OK. Now I'm starting to get a bit irritated. I warned my wife there would be runs on the stores several weeks ago and we ought to get some non-perishable food. She pretty much told me to shove it--that I didn't know what I was talking about. Now the local stores are empty, not just of sanitizer, but most food. And she's blaming Trump.
I'm not sure how she expects a president to keep shelves stocked in a capitalist economy.
But what really irritates me is that people didn't buy just a bit more, they went all out at emptying the stores. I really didn't expect empty shelves for most food items. Do people have empty refrigerators, freezers and pantries during normal times? Empty space that would allow them to do massive stocking? I guess they can fill up the kid's bedroom with canned goods.
But from what I can read and infer, production and shipping of most items has not been severely impacted. Supplies should be getting to the stores, just like Amazon continues to deliver (items not associated with cleaning and sanitization).
Another thing I had worried about early, but at least recently have discounted, is the possibility that electricity or water supplies could be curtailed. But I haven't heard of any lockdowns where those essentials have been cutoff. Not Wuhan, not Italy, not even the one-mile radius that New York imposed. Apparently, government is at least competent enough not to intentionally start riots and kill people with no electricity or water.
Second, HEB (our local grocery monopoly) has apparently said it may close some stores--temporarily? My wife points to the empty shelves. But HEB prides itself, and advertises that it buys local. But there are no stories on the news or online that supplies cannot get to the stores, only that they are being sold out. Intermittent empty shelves may create some unhappy customers. But same input (slow) and same output (quick) seems to me to imply that profitability should not be affected. Why would a store close unless their supply stopped or unless customers stopped buying?
Restaurants to me seem to be the highest risk small business in my area. I know I won't eat in a fast food restaurant until this is over. They didn't clean their tables even before this 'pandemic'. But I can take a Clorox wipe with me to a sit-down restaurant and feel fairly safe--as long as no one is coughing around me.
It's the actual extent of the spread of the virus through the community that seems to present the greatest unknown, and worry. Johns Hopkins says 43 people in Texas (out of 29 million residents) have the virus. I assume they are quarantined or self isolated. They may be the people at Lackland they brought in from the cruise ships. Anyway, either the virus has spread unnoticed (i.e., most people get mild symptoms), or very few people have it.
Now minimizing social distance and trips out seems wise. Having a decent stock of food and cleaning supplies is always good.
Better yet would be widespread testing of everyone to show that 43 out of 29 million is the true number of corona virus cases in Texas. And we would be free to go out! Testing only the severely sick may be economically practical, but it is a fool's solution if you want to continue with a strong economy.
I'm assuming the government is doing whatever it can, as quickly as it can, to prepare for a more significant spread.
But it ought to be also working to get widespread testing for the general public to allow for a calming effect, and for targeted care of the sick and those who may spread the virus.
It's been warm the past week. I hope spring is here for good, and the virus will back off.
Saturday, March 14, 2020
Wednesday, March 11, 2020
Speculation on Coronavirus V - It's Not the Flu
This morning, I read two articles (relevant to this post). One was from a doctor in Italy who has seen his hospital overwhelmed with corona virus victims. Nothing else is being supported. Most are dying or nearly dying with double pneumonia. He says many doctors and nurses are infected and have spread it to their families. The patients who aren't going to make it aren't getting meds to save them for those that they will help. Then I read an article by a retired Lt Col marine. He thinks the stats are much worse for the flu. No need to panic. Just wash your hands, spray or wipe everything, and minimize social activities.
According to the marine's stats, if I happen to get the virus, I have a 3.6% chance of dying (my age group). He doesn't list my somewhat younger wife with asthma.
But suppose a large percentage of the elderly people you know are all in the hospital with pneumonia. How do you think they are going to help the people with less fatal problems? It's not going to happen. If you break your leg or have an ear infection, will you want to go to the hospital? Do you think they would spend time on you even if you do?
Hopefully, it won't get that bad in my area or yours. But it might. Acting like its just another flu is a ridiculous response.
And I don't know what your local situation is, but there's been no hand-sanitizer, clorox, or iso-propyl alcohol on the shelves in my area for a couple of weeks. No masks either. And it isn't available on Amazon. How do people continue to wash, wipe and spray if they don't have any?
According to the marine's stats, if I happen to get the virus, I have a 3.6% chance of dying (my age group). He doesn't list my somewhat younger wife with asthma.
But suppose a large percentage of the elderly people you know are all in the hospital with pneumonia. How do you think they are going to help the people with less fatal problems? It's not going to happen. If you break your leg or have an ear infection, will you want to go to the hospital? Do you think they would spend time on you even if you do?
Hopefully, it won't get that bad in my area or yours. But it might. Acting like its just another flu is a ridiculous response.
And I don't know what your local situation is, but there's been no hand-sanitizer, clorox, or iso-propyl alcohol on the shelves in my area for a couple of weeks. No masks either. And it isn't available on Amazon. How do people continue to wash, wipe and spray if they don't have any?
Monday, March 9, 2020
Speculation on Coronavirus IV - Nonsense Reporting
I was about done with my series on the corona virus. But today's lead posts on Fox and the New York Post made me reconsider. For example, on Fox, one post said coronavirus is very transmissible. The next one said it is less than that of the flu. Which is right?
But first of all, I'm tired with 'the panic is worse than the virus.' Tell that to the people that died, or the people stuck on infected cruise ships, or locked down in their apartments for over a month in Wuhan.
I'm also tired of comparing world-wide flu strain deaths (68,000 to 80,000 per year??) with a new virus (3,400+ deaths). The comparison is just nonsense unless you are trying to convince someone that covid-19 is not that bad. Even then, the comparison remains nonsense. We have flu vaccines that almost anyone can afford. Everyone knows they have a chance of getting the flu, and they know the process to seek medical care. I defy anyone to effectively defend the flu infection numbers they report. The deaths are probably pretty accurate, but no one has ever tested anyone I've known for the flu. If they don't have a fever, they claim it's a virus instead of bacteria. In either case, they treat the symptoms.
With the new coronavirus, they have tested a relatively small group of people, and for some reason, say they are "presumptively" positive. That tells me they are making a guess. When they come down with the coronavirus and enter the hospital, they claim an active case.
My point is, it is presumably (I'm guessing too), early in the spread of coronavirus. It appears that no one knows whether it is actually worse or not as bad as the flu. Though the high incidence of death among the elderly and those with existing health conditions suggest it is significantly worse.
Maybe it will slowly decline as warm (and humid?) weather comes to the northern hemisphere. But that is a guess; maybe a good guess based upon experience with other viruses like the flu strains.
But the flu comes back every fall and winter. It's quite possible coronavirus will spread out through the population and come back harder next fall. Will we have a vaccine? Some reports have indicated that early reports of vaccines for previous viruses like SARS have not come about. They complained that funding was dropped, and I suppose there was no profit anticipation for the pharmaceutical companies. Will vaccine efforts be dropped in this case too?
Finally, a few words about the Wuhan lockdown. From what I've read, China also locked down each apartment complex in the city. People were getting their food by large scale delivery from the groceries. That is a much more extensive lockdown than I think is feasible in about any US city. New York might be the possible exception. In most cities, most people do not live in mass apartment complexes. Instead, they are in individual dwellings. A city like San Antonio has a huge population, but I would guess that over 75% of the population lives in individual dwellings throughout the county. In such a situation, people either have a stock of 2 months of food, or they all have to go to the grocery. And much of the population won't have the opportunity to stock for that long, or the resources or space to do it.
Further, no US governor or mayor wants to inconvenience their voters or damage the economy in their area. That doesn't mean that some democrats wouldn't be unhappy causing mild panic with ineffective states of emergency that might hurt President Trump. But actually locking down neighborhoods, towns, or cities with criminal penalties isn't something most politicians in the US will do until it is too late.
My take away is that we just don't know. Be as prepared as you can, but don't hoard. Take precautions to minimize your chance of infection. Don't attend large functions just because your mayor or governor says the risk is low. If they actually develop and offer a vaccine, take it!
But first of all, I'm tired with 'the panic is worse than the virus.' Tell that to the people that died, or the people stuck on infected cruise ships, or locked down in their apartments for over a month in Wuhan.
I'm also tired of comparing world-wide flu strain deaths (68,000 to 80,000 per year??) with a new virus (3,400+ deaths). The comparison is just nonsense unless you are trying to convince someone that covid-19 is not that bad. Even then, the comparison remains nonsense. We have flu vaccines that almost anyone can afford. Everyone knows they have a chance of getting the flu, and they know the process to seek medical care. I defy anyone to effectively defend the flu infection numbers they report. The deaths are probably pretty accurate, but no one has ever tested anyone I've known for the flu. If they don't have a fever, they claim it's a virus instead of bacteria. In either case, they treat the symptoms.
With the new coronavirus, they have tested a relatively small group of people, and for some reason, say they are "presumptively" positive. That tells me they are making a guess. When they come down with the coronavirus and enter the hospital, they claim an active case.
My point is, it is presumably (I'm guessing too), early in the spread of coronavirus. It appears that no one knows whether it is actually worse or not as bad as the flu. Though the high incidence of death among the elderly and those with existing health conditions suggest it is significantly worse.
Maybe it will slowly decline as warm (and humid?) weather comes to the northern hemisphere. But that is a guess; maybe a good guess based upon experience with other viruses like the flu strains.
But the flu comes back every fall and winter. It's quite possible coronavirus will spread out through the population and come back harder next fall. Will we have a vaccine? Some reports have indicated that early reports of vaccines for previous viruses like SARS have not come about. They complained that funding was dropped, and I suppose there was no profit anticipation for the pharmaceutical companies. Will vaccine efforts be dropped in this case too?
Finally, a few words about the Wuhan lockdown. From what I've read, China also locked down each apartment complex in the city. People were getting their food by large scale delivery from the groceries. That is a much more extensive lockdown than I think is feasible in about any US city. New York might be the possible exception. In most cities, most people do not live in mass apartment complexes. Instead, they are in individual dwellings. A city like San Antonio has a huge population, but I would guess that over 75% of the population lives in individual dwellings throughout the county. In such a situation, people either have a stock of 2 months of food, or they all have to go to the grocery. And much of the population won't have the opportunity to stock for that long, or the resources or space to do it.
Further, no US governor or mayor wants to inconvenience their voters or damage the economy in their area. That doesn't mean that some democrats wouldn't be unhappy causing mild panic with ineffective states of emergency that might hurt President Trump. But actually locking down neighborhoods, towns, or cities with criminal penalties isn't something most politicians in the US will do until it is too late.
My take away is that we just don't know. Be as prepared as you can, but don't hoard. Take precautions to minimize your chance of infection. Don't attend large functions just because your mayor or governor says the risk is low. If they actually develop and offer a vaccine, take it!
Friday, March 6, 2020
Joe Biden's Mental Decline
There was a story on Legal Insurrection this morning where someone used the term 'cognitive decline' when talking about Joe Biden's inability to talk through a concept. I think that's better than 'mental decline' but hated to reuse someone else's terminology.
What I actually wanted to talk about was how I think the media and DNC are going to protect their presidential front runner, Joe Biden, from any exposure of his probable mental disability. That is, any poor performance significant enough to impact his chance of being elected.
Personally, from what I've seen of transcripts and short videos, it looks to me like he's got some kind of Alzheimer's or general senility that prevents him from speaking coherently when he's not reading from a teleprompter.
If that is so, what I expect the DNC to do is cancel any future Democratic debates, especially any that are two hours or longer. They may have one or two that are an hour long, if they think Joe's meds or his stamina can last that long. But I really suspect they will announce that the multiple previous debates plus all the town halls have been enough to present the primary voters with a stark choice between Joe and Bernie.
That will have the additional benefit of the DNC not having to change the rules to eliminate Tulsi Gabbard from future debates.
If Joe is the democratic nominee, and President Trump wants debates, I expect Joe will claim that he is unwilling to be on the same stage as an illegitimate president and reprobate like Trump. Obviously, I think President Trump is a great president, I'm using words I think democrats would say.
All of that would mean potential voters won't get to see anything but a few brief, scripted, teleprompted speeches by Joe Biden between now and November 2020. If, as I suspect, 80% of the voters have not seen anything of Biden since he was VP, this will greatly improve his chances of winning.
What I actually wanted to talk about was how I think the media and DNC are going to protect their presidential front runner, Joe Biden, from any exposure of his probable mental disability. That is, any poor performance significant enough to impact his chance of being elected.
Personally, from what I've seen of transcripts and short videos, it looks to me like he's got some kind of Alzheimer's or general senility that prevents him from speaking coherently when he's not reading from a teleprompter.
If that is so, what I expect the DNC to do is cancel any future Democratic debates, especially any that are two hours or longer. They may have one or two that are an hour long, if they think Joe's meds or his stamina can last that long. But I really suspect they will announce that the multiple previous debates plus all the town halls have been enough to present the primary voters with a stark choice between Joe and Bernie.
That will have the additional benefit of the DNC not having to change the rules to eliminate Tulsi Gabbard from future debates.
If Joe is the democratic nominee, and President Trump wants debates, I expect Joe will claim that he is unwilling to be on the same stage as an illegitimate president and reprobate like Trump. Obviously, I think President Trump is a great president, I'm using words I think democrats would say.
All of that would mean potential voters won't get to see anything but a few brief, scripted, teleprompted speeches by Joe Biden between now and November 2020. If, as I suspect, 80% of the voters have not seen anything of Biden since he was VP, this will greatly improve his chances of winning.
Tuesday, March 3, 2020
Speculation on Coronavirus III - The San Antonio Error
My planned discussion of the Wuhan lockdown will have to wait for another day. I live north of San Antonio, and yesterday, the CDC released one person from Lackland Air Force Base that had supposedly finished quarantine with two negative tests for COVID-19. Then a third test came back positive.
I don't know whether the person had recovered, or was never ill. But he/she went to the Holiday Inn Express, then on to one of the city's bigger malls. The individual ate at the food court and shopped in several stores. The individual was then sent back to Lackland. The mall was closed and 'disinfected.' The city and county declared medical states of emergency and forbade any quarantined or formerly quarantined individual from entering the city or county.
I thought it was peculiar when the CDC distributed returning citizens at various military bases across the U.S. I figured they must not have sufficient quarantine capacity at any one facility. But it sure seemed like a recipe for causing multiple contagion points. And Lackland is awfully close to the center of San Antonio.
I've been telling my wife to stock up in case there are runs on food and other materials, and she's been effectively ignoring me. That's a polite way of describing her reaction. Then late yesterday, she went to the store to get some things. Apparently, most of HEB (the Texas grocery monopoly) and Walmart were both nearly empty of food and overrun with people hauling water and other stuff out. She was pretty upset.
Most of the conservative bloggers I read are saying the coronavirus is nothing more deadly than a new strain of flu. And they may be right. But that doesn't take into account the panic the public will show from all of the 'world ending' news reports. And San Antonio's state of emergency is sure to rile up everyone down here in south Texas.
FYI San Antonio is a true democratic hotbed. The surrounding counties are republican, but San Antonio and it's county, Bexar, are democrat. So a democrat mayor issued a state of emergency.
I don't like panic inducing news and actions. I do advocate being sure you have a reasonable water and food supply. But don't overdue it. Make moderate purchases and keep a good long-term capability that you can use for storms and long electricity outages.
On the other hand, I do agree with the city's actions at forbidding previously quarantined people entry into the city. Unless they happen to live here. Since the subject individual went to a Holiday Inn, I presume the individual is not a resident of south Texas. That agreement would change if the CDC could show that it's testing and isolation procedures were reliable.
But having two tests showing negative, followed by a positive (after release of an individual) indicates one of a few possibilities. First, illness from the COVID-19 might be recurring. It appears to go away, but you still have the virus, and it takes hold again. Since the individual seemed one of the first to be released, I think it likely he/she had shown no symptoms. So this possibility likely didn't happen in this case. [Update: I've read news accounts where this individual initially tested positive, so this might be the situation with this individual.] Second, the quarantine process is not very effective. The individual probably got exposed sometime in the 14-day no-symptom period, and the density of the virus did not increase to a detectable level till the last test. This seems the most probable situation and suggests an extended quarantine period and better isolation procedures are needed. The third possibility is that the test is just not reliable. That could easily be the case.
Any of the three possibilities are worrisome. I don't think they can contact all of the possible people that were exposed. It probably numbered in the hundreds. I guess we'll find out just how contagious COVID-19 is, a little sooner than I expected.
I don't know whether the person had recovered, or was never ill. But he/she went to the Holiday Inn Express, then on to one of the city's bigger malls. The individual ate at the food court and shopped in several stores. The individual was then sent back to Lackland. The mall was closed and 'disinfected.' The city and county declared medical states of emergency and forbade any quarantined or formerly quarantined individual from entering the city or county.
I thought it was peculiar when the CDC distributed returning citizens at various military bases across the U.S. I figured they must not have sufficient quarantine capacity at any one facility. But it sure seemed like a recipe for causing multiple contagion points. And Lackland is awfully close to the center of San Antonio.
I've been telling my wife to stock up in case there are runs on food and other materials, and she's been effectively ignoring me. That's a polite way of describing her reaction. Then late yesterday, she went to the store to get some things. Apparently, most of HEB (the Texas grocery monopoly) and Walmart were both nearly empty of food and overrun with people hauling water and other stuff out. She was pretty upset.
Most of the conservative bloggers I read are saying the coronavirus is nothing more deadly than a new strain of flu. And they may be right. But that doesn't take into account the panic the public will show from all of the 'world ending' news reports. And San Antonio's state of emergency is sure to rile up everyone down here in south Texas.
FYI San Antonio is a true democratic hotbed. The surrounding counties are republican, but San Antonio and it's county, Bexar, are democrat. So a democrat mayor issued a state of emergency.
I don't like panic inducing news and actions. I do advocate being sure you have a reasonable water and food supply. But don't overdue it. Make moderate purchases and keep a good long-term capability that you can use for storms and long electricity outages.
On the other hand, I do agree with the city's actions at forbidding previously quarantined people entry into the city. Unless they happen to live here. Since the subject individual went to a Holiday Inn, I presume the individual is not a resident of south Texas. That agreement would change if the CDC could show that it's testing and isolation procedures were reliable.
But having two tests showing negative, followed by a positive (after release of an individual) indicates one of a few possibilities. First, illness from the COVID-19 might be recurring. It appears to go away, but you still have the virus, and it takes hold again. Since the individual seemed one of the first to be released, I think it likely he/she had shown no symptoms. So this possibility likely didn't happen in this case. [Update: I've read news accounts where this individual initially tested positive, so this might be the situation with this individual.] Second, the quarantine process is not very effective. The individual probably got exposed sometime in the 14-day no-symptom period, and the density of the virus did not increase to a detectable level till the last test. This seems the most probable situation and suggests an extended quarantine period and better isolation procedures are needed. The third possibility is that the test is just not reliable. That could easily be the case.
Any of the three possibilities are worrisome. I don't think they can contact all of the possible people that were exposed. It probably numbered in the hundreds. I guess we'll find out just how contagious COVID-19 is, a little sooner than I expected.
Monday, March 2, 2020
Speculation on Coronavirus II - The Numbers
I won't give my introduction again, see my first post "An Introduction." What I will remind any readers is that I am not a doctor. This is my speculation. And it may all be nonsense.
I won't try to quote specific numbers, and here I am focusing only on China. What I saw in the reporting was that China's infected numbers grew to about 75,000 and then seemed to stall. In the meantime, numbers started growing around the world.
From all reports, it seems easy to catch. People on ships, people traveling to Italy or China, just about anybody in contact with an infected person seems to get sick.
An early BBC report from China, after they isolated the city in Wuhan, showed that they allowed people to go in, but not to come back out. At least that's what the crew reported. They then went in, and a little while later, Chinese police escorted them back out. Peculiar. Also, a recovered Chinese national claims that when he went to the hospital early in the epidemic, the Chinese medical staff were wearing full HAZMAT/infectious gear that he had seen only in movies. The Chinese seemed to think it spread easily.
So why did the Chinese numbers stop climbing? Either the numbers actually stopped climbing, the Chinese are lying, or they simply stopped testing/reporting on the numbers. I hope the former is true, but really suspect they've stopped formal testing and/or reporting.
Think about the quarantine or isolation procedure. Suppose in a city of 1 million, 20,000 people have the virus, and the government stops people from leaving the area. Would anybody enter that didn't live there? Further, suppose they had an extremely large infectious disease isolation capability at the city hospitals that could handle 1,000 people at a time. The rest (19,000) are told to self-quarantine at home. Do they go to the store for food? Or do their relatives, who then have to get the food to the infected person, do the shopping for them? Self-quarantine, except for the survival hermit out in the woods, is not going to stop person-to-person contact with the sick. Of course, everyone is going to minimize person-to-person contact and hopefully use good hygiene procedures to minimize contagion.
While the spread may be slowed, it's going to grow from an ever-greater base. 19,000 will become 25,000 then 30,000.... With the 14-day incubation period, there's going to be person-to-person contact. But now, who's going to get the test kits into the city or the medical supplies needed? I presume the Chinese army would use HAZMAT protection to deliver food, medicines and supplies. At least to the extent protective gear is available.
They say half of the population of Wuhan left before the lock-down. Some of those must have been infected and would be spreading it further.
I just don't understand a stall of the numbers. Unless masks work, or most people are on a self-sufficient homestead and do not need or desire to socialize or shop, the numbers should not have stalled. Most likely, it's the Chinese government not reporting numbers that would induce a panic.
But there might be one other situation where an infected-number stall is reasonable. Oftentimes, you need a certain 'number' of pathogens to get sick. Your body can fight off a small number, in many cases. Suppose a high-density release started the epidemic, and high population interaction extended the initial spread. Then the Chinese minimized person-to-person interaction, all of the sick started wearing masks, and good quarantine was provided to the really sick. The spread per person might drop off with each 'wave' of newly sick. Resulting in an eventual stall.
I suspect that happened with SARS. But I don't really think it happened with COVID-19. Since most of the symptoms look like flu, unless you do the right tests, it would be easy for China simply to classify most non-lethal cases as flu rather than coronavirus. Simply order the hospitals to stop doing COVID-19 tests if the patient does not need the ICU.
Anybody see any CDC or WHO reporting from on-site Chinese health facilities in the affected areas?
I won't try to quote specific numbers, and here I am focusing only on China. What I saw in the reporting was that China's infected numbers grew to about 75,000 and then seemed to stall. In the meantime, numbers started growing around the world.
From all reports, it seems easy to catch. People on ships, people traveling to Italy or China, just about anybody in contact with an infected person seems to get sick.
An early BBC report from China, after they isolated the city in Wuhan, showed that they allowed people to go in, but not to come back out. At least that's what the crew reported. They then went in, and a little while later, Chinese police escorted them back out. Peculiar. Also, a recovered Chinese national claims that when he went to the hospital early in the epidemic, the Chinese medical staff were wearing full HAZMAT/infectious gear that he had seen only in movies. The Chinese seemed to think it spread easily.
So why did the Chinese numbers stop climbing? Either the numbers actually stopped climbing, the Chinese are lying, or they simply stopped testing/reporting on the numbers. I hope the former is true, but really suspect they've stopped formal testing and/or reporting.
Think about the quarantine or isolation procedure. Suppose in a city of 1 million, 20,000 people have the virus, and the government stops people from leaving the area. Would anybody enter that didn't live there? Further, suppose they had an extremely large infectious disease isolation capability at the city hospitals that could handle 1,000 people at a time. The rest (19,000) are told to self-quarantine at home. Do they go to the store for food? Or do their relatives, who then have to get the food to the infected person, do the shopping for them? Self-quarantine, except for the survival hermit out in the woods, is not going to stop person-to-person contact with the sick. Of course, everyone is going to minimize person-to-person contact and hopefully use good hygiene procedures to minimize contagion.
While the spread may be slowed, it's going to grow from an ever-greater base. 19,000 will become 25,000 then 30,000.... With the 14-day incubation period, there's going to be person-to-person contact. But now, who's going to get the test kits into the city or the medical supplies needed? I presume the Chinese army would use HAZMAT protection to deliver food, medicines and supplies. At least to the extent protective gear is available.
They say half of the population of Wuhan left before the lock-down. Some of those must have been infected and would be spreading it further.
I just don't understand a stall of the numbers. Unless masks work, or most people are on a self-sufficient homestead and do not need or desire to socialize or shop, the numbers should not have stalled. Most likely, it's the Chinese government not reporting numbers that would induce a panic.
But there might be one other situation where an infected-number stall is reasonable. Oftentimes, you need a certain 'number' of pathogens to get sick. Your body can fight off a small number, in many cases. Suppose a high-density release started the epidemic, and high population interaction extended the initial spread. Then the Chinese minimized person-to-person interaction, all of the sick started wearing masks, and good quarantine was provided to the really sick. The spread per person might drop off with each 'wave' of newly sick. Resulting in an eventual stall.
I suspect that happened with SARS. But I don't really think it happened with COVID-19. Since most of the symptoms look like flu, unless you do the right tests, it would be easy for China simply to classify most non-lethal cases as flu rather than coronavirus. Simply order the hospitals to stop doing COVID-19 tests if the patient does not need the ICU.
Anybody see any CDC or WHO reporting from on-site Chinese health facilities in the affected areas?
Speculation on Coronavirus - An Introduction
If I actually hit the publish button, this will be one of a series of posts on the coronavirus COVID-19. It is totally my speculation about what has, is and will happen. I'm not a doctor. My Ph.D. is in physics and electrical engineering, so I am good at solving problems. But any or all of this could be nonsense!
From the numbers posted by Johns Hopkins University, the death rate for those diagnosed with the virus is now at 3.4% (March 2, 2020). Reports seem to indicate nearly all deaths are the elderly or those with pre-existing health conditions. For some reason, the accepted 'truth' is that the death rate is between 2 and 3 percent. I'm not sure how they make that conclusion, but I suspect they are assuming there is a significantly large undiagnosed group of people with coronavirus--that have not died.
Either way, that means if the virus spreads in your community, you might expect one out of thirty to fifty people that catch it to die.
They also 'say' that the virus survives longer outside of the body than the flu, that it can 'hang' in the air longer, and that it may also be spread through fecal matter. I would therefore guess that it is significantly smaller than the various flu viruses, and can probably penetrate cells easier. Combined with the fact that you cannot tell whether a person is infected before symptoms show, and that a number of people have recovered (according to CDC tests) and then later tested positive again, one has to assume that this spreads much easier than the flu.
That is, if it gets out in your community, a lot of people will catch it. That doesn't mean they will all show bad symptoms, get very sick, or even die.
One thing about the source of the virus. It seems pretty amazing that China's most infectious bio-research facility was a couple of miles from the alleged food market where they say the infection started. It seems more likely than not that COVID-19 was part of a Chinese bio-weapon or bio-research project that accidentally got out. It's ease of spread, and worse-than-flu effects, seem consistent with a man-made or man-modified virus.
There are two things that really concern me about the virus and what happens in the future. First, my wife has asthma and her lungs are not in good shape. I'm really worried that she might catch it with a bad outcome. Second, China and Italy have responded by isolating communities. Some schools in the US have been closed. If the virus spreads and the death rate stays high, we may see community closures throughout the US.
The problems with a city or town closure are how to distribute food, water, fuel and electricity safely. I saw a run on gasoline a couple of years ago after storm damage to off-shore and near shore facilities. The gas at stations disappeared in a day. Luckily, gas availability returned in a few days before the cars ran dry and people were stuck.
But what if a city closure means no gas and diesel trucks get in. No food gets to market. Will the electricity grid stay up from power stations outside the isolated city? What about city water? How will they get their fuel. With a claimed 14-day incubation period, you figure any isolation is going to be a minimum of 14 days and probably 30 days or more. How many people keep that amount of food, water and/or fuel around? If the U.S. starts to isolate cities or communities, there are going to be runs everywhere--on everything!
Clearly, the spread of COVID-19 is not at that point in the U.S., and President Trump has done a good job of delaying or slowing down the spread in the U.S.
Obviously, I don't want a panic, or think that one is appropriate now. I do think you should start thinking about where you would get water and how long your food would last if they said no-one was going in or out of your town (without HAZMAT clothing) for the next 30 days. Personally, if current outcome probabilities are accurate, I think town/city/region closures would be much more destructive than the virus. They should be avoided in almost all cases.
One last point. I'm pretty disgusted about the Surgeon General and others deriding citizens for buying face masks. They claim they don't help prevent catching the virus (point 1), then they claim they want the masks available to protect doctors and nurses (point 2). If they don't help prevent catching the virus, what good are they to doctors and nurses? I know this is over-simplified. But pass a law that in a national medical emergency, the Government can prioritize purchase/delivery of medical items to medical facilities and professionals. Don't expect citizens in an open market to not make a choice in their individual best interest.
From the numbers posted by Johns Hopkins University, the death rate for those diagnosed with the virus is now at 3.4% (March 2, 2020). Reports seem to indicate nearly all deaths are the elderly or those with pre-existing health conditions. For some reason, the accepted 'truth' is that the death rate is between 2 and 3 percent. I'm not sure how they make that conclusion, but I suspect they are assuming there is a significantly large undiagnosed group of people with coronavirus--that have not died.
Either way, that means if the virus spreads in your community, you might expect one out of thirty to fifty people that catch it to die.
They also 'say' that the virus survives longer outside of the body than the flu, that it can 'hang' in the air longer, and that it may also be spread through fecal matter. I would therefore guess that it is significantly smaller than the various flu viruses, and can probably penetrate cells easier. Combined with the fact that you cannot tell whether a person is infected before symptoms show, and that a number of people have recovered (according to CDC tests) and then later tested positive again, one has to assume that this spreads much easier than the flu.
That is, if it gets out in your community, a lot of people will catch it. That doesn't mean they will all show bad symptoms, get very sick, or even die.
One thing about the source of the virus. It seems pretty amazing that China's most infectious bio-research facility was a couple of miles from the alleged food market where they say the infection started. It seems more likely than not that COVID-19 was part of a Chinese bio-weapon or bio-research project that accidentally got out. It's ease of spread, and worse-than-flu effects, seem consistent with a man-made or man-modified virus.
There are two things that really concern me about the virus and what happens in the future. First, my wife has asthma and her lungs are not in good shape. I'm really worried that she might catch it with a bad outcome. Second, China and Italy have responded by isolating communities. Some schools in the US have been closed. If the virus spreads and the death rate stays high, we may see community closures throughout the US.
The problems with a city or town closure are how to distribute food, water, fuel and electricity safely. I saw a run on gasoline a couple of years ago after storm damage to off-shore and near shore facilities. The gas at stations disappeared in a day. Luckily, gas availability returned in a few days before the cars ran dry and people were stuck.
But what if a city closure means no gas and diesel trucks get in. No food gets to market. Will the electricity grid stay up from power stations outside the isolated city? What about city water? How will they get their fuel. With a claimed 14-day incubation period, you figure any isolation is going to be a minimum of 14 days and probably 30 days or more. How many people keep that amount of food, water and/or fuel around? If the U.S. starts to isolate cities or communities, there are going to be runs everywhere--on everything!
Clearly, the spread of COVID-19 is not at that point in the U.S., and President Trump has done a good job of delaying or slowing down the spread in the U.S.
Obviously, I don't want a panic, or think that one is appropriate now. I do think you should start thinking about where you would get water and how long your food would last if they said no-one was going in or out of your town (without HAZMAT clothing) for the next 30 days. Personally, if current outcome probabilities are accurate, I think town/city/region closures would be much more destructive than the virus. They should be avoided in almost all cases.
One last point. I'm pretty disgusted about the Surgeon General and others deriding citizens for buying face masks. They claim they don't help prevent catching the virus (point 1), then they claim they want the masks available to protect doctors and nurses (point 2). If they don't help prevent catching the virus, what good are they to doctors and nurses? I know this is over-simplified. But pass a law that in a national medical emergency, the Government can prioritize purchase/delivery of medical items to medical facilities and professionals. Don't expect citizens in an open market to not make a choice in their individual best interest.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)