have their butts wiped, and would be looking down at their phones all the time.

The U.S.A is limp like a wet rag. NATO member countries now consider us as being "unreliable." COVID-19 is so thick here, people from other parts of the world are actually afraid for their own safety in their native lands. I have never seen anything like this before, and it is not likely to improve anytime soon.

[QUOTE=storm5510;553326].

Take the same group of 18 to 21 year-olds now, well, we would just be totally screwed. They would want timeout, have their butts wiped, and would be looking down at their phones all the time.

[/QUOTE]

I agree.
This is an anecdote about my uncle from his son:

My uncle enlisted in the navy in 1940 with his brother. Note this was BEFORE Pearl Harbor. Since he was mostly stationed on aircraft carriers, he was almost always at sea and frequently in combat. He rarely got the chance to send or receive mail. Despite the points system, he didn't muster out until the summer of 1946.

During Gulf War 1, he was watching the evening news that had a segment about our troop's morale. ALL of them were whining about not getting to call home every day and the cost of doing so when they did. He was so furious, he put his shoe thru the TV !! It was a tube TV, not a flat screen.

[QUOTE=tServo;553331]I agree.
This is an anecdote about my uncle from his son:

My uncle enlisted in the navy in 1940 with his brother. Note this was BEFORE Pearl Harbor. Since he was mostly stationed on aircraft carriers, he was almost always at sea and frequently in combat. He rarely got the chance to send or receive mail. Despite the points system, he didn't muster out until the summer of 1946.

During Gulf War 1, he was watching the evening news that had a segment about our troop's morale. ALL of them were whining about not getting to call home every day and the cost of doing so when they did. He was so furious, he put his shoe thru the TV !! It was a tube TV, not a flat screen.[/QUOTE]

Your uncle was in the navy for over 50 years. Desert Storm was in 1990, I believe. That is some kind of record.

It takes considerable force to break one of those old CRT tubes. Most country folk would get out the old scatter-gun and solve it that way. :grin:

Every generation has the older generation telling them they are soft.

[YOUTUBE]VKHFZBUTA4k[/YOUTUBE]

[QUOTE=storm5510;553352]Your uncle was in the navy for over 50 years. Desert Storm was in 1990, I believe. That is some kind of record.

It takes considerable force to break one of those old CRT tubes. Most country folk would get out the old scatter-gun and solve it that way. :grin:[/QUOTE]

In my post I said "He didn't muster out until 1946" so he did 6 years.

What is wrong with young people today? - A view from the past.
[url]https://proto-knowledge.blogspot.com/2010/11/what-is-wrong-with-young-people-today.html?m=1[/url]

[QUOTE=Xyzzy;553360]Every generation has the older generation telling them they are soft.[/QUOTE]

Which doesn't mean that for some generations, it isn't true. :)

I mean, a generation of smartphone-addicted screen-starers, and also the most overweight - at least in the US - in history.

Not that I'm blaming the kids, mind you - greedy corporations worked very hard to feed the various toxic addictions encompassed by the above, and a generation of overprotective "helicopter parents" did the rest.

"Butlerian Jihad" springs to mind ... except that the vision of what the protagonist wants to do by way of "re-educating" the Erewhonians in the referenced classic novel is really quite appalling.

Some people say Socrates said this:[QUOTE]The children now love luxury; they have bad manners, contempt for authority; they show disrespect for elders and love chatter in place of exercise. Children are now tyrants, not the servants of their households. They no longer rise when elders enter the room. They contradict their parents, chatter before company, gobble up dainties at the table, cross their legs, and tyrannize their teachers.[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=tServo;553373]In my post I said "He didn't muster out until 1946" so he did 6 years.[/QUOTE]

So you did. I did not read it correctly. My apologies. :blush:

[QUOTE=ewmayer;553380]Which doesn't mean that for some generations, it isn't true. :)

I mean, a generation of smartphone-addicted screen-starers, and also the most overweight - at least in the US - in history.

Not that I'm blaming the kids, mind you - greedy corporations worked very hard to feed the various toxic addictions encompassed by the above, and a generation of overprotective "helicopter parents" did the rest.[/QUOTE]That doesn't explain why other species, including feral or on measured rations in labs, are also increasingly obese. Something in the water? [url]https://www.livescience.com/10277-obesity-rise-animals.html[/url]

Yesterday, the UK took around 5000 death from its COVID death toll list...



From [url]https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/uk/[/url]
[LIST][*]1,009 new cases and 20 new deaths in [B][URL="https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/uk/"]the United Kingdom[/URL][/B]. [B]England has removed 5,377 deaths from its time series. [/B]fNOTE from the UK Government):
"On 17 July, the Secretary of State asked Public Health England (PHE) to urgently review the way daily death statistics are currently reported.
A review into the method used to calculate these figures considered a range of scientific evidence to identify the best time limit to apply between date of test and date of death.
The new daily measure provides a UK-wide count of deaths under a consistent methodology for England, Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales that has been endorsed by an external review.
The measure will be based on a 28-day limit between the date of a positive lab-confirmed test and date of death. Deaths that occur more than 28 days after a positive test will not be included in the headline count." [[URL="https://www.gov.uk/guidance/coronavirus-covid-19-information-for-the-public"]source[/URL]][/LIST]So people dying after hanging more than 4 weeks on an respirator do not count as COVID-deaths anymore?


Congrats Britain!

[QUOTE=kriesel;553494]That doesn't explain why other species, including feral or on measured rations in labs, are also increasingly obese. Something in the water? [url]https://www.livescience.com/10277-obesity-rise-animals.html[/url][/QUOTE]

The article does speculate as to possible causes toward the end - if I had to lay odds, I would guess the estrogen-mimicking chemicals humans have flooded the globe with (byproduct of plastic production) might be to blame. More-recent human generations would thus have the following triple whammy at work:

1. Processed food, esp. those loaded with high-fructose corn syrup and other "empty calories";

2. Ever-increasing sedentism;

3. Estrogen-mimicking chemicals.

[QUOTE=Till;553571]So people dying after hanging more than 4 weeks on an respirator do not count as COVID-deaths anymore?[/QUOTE]
In the larger organization that I work for, we had someone hang on for 45 days on a ventilator before dying of COVID.

[QUOTE=ewmayer;553575]The article does speculate as to possible causes toward the end - if I had to lay odds, I would guess the estrogen-mimicking chemicals humans have flooded the globe with (byproduct of plastic production) might be to blame. More-recent human generations would thus have the following triple whammy at work:

1. Processed food, esp. those loaded with high-fructose corn syrup and other "empty calories";

2. Ever-increasing sedentism;

3. Estrogen-mimicking chemicals.[/QUOTE]

WRT #3, No need to mimic, what about estrogen itself and other hormones. This is a common component of birth control pills, for instance. I question whether water treatment plants can completely render them harmless. Also, many homes and cottages have septic tanks which will leave hormones intact.

[QUOTE=tServo;553594]This is a common component of birth control pills, for instance. I question whether water treatment plants can completely render them harmless. Also, many homes and cottages have septic tanks which will leave hormones intact.[/QUOTE]And so many other chemicals/drugs.

The answer is no and yes. Standard primary and secondary treatment can have almost no effect on those items. Tertiary has little to no effect on them. Advanced treatment and treatment systems for direct reuse (membrane bio reactors, RO, etc.) can have a good chance of clearing a major portion of them out of the water.
I don;t know if the UV exposure in a pond treatment system would help.

Septic tanks will disperse the water component to a leach field. The ground microbes may or may not do anything.

Apparently, the British government has at short notice decreed that anyone travelling to the UK from France or the Netherlands after 4am tomorrow will have to spend 14 days in quarantaine.
This has caught out large numbers of British people who are now breaking off their visits and flying head-over-heels to get back before the deadline.
The night ferry from Hoek van Holland to Harwich, for example, will depart early and sail faster in order to be alongside before 4am.

[URL]https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-53782019[/URL]

Every country in the world needs to impose quarantines, or flat-out refusals, on travelers from the U.S. now. COVID-19 is out of control here and not many seem to care. Now, everybody's fixated on the election in November. Another distraction.

I believe someone above mentioned water. I live by a sizable river and the community water supply comes from there. They put so much chlorine in it now that very few actually drink it. Bottled water flies of store shelves around here. My cat likes the tap water. Perhaps he cannot smell or taste the bleach in it. I do not let him have it now. The amount of dissolved limestone is incredible.

Something, I think about is all the pharmaceuticals in the water. Pain killers, cancer drugs, illegal drugs, and so on. As far as I know, it would take a reverse-osmosis filtration system to catch part or all of it. No many communities can afford such a system. Here, the local utility installed an ultraviolet light device two years ago. That is when the chlorine got really bad.

[QUOTE=storm5510;553718]Another distraction.[/QUOTE]

"Don't Panic." - Douglas Adams.

Seriously, just manage the situation as best you can. That's all you can actually really do, so focus on that.

[QUOTE=storm5510;553718]...
My cat likes the tap water. Perhaps he cannot smell or taste the bleach in it.
...[/QUOTE]I seems that, for as yet unknown reasons, cats like the smell of bleach. A search of "cats bleach" on Internet will return a lot of results...

Jacob

[QUOTE=chalsall]"Don't Panic." - Douglas Adams.

Seriously, just manage the situation as best you can. That's all you can actually really do, so focus on that.[/QUOTE]

For me, it is a bit worrisome, but nothing more. I certainly do not dwell on it like many do. I prefer to use my mental energy for other things.

[QUOTE=S485122]It seems that, for as yet unknown reasons, cats like the smell of bleach. A search of "cats bleach" on Internet will return a lot of results...[/QUOTE]

There is a lot of information there. All I can say is, his nose is a lot stronger than mine.

[url=https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-02400-7]What the immune response to the coronavirus says about the prospects for a vaccine[/url] | Nature

[QUOTE=Uncwilly;550875]The peak is now >24,000 above the norm for that week.
Because the data are lagging,
..
I have not plotted the last 4 weeks.[/QUOTE]
That number is about 24,840 now.
[QUOTE=Uncwilly;552115]I feel that the link that I have been using, while lagging, may soon be much more reliable in the future.
....
The attached file is a graph generated on the site. While aimed at Flu and Pneumonia, COVID looks like it is getting caught as a happenstance. It shows a second peak developing.[/QUOTE]
Here is the update of my graph with this weeks numbers. The last 2 weeks numbers are not plotted as they are vastly incomplete. I expect the week 31 number to go up to closer to 10,000 (maybe even 11,000) before it settles down.
USA election day is on week 45.

Paper on long term survival of virus on/in food shipments, and what it means for viral spread globally, including to regions that have eliminated it. [URL]https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.08.17.255166v1.full[/URL]

[url=https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.08.25.265561v1]SARS-CoV-2 infection of human iPSC-derived cardiac cells predicts novel cytopathic features in hearts of COVID-19 patients[/url] | (preprint) bioRxiv. From the abstract:
[quote]COVID-19 causes cardiac dysfunction in up to 50% of patients, but the pathogenesis remains unclear…. These striking transcriptomic and cytopathic changes provide a roadmap to understand the mechanisms of COVID-19 cardiac damage, search for potential treatments, and determine the basis for prolonged cardiac morbidity observed in this pandemic.[/quote]

[url=https://www.wired.com/story/97000-people-got-convalescent-plasma-who-knows-if-it-works/]97,000 People Got Convalescent Plasma. Who Knows if It Works?[/url] | WIRED
[quote]As of Monday, August 17, a nationwide program to treat Covid-19 patients with a fluid made from the blood of people who’d recovered from the disease—so-called convalescent plasma—had reached 97,319 patients.

That’s a huge number of people, considering that nobody really knows whether convalescent plasma actually works against Covid-19.

A spontaneously generated, self-assembling group of clinicians and cross-disciplinary researchers that built the nationwide program to ensure “expanded access” to convalescent plasma also created protocols for randomized, controlled trials, the gold standard for evidence in science. They hoped to test plasma’s ability to prevent disease after exposure, its capacity to treat Covid-19—and what Michael Joyner, an exercise physiologist at the Mayo Clinic who was instrumental in setting up the expanded-access network, called a “Hail Mary” protocol to try to help people who are severely ill, on ventilators.

The distribution system got approved and built; the trial protocols did not. They never began.

There are plenty of reasons to think plasma might help fight Covid-19. Physicians have used it for more than a century; it’s made by taking blood from people who’ve recovered from a disease and spinning it in a centrifuge down to a frothy, yellow liquid that contains the sum total of the donor’s immune response—molecules that attack all invading germs, and some that specifically target all the individual pathogens the donor has ever encountered. But actual rigorous trials of the stuff are rare. Dozens of randomized, controlled clinical trials are underway—tests that systematically compare the same kinds of people at similar stages of the disease who get convalescent plasma to those who don’t.

Even without that rigor, this year tens of thousands of people received plasma for Covid-19. It played out as a one-on-one decision between physicians and patients, not a population-scale experiment designed to elicit knowledge about its efficacy. A preprint from the expanded-access group, not yet peer-reviewed, recounts the outcomes of more than 35,000 of these recipients at hundreds of hospitals. It retroactively splits that population into groups based on when in their illness they got plasma, or how laden the plasma was with the antibodies that actually do the disease-fighting.

But, as the researchers and outside experts both acknowledge, that’s not as good as a clinical trial in which people get randomly assigned to a group that gets a drug (or procedure or surgery or whatever) versus a group that doesn’t, and then someone compares the results. And that’s a palpable loss.

“Fifty thousand people have been given a treatment, and we cannot know whether it worked or not,” says Martin Landray, one of the leaders of the Randomised Evaluation of Covid-19 Therapies (or Recovery) Trial in England, a large-scale, multi-center, multi-drug randomized controlled trial that showed that the corticosteroid dexamethasone saved the lives of Covid-19 patients and the autoimmune drug hydroxychloroquine did not. (That 50,000 number was from a few weeks back, just after the plasma preprint came out.) “You wouldn’t need to randomize 50,000 patients. You wouldn’t need to randomize 5,000 patients to get the answer,” he says. “But that one difference is the difference between the effort being worthwhile or not.”

Here’s another perspective, using the more up-to-date number: “In my mind, treating 98,000 people with plasma and not having conclusive data if it worked is problematic, and we should have a more robust data set before we give 98,000 people a product,” says John Beigel, associate director for clinical research at the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases’ Division of Microbiology and Infectious Diseases. Beigel was the lead author on the study of the drug remdesivir that led to its incorporation into the US standard of care for Covid-19.
Advertisement

On Wednesday, The New York Times reported that in light of the current lack of efficacy data, the FDA has put on hold plans to issue an Emergency Use Authorization to allow anyone with Covid-19 to be treated with convalescent plasma, even beyond the Mayo-led program. (In an emailed statement, Anand Shah, deputy commissioner for medical and scientific affairs at the FDA, wrote: “Per policy, we are not able to comment on whether or not we will take any action regarding emergency use authorization for convalescent plasma and will render a decision at the appropriate time.”)

What looked at the beginning of the pandemic like a rare bright spot—that a classic treatment used in pandemics for the past century might prove effective in this one, too, and provide a relatively simple stopgap before monoclonal antibodies and vaccines—now looks dimmer. It’s not that it doesn’t work. It’s worse than that: Because of failures in the system of how science gets done, nobody knows...[/quote]

[url=https://www.chron.com/news/article/The-University-of-Arizona-says-it-caught-a-dorm-s-15521359.php]The University of Arizona says it caught a dorm's covid-19 outbreak before it started. Its secret weapon: poop.[/url] - Houston Chronicle

[QUOTE=ewmayer;555404][URL="https://www.chron.com/news/article/The-University-of-Arizona-says-it-caught-a-dorm-s-15521359.php"]The University of Arizona says it caught a dorm's covid-19 outbreak before it started. Its secret weapon: poop.[/URL] - Houston Chronicle[/QUOTE]
So, they did a screening, where you collect secretions from one infected guy, without mixing it (diluting it) with anything and didn't detect the virus, but then did another screening from a big pile of shit into which two infected students shit once per day for a week, which was combined with another fifteen thousand shits from another five thousand students shitting for a week, and they detected the virus? Sorry, but here, it smells...
In spite of my daughter, who is the expert in shit analyzing :lol: says it is possible, to me, it smells... (at least politically).

@LaurV: the technique has been used for years with other viruses (e.g. polio), so before calling BS, perhaps you should read up on it? You start with a big bunch of gloop perhaps containing an exceedingly tiny amount of viral genome fragments. Working in your favor is the fact that all key parts of the target virus genome have been sequenced by multiple labs worldwide, so you use those data to look for some specific target gene sequences which uniquely identify your quarry in the gloop. So you need some way to fish out incredibly tiny amounts of the target sequences from the gloop, and somehow concentrate just those. Hmm, what does that sound like? Ah yes, it sounds like [url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polymerase_chain_reaction]this[/url].

[QUOTE=ewmayer;555481] it sounds like [URL="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polymerase_chain_reaction"]this[/URL].[/QUOTE]
nope, I won't read anything whose initials are abbreviated to [URL="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Romanian_Communist_Party"]pcr[/URL]! :razz:

[QUOTE=LaurV;555522][COLOR=Silver]nope, I won't read anything whose initials are abbreviated to pcr![/COLOR] :razz:[/QUOTE]

One of these days, I am going to reach out and pull that tongue through my screen. Prepare yourself...

:missingteeth:

OpenPandemics @ WCG
 

Probably not an interesting thing to say here but I don't think it violates any forum rules so I'll say it anyways: recently I've actually stopped contributingto GIMPS, except for GPU factoring on colab. Instead I began to donate all my computational power to [URL="https://www.worldcommunitygrid.org/research/opn1/news.do"]OpenPandemics[/URL] at World Community Grid. I'll be back here once all this is over.

Why so different a pandemic response now, than 50 years ago? [url]https://nypost.com/2020/05/16/why-life-went-on-as-normal-during-the-killer-pandemic-of-1969/[/url]

"The idea that a pandemic could be controlled with social distancing and public lockdowns is a relatively new one, said Tucker. It was first suggested in a 2006 study by New Mexico scientist Robert J. Glass, who got the idea from his [B]14-year-old daughter’s science project.[/B]"

Using your logic we probably shouldn't wash our hands either.

Common sense tells us that the best way to not catch a highly communicable disease is to avoid people who have it.

Let's say there is a room full of people with the bubonic plague. You have the choice to go in the room or not. What is your choice?

:crazy:

[QUOTE=Xyzzy;555953]Let's say there is a room full of people with the bubonic plague. You have the choice to go in the room or not. What is your choice?[/QUOTE]If that room is on the spacecraft that is going to the Moon then I choose not to go.

[QUOTE=Xyzzy;555953][COLOR=Gray]Using your logic we probably shouldn't wash our hands either.[/COLOR]

Common sense tells us that the best way to not catch a highly communicable disease is to avoid people who have it.

Let's say there is a room full of people with the bubonic plague. You have the choice to go in the room or not. What is your choice?
[/QUOTE]

This is giving me a moment of pause. I have a granddaughter who will one year old on Monday, (September 7). My son is having a private birthday party for her the day before at an amusement location designed for kids. Part of it is indoors and the rest outdoors. I have already informed him that I [U]might[/U] attend.

My son works at an auto parts manufacturing plant. They make various things for Toyota. There are people coming in there from all over on a daily basis. I do not mix with his friends. it is a generational thing. I find all of them to be a bit goofy.

To the point: How do I know that my son is not going to bring home the big, bad, creepy-crawler from somewhere he has been? I do not know. He may be a carrier, I may be a carrier. I am rapidly closing in on age 65. I am told that I am in really good condition compared to the majority in my age group. I try to eat properly and take supplements. Bottom line: I would rather not take the chance. However, I do not want to create a rift in the family. :no:

[QUOTE=Xyzzy;555953]Using your logic we probably shouldn't wash our hands either.

Common sense tells us that the best way to not catch a highly communicable disease is to avoid people who have it.

Let's say there is a room full of people with the bubonic plague. You have the choice to go in the room or not. What is your choice?

:crazy:[/QUOTE]So, you think 14-year-olds' ideas should run the world? (And still produce LOTS of deaths that they were intended to prevent. With multiple indications of yielding more total death than not implementing them.)

The room choice depends. Do I already have it, a new patient arrival? Am I their doctor and wearing adequate PPE?

Let's say that you're a covidophobe, and are confident that at some point some CV19+ persons have been or will be in your grocery store, post office, gas station, pharmacy, etc. Do you live out the rest of your days without going to any such place, dying to avoid possible exposure? Stress out and have a heart attack worrying about the disease? Shelter and starve in place?

There's a middle ground. Ruining the economy (bankrupting many small businesses and many employees), creating bottlenecks in the supply chain such that additional millions more are expected to die of starvation than covid19, is not the middle ground, & is not any kind of optimal.

Did you read the article before posting a response?

I remember at the start of the covid-19 panic that most countries stated that they needed to "flatten the curve" to reduce the peak load on the care facilities. But now the focus seems to have shifted to eliminating the virus from any future spread.

The difference being that previously it seemed like people accepted that we will all eventually get covid-19 and we were just trying to delay [i]when[/i] it finds you. And lately it is more a thought process of we don't ever want to get it, keep your filthy viruses away from me.

So long term can we (as a group) ever avoid it? I think not, we can only ever delay it. Those susceptible to death from it will eventually die from it. Those who's immune system can shrug it off will be fine.

So how much longer do you want to live in fear? You [i]will[/i] get it eventually (if you haven't already). Make your choice: Be forever fearful, scared of everything, or bring it on and let's see what happens.

[QUOTE=retina;555968]
So how much longer do you want to live in fear? You [i]will[/i] get it eventually (if you haven't already). Make your choice: Be forever fearful, scared of everything, or bring it on and let's see what happens.[/QUOTE]

That's a false choice. There will be a vaccine. If society is responsible, a lot of people will get a vaccine before they are infected, saving millions of lives.

[QUOTE=kriesel;555950]Why so different a pandemic response now, than 50 years ago? [url]https://nypost.com/2020/05/16/why-life-went-on-as-normal-during-the-killer-pandemic-of-1969/[/url]

"The idea that a pandemic could be controlled with social distancing and public lockdowns is a relatively new one, said Tucker. It was first suggested in a 2006 study by New Mexico scientist Robert J. Glass, who got the idea from his [B]14-year-old daughter’s science project.[/B]"[/QUOTE]

Complete bullshit article.

Couple of points:
1. H3N2 was less lethal than COVID-19
2. H3N2 is a strain of influenza; influenza vaccines had been around since the 1940s.

With COVID-19 we have a more deadly virus, with less guarantee that a vaccine will be readily available.

[QUOTE=kriesel;555966]So, you think 14-year-olds' ideas should run the world? (And still produce LOTS of deaths that they were intended to prevent. With multiple indications of yielding more total death than not implementing them.)
[/QUOTE]

Governments around the world adopted lockdowns, social distancing measures, quarantines and mask mandates. But sure, if you want to get your panties in a bunch because a 14-yo may have suggested it first, enjoy your wedgie.

[QUOTE=masser;555972]There will be a vaccine.[/QUOTE]Do you have a lot of confidence in that claim?

We still haven't found a vaccine for HIV and many other viruses.

One more time, with feeling:

[QUOTE=retina;555977]Do you have a lot of confidence in that claim?
[/QUOTE]

Yes.

[QUOTE=retina;555977]Do you have a lot of confidence in that claim?[/QUOTE]

Yes, because Trump says so. :wink:

There will be a vaccine out on Nov. 1. He will make sure of it. The problem is that I would prefer a vaccine that was generated by the medical community instead of the political industry.

If this prediction is right, and like magic a vaccine appears on Nov. 1, I won't take it. Its effectiveness will have to be proven over time first.

[QUOTE=masser;555980][QUOTE=retina;555977]Do you have a lot of confidence in that claim?
[/QUOTE]

Yes.[/QUOTE]When will we have it?

If it is five years away then you want to stay scared until then?[QUOTE=PhilF;556007][QUOTE=retina;555977]Do you have a lot of confidence in that claim?
[/QUOTE]

Yes, because Trump says so. :wink:[/QUOTE]Touché.

[QUOTE=retina;556008]When will we have it?

If it is five years away then you want to stay scared until then?[/QUOTE]

The WHO says [URL="https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-who-briefing/widespread-covid-vaccinations-not-expected-until-mid-2021-who-says-idUSKBN25V1B0"]mid-2021[/URL].

I'll also note that protecting lives (potentially millions) is not cowardice.

[QUOTE=masser;555979]One more time, with feeling:[/QUOTE]

[U]Off topic[/U]: All bourbon smells like kerosene to me. Sour-mash is much better. :bounce:

[QUOTE=masser;555976]Governments around the world adopted lockdowns, social distancing measures, quarantines and mask mandates. But sure, if you want to get your panties in a bunch because a 14-yo may have suggested it first, enjoy your wedgie.[/QUOTE]
Coronaviruses have been known since the late 1920s; infecting humans since the 1960s. "Dorothy Hamre[URL="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coronavirus#cite_note-31"][31][/URL] and John Procknow at the [URL="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University_of_Chicago"]University of Chicago[/URL] isolated a [B]novel cold[/B] from medical students in 1962. [URL]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coronavirus#History[/URL]
There are reports of some immunity to CV19 as a result of infection previously by a different coronavirus. Preventing people from acquiring cross-immunity from a mild pathogen against a more dangerous pathogen is unwise, but that is widespread governmental mandate. Lockdown etc. was introduced when little was known, as erring on the side of caution. Now it is a political decision to continue, despite new information.

[FONT=sans-serif][QUOTE]Importantly, we detected SARS-CoV-2-reactive CD4+T cells in 40%–60% of unexposed individuals, suggesting cross-reactive T cell recognition between circulating ‘‘common cold’’ coronaviruses and SARS-CoV-2.[/QUOTE] [/FONT][URL]https://www.cell.com/action/showPdf?pii=S0092-8674%2820%2930610-3[/URL]
All that social distancing and handwashing etc. is reducing development and maintenance of immunity by reducing propagation of mild pathogens.

Why do you think that you know more than health authorities all over the world? You've selected a few data points, while they have seen those points plus hundreds, if not thousands, of other studies, with deeper understanding of the credibility of the studies and their implications.

On this issue, you're like the cranks who wonder into this forum and insist that because [I]they[/I] determined that p, a 9 digit number is prime, that they've discovered the next Mersenne prime and it's Mp.

[QUOTE=kriesel;556025]
All that social distancing and handwashing etc. is reducing development and maintenance of immunity by reducing propagation of mild pathogens.[/QUOTE]


FWIW, I think that statement is absolutely true. I also think that Health-Authorities and the present-day "[STRIKE]science[/STRIKE]"-of-medicine are given much more credits than they deserve.
Having said all that, due to severe consequences of not social-distancing we are cornered and can not afford to make it a free for all. The quoted statement would apply to any pathogen. Would (generic)-you recommend business as usual if the pandemic was that of Cholera, Ebola or some other very deadly disease?

[QUOTE=kriesel;556025]All that social distancing and handwashing etc. is reducing development and maintenance of immunity by reducing propagation of mild pathogens.[/QUOTE][QUOTE=a1call;556053]FWIW, I think that statement is absolutely true.[/QUOTE]
Immunity to what? Keeping clean does not change your body's ability to fight something like the chicken pox. That data is on file and ready to deploy when needed.
Your immune system does not have immunity to things you haven't been exposed to (by catching it or getting vaccinated).

Here is part of transcript ([URL="https://maximumfun.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/Sawbones-Ep323-COVID-19-QA.pdf"]full PDF[/URL]) of a Dr talking about this:

[QUOTE]Sydnee: Laura asked me about social distancing, and whether or not it can
weaken our immune system, and Laura was not the only one to ask that
question.
Many people have asked that, because it was one of the thing in that, uh—
the video, the press conference from those two urgent care doctors. Uh,
they mention this. And I—I—it was on my list of things to address, but I got
lost in statistics and forgot to mention it.
So, um, if you have heard people say that—and I think it's in that—actually,
I know, it's in that Plandemic, uh, thing too. That other… completely false,
bogus thing.
Um, that the idea that staying inside is making our immune systems weak,
and we're more at risk for… [pauses] General disease, COVID specifically,
whatever.
Um, this is false. I think—here is what I think they are trying to… I think
they're trying to make connections between things that aren't connected, to
confuse people.
Justin: Okay.
Sydnee: Okay. I think they're sort of referencing the hygiene hypothesis.
Have you heard of that before?
Justin: Hmm… I feel like we've talked about it before.
Sydnee: I think we've mentioned it. It's a way of explaining why there's
more, like, incident of allergies and, um, uh, like, contact dermatitis, like
atopic disease and asthma and things like that nowadays.
Justin: The theory being that we make ourselves too clean, and so, our
body doesn't develop the, uh, immune responses that we need to…
pathogens.
Sydnee: Well, we have an exaggerated immune response, really, is what
we're, uh, assuming, because we're not exposed to these things early
enough.
Justin: Okay.
Sydnee: It's similar to the idea, if you—if you have little kids, or if you have,
in the past, you know, if you have bigger kids that used to be little, or you
have a lot of contact with little kids, you may have heard the
recommendations about food introduction change through the years.
We used to say, wait when it comes to, like, nut butters, things that have a
higher likelihood of having allergies to. And now, we say you should
introduce them earlier.
Justin: It's even, like, since we've had kids, right?
Sydnee: Yeah. It has changed even since then. Like, give a baby peanut
butter, because then they're less likely to be allergic to peanuts later.
Justin: Uh-huh. And 'cause they love it, and their little mouths go…
[smacking noises] It's adorable.
Sydnee: [laughs quietly] They—they do love peanut butter. Uh, so I think
that's what they're kind of… trying to talk about with this. The idea that, like,
when we're younger, if we're not exposed to a lot of stuff, maybe we're more
likely to have allergies to stuff later on.
I—but that's a whole—first of all, allergy is a whole other thing… that isn't a
virus or a bacteria, obviously. So they're—they're not related, but I think
that might be what they're talking to.
It is fair to say that you can't develop antibodies to a specific infection until
you're exposed to it, right?
Justin: Right.
Sydnee: Like… you and I, as far as we know, have not been exposed to
coronavirus, to this specific—
Justin: Right.
Sydnee: —to, you know, novel coronavirus, so we do not have antibodies
to it. Now, in this example, I am a healthcare worker. I have probably been
exposed to and developed antibodies against maybe a higher number of
pathogens than you. Let's theorize that.
Justin: Okay.
Sydnee: I don't know if that's true, but let's—
Justin: It sounds right.
Sydnee: —let's—let's say it.
Justin: I do some na—I get up to some nasty stuff, so I'm not gonna just
100% grant it to you, but okay. Let's assume it.
Sydnee: My—now, you and I, though, have not been exposed to
coronavirus. If we are exposed to coronavirus, neither of us have antibodies
to it. We both are at risk for an infection. That's it.
It does not matter how many other things I have antibodies to. My immune
system is not stronger than yours. It's a one to one thing. So this is a really
weird argument to try to make with people; the idea that you need to be out
in the world exposing yourself to other viruses and bacteria so that you'll be
ready… for when you get COVID.[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=Uncwilly;556060]Immunity to what? Keeping clean does not change your body's ability to fight something like the chicken pox. That data is on file and ready to deploy when needed.
Your immune system does not have immunity to things you haven't been exposed to (by catching it or getting vaccinated).

Here is part of transcript ([URL="https://maximumfun.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/Sawbones-Ep323-COVID-19-QA.pdf"]full PDF[/URL]) of a Dr talking about this:[/QUOTE]

An interesting read. I grew up in farm country, meaning I practically lived outside. There were lots of horses, cattle, pigs, sheep. chickens, and other animals in close proximity. Most of the farmers raised tobacco, corn, soybeans, wheat, clover, and alfalfa. I lived in this type environment until I was 26. I have never had any type of allergies. It was extremely rare for me to become ill. Neither did my brothers and a sister, or my parents. This was far from the sterile lives people try to live now. Perhaps there is something to this...

It is in a way parallel in operation to use of antibiotics to destroy bad-bacteria and in the process destroy the Healthy/Beneficial-Bacteria-Cultures of the digestive tract.
[url]https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/09/180926082539.htm[/url]
But we still have to use antibiotics (the full course of) when needed since the alternative can be worse.
Social-distancing is to viruses/bacteria, what is antibiotics to bacteria.

Even the Republican ‘skinny’ relief bill failed. How is such unnecessary suffering justified?
 

The following is dripping politics, but I don't see where else to put it.
[URL]https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/sep/14/republican-skinny-coronavirus-relief-mitch-mcconnell[/URL]
[QUOTE]According to the Republicans, the aid is “[URL="https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2020/03/lindsey-graham-coronavirus-stimulus-bill"]too generous[/URL]” and “[URL="https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/week-transcript-20-house-speaker-nancy-pelosi-treasury/story?id=72129897"]disincentivizes[/URL]” the unemployed from seeking work. So perverse are the [URL="https://www.nationalreview.com/news/republican-senators-warn-of-rising-unemployment-rate-as-benefits-outpace-wages-for-many/"]effects of these benefits[/URL], they argue, that it is actually workers gaming the system who are [URL="https://www.postandcourier.com/health/covid19/sen-lindsey-graham-says-unemployment-benefits-are-holding-charleston-economy-back/article_71c91fd8-a1c6-11ea-82a7-7fa51a1355bc.html"]slowing the economic recovery[/URL], not the Covid-driven loss of millions of jobs.

That these charges persist despite significant [URL="https://www.chicagofed.org/publications/chicago-fed-letter/2020/441"]evidence[/URL] to the [URL="https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-myth-of-unemployment-benefits-depressing-work/2020/08/03/54cca9f4-d5ba-11ea-9c3b-dfc394c03988_story.html"]contrary[/URL] testifies to the power of the conservative creed that few things in life are more perilous than excess government compassion: “unearned” income such as unemployment benefits perversely undermines recipients’ self-discipline and willingness to work, leaving them even worse off. It is a self-evident truth of human nature, conservatives avow, that relieving the suffering of those in need induces dependence and indolence, whereas deprivation incentivizes labor.
[/QUOTE]

Something I read yesterday: The recent motorcycle rally in Sturgis, SD, resulted in over 250,000 new COVID-19 cases. They, and I don't know who "they" are, managed to get all the addresses of the phones there during the week. After everyone left, the attendees were tracked to see who they came into contact with, and who their friends contacted, and on and on.

it seems to me that a court authorization would be required to do this, if it actually happened. If Homeland Security did this, then maybe they would not need authorization from an external source. In either case, I find their figure dubious, at best. This may be used as an excuse to prevent this event from happening next year, and maybe beyond.

I definitely agree that the programs have disincentivized work, and may continue to do so. There have been plenty of articles about people being angry at their small business owners for applying for and receiving grants to re-open because their benefits (with the $600 pandemic bonus) were comparable to their pay.

But here's the thing. If they want to go down that route, the program that provides support without disincentivizing work is basic income. This has both experimental and theoretical backing.

There are those who argue that "work" is becoming ever more irrelevant. The over-developed world, goes the argument, is becoming ever more capable for those who want to work being able to do so and support (with the assistance of non-human economic providers) an acceptable standard of living for those who do not without significant impacts on their own standard of living.

Progress towards a post-scarcity economy, IOW.

[QUOTE=xilman;556969]There are those who argue that "work" is becoming ever more irrelevant. The over-developed world, goes the argument, is becoming ever more capable for those who want to work being able to do so and support (with the assistance of non-human economic providers) an acceptable standard of living for those who do not without significant impacts on their own standard of living.[/QUOTE]

I haven't seen evidence of that, but that sounds pretty exciting.

[QUOTE=kriesel;556025]There are reports of some immunity to CV19 as a result of infection previously by a different coronavirus. Preventing people from acquiring cross-immunity from a mild pathogen against a more dangerous pathogen is unwise, but that is widespread governmental mandate. Lockdown etc. was introduced when little was known, as erring on the side of caution. Now it is a political decision to continue, despite new information.

[URL]https://www.cell.com/action/showPdf?pii=S0092-8674%2820%2930610-3[/URL]
All that social distancing and handwashing etc. is reducing development and maintenance of immunity by reducing propagation of mild pathogens.[/QUOTE]Lockdown was chosen as an intrusive government policy so politicians could be seen to be doing something, in March, until more was known about the virus. Time has passed, more has been learned, but there's little evidence of governors' positions being affected by improved knowledge The paper documenting cross-immunity from the common cold to Covid19 is dated June 25. Coronavirus immunities are known to fade over time, whch allows us to catch a cold many times in a lifetime. That immunity gets refreshed by reexposure, and lost by minimizing exposure. Connect the dots people. Think for yourselves.

[QUOTE=kriesel;556982]That immunity gets refreshed by reexposure, and lost by minimizing exposure.[/QUOTE]Our biological systems respond to stresses and injuries by directing resources into strengthening the affected areas; to save energy and use available resources wisely. So yes, continually exposing yourself to those tiny invaders will help to boost your immune response systems. The problem is that the initial invasion can become too intense. How could the immune system plan for something that it has never encountered before?

[QUOTE=kriesel;556982]The paper documenting cross-immunity from the common cold to Covid19 is dated June 25.[/QUOTE]

There's definitely cross-reactivity from various cornaviruses, I wouldn't say cross-immunity. I don't know the particular paper you're referencing, though.

[QUOTE=kriesel;556982]Coronavirus immunities are known to fade over time, whch allows us to catch a cold many times in a lifetime. That immunity gets refreshed by reexposure, and lost by minimizing exposure.[/QUOTE]

Given that COVID-19 causes bradykinin storms (and possibly also cytokine storms), I don't think refreshing immunity by re-exposure is a good idea. :ermm:

[url]https://imgur.com/gallery/25hlVvg[/url]

[QUOTE=retina;556984]How could the immune system plan for something that it has never encountered before?[/QUOTE]Parts of the CV19 exterior have enough in common with that of other milder pathogens, that previous exposure to the milder confers some immune response to CV19 on first contact. The immune system doesn't know or care which pathogen the bit it's reactive to is attached to. It functions at the level of chemistry, not species identification.

The cross-reactivity is refreshed by catching another cold, rarely a dangerous proposition, more of an annoyance.

[QUOTE=kriesel;556982]…intrusive government policy…[/QUOTE]Your "intrusive government policy" comment just makes you appear as if you are a sociopath.

"I'm okay, and I'm well-off enough that I'm safe, so there's no need to protect anybody else, like the elderly, or the immunocompromised."

"200,000 dead people? That sounds like a good way to fix the Social Security funding problem!"

"Gee, I might be inconvenienced by all these shutdowns. I'd rather my friends and neighbors die rather than have to wear a silly little mask when I go out to buy snacks."

"Oh dear! My investments might lose some value. It's a shame those dead people are negatively impacting my comfortable existence."

We don't know you personally, but we can only think of two possible ways you could act the way you do:

1) You have never known or experienced hard times or any difficulty. You are successful not because of your hard work and perseverance. You are successful because you were handed the keys to success. Or you have been lucky. Or both. (A certain president comes to mind here!)

OR

2) You have known rough times and you have worked hard and struggled. But you have forgotten where you came from. Sometimes the most vocal opponents to immigration or welfare are those who have worked their way up and out. They believe they did it all on their own, so everyone else should too. But in reality, nobody does it alone.

Here is a simple question for you:

It is February 2020. You are the president of the US. What would you do?

Bonus question: How many deaths are you willing to accept to keep the economy going? Does it matter if anyone from your family is affected? Your friends?

Do you even know anybody affected by this catastrophe?

FWIW, our mind is not closed. If you have a persuasive argument we will listen intently. We have been wrong before.

Personally, it is very hard for us to trade lives for money. Maybe we are flawed in that regard?

WWJD?

:goodposting:

[QUOTE=kriesel;556994]Parts of the CV19 exterior have enough in common with that of other milder pathogens, that previous exposure to the milder confers some immune response to CV19 on first contact. The immune system doesn't know or care which pathogen the bit it's reactive to is attached to. It functions at the level of chemistry, not species identification.

The cross-reactivity is refreshed by catching another cold, rarely a dangerous proposition, more of an annoyance.[/QUOTE]So you are saying that as long as someone has had a cold at some point in the past then they will be fine coping with COVID-19, it will just be an annoyance for them? And those 927k dead people were just unlucky to have never had a cold in their lives?

[QUOTE=Xyzzy;556995]"Oh dear! My investments might lose some value. It's a shame those dead people are negatively impacting my comfortable existence."[/QUOTE]

It's a Hobson's choice: take the precautions, save lives, and take a hit to the economy, or else fail to take precautions, people die, and the economy takes a hit anyway.

[QUOTE=Xyzzy;556995]Personally, it is very hard for us to trade lives for money. Maybe we are flawed in that regard?[/QUOTE]From that statement I deduce that you find it very hard to take out life insurance on yourself so that your family will receive a payout when you die.

Highly effective antibody found. As treatment or preventive, works in mice. On to human trials at some point. [url]https://www.pittwire.pitt.edu/news/pitt-scientists-discover-tiny-antibody-component-highly-effective-preventing-and-treating-sars[/url]

[QUOTE=retina;556999]So you are saying that as long as someone has had a cold at some point in the past then they will be fine coping with COVID-19, it will just be an annoyance for them? And those 927k dead people were just unlucky to have never had a cold in their lives?[/QUOTE]You're being ridiculous. I've previously posted about immunity fade, and provided the links so those interested in learning about cross reactivity can go and read the source.

[QUOTE=Xyzzy;556995]Your "intrusive government policy" comment just makes you appear as if you are a sociopath.
WWJD?[/QUOTE]You are way off the mark. It is not as simple as dollars versus lives. Does this consequence of the extreme measures taken not concern you at all? How selfish that would be. [URL]https://time.com/5864803/oxfam-hunger-covid-19/[/URL] But maybe to an environmentalist, many millions more humans starving to death is a good thing for the spotted owl or snail darter. It's not only starvation. More deaths are occurring from suicide and other violence too.

Note also that much of the usual medical care, called elective, but with important consequences, was shut down for months. Whole hospital wards closed down, staff laid off. People were not getting cancer screenings etc. There will be excess deaths in the coming months and years from that reduction in medical care. Early cancer detection is important.
I personally am willing as a senior to take on some additional risk for the greater good. And I have done so in the past, repeatedly, and on one occasion it landed me in the hospital briefly. (Traffic accident; I was the only one injured, as the result of a maneuver that succeeded in avoiding collision with someone else.)

Re fatalities, Covid19 is mostly an old person's disease.(60% over 75, 80.7% over 65, 92.6% over 55) [URL]https://www.acsh.org/news/2020/06/23/coronavirus-covid-deaths-us-age-race-14863[/URL]
Life expectancy without Covid19, worldwide is ~73 years. [URL]https://www.worldometers.info/demographics/life-expectancy/[/URL]
In the US, ~79 years, with a death rate in recent years of about 2.8 million annually.

The twenty leading causes of death worldwide: [URL]http://deathmeters.info/[/URL]
Compare the list of underlying conditions in the 94% of US covid19 deaths with comorbidities, to the top 20 causes of deaths list. [URL]https://www.msn.com/en-us/health/medical/cdc-94percent-of-covid-19-deaths-had-underlying-medical-conditions/ar-BB18wrA7[/URL]
Consider also to what extent some of those conditions are substantially self inflicted, by choices to eat too much, exercise too little, smoke, abuse alcohol or other substances, drive recklessly, engage in crime and violence, etc.

I think it's a bad trade, and morally indefensible, to do substantial harm to the lives of all (including actions that reduce life expectancy of many), to produce a statistically insignificant increase in life expectancy of people in my broad age bracket.
Being old is risky. Being very old is very risky. [URL]https://www.ssa.gov/oact/STATS/table4c6.html[/URL]

:popcorn:

[QUOTE=kriesel;557018]I personally am willing as a senior to take on some additional risk for the greater good.[/QUOTE]That is easy to say when you are in a position where you really aren't putting yourself at risk.

"The speed limit should be 150 MPH. Yes it is more dangerous, but I'm willing to take the additional risk to help society. (Oh, BTW, I don't drive.)"[QUOTE=kriesel;557018]You are way off the mark. It is not as simple as dollars versus lives.[/QUOTE][QUOTE=Xyzzy;556995]Here is a simple question for you:

It is February 2020. You are the president of the US. What would you do?
[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=kriesel;556982]Lockdown was chosen as an intrusive government policy so politicians could be seen to be doing something, in March, until more was known about the virus. [/QUOTE]I would point out that this also [i]ascribes motives[/i]. That is worrisome enough.

But it also dismisses out of hand the idea that the "lockdown" measures were put in place and remain in place because what was [i]already[/i] known: such measures actually help slow down the spread of the virus. This has been confirmed by what happened when politicians decided to re-open the bars and whatnot, and new cases spiked.

You want intrusive? The political appointees at the top of the tree at HHS want to revise CDC reports (as first reported at [url=https://www.politico.com/news/2020/09/11/exclusive-trump-officials-interfered-with-cdc-reports-on-covid-19-412809]Politico[/url]) if they think they make the guy who appointed them look bad. No ascribing motives here -- they said so themselves:

[quote]The health department's politically appointed communications aides have demanded the right to review and seek changes to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's weekly scientific reports charting the progress of the coronavirus pandemic, in what officials characterized as an attempt to intimidate the reports' authors and water down their communications to health professionals.

In some cases, emails from communications aides to CDC Director Robert Redfield and other senior officials openly complained that the agency's reports would undermine President Donald Trump's optimistic messages about the outbreak, according to emails reviewed by POLITICO and three people familiar with the situation.[/quote]IMO [i]that[/i] is an "intrusive government policy."

[QUOTE=CRGreathouse;557000]It's a Hobson's choice: take the precautions, save lives, and take a hit to the economy, or else fail to take precautions, people die, and the economy takes a hit anyway.[/QUOTE]:tantrum:

Just a pedantic nitpick, perhaps, but what you describe is [i]not[/i] a Hobson's choice. I think it is more properly described as a dilemma.

A Hobson's choice is a "take it or leave it" proposition, a choice between what is offered or nothing. It is named for a stable owner who offered his customers the use of the horse in the stall closest to the door, and no other.