Upstate NY Banter and General Discussion..

[Buckeyes_Suck]

On 10/18/2020 at 7:50 AM, OSUmetstud said:

They're scenarios. I think that's important to appreciate. 

But, when I saw the first best guess one they posted at 0.26 (I think it was April?), I was pretty skeptical. It seemed very low given the American experience thus far. They did a July update to 0.65, and then this one on September 10th to the banded age groups. 

It's actually quite close to the imo wrongly maligned University of College London study from March 16th which had an age banded 0.9% and projected the 2.2 million US deaths in an unmitigated pandemic. 

I don't think we've ever tried to make a coronavirus vaccine, at least to this great extent. We're throwing all the will and might of science and cash at the problem. 

They were getting close with SARS (and they are using some of that research/technology for this one), but then because it is only infectious when people are very sick, we were able to isolate everyone and the infection died out so we didn't need it. 

I think the most likely scenario is that the vaccine reduces severe disease but doesn't prevent infection and that SARS-Cov 2 becomes a fairly benign endemic seasonal coronavirus in the next several years much like the other ones. 

 

If a vaccine isn’t possible at all, what would your position be? Just curious.

[brentrich]

2 hours ago, Luke_Mages said:

Just delaying the inevitable.  At this rate 10 years of lockdowns...

if that actually plays out you’re looking at your looking at several economic collapses and ww3. 

Total lockdown will HAPPEN, no question about it only if Biden wins the election. Look at New Zealand, they were on total lockdown for 6 weeks and look what happened, they have zero case right now and they are enjoying their normal lives with no mask or social distance. So we will have to do total lockdown, not just some states, that's the only way to make it work. 

[DeltaT13]

3 hours ago, brentrich said:

Total lockdown will HAPPEN, no question about it only if Biden wins the election. Look at New Zealand, they were on total lockdown for 6 weeks and look what happened, they have zero case right now and they are enjoying their normal lives with no mask or social distance. So we will have to do total lockdown, not just some states, that's the only way to make it work. 

Lockdowns aren’t necessary if we had a leader that didn’t think testing was the enemy. Testing is the solution.  

From day 1, there should have been a full scale military style effort to establish mass testing across the country.  We should have developed a way to test at least 100 million people per week coast to coast. Test test test. Set up every available facility to test and create a system where it’s somewhat random to weed out the completely symptom free spreaders. Once you find positive case you lock them down for 10-14 days or hospitalize them 

Testing and contact tracing could beat this thing in 6 weeks if we didn’t have a moron hell bent on trying to keep the numbers low and denying we have a crisis.  7 months in and we have only tested 132 million people total?!  Roughly one third of this country. Absolutely pathetic.  We should be testing the entire country almost once a month by this point. That’s how you beat it. 

[Buckeyes_Suck]

10 hours ago, brentrich said:

Total lockdown will HAPPEN, no question about it only if Biden wins the election. Look at New Zealand, they were on total lockdown for 6 weeks and look what happened, they have zero case right now and they are enjoying their normal lives with no mask or social distance. So we will have to do total lockdown, not just some states, that's the only way to make it work. 

You can’t use a country half the population of NYC and on an island as a case example...that’s silly. 

[brentrich]

12 hours ago, DeltaT13 said:

Lockdowns aren’t necessary if we had a leader that didn’t think testing was the enemy. Testing is the solution.  

From day 1, there should have been a full scale military style effort to establish mass testing across the country.  We should have developed a way to test at least 100 million people per week coast to coast. Test test test. Set up every available facility to test and create a system where it’s somewhat random to weed out the completely symptom free spreaders. Once you find positive case you lock them down for 10-14 days or hospitalize them 

Testing and contact tracing could beat this thing in 6 weeks if we didn’t have a moron hell bent on trying to keep the numbers low and denying we have a crisis.  7 months in and we have only tested 132 million people total?!  Roughly one third of this country. Absolutely pathetic.  We should be testing the entire country almost once a month by this point. That’s how you beat it. 

 

3 hours ago, Luke_Mages said:

You can’t use a country half the population of NYC and on an island as a case example...that’s silly. 

If it's not necessary to have second lockdown and it's just silly then please explain to me why other countries such as France, Italy, Germany, etc. are going through second lockdown and their economy is doing just fine. 

[Buckeyes_Suck]

1 hour ago, brentrich said:

 

If it's not necessary to have second lockdown and it's just silly then please explain to me why other countries such as France, Italy, Germany, etc. are going through second lockdown and their economy is doing just fine. 

I wouldn’t call shrinking gdps and double digit unemployment numbers just fine. And you’re only looking at countries that can afford to print more money. 

[vortmax]

On 10/24/2020 at 9:32 PM, DeltaT13 said:

Lockdowns aren’t necessary if we had a leader that didn’t think testing was the enemy. Testing is the solution.  

From day 1, there should have been a full scale military style effort to establish mass testing across the country.  We should have developed a way to test at least 100 million people per week coast to coast. Test test test. Set up every available facility to test and create a system where it’s somewhat random to weed out the completely symptom free spreaders. Once you find positive case you lock them down for 10-14 days or hospitalize them 

Testing and contact tracing could beat this thing in 6 weeks if we didn’t have a moron hell bent on trying to keep the numbers low and denying we have a crisis.  7 months in and we have only tested 132 million people total?!  Roughly one third of this country. Absolutely pathetic.  We should be testing the entire country almost once a month by this point. That’s how you beat it. 

This isn't China and the US public wouldn't go for a military-style effort - especially an on-going weekly testing with swabs up the nose. Right now, you can go to virtually any CVS, RiteAid, or Walgreens for a free test.

There needs to be a quick 5-minute test developed and deployed to all pharms, doc offices, etc. to make this work - and this is exactly what's happening:  https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/10/new-test-detects-coronavirus-just-5-minutes. Once this gets commercialized, which it will, then we can begin the widespread quick testing that is needed to manage this virus (and future ones as well).

The good news is that we'll be better prepared for any future viruses as far as testing and vaccinations are concerned with all the $$ being thrown at this. CRISPR and mRNA are getting the funding they need to make it happen.

 

 

[BuffaloWeather]

Some really good news. It's in late stage human trials and really good responses so far. 

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/astrazenecas-covid-19-vaccine-trials-offer-hope-for-older-adults-11603718356

[vortmax]

33 minutes ago, BuffaloWeather said:

Some really good news. It's in late stage human trials and really good responses so far. 

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/astrazenecas-covid-19-vaccine-trials-offer-hope-for-older-adults-11603718356

Yes, great news coming from them and Moderna.

[DeltaT13]

1 hour ago, vortmax said:

This isn't China and the US public wouldn't go for a military-style effort - especially an on-going weekly testing with swabs up the nose. Right now, you can go to virtually any CVS, RiteAid, or Walgreens for a free test.

There needs to be a quick 5-minute test developed and deployed to all pharms, doc offices, etc. to make this work - and this is exactly what's happening:  https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/10/new-test-detects-coronavirus-just-5-minutes. Once this gets commercialized, which it will, then we can begin the widespread quick testing that is needed to manage this virus (and future ones as well).

The good news is that we'll be better prepared for any future viruses as far as testing and vaccinations are concerned with all the $$ being thrown at this. CRISPR and mRNA are getting the funding they need to make it happen.

 

 

Yeah, why would the US want get behind a cohesive plan that actually addressed the problem and solved it ****Enormous eye roll***   

I'm not advocating for tanks rolling down the streets, but we could have enacted the defense protection act to manufacture tests and set up locations for testing.  And we could have at least had a leader that didnt want to bury the issue instead of facing it head on.  Who gives a **** how many cases we have, just start finding them and fix the problem.  

[vortmax]

27 minutes ago, DeltaT13 said:

Yeah, why would the US want get behind a cohesive plan that actually addressed the problem and solved it ****Enormous eye roll***   

I'm not advocating for tanks rolling down the streets, but we could have enacted the defense protection act to manufacture tests and set up locations for testing.  And we could have at least had a leader that didnt want to bury the issue instead of facing it head on.  Who gives a **** how many cases we have, just start finding them and fix the problem.  

That 'cohesive plan' requires adherence by the general public. Mandatory testing wouldn't fly. Also the DPA was enacted for N95s, ventilators, and testing in nursing homes. Hindsight is 20/20, but I really don't see how this could've been much more contained without doing serious long-term economical and psychological damage.  

[DeltaT13]

17 minutes ago, vortmax said:

That 'cohesive plan' requires adherence by the general public. Mandatory testing wouldn't fly. Also the DPA was enacted for N95s, ventilators, and testing in nursing homes. Hindsight is 20/20, but I really don't see how this could've been much more contained without doing serious long-term economical and psychological damage.  

Do you believe we've been testing too much?  Do you think testing is the only reason we have cases?  Do you think 132 million tests is an impressive feat over 7 months from one of the most powerful nations on earth?  Do you see testing as a way to get a better grip on the situation or do you think testing is bad and creating the problem?  

[vortmax]

1 hour ago, DeltaT13 said:

Do you believe we've been testing too much?  Do you think testing is the only reason we have cases?  Do you think 132 million tests is an impressive feat over 7 months from one of the most powerful nations on earth?  Do you see testing as a way to get a better grip on the situation or do you think testing is bad and creating the problem?  

No. No. Pretty impressive. Yes, but quicker testing for a truly better grip - as testing (and antibody testing) needs to be redone multiple times as things progress in this fluid situation.

[DeltaT13]

4 hours ago, vortmax said:

No. No. Pretty impressive. Yes, but quicker testing for a truly better grip - as testing (and antibody testing) needs to be redone multiple times as things progress in this fluid situation.

Alright, just checking to see where you stand.

If the government told me in February that a new virus was spreading and it was hard to spot because it sometimes spreads asymptomatically, therefore they would begin an aggressive plan to test each American as frequently as possible with the end goal of testing every available US citizen once a week until things were under control I would have felt very relieved to know there was a plan and they were on top of things.  I don't see why Americans would have been against that.  If the government offered that plan in lieu of shut downs, who wouldnt be onboard.  Testing is and always will be the best option for managing this virus in its first year.  And testing has been pretty poor thus far.  

[Buckeyes_Suck]

4 minutes ago, DeltaT13 said:

Alright, just checking to see where you stand.

If the government told me in February that a new virus was spreading and it was hard to spot because it sometimes spreads asymptomatically, therefore they would begin an aggressive plan to test each American as frequently as possible with the end goal of testing every available US citizen once a week until things were under control I would have felt very relieved to know there was a plan and they were on top of things.  I don't see why Americans would have been against that.  If the government offered that plan in lieu of shut downs, who wouldnt be onboard.  Testing is and always will be the best option for managing this virus in its first year.  And testing has been pretty poor thus far.  

I’d challenge you on that. We’ve done more testing per capita than any large country other than the UK which is only slightly higher. I agree that it would work in concept, I just don’t think the manufacturing capability was there back in February to have made a difference. 

[cny rider]

11 hours ago, Luke_Mages said:

I’d challenge you on that. We’ve done more testing per capita than any large country other than the UK which is only slightly higher. I agree that it would work in concept, I just don’t think the manufacturing capability was there back in February to have made a difference. 

Numerically, we've done many tests.

But we have done them in a highly ineffectual way, with many tests being useless because turn around time has been so long.

Our federal government has completely failed us.  Now they're openly surrendering, per Mark Meadows comments.

It's disgraceful.  When has America been so content with failure, so content to let thousands die unnecessarily?

 

[BuffaloWeather]

I kind of agree with the testing. We're the most powerful nation in the country. We should have been able to test the entire country several times over in the course of 7-8 months. We would have been able to quarantine those with it for 2 weeks and get on with our lives. If it didn't completely weed out the virus the infection rate nationwide would have been minimal in affecting day to day activities. Instead we're pushing 100k new cases per day and rising. 

[vortmax]

1 hour ago, BuffaloWeather said:

I kind of agree with the testing. We're the most powerful nation in the country. We should have been able to test the entire country several times over in the course of 7-8 months. We would have been able to quarantine those with it for 2 weeks and get on with our lives. If it didn't completely weed out the virus the infection rate nationwide would have been minimal in affecting day to day activities. Instead we're pushing 100k new cases per day and rising. 

I think you guys are really missing some key things (from this June article): https://www.technologyreview.com/2020/06/27/1004545/us-covid-19-coronavirus-test-capacity-unused-available-reopening/

I'll summarize: 

• It seem have a greater ability to test, but we don't due to state restrictions (symptoms only), not federal.
  • In California, Governor Gavin Newsom has admitted that the state could test 100,000 people a day but is using only 40% of that capacity.
• Testing fatigue - this is a real thing and is already happening at these lower-levels of testing.
• Antibody testing (not infection testing) may be more useful at lull times to track the virus' progress in communities.
• Most scientists are in agreement for more testing, it seems, but not all agree to how much more is necessary to be effective.
• Testing time - needs to be quicker in order to be proactive real-time (again, the 5-minute test is key here).
• The logistics of testing the entire population weekly is enormously difficult, but more effective/possible with a quick test.

Also, there is a mindset out there that this virus isn't the end of humanity as we know it and its survival rate is very high for most age groups. Therapeutics have improved a lot with less people dying in hospitals as well (not just due to lower average age). The DPA was enacted to prioritize testing for nursing homes (our most vulnerable population). Again, I'm all for more testing, but specifically quicker testing to really be effective in this fluid situation.

We are learning a lot during this pandemic and I think the world will be more prepared for the next one.

[DeltaT13]

11 minutes ago, vortmax said:

I think you guys are really missing some key things (from this June article): https://www.technologyreview.com/2020/06/27/1004545/us-covid-19-coronavirus-test-capacity-unused-available-reopening/

I'll summarize: 

• It seem have a greater ability to test, but we don't due to state restrictions (symptoms only), not federal.
  • In California, Governor Gavin Newsom has admitted that the state could test 100,000 people a day but is using only 40% of that capacity.
• Testing fatigue - this is a real thing and is already happening at these lower-levels of testing.
• Antibody testing (not infection testing) may be more useful at lull times to track the virus' progress in communities.
• Most scientists are in agreement for more testing, it seems, but not all agree to how much more is necessary to be effective.
• Testing time - needs to be quicker in order to be proactive real-time (again, the 5-minute test is key here).
• The logistics of testing the entire population weekly is enormously difficult, but more effective/possible with a quick test.

Also, there is a mindset out there that this virus isn't the end of humanity as we know it and its survival rate is very high for most age groups. Therapeutics have improved a lot with less people dying in hospitals as well (not just due to lower average age). The DPA was enacted to prioritize testing for nursing homes (our most vulnerable population). Again, I'm all for more testing, but specifically quicker testing to really be effective in this fluid situation.

We are learning a lot during this pandemic and I think the world will be more prepared for the next one.

You say we are missing key points and then make a summary that basically says we should be testing more and testing is probably the key to beating this thing.  

We appear to be in agreement.  Not sure why you can't just say "yeah, more testing would be good"....thats the gist of it.  

[Buckeyes_Suck]

2 minutes ago, DeltaT13 said:

You say we are missing key points and then make a summary that basically says we should be testing more and testing is probably the key to beating this thing.  

We appear to be in agreement.  Not sure why you can't just say "yeah, more testing would be good"....thats the gist of it.  

I think he is saying that more testing would be good but unless you made it law for mandatory testing it just wouldn’t happen. We have the capacity to test more, we’re just not forcing people to be tested. Which I’d agree with that. 

[BuffaloWeather]

39 minutes ago, Luke_Mages said:

I think he is saying that more testing would be good but unless you made it law for mandatory testing it just wouldn’t happen. We have the capacity to test more, we’re just not forcing people to be tested. Which I’d agree with that. 

This is also true. How many people here have taken the Covid test? I took the antibody test a few months back, but never the Covid test. I would only take the test if I had symptoms, is there any reason to take the test without? I guess there would be if you're asymptomatic, but wouldn't you have to take the test many, many times and guess right if no symptoms? What would be the point in that? 

[vortmax]

51 minutes ago, DeltaT13 said:

You say we are missing key points and then make a summary that basically says we should be testing more and testing is probably the key to beating this thing.  

We appear to be in agreement.  Not sure why you can't just say "yeah, more testing would be good"....thats the gist of it.  

 

47 minutes ago, Luke_Mages said:

I think he is saying that more testing would be good but unless you made it law for mandatory testing it just wouldn’t happen. We have the capacity to test more, we’re just not forcing people to be tested. Which I’d agree with that. 

I'm also saying that 1) it's not all the POTUS'/Feds fault and that 2) quicker infection testing (5 min) is needed to really make the difference we need in this fluid situation, and 3) better antibody testing is needed to understand the immunity picture.

[vortmax]

17 minutes ago, BuffaloWeather said:

This is also true. How many people here have taken the Covid test? I took the antibody test a few months back, but never the Covid test. I would only take the test if I had symptoms, is there any reason to take the test without? I guess there would be if you're asymptomatic, but wouldn't you have to take the test many, many times and guess right if no symptoms? What would be the point in that? 

Yes, testing fatigue is already an issue and would only be compounded if mandatory testing was established. Again, this isn't a humanity-ending virus so there isn't a huge motivation to test regularly. A 5-minute test would help with this, especially if they could swab the cheek or something - many people don't like the nose swab. Imagine having to do that weekly, especially with no symptoms.

[DeltaT13]

40 minutes ago, vortmax said:

Yes, testing fatigue is already an issue and would only be compounded if mandatory testing was established. Again, this isn't a humanity-ending virus so there isn't a huge motivation to test regularly. A 5-minute test would help with this, especially if they could swab the cheek or something - many people don't like the nose swab. Imagine having to do that weekly, especially with no symptoms.

While it doesnt sound fun to be tested weekly, the alternative hasnt exactly been a picnic and things appear to be spiraling into uncharted territory as we speak.  In a perfect scenario, weekly testing could potentially knock this thing out in 6-8 weeks, so it's not like we would have been testing everyone forever.   

For the record, I've had two antibody tests and one nose swab so far.  Can confirm the nose swab is no fun but only takes 10 seconds.  Negative on all 3.  

[vortmax]

23 minutes ago, DeltaT13 said:

While it doesnt sound fun to be tested weekly, the alternative hasnt exactly been a picnic and things appear to be spiraling into uncharted territory as we speak.  In a perfect scenario, weekly testing could potentially knock this thing out in 6-8 weeks, so it's not like we would have been testing everyone forever.   

For the record, I've had two antibody tests and one nose swab so far.  Can confirm the nose swab is no fun but only takes 10 seconds.  Negative on all 3.  

Where did you get the antibody test and did insurance pay? Been looking for a place to do this.

[DeltaT13]

4 minutes ago, vortmax said:

Where did you get the antibody test and did insurance pay? Been looking for a place to do this.

I got my first antibody test in May at Well Now.  It was a very smooth and well run process.  https://wellnow.com/  This test was covered in full under the CARES act.  I'm not sure if that is still how it works.  Even without the CARES act, this is what I'm finding online

"COVID-19 tests are available at no cost nationwide at health centers and select pharmacies. The Families First Coronavirus Response Act ensures that COVID-19 testing is free to anyone in the U.S., including the uninsured. Additional testing sites may be available in your area."

My second antibody test and nose swab occured when I was admitted to the hospital for an emergency appendectomy in Late July.  

[BuffaloWeather]

42 minutes ago, vortmax said:

Where did you get the antibody test and did insurance pay? Been looking for a place to do this.

I booked my appt at Quest, took 5 minutes for the blood tests and had results within 48 hours. Was completely free. I got mine in summer. 

[wolfie09]

As of Sunday

 

[BuffaloWeather]

Thoughts on who wins and margin of victory on Tuesday? I'm saying Biden wins electoral vote by 1-2 states (Michigan/Pennsylvania/Wisconsin) and popular vote by 10 million. 

[BuffaloWeather]

Biden is up 10% in the polls in Wisconsin and Michigan. Trump cannot win if Biden gets those 2 states.