Covid-19 / SARS-Cov2 - naučne/medicinske informacije i analize

[NMX]

5 minutes ago, I, Ja Sam Laki said:

Otuda i izjave Makrona da virus nije nastao u labaratoriji, tj nije ljudskih ruku delo.

 

Budala. Valjda Slavica sa fejsbuka i Nestorović iz ludnice znaju bolje. 

[Don Juan]

35 minutes ago, I, Ja Sam Laki said:

Da, mozda kod nas nije bilo zarazenih, ali eto taj slucaj u Francuskoj, skoro mesec dana nije bilo zarazenih, a onda za nedelju dana 20000 ( karikiram) 

Pa i nije nemoguće da su prvi slučajevi bili u decembru. Virus u Kini se pojavio krajem novembra/početkom decembra, a epidemija je proglašena u januaru. Kada pričamo o pojedinačnim slučajevima koji su se pojavili u Evropi u decembru, oni nisu imali mogućnost da izazovu epidemiju u tom trenutku, pošto je i "virulentnost" bila niska. Odnosno, bilo je potrebno virusu da uzme maha, što se kasnije i desilo. Čak i da je bilo veći broj zaraženih, mi to tada nismo mogli da znamo, pošto su gotovo sigurno takvi slučajevi tretirani kao običan sezonski grip. Posle toga su se desile stvari koje su omogućile virusu da se brže razvija - praznici, povećan broj turista zbog praznika i sezone skijanja, povećan broj turista iz Kine, posebno regije oko Vuhana, sportski događaji.

Uporedi to sa sezonskim gripom, pojedinačni slučajevi se javljaju već u novembru, ali epidemija je najčešće kraj decembra/početak januara, pa i kasnije.

[wwww]

Evo sta Prof Drosten kaze o studiji iz Heinsberga:
 

Spoiler

 

Quote

Korinna Hennig: If we're on the subject of regions, we can go straight to a German study that attracted attention about four weeks ago, especially in connection with this easing debate, namely the investigation in the community of Gangelt in Heinsberg in North Rhine-Westphalia . The data is now available - as a scientific pre-publication. Antibody tests have tested more than 900 subjects in over 400 households for immunity. And the result is: 15 percent, five times more than officially reported to the health authorities, have apparently already gone through the infection with the corona virus there. So it's about the undisclosed number, the undetected infections.

Now that was a hot spot in Gangelt, an earlier violent outbreak. The big question that arises in the room: Can you still extrapolate this undisclosed figure for the whole country in some way?

Christian Drosten: There have also been attempts to convert the infection mortality rate that was determined there. The figure is 1.8 million. I don't think you can take just that number, but infectious mortality rates that were previously estimated, maybe somewhere between half a percent and one percent. Then you can make conversions.

My own estimate, which I have been calculating for a long time, is that we have probably reported a quarter to one eighth of the actual infections in the statistics. I also think we overlook a relatively large number of infections. But there are not that many in Germany. In other countries, the factor by which you estimate yourself if you only accept the officially reported figures is much greater. It is in the nature of things, nobody can do anything about it.

We essentially have symptom-based testing. Not everyone has symptoms now. Rates of maybe 20 percent are assumed. Some studies say up to 40, 45 percent of asymptomatic infections. The last word is not spoken here either, there are different estimates in the studies.

 

You also have to keep in mind that if you simply ask for symptoms of colds or respiratory diseases, there are still unrecognizable other respiratory pathogens in the cohorts that also cause these symptoms, so that even the number of asymptomatic people is slightly underestimated in all these studies . If you take this into account, you come to the conclusion that perhaps up to half of the cases in symptom-based diagnostics cannot be recognized in this way.

 

 

 

 

Spoiler

Korinna Hennig: Looking at the Gangelt study: Would you say that 1.8 million infections in Germany - including the undetected infected - are too high?

Christian Drosten: In my opinion, that's a little too high. But as I said, in my own calculations I am not referring to the Gangelt study, but to the assumption that many modeling studies have determined that the infection mortality from this disease is between 0.4 and 0.9 percent. I also said between 0.3 and 0.7. Something like that has been correcting itself a bit upwards lately rather than downwards. But you will be in this area.

In this area, the Gangelt study is now the result. We don't have to talk about it that much in detail, but if I saw the data in the Gangelt study, I would have evaluated it a little differently. In the Gangelt study, statistical corrections are used relatively often and these corrections often go up in terms of numbers. What you don't see in the manuscript is the raw data of the confirmed antibody test, i.e. not only the ELISA, the initial values, but also the confirmation by the neutralization test. The authors did that, but did not include the results in the evaluation. You have to count points in figures because there is no real raw data, no table in which the results are fully disclosed. But you can count that too. You might make small mistakes in details. I must have made mistakes in counting points. But I wrote my own bill on a piece of paper. That would be more of a calculation based on the raw data. I would come to a lower prevalence of really confirmed seropositive, i.e. antibody-positive patients - based on the data. The PCR data must be left as it is. Overall, I don't get an infection mortality rate of 0.36 percent for myself, but 0.45 percent, which is a bit higher.

 

But that doesn't make any huge differences. One can argue about whether they did it right or whether my somewhat wooden calculation, which I say, for me, a confirmed seropositivity is what can be confirmed in the neutralization test, which is perhaps a bit brief. However, I see a few of the corrections to be calculated in the other direction. Even if you say what's in our cohort versus what's reported in the population, I would have corrected the other way round. But be it, with these uncorrected numbers, I still end up in the same area.

So if I took this infection mortality calculated by me on a piece of paper and multiplied it by RKI reports, I would get 1.4 million and not 1.8 million total infected. But these are totally wooden, rough calculations, whether with or without correction factors. I am not sure if you can just do it like this, converting it all directly to national registration numbers. I think there are still effects that are not taken into account in such rough calculations.

 

But on the other hand, it is like this: the infection mortality rate for this virus is very specific, and it applies to a large extent to populations of similar density and to similar medical systems. Then you come to the conclusion, when you look at the case mortality rates that are reported, that you are probably underestimated by a factor of four to a factor of eight. Incidentally, this also applies to the Gangelt study. An additional uncertainty is that you always have this dragging of the deceased numbers. It always takes about a month from infection to the development of symptoms and then to death. Perhaps one cannot say at the moment - even according to data from the Gangelt study - how this number, this infection mortality rate, is in reality. It is all very preliminary. But all of this preliminary does not change the basic belief that we have more cases than we thought. But there are no more astronomical cases. If we underestimate factors four to eight, we are still very far from the fact that a large proportion of the population has become infected and is already immune.

 

U principu, bas se trudio da ne kritikuje profu-manekena (ipak se radi o njegovom bivsem Univerzitetu gde ovaj radi, jos je profi-manekenu pomogao kod razgovra za posao - sam profa-maneken to izjavio). Ali je rekao da bi on neke stvari malcice drugacije odradio (od eksperimentalnog dela do proracuna).

Profa Drosten kaze da je on na osnovu manuskripta sam preracunao neke stvari (ali je tu bilo i ocitavanja rezultata s dijagrama, pa njegov prorcun ne mora biti 100% tacan kao da je imao ciste podatke, nego recimo 99%). Pa je on dosao do brojke 0,45% umrlih u odnosu na zarazene (umesto 0,36% iz studije), sto nije preterana razlika. Njegova ekstrapolacija na nivo cele Nemacke bi bila 1,4 miliona zarazenih, a ne 1,8 kao u studiji. Sto se uklapa u njegovu raniju ocenu da se samo cetvrtina, ako ne i samo osmina, zarazenih detektovala zvanicno testom (nisu svi koji su imali simptome ni mogli da se testiraju, a kamo li oni bez simptoma). Sve u svemu , konacna brojka je mala.

 

Takodje je upozorio da ne moze tek tako da se sve preracuna na nivo Nemacke. Mada kaze da se za slicnu konfiguraciju stanovnistva i zdravstvenog sistema ova studija moze uzeti za reprezentativnu i da se mogu preuzeti ove vrednsti. U svakom slucaju poruka je da ima vise stvarno inficiranih od onog broja koji je registrovan, ali da ta razlika nije sad astronomska (da se 20-100x vise zarazilo od zvanicnog broja detektovanih zarazenih), vec da je za Nemacku negde 4-8x veca brojka (za druge zemlje je ovaj faktor veci jer su manje testirali).

 

Onda se nadovezao pricom o imunitetu krda, kao i o efektima na broj preminulih ako se zdravstveni sistem preoptereti, plus efekti na one koji preleze zarazu:

Spoiler

Korinna Hennig: So keyword herd immunity.

Christian Drosten: Yes, herd immunity is exactly the problem. We know little about it. So we say 70 percent must be immune, then the pandemic spread stops. In the first approximation that is correct. In a second diet, this is not quite right. Because if an epidemic wave spreads unchecked, then the infections do not stop when the herd immunity reaches 70 percent, but it is the turning point at which it gets less every day. But the whole thing continues to run. That will only stop when well over 90 percent are infected. This herd immunity level is not a sudden brake on an epidemic wave, it is just the apex.

This is not directly relevant for us, because it only applies to a population that is equally vulnerable and available. We have talked about this a lot. It is also about the availability of infectables in transmission networks. This availability is not complete, so that we do not have to expect 70 percent herd immunity in a continuous epidemic wave. Rather, there are fewer who have to become infected until the apex is reached. That is one factor.

Another factor - as we have already discussed here - is that we do not know what kind of background immunity there is that we have not yet recognized. A possible background immunity, for example, at the level of the T cells due to the cold coronaviruses, which nevertheless protects some of the infectable, without us being aware of this. We don't even know this size of calculation. If it comes to an extreme, nobody can predict that at the moment, you will soon notice in the first countries: Now we have braked the waves and now we are loosening the brakes. And we see the wave doesn't come back at all.

 

Korinna Hennig: That would be very positive news.

Christian Drosten: That would be completely unexpected positive news, which I personally do not expect. But I don't want to leave it unsaid that this possibility exists theoretically. We cannot say that it cannot be so. We just don't know that.

Korinna Hennig: A question of understanding about availability. They said that people are not all available for the virus because we have measures in place, for example because older people do not leave the house or because schools do not provide regular classes.

Christian Drosten: Exactly, that's all of these things. Even in a normal society, it is not the case that everyone constantly meets everyone. But our society has gone through weeks of contact reduction and many people are taking learning effects with them - even if it is said now that we can relax the measures in some places, many people in the population will still remain cautious. And that's just as well. This will mean that not all infection networks can be used by the virus. This is an important effect, which we will certainly take with us from this period of contact blocking.

Korinna Hennig: As far as the mortality rate is concerned, this is a laboratory situation for now - if we consider the pure mortality rate as a property of the virus. But when a system is overloaded, completely different numbers arise because it also plays a role in how well someone who is in the intensive care unit can be cared for - if we look at Italy, for example.

Christian Drosten: Yes, it is very important to understand that. That is why we initiated these contact measures at all so that not so many cases occur at once. It's really about speed. When many cases occur at once, patients can no longer get the treatment they need. Then the infection mortality and the case mortality increase sharply. This has been observed, for example, in Wuhan and in Italy. We want to prevent this by all means.

But it should be said again, even if you get an intensive care bed, it does not mean that you will survive this infection right away. We have different survival rates in different countries, but in certain age groups, about half of the intensive care patients die despite ventilation. The after-effects of ventilation - depression, premature dementia and many other long, long-lasting after-effects, which may make life after a surviving illness no longer seem worth living - all of which must also be taken into account. Having enough intensive care beds is not the panacea. “Flattening the curve” is also about simply protecting as many patients as possible from the infection. These are especially the risk groups - you want to bring them over time until a vaccine is available.

 

 

Edited May 6, 2020 by wwww

[nemanjaol]

Ako gledamo informacije koje su nam do sada bile dostupne, i meni deluje nelogično da je virus vec u decembru bio u cirkulaciji u Evropi. Pogotovo sto i ovaj slučaj koji je nađen u Francuskoj nije kod čoveka koji je putovao u Kinu. Što znači da se već tad u određenoj meri lokalno širio. 

 

Mislim da moramo da sačekamo još podataka od ovih istrazivanja na prisustvo antitela i da vidimo da li će isplivati još slučajeva poput ovog u Francuskoj. 

 

Ako je virus stvarno slobodno cirkulisao po Evropi toliko dugo to bi onda trebalo da znači da treba ponovo preispitati i one stvari koje smo mislili da sa velikom sigurnoscu znamo da su tacne. 

[wwww]

1 hour ago, I, Ja Sam Laki said:

Pa ne znam, ovde ide prica da su se neki virolozi vratili iz Vuhana krajem Decembra u Strazbur. Francuzi i Kinezi rade na nekom zajednickom ispitivanju. Otuda i izjave Makrona da virus nije nastao u labaratoriji, tj nije ljudskih ruku delo.

To da je virus delo majke prirode a ne vestacki stvoren su izjavili svi koji iole ista znaju o ovoj oblasti (ne racunaju se Tramp, Slavica s fejsbuka i smesni doktor Nestorovic).

 

Profa Drosten je pominjao jednu francusku studiju (sever Francuske je u pitanju) iz jedne skole:

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.18.20071134v1

koja je dobra za analizu uticaja dece/djaka na sirenje virusa.

 

Spoiler

Korinna Hennig: We already took a closer look at the topic of "children" in the last two podcast episodes. From the large number of previous publications, there is now an interesting preprint for a study from northern France. The outbreak is documented in a school in Oise - looking back when the schools were still open. A good 660 people were tested for antibodies. Teachers, students, but also parents and siblings. So an infection in a school, that's something we haven't read before, right?

 

Christian Drosten: Yes, that's right. It is a very interesting study. The basic situation was as follows: There had been cases in this region relatively early, as was found afterwards. For about five weeks there was a slowly escalating outbreak in this school. At first you didn't really notice it. You can see on the time analysis that it took five weeks from the first case in school to the school to close. The school was not closed because it was seen that we had a huge outbreak and we are now going into a lockdown in France, but because we were on vacation.

 

This is an interesting natural situation that you can no longer observe in retrospect in the current situation. And there we have an interesting reference value. How many students get infected has been examined here. How many teachers are infected? But also how many household members of the infected pupils become infected with these pupils at home? So again this reference value of the secondary attack rate, which was already determined both in Gangelt and in China and also at that time in the Munich study.

We have numbers of 10.2 and 11.4 percent for the transfers to the siblings and to the parents. One would say that everything is clear, that is completely in the green. Something you would have expected. With this impression, you could say, let's take a look at the numbers at school. If the household numbers match expectations, let's look at the school numbers. Here we see that 38.3 percent of the students have become infected, as well as 43.4 percent of the teachers and 60 percent of the other employees, from the canteen staff to the caretaker and school psychologists. These are numbers, you have to say that if this happens in schools, you cannot open schools. On average, over 40 percent really get infected.

Now you have to take a closer look. Is it really that dramatic in schools? One thing that has to be said here is that it is a kind of high school. This is not a school for small children, but rather a school in which the focus of the age groups is approximately in the range between 15 and 18 years.

Korinna Hennig: So it's more about young people than children.

Christian Drosten: Right, it's about the students who are already allowed to drive mopeds and will soon be driving a license. These are no longer small children. But at least 40 percent of the entire school was infected. That is significant. Such a large high school in a city has 1500 students. If you suddenly had about 800 new cases within a few weeks - in the city and in all the families that belong to it - then you can imagine that this will lead to an outbreak.

I want to say one more thing about the 40 percent or so who got infected in this school. There is another objection that you have to be clear about. Out of the approximately 1300 students - I even wrote down the number, there are 1262 students at this school - only 326 registered to take part in the study. So only 37 percent of the school participated in the study. Not all 1262 have been tested, only 326.

Korinna Hennig: Plus the relatives.

Christian Drosten: And the relatives too. That was even a little more, that was 345. You have to say, is this a representative sample now? So 326 are actually such a balanced sample that it reflects the reality of the 1200? Or are there any influencing factors? One influencing factor is that they are volunteers and volunteers have different phenomena. One phenomenon can be, I volunteer to take part in the study because I had symptoms at the time. And I want to know if that came from this disease. So now I want to get an antibody test. This would tend to bring more infected people into the study than are infected in the population.

That's the one point. The other point that plays against this and that could cancel out this effect is that there was already intensive testing in this school at that time. So there was intensive testing in this whole community, and very shortly after the end of school. Many of those affected had already received a result about their infection by PCR. So they already knew that. And someone who already knew that will say if I take a voluntary blood test: I don't care. I'm not going there. I know I was infected. That would be very strong again, and even more so than the other effect, to shift the study back to the negative, that is, to the negative results. The authors say themselves that they cannot say how they should weigh it up, whether one or the other effect is more pronounced. But the fact is, there are two possible colors in one direction and the other. And maybe that will cancel each other out. You can't say it.

In any case, it is an impressive number for me how many students from these older students got infected here. Of course, you also have to say that this does not correspond to the reality of the current plans for gradual school opening. In the current reality, the students should wear a mask, there should be distance between the classes, thinned cohorts, sometimes not every day lessons, but on staggered days, so that fewer students are in school. Design break rules differently so that the big break does not look like all the students run around in the school playground. All of these things will make events in today's school look very different.

 

U principu radi se o nekoj srednjoj skoli gde su se pojavili neki zarazeni, ali nisu na pocetku detektovani (asimptomaticni), vec se zaraza sirila neko vreme (5 sedmica). Tako da su mogli da isprate kako bi to bilo i prouce efekat skole.

Nasli su nekih 600 ljudi pozitivnih na antitela (djaci, nastavnici/ostao osoblje skole, roditelji, braca/sestre). Pronasli su da se nekih 10,2-11,4%  brace/sestara odnosno roditelja zarazilo.

U samoj skoli 38,3% djaka se zarazilo, 43,4% nastavnika i 60% ostalog osoblja - znaci nekih prosecno 40% ljudi u skoli, sto govori u prilog tome da je skole trebalo zatvoriti. Doduse, ovde se radi o starijim tinejdzerima za koje bi trebalo da prakticno vazi isti sistem sirenja zaraze kao kod odraslih. Ne mora da znaci da bi isto bilo i s osnovcima i decom u vrticima.

 

Takodje je malo govorio i o reprezentativnosti uzorka i sta sve moze da utice da on ne bude unbiased.

A napomenuo je i da se ova studija ne moze preneti 1-1 na stanje sada, kada se skole otvaraju uz primenu mera distnciranja.

 

Edited May 6, 2020 by wwww

[ciao]

Jedna mogucnost je da je relativno dugo vremena - mesec dva recimo korona vitus bio mesan sa gripom kao slucaj u Fra sto je bio, uostyalom simptomi nisu toliko razliciti, zavrsi se sa zapalenjem pluca - u Fra je u toj bolnici (to je inace regija gde je bio prvi veliki klaster u Fra i sada je to najugrozenja oblast) je bilo 15 slucajeva u decembru, od toga jedan je bio korona, ostali klasicna influenza, mozda se onda malo postepeno "obican grip - influenza" povlacio a korona razvijala, korona usvtari ima spor pocetak, a nisu mogli ni da znaju ni da pretpostave obicni lekari da je neki sasvim nov virus slican gripu ali bitno opasniji napravljen i da pocinje da hara. Poceti o tome d arazmisljas onako iz manje vise cista mira nije uobicajeno, logicno, nemas test da proveris bilo sta i moguce je da se vrlo polako neprimetno sirio, mislim da mogucnost mi nije nemoguca.

 

@wwww

ja te molim da prestanes da zoves tog (ne znam kako se zove) profa-maneken i da ga zoves njegovim imenom,  to mi jako smeta, on je covek izuzetno strucan ocigledno, to sto je tebi nesimpatican, radi za farmaceutske firme (koliko sam shvatila) za razliku od Drostena koji je postao ikona u nemackoj, ne znaci da je onaj budala. Mislim da nije u redu omalovazavati bilo kog strucnjaka koji jeste strucnjak a pogotovo od strane nekog ko nije strucnjak u oblasti - ovde na forumu niko nije strucnjak iz oblasti a koliko znam a i da jeste nije lepo, i nema razloga; znanje treba uvek postovati

[wwww]

dozvoli da cu da zovem koga hocu kako hocu. ti ne moras da citas sta pisem, postoji ignore lista.

 

edit: inace mi nije jasno u cemu je problem s nadimkom maneken. Momak je zgodan, visok, vitak, u formi, mogao bi biti maneken. Pored toga oblaci se kao da je izasao iz kataloga.

Drosten nije ni nesto visok, niti je nesto lep u faci, malo je povijen kad stoji, oblaci se lezerno, kao za do prodavnice (tj. kao tipican naucnik iz filmova), ne bi ga bas uzeli da pozira za modne casopise.

Slicno vazi i za Lauterbach-a, s tim sto se oblaci zivopisnije i nije toliko elokventan kao Drosten, plus malo suska kad prica:

 

ovaj u sredini je Kekule (iz Minhena)

 

ovo je Prof Melanie Brinkmann iz Braunsweiga (ima troje dece):

 

ovo je Prof Susanne Herold iz Gießena:

lepa zena

 

Prof Michael Meyer-Hermann, Helmholtz Centre for Infection Research in Braunschweig

 

Lothar Wieler, sef Robert Koch Instituta

ovaj pored njega je Prof Lars Schaade

 

Jonas Schmidt-Chanasit, Hamburg

 

Prof Uwe Janssens, sef udruzenja Intensiv- & Notfallmedizin, lecio pacijente u Heinsbergu

 

Prof. Fätkenheuer, uni klinika Keln, radio remdesivir klinicka ispitivanja:

ovd s dvojicom kolega s kojima saradjuje:

Edited May 6, 2020 by wwww

[Laki21]

https://nova.rs/region/upravo-je-otkrivena-ahilova-peta-koronavirusa/

[Laki21]

https://rs.n1info.com/Zdravlje/a595981/Holandski-naucnici-kreirali-antitelo-koje-bi-moglo-da-pobedi-COVID-19.html?utm_campaign=ug.contentexchange.me&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=ug.contentexchange.me&utm_term=ug.contentexchange.me

[Angelia]

7 hours ago, CheshireCat said:

Kako se ove ideje o virusu u novembru uklapaju u priču o prenosu virusa?

 

Šta meni ne drži vodu:

 

Ako je u Fra 27.12. zabeležen slučaj korone - to znači da je virus bio prisutan barem nedelju dve ranije u zemlji.

Oni tek 24.1 otkrivaju slučajeve, a 2x.2 počinje masovnije otkrivanje zaraženih.

 

Dakle 2 meseca je bio virus u cirkulaciji bez mera pre nego što kreće širenje.

Sledeća 2 meseca imamo 150000 otrkivenih slučajeva sa karantinom.

Voleo bih da mi to neko objasni. Da tebi virus 2 meseca bude u populaciji a ne raširi se, a onda pod lockdownom eksplodira - meni tu nedostaju logična objašnjenja.

 

Mislim na geometrijsku progresiju širenja.

Koliko sam ja razumela virus je mutirao. Kad su istrazivali u US, nasli su 3 mutacije, jedna je bila iz evrope, jedna iz Kine i treca se napravila u US.

A negde sam citala da je i u Wuhanu mutirao i postao zarazniji.

Veoma je moguce da je greskom smatrano da se radi o "cudnom gripu" jer niko nije znao sta se dogadja u Kini.

 

Sa te strane ako je to tacno, a sve vise se govori o tome, da je virus vec cirkulisao u decembru, a mozda i ranije, onda sve ove rasprave o kada je sve trebalo zatvoriti padaju u vodu

[ciao]

2 hours ago, wwww said:

dozvoli da cu da zovem koga hocu kako hocu. ti ne moras da citas sta pisem, postoji ignore lista.

 

 

 

 

Ja jako volim da citam sta ti pises, i vrlo sam ti zahvalna za puno korisnih linkova i stvari koje si stavila i nadam se da ces nastaviti.

Meni smeta to neko omalovazavanje kao da ga ismevas svaki put - po meni ili mislis da je OK to sto je rekao i vredi ovde napisati ili ne vredi onda ne stavis;

Ovako kao da kazes rekao je profa-maneken ali posto je to profa maneken to nema veze, pa mi je bzvz - ako mislis da je bzvz ne stavljaj ako mislis da vredi staviti citiraj ga po imenu tj prezimenu.  U svakom slucaju naravno da cu nastaviti da citam sve sto stavljas.

 

 

 

[ciao]

Medicinsko osoblje u Juznoj Africi je pocelo veliki test uticaja BSG vakcine kao zastite od coronavirusa - ucestvuje 250 vakcinisanih i 250 placebo vakcinisanih zdravstvenih radnika koji ce raditi u bolnici u Cap.

 

https://www.lemonde.fr/afrique/article/2020/05/05/coronavirus-des-scientifiques-sud-africains-testent-l-effet-bouclier-du-bcg_6038685_3212.html

 

 

[Angelia]

Inace vest sa Floride, koja je ocigledan dokaz da je virus cirkulisao ranije, i verovatno da je mnogo stosta pripisano gripu. Sve mi vise deluje da sam ja to zlo prelezala...

 

An analysis of the state data, which has been downloaded and retained by The Post since the state started posting it in March, found these diverse early cases:

• A 4-year-old Duval County girl started feeling symptoms or had her first positive test on Jan. 1. The state did not officially record her case until April 8.

• An 84-year-old Palm Beach County man who had not traveled, but was hospitalized, had symptoms or a positive result on Feb. 5. But his case was not added to Florida’s coronavirus tally until April 3.

• A 48-year-old Palm Beach County woman's symptoms or positive test results were reported Feb. 6. Her case was counted on Saturday.

• A 74-year-old Palm Beach County woman's symptoms or a positive result on Feb. 23, was recorded by the state on April 4. She reported no out-of-state travel and she came into contact with someone carrying the virus.

• A 65-year-old man in Broward County who had traveled to the Cayman Islands listed symptoms or a positive test on Jan. 4, but his case was not recorded until March 7.

• A 30-year-old Broward County man, whose symptoms or first positive result came on Feb. 25, died. His case was added on March 15.

• A 65-year-old man in Sarasota County traveled to California and came into contact with an infected person reported symptoms or had a positive result on Feb. 23. State health officials added his case on April 6.

Among the 171 patients were 105 women and 66 men. They ranged in age from 4 to 91.

Even though the disease was thought confined to China before January, most of the early patients hadn’t traveled: 103 reported no travel while just 52 said they had.

None reported traveling to China.

[𝓑𝓪𝓫𝔂]

1 hour ago, Angelia said:

 

Even though the disease was thought confined to China before January, most of the early patients hadn’t traveled: 103 reported no travel while just 52 said they had.

None reported traveling to China.

 

Kako su krenuli jos ce na kraju ispasti da je ustvari floridski virus

 

Elem, zasto bi iko morao da putuje da se zarazi? Dovoljno je da je dosao neko iz Kine u turizam, seo u restoran, zarazio konobaricu, oboje asimptomaticni, a ona prenela dalje nekom ko je imao simptome. Zar ne? Odakle virus, ko ce ga znati, a ustvari konobarica ima stotine musterija dnevno i onaj sto je dosao iz Kine (a ne mora da bude Kinez) je jedan od tih. 

Edited May 6, 2020 by Baby

[Angelia]

Just now, Baby said:

 

Kako su krenuli jos ce na kraju ispasti da je ustvari floridski virus

 

Elem, zasto bi iko morao da putuje da se zarazi? Dovoljno je da je dosao neko iz Kine u turizam, seo u restoran, zarazio konobaricu, oboje asimptomaticni, a ona prenela dalje nekom ko je imao simptome. Zar ne? Odakle virus, ko ce ga znati, a ustvari konobarica ima stotine musterija dnevno i onaj sto je dosao iz Kine (a ne mora da bude Kinez) je jedan od tih. 

Putovanje se navodi kao dokaz da je do prenosa doslo u lokalu, tj da je neko bio donosioc.

[𝓑𝓪𝓫𝔂]

1 minute ago, Angelia said:

Putovanje se navodi kao dokaz da je do prenosa doslo u lokalu, tj da je neko bio donosioc.

 

Kako mogu npr u NY ili Floridi ili CA da zakljuce to kada dolaze milioni turista koji su bazali pre tog ko zna gde?

[Angelia]

7 minutes ago, Baby said:

 

Kako mogu npr u NY ili Floridi ili CA da zakljuce to kada dolaze milioni turista koji su bazali pre tog ko zna gde?

Mislim da se ne razumemo. Govori se da ovi ljudi nisu putovali, kao dokaz da je neko doneo virus, tj nisu ga zaradili negde u inostranstvu, nego negde u lokalu.

Tj pricamo isto, neko ga je doneo dolazeci turisticki. Tako da nemam pojma sto mi postavljas to pitanje.

 

[Janne240]

Pa jel si ti na Floridi?

[𝓑𝓪𝓫𝔂]

44 minutes ago, Angelia said:

Mislim da se ne razumemo. Govori se da ovi ljudi nisu putovali, kao dokaz da je neko doneo virus, tj nisu ga zaradili negde u inostranstvu, nego negde u lokalu.

Tj pricamo isto, neko ga je doneo dolazeci turisticki. Tako da nemam pojma sto mi postavljas to pitanje.

 

 

Postavljam pitanje hipoteticki jer sve je i pocelo od toga da li je neko putovao ili nije. Dosta dugo nisu ni hteli da testiraju ako nisi nigde putovao, a imao si neke simptome. Mislim, meni je toliko bezvezno to sa putovanjima da ne mogu ni da opisem, a stalno se negde pojavljuje... Nije do tebe, nego uopsteno do tih i takvih vesti ili sta li su vec... 

Kada su pricali o onom momku koji je navodno bio pacijent 0 u Sijetlu, pa se svi cudili kao nije putovao niti bio sa nekim u kontaktu ko jeste (uglavnom se na Kinu mislilo) putovao, ali pritom je bio u kontaktu sa njih stotinu u skoli/fakultetu koji su mozda bili slucajno u kontaktu sa nekim, pa da ni ne znaju... i onda kao, odakle virus njemu.

Edited May 6, 2020 by Baby

[Angelia]

36 minutes ago, Janne240 said:

Pa jel si ti na Floridi?

Ako si mene pitao, ne, baby jeste.

15 minutes ago, Baby said:

 

Postavljam pitanje hipoteticki jer sve je i pocelo od toga da li je neko putovao ili nije. Dosta dugo nisu ni hteli da testiraju ako nisi nigde putovao, a imao si neke simptome. Mislim, meni je toliko bezvezno to sa putovanjima da ne mogu ni da opisem, a stalno se negde pojavljuje... Nije do tebe, nego uopsteno do tih i takvih vesti ili sta li su vec... 

Kada su pricali o onom momku koji je navodno bio pacijent 0 u Sijetlu, pa se svi cudili kao nije putovao niti bio sa nekim u kontaktu ko jeste (uglavnom se na Kinu mislilo) putovao, ali pritom je bio u kontaktu sa njih stotinu u skoli/fakultetu koji su mozda bili slucajno u kontaktu sa nekim, pa da ni ne znaju... i onda kao, odakle virus njemu.

Pa pitanje da li neko putovao, ima smisla jer bi se tako znalo da li je on donosilac. Ovde se namerno pominje da nisu, sto znaci da je neko drugi (s kim su bili u kontaktu, prva ili druga ili treca karika) bili donosioci. Sto ce reci - virus je u US bio prisutan u decembru.

[𝓑𝓪𝓫𝔂]

1 hour ago, Angelia said:

Pa pitanje da li neko putovao, ima smisla jer bi se tako znalo da li je on donosilac. Ovde se namerno pominje da nisu, sto znaci da je neko drugi (s kim su bili u kontaktu, prva ili druga ili treca karika) bili donosioci. Sto ce reci - virus je u US bio prisutan u decembru.

 

Pa to je moguce. Meni su neki govorili, otac je umro krajem januara, pa kada je krenuo virus onda su oni zakljucili da je on umro od toga, jer su sva deca (velika) imali simptome i bili jako bolesni bas posto su njega sahranili, samo majka nije bila bolesna. Simptomi su bili kao kod covida. 

[Angelia]

Most new Covid-19 hospitalizations in New York state are from people who were staying home and not venturing much outside, a “shocking” finding, Gov. Andrew Cuomo said Wednesday.   

The preliminary data was from 100 New York hospitals involving about 1,000 patients, Cuomo said at his daily briefing.

It shows that 66% of new admissions were from people who had largely been sheltering at home. The next highest source of admissions was from nursing homes, 18%. 

 

Znaci kad su testirali anti-tela na onima na ulici, trebali su da testiraju one koji su u kucama u lockdownu. Mnogo logicnije je da su ovi oboleli u stvari lagali da nisu bas izlazili.

[wwww]

 

U Utrechtu pocinju i studiju o uticaju BCG vakcine na starije od 60 godina:

https://www.umcutrecht.nl/en/over-ons/nieuws/infection-and-immunity/apr-16-what-is-the-effect-of-the-tb-vaccine-on-corona-in-the-elderly

https://www.radboudumc.nl/en/news/2020/study-on-effect-of-bcg-vaccine-on-coronavirus-infection-in-the-elderly

 

Edited May 7, 2020 by wwww

[nonick]

5 hours ago, Angelia said:

Inace vest sa Floride, koja je ocigledan dokaz da je virus cirkulisao ranije, i verovatno da je mnogo stosta pripisano gripu. Sve mi vise deluje da sam ja to zlo prelezala...

 

An analysis of the state data, which has been downloaded and retained by The Post since the state started posting it in March, found these diverse early cases:

• A 4-year-old Duval County girl started feeling symptoms or had her first positive test on Jan. 1. The state did not officially record her case until April 8.

• An 84-year-old Palm Beach County man who had not traveled, but was hospitalized, had symptoms or a positive result on Feb. 5. But his case was not added to Florida’s coronavirus tally until April 3.

• A 48-year-old Palm Beach County woman's symptoms or positive test results were reported Feb. 6. Her case was counted on Saturday.

• A 74-year-old Palm Beach County woman's symptoms or a positive result on Feb. 23, was recorded by the state on April 4. She reported no out-of-state travel and she came into contact with someone carrying the virus.

• A 65-year-old man in Broward County who had traveled to the Cayman Islands listed symptoms or a positive test on Jan. 4, but his case was not recorded until March 7.

• A 30-year-old Broward County man, whose symptoms or first positive result came on Feb. 25, died. His case was added on March 15.

• A 65-year-old man in Sarasota County traveled to California and came into contact with an infected person reported symptoms or had a positive result on Feb. 23. State health officials added his case on April 6.

Among the 171 patients were 105 women and 66 men. They ranged in age from 4 to 91.

Even though the disease was thought confined to China before January, most of the early patients hadn’t traveled: 103 reported no travel while just 52 said they had.

None reported traveling to China.

 

 

Sta to zanci kod svakod slucaja "or"? Imali su Covid testove u Floridi oko nove godine?

 

Inace kupio sam neke masine u decembru i dealer (sales guy) je dosao kod nas kad su stigle masine prve nedelje u januaru. Ja ono rukovao i sve i posle kaze da je imao prehladu dve nedelje i u treceoj nedelji dobio upalu pluca. :)   

 

 

 

 

[wwww]

https://www.businessinsider.com/death-rate-german-laboratory-city-5x-less-than-national-average-2020-4?r=DE&IR=T

Quote

Streeck went on to say that though the virus could "live" on various surfaces for up to seven days, he believed there was little chance that someone could become infected via surfaces, contradicting both the Center for Disease Control and National Institute of Health guidelines.

 

Quote

Streeck posited that in order to contract the virus via a surface like a doorknob, "it would be necessary that someone coughs into their hand, immediately touches a doorknob, and then straight after that another person grasps the handle and goes on to touches their face," Streeck told reporters. 

Instead, claims Streeck, his study found that: "There is no significant risk of catching the disease when you go shopping. Severe outbreaks of the infection were always a result of people being closer together over a longer period of time."

Regardless of Streeck's claims that public activities like shopping and eating out won't increase the risk of transmission, Stephan Pusch, District Administrator of Heinsberg, told Die Welt that the restrictive protective measures put in place in the district are working.

The curve of infection numbers is flattening and "Heinsberg has avoided a huge disaster," he told the paper.

 

Quote

Streeck said his aim with the study is to help develop what he calls "exit strategies" to the lockdown.

"It is important to obtain this data in order to make sure that decisions are taken based on facts rather than assumptions. The data should serve as a basis of information for the government so they can then think about their further course of action," he said.

 

intervju na engleskom:

Interesantno je uporediti ovo s radom naucnika iz Francuske (koji god hocemo rad koji smo pominjali ovde, moze i ovaj o gimnaziji u mestu severno od Pariza).

 

(toliko bih imala stvari da prokomentarisem, ali ostavicu svakome da sam poslusa, uporedi s svim radovima i tekstovima koje smo kacili ovde i nek sam prosudi)

Edited May 7, 2020 by wwww