4 ms·

Also there have been reports of Ground Glass Opacities[1] in the lungs of people with infections previously thought of as asymptomatic. [1]: https://en.m.wikip

Also there have been reports of Ground Glass Opacities[1] in the lungs of people with infections previously thought of as asymptomatic. [1]: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ground-glass_opacity https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ground-glass_opacity

arcticbull 6y ago
Sure, but that doesn't mean they... won't go away. In fact, I'm pretty confident all signs point to the fact they will go away. In fact you get ground glass opacities with H1N1 inflenza [1]. I guess the question is "functional asymptomaticity" vs "actual asymptomaticity". Like, if it's not bad enough for people to even notice does it really matter? [1] https://pubs.rsna.org/doi/full/10.1148/radiol.10092240 https://pubs.rsna.org/doi/full/10.1148/radiol.10092240
- wavegeek 6y ago
  > I'm pretty confident powerful argument there, not. With SARS1 there was continuing damage post 6 months.
  - arcticbull 6y ago
    SARS-COV-1 has a two orders of magnitude higher fatality rate, so one would imagine the damage would be substantially worse. Is it really a stretch to believe that level and quantity of damage correlate both to recovery time and to mortality rates? Further, were there asymptomatic SARS-COV-1 cases? SARS-COV-1 had an IFR (not CFR) of 14-15%. Broken out, it's less than 1% for people younger than 25, 6% for those aged 25 to 44, 15% for those aged 45 to 64, and more than 50% for people 65 or older, officials said. [1] On the other hand SARS-COV-2 has an IFR of somewhere in the lower quartile of the range 0.1% to 1%, trending to around 0.3%. Not to mention, I argued that lung function would recover, to which you said "strong argument, not [the much worse disease saw lung function recover in 6 months]" which implies you were actually supporting my argument not refuting it. The coronaviridae family is huge, and fatality varies from ~0% in the 15% of common colds they cause to 0.1-1% for COVID to 15% for SARS-COV-1 to 50% for MERS. I can't stress this enough. SARS-COV-1 and MERS are not SARS-COV-2, they are much worse diseases. [1] https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2003/05/estimates-sars-death-rates-revised-upward https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2003/05/estimate...
- 8note 6y ago
  Do those count as a comorbidity though? If coronavirus goes around again, that could raise the death rate
  - arcticbull 6y ago
    There's no evidence to date that people are being re-infected. They may in the future, but to date, no such evidence exists. There are some people who tested negative before who are testing positive now, but that is much more likely to be false negatives and/or false positives. It would be pretty novel for the human immune system to clear out the disease on it's own, then a few days later forget how to do that, and become re-infected. SARS-COV-1 saw immunity conferred for 2-3 years. [1] I suspect something similar is likely here, probably for a shorter duration due to the more limited severity, but long enough to get us to a vaccine. [1] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2851497/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2851497/
    - greedo 6y ago
      And there's no evidence to date that people who test for antibodies are immune to future infections.
      - arcticbull 6y ago
        Ah my old friend greedo. That's how it normally works, this time could be different, but we have no reason to believe that. Generally for as long as you show antibody response you won't be re-infected because that's what antibodies do. The link I provided to the study I referenced was specifically for the purpose of, and I quote: "to assess SARS patients’ risk for future reinfection." "To be clear, most experts do think an initial infection from the coronavirus, called SARS-CoV-2, will grant people immunity to the virus for some amount of time. That is generally the case with acute infections from other viruses, including other coronaviruses." [1] If you think this time is different the burden of proof is on you to provide studies and not provide unsupported, unsubstantiated conjecture. [1] https://www.statnews.com/2020/04/20/everything-we-know-about-coronavirus-immunity-and-antibodies-and-plenty-we-still-dont/ https://www.statnews.com/2020/04/20/everything-we-know-about...

arcticbull 6y ago

Sure, but that doesn't mean they... won't go away. In fact, I'm pretty confident all signs point to the fact they will go away. In fact you get ground glass opacities with H1N1 inflenza [1]. I guess the question is "functional asymptomaticity" vs "actual asymptomaticity". Like, if it's not bad enough for people to even notice does it really matter? [1] https://pubs.rsna.org/doi/full/10.1148/radiol.10092240 https://pubs.rsna.org/doi/full/10.1148/radiol.10092240

wavegeek 6y ago
> I'm pretty confident powerful argument there, not. With SARS1 there was continuing damage post 6 months.
- arcticbull 6y ago
  SARS-COV-1 has a two orders of magnitude higher fatality rate, so one would imagine the damage would be substantially worse. Is it really a stretch to believe that level and quantity of damage correlate both to recovery time and to mortality rates? Further, were there asymptomatic SARS-COV-1 cases? SARS-COV-1 had an IFR (not CFR) of 14-15%. Broken out, it's less than 1% for people younger than 25, 6% for those aged 25 to 44, 15% for those aged 45 to 64, and more than 50% for people 65 or older, officials said. [1] On the other hand SARS-COV-2 has an IFR of somewhere in the lower quartile of the range 0.1% to 1%, trending to around 0.3%. Not to mention, I argued that lung function would recover, to which you said "strong argument, not [the much worse disease saw lung function recover in 6 months]" which implies you were actually supporting my argument not refuting it. The coronaviridae family is huge, and fatality varies from ~0% in the 15% of common colds they cause to 0.1-1% for COVID to 15% for SARS-COV-1 to 50% for MERS. I can't stress this enough. SARS-COV-1 and MERS are not SARS-COV-2, they are much worse diseases. [1] https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2003/05/estimates-sars-death-rates-revised-upward https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2003/05/estimate...
8note 6y ago
Do those count as a comorbidity though? If coronavirus goes around again, that could raise the death rate
- arcticbull 6y ago
  There's no evidence to date that people are being re-infected. They may in the future, but to date, no such evidence exists. There are some people who tested negative before who are testing positive now, but that is much more likely to be false negatives and/or false positives. It would be pretty novel for the human immune system to clear out the disease on it's own, then a few days later forget how to do that, and become re-infected. SARS-COV-1 saw immunity conferred for 2-3 years. [1] I suspect something similar is likely here, probably for a shorter duration due to the more limited severity, but long enough to get us to a vaccine. [1] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2851497/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2851497/
  - greedo 6y ago
    And there's no evidence to date that people who test for antibodies are immune to future infections.
    - arcticbull 6y ago
      Ah my old friend greedo. That's how it normally works, this time could be different, but we have no reason to believe that. Generally for as long as you show antibody response you won't be re-infected because that's what antibodies do. The link I provided to the study I referenced was specifically for the purpose of, and I quote: "to assess SARS patients’ risk for future reinfection." "To be clear, most experts do think an initial infection from the coronavirus, called SARS-CoV-2, will grant people immunity to the virus for some amount of time. That is generally the case with acute infections from other viruses, including other coronaviruses." [1] If you think this time is different the burden of proof is on you to provide studies and not provide unsupported, unsubstantiated conjecture. [1] https://www.statnews.com/2020/04/20/everything-we-know-about-coronavirus-immunity-and-antibodies-and-plenty-we-still-dont/ https://www.statnews.com/2020/04/20/everything-we-know-about...