new deadly human-to-human-transmissible coronavirus emerges out of China by 1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.

Scientists have discovered that it can be transmitted from person to person very easily, it has an incubation period of up to 24 days https://www.sciencemediacentre.org/expert-reaction-to-preprint-on-the-
incubation-period-of-the-novel-coronavirus/, and it can survive on smooth surfaces for up to 9 days https://www.researchgate.net/post/Novel_Corona_virus_spreading_and_san
itation_issues-are_you_caring .

https://www.infectioncontroltoday.com/environmental-services/best-appr
oach-disinfecting-surfaces-amid-novel-coronavirus-outbreak
“Ethanol at concentrations between 62% and 71% reduced coronavirus infectivity within 1 min exposure time by 3.0–4.0 log10,” according to the study. “Concentrations of 0.1- 0.5% sodium hypochlorite and 2% glutardialdehyde were also quite effective with > 3.0 log10reduction in viral titre. In contrast, 0.04% benzalkonium chloride, 0.06% sodium hypochlorite and 0.55% ortho-phtalaldehyde were less effective.”
“A higher temperature such as 30°C or 40°C reduced the duration of persistence of highly pathogenic MERS-CoV, TGEV, and MHV,” the study states. “However, at 4°C persistence of TGEV and MHV can be increased to = 28 days.”

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/7818957_Efficacy_of_various_d
isinfectants_against_SARS_coronavirus
The recent severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) epidemic in Asia and Northern America led to broad use of various types of disinfectant in order to control the public spread of the highly contagious virus. However, only limited data were available to demonstrate their efficacy against SARS coronavirus (SARS-CoV). We therefore investigated eight disinfectants for their activity against SARS-CoV according to prEN 14476. Four hand rubs were tested at 30s (Sterillium, based on 45% iso-propanol, 30% n-propanol and 0.2% mecetronium etilsulphate; Sterillium Rub, based on 80% ethanol; Sterillium Gel, based on 85% ethanol; Sterillium Virugard, based on 95% ethanol). Three surface disinfectants were investigated at 0.5% for 30 min and 60 min (Mikrobac forte, based on benzalkonium chloride and laurylamine; Kohrsolin FF, based on benzalkonium chloride, glutaraldehyde and didecyldimonium chloride; Dismozon pur, based on magnesium monoperphthalate), and one instrument disinfectant was investigated at 4% for 15 min, 3% for 30 min and 2% for 60 min [Korsolex basic, based on glutaraldehyde and (ethylenedioxy)dimethanol]. Three types of organic load were used: 0.3% albumin, 10% fetal calf serum, and 0.3% albumin with 0.3% sheep erythrocytes. Virus titres were determined by a quantitative test (endpoint titration) in 96-well microtitre plates. With all tested preparations, SARS-CoV was inactivated to below the limit of detection (reduction factor mostly > or =4), regardless of the type of organic load. In summary, SARS-CoV can be inactivated quite easily with many commonly used disinfectants.

https://www.nea.gov.sg/our-services/public-cleanliness/environmental-c
leaning-guidelines/guidelines/interim-list-of-household-products-and-active-ingredients-for-disinfection-of-novel-coronavirus (Singapore)

Interim Guidelines for Environmental Cleaning and Disinfection of Areas Exposed to Confirmed Case(s) of 2019 Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV) in Non-Healthcare Commercial Premises
Interim Guidelines for Environmental Cleaning and Disinfection in Residences That May Be Exposed to the 2019 Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV)
Interim List of Household Products and Active Ingredients for Disinfection of Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV)

Many general household products contain the appropriate concentrations of active ingredients (A.I.) that are known to inactivate coronaviruses. As the nCoV is new, no study has been conducted directly on the virus. However, because nCoV is a coronavirus, published scientific studies using coronaviruses have been referenced.

For general precautionary cleaning, detergent and water are adequate. For disinfection of areas that are very likely to be contaminated with nCoV (e.g. bedroom of a person confirmed to have a nCoV infection), disinfectant/cleaning products listed in Table 1 can be used. The active ingredients and their effective concentrations listed in table 2 have been shown by published scientific studies to be effective against coronaviruses. Both tables will be updated as data from more products are gathered, and as more products are assessed to be appropriate.

Check the labels and use according to instruction, and be aware of the potential hazard of each product.
For disinfection of highly contaminated surfaces or material, avoid the use of spray, and allow appropriate time needed for disinfection (refer to product instruction).
This product list should be read in conjunction with the Guidelines and Advisories issued by NEA with instruction and guidelines on how to conduct proper cleaning and disinfection of premises.

Table 1 List of Household Disinfectants/Cleaning Products Effective Against Coronaviruses
Product Name Active Ingredients
1. Simple Green Clean Finish Alkyl dimethyl benzyl ammonium chlorides 0.15%
Alkyl dimethyl ethyl benzyl ammonium chlorides 0.15%
2. Clorox Disinfectant Wipes Alkyl dimenthylbenzyl ammonium chloride 0.13%
3. Clorox Scentiva Disinfectant (Various Scents) Alkyl dimethyl benzyl ammonium chloride 0.3%
4. Dettol Anti-bacterial Surface Cleanser Trigger Spray Benzalkonium chloride 0.096%
5. Dettol Healthy Clean Kitchen Benzalkonium chloride 0.1%
6. Dettol Healthy Clean Bathroom Benzalkonium chloride 0.1%
Hydrogen peroxide 1%
7. Mr Muscle 5 in 1 Multi-Purpose Cleaner (Various Scents) Quartenary ammonium compounds 0.16%
8. Dettol Laundry Sanitiser Chloroxylenol 2%
9. Walch Laundry Sanitiser Chloroxylenol 2.3-2.5%
10. Walch Antiseptic Germicide Chloroxylenol 4.5-5.5%
11. Dettol Antiseptic Germicide Chloroxylenol 4.8%
12. Dettol Antiseptic Disinfectant Liquid Chloroxylenol 4.8%
13. Kao Bleach Liquid Hypochlorite > 1%
14. Clorox Clean-Up Cleaner + Bleach Sodium hypochlorite 1.84%
15. Clorox Toilet Bowl Cleaner with Bleach Sodium hypochlorite 2.40%
16. Essential Waitrose Thick Original Bleach Sodium hypochlorite 2.5-5.0%
17. Budget Bleach Sodium hypochlorite 3.25%
18. Giant All Purpose Household Bleach Sodium hypochlorite 5.25%
Each of the disinfectant product typically comprises one of three active ingredients namely, quaternary ammonium compounds, chloroxylenol and sodium hypochlorite. In addition to following the instructions on the product labels, the following precautions should be taken:

1. Avoid contact with eye and skin when handling cleaning products.
2. Avoid mixing different cleaning products together.
3. When sodium hypochlorite is used on metal, wipe away residues after 10 minutes with wet cloth as it is corrosive to metals.
4. Products that contains isopropanol and ethyl-alcohol could be flammable at high concentration. Keep away heat/sparks/open flames/hot surfaces.

Table 2. Active Ingredients and their Working Concentrations Effective Against Coronaviruses

Active Ingredient (A.I.)
1. Sodium hypochlorite
(0.1 – 0.5%)1
2. 70% ethyl alcohol1
3. Povidone-iodine (1% iodine)1
4. Chloroxylenol (0.12%)2
5. 50% isopropanol3
6. 0.05% benzalkonium chloride3
(Quaternary Ammonium Compound)
7. 50ppm iodine in iodophor3
8. 0.23% sodium chlorite3
9. 1% cresol soap3
(sodium alkyl-ben-zene sulfonate)
10. Hydrogen peroxide (0.5-7.0%)4

1 Sattar SA, Springthorpe VS, Karim Y, Loro P. (1989). Chemical disinfection of non-porous inanimate surfaces experimentally contaminated with four human pathogenic viruses. Epidemiol. Infect. 102:493-505; Tested against coronavirus 229E.
2 Dellanno, C., Vega, Q., & Boesenberg, D. (2009). The Antiviral action of common household disinfectants and antiseptics against murine hepatitis virus, a potential surrogate for SARS coronavirus. American Journal of Infection Control, 37(8), 649-652. doi:10.1016/j.ajic.2009.03.012
3 Saknimit M, Inatsuki I, Sugiyama Y, Yagami K. (1988) Virucidal efficacy of physico-chemical treatments against coronaviruses and parvoviruses of laboratory animals. Jikken Dobutsu. 37:341-5; Tested against canine coronavirus
4Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2008) Guideline for Disinfection and Sterilization in Healthcare Facilities, U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, February 12, 2020 2:54 AM

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.

Quote:
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
I think I've told you all about my strep throat story and how I nearly died from it before?

Do Right, Be Right. :)

No, I don't recall ... but it might have been a post I overlooked because of not being here all the time, or maybe tired and inattentive. Please ... I'd like to hear it.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, February 12, 2020 4:38 AM

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.

So I did a quick look-see - how ARE they testing for the virus? I found results from Australia, Ontario Canada, and the CDC, so I can't say anything about China, or Japan, or anywhere else.

And I think people versed in this technology would school me about the critical differences between the three methods I found! But basically they take swab samples for the nasopharynx (back of the nose), oropharynx (back of the throat), lower respiratory tract (sputum, if the patient has a productive cough), and/ or blood. After proper storage and transport the samples are tested for viral RNA. (People have DNA that codes the cells, some viruses have RNA instead.) The RNA is translated to DNA, and certain portions of the DNA are amplified (reproduced) in order to be detected.

In general, this is a sensitive type of test method, but there seems to be a lot of false negatives (the virus isn't detected even though people are infected) with this particular virus.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, February 12, 2020 8:20 AM

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly

When an outbreak of the Ebola virus touched the United States’ shores in mid-2014, Donald J. Trump was still a private citizen. But he had strong opinions about how America should act.

Mr. Trump, who has spoken openly about his phobia of germs, closely followed the epidemic, and offered angry commentary about what he said was the Obama administration’s dangerous response. He demanded draconian measures like canceling flights, forcing quarantines and even denying the return of American medical workers who had contracted the disease in Africa.

“Ebola patient will be brought to the U.S. in a few days — now I know for sure that our leaders are incompetent. KEEP THEM OUT OF HERE!” Mr. Trump tweeted on that July 31 after learning that one American medical worker would be evacuated to Atlanta from Liberia. “The U.S. cannot allow EBOLA infected people back,” Mr. Trump wrote the next day, adding: “People that go to far away places to help out are great — but must suffer the consequences!”

In nearly 50 tweets, as well as in appearances on Fox News and other networks, Mr. Trump supported flight bans and strict quarantines and branded President Barack Obama’s deployment of troops to West Africa to fight the disease as “morally unfair.”

Many health experts called Mr. Trump’s responses extreme, noting that the health workers would have most likely faced agonizing deaths had they not been evacuated to American hospitals. Former Obama administration officials said his commentary stoked alarmism in the news media and spread fear among the public.

Now Mr. Trump confronts another epidemic in the form of the coronavirus, this time at the head of the country’s health care and national security agencies. The illness has infected few people in the United States, but health officials fear it could soon spread more widely. And while Mr. Trump has so far kept his distance from the issue, public health experts worry that his extreme fear of germs, disdain for scientific and bureaucratic expertise and suspicion of foreigners could be a dangerous mix, should he wind up overseeing a severe outbreak at home.

https://attentiontotheunseen.com/2020/02/11/experts-worry-as-a-germ-ph
obic-trump-confronts-growing-coronavirus-epidemic/

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, February 12, 2020 12:08 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by second:
When an outbreak of the Ebola virus touched the United States’ shores in mid-2014, Donald J. Trump was still a private citizen. But he had strong opinions about how America should act.

Mr. Trump, who has spoken openly about his phobia of germs, closely followed the epidemic, and offered angry commentary about what he said was the Obama administration’s dangerous response. He demanded draconian measures like canceling flights, forcing quarantines and even denying the return of American medical workers who had contracted the disease in Africa.

“Ebola patient will be brought to the U.S. in a few days — now I know for sure that our leaders are incompetent. KEEP THEM OUT OF HERE!” Mr. Trump tweeted on that July 31 after learning that one American medical worker would be evacuated to Atlanta from Liberia. “The U.S. cannot allow EBOLA infected people back,” Mr. Trump wrote the next day, adding: “People that go to far away places to help out are great — but must suffer the consequences!”

In nearly 50 tweets, as well as in appearances on Fox News and other networks, Mr. Trump supported flight bans and strict quarantines and branded President Barack Obama’s deployment of troops to West Africa to fight the disease as “morally unfair.”

Many health experts called Mr. Trump’s responses extreme, noting that the health workers would have most likely faced agonizing deaths had they not been evacuated to American hospitals. Former Obama administration officials said his commentary stoked alarmism in the news media and spread fear among the public.

Now Mr. Trump confronts another epidemic in the form of the coronavirus, this time at the head of the country’s health care and national security agencies. The illness has infected few people in the United States, but health officials fear it could soon spread more widely. And while Mr. Trump has so far kept his distance from the issue, public health experts worry that his extreme fear of germs, disdain for scientific and bureaucratic expertise and suspicion of foreigners could be a dangerous mix, should he wind up overseeing a severe outbreak at home.

https://attentiontotheunseen.com/2020/02/11/experts-worry-as-a-germ-ph
obic-trump-confronts-growing-coronavirus-epidemic/

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly

Oh. Good to know.

That's exactly what I said they should do.

Hopefully when an extinction level event comes our way instead of just the flu, we'll act appropriately.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, February 12, 2020 12:51 PM

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly

Quote:
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

Oh. Good to know.

That's exactly what I said they should do.

Hopefully when an extinction level event comes our way instead of just the flu, we'll act appropriately.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

Trump already wants to shutdown the country because he is in a panic, but he has not because that would crash the economy and he would lose the next election. The experts keep telling Trump to NOT do it, but Trump, if and when he gets a cough, will tweet a shutdown against the advice of the experts.
www.nytimes.com/2020/02/10/us/politics/trump-coronavirus-epidemic.html

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, February 12, 2020 12:57 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by second:
Quote:
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

Oh. Good to know.

That's exactly what I said they should do.

Hopefully when an extinction level event comes our way instead of just the flu, we'll act appropriately.

Do Right, Be Right. :)
Trump already wants to shutdown the country because he is in a panic, but he has not because that would crash the economy and he would lose the next election. The experts keep telling Trump to NOT do it, but Trump, if and when he gets a cough, will tweet a shutdown against the advice of the experts.
www.nytimes.com/2020/02/10/us/politics/trump-coronavirus-epidemic.html

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly

I'm hesitant to give anybody the title of "expert".

But I do get your point. The point being that TRUMP IS NOT A DICTATORSHIP.

Just wanted to point that out here to all the feeble minded chumps who have said otherwise for three years straight.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, February 12, 2020 1:00 PM

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly

Quote:
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

I'm hesitant to give anybody the title of "expert".

But I do get your point. The point being that TRUMP IS NOT A DICTATORSHIP.

Just wanted to point that out here to all the feeble minded chumps who have said otherwise for three years straight.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

Once Trump orders the borders closed, the experts will have to either stop saying it is excessive or lose their jobs.
www.nytimes.com/2020/02/10/us/politics/trump-coronavirus-epidemic.html

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, February 12, 2020 1:06 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by second:
Quote:
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

I'm hesitant to give anybody the title of "expert".

But I do get your point. The point being that TRUMP IS NOT A DICTATORSHIP.

Just wanted to point that out here to all the feeble minded chumps who have said otherwise for three years straight.

Do Right, Be Right. :)
Once Trump orders the borders closed, the experts will have to either stop saying it is excessive or lose their jobs.
www.nytimes.com/2020/02/10/us/politics/trump-coronavirus-epidemic.html

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly

Oh. So you're telling me that we DID nuke those hurricanes then?

Do Right, Be Right. :)

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, February 12, 2020 3:27 PM

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly

Quote:
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

Oh. So you're telling me that we DID nuke those hurricanes then?

Do Right, Be Right. :)

The last time the White House became involved in managing a national emergency, during Hurricane Dorian in September, he misstated an official forecast of the storm’s path, then displayed a tracking map in the Oval Office that he appeared to have altered with one of his signature Sharpie pens.

Presidential words have played an important role in past health crises. Ronald Reagan was severely criticized for his slow response to the spread of H.I.V. and for recommending abstinence to address the infection. Mr. Obama resisted pressure from Mr. Trump to institute sweeping travel bans and quarantines, calling them alarmist and urging levelheaded thinking.

“This is a serious disease, but we can’t give in to hysteria or fear because that only makes it harder to get people the accurate information they need,” Mr. Obama said in October 2014 in a radio address. “We have to be guided by the science. We have to remember the basic facts.”

Mr. Trump’s record on presenting facts has been a persistent source of criticism in the scientific community. He is a clown, in other words.

“Our government is staffed with the best experts, scientists and medical leaders in the world. But Trump’s instincts — anti-science, anti-expert, isolationist and xenophobic — risk that he will eschew that advice at critical points,” said Ronald Klain.

www.nytimes.com/2020/02/10/us/politics/trump-coronavirus-epidemic.html

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, February 12, 2020 6:15 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
From the article ...
Quote:
After a relatively quiet 36 hours for the 'Diamond Princess', Japanese authorities reported 39 more cases, bringing the total to 174 out of 492 people on board tested, while Japan's defense Minister Taro Kono tweeted that a quarantine officer from the health ministry also tested positive for the virus. As Bloomberg notes, Carnival’s Diamond Princess cruise ship has become the biggest center of infection of any place outside of China. The Diamond Princess was placed under quarantine last week and checks were conducted after a passenger from Hong Kong who had been on the ship tested positive for the virus. The ship has become a case of concern because of the possibility of more infections in the vessel’s confined spaces, and the increased risks to elderly passengers.

So isolating people in their cabins and serving them meals in-cabin HASN'T stopped the spread of the NOCOV-19 virus? Do the servers test positive? If not, what's left? Ventilation systems?

Like I said, it will provide valuable data once they tease out HOW people are becoming infected. I'd sure hate to be on that ship.

Test results, and then quarantine ony happened a week ago. So new cases found now would be from the spread before all of these quarantine measures.
But the issue of the Japanese Quarantine Officer, that seems troubling.

I forgot if anybody mentioned that one of the airlifted Americans from China tested positive near San Diego. I think this means that their new 2-week quarantine clock starts now. Meaning it just got extended.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, February 12, 2020 7:32 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by second:
Quote:
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

Oh. So you're telling me that we DID nuke those hurricanes then?

Do Right, Be Right. :)
The last time the White House became involved in managing a national emergency, during Hurricane Dorian in September, he misstated an official forecast of the storm’s path, then displayed a tracking map in the Oval Office that he appeared to have altered with one of his signature Sharpie pens.

Presidential words have played an important role in past health crises. Ronald Reagan was severely criticized for his slow response to the spread of H.I.V. and for recommending abstinence to address the infection. Mr. Obama resisted pressure from Mr. Trump to institute sweeping travel bans and quarantines, calling them alarmist and urging levelheaded thinking.

“This is a serious disease, but we can’t give in to hysteria or fear because that only makes it harder to get people the accurate information they need,” Mr. Obama said in October 2014 in a radio address. “We have to be guided by the science. We have to remember the basic facts.”

Mr. Trump’s record on presenting facts has been a persistent source of criticism in the scientific community. He is a clown, in other words.

“Our government is staffed with the best experts, scientists and medical leaders in the world. But Trump’s instincts — anti-science, anti-expert, isolationist and xenophobic — risk that he will eschew that advice at critical points,” said Ronald Klain.

www.nytimes.com/2020/02/10/us/politics/trump-coronavirus-epidemic.html

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly

Dumb.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, February 12, 2020 7:41 PM

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.

Back to the OP -

I kind of want to summarize what I gleaned are the highlights of the epidemic and the virus.

As we know by now, the virus is highly infectious, in other words, it spreads easily from person to person. I believe it's because of the unusual 4 inserts that recognize and attach to specific ACE 2 binding sites in the human body. ACE(nzymes) are located (from wiki): It is located mainly in the capillaries of the lungs but can also be found in endothelial and kidney epithelial cells. Just as an aside, endothelial cells line the entire cardiovascular system, including the heart. I read speculation that that's why the first person to die from 2019-nCoV died from heart failure, not pneumonia.

Exactly HOW the virus spreads is still a question. Is it by direct inhalation of aerosols from coughing and sneezing? By saliva? By feces? By contact with contaminated surfaces? And considering that the receptors are found in the kidneys and infection is known to cause kidney damage in some people, by urine? Are there asymptomatic carriers? Can it be airborne without inhaling aerosols? Are there other non-human vectors? Did this start at the BSL4 facility in Wuhan? To me, until we know how this is spread, we won't have a real handle on it (assuming we're not past the point of containing it).

BTW, as I've read over, and over, and over - there's a lot we don't know. And I'm going to say upfront that OBVIOUSLY I don't know what the experts know, all I know is what I glean from the news; and that everything I know I feel is provisional.

Moving forward with those caveats in mind, there is still no treatment or vaccine. The potential incubation period has been extended to 24 days, and the virus can survive at room temperature on smooth surfaces for up to 9 days (much longer with cold and moisture).

And we still don't know how many are infected, and what the death rate is. And that has to do with the lack of test kits (which test for viral RNA), and imo the number of false negatives. Though, again imo, that has to do with their sampling. The virus infects the lungs, and possibly the cardiovascular-system endothelium and the kidneys, and so sampling the back of the nose and the back of the throat might not find any infected cells.

It looks like many chemicals may potentially sanitize surfaces contaminated with generic coronaviruses, and a minimum of 70% ethanol (or 50% IPA) will sanitize hands contaminated with generic coronaviruses.

And then there's the cruise ship with no infected passengers that can't dock ... and the Diamond Princess which is a floating nightmare. There's Singapore with community spread and then ... there's us?

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, February 12, 2020 8:09 PM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

China reports huge jump in new infections...

Phone makes it difficult to copy, but Hubei reported an additional 14,840 infections and 242 deaths, due to a change in definition (AGAIN). Originally they were including asymptomatic people who tested positive. Then they started excluding asymptomatic people who tested positive. Then they reversed their previous change and are now including asymptomatic people who test positive, and also including people diagnosed on the basis of "clinical symptoms" without a positive test (because test kits may not be available or result in false negatives)

For comparison, just the day before the definition change, the number of "new infections" was about 2000 and going down.

My take on this is that China is seeing a real reduction in cases and now that they feel they have a handle on this they're letting in foreigners and being more honest with their numbers. Chinese really don't want to air their dirty laundry especially to foreigners. To mix metaphors, something about losing face

-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake

Happy New Year, WISHY. I edited out your psychopathic screed!

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, February 13, 2020 2:52 PM

North Korea has an outbreak solution: execution. Fairly strict on the quarantine concept.

https://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/breaking-north-korea-exec
utes-coronavirus-21488604

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, February 13, 2020 2:56 PM

I meant to mention a few days ago: Local news reported that in WI, 15 persons had been targeted for testing, with 13 negatives results, one confirmed positive (Madison), and one not negative - I believe that person is being further tested.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, February 13, 2020 3:16 PM

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.

https://edition.cnn.com/asia/live-news/coronavirus-outbreak-02-13-20-i
ntl-hnk/index.html

Weeks into the coronavirus outbreak, CDC still not invited to China

Novel coronavirus can be spread by people who aren’t exhibiting symptoms, CDC director says
(That's one vital question answered.)

US health expert expects coronavirus to be around "beyond this season, beyond this year"
“I do think that eventually we are going to be in more of a mitigation phase in dealing with this virus but that’s not to underestimate the importance of the containment phase that we’re in right now,” Redfield said.
“The containment phase is really to give us more time. This virus will become a community virus at some point in time, this year or next year,” Redfield said. (That's another vital question partially answered. What is a PlanB?) “We don’t have any evidence that this coronavirus is really embedded in the community at this time, but with that said, we want to intensify our surveillance so that we’re basing those conclusions based on data.” (And another vital question is partially answered. Are they surveilling for community transmission?)

https://www.cnn.com/2020/02/13/us/us-coronavirus-case-texas-base/index
.html
The 15th US case of coronavirus is an evacuee at an Air Force base in Texas
(There are 2 cases of US-based person to person transmission among the 15 cases in the US.)
This is the third case of the coronavirus confirmed among evacuees from China, following two cases in California.
It's the first case of the coronavirus confirmed in Texas. Eight cases have been confirmed in California, one in Massachusetts, one in Washington state, one in Arizona, two in Illinois and one in Wisconsin. There are two instances of person-to-person transmission, one in Illinois and one in California.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-02-13/coronavirus-could-i
nfect-two-thirds-of-globe-researcher-says
Coronavirus Could Infect Two-Thirds of Globe, Research Shows

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, February 13, 2020 7:30 PM

Does coronavirus render folk stupid?

https://ca.news.yahoo.com/london-coronavirus-patient-turned-hospital-1
25033463.html

My local news just reported that in WI, 15 tests were performed, all but one were negative.

And, 15th case in TX.
https://edition.cnn.com/2020/02/13/us/us-coronavirus-case-texas-base/i
ndex.html

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, February 13, 2020 7:45 PM

It has been mentioned that the incubation period is believed to be 24 days.

Today is the 24th day since the 20 Jan report of Coronavirus in America, when this thread started.

So, just like watching a star 700 years away is revealing what happened with that star 700 years ago, what we see from now is likely a result of what happened during this thread, and what we've seen up until now could likely have been from spread before this thread started.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, February 13, 2020 9:15 PM

Cool.

Good luck everybody.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, February 13, 2020 11:56 PM

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.

How deadly pathogens have escaped the lab — over and over again
Research into dangerous viruses and bacteria is important, but for the deadliest pathogens, it’s not clear the benefits are worth the risks.

In 1977, the last case of smallpox was diagnosed in the wild.

The victim was Ali Maow Maalin of Somalia. The World Health Organization tracked down every person he’d been in face-to-face contact with to vaccinate everyone at risk and find anyone who might have caught the virus already. Thankfully, they found no one had. Maalin recovered, and smallpox appeared to be over forever.

That moment came at the end of a decades-long campaign to eradicate smallpox — a deadly infectious disease that killed about 30 percent of those who contracted it — from the face of the earth. Around 500 million people died of smallpox in the century before it was annihilated.

But in 1978, the disease cropped back up — in Birmingham, in the United Kingdom. Janet Parker was a photographer https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-birmingham-45101091 at Birmingham Medical School. When she developed a horrifying rash, doctors initially brushed it off as chicken pox. After all, everyone knew that smallpox had been chased out of the world — right?

Parker got worse and was admitted to the hospital, where testing determined that she had smallpox after all. She died of it a few weeks later.

How did she get a disease that was supposed to have been eradicated?

It turned out that the building that Parker worked in also contained a research laboratory, one of a handful where smallpox was studied by scientists who were trying to contribute to the eradication effort. Some papers https://books.google.com/books?id=mUhdsCUjJeQC&pg=PA12#v=onepage&a
mp;q&f=false reported https://www.nytimes.com/1979/02/04/archives/smallpox-is-not-dead.html that the lab was badly mismanaged, with important precautions ignored because of haste. (The doctor who ran the lab died by suicide https://www.nytimes.com/1979/02/04/archives/smallpox-is-not-dead.html shortly after Parker was diagnosed.) Somehow, smallpox escaped the lab to infect an employee elsewhere in the building. Through sheer luck and a rapid response from health authorities, including a quarantine of more than 300 people, the deadly error didn’t turn into an outright pandemic.

Could something like that happen today?

All over the world, bio research labs handle deadly pathogens, some with the potential to cause a pandemic. Sometimes, researchers make pathogens even deadlier https://www.vox.com/2019/2/17/18225938/biologists-are-trying-to-make-b
ird-flu-easier-to-spread-can-we-not in the course of their research (as Science Magazine reported last month, the US government just approved two such experiments after years of keeping them on hold).

Research into viruses can help us develop cures and understand disease progression. We can’t do without this research. But on a few notable occasions, it’s gone dangerously wrong and even killed people.

Reviewing the incidents, it looks like there are many different points of failure — machinery that’s part of the containment process malfunctions; regulations aren’t sufficient or aren’t followed. Human error means live viruses are handled instead of dead ones.

Sometimes, these errors could be deadly. “If an enhanced novel strain of flu escaped from a laboratory and then went on to cause a pandemic, then causing millions of deaths is a serious risk,” Marc Lipsitch, a professor of epidemiology at Harvard, told me.

It’s not that there’s a high rate of mistakes in these labs; the rate of mistakes is actually quite low. But it’s one thing to run a one-in-thousands chance of killing a handful of others from a mistake — the odds we face over a lifetime of driving. It’s another thing entirely to accept a similar probability of killing millions of people.

The cost-benefit analysis for pathogens which might kill the people exposed or a handful of others is vastly different from the cost-benefit analysis for pathogens which could cause a global pandemic — but our current procedures don’t really account for that. As a result, we’re running unacceptable risks with millions of lives.

How pathogens can find their way out of the lab

The US government controls research into “select agents and toxins” that pose a serious threat to human health, from bubonic plague to anthrax. There are 66 select agents and toxins regulated under the program and nearly 300 labs https://www.cdc.gov/cpr/whatwedo/sat.htm approved to work with them. Researching pathogens and toxins allows us to develop vaccines, diagnostic tests, and treatments. New biology techniques also allow for more controversial forms of research, including making diseases more virulent or more deadly https://www.vox.com/2019/2/17/18225938/biologists-are-trying-to-make-b
ird-flu-easier-to-spread-can-we-not to anticipate how they might mutate in the wild.

So this research can be really important, and a critical part of public health efforts. Unfortunately, the facilities that do such work can also be plagued by a serious problem: human error.

The 1978 smallpox death was, most analyses found, caused by carelessness — poor lab safety procedures and badly designed ventilation. Most people would like to think that we’re not so careless today. But scary accidents — caused by human error, software failures, maintenance problems, and combinations of all of the above — are hardly a thing of the past.

In 2014, as the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) did cleanup for a planned move to a new office, hundreds of unclaimed vials of virus samples were found in a cardboard box https://www.fda.gov/media/101811/download in the corner of a cold storage room. Six of them, it turned out, were vials of smallpox. No one had been keeping track of them; no one knew they were there. They may have been there since the 1960s.

Panicked scientists put the materials in a box, sealed it with clear packaging tape, and carried it to a supervisor’s office. (This is not approved handling of dangerous biological materials.) It was later found that the integrity of one vial was compromised — luckily, not one containing a deadly virus.

In a lengthy report on how the incident happened, the FDA found persistent, horrifying shortcomings in the handling of these incredibly dangerous materials. Among them:

Quote:
The security and inventory control of orphaned biological materials (material whose owner departed the lab, but did not properly remove, destroy, or transfer the material to a new owner) was not maintained.

...

FDA did not follow the CDC Select Agent Guidelines for the packaging and transfer of samples to a high containment facility for securing the materials.

...

FDA did not conduct a complete inventory of all of its laboratories and associated spaces when smallpox was eradicated in 1980 and all biological agents that cause smallpox were consolidated under the WHO Collaborating Centre repositories at the CDC. FDA also did not conduct a complete inventory when the Federal Select Agent Program was enacted in 2003.

The blizzard of dangerous errors over only a few months in 2014, and the additional errors uncovered by subsequent investigations, inspired the US government to change its practices. https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/sites/default/files/docs/10-2015_
biosafety_and_biosecurity_memo.pdf The government called on all labs that handle secure substances to immediately improve their inventory policies and review their procedures, and to provide written documentation that they’d done so. It launched government-wide reviews to better understand how to safely regulate pandemic pathogens. The FDA began providing better training and conducting periodic audits to make sure that the safety procedures that were ignored in this case are being followed.

The 1979 and 2014 incidents grabbed attention because they involved smallpox, but incidents of unintended exposure to controlled biological agents are actually quite common. https://thebulletin.org/2014/03/threatened-pandemics-and-laboratory-es
capes-self-fulfilling-prophecies/ Hundreds of incidents occur every year, though not all involve potentially pandemic pathogens.

In 2014, a researcher accidentally contaminated a vial of a fairly harmless bird flu with a far deadlier strain. The deadlier bird flu was then shipped across the country to a lab that didn’t have authorization to handle such a dangerous virus, where it was used for research on chickens.

The mistake was discovered only when the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) conducted an extensive investigation in the aftermath of a different mistake https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/cdc-botched-handling-of-dea
dly-flu-virus/ — the potential exposure of 75 federal employees to live anthrax https://www.cdc.gov/media/releases/2014/p0711-lab-safety.html , after a lab that was supposed to inactivate the anthrax samples accidentally prepared activated ones.

The CDC’s Select Agents and Toxins program requires that https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK285575/ “theft, loss, release causing an occupational exposure, or release outside of primary biocontainment barriers” of agents on its watchlist be immediately reported. Between 2005 and 2012, the agency got 1,059 release reports — an average of an incident every few days. Here are a few examples:

• In 2008, a sterilization device malfunctioned and unexpectedly opened http://www.documentcloud.org/documents/2842494-CDC-2008-Autoclave-Pote
ntial-Exposure-Incident.html , exposing a nearby unvaccinated worker to undisclosed pathogens.
• In 2009, a new high-security bio research facility https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2016/06/02/newly-disclosed-cdc-lab
-incidents-fuel-concerns-safety-transparency/84978860/ , rated to handle Ebola, smallpox, and other dangerous pathogens, had its decontamination showers fail. The pressurized chamber kept losing pressure and the door back into the lab kept bursting open while the scientists leaned against it to try to keep it closed. Building engineers were eventually called to handle the chemical showers manually.
• In 2011, a worker at a lab that studied dangerous strains of bird flu found herself unable to shower after a construction contractor accidentally shut off the water. She removed her protective equipment and left without taking a decontaminating shower http://www.documentcloud.org/documents/2842405-CDC-Email-13May2011-Re-
Tech-Leaving-Lab-Without.html . (She was escorted to another building and showered there, but pathogens could have been released in the meantime.)

Now, the vast majority of these mistakes never infect anyone. And while 1,059 is an eye-popping number of accidents, it actually reflects a fairly low rate of accidents — working in a controlled biological agents lab is safe compared to many occupations, like trucking or fishing.

But a trucking or fishing accident will, at worst, kill a few dozen people, while a pandemic pathogen accident could potentially kill a few million. Considering the stakes and worst-case scenarios involved, it’s hard to look at those numbers and conclude that our precautions against disaster are sufficient.

“We have to work with these flu viruses, that is how we can understand them,” Michael Osterholm, director of the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy at the University of Minnesota, told Scientific American https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/cdc-botched-handling-of-dea
dly-flu-virus/ after the string of 2014 containment disasters. “What’s more important is we have to be able to do this safely. That’s really the key piece. We don’t want to stop this work.”

The challenges of safe handling of pathogens

Why is running labs without such errors so hard?

A look at the CDC’s records of Select Agent containment failures helps answer that question. Errors come from many directions. With worrying frequency, people handle live viruses thinking they’ve been given deactivated ones. Technology that’s a critical part of the containment process can fail unexpectedly. It’s not that there’s a single “problem” piece of technology — it’s that there are so many that are a part of the containment process, and all of them have some small risk of failing. We can secure against showers depressurizing and sterilization equipment flying open when it malfunctions, but many other pieces of hardware are a critical part of containment measures, and they might have obscure malfunctions under the wrong conditions too.

These problems don’t just occur in the US. In the United Kingdom, a recent investigation found https://www.theguardian.com/science/2018/feb/09/safety-blunders-expose
-uk-lab-staff-to-potentially-lethal-diseases :

Quote:
more than 40 mishaps at specialist laboratories between June 2015 and July 2017, amounting to one every two to three weeks. Beyond the breaches that spread infections were blunders that led to dengue virus — which kills 20,000 people worldwide each year — being posted by mistake; staff handling potentially lethal bacteria and fungi with inadequate protection; and one occasion where students at the University of the West of England unwittingly studied live meningitis-causing germs which they thought had been killed by heat treatment.

Severe acute respiratory syndrome, or SARS, had an outbreak in 2003. Since then it hasn’t reoccurred in the wild, but there have been six separate incidents https://thebulletin.org/2014/03/threatened-pandemics-and-laboratory-es
capes-self-fulfilling-prophecies/ of it escaping the lab: one in Singapore, one in Taiwan, and four times at one lab in Beijing.

“These narratives of escaped pathogens have common themes,” argued an analysis of biocontainment failures by medical historian Martin Furmanski in the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists https://thebulletin.org/2014/03/threatened-pandemics-and-laboratory-es
capes-self-fulfilling-prophecies/ . “There are unrecognized technical flaws in standard biocontainment, as demonstrated in the UK smallpox [case]. ... The first infection, or index case, happens in a person not working directly with the pathogen that infects him or her, as in the smallpox and SARS escapes. Poor training of personnel and slack oversight of laboratory procedures negate policy efforts by national and international bodies to achieve biosecurity, as shown in the SARS and smallpox escapes.”

It’s easy to see why these problems are hard to address. Adding more rules for those handling pathogens won’t help if the people infected are usually not the ones handling the pathogens. Adding more federal and international regulations won’t help if the regulations aren’t consistently followed. And if there are still unrecognized technical flaws in the standards for biocontainment, how would we know until an incident made those flaws apparent?

This is a worry that’s recently back in the news https://www.vox.com/2019/2/17/18225938/biologists-are-trying-to-make-b
ird-flu-easier-to-spread-can-we-not because the US government has approved research aimed at making certain deadly influenza viruses more virulent — that is, making it easier for them to spread from person to person. The researchers involved want to learn more about transmissibility and virulence, in order to better equip us to combat these diseases. The labs conducting such research have taken unusual steps to ensure their safety and to reduce the risk of an outbreak.

But have they reduced it enough? “We imagine that when there’s an accident, it’s because a ventilation system fails or someone just forgets to do something, or that it’s sort of avoidable mechanical or human error,” Lipsitch told me.

Yet many of the recent failures don’t fit that pattern. “Rather, it was people doing something that they thought was the right thing and was neutralizing a dangerous pathogen by killing it, and in fact they still had some dangerous pathogen or contamination with a dangerous pathogen,” he said. “My concern is not really that one of these people will do something that’s foolish or reflects poor training. My concern is that there’ll be human error of the kind that’s not really avoidable.”

Lipsitch does not think we should tighten standards for most research. He argues that our current approach, while its error rate will never be zero, is a good balance of scientific and global health concerns with safety — that is, for most of the pathogens biologists research. But for the most dangerous pathogens, the ones with the potential to spark a global pandemic, he points out that that calculus doesn’t hold.

The influenza pandemic of 1918 killed 50 million people. Models of how influenza spreads https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4220800/ suggest that an escape from containment by an influenza virus might not be contained in the local community where the incident occurred, as Birmingham’s smallpox outbreak thankfully was. Is it sufficient for procedures to look airtight on paper, when the stakes are so high? Are there any labs in the world that we can confidently expect to be sufficiently careful with pathogens — to never, ever make the mistakes that other labs have made thousands of times despite high standards of caution?

So far, too much biosecurity policy has been reactive — tightening standards after something goes wrong. Given how badly things can go wrong, that’s not good enough. It’ll be exceptionally challenging to make our labs safer, but when it comes to the riskiest pathogens, we simply have to be up to the challenge.

https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/2019/3/20/18260669/deadly-pathogens
-escape-lab-smallpox-bird-flu

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, February 15, 2020 1:03 PM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

A very smart person ... I think it was RUE ... once told me that people are very poor at one thing: VIGILANCE. You might start awake after hearing tiger-like sounds, but after stirring up the fire and staring into the dark for an hour, your eyes start to close.

Or maybe you're on watch for eight hours ... but only manage to be alert for five. That's why we have nuclear power-plant operators sleeping on the job. It's no surprise that Chernobyl happened at night. And usually the worst disasters happen when three or four low-probability things happen. But "low" probability doesn't mean "no" probability, and if you do something, anything, for tens of thousands of hours (fly airplanes, run nuclear power plants, conduct research into deadly pathogens) eventually you run into that "tail" end of the bell curve, when those three or four or five things happened. Maybe the answer to research into deadly organisms should be conducted out in the boondocks, and everyone who works there has to live there, without their families, or any direct contact with the rest of the world.

*****

Well, even as China seems to be getting control of the virus, the WHO and the CDC seem to be getting more and more pessimistic. China and Hong Kong are doing what they're doing by means that would not be tolerated ... or even possible ... in Europe or North America ... creating "cordon sanitaires" and dragging people off the streets en masse and stuffing them into quarantine. Or quarantining entire apartment buildings.

Which means, IMHO, that unless you manage to keep these people isolated FROM EACH OTHER all you will manage to do is create more new cases.

And even isolating people individually doesn't seem to work ... the Diamond Princess cruise ship, an exquisite yet terrifying experiment in quarantining the sick with the well ... has experience a 30% jump in cases

Quote:
Toll of infected passengers and crew aboard 'the Diamond Princess' climbs to 285; The US arranges a charter plane for Americans aboard ship.

https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/china-says-nearly-2000-doctors-
nurses-infected-shortages-medical-supplies-persist

Clearly, whatever they're doing aboard the ship isn't working; let's hope they figure it out before EVERYONE gets infected!

*****

And just an "I told you so", which I should post in the relevant thread ... I have been thumping for quite a few years under What are America's interests? that the USA ... and indeed ALL nations interested in self-preservation ... should have as self-sufficient economy and neutral balance of trade as possible. The reason for that thinking is that highly centralized and interconnected production, while extremely profitable, is also extremely FRAGILE. I have pointed out several cases ... the plastics factory in Japan that was the only source of chip-making plastic which caught on fire, leaving the world with no ability to make memory sticks, the JUST IN TIME delivery which leaves every production facility hostage to any interrruption in transportation ...

Well, here we have China, "factory to the world" (and also source of cheap migrant labor into S Korea and Japan) ... a position which it coveted and which "advanced" nations were willing to give up ... in essence shutting down to control the spread of the Wuhan virus.

Yanno, we can do without Apple products. But China is a source in a vast and unaccounted SUPPLY CHAIN for a vast number of products, from car parts to textiles. They disrupted our entire recycling industry when they stopped taking our contaminated plastics ... what would happen if they were to shut down almost entirely?

When I was working, I had to order specialty chemicals to use as standards so we could analyze a wide variety of industrial and household products. Acrylic glue for packaging tape, the kind so beloved by Amazon. Resins for autobody paints. Surfactants for cleaners and stabilizers/antifungals for house paints. Catalysts for oil refining FCCUs.

Do you know how many were made in the USA?

NONE.

Some in Germany, but mostly in China. Pharmaceutics? Pesticides? Where are THEY coming from?

-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake

Happy New Year, WISHY. I edited out your psychopathic screed!

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, February 15, 2020 3:51 PM

Question, kiki: What is the fastest turnaround that you've seen for coronavirus 2019? Time from exposure to testing positive?

Is it possible that these "new" cases on the cruise ship were spread AFTER the quarantine?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, February 15, 2020 4:57 PM

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.

I could go and look this up, but this timetable I dug out of memory is reasonably OK. The fastest turnaround I know of is on the quarantined ship. The infectious passenger was on the ship for roughly 4@ 24hr-days. He tested positive roughly 4 days after he debarked. The ship was eventually quarantined at Yokohama 2 days after that, which is when people started being tested (and it wasn't reported as such, but it seems that they were tested 'for cause' - ie because of concerning symptoms), and a number of people tested postive.

So in the span of 4days he infected a number of people, and people started testing positive 10days after he boarded. But as the news has told us, there are many false negatives, and there may be an incubation period of up to 24days.

Despite that the newly positive are well within the 24day window, my personal opinion - based on nothing more than my personal sense of how quickly the virus moves through a population by unknown means and how many people have been infected - is that these represent secondary infections.

Here's some information (dug out of memory, which I haven't verified or followed up on) that might explain to you why I feel that way. In Hong Kong, a man and a woman in separate apartments 2 or 3 floors apart, with the man as far as I know not leaving his apartment in weeks - both tested positive for 2019-nCoV. So how did he get it?

They were apparently on the same plumbing waste stack and vent with the man 2 or 3 floors below the woman. Some illegal waste line modification meant that the man's waste stack vent was ultimately open to the apartment air. IN ADDITION, there's historical precedent for the spread of SARS through apartment building waste lines: one building became contaminated and people contracted SARS because - for some reason not clear to me - there was no water in the P-traps. So the waste lines were venting into breathing air and that's how people got exposed. So it seems to me entirely possible that he became exposed through his waste stack vent line.

While the people who study these things claim the ship's ventilation system couldn't possibly be spreading 2019-nCoV (but there's always a chance they're wrong), it could also be spreading through the waste system.

Anyway, I see the potential for spread. I don't think (and it's obvious to me) the virus is as locked-down as they imagine it is. And I don't believe one person created an initial infection event of nearly 300 people all by himself.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, February 15, 2020 9:12 PM

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.

I was curious about how the CDC now does surveillance. Back in the day when I worked at the county hospital, it participated in CDC flu surveillance, which was: during flu season, the hospital received a number of swabs+media from the CDC to be used to sample patients. When a person who looked like they had flu came in to the ER, swab samples were taken and put in the special media and stored, till they were shipped off to the CDC for determination. That was it.

So I was curious how surveillance might be done now, for SARS-COV-2.

Apparently surveillance occurs through several mechanisms. One is participation of a vast majority of ERs and other participants in symptom tracking, through a national shared database, a "cloud-based BioSense Platformexternal, a secure integrated electronic health information system with standardized analytic tools and processes." This was legislated in the 2002, "Public Health Security and Bioterrorism Preparedness and Response Act of 2002". By tracking the numbers of patients with symptoms, where the symptoms seem to be clustering together into some kind of pattern (cough + fever + history of travel to China), to see if a particular cluster of symptoms is surging, it's hoped that epidemics will be detected early.

When it comes to the test kits themselves to test for the virus (what I think they call virilogic surveillance), it's made to be used on a particular instrument (Applied Biosystems 7500 Fast DX Real-Time PCR Instrument with SDS 1.4 software). Apparently the first 400 test kits had 1 bad reagent and so worked poorly; the CDC is working on preparing a better batch. I didn't find a list of who might have received those kits, but I imagine either large public laboratories or research institutions with the appropriate instrument.

When it comes to persons under investigation (for possible 2019-nCoV infection) there are levels of risk and isolation recommended for each category. https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/php/risk-assessment.html Just giving this a quick glance, it seems to me that the vast majority of the infected people on the Diamond Princess would have been considered low-risk, because they either weren't in close contact with the index patient, or they were isolated in their cabins from pretty much everybody else except their cabin-mates during quarantine. "Low Risk - Being in the same indoor environment (e.g., a classroom, a hospital waiting room) as a person with symptomatic laboratory-confirmed 2019-nCoV infection for a prolonged period of time but not meeting the definition of close contact"

What about mass detention? Nothing in the CDC guidance forbids it.

Quote:
Recommendations for Exposure Risk Management

State and local authorities have primary jurisdiction for isolation and other public health orders within their respective jurisdictions. Federal public health authority primarily extends to international arrivals at ports of entry and to preventing interstate communicable disease threats.

CDC recognizes that decisions and criteria to use such public health measures may differ by jurisdiction. Consistent with principles of federalism, state and local jurisdictions may choose to make decisions about isolation, other public health orders, and monitoring that exceed those recommended in federal guidance.

The issuance of a public health order should be considered in the context of other less restrictive means that could accomplish the same public health goals. People under public health orders must be treated with respect, fairness, and compassion, and public health authorities should take steps to reduce the potential for stigma (e.g., through outreach to affected communities, public education campaigns). Considerable, thoughtful planning by public health authorities is needed to implement public health orders properly. Specifically, measures must be in place to provide shelter, food, water, and other necessities for people whose movement is restricted under public health orders, and to protect their dignity and privacy.

This link - with extensive links to other pages - explains the federal authority and role in preventing importation of contagious diseases and spread between states, and other efforts to be prepared for a potential pandemic. https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/php/pandemic-preparedness-re
sources.html

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, February 15, 2020 9:58 PM

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.

So, Jack I was thinking about what you posted - that if I wanted to post AND BE UNDERSTOOD - I should be posting on some biology board.

You're right and I apologize. I do try to keep the jargon down to a minimum. But it goes beyond jargon. There are concepts that I reference that probably aren't obvious to the non-bio person. So I'll try to be more aware of when I'm heading into bio-territory, and adjust my posts to account for that.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, February 15, 2020 11:01 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by 1KIKI:
So, Jack I was thinking about what you posted - that if I wanted to post AND BE UNDERSTOOD - I should be posting on some biology board.

You're right and I apologize. I do try to keep the jargon down to a minimum. But it goes beyond jargon. There are concepts that I reference that probably aren't obvious to the non-bio person. So I'll try to be more aware of when I'm heading into bio-territory, and adjust my posts to account for that.

No need to apologize. We were getting a little sensitive with each other as you and I tend to do from time to time. I'm glad I went out of my way to correct the statement and clarify the "understand" part. I feel even better about it that you've had time to digest that and have given it some thought.

We're cool.

I've got to see far more about this than I want just looking at thumbnails about it in my recommended video feed. Things I recall seeing in the thumbnails now are "you can get it more than once", "it's deadlier the second time", "it causes infertility in males". It's like, meh... whatever.

I think everybody is just over reporting on this right now because they want to deflect from how awful the Democratic Party is right out of the gates in 2020.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, February 16, 2020 2:47 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by 1KIKI:
So, Jack I was thinking about what you posted - that if I wanted to post AND BE UNDERSTOOD - I should be posting on some biology board.

You're right and I apologize. I do try to keep the jargon down to a minimum. But it goes beyond jargon. There are concepts that I reference that probably aren't obvious to the non-bio person. So I'll try to be more aware of when I'm heading into bio-territory, and adjust my posts to account for that.

I request that your please do not dumb down your posts on this forum.
Only one person was unable to comprehend what you have been saying, the rest of us had not problem. There was only one person who was celebrating illiteracy, he was intentionally being obtuse, dumb, and argumentative, and I think he even apologized for it all. The rest of us enjoy your discourse and your ability to not treat us like children with a temper tantrum.

Again, I request that you not dumb down your posts here. This is a Sci-Fi based forum. If you happen to post at Densa, then feel free to dumb down.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, February 16, 2020 2:49 PM

I will try to post here a timeline of the cruise ship events. It may take a while.

I plan to use only data and info culled from this thread, unless otherwise noted.

Cruise Ship:
Fri 17 Jan. 80-year old man flies into Tokyo.
Sun 19 Jan. He acquires cough.
Mon 20 Jan. He boards Cruise Ship.
Sat 25 Jan. He debarks Cruise Ship at Hong Kong.
Thu 30 Jan. He first detects fever, and that day is confirmed as coronavirus.
Mon 3 Feb. Cruise Ship is quarantined.
Tue 4 Feb. 10 Cases confirmed aboard Cruise Ship. later that day, another 10 cases confirmed. Total 20 beyond Patient Zero.
Thu 6 Feb. 41 more cases confirmed aboard Cruise Ship. Total 61.
Fri 7 Feb. First post in this thread about Cruise Ship. 3 Americans confirmed infected.
Sat 8 Feb. 3 more positives, total 64 on Cruise Ship.
Sun 9 Feb. Now 70 cases.
Sun/Mon 9/10 Feb. Another 136 cases confirmed aboard Cruise Ship. (This does not fit with other data - most likely this is 136 total cases, or 95 new cases since 6 Feb.)
Tues 11 Feb. 39 new cases aboard Cruise Ship. Likely total of 175. Report says 174 total confirmed cases of 492 tested on board.
Tues 11 Feb. First non-Cruise person confirmed - a Japanese Quarantine Officer.
Sat 15 Feb. 285 cases on Cruise Ship, planes chartered to evacuate Americans.

Overall:
20 Jan 2020. First Coronavirus case confirmed in America, and this thread starts. Seattle.
23 Jan. Possible case in Brazos Co, TX.
25 Jan. 3 caes in France, 4 in Australia.
26 Jan. Case in Santa Ana, 2nd case in SoCal.
27 Jan. 1st Canada case also infected wife. Toronto.
29 Jan. Flight of 200 Americans from China got out, to March RAFB. (then quarantined)
29 Jan. 5 cases in Americxa, plus suspected case in from Logan Airport (Boston).
30 Jan. 1st person-to-person infection in America. Husband-wife in Chicago.
31 Jan. Insertions finding revealed.
1 Feb. MA confirms 1st case (see 29 Jan).
3 Feb. 11th case in America is person-to-person in CA, Santa Clara Co. Includes 2 in San Benito Co, 1 in Orange Co, 1 in LA Co.
3 Feb. 1st case in NYC.
4 Feb. 1st patient released after treatment. Seattle.
4 Feb. America: 178 tested, 11 confirmed, 82 awaiting results.
5 Feb. Accidental posting of real figures on Tencent.
5 Feb. 12th case is in WI. (Madison, flew in from China)
5 Feb. Also, more charter flights are scheduled from China.
7 Feb. 3 Americans have virus aboard Cruise Ship.
11 Feb. 13th case is evacuee, now in San Diego.
11 Feb. 398 tested in 37 states, 318 negative, 68 pending.
11 Feb. 195 evacuees released from quarantine at March RAFB. (Ontario, CA)
13 Feb. 15th case, evacuee to TX AFB (1st in TX). After 2 evacuees in CA. Includes 8 in CA, 1 in WA, 1 in MA, 1 in AZ, 2 in IL, 1 in WI.

Canada:
27 Jan. 1st Canada case also infected wife. Toronto.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, February 16, 2020 3:26 PM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

KIKI, I appreciate your detailed posts. I come here to read about the Wuhan virus, because you have culled the best parts from the M$M and bird-dogged the scientific studies, and informed your posts with your own knowledge and interpretation. For example, I have never heard before of, or understood how, people could become infected thru waste stack vent pipes.

So thank you for your service of bringing the best and latest info on this topic to the board.

SIX, if this topic distresses you, I warmly and politely suggest that you simply not read this thread. As you have said, you get enuf of it on your suggested news feeds, No need to distress yourself further delving into this topic.

However, just as an aside, if you should at some point desire to become prepared for the zombie apocalypse, you could store 30 pounds of various dried beans and 30 pounds of dried grain (could be wheat, corn, or rice, or all three) plus spices and maybe some dried veggies (dried onion, dried parsley, dried carrot etc for flavor) and dried ham (flavor) plus a quart of canola oil, some fish oil caps, multi-vitamins WITH B-12, and TUMS (or generic) and you'd be set for a month, once you've eatne up everything in your fridge, freezer, and cupboards. If you cook two cups of beans and two cups of grain per day and add 3 T of canola oil that you give you sufficient protein, calories, fat, fiber, and minerals. Just make sure to store them in an airtight, rodent-proof container, and freeze your grains for a couple of weeks to kill any pantry-moth eggs that might be lurking there.

KIKI, since you're a biologist with an interest in nutrition I would appreciate a review of my suggestion. I believe it's short of calcium, but cheese powder is very expensive. Any thoughts?

-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake

Happy New Year, WISHY. I edited out your psychopathic screed!

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, February 16, 2020 3:44 PM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

As an aside ... there are many nations and regions whose healthcare and epidemiological monitoring would be totally incapable of detecting, much less tracking and isolating, Wuhan virus infections. That would be India, most of the 'stans, all of Africa, and all of South and Central America except Cuba. Given that the virus is likely to have already spread to a number of nations such as Singapore, Taiwan, Cambodia, Philippines, Indonesia etc (India and China don't get along, there are very few Chinese in India. Same with Vietnam. But "very few" doesn't mean "none"; and the possibility of spread to these nations still exists.) and will quite possibly spread further, what should the border response be? A ban on ALL international travel? Don't invest in airline stocks or cruise ships!

It was just a thought.

Also, what effect does this have on China's One Belt, One Road project? As a means of moving goods and investing in foreign infrastructure it should be OK, but its people-moving aspect might lag behind, until a successful vaccine and/or antivirals are developed.

-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake

Happy New Year, WISHY. I edited out your psychopathic screed!

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, February 16, 2020 4:13 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
Quote:
Originally posted by 1KIKI:
So, Jack I was thinking about what you posted - that if I wanted to post AND BE UNDERSTOOD - I should be posting on some biology board.

You're right and I apologize. I do try to keep the jargon down to a minimum. But it goes beyond jargon. There are concepts that I reference that probably aren't obvious to the non-bio person. So I'll try to be more aware of when I'm heading into bio-territory, and adjust my posts to account for that.
I request that your please do not dumb down your posts on this forum.
Only one person was unable to comprehend what you have been saying, the rest of us had not problem. There was only one person who was celebrating illiteracy, he was intentionally being obtuse, dumb, and argumentative, and I think he even apologized for it all. The rest of us enjoy your discourse and your ability to not treat us like children with a temper tantrum.

Again, I request that you not dumb down your posts here. This is a Sci-Fi based forum. If you happen to post at Densa, then feel free to dumb down.

It sounds like you're talking about yourself because that's not at all how the conversation went.

Why don't you re-read it before you say something else stupid that you're going to regret?

That's strike two.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, February 16, 2020 4:24 PM

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.

Quote:
I believe it's short of calcium, but cheese powder is very expensive. Any thoughts?

-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake

Happy New Year, WISHY. I edited out your psychopathic screed!

Dry powdered milk?

https://www.fatsecret.com/calories-nutrition/carnation/nonfat-dry-milk
-powder

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, February 16, 2020 4:34 PM

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.

I think the consensus is that I continue to geek-out. But I'll keep in mind that it might be helpful for me to explain some concepts or define some terms.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, February 16, 2020 4:39 PM

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.

This just occurred to me - while the Diamond Princess was a stew of infectivity (and omg would I hate to have been on it), AFAIK there've been no definite cases of person-to-person spread in US-based quarantine (though there have been cases of people who tested negative initially 'converting' to positive). That indicates to me that 1) we need better tests !! and 2) there's an arguable handle on how to prevent transmission.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, February 16, 2020 6:37 PM

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.

Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
... what should the border response be? A ban on ALL international travel?

I don't know what it 'should' be, but having read through some of the CDC's pandemic webpages, it looks like the US has the authority to quarantine anyone or everyone coming across the border, or deny entry, even if the point of entry is by air or ship.
One rumor I've read is that the US is preparing a number of military bases as mass quarantine facilities, but it was posited as for US people.
When it comes to people arriving from other countries ... the CDC is already predicting this will become endemic here (medical definition: present or usually prevalent in a population or geographical area at all times). What it's hoping to do is SLOW the progression from sporadic to endemic, to give medicine a chance to catch up with testing, treatment, and/ or vaccination. So when it comes to foreign entry, I guess it'll depend on how prevalent the virus seems to be in the incoming people (by perhaps country of origin). If it doesn't seem to be adding to the spread, I presume people will be allowed to enter if they're symptom-free. But if it appears to be accelerating spread, I can imagine the borders being closed.
But clearly we need better tests or testing, because results seem far less than meaningful. I agree with China to diagnose on the basis of symptoms - I would argue chest x-day as the most meaningful addition.

Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Also, what effect does this have on China's One Belt, One Road project? As a means of moving goods and investing in foreign infrastructure it should be OK, but its people-moving aspect might lag behind, until a successful vaccine and/or antivirals are developed.

-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake

Happy New Year, WISHY. I edited out your psychopathic screed!

I would imagine that would be the case.

But we'll also see a drop in supplies to the world - as you pointed out even vital fine chemicals and pharmaceuticals. That'll put the US in a world of hurt.

I personally am wondering how this will impact CO2 emissions! A drop in sales = a drop in demand = a drop in manufacturing, at least. And then there is the direct closure of factories themselves to stop the spread. I wonder if we'll see a divot in emissions, like we saw in 2008 from the Great Recession.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, February 16, 2020 6:54 PM

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.

https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/02/bit-chaotic-christening-new-co
ronavirus-and-its-disease-name-create-confusion

COVID-19 is a name for the disease, not for the virus that causes it, which until now had a temporary moniker, 2019-nCoV, signifying it was a novel coronavirus that emerged last year. But the pathogen also got a new designation, which arrived before Tedros had even finished his press conference, by way of a preprint posted on bioRxiv by the body charged with classifying and naming viruses. The Coronavirus Study Group (CSG) of the International Committee on Taxonomy of Viruses, the paper noted, had decided that the virus is a variant of the coronavirus that caused an outbreak of severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) in 2002–03. So, it named the new pathogen severe acute respiratory syndrome-related coronavirus 2, or SARS-CoV-2.

But that’s not a name WHO is happy with, and the agency isn’t planning on adopting it. “From a risk communications perspective, using the name SARS can have unintended consequences in terms of creating unnecessary fear for some populations, especially in Asia which was worst affected by the SARS outbreak in 2003,” a WHO spokesperson wrote in an email to Science. “For that reason and others, in public communications WHO will refer to 'the virus responsible for COVID-19' or 'the COVID-19 virus,' but neither of these designations is intended as replacements for the official name of the virus" that the study group has picked.

comment: So for political reasons - why else? - WHO won't use the official virus name because it's too traumatizing to the people of the countries who underwent the SARS outbreak in 2002-2003. And thus, a useful designation that carries scientific meaning - ie - the virus is a variation of SARS - won't be used by everyone.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, February 16, 2020 7:07 PM

It would be far too late to close the borders at this point.

I think that people who make decisions should look at this virus as a precursor for what's down the pike, since it's only a matter of time until something extremely deadly and highly contagious makes an outbreak.

At this point, and forgive me for sounding like a dick here, I'm hoping that this is a bit more serious than I've thought it was and that it does make a large and negative impact here in the states. Nothing earth shattering, but enough to give a serious sting and to get people to be a little outraged about how it was handled.

Even somebody like JSF was giving me shit when I said that we shouldn't let US citizens back in from China, as if I am unpatriotic to even think such an idea. I want him to be wrong here. I want people like him to even think that it's a bad idea to take American citizens back from countries where an outbreak is occurring.

It's all fun and games until a few million people die.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, February 17, 2020 10:16 AM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

We can let evacuees in, provided that they're quarantined for a month, and (since there seems to be an unacceptable false negative rate with testing) tested multiple times throughout their quarantine before being released (also, if anyone tests positive the clock to being released for the whole group is reset to zero.)

What we CAN'T do is test EVERYONE who crosses our borders: tourists, students, businesspeople, guest workers, and (of course) legal and illegant migrants, so a border ban might be in order, especially if we're trying to stampout the Wuhn virus here.

*****

Oh, toilet paper. Don't forget the toilet paper in your emergency kit. A pack of N95 masks and a box of disposable gloves and a pump-bottle of hand sanitizer, shampoo, toothpaste, and a month's worth of whatever medication you're taking.

Unfortunately for us, dear daughter can't eat beans and dear hubby can't eat too much starch, so I will have to think up another emergency kit for the family.

-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake

Happy New Year, WISHY. I edited out your psychopathic screed!

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, February 17, 2020 2:20 PM

Well yeah, I already mentioned that this entire thing was a great advertisement for Bernie's Open Borders.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, February 17, 2020 7:26 PM

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.

If there were sufficiently good tests for SARS-COV-2 that were accurate enough, cheap enough, and fast enough - the government could go out and test random people in the population, instead of waiting for sick people to show up in the ER, or at some type of border entry. That would give the government an earlier, better idea of distribution in the particular population they were testing.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, February 17, 2020 8:10 PM

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.

https://www.zerohedge.com/health/us-breaks-diamond-princess-quarantine
-flies-13-coronavirus-infected-americans-omaha-facility

As a reminder, the Princess Cruises ship was carrying 2,666 guests and 1,045 crew when it set sail and was quarantined after 10 cases of coronavirus were reported Feb. 4. Since then the number of cases on board has exploded, and on Monday alone, Japan announced an additional 99 infections on the Diamond Princess, raising the ship’s total number of cases to 454. And since most of the people on the ship have yet to be tested, the real number of infections may not be known for days.

"The quarantine process failed," Fauci said. "I'd like to sugarcoat it and try to be diplomatic about it, but it failed. People were getting infected on that ship. Something went awry in the process of the quarantining on that ship. I don't know what it was, but a lot of people got infected on that ship."

What might have gotten awry is that the virus is airborne and spread via the air conditioning system. But before we get banned from another social network, we will wait for someone "more credible" to make that claim.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, February 17, 2020 8:34 PM

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.

I learned a lot from this exceptional basic explanation of epidemiology and prediction. And there are many links to sources and related articles, so you might be interested in going to the original.

https://www.statnews.com/2020/02/14/disease-modelers-see-future-of-cov
id-19/

Disease modelers gaze into their computers to see the future of Covid-19, and it isn’t good
By Sharon Begley @sxbegle
February 14, 2020

At least 550,000 cases. Maybe 4.4 million. Or something in between.

Like weather forecasters, researchers who use mathematical equations to project how bad a disease outbreak might become are used to uncertainties and incomplete data, and Covid-19, the disease caused by the new-to-humans coronavirus that began circulating in Wuhan, China, late last year, has those everywhere you look. That can make the mathematical models of outbreaks, with their wide range of forecasts, seem like guesswork gussied up with differential equations; the eightfold difference in projected Covid-19 cases in Wuhan, calculated by a team from the U.S. and Canada, isn’t unusual for the early weeks of an outbreak of a never-before-seen illness.

But infectious-disease models have been approximating reality better and better in recent years, thanks to a better understanding of everything from how germs behave to how much time people spend on buses.

“Year by year there have been improvements in forecasting models and the way they are combined to provide forecasts,” said physicist Alessandro Vespignani of Northeastern University, a leading infectious-disease modeler.

That’s not to say there’s not room for improvement. The key variables of most models are mostly the same ones epidemiologists have used for decades to predict the course of outbreaks. But with greater computer power now at their disposal, modelers are incorporating more fine-grained data to better reflect the reality of how people live their lives and interact in the modern world — from commuting to work to jetting around the world. These more detailed models can take weeks to spit out their conclusions, but they can better inform public health officials on the likely impact of disease-control measures.

Models are not intended to be scare machines, projecting worst-case possibilities. (Modelers prefer “project” to “predict,” to indicate that the outcomes they describe are predicated on numerous assumptions.) The idea is to calculate numerous what-ifs: What if schools and workplaces closed? What if public transit stopped? What if there were a 90% effective vaccine and half the population received it in a month?

“Our overarching goal is to minimize the spread and burden of infectious disease,” said Sara Del Valle, an applied mathematician and disease modeler at Los Alamos National Laboratory. By calculating the effects of countermeasures such as social isolation, travel bans, vaccination, and using face masks, modelers can “understand what’s going on and inform policymakers,” she said. For instance, although many face masks are too porous to keep viral particles out (or in), their message of possible contagion here! “keeps people away from you” and reduces disease spread, Del Valle said. “I’m a fan of face masks.”

The clearest sign of the progress in modeling comes from flu forecasts in the U.S. Every year, about two dozen labs try to model the flu season, and have been coming ever closer to accurately forecasting its timing, peak, and short-term intensity. The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention determines which model did the best; for 2018-2019, it was one from Los Alamos.

Los Alamos also nailed the course of the 2003 outbreak of SARS in Toronto, including when it would peak. “And it was spot on in the number of people who would be infected,” said Del Valle: just under 400 in that city, of a global total of about 8,000.

The computers that run disease models grind through calculations that reflect researchers’ best estimates of factors that two Scottish researchers identified a century ago as shaping the course of an outbreak: how many people are susceptible, how many are infectious, and how many are recovered (or dead) and presumably immune.

That sounds simple, but errors in any of those estimates can send a model wildly off course. In the autumn of 2014, modelers at CDC projected that the Ebola outbreak in West Africa could reach 550,000 to 1.4 million cases in Liberia and Sierra Leone by late January if nothing changed. As it happened, heroic efforts to isolate patients, trace contacts, and stop unsafe burial practices kept the number of cases to 28,600 (and 11,325 deaths).

To calculate how people move from “susceptible” to “infectious” to “recovered,” modelers write equations that include such factors as the number of secondary infections each infected person typically causes and how long it takes from when one person gets sick to when the people she infects does. “These two numbers define the growth rate of an epidemic,” Vespignani said.

The first number is called the basic reproduction number. Written R0 (“R naught”), it varies by virus; a strain that spreads more easily through the air, as by aerosols rather than heavier droplets released when an infected person sneezes or coughs, has a higher R0. It has been a central focus of infectious disease experts in the current outbreak because a value above 1 portends sustained transmission. When the R0 of Covid-19 was estimated several weeks ago to be above 2, social media exploded with “pandemic is coming!” hysteria.

But while important, worshipping at the shrine of R0 “belies the complexity that two different pathogens can exhibit, even when they have the same R0,” the Canadian-U.S. team argues in a paper posted to the preprint site medRxiv. Said senior author Antoine Allard of Laval University in Quebec, “the relation between R0, the risk of an epidemic, and its potential size becomes less straightforward, and sometimes counterintuitive in more realistic models.”

To make models more realistic, he and his colleagues argue, they should abandon the simplistic assumption that everyone has the same likelihood of getting sick from Covid-19 after coming in contact with someone already infected. For SARS, for instance, that likelihood clearly varied.

“Bodies may react differently to an infection, which in turn can facilitate or inhibit the transmission of the pathogen to others,” Allard said. “The behavioral component is also very important. Can you afford to stay at home a few days or do you go to work even if you are sick? How many people do you meet every day? Do you live alone? Do you commute by car or public transportation?”

When people’s chances of becoming infected vary, an outbreak is more likely to be eventually contained (by tracing contacts and isolating cases); it might reach a cumulative 550,000 cases in Wuhan, Allard and his colleagues concluded. If everyone has the same chance, as with flu (absent vaccination), the probability of containment is significantly lower and could reach 4.4 million there. Or as the researchers warn, “the outbreak almost certainly cannot be contained and we must prepare for a pandemic ….”

Modelers are also incorporating the time between when one person becomes ill and someone she infects does. If every case infects two people and that takes two days, then the epidemic doubles every two days. If every case infects two people and they get sick four days after the first, then the epidemic doubles every four days.

Called “agent-based models,” they simulate hypothetical individuals, sometimes tens of millions of them, as they go about their day. That requires knowing things like how many people commute from where to where for work or school, how they travel, where and how often they shop, whether it’s customary to visit the sick, and other key details. Computers then simulate everyone’s movements and interactions, for instance by starting with one infected person leaving home in the morning, chatting with other parents at school drop-off, continuing to work on a bus, standing 2 feet from customers and colleagues, and visiting a pharmacy for her migraine prescription.

The models keep track of people second by second, said Los Alamos computer scientist Geoff Fairchild, “and let you assess the impact of different decisions, like closing schools during flu season.” (Some research shows that can dampen an outbreak.) Although “agent-based models can simulate reality better,” he said, they are less widely used because they require enormous computing power. Even on the Los Alamos supercomputer, a single run of a complicated model can take days or even weeks — not counting the weeks of work modelers spend writing equations to feed the computer.

The Los Alamos researchers are still wrestling with their Covid-19 model, which is showing — incorrectly — the outbreak “exploding quite quickly in China,” Del Valle said. It is overestimating how many susceptible people become infected, probably because it’s not accurately accounting for social isolation and other countermeasures. Those seem to have reduced R0 toward the lower range of 2-to-5 that most modelers are using, she said.

In the current outbreak, researchers are building models not only to peek into the future but also to reality-check the present. Working backwards from confirmed infections in countries other than mainland China, researchers at Imperial College London who advise the World Health Organization estimated that Wuhan had 1,000 to 9,700 symptomatic cases as of Jan. 18. Three days later, all of mainland China had officially reported 440 cases, supporting the concerns of global health officials that China was undercounting.

In a more recent model run, Jonathan Read of England’s University of Lancaster and his colleagues estimated “that only about 1 in 20 infections were being detected” in late January, Read said: There were probably 11,090 to 33,490 infections in Wuhan as of Jan. 22, when China reported 547 cases. “It highlights how difficult it is to track down and identify this virus,” Read said, especially with residents of quarantined Wuhan being turned away from overwhelmed hospitals and clinics without being tested for the virus. Using a similar approach, modelers led by Dr. Wai-Kit Ming of Jinan University in Guangzhou estimated that through Jan. 31, China probably had 88,000 cases, not the 11,200 reported.

Read’s group is updating its model to estimate the fraction of true cases in February; China’s cumulative cases topped 60,000 on Thursday.

For modelers, a huge undercount can corrupt the data they base their equations on. But even with that disadvantage the Covid-19 models “are doing quite well, despite a lot of complicated dynamics on the ground,” said Los Alamos’s Fairchild. While it’s not clear yet if they’ve nailed the true numbers of cases, they are correctly projecting the outbreak’s basic shape: increasing exponentially, the number of cases growing more quickly the more cases there are.

This “serial time” is related to how quickly a virus multiplies, and it can have a big effect. For a study published this month in Annals of Internal Medicine, researchers at the University of Toronto created an interactive tool that instantly updates projections based on different values of R0 and serial interval.

Using an R0 of 2.3 and serial interval of seven days, they project 300,000 cases by next week. If the serial interval is even one day less, the number of cases blasts past 1.5 million by then. But if the countermeasures that China introduced in January, including isolating patients, encouraging people to wear face masks, and of course quarantining Wuhan, reduce the effective reproduction number, as has almost certainly happened, those astronomical numbers would plummet: to 100,000 and 350,000 cases, respectively.

Just as public health officials care how long someone can be infected without showing symptoms (so they know how long to monitor people), so do modelers. “When people are exposed but not infected, they tend to travel and can’t be detected,” Vespignani said. “The more realistic you want your model to be, the more you should incorporate” the exposed-but-not-ill population. This “E” has lately become a fourth category in disease models, joining susceptible, infectious, and recovered.

At Los Alamos, Del Valle and her colleagues are using alternatives to the century-old susceptible/infectious/recovered models in hopes of getting a more realistic picture of an outbreak’s likely course. A bedrock assumption of the traditional models is “homogeneous mixing,” Del Valle said, meaning everyone has an equal chance of encountering anyone. That isn’t what happens in the real world, where people are more likely to encounter others of similar income, education, age, and even religion (church pews can get crowded).

“Ideally, you’d break the population into many groups” and estimate the likelihood of each one’s members interacting with each other and with every kind of outsider, Del Valle said. “Your model would become more accurate.”

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, February 18, 2020 1:06 AM

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.

https://summit.news/2020/02/17/who-holds-secret-talks-with-tech-giants
-to-stop-spread-of-coronavirus-misinformation/
WHO Holds Secret Talks With Tech Giants To Stop Spread of Coronavirus “Misinformation”
Despite the fact that some things labeled “misinformation” turned out to be true.
The meeting was organized by the WHO but hosted by Facebook at its Menlo Park campus in California. Attendees included representatives from Amazon, Twilio, Dropbox, Google, Verizon, Salesforce, Twitter, YouTube, Airbnb, Kinsa and Mapbox.
According to the WHO’s Andy Pattison, an “infodemic” of misinformation has accompanied the coronavirus outbreak and big tech giants need to respond by censoring “fake news” content.
Both Facebook and Twitter already announced that they would remove content deemed to be misinformation regarding the virus, a dangerous new lurch to mass censorship ...
I mentioned earlier in the thread that I noticed an abundance of "official' sources on duckduckgo/ google while I was looking for new-news. I've been told that google has been monkeying with its search results, moving officialese/ propaganda higher on the list. Now some social media are outright removing content.

https://www.epsilontheory.com/the-industrially-necessary-doctor-tedros/
The Industrially Necessary Doctor Tedros
"The World Health Organization is working with Google to ensure that people get facts from WHO first when they search for information about the new virus that recently emerged in China.
Since the outbreak began, a number of misleading claims and hoaxes about the virus have circulated online. They include false conspiracy theories that the virus was created in a lab and that vaccines have already been manufactured, exaggerations about the number of sick and dead, and claims about bogus cures." - Associated Press, Feb. 3, 2020
It’s not just Google. It’s also Ten Cent. It’s also Facebook. It’s also Twitter.
This article makes a cogent case that Tedros is merely parroting the Chinese Party Line. But because Tedros gives it WHO's official stamp, anyone disagreeing with WHO ... that in effect are disagreeing with propaganda, could be banned as spreading 'misinformation'.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, February 18, 2020 4:01 PM

https://ca.news.yahoo.com/coronavirus-diamond-princess-canadians-15451
3845.html

https://ca.news.yahoo.com/chef-jose-andres-provides-meals-115149233.ht
ml

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, February 18, 2020 6:12 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by 1KIKI:
https://summit.news/2020/02/17/who-holds-secret-talks-with-tech-giants
-to-stop-spread-of-coronavirus-misinformation/
WHO Holds Secret Talks With Tech Giants To Stop Spread of Coronavirus “Misinformation”
Despite the fact that some things labeled “misinformation” turned out to be true.
The meeting was organized by the WHO but hosted by Facebook at its Menlo Park campus in California. Attendees included representatives from Amazon, Twilio, Dropbox, Google, Verizon, Salesforce, Twitter, YouTube, Airbnb, Kinsa and Mapbox.
According to the WHO’s Andy Pattison, an “infodemic” of misinformation has accompanied the coronavirus outbreak and big tech giants need to respond by censoring “fake news” content.
Both Facebook and Twitter already announced that they would remove content deemed to be misinformation regarding the virus, a dangerous new lurch to mass censorship ...
I mentioned earlier in the thread that I noticed an abundance of "official' sources on duckduckgo/ google while I was looking for new-news. I've been told that google has been monkeying with its search results, moving officialese/ propaganda higher on the list. Now some social media are outright removing content.

https://www.epsilontheory.com/the-industrially-necessary-doctor-tedros/
The Industrially Necessary Doctor Tedros
"The World Health Organization is working with Google to ensure that people get facts from WHO first when they search for information about the new virus that recently emerged in China.
Since the outbreak began, a number of misleading claims and hoaxes about the virus have circulated online. They include false conspiracy theories that the virus was created in a lab and that vaccines have already been manufactured, exaggerations about the number of sick and dead, and claims about bogus cures." - Associated Press, Feb. 3, 2020
It’s not just Google. It’s also Ten Cent. It’s also Facebook. It’s also Twitter.
This article makes a cogent case that Tedros is merely parroting the Chinese Party Line. But because Tedros gives it WHO's official stamp, anyone disagreeing with WHO ... that in effect are disagreeing with propaganda, could be banned as spreading 'misinformation'.

mmmm. So.

Do you believe the information you posted about insertions in the DNA/RNA are factually accurate, or a hoax?

These are now defined as "misinformation" by WHO, correct?

Do you have an idea, or can recall some of the "misinformation" which has been proven true? Like which specific items?

Do you think this is a global assault on the Freedom of Speech?
U.S.A is the only place with Freedom of Speech in the world, correct?
The conference was held in the U.S.
Without Freedom of Speech, all other nations may believe they can completely control which propaganda is issued to the masses, but the pesky U.S. messes that up for some nations.
In movies and novels, some plot use government control of media to regulate panic, mass hysteria. Sometimes for Outbreaks, or else Aliens, etc. The mass hysteria of Trump-haters is unfettered, but real information on coronavirus seems readily scrubbed.
Is this all targeting Free Speech?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, February 18, 2020 6:53 PM

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.

Quote:
Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
Do you believe the information you posted about insertions in the DNA/RNA are factually accurate, or a hoax?

It SHOULD be a HUGE topic of study. But after a comment on bioRxiv (preprint server of Cold Springs Harbor Laboratory) by someone who claims to have used the same data and software and linked SARS-COV-2 to existing SARS binding sites (rather than HIV), I've found nothing. And indeed, after reading a large number of claims that the paper was withdrawn, it still is available at the bioRxiv site: https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.01.30.927871v1.full.pdf

I can't conclude anything except that it seems to be a verboten topic.

Quote:
These are now defined as "misinformation" by WHO, correct?

AFAIK, yes. The official story is that while the virus may have come from bats, the source hasn't been identified, but it came from the live market in Wuhan, and nowhere else. And don't you forget it.
https://www.bostonherald.com/2020/02/03/the-latest-uae-suspends-flight
s-to-china-outside-beijing/

Quote:
Do you have an idea, or can recall some of the "misinformation" which has been proven true? Like which specific items?

OMG - how many? Start of epidemic. Source of epidemic. Transmissibility between people. Number of cases. Actions taken by China to limit the spread ...

Quote:
Do you think this is a global assault on the Freedom of Speech?

Yes. The media and the internet span the globe. It's not a question of IF major players have met to decide what we can and can't see. It's a question of how much they decided to let us see.

Quote:
U.S.A is the only place with Freedom of Speech in the world, correct?

IDK if other countries have a similar constitutional 'guarantee'.

Quote:
Without Freedom of Speech, all other nations may believe they can completely control which propaganda is issued to the masses, but the pesky U.S. messes that up for some nations.

The US is all on board with censorship.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/2020/01/29/coronavirus-symptoms-fa
cebook-youtube-twitter-misinformation/4610730002/
Coronavirus outbreak: Facebook, Google, YouTube and Twitter scramble to contain misinformation

Quote:

In movies and novels, some plot use government control of media to regulate panic, mass hysteria. Sometimes for Outbreaks, or else Aliens, etc. The mass hysteria of Trump-haters is unfettered, but real information on coronavirus seems readily scrubbed.
Is this all targeting Free Speech?

Whether it's intended or not ... ultimately? Yes, Free Speech is a victim, along with actual dead people and those permanently impacted. But honestly, I don't care about the rest of the world. I care about here, in the US. Our 'news' has been distorted for a long, long time. But looking for 'news' on the coronavirus, given my background and experience, it's horrifyingly obvious how deeply it's been truncated to officialese and propaganda.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, February 19, 2020 12:09 PM

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.

NYTimes:

Japan Lets Cruise Passengers Walk Free. Is That Safe?

As a quarantine over a coronavirus outbreak ended, experts expressed alarm over the protocols on the ship, which has 621 confirmed infections.

CNN:

A total of 624 cases of the virus are linked to the stricken ship.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, February 19, 2020 12:21 PM