Coronavirus: What questions do you have?

The Rocketry Forum

Help Support The Rocketry Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Why does vaping or smoking increase the odds of death?

Nicotine and tobacco cause inflammation at a baseline in the lungs and thus the inflammation is worsened by COVID. Long term smoking destroys the elasticity of the lung and causing obstructions. This can make it impossible for your body to respond to increased need during the stress of the infection. That is a little simplified, but you can see why it is causing problems.

In our local area, 100% of those under 50 that have died, smoked, vaped, or had some immunocompromised state.
 
Dammit, Eric!

That was the first thing that came to my mind, too.

Trivia: Actor portraying Immortan Joe played The ToeCutter in Mad Max.

I didn’t know Immortan Joe and the Toecutter were played by the same actor. Cool trivia!
 
Do we know what Germany is doing different? Is it how they are counting or do they have a different treatment??

Looking at the latest data
Country Confirmed cases Deaths
Italy 119800 14680
Spain 119200 11198
Germany 91959 1277


Italy and Spain are nearly tied for cases. The death rate is "in the same ballpark" for Italy and Spain
The nearly 92K for Germany vs 120K each for Italy and Spain are also in the same ballpark, but the German death rate is only 10% of Italy or Spain. Why?

Thanks! - Stay Healthy!!!!

Germany is testing more. In fact, they are testing much less symptomatic folks. That can be a dual-edged sword because if they test negative because they shedding less, it can create a false negative. That false sense of security can lead to more infections.

Time will tell if the increased testing leads to fewer deaths.
 
I apologize if someone has already posted this link about "blue shop towels"... my only excuse is that I didn't want to go back through 26 pages of comments... that's what I get for being "late to the party".
Anyhow, according to this article, incorporating "blue shop towel" material into a cloth mask, greatly improve the filtration of sub-micron particles. Of course, wouldn't you know, case of Scott towels I found in my shop are least effective... guess we'll just double and triple the layers.

https://www.businessinsider.com/hom...s9ZKufxn_eyS1yiZXcC35qSzO9D9svay1ZYmUtcJtkpvY
 
Anyhow, according to this article, incorporating "blue shop towel" material into a cloth mask, greatly improve the filtration of sub-micron particles.
I have read that cut up vacuum cleaner bags have the highest particle filtering efficiency of readily available materials tested. Might be a moot point if a homemade face mask has significant leakage around the mask, which I suspect is the case. Still better than nothing, I guess.
 
Last edited:
I apologize if someone has already posted this link about "blue shop towels"... my only excuse is that I didn't want to go back through 26 pages of comments... that's what I get for being "late to the party".
Anyhow, according to this article, incorporating "blue shop towel" material into a cloth mask, greatly improve the filtration of sub-micron particles. Of course, wouldn't you know, case of Scott towels I found in my shop are least effective... guess we'll just double and triple the layers.

https://www.businessinsider.com/hom...s9ZKufxn_eyS1yiZXcC35qSzO9D9svay1ZYmUtcJtkpvY

Blue shop towels work. The thing most people confuse is the purpose of wearing a mask. Masks protect others from aerosol and droplets from you. Most of those who catch this virus still catch it from hands to eyes, mouth, or nose. The mast helps protect others from you passing the virus. Close contact will also pass the virus.

Does a mask protect you from others?: yes, but not as much as social distancing and hand washing.
 
How accurate are the tests?

That is not an easy question. It depends on the test performed. I will list the test types available now in order of most accurate to least.

Tests:
  1. PCR or Polymerase Chain reaction: This test is very similar to the test performed on DNA to look for DNA evidence in a murder. I would call this a good rule in text and not a good rule-out test. It looks at the DNA or RNA for a virus and compares it to a known sample. The sufferer must be a shedder or producer of viruses for it to test positive. Symptoms can be a sign of shedding. If the proper incubation period has not passed (48-96 hours) or if the testee is not symptomatic enough, the test may be a false negative due to the prematurity of the testing. The false-positive rate is about 3-5% and the false-negative rate is 2-17 percent based om tester technique and symptomology. Test time varies by machine but 15-18 minutes to hours. Our machine will do 19 samples every 3-4 hours.
  2. Serology or antibody testing: Approved last week. Tests for IgM or IgG antibodies that our bodies form against the virus. These can be both office testing like pregnancy testing and lab-based testing. These are good population bases screening tests for exposure are not great to reveal an active infection. In fact, they have a significant cross-reactivity to other Coronaviruses which most of us have had already. They may indicate a degree or complete immunity. It is neither specific but is fairly sensitive for a prior coronavirus infection. The length of the test depends on son the total antibody load (minutes to an hour).
  3. Antigen testing: Approved in April. It uses a viral particle that is released when our bodies attempt to fight it off. A good sign on an active infection. Unsure sensitivity and specificity. This could be the smoking gun for widespread testing. Test time 2-3 hours.
  4. Lateral Flow Testing: An at-home test that is pending approval. Some tests for antibodies and others test for viral products, but they are identical to a home pregnancy test. Test time 5-15 minutes. Likely very good screening test when approved.
So which is the best test? PCR is the most accurate at this time for infection but antigen testing could replace it. Serology is the best to screen for prior infection. Lateral flow testing is intriguing for testing prior to events and travel.
 
Blue shop towels work. The thing most people confuse is the purpose of wearing a mask. Masks protect others from aerosol and droplets from you. Most of those who catch this virus still catch it from hands to eyes, mouth, or nose. The mast helps protect others from you passing the virus. Close contact will also pass the virus.

Does a mask protect you from others?: yes, but not as much as social distancing and hand washing.

 
These are good population bases screening tests for exposure are not great to reveal an active infection. In fact, they have a significant cross-reactivity to other Coronaviruses which most of us have had already. They may indicate a degree or complete immunity. It is neither specific but is fairly sensitive for a prior coronavirus infection.

Do we know yet if someone previously infected by other corona virus is more susceptible or less susceptible to developing more severe disease? I've seen some articles that suggest that this virus may benefit from antibody dependent enhancement. If that's the case, what implications might that have for those who've had prior exposure to either this or other corona virus? Here's an example of an articles I've seen that talks about ADE ad how it may make developing a vaccine more difficult. Of course there seem to be conflicting opinions.

https://www.pnas.org/content/early/2020/03/27/2005456117

Could the same be true for prior exposure?
 
Do we know yet if someone previously infected by other corona virus is more susceptible or less susceptible to developing more severe disease? I've seen some articles that suggest that this virus may benefit from antibody dependent enhancement. If that's the case, what implications might that have for those who've had prior exposure to either this or other corona virus? Here's an example of an articles I've seen that talks about ADE ad how it may make developing a vaccine more difficult. Of course there seem to be conflicting opinions.

https://www.pnas.org/content/early/2020/03/27/2005456117

Could the same be true for prior exposure?

Prior exposure is an infection that someone fought off. We really do not know why some have much fewer symptoms, but it probably an immunity caused by other prior Coronavirus exposures. The research is premature but it appears that antibody-rich plasma can assist people with fight off an infection. We need more time to test this theory, but it is promising.
 
Well, off to work I go. It is time to make the doughnuts. This is the week where we hopefully make some progress against this virus. The curve should flatten in the next two weeks. Some areas are starting, but it could easily reverse.
 
I have heard that people with COVID that admitted and require a ventilator have a high death rate. Is that true? Why?

First thing, each patient is different so it is hard to generalize. In general, without COVID, patients who require a ventilator for anything other than surgery or trauma are much more likely to die. If you need ventilator support to survive, it is not a good thing. We use a ventilator for pulmonary failure and if your lungs are failing, list ios tenuous at best.

The statistics, although premature, show that patients with COVID that do on a ventilator will not come off 84% of the time. That is a much lower rate than average in the US, but then again the study was done in China. In the study, 3 of 22 patients were successfully weaned off the ventilator. The remained succumbed to COVID. The stat of 84% gets worse when adjusted for age. Above the age of 75 years has a greatly reduced success. When adjusted for fitness, tobacco use, and age, the odds are much more grave.

Ventilators are a popular topic in NY and on the news. More ventilators may just be delaying the inevitable. They are absolutely not the panacea that the news projects.
 
61rb-7HWexL._AC_SX425_.jpg
 
Chuck,

My next door neighbor is a medical researcher at Johns Hopkins. He said that life as we know it is basically gone. He expected the current restrictions to be in place for one to two years. Is that lining up with what you are hearing?
 
FYI, I just made one of the no-sew blue shop towel masks per the video above. It was really easy, does actually fit comfortably and doesn't ride up like the N95 masks I use when cutting MDF. I have a beard and the extra material below the mask seems to be better for fitment.

Obviously, I don't know how well it would work in a rigorous study, but it seems to me to at least be on par with a home-made cloth mask and seems to fit the spirit of general public use. If nothing else, maybe make a few to throw in the car as a backup.

Thanks for the continued good information and low noise to content ratio.

Sandy.
 
Chuck,

My next door neighbor is a medical researcher at Johns Hopkins. He said that life as we know it is basically gone. He expected the current restrictions to be in place for one to two years. Is that lining up with what you are hearing?

That may change if an effective vaccine is found. I suspect the Academics are working like crazy for one. Don't know if the Corona viruses mutate as quickly as Influenza. What the CDC does for the flu vaccines is they take swabs from around the country and type the Influenza viruses that are prevalent in the population. They use that information to make "next year's" vaccine as it will likely still be effective against a mildly mutated strain of virus. Sometimes they're off in a choice or the virus mutates enough that the vaccine doesn't cover a particular strain. That's why even with good immunization rates some years are not good one's and people get the flu even though they had the vaccine. Overall, they do a pretty good job.

I do hope effective treatments and or vaccines don't take as long as it did for HIV therapies. Now AIDs is a nuisance controlled by a couple of pills and people can live a long time with it.

I recommend John Barry's 2004 book "The Great Influenza" as a fine read and also gives a history of academic medicine and research in the U.S. You don't have to be a science jock to understand it. There are a lot of cemeteries in this country where you can see the year of demise of young people around 2018-2019 and a fair bet they succumbed to the H1N1 flu if not an accident. Kurt
 
That may change if an effective vaccine is found. I suspect the Academics are working like crazy for one. Don't know if the Corona viruses mutate as quickly as Influenza. What the CDC does for the flu vaccines is they take swabs from around the country and type the Influenza viruses that are prevalent in the population. They use that information to make "next year's" vaccine as it will likely still be effective against a mildly mutated strain of virus. Sometimes they're off in a choice or the virus mutates enough that the vaccine doesn't cover a particular strain. That's why even with good immunization rates some years are not good one's and people get the flu even though they had the vaccine. Overall, they do a pretty good job.

I do hope effective treatments and or vaccines don't take as long as it did for HIV therapies. Now AIDs is a nuisance controlled by a couple of pills and people can live a long time with it.

I recommend John Barry's 2004 book "The Great Influenza" as a fine read and also gives a history of academic medicine and research in the U.S. You don't have to be a science jock to understand it. There are a lot of cemeteries in this country where you can see the year of demise of young people around 2018-2019 and a fair bet they succumbed to the H1N1 flu if not an accident. Kurt
Yeah, but we're hearing that a vaccine is still a year out. I'm trying to get my head around what series of events would need to occur to make it okay for people to start congregating again, and how soon or far out that might be.
 
Yeah, but we're hearing that a vaccine is still a year out. I'm trying to get my head around what series of events would need to occur to make it okay for people to start congregating again, and how soon or far out that might be.

I would guess that they'll lift some of the stay at home orders after the peak and see what happens. If case numbers start shooting up again, they'll go back to stay at home. If cases stay relatively steady, they'll stay there and then gradually open up again. I don't see us back to normal for quite a while though.
 
Chuck,

My next door neighbor is a medical researcher at Johns Hopkins. He said that life as we know it is basically gone. He expected the current restrictions to be in place for one to two years. Is that lining up with what you are hearing?

I think it depends on our current efforts. Thew experts I work with sat that is on the long side, but it is possible if folks end this too soon. Heck, NY already starting to suppress the curve.
 
Yeah, but we're hearing that a vaccine is still a year out. I'm trying to get my head around what series of events would need to occur to make it okay for people to start congregating again, and how soon or far out that might be.

Not a year out, but definitely not this summer. USAMRIID is already testing some candidates. We will hear more this summer.
 
Well, the folks a few miles upriver from me at my alma mater, Pitt (UPMC), have announced they have something that is very promising with the amount of antibodies it is producing in mice. It is the "first study to be published after critique from fellow scientists at outside institutions," which sounds like some level of peer review. Still a ways to go, no doubt.

As a numbers guy (mechanical engineer), I've been trying to find good statistics (keeping Mark Twain's comment in mind...). It seems that many curves just tally how many people have had it, not how many cases are active or contagious, though that last one would be real squishy. But even the Johns Hopkins maps show many areas with zero recovered, and that seems absurd for four weeks or more into it. PA is still showing an exponential increase in the total count, and even dropping out the numbers from two weeks back doesn't change it too much; to make a substantial difference you have to drop out cases after a week and I doubt that is warranted. Statewide, we're at 1 in 1,000 people having had it at some point (confirmed of course). But the per-capita rate is much lower in this area.
 
But even the Johns Hopkins maps show many areas with zero recovered, and that seems absurd for four weeks or more into it.
Not from what I'm reading. Some people have it for better than a month. And then there's a two-week quarantine period after recovery during which you are supposed to avoid contact.
 
Not from what I'm reading. Some people have it for better than a month. And then there's a two-week quarantine period after recovery during which you are supposed to avoid contact.

It depends on the age of the patients you are treating and the onset when the infections started. We have people that have recovered already. At 2-4 weeks, you should start having some recoveries.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top