Tracking the COVID-19-Virus in Germany, the USA, Italy and other hot spots in the world

Some might, but they will probably go to places without modern health infrastructure as part of a WHO team. Some places are in lockdown, so travelling overseas might be tricky, even if people want to go.

 

True enough. But what is bothering me today is the news from the US saying that one's infection is not necessarily evident to the person. Meaning that one may indeed be infected and not know it. That is humanly possible, I must admit.

But, I do wonder what is the "period of gestation" before one starts to show demonstrably that they are indeed infected ...

 

Feel free to start any time. Be the example for others.

 

That depends upon what you mean by "overseas". They won't be coming to the Europe Union (EU) without a negotiation of their intent, that's for sure.

And going just about anywhere elsewhere will demonstrate, I submit, a medical-situation that is not ideally as relevant as it would be with the EU ...

PS:I am guessing! Anyone care to disagree?

 

This is not the appropriate thread for your partisan carping.

 

Maybe they would like to go to an English-speaking country, like India.

But in Europe, the already English-speaking countries will not need them. And, with just English, anywhere else would be almost useless. There would be people who could translate but that could be a considerable bother. The locals can handle the situation better with "native-speaking people" all by themselves. As they have been doing for more than three weeks now.

Time is of the essence with this disease ... already the non-English native-speakers here in France are very, very tired. The work is truly exhausting according to personal testimony on TV. These people have become truly public-heroes.

Adding another problem (translation) would not be a very good idea ...

 

lmao.

great jokes. you should take that show on the road!

 

So, that was that. You had your chance. That is not debate. It is only trolling.

Bye-bye.

 

I just received the message that the first business-contact of mine, whom I have known for four years, died this morning at 01:00 am, of COVID-19. He was admitted Saturday evening to a hospital close to Cologne and just a little more than 2 days later, he was dead. His stituation deteriorated so rapidly, no help in all the world would have been enough to help him. He will be cremated and a memorial service will be held once the national quarantine is over.

This is a horrible gut punch for me personally. It hits very close to home.

 

Spain has already reported +489 COVID-19 deaths today. They update again in the evening.

Iran has reported +138 deaths.

Belgium has reported +123 deaths.

Likely, within 2 days, Germany will leapfrog over China in the total number of COVID-19 cases.

The Dominican Republic, Argentina and Peru have all three now crossed over the 1,000 line.

 

Man, that's such a terrible and tragic loss and I'm here for you(and so is everyone else). You've been here for us, giving us statistics and stuff. That rapidly deteriorating situation though gives us a clue that just because symptoms might be "low key" at first, that's actually the best and most opportune time to begin aggressive treatment. Treating them when they first develop 'serious' symptoms is too late.

 

On a personal note, I play fantasy baseball and we had folks in the league trying to argue that we should stick to the draft schedule (approximately one week after MLB announced its first suspension). Even at the time, I said I believed that there was no point in drafting because there was a substantial chance that the entire season would be cancelled.

That chance seems like it has only increased.

 

The link you provided ONLY applies to Federal SUPPLEMENT programs like SNAP.

I am talking about the nationwide supply chain for Supermarkets. While there are probably Federal REGULATIONS that apply to the HANDLING of food products they would NOT have any role when it comes to ENSURING that the shelves are well stocked at all times. That is ALL managed by the Private Sector.

So to put this into some kind of perspective let's pick a medium sized city in the Midwest. There are several supermarket chains all operating in that market with some in the city itself and most of the rest in the outlying suburbs. Ensuring that breakfast cereals remain stocked on the shelves requires that all sales are processed by the central IT system that then totals inventory levels at each store and sends the data to the cereal manufacturers who then ship the replacements to the distributors who send out trucks and drivers to restock the shelves. That is a 30,000' superficial overview of that aspect of the supply chain for a single product line. It is replicated with various modifications for most retail products sold through supermarkets.

Now let us look at what happens when that supply chain is disrupted by a Pandemic. The distributor has a limited number of drivers to cover all of the supermarkets. What happens when he no longer has enough drivers to keep all of the shelves stocked in every supermarket? That is just one point of failure link in the whole supply chain. You can pick any part of it and see that it can fail just as easily. The machine that fills the cereal boxes breaks down and the technician who maintains it is not available. The supplier of the glue for the boxes loses his staff so now he is unable to provide it to the manufacturer. All of this is managed by JIT (Just In Time) Software in order to keep costs to the bare minimum throughout the entire supply chain of every product.

So yes, there is a certain degree of flexibility to cover routine interruptions in the supply chain but a Pandemic is NOT routine. The people who will be most affected are the managers whose job it is to find ways to keep everything moving. Loose them and now you have key people missing where you need them most at the time that you need them. Profit driven corporations eliminate redundancy because it means higher dividends for shareholders but it also means that the people manning the supply chains are thinly stretched and there is the bare minimum of flexibility in the system.


https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/31/opinion/coronavirus-food-supply.html

 

You analysis is missing a bit of math. One is ten people are not infected seriously enough to get a test. We are only testing people who show symptoms, like most other states. The governor said, "Less than 10% are positive." The actual number is 7.6% positive. We've only tested 50,000 people out of 30 million which is about 1/5th of 1% of the population.

So, 7.6% of people who are sick enough to call a doctor or go to the emergency and be deemed "worthy" of burning a test are positive. Those are the sickest of the sick. 10% of those are being hospitalized, which works out right now to 326 people hospitalized out of 30 million.

No doubt our numbers will get worse in Texas, like everyone else's, but math is math.

 

When the numbers become people you know this reveals the harsh reality that all of us are going to have to come to terms with. My sincere condolences.

 

You did not provide any link so my math is based entirely upon what you posted.

 

Im sorry about your friend.

 

The worst part is the asymptomatic phase. Not only in terms of unknowingly infecting others, but not knowing yourself if you're affected. In the other post, I said that those "small symptoms" are the window for treatment, but actually if the goal were to treat these people as soon as possible, it would be if we could catch them/us in the asymptomatic phase. That's how Germany/South Korea are "succeeding".

We need these tests in super high quantity to be able to help the most people we can.

 

So...uh...I noted that it looked like we would end the day at 726. According to WorldofMeters, the US ended the day at 912.

****.

 

Almost none of this post is remotely useful for this thread. Take the political grandstanding elsewhere.

 

Are chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine effective for treating COVID-19?
Recently, there has been considerable discussion of whether two related drugs — chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine — that have been available for decades to treat other illnesses might also be effective in treating COVID-19.

The drugs are primarily used to treat malaria and several inflammatory diseases, including systemic lupus erythematosus (lupus) and rheumatoid arthritis. No drug is perfectly safe, but these drugs are quite safe when used for just the several days they might be needed to treat COVID-19. They are also cheap, already available at our local drug stores, and relatively free of side effects.

The question, of course, is whether they are effective against the coronavirus that causes COVID-19. Are they effective in killing the virus in a laboratory dish? And are they effective in killing the virus in people? If the answer to the first question is "no," there's no point in getting an answer to the second question.

There is strong evidence that both drugs kill the COVID-19 virus in the laboratory dish. The drugs appear to work through two mechanisms. First, they make it harder for the virus to attach itself to the cell, inhibiting the virus from entering the cell and multiplying within it. Second, if the virus does manage to get inside the cell, the drugs kill it before it can multiply.

But do the drugs work in people with COVID-19? Many studies are underway to get an answer to this question, but as of March 24, 2020, only two have issued preliminary results.

One report, published in February 2020, claimed that chloroquine had been used in more than 100 patients in China who had COVID-19. The scientists stated that their results demonstrated that chloroquine is superior to the control treatment in inhibiting the worsening of pneumonia, improving lung imaging findings, eliminating the virus from the body, and shortening the duration of the disease.https://www.health.harvard.edu/diseases-and-conditions/treatments-for-covid-19

 

A little common sense goes a long way, but we all know that common sense is an oxymoron for most people.

The virus isn't going to jump onto you from items you don't touch. Droplets from coughing are not going to hang in the air for more than a few minutes, much less 72 hours. That's why they think a 6 ft distance from another person is safe so someone's droplets don't get on you if they sneeze or cough. Then they have to get in your nose, mouth, or eyes. Gravity does the rest of the work, but you still need to disinfect hard surfaces where you can, and wear gloves where you can't.

Amazon has boxes of disposable gloves in stock (for now).

At the press briefing yesterday, they said you can wear a scarf if you can't find a mask.

I've been keeping some gloves in my car for shopping, putting gas in the car, etc. Pull them off so they go inside-out as soon as you're back in the car or at home.

Mainly keep your hands clean.

 

I feel sorry for the new mother's and newborns right now. Mom's really need to stay home and let someone else do the shopping, or order at-home delivery.

 

The shelves being empty of many staple items due to the hoarders has people who would not normally hoard food begin to hoard. That's a vicious cycle.

I've had to shop six times more often because of 1) empty shelves and 2) when the store has a product I need, the quantity limits which are intended to stop hoarding are often not a 2-week supply. It's hard to make one shopping trip, get 2-weeks of food/paper/cleaners, so you can stay home right now.

I found plenty of bread and tortillas last week, but meats, cheeses and eggs were wiped out. I jokingly thought, "Well, people can eat air sandwiches, if nothing else." Shopping is like a scavenger hunt.

Pence is planning to do a press briefing from a Walmart distribution hub to show people there is no product or food shortage. As long as people keep finding empty shelves, no one is going to believe it.

I do believer that we have plenty of basic food and other things needed, but the continued hoarding is very frustrating. The "limit 2" on some items does not stop the hoarders from driving to ten or twelve different stores to end up with 20 or 24 of the "limit 2" items....if some other hoarder didn't get there first. I thought the hoarding would end after a couple weeks. This is the most frustrating thing I've experienced (so far) out of the entire pandemic.

 

At this point the antibody testing would be more helpful. If you have antibodies, you can be "released". I hope that is ramping up more quickly than the testing did.