A Good Article to Better Explain the "Over 70" Issue

[SRF]

On 3/19/2020 at 2:49 PM, JennyB1977 said:

I am going to get a bit in the weeds. Coronaviruses are like noroviruses and rhinoviruses. They are large families of viruses. Within each family there are types. COVID-19 is a type of coronavirus. Coronaviruses normally cause mild to moderate upper-respiratory illness, including the common cold.

 

Thank you.

 

I over simplified. 🙂

 

Although technically, the virus is the SARS-CoV-2 and COVID 19 is the disease it causes.

 

 

[SRF]

14 hours ago, Elaine5715 said:

 

The last line of the second paragraph is telling.

 

It is likely that many people have had COVID 19, but only had mild, cold like symptoms, recovered and have gone on.

 

Remember, the number of cases are based on those sick enough to seek medical attention.

 

However, with more widespread testing, we will have a better idea.  Except, as I understand it, the tests will tell you if you have it CURRENTLY or not.  It actually detects the presence of the virus.  So we will still not know how many had it and got over it.

[clo]

1 minute ago, SRF said:

 

However, with more widespread testing,

I read yesterday that they're cutting back on testing.It's using too much PPE what they need in the hospitals. They're now saying it you get mild symptoms to stay home and monitor it. And a positive or a negative isnt' the be all and end all.

[njhorseman]

2 hours ago, SRF said:

 

The last line of the second paragraph is telling.

 

It is likely that many people have had COVID 19, but only had mild, cold like symptoms, recovered and have gone on.

 

Remember, the number of cases are based on those sick enough to seek medical attention.

 

However, with more widespread testing, we will have a better idea.  Except, as I understand it, the tests will tell you if you have it CURRENTLY or not.  It actually detects the presence of the virus.  So we will still not know how many had it and got over it.

Eventually they'll be able to identify who had it by testing blood for the presence of antibodies. They can make a reasonable statistical estimate from a properly drawn sample of the population. But that's pretty far down the pecking order of things to do right now.

[chipmaster]

You got a new pathogen that attacks the respiratory track, hmm why would it be a surprise those with weaker respiratory or weakness to secondary things be more at risk, new virus attacks everyone equally.

 

Those that are healthy or have immune systems that are robust with out going into overdrive show little symptoms and possible recovery without knowing anything is wrong ( think all those spring breakers ).

 

While the old and those overweight, diabetic, or just weak for other reason will struggle with the new pathogen, exactly what we are seeing across the world, old, weak, and those with secondary medical conditions are all at risk.

 

Seem obvious those that are weak simply need to practice more caution,  now what will the hospitals do/choose when they need to decide to save is also skewing the mortality rate.  Likely a lot of the older and at risk could be saved, but when given a choice who do you save?

 

 

[clo]

3 hours ago, njhorseman said:

Eventually they'll be able to identify who had it by testing blood for the presence of antibodies. They can make a reasonable statistical estimate Rfrom a properly drawn sample of the population. But that's pretty far down the pecking order of things to do right now.

Really? So they're going for a serological antigen/antibody test? Is that pretty unusual?

[londonben]

22 minutes ago, clo said:

Really? So they're going for a serological antigen/antibody test? Is that pretty unusual?

This went out in the UK last week.

https://www.channel4.com/news/rapid-coronavirus-testing-kit-developed-slashing-results-time-for-covid-19-diagnosis

 

Ben.

[londonben]

This 3 days ago.

https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-uk-plans-to-buy-antibody-tests-which-may-be-gamechanger-in-fighting-covid-19-spread-11960554

 

 

[clo]

6 minutes ago, londonben said:

This 3 days ago.

https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-uk-plans-to-buy-antibody-tests-which-may-be-gamechanger-in-fighting-covid-19-spread-11960554

 

 

https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/03/new-blood-tests-antibodies-could-show-true-scale-coronavirus-pandemic

[SRF]

On 3/22/2020 at 11:02 AM, clo said:

I read yesterday that they're cutting back on testing.It's using too much PPE what they need in the hospitals. They're now saying it you get mild symptoms to stay home and monitor it. And a positive or a negative isnt' the be all and end all.

 

Agreed.  

 

EXCEPT, that people are basing plans on the numbers, when it is known that the "number of cases" is GROSSLY under reported.

[SRF]

On 3/22/2020 at 5:02 PM, londonben said:

This 3 days ago.

https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-uk-plans-to-buy-antibody-tests-which-may-be-gamechanger-in-fighting-covid-19-spread-11960554

 

 

 

Finally, someone actually doing some epidemiology

 

[clo]

1 hour ago, SRF said:

 

Agreed.  

 

EXCEPT, that people are basing plans on the numbers, when it is known that the "number of cases" is GROSSLY under reported.

BUT. They still need the data. And, yes, an antibody/antigen test is IMO the way to go. I used to do loads of testing for WHO. Batches of sera would come in by the 100s and generally get 'run' when I had the time.

[SRF]

We need BOTH tests.