7 ms·

If this person has COVID-19, should they not socially distance with extreme vigilance for a very long time? I must be misinterpreting you, are you really sayin

If this person has COVID-19, should they not socially distance with extreme vigilance for a very long time? I must be misinterpreting you, are you really saying you'd be comfortable being around people right after peak symptoms of a COVID-19 infection?

tumblerz 7y ago
parent is using CDC guidelines (I think?). I agree with your take, however.
- alteria 7y ago
  Yeah, those were (and maybe still are) CDC guidelines: 2 negative tests at least 24 hours apart OR 7+ days since symptom onset, AND 72+ hours without fever (with no meds) AND significant improvement in respiratory symptoms
  - ooobit2 7y ago
    In other words: A moderate length of time, combined with self-isolation as much as possible. Precision with language, people, please and thank you. Non-precision is how we've ended up with half the country calling fast-food-drive-thrus "public endangerment" one day, and the next day deploying a brand new plan to reopen everything much sooner than expected. So, moderate length of time, 7-14 days or until tests are returning consistent negative results.
disillusioned 7y ago
There's mounting evidence that people are no longer infectious from day 8 after symptoms first appear onward. A German study tracked only a handful of patients, but tracked them very rigorously, with multiple swabs each day for 30 days and were unable to cultivate a live viral isolate after day 8 in ALL cases, even when the patient's viral load was still extremely high. (But in fairness, a bunch of viruses work this way, where patients are still sick and their viral load is high, but they cease being contagious after a few days. Eight days is still a long time, but you shouldn't have to quarantine for a month, we hope.)
- lbeltrame 7y ago
  Do you have a link to the study?
  - lbeltrame 7y ago
    For those who wonder, it's a preprint[1]. [1] https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.03.05.20030502v1 https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.03.05.20030502v...

tumblerz 7y ago

parent is using CDC guidelines (I think?). I agree with your take, however.

alteria 7y ago
Yeah, those were (and maybe still are) CDC guidelines: 2 negative tests at least 24 hours apart OR 7+ days since symptom onset, AND 72+ hours without fever (with no meds) AND significant improvement in respiratory symptoms
- ooobit2 7y ago
  In other words: A moderate length of time, combined with self-isolation as much as possible. Precision with language, people, please and thank you. Non-precision is how we've ended up with half the country calling fast-food-drive-thrus "public endangerment" one day, and the next day deploying a brand new plan to reopen everything much sooner than expected. So, moderate length of time, 7-14 days or until tests are returning consistent negative results.

disillusioned 7y ago

There's mounting evidence that people are no longer infectious from day 8 after symptoms first appear onward. A German study tracked only a handful of patients, but tracked them very rigorously, with multiple swabs each day for 30 days and were unable to cultivate a live viral isolate after day 8 in ALL cases, even when the patient's viral load was still extremely high. (But in fairness, a bunch of viruses work this way, where patients are still sick and their viral load is high, but they cease being contagious after a few days. Eight days is still a long time, but you shouldn't have to quarantine for a month, we hope.)

lbeltrame 7y ago
Do you have a link to the study?
- lbeltrame 7y ago
  For those who wonder, it's a preprint[1]. [1] https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.03.05.20030502v1 https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.03.05.20030502v...