Coronavirus - those in China, and general discussion

[somethingfunny]

Yes, I was listening to the radio only two hours ago and they had two different people on who both said it was a case of months not weeks.  Now we're being told it's days not weeks.

[889]

I don't understand much technically about all this.

 

I think I understand how a rapid widely available test for the virus itself would have great benefit: we could quickly screen out the asymptomatic contagious and determine whether someone with symptoms actually has the virus or not.

 

But once you've been infected and long after the virus has been cleared, you'll still test positive for the antibodies. It's no doubt interesting to know how many have been infected and comforting perhaps to know you have the antibodies if you had such a mild case you didn't even know you were infected.

 

Yet my limited understanding is that antibodies often can't be detected until after the virus itself has cleared from the body, so the antibody test isn't really much of a proxy for the virus test: the antibody test confirms you were once infected and nothing else.

 

That is, I don't see how this is such a great advance.

 

What am I missing?

 

[Flickserve]

@889

social epidemiology is fascinating topic.

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_epidemiology

I suspect the course module I attended is the precursor of the MOOC mentioned below. Kawachi is excellent (personal testimony).
 

https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/ichiro-kawachi/

 

[roddy]

26 minutes ago, 889 said:

What am I missing?

Quote

The test detects the presence of IGM, an antibody that arises very early on in the infection, and IGG, which is increased in the body’s response to the virus.

I'm as hazy on the technicalities as you are, but it sounds like at the very least this lets people get out of quarantine a lot faster. 

 

Edit - The more I read it the more confusing I find it, but it does seem to me the test is meant to tell you both if you have it now, or have had it in the past. Which, combined with wide availability, makes things much easier?

 

But then: 

Quote

Prof. Lang says being able to test if an individual has developed antibodies to the virus will be “completely transformational” in fighting Covid-19 around the world. “We can make sure we’ve got doctors or nurses who can work safely in hospitals,” she says. “People won’t have to isolate unnecessarily at home for 14 days, because you’ll be able to tell very quickly if people have cleared it or not.”

Which isn't quite the same thing. Anyway, the professor seems quite excited. 

[889]

So it doesn't test for the antibody specific to the virus itself, but for another antibody which does become detectable very early in the course of the disease?

[roddy]

Dunno. And I was doing so well at not reading the news today. 

[Shelley]

I think one advantage to the antibody test is the speed and ease it can be done with. I can order the test from Amazon, test myself and get the result without having to wait or involve a third party like the NHS.

 

It will allow NHS workers and other important workers to get back to work sooner and safer.

 

Also finding how many people have had and didn't even know about it can help with working out the way this virus moves around.

 

[Jan Finster]

53 minutes ago, 889 said:

But once you've been infected and long after the virus has been cleared, you'll still test positive for the antibodies. It's no doubt interesting to know how many have been infected and comforting perhaps to know you have the antibodies if you had such a mild case you didn't even know you were infected.

 

Yet my limited understanding is that antibodies often can't be detected until after the virus itself has cleared from the body, so the antibody test isn't really much of a proxy for the virus test: the antibody test confirms you were once infected and nothing else.

 

The idea is that you can find out if you had the virus (without knowing it). This would be immensely helpful as you can "relax" once you know you have had it.

Also, in healthcare you can send those nurses and doctors that are antibody positive to the frontline and focus your protective efforts more on the antibody negative ones. 

(if you can really become re-infected to a significant degree and get seriously sick another time is very detabatable (People say there are different strains of the virus)

[889]

"Also, in healthcare you can send those nurses and doctors that are antibody positive to the frontline and focus your protective efforts more on the antibody negative ones."

 

But if as Roddy suggested the test measures a particular antibody that becomes detectable early in the course of the disease, anyone testing positive could still be contagious, though asymptomatic. Not the sort of people you want to send out to see patients!

[Jan Finster]

52 minutes ago, 889 said:

But if as Roddy suggested the test measures a particular antibody that becomes detectable early in the course of the disease, anyone testing positive could still be contagious, though asymptomatic. Not the sort of people you want to send out to see patients!

There is possibly a short time period in which you could be antibody positive but symptom-free and infectious. So, you would have to wait 2 weeks or so after testing antibody positive until you are good to go. 

[Jim]

Print out for your doors:

[abcdefg]

That's great, Jim! What a fabulous 门神。I have just printed a large copy and installed it. No rogue virus will now dare to enter these premises. I will sleep soundly tonight. 

[Flickserve]

7 hours ago, 889 said:

But if as Roddy suggested the test measures a particular antibody that becomes detectable early in the course of the disease, anyone testing positive could still be contagious, though asymptomatic

 

True.

 

IgM is the antibody initially produced in response to an infection after a few days. 

 

IgG is produced later so presence of IgG means having had infection in the past. 

 

6 hours ago, Jan Finster said:

So, you would have to wait 2 weeks or so after testing antibody positive until you are good to go. 

 

From what we know, also true for most people. It seems there still might be a few transmissions after two weeks of symptoms. So, extending social distancing is still useful. 

 

The other point to be wary of is a recovered person still being able to pass on the virus as a vector between an infected person and a later meeting a non-infected person. Continued good hygiene and awareness is important.

[Flickserve]

Did WHO and CDC get it wrong about only wearing masks if you are symptomatic?

 

 

Fourth, the W.H.O. and the C.D.C. told the public to wear masks if they were sick. However, there is increasing evidence of asymptomatic transmission, especially through younger people who have milder cases and don’t know they are sick but are still infectious. Since the W.H.O. and the C.D.C. do say that masks lessen the chances that infected people will infect others, then everyone should use masks. If the public is told that only the sick people are to wear masks, then those who do wear them will be stigmatized and people may well avoid wearing them if it screams “I’m sick.” Further, it’s very difficult to be tested for Covid-19 in the United States. How are people supposed to know for sure when to mask up?

 

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/17/opinion/coronavirus-face-masks.html

 

 

The controversy continues in this discussion

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-52015486

 

 

Lack of evidence of wider benefits doesn't mean an effect doesn't exist. 

[Jan Finster]

6 hours ago, Flickserve said:

Did WHO and CDC get it wrong about only wearing masks if you are symptomatic?

 

I totally agree with you.

 

However, I am not sure western countries actually have enough masks for everyone at the moment. Also, if people start hoarding masks as they do with toilet paper at the moment, then I fear healthcare workers may run out of them. I advocate making your own mask from cotton. They are probably pretty much similar in efficacy to surgical masks (the good FFP3 masks are absolutely unavailable in Germany and even the inferior FFP2 masks are sold out).

 

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/how-to-make-face-mask-coronavirus_l_5e78cb2fc5b6f5b7c5483e17?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuZ29vZ2xlLmNvbS8&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAAHZcksJ30ULWR8Bs4CtF3G3jfjiE6oqrzHfAeKbnnPnXljpC9xMztXOVKkqiclr3rFYJjSU7SkvftpwiDi05vC6ee1hwmm1EHV0MlgScKKQwnyXX4iWwIhElqfNpelipCN5WFeVtrvH73JauceD0-sSwBV_xdk1Xk6s86RyFbVI-

 

 

[arreke]

Is this information real or fake?

[roddy]

Just came on to post that, I saw it on SCMP. 

[ChTTay]

Yes, here as well ... 
 

borders are closed ?

[roddy]

So that's 24 hours to get in if you want to... hope nobody's on a visa run...

[Flickserve]

Affects @abcdefg going back in