All things CoronaVirus

[jhu72]

Read what the article stated,the patient was asymptomatic the throughout the re-infection. Its likely that the his immune system having familiarity with the virus prevented him/her from experiencing any symptoms. This is a rather extremist take, there is nothing that is NOT good about it. Reinfection does not and rarely has to be associated with worse symptoms. This would fly in the face of every scientific principle known to mankind. This isn't a new virus, just a very different strain of the Coronavirus family that has been around for quite a while. This post is leaving a lot of what the article said and inserting your alarmist beliefs into it. I am a casual observer of this forum, but a lot of the time its very hard to even take you serious. You are purposefully divisive, alarmist, insensitive and take things to the extreme every chance you get. I get it, you are unhappy with the current leadership in this country, but that doesn't call for some of the extreme takes that you throw out in regards to this virus. There's a lot of people unhappy with the leadership as you are, yet they don't abandon their sense of rational belief and make such divisive statements as if they are making them just to elicit some sort of response that they may seek.

Go Twins,
JoeMauer89!

I agree with much of your post, but you neglect to mention what I think is a rather serious issue. Those who get reinfected may have better experiences, themselves, with the disease the second time around, but I believe they are still just as contagious and, thus, can spread the disease just as easily as they could the first time. The point is (and I didn't come up with this, just repeating what I have heard or read) that if people can get reinfected (it seems they can), then if will be more difficult to reach herd immunity when members of the herd can get (and more importantly spread) the disease more than once, and maybe multiple times.

… that's in fact the real problem. Can the re-infected still infect others? I think the jury is still out on this question.

[wgdsr]

Read what the article stated,the patient was asymptomatic the throughout the re-infection. Its likely that the his immune system having familiarity with the virus prevented him/her from experiencing any symptoms. This is a rather extremist take, there is nothing that is NOT good about it. Reinfection does not and rarely has to be associated with worse symptoms. This would fly in the face of every scientific principle known to mankind. This isn't a new virus, just a very different strain of the Coronavirus family that has been around for quite a while. This post is leaving a lot of what the article said and inserting your alarmist beliefs into it. I am a casual observer of this forum, but a lot of the time its very hard to even take you serious. You are purposefully divisive, alarmist, insensitive and take things to the extreme every chance you get. I get it, you are unhappy with the current leadership in this country, but that doesn't call for some of the extreme takes that you throw out in regards to this virus. There's a lot of people unhappy with the leadership as you are, yet they don't abandon their sense of rational belief and make such divisive statements as if they are making them just to elicit some sort of response that they may seek.

Go Twins,
JoeMauer89!

I agree with much of your post, but you neglect to mention what I think is a rather serious issue. Those who get reinfected may have better experiences, themselves, with the disease the second time around, but I believe they are still just as contagious and, thus, can spread the disease just as easily as they could the first time. The point is (and I didn't come up with this, just repeating what I have heard or read) that if people can get reinfected (it seems they can), then if will be more difficult to reach herd immunity when members of the herd can get (and more importantly spread) the disease more than once, and maybe multiple times.

i take it this is just guesswork based on other viruses or coronaviruses ?

Sort of like “claim” or “think”.....May as well add in believes while we are at it.....(see above post for context)

i was talking about njbill's sources. not his beliefs. which may or may not have been related to this one case (or several other possibles that popped up a couple months ago). i was looking for clarification.

[Peter Brown]

Party over science. Don't believe Yale scientists, folks!

Also, Sweden reached herd immunity. I realize the Fanlax Dems hate to hear this, but science is science, not your Party.

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/swede ... =home-page

There you go reading a headline. What does “claim” mean in that context? In the article, the synonym used is “thinks”.....what does that mean to you?

njbill told me last night that the Party comes ahead of science, so I am not sure if debating anything Covid is useful anymore with your squad. That said, it sounds that, like njbill, you don;t like the narrative spun by some very serious epidemiologists like Anders Tegnel...you should take up your hysteria with him as his country now has no Covid of any significance.

No face masks...

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/0 ... countries/

Schools open...

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/0 ... en-spread/

Full herd immunity...

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/12481469/ ... -pandemic/

No Covid.

Meanwhile, our Democrats think the sky is falling. Until 11-3 that is.

[Typical Lax Dad]

Read what the article stated,the patient was asymptomatic the throughout the re-infection. Its likely that the his immune system having familiarity with the virus prevented him/her from experiencing any symptoms. This is a rather extremist take, there is nothing that is NOT good about it. Reinfection does not and rarely has to be associated with worse symptoms. This would fly in the face of every scientific principle known to mankind. This isn't a new virus, just a very different strain of the Coronavirus family that has been around for quite a while. This post is leaving a lot of what the article said and inserting your alarmist beliefs into it. I am a casual observer of this forum, but a lot of the time its very hard to even take you serious. You are purposefully divisive, alarmist, insensitive and take things to the extreme every chance you get. I get it, you are unhappy with the current leadership in this country, but that doesn't call for some of the extreme takes that you throw out in regards to this virus. There's a lot of people unhappy with the leadership as you are, yet they don't abandon their sense of rational belief and make such divisive statements as if they are making them just to elicit some sort of response that they may seek.

Go Twins,
JoeMauer89!

I agree with much of your post, but you neglect to mention what I think is a rather serious issue. Those who get reinfected may have better experiences, themselves, with the disease the second time around, but I believe they are still just as contagious and, thus, can spread the disease just as easily as they could the first time. The point is (and I didn't come up with this, just repeating what I have heard or read) that if people can get reinfected (it seems they can), then if will be more difficult to reach herd immunity when members of the herd can get (and more importantly spread) the disease more than once, and maybe multiple times.

i take it this is just guesswork based on other viruses or coronaviruses ?

Sort of like “claim” or “think”.....May as well add in believes while we are at it.....(see above post for context)

i was talking about njbill's sources. not his beliefs. which may or may not have been related to this one case (or several other possibles that popped up a couple months ago). i was looking for clarification.

I know. It was tongue in cheek as old PB “believes” word like “claim” and “think” are proof....did you see Luka’s game winner! I had not jumped out of my seat like that since the Pats beat Atlanta in the super bowl.

[jhu72]

Party over science. Don't believe Yale scientists, folks!

Also, Sweden reached herd immunity. I realize the Fanlax Dems hate to hear this, but science is science, not your Party.

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/swede ... =home-page

… this proves absolutely nothing!! Two weeks ago you had folks from the Swedish Ministry of Health claiming just the opposite - that they had made a big mistake.

[njbill]

Read what the article stated,the patient was asymptomatic the throughout the re-infection. Its likely that the his immune system having familiarity with the virus prevented him/her from experiencing any symptoms. This is a rather extremist take, there is nothing that is NOT good about it. Reinfection does not and rarely has to be associated with worse symptoms. This would fly in the face of every scientific principle known to mankind. This isn't a new virus, just a very different strain of the Coronavirus family that has been around for quite a while. This post is leaving a lot of what the article said and inserting your alarmist beliefs into it. I am a casual observer of this forum, but a lot of the time its very hard to even take you serious. You are purposefully divisive, alarmist, insensitive and take things to the extreme every chance you get. I get it, you are unhappy with the current leadership in this country, but that doesn't call for some of the extreme takes that you throw out in regards to this virus. There's a lot of people unhappy with the leadership as you are, yet they don't abandon their sense of rational belief and make such divisive statements as if they are making them just to elicit some sort of response that they may seek.

Go Twins,
JoeMauer89!

I agree with much of your post, but you neglect to mention what I think is a rather serious issue. Those who get reinfected may have better experiences, themselves, with the disease the second time around, but I believe they are still just as contagious and, thus, can spread the disease just as easily as they could the first time. The point is (and I didn't come up with this, just repeating what I have heard or read) that if people can get reinfected (it seems they can), then if will be more difficult to reach herd immunity when members of the herd can get (and more importantly spread) the disease more than once, and maybe multiple times.

i take it this is just guesswork based on other viruses or coronaviruses ?

I don't think it is "just guesswork." I would say more of a logical deduction from the available evidence. But, no, I don't have a peer reviewed double blind study to show you.

You become reinfected when you are once again exposed to the virus. You have the virus in your body again. Why would the same virus be less contagious the second time? If someone can spread the virus the first time they get it, even if asymptomatic, why wouldn't they be able to do so the second time?

You disagree?

[njbill]

njbill told me last night that the Party comes ahead of science, so I am not sure if debating anything Covid is useful anymore with your squad. That said, it sounds that, like njbill, you don;t like the narrative spun by some very serious epidemiologists like Anders Tegnel...you should take up your hysteria with him as his country now has no Covid of any significance.

I told you he was the last doctor on the planet supporting HCQ. Still not convinced that wasn't a rerun from May.

And be careful in your use of the term "squad." It's been copyrighted. You don't want me to have to sic AOC on you.

[Peter Brown]

Party over science. Don't believe Yale scientists, folks!

Also, Sweden reached herd immunity. I realize the Fanlax Dems hate to hear this, but science is science, not your Party.

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/swede ... =home-page

… this proves absolutely nothing!! Two weeks ago you had folks from the Swedish Ministry of Health claiming just the opposite - that they had made a big mistake.

maybe check your sources better:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/0 ... en-spread/

[Typical Lax Dad]

Party over science. Don't believe Yale scientists, folks!

Also, Sweden reached herd immunity. I realize the Fanlax Dems hate to hear this, but science is science, not your Party.

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/swede ... =home-page

There you go reading a headline. What does “claim” mean in that context? In the article, the synonym used is “thinks”.....what does that mean to you?

njbill told me last night that the Party comes ahead of science, so I am not sure if debating anything Covid is useful anymore with your squad. That said, it sounds that, like njbill, you don;t like the narrative spun by some very serious epidemiologists like Anders Tegnel...you should take up your hysteria with him as his country now has no Covid of any significance.

No face masks...

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/0 ... countries/

Schools open...

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/0 ... en-spread/

Full herd immunity...

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/12481469/ ... -pandemic/

No Covid.

Meanwhile, our Democrats think the sky is falling. Until 11-3 that is.

I know this isn’t the Sun and may be hard to get through but it’s worth the effort.

Noting the recent drop in the daily tally of COVID-19 cases, Tegnell observed on August 9, "Exactly why this happened at that time and why it was so quick and sudden, is difficult for us to understand." Tegnell acknowledges that the results of antibody blood tests do not find that enough Swedes have been infected and recovered to confer herd immunity as would be conventionally expected by epidemiologists.

[Bart]

Read what the article stated,the patient was asymptomatic the throughout the re-infection. Its likely that the his immune system having familiarity with the virus prevented him/her from experiencing any symptoms. This is a rather extremist take, there is nothing that is NOT good about it. Reinfection does not and rarely has to be associated with worse symptoms. This would fly in the face of every scientific principle known to mankind. This isn't a new virus, just a very different strain of the Coronavirus family that has been around for quite a while. This post is leaving a lot of what the article said and inserting your alarmist beliefs into it. I am a casual observer of this forum, but a lot of the time its very hard to even take you serious. You are purposefully divisive, alarmist, insensitive and take things to the extreme every chance you get. I get it, you are unhappy with the current leadership in this country, but that doesn't call for some of the extreme takes that you throw out in regards to this virus. There's a lot of people unhappy with the leadership as you are, yet they don't abandon their sense of rational belief and make such divisive statements as if they are making them just to elicit some sort of response that they may seek.

Go Twins,
JoeMauer89!

I agree with much of your post, but you neglect to mention what I think is a rather serious issue. Those who get reinfected may have better experiences, themselves, with the disease the second time around, but I believe they are still just as contagious and, thus, can spread the disease just as easily as they could the first time. The point is (and I didn't come up with this, just repeating what I have heard or read) that if people can get reinfected (it seems they can), then if will be more difficult to reach herd immunity when members of the herd can get (and more importantly spread) the disease more than once, and maybe multiple times.

i take it this is just guesswork based on other viruses or coronaviruses ?

You become reinfected when you are once again exposed to the virus. You have the virus in your body again. Why would the same virus be less contagious the second time? If someone can spread the virus the first time they get it, even if asymptomatic, why wouldn't they be able to do so the second time?

You disagree?

It would be dependent on the viral load of the second infection. In the case we are/were discussing the person has no symptoms so one could make the argument that the secondary immune response is clearing the virus at a rate greater than it can replicate and cause adverse effects. If this is the case then it may mean that the viral load is not great enough to cause infection to those around you.

Speculation that only time and observation will answer

[njbill]

I agree none of this has been proven, as yet, at least as far as I know.

And the scenario you posit is certainly possible. It is also possible, however, that in some cases of reinfection the person can be contagious. And I would go further, and yes, this is just my conjecture, but I'll bet if 100 people become reinfected, a significant number will be contagious. That is the concern.

[wgdsr]

Read what the article stated,the patient was asymptomatic the throughout the re-infection. Its likely that the his immune system having familiarity with the virus prevented him/her from experiencing any symptoms. This is a rather extremist take, there is nothing that is NOT good about it. Reinfection does not and rarely has to be associated with worse symptoms. This would fly in the face of every scientific principle known to mankind. This isn't a new virus, just a very different strain of the Coronavirus family that has been around for quite a while. This post is leaving a lot of what the article said and inserting your alarmist beliefs into it. I am a casual observer of this forum, but a lot of the time its very hard to even take you serious. You are purposefully divisive, alarmist, insensitive and take things to the extreme every chance you get. I get it, you are unhappy with the current leadership in this country, but that doesn't call for some of the extreme takes that you throw out in regards to this virus. There's a lot of people unhappy with the leadership as you are, yet they don't abandon their sense of rational belief and make such divisive statements as if they are making them just to elicit some sort of response that they may seek.

Go Twins,
JoeMauer89!

I agree with much of your post, but you neglect to mention what I think is a rather serious issue. Those who get reinfected may have better experiences, themselves, with the disease the second time around, but I believe they are still just as contagious and, thus, can spread the disease just as easily as they could the first time. The point is (and I didn't come up with this, just repeating what I have heard or read) that if people can get reinfected (it seems they can), then if will be more difficult to reach herd immunity when members of the herd can get (and more importantly spread) the disease more than once, and maybe multiple times.

i take it this is just guesswork based on other viruses or coronaviruses ?

I don't think it is "just guesswork." I would say more of a logical deduction from the available evidence. But, no, I don't have a peer reviewed double blind study to show you.

You become reinfected when you are once again exposed to the virus. You have the virus in your body again. Why would the same virus be less contagious the second time? If someone can spread the virus the first time they get it, even if asymptomatic, why wouldn't they be able to do so the second time?

You disagree?

i don't disagree or agree, i don't know. i asked bc you mentioned that what you heard and read, this would be the case (paraphrasing). didn't know what that position was based off of (this case, previous possible reinfections, other viruses). until it's shown otherwise, i'd imagine any range of scenarios are possible.

[Bart]

I agree none of this has been proven, as yet, at least as far as I know.

And the scenario you posit is certainly possible. It is also possible, however, that in some cases of reinfection the person can be contagious. And I would go further, and yes, this is just my conjecture, but I'll bet if 100 people become reinfected, a significant number will be contagious. That is the concern.

Fair enough. Time will tell.

[kramerica.inc]

Baltimore Ravens will start the season with no fans in the stands and consider allowing a limited number in future:

https://www.baltimoreravens.com/news/ra ... 020-season

[jhu72]

Florida judge says DeSantis can't force kids and teachers to go back to school.

[DocBarrister]

What many have feared ... world’s first confirmed case of novel coronavirus re-reinfection.

https://www.nbcnews.com/science/science ... y-n1237840

This suggests that for some or many (or most or all?) people, any immunity through infection/recovery or vaccination will be temporary.

Not good.

DocBarrister

One possible implication ... we may face a future requiring constant vigilance against this virus. Meaning, repeated vaccinations and occasional isolations and shutdowns when local outbreaks occur.

DocBarrister

Read what the article stated,the patient was asymptomatic the throughout the re-infection. Its likely that the his immune system having familiarity with the virus prevented him/her from experiencing any symptoms. This is a rather extremist take, there is nothing that is NOT good about it. Reinfection does not and rarely has to be associated with worse symptoms. This would fly in the face of every scientific principle known to mankind. This isn't a new virus, just a very different strain of the Coronavirus family that has been around for quite a while. This post is leaving a lot of what the article said and inserting your alarmist beliefs into it. I am a casual observer of this forum, but a lot of the time its very hard to even take you serious. You are purposefully divisive, alarmist, insensitive and take things to the extreme every chance you get. I get it, you are unhappy with the current leadership in this country, but that doesn't call for some of the extreme takes that you throw out in regards to this virus. There's a lot of people unhappy with the leadership as you are, yet they don't abandon their sense of rational belief and make such divisive statements as if they are making them just to elicit some sort of response that they may seek.

Go Twins,
JoeMauer89!

The ignorance in your post is truly astonishing. I would correct every errant statement in your post, but I have a day job and don’t have the time to teach you all you should know.

You also missed a key point ... the second infection was caused by a different variant of the novel coronavirus. Same virus, different variant. That is definitely bad.

Public health officials were hoping that long-term immunity would be possible with the Covid-19 virus (as it was with SARS and MERS). Such long-term immunity was key to getting those earlier pandemics under control. More and more, that does not seem likely with the novel coronavirus. In other words, the novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) is not like other viruses.

There is also another sickness involved here ... a repugnant and dishonest effort to portray SARS-CoV-2 as just another strain of coronavirus.

WRONG ... we’re well on our way to a million worldwide deaths despite the most extreme infection mitigation efforts in over a century (plus, modern medicine and technology). There will likely be a quarter million dead Americans by the end of the year. THAT is nothing like other recent coronaviruses. To say otherwise is disrespectful, dishonest, and ignorant.

Seriously, let’s stop with the ignorant posts.

DocBarrister

[Typical Lax Dad]

Baltimore Ravens will start the season with no fans in the stands and consider allowing a limited number in future:

https://www.baltimoreravens.com/news/ra ... 020-season

Democrats

[ggait]

Sweden bent their curve the old fashioned way -- with social distancing. Which the Swedes took VERY seriously. Not herd immunity. Masks are but one form, but not the only form, of SD after all.

Unlike Americans, Swedes do what they are told is useful and advise-able. So the Swedes did a lock down without a mandatory lock down order. That approach hasn't worked in the USA.

"Swedes in general have changed their behavior to a great extent during the pandemic and the practice of social distancing as well as physical distancing in public places and at work has been widespread," said Maria Furberg, MD, PhD, an infectious diseases expert at Umea University Hospital in northeastern Sweden.

"During the months of March to early June, all shops were practically empty, people stopped dining with friends, and families stopped seeing even their closest relatives," Furberg told MedPage Today. "A lock-down could not have been more effective. Handwashing, excessive use of hand sanitizers, and staying home at the first sign of a cold became the new normal very quickly."

Mozhu Ding, PhD, an epidemiologist at the famed Karolinska Institute, said the decline is "likely to be a combination of measures taken by individuals, businesses and a widespread information campaign launched by the government."

"Even without a strict lockdown order, many businesses allowed employees to work from home, and universities are offering distance courses to the students," Ding told MedPage Today. "Individuals are also taking personal hygiene more seriously, as items like hand sanitizers and single-use gloves are often sold out in pharmacies and grocery stores."

https://www.medpagetoday.com/infectious ... id19/87812

After their initial mis-steps and challenges, Sweden (along with ALL the other first world countries) figured out how to do SD well. The USA is alone among first world countries in being completely unable to figure this out.

Hence the following daily death numbers (7 day average):

USA 989

Spain 31
Australia 16
France 15
UK 9
Japan 7
Germany 6
Canada 6
Italy 5
Sweden 0
Norway 0
Finland 0
NZ 0

[youthathletics]

Wonder if they are re-testing all those people that died of CV-19? Wonder how many other tests ran through this same type place.

https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/all- ... amination/

[Typical Lax Dad]

Wonder if they are re-testing all those people that died of CV-19? Wonder how many other tests ran through this same type place.

https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/all- ... amination/

All 800,000?