Coronavirus discussion thread

Posted on March 14, 2020 by | 495 Comments

by Judith Curry

Discuss.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

495 responses to “Coronavirus discussion thread”

  1. Norman Pilon | March 14, 2020 at 10:51 am |

    I’ll let an expert speak: Michael Osterholm on coronavirus

    https://youtu.be/V1xBiBVH7U4

  2. jimeichstedt | March 14, 2020 at 10:55 am |

    Are there models that relate incubation, communicability, immunity, etc., with speed of propagation through a population? Spanish flu took two years to infect and kill or immunize everyone.

    • Joz Jonlin | March 14, 2020 at 11:17 am |

      You can’t call it Spanish Flu anymore. That’s racist! You might hurt someone’s feelings. 😉

      • David Appell | March 14, 2020 at 12:42 pm |

        Not only that, but the virus didn’t originate in Spain.

      • JCH | March 14, 2020 at 1:18 pm |

        They’re still arguing about where it originated. I say the soils of SE Nebraska, SW Iowa, NW Missouri, and NE Kansas.

        They raise a lot of hogs in that region, and they were selling them to the army bases in Kansas, and those bases were shipping tens of thousands of men all around the world.

        But now a researcher is claiming it was partially avian.

        And the Spanish are pretty proud of having a free press when they rest of the world didn’t.

      • afonzarelli | March 14, 2020 at 5:11 pm |

        Iberian flu…

      • Crispin in Waterloo | March 15, 2020 at 10:59 pm |

        According to researchers who dug up bodies buried in permafrost in the Aleutian Islands and who then sampled the lung tissue, it was indeed a bird flu. There was nothing Spanish about it, save that it appeared there as well and at the time the incubation was not known to take long enough to get across the Atlantic.

      • Peter Webster | March 19, 2020 at 11:58 am |

        But I believe it originated in the US. Kansas I believe.
        PW

      • JCH | March 19, 2020 at 12:17 pm |

        If it was avian, it probably didn’t.

        Our family has always called it the Swine Flu because they had seen viral disease in their herds that killed in a similar, aggressive way. My Grandfather died of the Swine Flu: family bible. He hauled a load of hogs from NW Missouri to a market in St. Joe and came home sick and died a couple of days later. Last wave.

        Never heard it called the Spanish Flu until I was in college.

    • mesocyclone | March 14, 2020 at 11:28 am |

      I am not a pro, but the models of this are pretty easy to write. You can access my little Python based one at https://github.com/crotalustigris/covid19sim

      It isn’t verified, but it produces results similar to those I have seen from the experts. It is a pretty simple model – I’ve seen far more sophisticated ones out there, but I think the sophisticated ones don’t change the general shape of the curve that much. If anyone finds an error, I’d love to know, BTW.

      It’s very interesting to tweak the parameters and see the changes. R0 – the reproduction number – is how many people are infected by each infected person (on average, of course). The effective reproduction rate changes with the total number who are susceptible (which goes down as people get the disease), and with control measures such as sanitation and social distancing.

      Documentation is in the model. You can tweak parameters as you want. You need to have Python to use it.

      It looks like, without control measures, this one would get to most susceptible people within 6 moths or less – if the preliminary parameters are anywhere close to right: Reproduction number R0 2.3, incubation period 6 days, Length of time infectious – 10 days (the longer this is, the slower the spread – counterintuitively. An epidemic won’t get to everyone because at some point the proportion of those susceptible goes low enough that it dies out – the number of people infected (R) by each case goes below 1.0.

    • Don132 | March 14, 2020 at 11:56 am |

      Maybe not that important or relevant here, but there’s good evidence that the mortality of Spanish flu might have been due to aspirin, which in overdose amounts– which is what people were taking because they didn’t know any better– causes fluid accumulation in the lungs. Aspirin was being pushed hard at the time. I’m not going to argue this point so just let it be, please, as “hmmm, maybe interesting.” https://academic.oup.com/cid/article/49/9/1405/301441

    • Bina | March 18, 2020 at 4:55 pm |

      Just a helpful link to increase awareness on handling the epidemic little better.
      Virus Pandemic Preparedness Guide
      https://erelicus.com/products

    • pdcarey | March 25, 2020 at 6:01 pm |

      When I saw this episode a week or so ago it made my hair stand on end. “Computer models would not have predicted the virus.” And, “Man is not clever enough.”

      Osterholm is a liar. He participated in the research that enabled the creation of the virus.

      This from a neurobiologist in Pittsburgh. Links to supporting papers are given

  3. Ron Clutz | March 14, 2020 at 10:58 am |

    Here’s my POV based on information from Dr. Bruce Aylward, Asst. Dir. WHO and leader of the two week mission to Wuhan province, along with info from Robert Walker at Science 2.0

    Dr. Wylward:
    “What China demonstrates is that this one is not beyond control. It’s a function of your response,” said Bruce Aylward, who led an independent fact-finding mission to study the spread of the virus in China, as well as that country’s response.

    COVID-19 spreads so rapidly that one Harvard researcher has warned that 40 to 70 per cent of the world’s adults will be infected. Its deadliness has raised frightening comparisons with the Spanish flu.

    But “we don’t need to end up there,” said Dr. Aylward, who came away from China convinced that the virus is not spreading as easily as feared and that the outbreak can be arrested if public-health authorities prepare well and act swiftly. In China and elsewhere, there is little evidence of widespread community transmission, he said. Instead, “it is more a whole bunch of clusters of transmission.” Take the Diamond Princess cruise ship in Japan. Or members of a sect in South Korea. Or people living in single buildings in Beijing or Hong Kong.

    That, he said, “is really important. Because you can get on top of that.” But to do so, “speed is everything here.”

    https://rclutz.wordpress.com/2020/03/13/how-to-fight-and-win-against-covid19/

    • Ron Clutz | March 14, 2020 at 11:00 am |

      Report of the WHO-China Joint Mission on Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) is here:
      https://www.who.int/docs/default-source/coronaviruse/who-china-joint-mission-on-covid-19-final-report.pdf

      • pdcarey | March 25, 2020 at 8:52 pm |

        The report is dated. It is now known that that the pathogen is airborne.

      • Ron Clutz | March 25, 2020 at 9:04 pm |

        Don’t be so pedantic. When infected people cough or sneeze, the droplets do not last long in the air, which is the risk for most of us. Health care givers do have an exposure to smaller aerosols generated when treating infected patients, and those last longer in the air. Thus they need the surgical quality masks, those are wasted on the rest of us.
        Dr. Maria Van Kerkhove, head of the WHO’s emerging diseases and zoonosis unit, underscored the need for healthcare professionals to take extra steps to protect themselves when performing certain procedures— such as intubation—on patients with COVID-19 or those suspected of infection.

        “When you do an aerosol-generating procedure like in a medical care facility, you have the possibility to what we call aerosolize these particles, which means they can stay in the air a little bit longer,” Dr. Van Kerkhove said.”

      • Ron Clutz | March 25, 2020 at 10:19 pm |

        The NIAID study “is measuring virus under ideal conditions and with a lot of virus,” said microbiologist Benjamin tenOever of the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai. “So their results are all likely to be overestimates. That said, I think those values should at least be used to let people know that things like subway poles can harbor virus for more time than I would have considered possible,” because an aerosol that encounters a solid object can stick to it. “Washing hands is more important than ever.”

        “We’ve seen no evidence that aerosolized virus is the primary transmission risk for everyday people in everyday settings,” said Dylan Morris of Princeton University, a co-author of the study. “One should not rule anything out categorically with a novel, still-poorly-understood virus, [but] based on what we know about coughing and sneezing, one should be cautiously optimistic that aerosolization may not play a big role in everyday transmission.”

        https://www.statnews.com/2020/03/16/coronavirus-can-become-aerosol-doesnt-mean-doomed/

  4. Wagathon | March 14, 2020 at 11:05 am |

    I think the fact that it’s so catching, causing medical facilities to be so quickly overwhelmed, really scared folks.

    • Turbulent Eddie | March 14, 2020 at 11:20 am |

      So, if one is relatively young and healthy, should one seek exposure?

      Assuming infection confers immunity, which is not certain, of course, the more young people achieve immunity, the slower the spread.

      Old and young are not that separable, but perhaps only the old and vulnerable should isolate.

      • Curious George | March 14, 2020 at 11:48 am |

        Right now, we have only one process of “achieving immunity”: it is known as the spread.

        It seems that tropical countries like Indonesia have not been hit hard. Maybe global warming could actually help?

      • Steinar Midtskogen | March 14, 2020 at 2:11 pm |

        Seek exposure AND go into absolute isolation for 2 – 3 weeks, you mean? Anyway, I don’t think it’s established beyond doubt that it leads to full immunity.

      • tonyb | March 14, 2020 at 3:13 pm |

        curious George

        this was an interesting study which although not as yet published looks exhaustive and credible.
        https://inconvenientfacts.xyz/blog/f/corona-virus-and-a-warming-light-at-the-end-of-the-tunnel

        Covid 19 appears to be mostly a temperature country virus which will likely follow the route of conventional flu and start to die away in april as warmer weather comes.

        It may reappear of course next winter so it is imperative a vaccine is found

        tonyb

      • Turbulent Eddie | March 14, 2020 at 3:41 pm |

        Covid 19 appears to be mostly a temperature country virus which will likely follow the route of conventional flu and start to die away in april as warmer weather comes.

        The following is speculative, but it may be the body’s own responses that bring about the seasonal responses ( https://www.nature.com/articles/ncomms8000,
        Our genes change with the seasons, just like the weather.

        Could be response to sunlight, temperature, or indirectly from lack of nitric oxide or vitamin D from sunshine.

      • aaron | March 15, 2020 at 2:12 am |

        No. Exposure must also be done along with isolation from unexposed population. There is a long incubation period with substantial contagious period before symptoms become apparent.

        We should have a system to incentivize key groups to expose and isolate until immune. This should focus on key healthcare workers and those who work with vulnerable populations.

      • aaron | March 15, 2020 at 2:14 am |

        Infection does result in immunity. There may be some exceptions, but immunity is evident.

      • Hans Erren | March 16, 2020 at 3:04 pm |

        Worst case statistics from Hubei, China: 1 in 883 get infected, 3.9% of the infected do not survive.

  6. Turbulent Eddie | March 14, 2020 at 11:10 am |

    * The twitter-verse has attempted to draw parallels between pandemic and climate change – the difference being that with this virus, there are all too obvious body counts, while with climate change, no obvious fatality.

    * We tend to worry about the wrong things. Mortality from COVID-19 is much greater for those with insulin resistance. But insulin resistance is self-induced from diet. Cinnamon rolls don’t seem threatening and indeed are pleasurable in the short term. But in the longer term, we should worry more about cinnamon rolls than climate change:
    https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/07/Preventable_causes_of_death.svg/1280px-Preventable_causes_of_death.svg.png

  8. cerescokid | March 14, 2020 at 11:33 am |

    CDC summation of flu burden in US since 2010.

    https://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/burden/index.html

  9. cerescokid | March 14, 2020 at 11:38 am |

    This website updates daily global data by country on Coronavirus concerning cases, deaths and new cases and deaths.

    https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/

  10. ristvan | March 14, 2020 at 11:44 am |

    I have posted several times on this over at WUWT past few weeks, based on my decade of experience as CEO of a privately held company owning the patents on a persistent hand sanitizer (alcohol evaporates so has no persistence), especially during the 2009 swine flu. Intensive interactions with Dr. Fauci, the CDC, and the FDA. Lots of in vitro lab work.

    The primary route of Wuhan coronavirus is close personal contact (direct, by inhaling cough microdroplets, or indirect by touching surfaces where they settle (and where NIH showed last week the virions experimentally remain viable for up to three days depending on surface and environmental conditions) and then your mouth, nose, or eyes (which many studies show happens between 15 and 25 times per hour depending on setting and cohort).

    This means that social distancing, in the extreme quarantine, is an effective way to reduce RO below one where the pamdemic will naturally die out. This justifies all the recent large group cancellations (March Madness to March Sadness).

    The remaining unknown is fatality. Flu is NOT a good analogy. This is not so simple, because we now know the elderly and those with underlying comorbidities (hypertension, diabetes) are disproportionately more vulnerable. Plus, it depends on whether hospitals (ICU ventilators) become overwhelmed. Plus, the outcomes ratio fatalities/recoveries denominator must be much larger than documented recoveries since many cases are mild or asymptomatic so never diagnosed to then recover.

    The Diamond Princess ‘experiment’ in Japan offers an observational first order denominator correction ‘worst case’ as the passengers skew older so more susceptible. The final official Japan report results say gross up the denominator by dividing by 0.556. Using the JHU.CSSE.edu monitor, Thursday a week ago the mortality result was 3.4%, same as WHO estimate. Yesterday it was 4.1%. This Saturday morning 3/14 it is 4.3%.

    The rise shows the Wuhan CoVid 19 impact in a skewed old Italian population with an overwhelmed northern Italy hospital system. All the present US social distancing disruptions are FULLY justified. Panic TP buying is not.

    • Stefano | March 14, 2020 at 12:47 pm |

      In Italy, it seems we’re moving towards a full lockdown, only God knows for how long.
      Many People here ask others to stay at home, but virtually no one cares about the effect it will have on our economy, which is already suffering because of other reasons. They mainly care abou the deficiency of ICUs in hospitals, which is obviously important but it is not the only thing we should look at IMHO.
      It seems that Corea and UK at least have a more practical approach to the matter, trying to balance sanitation and economic issues.

    • tonyb | March 14, 2020 at 1:42 pm |

      Rud

      You say

      “The remaining unknown is fatality. Flu is NOT a good analogy. This is not so simple, because we now know the elderly and those with underlying comorbidities (hypertension, diabetes) are disproportionately more vulnerable.”

      Virtually everyone in the UK who have died so far have had very serious underlying health issues. Would they have succumbed to flu? I was genuinely shocked on researching this matter to discover that the UK during the flu season has some 100 deaths per day-(2017/18) A couple of years previously there were 186 flu deaths per day.

      This is despite a sophisticated and well publicised campaign where vaccination is free. The overwhelming majority who die of flu are in much the same risk categories as Covid 19.

      Fortunately this appears to have been a light flu season in the UK which hopefully provides some extra medical capacity for those that will become ill n the next few weeks

      Are you on your farm or your Florida high rise? which is statistically safer? Best regards and keep safe

      tonyb

      • ristvan | March 14, 2020 at 2:12 pm |

        The farm is safer once we lay in groceries. (We keep a two week stock always because of the possibility of big snows.) In terms of social distancing, the nearest neighbors are more than half a kilometer away.

        But I have beenin Fort Lauderale on the ocean since our Thanksgiving, unfortunately only about 5 km from Port Everglades, a BIG cruise ship port. Because of that, Broward county has the highest number of cases in Florida by far up from zero last week to over 20 now. Our condo association last week installed wall mounted hand sanitizer units by all the entrance elevators.
        We are provisioning once a week. I don’t touch face until get home and wash hands. Then we put food away and wash hands again. Avoiding all unbagged/sealed fruits and vegetables except bananas and citrus since you dont eat the peels, and apples since we wash them anyway to remove any pesticide residues. Stay safe, and highest regards.

      • ristvan | March 14, 2020 at 7:23 pm |

        Hi again Tonyb. I did not directly respond to your comment about flu and my statement that it is NOT a good analogy. So a belated explanation from a decidedly non medical expert who unfortunately became anyway an ‘expert’ on this stuff.

        You are correct that deaths in flu and CoViD-19 are related to the same underlying factors—age and comorbidity.

        But there are many confounding factors saying you cannot use influenza as a predictor of how Wuhan will play out.

        Flu R0 ranges from 1.2-1.4, usually stated as 1.3, dependent on the never right vaccine from last years predominant strains to this year. This year, the preliminary miss was about 50%. Good on B, horrible on A. Unavoidable, as explained over at WUWT, since viruses constantly mutate. DNA based much less than RNA based. Both Wuhan and all Flu are unfortunately RNA based. Flu is seasonal because of route of transmission.

        CoVidC-19 is likely NOT seasonal, as route of transmission is different. R0 is higher ~2.5-3 at present absent social distancing (quarantine extreme) to ‘bend the ICU curve’.

        Influenza mortality (remember, imperfect vaccine but highly infectious otherwise) is ~0.1%. CoViD-19 mortality is (latest Sat US pm JHu calculation using JHU data) is 4.4% in essentially the same age susceptible cohort with immune systems weakened by age and comorbidity disease.

      • tonyb | March 15, 2020 at 3:43 am |

        Rud

        Thanks for your post

        You say

        “You are correct that deaths in flu and CoViD-19 are related to the same underlying factors—age and comorbidity.

        But there are many confounding factors saying you cannot use influenza as a predictor of how Wuhan will play out.”

        I think there are similarities and dissimilarities and we shall have to see how it all resolves itself.

        However, as you ,may have seen in another of my posts my interest in this was also regarding the different reactions from the media. They have become hysterical over covid 19 from the first death.

        Yet we have during the season in a bad year nearly 200 people dying from common flu every day and there is not a peep pout of them. it is fortunate, because you can appreciate the mass panic that would cause if that news got out, but it is still strange the media haven’t looked at the relative figures which at least would provide some badly needed context.

        tonyb

      • matthewrmarler | March 16, 2020 at 3:26 pm |

        Right now, https://gisanddata.maps.arcgis.com/apps/opsdashboard/index.html#/bda7594740fd40299423467b48e9ecf6

        reports that S. Korea has had 75 deaths in 8236 known cases. a 0.91% mortality rate (ignore for now pretense of 2 sig fig of accuracy) Italy has had 2158 deaths from 27980 cases, a mortality rate of 7.71%; for United Kingdom there have been 53 deaths in 1551 cases, a mortality rate of 3.42%. I think those are countries whose reporting we can call “informative” (China is perplexing). I think the best summary of the state of knowledge now is that we do not know the mortality rate with much accuracy.

        In some parts of the US, the number of known cases is still doubling every day or two (that confounds new cases with new positive tests on existant cases), so it is too soon to estimate much of anything.

      • JCH | March 16, 2020 at 4:13 pm |

        In South Korea some 60% of cases are from one religious sect. 43% of those people were infected from a single source. The religious sect is secretive, but some say they practice some sort of face-to-face prayer ritual, which, if true, would spread the disease very quickly among its members. The sect recruits heavily among younger people, and they are the least likely to die from COVID-19.

        Bringing seasonal flu into the conversation makes zero sense.

      • matthewrmarler | March 16, 2020 at 4:31 pm |

        JCH: In South Korea some 60% of cases are from one religious sect. 43% of those people were infected from a single source.

        JHU reports 8236 cases in S. Korea. Are you saying that 4800 or so are from that sect?

      • JCH | March 16, 2020 at 4:40 pm |

        Before you start calculating death rates, you should probably research how the country first identified the disease’s presence and what they did to address it.

      • matthewrmarler | March 16, 2020 at 5:24 pm |

        JCH: Before you start calculating death rates, you should probably research how the country first identified the disease’s presence and what they did to address it.

        You didn’t answer my question.

        The point of my calculations was to emphasize that the mortality rate is not well known on the basis of data reported to date. Even if it is true that the S. Korean infected population is unusually young and that the Italian infected population is unusually old, I think that the reporting to date is spotty and unreliable.

      • jungletrunks | March 16, 2020 at 5:40 pm |

        JCH, You’re the one talking like the expert here, and that the U.S. is doing a lousy job, so maybe it’s you who “should probably” give us the parameters for correct calculations here. What’s the total number of people in the world that has COVID-19? Okay, that’s an impossible question; what’s the total US population that has COVID-19? Well, guess that’s impossible to know too. But according to you the US is reacting poorly to this disease; yet the U.S. is a major hub of commerce, with nearly as big a population of Western Europe, but much fewer cases of COVID-19.

        Western Europe has about 390 million population, just 50–60 million over the population of the U.S., at 329 million; but as of March 16, Western Europe has over 141k cases of coronavirus, and over 2,730 deaths. I only added up totals for countries with 900+ cases. South Korea has 8,236 cases, and 75 deaths.

        The U.S. has 4,165 cases and 72 deaths as of today, nothing to brag about, but relative to global comps pretty good.
        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019–20_coronavirus_pandemic_by_country_and_territory

        You speak like an expert, but are really talking out your other pie hole.

      • Don Monfort | March 17, 2020 at 4:27 am |

        JCH is factoring Trump into his calculations. The U.S. has to be doing worse than the rest of the world. Orange man bad.

      • matthewrmarler | March 17, 2020 at 10:57 am |

        mrm: S. Korea has had 75 deaths in 8236 known cases. a 0.91% mortality rate (ignore for now pretense of 2 sig fig of accuracy) Italy has had 2158 deaths from 27980 cases, a mortality rate of 7.71%; for United Kingdom there have been 53 deaths in 1551 cases, a mortality rate of 3.42%.

        Quick update. If only 20% of actual cases have been identified, then dividing those figures by 5 gives better estimates. If only 10% of actual cases have been identified, then dividing by 10 gives better estimates.

        Maybe not a “monster”, but uncertainty in the count of unidentified cases is certainly a factor.

    • Mark | March 14, 2020 at 8:17 pm |

      ‘The primary route of Wuhan coronavirus is close personal contact (direct, by inhaling cough microdroplets, or indirect by touching surfaces where they settle (and where NIH showed last week the virions experimentally remain viable for up to three days depending on surface and environmental conditions) and then your mouth, nose, or eyes (which many studies show happens between 15 and 25 times per hour depending on setting and cohort). ‘

      I wonder about the utility of surgical gloves. They are certainly less conspicuous than masks, and more likely to be used if the utility could be demonstrated.
      The would inhibit a transmission path if one were infected. But more usefully perhaps the wearing of gloves has an unconscious bias regarding the touching ones mouth, nose or eyes. At least, this is something I’ve noticed when I’ve been working on my bike for instance.
      If in fact, others might be able to tell me that they do provide an effective barrier, such as it is, they are certainly more available than the masks which I think might have some dubious value.

  11. Stuart E. | March 14, 2020 at 12:13 pm |

    Covid-19 is the Gaia Theory in action. Too many people placing too much stress on resources and eco-systems. It’s Mother Nature’s way of saying….”there are too many of you folks in my house…some of you will have to leave!”

    • Curious George | March 14, 2020 at 5:12 pm |

      Especially in 1348. Please read The Decameron again.

    • Stuball | March 15, 2020 at 11:23 am |

      Hello Stuart E. Your Mother Nature is more pleasant than mine. I believe humans are the “Cockroaches of the mammal world”. We can live in the Arctic, in jungles, in deserts or high rises. Whenever Mother Nature turns over a rock anywhere in the world, a bunch of humans scurry out. She tries to stomp on us but we are quick and most of us get away. Even the Covid-19 math doesn’t work. Only 6000 people have died and every day 220,000 people are added o the global population. I have told my children that by 2060-70 (I won’t be around) that unfortunately, they may have to make some drastic decisions on global population. There are many decades to go with many changes and technology but if they approach 11 billion, I think my children and grandchildren may be in trouble. Maybe the system will just fluctuate between 9 billion and 11 billion for the next million years and everything will be fine. Always having fun, long live the cockroach!!

      • tonyb | March 15, 2020 at 12:14 pm |

        stuball

        “Only 6000 people have died and every day 220,000 people are added o the global population. I have told my children that by 2060-70 (I won’t be around) that unfortunately, they may have to make some drastic decisions on global population.”

        interesting figure. The world population has grown exponentially over the last 50 years or so and that causes many problems, from lack of resources, less space, more traffic, water concerns rubbish disposal etc etc.

        The numbers expected in Africa over the next few decades are truly frightening. In general the wealthier a population the smaller their population growth, so that is one route another is much more vigorous birth control programmes.

        If you mention Malthus on WUWT it causes an almighty row but we cant go on increasing at this rate
        tonyb

      • John Egan | March 15, 2020 at 3:02 pm |

        The Nazis compared Jews to vermin and in Rwanda the genocidaires compared Tutsis to cockroches. Perhaps comparing humans to cockroaches is not the best metaphor.

      • Paul Aubrin | March 19, 2020 at 3:17 am |

        Watch the interesting video “Don’t Panic” by Hans Rosling. Growing curves look like exponentials at the beginning, but are generally logistic curves. We are already past the inflexion point.

  13. morpheusonacid | March 14, 2020 at 12:26 pm |

    What was the point of this? It is a collection of mainly uniformed opinion. The best thing to do is to delete it all.

  14. Don132 | March 14, 2020 at 12:33 pm |

    Vitamin C is apparently an effective treatment for organ sepsis, which includes lung sepsis, which I think it’s safe to assume is highly relevant to the COVID-19 outbreak. But before I go on I’d like to thank Dr. Curry for this open forum; I have never been censored here (for that matter, I’ve never been censored at WUWT, either.) So, thank you.

    The immediate reaction of many people will be to accuse me of junk science, but hear me out, and understand that vitamin C is a huge, and I mean absolutely huge, controversy in the medical profession at this very moment. While many physicians dismiss this out-of-hand, many others swear by it and question why we’re so resistant to a cheap, extremely safe treatment that has good– even astonishing– results in clinical practice. Part of this controversy might hinge around the fact that vitamin C therapy threatens the pill-for-an-ill machine. Anyhow, let’s have a look.

    For the Climate Etc. audience I think one of the best places to start might be this longish video of a presentation of a clinical trial of what’s called the “Marik protocol” for treatment of sepsis, because this brings the controversy among researchers and physicians into stark contrast. The VITAMINS trial, which found no benefit at all from vitamin C therapy, is presented. Case closed? Not so simple, and at the 33 minute mark you’ll see Dr. Marik himself make a rather fiery presentation, but I think the core argument he makes is valid: they didn’t actually test the Marik protocol because the time-to-treat was vastly different from that employed in actual clinical practice, and time-to-treat is critical. Here it is: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sF2ktY00dqs

    A short interlude here is the testimony of three ICU nurses who work with Dr. Marik: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=adYqbucF8M4

    Then we have the presentation of the CITRIS-ALI trial by Dr. Fowler, which also failed– or did it? This is an extremely interesting presentation by an advocate for vitamin C therapy. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HXs5Xzr6qCI For those who don’t want to wade through another hour of video, a good summary is here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j-FPaZOpjU0

    The Shanghai government has recommended vitamin C in the treatment of COVID-19, and there are clinical trials ongoing in China and in the US for vitamin C treatment. (I can’t find the Shanghai reference at the moment.)

    The take-way is that we might want to consider taking vitamin C to help protect ourselves against COVID-19, and if you get really sick with it and your doctor won’t give you vitamin C immediately, then get another doctor who will. It’s cheap and it’s remarkably safe.

    Bonus feature: Dr. Benjamin Neel, director of NYU Langone’s Perlmutter Cancer Center, discusses how vitamin C may “tell” faulty stem cells in the bone marrow to mature and die normally, instead of multiplying to cause blood cancers. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ya4yMdHJV3Y

    • David Appell | March 14, 2020 at 12:50 pm |

      Where is the clinical trial ongoing in the US for vitamin C treatment of Covid-19? Do you have any links to papers, research sites, etc?

      • Don132 | March 14, 2020 at 1:00 pm |

        Clarification, not clinical trials for COVID-19 per se, but trials for vitamin C. See here: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/results?term=Vitamin+C&cond=Sepsis&Search=Apply&recrs=a&age_v=&gndr=&type=&rslt=

        I think it’s safe to say that if the primary outcome of severe COVID-19 is organ sepsis, then some of these trials are highly relevant. Here is the VICTAS trial I was looking for, which I believe concludes in 2021. http://victastrial.org/

      • Don132 | March 15, 2020 at 8:30 am |

        Here is the updated version of the vitamin C, thiamine, and hydrocortisone trial, and it seems they’ve paid some attention to criticism of the original trial (VITAMINS) in that time-to-treat is supposed to be within four hours of randomization, although since randomization is supposed to occur with 24 hours after diagnosis of first organ dysfunction, my guess is that this is still too long to treatment and doesn’t reflect clinical practice. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6894243/

        It seems to me that if you want to test the actual protocol, you have to follow the actual protocol, especially when clinicians who use this practice say that time-to-treat is critical. I wonder if this trial had bothered to consult with Dr. Marik, whose protocol this is, and whose input on any aspect of the VITAMINS trial was not solicited? Dr. Fowler, who uses vitamin C in the treatment of sepsis, is one of the co-authors of this paper who might ensure the even-handedness of the trial.

    • Vaughan Pratt | March 14, 2020 at 5:20 pm |

      One of the possible confounding factors in trials of vitamin C is hydration.

      What I’d be interested in knowing is, how does one design an experiment in which some of those taking vitamin C do so without washing it down with water?

      • Don132 | March 14, 2020 at 5:43 pm |

        V. Pratt says,
        “What I’d be interested in knowing is, how does one design an experiment in which some of those taking vitamin C do so without washing it down with water?”

        The clinical protocol is IV vitamin C, and hydration is a huge issue and is monitored closely in clinical settings, according to Dr. Marik, but the hydration issue was not presented in the VITAMINS trial, although apparently they have the data.

        So to answer your question, because this is IV they know exactly how much fluid a patient is getting.

        Another point that makes me an advocate of this protocol is that studies have shown that septic patients present with near-scurvy levels of vitamin C, and it seems to me malpractice to refuse to give them vitamin C. Why the huge resistance, then? Yes, we need more studies– no one disagrees with this–but this is an extremely safe treatment and organ sepsis will kill you, and is very likely the main cause of death for COVID-19 victims.

  15. Ireneusz Palmowski | March 14, 2020 at 12:41 pm |

    Death rate depends on the angle of rising curve of the amount infected with the virus. So, from human awareness and the ease from human-to-human transmission.
    Mortality depends on the efficiency of the healthcare system. Therefore, it is crucial to flatten the infection curve and extend it over time.
    Very high humidity in France and the UK will cause a rapid increase in infection.
    https://images.tinypic.pl/i/00999/mg89nssgvz31.png
    Moisture increases the survivability of the virus. Higher temperatures do not matter. Solar radiation dries viruses faster. After winter, the human body is weakened and more susceptible to infection.

    • tonyb | March 14, 2020 at 1:46 pm |

      Which raises the interesting question as to whether we should try to reduce high humidity in our homes, if so to what levels and does temperature of the house make a difference?

      tonyb

      • Ireneusz Palmowski | March 14, 2020 at 3:00 pm |

        Do you have contact with an infected person in the apartment? Just sanitize. For a dry cough, I recommend bread with fried lard, garlic or onion.

      • tonyb | March 14, 2020 at 3:29 pm |

        We have a house so can be as antisocial as we like!

        We live next to the sea however and humidity at this time of the year is quite high.

        tonyb

      • Ireneusz Palmowski | March 14, 2020 at 3:55 pm |

        The air itself is not contagious. You must have contact with the liquid excreted by the infected person.

      • aaron | March 18, 2020 at 4:17 pm |

        SARS1 was seasonal, this should be too.

        If it is like flu, humidity reduces how far it can travel and infection rate.

  16. David | March 14, 2020 at 12:42 pm |

    I think people have to be careful about diseases but this applies every year when the cold, flu or any other virus is going around. I get my flu shot every year and so does my entire family. I think we have to look at elevation and air pollution as significant factors in making the disease worse. Look at Iran and Northern Italy. Both are elevated areas with high levels of pollution.

    The figures from Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Finland, Switzerland, South Korea, Iceland and Israel are probably more representative of the intensity of the disease than the figures from countries that haven’t had as much testing.

    https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/

    If we look at U.S. states, the Southeast has seen the fewest cases and the fewest deaths. Israel has significantly fewer cases than Switzerland. So maybe warmer weather will help with a respiratory ailment.

    I don’t think the case/death numbers from Italy, Spain or Iran mean much. If the system is overloaded, people are not going to go to the doctor or hospital unless they are dying. So those countries probably are not testing people with mild symptoms.

    • afonzarelli | March 14, 2020 at 8:47 pm |

      If we look at U.S. states, the Southeast has seen the fewest cases and the fewest deaths.

      Perhaps that’s simply because we’re furthest away from the Seattle epicenter.

    • Bill Fabrizio | March 15, 2020 at 6:28 pm |

      Earlier someone pointed out that the virus stays active longer in humid air. As you go up in elevation the air generally gets dryer.

  17. jacksmith4tx | March 14, 2020 at 12:46 pm |

    Comment:
    The two most important technologies that will determine the future of mankind (and the planet) are AI and Genetic Engineering. Here is something that my curated news search filtered out of the millions of news items flooding the web.

    “March 13, 2020 — 20:14 GMT
    MIT’s deep learning found an antibiotic for a germ nothing else could kill”
    Scientists at MIT and Harvard’s Broad Institute and MIT’s CSAIL built a deep learning network that can acquire a broad representation of molecular structure and thereby discover novel antibiotics. The resulting compound, halicin, can destroy a pathogen for which no cure has existed, and it could even help in the fight against coronavirus.
    https://www.zdnet.com/article/mits-deep-learning-found-an-antibiotic-for-a-germ-nothing-else-could-kill/
    —
    One day they are spending hours and days crunching through terabytes of data to model physics and chemistry. Change a few algorithms and the same programs run 10 million to 2 billion times faster.

    http://www.infoq.com/news/2020/03/deep-learning-simulation/
    “The research team used DENSE to build emulators for 10 different simulation cases from fields such as:
    high-energy-density physics
    astrophysics
    fusion energy science
    climate science
    earth science
    The emulators ran much faster as well; for simulations that run in “minutes to days,” the emulators can run in “milliseconds to a few seconds.” DENSE also outperformed other non-neural network emulators, such as random forests, or manually-designed neural networks.”
    —
    Hey, What’s that sound?
    All the things people think of as a store of wealth freaked out this week. Precious metals, bitcoins, non govt. debt – everything.
    “The Loss of Moneyness”
    http://creditbubblebulletin.blogspot.com/2020/03/weekly-commentary-loss-of-moneyness.html
    Weekly Commentary: The Loss of Moneyness
    It was as if global markets pulled elements from the 1994 bond market dislocation, 1997’s Asian Bubble collapses and the 1998 Russian/LTCM.
    It’s definitely not normal.
    Crude collapsed 25% Monday. Bitcoin collapsed 41% during the week. For the week, palladium collapsed 37%, platinum 17% and silver 16%. Gold dropped 8.6%. Sugar and Cattle were down almost 10%, as the Bloomberg Commodities Index sank 7.8% for the week. The S&P500 dropped 7.6% Monday; rallied 4.9% Tuesday; fell 4.9% Wednesday; sank 9.5% Thursday; and surged 9.3% Friday. Circuit breakers were triggered at least twice – and I don’t recall anything quite like it, even during 2008. It was a week when, to those paying attention, the potential for a crisis much beyond the scope of 2008 became readily apparent. We witnessed more than a glimpse of how global financial collapse could materialize. “

  18. Andy West | March 14, 2020 at 12:52 pm |

    UK taking a different tack…

    If within the countries where heavy lock-down has caused a big reduction, it simply comes back later when the lock-downs are removed, then the UK tack may pay off. If this is not the case and it doesn’t come back (why would this be so?), especially if it stays absent even during the next winter, then the current UK policy is worse not better. Can’t lock-down forever, eventually food production / distribution will be an issue, on top of many more near-term social issues. But if there’s an early vaccine (albeit seems unlikely for corona family), then the UK policy is also a worse choice. I’ve no idea whether it’s better or worse; there seems to be experts arguing both sides. Even if it’s a theoretically good tack, I should imagine though that it’ll be very difficult to manage in a manner that does not simply overwhelm the medical system.

    • Ireneusz Palmowski | March 14, 2020 at 1:13 pm |

      Such a course in Poland means high mortality due to poor health care. Great Britain takes risks.

      • JCH | March 14, 2020 at 1:35 pm |

        Yes, huge gamble.

        Short study out of China; 150 patients; 20 in my age range; 3 survived, 17 died.

        2nd wave is an unknown. They often happen.

    • tonyb | March 14, 2020 at 1:58 pm |

      Andy

      Here in the UK we are nowhere near as tactile as the Italians nor indulge in big family gatherings where younger relatives might inadvertently be infected without knowing. Also we tend to open windows to let air circulate which is anathema to a proportion of Italians who don’t like cold air.

      Our age profile is also lower and fewer smoke. In the North of Italy many live in flats and I am sure they will be popping in and out of each others doors whilst their children play together, so a lockdown into confined spaces could be counter productive Spain is not dissimilar.

      Provided those not feeling well over here do self isolate I am optimistic. It was pretty much business as usual round our way today with a new choc shop opening day attracting lots of people.

      we went in when the crowds had gone and refused the free samples on a plate.

      Plenty of loo roll. I was told by two different managers of major supermarkets that they have masses of stock of all types of things in their warehouses stockpiled in preparation for Brexit disruption.

      Tonyb

      • cerescokid | March 14, 2020 at 7:11 pm |

        Tony

        “….big family gatherings…”

        The worldometer website that I linked above posts updates to cases and deaths etc., daily for all countries. I note the very large difference between Italy (60 M population, 21,000 cases and 1441 deaths) and Germany (80 M population, 4,600 cases and 9 deaths). (Data as of this comment.)
        I knew about the aged population in the affected region in Italy. But given they were both advanced economies and apparent modern health systems, I was at a loss for the huge difference in rates of cases and deaths per population. I hadn’t considered social and family custom differences. That is another variable to think about.
        I know we are in the early stages but it’s also interesting that heavily populated countries such as Brazil, Pakistan, Mexico and Malaysia have 0 deaths. Also, India has only 2 and Thailand only 1. Certainly, the website could be in error.

        I suspect it will take another year to form conclusions about all the factors involved in varying rates of cases, deaths and recoveries, within the various countries.

        Economically, this is one of those Black Swan events. 10 years of low interest rates. Central Banks pushing on a string, Some Corporations leveraged to the hilt, Saudis and Russians eyeball to eyeball on oil production and now a potential collapse of global demand.

      • afonzarelli | March 14, 2020 at 8:54 pm |

        In other words, Italians are a bunch of boorish slobs. (thanks a lot, tony… 👎)

  19. another Jim | March 14, 2020 at 12:54 pm |

    Vitamin C is a one legged stool. Yes, it is important, but if you are deficient in Vit D and Zinc, Vit C is wasted. I read one reference where they reported that all of the severe Wuhan pneumonia cases had low blood selenium. Yea, I know, cite the source, bummer.
    Anyway, it is more than any one factor, and many co factors influence immune response.

    • Don132 | March 14, 2020 at 1:07 pm |

      Studies have shown that patients admitted to ICU for sepsis have plasma C levels that are borderline scurvy; it makes zero sense not to give these patients vitamin C. Not quite sure I agree that vitamin C is wasted without D and zinc, because that’s not what the clinical studies show. I do agree that most of us need adequate D and zinc when we’re sick.

    • Ireneusz Palmowski | March 14, 2020 at 3:05 pm |

      Zinc and selenium are antagonists. Take selenium one day, zinc the next. An excess of selenium can have side effects. Organic zinc is safe (excess excreted in faeces).

    • Ireneusz Palmowski | March 14, 2020 at 3:13 pm |

      It’s best to suck the zinc tablets when leaving the apartment, because the virus gets in through the airways.

    • Ireneusz Palmowski | March 14, 2020 at 3:19 pm |

      I recommend drinking sage tea as a respiratory disinfectant.

      • Curious George | March 14, 2020 at 5:20 pm |

        Don’t underestimate vodka, rum, whisky .. a local sacred drink.

      • Ireneusz Palmowski | March 14, 2020 at 7:07 pm |

        Provided that it has at least 60% pure alcohol, otherwise it will only weaken the body.

      • Peter Jezukaitis | March 15, 2020 at 4:11 am |

        Pickled herring, onions and garlic, whilst not effective for covid 19 are great for social distancing.

        On a more serious note, whilst the incidence, morbidity and mortality of covid 19 are direct and measurable, little is said about the adverse health impacts of social isolation, closures, lack of access to food, regular health care, work and so on. For Fukushima and Chernobyl, ( see Chernobyl forum report), the greatest consequences were not from ionising radiation but from the multiplier effect of disruption.

  20. dpy6629 | March 14, 2020 at 12:56 pm |

    I personally think there is a lot of overreaction and panic. For people under 60 who are healthy, this virus appears to be less deadly than the flu. Virtually all the dead in Washington state have been elderly and with underlying medical conditions. It seems to me that its these people who need to take precautions. I suspect that this virus will become endemic and virtually everyone will eventually be exposed. We can slow the rate of infection, but we don’t have effective tools for effective control.

    It is also true that right now, its quite likely that there is dramatic underreporting of infections. No deaths are going to be missed. The death rate will go down over time. Places like Italy with a population heavily skewed toward the elderly will be more effected.

    I am skeptical that emergency government measures will have much of an effect in the long run. What may make a short term difference is very careful monitoring of nursing homes to keep infected workers from going to work and isolating any residents who are infected. Testing everyone in these facilities might be a good idea. If you know someone over 80, make sure they get the medical care they need.

    • Ireneusz Palmowski | March 14, 2020 at 3:45 pm |

      Respiratory failure, which is a common symptom, is a great suffering for the patient.

  22. David Wojick | March 14, 2020 at 2:03 pm |

    Jo Nova has been blogging about this relentlessly for some time. Lots of stuff there: http://joannenova.com.au/.

  23. billbedford | March 14, 2020 at 2:44 pm |

    Is there any evidence from any country that the deaths from Covid-19 have exceeded the normal rates of Excess Winter Deaths?

    • tonyb | March 14, 2020 at 3:07 pm |

      Bill

      I have been studying this for the UK. Deaths from flu and other causes of ‘excess winter mortality’ differs considerably year to year, but in recent years has been up to 40000 excess deaths with an average of 17000 per year attributed to flu.

      At this stage of the season in 2017 there were 100 daily flu deaths and in 2014 186 flu deaths per day. So as far as the UK goes definitely not.

      I am amazed the media have not cottoned on to this as imagine what panic you can create with those figures, but year after year this occurs with very little comment until this latest one comes along.

      tonyb

  24. JCH | March 14, 2020 at 3:00 pm |

    US population of 80-year olds – ~10 million
    US population of 90-year olds – ~1.9 million
    US population of 100-year olds – ~72 thousand

    • Turbulent Eddie | March 14, 2020 at 3:48 pm |

      Elderly are more susceptible to COVID, but they’re also more susceptible to just about everything else.

      The risk factors:
      aged over 60 years
      and those with underlying conditions such as:
      hypertension, diabetes, cardiovascular disease, chronic respiratory disease and cancer.

      But hypertension, diabetes, cardiovascular disease are often undiagnosed and common over 60.

      So, if one is healthy and 62, is one still at risk?

      • tonyb | March 14, 2020 at 3:59 pm |

        Turbulent

        As females and the young have much less risk I have self identified as a 18 year old woman.

        tonib

      • JCH | March 14, 2020 at 5:12 pm |

        “So, if one is healthy and 62, is one still at risk?”

        I don’t think they know yet. If the system is overwhelmed and hospital staff determine nobody above 60 gets drugs and a nurse and a ventilator, you’re potentially a goner.

      • cerescokid | March 14, 2020 at 9:15 pm |

        Tony

        When I was 7, I told my parents I wanted to be a giraffe. They told me no, you are not going to be a giraffe, you are going to be a little boy.

        It’s a good thing for them they told me that, otherwise they would have had to buy a new house with 25 foot ceilings.

      • Turbulent Eddie | March 15, 2020 at 9:55 am |

        https://ourworldindata.org/uploads/2020/03/Coronavirus-CFR-by-health-condition-in-China.png

        Since Hypertension/Diabetes/Cardiovasular diseases are probably not diagnosed once one is infected ( active infection skews a lot of the numbers ), it stands to reason that a lot of the ‘no health condition’ really have undiagnosed conditions.

  25. another Jim | March 14, 2020 at 3:29 pm |

    Community Outpatient Influenza-like Illness Surveillance Network (ILINet) Data for Washington state shows a large increase in Influenza-like Illness (figure 4), but no large increase in clinical positive Flu A/B tests (figure 2).
    https://www.doh.wa.gov/DataandStatisticalReports/DiseasesandChronicConditions/CommunicableDiseaseSurveillanceData/InfluenzaSurveillanceData
    So is Wuhan pneumonia increasing the Influenza-like Illness in Washington?
    Inquiring minds want to know!

    • Ireneusz Palmowski | March 14, 2020 at 3:48 pm |

      Flu weakens the body, especially the lungs and heart. It’s easy to get another infection (e.g. bacterial).

  26. mdgreig | March 14, 2020 at 3:40 pm |

    I recommend this article for its explanation of the different experiences of different countries, the ratio of reported to true cases and the 10 fold death rate increase in an overloaded health system
    https://medium.com/@tomaspueyo/coronavirus-act-today-or-people-will-die-f4d3d9cd99ca

  27. billbedford | March 14, 2020 at 3:44 pm |

    Most people die in the winter and the UK government publishes statistics which give the excess of winter deaths over summer ones. In 2017-8 the figure was ~49,000, while in 2018-9 it was ~23,000. This reflects the difference between a cold winter and a mild one.

    Almost all the discussion I have seen make the assumption that any deaths from the Covid-19 virus will be in addition to the normal death rates. However, given that the demographic of most of the people who succumb to the virus more or less matches that of those people who are likely to die in a given period isn’t it just as likely that the virus kills those who already have a limited life expectancy.

    • tonyb | March 14, 2020 at 3:57 pm |

      bill

      Here in the UK we have an average of around 100 deaths per day in the 2017 flu season and 186 a day in the bad 2014 season.

      Yet barely a peep from the news papers about this mass carnage year after year whilst there is hysterical panic over covid 19.

      Lets hope it doesn’t escalate too much, but at present the current flu season is quite modest and it looks possible that flu and covid 19 deaths combined will still be less than recent bad common flu years.

      tonyb

      • JCH | March 14, 2020 at 4:10 pm |

        If you gave it an ounce of thought you would know why.

      • Curious George | March 14, 2020 at 5:23 pm |

        Let’s not count deaths too early. It is far from over.

      • afonzarelli | March 14, 2020 at 5:40 pm |

        If you gave it an ounce of thought you would know why

        Master reply. (sniping at the ignorance of another whilst masking your own)…

      • JCH | March 14, 2020 at 6:50 pm |

        The office just sent out an email that is is now closed. Employees are to work from home.

      • jungletrunks | March 14, 2020 at 7:08 pm |

        Tony, I believe there’s a curious disconnect between the flu and covid 19. In 2009 the swine flu killed over 12k citizens In the US, and it infected over 60 million. Globally the death toll of the swine flu was between 151,700 and 575,400; using the low number covid 19 has a lot of catching up to do to justify its unique hype. There was nowhere near the broad hysteria over the swine flu, I actually had to reflect on what happened, I have little recollection; this is quite interesting when considering that roughly 20% of the US population became infected, yet business went on. So far, in not yet quite 3 months, the flu has already killed more than 10k in the US.

        The CDC estimates that, from October 1, 2019, through March 7, 2020, there has been between 22,000 – 55,000 flu deaths. https://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/burden/preliminary-in-season-estimates.htm

      • JCH | March 14, 2020 at 7:44 pm |

        For one, the healthcare system has the capacity to deal with the seasonal flu every year because it is, well, seasonal, and they have the capacity to deal with it every year.

        As for the people who are about to get COVID-19, it’s possible we do not have enough nurses; it’s possible we do not have enough ICU capacity; it’s possible we do not have enough specialists. A version of battlefield medicine.

        Not the case with seasonal flu and not the case with the stupid thing winter deaths are on climate blogs.

      • jungletrunks | March 14, 2020 at 8:15 pm |

        I appreciate your suppositions too, JCH.

  28. john ferguson | March 14, 2020 at 5:18 pm |

    Why did the rate of new infections per day in China peak and then diminish to very few. Is it possible that everyone who was susceptible was exposed and caught it? Is it possible that not everyone is susceptible? Is it possible that the virus ran out of potential victims?
    Is this a sequence that is common to this sort of thing?

    • JCH | March 14, 2020 at 6:53 pm |

      Because the government panicked and did something.

      • john ferguson | March 14, 2020 at 7:45 pm |

        Thank you so much for helping me with this. I am confused. No doubt about it. But I cannot help thinking that the virus running out of people to infect cannot be the only possible explanation for the decline in new victims. To my perverted view of things, it seems too obvious.

      • JCH | March 14, 2020 at 8:53 pm |

        There are a lot of things that are not known, but looks like very few people in Wuhan by percentage got the disease. The expectation I think was that a lot of people got it, only a very mild case, and that it is not containable within a country.

        The testing, where widespread, indicates a large percentage were not infected.

        A person who is not infected and remains isolated cannot get the disease unless the break isolation or make some sort of mistake. The virus cannot live outside a host for a long time. They debating the actual length, but it’s limited. The virus in a host, if it cannot spread to another host, is either going to die when the host dies or die when the host develops immunity.

        So, possibly, the end of the virus without achieving a meaningful level herd immunity.

        If you look at South Korea, they have done tens and tens and tens of thousands, perhaps 100,000’s of thousands of tests, and they have only 8,806 positives.

        So there a billions of people in China who could still get it, but it’s looking like they have come very close to completely containing it.

        Chinese kids have been flying home from Harvard. They could have it, but I suspect they are tested coming off the plane in China and quarantined.

    • mesocyclone | March 14, 2020 at 7:01 pm |

      I see a lot of confusion above.

      Here are some facts. Some are provisional, but they have held fairly well over the last month.

      First, a normal epidemic will have an exponentially increasing number of cases until the number of susceptible individuals drops substantially, with a corresponding reduction in the spread – the effective reproduction number Reff (number of new cases resulting from spread from one case) drops. When that falls enough, and Reff drops below 1, the epidemic will die off. The other thing that can lower Reff is public health measures.

      For COVID19, the doubling rate (resulting from an R0 of 2-3 and other characteristics) appears to be around 6 days. So, on any day in the future, the number of new will be R0^(d/6). Do the math – exponential growth like this results in huge numbers.

      The number of cases requiring hospitalization runs 10%-20% of all, with the best guess seeming to be around 10%. So if you have 50,000,000 infected in, say, the US, you need to be able to care for 5,000,000 severely or critically ill cases. We have the ability to care for well under 1,000,000 (don’t remember the exact number). The consequence of this – this epidemic allowed to grow at its natural rate – will be catastrophic to the health care system, both in terms of having to let most COVID19 patients who need care die, and in terms of (at the same time) having a reduced staff because many will be ill.

      If you slow down the growth – “flattening the curve” is the term going around – then the scale of that disaster is reduced, and if you flatten it enough, it becomes tolerable. But, unless you can extinguish the epidemic, eventually a substantial proportion of the population will be infected. However, if you can delay that long enough, a vaccine can reduce the susceptible population, plus treatment options – such as antivirals – may appear.

      The critical need to flatten the curve is what is driving efforts by governments – the cancellations and other forms of social distancing, the quarantines, the increase sanitation.

      I see some who shrug this off because it only kills the old and/or sick. I find that a shockingly callous attitude, and as someone who is in a high risk group – it stuns me!

      Those trying to downplay the death rate by comparing it to influenza are mistaken. This is far more serious – there is no native immunity, no vaccines, no known antivirals, and it is significantly more deadly. There are certainly questions about the death rate due to measurement difficulty of the number of cases, but when Dr. Anthony Fauci estimates it to be 1%, listen to him! The measured case fatality rate is all over the place, but that’s most likely due to two factors: difficulty in measuring without widespread serological surveys, and in some countries, an elevated death rate due to the overburdening of the hospital system

      As to various nostrums being floated – Vitamin C, this or that other thing – enough! If those worked, we would know it, and government would be urging the use. Certainly staying healthy counts, but nothing will guarantee you don’t get this, unless it is stopped or widespread vaccination happens. And, young people do die from this. The whistleblower doctor in Wuhan died of it, and he was 34 year old. I have seen no evidence that he had pre-existing conditions.

      • Don132 | March 14, 2020 at 8:34 pm |

        mesocyclone says, “As to various nostrums being floated – Vitamin C, this or that other thing – enough! If those worked, we would know it, and government would be urging the use.”

        Disagree 100% with regard to vitamin C. There has been a very long battle over vitamin C going back some 50 years, ever since Dr. Klenner stood up at an AMA meeting and declared that he’d cured every single case of polio with vitamin C. If we think of inflammation and oxidation-reduction reactions in the body, then the use of vitamin C, a powerful antioxidant, starts to make sense.

        The politics of this, I believe, involve the great reluctance to admit that a natural, non-patentable molecule can do what pharmaceuticals cannot, and safely. This is a huge threat to the pharmaceutical industry and it’s a huge threat to the pill-for-an-ill medical education that doctors are subjected to.

        Look at the videos I linked to and understand that clinical practice with vitamin C in treating sepsis has shown great promise. One thing we know is that this is remarkably safe, and so yes, the government should be urging its use but is not, and hadn’t even mentioned the possibility, and when we consider clinical experience and safety profile this omission is glaring. I might suggest that the reason for this is that the powers that be have been trying to sabotage vitamin C therapy for years; witness the VITAMINS trial presentation, which was specifically designed to test the Marik protocol and which Dr. Marik had been invited to respond to well before the presentation. Yet when did he find out the results of the study? Two days before the presentation. Did anyone consult Dr. Marik prior to the study to determine exactly what the protocol was, and in particular the critical time-to-treat protocol? No, they did not. Was the study designed to fail? You tell me: now the headlines can read: vitamin C protocol fails. Right? And yet was the protocol even followed? Marik was rightly pissed off, in my view.

        We all know the dangers of groupthink; they are exhibited on a daily basis in climate science. We seem to think that somehow the medical profession is immune to groupthink, yet how can this be when a safe, cheap, and clinically-tested protocol has shown great promise and can save lives, yet the authorities refuse to even mention it?

        No, you underestimate the pig-headedness of our medical authorities and the influence of the pharmaceutical industry on medical practice.

      • JCH | March 14, 2020 at 9:03 pm |

        We care for a 96-year old family member in our home. We started vigilance against this thing about a month ago. No chronic issues; could survive the disease, but we are doing everything we can think of to prevent them from getting it.

        Started by only shopping for groceries after midnight or at 6 am. For a long time I was the only person there.

        And I’ve been looking for information on that young doctor as well. Basically, a perfectly healthy person of any age above 9 can probably die of this disease, but it’s not likely. There seems to be no mention of this anywhere, but saying most have underlying complicating factors means some of the dead did not.

    • jungletrunks | March 14, 2020 at 7:26 pm |

      I have all the same questions, John. Bottom line, China’s data can’t be relied upon, not really. It’s known that in mild cases symptoms of the virus are virtually undetectable, this makes the death toll to exposure highly suspect. Dr. Fauci himself stated he expects the death toll as a percentage to drop substantially for these reasons (i.e., nursing home deaths are an outlier). In the end, if you have it, and don’;t know it, then death toll can never adequately be quantified.

      • mesocyclone | March 14, 2020 at 8:14 pm |

        The China data does not seem to be that bad, but you are right, we may not know. It’s been a few days, but so far, I have not seen the experts expecting there to be a significant number of people who are both asymptomatic and infectious. But.. someone who is asymptomatic may have a much lower reproduction number, because they aren’t coughing and sneezing.

        Fauci expects it to drop to 1% (from current 3.4%), not drop from 1%, unless he changed in the last day or two.

        What I don’t know is if there has been enough testing of to detect how many get it and are asymptomatic.

        It’s early, and as I say, I haven’t looked in a couple of days – trying to regain my sanity :-)

      • JCH | March 14, 2020 at 10:18 pm |

        I think China’s data is pretty reliable. They have medical researchers and doctors from around the world working side by side with their people.

    • afonzarelli | March 14, 2020 at 9:23 pm |

      John, here’s a guest post by Willis Eschenbach over at WUWT on this very subject:

      https://wattsupwiththat.com/2020/03/13/the-math-of-epidemics/

      Difficult to say with communist China. Perhaps we’ll get a better answer with South Korea…

  29. Christos Vournas | March 14, 2020 at 5:20 pm |

    Children do not have symptoms of covid-19 but if infected children spread infection. That is why schools are closed for two weeks in Greece.
    Most of the people, when infected, do not have symptoms but they spread the disease.
    That is why everything is closed for two weeks in Greece: restaurants, cafeterias, theaters 
 except pharmacies and food stores.
    Everyone should stay at home.
    There is not medicine yet found.
    The treatment is quarantine and discipline.
    When it is said stay at home it means exactly that: stay put at home.

  30. Keith Rowe | March 14, 2020 at 5:58 pm |

    My opinion is it is just another cold type. Typically affecting the old. Death’s are less than 1% of people tested when there is not underlying issues. Fatality rate is likely under 1%. The testing regimen takes 3-6 hours and alot of medical resources, there is hope that an automatic test will start to come into effect and be much cheaper. Korea which instituted mass testing reported 0.6% fatality rate. Until then our ability to test is beyond those with with severe symptoms it will skew results to higher fatality rates. The biggest problem is that nobody is immune which makes for a huge spikes in the infected and might overwhelm the medical care in the area. Not sure how far ahead of the curve we can get on this but we can limit the extremes in health care resource required.

  31. john321s | March 14, 2020 at 6:20 pm |

    The Wuhan coronavirus is certainly more deadly than ordinary varieties of the flu–by a factor near 50. Nevertheless, that’s far less than the bubonic plague or Ebola. Nor is it that severely symptomatic in the healthy, younger generation. The media has been instrumental in creating a public panic.

  33. mesocyclone | March 14, 2020 at 7:03 pm |

    Oops – I posted this in a subthread. Here for the main thread.

    I see a lot of confusion above.

    Here are some facts. Some are provisional, but they have held fairly well over the last month.

    First, a normal epidemic will have an exponentially increasing number of cases until the number of susceptible individuals drops substantially, with a corresponding reduction in the spread – the effective reproduction number Reff (number of new cases resulting from spread from one case) drops. When that falls enough, and Reff drops below 1, the epidemic will die off. The other thing that can lower Reff is public health measures.

    For COVID19, the doubling rate (resulting from an R0 of 2-3 and other characteristics) appears to be around 6 days. So, on any day in the future, the number of new will be R0^(d/6). Do the math – exponential growth like this results in huge numbers.

    The number of cases requiring hospitalization runs 10%-20% of all, with the best guess seeming to be around 10%. So if you have 50,000,000 infected in, say, the US, you need to be able to care for 5,000,000 severely or critically ill cases. We have the ability to care for well under 1,000,000 (don’t remember the exact number). The consequence of this – this epidemic allowed to grow at its natural rate – will be catastrophic to the health care system, both in terms of having to let most COVID19 patients who need care die, and in terms of (at the same time) having a reduced staff because many will be ill.

    If you slow down the growth – “flattening the curve” is the term going around – then the scale of that disaster is reduced, and if you flatten it enough, it becomes tolerable. But, unless you can extinguish the epidemic, eventually a substantial proportion of the population will be infected. However, if you can delay that long enough, a vaccine can reduce the susceptible population, plus treatment options – such as antivirals – may appear.

    The critical need to flatten the curve is what is driving efforts by governments – the cancellations and other forms of social distancing, the quarantines, the increase sanitation.

    I see some who shrug this off because it only kills the old and/or sick. I find that a shockingly callous attitude, and as someone who is in a high risk group – it stuns me!

    Those trying to downplay the death rate by comparing it to influenza are mistaken. This is far more serious – there is no native immunity, no vaccines, no known antivirals, and it is significantly more deadly. There are certainly questions about the death rate due to measurement difficulty of the number of cases, but when Dr. Anthony Fauci estimates it to be 1%, listen to him! The measured case fatality rate is all over the place, but that’s most likely due to two factors: difficulty in measuring without widespread serological surveys, and in some countries, an elevated death rate due to the overburdening of the hospital system

    As to various nostrums being floated – Vitamin C, this or that other thing – enough! If those worked, we would know it, and government would be urging the use. Certainly staying healthy counts, but nothing will guarantee you don’t get this, unless it is stopped or widespread vaccination happens. And, young people do die from this. The whistleblower doctor in Wuhan died of it, and he was 34 year old. I have seen no evidence that he had pre-existing conditions.

    • Ireneusz Palmowski | March 14, 2020 at 7:14 pm |

      Older people in Italy die conscious and separated from their families in hospitals. Just cry.

  34. jungletrunks | March 14, 2020 at 8:13 pm |

    Astonishingly, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Zhao Lijian claimed Thursday that the US army is responsible for COVID-19. How does this make it to the worlds press? China is a totalitarian state, propaganda must be vetted. But is this designed to cover earlier information that also originated from Chinese sources?

    In the US there’s been suspicions hinting at the possibility that the virus was let loose via a biological weapon mishap in China, interestingly, this suspicion originates from Chinese sources. Apparently China has a bio lab that “studies deadly pathogens” near Wuhan. This conspiracy theory originates from a team of scientists from Xishuangbanna Tropical Botanical Garden of Chinese Academy of Sciences, South China Agricultural University, and Chinese Institute for Brain Research, written in a paper published on ChinaXiv http://www.chinaxiv.org/abs/202002.00033

    Okay, the before is a conspiracy theory, but there’s plausibility in this particular conspiracy theory. First, what one must acknowledge is that it’s factually true that all the major powers either have, or that certain nations are today advancing biological warfare agents.

    And since this is a dedicated science site it’s important to note; medical science uses viruses as a benevolent curative tool, it’s no longer experimental science, there are actually techniques used in clinical science to deliver cures for disease. Viruses are a particular delivery agent used to, i.e., to deliver corrective genetic code to repair damaged DNA. It’s frontier territory in medical science.

    Here’s a thought experiment: A malevolent totalitarian state, with closed borders, develops a deadly virus as a warfare agent. They develop an antidote for this deadly virus to protect their own population before they release such an agent on the world at large. Wouldn’t this be a more practical methodology for world domination, for a dictator so inclined, than nuclear weapons? Ever think about this? I’ve been considering this for some time.

    Not to be a scare monger here either, but theis technology has arrived. Wherever COVID-19 originates is besides the point, it’s a good wakeup call. And just to underscore the considerations, it makes CAGW worries pale in comparison relative to potential near-term global consequences.

    • David L. Hagen (HagenDL) | March 15, 2020 at 11:10 pm |

      Re Origins of Chinese Wuhan Coronavirus COVID19
      See numerous posts at ZeroHedge.com identifying and discussing evidence around the possible bioengineered source of the Wuhan Coronavirus COVID19.
      It may have been created and tested in the lab. See links to papers discussing similar effects.
      Live infected research animals were sold into the Wuhan fresh animal market on the side rather than being incinerated.
      When the 8 Doctors began raising the alarm over a new SARS type coronavirus and pneumonia, the end of December, the nearby military bases were immediately closed etc.

      • jungletrunks | March 16, 2020 at 9:55 am |

        There’s a great deal we will probably never learn relative to the origins of this virus, unless there’s some sort of genetic marker that can be unraveled from COVID-19 RNA — which was sequenced in China and shared in January. I’d rather U.S. scientists resequence it, frankly. Maybe more can be learned over time, but my guess is this will become one of the great human conspiracy theories by nature of the plausibility this disease was manufactured.

        https://www.statnews.com/2020/01/24/dna-sleuths-read-coronavirus-genome-tracing-origins-and-mutations/

      • jungletrunks | March 16, 2020 at 11:35 am |

        To clarify, obviously US scientists are in fact resequencing the virus. This appears to be the protocol to keep track of mutations.

        The following sentence from the linked article is a very interesting tidbit of information; interesting because I find it unfathomable that Chinese scientists would have had enough situational awareness to test for a new virus with so few deaths initially (roughly 20), and these deaths coming from causes that are so very common, pneumonia, with symptoms virtually indistinguishable from flu, or a bad cold; considering it’s a tiny sampling of Wuhan’s population of 19 million. There must be many daily deaths from pneumonia in a population that size, so what would have alerted scientists they were dealing with something new? Sequencing the RNA a month after the first deaths, and the genesis of the disease arriving on scene in late 2019, there had to be some foresight, expectation — they had to be looking for it.

        “Scientists in China sequenced the virus’s genome and made it available on Jan. 10, just a month after the Dec. 8 report of the first case of pneumonia from an unknown virus in Wuhan.”

        If science sequenced RNA after every new pneumonia death the costs would be prohibitive, we wouldn’t be able to afford healthcare. There had to be more reason for this testing than a few deaths.

  35. Robert Clark | March 14, 2020 at 8:42 pm |

    By next weekend the hysteria will have calmed down and the medical community will have it controlled as well as the humanly possible.
    I am an independent and believe we have a President that is following the recomendations of the medical community.
    I would like see a print out of the bill passed by the House of Representatives. What useless items did he have to give the Democrats to save the the world, thus our fellow Americans!!!

    • Lichanos | March 16, 2020 at 7:36 pm |

      @Robert Clark
      Wow! I hope you will comment on…say, March 21st. We’ll see how under control it is and how the “hysteria” is doing.
      Are YOU practicing social distancing? If not, you might be a great test case!
      BTW, who the heck cares about what political party you subscribe to? Is that some sort of marker of your qualifications to comment on epidemiology?

    • CH | March 19, 2020 at 5:03 am |

      It is next week and countries have only ramped out measures. What is it with the internet and people loving conspiracy theories?

  36. JCH | March 15, 2020 at 12:17 am |

    SARS-CoV- 2 is not going to behave in the same manner it has in China and South Korea, which have very different circumstances, unless a country is just as effective in its counter measures as they have been, especially the Chinese. The South Korea situation is weird: ~63% of all cases related to one church. Without that church, their infection rate could still be increasing.

    An exception would be if the self limiting is built into the virus itself. For instance, sensitive to warmer temperatures. It does not look like that is the case as of now.

    It looks like the Chinese have done a rather amazing thing: stopped a very contagious respiratory virus in its tracks: an amazingly tiny percentage of their population have been infected.

    The US epidemiologists have been saying from the beginning that this virus was going to infect ~50 to ~70% percentage of the US population by the end of 2020.

    Right now the Chinese are reporting 20 new cases so far today.

    The Chinese government “panicked” and did a lot of very aggressive and bold things, and they appear to have been successful.

    • afonzarelli | March 15, 2020 at 10:20 am |

      The Chinese government “panicked” and did a lot of very aggressive and bold things, and they appear to have been successful.

      And yet, for all that we actually know, government panic is the equivalent of killing a fly with a sledgehammer…

      (amazing the stupidity that arises here at Climate etc without RIE around to keep it in check)

    • billbedford | March 15, 2020 at 1:42 pm |

      I would have thought that churches would be a likely place to become infected, with all that singing and bodily contact…

    • JCH | March 15, 2020 at 2:09 am |

      There are 7 known coronaviruses that have made the jump. I believe none of them have a vaccine.

    • JCH | March 15, 2020 at 9:00 am |

      SARS – 2003: still no vaccine.
      MERS – 2012: still no vaccine.

      SARS-CoV-2: there could be a vaccine, if they are incredibly lucky, or it could be like the above. This one is both contagious and a killer. It is far more lethal than the flu. May not know if infected people gain a useful immunity until a few years of this have passed. It could go away; it could come back a far nastier thing to which there is no immunity.

      The above are new: AGW.

      Four coronaviruses that cause common colds – probably around for lots of centuries: still no vaccine. Also, immunity? Appears to be no.

      7 have made the jump – none have a vaccine. Are the infected immune to any of them? This one is appears to be far more contagious than MERS and SARS.

      Next one? Probably not far away.

      Read about hog cholera: a killer virus in swine. I’ve seen pig lots full of dead and dying pigs. People would get cheap and not vaccinate. Then boom, they died like flies. When I was a kid my Dad wore a gigantic black bladder that fit around him like a vest. It was full of gallons of hog cholera vaccine. It had hoses to two syringes, one in each of his hands. He held a surgical blade for castration between his lips. I would catch 100’s and 100’s of piglets. All day long. This went on for weeks. Dad was fast; I had arms like Arnold in grade school. He gave each one a shot and castrated the males. Then one day some scientist saved my childhood. I could hug and kiss that guy. He decided they should kill the hosts. They stopped vaccinating. Worldwide attempt, every pig that caught it immediately met their maker and the lots quarantined. The governments killed them methodically in huge numbers. Now the disease is considered eradicated in many countries, including the US – back in the day when we had intelligent leaders and a real congress. They were trying for the whole world. Tough to do when countries can elect complete idots to high office. This may be what you’re looking at here. They may have to be ready to effectively isolate entire human populations until this thing barely exists in humans. How long will it take? Unknowable now, but could be just a matter of months, and then vigilance forever. Thank gawd for the Chinese and CNN. Gung ho “Socialist Welfare for Capitalists” America! Too funny.

  42. Ireneusz Palmowski | March 15, 2020 at 2:59 am |

    New active ingredient from LĂŒbeck is said to help against coronavirus
    by Linda Ebener

    They worked on him day and night, and soon they will be presenting their development to the scientific world in the renowned scientific journal “Science”: a team of researchers led by Professor Rolf Hilgenfeld from the University of LĂŒbeck has developed an active ingredient that is supposed to help against the novel corona virus. This is responsible for the current Covid 19 pandemic. The drug has already been tested in the laboratory in human lung cells that are infected with the new virus. The active ingredient is active, says Hilgenfeld. That means he helps. Hilgenfeld and his co-workers Xinyuanyuan Sun and Linlin Zhang’s approach: The active ingredient is said to render the viruses in the lungs harmless. Because the corona primarily attacks the lungs.
    https://www.ndr.de/nachrichten/schleswig-holstein/Der-Wirkstoff-gegen-das-Coronavirus-kommt-aus-Luebeck,corona666.html

  43. giuliano | March 15, 2020 at 5:34 am |

    Beware of asymptomatic people! We must proceed with mass swabs. It’s the only way to fight the epidemic! In the small town of Vo ‘(in Italy, near Venice, about 3600 people) the Veneto Region performed two complete samplings at a distance of 9 days. At present, there are only asymptomatic positive people in strict isolation in the city. Making tampons for everyone allows to identify both asymptomatic and symptomatic people from the beginning. After the second sampling the infection rate is 2.5 per thousand. Only with a complete sampling is a significant drop achieved and the epidemic is controlled! Speech translated with Google translator …

  44. Rob Johnson-taylor | March 15, 2020 at 9:40 am |

    This seminar on SARS-CoV-19 held at The Royal Collage of Physicians is the most authorative and measured I found.
    https://www.rcplondon.ac.uk/news/covid-19-expert-update-doctors?fbclid=IwAR0EnYKKRCj8HFsrPmicK3ZihJno5S0jHxuSbw4YKRtNnf8OcXOoMpixW3M

  45. nobodysknowledge | March 15, 2020 at 10:24 am |

    I wonder about the deathrate of the coronavirus. If we look at cases with an outcome (closed cases), the global numbers are 7% deaths and 93% recovered. And among active cases there are 7% serious or critical and 93% mild conditions. https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/
    This looks much more serious to me than a fatality rate of 1 %.

    • JCH | March 15, 2020 at 10:41 am |

      It is. CNN got it right. There was ample reason to panic. This one is contagious, and it’s a killer. I suspect the actual number infected is not a number significantly larger than the confirmed cases to date. Gov DeWine did the right thing, but there likely were not even remotely close to 100,000 people infected in Ohio when he closed the schools.

      The China model has virtually stopped this thing. They are far better at leadership than we are.

      The virus cannot infect people who are isolated. If the virus cannot jump to a new host, it either dies when the human host dies or it dies, hopefully, when the human host develops an immune response that kills it.

      AGW – SARS, MERS, SARS-CoV-V2. No vaccines to date, no guarantee there ever will be one, and it is not guaranteed the infected will gain a useful immunity. Only solution may be to eradicate the virus from the human population.

      • tonyb | March 15, 2020 at 10:52 am |

        JCH

        I think it essential that people do not have to go to hospital or doctor because they have caused themselves an unnecessary injury. I seem to remember you enjoyed hot air balooning so I hope you have cancelled any flights.

        Our medical officers believe there to be at least 10000 cases over here with only a tenth of that currently diagnosed. If so that brings the death rate down very considerably.

        Over here we have had a very light flu season and it is likely that those who have died-almost without exception very elderly and with severe underlying conditions might have succumbed anyway in a normal flight season.

        Of course that might all change as the situation develops.

        tonyb

      • Joshua | March 15, 2020 at 11:18 am |

        JCH –

        > I suspect the actual number infected is not a number significantly larger than the confirmed cases to date

        Why? The number of confirmed infected is at best more or less a snapshot of the number who became infected a week ago and had the one to manifest symptoms such as to warrant testing. It’s a number that misses a week of exponential growth.

        And then you throw in the many anecdotal reports of people who say they have had symptoms but been unable to get tested.

      • JCH | March 15, 2020 at 11:35 am |

        I built them. Basically I stopped flying in them after a rash of lethal accidents involving power lines. Flying in them is a wonderful experience, but I ruled out dying like a pork rib.

        Boris thinks the Mayor in Jaws was correct to keep the beaches open as eventually the Great White would tire of eating cute little girls in bikinis and move its big fat butt to a new flavor at some beach far far away.

        Good luck.

      • JCH | March 15, 2020 at 12:04 pm |

        Joshua – mostly because of testing results in China.

        11 to 20 new cases a day in China is not going to get them to 50 to70% infected by the end of 2020.

        That’s the model DeWine based his correct decision for the wrong reason upon. Call it the consensus model. Nobody in the consensus dreamed in a million years that Chinese could stop a contagious respiratory illness in its tracks.

        At 3.6% lethality, those lovable world saving gung ho Chinese commies just saved a lot of millions of lives.

      • john ferguson | March 15, 2020 at 12:21 pm |

        Fauci made some remarks on this morning’s Chuck Show (MTP) about how we should worry more when the community infection rate starts to rise.
        Until you can get a test without meeting the current requirements for testing here in Florida, no-one will know because you have to show travel experience or contact with an already diagnosed victim and symptoms. Unknown exposure which is what community would be doesn’t cut it. I suspect they will open things up more when they actually do have the test kits .
        Just like in early 1942 when we found (in the US) ourselves without military establishment competent to pursue the war, it is likely that our current pandemic crisis management “team” is also not up to the job, although it may not be their fault – funding etc.
        If you doubt this, look at the photos of what was going on US international airports last might, Ohare in particular.

      • Turbulent Eddie | March 15, 2020 at 1:00 pm |

        “I suspect the actual number infected is not a number significantly larger than the confirmed cases to date.”

        And your reason for this is…???

        Supposedly, there are infected, but asymptomatic cases.

        Since only those symptomatic show up for testing,
        it would be far more likely that there are significantly more
        asymptomatic/mild/moderate cases which are not being counted.

        The samples are not random, but are biased toward including those with disease.

      • doohmax | March 15, 2020 at 1:03 pm |

        JCH, your comment that “the Chinese are far better at leadership than we are” I find, to put it respectfully, rather bizarre, seeing that you are referencing the leadership of a totalitarian police state.

      • JCH | March 15, 2020 at 2:23 pm |

        Yeah, ironic as heck. But then, we sent in the FOX News cheerleaders and the leadership scrubs.

      • cerescokid | March 15, 2020 at 2:33 pm |

        doohmax

        I’ve learned to give our friend a pass every now and then. He has his moments. He might have meant the ones who are kind, benevolent, equal but more equal than your average totalitarian numero uno. Or perhaps he hasn’t thrown away his 1940s books (With book review by Whittaker Chambers and endorsed by Alger Hiss) that were gaga about Uncle Joe and Chairman Mao.

      • afonzarelli | March 15, 2020 at 3:43 pm |

        What we’re seeing in the resident boorish slob of Climate, Etc is perhaps a clear cut case of obsessive compulsive alarmism. (switching now from agw to coronavirus) He’s even going so far as to go grocery shopping at two a.m. so as not to contract the virus. Begs the question, why hasn’t he been doing this on account of the flu? A year or two ago, the state of texas had 12,000 deaths from the flu. Thus far they’ve only seen a couple dozen cases, period, of coronavirus. Do texans really expect to see a greater number of deaths over the next few months than those of the flu? Just how many more deaths (than flu) would they have to see in order to justify the odd behavior of shopping at two in the morning?

      • afonzarelli | March 15, 2020 at 8:28 pm |

        Yeah, ceresco, every modern day liberal dreams of being Stalin at some point. (so much better to mow your opposition down like grass than it is to have to endlessly manipulate them)…

      • matthewrmarler | March 15, 2020 at 9:09 pm |

        JCH: This one is contagious, and it’s a killer. I suspect the actual number infected is not a number significantly larger than the confirmed cases to date.

        Upon what do you base that suspicion? Reportedly, 80% of infected person have no or light symptoms.

        The China model has virtually stopped this thing. They are far better at leadership than we are.

        Why do you say that? Hubei province had more than 3,000 deaths in a population of 65,000,000 before there was effective action.

        The ONE thing China did well was share the genome and protein sequence of the “corona” with the rest of the world as soon as they knew them.

      • afonzarelli | March 16, 2020 at 12:30 am |

        Matthew, he’s just hand waving/ trolling… Rather than his usual dopey climate alarmism, we’re getting dopey coronavirus alarmism instead. (why does anyone bother taking him seriously?) Been an eyesore in this manner for years. You might even say that he’s the pooh’s bottom of Climate, etc:

        https://youtu.be/HlbdMWJ57H4

      • JCH | March 16, 2020 at 12:50 am |

        You guys never ask who dies of the seasonal flu? It’s by and large the people who are about to die anyway.

        To die of old age is a death rare, extraordinary, and singular 
 a privilege rarely seen.

        In a great deal of cases “died of the seasonal flu” is synonymous with “died of old age.”

        When these people die it’s often a multiple choice question as to cause of death where more than one of the answers are arguably correct. How many people categorized as having died of the flu have a flu test that proves they even had the flu? That is not in the computer model that spits out 46,000 people died of the seasonal flu in the year.

        Does the CDC have a number for “died of old age.” Nope. dying of old age is not a category.

      • matthewrmarler | March 16, 2020 at 1:42 am |

        JCH: You guys never ask who dies of the seasonal flu? It’s by and large the people who are about to die anyway.

        …

        Does the CDC have a number for “died of old age.” Nope. dying of old age is not a category.

        So what?

      • JCH | March 16, 2020 at 2:05 am |

        The killing capacity of SARS-CoV-2 and the killing capacity of the seasonal flu are night and day.

        The seasonal flu number is marketing for flu shots. It’s not real. Think 37,000 (36,750 died of pneumonia; 250 died of the flu.)

      • aaron | March 18, 2020 at 5:41 pm |

        Asymptomatic make up 50% of infections. But they are believed to only cause 10% of transmissions.

    • David L. Hagen (HagenDL) | March 15, 2020 at 11:22 pm |

      Death rate is highly dependent on the total infected AFTER going through the epidemic cycle. Some 50% may be Asymptomatic and NOT detected.
      By a massive Coronavirus Testing, Tracking and Isolation program, South Korea controlled peak of COVID19 infections and is now settling down.
      However the influx of Wuhan Virus infected Chinese migrant workers influx back into northern Italy with little tracking may have caused a high seeding of infections. Into an unsuspecting highly social community that created a very rapid growth rate. It has overwhelmed hospitals, forcing them into Triage Mode with a much higher Fatality rate.
      Seattle hospitals are now entering a similar Triage mode to Italy.
      Andy Biotech @AndyBiotech

      2wks ago, South Korea ~3500 vs Italy ~1700 cases -> 2:1
      1wk ago, both S. Korea and Italy had ~7000 cases -> 1:1
      Today, S. Korea 8200 vs Italy ~25000 cases -> 1:3</blockquote.
      See graph

    • Don Monfort | March 17, 2020 at 4:45 am |

      JCH knows squat. Spreading misinformation and shameful alarmist claptrap.
      The left loons are seizing on this crisis as their last best hope of defrating Trump. Not going to work.
      I don’t know if it has been mentioned, but get yourselves some chloroquine and zinc. Chloroquine has been around forever used as prophylaxis and treatment for malaria. I have taken it on and off for many years. It doesn’t always prevent malaria. No side effects for me.

    • nobodysknowledge | March 19, 2020 at 6:19 am |

      I had a comment based on Worldmeter numbers and concluded. “This looks much more serious to me than a fatality rate of 1 %.”
      I have to take it back. The fatality rate can be well under 1%. It looks like most of infected people go undetected. The first thing we have to find out is how many. A new estimate from China says that as many as 86% were undetected the first weeks of the outbreak.

  46. krmmtoday | March 15, 2020 at 10:50 am |

    As for the curve flattening, this may not be that easy:
    https://medium.com/@joschabach/flattening-the-curve-is-a-deadly-delusion-eea324fe9727

    You want get to the max possible infected fast and then switch to social distancing to reduce the max infected.
    Did a few calculations on my own (not sure if the math is correct) whereby using the current best guesses on parameters (growth of 15% a day with a virus free population, max 50% of population infected) I get for Germany for instituting a reduction in social contacts by 90% on day 100 a max number of infected of 1.8-1.9 mio on day 342 with a very drawn out slow decay thereafter.
    There seem to be approx 240000 critical care beds (?).
    Instituting the social distancing at day 90 shifts the max to day 426.
    Reducing contacts by 80% on day 100 yields max of 3.7 mio on day 227.

    To get a max of 900000 on day 573 you have to reduce contacts on day 100 by 95%.

    Approx. 1000 infected on day 10000 in each case.

    Controlled management seems a bit illusionary. Too achieve something like the Chinese or in Singapur or Taiwan seems to be out of the question. Too half hearted too late, no plan like that and no means to execute one.

    So lets hope the math is meaningfully wrong or parameters turn out to be more benign.

  47. Jeff | March 15, 2020 at 11:07 am |

    As a Biologist the first questions that come to my mind with the virus is how does timing, seasonality and environmental factors impact the spread and duration of the outbreak from a geographical perspective.

    Below is a recent article that sheds some preliminary light on the subject. Very interesting.

    https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3550308

  48. Ragnaar | March 15, 2020 at 11:11 am |

    The money knows. The S & P 500 index is properly indicating what’s going on. It didn’t stop knowing once this deal came along.

    The system shudders before a collapse. It may be doing that now. The index is up and down more than 3% each trading day, sometimes moving in the opposite direction from the previous day.

    I am not a doom and gloomer. I think things will work out. The signals may be false or false enough. Our system may be resilient enough. We are capitalists.

    Is chaos theory universal? Why not.

    • JCH | March 15, 2020 at 11:43 am |

      The S&P does not have a freakin’ clue. Proof, the big bad capitalists want welfare.

      • Ragnaar | March 15, 2020 at 1:01 pm |

        Yes. It’s a truism they frequently want welfare. And the establishment gives it to them. Big corporatations often run cons. But it’s the best system compared to all the others.

        Over at WUWT, Andy May wrote about Biofuels. I am off the fence now. A con.

        Let’s go here JCH. The chaos. We have a lot to learn.

      • Curious George | March 15, 2020 at 4:24 pm |

        Would you kindly share your freakin’ cue with us?

    • Don Monfort | March 17, 2020 at 4:50 am |

      Buy stocks.

      • tonyb | March 17, 2020 at 8:07 am |

        Don

        I am much more ambivalent about Trump than many of the liberals on this board, but he needs to up his game as his off the cuff manner has not inspired confidence in recent weeks.

        I don’t think he has had a good virus crisis, but the thought of Biden as the alternative is not encouraging.

        I am mystified as to why the democrats have not managed to come up with a more plausible and younger candidate.

        tonyb

      • afonzarelli | March 17, 2020 at 11:33 am |

        I am mystified as to why the democrats have not managed to come up with a more plausible and younger candidate.

        Dey tried w’ da gay guy (din’t work)…

      • tonyb | March 17, 2020 at 11:59 am |

        afonzarelli

        The ‘gay guy’ was surely a very unknown quantity so had no momentum or widespread support.

        With a large and wealthy established party like the Democrats I would have thought there should be half a dozen familiar and credible candidates, so there should be no need to rely on the relatively unknown

        tonyb

      • scotts4sf | March 17, 2020 at 12:44 pm |

        Tonyb
        Buy stocks.

        As for Trump,
        One must asses what different actions one could take.
        Shut travel from China.
        Shut travel from Europe.
        Shut travel from Britain and Ireland.
        Streamline CDC vacine and trearment approval.
        Lead w NIH and CDC doctors in response.
        Increase intensive care beds and equipment.

        Panic will subside and Wall Street sharks make lots o money, plus Sorus.

        Best of luck w National Health Service rationing of intensive care beds and Triage of older people in Briton.

        Best wishes, An older one also.
        Scott

      • afonzarelli | March 17, 2020 at 5:14 pm |

        Tony, mine was just a joke. i don’t know that we actually have an impressive pool of dems to pick from in the first place. They’ve all become so comparatively loony, that what we’ve seen this primary season is probably what we’re going to get from now on. i think that if the democratic party hadn’t gone so far off the deep end, they’d be winning election after election because demographics have changed so much. It’s amazing what a jimmy carter could do back in the day with those demographic headwinds going against him. Biden’s got a shot — i can think of plenty more obnoxious candidates than him. Plus, he had already made a name for himself before becoming V.P. (beside dat, he don’ look all dat ol’)…

  49. nobodysknowledge | March 15, 2020 at 11:38 am |

    tonyb: “Our medical officers believe there to be at least 10000 cases over here with only a tenth of that currently diagnosed.”
    If this is true it could be really bad for UK. Then houses for elderly, hospitals and other health institutions will already be infected. It could be worse than in Italy.

    • Adam Gallon | March 16, 2020 at 7:03 am |

      Yes & the way our great leader, Borisconi, is carrying one, it’ll be worse. Scotland’s reported cases in a care home for the elderly.
      Hospitals will self-evidently have the virus, hopefully their infection control procedures, will minimise spread.
      Staff for these institutions have to come & go.
      Great concerns about it hitting prisons, staff are being checked for raised temperatures & are being sent home if they have one.

  50. RiHo08 | March 15, 2020 at 1:22 pm |

    A number of thoughts:

    Seeing is believing. Until the invention of the electron microscope in 1931, viruses could not be visualized although it was known that filtrates that eliminated bacteria still caused infection. The virus was a particle.

    The 1918 Spanish flu was extremely impactful with 50 million dead in one year and then disappeared such that its identity exists only in inert specimens.

    People dying of Spanish flu were by and large young and died of secondary pneumonia infections from the misnamed bacteria Haemophilus influenza cultured from autopsy specimens.

    The presumptive chain of events: close contacts, coughing large doses of virus attaching to upper respiratory tract cells (sialic acid) resulting in an exuberant immunological response, the “cytokine storm”. The body’s immune system attacking the body itself.

    The Spanish influenza virus killed so quickly that adaptive mechanisms necessary for the virus to remain in the community didn’t have time to develop; hence, the virus disappeared from the community.

    Current “flu” viruses have attachment spikes: Heamagglutinin & Neurominadase that stick to sialic acid sites in the upper respiratory tract so much of the symptoms are cough, sneeze with copious upper airway fluids.

    The current Wuhan coronavirus, COVID- 19 attaches to Angiotensin Converting Enzyme (ACE) receptors found mainly in the lower airways and lung tissue itself so the symptom of “dry” cough reflects the developing viral pneumonia.

    The downside IMHO to dragging the COVID-19 infection period out over a year or so, although sparing the surge upon the medical system, allows the virus to adapt to surviving in the community.

    Thoughts for the day.

    • Rob Starkey (@Robbuffy) | March 15, 2020 at 1:50 pm |

      “The downside IMHO to dragging the COVID-19 infection period out over a year or so, although sparing the surge upon the medical system, allows the virus to adapt to surviving in the community.”

      1. Virus’s are generally less lethal to humans after mutations and in the initial strain.

      2. A number of treatments will become available in the next several months that will lower the fatality rate drastically.

      AIDS is an example of where a vaccine isn’t yet possible but the death rate has been lowered thru treatments.

    • Adam Gallon | March 16, 2020 at 7:10 am |

      Some interesting info on the mortality due to the “Spanish Flu”. For about a decade now, it’s been strongly suggested, that Aspirin overdose certainly contributed to mortality.

  51. Ireneusz Palmowski | March 15, 2020 at 1:49 pm |

    The number of infected in Italy and Spain is growing rapidly. The virus became active when the temperature in southern Europe increased.

    • afonzarelli | March 15, 2020 at 3:18 pm |

      Yeah, but ren, what is meant by growing rapidly? Here in the states we get 10 million cases of the flu annually. That’s rapid. All these coronavirus numbers are chump change in comparison…

    • JCH | March 15, 2020 at 5:46 pm |

      UK hit 342 new cases yesterday, and is already at plus 251 now. Should easily exceed 342.

      What is the reason you never hear about UK hospitals having to decide which victim of seasonal flu dies and which one lives when both have very good chances of survival?

      On March 2, Italy had 335 new cases.

      https://i.imgur.com/X4pfLoU.png

      Yesterday Italy had 3,497 new cases. Today’s will easily exceed that.

      https://i.imgur.com/nC8NWVx.png

      Good luck.

      • tonyb | March 15, 2020 at 6:03 pm |

        No that is the final figure as they are released each day covering the previous 24 hours. The number of new cases was sharply down over yesterday but that may be because things work differently at the weekend so we will have to see if there is a spike on Monday

        tonyb

  52. John Ferguson | March 15, 2020 at 2:27 pm |

    What is probably the most benign comment I’ve ever posted is stuck in moderation. I wonder what word the algorithm didn’t like;Fauci, 1942, war, military?

  53. RiHo08 | March 15, 2020 at 4:15 pm |

    It occurred to me while surfing the mainstream media, that a major economic impact of the Wuhan coronavirus pandemic is being felt by the entertainment industry. There is the impact of shutting down spectator sporting events (amateur and professional), theaters of all sorts, concerts and political contests. Another category of economic impact is felt by the large gatherings around trade shows, conventions, and other conclaves that attract large audiences and require airline, taxi, hotel, food catering, and a host of services to support such an endeavor. There are of course the luxury goods stores that have closed their doors awaiting more favorable economic conditions.

    When this virus pandemic runs its course, there will be a recession of sorts, just, the question exists, how much? Besides restarting the school/academic mill again, will there be any structural/social/behavioral change take place in the mean time that we don’t foresee at this time.

    I would be interested in other people’s thoughts on any lasting changes as a result of this pandemic.

    • afonzarelli | March 15, 2020 at 6:45 pm |

      Rag, it should be interesting to watch the economy should it tank over the course of the the next several months. Usually, once an economy tilts into a recession, that’s all she wrote. Failure begets failure. i see that the fed has finally cut rates to zero. Should be fun (though gruesome) to watch…

      • matthewrmarler | March 17, 2020 at 10:09 am |

        afonzarelli: Usually, once an economy tilts into a recession, that’s all she wrote.

        In this case, the “economy” is “tanking” because people are staying home from work to avoid spreading the virus. Nothing the Fed can do is likely to get them to work: a slight decrease in their home mortgage rate? This isn’t “usual”. Some people are losing income because they have chosen not to provide goods and services; other people are preserving cash by not spending it yet on goods and vacations.

  54. Lowell Brown | March 15, 2020 at 4:24 pm |

    Denominators are fun. Here’s a peek at cases per million population, European countries vs. the U.S., with the world-wide ranking as the first column. (Note – U.S. is at the bottom, that’s where I cut things off):

    1 Italy 206.1
    3 Norway 129.7
    6 Denmark 106.2
    7 Switzerland 100.2
    9 Spain 64.2
    10 Sweden 62.9
    12 Slovenia 42.8
    13 Netherlands 35.8
    14 France 34.9
    15 Belgium 34.4
    16 Austria 33.5
    18 Germany 27.7
    19 Finland 19.7
    22 Estonia 12.8
    25 Greece 9.5
    26 Czechia 9.0
    27 Ireland 8.7
    29 Latvia 8.5
    30 Albania 8.0
    31 Portugal 7.6
    32 UK 6.8
    38 Croatia 4.6
    41 North Macedonia 4.3
    42 USA 4.1

    ARE THESE NUMBERS CORRECT?

    • RiHo08 | March 15, 2020 at 5:51 pm |

      Interesting. In summary: You harm yourself by not following strategies (social distancing) to protect the community at large, the multitude, because your low risk of catching and being harmed by, in this case COVID-19, in some way contributes a grain of sand to the health care resources scale potentially tipping that scale into negative consequences. As health care assets are finite, those assets would not be available to yourself in your time of need for some other unrelated health condition. If I don’t adhere to social distancing guidelines and get sick or pass on COVID-19, even if I have a mild case yet I pass the virus onto someone who is much more vulnerable and will require intensive resource utilization, I would be acting ethically, morally and otherwise in my own best interests to practice social distancing. If this, then that.

      Do I have that correct?

    • Curious George | March 16, 2020 at 11:16 am |

      Why do “complex systems institute” guys concentrate on a single aspect and totally disregard collateral effects?

    • Turbulent Eddie | March 18, 2020 at 9:02 am |

      This raises a lot of issues I’m not sure he’s considering.

      US deaths now clearly indicate the pattern of old age AND pre-existing conditions.

      A more targeted sequester of old and particularly old with pre-existing conditions but continued economic participation by the young would have achieved two things:

      1.) prevented the precipice of economic depression which also kills.

      2.) increased herd immunity in those not likely to suffer from disease which in the longer run protects everyone.

      Taleb also mentions ethics and ICUs.
      An elderly person subjected to ICU for two weeks,
      assuming they survive the ICU, has a very poor prognosis both in terms of quantity and quality of remaining life.

      As a society, this has a very high costs ( most life time medical expense comes close to the end of life when care is futile ).

      EVERYONE should make advance directives known so that when one loses consciousness, these wishes can be known.

      5 Wishes makes these choices available here:
      https://fivewishes.org/five-wishes-covid-19

  56. afonzarelli | March 15, 2020 at 8:08 pm |

    Tony, i assume this is you:

    https://wattsupwiththat.com/2020/03/15/the-climate-emergency-running-with-the-crowds/

    Only one person on earth writes like that (and has similar biases… 😉). Good comment from commieBob — i kind of felt the same way. If someone tells you the dam has burst, run first, ask questions later…

    • tonyb | March 17, 2020 at 3:44 am |

      afonzarelli

      Yes. This was my reply to him as unfortunately he did not read the information.

      “From your own (and my) link

      “Thurber wrote. But “when the panic had died down and people had gone rather sheepishly back to their homes and their offices,
city engineers pointed out that even if the dam had broken, the water level would not have risen more than two additional inches in the West Side,” which was, Thurber noted, already under 30 feet of water. “The East Side (where we lived and where all the running occurred) had never been in any danger at all.”

      So it was irrational, the impossibility of flooding in their section of town was known which was why- until something sparked it-there had been no panic.

      tonyb

  57. UK-Weather Lass-In Earnest | March 16, 2020 at 6:31 am |

    As it stands I may or may not be a risk to all those I come into contact with.

    The sensible thing for me to do is to consider that I may have the virus and be asymptomatic. I should ensure that I self isolate as far as possible and do not get into close contact with anyone else and infect them. This also happens to be the most sensible thing to do were others infected.and I not.

    Without testing and proof that a survived infection equals immunity I believe we should all consider ourselves a risk to others and self isolate as far as possible at least until information crucial to understanding the way the virus works becomes available.

    Those in the front line of this pandemic need our best resolve to not be their next casualty.

    • Keith Rowe | March 16, 2020 at 7:00 am |

      The problem I see with this approach. For how long. As this goes into months and month and then years? This is highly contagious, flattening the curve just means that you restrict the amount resources required not eradication, which is unlikely at this point. Do we keep on guard for years? With the mass reduction in contact and work being done? The problem is nobody is resistant to it so you have very large spikes in infection overwhelming the health infrastructure, this still is the case until it starts to go through the population until we have a vaccine and a vaccine can take years. I understand the want to not harm anyone but until the population get some immunity by being infected it will still be very spikey unless the restrictions are maintained. Pragmatism would say to keep a low level of infection and people get infected. Perhaps the damage done to society from stopping it causes more pain than the infection. This is the first time we have tried this, we will see what happens, but lessons will be learned. Also hysteria is tough to go against.

      • UK-Weather Lass-In-Earnest | March 16, 2020 at 1:49 pm |

        My self-isolation (i.e. restricted and only essential contact with others) will remain in force until testing becomes more comprehensive. In the UK the Government is testing people with symptoms and showing a considerable number of negative results (good) but not testing people without symptoms who may be carrying the virus (bad). That is why I have chosen to do what I am doing.

        Comprehensive testing is surely a truly important way of understanding this disease and I am so disappointed the UK is not doing more to safeguard its population and our NHS workforce.

      • Roger Knights | March 16, 2020 at 11:42 pm |

        Get a load of this!:
        ————–
        “A War Footing: Surfing the Curve”
        Joshua Gans Medium, Mar 14 · 7 min read
        https://medium.com/swlh/a-war-footing-surfing-the-curve-f5ffe6134e37

        The health care system capacity is likely way lower than the diagram is showing beyond what flattening the curve can actually achieve.

        When everything is laid out this way, the policy solution is obvious. If we can’t flatten the curve enough, we must dramatically increase health care capacity.

        To that end, I believe all governments should consider the following policies:

        Placing the military in charge of health care expansion nation-wide.
        Taking control of all bed, medical device and related manufacturing capacity. I don’t mean this physically but I do mean this in terms of being able to direct activity.
        Putting in place measures to conscript anyone who can be useful in this task. Conscription is an ugly word but you are not sending anyone to fight or die. You are putting people to work. Moreover, we just shut down the Universities and I know we all talk about continuing stuff online, let’s face it, students can do something else for the rest of the year and we will recover. Part of that work could be taking care of dependents while more qualified people do the work.
        This is already happening but there needs to be a Manhattan Project like activity to find a vaccine. The world is going to need it.

        The health care system needs to surf the curve (#surfthecurve). This is war and there is no need to keep our plans secret from the enemy.

        Update (14 March 7pm): Not sure of the details yet but Boris Johnson seems to be putting the UK on a war footing along these lines — language and all.

    • tonyb | March 17, 2020 at 11:52 am |

      Uk weather lass

      Yes, but we also need to ensure that the fit and healthy older people don’t go into a serious and permanent mental and physical health decline because they can’t get out for four months.

      Also there is no point in being saved if they emerge to a broken economy. The over 80’s and chronically ill are another matter but by definition they are very unlikely to be out and about much anyway so are already isolated

      tonyb.

  58. Turbulent Eddie | March 16, 2020 at 7:46 am |

    The odds of surviving ICU are not good even before considering COVID-19.
    ( less than 50% )

    And the odds of surviving similarly decrease rapidly with age and the same comorbidities that endanger one to COVID-19.

    Sadly, I have seen the damage from ICU and intubation, and have do not intubate in my “5 Wishes”.

    I certainly wish everyone the best, and the numbers that will actually perish is probably not that high, but I also think everyone should make their choices known in a 5 Wishes document, which you can consider and fill out here for free.

    In the event of life threatening condition, this may save grief for your loved ones and the medical practitioners.

  59. Don132 | March 16, 2020 at 8:00 am |

    Pragmatism would tell us to test, to isolate cases, to avoid large gatherings, and to use vitamin C, which has shown great success in clinical practice for 50 years, is being used now with success to treat sepsis, and is so promising that numerous clinical trials are ongoing to test this vitamin in a double-blind, randomized fashion. It’s also remarkably safe. So in this time of great concern, I’d like someone to tell me, please, why people aren’t being told to take vitamin C and why most hospitals aren’t treating septic patients with vitamin C, since the clinical evidence is that it works in countering the sepsis and oxidative stress that an organism like COVID-19 causes? We don’t have time to wait for the results of the larger clinical trials, and we don’t have time to wait for a vaccine.

  60. Wolf1 | March 16, 2020 at 10:44 am |

    A few comments:
    1) I’m glad I don’t see the anti-vaxxers here, but the related micronutrient/Vitamin C pushers are. I’ve listened/read to the arguments about micronutrients/Vitamin C – the problem is that if one or both of these was truly a problem, why is this not reflected in life expectancy/mortality stats?
    2) novel coronavirus (I just say nCOV) isn’t going away. So what happens after 1 or even 2 months of lockdown? Infection spread will simply restart. What is the economic impact of multiple cycles of economic lockdown?
    I agree with the goal of preventing overload of the hospital system, but it isn’t clear to me that unilateral lockdowns will solve the problem.
    And even if China shows that reoccurence can be controlled – can Western democracies institute the draconian measures that China has enacted? The committee in front of every apartment building with permits required for people to leave (and come back)?
    3) I’m also seeing all manner of “magic” solutions beyond the micronutrient/Vitamin C: remdesivir, hydroxycloroquinine, tocilizumab, interferon, etc etc. If one of them proves out, that’s great – but I remember the news articles about MERS and the promises of x or y or z – and none of them panned out. MERS still has no treatment today, according to the CDC.
    4) And along the lines of 2): what is the economic impact of society wide lockdowns, particularly in the consumer-driven West? And more specifically, in the health care and economic precarity US? Travel, tourism, conventions, cruise ships, restaurants and bars are all slammed or gone to zero. Outside of toilet paper and hand sanitizer – are people buying anything except online porn and food delivery? I really wonder if the economic impact of most hourly workers getting little/no work is worse than the health hit.
    Even Amazon: I can just imagine nCOV spreading like wildfire through one of the sorting warehouses, and from there to customers. The warehouse workers don’t have health care – they’re already abused as it is.
    5) Supply chain: 90% of active ingredients in US pharma comes from China. 80% of all pharma comes from China or India – with India getting 80% of its supplies from China.
    Masks, iPhones, IT gear – the list of what comes from China is ginormous – how do lockdowns in China affect the global supply?
    Interesting times…

    • Don132 | March 16, 2020 at 11:13 am |

      If you look at the CITRIS-ALI double-blind placebo controlled study, you see that mortality is indeed significantly affected by the vitamin C therapy. But that wasn’t the primary outcome measured, so as measured by primary outcomes, the study was a “failure”– no change. Yet there WAS a change.

      If you look at the VITAMINS trial, we found no difference whatsoever in the vitamin-C treated group, but as Dr. Marik rightly points out, the time-to-treat was vastly different than that used in actual clinical practice, and time-to-treat is critical in sepsis cases. Hence, the much larger VICTAS trial is underway to try to remedy the shortcomings of the VITAMINS trial. If vitamin C therapy is such a fraud, why the large numbers of clinical trials testing it?

      Most importantly, if we look at clinical practice we see very promising results using IV vitamin C in treating organ sepsis cases.

      • Wolf1 | March 17, 2020 at 12:13 pm |

        The study showed lower mortality, but didn’t show that Vitamin C treatments reduced organ failure or reduced inflammation – which is was the primary goal of the study. Given the low numbers of patients – 167 started, 103 finished (presumably 64 died) – it isn’t clear that the mortality result is real. At such low numbers, skew is very easy to occur by random chance.
        I can’t access the full text to see what the actual numbers are – more specifically, just how much mortality difference there was.

      • Wolf1 | March 17, 2020 at 12:42 pm |

        The other note is that nCOV has 4 stages
        1) virusemia
        2) viral and bacteria pneumonia
        3) non-cardiopathic edema
        4) sepsis
        Vitamin C *might* help with 4) according to that study, but it doesn’t show anything about stages 1 to 3

      • Don132 | March 17, 2020 at 2:26 pm |

        “The study showed lower mortality, but didn’t show that Vitamin C treatments reduced organ failure or reduced inflammation – which is was the primary goal of the study. Given the low numbers of patients – 167 started, 103 finished (presumably 64 died) – it isn’t clear that the mortality result is real. At such low numbers, skew is very easy to occur by random chance.
        “I can’t access the full text to see what the actual numbers are – more specifically, just how much mortality difference there was.”

        You might want to watch Dr. Fowler’s video. Fowler speculates that time-to-treat was the reason for no difference in SOFA scores, and that’s a reasonable assumption. Yet despite this, patients who had vitamin C had lower mortality and this was statistically significant: not likely by chance. The reason we have ongoing trials is that we don’t have any definitive answers yet, except for clinical practice which the trials are attempting to test.

        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HXs5Xzr6qCI

        We’re just beginning to take vitamin C sorta seriously, so who knows what this powerful antioxidant, vital in numerous biological processes and necessary for life, can do.

      • Wolf1 | March 18, 2020 at 8:43 am |

        @Don132
        I looked through the video – it is still unclear that Vitamin C does what it is supposed to do.
        Doctor Fowler documents a clear story in the video: reduced Vitamin C levels in the affected tissues leading to a theory that it is Vitamin C levels contributing to sepsis.
        The CITRiS study showed worse results in SOFA scores as well as another metric for Vitamin C treatment vs. placebo – directly contradicting the much smaller study Fowler ran.
        The mortality differences were 40 of 83 vs. 28 of 84 but the Placebo patients had a 10.38 SOFA vs. 9.77 for Vitamin C.
        I did a quick Google search for SOFA vs. mortality and found this picture: https://jamanetwork.com/data/Journals/JAMA/935995/joi160156f2.png
        which shows significant mortality differences for SOFA 9 vs 10 – my eyeball says 36 vs. 29.
        While this is a smaller difference (due to the lower SOFA score delta) than the CITRIS, the fact that there is a significantly scaling mortality difference at increased SOFA levels – reduces the Vitamin-C vs. placebo mortality delta into potentially noise levels.
        So, net net, I remain unconvinced.
        Dr. Fowler is sincere but he is clearly a Vitamin C proponent; the results presented are not conclusive.
        One way to reduce this uncertainty would be to look at the actual SOFA levels of the deceased vs. the distribution in their respective cohorts and vs. the SOFA mortality results from the above study (which has a really large population).

      • Don132 | March 18, 2020 at 10:01 am |

        “The mortality differences were 40 of 83 vs. 28 of 84 but the Placebo patients had a 10.38 SOFA vs. 9.77 for Vitamin C.”

        Agree that results are inclusive on the CITRIS-ALI trial. Regarding SOFA scores, the curious thing is that despite the difference, significantly more vitamin C patients lived. As I think I mentioned earlier, some suggested to Fowler that he give deceased patients SOFA scores of 24– the highest– in both arms, thus making the SOFA scores jive with mortality. But Fowler refused to do this and I think he was right.

        Fowler believes that CITRIS-ALI SOFA scores might reflect the fact that time-to-treat was delayed. This is also the main complaint of Marik against the VITAMINS trial.

        We have clinical practice– where time-to-treat is much quicker because we’re not worried about screening/enrollment in a study and following study protocol– showing good results with vitamin C treatment.

        I agree that the jury is out and I agree that more study is needed. What I’m not sure I agree with is refusing to treat with vitamin C when it’s a virtually harmless intervention. But, that’s me. If the larger VICTAS trial, fairly done, shows no benefit as well, then we’d have to reconcile clinical trials with clinical practice. I have a funny feeling that whatever the flaws of the VICTAS trial, the desired headline will be: trial shows no benefit to vitamin C, and that’s exactly what the VITAMINS headline was, despite that it didn’t follow the protocol it was testing and that it never consulted Marik concerning his input on the VITAMINS protocol, which was (supposedly) testing his protocol as used in his ICU.

        So are we doing science here? Or are we being careful to get the results we want? The CITRIS-ALI trial was sound and a good starting point, but it seems to me that the VITAMINS trial was designed to fail. Take a look at the presentation of that trial and see what you think: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sF2ktY00dqs Somewhat boring first 33 minutes but after that it gets interesting.

      • Wolf1 | March 18, 2020 at 8:48 pm |

        @Don132
        The Vitamin C cohort had a significantly lower average SOFA score – 0.61 lower – and so there *should* be lower mortality. The delta in mortality was less than the data I showed for a full 1 point difference, but there’s all sorts of variables.
        What the SOFA score differences underline, however, is that the mortality differences between Vitamin C and placebo – in the CITRIS trial – has an alternate explanation.
        As for no harm: there is very much harm in pushing Vitamin C as a “proven” solution to sepsis.
        There are web sites out there including “orthomolecular,org” – which is funded by Riordan clinic – which in turn offers Vitamin C therapy. Orthomolecular,org hosts all manner of articles pushing alternative treatments such as Vitamin C therapy; this is clearly far in advance of any clinical validation, so I disagree that there is no harm in incorrectly stating Vitamin C has proven sepsis remediation value.

      • Don132 | March 18, 2020 at 9:13 pm |

        “Orthomolecular,org hosts all manner of articles pushing alternative treatments such as Vitamin C therapy; this is clearly far in advance of any clinical validation, so I disagree that there is no harm in incorrectly stating Vitamin C has proven sepsis remediation value.”

        Orthomolecular medicine focuses on treating conditions with vitamins/minerals so far as possible. It’s closely allied with Functional Medicine.

        So far as proven sepsis remediation value, maybe nothing definitive, agreed. But clinical experience as opposed to clinical trials does seem to point to value, and if this is a harmless intervention– why not?

        I know a lot of people are upset about anything that isn’t approved by the AMA, but the AMA, in my humble opinion, is basically towing the line of the drug companies, who largely fund AMA conventions and other treats. That is simply my opinion, after many years of looking into these matters, and so yes, my views are more favorable to alternative remedies which, amazingly, do seem to work even though the AMA has so far spit on them.

        So disagree with me, that’s OK. We can both agree that vitamin C hasn’t passed the test of clinical trials (or, not completely.) If a remedy saves lives and is remarkably harmless, do we have to wait for a definitive clinical trial to save a life?

      • Wolf1 | March 19, 2020 at 11:01 am |

        @Don132
        There is no validation that Vitamin C treatments save lives.
        There is very much potential harm in charging people and influencing option choices with incorrect and irresponsible statements like “saves lives” and “remarkably harmless”.
        So no, I don’t agree.

      • Don132 | March 19, 2020 at 11:21 am |

        Wolf1: “There is no validation that Vitamin C treatments save lives.”

        As I’ve pointed out, clinical practice says vitamin C does save lives. I agree that the jury is out regarding clinical trials, but you simply cannot ignore the lives saved in the CITRIS-ALI trial, you cannot ignore the lives that Drs. Marik (and his ICU nurses) and Fowler say have been saved in clinical practice, and you cannot ignore the results the Shanghai medical community is experiencing. Or, maybe you can.

        Oxidative stress, cytokine storms, etc. What does vitamin C do? It quells these. It’s a powerful antioxidant; we know that. No doubt about it. Fowler has presented other data on clinical effects of vitamin C.

        If you don’t like it, don’t use it and don’t ask for it, and we hear you loud and clear: you think it’s junk science. Your position has been duly noted. Thank you. If we’re arguing that trials so far aren’t definitive, I agree 100%, but if vitamin C were so “junk science” then why are they bothering to do the much larger VICTAS trial? Rhetorical question, but if your answer is because people are deluded, I respect that answer and would prefer not to argue with it. We disagree.

        All of this information is being presented as food for thought and consideration, and of course we might have different opinions about what makes sense and what doesn’t. The important things is that all of us are trying to shed light on the subject, in the spirit of good will towards others.

  61. Ragnaar | March 16, 2020 at 11:02 am |

    More on the money knows. For the past 30 years, I’ve never sold my positions. Not during a market downturn. I am about 75% in total market stock funds, mostly domestic with about 1/3 of that in international ones. Will I be wrong? I got a 50/50 shot.
    This is actually me thinking I know what the markets will do. I don’t.
    We are strong. We are resilient. We do not fold. We will prevail.

    • Ragnaar | March 16, 2020 at 11:03 am |

      Low cost total stock market index funds.

      • cerescokid | March 16, 2020 at 1:54 pm |

        Ragnaar

        A few thoughts I’ve been kicking around. In 1929 the Dow was 381. By 1932 it had dropped to 41. It took until 1954 to hit the 1929 peak. In 1966 the Dow had an intraday high over 1000. It peaked at 1051 in 1973 then dropped to 577 in 1974 then it went over 1000 and then during the 81-82 recession, it dropped to 775. But by 1987 it had hit 2700 before dropping to 1700 later that year. By 2007 it peaked at 14,000 dropped below 7,000 in March 2009, then it was off to the races to 30,000.

        My mistake in the last 50 years was thinking about the next year or 2 or 5 instead of the next 20 or 30 years or 40. Someone who had purchased 100 shares of McDonalds in 1967, with its multiple splits, would have had a nice little nest egg now. Wall Street is obsessed with the next week or next quarter. We shouldn’t be. I told my daughters to think about what the company or economy will be in 30 years, not what they will be next year. Easier said than done.

        Things most likely will get uglier before they get better because of the unknown health issues, then the financial issues and then the real world economic issues. Our state just today shut down restaurants and bars for the rest of March. Regardless of government help and programs, stopping the economy in its tracks has to have contractionary effects, resulting in a recession of some duration and magnitude.

        The markets always overreact, on the downside and the upside. Next year will be better.

    • jacksmith4tx | March 16, 2020 at 11:43 am |

      So what do you know about Behavioral Economics? What does the term “manage inflation expectations” mean to Joe 6pack? It sure means something to the FED and billionaires.

      I would note the original scientists who published the BH* theory thinks since we born to discount future dangers we will not rise to the challenge of adapting to a slow moving threat like climate change. I agree with them.

      * “Richard Thaler’s Nudge” and “Daniel Kahneman’s Thinking Fast and Slow”

    • Wolf1 | March 17, 2020 at 12:15 pm |

      I wish you well.
      The stock market is tremendously overvalued – even at today’s levels. The economic impact is going to last a long time and this will affect earnings, which in turn are eventually going to affect stocks.
      It is without question that we are in a “fear” phase.

  62. Ireneusz Palmowski | March 16, 2020 at 1:31 pm |

    In Italy, the number of detected cases is 27 980, and cured 2749th. It shows how serious the disease is.

  63. Atomsk's Sanakan (@AtomsksSanakan) | March 16, 2020 at 4:29 pm |

    Recommendations:

    1) Rely on reputable scientific sources, especially peer-reviewed papers and agencies such as the World Health Organization [WHO].
    2) If you don’t have the time, expertise, etc. to read and understand peer-reviewed papers, then defer to the evidence-based scientific consensus, as reflected in documents from competent sources and your doctor.
    3) Don’t rely on conspiracy theorists, non-peer-reviewed contrarians blogs, and other such sources.
    4) Don’t rely on anyone who says silly things such as the science on this topic is a religion with the doctors / scientists as “high priests”, scientists + governments are exaggerating this issue for the sake of money or power, the mainstream consensus on this is trying to suppress / blacklist dissident truth-tellers, etc.

    This issue is reminiscent of other scientific/medical topics, such as vaccination. It is simply too important for people to import the contrarian mindset they may apply to climate science. As per the WHO:

    “11. Underline scientific consensus
    Research in the area of climate change shows that the belief in a scientific
    fact increases when consensus is highlighted [60][30]. However, identifying
    a scientific consensus requires a thorough understanding of the specific
    area of interest and a layperson will not gain that knowledge all by himself
    [61]. Therefore, highlighting the scientific consensus in public is a powerful tool to transfer essential scientific knowledge and increase belief in a
    scientific fact, especially when presented in a simple and short message
    [62][63].
    Underline scientific consensus with regard to vaccine safety and efficacy.“
    https://www.who.int/immunization/sage/meetings/2016/october/8_Best-practice-guidance-respond-vocal-vaccine-deniers-public.pdf

    Below are some helpful articles on this, debunking various conspiracy theories from contrarian blogs and addressing people’s prejudiced/paranoid views on this topic:

    “No credible evidence supporting claims of the laboratory engineering of SARS-CoV-2”
    “HIV-1 did not contribute to the 2019-nCoV genome”
    “Protein structure and sequence re-analysis of 2019-nCoV genome does not indicate snakes as its intermediate host or the unique similarity between its spike protein insertions and HIV-1”
    “Trump claims public health warnings on covid-19 are a conspiracy against him”
    “Fear can be more harmful than the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 in controlling the corona virus disease 2019 epidemic”
    “In the fight against the new coronavirus outbreak, we must also struggle with human bias”
    “Tracking online heroisation and blame in epidemics”

    • verytallguy | March 16, 2020 at 4:49 pm |

      Well, who could *possibly* disagree with that ;-)

    • Don132 | March 16, 2020 at 5:54 pm |

      Let’s not get in to a big vaccine argument; suffice it to say that there are many good physicians who disagree with the consensus. The argument against aggressive over-vaccination is very strong, and despite the demonization of those who oppose the consensus on vaccination, most of us are not opposed to vaccination in principle, but only to the way our children are being used as pincushions for profit and the way science is being abused in order to promote an agenda; also how the basic right to informed consent is being undermined when the abuse of the power to force medications should be what scares us, not a few refusers, since history has shown us loudly and clearly how forced medication can be abused. One word illustrates this: “eugenics.”

      I find it remarkable that a group that often warns of “the consensus” with regard to climate science embraces consensus without question when it comes to medicine, when we have extensive documentation telling us that medical science has been seriously corrupted by pharmaceutical interests.

      • matthewrmarler | March 16, 2020 at 6:14 pm |

        Don 132: I find it remarkable that a group that often warns of “the consensus” with regard to climate science embraces consensus without question when it comes to medicine,

        Who embraces consensus on medicine without question? That would be different from countering the anti-vaxxer claims sometimes written here.

        If you have a right to refuse vaccinations of your kids, do your neighbors have a right to choose not to send their kids to schools that your children attend? However the debate might fall out, hardly anyone here will be embracing the consensus without recourse to published evidence.

      • Atomsk's Sanakan (@AtomsksSanakan) | March 16, 2020 at 6:28 pm |

        Re: “I find it remarkable that a group that often warns of “the consensus” with regard to climate science embraces consensus without question when it comes to medicine, when we have extensive documentation telling us that medical science has been seriously corrupted by pharmaceutical interests.”

        *sigh*

        Let me know when you look up what “evidence-based scientific consensus” is.

        “Studies of AIDS denialism in South Africa, the Intelligent Design controversies in the US, and the global climate change debate have focused on the techniques arguers use to manufacture purported scientific controversies in the public sphere (Ceccarelli 2011; Paroske 2009).
        […]
        The account of expert/citizen communication starts by acknowledging the general (if ambiguous) norm: it is imprudent for the nonexpert to go against the expert view (Goodwin 1998). When a local tells a tourist that a road is dangerous, or a doctor advises a patient that smoking is harmful to her health, or a climate scientist tells the rest of us that the world is warming because of our activities, then the tourist or patient or we would be dumb keep going along regardless. “Only the fool would not want some expert advice in technical matters” (Fischer 2009, p. 139); “other things being equal, we ought to prefer the judgments of those who ‘know what they are talking about’” (Collins and Evans 2007, p. 2).”
        https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10503-011-9219-6

      • Don132 | March 16, 2020 at 6:53 pm |

        I think most embrace the necessity of vaccination without question, but I think it’s legitimate question whether the number of vaccines children get is necessary. Regarding the published research, this is part of the problem: the Verstraeten study begun in 1998 (I believe) was apparently designed to show “no harm” from thimerosal in vaccines, when in fact that’s not what the original study suggested, and there are far too many examples of this type of politicized science in the realm of vaccines. Sorting out what’s science and what’s agenda in the guise of science is not so simple as proponents of forced vaccination believe.

        The laws concerning school vaccinations as they stand in most states that allow for non-medical exemptions are sound: in outbreaks, unvaccinated children must go home. Fair enough: not an oppressive penalty and sufficient to protect the public health since so few people refuse all vaccines all the time. I’m perfectly OK with, say, a $150 fine for refusing vaccines, enough to discourage people. In my view, those who refuse are the lessor evil; the greater evil is that we throw the principle of informed consent out the window. The entire biomedical program of the Third Reich was premised on the principle that the state could control individual bodies without individual consent, and this is entirely relevant to vaccination because the 1927 decision in Buck v Bell legitimatizing state power to compel sterilization without consent was based squarely on the 1905 Jacobson decision which allowed for vaccine mandates but (specifically) without oppressive penalties. How did that get warped into throwing out informed consent? It got warped because Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes was himself a eugenicist and believed in state power over individuals. This decision, Buck v Bell, essentially blessed forced sterilization and gave it a second life, and was one philosophical basis for the German eugenics program. How quickly we forget!

        A few refusers is the lesser of two evils. If too many people refuse, then my suggestion is that the problem isn’t with the refusers, but with the vaccine program which seems, to many of us, to be too aggressive and too dismissive of harms.

      • Don132 | March 16, 2020 at 7:08 pm |

        “The account of expert/citizen communication starts by acknowledging the general (if ambiguous) norm: it is imprudent for the nonexpert to go against the expert view (Goodwin 1998).”

        Yet experts are telling us vitamin C can treat organ sepsis effectively; experts are telling us that our children are over-vaccinated. There isn’t one single doctor saying you shouldn’t set a broken bone: here the consensus is solid. On controversial issues upon which experts disagree, the authority of the consensus isn’t so clear-cut. This should be obvious. Many, many doctors disagree with the current vaccine program, and thankfully many more doctors are understanding that vitamin C can be a clinically powerful treatment. However there are doctors who, as Dr. Klenner found out many years again, would rather their patients die than treat them with vitamin C, a powerful antioxidant. Today, the same: I have no doubt that there are many doctors out there who would let a patient die rather than administer vitamin C, even though patients presenting with sepsis are borderline scurvy and vitamin C is virtually harmless. What, afraid patients might survive and a few might get kidney stones? Afraid the drug companies are going to come after them for using “a vitamin”? What, then?

      • Atomsk's Sanakan (@AtomsksSanakan) | March 16, 2020 at 7:53 pm |

        Re: “experts are telling us that our children are over-vaccinated.”

        No, that is not what the evidence-based scientific consensus is telling people. Don, I have a PhD in immunology and am completing my medical training. I literally write articles on addressing contrarian responses to vaccination. So don’t try to fool me on a topic in which I have expertise. Don’t import your contrarian mindset from climate science to vaccine science. I’m beginning to see how climate scientists like Michael Mann, Susan Solomon, and Ben Santer must feel when they see contrarians on blogs make stuff up about their field of expertise.

        Anyway, children are not over-vaccinated, including with respect to antigens, aluminum-contain containing, mercury-containing compounds, etc. If anything, more vaccinations should be given, as more vaccines are developed. I look forward to the day when there are more vaccines to coronaviruses and the like. Unless one is immunocompromised, vaccines do not even come close to seriously overwhelming the load one’s immune system can take. In fact, it’s the under-vaccinated who tend to do worse.

        There’s been study after study on this, Don. Read them, instead of spreading dangerous disinformation (that results in sick + dead kids and adults) to appease your contrarian streak. Below is some material to get you started, for whenever you become genuinely interested in the evidence:

        “Vaccination status and health in children and adolescents”
        “On-time vaccine receipt in the first year does not adversely affect neuropsychological outcomes”
        “Vaccines and autism: A tale of shifting hypotheses”
        “Lack of broad functional differences in immunity in fully vaccinated vs. unvaccinated children”
        “Measles, mumps, rubella vaccination and autism: A nationwide cohort study”
        “Vaccination and all-cause child mortality from 1985 to 2011: global evidence from the Demographic and Health Surveys”
        “Association between undervaccination with diphtheria, tetanus toxoids, and acellular pertussis (DTaP) vaccine and risk of pertussis infection in children 3 to 36 months of age”
        “Parental refusal of pertussis vaccination is associated with an increased risk of pertussis infection in children”
        “Bacillus Calmette-GuĂ©rin vaccination and infant mortality”
        “Rotavirus vaccination is associated with reduced seizure hospitalization risk among commercially insured US children”
        “Nonmedical vaccine exemptions and pertussis in California, 2010”

      • matthewrmarler | March 16, 2020 at 8:02 pm |

        Atomsk’s Sanakan: Below is some material to get you started, for whenever you become genuinely interested in the evidence:

        It would be helpful, to me at least, if you provided links or journal citations. I follow lots of hot links presented here.

      • phil salmon | March 16, 2020 at 8:17 pm |

        Don132
        The consequences of the antivax meme are real simple – people die of measles. Often children. All round the world there is a sub population of feeble minded narcissists who follow anti-establishment views simply for perverse gratification. They believe in UFOs, religious cults, chem-trails etc because their irrational belief gives them a puny sense of power, in resisting being forced to believe anything at all, especially if it is true. They cling to their pet lies as to a security blanket. That’s OK if these narcissistic weirdos only worship green men on the moon. But when they follow the likes of Andrew Wakefield and start refusing MMR vaccines for their children, because a “scientific study” with a handful of anecdotal cases and no control group concluded that MMR causes autism, then they become a real threat to everyone. This new intractable religion is daily causing new deaths from measles as population immunity to diseases is lost.

        Antivax arguments are based on a pathetically hollow statistical fallacy. A majority of the population – a very large number of people numbering tens or hundreds of millions – get vaccinated. With such large numbers, by pure chance a few cases will inevitably occur of very bad health events happening – by chance – just after vaccination. Lightning will strike some. Others might be bitten on the backside by an escaping sewer rat while sitting on the toilet. Others might contract an unexpected illness. Now the conspiratorial-narcissist will easily weave together a story from these random adverse events, that vaccines have caused them. This is easy to do simply due to the large number of people vaccinated. It’s like saying that anyone who dies in the day is killed by the sun, or at night by the moon.

        Likewise it will be just as easy to cherrypick selected examples of individuals who have rejected vaccines and live in apparent radiant health. The flush of euphoria from recent religious conversion explains much of this.

        But make no mistake. There is nothing rational to argue about vaccines. Those that oppose them are nothing but narcissistic psychopaths. They kill gratuitously, enthralled by their own self-righteousness as they do so. The only right place for such people is prison.

      • Don132 | March 16, 2020 at 8:41 pm |

        “I’m beginning to see how climate scientists like Michael Mann, Susan Solomon, and Ben Santer must feel when they see contrarians on blogs make stuff up about their field of expertise.” Are you trying to tell me that Mann’s hockey stick is legitimate science? In like manner, the medical journals are filled with papers that Dr. Richard Horton, editor of the Lancet, called “information-laundering” by the pharmaceutical companies. And Marcia Angell, a former assistant editor of the NEJM, has been very vocal in her opposition to the corruption of medical journal science, which she says has gotten to the point where that science is simply not to be trusted: its purpose is often to sell drugs and not to recommend best patient practices.

        Since you’re an MD in training you might want to read some of the books written by MDs on the corruption of medical science and practice by the pharmaceutical industry; for example, Marica Angell’s “The Truth About Drug Companies” or John Abramson’s “Overdosed America,” and get over the idea that medicine is practicing objective science when it’s often practicing science that’s geared toward selling product.

        Jerome P. Kassirer, MD, former editor-in-chief of the NEJM: “I believe that the great majority of physicians are high-minded and principled, and that most of them intentionally avoid any any kind of entanglement with industry 
. Nonetheless, serious conflicts of interest are widespread, and with the growth of industry marketing, they continue to increase. Whether intentionally or not, too many physicians have become marketing whores, mere tools of industry’s promotional efforts. Others have engaged in pseudoscientific studies and published biased articles and educational materials that foster industry goals over patient goals.”

        No, more vaccinations should NOT be given and yes, the science on aluminum adjuvant toxicology is very clear but ignored by the medical profession, but this obfuscation is carefully orchestrated so that people like you believe you’re actually reading “science.” In many ways medical science isn’t as bad as climate science; it’s worse.

        I can go on for a very long time and bring up reams of evidence to back up what I say, but I suggest we let this go and return our focus to COVID-19. In that vein, I’d ask you: what about vitamin C for the treatment of organ sepsis brought about by COVID-19? It seems to me that this is an important and relevant topic, and as readers who are familiar with my posts in past years, I’m persistent and you probably don’t want to get in the weeds with me over vaccines. Let’s just say we disagree.

      • Atomsk's Sanakan (@AtomsksSanakan) | March 16, 2020 at 8:57 pm |

        @matthewrmarler

        Re: “It would be helpful, to me at least, if you provided links or journal citations. “

        For each paper, I either gave a link or the paper’s title. That should be sufficient for finding the papers.

        @Don132

        Re: “Since you’re an MD in training you might want to read some of the books written by MDs on the corruption of medical science and practice by the pharmaceutical industry”

        No more than I’d want to rely on a flat Earther book, or a book claiming HIV does not cause AIDS, or a book claiming drinking bleach (Mineral Miracle Solution) cures cancer, or a book defending that breatharian idea that one does not need to eat food to live, or…. Contrarians can spout nonsense in non-peer-reviewed books, which they would not be able to do in reputable, peer-reviewed journals. So no, I’m not going to get my information on science from paranoid books you happen to read. I, like other competent scientists, will stick to reputable scientific sources. You can continue in your conspiracist ideation.

        “Like the vast range of other non-peer-reviewed material produced by the denial community, book authors can make whatever claims they wish, no matter how scientifically unfounded.”
        https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/0002764213477096

        “Deniers argue that because scientists receive grant money, fame, and prestige as a result of their research, it is in their best interest to maintain the status quo [15]. This type of thinking is convenient for deniers as it allows them to choose which authorities to believe and which ones to dismiss as part of a grand conspiracy. In addition to being selective, their logic is also internally inconsistent. For example, they dismiss studies that support the HIV hypothesis as being biased by “drug money,” while they accept uncritically the testimony of HIV deniers who have a heavy financial stake in their alternative treatment modalities.”
        https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1949841/

      • matthewrmarler | March 16, 2020 at 8:58 pm |

        Don132: No, more vaccinations should NOT be given and yes, the science on aluminum adjuvant toxicology is very clear but ignored by the medical profession, but this obfuscation is carefully orchestrated so that people like you believe you’re actually reading “science.” In many ways medical science isn’t as bad as climate science; it’s worse.

        Is there even one study showing that millions of people would be better off without being vaccinated for measles than if they were vaccinated? whooping cough? Diphtheria, tetanus? Typhoid, typhus? rabies?

        Meanwhile, we are about to find out how effective the vaccines are against SARS-nCV-2. If enough people self-medicate on vitamin C, as they do with co-enzyme Q and echinacea, we ought to learn soon how well that works. Maybe you could interest someone in a clinical trial.

      • matthewrmarler | March 16, 2020 at 9:00 pm |

        Atomsk’s Sanakan: For each paper, I either gave a link or the paper’s title. That should be sufficient for finding the papers.

        Where other than Sci-Hub (which gives me inconsistent results) can I search by title.

      • Don132 | March 16, 2020 at 9:05 pm |

        phil salmon: “All round the world there is a sub population of feeble minded narcissists who follow anti-establishment views simply for perverse gratification.”

        Well, now we’re getting into it, aren’t we? Yes, I’m anti-authoritarian, and I’m highly suspicious of authority, but twenty years ago I was the exact opposite. Experience shows us the way.

        You say I’m a threat to others, even though I don’t oppose all vaccines out-of-hand; my position, as I’ve stated, is that out children are over-vaccinated, not that they should never be vaccinated. But look at the threat that measles actually presents: you’re more likely to die from a lightening strike in the US than you are to die of measles. Measles is not a threat, thanks to vaccination: I’ll acknowledge that. So why are we worried about a few people who refuse to get vaccinated? The school laws in many states say that unvaccinated children have to stay home during epidemics, and this is fair enough. To deny them a public education for missing even one vaccine isn’t fair, and is an abuse of the principle of informed consent.

        We disagree. Even physicians disagree on the vaccine issue and on the safety of vaccines.

        The proper remedy is to mandate, but not force vaccination. We can disagree; I say that you cannot force me to get vaccinated, and in that I’m aligned with the 1905 Jacobson decision that determined that Jacobson did, indeed, have to pay a $5 fine for refusing to get vaccinated during a smallpox epidemic in Cambridge, MA. But, he did not have to get vaccinated. How far we’ve moved from the wisdom of 1905 when, even after the errors in forced sterilization of the US eugenics movement and the horrors of the Nazi biomedical program, we think we can dispense with informed consent as if it were a mere inconvenience. That, and not whether I’m right or wrong about the virtues of vaccination, is the central issue.

      • Atomsk's Sanakan (@AtomsksSanakan) | March 16, 2020 at 9:06 pm |

        Re: “Where other than Sci-Hub (which gives me inconsistent results) can I search by title.”

        Google and Google Scholar:
        https://scholar.google.com/

        It is straight-forwardly easy to copy-and-paste a paper’s title in there (in quotation marks) to find the paper, including the paper’s DOI number. Sci-Hub will also give you the paper if you give the paper’s DOI number. I am not going to go dig up the links for each paper for you, when I’ve given you enough information to find them.

      • Don132 | March 16, 2020 at 9:10 pm |

        “No more than I’d want to rely on a flat Earther book, or a book claiming HIV does not cause AIDS, or a book claiming drinking bleach (Mineral Miracle Solution) cures cancer, or a book defending that breatharian idea that one does not need to eat food to live, or
. Contrarians can spout nonsense in non-peer-reviewed books, which they would not be able to do in reputable, peer-reviewed journals.”

        My. We haven’t been paying attention, have we? Do you suppose the editor of the Lancet is a contrarian? The former editor of the NEJM? The assistant editor of NEJM?

        Good for you. Now, keep your paws off my kids.

      • Curious George | March 16, 2020 at 9:15 pm |

        I am a vaccination believer. Just for fun, I randomly selected an item from Mr. Sanakan’s list: “Parental refusal of pertussis vaccination is associated with an increased risk of pertussis infection in children”. The corresponding link is probably https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19482753

        I was shocked by the study results: “We identified 156 laboratory-confirmed pertussis cases and 595 matched controls. There were 18 (12%) pertussis vaccine refusers among the cases.” Out of 156 cases of pertussis – whatever it might be – only 18 cases were attributed to a vaccine refusal. Remaining 138 cases are left totally unexplained. Mr. Sanakan, that’s not the best calling card for immunology.

      • Don132 | March 16, 2020 at 9:21 pm |

        “Is there even one study showing that millions of people would be better off without being vaccinated for measles than if they were vaccinated? whooping cough? Diphtheria, tetanus? Typhoid, typhus? rabies?

        “Meanwhile, we are about to find out how effective the vaccines are against SARS-nCV-2. If enough people self-medicate on vitamin C, as they do with co-enzyme Q and echinacea, we ought to learn soon how well that works. Maybe you could interest someone in a clinical trial.”

        I don’t think I ever said that people would be better off if not vaccinated; I said simply that we’re over-vaccinating our children and we’re not paying attention to safety. That’s my position. What the proper schedule is, is for others to figure out, but I highly doubt, for example, that we need to give infants hepB vaccine on the first day of life. And I don’t think the MMR is safe, but that’s a very long story that’ll get us off on another tangent. I think the HPV vaccine is a despicable vaccine that should be withdrawn. http://ijme.in/articles/lessons-learnt-in-japan-from-adverse-reactions-to-the-hpv-vaccine-a-medical-ethics-perspective/?galley=html

        Regarding trials, you haven’t been paying attention. There are indeed clinical trials completed and ongoing for vitamin C: http://victastrial.org/

        https://emcrit.org/pulmcrit/pulmcrit-citris-ali-can-a-secondary-endpoint-stage-a-coup-detat/

        Groupthink: it’s not just for climate scientists.

      • Atomsk's Sanakan (@AtomsksSanakan) | March 16, 2020 at 9:32 pm |

        Re: “Out of 156 cases of pertussis – whatever it might be – only 18 cases were attributed to a vaccine refusal. Remaining 138 cases are left totally unexplained. Mr. Sanakan, that’s not the best calling card for immunology.”

        Ridiculous response. If you have to say “whatever it might be” in response to pertussis, then that’s probably a hint you lack basic knowledge in the topic you’re trying to critique. The purpose of the study was not to explain all cases of pertussis. The purpose of the paper was to see if there was an association between parental vaccine refusal and the risk of pertussis infection. There was. So you basically moved the goalposts and attacked a straw man regarding what the paper was about, to avoid admitting to the conclusion it supported.

        What you did is as ridiculous as saying that a study on the relationship between smoking and cancer is bad because it doesn’t explain all instances of cancer ever. One doesn’t need to explain all instance of cancer ever, to show smoking increases one’s risk of cancer. You’re literally using the same garbage reasoning the tobacco industry used to dodge evidence on the health risks of smoking (‘but look at all these cases of cancer in non-smokers!!’). How sad.

        If you want to know how people get pertussis in general, then here’s a hint: open a medical textbook, or another scientific source on the tooic. Don’t whine about a paper not answering a question the paper was not meant to answer. If you people read climate science papers as badly as you read medical science papers, no wonder you remain faux “skeptics” on climate science.

      • Don132 | March 16, 2020 at 9:36 pm |

        Mr. Sanakan has perhaps not read the paper that showed that vaccination doesn’t stop the spread of pertussis in a primate model, which may be why the CDC did not blame pertussis cases on the unvaccinated. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24277828

      • matthewrmarler | March 16, 2020 at 9:36 pm |

        Don132: I don’t think I ever said that people would be better off if not vaccinated; I said simply that we’re over-vaccinating our children and we’re not paying attention to safety.

        No, more vaccinations should NOT be given, … .

        I am glad that you clarified. Next step: if we are over-vaccinating, which vaccines would we be better off discontinuing?

        Before I wade into it again, how can you tell that the vitamin-C research is free of the corruption you attribute to the rest of medical research?

      • matthewrmarler | March 16, 2020 at 9:40 pm |

        Don132: Mr. Sanakan has perhaps not read the paper that showed that vaccination doesn’t stop the spread of pertussis in a primate model,

        Are you denying that the outbreaks of pertussis that result from discontinuation of vaccinations are actually due to the discontinuation of the vaccinations?

      • Atomsk's Sanakan (@AtomsksSanakan) | March 16, 2020 at 9:52 pm |

        Re: “Do you suppose the editor of the Lancet is a contrarian? The former editor of the NEJM? The assistant editor of NEJM?”

        You’re not going to fool me into thinking the editorial staff of The Lancet and NEJM agree with you on vaccination. Your tactics might work on scared + credulous people looking to not accept the science, Don. But they won’t work on sensible and informed people. For example, the following below from The Lancet:

        “Vaccine hesitancy has been another major barrier to progress towards the 2020 targets.”
        https://www.thelancet.com/action/showPdf?pii=S0140-6736%2818%2932862-9

        Re: “Good for you. Now, keep your paws off my kids.”

        I’d be happy to see your children (and any other children) receive a mandatory vaccination over your (their guardian’s) complaints, assuming there’s no justified medical exemption, just like I’d be happy to see a child fed food over the complaints of their breatharian parents. Similarly, if a child was dying of coronavirus, and their parents turned down life-saving medical treatment by saying “keep your paws off my kids”, then I’d support appointing a new legal guardian for that child, so the child can receive treatment. I don’t condone negligence from guardians that places their wards at undue risk. I’m not alone in that. Complain all you want; I, and much the legal system, really could not care less about your complaints.

        https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/interactives/public-scientists-opinion-gap/
        “Vaccine refusal, mandatory immunization, and the risks of vaccine-preventable diseases”
        “Mandatory immunization: the point of view of the French general population and practitioners”
        “Association of vaccine-related attitudes and beliefs between parents and health care providers”

      • matthewrmarler | March 16, 2020 at 9:56 pm |

        from the emcrit site: There was no difference at all in any of the primary endpoints (change in SOFA score, CRP levels, or thrombomodulin levels). So based on the primary endpoints, this is a solidly “negative” study.

        But it’s not that simple. Patients in the Vitamin C group had a lower mortality. This difference is most striking during the first 96 hours while on IV vitamin C (during which mortality was ~23% in the placebo group vs. ~4% in the vitamin C group):

        Unless the secondary result has been replicated, that is simply a negative result. Data dredging and selective reporting after the main endpoints have not shown a change is one of the common practices that makes results unreliable.

        http://victastrial.org/ Does not report results.

      • Curious George | March 16, 2020 at 10:03 pm |

        Dear Mr. Sanakan: I never claimed to know about whooping cough – that’s your field of expertise – but I can count. If you fail to recognize a sloppy work, that’s your privilege. But it is a sloppy work, not a straw man. Substitute the name of your favorite disease for “pertussis”, it will still be a sloppy work.

      • Atomsk's Sanakan (@AtomsksSanakan) | March 16, 2020 at 10:22 pm |

        @Don132

        Re: “Mr. Sanakan has perhaps not read the paper that showed that vaccination doesn’t stop the spread of pertussis in a primate model, which may be why the CDC did not blame pertussis cases on the unvaccinated.
        https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24277828 “

        This is a great example of how you contrarians distort science to reach your pre-determined, ideologically-motivated conclusions on topics you don’t even try to understand.

        Pertussis vaccination comes in at least two types: acellular and whole-cellular. The whole-cellular version is already known to prevent disease and transmission. The acellular version, which is now more commonly used, is known to prevent disease, but its preventing of transmission is a bit less clear. So, amazingly, you are complaining about a vaccine that’s known to prevent disease.

        Of course, anti-vaxxer parents gave their kids neither the whole-cellular nor the acellular form of the vaccination. And as the paper I cited noted, this was associated with increased risk of pertussis infection:

        “Children of parents who refuse pertussis immunizations are at high risk for pertussis infection relative to vaccinated children.”
        https://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/123/6/1446.long

        You then act as if the CDC supports your anti-vaxxer talking points. They don’t:

        “CDC recommends whooping cough vaccination for all babies and children, preteens and teens, and pregnant women.”
        https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vpd/pertussis/index.html

        “Pertussis remains one of the leading causes of vaccine-preventable deaths worldwide, despite overall high vaccination coverage. Most pertussis deaths occur in young babies who are either unvaccinated or incompletely vaccinated.“
        https://www.cdc.gov/pertussis/countries/index.html

        You’re a never-ending source of dangerous disinformation, Don. How many more kids need to suffer and die before you’re satisfied? Are you going to keep spreading disinformation on vitamin C and COVID-19 as well, to see how many more people can die from that?

      • afonzarelli | March 16, 2020 at 10:23 pm |

        It’s as though Atomsk has never heard of false paradigms before. He’s so insistent on his arrogant group think, that he can’t see beyond it. All disciplines entail a certain degree of corruption. (the real danger may lie in the herd mentality led by the atomsk’s of the world)…

      • Atomsk's Sanakan (@AtomsksSanakan) | March 17, 2020 at 12:10 am |

        @afonzarelli

        Re: “It’s as though Atomsk has never heard of false paradigms before. He’s so insistent on his arrogant group think, that he can’t see beyond it. All disciplines entail a certain degree of corruption. (the real danger may lie in the herd mentality led by the atomsk’s of the world)
”

        Evidence-free rhetoric from you, as usual. As ludicrous as saying that since someone somewhere once did some corruption in astronomy, we don’t know whether Earth is round, and it’s “arrogant group think” + “herd mentality” to debunk flat-Earthers. Drop your nirvana fallacy, and your tone argument; how arrogant you find me is irrelevant to the cogency of my point, and a scientific discipline can still have strongly supported conclusion even if someone somewhere was at some point corrupt. Perfection is not required for reliability. You don’t get to dodge the evidence on vaccine science with vague nonsense like that. You don’t get to insinuate a paradigm is false when you have next-to-no clue about the evidence in it. Do your homework, because your bluffing isn’t going to work on those who have. It’s quite easy to tell the people who’ve bothered to understand the science, and those who haven’t. (Hint: it’s those citing scientific research on well-evidenced point)

      • Don132 | March 17, 2020 at 5:46 am |

        “Are you denying that the outbreaks of pertussis that result from discontinuation of vaccinations are actually due to the discontinuation of the vaccinations?”

        Wait a minute– who discontinued the pertussis vaccine? Some people– a very small minority of the population– refuse it. And the paper said what it says: the pertussis vaccine does not stop the spread of pertussis.

      • Don132 | March 17, 2020 at 6:10 am |

        “I don’t condone negligence from guardians that places their wards at undue risk. I’m not alone in that. Complain all you want; I, and much the legal system, really could not care less about your complaints.”

        In special cases, the courts are justified in overruling parental wishes, but I’d have to say that those are very special cases. What you’re advocating is blanket removal of informed consent to medical treatment; I strongly disagree. Medical ethics has fallen short in the past, and we only have to look at the example of forced sterilizations or the Tuskegee experiment to see what can go wrong. In a world with rapidly evolving treatments, what else could go wrong if we decide that the state, or the medical authorities, can remove informed consent because the interests of the state or the authorities trump the interests of the individual in medical matters? That lands us squarely in the realm of forced medical procedures during the Third Reich: do we really want to go there? No chance, you say? And how do you know that? Once informed consent is thrown out the door it’ll be hard to get it back, especially when we might need it most.

        States are trying to remove non-medical exemptions to vaccines. Why? Because of a measles outbreak? Folks, you’re more likely to drown in the US than even catch a case of measles: look up the statistics. There is no measles crisis; it’s made-up, and the reason, I and others believe, is because they want to scare the bejesus out of people so that they can remove informed consent to vaccination, and then if they can get vaccines like Gardasil on the recommended list, then we’re talking some real money. So although it’s true that some medical journal editors have spoken out against the corruption of medical practice by the pharmaceutical industry, it seems to me odd that at the same time they act as if the vaccine industry is incapable of corrupting medical practice, even though vaccines are very profitable indeed and are projected to be engines for growth of pharmaceutical sales.

        In any case, the central issue should be: should informed consent to medication be removed? I vote “no” for reasons I’ve explained. In my opinion those who wish to removed informed consent have forgotten fairly recent history and are choosing the greater of two evils: removing informed consent or allowing a very few refusers, which refusers, for all practical purposes, DO NOT impact public health in any meaningful way.

      • Don132 | March 17, 2020 at 9:06 am |

        “Before I wade into it again, how can you tell that the vitamin-C research is free of the corruption you attribute to the rest of medical research?”

        The pharmaceutical has the money, is one of the largest lobbying organizations in the world, largely controls the medical journals, and has a huge influence on medical education, and you’re trying to say that the vitamin C researchers are cooking the books? Maybe they are. Let’s see.

        The VITAMINS trial tested whether the Marik protocol using vitamin C, thiamine, and hydrocortisone was effective in treating sepsis in an ICU, and the basis of the investigation was a paper published by Marik showing an astounding reduction in deaths by using the protocol. Marik’s paper was followed by the CITRIS-ALI trial, which was a double-blind placebo controlled trial that also found a statistically significant reduction in deaths with a vitamin C protocol (even though this wasn’t the primary outcome measured.) So naturally, another trial, the VITAMINS, was needed to test the protocol and they found no benefit at all. Zero. So what should we take away from that? Marik and Fowler, clinicians who’ve used this, say it works, and the CITRIS-ALI gave us good evidence.

        Maybe we need to look at the VITAMINS trial more closely, and here is where the video I linked to comes in handy, because it’s video of the presentation of the results of the VITAMINS trial to a group of physicians, with Dr. Marik invited to respond to the trial results. So far, so good … except, as we hear around the 33 minute mark, Dr. Marik never received the results of the trial until two days before the presentation. Does that seem reasonable? Also, as Dr. Marik pointed out and as I explained earlier, the time-to-treat in ICU sepsis cases is critical, and time-to-treat in the VITAMINS trial was much slower than that used in clinical practice. Was the trial, as Dr. Marik accused, designed to fail? Because point of fact it did not test the actual Marik protocol, although ostensibly– misleadingly?– it purports to have tested the protocol.

        The battle over vitamin C is on-going, and hence the VICTAS trial. So I suggest that if any tilting of the playing field was going on, it was going on by those who conducted the VITAMINS trial, not by those who’ve used vitamin C in clinical practice with good results. We’ll have to wait for the VICTAS trial results and we can only hope that these were conducted with an honest inquiry into the truth, and testing the protocol as it’s actually used in an ICU setting.

        I have no doubt there are honest, good researchers out there trying to do the right thing. But I also know that vitamin C therapy is a huge threat to the pharmaceutical industry, because my God, if this low-cost, safe therapy works as well as some say it does, then that opens the floodgates to vitamin therapy for other diseases and research into safer and cheaper alternatives to pharmaceuticals. Pharma does NOT want that to happen.

      • matthewrmarler | March 17, 2020 at 10:24 am |

        Don: Let’s not get in to a big vaccine argument; suffice it to say that there are many good physicians who disagree with the consensus.

        Right. It is “sufficient” to agree with you instead of disputing your claims.

      • matthewrmarler | March 17, 2020 at 10:28 am |

        Don132: Wait a minute– who discontinued the pertussis vaccine? Some people– a very small minority of the population– refuse it. And the paper said what it says: the pertussis vaccine does not stop the spread of pertussis.

        Second point first: in some primate models, which is why all things have to be tested in humans.

        When large numbers of people at the same time refuse the pertussis vaccine the pertussis incidence rises. Is that not true?

      • matthewrmarler | March 17, 2020 at 10:35 am |

        Don132: So naturally, another trial, the VITAMINS, was needed to test the protocol and they found no benefit at all. Zero. So what should we take away from that? Marik and Fowler, clinicians who’ve used this, say it works, and the CITRIS-ALI gave us good evidence.

        To date clinical trials have found no efficacy with regard to the pre-selected endpoints, though in fact the later “end points” were chosen after earlier failure with the preferred end points. For the reason that I wrote, there is at present no reliable evidence that the treatment works.

        For everything that does not work, there is a subset of clinicians who believe in it. You can still find clinicians recommending copper bracelets and snake venom for arthritis.

        I went to your sources and they are, using polite language, “weak”. You ought at least to be modest and avoid insulting those who disagree with you.

      • matthewrmarler | March 17, 2020 at 10:37 am |

        Don132: you’re trying to say that the vitamin C researchers are cooking the books?

        That is not what I wrote. Is it?

      • matthewrmarler | March 17, 2020 at 10:47 am |

        Don132: Good for you. Now, keep your paws off my kids.

        Schooling is required by law. Do my kids have to go to school with your unvaccinated kids, or can I, through my power as a voter and through legislation, require your kids to be vaccinated or choose a school for my kids that your kids do not attend? Right now my only alternatives are home schooling or moving out of your school district.

      • Wolf1 | March 17, 2020 at 12:48 pm |

        No, experts say no such thing about Vitamin C effectively treating sepsis. The one study which looked at the medical effectiveness of Vitamin C to treat sepsis failed – Vitamin C did not actually decrease rates of organ failure or reduce inflammation in sepsis patients. There was a lower mortality rate for patients, but the study was only 167 people with perhaps 64 dying (103 “completed”) – so the possibility of noise causing this result is very significant.

      • Don132 | March 17, 2020 at 1:37 pm |

        “Right. It is “sufficient” to agree with you instead of disputing your claims.”

        Look, this top posting isn’t about vaccines and I’d prefer to more-or-less let it drop. I can defend myself, rest assured.

        Regarding pertussis, the study says what it says: pertussis vaccine will protect the individual but won’t stop transmission. If you don’t like it, take it up with the study’s authors. That’s why the authorities had to scare people with measles (which, remember, you’re less likely to even catch than you are to die from drowning) instead of pertussis, which is more widespread and arguably more dangerous than measles.

      • Don132 | March 17, 2020 at 1:47 pm |

        “To date clinical trials have found no efficacy with regard to the pre-selected endpoints, though in fact the later “end points” were chosen after earlier failure with the preferred end points. For the reason that I wrote, there is at present no reliable evidence that the treatment works.”

        Resorting to making stuff up, are we? If you’d been paying attention you’d know that the primary end points were there all along, and so was the secondary endpoint: mortality. No one, not one person, is pretending that the secondary endpoint was shifted to be the primary endpoint– except perhaps you. I give Fowler credit because he could have made the SOFA scores of the deaths = 24 and thereby juiced the primary endpoints, as some urged him to do, but he decided to play it honestly.

        And pray tell what’s so terrible about a secondary endpoint that equals significantly fewer deaths with the vitamin C treatment?

        As for reliable evidence, again, please pay attention because Marik has had great clinical success, and he wrote it up in the medical journal “Chest,” and Fowler has had great clinical success and so have doctors in Europe. The point of the clinical trials was to test clinical experience, and so far I’d say the CITRIS-ALI trial was an important measure of success, unless you think that dying is a success. I, and many others, think the VITAMINS trial was flawed; hence, the VICTAS trial.

      • Don132 | March 17, 2020 at 2:03 pm |

        “The acellular version, which is now more commonly used, is known to prevent disease, but its preventing of transmission is a bit less clear. So, amazingly, you are complaining about a vaccine that’s known to prevent disease.”

        I’m not complaining about a vaccine known to prevent disease, but the plain fact is that you can’t blame the spread of pertussis on the unvaccinated, and the CDC knows this and has stated this. That doesn’t mean that the CDC is recommending against the vaccine, or against any vaccine. Nor did I say any such thing.

        Look, we can argue until the cows come home. If you want to get vaccinated, get vaccinated. If you want to force vaccination, then you’re walking down a very dangerous road, as history has shown us clearly.

        I think the reasonable position is that if society believes that vaccination is for the public good, then vaccine mandates are appropriate, and modest penalties are appropriate to encourage people to follow those mandates. However, oppressive penalties are not appropriate and are a step too close to removing informed consent to medical procedures. Since the definition of “oppressive” shifts and people can be very nasty about imposing their medical beliefs on others against their wills, I lean toward removing all penalties except those of making unvaccinated kids stay home during epidemics, and similar very modest and necessary and reasonable measures.

        I

      • Don132 | March 17, 2020 at 2:16 pm |

        “Schooling is required by law. Do my kids have to go to school with your unvaccinated kids, or can I, through my power as a voter and through legislation, require your kids to be vaccinated or choose a school for my kids that your kids do not attend? Right now my only alternatives are home schooling or moving out of your school district.”

        School kids don’t spontaneously bring in germs, as you should well know; they require transmission. Let’s suppose everyone was vaccinated against COVID-19 except for my kids, who go to your school. Then let’s suppose that there’s an outbreak of COVID-19. Lucky you: your kids are vaccinated! My kids have to go home until the disease clears up. I’m OK with that, and you should be, too.

        Lessor of two evils: is it worse if we remove the right to informed consent to vaccination, or is it worse if we allow a very small minority of the population to refuse some or all vaccines? You know where I stand, and my contention is that if you think removing informed consent is a good idea then you need to re-read some history, and you might want to start with reading about what the Nazi doctors did. But, you don’t even have to go that far; you can simply read what America did during the eugenics craze.

        With all the new genetics coming out and the promises of “sure-fire” solutions to social or public health problems through medicine, we should be very careful about giving up informed consent, because sometimes society as a whole makes some very bad decisions. Or, sometimes dictators arise.

      • Don132 | March 17, 2020 at 2:37 pm |

        “No, experts say no such thing about Vitamin C effectively treating sepsis.”

        Dr Marik is currently Professor of Medicine and Chief of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Eastern Virginia Medical School. He has used vitamin C in ICU sepsis cases with astonishing results and his published clinical study was what spurred this renewed interest in vitamin C.

        Dr. Fowler, William Taliaferro Thompson Professor of Medicine, Division of Pulmonary Disease and Critical Care Medicine, and Director, The VCU Johnson Center for Critical Care and Pulmonary Research, Virginia Commonwealth University School of Medicine, has corroborated Marik’s results, so I’d say that’s a pretty good start.

        Clinical trials are ongoing.

      • matthewrmarler | March 17, 2020 at 3:38 pm |

        Don132: And pray tell what’s so terrible about a secondary endpoint that equals significantly fewer deaths with the vitamin C treatment?

        Unless the secondary endpoint is specified before the sample has been randomized, there is not “statistical significance”.

        It’s the difference between asking “How likely is a result when the treatment is ineffective, just due to the randomization” and “How likely is it that we can find an apparently ‘signficant’ effect given the randomization and the lack of effect.” You can always find something post-hoc, so finding something post-hoc is evidence of data-dredging and nothing else. For evidence, you need a new trial to see if the likely adventitious result is reliable. You used the inappropriate word “terrible”, where the better words are “unreliable” and “adventitious”.

        It is the difference between testing a hypothesis and rescuing a hypothesis. Hypotheses can always be rescued via a thorough data dredge.

      • matthewrmarler | March 17, 2020 at 3:42 pm |

        Don132: Look, this top posting isn’t about vaccines and I’d prefer to more-or-less let it drop.

        Vaccines for the novel coronavirus have been developed, and at least one clinical trial is underway. I am sure we shall all be “discussing” their progress, formally or informally, for at least the next half year.

      • Don132 | March 17, 2020 at 4:40 pm |

        “Unless the secondary endpoint is specified before the sample has been randomized, there is not “statistical significance”.”

        Sorry, you’re just trying to deny results that you don’t like. Nothing about that trial was definitive; we all know that. Hence, more trials.

      • Wolf1 | March 18, 2020 at 8:58 am |

        Your arguments against mandatory vaccination are political, not medical or scientific.
        I also am impressed with how “consensus” anti-vax arguments are: they focus on the “profit” of mandatory vaccination much as the climate panicmongers focus on the profit of the fossil fuel companies.
        Yet the reality is that most nations – i.e. every 1st or 2nd world nation outside of the US – vaccination is *not* a huge profit center, because the national health care systems negotiate far lower prices.
        So throw that anti-vax argument out – it is a red herring.
        The other major anti-vax argument I see is that the scientific/medical evidence of the net benefits of vaccines isn’t clear because X disease didn’t actually kill that many people.
        Again, that is a non-starter. Every time I’ve looked at these arguments and the underlying data, the part that is (deliberately?) overlooked is the health care system impact and cost.
        For example: measles was killing “only” 400-500 a year in 1963 prior to the vaccine development. So the (unproven) risk of autism isn’t worth saving so few children – is the apparent argument.
        But again, a red herring. The 400-500 was the tip of a medical iceberg: CDC data shows 1,000 cases with brain swelling and 48000 hospitalizations. The US population in 1963 was under 60% of the population today, so the numbers for a not-measles vaccination US today would be 2/3rds higher. Is 650-800 deaths, 1600+ cases of encephalitis and 84000 hospitalizations not something worth preventing? Particularly since the autism thing is totally unproven?
        Seems pretty clear cut to me, but clearly YMMV.

      • Don132 | March 18, 2020 at 10:46 am |

        “Your arguments against mandatory vaccination are political, not medical or scientific.
        “I also am impressed with how “consensus” anti-vax arguments are: they focus on the “profit” of mandatory vaccination much as the climate panicmongers focus on the profit of the fossil fuel companies.
        Yet the reality is that most nations – i.e. every 1st or 2nd world nation outside of the US – vaccination is *not* a huge profit center, because the national health care systems negotiate far lower prices.”

        The plain fact is that vaccines are hugely profitable, and vaccines like Gardasil are billion-dollar blockbuster, regardless of whether or not the government buys these vaccines. https://www.ft.com/content/93374f4a-e538-11e5-a09b-1f8b0d268c39 and https://www.marketsandmarkets.com/PressReleases/vaccine-technologies.asp

        I’ve given up arguing so much about vaccine safety because this falls on deaf ears. I believe, through much reading of the evidence, that vaccines can cause very serious harms and these are ignored, and the reason these are ignored is partly for a good reason– we don’t want to scare people away from vaccines– and partly for a bad reason: we want to sell as many vaccines as possible. But the issue of safety is hugely complicated and takes a lot more evidence than I could possible give on this forum, what with all the counter-attacks that would have to be answered. So let’s let that be.

        I think the political argument is that best argument against forced vaccination. Many, many people believe that vaccines are good and necessary. I personally don’t quite buy it, but that doesn’t mean I’m against all vaccines all the time, and I know of very few so called “anti-vaxxers” (how about “vaccine safety advocates”?) who are. But the political argument is central, because given my side and given your side, what should we do? Force vaccines? Then you’re removing informed consent; really want to do that? Allow for people to refuse? My view is that with the very small number of people who refuse (and note that they often object only to the schedule or only to a few vaccines) aren’t hurting public health to any meaningful degree. Look at measles: very few cases, and yes, you really ARE more likely to drown than catch measles in the US. Thanks to the vaccine. So far, those who refuse this vaccine aren’t causing any real problems: a few cases, yes, but virtually no deaths in a population of 329 million. We can deal with a few refusers, but my contention is that informed consent is a core right that should never be given up. As I’ve said before, if too many people start refusing vaccines, the solution isn’t to tell them to shut up and take their vaccines, the solution is to pay attention to their concerns and look harder at the problems with the vaccine program, and ask if the CDC isn’t being a bit too cosy with pharma.

        A reasonable solution is for society to encourage vaccination but to allow people to opt-out with modest penalties (such as pulling children from school during an epidemic.) It actually has worked extremely well for us until people got all bent-out-of-shape over the non-measles “crisis” and decided that we’re all going to die unless every single person gets vaccinated for measles, whether they want to or not.

        Look at it this way, too: people aren’t stupid. If the Black Plague comes back (actually, it has, but that’s another story … ) do you suppose people are going to refuse to get vaccinated? Smallpox– how many would refuse if an epidemic came? COVID-19 vaccine: from the sounds of things today, supply couldn’t keep up with demand. The issue of forcing vaccination just strikes me as a misguided attempt to get Gardasil and other blockbuster vaccines mandated through the back door, since states refused to make this vaccine mandatory when Merck went around lobbying for it. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-merck-gardasil/merck-ending-lobbying-for-mandatory-gardasil-vaccine-idUSN2022501520070221 We’re talking big bucks with mandatory Gardasil, folks. Big bucks.

        Do NOT give up your right to informed consent. If you do, you may not be sorry, but your children’s children’s children might be.

      • Wolf1 | March 18, 2020 at 8:53 pm |

        @Don132
        You are still keeping with the anti-vax strategy: now you’re saying vaccination is a freedom/liberty thing.
        The reality is: vaccination is a law. I have no problems with anyone deciding to not follow the law – but they should be prepared for the consequences: fines, no school, etc.
        If there were even the slightest actual evidence of net harm from vaccines (note I did not say no harm – because that is another red herring), then it would be easy to push for a change in the laws. There is no such validation however.
        Instead, there is a very insidious and well funded anti-vax movement – including shared playbooks and institutional funding from Mercola, among others.

      • Don132 | March 18, 2020 at 9:23 pm |

        “Instead, there is a very insidious and well funded anti-vax movement – including shared playbooks and institutional funding from Mercola, among others.”

        And there’s not an insidious and well-funded pharmaceutical campaign to get us to take as many drugs and vaccines as possible, with institutional funding from Merck and company?

        So then, are you willing to dispense with informed consent? That is the question, and that’s what out differences all boil down to. If you are, we have nothing more to say. I’m not going to change your mind, and you’re not going to change mine.

        Sorry we got so sidetracked, but I DID say that I’d prefer we didn’t get into it.

      • matthewrmarler | March 18, 2020 at 9:59 pm |

        Don132: Sorry, you’re just trying to deny results that you don’t like.

        No. The phrase “statistical significance” (along congeners and associated concepts like “p-value” have technical definitions that are commonly ignored after the tests of the primary endpoints.

      • Don132 | March 19, 2020 at 5:24 am |

        “No. The phrase “statistical significance” (along congeners and associated concepts like “p-value” have technical definitions that are commonly ignored after the tests of the primary endpoints.”

        Good Lord, please understand what the study said before saying things like that. You don’t know what you’re talking about in relation to that study.

      • Wolf1 | March 19, 2020 at 11:03 am |

        No, there isn’t an insidious and well funded conspiracy to promote vaccines.
        There is all manner of extremely well documented studies showing that
        a) the vaccines don’t cause harm
        b) the vaccines confer benefit
        So again, your anti-vax playbook is trying hard but still fails to address the core issues.

      • Don132 | March 19, 2020 at 12:00 pm |

        Wolf1: “No, there isn’t an insidious and well funded conspiracy to promote vaccines.

        [No? Merck didn’t push hard to get Gardasil mandated among the states, even though cervical cancer isn’t a communicable disease in the sense that we typical think of these?]

        There is all manner of extremely well documented studies showing that
        a) the vaccines don’t cause harm
        b) the vaccines confer benefit
        So again, your anti-vax playbook is trying hard but still fails to address the core issues.”

        Point B is accepted, point A is not, and my opinion is that you simply don’t know all of the details and published research that refute point A.

        Suggest we drop this because trust me, I can go a very long time and I know a hell of a lot more about the politics of vaccination, and the abuse of science in order to quell fears of vaccination (and sell vaccines) than you do. We’d just get into a very long back-and-forth that would be far from the topic at hand, which I believe was the coronavirus.

        It all boils down to: should we force vaccination? That’s where it all lands.

        It doesn’t matter what you think about vaccines. It doesn’t matter what the science says. It doesn’t matter what I say. It doesn’t matter if “anti-vaxxers” are all complete lunatics that should be in the madhouse. The question of “should we force medication on the general public?” falls into the realm of ethics, irrespective of which medication or treatment it is we’re forcing. And the answer, I believe, is a resounding “no.”

    • Atomsk's Sanakan (@AtomsksSanakan) | March 16, 2020 at 6:17 pm |

      It looks like medical scientists, doctors, public health officials, epidemiologists, etc. are paying attention to the recommendations for the World Health Organization (WHO), by making the evidence-based scientific consensus clear. For example:

      “The species Severe acute respiratory syndrome-related coronavirus: classifying 2019-nCoV and naming it SARS-CoV-2”
      https://www.nature.com/articles/s41564-020-0695-z

      “Diagnosis, treatment, and prevention of 2019 novel coronavirus infection in children: experts’ consensus statement”
      https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12519-020-00343-7?fbclid=IwAR3Izw7GwUnDAmjMYUcRRL9lpGVmn4AHQnqadDvIneOsy0AMgYlhYM1-ltY

      Good. We don’t want a repeat of HIV/AIDS, vaccination, the health risks of smoking and second-hand smoking, etc. where contrarians misled the public, to the point that many people ignored the evidence-based scientific consensus and (at least) thousands needlessly suffered and/or died. Those examples show the danger of relying on random paranoid people, instead of reputable scientific sources, especially paranoid people who downplay the evidence-based scientific consensus. For those who want to learn more about the consensus statements on those topics, and how contrarians tried to downplay them, see:

      https://ncse.ngo/files/pub/RNCSE/31/5-All.pdf
      https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/interactives/public-scientists-opinion-gap/
      “HIV denial in the Internet era”
      “The Durban Declaration”       [DOI: doi.org/10.1038/35017662]
      “Countering evidence denial and the promotion of pseudoscience in autism spectrum disorder”

      “In this way, the tobacco industry managed to sustain the widespread perception of an active and highly contested scientific controversy into the 1960s despite overwhelming evidence and scientific consensus that smoking caused serious disease.
      […]
      But skepticism does not indicate that there is not consensus. With each passing year, skepticism concerning the relationship between smoking and cancer was increasingly dominated by industry resources and public media.
      […]
      By making science fair game in the battle of public relations, the tobacco industry set a destructive precedent that would affect future debates on subjects ranging from global warming to food and pharmaceuticals.”
      https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3490543/

      This biology and medicine, folks. Don’t use it as a game to spout whatever conspiracy ideation you brought from climate “skepticism”. I, and others with a background in biology, are not going to stand-by doing nothing while charalatans try to mislead people.

      https://twitter.com/AtomsksSanakan/status/1234208708902735873

      • Robert I. Ellison | March 17, 2020 at 1:13 am |

        “The new paradigm of an abruptly changing climatic system has been well established by research over the last decade, but this new thinking is little known and scarcely appreciated in the wider community of natural and social scientists and policy-makers.” Executive Summary. National Research Council. 2002. Abrupt Climate Change: Inevitable Surprises. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10136

        I noted the word paradigm in skimming Atomski’s oft repeated arguments that are as usual merely an appeal to consensus on AIDS, smoking, vaccines, etc in support of an entrenched climate agnotology. Tim Palmer and Bjorn Sevens recently called it a congealed consensus at odds with the true state of climate science (Palmer and Stevens, 2019). Not science at all in other words – merely social stereotyping.

      • Atomsk's Sanakan (@AtomsksSanakan) | March 17, 2020 at 2:11 am |

        Leave biology and medical science to competent people. Robert. Your usual evidence-free talking points about paradigms and blah blah blah, does nothing to address the published evidence in this topic and the evidence-based scientific consensus. If you aren’t willing to do the reading, don’t bother those who have.

      • jungletrunks | March 17, 2020 at 12:16 pm |

        “Leave biology and medical science to competent people.”

        Atomsk’s Sanakan, what’s really your competency on climate other than regurgitating appeals from consensus? It appears nothing hinders your rehearsed sense of authority if it buttresses your ideological concerns.

      • afonzarelli | March 17, 2020 at 12:49 pm |

        Robert(!) i never thought you’d show up. Without you around, our boorish little friend out of texas (whose three capital letter handle sends my oft deriding comments into moderation) has had unfettered free reign on this thread!!! Just imagine an overweight 70+ year old, high on acid, dancing at a Dead & Company show in the nude. (that’s how ugly this thing got) Always nice to see you and read your comments on any thread…

        post script ~ looks like atomsk could use a little coming down off his high as well

      • Don Monfort | April 23, 2020 at 2:29 pm |

        We will see when the results of dozens of clinical trials of HDQ+AZ are reported, verytrollguy. So far you TDS jokers with your vendetta against HDQ have the Brazil “study” where they overdosed patients with 12 grams of chloroquine in ten day treatments, not hydroxychloroquine, and the retrospective “study” of VA patients, who were given HDQ when they had one foot in the body bag. Is any of that peer-reviewed science, verytrollguy?

        Meanwhile HDQ is being used all over the world by many thousands of practicing physicians on many thousands of COVID 19 patients. They see the results first hand. This is how medical science progressed for hundreds of years, before mid 20th century. Of course, you know squat about medical science.

        There is no treatment for COVID 19 that has gone through randomized double blind placebo controlled clinical trials. According to the way you TDS clowns look at science, in NY they are killing 9 out of 10 patients, by putting them on ventilators.

      • Don132 | April 23, 2020 at 3:46 pm |

        At one time I linked elsewhere to the opinions of a clinical care specialist who explained what was likely happening with the biochemistry of Covid-19. https://www.hippocraticpost.com/covid-19-update/has-covid-19-had-us-all-fooled/?utm_source=website&utm_medium=webpush&utm_campaign=notifications

        As you can see, the essay has been taken down– why? If it was wrong, then explain why. In any case this anonymous person stated that Covid-19 appeared to be attacking hemoglobin, and hydroxychloroquine worked to reverse these effects. This person explained each of the markers of disease progression and how they could be explained by his hypothesis. Unfortunately I copied the link but not the paper.

        As for clinical testing, in my opinion the success of a test often depends on whether or not they want the test to succeed. It’s a much more brutal world than those who are innocent of the shenanigans of the medical-industrial complex want to believe, and their blinders of “oh that’s conspiracy theory” often keep them from seeing the truth.

        For example, it’s recently come to my attention that the WHO is comprised of many good people with some real jerks in key positions who manage to subvert real science. If you think this is conspiracy theory, it might be, but watch the documentary “Trust WHO” and ask yourself who is telling the truth (those with unbounded faith in authority will watch with blinders on.) Or read this interesting piece by a WHO epidemiologist who calls out the fiasco the WHO committed when it set in motion the swine flu pandemic of 2009. http://assembly.coe.int/CommitteeDocs/2010/20100126_ContributionKeil.pdf

        It’s very interesting that the same person who gave out wildly inflated estimates of swine flu deaths that proved to be wildly wrong– a Dr. Ferguson– happens to be the very same Dr. Ferguson of Imperial College who gave out wild estimates of Covid deaths before walking them back–er, I mean clarifying what he really meant (after scaring the hell out of everyone.) https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1180731/Swine-flu-infect-worlds-population-detailed-study-virus-predicts.html

        So my opinion now is that everything that comes from WHO is BS, pure and simple. Remember that the WHO told us that it could see no evidence of large numbers of uncounted cases in China, when common sense would have told us that of course there were likely to be a good many mild or maybe even asymptomatic cases that were never tested. All of the evidence since then– and even at the time– confirms this, and confirms that the infection fatality rate is far lower than the original fear-mongering suggested, and confirms that however many good people are at WHO, basically they’re talking out of both sides of their mouths. https://ahrp.org/who-controls-the-who/

        My question is: has the WHO created another pandemic? And why? Who benefits? Because one thing we know for sure by now is that this disease leaves a large majority of people with mild or no symptoms, and that’s not the mark of a dangerous killer that requires shutting down the world economy.

      • matthewrmarler | April 23, 2020 at 3:58 pm |

        Don132: As for clinical testing, in my opinion the success of a test often depends on whether or not they want the test to succeed.

        This is one of the reasons that double-blind placebo-controlled trials with random assignment are necessary. That way the possibilities for cognitive and motivational biases to pervert the outcome are greatly reduced.

      • Don132 | April 23, 2020 at 4:59 pm |

        M: “This is one of the reasons that double-blind placebo-controlled trials with random assignment are necessary. That way the possibilities for cognitive and motivational biases to pervert the outcome are greatly reduced. ”

        Ya, but funny thing is when they went to do the VITAMINS trial to test the Marik protocol, they never once asked him what the protocol actually was so they ended up giving it too patients too late. So that double-blind placebo controlled trail ended up finding: no good! Now wasn’t that a coincidence, because it was testing the efficacy of vitamin C, and we all know that vitamin C is worthless for anything.

    • matthewrmarler | March 17, 2020 at 10:21 am |

      Atomsk’s Sanakan: “Trump claims public health warnings on covid-19 are a conspiracy against him”
      goes to
      Trump claims public health warnings on covid-19 are a conspiracy against him

      O Dyer – 2020 – bmj.com US public health officials are struggling to overcome conflicting messaging on covid-19 from the White House, as Donald Trump seems to want to downplay the threat, hoping to
      minimise economic disruption that could harm his chances of re-election in November.The virus seized Trump’s attention on his 26 February return from India, as he watched on the screens of Air Force One the first stock market plunge driven by pandemic fears. He took to Twitter to complain that “Low Ratings Fake News… are doing everything possible to make 


      There is no complete and accurate quote of what Trump actually said. He was asserting that some “news” sources and Democratic operatives (or politicians) were exaggerating the problems. Not that warnings from Anthony Fauci, for example, or other health experts were conspiring against him. Note the ellipses (…) and “seems to want”. As early as anyone else in authority, he restricted travel to the US from China, a clear indication that he took the threat seriously, a move that has probably saved hundreds of American lives so far.

      • Atomsk's Sanakan (@AtomsksSanakan) | March 18, 2020 at 2:41 am |

        Then go watch the video of what he said:

        https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/trump-coronavirus-rally-remark/
        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NbwCjL7HC1c

        He erroneously downplayed COVID-19 in his comparison of it to the flu, despite COVID-19’s likely higher mortality rate. And he said the criticism of his response to it was a political hoax, even though much of those criticism were coming from public health experts.

        So no, I’m not going to give that charlatan the benefit of the doubt, given his track-record on attacking the medical profession. He’s setup an environment where his followers are more likely to be distrustful of public health officials, especially when it comes to viewing vaccinations negatively. Do you see the problem with that, once more coronavirus vaccinations become available?

        https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/507158574670573568

        “Donald Trump and vaccination: The effect of political identity, conspiracist ideation and presidential tweets on vaccine hesitancy”
        “Processing political misinformation: comprehending the Trump phenomenon”
        “It’s not all about autism: The emerging landscape of anti-vaccination sentiment on Facebook”

      • tonyb | March 18, 2020 at 5:34 am |

        Atomsk’s Sanakan

        As a medical person I would be interested to hear your comments on a question I asked elsewhere

        On several different sites I have seen someone assert that fully one third of Italians are resistant to anti biotics as it is so commonly prescribed over there, implying this has an effect on the large number of covid 19 cases.

        Can anyone tell me if;

        A) That is true
        b) What sort of medical conditions were being treated with the antibiotics
        c) Are those medical conditions likely to result in greater susceptibility to corona virus
        d) Are anti biotics actually used to treat this virus

        There are many cultural differences between the Italian and Anglo culture which will likely affect the spread of the virus so I wondered if this anti biotics business was one of them? Thanks

        I received this reply

        “ANSA) – Milan, March 13 – Italy is top in Europe for antibiotics-resistant deaths, according to a Higher Health Institute (ISS) study to be presented to the VII international congress of the Infectious and Tropical Issues (AMIT) organisation.

        Italy alone accounts for more than 10,000 of Europe’s 33,000 deaths due to resistance to antibiotics each year, the ISS said.

        It said that in 2050 bacterial infections will be the main cause of deaths in Italy.”

        http://www.ansa.it/english/news/science_tecnology/2019/03/13/italy-top-for-antibiotics-resistance_f0042073-b347-4787-978c-2e642c0255d1.html

        I then commented

        Thanks for that. So I guess my question A) is answered. Hopefully others can answer the others.

        A highly tactile nation with many intergenerational contacts with an older generation resistant to anti biotics and who habitually smoked does not sound a good combination to resist this virus.

        —- ——
        So, can you answer any of my other three questions? Thanks

        tonyb

      • Atomsk's Sanakan (@AtomsksSanakan) | March 18, 2020 at 12:03 pm |

        Yes, resistance rates for specific antibiotics were increasing in places like Italy and various other countries (ex: 10.1186/s13756-015-0087-y ; https://www.uptodate.com/contents/epidemiology-of-extensively-drug-resistant-tuberculosis; FYI: UpToDate is one of the best resources for staying up-to-date on medicine). But that would be antibiotic-resistance for specific bacteria in response to specific antibiotics, not people being resistant to all antibiotics in general. For example, MRSA is specifically about the bacteria S. aureus being resistant to the antibiotic methicillin. So you would treat MRSA with a different antibiotic, such as clindamycin or doxycycline.

        It therefore makes no sense to claim that 1/3 of Italians are resistant to antibiotics in general. They might have a particular bacteria resistant to particular antiobiotics or classes of antibiotics. But it’s unlikely those bacteria are resistant to all anitbiotics.

        The antibiotics treat bacteria that cause of a range of conditions. For Italy, common ones would be bacteria causing pneumonia, such as A. baumannii and K. pneumoniae. COVID-19 also causes pneumonia, but an antibiotic wouldn’t treat the virus itself since it isn’t a bacteria. However, an out-of-control viral infection would make you more susceptible to bacteria that could themselves cause pneumonia. So a standard treatment would be an anti-viral with an antibiotic, at least for the treatment algorithms I’ve seen. For example, the anti-viral arbidol with an antibiotic like levofloxacin ( https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanres/article/PIIS2213-2600(20)30071-0/fulltext ).

        Hope that addresses some of your questions.

      • JCH | March 18, 2020 at 12:15 pm |

        Atomsk’s – anecdotal, but in a TV interview with an infected victim form Georgia, a retiree, he said he was getting better and that he was being treated with antibiotics. He was back on TV abut a week later so it does look like he is going to make it. May have meant anti-virals.

      • JCH | March 18, 2020 at 12:19 pm |

        Should have read your post more carefully. That is how a veterinarian of the 50’s through 70’s would have treated every animal in a herd where viral pneumonia was present.

      • tonyb | March 18, 2020 at 1:46 pm |

        Atomsk’s Sanakan

        Thanks for your response. On a related theme I know that there is some talk of anti malarial drugs being possibly found useful to counter covid 19 and the UK has actually recently forbidden the export of one of them, Chloroquine.
        .
        Willis Essenbach did an interesting analysis of the Cases/deaths on the Diamond Princess ( I don’t want to get into a discussion on your thoughts of his capabilities!!)

        I did a bit of poking around myself to see if the passengers may have been taking anti malarial precautions which MAY have protected them following a comment elsewhere;

        “On the theme of the effect of anti-malarials, is it possible that these drugs could have influenced the Diamond Princess outcome?”

        I then did some research on the subject following this post

        Malaria is found in more than 100 countries, mainly in tropical regions of the world, including:
        large areas of Africa and Asia.
        Central and South America.
        Haiti and the Dominican Republic.
        parts of the Middle East.
        some Pacific islands

        When the Diamond Princess left the port of Yokohama in Japan on January 20, the 2,666 passengers on board were ready to enjoy a trip to China, Vietnam and Taiwan.

        I Looked at the UK NHS web site
        https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/malaria

        and also specific advice for travellers to the area.

        Taiwan would seem to be free of malaria but have other infection possibilities. Both China and Vietnam have Malaria and numerous other dangers . Reading the advice from the Diamond Princess operators and the medical authorities, vaccinations are suggested or required, together with taking anti malarial tablets including Chloroquine.

        Bearing in mind the age group and likely health issues of many of the passengers and mandatory country requirements and Insurance demands, I would be amazed if anti malarial type precautions were not required for EVERY passenger. Whether that applies to crew members I can’t say.

        So that could explain why the entire complement on the ship didn’t come down with Covid 19 in the restricted and close quarters of the ship if indeed, as is being suggested, anti malarial drugs have some impact on it.

        Any thoughts?

        tonyb

      • Atomsk's Sanakan (@AtomsksSanakan) | April 14, 2020 at 10:49 pm |

        Re: “Thanks for your response. On a related theme I know that there is some talk of anti malarial drugs being possibly found useful to counter covid 19 and the UK has actually recently forbidden the export of one of them, Chloroquine.”

        Hydroxychloroquine differs from chloroquine. But this class of medication has previously been used to treat viral infections. For example:

        “Current and future use of chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine in infectious, immune, neoplastic, and neurological diseases: a mini-review”
        “New insights into the antiviral effects of chloroquine”
        “Chloroquine and beyond: exploring anti-rheumatic drugs to reduce immune hyperactivation in HIV/AIDS”

        This makes some sense since this class of medication helps limit hyper-inflammatory responses, as would occur in a cytokine storm. To simplify: one of the problems with COVID is that one’s immune system over-reacts to the virus. Medications like hydroxychloroquine help limit that immune response, which is why these medications are sometimes given to people who have conditions like rheumatoid arthritis and lupus, in which one’s immune system is hyperactive.

        However, there’s currently insufficient evidence for thinking hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine would be effective treatments for COVID-19, outside of emergencies or experimental contexts. More testing needs to be done before giving a medication (as standard of care) that suppresses the immune system. After all, in principle it’s possible to suppress the immune system so much that you just make the disease worse. And you need to know how patient’s bodies will respond to drug doses in the midst of this specific type of viral pneumonia. For further context, see the sources below:

        Non-peer-reviewed manuscript:
        “Chloroquine diphosphate in two different dosages as adjunctive therapy of hospitalized patients with severe respiratory syndrome in the context of coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) infection: Preliminary safety results of a randomized, double-blinded, phase IIb clinical trial (CloroCovid-19 Study
        […]
        Preliminary findings suggest that the higher CQ dosage (10-day regimen) should not be recommended for COVID-19 treatment because of its potential safety hazards. Such results forced us to prematurely halt patient recruitment to this arm.”
        https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.07.20056424v1.full.pdf

        “Hydroxychloroquine-COVID-19 study did not meet publishing society’s “expected standard”
        […]
        The paper that appears to have triggered the Trump administration’s obsession with hydroxychloroquine as a treatment for infection with the novel coronavirus has received a statement of concern from the society that publishes the journal in which the work appeared.
        […]
        Last month, Elisabeth Bik took a close look at the IJAA article and detailed a long list of serious problems with the study, including questions about its ethical underpinnings, messy confounding variables, missing patients, rushed and conflicted peer review, and confusing data.
        Others have used PubPeer to report additional issues with the Raoult article.”
        https://retractionwatch.com/2020/04/06/hydroxychlorine-covid-19-study-did-not-meet-publishing-societys-expected-standard/

        Below are links to the PubPeer threads on the paper and its draft, along with Bik’s criticism of the paper:

        https://pubpeer.com/publications/B4044A446F35DF81789F6F20F8E0EE
        https://pubpeer.com/publications/E09AC9D25125B0AB077971FBA6DD7B
        https://scienceintegritydigest.com/2020/03/24/thoughts-on-the-gautret-et-al-paper-about-hydroxychloroquine-and-azithromycin-treatment-of-covid-19-infections/

        And below is a link to the IJAA’s (the International Journal of Antimicrobial Agents) notice on the paper in question:

        “The use of chloroquine/hydroxychloroquine as a potential prevention or treatment for COVID-19 has been reported anecdotally but there is currently no large-scale data available on its safety and efficacy for this use.
        […]
        Concerns have been raised regarding the content, the ethical approval of the trial and the process that this paper underwent to be published within International Journal of Antimicrobial Agents.
        In response, we want to clarify that the journal’s standard peer review process was followed in the publication of this paper. […]
        At present, additional independent peer review is ongoing to ascertain whether concerns about the research content of the paper have merit.”
        https://www.isac.world/news-and-publications/official-isac-statement

        Re: “Willis Essenbach did an interesting analysis of the Cases/deaths on the Diamond Princess ( I don’t want to get into a discussion on your thoughts of his capabilities!!)”

        You mean the non-expert charlatan who wrote things like?:

        “I’ve been following the many changes in the IHME coronavirus model used by our very own most incompetent Dr. Fauci.”
        https://wattsupwiththat.com/2020/04/08/flattening-the-curve/

        No, I prefer competent people who actually know what they’re talking about, instead of a contrarian blogger who distorts science (both climate science and medical science) to suit his preferred ideology. Even other bloggers can debunk Willis’ long history of screw-ups. For example:

        https://tamino.wordpress.com/2017/07/22/does-willis-eschenbach-have-any-honor/
        https://tamino.wordpress.com/2018/12/06/cooling-down-the-what/

      • Atomsk's Sanakan (@AtomsksSanakan) | April 22, 2020 at 11:56 pm |

        Predictable results when a country elects a President who is an anti-vaxxer and who casts undue aspersions on medical experts who know more than him. To cut a long story short:

        – there is currently insufficient evidence for using hydroxychloroquine to treat COVID-19, outside of experimental settings
        – there’s evidence of COVID-19 patients experiencing serious adverse events in response to hydroxychloroquine
        – Donald Trump was asinine + irresponsible for going against his administration’s medical experts by recommending hydroxychloroquine as a COVID-19 treatment before this drug was well-tested for that purpose
        – though research should continue on hydroxychloroquine to follow-up on positive preliminary results, there is a serious risk of shortage of the medication for rheumatology patients who need it
        – a medical/scientific expert was removed from their position in helping develop a SARS-CoV-2 vaccine, because they didn’t go along with Trump’s nonsense on hydroxychloroquine

        https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/22/us/politics/rick-bright-trump-hydroxychloroquine.html

        “The doctor who led the federal agency involved in developing a coronavirus vaccine said on Wednesday that he was removed from his post after he pressed for rigorous vetting of hydroxychloroquine, an anti-malaria drug embraced by President Trump as a coronavirus treatment, and that the administration has put “politics and cronyism ahead of science.
        […]
        In briefing after briefing with reporters at the White House, Mr. Trump defied the voices of medical experts and some of his own top advisers — including Dr. Anthony S. Fauci, the nation’s top infectious disease specialist and an adviser to the coronavirus task force. They cautioned that hydroxychloroquine, which is used to treat autoimmune diseases like rheumatoid arthritis and lupus as well as malaria, needed to undergo the same kind of rigorous evaluation that other drugs do.
        […]
        In mid-April, a small trial in Brazil was halted after some patients developed irregular heart rates. Then a study this week of 368 Veterans Affairs patients, which has not been peer-reviewed, found that it did not help patients avoid the need for ventilators, and that the use of the drug alone was associated with an increased risk of death. And this week, a panel of the government’s own experts at the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases said there was “insufficient data” to recommend taking it to treat symptoms from the virus.
        The president has not talked much since then about hydroxychloroquine.”
        https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/coronavirus-vaccine-doctor-says-he-was-fired-over-doubts-on-hydroxychloroquine/ar-BB133TTm?li=BBnb7Kz&ocid=DELLDHP17

        “At present, no drug has been proven to be safe and effective for treating COVID-19. There are insufficient data to recommend either for or against the use of any antiviral or immunomodulatory therapy in patients with COVID-19 who have mild, moderate, severe, or critical illness (AIII).”
        https://www.covid19treatmentguidelines.nih.gov/overview/
        [ http://archive.is/xrDOb#selection-411.0-415.1 ]

        Accepted pre-proof:
        “No evidence of rapid antiviral clearance or clinical benefit with the combination of hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin in patients with severe COVID-19 infection”

        Non-peer-reviewed manuscript:
        “In this study, we found no evidence that use of hydroxychloroquine, either with or without azithromycin, reduced the risk of mechanical ventilation in patients hospitalized with Covid-19. An association of increased overall mortality was identified in patients treated with hydroxychloroquine alone.”
        https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.16.20065920v1.full.pdf

        “There is enough rationale to justify the continued investigation of the efficacy and safety of HCQ in hospitalized patients with COVID-19. It is critical to reiterate that although viral clearance is important, clinical outcomes are much more relevant to patients. There currently are no data to recommend the use of HCQ as prophylaxis for COVID-19, although we eagerly await data from trials under way. Thus, we discourage its off-label use until justified and supply is bolstered. The HCQ shortage not only will limit availability to patients with COVID-19 if efficacy is truly established but also represents a real risk to patients with rheumatic diseases who depend on HCQ for their survival.”
        https://annals.org/aim/fullarticle/2764065

        “Potential shortages of hydroxychloroquine for patients with lupus during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic”

        from 2:15 – 4:08 :

      • Don Monfort | April 23, 2020 at 12:11 pm |

        A genius epididdlymologist like yourself should know that the VA retrospective proves nothing about the safety and effectiveness of hydroxychloroquine. I could explain why, but a cherry picker with an ax to grind like you is impermeable to logic and facts. Same with the Brazil shutting down of one arm of a trial that was overdosing patients. That just proves that 12 grams of HDQ in 10 days is too much. There are dozens of ongoing trials that have not been shut down. Hydroxychlorquine is still in widespread use in many countries. You hate it because TDS.

      • verytallguy | April 23, 2020 at 12:21 pm |

        I’m *very* disappointed in you Don, continuing to bang the hydroxychloroquine drum in the absence of evidence.

        You’ve let the denizens down

        You’ve let yourself down.

        But worst of all, in the end you’ll have let your big orange idol down too.

        Must try harder. I believe Popper is poppular around here? Take a week reading him and all the evidence. Report back.

      • dpy6629 | April 23, 2020 at 12:44 pm |

        Michael Lin from Stanford cites strong evidence that Chloroquin works in tests in cultures of human cells. He mentions about 4 other drugs that also have evidence they might work.

        This whole controversy is political hacks using it as a weapon to attack their already tarred and feathered favorite witches, i.e., its about OMBS (orange man bad syndrome) whose primary symptom is BS.

        Doctors can make their own decisions on this front and will do so. With proper dosing there is zero evidence of serious side effects perf my brother. He says his hospitals are using it with a 5 day dosing regimen. If I was ill I would probably ask to have it prescribed. Trump haters can make their own decisions. Banning it as half-Witmer did is actually probably illegal and certainly very stupid and partisan hack behaviour.

      • verytallguy | April 23, 2020 at 1:41 pm |

        Hi dpy,

        One of the very few positives of COVID has been the entertainment of your meltdown into an inability to even pretend a facade of scientific detachment.

        Your ever more histrionic determination “to defeat the managerial state that Woodrow Wilson wanted to substitute for the Constitution and that Eisenhower warned about” and its concomitant desperation to avoid facing facts provides dark amusement as we ponder the nature of humanity during “La Peste”.

      • dpy6629 | April 23, 2020 at 2:29 pm |

        Another ad hominem fact free rant from an anonymous (very huge though) internet hack. You really should try to get some medical help for your OMBS.

        Also you are cherry picking out of my massive postings a single sentence. That’s partisan hack behaviour but it fits your long established pattern.

        How about chloroquine? No doubt you are an instant internet medical expert too.

      • dpy6629 | April 23, 2020 at 2:43 pm |

        Verytrollguy is very good Don. Wish I’d thought of it.

      • Don Monfort | April 23, 2020 at 3:08 pm |

        Partisan hack is good too, dpy. I’ll use that one, next time he rears.

      • matthewrmarler | April 23, 2020 at 4:04 pm |

        dpy6629: Michael Lin from Stanford cites strong evidence that Chloroquin works in tests in cultures of human cells.

        Lots of things work in tests in cultures but not in whole human bodies. That is why so many drugs fail in clinical trials after having been brought forward into clinical trials in the first place.

      • dpy6629 | April 23, 2020 at 4:06 pm |

        Yes Matt, I agree that its only a sign that further testing is warranted.

      • Atomsk's Sanakan (@AtomsksSanakan) | April 23, 2020 at 5:40 pm |

        Re: “Michael Lin from Stanford cites strong evidence that Chloroquin works in tests in cultures of human cells. He mentions about 4 other drugs that also have evidence they might work.”

        Yet you don’t actually cite the research in question. Typical for you. Also, it’s chloroquine, not “Chloroquin”. And hydroxychloroquine is not the same thing as chloroquine. I suggest you look up why the former is being used more than the latter (hint: toxicity). Spelling errors are fine. Treating chloroquine as if it’s hydroxychloroquine isn’t. If you cannot get basic points like this right, then people should not be relying on you on this subject.

        Moreover, cultured cells are not clinical efficacy, dpy. I suggest you learn the differences between ‘in vitro anti-viral activity’, ‘in vivo anti-viral activity’, ‘in vivo efficacy in a non-human animal model’, and ‘clinical efficacy in humans’. Then review the following:

        Peer-reviewed: “No evidence of rapid antiviral clearance or clinical benefit with the combination of hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin in patients with severe COVID-19 infection”
        Non-peer-reviewed: “No evidence of clinical efficacy of hydroxychloroquine in patients hospitalised for COVID-19 infection and requiring oxygen: results of a study using routinely collected data to emulate a target trial”
        Non-peer-reviewed: “Outcomes of hydroxychloroquine usage in United States veterans hospitalized with Covid-19”

        Correspondence:
        “Could chloroquine/hydroxychloroquine be harmful in Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) treatment?
        […]
        In conclusion:
        Despite the in vivo antiviral activity, no acute virus infection has been successfully treated by CQ/HCQ in humans [7];
        CQ/HCQ did not show any anti–SARS-CoV effect in an in vivo model [3]”

        Re: “With proper dosing there is zero evidence of serious side effects perf my brother.”

        Your brother? Are you serious? Well, that trumps decades of research on the real risk of serious side effects from hydroxychloroquine, even with proper dosing (let alone in people weakened by COVID-19). Same for published research on adverse events in COVID-19 patients from hydroxychloroquine treatment. All of that science is moot because dpy claims his brother said something.

        Re: “This whole controversy is political hacks using it as a weapon to attack their already tarred and feathered favorite witches, i.e., its about OMBS (orange man bad syndrome) whose primary symptom is BS.
        […]
        If I was ill I would probably ask to have it prescribed. Trump haters can make their own decisions. Banning it as half-Witmer did is actually probably illegal and certainly very stupid and partisan hack behaviour.”

        Oh look, political grand-standing that does nothing to address the evidence I cited. It’s pretty clear who’s using politics to avoid what the evidence shows. And his name being with d.

        Anyway, dpy, you can return to using your usual excuses for avoiding points that rebut you (ex: ‘oh, some many words; my attention-span can’t take that!).

      • Don Monfort | April 23, 2020 at 5:50 pm |

        Hatchet-faced blatantly hostile and biased MSDNC talking head thought she was going to nail VA Sec. Bob Wilkie. She failed. The frustrated
        thing saved the “study” of hydroxychloroquine use in VA hospitals for last. Wilkie says it does work on patients, who are not already at death’s door. They won’t invite Wilkie back again. And you won’t see the other DNC media talking about what the VA Sec. said about the recent sensational “VA is killing vets with HDQ” story. The worst virus we have in the country is the terrible media.

        We are well past experiments in vitro. There are dozens of government sanctioned clinical trials ongoing. There are observational studies by thousands of front line docs, who have treated thousands of COVID 19 patients.

        Has anybody heard of any significant number of the front line docs stating that HDQ doesn’t work and they ain’t using it any more? Or that there are significant numbers of serious side effects? The TDS media would make sure you heard about it 24/7, if it were so. Gov Cuomo has promoted its use in NY and asked for more supply. Is the DNC TDS media hounding him? No. He’s a Democrat.

        https://www.msnbc.com/stephanie-ruhle/watch/secretary-robert-wilkie-we-re-doing-a-pretty-good-job-handling-coronavirus-82397253606

      • dpy6629 | April 23, 2020 at 5:58 pm |

        Wiley Coyote continues to set new records for arrogance, fake expertise, and proof text citing papers in fields he is ignorant of.

        My brother holds an MD and is medical director for a network of hospitals. He researched the literature himself and says that the major and scary side effects of Hydroxychloroquine come only after years of use. He is using a 5 day regimen. The medication has a long half life, so physicians are told to use conservative doses.

        I know the difference between in culture and in vivo. The result Michael Lin quoted merely shows more research is needed.

        My brother would tell you to go to hell and that’s my attitude too. MD’s are qualified to prescribe off label. Anonymous internet hacks should just shut up.

      • Don Monfort | April 23, 2020 at 6:39 pm |

        If you wonder why Wiley doesn’t provide links for the junk that he cites, the alleged peer reviewed study was a Letter to the Editor talking about 11 patients. Very thin gruel. That’s all the time I will spend on Wiley’s foolishness.

        He thinks that Letters to the Editor are peer reviewed. Not very bright for an alleged epididdlymologist.

        “Peer-reviewed: “No evidence of rapid antiviral clearance or clinical benefit with the combination of hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin in patients with severe COVID-19 infection”

      • Don Monfort | April 23, 2020 at 6:43 pm |

        Here’s the link that diddly did not provide:
        https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0399077X20300858?via%3Dihub

      • Don Monfort | April 23, 2020 at 6:50 pm |

        Oooops!
        “Articles in press are accepted, peer reviewed articles that are not yet assigned to volumes/issues, but are citable using DOI. Note to users”

        You have to read the fine print. Not being a coyote, I correct my errors. It’s still a non-randomized POS study of a number of patients barely into double digits. It must have taken the reviewers 11 minutes for the review.

      • Don Monfort | April 23, 2020 at 7:08 pm |

        Not one of your more powerful journals:

        https://www.editage.com/journal/medecine-et-maladies-infectieuses

        0.47
        CiteScore

        CiteScore is essentially the average citations per document that a title receives over a three-year period.

      • Atomsk's Sanakan (@AtomsksSanakan) | May 12, 2020 at 11:35 am |

        As of May 12, 2020:

        1) A number of higher-quality, peer-reviewed studies now show hydroxychloroquine is ineffective at treating COVID-19 and at preventing strong SARS-CoV-2 infection.
        2) People should evaluate studies based on the evidence pyramid, among other factors, as further higher-quality studies are published.

        The evidence-base has improved from case series with no control groups and poorly-explicated randomized controlled trials with small sample sizes, to properly-done case-control studies and cohort studies:

        “Baseline use of hydroxychloroquine in systemic lupus erythematosus does not preclude SARS-CoV-2 infection and severe COVID-19”
        Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, review : “COVID-19 coronavirus research has overall low methodological quality thus far: case in point for chloroquine/hydroxychloroquine”
        “A rush to judgment? Rapid reporting and dissemination of results and its consequences regarding the use of hydroxychloroquine for COVID-19”
        Autoimmunity Reviews, case-control study : “Continuous hydroxychloroquine or colchicine therapy does not prevent infection with SARS-CoV-2: Insights from a large healthcare database analysis”
        JAMA paper, cohort study : “Association of treatment With hydroxychloroquine or azithromycin with in-hospital mortality in patients with COVID-19 in New York State”
        NEJM paper, cohort study : “Observational study of hydroxychloroquine in hospitalized patients with Covid-19”
        NEJM companion piece : “The urgency of care during the Covid-19 pandemic — Learning as we go”

        We’re moving up the evidence pyramid:

        evidence pyramid: https://amedd.libguides.com/c.php?g=476751&p=3259492
        “New evidence pyramid” [ https://ebm.bmj.com/content/21/4/125 ]

        In the coming months, we should have some better randomized control trials to feed into the higher levels of the pyramid, with drugs that will almost certainly be better than hydroxychloroquine:

        “Major ongoing clinical trials for COVID-19 treatment and studies currently being conducted or scheduled in Japan”
        “Do we have enough evidence to use chloroquine/hydroxychloroquine as a public health panacea for COVID-19?”
        “A systematic review on the efficacy and safety of chloroquine for the treatment of COVID-19”

        At this point, the peer-reviewed, higher-quality studies show hydroxychloroquine isn’t an effective treatment. That’s unfortunate, but there will be other medications to try. One bright side is that patients with autoimmune conditions (like SLE and RA) will have less to worry about now in terms of hydroxychloroquine availability as a treatment for their condition. Anyway, as I said earlier in this thread, the anti-viral arbidol was used very early on as a treatment. My money would be an anti-viral being the most, or one of the most, successful treatments here, not an immunosuppressive drug of the sort hydroxychloroquine is:

        “The nail has virtually been put in the coffin of hydroxychloroquine,” said Dr. William Schaffner, an infectious disease expert and longtime adviser to the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
        https://www.cnn.com/2020/05/11/health/hydroxychloroquine-doesnt-work-coronavirus/index.html

        https://twitter.com/AtomsksSanakan/status/1260173020708167681

      • Don132 | May 12, 2020 at 1:25 pm |

        Re: hydroxychloroquine and NEJM study, May 11, 2020: ” … 56.1% of patients in all groups entered intensive care within 1 day of admission.”

        https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2766117

        Hydroxychloroquine has only been touted as an early treatment (by physicians who say it works) and the claim is that it suppresses the virus early so that the immune system can handle Covid. This is the central claim; see for example here: https://covid19criticalcare.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/PressReleaseTreating-Covid-19-in-ER-April-15-2030_3.pdf “By initiating the protocol within 6 hours of presenting with tachypnea or any oxygen requirement >/= 4L/min, the need for mechanical ventilators and ICU beds will decrease dramatically.”

        Yet, 56% of the patients in the NEJM were already in the the ICU by the time HCQ treatment was started, since treatment was started at about one day after admission and these patients were ICU-ready within one day.

        The Critical Care Working Group protocol, however, is treating to avoid ICU. Since 56% of patients in the NEJM study were so deteriorated as to require ICU essentially as treatment with HCQ began, the NEJM refutes nothing about the CCWG claim or about the efficacy of early treatment with hydroxychloroquine to prevent the need for ICU, which one would expect would also prevent the need for dying.

      • Don Monfort | May 12, 2020 at 12:36 pm |

        The cherry picker has returned. Yeah, some retrospectives of cases where hydroxychloroquine has been used as the de facto last resort treatment for far gone patients have not shown effectiveness, but compared with what. Nothing is saving these people. Other studies have indicated earlier use is effective. We have discussed all that since the cherry picker’s last uninteresting visit. Despite the pro-virus propaganda advocating that HCQ should be shunned, new authorized trials of hydroxychloroquine vs. COVID 19 are being added to the list, everyday. 182 and counting:

        https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/results?cond=covid+19&term=hydroxychloroquine&cntry=&state=&city=&dist=

        We will soon have results from some important randomized double-blind placebo controlled trials.

      • Atomsk's Sanakan (@AtomsksSanakan) | May 12, 2020 at 12:43 pm |

        Earlier in the thread I stated that:

        “[Donald Trump] erroneously downplayed COVID-19 in his comparison of it to the flu, despite COVID-19’s likely higher mortality rate.”

        More evidence is further bearing this out, with the IFR (infection fatality rate) for SARS-CoV-2-induced COVID-19 being at least 10 times larger than the seasonal flu’s IFR, on average. The seasonal flu does not have an IFR of 0.1%; it’s more on the order of 0.02% – 0.05%, possibly less. And that’s not even touching on some of the other factors that make COVID-19 worse than the seasonal flu:

        https://twitter.com/AtomsksSanakan/status/1259409952269008897

        It’s sad that even in May, so many right-wingers continue insinuating that COVID-19 is like the flu, in the hopes of undermining policies they dislike, such as lockdowns. Reminiscent of previous politically-motivated, right-wing distortions of the science on anthropogenic greenhouse-gas-induced climate change, smoking and second-smoking, ozone depletion, evolutionary biology, etc.:

        https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/05/07/doctor-to-senators-coronavirus-fatality-rate-10-to-40x-lower-than-estimates-that-led-to-lockdowns/
        https://skagitrepublicans.com/May2020ChairmansCornerNewsletter3
        https://americanpriority.com/news/coronavirus-fatality-rate-10-to-40-times-lower-than-estimates/
        https://canadafreepress.com/article/doctor-to-senators-coronavirus-fatality-rate-10-to-40x-lower-than-estimates

        http://archive.is/gsUuK#selection-2801.0-3079.3
        http://archive.is/gT7mJ#selection-2857.0-3109.20
        http://archive.is/tp3u3#selection-2801.0-3153.3
        http://archive.is/vaSYZ#selection-2845.0-2897.279
        http://archive.is/RN04b#selection-2801.0-2921.95
        http://archive.is/ppat2#selection-2999.0-2999.57

    • Geoff Sherrington | March 17, 2020 at 5:46 pm |

      Atomsk,
      Some people get agony from sexual prostitution, some get ecstasy. To maintain momentum irrespective of sins and virtues, there are promotional pimps.
      Your words here immedately put into my mind “scientific pimp.” Ask yourself why you wrote them, your personal benefit:cost analysis, then conclude that you should stop before you catch something.
      These topics about climate and a pandemic are not there as a vehicle for word play. They are serious topics on which many of us are able to arrive at satisfactory conclusions without pimping. Geoff S

      • Atomsk's Sanakan (@AtomsksSanakan) | March 17, 2020 at 7:10 pm |

        This thread helps illuminate the contrarian mindset underlying climate (faux) “skeptics”, anti-vaxxers, conspiracist on COVID-19, etc.

        You have contrarians ranting against a scientific process and evidence-based scientific consensus that saves peoples lives, while those contrarians have no evidence to back up their claims. And, in contrast, there are people citing published evidence on this COVID-19, it’s treatment, who’s at risk, etc.

        Crises like these expose contrarians for what they are: dangerous, paranoid people with no genuine interest in scientific evidence. So Geoff, let me know when you have something of value to say on the published evidence on COVID-19, instead of wasting people’s time with whatever sexual terminology exists in your mind.

    • Atomsk's Sanakan (@AtomsksSanakan) | March 22, 2020 at 5:13 pm |

      To explain further:

      This article claimed that COVID-19 had an inserted sequence specific HIV:

      “Uncanny similarity of unique inserts in the 2019-nCoV spike protein to HIV-1 gp120 and Gag”

      This led to conspiracy theories (from a number of right-wing sources) that COVID-19 was bio-engineered to kill people, maybe by Chinese scientists, despite the article in question making no such claim. US Senator Tom Cotton even got in on it, while JAQing off (‘just asking questions’), a standard tactic of conspiracy theorists:

      from 4:10 :
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r05EBrbJn0w&feature=youtu.be&t=250

      https://twitter.com/PrisonPlanet/status/1229400541702258688

      “A popular pro-Trump website has released the personal information of a scientist from Wuhan, China, falsely accusing them of creating the coronavirus as a bioweapon, in a plot it said is the real-life version of the video game Resident Evil.”
      https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/ryanhatesthis/a-pro-trump-blog-has-doxed-a-chinese-scientist-it-falsely

      On how conspiracy theorists employ JAQing off:

      “Not Just Asking Questions: Effects of implicit and explicit conspiracy information about vaccines and genetic modification”
      “Beyond belief: The social psychology of conspiracy theories and the study of ideology”
      “Conspiracy and bias: argumentative features and persuasiveness of conspiracy theories”
      “Propagating and debunking conspiracy theories on Twitter during the 2015–2016 Zika virus outbreak”

      It turns out that the original article was wrong, COVID-19 did not have an HIV-unique insertion, and the article that made that original claim was withdrawn. Not that that will stop many right-wing conspiracy theorists:

      “No credible evidence supporting claims of the laboratory engineering of SARS-CoV-2
      […]
      Currently, there are speculations, rumours and conspiracy theories that SARS-CoV-2 is of laboratory origin.
      […]
      In a rebuttal paper led by an HIV-1 virologist Dr. Feng Gao, they used careful bioinformatics analyses to demonstrate that the original claim of multiple HIV insertions into the SARS-CoV-2 is not HIV-1 specific but random [15]. Because of the many concerns raised by the international community, the authors who made the initial claim have already withdrawn this report.”

      “HIV-1 did not contribute to the 2019-nCoV genome
      […]
      Unfortunately, before the natural sources of new pathogens are clearly defined, conspiracy theories that the new pathogens are man-made often surface as the source. However, in all cases, such theories have been debunked in history.
      […]
      Biased, partial and incorrect analysis can dangerously lead to conclusions that fuel conspiracies and harm the process of true scientific discoveries and the effort to control the damage to public health.”

      “Protein structure and sequence re-analysis of 2019-nCoV genome does not indicate snakes as its intermediate host or the unique similarity between its spike protein insertions and HIV-1”

      Looks like the conspiracy theory mindset and contrarianism that infected much of the American right’s approach to climate science, has also extended to their approach to medical science.
      Who could have ever seen that coming? (besides anyone who’s actually been paying attention)

      • dpy6629 | April 23, 2020 at 8:51 pm |

        And does any sentient human being care to even read a cherry picked quote mining whose sole purpose is to tar right wingers. I don’t.

  64. Ireneusz Palmowski | March 16, 2020 at 5:35 pm |

    As many as 54% of patients with COVID-19 develop liver enzyme abnormalities during disease progression, according to a brief review.
    https://gihealthfoundation.org/reuters/article.cfm?article=20200311Other1289471199&cat=Othe&dstate=GI

    • cerescokid | March 17, 2020 at 6:13 pm |

      300 million in China have chronic liver disease

      Even adjusting for differences in population that is an astonishing number given there are 4.5 million adults in the US with liver disease.

    • matthewrmarler | April 23, 2020 at 9:31 pm |

      Ireneusz Palmowski: As many as 54% of patients with COVID-19 develop liver enzyme abnormalities during disease progression,

      Thank you for the link. I don’t know how I missed it last month.

  65. Ireneusz Palmowski | March 16, 2020 at 5:59 pm |

    It is also possible that the liver impairment is due to drug hepatotoxicity, which might explain the large variation observed across the different cohorts. In addition, immune-mediated inflammation, such as cytokine storm and pneumonia-associated hypoxia, might also contribute to liver injury or even develop into liver failure in patients with COVID-19 who are critically ill.
    Liver damage in mild cases of COVID-19 is often transient and can return to normal without any special treatment. However, when severe liver damage occurs, liver protective drugs have usually been given to such patients in our unit.
    https://www.thelancet.com/journals/langas/article/PIIS2468-1253(20)30057-1/fulltext

  67. ksee | March 16, 2020 at 7:03 pm |

    There is a new paper in Science:

    https://science.sciencemag.org/content/early/2020/03/13/science.abb3221

    The main point seems to be that undocumented infection cases might have had considerable effect in the spread of COVID-19. According to this paper, 86% of all infections within China were undocumented and that these undocumented cases were the infection source for 79% of the documented cases.

    This seems to be quite well in line with earlier estimates that 80-90% cases are very mild or asymptomatic. And what is more important, simplistic “fatalities” / “positive test cases” calculations are very likely far of the real figures.

    • afonzarelli | March 16, 2020 at 10:36 pm |

      …86% of all infections within China were undocumented…

      Which would reduce the mortality rate to one half of 1%

    • JCH | March 16, 2020 at 10:56 pm |

      The period is from the beginning of the outbreak until January 23, 2020. When they began their aggressive countermeasures, which included expansive testing. That would drive the undocumented number down and the documented number up.

  70. angech | March 16, 2020 at 11:41 pm |

    A couple of comments.
    “‘The rise shows the Wuhan CoVid 19 impact in a skewed old Italian population with an overwhelmed northern Italy hospital system. All the present US social distancing disruptions are FULLY justified.”
    An article yesterday claimed that the > 60 YO age group so far accounts for 99% of the deaths in Italy.
    A very serious disease in the older person of whom a few of us , myself included may be in.The second is the containment which the Chinese have implemented. Their problem now will be keeping it out not keeping it in!
    –
    Apart from the fact that one might die a better course might seem to be to let the disease slowly run through the community to build up the fabled herd immunity. Children hopefully are at minimal risk. Business will be saved by which I mean our livelihoods actually.
    Hopefully a vaccination will be developed.

    • JCH | March 17, 2020 at 12:01 am |

      Looking at attributes and death rates of the elderly, countries where a fair percentage of elderly live alone and have few visitors, Germany and USA, are experiencing lower death rates. Countries where the elderly often live with their children’s families are experiencing higher death rates, Italy and China.

      In China the primary means of transmission was within families.

      7 coronaviruses have jumped; to date none have a vaccine.

      • angech | March 17, 2020 at 6:45 am |

        Just cancelled our 500 and Bridge games at our University of the third age in Australia. Very sad but necessary.
        Hoping for some good news soon . Always darkest before the dawn.
        Stay well JCH.

      • tonyb | March 17, 2020 at 8:01 am |

        JCH

        Yes, the tactile nature of the Spanish, Italians and French places them apart to many other countries.

        They have much greater intergenerational mixing and often live in multi generational properties or interact at frequent family get togethers, which all help to spread the virus to the vulnerable. These are not factors present in many other countries, let alone in reticent Britain.

        Round our way everything is surprisingly and eerily normal with even 4 of the 6 local tennis courts fully occupied by the older generation on a cool grey morning, the builders are working on building sites, the cafes are open and although not busy have customers, and the council are busy painting double yellow lines on the road obviously still expecting the summer tourist hordes.

        tonyb.

      • JCH | March 17, 2020 at 11:50 am |

        tonyb – it’s a possible explanation for the disparate national death rate stats. If true – it’s my speculation – it probably means just a slower chew through the elderly population.

      • matthewrmarler | March 17, 2020 at 4:00 pm |

        JCH | March 17, 2020 at 2:13 pm |

        Thank you.

  71. Ireneusz Palmowski | March 17, 2020 at 2:18 am |

    Fluctuating temperatures in California are very conducive to infection.
    https://files.tinypic.pl/i/01000/w4qma0t0uhtb.png

  73. matthewrmarler | March 17, 2020 at 11:38 am |

    Network based drug repurposing for novel coronavirus:

    https://www.nature.com/articles/s41421-020-0153-3

    • Ireneusz Palmowski | March 17, 2020 at 1:24 pm |

      “The antioxidant effect of melatonin makes it a putative candidate drug to relieve patients’ clinical symptoms in antiviral treatment, even though melatonin cannot eradicate or even curb the viral replication or transcription61,62. In addition, the application of melatonin may prolong patients’ survival time, which may provide a chance for patients’ immune systems to recover and eventually eradicate the virus.”

    • Ireneusz Palmowski | March 17, 2020 at 2:16 pm |

      A major unresolved issue, as already mentioned above, relates to the significance of the
      various actions of melatonin that function in
      reduction of oxidative stress. At this point, it
      is unknown which of the multiple actions of
      melatonin, i.e., whether free radical scavenging, stimulation of antioxidative enzymes, increasing the efficacy of mitochondrial ETC
      and reducing electron leakage, improving the
      efficiency of other antioxidants, etc., are most
      important in contributing to its high efficacy.
      It is also likely that both receptor-independent and receptor-dependent actions of melatonin participate in its function as an antioxidant (Tan et al., 2003a). Its successful use in
      human conditions where excessive free radical generation occurs, however, should encourage its continued use in the treatment of
      other disease processes, and there seem to be
      many, where oxidative stress is a component.
      http://www.actabp.pl/pdf/4_2003/1129s.pdf

  74. nickels | March 17, 2020 at 1:48 pm |

    Current –United States– deaths and Cases.

  76. nickels | March 17, 2020 at 3:34 pm |

    Hopefully Judith will have the decency to set aside a post highlighting all the posts she deleted that called it when this thing turns out to be an economy killing farce in a few months:

    • curryja | March 17, 2020 at 6:36 pm |

      I am looking for information and arguments, and not unsupported opinions/conclusions that are inflammatory.

      • dougbadgero | March 17, 2020 at 8:12 pm |

        Whilst I don’t think this is a conspiracy, it does seem to be the progression of a society that increasingly doesn’t know how to deal with risk. The last pandemic, H1N1 in 2009, was far more deadly because it was much more widely spread. Around 15000 Americans died, and 500000 or so worldwide. There was no where near the social panic. In that case a national health emergency was declared and many schools were shut, but nothing like this response. Also it affected the young and the healthy more severely than the old. The old apparently having some immunity due to exposure to similar viruses. I realize this isn’t over yet but it is not progressing as rapidly or deadly as H1N1 IMO.

        The Red Cross just stated they were desperate for blood as over 2700 blood drives had been cancelled. When this is over it will be interesting to see if the panic kills more than the virus. We seem to have forgotten that economic hardship causes death on the edges.

      • jacksmith4tx | March 17, 2020 at 9:33 pm |

        By almost every metric it’s never been a better time to be alive.
        If it wasn’t for this pesky virus and the panic spread by social media it would be Utopia.
        But then again maybe the virus is just a symptom and the real danger lies elsewhere…
        https://youtu.be/5m7X-1V9nOs

      • JCH | March 17, 2020 at 10:20 pm |

        The Imperial College of London scientists who produced the COVID-19 study are perfectly aware of the current numbers. They know all about viruses and epidemics. They came up with 1.2 million to 2.2 million deaths in the United States.

        I don’t think you will find a single working medical scientist in the world who thinks the 2009-10 swine flu was more dangerous than COVID-19. Why? Because they keep going up:

        https://i.imgur.com/A1S7yse.png

      • dougbadgero | March 18, 2020 at 12:39 pm |

        “I don’t think you will find a single working medical scientist in the world who thinks the 2009-10 swine flu was more dangerous than COVID-19.”

        https://www.statnews.com/2020/03/17/a-fiasco-in-the-making-as-the-coronavirus-pandemic-takes-hold-we-are-making-decisions-without-reliable-data/

    • JCH | March 17, 2020 at 4:32 pm |

      They’re saying the White House acquiesced today to experts when their latest model showed 1.2 million USA deaths with the inept countermeasures in place.

      So, we get today’s countermeasures. Still inept.

      • afonzarelli | March 17, 2020 at 5:33 pm |

        (says the man who goes shopping at two in the morning wearing a gas mask)…

      • jeffnsails850 | March 17, 2020 at 5:43 pm |

        And if we did everything just like the super-competent EU it would be… a complete disaster.
        Write this down- governments can’t always make bad things go away. This is one of those times. They can make them minimally better and they can also make them maximally worse. The US is doing the former, panic accomplishes the latter.

      • JCH | March 17, 2020 at 6:01 pm |

        still likely result in hundreds of thousands of deaths and health systems (most notably intensive care units) being overwhelmed many times over. For countries able to achieve it, this leaves suppression as the preferred policy option.

        being overwhelmed many times over.

        … Two fundamental strategies are possible: (a) mitigation, which focuses on slowing but not necessarily stopping epidemic spread – reducing peak healthcare demand while protecting those most at risk of severe disease from infection, and (b) suppression, which aims to reverse epidemic growth, reducing case numbers to low levels and maintaining that situation indefinitely. Each policy has major challenges. We find that that optimal mitigation policies (combining home isolation of suspect cases, home quarantine of those living in the same household as suspect cases, and social distancing of the elderly and others at most risk of severe disease) might reduce peak healthcare demand by 2/3 and deaths by half. However, the resulting mitigated epidemic would still likely result in hundreds of thousands of deaths and health systems (most notably intensive care units) being overwhelmed many times over. For countries able to achieve it, this leaves suppression as the preferred policy option. …

      • JCH | March 17, 2020 at 6:23 pm |

        An author of the study, Imperial College Professor Neil Ferguson, said in an email to CNN on Tuesday the study was given to the White House Coronavirus Task Force over the weekend and the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention on Monday.

        “The White House task force received it late Sunday afternoon, CDC yesterday,” Ferguson wrote to CNN. “To be honest, I don’t know how much it influenced decision making. But I hear Dr Birx cited it. We will be having a much more detailed discussion with the task force tomorrow morning.”

        During a briefing on Monday, White House coronavirus response coordinator Dr. Deborah Birx said, “We have been working on models, day and night, around the globe … We’ve been working with groups in the United Kingdom. So we had new information coming out from a model.” She did not specify which model she was referring to.

      • JCH | March 17, 2020 at 7:36 pm |

        This is the “it’s being overblown, don’t panic” death toll: for the USA – 1,200,000 dead people.

        https://i.imgur.com/qm0Z5FY.png

      • JCH | March 17, 2020 at 7:48 pm |

        Sorry, press article says 1.2; graph says 2.2. a millions isn’t really that many Grandmothers. Don’t panic. Stay calm. 15 to zero baby, 15 to zero.

        I give myself a 10.

      • matthewrmarler | March 17, 2020 at 7:53 pm |

        JCH: They’re saying the White House acquiesced today to experts when their latest model showed 1.2 million USA deaths with the inept countermeasures in place.

        That is almost 300 times the number of deaths that have occurred in China. How exactly can you support the claim that we have inept countermeasures, when we have fewer cases than Italy, Iran, Spain, Germany and France — not to mention fewer than 10% of the cases in China? as of now:
        https://gisanddata.maps.arcgis.com/apps/opsdashboard/index.html#/bda7594740fd40299423467b48e9ecf6

        Our countermeasures have been mostly state level, local and voluntary, largely in accord with our Constitution. CDC was inflexible slow to respond, but they have stepped up their act. China’s centralized dictatorial policy was arguably more nearly catastrophic.

      • JCH | March 17, 2020 at 8:20 pm |

        It’s not my model to support.

        It came out of the Imperial College of London. They, the CDC and that pack sycophant bro nosing creeps that hang out with him at the podium, had to find a study Donnie the Brat would like. England has kings, and Donnie wants to be a King. So the child who want to a be a King apparently liked the Imperial study as he marched right out and panicked today.

        As for what you are asking about, it’s a contagious respiratory disease caused by a novel virus that is obviously a killer. What else do you need to know?

      • afonzarelli | March 17, 2020 at 9:25 pm |

        (plus, matthew, current deaths would be .01% of 1.2 million)…

      • matthewrmarler | March 17, 2020 at 9:48 pm |

        JCH: It came out of the Imperial College of London. They, the CDC and that pack sycophant bro nosing creeps that hang out with him at the podium, had to find a study Donnie the Brat would like. England has kings, and Donnie wants to be a King. So the child who want to a be a King apparently liked the Imperial study as he marched right out and panicked today.

        So it is reasonable to expect the US to suffer 400 times the number of deaths as China has? In spite of responding better in fact than China has?

      • matthewrmarler | March 17, 2020 at 10:04 pm |

        JCH: What else do you need to know?

        Numbers. Lots more numbers. I am not expecting to have enough data before mid-May. Meanwhile, I abide by quarantine requests, and work on trying to be patient.

      • JCH | March 17, 2020 at 10:28 pm |

        I believe the entire study is available on the Imperial College of London website.

      • matthewrmarler | March 18, 2020 at 1:59 am |

        mrm: So it is reasonable to expect the US to suffer 400 times the number of deaths as China has? In spite of responding better in fact than China has?

        Hubei province in China, with a population of about 65M, has suffered 3,122 deaths so far. In a couple more months, will the US with a population of about 320M have suffered about 15,000 deaths?

        What will be the effects of warmer weather and increased use of chloroquine?

        When I was in 3rd and 4th grade I had to worry about polio. I was warned not to get too tired and to avoid crowded places like swimming pools. Will this virus produce an annual death toll greater than polio, as does seasonal flu?

        I regard these as among the relevant questions whose answers are not known accurately enough.

      • JCH | March 18, 2020 at 3:10 am |

        The US response is not better than China’s. China’s response is radical and brilliant. They have literally killed the virus back to very few in number.

        At the start, this virus jumped. Before that it was probably in bats. It jumped to a human. From that human, it jumped to others, and from others to others to others to others. Boom, epidemic. Huge numbers in the virus population.

        With extreme measures, they isolated the uninfected. The virus cannot jump to an isolated host. This is not herd immunity, but similar effect. Big part of herd not available. The virus cannot jump to effectively isolated hosts.

        To the infected.

        A virus dies. One, it dies if it lands on an environment, surface, that cannot support it. Two, it dies when its host dies. Three, it dies when its host develops an immune response that kills it off, and it has nowhere to jump.

        So in China they assaulted the infected/sick. Aggressive detection methods. Fever found, they took the sick person straight to a clinic and they did not get out until SARS-CoV-2 was proven not to be inside them. If they had it, they went into immediate quarantine. There, the virus either died when they died, or it died when the immune systems of the infected developed response that killed them all. (If they gained meaningful immunity, virus cannot jump to them and thrive.)

        The virus population in China has been killed back to a very small number in just a small number of people. Their new cases are low, so it is in some humans and looking to jump. They will keep at it until they are to zero. Whole geographic areas can be said now to be virus free.

        It could be lurking in the environment, but I doubt it. This virus does not appear to thrive outside.

        With pigs it was easy. We killed ’em all. Whole cities of perfectly healthy pigs. It gave the virus no put. It died on that farm. All of it.

        In those Chinese quarantine facilities, the number of viruses got slaughtered like the pigs of my childhood.

        The virus in China did not self limit; it was killed by a war; a battle plan; waged by medical scientists and doctors who were not interfered with by the lumber-brain types in our White House.

        China is not the worst case to date; it’s the best case to date.

        Trump has fiddle farted the time away, and we are in a mess. A vaccine is somewhere between months to a year and months to never. It would be a miracle if it is less than a year – dumb luck.

      • matthewrmarler | March 18, 2020 at 2:01 pm |

        JCH: Trump has fiddle farted the time away, and we are in a mess. A vaccine is somewhere between months to a year and months to never. It would be a miracle if it is less than a year – dumb luck.

        Not dumb luck: US, Israeli, etc scintists in academia and business have been working on vaccines for corona viruses for years. The vaccine work for SARS-NCoV-2 they built on that work and its similarity to other coronaviruses.

        With 105 dead in the US and 3122 in Hubei province alone (probably more, given Chinese govt suppression of reporting), I think you have to be, oh what? unhinged? delusional? to conclude that China did a better job than the US. The one country that did really well is Taiwan, though not everyone considers Taiwan a “country”. No EU nation to date has done a better job than the US.

        Last for a while. I already have 30+ posts.

  79. jimmww | March 17, 2020 at 5:52 pm |

    For the voyeurs, Johns Hopkins will give you gory details:
    https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/map.html?mod=article_inline&modtag=djemBestOfTheWeb

    Mainland China new cases have leveled off since early Feb.
    Germany has more confirmed cases than SouthKorea. That ain’t due to more testing. Are you paying attention, Angela?

    The Diamond Princess has had 3 deaths, 325 recovered.
    There’s one case in Greenland and 3 in Alaska, 10 in Hawaii. Hmm. It’s a hard rain a-gonna faaaallll?
    BTW – no cases in Antarctica, so I guess isolation works.
    and
    This really sucks:
    https://nypost.com/2020/03/17/diamond-princess-cruise-ship-passenger-tests-positive-for-coronavirus-a-second-time/

    A Japanese man who recovered after testing positive for coronavirus aboard the quarantined Diamond Princess cruise ship caught the bug a second time at home, according to a new report. The man, in his 70s, first tested positive for COVID-19 Feb. 14 while on board the vessel off the coast of Yokohama, Japanese news agency NHK reported.

    He was confirmed negative for the bug on March 2, and was allowed to take public transportation home from the Tokyo medical facility where he was staying, to western Japan’s Mie prefecture, according to the report. But it wasn’t long before he started to feel sick again, and developed a fever of about 102 degrees on Thursday, according to the report. He went to the hospital Friday, and was confirmed to be infected again on Saturday.

    Well, so much for the British notion that the elderly should be confined while the young exposed themselves to infection and developed immunity, after which the elders could be released from confinement. Here’s Britain’s belated response to the epidemic.
    https://www.blabber.buzz/conservative-news/809039-uk-on-second-thought-our-coronavirus-strategy-could-kill-250000-people-special

    This is from Italy: https://youtu.be/o_cImRzKXOs
    Hunker down, chaps.

    • jimmww | March 17, 2020 at 6:26 pm |

      After 1368 Boccacio wrote his Decameron. 600 years later, Poe wrote The Masque of the Red Death. So… it could be worse. And has been.

      The Decameron ends well, if indecisively. Poe’s Masque of the Red Death can be thought of as the obverse of that, and it mocks human thoughts, perceptions, aspirations, calculations, and actions.
      We can be pleased that the current menace is so minimally lethal, for the youngsters, despite being rather aggressive in its spread. We fogies may think of ourselves as martyrs to youth. And hope that some lessons are learned.

      Here’s the Decameron
      https://blindhypnosis.com/the-decameron-pdf-giovanni-boccaccio.html
      and here’s the Poe
      https://www.poemuseum.org/the-masque-of-the-red-death

      and then there’s C.S. Lewis in 1948 reflecting on the atomic bomb panics. For atomic bomb, read: coronavirus:
      [[This does not and should not impair all proper and effective means of slowing down the progress of the virus. In all fairness, we must point out that atomic warfare is to some extent volitional. Covid19 is not. But carrying-on, as the Brits did in WWII, is indeed an admirable attitude.]]

      In one way we think a great deal too much of the atomic bomb. “How are we to live in an atomic age?” I am tempted to reply: “Why, as you would have lived in the sixteenth century when the plague visited London almost every year, or as you would have lived in a Viking age when raiders from Scandinavia might land and cut your throat any night; or indeed, as you are already living in an age of cancer, an age of syphilis, an age of paralysis, an age of air raids, an age of railway accidents, an age of motor accidents.”
      In other words, do not let us begin by exaggerating the novelty of our situation. Believe me, dear sir or madam, you and all whom you love were already sentenced to death before the atomic bomb was invented: and quite a high percentage of us were going to die in unpleasant ways. We had, indeed, one very great advantage over our ancestors—anesthetics; but we have that still. It is perfectly ridiculous to go about whimpering and drawing long faces because the scientists have added one more chance of painful and premature death to a world which already bristled with such chances and in which death itself was not a chance at all, but a certainty.
      This is the first point to be made: and the first action to be taken is to pull ourselves together. If we are all going to be destroyed by an atomic bomb, let that bomb when it comes find us doing sensible and human things—praying, working, teaching, reading, listening to music, bathing the children, playing tennis, chatting to our friends over a pint and a game of darts—not huddled together like frightened sheep and thinking about bombs. They may break our bodies (a microbe can do that) but they need not dominate our minds.
      “On Living in an Atomic Age” (1948) in Present Concerns: Journalistic Essays

      —and in Iran
      https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/mar/12/coronavirus-iran-mass-graves-qom
      On 24 February, at the time the trenches were being dug, a legislator from Qom, 75 miles (120 km) south of Tehran, accused the health ministry of lying about the scale of the outbreak, saying there had already been 50 deaths in the city, at a time when the ministry was claiming only 12 people had died from the virus nationwide.
      The deputy health minister, Iraj Harirchi, held a press conference to “categorically deny” the allegations, but he was clearly sweating and coughing as he did so. The next day, Harirchi confirmed that he had tested positive for the Covid-19 virus. There is a recent tweet, not confirmed or denied, that Harirchi has died.
      And the NYTimes, bless its heart, has a good video of what was – and wasn’t – done inside Iran –
      https://www.nytimes.com/video/world/middleeast/100000007011860/iran-coronavirus-outbreak.html
      I’ll refrain from saying that it couldn’t happen to a nicer country, insh’allah.
      And in Jordan…Ahmad Al-Shahrouri is a Jordanian Islamic scholar. On his show on Yarmouk TV, a Jordanian TV channel associated with the Muslim Brotherhood, he said “the Jews are more dangerous than AIDS, coronavirus, cholera, and all the diseases of this world.”

      and a Good Summary
      https://news.yahoo.com/burial-pits-irans-coronavirus-outbreak-172036490.html
      6 minutes. Not much new, but well presented, without froth. And incidentally answers the question Why don’t we have enough test kits.
      Our response actually measures rather well compared to other countries.
      Another discussion is by Dr Fauci on the Morning Joe show.
      March 13: Dr Anthony Fauci, on MSNBC, compliments the Trump administration for its pre-emptive travel bans on China and Europe, explains that test kits must be manufactured before they can be distributed.
      https://twitter.com/i/status/1238460647823872000
      and
      —Trump is being blamed, astonishingly, for the US not having enough test kits to determine the actual numbers of those infected.
      1. But he doesn’t control the manufacturing facilities. Nor does the CDC. Many of them are very likely overseas.
      2. The kits don’t provide any treatment. They might provide reassurance so long as you don’t wonder about false negatives. No measurable short term benefit.
      3. The progress of the disease does not depend in any way on the presence of test kits.
      4. And while it may be a year for a vaccine, there is hope for effective treatment:
      Remdesivir and chloroquine effectively inhibit the recently emerged novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) in vitro. Since these compounds have been used in human patients with a safety track record and shown to be effective against various ailments, we suggest that they should be assessed in human patients suffering from the novel coronavirus disease.
      —Manli Wang, Ruiyuan Cao, Leike Zhang, Xinglou Yang, Jia Liu, Mingyue Xu, Zhengli Shi, Zhihong Hu, Wu Zhong & Gengfu Xiao

      Hunker down, chaps.

  80. Faustino aka Genghis Cunn | March 17, 2020 at 9:47 pm |

    Facing death … I was born at home in bombed-out Coventry half-way through WW2, I was close to suicide in 1965 and 71-72, faced death in 65 when run down by a car while on a motorbike, the end of that suicidal episode – I was the calmest person in Emergency, I was expecdted to die but knew that I wouild live; after being pulled back from the bring of suicide in 72 by a young lady who’d learned a lot of value in India, leading me to go there; while alone in the Himalayas near Annapurna South, I thought I was almost certain to die from a fall, but stayed calm, made a decision as to how best to act and survived. So I’m not going to over-worry about coronavirus, I’ll stay sensible, as we all should even when we find that panickers have stripoped bare the supermarket shelves.

    I will note that for almost 20 years I’ve argued that the future is uncertain, it will always surprise us, that rather than fret about possibly (but not certainly) detrimental global warming in the distant future, we should increase our capacity to deal well with whatever unknown future befalls. I think that the 2008 Global Financial Crisis, the corona-virus and perhaps the rise of China, which drove Western nations out of drug-production by flooding the market with drugs priced far below their production cost, leaving a malignant country with a world monopoly in some cases, bears me out.

  81. Ireneusz Palmowski | March 18, 2020 at 4:13 am |

    Coenzyme Q10 is one of the most significant lipid antioxidants, which prevents the generation of free radicals and modifications of proteins, lipids, and DNA. In many disease conditions connected with increased generation and the action of reactive oxygen species (ROS), the concentration of coenzyme Q10 in the human body decreases[1,2] and the deficiency of coenzyme Q10 leads to the dysfunction of the respiratory chain, which is due to the insufficient production of highly energetic compounds, which decrease the efficiency of cells. To protect the cells and organ systems of the body against ROS, humans have evolved a highly sophisticated and complex antioxidant protection system. It involves a variety of components, both endogenous and exogenous in origin, which function interactively and synergistically to neutralize free radicals and include nutrient-derived antioxidants (Vitamin C and E, beta carotene, and polyphenols), antioxidant enzymes (bilirubin, thiols, ubiquinones, and uric acid), metal-binding proteins (albumin, ceruloplasmin, ferritin, and myoglobin), and numerous other antioxidant phytonutrients (plant-derived substances) present in a wide variety of plant foods.[3] Antioxidants, such as CoQ10, can neutralize free radicals and may reduce or even help prevent some of the damage they cause. CoQ10 improves energy, augments the immune system, and acts as an antioxidant. The potential use of coenzyme Q10 supplements alone or in combination with other drug therapies and nutritional supplements may help prevent or treat some of the following conditions: cardiovascular diseases, high blood pressure, cancer, periodontal diseases, mitochondrial disorders, radiation injury, obesity, diabetes, Parkinson’s disease, acquired immune deficiency syndrome (AIDS),
    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3178961/

  82. Turbulent Eddie | March 18, 2020 at 8:29 am |

    Use COVID as a WAKE UP call if you are at risk. The largest risk factors besides age are Hypertension/”Heart Disease”/Diabetes. These are all manifestations of the same condition “Metabolic Syndrome”. Metabolic syndrome is a chronic manifestation of modern diet consumed by our bodies evolved for paleolithic conditions. Because metabolic syndrome is chronic, it explains part of the age risk – the older one is, the longer one has accumulated the results of chronic conditions.

    People associate “full blown” diabetes with high blood sugar, but the chronic condition is “insulin resistance” which begins decades before high blood sugar appears. A very large percentage of the US population is insulin resistant and does not know:
    https://thefastingmethod.com/wp-content/uploads/Kraft-Curves-Cummins.png

    If you have high blood pressure, are overweight, or certainly have heart disease markers, you should investigate whether you are insulin resistant.
    A doctor can identify this, though they need to examine insulin response to a glucose tolerance test, not glucose which is an already out the barn door measure. There is a lab where one can test this one’s self:
    https://www.meridianvalleylab.com/services/kraft-prediabetes-profile/

    The largest single action for improving insulin resistance is to lose fat. The lower the amount of fat stored in fat cells, the more readily the body can use this storage to store occasional excess glucose that one may consume. Keeping fat stored within fat cells requires a certain amount of insulin which slowly increases as part of insulin resistance. Some people can be IR even with “normal weight” because of internal fat around organs.

    It may seem like “blaming the victim” to say it, but part of the suffering from this virus is preventable because the greatest risk factor of insulin resistance is preventable. But even beyond COVID-19, insulin resistance also is associated with huge adverse outcomes, shortened life span, and large medical expenses for society and for the individual.

    Modern society has made available very high energy density food because we all are evolved to seek it, but we are evolved for environments that had very little of such foods. Eating is not an activity that requires thinking or animals would perish, but in this age, we have knowledge and understanding to guide our behavior. Simply put, to reverse insulin resistance, “Eat for nutrient density and avoid energy density”. Fortunately, part of our hunger is to satisfy nutrient requirements, so eating for nutrient density tends to help satiety.

  83. docsiders | March 18, 2020 at 10:41 am |

    There must be a really good “treatment option” hidden in the data relating to the immunity that the “under 16” age group apparently has. There is at least one factor that should be traceable statistically that correlates nearly perfectly with susceptibility…and that is also clinically/physiologically related to the morbidity of the disease.

    Also, keep in mind when doing population epidemiological calculations that this ~20% of the population is immune. So, from the start, we are 20% of the way to “herd immunity”.

    When doing the epidemiological calculations you should also factor in the ~80+% self quarantine status of ~25% of the population over 65…and that these would have been the ones clogging up the healthcare system. The baseline data would look like a population that is ~20% smaller (those 16 and under), and most (80% ?) of the “poor results” are being sequestered out of the equation.

    • JCH | March 18, 2020 at 11:31 am |

      Neighbors, most in high risk group, this morning. Several went to the office. I see two are having their maids in today to clean their houses. Two are having their Grandkids for sleep overs.

      They are not isolated. They are now 14 full days of perfect isolation from being free of COVID -19.

      FOX News has killed an enormous number of people. They are the walking dead.

      To work at home, we had to have IT personnel load the computers, etc. into the car. Our clock started then. Every time people expose themselves, the clock restarts.

  84. aaron | March 18, 2020 at 10:58 am |

    Asymptomatic carriers make up about 50% of infected but only account for about 10% of transmission.

    https://twitter.com/AgBioWorld/status/1239887720287219713

  85. Ireneusz Palmowski | March 18, 2020 at 12:17 pm |

    The Polish Press Agency reports that in China, patients are given plasma from cured people who have developed antibodies.

  86. curryja | March 18, 2020 at 12:50 pm |

    Votes from the market: Amazon is sold out of Vitamin C, Zinc and Tylenol. Makes more sense to stock up on these than toilet paper

    • Ireneusz Palmowski | March 18, 2020 at 2:33 pm |

      Unfortunately, this is not a flu. Some patients develop an uncontrolled course of pneumonia.

  87. matthewrmarler | March 18, 2020 at 1:47 pm |

    Quick update:
    https://gisanddata.maps.arcgis.com/apps/opsdashboard/index.html#/bda7594740fd40299423467b48e9ecf6

    US has suffered 105 deaths, if I counted correctly; France and Spain 148 and 623 respectively. It looks like China is not updating its numbers.

    • Ireneusz Palmowski | March 18, 2020 at 2:28 pm |

      China has almost 70,000 patients cured. They can take plasma and antibodies.

    • JCH | March 18, 2020 at 2:37 pm |

      China so far today, 11 deaths, 13 new cases. The have around 8,000 patients in total isolation.

    • Ireneusz Palmowski | March 18, 2020 at 2:38 pm |

      In Italy, there is still no peak of infection. May get sick even 100 thousand.

      • JCH | March 18, 2020 at 2:42 pm |

        The simple USA-style countermeasures they have employed stand no chance of success. Italy, to a significant degree, including bigger, is about to happen here.

      • jungletrunks | March 18, 2020 at 4:41 pm |

        JCH, You obviously suffer from the new delusional inducing strain of Agent Orange.

        I imagine Chinese internment camps that hold the million Uyghurs are COVID-19 free, such is a desirable outcome driven metric for the Left I’m sure. It’s remarkable what forced isolation can do to protect a society from both viral and religious contagions. This represents the luxury of any totalitarian state, an enviable best practice for any self respecting Leftist.

        China, of course, does what they want to their population. Draconian government force produces remarkable results that a democracy can never hope to duplicate. It’s no surprise why the propagandistic methods of the Chinese dictatorship are so envied by the Left. Collectivism works towards a unified sense of purpose, a sight to behold for its efficiency.

        I can appreciate why you demonstrably envy China’s efficiency, the statist governance approach, and alternatively why you have such disdain for democratic sensibilities which puts undo emphasis on freedom; those jurisdictions that react in measured response in order to protect both life and freedom; notions like these are a cancer to be avoided by the statist who measure democracy as trite, even selfish, where protections for the individual usurp the state. The state is what’s important. Freedom is so overblown.

        I hear Chinese maids can be found on the cheap, BTW. Oh, there are 5 new deaths today in the US, the democracy reels from these numbers.

    • Ireneusz Palmowski | March 18, 2020 at 2:47 pm |

      The wave of cases in Spain follows Italy.

  88. JCH | March 18, 2020 at 2:19 pm |

    This was inevitable. People were led to believe young people are immune/only get mild symptoms. There are two young adults in Dallas with COVID-10 who are in critical condition.

    https://i.imgur.com/pGCMN3q.png

    • cerescokid | March 18, 2020 at 3:37 pm |

      They weren’t led to believe. That was what the early data said. The medical profession can only go on what the experiences were.

      Did it ever dawn on you the entire world has no experience with this strain of virus? That is why it is called novel

  89. Ireneusz Palmowski | March 18, 2020 at 2:51 pm |

    You have to learn quickly from the Chinese to save people.

  91. phil salmon | March 18, 2020 at 4:02 pm |

    On Coronavirus. Stay at home especially if you’re old.
    On sea ice. Arctic sea ice maximum just passed, highest in 5 years. Inconvenient fact almost disappeared from the internet. Now that’s news.

    http://ocean.dmi.dk/arctic/icecover.uk.php

  92. Russell Seitz (@RussellSeitz) | March 18, 2020 at 4:03 pm |

    The world’s most viewed climate blog assures that Schweppervescene will soon vanquish the coronvirus plague :

    https://vvattsupwiththat.blogspot.com/2020/03/climate-skeptic-touts-gin-tonic.html

  93. potsniron | March 18, 2020 at 4:11 pm |

    folks, I was steered to this youtube channel by a friend.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tmhsNdW24BM

    Very sensible and educational, covering virus spread and also the financial implications.
    They update about every other day.

  94. Ireneusz Palmowski | March 18, 2020 at 5:00 pm |

    The use of mass tests and the detection of asymptomatic patients may allow the collection of plasma with antibodies.

  95. Don132 | March 18, 2020 at 5:25 pm |

    Breaking news: Successful High-Dose Vitamin C Treatment of Patients with Serious and Critical COVID-19 Infection
    by Richard Cheng, MD, PhD
    (OMNS Mar 18, 2020) A group of medical doctors, healthcare providers and scientists met online March 17, 2020, to discuss the use of high dose intravenous vitamin C (IVC) in the treatment of moderate to severe cases of Covid-19 patients. The key guest was Dr. Enqian Mao, chief of emergency medicine department at Ruijin Hospital, a major hospital in Shanghai, affiliated with the Joatong University College of Medicine. Dr. Mao is also a member of the Senior Expert Team at the Shanghai Public Health Center, where all Covid-19 patients have been treated. In addition, Dr. Mao co-authored the Shanghhai Guidelines for the Treatment of Covid-19 Infection, an official document endorsed by the Shanghai Medical Association and the Shanghai city government. [1]

    Dr. Mao has been using high-dose dose IVC to treat patients with acute pancreatitis, sepsis, surgical wound healing and other medical conditions for over 10 years. When Covid-19 broke out, he and other experts thought of vitamin C and recommended IVC for the treatment of moderate to severe cases of Covid-19 patients. The recommendation was accepted early in the epidemic by the Shanghai Expert Team. All serious or critically ill Covid-19 patients in the Shanghai area were treated in Shanghai Public Health Center, for a total of 358 Covid-19 patients as of March 17th, 2020.

    Dr. Mao stated that his group treated ~50 cases of moderate to severe cases of Covid-19 infection with high dose IVC. The IVC dosing was in the range of 10,000 mg – 20,000 mg a day for 7-10 days, with 10,000 mg for moderate cases and 20,000 for more severe cases, determined by pulmonary status (mostly the oxygenation index) and coagulation status. All patients who received IVC improved and there was no mortality. Compared to the average of a 30-day hospital stay for all Covid-19 patients, those patients who received high dose IVC had a hospital stay about 3-5 days shorter than the overall patients. Dr. Mao discussed one severe case in particular who was deteriorating rapidly. He gave a bolus of 50,000 mg IVC over a period of 4 hours. The patient’s pulmonary (oxygenation index) status stabilized and improved as the critical care team watched in real time. There were no side effects reported from any of the cases treated with high dose IVC.

    Among the international experts who attended today’s video conference were: Dr. Atsuo Yanagisawa, formerly professor of medicine at the Kyorin University, Tokyo, Japan, and the president of the International Society for Orthomolecular Medicine; Dr. Jun Matsuyama of Japan; Dr. Michael J Gonzalez, professor at University of Puerto Rico Medical Sciences, Dr. Jean Drisko, professor of medicine, and Dr. Qi Chen, professor of pharmacology, both at the Kansas University Medical School, Dr. Alpha “Berry” Fowler, professor of pulmonary and critical care medicine, Virginia Commonwealth University, Dr. Maurice Beer and Asa Kitfield, both from NutriDrip and Integrative Medical NY, New York City; Dr. Hong Zhang of Beijing; William T. Penberthy, PhD of CME Scribe, Florida; Ilyes Baghli, MD, president of the Algerian Society of Nutrition and Orthomolecular Medicine (SANMO); Drs. Mignonne Mary and Charles Mary Jr, of the Remedy Room, New Orleans; Dr. Selvam Rengasamy, president of SAHAMM, Malaysia. I, Richard Cheng, MD, PhD of Cheng Integrative Health Center of South Carolina, and Senior Advisor to ShenZhen Medical Association and Shenzhen BaoAn Central Hospital, coordinated this conference.

    Albeit a brief meeting of less than 45 minutes due to Dr. Mao’s limited time availability, the audience thanked Dr. Mao for his time and sharing and wished to keep the communication channel open and also able to talk to other clinicians working at the front line against Covid-19.

    In a separate meeting, I had the honor to talk to Sheng Wang, M.D., Ph.D., Professor of Critical Care Medicine of Shanghai 10th Hospital, Tongji University College of Medicine at Shanghai China, who also served at the Senior Clinical Expert Team of the Shanghai Covid-19 Control and Prevention Team. There are three lessons that we learned about this Covid-19 infection, Dr. Wang said:

    1. Early and high-dose IVC is quite helpful in helping Covid-19 patients. The data is still being finalized and the formal papers will be submitted for publication as soon as they are complete.

    2. Covid-19 patients appear to have a high rate of hyper-coagulability. Among the severe cases, ~40% severe cases showed hyper-coagulability, whereas the number among the mild to moderate cases were 15-20%. Heparin was used among those with coagulation issues.

    3. The third important lesson learned is the importance for the healthcare team of gearing up to wear protective clothing at the earliest opportunity for intubation and other emergency rescue measures. We found that if we waited until a patient developed the full-blown signs for intubation, then got ready to intubate, we would lose the precious minutes. So the treatment team should lower the threshold for intubation, to allow proper time (~15 minutes or so) for the team to gear up. This critical 15-30 minutes could make a difference in the outcome.

    Also, both Drs. Mao and Wang confirmed that there are other medical teams in other parts of the country who have been using high dose IVC treating Covid-19 patients.

    [Note that Dr. Fowler, of the CITRIS-ALI trial, was one of the attendees of the video conference.]

    • matthewrmarler | March 19, 2020 at 2:30 am |

      Don132: Breaking news: Successful High-Dose Vitamin C Treatment of Patients with Serious and Critical COVID-19 Infection
      by Richard Cheng, MD, PhD

      Here’s hoping!

      BUT

      every open label study without random assignment of patients to treated and placebo groups reports at least some positive results. It isn’t evil or dishonest or “terrible” — it’s banal.

      • Don132 | March 19, 2020 at 12:46 pm |

        matthewrmarler: “every open label study without random assignment of patients to treated and placebo groups reports at least some positive results. It isn’t evil or dishonest or “terrible” — it’s banal.”

        This is clinical practice, not a clinical trial. Clinical practice shouldn’t be summarily dismissed. It is what it is. It may be faulty, and that’s why we have clinical trials.

  96. Turbulent Eddie | March 18, 2020 at 7:14 pm |

    China and South Korea flat.
    Italy and Iran seem to be getting there.
    No sign of slowing in US and Europe,
    but if we follow Korea, 3 weeks?

    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ETRyUYAXgAMSiur?format=jpg&name=large.jpg

      • matthewrmarler | March 18, 2020 at 7:31 pm |

        Quick note on doubling. There are today almost 8,000 cases in the U.S. Soon enough (maybe not soon enough for Niall Ferguson’s model) there will be 16,000, then 32,000 64,000, 128,000, 264,000, 512,000 etc. Somewhere in there the US may record 3,100 deaths, what has been recorded in Hubei province (1/400 th of the total forecast for the US by Niall Ferguson.) Somwhere in there we shall have enough information to decide whether US diagnosed case totals are growing exponentially, though the exponent may not be 2; and whether the combination of warm weather, chloroquine, and other medicines are making a difference.

        At the JHU website, numbers for China and its provinces have stopped increasing. Are there trustworthy data from China?

      • JCH | March 18, 2020 at 7:45 pm |

        The western medical scientists who have been on the ground in China say their numbers are real. The Ferguson numbers, studies like that, are usually to year end.

        The White House bought them.

        A few days ago I started suggesting SK’s numbers are two stories: one for the religious sect with rapid transmission of the infection to relatively young sect members *higher survival rate; and the second story the general population, which would lag far behind: barely started. Too soon to tell, but it is rising a bit. Won’t be a huge surge as they have imposed some countermeasures:

        https://i.imgur.com/QOBe7Kg.png

      • jungletrunks | March 18, 2020 at 8:06 pm |

        JCH, Is it that western medical scientists are looking at their own quantifiable data, leading into this slick matter of fact hand-off of yours, or does your data come from the Chinese? Who are these medical scientists, researchers you refer to? Do you have names? How many are there? Go ahead and post your unequivocal evidence, the link that you’ve bought into.

        China is kicking out reporters; this is the report; therefore the west loses the ability to credibly report on what’s going on in China, this should be a concern to you. It appears ideology consumes your attention.

        Per NYT: “The Chinese government, eager to claim victory in what China’s leader, Xi Jinping, has described as a “people’s war” against the virus, is leading a sweeping campaign to purge the public sphere of dissent, censoring news reports, harassing citizen journalists and shutting down news sites.”

        Your chart is really pretty, but why do you continue to trumpet Chinese propaganda, representative of success? Are you really that certain?

        https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/14/business/media/coronavirus-china-journalists.html

        https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-51486106

      • JCH | March 18, 2020 at 8:06 pm |

        And for the record, the White House panicked and acted.

        That is indisputable. And thank gawd.

      • JCH | March 18, 2020 at 8:37 pm |

        Its Coronavirus Cases Dwindling, China Turns Focus Outward

        This too easy.

        BEIJING — China’s leader, Xi Jinping, pledged to send more medical experts to Italy this week, on the same day Beijing sent 2,000 rapid diagnostic tests to the Philippines. Serbia’s president pleaded for assistance not from the country’s neighbors in Europe, which restricted the export of needed medical equipment, but from China.

        “European solidarity does not exist,” the Serbian leader, Aleksandar Vucic, said when he announced a state of emergency in televised remarks. “That was a fairy tale on paper. I believe in my brother and friend Xi Jinping, and I believe in Chinese help.”

        Only a few weeks ago, China was overwhelmed by the coronavirus epidemic that began in the central Chinese city of Wuhan, accepting donations of masks and other medical supplies from nearly 80 nations and 10 international organizations.

        Now, with new daily cases at home dwindling into the single digits, China is mounting a diplomatic offensive to help, as the rest of the world struggles to get the virus under control. From Japan to Iraq, Spain to Peru, it has provided or pledged humanitarian assistance in the form of donations or medical expertise — an aid blitz that is giving China the chance to reposition itself not as the authoritarian incubator of a pandemic but as a responsible global leader at a moment of worldwide crisis.

        Were people left to die? Absolutely. The rumors from Italy is they are leaving people to die. That what overwhelming the medical system means: people are triaged to the “let them die” pile.

        Our hospitals are preparing for the same thing right now. They’re alarmists, thank gawd.

  97. jimmww | March 18, 2020 at 8:24 pm |

    There are other opinions:
    John P.A. Ioannidis is professor of medicine, of epidemiology and population health, of biomedical data science, and of statistics at Stanford University and co-director of Stanford’s Meta-Research Innovation Center.

    He opines that we have no way of knowing at this time, and probably for a long time, what an accurate incidence and prevalence of the disease is, and what the fatality rate actually is. He suspects that we may be causing a global calamity in our exaggerated response to our fear and ignorance.
    >>Adding these extra sources of uncertainty, reasonable estimates for the case fatality ratio in the general U.S. population vary from 0.05% to 1%.
    A population-wide case fatality rate of 0.05% is lower than seasonal influenza. If that were the true rate, locking down the world with potentially tremendous social and financial consequences would be totally irrational. It’s like an elephant being attacked by a house cat. Frustrated and trying to avoid the cat, the elephant accidentally jumps off a cliff and dies.<> As you might imagine, before they knew it was a problem, the epidemic raged on the ship, with infected crew members cooking and cleaning for the guests, people all eating together, close living quarters, lots of social interaction, and a generally older population. Seems like a perfect situation for an overwhelming majority of the passengers to become infected. Patient Zero boarded the ship on 20th January. They were kept together for one full month. They didn’t know the virus was aboard until the first of February. One passenger on the Diamond Princess tested positive for the coronavirus after disembarking in Hong Kong in late January. Some 3,700 passengers and crew members were on the ship at the time. Upon returning to Yokohama, Japan, on February 3rd, the ship was held in quarantine, during which testing was performed in order to measure COVID-19 infections among the 3,711 passengers and crew members onboard.
    Passengers were initially to be held in quarantine for 14 days. However, those that had intense exposure to the confirmed case-patients, such as sharing a cabin, were held in quarantine beyond the initial 14-day window [3]. By 20th February, there were 634 confirmed cases onboard (17%), with 328 of these asymptomatic (asymptomatic cases were either self-assessed or tested.)
    And despite that, some 83% (82.7% – 83.9%) of the passengers never got the disease at all.
    [ And control measures were imperfect. Kentaro Iwata, the head of the infectious-diseases department at Kobe University Hospital and a member of Japan’s Disaster Medical Assistance Team, spent Tuesday monitoring the ship. In a video posted on YouTube late Tuesday, Iwata, who helped fight Ebola and SARS outbreaks in African countries and China, described the health procedures on the Diamond Princess as “completely inadequate” and said medics on board were callous about the coronavirus. https://www.businessinsider.com/seasoned-expert-visit-diamond-princess-ship-scared-terrible-hygiene-2020-2%5D
    In addition to the low rate of disease incidence (83% didn’t get it), the curious part of Figure 2 for Willis is that there’s not a whole lot of difference between young and old passengers in terms of how many didn’t get coronavirus. For example, sixty to sixty-nine-year-old passengers stayed healthier than teenagers. And three-quarters of the oldest group, those over eighty, didn’t get the virus.
    Slightly less than half the passengers (48.6% ± 2.0%) who got [infected] showed NO symptoms. Young and old were more likely to be symptom-free, while people in their 20s, 30s, and 40s were more likely to show symptoms.
    There were a total of 7 deaths among those on board. All of them were in people over seventy. According to the study, the age-adjusted infection fatality rate was 1.2% (0.38%–2.7%). Note the wide uncertainty range because of the small numbers. The 1,400 aged from 20-49 were almost all crew and subject to greatest exposure risk. Their low likelihood of contracting, and high survival rate are good news for that cohort.<<

    from https://wattsupwiththat.com/2020/03/16/diamond-princess-mysteries/
    with data supplied by https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.03.05.20031773v2.full.pdf

    • tonyb | March 19, 2020 at 5:44 am |

      jimmww

      I had been doing some investigation of this. Bearing in mind the age profile of the ship passengers and their eventual close confines in cabins (after freely mixing before and during the early stages of the outbreak) and it appears that due to the cruise itinerary and insurance purposes everyone would have had malaria vaccinations and been taking anti malarial drugs.

      . There is one particular drug that is widely used to treat malaria whose export has just been banned by the UK as they want to retain it to fight covid 19.

      So anti malarial treatments do seem to have some impact but it is too early to say how significant this is.

      tonyb

      • jimmww | March 19, 2020 at 6:02 pm |

        Yes, tonyb, chloroquin and remdesivir have shown some beneficial effect, how much as yet unknown. Best to remain cautiously hopeful and keep your powder dry.
        But even when there is a vaccine, it’s likely this will, like other coronaviruses, remain in place and resurrect occasionally with another mutation. To this day, people are still infected with, hospitalized and die from H1N1 flu.
        The Italian who just recovered after receiving remdesivir might well have recovered without it.
        According to the Centers for Disease Control, the first known influenza pandemic struck in 1580. Another epidemic of the disease originated from Rome in 1743, spreading throughout much of Europe and bringing the word influenza to the British Isles.

        I have it on good authority that chicken soup will help.

    • thomaswfuller2 | March 19, 2020 at 11:39 am |

      I would suggest that looking at Northern Italy might be a better model than the cruise ship. 475 people died from the corona virus. Yesterday.

      • jimmww | March 19, 2020 at 6:08 pm |

        Northern Italy is not a closed box like the cruise ship. They don’t have anything like good numbers. The ship is not a model, it’s an experimental population isolated from confounding variables.

  98. matthewrmarler | March 18, 2020 at 9:44 pm |

    jimmww: Here’s the reference for the Ioannidis article:

    It’s a question: A Fiasco in the Making?

    Thank you for the link.

  100. beththeserf | March 19, 2020 at 2:01 am |

    Israeli virologist with experience of Ebola and SARS says, ‘ Keep calm. The Cv infection is not airborn infection but via droplet transmission.. ‘
    https://www.timesofisrael.com/israeli-virologist-urges-world-leaders-to-calm-public-slams-unnecessary-panic/

    • tonyb | March 19, 2020 at 5:35 am |

      Beth

      The Imperial College report warning of a huge number of deaths seems to have spooked a number of govts and people. There is a great and withering reply to it in Yesterday Times Letters

      “I tolerated the company of this team of doom mongers on the foot and mouth disease committee under the chairmanship of Sir David King…’

      We were told that 400,000 would die from FMD. 175 did.

      Sir David King was of course Chief Scientific adviser to Tony Blair and created a panic with his wild and extreme concerns over climate change.

      Everyone needs to calm down. Those over 70 WITH several existing severe pathologies are by far the most at risk.

      We risk emerging blinking into the light from our homes in 3 months time to find the smoking landscape of a ruined economy with the realisation that the financial panic was worse overall in its long lasting and profound impact than the illness that caused it.

      tonyb

      • UK-Weather Lass-In Earnest | March 19, 2020 at 6:38 am |

        “We risk emerging blinking into the light from our homes in 3 months time to find the smoking landscape of a ruined economy with the realisation that the financial panic was worse overall in its long lasting and profound impact than the illness that caused it.” tonyb

        I think this covers all the bases when society is not always on the alert for the most predictable of all the unpredictable things we face. We needed comprehensive testing for coronavirus-19 from day one and the isolation of those infected with the virus from those not infected. Everything else comes down to selective testing which does not protect our health services front line from worse possible outcomes,

      • beththeserf | March 19, 2020 at 7:29 am |

        Never let a good crisis go to waste though missing denominator skews stats and in context of other viral endemics, SARS, Ebola, Spanish Flu, nothing approaching the mortality rate.
        https://spectator.org/apocalypse-no/

    • JCH | March 19, 2020 at 11:05 am |

      Have you ever walked across a hog lot with high mortality from droplet transmission? One of the silliest things I’ve ever read.

    • jungletrunks | March 19, 2020 at 3:24 pm |

      “Keep Calm” obviously the Israeli’s didn’t get the follow-up memo to put the kettle on.

  101. Ireneusz Palmowski | March 19, 2020 at 2:20 am |

    First, plasma with antibodies must be given to doctors because in Italy many doctors have become infected.

    • Ireneusz Palmowski | March 19, 2020 at 2:40 am |

      Plasma of those who have recovered may be a temporary vaccine for the highest risk groups.

  102. Ireneusz Palmowski | March 19, 2020 at 5:24 am |

    In hospitalized adult patients with severe Covid-19, no benefit was observed with lopinavir–ritonavir treatment beyond standard care. Future trials in patients with severe illness may help to confirm or exclude the possibility of a treatment benefit. (Funded by Major Projects of National Science and Technology on New Drug Creation and Development and others; Chinese Clinical Trial Register number, ChiCTR2000029308. opens in new tab.)
    https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2001282?query=featured_home

  103. David | March 19, 2020 at 6:00 am |

    Hi

    Try coconut water

  104. Ireneusz Palmowski | March 19, 2020 at 7:13 am |

    You must act immediately. It is better to use preparations that are made from plasma. They can be obtained from people who have recovered. Treatment must be as early, as possible at an early stage.
    If treatment is already undertaken in severe cases, we lose control over pneumonia.

  105. nobodysknowledge | March 19, 2020 at 7:55 am |

    The coronavirus goes undetected in most countries. One exeption is the Faeroe Islands. They have detected 1474 infected pr million. Some days ago they had done 14000 tests on a population of 50000. Denmark has detected 195 cases pr million. This can confirm the chinese study that 86% goes undetected. So for most countries we can multiply the number of infected with 6. For countries with an extensive testing this would be much less.
    So, to my best judgement UK has 16000 infected and USA has 57000 infected. I think this can be a better fit to the number of deaths.
    This is my best speculation for now.

    • nobodysknowledge | March 19, 2020 at 7:59 am |

      Numbers are from Worldometers.
      Faeroe Islands has no deaths and no critical ill.

    • jimmww | March 19, 2020 at 6:28 pm |

      According to Wikipedia and, better, Johns Hopkins, on 19 March, 14 new cases were confirmed, bringing the total up to 72. 1,221 people have now been tested altogether. Presumably they’re all symptomatic, but there have been no deaths, no reported hospitalizations.

      It’s unlikely to the the point of unbelievable that any infection rate or infected percent can be determined there at this time. But that does look like another possible experimental population if the borders can remain closed.

  106. Turbulent Eddie | March 19, 2020 at 9:13 am |

    Don’t Expect Millions To Die From Coronavirus, Says Richard Epstein

    We’ll see.

    Virus evolution, which can be rapid, tends to select for lower lethality ( good parasites don’t kill their hosts ).

    Epstein also invokes climate change as analogy of faulty presumptions in models.

  107. Ireneusz Palmowski | March 19, 2020 at 9:36 am |

    Breadth of concomitant immune responses prior to patient recovery: a case report of non-severe COVID-19
    https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-020-0819-2

  108. jimmww | March 20, 2020 at 12:53 am |

    And now, from France —
    there is this response to questions we all want answers to…
    COVID-19: quelle est la réalité du terrain? Témoignage du Dr Benjamnin Davido, médecin infectiologue referent 16 Mar 20

    >>When we had only 40 cases in France, we relied on level 1 Health Referral Centres (Ă©tablissements de santĂ© de rĂ©fĂ©rence; HRCs), such as Bichat or PitiĂ©-SalpĂȘtriĂšre hospitals in Paris, to absorb the flow of patients. Now we have more than 3000 infected individuals, it is obvious that the dozen level 1 HRCs across the country are no longer enough. Consequently, second line centres, like our hospital, are taking their turn, just in time.

    We have had to adapt and put in place dedicated COVID-19 units. We have, as of today [13th March] a total of 11 beds, with a planned increase to 20 beds next week. Centres no longer have the time nor the space to receive and respond to the demand for screening. Fifteen days ago, the screening of suspected patients had to be done in the hospital with containment measures. Today, it is no longer possible as these places are taken by confirmed cases. Screening is therefore performed in the emergency department. This is stage 3 crisis management, although this has not yet been officially announced, which underlines the pressure from the flow of patients arriving in hospitals.

    Some hospitals have installed tents for urgent services, but you still need to have the capacity, to have the space and enough caregivers. And these tents only allow outpatient diagnoses, they don’t allow for patients considered fragile or severe cases requiring hospitalization in a dedicated isolation facility.

    Is France heading for a situation like Italy?
    It is certain that the curves of the Italian and French epidemics can be superimposed; they are just separated in time by around 10 days. One difference between the two countries is that Italy has a particular set-up in which healthcare is organised separately by region, which may have led to a delay in the organisation of care.

    Today, in France, we no longer talk of zones or foci of COVID-19, and we no longer take into account travel. On the contrary, we consider the severity of the illness, and it is the presence of unexplained pneumonia that makes us suspect a COVID-19 diagnosis, especially if it is serious straight away (in resuscitation, for example).

    But as we no longer include history of travel, and the relevant symptoms are flu-like, such as having a fever, a runny nose, or coughing, and that, chronologically, it is the peak of the flu epidemic, we have an enormous influx of patients who may have flu or seasonal viral infection (mainly rhinovirus). These are consistent with the new coronavirus and, as such, we cannot, for benign cases, make a clinical distinction between them. It becomes therefore impossible to screen everyone. In any case, we don’t have enough kits. We are at the stage of counting the number of cotton swabs to take samples


    Did France act too late to prevent shortages?
    Yes. Personally, for 10 days, I and my colleagues have struggled with the healthcare teams to urgently set up a hospitalization and screening structure to make the diagnoses, as some seemed doubtful due to the lack of anticipation by our local bodies. I don’t blame them, because bodies at the ministerial level have not given us the funds for taking the samples, as the laboratories themselves do not yet have the testing machines.
    On the other hand, what should have been anticipated is the current situation where we find ourselves with questions over the supply of masks. There are general practitioners who cannot see patients in their office due to a lack of surgical masks (FFP2s (masks only have demonstrated effectiveness in resuscitation and when obtaining the sample), while we are in a period of seasonal flu and colds
and coronavirus. There is also a lack of hydroalcoholic gels. For lack of a better option, it is necessary to rely on hand-washing, which is a backwards step in terms of hygiene practices. That’s why, there should be, from tomorrow, a national plan that fits with the pandemic, as declared by the WHO. Care, as set out in the current plan, is not tenable in the long-term because in the short-term we will no longer have the capacity to accept and regulate the flow of hospitalized patients, or even to screen them. If the epidemic lasts for 3 months, I think it will be very difficult.

    Hospitals in France have been in crisis for years; in January, healthcare professionals protested against the lack of healthcare personnel and to explain that the austerity policy, which would see hospital beds close and push outpatient care, was not viable. Today, we are reopening hospital beds and requisitioning them to hospitalise suspected coronavirus patients. This morning, the regional health agencies asked us to cancel all scheduled non-urgent hospital admissions.

    Doctors in Italy have had to make difficult ethical choices due to the lack of equipment (respirators, beds, etc). Will this happen in France?
    We have discussed it among infectious disease specialists, and we think that it’s a question which will sadly arise when we have no more room for resuscitation, which is currently not the case. But COVID-19 patients with severe disease stay in hospital for a long time (around 3 to 6 weeks) so if the epidemic lasts, it may indeed happen. But this decision algorithm is sadly not rare in medicine. We decide not to resuscitate a patient when we know it will not save them. What is new is that this is a kind of illness for which we are not used to taking this type of decision.

    [[Military doctors are familiar with the process of triage, which means dealing incoming patients into three sorts: those for whom nothing can be done; those for whom nothing need be done urgently; and those who need urgent care with a prospect of benefit. MASH never really went into that, but they should have when the children weren’t watching.]]
    …
    Currently, a third of hospitalized patients in resuscitation in France don’t have risk factors, including some under 40 years of age. We don’t know why yet. >>

    Then he adds: “Contaminated caregivers have been probably, in the main, in the community or hadn’t take sufficient precautions at the start of the epidemic by not wearing a mask when the patient had signs consistent with the illness (especially cough). Personally, I think I have more risk of catching the virus on public transport than in the hospital.” But a mask will to some degree protect the contacts, not the person wearing the mask. And there are more sick people in the hospital than on the Metro.
    https://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/926883?src=wnl_tp10f_200319_mscpedit&uac=26081DN&impID=2317362#vp_4

    Makes us – and Trump – look pretty good…among the humans.

    Links to references are at the Medscape site.

  109. jimmww | March 20, 2020 at 2:49 pm |

    On nomenclature:
    ABC News, MSNBC, and PBS reporters, and many thereafter, have vilified those who refer to covid19 as the Wuhan virus or even as Chinese in origin.
    “it’s nakedly racist and obviously racist and blatantly racist.”
    https://spectator.org/abcs-cecilia-vega-and-pbss-yamiche-alcindor-play-the-race-card/

    They don’t seem to object to some of the other designated diseases:
    Middle East respiratory syndrome -MERS
    West Nile Virus
    Zika virus
    Lassa Fever
    Venezuelan equine encephalitis
    Venezuelan hemorrhagic fever
    Rift Valley fever
    Guinea Worm — now, that’s doubly bad, impugning not only Africans but Italians.
    German Measles
    Marburg Fever virus
    Omsk Hemorrhagic Fever
    Ross River Virus
    Spanish Flu
    Bolivian hemorrhagic fever
    Argentine hemorrhagic fever
    Crimean-Congo hemorrhagic fever
    Colorado tick fever
    Asian Flu
    Kawasaki disease
    Ebola
    and, lest we feel left out –
    Rocky Mountain Spotted Fever
    La Crosse Encephalitis
    St. Louis Encephalitis
    and of course Lyme Disease, named after a town in Connecticut that is 98%white, plus the obvious fact that lime is white.

    I guess they have a point. Or maybe they’re just nakedly stupid and obviously stupid and blatantly stupid. No wonder the Chinese kicked them out of the country.

    But I rather like calling it the Kung Flu.

  110. Emmanuel | March 20, 2020 at 11:45 pm |

    I have a question ., Corona spreads through cough droplets, so if the cough droplets are on the water surface then will it be viral?

  111. UK-Weather Lass-In-Earnest | March 23, 2020 at 6:19 am |

    In my lifetime those who manage our health have not wanted to know about colds and ‘flu unless symptoms pass a certain point and get serious. Superficially covid-19 seems a similar case except for the fact that somehow our health service resources have not been adequately maintained or, at the very least, sized up to deal with it. Panic ensues at a high level and policy simply appears to have relocated infection centres from hundreds of normal areas (e.g. households, schools, workplaces etc.) to shops, chemists, parks, and the few remaining things we are freely allowed to do. The moral here is, perhaps, not to panic. Medics are on their usual job to come up with better answers to the repetitious dilemma of how to deal with it and stop a similar event happening again in the future. Time goes by and complacency returns. Nature has cleaned up much bigger messes than this many times before and doesn’t seem to be registering this event as much out of the ordinary.

    In my lifetime the weather has been unpredictably predictable. Our weather and climate ‘medics’ have been forever scrabbling around for better data and a higher degree of resolution of that data just like other professions who deal in things that change. Some extreme weather events happen as they always have done and some panic ensues just as it always will. And then a ‘genius’ comes along and claims we are murdering ourselves slowly and surely because things we have naturally learned to do over time through scientific endeavour are somehow of a scale that is damaging our planet. The genius offers, as evidence, proof that a rise in CO2 is pushing temperatures up on an unprecedented scale. This genius is later found to have cooked the books but instead of being ridiculed and banished, those who have huge reasons to persist with this idea that we are killing ourselves, wish to protect the potential enrichment they have noticed in their own lifestyles. Meanwhile the planet ticks over sighs another ‘Whatever next?’ A battle ensues between those who wish to protect science and those who wish to protect their ill got lifestyles. Honesty moves a safer distance away from them.

    Is human sourced carbon dioxide increasing? Of course it is since the population is increasing. Is it damaging the planet? Nobody seems to have a winning theory or clue about a) how that would work; b) how you could see it working; c) why the planet has cleaned up much bigger messes than this many times before. Nature doesn’t appear to registering this event as at all important and is very much business as usual.

    How is it that in the twenty first century we seem to be going backwards?

  112. Eki | March 31, 2020 at 8:56 am |

    In pandemia everyone in Finland is treated equally and receives hospital care free of charge including refugees.
    .

  113. Stella de Wyatt | March 31, 2020 at 5:23 pm |

    Most of the people who have died from coronavirus have underlying health conditions. Age per se of 70 year olds is not a major factor, in itself. The reason age appears to be a factor is because of correlation between age and underlying health conditions.
    Correlation is not causation. A 70-75 year old with no underlying health conditions and who takes immune booster, tumeric, ginger, andrographis, echinacea, vitamin c and d, etc. is no more at risk from the virus than a younger person.
    I strongly object to the identity politcs being applied to older people, ie, lumping all people over 70 into one group, and the failure to distinguish between at risk people in that group and people not at any enhanced risk in that group.
    Even worse, I am seeing vilification and unnecessary control of perfectly competent, fit healthy older people who are no more at risk from the virus than anyone else.
    As a side note, I think we will see the re-emergence of ricketts from beople staying indoors.

    • JCH | March 31, 2020 at 5:54 pm |

      This is why it’s going to keep right on gnawing through the west.

      https://i.imgur.com/lWJlaNS.png

      Total confirmed cases for various provinces around Wuhan, and maybe a wakeup call for those who keep insisting South Korea is the country to emulate:

      https://i.imgur.com/uMwLbOF.png

      • Don Monfort | March 31, 2020 at 6:30 pm |

        I like that scale. We are at 3000+ and Italy is at 12000+ on the same day, but we are just about to catch up. Somebody better tell Cuomo and De Blasio. They are going to have to supply most of the deaths to get us there. They better get busy, so we don’t have folks here on this board getting disappointed.

        Obviously, our solution is not to follow S Korea’s methods. But to beg the Red Chinese Thugocracy to send us several divisions of the goons they use to beat and disappear their people into submission. People around here don’t like that kind of order, but it’s for their own good.

      • JCH | March 31, 2020 at 7:24 pm |

        Uh, no.

  116. Stella de Wyatt | March 31, 2020 at 6:38 pm |

    In most countries, the virus kills far fewer people than die from medical malpractice, infections acquired in hospitals, not to mention flu and road deaths.
    I cannot understand the panic, especially as we have both prophylactic measures to reduce the likelihood of catching the virus and treatments for the virus (both contrary to what we are told by the medical profession, Big Pharma and by gov.).

    One can only think that the motivations for the ridiculous and dangerous panic about the coronavirus are a combination of govs wanting to take more control of people, and Big Pharma wanting to make lots of money from a vaccine.

    Othewise, why are we being told that there are no treatments.
    Some likely or established treatments for similar viruses to Covid 19 are BHT, injected vitamin C, lysineacetylsalicylic acid (noting the risk from aspirin), various forms of quinine (low doses can posibly be taken prophylactically), certain antibiotics (surprisingly), andrographis and oregano (prophylacticaly), oral vitamin c (prophylactically) and established antivirals (for treatment).

    Many more people will die from self-harm and get sick generally from not getting any sunlight etc. than will die from coronavirus. The advice to stay inside is lunacy. People should be told to not mix with people but staying inside means no vitamin d and no melatonin. The lack of both these things weaken one’s immune system substantially. At the very least, people should be told to take vitamin d, and possibly melatonin also, if they are staying inside.

  117. lauren marshall | April 2, 2020 at 7:07 pm |

    Can covid19 be transmitted thru apartment air ducts in central air?

    • Turbulent Eddie | April 23, 2020 at 10:33 am |

      Maybe not so well.

      Supposedly, on the cruise ships, the air ducts were in series.

      Passengers were sequestered in their rooms, and those sharing rooms with COVID positive room-mates did indeed get infected.

      BUT- passengers sharing rooms with UN-infected room-mates did not get infected.

      So even though they were getting air in part from infected cabins, there was not airborne transmission.

  118. Craig Michael Vandertie | April 4, 2020 at 12:05 pm |

    Fact, the Covid-19 virus was Bioengineered by Chinese nationalist Virologists and Geneticists at the behest of the tyrannical Chinese politicians to primarily to destroy the United States economy with only those you will find listed within Forbes and Fortune 500 profitting off of it through charity provided by the United States branch of the Rothschild controlled World Bank which our tyrants refer to as the Federal Reserve.

    It is the most wealthiest and inhuman individuals who conspired with the tyrannical Chinese politicians to unleash this disease upon the human population.

    https://www.finder.com/what-are-the-top-20-causes-of-death-in-united-states

    https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/deaths.htm

    True based on empirical, repeatedly checked research results have the projected figures of deaths due to the Covid-19 virus lower than any of the top 20 causes of death projected of death this year.

  119. dpy6629 | April 24, 2020 at 1:17 am |

    You are now wasting your precious but worthless life energy. No one is reading except me and I’m done.

    What you have contributed [sic] will not change a single MD’s mind and you have nothing new or interesting.

  120. Alex Fovard | April 25, 2020 at 11:54 am |

    Who wants to protect themselves from the virus, then you can see this article https://bit.ly/3cLZ4ZP