Markola
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
A lot of thoughtful comments here. One assumption above seems to be that someone who has had the virus becomes immune. Do scientists know that yet?
A lot of thoughtful comments here. One assumption above seems to be that someone who has had the virus becomes immune. Do scientists know that yet?
I think they do, and the main unknown seems to be how long the immunity lasts.
It is less clear what those antibody tests mean for real life, however, because immunity functions on a continuum. With some pathogens, such as the varicella-zoster virus (which causes chicken pox), infection confers near-universal, long-lasting resistance. Natural infection with Clostridium tetani, the bacterium that causes tetanus, on the other hand, offers no protection—and even people getting vaccinated for it require regular booster shots. On the extreme end of this spectrum, individuals infected with HIV often have large amounts of antibodies that do nothing to prevent or clear the disease.
At this early stage of understanding the new coronavirus, it is unclear where COVID-19 falls on the immunity spectrum. Although most people with SARS-CoV-2 seem to produce antibodies, “we simply don’t know yet what it takes to be effectively protected from this infection,” says Dawn Bowdish, a professor of pathology and molecular medicine and Canada Research Chair in Aging and Immunity at McMaster University in Ontario. Researchers are scrambling to answer two questions: How long do SARS-CoV-2 antibodies stick around? And do they protect against reinfection?
Early on, some people—most notably U.K. Prime Minister Boris Johnson (who has the virus and is currently in intensive care) and his government’s scientific adviser Patrick Vallance—touted hopes that herd immunity could be an eventual means for ending the pandemic. And although it appears that recovered COVID-19 patients have antibodies for at least two weeks, long-term data are still lacking. So many scientists are looking to other coronaviruses for answers.
Antibody testing shows SARS-CoV immunity peaks at around four months and offers protection for roughly two to three years. As Preeti Malani, chief health officer and a professor of medicine at the University of Michigan, said in a video interview with JAMA Editor in Chief Howard Bauchner,this period presents “a pretty good time line for thinking about vaccines and therapeutics” for COVID-19.
But other than that, what’s the problem?
I agree that this may get worse but the bolded text makes it sound like the governors are at fault since they "get" to make their own decisions. The problem is there is no real national effort to give them a solid plan. I suspect most of those governors would be glad to join into a well thought out Federal plan if one was forthcoming.There is no exit strategy, at least not one that will be well-coordinated. There are numerous state governors and big city mayors who apparently get to make the decision to rescind their individual shutdown orders.
There will be people who will fear for their own life if their area opens up, and there will be people who will fear for their family's livelihood if their area doesn't open up. This is going to get far, far worse.
+1 And, again, without a national strategy this will be far worse than it need be. Using the logistical capabilities of the military and procurement authorities of the DPA to pay for and distribute tests is critical to enable testing of symptomatic (but not seriously sick) people with quick followup on positives (e.g. tracing and testing their contacts).There is no perfect plan, but we have to restart sooner or later. We should weigh all the risks, but we can’t wait to eliminate every risk. Some people will die, but nothing like an uncoordinated effort. Over 2 million people die in the US every year due to various illnesses and accidents (excluding old age) and we accept that without much thought. As usual, we can’t let the perfect be the enemy of the good. Some people will go back to soon, some people will choose to stay away (long) after we’re allowed.
And some businesses may be forever changed, e.g. large concerts, festivals, sporting events, weddings and funerals, restaurants and bars, museums and galleries, movies and theater, air travel and hotels - anything that involves crowds of strangers and/or communal use without extensive verifiable cleaning. I think the latter has been more common in Asia, and will become more common in the West now.
There have been about 80 deaths from Covid, and about 80 deaths from the 2019/2020 flu season.
Viruses do not hibernate. Viruses continue only as long as they remain viable on a host. So during the usual flu season, influenza tends to move across continents, eg. when flu season “ends” in NA, it actually has moved south of the equator. Some viruses can be carried by multiple species, like SARS CoV2 has been found to be carried by cats (house cats, and the lion/tigers at Bronx zoo). This potentially could serve as a reservoir for later re-emergence in a human population. If a virus could no longer find a naive host, it would die out....Even if this virus goes into hibernation for awhile and infection rates drop significantly...
I can't make any sense in my mind of how a partial return to businesses that are shut down would even work. No dine-in restaurant can work financially with either spaced out seating or some limited demographic for clientele. Planes can't fly at 50% load factors and not lose $, even in this time of cheap fuel. Either you are cutting hair, giving massages, doing nails, etc., or not. Brick-and-mortar retail - same as restaurants - fixed costs are the same but fewer customers? And being open doesn't mean there is demand for the things one sells.
Our consumer-based economy is fine-tuned to maximize profit and therefore optimize efficiency.
And I find the idea of localized open areas vs. shut-down areas unfathomable. One town (county, state....) over, the Hobby Lobby or sit-down restaurant is open but my local version is closed? How has the US consumer usually responded to such situations? Gas is cheap!
I can't make any sense in my mind of how a partial return to businesses that are shut down would even work. No dine-in restaurant can work financially with either spaced out seating or some limited demographic for clientele. Planes can't fly at 50% load factors and not lose $, even in this time of cheap fuel. Either you are cutting hair, giving massages, doing nails, etc., or not. Brick-and-mortar retail - same as restaurants - fixed costs are the same but fewer customers? And being open doesn't mean there is demand for the things one sells.
Our consumer-based economy is fine-tuned to maximize profit and therefore optimize efficiency.
And I find the idea of localized open areas vs. shut-down areas unfathomable. One town (county, state....) over, the Hobby Lobby or sit-down restaurant is open but my local version is closed? How has the US consumer usually responded to such situations? Gas is cheap!
Dentists are going to have a tough time reopening. Much of their business is routine cleaning and exams. Having someone’s face inches from yours while their hands are in your mouth does not fit the definition of social distancing. And since cleanings are preventative, they are easy to put off.
My dental cleaning is scheduled for next week. My dentist beat me to it by sending me a text letting me know it was cancelled.
My Dentist's office closed before social distancing was implemented. Nothing but emergency services. DWs brother is a dentist in SW SW Florida. He's finally closed, middle of March, for all except emergency services.Dentists are going to have a tough time reopening. Much of their business is routine cleaning and exams. Having someone’s face inches from yours while their hands are in your mouth does not fit the definition of social distancing. And since cleanings are preventative, they are easy to put off.
My dental cleaning is scheduled for next week. My dentist beat me to it by sending me a text letting me know it was cancelled.
We just have to get over this "hump" thing and go back to business so everyone can get infected at a lower rate and get the immunity thing going.
Survive it or die. Natural selection.
Earlier this week, our governor suggested that businesses that can comply with social distancing might be able to open up when he starts to lift restrictions, while those that can't maintain social distancing would have to remain closed. Forgetting for the moment public establishments, that's not even possible in many offices. Think cube farms.
I agree that this may get worse but the bolded text makes it sound like the governors are at fault since they "get" to make their own decisions. The problem is there is no real national effort to give them a solid plan. I suspect most of those governors would be glad to join into a well thought out Federal plan if one was forthcoming.
+1 And, again, without a national strategy this will be far worse than it need be. Using the logistical capabilities of the military and procurement authorities of the DPA to pay for and distribute tests is critical to enable testing of symptomatic (but not seriously sick) people with quick followup on positives (e.g. tracing and testing their contacts).
The Federal government has no power to issue an edict/order to do so, unless Congress gives the President to do so. In this current environment, it isn't going to happen. Lawyers were chomping at the bit to go to court the moment a nationwide quarantine was put into effect. Elected governors/mayors do have that power to do that in their jurisdictions. The Federal government can only issue guidelines. Also, one size does not fit all, and I would rather have a more local elected politician make the decision for their constituents because they are/should be more responsive to there own. It is the basic principle of Federalism.
The Federal government has no power to issue an edict/order to do so, unless Congress gives the President to do so. In this current environment, it isn't going to happen. Lawyers were chomping at the bit to go to court the moment a nationwide quarantine was put into effect. Elected governors/mayors do have that power to do that in their jurisdictions. The Federal government can only issue guidelines. Also, one size does not fit all, and I would rather have a more local elected politician make the decision for their constituents because they are/should be more responsive to there own. It is the basic principle of Federalism.
To be fair, a virus does not care about state borders.