Coronavirus Thread

  • Thread starter Deleted member 2897
  • Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.

GoldZ

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
886
LOL....to be clear, it’s your opinion, it’s not “true” until alot more facts are known. Stanford has issued a report indicating infection rates are much higher than previously thought, which means the lethality rate of this virus is pretty low. It does happen to be extremely contagious, but best information now is that it is really a danger only to the elderly and infirm. Many more people show no symptoms than is the case with influenza.
H1N1= 12,400 deaths. How many so far in NYC alone? I think Stanford and others are focused on "rates". In '09 we did not close borders, shut down schools, shut down businesses, etal, and we have with Covid and it's killing many more people.
 

GoldZ

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
886
Not true. Trump claims that Obama waited 6 months to declare a national emergency, but that's only part of the story. Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano declared a public health emergency shortly after the outbreak of H1N1 in April of 2009, and if H1N1 had been comparable to the public health threat that coronavirus is, I'm quite sure Obama's response would have been a far stronger and more competent one that Trump's is now. H1Ni killed a little over 12,000 people (Trump falsely inflates this to 17,000), which is about the number that would normally die in an average flu season. Coronavirus has killed about 38,000 and counting.

https://hillreporter.com/trump-call...have-died-of-coronavirus-than-swine-flu-63820
Trump inflates a lot of things, but you tell me, if we didn't mitigate this far differently than we did in '09, what would the World look like now as we speak ?
Obama was late in declaring a National Emergency compared to Trump (and that virus started here and/or Mexico!). A health emergency declaration is < and different than a NE.
Under the same circumstances as today, Obama's actions or lack of in '09, give me no confidence he would have been more competent at all. We did not have an order of magnitude greater supply of critical health supplies, before or after Obama, or Clinton, or Bush.
 

Deleted member 2897

Guest
This is so false.

It is not just as deadly as the flu. The latest studies suggest it is about 6 times more deadly than the flu (0.66% to 0.1%).
It also has a transmissions rate anywhere from double the flu to 4.5X the flu depending upon which study you use (flu R0 is around 1.2-1.3, COVID19 is anywhere from 2.6 to 5.6).

using legitimate comparison measures (death certificate to death certificate) this virus has already killed 4.5X as many who died from the flu this season and we aren't even half way through it with semi strong mitigation measures. This is an exponentially more dangerous infectious disease.

The estimate for the flu infections for the last 9 years is 28.4M people contracting it per year and an average of less than 10,000 death certificates filed for flu per year (which leads to the modeling estimates of 16K-50K flu deaths most years).
If you use a 5% number of COVID19 infection, which is likely too high, then you are talking about 16.4M Americans being infected with over 30,000 death certificates so far.
That is not even a remotely similar mortality rate. If you equalize the infected population then the difference in mortality rate would be about 5-6X higher.

Best case scenario is that the transmission rate is a little more than double the flu's (2.6 to 1.2). That transmission rate would mean needing more than 60% infection to stop the spread (you have to get the R0 under 1). If it is on the higher end (one study said 5.6) then you would need over 80% infection rate. Right now all studies suggest an infection rate of no more than 5% (most are 1-3%).
To put the numbers in perspective. Going the straight herd immunity route would likely create documented deaths of at least 480K possibly as high as 650K, which using a similar model to how we calculate flu deaths would lead to an overall final death count estimate of 1.1-3.25M deaths.

Given the differences in health care resources needed to fight it, medical resources would be quickly overwhelmed - the avg stay for someone with COVID19 requiring ICU/ventilator is 20 days, those not needing icu/ventilator are in the hospital an avg of 8 days. The average time to death in the hospital is 7 days. The avg length in time in the hospital for flu is 5 days. COVID19 requires much higher resource use for much longer periods of time.

Also, if you choose to 'let it rip', given how contagious combined with the mortality rate this has, our economy will likely crash within 8-10 weeks due to the amount of people who would start coming down with it - from those who would be asymptomatic but required to quarantine for 2 weeks, for those who get sick and are out for weeks or longer and those who die. The fear from that would cause a large percentage of remaining healthy people to refuse to go to work. The economy would actually be worse than it is right now and would greatly increase how long it would take the country to recover - as well as give you a lower ceiling on your recovery. it is impossible to go back to the economy of Feb 2020 - that economy is gone, for years. It's not coming back - Because we didn't take this seriously we now have to work through the consequences and get ourselves to a new spot that can work. We have to strap on our big boy pants, grow up and handle the big time adversity that is going to be with us for a long time.

It is so obvious that those who like the idea of letting those 60+ stay isolated have no clue what they are talking about. There are 68.7M Americans over 60. How exactly are you going to isolate that many people, do you have an island paradise somewhere they can all stay? Also, you can't just isolate 60+, you would also have to isolate all Americans who are high risk for COVID19 due to co-morbidity factors. For under 60 that is an additional 41.4M Americans. Does your isolated island paradise have room for 110.1M Americans? Of course, that is almost 45% of all American adults, but i'm sure the other 55% can easily make up all that lost labor. Or maybe we need our 81M kids to go to work. Of course they might have to given that 30% of teachers are over 50 and a decent percentage of the under 50 would be high risk so there wouldn't be enough teachers for them to go to school anyways.

China is having issues restarting its economy. Canada has already announced that it does not plan to re-open its border with the US within the next few weeks (our biggest trading partner). Even if we wanted to let the economy rip we literally cannot because the world economy all countries rely on would not allow us to.

You are right about alot of Americans losing their jobs due to the government, but not because of the shutdown orders. It is due to the government failing to act from Jan 3 forward when they were warned the single biggest threat to the US was Coronavirus and they chose to do nothing about it.

Historically only one strategy has ever worked against dangerous infectious diseases. Identify, test, trace, quarantine.
You have to identify the disease, you have to quickly test for it among your population, you have to trace its spread, and you have to quarantine anyone who has it as well as anyone who has come into contact with those who have it. The US managed to go 1/4 - ok for a baseball player, not good enough to fight a dangerous disease. We did identify it pretty quickly. Didn't have it completely mapped but knew enough to know what family of disease it is. But we didn't test at all, we didn't trace at all, and because we didn't do those 2 we were not able to quarantine at all. Those missteps put the government in a spot where it literally had no other choice. The only thing the government could have done would have been to implement even stricter mitigation policies like some European countries did (and Australia and New Zealand).

The mitigation measures have bought us time, but have not solved the problem, nor were they designed to. For the last 2+ weeks we have been able to keep the new cases relatively flat around 30K. But we haven't been able to get it to go below that level. Cases are a 2-3 week lagging indicator and deaths are a 3-4 week lagging indicator. If we are still avg 30K cases a day come May 1st we are in a heap of trouble as it means we haven't done good enough to not only 'flatten the curve' but to bend it back downward.

As Americans we need to understand what we are up against. We are likely going to be dealing with this significantly until at least the end of June.
Experts in last week survey conducted by UMass-Amherst believed we would likely be at around 50K deaths by the end of the month, Unless the current rate drops quickly we are going to easily pass that.
https://fivethirtyeight.com/feature...eath-toll-will-hit-50000-by-the-end-of-april/
We are not out of this by a long shot and until we are our economy has little chance to get much better.

You did so well with all kinds of good thoughts and information...until you completely contradicted yourself and polluted the post saying all the jobs were lost because of the government not doing anything on January 3rd or even after for awhile. If you ever think we can be a police state with quarantined enforced at the point of a gun, surveilling and tracking Americans and so on - no, we wont. We didn’t even have 30 total cased nationwide until March. There is no way we could have shutdown the economy back then. And most importantly, we did everything the health experts recommended we do.
 

GoldZ

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
886
I think we need to just let it rip with people under 60 and have people older than that stay in. Watching so many people lose their jobs and businesses due to orders from the government is just more than I can stand. I’d rather take my chances with something that has the mortality rate of the flu regardless of how contagious it is.
How have the nursing homes and assisted living complexes been so far for the oldies ? Even if Covid ends up having the same death rate as the flu, it's far greater contagious rate is gonna kill a LOT more people, especially without mitigation efforts. I vote for the phased/staged approach based on testing.
 

Deleted member 2897

Guest
EDIT: As to inflation, I don't see how it won't happen. The FED has pumped trillions of dollars into the economy that didn't exist a few weeks ago. For several years there has been low interest rates, low inflation, and high growth. All three of those at the same time doesn't make sense. I'm not an economist, but I don't see how that along with injecting trillions of new dollars into the economy can not cause inflation.

It always had led to inflation and always will. Inflation is the great invisible tax on working class Americans, and a big reason why despite earning a living they still go through life heavily dependent on help from the government. We have changed how we calculate inflation quite a few times over the years. If you go look up those old numbers, they show inflation over the last 10-20 years has run 5%-10% per year. And think about it - housing, healthcare, groceries - most of the things we buy have steadily gotten more and more expensive. Our current way of calculating inflation is silly. If Apple comes out with a new phone and prices it the same but it was twice the computing power, that’s a 50% reduction in costs in the inflation calculator.
 

Deleted member 2897

Guest
We’ve been shutdown over a month. And yet the trend continues to be back up in daily new cases. The current clash between staying shut and opening will be one our kids’ kids read and learn about in school one day.

1vMfUKS.png
 

MWBATL

Helluva Engineer
Messages
6,176
H1N1= 12,400 deaths. How many so far in NYC alone? I think Stanford and others are focused on "rates". In '09 we did not close borders, shut down schools, shut down businesses, etal, and we have with Covid and it's killing many more people.
Perhaps I wasn't clear. I was responding to your comment that the mortality rate was much higher than the seasonal flu. I do not disagree with your primary point that had we reacted to this like we did to the swine flu, that we would have had a MUCH more serious loss of life. My point though was that this bug's danger lies primarily in its contagious nature and less in its mortality rate. At least, based on what Stanford has been saying for some time now.

What I do find fascinating is the fact that we really still "know" very little about this virus and its real impacts on humanity. People are throwing out number sin this thread as if they are facts and fully agreed upon. Yet, if you read the comments to the preliminary Stanford study on infection rates in SSanta Clara County, it is rather eye-opening to see the disagreement among the scientists and doctors who read the paper. Here are a few examples:

But we also know that Covid19 as a cause of death has been attributed to many people who died WITH the virus and not necessarily FROM the virus. Scientists in Italy reevaluated their Covid deaths and found only 12 % of reported Covid deaths actually died from it; the rest died from their co-morbidities.
For some reason the CDC came up with a whole new way of recording cases and deaths with this virus, even stating that an "assumption" of a person having Covid without any actual proof was sufficient to record a cause of death from it. Why would the CDC do this?

_______________________
Where is the discussion of selection bias? You invite folks to get tested by advertising on Facebook... I think there will be an over-representation of folks who fear they have COVID-19 based on their recent interactions in places with or around COVID-19 cases.

Without randomization to eliminate self-selection bias, the authors should not be making any far-reaching conclusions that are now being picked up and reported by the media without providing proper interpretation.

I think this publication should be rejected for not doing this study properly.. and then seeking publicity!
________________________
Many posts here have missed critical point - samples maybe biased (off by 50-75%) but if these data are even partially correct means COVID-19 can be managed down to zero. Many comments here about NYC infection rate are not correct.

NYC data has a near zero new case rate today (0.7%/day) if true that actual infected rate is 50X over reported we are at 70% of population (about 6 million) infected in NYC - explains actual drops in mortality rate and new cases to near zero in NYC and must be herd immunity

Many posts here are just not accurate and not aware of real data. have summarized www.rubee.io/nyc - see NYC posted data today look at graphs at bottom.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wi...

John K. Stevens Ph.D.
________________________

I do not believe these conclusions. A crucial control for the estimate of false positive detection by their method is grossly inadequate. This manuscript should not have seen the light of the day in this form, let alone be published even in a pre-print format because of the sensitivity of the topic.

Here is the reason: The common cold coronaviruses that could potentially cross-react to existing pre-COVID19 IgM/IgG are quite prevalent in the population. To address this, the authors tested 30 pre-COVID19 sera.

Given an unadjusted detection rate of 2.8% seropositives in post-COVID-19 samples, if all were false positives, they needed to test, for 99% confidence, a MINIMUM of log(0.01)/log(0.972) = 162 pre-COVID19 sera of similar demographics (age/sex/location).

Instead, they tested only 30!
_________________________

My point is pretty straightforward....ANYBODY who is making points in this thread and putting links in and quoting stories as if they were all facts and accepted truths is not telling the whole story of the discourse that is taking place within the scientific community itself. (That includes me.) There is still much we do not know or understand. MUCH. We do not even have accurate counts of the deaths from this virus. And to be fair, how could we? If a person with chronic emphysema catches this virus and dies, what killed them? The virus or the emphysema?

Many of my posts have been trying to raise the basic issue that we still don't understand this virus very well. We have more knowledge than we did a week ago or a month ago etc, and our scientific community is working hard on it, but there is a lot we still do not know. Yet we are making decisions that affect 339 million Americans, and literally we are "taking our best shot" based on what little factual information we have.
 

MWBATL

Helluva Engineer
Messages
6,176
You did so well with all kinds of good thoughts and information...until you completely contradicted yourself and polluted the post saying all the jobs were lost because of the government not doing anything on January 3rd or even after for awhile. If you ever think we can be a police state with quarantined enforced at the point of a gun, surveilling and tracking Americans and so on - no, we wont. We didn’t even have 30 total cased nationwide until March. There is no way we could have shutdown the economy back then. And most importantly, we did everything the health experts recommended we do.
More than that.....the argument that this was headline news as of January 3rd is just...false. I have listened to podcasts in late January where Dr. Fauci and other medical experts were speaking of this virus in almost identical terms to the swine flu from 10 years ago. It would seem that...whatever the reports that @RamblinRed is citing...our medical experts did not believe them. Now, if you were the government, and even if the Intelligence Community was screaming about this (not something we know with any certainty, I would argue) but we can hear with our own ears podcasts of our medical experts telling us they did not expect this virus to be a big deal in late January......well, someone is not painting an accurate picture. Is there an agenda here?
 

GoldZ

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
886
If there were agendas on the part of people like Fauci, I tend to think it was more like incomplete or false data they were basing their no big deal for the US on.
Your last 2 paragraphs above speak volumes.
 

MWBATL

Helluva Engineer
Messages
6,176
The lethality rate is not 'pretty low'. Even with the numbers from the Stanford study the mortality rate is still 5-6X the flu.

it's also not just a disease that affects the elderly and infirm. There is a higher asymptomatic rate than flu but the transmission rate makes up for that. Also, it is not just deaths. If you get sick, your symptoms are highly likely to be more severe and longer lasting than what you would experience with the flu.
Their study projects a fatality rate of 0.12-.020% while the flu kills an estimated 0.01-0.02%, so I think your comment is correct and mine is exaggerated.

But I was not arguing that it ONLY affects the elderly and infirm, I was arguing that it predominately affects those groups. Influenza also kills infants and young children at a much higher rate, if I am not mistaken.

I do completely agree with the concept that one of the biggest problems this bug creates for us is the overloading of our medical system, which can itself lead to some (many?) people not getting proper treatment and dying because of that.

I do think that there is too much disagreement being voiced in this thread when I suspect many or most of us are much closer on our views than it might seem. While I was (and remain) skeptical about some of the "findings" that are being screamed out by our country's media, it is primarily because my own opinion is that we do not know enough yet. Not because I believe this is no worse than the flu. I concur that we had to do mitigation. It would have been nice if we had been able to handle this illness with the tracing and testing approach used in Taiwan and South Korea, but we were not set up for that. You can blame this administration AND prior administrations for our country not being ready in that that regard. Or you can shrug your shoulders and say that in life it is impossible to prepare for every contingency, and that the Obama folks and the Trump folks and the Bush folks etc etc did the best they could. If we suddenly find that an asteroid is going to strike the earth, we can all blame Trump for not having invested in an asteroid detection system, or we can blame the previous 10 administrations, or we can shrug our shoulders and admit act we cannot guard against every possibility. And an asteroid strike will happen again....someday.

I will admit that I was one who was scaling my initial opinions based on the Chinese data. I felt that if China only had 30,000 deaths that there was no way this would become a pandemic that killed 2 million Americans (as some early models suggested). I continue to believe if our medical professionals had all the data form inside China, that we would have reacted sooner and more vigorously. But I do not blame our medical professionals. I do blame the Chinese. Recent attempts to make the WHO look better are feeble in light of their treatment of Taiwan and their blind acceptance of Chinese data. I suspect such efforts are driven by US political differences more than any genuine respect for and support of the WHO as an organization. But I think the facts speak for themselves.

I look forward to learning more about this bug.
 

MWBATL

Helluva Engineer
Messages
6,176
If there were agendas on the part of people like Fauci, I tend to think it was more like incomplete or false data they were basing their no big deal for the US on.
Your last 2 paragraphs above speak volumes.
I do NOT suspect Fauci of having any agenda at all. I do suspect those who report that this was well known within the administration since January 3rd of having an agenda.
 

MWBATL

Helluva Engineer
Messages
6,176
One other thing about that Stanford report. There are two somewhat conflicting bits of data in that report......

One is that the actual positive rate they found was (as @RamblinRed already cited) only in the 1.5% range of those they tested. That is not high and the headline of the study which states that it is 50-85 times the confirmed cases in the county is what caught people's attention. Germany randomly tested 500 people in a village and found an infection rate of 15%. So (as always) there is a huge range of results in these very early (and very small) tests.

What caught my eye was the difference between the positive tests and the recorded cases....that 50-85 times piece of data. If you use the 1.5% datapoint, then the infection rate is well below anything that would cause optimism. But if the infected rate if 50 times the confirmed cases rate...and nationally, the confirmed cases rate is already at about 0.2%...then you get to around 11%...which ties to the German test. That is cause for optimism.

Only problem is I think I had to wrap my brain around a flagpole to come up with that so I am not at all sure I believe it...yet.
 

MWBATL

Helluva Engineer
Messages
6,176
How have the nursing homes and assisted living complexes been so far for the oldies ? Even if Covid ends up having the same death rate as the flu, it's far greater contagious rate is gonna kill a LOT more people, especially without mitigation efforts. I vote for the phased/staged approach based on testing.
I am not arguing that this bug isn't worse than the flu...I agee that its contagion rate makes it rather scary in that regard...but I am curious about your response here.

Why wouldn't a strategy that provide mitigation for those most at risk (elderly and already infirm) while releasing the rest of the population be a viable strategy? Genuine question...not picking at you...
 

GCdaJuiceMan

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,937
One other thing about that Stanford report. There are two somewhat conflicting bits of data in that report......

One is that the actual positive rate they found was (as @RamblinRed already cited) only in the 1.5% range of those they tested. That is not high and the headline of the study which states that it is 50-85 times the confirmed cases in the county is what caught people's attention. Germany randomly tested 500 people in a village and found an infection rate of 15%. So (as always) there is a huge range of results in these very early (and very small) tests.

What caught my eye was the difference between the positive tests and the recorded cases....that 50-85 times piece of data. If you use the 1.5% datapoint, then the infection rate is well below anything that would cause optimism. But if the infected rate if 50 times the confirmed cases rate...and nationally, the confirmed cases rate is already at about 0.2%...then you get to around 11%...which ties to the German test. That is cause for optimism.

Only problem is I think I had to wrap my brain around a flagpole to come up with that so I am not at all sure I believe it...yet.
The report definitely has some cause for concern. Especially how it sampled. I am very interested to see what data comes from the “voluntary” MLB staff sampling.
 

GoldZ

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
886
I am not arguing that this bug isn't worse than the flu...I agee that its contagion rate makes it rather scary in that regard...but I am curious about your response here.

Why wouldn't a strategy that provide mitigation for those most at risk (elderly and already infirm) while releasing the rest of the population be a viable strategy? Genuine question...not picking at you...
I guess for me, the devil is in the details. The nursing homes and cruise ships have shown themselves to be petri dishes. The ones at home, which is surely a greater number, are dependent on the people we would release from bondage. If the younger healthy people get a spike because we jumped the gun, which we will probably jump said gun (see current protests), the elderly are in trouble because they depend on the youngsters. What about the administrators, coaches, and numerous support people required to put on one single CFB game? The over 60 crowd seems to be more likely to get it, suffer greatly from it, and die from it. The stats we keep posting here are far worse for them, er us. Either of us could easily make this a TLDR exercise as the examples are endless.

I still prefer the phased/staged approach based on testing evidence. A series of false starts will deepen the already badly injured economy and cause longer lasting consumer reticence from spending, which after all, is the foundation of the economy.

No matter what, it's a catch-22 for sure. Throwing grandma under the bus will scar who and what we are for a looong time (Soylent Green sux). Likewise for keeping the economy closed past early June or so. I'm certain you are referencing a well co-ordinated happy medium, but there's scant evidence imo that such is in the cards. Hell, I'm worried enuf about my preferred approach.
 

MWBATL

Helluva Engineer
Messages
6,176
I guess for me, the devil is in the details. The nursing homes and cruise ships have shown themselves to be petri dishes. The ones at home, which is surely a greater number, are dependent on the people we would release from bondage. If the younger healthy people get a spike because we jumped the gun, which we will probably jump said gun (see current protests), the elderly are in trouble because they depend on the youngsters. What about the administrators, coaches, and numerous support people required to put on one single CFB game? The over 60 crowd seems to be more likely to get it, suffer greatly from it, and die from it. The stats we keep posting here are far worse for them, er us. Either of us could easily make this a TLDR exercise as the examples are endless.

I still prefer the phased/staged approach based on testing evidence. A series of false starts will deepen the already badly injured economy and cause longer lasting consumer reticence from spending, which after all, is the foundation of the economy.

No matter what, it's a catch-22 for sure. Throwing grandma under the bus will scar who and what we are for a looong time (Soylent Green sux). Likewise for keeping the economy closed past early June or so. I'm certain you are referencing a well co-ordinated happy medium, but there's scant evidence imo that such is in the cards. Hell, I'm worried enuf about my preferred approach.
Thanks, I get those concerns......and I don' t know the right approach either...
 

GTNavyNuke

Helluva Engineer
Featured Member
Messages
9,934
Location
Williamsburg Virginia
This comparison isn't exactly accurate. The yearly flu deaths are estimated precisely because death certificates don't always have flu listed, even if flu caused pneumonia or a bad heart condition to kill a person. With respect to COVID-19, even presumed cases are listed in the number of deaths. The comparison would be the 16K-50K to the 30k. (Although the CDC number is actually 12K-61K. The uncertainty for 2017-18 is up to 95K. and the deaths associated to COVID-19 to date are 39K)

It is still too early to draw definitive conclusions. It is possible that we have detected every single person who is infected and the death rate is as you describe. Unlikely, but possible. It is also possible that 80% of the US population is already infected with the majority showing no symptoms, so we have already achieved herd immunity. Unlikely, but possible. The numbers for flu are derived at from statistical modelling for a very well known and understood disease. Doctors and epidemiologists don't know and understand this disease as well as the flu. If we did antibody tests on every American, and continued on every non-infected American weekly, it could probably be understood quite well, but that is impractical. Perfect data will never be available. The data that we have now is far from good. That isn't anyone's fault: Republican, Democrat, Libertarian, Communist, etc It is just the nature of epidemiology. It seems that people expect epidemiology to be like Google. Ask and it has the correct answer quickly. It isn't that. It is a lot of statistics run on imperfect data.

Unfortunately the USS THEODORE ROOSEVELT (CVN-71) is a good microcosm with "“As of today, 94 percent of Theodore Roosevelt crew members have been tested for COVID-19, with 660 positive and 3,920 negative results,” according to Friday’s COVID-19 report from the service. “4,059 sailors have moved ashore.” I have been on that ship and many others. Social distancing is impossible in crews quarters. https://news.usni.org/2020/04/17/navy-cdc-to-study-covid-19-outbreak-on-carrier-theodore-roosevelt

Also MLB is doing large scale testing. https://www.wsj.com/articles/mlb-employees-to-participate-in-coronavirus-antibody-study-11586944803

We'll get more facts in the next few months. I have to keep reminding myself that the first cases were only 4 months ago.
 

RonJohn

Helluva Engineer
Messages
4,546
Unfortunately the USS THEODORE ROOSEVELT (CVN-71) is a good microcosm with "“As of today, 94 percent of Theodore Roosevelt crew members have been tested for COVID-19, with 660 positive and 3,920 negative results,” according to Friday’s COVID-19 report from the service. “4,059 sailors have moved ashore.” I have been on that ship and many others. Social distancing is impossible in crews quarters. https://news.usni.org/2020/04/17/navy-cdc-to-study-covid-19-outbreak-on-carrier-theodore-roosevelt

Also MLB is doing large scale testing. https://www.wsj.com/articles/mlb-employees-to-participate-in-coronavirus-antibody-study-11586944803

We'll get more facts in the next few months. I have to keep reminding myself that the first cases were only 4 months ago.

I'm not sure what they did on the carrier. If the infection rate is between 5 and 6 like the Los Alamos report indicated, then I would expect that un-quarantined and un-mitigated that over 90% would have been infected in that situation.

I raised some concerns earlier about whether the MLB testing can be sampled in such a way to be a statistical sample of the US population. It can produce interesting data. I'm just not sure it can actually answer questions about the US in general.

I am glad that you are able to maintain perspective. Too many people believe that it is possible to give answers immediately.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top