Posted on 04/09/2020 9:49:35 AM PDT by Mariner
Yesterday's thread here:
http://freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3833043/posts?page=1
Hey, How ya’ doin’? Are you doing the same commentary as previously? You know, when you speak of: “Filthy Money Changers?”
IL
Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) in Illinois Test Results
Positive 16,422
Deaths 528
Total Tests Performed* 80,857
http://dph.illinois.gov/covid19
CA
s of April 8, 2020, there are a total of 18,309 positive cases and 492 deaths in California.
Ages of all confirmed positive cases:
Age 0-17: 252 cases
Age 18-49: 8,939 cases
Age 50-64: 5,003 cases
Age 65 and older: 4,056 cases
Unknown/Missing: 59 cases
Gender of all confirmed positive cases:
Female: 8,776 cases
Male: 9,130 cases
Unknown: 403 cases
https://www.cdph.ca.gov/Programs/CID/DCDC/Pages/Immunization/ncov2019.aspx
19,691
confirmed cases
+628 so far today
+1,524 yesterday
538
deaths
+31 so far today
+57 yesterday
https://www.latimes.com/projects/california-coronavirus-cases-tracking-outbreak/
Thank you for your unwavering loyalty here, Mariner, and for Corona Virus Daily Thread #42!
Nice try - it was you, and you and everyone knows it...
He means the Swedish guy is the money changer.
Data do not back cloth masks to limit COVID-19, experts say
Filed Under:
COVID-19
Mary Van Beusekom | News Writer | CIDRAP News
| Apr 09, 2020
Limited, indirect evidence from lab studies suggests that homemade fabric masks may capture large respiratory droplets, but there is no evidence they impede the transmission of aerosols implicated in the spread of COVID-19, according to a paper published yesterday by the National Academy of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine.
In the paper, the National Academies’ Standing Committee on Emerging Infectious Diseases and 21st Century Health Threats said that, because no studies have been done on the effectiveness of cloth masks in preventing transmission of coronavirus to others, it is impossible to assess their benefits, if any.
The paper was prepared by committee members Richard Besser, MD, of the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, and Baruch Fischhoff, PhD, of Carnegie Mellon University, and two subject matter experts contributed. It was approved by Committee Chair Harvey Fineberg, MD, PhD, and was peer-reviewed by seven additional US experts.
In the absence of widespread availability of more effective protection and to preserve surgical masks and respirators for healthcare workers, homemade fabric masks have been proposed to limit spread of coronavirus by wearers who might be contagious but are asymptomatic or pre-symptomatic. The US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recently endorsed their use.
Many factors at play in gauging effectiveness
Committee members point out that research suggests that COVID-19 can spread via invisible droplets as small as 5 microns and by tiny bioaerosol particles as well as via visible respiratory droplets just by breathing.
Infected yet asymptomatic people are of particular concern because the particles they breathe are predominantly bioaerosols. “To complicate matters further, different individuals vary in the extent to which they emit bioaerosols while breathing,” they said.
Because different masks have different filtering capacities and the role of droplet size on disease transmission is unknown, it is difficult to predict the effectiveness of these masks, the authors said. “The extent of any protection will depend on how the masks are made and used,” they wrote. “It will also depend on how mask use affects users’ other precautionary behaviors, including their use of better masks, when those become widely available.”
Those behaviors may reduce or enhance homemade fabric masks’ overall effects on public health, they noted. “The current level of benefit, if any, is not possible to assess,” they said.
Michael Osterholm, PhD, MPH, director of the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy (CIDRAP), who contributed to the paper along with Sundaresan Jayaraman, PhD, of the Georgia Institute of Technology in Atlanta, said in his weekly CIDRAP podcast yesterday that, because aerosols likely play an important role in coronavirus transmission, cloth masks will do little, if anything, to limit spread of the disease.
Even more, he worries that encouraging cloth masks is emboldening people to try to get surgical masks for better protection, taking them away from frontline healthcare workers, who desperately need them. “If we’re right now in a major shortage status—and we will be for the kind of N95 and surgical mask protection—the public should not ever try to get these,” he said.
CIDRAP publishes CIDRAP News.
Research needed on effectiveness, precautions
In the report, the committee members called for research to yield clear instructions on how to properly make, fit, use, and clean homemade fabric masks.
Studies also need to explore estimates of the protection that such masks afford users and others in different settings (eg, in places in which the likelihood of contact is higher, like grocery stores, compared with wearing masks everywhere), they wrote. In addition, they said data need to be gathered on effective reinforcement of other precautions, such as physical (social) distancing.
“That research could provide policy makers with estimates of the net effect of encouraging use of homemade cloth masks on public health, with realistic estimates of how such masks will be made and used, as well as how they will affect other precautionary behaviors of users and others who observe and interact with them,” they said.
My guess is she found it hard to breath and pulled the mask down. Her face looks a little reddish compared to the rest of her.
She’s at the point of unloading a good amount of groceries after pushing a heavy basket around the store. I had the same problem last time I went with my bandanna mask with coffee filter inside the layers.
By the time I got done bagging my groceries, bringing them to the car and unloading them into the car, I had to get in, turn the air on, take the mask off and breathe for about 10 minutes just to catch up.
“’Oh, Alexa, I’m Going To Hurt’: A Woman Who Died Of The Coronavirus Spent Days Asking Alexa To Help With Her Pain”
Effectiveness of convalescent plasma therapy in severe COVID-19 patients
Today, 03:42 PM
Significance
COVID-19 is currently a big threat to global health. However, no specific antiviral agents are available for its treatment. In this work, we explore the feasibility of convalescent plasma (CP) transfusion to rescue severe patients.
The results from 10 severe adult cases showed that one dose (200 mL) of CP was well tolerated and could significantly increase or maintain the neutralizing antibodies at a high level, leading to disappearance of viremia in 7 d. Meanwhile, clinical symptoms and paraclinical criteria rapidly improved within 3 d. Radiological examination showed varying degrees of absorption of lung lesions within 7 d.
These results indicate that CP can serve as a promising rescue option for severe COVID-19, while the randomized trial is warranted.
Abstract
Currently, there are no approved specific antiviral agents for novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). In this study, 10 severe patients confirmed by real-time viral RNA test were enrolled prospectively. One dose of 200 mL of convalescent plasma (CP) derived from recently recovered donors with the neutralizing antibody titers above 1:640 was transfused to the patients as an addition to maximal supportive care and antiviral agents. The primary endpoint was the safety of CP transfusion. The second endpoints were the improvement of clinical symptoms and laboratory parameters within 3 d after CP transfusion. The median time from onset of illness to CP transfusion was 16.5 d. After CP transfusion, the level of neutralizing antibody increased rapidly up to 1:640 in five cases, while that of the other four cases maintained at a high level (1:640). The clinical symptoms were significantly improved along with increase of oxyhemoglobin saturation within 3 d. Several parameters tended to improve as compared to pretransfusion, including increased lymphocyte counts (0.65 × 109/L vs. 0.76 × 109/L) and decreased C-reactive protein (55.98 mg/L vs. 18.13 mg/L). Radiological examinations showed varying degrees of absorption of lung lesions within 7 d. The viral load was undetectable after transfusion in seven patients who had previous viremia. No severe adverse effects were observed.
This study showed CP therapy was well tolerated and could potentially improve the clinical outcomes through neutralizing viremia in severe COVID-19 cases. The optimal dose and time point, as well as the clinical benefit of CP therapy, needs further investigation in larger well-controlled trials.
https://www.pnas.org/content/early/2020/04/02/2004168117
My 3.2% is based on #cases from worldometers.info. I'm guessing their figures are based on those who test positive but I'm not real sure about that. More likely, worldometers just uses what the locale gives them in way of data.
So, the CFR (ratio) I'm deriving may change, a lot in fact. This is dynamic. There are many factors at play and each factor is subject to change. If you look at Italy's CFR, on the graph I posted, it's around 12! I guessing that's partially due to a collapse in HCS driving up the death rate - collapse of HCS being another factor.
Your comments and points are greatly appreciated and encouraged. I generally look forward to being corrected so that I may increase my knowledge of a subject for the sake of passing accurate and timely information to others.
Again, I'm using the same case numbers most everyone else is - just doing the simple math based on the available data for the calculations above. My more complex is about 200k but it's been some time since I have evaluated what factors have changed. And frankly, I'm a bit disappointed that the number of deaths haven't fallen more, due to new treatments, continued unavailability of appropriate PPE, and people in the US not taking CV more seriously - all factors in a final death toll.
My last projection was for 10 April of 17,328. I'll try to update my figures tomorrow night based on where the ND/TD ratio is tonight.
My projection for the 5th of April was 384 too high, but the two before that 1 April for the US, and 2 April for Sweden, were spot on. I say this only to show this can be forecast with some degree of accuracy. I see the professionals all lowering and changing their models. I just hope they aren't being pressured into doing it. If so, that's going to cost even more lives - another factor - because the US will have relaxed its effort to control the spread.
I'm only capable of short range estimates ( 5 - 10 days max ). So even tonight's numbers - I'm hoping they're much lower - will be a big factor in my next estimation for the near future.
My limited skills are only due to my long hours as a IT nerd with data experience, and some formal instruction and work in Foresty where we estimate timber stands, value, etc.
My exceedingly limited ability to use.and understand charts and graphs, is from a long hobby in trading commodities, stocks, crypto currencies, and as a consultant on contractor performance evaluation, budgets, and in improving workflow efficiencies for small to medium size organizations.
Finding the need for work to earn "money" no longer an issue for over a decade now, I'm currently and frequently plagued by "senior moments" - do take that into consideration. Somehow through it all, I've managed to maintain some sense of humor - Lol.
BS.. Your post was deleted because of what you had stated.. No “Swedish person” ..And your backups are also commenting to ‘protect your BS’...
I’m just commenting so folks know your history... I’ll resume the lurking...
Just had 9 people walking well within the 6 foot distance past the house. More bleepin’ tourists bringing CV to the neighborhood.
I don’t re,member you being that concerned about the health dribble influenza season we just had
I’m not dissing Trying mp. He went with the info given him. It was terrible Faucet has always relied on bad models. Always
I’m suggesting we have been layer. We had better wake up beforbefore re everything goes
The 14K deaths is TOTAL...not just this week.
GA
COVID-19 Confirmed Cases: No. Cases (%)
Total 10885 (100%)
Hospitalized 2298(21.11%)
Deaths 412 (3.79%) 43 more than yesterday
https://dph.georgia.gov/covid-19-daily-status-report
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.