Originally Posted by Bwana:
Once again, don't come in this thread with some kind of political agenda, or you will be shown the door. If you want to go that route, there is a thread about this in DC.
Originally Posted by Dartgod:
People, there is a lot of good information in this thread, let's try to keep the petty bickering to a minimum.
We all have varying opinions about the impact of this, the numbers, etc. We will all never agree with each other. But we can all keep it civil.
Thanks!
Click here for the original OP:
Spoiler!
Apparently the CoronaVirus can survive on a inanimate objects, such as door knobs, for 9 days.
California coronavirus case could be first spread within U.S. community, CDC says
By SOUMYA KARLAMANGLA, JACLYN COSGROVE
FEB. 26, 2020 8:04 PM
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention is investigating what could be the first case of novel coronavirus in the United States involving a patient in California who neither recently traveled out of the country nor was in contact with someone who did.
“At this time, the patient’s exposure is unknown. It’s possible this could be an instance of community spread of COVID-19, which would be the first time this has happened in the United States,” the CDC said in a statement. “Community spread means spread of an illness for which the source of infection is unknown. It’s also possible, however, that the patient may have been exposed to a returned traveler who was infected.”
The individual is a resident of Solano County and is receiving medical care in Sacramento County, according to the state Department of Public Health.
The CDC said the “case was detected through the U.S. public health system — picked up by astute clinicians.”
Officials at UC Davis Medical Center expanded on what the federal agency might have meant by that in an email sent Wednesday, as reported by the Davis Enterprise newspaper.
The patient arrived at UC Davis Medical Center from another hospital Feb. 19 and “had already been intubated, was on a ventilator, and given droplet protection orders because of an undiagnosed and suspected viral condition,” according to an email sent by UC Davis officials that was obtained by the Davis Enterprise.
The staff at UC Davis requested COVID-19 testing by the CDC, but because the patient didn’t fit the CDC’s existing criteria for the virus, a test wasn’t immediately administered, according to the email. The CDC then ordered the test Sunday, and results were announced Wednesday. Hospital administrators reportedly said in the email that despite these issues, there has been minimal exposure at the hospital because of safety protocols they have in place.
A UC Davis Health spokesperson declined Wednesday evening to share the email with The Times.
Since Feb. 2, more than 8,400 returning travelers from China have entered California, according to the state health department. They have been advised to self-quarantine for 14 days and limit interactions with others as much as possible, officials said.
“This is a new virus, and while we are still learning about it, there is a lot we already know,” Dr. Sonia Angell, director of the California Department of Public Health, said in a statement. “We have been anticipating the potential for such a case in the U.S., and given our close familial, social and business relationships with China, it is not unexpected that the first case in the U.S. would be in California.”
It is not clear how the person became infected, but public health workers could not identify any contacts with people who had traveled to China or other areas where the virus is widespread. That raises concern that the virus is spreading in the United States, creating a challenge for public health officials, experts say.
“It’s the first signal that we could be having silent transmission in the community,” said Lawrence Gostin, director of the World Health Organization Collaborating Center on National and Global Health Law. “It probably means there are many more cases out there, and it probably means this individual has infected others, and now it’s a race to try to find out who that person has infected.”
On Tuesday, the CDC offered its most serious warning to date that the United States should expect and prepare for the coronavirus to become a more widespread health issue.
“Ultimately, we expect we will see coronavirus spread in this country,” said Nancy Messonnier, director of the CDC’s National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases. “It’s not so much a question of if, but a question of when.”
According to the CDC’s latest count Wednesday morning, 59 U.S. residents have tested positive for the new strain of coronavirus — 42 of whom are repatriated citizens from a Diamond Princess cruise. That number has grown by two since Messonnier’s last count Tuesday, although the CDC was not immediately available to offer details on the additional cases.
More than 82,000 cases of coronavirus have been reported globally, and more than 2,700 people have died, with the majority in mainland China, the epicenter of the outbreak.
But public health leaders have repeatedly reminded residents that the health risk from the novel coronavirus to the general public remains low.
“While COVID-19 has a high transmission rate, it has a low mortality rate,” the state Department of Public Health said in a statement Wednesday. “From the international data we have, of those who have tested positive for COVID-19, approximately 80% do not exhibit symptoms that would require hospitalization. There have been no confirmed deaths related to COVID-19 in the United States to date.”
CDC officials have also warned that although the virus is likely to spread in U.S. communities, the flu still poses a greater risk.
Gostin said the news of potential silent transmission does not eliminate the possibility of containing the virus in the U.S. and preventing an outbreak.
“There are few enough cases that we should at least try,” he said. “Most of us are not optimistic that that will be successful, but we’re still in the position to try.”
I just decided to ask Google and the first document that came up was from the State of Michigan Health Department.
Concern: I have read that “natural immunity” (getting the disease) is safer and works
better than getting vaccinated.
General Responses:
It is true that natural infection almost always causes better immunity than vaccines.
Because after a single natural infection, you often get immunity (like with
measles or chickenpox) whereas you generally need 2 or more doses of a vaccine
to be protected. https://www.michigan.gov/documents/m...y_479884_7.pdf
I feel like I went back to science class for Covid these last few months. Took AP Biology and Physics in high school but did nothing but liberal arts in college. [Reply]
Originally Posted by MahomesMagic:
I just decided to ask Google and the first document that came up was from the State of Michigan Health Department.
Concern: I have read that “natural immunity” (getting the disease) is safer and works
better than getting vaccinated.
General Responses:
It is true that natural infection almost always causes better immunity than vaccines.
Because after a single natural infection, you often get immunity (like with
measles or chickenpox) whereas you generally need 2 or more doses of a vaccine
to be protected. https://www.michigan.gov/documents/m...y_479884_7.pdf
I feel like I went back to science class for Covid these last few months. Took AP Biology and Physics in high school but did nothing but liberal arts in college.
Originally Posted by Kidd Lex:
Lots and lots of great and exciting science to read about in this thread and all over the internet. Real clinical trials and studies showing that vaccines work and immunity is at a minimum (with some exceptions) 6-12 months and almost certainly long lasting given what they’ve found regarding the bodies immune response both short and long term. Only time will tell us how long, but my best guess is many years to decades.
The first article on CNN seemed more like a hopeful aspiration. Well, if we could know all the ins and outs of how natural immunity was conferred for such and such we should be able to...
Sounds more like a Big Pharma Ted Talk.
The second one I skimmed but did not see the point made so you will have to spell that one out. [Reply]
Originally Posted by MahomesMagic:
The first article on CNN seemed more like a hopeful aspiration. Well, if we could know all the ins and outs of how natural immunity was conferred for such and such we should be able to...
Sounds more like a Big Pharma Ted Talk.
The second one I skimmed but did not see the point made so you will have to spell that one out.
Appreciate you caring to look. The second one is just the abstract, you have to click on the actual rest of it to get the whole paper but essentially they found that the T and B cell response (critical for long term immunity) was robust and strong. Very very good news and quite frankly to be expected because that’s how most viruses work in relation to our immune system. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Kidd Lex:
Appreciate you caring to look. The second one is just the abstract, you have to click on the actual rest of it to get the whole paper but essentially they found that the T and B cell response (critical for long term immunity) was robust and strong. Very very good news and quite frankly to be expected because that’s how most viruses work in relation to our immune system.
Ok, but how does this make the vaccine better than what our bodies already do?
We know that natural immunity to SARS lasts 17 years. I don't see too many vaccine trials claiming they will get anything close to that for sars2 [Reply]
Originally Posted by MahomesMagic:
Good. I trust almost all papers more BC, Before Covid.
I don’t follow. That’s not how the scientific method works. I would agree that opinion pieces and editorials are all over the place (with everything ie Covid chocolate, fats, coffee, etc...) but the RCT’s being completed and Covid studies are by far our greatest way out of this mess. The science that has been underway for decades that allowed this new dawn of mRNA vaccines to become available is game changing for humanity. [Reply]
Originally Posted by MahomesMagic:
Ok, but how does this make the vaccine better than what our bodies already do?
We know that natural immunity to SARS lasts 17 years. I don't see too many vaccine trials claiming they will get anything close to that for sars2
I literally linked an article and a study explaining how that works:
“Vaccines have other advantages over natural infections. For one, they can be designed to focus the immune system against specific antigens that elicit better responses.
For instance, the human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine elicits a stronger immune response than infection by the virus itself. One reason for this is that the vaccine contains high concentrations of a viral coat protein, more than what would occur in a natural infection. This triggers strongly neutralizing antibodies, making the vaccine very effective at preventing infection.
The natural immunity against HPV is especially weak, as the virus uses various tactics to evade the host immune system. Many viruses, including HPV, have proteins that block the immune response or simply lie low to avoid detection. Indeed, a vaccine that provides accessible antigens in the absence of these other proteins may allow us to control the response in a way that a natural infection does not.” [Reply]
Originally Posted by Kidd Lex:
I don’t follow. That’s not how the scientific method works. I would agree that opinion pieces and editorials are all over the place (with everything ie Covid chocolate, fats, coffee, etc...) but the RCT’s being completed and Covid studies are by far our greatest way out of this mess. The science that has been underway for decades that allowed this new dawn of mRNA vaccines to become available is game changing for humanity.
I'll be glad to get my life back to where it was. I have no interest in the new Health Technocrats promising me they can save me.
Walk into a supermarket and look at the crap on the shelves. If people actually cared about health they would look much different. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Kidd Lex:
I literally linked an article and a study explaining how that works:
“Vaccines have other advantages over natural infections. For one, they can be designed to focus the immune system against specific antigens that elicit better responses.
For instance, the human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine elicits a stronger immune response than infection by the virus itself. One reason for this is that the vaccine contains high concentrations of a viral coat protein, more than what would occur in a natural infection. This triggers strongly neutralizing antibodies, making the vaccine very effective at preventing infection.
The natural immunity against HPV is especially weak, as the virus uses various tactics to evade the host immune system. Many viruses, including HPV, have proteins that block the immune response or simply lie low to avoid detection. Indeed, a vaccine that provides accessible antigens in the absence of these other proteins may allow us to control the response in a way that a natural infection does not.”
That's the Pharma sales pitch. My understanding is that it normally doesn't come out that way. I have no idea about HPV and if this "improved immune response" is real or something like putting vitamins in white bread for fortification. SarsCov2 is the one we are dealing with here. All I heard from Fauci was a promise that it couldn't be harmful. [Reply]
United Airlines Holdings Inc., reportedly began operating charter flights on Friday to better position Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine for distribution once the inoculation is approved by the Food and Drug Administration.
United will fly the chartered planes between Brussels International Airport and Chicago O’Hare International Airport as part of the “first mass air shipment of a vaccine,” supported by the FAA, The Wall Street Journal reported.
The news of securing the charter flights comes as Pfizer has started to lay the foundation to move the vaccine quickly once the FDA and other regulators approve it.
According to the Journal, Pfizer has expanded storage capacity at specific distribution sites in Pleasant Prairie, Wisc., and Karlsruhe, Germany. The drug company plans to use suitcase-size frozen storage in cargo planes and trucks to distribute the vaccine around the world.
Pfizer and United Airlines did not immediately respond to Fox News' request for comment.
United Airlines will be allowed to carry five times the amount of dry ice normally permitted on board to keep the vaccine at the necessary cold temperature.
Other cargo and passenger airlines have also begun preparing for future vaccine shipments, the Journal reported.
Previously, Andrew Peterson, assistant professor of philosophy at George Mason University had brought up the complex issue of transporting and distributing the vaccine due to the fact it must be stored at temperatures of minus 70 degrees Celsius or below.
“The logistics of distributing the Pfizer vaccine, if proven to be safe and effective, will no doubt be a Herculean task,” Peterson told Fox News. “Beyond the challenge of physically transporting the vaccine by air and land to distribution centers across America and internationally, there are the additional obstacles of keeping the vaccine at sub-zero temperatures and monitoring deliveries for theft.”
Last week, Pfizer and partner BioNTech requested an emergency approval for their coronavirus vaccine candidate in a bid to get it out to the global population as soon as possible.
The vaccine has been called more than 90 percent effective in percent effective at stopping people from getting sick during phase 3 trials. [Reply]
Originally Posted by TLO:
The vaccine has been called more than 90 percent effective in percent effective at stopping people from getting sick during phase 3 trials.
How do they test this metric? Expose people to the virus? [Reply]
Originally Posted by Otter:
How do they test this metric? Expose people to the virus?
You have two groups: a placebo group and a vaccine group. The groups should be comparable in distribution (similar distribution of age, race, sex). Over a period of several weeks, you establish the number of infections in both groups. If the sample sizes are sufficient, and once you reach a certain number of infections, you can establish the risk of infection after receiving the vaccine. That risk reduction is the efficacy of the vaccine. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Otter:
How do they test this metric? Expose people to the virus?
You have a double blind RCT and allow time to do its thing. If they had done a challenge trial we’d all be getting vaccinated by now but ethics and all that.... this would be a fun one to examine in a philosophy class some day. [Reply]
When conducting research, scientists use the scientific method to collect measurable, empirical evidence in an experiment related to a hypothesis (often in the form of an if/then statement), the results aiming to support or contradict a theory.
"As a field biologist, my favorite part of the scientific method is being in the field collecting the data," Jaime Tanner, a professor of biology at Marlboro College, told Live Science. "But what really makes that fun is knowing that you are trying to answer an interesting question. So the first step in identifying questions and generating possible answers (hypotheses) is also very important and is a creative process. Then once you collect the data you analyze it to see if your hypothesis is supported or not."
The steps of the scientific method go something like this:
Make an observation or observations.
Ask questions about the observations and gather information.
Form a hypothesis — a tentative description of what's been observed, and make predictions based on that hypothesis.
Test the hypothesis and predictions in an experiment that can be reproduced.
Analyze the data and draw conclusions; accept or reject the hypothesis or modify the hypothesis if necessary.
Reproduce the experiment until there are no discrepancies between observations and theory. "Replication of methods and results is my favorite step in the scientific method," Moshe Pritsker, a former post-doctoral researcher at Harvard Medical School and CEO of JoVE, told Live Science. "The reproducibility of published experiments is the foundation of science. No reproducibility – no science."
Some key underpinnings to the scientific method:
The hypothesis must be testable and falsifiable, according to North Carolina State University. Falsifiable means that there must be a possible negative answer to the hypothesis.
Research must involve deductive reasoning and inductive reasoning. Deductive reasoning is the process of using true premises to reach a logical true conclusion while inductive reasoning takes the opposite approach.
An experiment should include a dependent variable (which does not change) and an independent variable (which does change).
An experiment should include an experimental group and a control group. The control group is what the experimental group is compared against.