Go Back  FlyerTalk Forums > Travel&Dining > Travel Health and Fitness > Coronavirus and travel
Reload this Page >

Coronavirus / COVID-19 : general fact-based reporting

Community
Wiki Posts
Search
Old Jan 27, 2020, 9:09 am
FlyerTalk Forums Expert How-Tos and Guides
Last edit by: username
PLEASE READ BEFORE POSTING
This thread has become a valuable resource on Corona Virus/COVID-19 in general and no longer just about its impact on China travel. In order for the thread to remain fact-based and useful, posters are reminded to keep it free of speculation, conjecture and fear-mongering. Posts which do not meet these guidelines or which break the FT rules may be edited or deleted. Please observe the following FT rules in particular:

- be respectful and helpful
- stay on topic
- posts must be contributive to the thread
- inflammatory, inciting or unnecessarily provocative posts are not allowed
- repetitively posting comments of the same general theme is not permitted
- abusive, hateful, threatening, harassing or otherwise offensive posts will not be tolerated
- do not post comments on moderator decisions

FlyerTalk Senior Moderator Team

The following two links are updated daily:
IATA international transit / arrival policies Coronavirus Outbreak - Update
WHO Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) situation reports

Counters / Meters : Other Discussions on FlyerTalk Pertaining to COVID-19:

General (in this forum)
Location-specific
Airlines
Hotels
Other
Please add other discussions on FlyerTalk pertaining to COVID-19 not already been included in this WikiPost. Thank you.


Print Wikipost

Coronavirus / COVID-19 : general fact-based reporting

 
Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old May 25, 2020, 11:37 am
  #5311  
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: PHX
Programs: Delta DM, Marriott Lifetime Titanium, HHonrs Diamond
Posts: 1,336
Also, seems like the European/Eastern USA strain has led to the post-inflammatory autoimmune sequelae in children compared to the original strain.

However, these guys, who are probably at the forefront of mutation analysis seem to think that the differences in outcomes can still be explained by response and social measures in the face of infection. They still claim there is one "strain" and one clinical infection.
https://nextstrain.org/narratives/nc...rep/2020-05-15

It is hotly debated and both sides have some great anecdotal evidence.

Closed environments facilitate transmission 18x compared to open air environments.
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1....28.20029272v2

Yet all the media is doing this weekend is showing people congregated outside. No cameras indoors at night where the transmission really occurs.

Last edited by NewbieRunner; May 26, 2020 at 5:19 pm Reason: Merge consecutive posts by same member
FlyBitcoin is offline  
Old May 25, 2020, 11:44 am
  #5312  
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Programs: Continental Onepass, Hilton, Marriott, USAir and now UA
Posts: 6,423
Originally Posted by wco81
Seems like a shock and awe approach, pour a lot of money, to start manufacturing before trials are finished. Probably a measure of desperation.
It depends on what one considers "a lot" of money.

I believe our first Covid bail-out bill was to the tune of 2 Trillion dollars and the subsequent suggested bills may be even greater. If a vaccine can be produced rapidly and allow economic recovery sooner, then the money saved by not having to extend life support services to the economy will far exceed the ante put down to produce a vaccine more rapidly.

A fail costs a few billion. A bailout cost trillions.
radonc1 is offline  
Old May 25, 2020, 11:59 am
  #5313  
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: PHX
Programs: Delta DM, Marriott Lifetime Titanium, HHonrs Diamond
Posts: 1,336
Originally Posted by radonc1
It depends on what one considers "a lot" of money.

I believe our first Covid bail-out bill was to the tune of 2 Trillion dollars and the subsequent suggested bills may be even greater. If a vaccine can be produced rapidly and allow economic recovery sooner, then the money saved by not having to extend life support services to the economy will far exceed the ante put down to produce a vaccine more rapidly.

A fail costs a few billion. A bailout cost trillions.
From an economic standpoint, CV-19 is worldwide. Everyone is printing money.
It's not like the "contagions" of financial crises (1990's Asia and 2008 US) that hurt the origin nation more than world markets.

IF, and it remains an "if", the world can resist a global inflationary spiral, AND we don't see a mass distrust of fiat currency with moves into gold (hasn't happened at all yet), then the world financial order remains relatively unchanged and unscathed. This is why "printing money" here vs printing money when nobody else is printing money are two completely different problems. it is a tightrope to walk, but as much as most of us hate printing money, this may be a time when it conveys less damage (on a global stage) than the alternative of not doing so.
FlyBitcoin is offline  
Old May 25, 2020, 12:03 pm
  #5314  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Bay Area
Programs: DL SM, UA MP.
Posts: 12,729
Originally Posted by FlyBitcoin
Closed environments facilitate transmission 18x compared to open air environments.
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1....28.20029272v2

Yet all the media is doing this weekend is showing people congregated outside. No cameras indoors at night where the transmission really occurs.
We see pictures of people outside at lake resorts and they're pretty close to each other, nobody wearing masks.

there was also a picture of stands packed at a race car event in NC.

Then you had a case like this:

https://www.cnn.com/2020/05/23/us/ar...rus/index.html

Pool was presumably outside but people still get close, talk to each other in close distances, probably drinking so if they were inclined to socially distance, how long did they try to maintain it once the drinks started being consumed?
wco81 is offline  
Old May 25, 2020, 12:16 pm
  #5315  
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Silicon wasteland
Programs: UA 1KMM
Posts: 1,381
Originally Posted by radonc1
It depends on what one considers "a lot" of money.

I believe our first Covid bail-out bill was to the tune of 2 Trillion dollars and the subsequent suggested bills may be even greater. If a vaccine can be produced rapidly and allow economic recovery sooner, then the money saved by not having to extend life support services to the economy will far exceed the ante put down to produce a vaccine more rapidly.

A fail costs a few billion. A bailout cost trillions.
As I said in my comment previously, we should be doing everything scientifically possible to reduce the time to vaccine. If this means starting production on promising stuff before the effectiveness can be deduced, so be it. We should be getting started on 10 of these things simultaneously -- as long as manufacturing one doesn't interfere with manufacturing the others. (they probably do). It's classic triage, and as the previous pointer pointed out, the penalty for guessing wrong is but a drop in the bucket compared to the world economic seizure we are currently in.
ryman554 is offline  
Old May 25, 2020, 12:17 pm
  #5316  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Bay Area
Programs: DL SM, UA MP.
Posts: 12,729
Originally Posted by radonc1
It depends on what one considers "a lot" of money.

I believe our first Covid bail-out bill was to the tune of 2 Trillion dollars and the subsequent suggested bills may be even greater. If a vaccine can be produced rapidly and allow economic recovery sooner, then the money saved by not having to extend life support services to the economy will far exceed the ante put down to produce a vaccine more rapidly.

A fail costs a few billion. A bailout cost trillions.
Sure compared to measures to try to mitigate the economic lockdown.

But compared to the cash flow a startup like Moderna is used to?

Or even larger Pharma like Astra Zeneca or J&J, it's probably a lot of money in a short period of time for a single project.

I'm not criticizing the approach, yet.

But there are political incentives to raise expectations, which may not be supported by science or at least history.

Soumya Swaminathan, chief scientist for the World Health Organization, believes an optimistic scenario is a vaccine produced in the “tens of millions” next year, which would be mainly distributed to healthcare workers, and far larger volumes in 2022. To inoculate the world and defeat Covid-19 could take four to five years, she says.

We have no “crystal ball” to tell the future, she told the Financial Times. “It depends how the virus behaves: whether it mutates, whether it becomes more or less virulent, more or less transmittable.”

Peter Hotez, a professor at the Baylor College of Medicine in Houston who is developing a vaccine, says the US president sees vaccines as a “manufacturing problem,” like making enough ventilators or tests.

“Manufacturing is not the hurdle. It’s taking the time to collect enough efficacy and safety data,” he says. “The Operation Warp Speed language coming out of the White House and biotechs and pharma companies [saying] that they will have a vaccine by the fall—or in weeks or days—does so much damage.”
https://arstechnica.com/science/2020...cine-research/

Obviously we all want several of the vaccines to succeed, sooner than later. The optimist view:

Vaccines are usually developed over many years and even decades. A 2013 paper from Dutch scientists says the average vaccine took 10.71 years and had only a 6 per cent success rate from start to finish. Each stage is an experiment: from the small phase one trials happening now to the large phase three trials needed for regulatory approval.

There are good reasons to believe this time will be quicker. The Covid-19 vaccines benefit from groundwork done for the Sars and Mers coronaviruses even if they were never approved, says Walter Orenstein, a professor at the Emory Vaccine Center in Atlanta.

New technologies are fueling the hope for a faster process. Analysts from Morgan Stanley estimate that Moderna’s vaccine has a 65 percent chance of success. They believe that before the end of the year we could see vaccines from Pfizer and their German partner BioNTech, and AstraZeneca and Oxford university.

But advances like the messengerRNA programming used by Moderna, BioNTech and another German company, CureVac, have never been used to create products approved by a regulator. The technique translates a protein from the virus into human cells and shows it to the B cells that secrete antibodies.

The pandemic has pushed governments and companies to pour money into Covid-19 vaccines, even if there has been a lack of global cooperation. Peter Bach, director of the Center for Health Policy and Outcomes at Memorial Sloan Kettering, says it helps that there are so many horses in this race.
Raised expectations may not meet the reality of these vaccines in development. They could also lead people not to observe the cautions about limiting the spread of infections:

If a vaccine proves safe, there will still be questions about its effectiveness. Paul Stoffels, chief scientific officer at Johnson & Johnson, says one of the biggest questions is whether it will stop infection or just the disease—or even, like the flu shot, only prevent the most severe symptoms of the disease.

“It would be good if it protects against both,” he says. “If you can prevent infection, it prevents spread going forward in the community.”

Before a vaccine is produced, developments in treatments—such as antivirals and antibodies—may help improve outcomes for Covid-19 patients. A vaccine that is only 60 or 70 per cent effective could still be approved by the regulator and have a significant impact on the spread of the disease, says Stéphane Bancel, Moderna chief executive.

He is “cautiously optimistic” he will see efficacy in the large and final phase three trial—but does not know if it will be 70 or 95 per cent. “Even if it was 70 per cent effective it would reduce tremendously the problem, which is that the virus is so contagious,” he says.

Political leaders will declare victory if a vaccine maker manages to move safely at speeds more suited to science fiction. However, the mass inoculation that could speed up the return to normal life is further away. The first vaccines will probably be given to healthcare workers who will be studied closely, as if they were still part of a trial.

Michael Osterholm, director of the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy at the University of Minnesota, says we must remember there is still a chance we do not get a vaccine at all. It is not a “slam dunk,” he says.

He is concerned that people are not taking other public health measures to stop the spread because of the “optimism and enthusiasm” about a vaccine.

“People will just assume it’s like a Hollywood movie and at the very last minute, someone will swoop in their helicopter with a new vaccine that was only made a day ago. And the whole world is saved,” Mr. Osterholm says. “It’s human behavior. When you’re faced with such a serious challenge, you want any good news you can get.”
wco81 is offline  
Old May 25, 2020, 12:42 pm
  #5317  
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: PHX
Programs: Delta DM, Marriott Lifetime Titanium, HHonrs Diamond
Posts: 1,336
Originally Posted by wco81
We see pictures of people outside at lake resorts and they're pretty close to each other, nobody wearing masks.

there was also a picture of stands packed at a race car event in NC.

Then you had a case like this:

https://www.cnn.com/2020/05/23/us/ar...rus/index.html

Pool was presumably outside but people still get close, talk to each other in close distances, probably drinking so if they were inclined to socially distance, how long did they try to maintain it once the drinks started being consumed?
The point is, if they test positive for this virus next week, then there is an 18x higher chance they caught it and spread it in the car ride, in bed together, or crammed into that beach house, than they did outdoors day in, day out. These are units of people who are not exclusively sharing time and space at the beach. They share it off the beach as well.

Yet, some idiots in the media will elevate their "photojournalism" to capturing that very moment the virus transfers from person to person. They will forget that people still spend half of their time indoors even in the best of weather. And that viral load on the sand is left behind and baked away, but viral load on the kitchen counter at home remains from the morning.

We will see, but I remain much more wary of groups indoors compared to outside in the sun.
FlyBitcoin is offline  
Old May 25, 2020, 12:47 pm
  #5318  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: BOS, YVR, ZRH
Programs: *G
Posts: 17,387
Originally Posted by FlyBitcoin
The point is, if they test positive for this virus next week, then there is an 18x higher chance they caught it and spread it in the car ride, in bed together, or crammed into that beach house, than they did outdoors day in, day out. These are units of people who are not exclusively sharing time and space at the beach. They share it off the beach as well.

Yet, some idiots in the media will elevate their "photojournalism" to capturing that very moment the virus transfers from person to person. They will forget that people still spend half of their time indoors even in the best of weather. And that viral load on the sand is left behind and baked away, but viral load on the kitchen counter at home remains from the morning.

We will see, but I remain much more wary of groups indoors compared to outside in the sun.
I don't think all "outside" is the same. E.g. going for a jog/walk your risk will be very low. congregating outside for 1/2 hours at a time in a densely packed group? That number has gotta be much closer to "indoors" than generic "outdoors". Would be good to see that breakdown eventually.
nk15 likes this.
Smiley90 is online now  
Old May 25, 2020, 12:53 pm
  #5319  
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: PHX
Programs: Delta DM, Marriott Lifetime Titanium, HHonrs Diamond
Posts: 1,336
Originally Posted by Smiley90
I don't think all "outside" is the same. E.g. going for a jog/walk your risk will be very low. congregating outside for 1/2 hours at a time in a densely packed group? That number has gotta be much closer to "indoors" than generic "outdoors". Would be good to see that breakdown eventually.
The accuracy of your statement depends on how "densely" is defined. Also, what is the wind velocity and how mobile are the people? All are more controlled with less variation in an indoor environment even if density if left constant.
FlyBitcoin is offline  
Old May 25, 2020, 12:58 pm
  #5320  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Bay Area
Programs: DL SM, UA MP.
Posts: 12,729
When you see dozens of people outside around a pool or clustered around tables which aren't too far apart, it's only a handful of them who are riding in cars together or spending time in the same living quarters.

It's more likely that a family or a group of friends go to these events, then come close to strangers, then infect each other, no?

Or do you think any infections arising from these events occur because these groups of 4 or 5 people already had one spreader and they mainly spread it within this group of 4 or 5 but not to strangers outside that group?
wco81 is offline  
Old May 25, 2020, 1:40 pm
  #5321  
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 1,353
Originally Posted by FlyBitcoin
Closed environments facilitate transmission 18x compared to open air environments.
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1....28.20029272v2

Yet all the media is doing this weekend is showing people congregated outside. No cameras indoors at night where the transmission really occurs.
We're going to see more outdoor pictures because it's probably a *lot* easier to take pictures in an outdoor public place than inside a private building. I'd surely like to see pictures from inside the church in Mendocino, CA where 9 people so far got infected from a "livestreamed" Mother's Day service (yeah, catchy headline but it sounds like it was a full-on choir singing on site. 3 of them are hospitalized now), or any of the other similar gatherings that have varying claims of "but we took precautions!". But I suspect getting permission to do so would be...unlikely.

It's true that some of the spread vectors outside may be lower -- touching the picnic table in the full sun that an infected person coughed on 20 minutes ago might be safer than touching the plastic packaging that the same person coughed on (perhaps through their vented N95) in the grocery store. And people often have more *opportunity* to space out in large outdoor spaces than in the aisles of the store, whether they do so or not. But talking to someone 2 feet away is likely the same risk as it is indoors (yes, made better or worse by the wind at a particular point); I don't think UV rays can kill the virus in traveling droplets in seconds, can they?

I agree with prioritizing indoor infection transmission, but I don't think it's safe to ignore outdoor and give people the impression they touch/eat with/do whatever they want as long as it's not under a roof.
jmastron is offline  
Old May 25, 2020, 1:47 pm
  #5322  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Bay Area
Programs: DL SM, UA MP.
Posts: 12,729
Dartmouth professor of biology talks about different infection scenarios, specifically exposure quantity (viral load) and time. She assumes 1000 viral particles as being sufficient dose for infection and talks about how different types of scenarios produce different levels of exposure.

https://www.erinbromage.com/post/the...hem-avoid-them
wco81 is offline  
Old May 25, 2020, 2:19 pm
  #5323  
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: SFO, TPE, HNL
Programs: UA GS 4MM, RCC life member (paid), Marriott Lifetime Titanium, Hyatt Globalist, CLEAR
Posts: 1,822
UCSF has a series of lecture and discussions on
Guidance for Parks as an Essential Service During a Pandemic

The material should be relevant to beach gathering. It seems that the main concerns of such outdoor activities are the use of bathrooms.
PanAmWT is online now  
Old May 25, 2020, 2:22 pm
  #5324  
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Programs: Continental Onepass, Hilton, Marriott, USAir and now UA
Posts: 6,423
Originally Posted by wco81
Dartmouth professor of biology talks about different infection scenarios, specifically exposure quantity (viral load) and time. She assumes 1000 viral particles as being sufficient dose for infection and talks about how different types of scenarios produce different levels of exposure.

https://www.erinbromage.com/post/the...hem-avoid-them
I don't believe she is a Dartmouth professor, but a U. Mass professor at Dartmouth. This is from her Bio
"I am a Comparative Immunologist and Professor of Biology (specializing in Immunology) at the University of Massachusetts Dartmouth."

In her blog, she describes herself in the following fashion...which I personally think is nice.
"The blog posts, while factual, discuss emerging science on COVID-19 in a colloquial way. They should not be interpreted in any other way. My goal is to make the science accessible to the general public."

However, what she says she is doing is exactly what we are doing here in this thread and note that she does not describe herself as an expert.
"I am not holding myself out as an expert on this virus or epidemiology and I rely on the amazing scientists publishing and discussing their work for the material and data content of my posts."

Finally, this blog post is dated 5/3 which in Covid-19 research world is obsolescent as far as data is concerned. She makes a point about surfaces and transmission that has not been supported by data. One can read the rest of the report using the above link.
MSPeconomist likes this.
radonc1 is offline  
Old May 25, 2020, 2:32 pm
  #5325  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Bay Area
Programs: DL SM, UA MP.
Posts: 12,729
Well turns out it's a he.

But the comparisons of different kinds of breathing activities and implications for viral load are interesting.

Most of that post is about the loads in droplets, number of droplets, etc., not so much fomites from surfaces.

Most telling is the case of some indoor spread where people got infected from 50 feet away because internal air circulation systems spread the "cloud" all over even larger rooms.
wco81 is offline  


Contact Us - Manage Preferences - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.