5 ms·

Had, not have. One fifth of New Yorker had the virus. (If that study is correct) In other words, not all of those people that had a virus are currently infecti

Had, not have. One fifth of New Yorker had the virus. (If that study is correct) In other words, not all of those people that had a virus are currently infectious. Only the people that are currently actively infectious are the ones that need to be traced.

remarkEon 6y ago
None of this makes any sense to me. I'm hearing such a wide variety of claims about this virus that I have by default become skeptical of anything that makes a wide ranging claim. The descriptions range from "highly infections, potentially causes strokes in otherwise young healthy people" to "highly infectious, young people often display no symptoms at all". Are there multiple strains of this virus out there in the wild? I don't know of another way to explain what I'm hearing from people that work in virology and in hospitals on the front line.
- postingawayonhn 6y ago
  This site shows all the strains that have been identified. From what I understand though the mutations are minor and symptom shouldn't differ much. https://nextstrain.org/ncov/global https://nextstrain.org/ncov/global
  - maxerickson 6y ago
    Yeah, I think the variation there doesn't amount to different strains even, at least not in the sense that people tend to mean it.
- teraflop 6y ago
  Why do you think the two statements you quoted are contradictory? The baseline rate of stroke in young adults is very low, so even if the virus dramatically increases one's risk of stroke, it can still be true that the vast majority of infected people in that demographic are completely asymptomatic.
  - remarkEon 6y ago
    I suppose you're right, in that it's possible that a) coronavirus increases your risk of stroke & because of that we're seeing some young people have strokes that otherwise wouldn't and b) the vast majority of young people are asymptomatic ... but that doesn't really address my broader point, which is that this virus seems to be way worse in some regions and essentially a non-issue in others.
    - noirbot 6y ago
      I'm not sure we'll specifically know the answer there for a while, but I haven't seen much in terms of regional variation that seems especially crazy. Most of the places where it's been especially bad are places you'd expect a virus to spread well - major cities with lots of international travelers and high density. Then you overlay the timelines for when various places took serious measures and you get some logic behind why Chicago is doing better than NYC right now. There's probably a lot of other factors that feed into it - median age, pollution, weather/temperature, potentially genetic/ethnic factors... Even things like the prevalence and use of public transit. It's a lot harder to get/spread the virus in LA where most people drive private cars to everything than in NYC where a lot of people spend an hour or more every day in crowded subway trains/stations. Working out exactly what contributed to the real-world outcomes we're seeing is something we'll probably only be able to guess at, but nothing I've seen so far feels inexplicable.
- rndgermandude 6y ago
  >The descriptions range from "highly infections, potentially causes strokes in otherwise young healthy people" to "highly infectious, young people often display no symptoms at all". Both those things can be true at the same time. I saw one German doctor (from Charité Berlin I think?) who did over 100 autopsies on TV saying in all cases he had on his table there were preexisting conditions (and the older the more likely you have one or more of those). But he also said that the young and "healthy" people he looked at also had preexisting conditions that usually were never diagnosed before. This reminded me of a buddy in school, who went for the routine mandatory checkup before the mandatory military service (since been abandoned), a jock-type who seriously considered joining up voluntarily to become a jet fighter pilot, and ended up learning he only had one kidney since birth. Something he never knew or suspected and never had any issue with because he was otherwise young and healthy, but which could come back to bite him when he gets old or when he contracts some serious disease (like this one maybe).
  - usaar333 6y ago
    Deaths without comorbidities are relatively rare. Santa Clara's dashboard shows 5% of all deaths. You could ballpark a 1/1000 order of magnitude chance of death from an infection. In some sense that is pretty high compared to the baseline, but being equal to 10 years of driving isn't apocalyptic.
- Gibbon1 6y ago
  You can follow Bob Wachter, chairman of the UCSF Department of Medicine One of probably a dozen panel discussions on COVID19 he's hosted so far. UCSF Experts on the Epidemiology, Science, & Clinical Manifestations of COVID-19, and UCSF Response https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bt-BzEve46Y https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bt-BzEve46Y

remarkEon 6y ago

None of this makes any sense to me. I'm hearing such a wide variety of claims about this virus that I have by default become skeptical of anything that makes a wide ranging claim. The descriptions range from "highly infections, potentially causes strokes in otherwise young healthy people" to "highly infectious, young people often display no symptoms at all". Are there multiple strains of this virus out there in the wild? I don't know of another way to explain what I'm hearing from people that work in virology and in hospitals on the front line.

postingawayonhn 6y ago
This site shows all the strains that have been identified. From what I understand though the mutations are minor and symptom shouldn't differ much. https://nextstrain.org/ncov/global https://nextstrain.org/ncov/global
- maxerickson 6y ago
  Yeah, I think the variation there doesn't amount to different strains even, at least not in the sense that people tend to mean it.
teraflop 6y ago
Why do you think the two statements you quoted are contradictory? The baseline rate of stroke in young adults is very low, so even if the virus dramatically increases one's risk of stroke, it can still be true that the vast majority of infected people in that demographic are completely asymptomatic.
- remarkEon 6y ago
  I suppose you're right, in that it's possible that a) coronavirus increases your risk of stroke & because of that we're seeing some young people have strokes that otherwise wouldn't and b) the vast majority of young people are asymptomatic ... but that doesn't really address my broader point, which is that this virus seems to be way worse in some regions and essentially a non-issue in others.
  - noirbot 6y ago
    I'm not sure we'll specifically know the answer there for a while, but I haven't seen much in terms of regional variation that seems especially crazy. Most of the places where it's been especially bad are places you'd expect a virus to spread well - major cities with lots of international travelers and high density. Then you overlay the timelines for when various places took serious measures and you get some logic behind why Chicago is doing better than NYC right now. There's probably a lot of other factors that feed into it - median age, pollution, weather/temperature, potentially genetic/ethnic factors... Even things like the prevalence and use of public transit. It's a lot harder to get/spread the virus in LA where most people drive private cars to everything than in NYC where a lot of people spend an hour or more every day in crowded subway trains/stations. Working out exactly what contributed to the real-world outcomes we're seeing is something we'll probably only be able to guess at, but nothing I've seen so far feels inexplicable.
rndgermandude 6y ago
>The descriptions range from "highly infections, potentially causes strokes in otherwise young healthy people" to "highly infectious, young people often display no symptoms at all". Both those things can be true at the same time. I saw one German doctor (from Charité Berlin I think?) who did over 100 autopsies on TV saying in all cases he had on his table there were preexisting conditions (and the older the more likely you have one or more of those). But he also said that the young and "healthy" people he looked at also had preexisting conditions that usually were never diagnosed before. This reminded me of a buddy in school, who went for the routine mandatory checkup before the mandatory military service (since been abandoned), a jock-type who seriously considered joining up voluntarily to become a jet fighter pilot, and ended up learning he only had one kidney since birth. Something he never knew or suspected and never had any issue with because he was otherwise young and healthy, but which could come back to bite him when he gets old or when he contracts some serious disease (like this one maybe).
- usaar333 6y ago
  Deaths without comorbidities are relatively rare. Santa Clara's dashboard shows 5% of all deaths. You could ballpark a 1/1000 order of magnitude chance of death from an infection. In some sense that is pretty high compared to the baseline, but being equal to 10 years of driving isn't apocalyptic.
Gibbon1 6y ago
You can follow Bob Wachter, chairman of the UCSF Department of Medicine One of probably a dozen panel discussions on COVID19 he's hosted so far. UCSF Experts on the Epidemiology, Science, & Clinical Manifestations of COVID-19, and UCSF Response https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bt-BzEve46Y https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bt-BzEve46Y