CharonY

I only had them once (but they were the tiny variant) and I found them somewhat dry and thought it lacked it a bit of fat.

Actually I do think that this call is premature as well. We would need to look retrospectively at total hearlth burden to assess how damaging this strategy was. There is some truth that they are currently doing worse than their neighbours with over 2000 deaths, compared to 205 (Norway) or 427 (Denmark). Another issue is that Sweden has reported fewer tests, which increases uncertainty somewhat. So while the current trajectory does not look great, I think it takes a bit longer to ascertain whether it is total failure or not.

I think the need was never in question (as well as for the other treatments). Due to the ongoing situation, often the designs are less than optimal and/or part of emergency/mercy treatments. I have a hard time imagining how it would work. Most of the viral particles are not just sitting on tissue, but are inside the cells (or after leaving cells would circulate). I would assume radiation that is damaging to them, would also be harmful (probably more so) to live tissue. After exiting they also disseminate via body fluids so point sterilization does not seem to be the right strategy to me.

I think it should be noted that Sweden has a soft measures, with some restrictions, as well as some school closures. Countries which got ahead of the curve initially also had measures in place as well as overall high compliance to avoid more stringent restrictions. Initially that approach just did not work in Europe although there were some warnings, folks did go to mass gatherings and festivities. Presumably (but not certainly) folks might be more apprehensive now. As SJ Sweden is another live experiment among all the others and we do not have the data yet to clearly declare the right strategy. Moreover, it is too premature to assume that there is or there will be herd immunity. We do not yet have sufficient data to ascertain a) whether folks actually become immune (but also no hard data to contradict) or b) the proportion of infected folks become immune and c) if there is immunity, how long it lasts. The honest truth is that we still have huge knowledge gaps that we need to address. For a pragmatic, soft opening with observation, there also need to be certain structural elements in place. At minimum, it is necessary to have sufficient tests around, so that one can identify and trace new infections accurately and timely, one has to ensure that there are enough capacities in case severe cases spike and sufficient personnel needs to be allocated for timely data collection and dissemination.

I am wondering whether protesters are financially affected. In the US quite a number of these protests were orchestrated by certain ideological groups (https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/21/us/politics/coronavirus-protests-trump.html). That does not mean that economic anxiety is not a factor for some, but there is certainly something else at play here.

Even without vaccine the idea of flattening is to trickle in serious cases into hospitals in a manageable manner. Ripping off the bandaid would result in much higher number of deaths (as on can see during in the earlier stages in Italy, Wuhan and Spain. Of course initial contact tracing and isolation could have resulted in it burning out, but that ship has sailed.

That is a bit more complicated and I lack time to elaborate it right now. But one issue is definition, in clinical one often uses fatalities after detection of symptoms for practical reasons. Assessing likelihood after infection is another one which has other uses but due to the ongoing situation reports are a bit of a weird mix of both. Another aspect is that if true infections are higher, it means it is less lethal, but spreads more than anticipated. While implications are different, clinically it still means an increased burden to the health care system, as you mentioned. And again, I thing comparison with flu are problematic, as many think it is harmless. Yet they result I'm significant annual seat tolls (even with vaccine).

I dunno, the massive mismanagement of the pandemic response would be a massive thing to distract from. Not sure whether we need anything else.

Yes the immunoglobulins have different binding specificity. For these types of assays you use an antigen that is specific to what you want to detect (i.e. specific to SARS-CoV-2) and thereby only detect those immonoglobulins that are (at least in theory) indicative of a COVID-19 infection. Of course these tests have a limited specificity, which usually needs to be validated in trials. Current assays went through a fast approval process and can be a bit less specific than for other types of tests.

Just dry roasted? Interesting. I thought they would be somewhat low on fat for that.

I am unclear about details, but I feel garlic butter should be involved.

As a whole, zoonotic diseases from non-mammals are much less likely due to differences in overall physiology. One reason why pigs are quite often involved in jumps from animals to humans.

There are no different models. However, the receptor targeted by the virus are distributed throughout our body. While it is present in high levels in the lower respiratory tracts, you can also find them in the kidneys in high concentrations as well in the neural cortex. So if the virus starts spreading in the body, they can infect multiple sites. Also the immune response itself creates has the potential to create damage. Currently, the evidence is much stronger that different outcomes are more dependent on the host, rather on the variant of the virus.

Also note that estimates of the reproductive number on the cruise ships still indicate a fairly low transmission rate. That is consistent with limited airborne transmission (i.e. droplet transmission). If aerosol transmission was more common, more people would be expected to be infected, considering the timeline to detection.

Eh, politically there is no winning with Trump. There is so much stuff out there, there is no strong strategy to counter any of it. In the impeachment process Democrats tried to run a very narrow focus on things, and it did not help. Also being anti-immigration is always a safe call. And yet another example how the administrations cripples their own response in order to support their narrative. Well, turns out that the WSJ editorial board is also calling it out as a distraction and endangering the economy. https://www.wsj.com/articles/trumps-immigration-distraction-11587511218

That why to some extent it appears to be more symbolic than actually having a practical reason. But it appears that they will also pause green card processing, which would affect folks already in the US, waiting for a green card. At the same time it does not appear to affect folks on immigration work visa. And to me it is not clear what happens if status runs out while waiting in the US for a green card (though probably only few are affected). But for the most part it is just one of the things to show that he still cares about such things to his base, I assume (or a general distraction from their leadership issues in addressing the epidemic).

I do not think they care. It is painfully obvious that xenophobia and nationalism was part of the agenda all along (in fact, aside from dismantling protective agencies, it is one of the few obviously consistent policies) to make America great white again.

There is a minimum required, though it is often not well defined (and a bit stochastic, I.e. the more the likelier it is to become infected). But single particles are very unlikely to result in disease.

From what I read, parasites are also a bit of a problem. There was the famous case where someone infected themselves with Naegleria fowleri by nasal irrigation with tap water. Normally the low concentrations are fine when consumed, but the nose allowed penetration via the nasal mucosa and they entered the brain via the olfactory nerves.

None of this make sense. Bacteria are not infected by eukaryotic viruses, and immunity is an entirely different mechanism. Adaptive immunity in eukaryotes is target specific. It is like trying to get the innate ability to fly by cuddling ducks.

Yes, because they get released from sewer lines. There is a reason why they are considered non-potable. If one is wondering whether splash infections are likely, the answer is usually no, as sewage usually at least gets diluted and the measured titer is generally low. The risk is higher if you drink it, but typically bacteria are the bigger issue.

No, but the water is drawn from the Seine and other sources which are downstream from sewer lines (directly or indirectly). Wastewater treatment does get rid of a fair bit via flocculation (if they have such a stage) but removal is not always quantitative.

! Moderator Note Agreed. As there is apparently no way going forward in this thread it will be locked for now.

! Moderator Note Merged similar questions into one thread.

That is to be expected. If a lot of people are shedding, it will end up in the sewer system and can be detected with sensitive methods.