SARS-CoV-2 Coronavirus (COVID-19)

Merely sitting down in an eatery makes you much braver than me. But those adjacent seats not being already taped off reflects on the establishments and the governments, not their customers.

... and now, all inside seating is closed statewide here.

I'm on track to take another elder care / agricultural shift this coming week, in a deep red zone. Early on, they did obey mask and distancing guidelines, and kept their covid rate well below my area near the original national epicenter. But the last several times I was there, a great majority had returned to non-pandemic behaviors. E.g. in the grocery store, none of the staff was masked, and I was among the only two or three customers to wear masks.

Their current covid rate is far higher now than it ever was here. And dad's nearest neighbors tested positive this past week.

 

Probably mentioned somewhere in the previous 3000+ postings, but worth stating that seat belt laws and speed limits are good examples of decisions that were not left for individuals to decide. I’m sure we can think of many others.

Figures in the U.K. are looking better under this second lockdown. Fingers crossed we manage to get it right down.

Take extra care all you people in the States. The last thing you want as we (hopefully) approach the vaccine end-game is to catch it badly just before a nationwide roll-out.

(Makes me think of those sad stories that emerge in the final days of war)

 

Florida has a brain dead Governor and so we are living proof that people can't be trusted to make the tough decisions on their own.
MANY locally owned eateries are acting like nothing is happening; no reduced capacity and no masks on the staff.
I refuse to eat at those places. Oh.....and bars are open to full indoor capacity too.
This stupidity will catch up to us. It's just a matter of time.

 

Rules certainly help and also allow enforcement.

I also think wearing a mask and observing 6 foot distance is a litmus test of an individuals character.

Everyone realizes how contagious the virus is- how it can be a death sentence for some and how they conduct themselves to limit others risk gives wonderful insight into their character or lack of character.

 

and a lower maintenance temperature allows for standard supply chains.
1/2 dose and 1 full dose one month apart = 90%

i full dose and 1 full dose one month apart = 60%

interesting outcomes, imagine how things will improve as more studies are done.

 

Fantastic:

So my youth was not wasted!

Bob Wilson

 

Portable variations too!

 

'moderna chief medical officer says there is no proof that the vaccine will prevent people from being contageous, he thinks it will. but we should not change our behavior until more is known'

 

I would think that scientifically he has to say this. The vaccine trials are setup to measure only the placebo infections and the real vaccine infections. They then compare these two numbers (and probably a bunch of subsets of these by gender, blood type, age, etc.) to come up with the efficacy number.
If they aren't measuring who each vaccinated person infects how could they make any such claim?
Besides, how would they measure that unless they corralled all the participants in a locked stadium and monitored them somehow.

Mike

 

It sounds like this depends on the study design. That might be the case for Moderna, but as reported in the CNN interview (final minutes of that segment) of the Astrazenica product posted by tochahitu #3003 above , those researchers did include trying to address the question of suppression of viral transmission in their study design.

Regarding the Astrazenica product, worth noting that the accidental under dosing of the first dose in those 2,741 volunteers that achieved the 90+% efficacy result were apparently in the 18 - 55 age group - so no data (as yet, I understand) on such efficacy in older subjects. Fingers crossed that will come soon.

 

Indeed.
From the perspective that most of these simplest interventions (distance, mask, hand-washing, reducing social interactions) are of greater direct benefit to others than to oneself, but eventually benefits oneself too; this pandemic has really asked some tough and revealing questions about the nature of our society and humanity in the modern world.

Why so difficult to appreciate this interconnected world?

 

Given the number of false positives (2) (known CDC quality control, obvious laboratory / fiscal biases, unapproved tests, multiple case reportings, etc), are there any empirical data sets that include the cycle threshold (Ct) numbers for given RT-PCR test results?

I've read that test takers (or providers) are supplied with test results that include Ct numbers, does anyone know this to be true?

The negative results (below) could be positive if a lab were to follow the FDA, or even the implied Fauci guidelines.

 

A negative result shouldn't have a Ct (cycle threshold) value, because the RT-PCR determination is "not detected" at the max number of cycles - typically 35-40).

I guess I don't understand that graph. Where did it come from?

 

Your first link for the false-positive examples is about the antigen test, not the same thing as the PCR test. While it is not completely non-existence, false-positive for RT-PCR is very rare other than a possible human error of sample contamination. The currently used RT-PCR based COVID-19 test has very high specificity but moderate sensitivity. Often this results in more false-negative, but it is most often attributed to the sample quality again due to mainly human error.

 

Will be interesting to see what Thanksgiving visits bring.