• The Cycling News forum is looking to add some volunteer moderators with Red Rick's recent retirement. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to @SHaines here on the forum, or use the Contact Us form to message the Community Team.

    In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.

    Thanks!

Coronavirus: How dangerous a threat?

Page 159 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Gupta & Bhakdi share the same views including their opinion on masks with Bhakdi not recommending them ("show your face"), and going so far as saying it's nothing short of "child abuse" to force children to wear masks.
Whatever the science behind her position on masks in general, that she calls this "child abuse" makes it impossible for me to take her seriously.
 
"Gupta, 55, says that unless you are elderly or have underlying conditions, there is no need for a mask. She teaches without one."


40% of Americans have an underlying condition. And Gupta doesn't seem to understand that the purpose of wearing a mask, for the umpteenth thousandth time, is TO PROTECT OTHERS, NOT YOURSELF. It's precisely people who are not at high risk, and therefore who may be invisible with mild or no symptoms, who need to wear a mask.

On Sweden: You"ll find just as many positive articles that supports what they have done and, what appears to be, some degree of herd immunity. In addition, Tengell still isn't recommending masks.

On HCQ, you'll find just as many positive articles on it.

On not testing a lot, you'll find just as many positive articles on it.

On not contact tracing, you'll find just as many positive articles on it.

Here's a suggestion: do your search for positive articles in peer-reviewed scientific journals, not in posts by journalists who aren't scientists.

Tengell is part of the leadership that said Stockholm would have herd immunity by the end of June. The reason he's not recommending masks is because he wants as many people to catch the virus as possible. As long as he's an advocate of natural herd immunity, everything he recommends is to further the spread of the virus, not prevent it.
 
With context..I have a few ongoing procedures through VA medical. Because of the distance between appointments,I have had 7 Covid tests,that are required w w negative result before keeping the appointment. All tests have been done using what feels like an @18in fireplace poker..results are fast..easy and free..
San Diego reported @300+ positives Thursday or Friday..San Diego is @1.4 million..lots of inexpensive and free testing.
Baja North, which includes Tijuana @1.6 million..Ensenada..@380,000,and Mexicali..@1.1 million.. Baja also reporting 47 cases..in Mexico testing is not free..about @$80 bucks American..people admitted to the hospital w symptoms get tested..
not sure how the Mexican government numbers will help w border reopening or confidence in travel for business or pleasure..and for commerce..
Underreported numbers are not fooling anyone..and billions will be lost during the Christmas \ New Year shopping season as a result of just 2 countries blundering in the dark..
Not sure about the North, but I would trust Canadian government numbers more..not sure what Christmas constitutes for overall shopping -hospitality revenue for the year but I am sure it is huge
 
  • Like
Reactions: jmdirt
Whatever the science behind her position on masks in general, that she calls this "child abuse" makes it impossible for me to take her seriously.
On a similar note, Bhakdi is very concerned about the govt proposal that makes the future vaccine free. It is the way they couch some of their arguments that makes you wonder how much science is driving what they say. And I would like to hear from the herd immunity folks what the increasing number of irrefutable reinfections, especially so soon, means for their theories. To me, it means that the vulnerable will never be in the clear because there will always be endemic virus waiting to get into that population. Natural herd immunity is a mirage.
I'm not so sure about that. The NEJM just published this paper:

"Ensuring Uptake of Vaccines Against SARS-CoV-2."


"...substantive penalties could be justified, including employment suspension or stay-at-home orders for persons in designated high-priority groups who refuse vaccination."

Additionally, if I recall correctly, the Virginia governor initially had said the vaccine would be mandatory but has since walked back on that position. Nonetheless, there was a "We The People" rally in Virginia yesterday voicing opposition against lockdowns, restrictions, masks, mandatory Covid vaccine, etc.
which is why I said that I doubt it will be mandatory for the majority. It will be mandatory for some professions. I think my employer will require it. At the end of the day, you will have to decide whether the carrots and sticks change your mind. Same as with all the other restrictions. Mandatory vaccination for all is not going to happen. It is a boogeyman put out mostly by anti-vaxxers and conspiracy theorists imo.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jmdirt
Ah yes, the AEIR producing "proof" in the grand tradition of the Koch forebears, the John Birch Society. Studying the early print versions of this type of targeted information in junior high school we experienced classmates exclaiming "it must be true...it's in a book." Later it was true because it was on the TV; now it's part of culture with QAnon and other sources of digital disinformation. And it all is wrapped in the protection of First Amendment rights in the US which the exploiters will be the quick to point out.
There should be a cage match between the front line medical responders and these scientists when C19 is finally under control.
 
A study by Stanford Medical Center reports that about 9% of Americans have antibodies to the coronavirus. This surprises me, because about 2.5% have tested positive, and a lot of data suggest that there are about ten times as many people infected as test positive. Then again, it's possible that some infected people have lost their antibodies over time.

But to the extent that these results are valid, they would indicate that the mortality rate is higher than is generally thought to be the case. Currently, the case mortality rate in the U.S. as a whole is about 2.7%, and this is after the recent second or third waves, in which far fewer deaths/cases are being recorded than was the situation earlier in the pandemic (the median age of positives has dropped by about ten years). Based on this Ab study, the infectious mortality rate is about 0.73%, about three times what the CDC has been estimating.

The study examined 28,500 people on dialysis for kidney disease, which doesn't sound like a particularly representative sample, but the study's authors claim that it is, and that an advantage of this subject pool is that they get regularly tested.

The study also showed a high correlation with population density, as I confirmed a while ago with positive tests--up to 10 times higher rates in densely populated areas as opposed to less densely populated areas. Blacks and Hispanics had a 16.4% rate vs. 4.8% for whites.

 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: jmdirt
On a similar note, Bhakdi is very concerned about the govt proposal that makes the future vaccine free. It is the way they couch some of their arguments that makes you wonder how much science is driving what they say. And I would like to hear from the herd immunity folks what the increasing number of irrefutable reinfections, especially so soon, means for their theories. To me, it means that the vulnerable will never be in the clear because there will always be endemic virus waiting to get into that population. Natural herd immunity is a mirage.

which is why I said that I doubt it will be mandatory for the majority. It will be mandatory for some professions. I think my employer will require it. At the end of the day, you will have to decide whether the carrots and sticks change your mind. Same as with all the other restrictions. Mandatory vaccination for all is not going to happen. It is a boogeyman put out mostly by anti-vaxxers and conspiracy theorists imo.
The other issue though is that the orange clown and other politicians have created concern about what the initial product will be.
 
I saw this quote in the article about Scott Atlas in WaPo. I think this is the most succinct description of the USA response to COVID-19.

“It seems to me this is policy-based evidence-making rather than evidence-based policymaking,” said Marc Lipsitch, director of the Center for Communicable Disease Dynamics at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health. “In other words, if your goal is to do nothing, then you create a situation in which it looks okay to do nothing [and] you find some experts to make it complicated.”

It also highlights a few points that I have been saying for awhile. 1) Scott Atlas is driving this thing. 2) Herd Immunity is the default policy in action right now, even if no one wants to say it explicitly.

In summary, the vaccines better work, because it is going to be a long winter.

ETA. The therapeutic antibody data is very promising, but there are some legit roadblocks into bringing these therapies to people who don't fly in helicopters to their personal hospital suite.

View: https://twitter.com/walidgellad/status/1318149280327225346
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: jmdirt
A study by Stanford Medical Center reports that about 9% of Americans have antibodies to the coronavirus. This surprises me, because about 2.5% have tested positive, and a lot of data suggest that there are about ten times as many people infected as test positive. Then again, it's possible that some infected people have lost their antibodies over time.
I think two things are at play. 1) The antibody surveillance is an undercount for the reasons you mention. People have lost detectable antibody if they were infected early and there are publications that suggest many minor cases never develop antibodies at all. 2) I think we are picking up more cases as a percentage of the infected now than even in the summer. And summer was better than March/ April. Summer was problematic because a lot of the cases were constrained to a few big hotspots where testing capacity and administration were strained to the limit. That is how a lot cases slip through the cracks. Right now, the outbreaks are more broadly increasing across the country (which is bad), but is easier to surveil IMO. Case counts on Friday were nearing summer levels but hospitalizations are still much lower even though they are also on the uptick. Some of that is lag, but I would bet that we are finding more of the cases out there. I think this is also happening in Europe and will probably result in better containment since they are starting from a lower baseline.

View: https://twitter.com/COVID19Tracking/status/1317965087823441921
 
  • Like
Reactions: jmdirt
I think we are picking up more cases as a percentage of the infected now than even in the summer.

Yes, that's also consistent with the lower mortality rate in the later waves. While there has been a marked reduction in median age of the people testing positive, a larger % of infected people testing positive would also reduce the case mortality rate. IOW, positive cases are a little more representative of the total infected numbers than they were before.
 
Overdispersion is a manifestation of scale-free networks, where most of the traffic goes through a relatively small number of nodes (everyone is 6 steps from everyone else). I'm pessimistic that the super-spreaders can be identified. Some of the super-spreading may be inherent in the individual (someone who has a high concentration of active virus in the saliva, and exhales a large number of air-borne particles), but it will be hard to identify these people in a timely manner, and even if we did, there will be other factors that aren't specific to particular individuals, but rather the environment. Obviously, to have a super-spreading event, you have to have a large concentration of people in one place. A person with the potential to spread the virus to many people can't realize that potential unless s/he is in a crowd, or as the article suggests, has close contact with a large number of people in a relatively short time.

All we can do is keep hammering home the basic steps: masks, social distancing, avoid contact with others indoors, and so on. But now the President has called Fauci an idiot, and says that Americans are tired of the pandemic, and want to move on. It really looks as though cases, and eventually deaths, are going to continue to climb as we head into winter.
 
Last edited:
It would be very interesting to have data on those superspreaders. For example, comparison of infections in places they visited can give clues about which circumstances are most dangerous, comparison of places they visited while wearing a mask and while not wearing one, similarities in characteristics between superspreaders (e.g. gender, age, medical history, specific symptoms, etc.). Perhaps the fast tests similar to pregnancy tests will prove to be a breakthrough. While you don't identify all positives, you're likely to identify the ones with the highest viral load. People could then be tested before entering places where mass infection is a risk. The cost of the test will be important of course to really be practical.
 
Gaviria positive again. With other second-timers the assertion has been that their first bout wasn't that bad so they didn't build antibodies, but Gaviria was in the hospital for an extended time so you would think that his was severe enough to get a strong immune response. I'll be curious what his next test result is.
 
  • Like
Reactions: movingtarget
Some of the super-spreading may be inherent in the individual (someone who has a high concentration of active virus in the saliva, and exhales a large number of air-borne particles), but it will be hard to identify these people in a timely manner, and even if we did, there will be other factors that aren't specific to particular individuals, but rather the environment. Obviously, to have a super-spreading event, you have to have a large concentration of people in one place. A person with the potential to spread the virus to many people can't realize that potential unless s/he is in a crowd, or as the article suggests, has close contact with a large number of people in a relatively short time.

All we can do is keep hammering home the basic steps: masks, social distancing, avoid contact with others indoors, and so on. But now the President has called Fauci an idiot, and says that Americans are tired of the pandemic, and want to move on. It really looks as though cases, and eventually deaths, are going to continue to climb as we head into winter.
True on both counts. Everybody is tired of the pandemic and wants to move on. But that is not really an option. I've said this since April, but by not bringing the infection down to manageable levels, we are asking the population to do very hard things for a very extended period of time. The failure of contemporary American thinking is the fallacy that there are easy answers to protracted problems.
It would be very interesting to have data on those superspreaders. For example, comparison of infections in places they visited can give clues about which circumstances are most dangerous, comparison of places they visited while wearing a mask and while not wearing one, similarities in characteristics between superspreaders (e.g. gender, age, medical history, specific symptoms, etc.). Perhaps the fast tests similar to pregnancy tests will prove to be a breakthrough. While you don't identify all positives, you're likely to identify the ones with the highest viral load. People could then be tested before entering places where mass infection is a risk. The cost of the test will be important of course to really be practical.
I saw this thread yesterday that grouped a lot of the studies of mass outbreaks. It does help point out the places and circumstances to avoid if possible, but I have not heard much about pinpointing the super-spreader ahead of time. I think some of the more quick and dirty tests can be done at $1 a pop. They are not for every circumstance, but they would be good for grouped events or crowded workplaces. The concept probably won't fly here in the USA, but maybe doable in Europe.

View: https://twitter.com/AbraarKaran/status/1318230350250807298
 
I was blown away by hearing and reading about what restaurants are doing to accommodate diners in the first winter of Covid. I am a Mammoth person,but I also like Tahoe,Utah and Colorado..I dream to ski Idaho this year or British Columbia if one of my lotto tickets pays out..
I just can't wrap my head around how ski lodge dining will work. For the most part the places I go to have huge halls w picnic tables and speed lines for sandwiches,pizza, burger,fast food..outside massive racks to ditch your skis and poles and down some food and drink..w a complete random availability of seating,when somebody stands up after finishing,someone else sits down to start eating..who you are sitting with is insignificant in my experience..
The stuff I am hearing about is personal igloos ,yurts and rooms within restaurants w doors to isolate you from other guests..all this sounds beyond depressing to me because people watching is an absolute favorite of mine during ski outings..not looking forward to looking at myself in a tent or yurt..
 
  • Like
Reactions: jmdirt
I was blown away by hearing and reading about what restaurants are doing to accommodate diners in the first winter of Covid. I am a Mammoth person,but I also like Tahoe,Utah and Colorado..I dream to ski Idaho this year or British Columbia if one of my lotto tickets pays out..
I just can't wrap my head around how ski lodge dining will work. For the most part the places I go to have huge halls w picnic tables and speed lines for sandwiches,pizza, burger,fast food..outside massive racks to ditch your skis and poles and down some food and drink..w a complete random availability of seating,when somebody stands up after finishing,someone else sits down to start eating..who you are sitting with is insignificant in my experience..
The stuff I am hearing about is personal igloos ,yurts and rooms within restaurants w doors to isolate you from other guests..all this sounds beyond depressing to me because people watching is an absolute favorite of mine during ski outings..not looking forward to looking at myself in a tent or yurt..
Welcome to our new reality where many experiences won't be the same as before C19. Skiing has always been fairly social out of the very nature of getting on a hill and personal safety. Skiing is safer if someone is with you. Now everyone will be wearing balaclavas and getting reservations for lift access.
Canada and Utah were on my agenda last year and the shutdown was very disappointing. Fortunately for most of us, cycling is an outlet but racing is a no-go in the US and likely will be shut down for part of 2021. We will be whining a-plenty and hope all here that miss the outdoors/indoors can hold on until a solution emerges. At least we can get some therapy discussing this together, yes?
 
  • Sad
Reactions: Cookster15

TRENDING THREADS