How is COVID-19 controlled until a vaccine is found?

[Kitty Tantrum]

"My body my choice."

[Redhead14]

4 minutes ago, nittygritty said:

Sure they are. Every year thousands of people die in the US because someone exposed them to the flu. And there is a vaccine for that.

Oh, paleeze.

[Ellener]

It is a rabid adherence to the idea of 'my way or no way' which fuels polarisation of important issues, when a gentler middle ground might be more useful, particularly in the middle of a disaster scenario.

 

[chillii]

well, l'd say there was massive information very early in showing this could be much much worse than others even if we haven't heard about it because if you look at it this way , what's the one thing governments cringe at , money , they don't like giving the stuff away and they'd rather sell their grandmother than lose one penny in taxes  . That was the first thing hit me , it was like holy fk just what in the hell is this . Shutting down whole economies , paying wages , unemployment benefits  , just wtf this has to be very very serious shyt.

Edited April 18, 2020 by chillii

[Ellener]

1 hour ago, chillii said:

well, l'd say there was massive information very early in showing this could be much much worse than others even if we haven't heard about it because if you look at it this way , what's the one thing governments cringe at , money , they don't like giving the stuff away and they'd rather sell their grandmother than lose one penny in taxes  . That was the first thing hit me , it was like holy fk just what in the hell is this . Shutting down whole economies , paying wages , unemployment benefits  , just wtf this has to be very very serious shyt.

Everything is worse in 2020 because we can see it all as it unfolds, case by case almost.

People barely remember the 1957 pandemic and it's hard to find a lot of personl stories about it. The history channel details the early detection and development of a vaccine in the US by Maurice Hilleman and the Walter Reed Institute so by the time the virus came here people were already being vaccinated. The History Channel says 1 to 4 million people died globally and 70 000 Americans but CDC reports it as 1.1 million deaths globally and 116 000 Americans.

I don't know what causes the disparity in reporting the figures.

 

 

 

[poppyfields]

I just did a bit of wiki research on the 1957 Asian flu pandemic, Ellenor please correct me if my research is inaccurate.

First case reported late 1956, some reports state first case was Feb 1957.

June 1957 first case hits the US.

By October 1957, a vaccine had been developed.

So a vaccine within first year after outbreak. 

Let's hope that to be the case with corona as well!

Edited April 18, 2020 by poppyfields

[Ellener]

1 hour ago, poppyfields said:

 

So a vaccine within first year after outbreak. 

Let's hope that to be the case with corona as well!

It's a bit different because we don't already have the serums to base one on, 'flu vaccines were first developed in the 1940s, but yes, there's a lot more people working on this. 

 

[elaine567]

Flu vaccines  are easy, we have them down to a fine art.
New flu vaccine  - no problem.

The problem we have now is not really about mutations, though mutations will be a problem too.
The problem we have is about what the WHO reported today.
They report that there is no evidence as yet that having Covid -19 confers immunity.
Some patients have been found that lack an antibody response to the virus.
If having the virus does not promote an antibody response then what hope is there for a vaccine.
No antibodies, no immunity.

[carhill]

Filling in skateboard parks.... 👍😂

 

[simpycurious]

4 hours ago, poppyfields said:

Fair enough, but when they see the damage they can do, to themselves and their own families, by being so irresponsible (i.e become infected) , perhaps they may begin behaving like responsible adults? 

So I guess what you're saying is that we (or at least some folks who ruin it for the rest of us) are like children who need to be monitored, god that's so disheartening and sad!!! 

I think that I discovered that it does NOT live a mile off shore on a boat with a single person.  That might not be new news but it's good news.

[Mrin]

The key will be finding effective treatments to reduce the morbidity. If we can bring it down something close to influenza then it become a manageable as a species. 

[Ellener]

1 hour ago, Mrin said:

The key will be finding effective treatments to reduce the morbidity. If we can bring it down something close to influenza then it become a manageable as a species. 

Influenza wasn't 'manageable' until a few years ago, people were just more accepting of the death rates. New medical engineering and treatment innovations and finally vaccines helped the severe cases recover and we became complacent.

In 2005 a Pandemic Preparedness and Response Act was proposed in response to a potential Avian flu pandemic and the bill never passed Congress, was never reintroduced. People assumed the issue was managed.

Coronaviruses were discovered in the 1930s but the strains identified only affected chickens I think, human coronaviruses were first identified in the UK in the 1960s. 

I don't know why no vaccines have been developed since, not enough financial incentive I imagine, which seems short-sighted in terms of cost effectiveness now.

The CNN documentary Unseen Enemy aired in 2017 to warn against mass viral outbreaks and I don't remember there being a huge response.

But climate change isn't really reacted to either on a global scale, in fact some of the prominent politicians on the world stage are routinely arrogant and dismissive of any of the mass threats to human survival, preoccupied with the status quo.

Patients seem to be responding favourably to all the current trials for avenues of future treatment for Covid-19, like Remdesivir ( an antiretroviral developed against Ebola ) and there are four major trials ongoing, I'll find the link, for other proposed treatments.

 

 

[Ellener]

From AAAS:

'WHO is focusing on what it says are the four most promising therapies: an experimental antiviral compound called remdesivir; the malaria medications chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine; a combination of two HIV drugs, lopinavir and ritonavir; and that same combination plus interferon-beta, an immune system messenger that can help cripple viruses. Some data on their use in COVID-19 patients have already emerged—the HIV combo failed in a small study in China—but WHO believes a large trial with a greater variety of patients is warranted.

Enrolling subjects in SOLIDARITY will be easy. When a person with a confirmed case of COVID-19 is deemed eligible, the physician can enter the patient’s data into a WHO website, including any underlying condition that could change the course of the disease, such as diabetes or HIV infection. The participant has to sign an informed consent form that is scanned and sent to WHO electronically. After the physician states which drugs are available at his or her hospital, the website will randomize the patient to one of the drugs available or to the local standard care for COVID-19.'

Our President's comments about cutting funding to WHO seem rather misguided since they are coordinating or recording all the various efforts globally.

[gaius]

There isn't one universally correct answer to the question of containment. Since every country is different what might work in one won't work in another

As far as the US goes, you have a mostly dumb population teamed with a completely dumb leadership, so the best course of action is probably just to open things back up. Doing a half assed lock down that most people don't take seriously and hamstringing the economy for a year or more is largely pointless. Because half assed isn't going to beat anything. You either have to go all in and do what it takes to beat the virus or just let it take it's course.

Other countries have to come up with the solution that's right for them. If you have a population that's responsible and intelligent lock downs might not be as necessary. One smart thing to do would be to ban travel from the US for the foreseeable future because it's likely Americans will be a major infection risk for a while.

[Highndry]

We are in a situation in which there is no good answer. Until we have a solid treatment which quickly reverses the effects of the disease, or a vaccine, life as we knew it is not coming back.

People act like this lockdown is something new that the government just made up, but that is not the case. If you read some history about the Spanish Flu of 1918, you will see that all non-essential businesses - bars, restaurants, barbers, etc. - were shut down then as well. They basically told people to stay home except to get food.

The problem we have today is that the system is so loaded with debt, whether corporate, government or household, that a small interruption guarantees complete financial devastation for many. Nobody saved for a rainy day in spite of the fact that we had "the greatest economy in history." (not really)

This is a teachable moment for mankind as we were woefully unprepared in most places. Some countries and provinces are doing much better than others, like Taiwan. They learned from SARS and were ready. Others, like the US, were caught asleep at the switch. You have to go back to the Bush administration to find any surplus of supplies on the shelf. Trump said Obama left the cupboards bare, which he did, but Trump had 3 years to fill them and instead left them bare. There is plenty of blame to go around.

 

 

 

[Philosopher]

6 hours ago, elaine567 said:

Flu vaccines  are easy, we have them down to a fine art.
New flu vaccine  - no problem.

The problem we have now is not really about mutations, though mutations will be a problem too.
The problem we have is about what the WHO reported today.
They report that there is no evidence as yet that having Covid -19 confers immunity.
Some patients have been found that lack an antibody response to the virus.
If having the virus does not promote an antibody response then what hope is there for a vaccine.
No antibodies, no immunity.

With vaccines, I have read they do try to develop vaccines so that the immune system responds strongly enough so it produces enough antibodies to create long last immunity. Therefore if done right a vaccine should be about to develop immunity for all but those very immuno suppressed.     

Trials of remdesivir do seem to have been reasonably successful, therefore perhaps this could for allow less strict social distancing from the summer until a vaccine is found.

 

[chillii]

Speaking of gov debt , probably a silly question but .

There was a lot of stuff floating around a few wks back about govs just printing more of their own money to fund this.

What happens if they really do and why not just do that ?  Replace their countries earnings for a year , then everything could just start over fresh the next yr when this is all hopefully cleaned up .  l know there's gotta be a snag , just dunno what that is.

Edited April 19, 2020 by chillii

[schlumpy]

1 hour ago, chillii said:

Speaking of gov debt , probably a silly question but .

There was a lot of stuff floating around a few wks back about govs just printing more of their own money to fund this.

What happens if they really do and why not just do that ?  Replace their countries earnings for a year , then everything could just start over fresh the next yr when this is all hopefully cleaned up .  l know there's gotta be a snag , just dunno what that is.

If the government prints more money it makes the cash in your pocket worth less. I think the best way to understand it is to read about diluted shares in the stock market where preferred stock is issued as part of an executive benefit package and the effect it has on common stock which is what the public owns. It can affect not only the share price but also the earnings per share which of course decreases any dividends paid to common stock owners.

The same is true about printed money. Makes you think about those ads urging you to buy gold.

[thefooloftheyear]

8 hours ago, Highndry said:

 

 

The problem we have today is that the system is so loaded with debt, whether corporate, government or household, that a small interruption guarantees complete financial devastation for many. Nobody saved for a rainy day in spite of the fact that we had "the greatest economy in history." (not really)

 

 

 

 

Just wrong....

I don't care what country or what planet....Sure, many people aren't good savers....But even savers would see substantial loss of savings within just a few months of total lockdown, which is what we have now...If it lasts a year or more, which some are proposing, then it wont matter who saved what...a massive proportion of the population would be facing economic ruin.. You cant compare anything to this...This is not irresponsible behavior....This is a forced closure of most all revenue...

The economic model changed somewhere in the 60's/70's when it was evident that there would be two incomes coming into every household...As a result, the cost of everything went up so substantially that if you do a complete shutdown of everything, you wind up in the red very quickly...And lets' face it, so far people are getting breaks on their utilities and mortgages and such, but those bills aren't going to be forgiven....Its a debt  that will still have to be paid...

As for businesses, nothing much has changed over the 30 years I have been in business...Many of us have reserves and accounts receivables etc.....But close off the faucet of revenue practically 100% and you will fall behind very quickly...Regulatory fees, taxes, etc, notes, payables, etc..the list is endless..

Bottom line Is don't be so quick to blame poor planning on something no one would envision in their wildest imaginations..

TFY

[Redhead14]

16 hours ago, Kitty Tantrum said:

"My body my choice."

Your choice to exposure yourself, your body and possibly, even likely in lots of areas, be a carrier of a disease that is deadly to many and has severe consequences in most, makes you a possible murderer.  Just like people who knew they were exposed to or carriers of HIV and didn't practice responsible and transparent sexual practices could be charged with attempted murder if they infected someone else.  If it only killed you, I'd be fine with it.

If someone intentionally didn't follow the guidelines and was contagious and then infected someone else, I bet we will be seeing some court cases coming to light at some point.  Like those kids down in Florida who had parties and then took the virus home to friends and relatives and other on the trip home performed an act of negligence.  I'll be curious to see if court cases come out of those kinds of situations after the dust settles.  There were quite a few of these kinds of situations.  There should be consequences.  And, one can say that the "regular" flu kills people.  However, the entire world didn't shutdown over the "regular" flu which should speak volumes about this virus, however, lots of people still hang on to the "regular" flu argument   

 

Edited April 19, 2020 by Redhead14

[thefooloftheyear]

I had to meet up with a client yesterday to pick up some items for an upcoming job, so we decided to meet outside in the center of town rather than go to anyone's physical location...Anyway, the town was almost completely closed, all shops shut down, except for the liquor store, which in the 15 minutes I spent waiting in the car for him to arrive an estimated 30 people were in and out of the place...It was nuts...Most weren't wearing masks and only pulled their shirts up and covered their mouths when they entered the store.. this was not a big store, btw...I can only imagine the amount of people coming in and out of there in an entire day....Talk about an epidemiological breeding ground...Bear in mind, this wasn't even in a larger and densely populated town/city...

Now....someone please explain to me how this should be allowed to happen, when people aren't even allowed to go to outdoor parks or practically anything else?

TFY

 

[Redhead14]

4 minutes ago, thefooloftheyear said:

I had to meet up with a client yesterday to pick up some items for an upcoming job, so we decided to meet outside in the center of town rather than go to anyone's physical location...Anyway, the town was almost completely closed, all shops shut down, except for the liquor store, which in the 15 minutes I spent waiting in the car for him to arrive an estimated 30 people were in and out of the place...It was nuts...Most weren't wearing masks and only pulled their shirts up and covered their mouths when they entered the store.. this was not a big store, btw...I can only imagine the amount of people coming in and out of there in an entire day....Talk about an epidemiological breeding ground...Bear in mind, this wasn't even in a larger and densely populated town/city...

Now....someone please explain to me how this should be allowed to happen, when people aren't even allowed to go to outdoor parks or practically anything else?

TFY

 

It shouldn't be allowed.  Face masks are now, however, mandated everywhere I believe.  Our local liquor store only allows curbside pick up.  People have to call ahead and the store attendant puts the item out on a table for pick up.  No one can enter the store and no cash is accepted.  You must call ahead and give card info over the phone. 

[Redhead14]

There is a NY Times article today about a protest in Austin.  Most of the protesters didn't wear masks even.  I hope there is some kind of report later that reveals how many people who attended that protest, or any others, end up with Corona and/or tests positive at some point soon.  I'll have a very difficult time feeling any compassion or sympathy for any of them who do.

Edited April 19, 2020 by Redhead14

[nittygritty]

20 minutes ago, Redhead14 said:

It shouldn't be allowed.  Face masks are now, however, mandated everywhere I believe.  Our local liquor store only allows curbside pick up.  People have to call ahead and the store attendant puts the item out on a table for pick up.  No one can enter the store and no cash is accepted.  You must call ahead and give card info over the phone. 

7 States do not even have stay at home orders. Wearing face masks in public is not mandated everywhere. 

[Redhead14]

4 minutes ago, nittygritty said:

7 States do not even have stay at home orders. Wearing face masks in public is not mandated everywhere. 

I should have said, "face masks are mandated everywhere in my State". 

Edited April 19, 2020 by Redhead14