Coronovirus IV

[T.Lex]

You know what would resolve that issue entirely: start trending/reporting occurrence date, and stop trending/reporting recorded date. Recorded date is irrelevant. Occurrence date is relevant.

Recorded date is important to gauge the reporting cycle.

But, to your point, yeah. The ISDH actually has this more right than wrong. They show when the dates occurred when the deaths are reported. That's why they backdate some almost every day.

The CDC should have an F in the acronym.

 

[chipbennett]

Hey, smart people: or at least people smart about buildings and mechanics and things I know nothing about....

what can businesses do that have these modern, stuffy, windowless buildings?

My clinic is in a 1960s building which always seemed a disadvantage until now. Being a vet clinic, we also have overhead exhaust fans including a main one that works so well it practically sucks the doors in. So I feel like we have a good thing going as far as reducing airborn viral spread. Now that society is "opening up" a bit more I'm asking even our small work groups to wear a mask all day. But if they want to take it off to have a coffee or something, I ask them to sit at their own computer (ie away from others) and to turn on that overhead exhaust fan. We also keep the windows open, weather permitting.

Conversely, I went to my first "pandemic era" doctor's appointment this week at an ophthalmologist. I minimized my risk by taking the first appointment, wore my N95 (yes I'm using it repeatedly but it still should help), wore wrap around glasses until the actual exam, and went home for a shower afterward. There was also plenty of hand washing, etc.

Anyway, what really struck me was sitting in that little stuffy exam room. SARSCov2 can hang in the air for 2-3 hours after someone expels it. So it just seems to me that finding a way to get some air circulating to the outdoors would make a big difference.

I interface with building commissioning activities and we have several SMEs at my company, but it is not anywhere near my area of expertise. So, speaking only from observation/speculation:

1. I have concerns about the energy efficiency requirements of LEED conflicting with the airflow/fresh air recirculation concerns of preventing bioburden in enclosed spaces. Sure, it's possible to meet both, but for most SMBs, I imagine it very well might be cost-prohibitive.

2. The advent of air conditioning has been great for many reasons that almost certainly outweigh the negative, but some of those negatives include changes to building architecture from designs that utilized natural air flow/circulation and other means that would contribute to minimizing bioburden, to designs that maximize bioburden (lower ceilings, contained/recirculated airflow, elimination of convection-based air circulation, etc.). I also wonder about the difference in ambient humidity inside homes/buildings today vs pre-A/C, and the impact on viruses.

All of that said, some virus hanging around in the air might not be a bad thing. Exposure is the only thing that produces an immune response (the very theory of vaccination is based on this principle), and the viral load remaining in the air in an exam room would need to meet some critical mass in order to cause infection.

 

[chipbennett]

First, my wife showed me that clip last night. He was at least endorsing it, if not recommending it.

Second, in the immortal words of the great American philosopher, Bill Murray, "It just doesn't matter." We're bombarded with prescription drug advertisements/endorsements/recommendations. (Notwithstanding a vacuous emoluments issue, of course.)

People ARE more likely to ask their doctor about anything Trump claims to take. (Has he been taking it a few days, a week or so, or a few weeks?) And the docs are more likely to prescribe it, depending in part on their relationship with the sales rep.

That's just how the system is structured at this point.

(With all the other crap the Trump Campaign hawks in their emails, I wouldn't be surprised to see this cocktail.)

There is a huge gulf between a patient asking a doctor about a given prescription, and the doctor's inclination to indulge a specific request.

And I doubt there are very many sales reps out hawking hydroxychloroquine. Plaquenil has been off-patent since around 1995 (at least, that's when the first generic hit the market).

 

[chipbennett]

Recorded date is important to gauge the reporting cycle.

But, to your point, yeah. The ISDH actually has this more right than wrong. They show when the dates occurred when the deaths are reported. That's why they backdate some almost every day.

The CDC should have an F in the acronym.

There are a lot of things CDC should have an F for.

 

[T.Lex]

...the viral load remaining in the air in an exam room would need to meet some critical mass in order to cause infection.

Hey, speaking of that, its something that's been on my mind off and on and I haven't really seen anything on it. (Although, I also haven't done a smokingman-esque deep dive on the matter.) Have there been any studies of how many ppm or whatever the measurement is that is a minimum for infection? Or basically, a quantification range of the difference between "exposure" and "infection." (Yeah, I expect it is a range rather than a hard number, depending on many factors.)

 

[T.Lex]

There is a huge gulf between a patient asking a doctor about a given prescription, and the doctor's inclination to indulge a specific request.

Apparently not if you're POTUS.

 

[chipbennett]

Apparently not if you're POTUS.

Touche

 

[chipbennett]

Hey, speaking of that, its something that's been on my mind off and on and I haven't really seen anything on it. (Although, I also haven't done a smokingman-esque deep dive on the matter.) Have there been any studies of how many ppm or whatever the measurement is that is a minimum for infection? Or basically, a quantification range of the difference between "exposure" and "infection." (Yeah, I expect it is a range rather than a hard number, depending on many factors.)

I honestly don't know. I assume that someone, somewhere is conducting studies along those lines. I wouldn't even know how they would be done. Maybe Petri dish studies to determine the viral load required to overwhelm immune response/antibodies? (Any microbiologists in the house?)

 

[T.Lex]

I honestly don't know. I assume that someone, somewhere is conducting studies along those lines. I wouldn't even know how they would be done. Maybe Petri dish studies to determine the viral load required to overwhelm immune response/antibodies? (Any microbiologists in the house?)

I would think testing of the contact tracing subjects could be insightful. The amount of viral load in a newly-infected-but-asymptomatic versus newly-infected-symptomatic could provide at least a sampling-style outline.

There's got to be some studies of other c-viruses and what the load is to cause infection, so something to at least compare this one against.

I dunno, maybe this just isn't something biology can measure, since there are so many variables.

 

[JettaKnight]

This is what happens when government usurps power they should not have, largely from unconstitutional SCOTUS decisions stretching the commerce clause beyond recognition...

WTF does that that have to do with rooting for or against a medical treatment?


That is NOT why we have Tweets about hydrochloroxydril or however you spell it.

 

[T.Lex]

This is what happens when government usurps power they should not have, largely from unconstitutional SCOTUS decisions stretching the commerce clause beyond recognition...

Before SCOTUS got involved, Congress - composed of members to whom the electorate delegated this task - passed legislation expanding the commerce clause.

 

[JettaKnight]

Honestly, I can't see "we've" as appropriate here. It is almost entirely the MSM and some Democrats that treat this as a political issue.

It is more appropriate to say "they've". Their blinding hatred of anything merely associated with Trump makes them stupid.

Dude, you're the one posting the memes that exacerbate the situation. It's like kids in the back seat of the car.

 

[nonobaddog]

Since one single virion entering one lung cell can make thousands of replicates, each of which can then find lung cells and make thousands of replicates, each of which can then....
Can someone explain why there is an assumption that more than a single virion is needed to cause an infection?

 

[chipbennett]

Since one single virion entering one lung cell can make thousands of replicates, each of which can then find lung cells and make thousands of replicates, each of which can then....
Can someone explain why there is an assumption that more than a single virion is needed to cause an infection?

Because even without specific antibodies, the immune system will kill that single virion (and its replicates) before it can overwhelm the immune system. Is it possible that a single virion can cause an infection? I suppose. But it is highly improbable.

There needs to be sufficient viral load to overwhelm the immune response, in order for there to be infection.

 

[jamil]

Since one single virion entering one lung cell can make thousands of replicates, each of which can then find lung cells and make thousands of replicates, each of which can then....
Can someone explain why there is an assumption that more than a single virion is needed to cause an infection?

I'm not expert but it seems to me that it's a game of odds. I don't know how good these things are at infection. Any one may be able to infect but not every one does. So the more there are the more likely the infection. Kinda like getting pregnant.

 

[T.Lex]

Since one single virion entering one lung cell can make thousands of replicates, each of which can then find lung cells and make thousands of replicates, each of which can then....
Can someone explain why there is an assumption that more than a single virion is needed to cause an infection?

"Can make" v. "does make." Its not an assumption, there are many variables that are involved.

 

[nonobaddog]

Because even without specific antibodies, the immune system will kill that single virion (and its replicates) before it can overwhelm the immune system. Is it possible that a single virion can cause an infection? I suppose. But it is highly improbable.

There needs to be sufficient viral load to overwhelm the immune response, in order for there to be infection.

We are talking about a "novel" virus though - one which we have no immunity to. What will attack the replicates? I thought the virus needed to "trigger" the immune system to make antibodies before it could attack this virus. So that would lead to the same type of assumption that it takes a certain viral load of replicates before the immune system gets into gear to produce antibodies and even begin the fight.

If we have something that will kill the single virion then that implies that we already have some immunity.

 

[Phase2]

Dude, you're the one posting the memes that exacerbate the situation. It's like kids in the back seat of the car.

You mean this? This is criticizing politicization, not promoting it.

 

[T.Lex]

We are talking about a "novel" virus though - one which we have no immunity to. What will attack the replicates? I thought the virus needed to "trigger" the immune system to make antibodies before it could attack this virus. So that would lead to the same type of assumption that it takes a certain viral load of replicates before the immune system gets into gear to produce antibodies and even begin the fight.

If we have something that will kill the single virion then that implies that we already have some immunity.

Decent overview:
https://elemental.medium.com/this-is-how-your-immune-system-reacts-to-coronavirus-cbf5271e530e

When you first become infected, your body launches its standard innate immune defense like it would for any virus. This involves the release of proteins called interferons that interfere with the virus’s ability to replicate inside the body’s cells. Interferons also recruit other immune cells to come and attack the virus in order to stop it from spreading. Ideally, this initial response enables the body to gain control over the infection quickly, although the virus has its own defenses to blunt or escape the interferon effect.

Basically, the immune system isn't totally powerless against novel viruses, but that lack of antibodies means that if the "generic" response doesn't work, then bad stuff happens.

 

[JettaKnight]

You mean this? This is criticizing politicization, not promoting it.

And if you can't see it's polarizing, then perhaps you're in too deep.