Presymptomatics are undetectable. That has been the case always. The incubation time needs to be over first. For some people that is 3 days and for others up to 7 days+. Then after the incubation period PCRs of a combination of deep nose and mouth samples have almost 100% sensitivity, if I recollect it right. @Bbob had posted it before in one of his wife's videos
I recall that too. This study said it's at best 80% accurate (@8 days at infection; 3 days with symptoms <- i assume they avg that out).
From Franklin Veaux's Quora post: For every one person who dies: 19 more require hospitalization. 18 of those will have permanent heart damage for the rest of their lives. 10 will have permanent lung damage. 3 will have strokes. 2 will have neurological damage that leads to chronic weakness and loss of coordination. 2 will have neurological damage that leads to loss of cognitive function. So now all of a sudden, that “but it’s only 1% fatal!” becomes: 3,282,000 people dead. 62,358,000 hospitalized. 59,076,000 people with permanent heart damage. 32,820,000 people with permanent lung damage. 9,846,000 people with strokes. 6,564,000 people with muscle weakness. 6,564,000 people with loss of cognitive function.
Are they just going to pull the name(s) out of a hat? https://www.cnbc.com/2020/07/13/dru...end-of-summer-trump-health-officials-say.html Drugmakers will start coronavirus vaccine production by end of summer, Trump health officials say
Instead of zombie apocalypse, the uber wealthy become bloodsucking vampires...literally? A plasma shot could prevent coronavirus. But feds and makers won’t act, scientists say It might be the next best thing to a coronavirus vaccine. Scientists have devised a way to use the antibody-rich blood plasma of COVID-19 survivors for an upper-arm injection that they say could inoculate people against the virus for months. Using technology that’s been proven effective in preventing other diseases such as hepatitis A, the injections would be administered to high-risk healthcare workers, nursing home patients, or even at public drive-through sites — potentially protecting millions of lives, the doctors and other experts say. The two scientists who spearheaded the proposal — an 83-year-old shingles researcher and his counterpart, an HIV gene therapy expert — have garnered widespread support from leading blood and immunology specialists, including those at the center of the nation’s COVID-19 plasma research. But the idea exists only on paper. Federal officials have twice rejected requests to discuss the proposal, and pharmaceutical companies — even acknowledging the likely efficacy of the plan — have declined to design or manufacture the shots, according to a Times investigation. The lack of interest in launching development of immunity shots comes amid heightened scrutiny of the federal government’s sluggish pandemic response. There is little disagreement that the idea holds promise; the dispute is over the timing. Federal health officials and industry groups say the development of plasma-based therapies should focus on treating people who are already sick, not on preventing infections in those who are still healthy. Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases at the National Institutes of Health, said an upper-arm injection that would function like a vaccine “is a very attractive concept.” However, he said, scientists should first demonstrate that the coronavirus antibodies that are currently delivered to patients intravenously in hospital wards across the country actually work. “Once you show the efficacy, then the obvious next step is to convert it into an intramuscular” shot. But scientists who question the delay argue that the immunity shots are easy to scale up and should enter clinical trials immediately. They say that until there’s a vaccine, the shots offer the only plausible method for preventing potentially millions of infections at a critical moment in the pandemic. “Beyond being a lost opportunity, this is a real head-scratcher,” said Dr. Michael Joyner, a Mayo Clinic researcher who leads a program sponsored by the Food and Drug Administration to capitalize on coronavirus antibodies from COVID-19 survivors. “It seems obvious.” :: The use of so-called convalescent plasma has already become widespread. More than 28,000 patients have already received the IV treatment, and preliminary data suggest that the method is safe. Researchers are also looking at whether the IV drip products would prevent new infections from taking root. The antibodies in plasma can be concentrated and delivered to patients through a type of drug called immune globulin, or IG, which can be given through either an IV drip or a shot. IG shots have for decades been used to prevent an array of diseases; the IG shot that prevents hepatitis A was first licensed in 1944. They are available to treat patients who have recently been exposed to hepatitis B, tetanus, varicella and rabies. Yet for the coronavirus, manufacturers are only developing an intravenous solution of IG. Joyner told The Times that 600 COVID-19 survivors donating their plasma each day could, depending on donation volumes and concentrations, generate up to 5,000 IG shots. With millions of probable survivors in the United States, he said, capacity isn’t a problem. Plasma companies said they’ve focused their efforts on an intervention for the sickest patients. Grifols, for example, said it has not developed a shot because it is pursuing a federally supported IV formula “to treat patients already infected with a serious case of COVID-19,” but the company acknowledged that an antibody injection would be a good choice for prevention. Advocates for the immunity shots say businesses are reluctant to invest in a product that could soon be replaced by a vaccine, so the government should offer financial incentives to offset that risk. Billions of federal dollars are already being spent on vaccine research through Operation Warp Speed, and funding for an IG shot that could serve as a bridge to a vaccine would come with a relatively modest price tag, they say. “Antibodies are the most precious resource on the planet right now, next to air. We have the industry, the technology, and the know-how to produce a proven product,” said Patrick Schmidt, the chief executive of FFF Enterprises, a major distributor of IG products in the United States. “The amount of money and resources going into a vaccine, with no guarantee it will work — this could have saved lives by now.” :: The proposal for an injection approach to coronavirus prevention came from an immunization researcher who drew his inspiration from history. Dr. Michael Oxman knew that, even during the 1918 flu pandemic... ...
This is very important. Just because death rates are lower than they were in April, for now, doesn’t mean this disease is if no consequence.
Plasma based therapy is very interesting but we’re still not clear if immunity is granted from infection and for how long.
I haven't been to the thread in awhile, but I'd encourage you to look a little deeper into these numbers and understand why his extrapolations aren't remotely accurate.
Just found out that my nephew's wife has it. She was tested the morning that the symptoms showed up (really bad headache, suddenly very exhausted, some diarrhea) and found out 3 days later, this morning, that she's positive. She's probably 40. My nephew and his son (what do you call the son of your nephew??) were tested this morning and the pair are isolated from his wife in their house, waiting on the results. My nephew has diabetes, so fingers crossed that he doesn't get it, and if he does, that it's mild. We'll see. They live in League City.
Sorry to hear this, Deck. More and more of us will have a relative involved. Best wishes for that family having a mild and limited experience with it.
I've been wearing a mask when I need to. I'm still taking supplements as recommended and I'll continue to do it even after covid burns itself out. https://www.evms.edu/media/evms_pub...cine/EVMS_Critical_Care_COVID-19_Protocol.pdf I'm still doing jiujitsu 5 days a week and getting walks in daily. I'm going to get my blood work done tomorrow with a vitamin D and antibody test. My mom had her blood sugar levels checked to make sure there were no pre diabetes issues since it runs on her side of the family, but she was good and I got her to get her vitamin D levels checked and she was at 47 ng/ml.
Also, this study was making the news today... https://www1.racgp.org.au/newsgp/clinical/more-evidence-suggests-no-long-term-covid-19-immun More evidence suggests no long-term COVID-19 immunity A new longitudinal study has found coronavirus antibodies diminish rapidly within three months of peaking. https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.07.09.20148429v1.full.pdf However, my cardiologist friend said the headline and press release is very misleading "The paper says that antibodies tend to go up in proportion to how sick the person gets from COVID and tend to go down after the infection is over. At about 3 months (94 days) antibodies in some went down a lot. They only looked at this in 4 people and did not look longer than this. They also note that IgG memory B cells were found, which is very important for long term immunity. The press release is ****. In other infections antibody titers go way down after the infection. The real question is immunity. The body does not keep high levels of memory IgG B cells around for every infection. It keeps low levels, which if triggered, activate a response that upregulates them. So the study does not answer the question of how long people will be immune after infection. From some of the details of IgA and IgM there is also a hint that antibodies could be developed as treatment for the acute infection." then I asked if the antibody tests were even worth getting since I have one scheduled and I also noted that the study seemed to be positive and he said... "To prove whether or not someone has already had the infection, if antibody falls to a low level that falls below the detection level of the test, then the test will give a false negative. This paper is more about that question. If the antibody test is positive I think one can be very confident in the result but not a negative. If it is less than 90 days from when you think you might have been infected or if you were sick as a dog whenever you were ill, I think the antibody test as it exists now would be worth it. How long immunity lasts this paper does not address. And yes I agree- some of the findings in the paper are positive."
Thats nice but all these other diseases like tetanus and rabies dont cause cytocine storms. It would be criminal injecting hundreds of thousands with that without making sure with huge studies that they dont increase that chance of cytocine storms especially in younger patients. They have been giving them to hospital patients who are under medical supervision and I am certain only when they have the appropriate blood exams. It is not a cure all and could even potentially cause deaths. I wouldnt take it if it was available as a prophylaxis. However I would possibly consider to give it to my parents who are in the risky group.
Why so negative against the study authors? Thats what is more easily measurable and of great importance for vaccine development. When and if they can have multiple subjects who are re infected and we can check their immunity memory ,more studies could be make. Dont hold your breath that it will be any time soon, maybe in 2 years from now.
