Octopus Overlords

The agency had posted new guidelines suggesting the virus can transmit over a distance larger than six feet and that indoor ventilation is key to protection against its spread. This is a point that many independent experts have also been advancing, and it had appeared that the agency had come around to their point of view.

But the guidelines were removed late this morning because “that does not reflect our current state of knowledge,” a top CDC official said.

This is a developing story and will be updated
..
The CDC shifted its guidelines on Friday, but the change was not widely noticed until a CNN report on Sunday. Where the agency previously warned that the virus mostly spreads through large drops encountered at close range, it now cites “small particles, such as those in aerosols,” as the most common vector.

Smoove_B wrote: Mon Sep 21, 2020 12:58 pm I hope that one makes it into a history book somewhere.

I'm sure it will be hitting the news soon enough, but over the weekend, the CDC's website updated guidance to include information confirming what most in public health have been saying since March - that COVID-19 spreads through aerosols and that spending time indoors with poor ventilation is potentially high risk. This works against current, broad recommendations to have people gathering indoors, particularly when mask use isn't required or compliance is problematic (restaurants, bars, schools). The core issue was a debate between various public and private health factions over aerosol sperad vs droplet spread, which I detailed at some point earlier in this thread (little help, Isg?). In short, aerosol transmission (airborne) is much more problematic and concerning. In truth we don't know the primary route, but the theory was both. Anecdotally now after 6+ months, the evidence suggests aerosolized droplets should be a focus of prevention as it seems likely this is the primary way it's spreading, at least indoors.

Well, at some point this morning, that update and guidance information magically disappeared off the CDC's guidance page. I'm sure it's all on the up-and-up and no one from the Trump administration was involved.

The U.K.'s COVID-19 numbers are rising fast and could reach new 50,000 cases per day by mid-October, the country's top science adviser announced Monday. Sir Patrick Vallance said his warning is based on current trends that show "the epidemic is doubling roughly every seven days."
...
If the U.K.'s rate of new cases doubles four more times, the government health expert said, "you would end up with something like 50,000 cases in the middle of October per day."

That, in turn, would likely lead to more than 200 deaths per day by the middle of November, he added.

The figures are a warning, not a prediction, Vallance said, in a briefing hours before U.K. Health Secretary Matt Hancock was to speak in Parliament.
...
In one week, anyone who has coronavirus symptoms or is otherwise asked to self-isolate will be legally required to do so — or face fines that start at 1,000 pounds (about $1,280).

Isgrimnur wrote: Mon Sep 21, 2020 2:40 pm NPR

The U.K.'s COVID-19 numbers are rising fast and could reach new 50,000 cases per day by mid-October, the country's top science adviser announced Monday. Sir Patrick Vallance said his warning is based on current trends that show "the epidemic is doubling roughly every seven days."
...
If the U.K.'s rate of new cases doubles four more times, the government health expert said, "you would end up with something like 50,000 cases in the middle of October per day."

That, in turn, would likely lead to more than 200 deaths per day by the middle of November, he added.

The figures are a warning, not a prediction, Vallance said, in a briefing hours before U.K. Health Secretary Matt Hancock was to speak in Parliament.
...
In one week, anyone who has coronavirus symptoms or is otherwise asked to self-isolate will be legally required to do so — or face fines that start at 1,000 pounds (about $1,280).

LawBeefaroni wrote: Mon Sep 21, 2020 2:43 pm At 50K per day they have a full 3 and a half years until the entire country has been infected. There will be a vaccine by November, I'm told. All good. Pip pip.

"It affects virtually nobody," Trump says of the coronavirus, which has now killed 200,000 Americans and counting

Holman wrote: Tue Sep 22, 2020 9:24 am (BTW, does anyone know how to link to a single tweet from a thread without getting the one immediately above it as well?)

A member of the Kennedy dynasty who joined Jared Kushner's coronavirus task force spoke to The New Yorker about his time there.

Max Kennedy Jr., a grandson of Robert F. Kennedy, said he was asked to falsify a model to downplay predicted deaths and cast doubt on other, more dire forecasts.

He blew the whistle to Congress earlier this year. "I just couldn't sleep," he told The New Yorker. "I was so distressed and disturbed by what I'd seen."

A $1 billion fund Congress gave the Pentagon in March to build up the country’s supplies of medical equipment has instead been mostly funneled to defense contractors and used to make things such as jet engine parts, body armor and dress uniforms.

The change illustrates how one taxpayer-backed effort to battle the novel coronavirus, which has killed about 200,000 Americans, was instead diverted toward patching up long-standing perceived gaps in military supplies.

The Cares Act, which Congress passed earlier this year, gave the Pentagon money to “prevent, prepare for, and respond to coronavirus.” But a few weeks later, the Defense Department began reshaping how it would award the money in a way that represented a major departure from Congress’s intent.

The payments were made even though U.S. health officials think major funding gaps in pandemic response still remain. Robert Redfield, director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, said in Senate testimony last week that states desperately need $6 billion to distribute vaccines to Americans early next year. Many U.S. hospitals still face a severe shortage of N95 masks. These are the types of problems that the money was originally intended to address.

ImLawBoy wrote: Tue Sep 22, 2020 5:30 pm On the plus side, I'm actually a bit less concerned about the Big Ten's return to play after reading this story:

The most important elements of the presentation involved rapid testing, which had seen advances in technology and accessibility since the Big Ten's initial postponement.

"You're catching somebody with a positive before they're even contagious," said Dr. Jeff Mjaanes, Northwestern's head team physician and a member of the Big Ten's medical subcommittee. "That's a huge breakthrough in this. If we can do that on a daily basis, which is what's in our proposal, then we can identify people before they're even infectious, and we can remove them and really maintain the sanctity and the health of the team.

Isgrimnur wrote: Tue Sep 22, 2020 5:33 pm

ImLawBoy wrote: Tue Sep 22, 2020 5:30 pm On the plus side, I'm actually a bit less concerned about the Big Ten's return to play after reading this story:

The most important elements of the presentation involved rapid testing, which had seen advances in technology and accessibility since the Big Ten's initial postponement.

"You're catching somebody with a positive before they're even contagious," said Dr. Jeff Mjaanes, Northwestern's head team physician and a member of the Big Ten's medical subcommittee. "That's a huge breakthrough in this. If we can do that on a daily basis, which is what's in our proposal, then we can identify people before they're even infectious, and we can remove them and really maintain the sanctity and the health of the team.

I'm so glad we're using cutting-edge health technology so that we can watch college football.

Tensions between the US and China came to the fore of the annual UN General Assembly in New York, with US President Donald Trump blaming China for the spread of coronavirus.

He called for China to be held "accountable" for the pandemic.

ImLawBoy wrote: Tue Sep 22, 2020 5:40 pm

Isgrimnur wrote: Tue Sep 22, 2020 5:33 pm

ImLawBoy wrote: Tue Sep 22, 2020 5:30 pm On the plus side, I'm actually a bit less concerned about the Big Ten's return to play after reading this story:

The most important elements of the presentation involved rapid testing, which had seen advances in technology and accessibility since the Big Ten's initial postponement.

"You're catching somebody with a positive before they're even contagious," said Dr. Jeff Mjaanes, Northwestern's head team physician and a member of the Big Ten's medical subcommittee. "That's a huge breakthrough in this. If we can do that on a daily basis, which is what's in our proposal, then we can identify people before they're even infectious, and we can remove them and really maintain the sanctity and the health of the team.

I'm so glad we're using cutting-edge health technology so that we can watch college football.

Yes and no. I'm guessing it's easier to use this kind of testing on a closed group than it would be to introduce it to the general public. Is this testing ability taking away from other places where it could be effectively administered? If yes, then that bolsters your point. If no, then it's not really taking testing away from elsewhere.

And let's not forget that there is value in having entertainment, particularly during a pandemic. If that entertainment can be delivered more safely for the players, that's not necessarily a bad thing. (That's not to overlook all the bad things that may be associated with sports during a pandemic, including crowds (although I suspect the Big Ten will be more restrictive than most other leagues) and people gathering to watch games.)

gbasden wrote: Tue Sep 22, 2020 6:03 pm I'm going to say, off the top of my head, that nurses, doctors and police would be a much, much better way to use such tests than a bunch of student athletes providing no actual value during a pandemic.

gbasden wrote:If we are placing a high value on entertainment above people actively on the front lines, then why not TV shows and movies?

ImLawBoy wrote: Tue Sep 22, 2020 10:43 pm

gbasden wrote: Tue Sep 22, 2020 6:03 pm I'm going to say, off the top of my head, that nurses, doctors and police would be a much, much better way to use such tests than a bunch of student athletes providing no actual value during a pandemic.

Would these tests be used for them if they weren't going to athletes? I haven't heard much about test shortages these days, although I admit to not looking for that information. If nurses, doctors, and police were trying to get these tests but then the Big Ten came in and scooped them all up, that would certainly be a problem. I haven't heard that this is the case, though.

Covid-19 Testing Is Hampered by Shortages of Critical Ingredient
Lack of reagents is forcing health systems to limit who can get tested and end community testing programs

Leaders at hospitals across the country have had to cut COVID-19 testing in recent weeks because of a shortage of reagents needed to process tests, The Wall Street Journal reported.

Mark Steadham, CEO of Morris (Ill.) Hospital and Healthcare Centers, told the Journal that his facility can now conduct about a third of the number of tests per week it could in the summer. The facility has only been getting a third, sometimes less, of its allocation of Abbott rapid testing kits due to a reagent shortage.

An Abbott spokesperson told the Journal the company is working to expand its capacity and supply as many tests as possible.

LawBeefaroni wrote: Tue Sep 22, 2020 11:00 pm

ImLawBoy wrote: Tue Sep 22, 2020 10:43 pm

gbasden wrote: Tue Sep 22, 2020 6:03 pm I'm going to say, off the top of my head, that nurses, doctors and police would be a much, much better way to use such tests than a bunch of student athletes providing no actual value during a pandemic.

Would these tests be used for them if they weren't going to athletes? I haven't heard much about test shortages these days, although I admit to not looking for that information. If nurses, doctors, and police were trying to get these tests but then the Big Ten came in and scooped them all up, that would certainly be a problem. I haven't heard that this is the case, though.

Daily rapid tests? No, no front line workers are getting those. It's not a shortage exactly, it's more a cost and operational issue. You can test a football team and wait 30 minutes for results whole they have breakfast or whatever. You can't test an entire hospital staff on shift change.

The question to ask is if the rest of the college students are getting the same rigorous testing.

ImLawBoy wrote: If this is accurate, it means that it's no more dangerous for them to play football than it would be for them to be on campus. Of course, there's always the question of whether they should actually be on campus, but if the rest of the school is there, it's hard to say the football players shouldn't be there.

Isgrimnur wrote: Tue Sep 22, 2020 11:02 pm WSJ (Paywalled)

Covid-19 Testing Is Hampered by Shortages of Critical Ingredient
Lack of reagents is forcing health systems to limit who can get tested and end community testing programs

Beckers Hospital Review

Leaders at hospitals across the country have had to cut COVID-19 testing in recent weeks because of a shortage of reagents needed to process tests, The Wall Street Journal reported.

Mark Steadham, CEO of Morris (Ill.) Hospital and Healthcare Centers, told the Journal that his facility can now conduct about a third of the number of tests per week it could in the summer. The facility has only been getting a third, sometimes less, of its allocation of Abbott rapid testing kits due to a reagent shortage.

An Abbott spokesperson told the Journal the company is working to expand its capacity and supply as many tests as possible.

ImLawBoy wrote: Tue Sep 22, 2020 11:07 pm

LawBeefaroni wrote: Tue Sep 22, 2020 11:00 pm

ImLawBoy wrote: Tue Sep 22, 2020 10:43 pm

gbasden wrote: Tue Sep 22, 2020 6:03 pm I'm going to say, off the top of my head, that nurses, doctors and police would be a much, much better way to use such tests than a bunch of student athletes providing no actual value during a pandemic.

Would these tests be used for them if they weren't going to athletes? I haven't heard much about test shortages these days, although I admit to not looking for that information. If nurses, doctors, and police were trying to get these tests but then the Big Ten came in and scooped them all up, that would certainly be a problem. I haven't heard that this is the case, though.

Daily rapid tests? No, no front line workers are getting those. It's not a shortage exactly, it's more a cost and operational issue. You can test a football team and wait 30 minutes for results whole they have breakfast or whatever. You can't test an entire hospital staff on shift change.

The question to ask is if the rest of the college students are getting the same rigorous testing.

Oh, of course they're not. But wouldn't they have similar issues (or even greater) using these types of tests for for thousands of students as for hospital staffs?

ImLawBoy wrote: Tue Sep 22, 2020 11:07 pm Also, since Isg didn't grab all of my post when he pulled this from the NCAA thread in EBG, I think it's worth noting that I also said:

If this is accurate, it means that it's no more dangerous for them to play football than it would be for them to be on campus. Of course, there's always the question of whether they should actually be on campus, but if the rest of the school is there, it's hard to say the football players shouldn't be there.

LawBeefaroni wrote: Tue Sep 22, 2020 11:34 pm

ImLawBoy wrote: Tue Sep 22, 2020 11:07 pm

LawBeefaroni wrote: Tue Sep 22, 2020 11:00 pm

ImLawBoy wrote: Tue Sep 22, 2020 10:43 pm

gbasden wrote: Tue Sep 22, 2020 6:03 pm I'm going to say, off the top of my head, that nurses, doctors and police would be a much, much better way to use such tests than a bunch of student athletes providing no actual value during a pandemic.

Would these tests be used for them if they weren't going to athletes? I haven't heard much about test shortages these days, although I admit to not looking for that information. If nurses, doctors, and police were trying to get these tests but then the Big Ten came in and scooped them all up, that would certainly be a problem. I haven't heard that this is the case, though.

Daily rapid tests? No, no front line workers are getting those. It's not a shortage exactly, it's more a cost and operational issue. You can test a football team and wait 30 minutes for results whole they have breakfast or whatever. You can't test an entire hospital staff on shift change.

The question to ask is if the rest of the college students are getting the same rigorous testing.

Oh, of course they're not. But wouldn't they have similar issues (or even greater) using these types of tests for for thousands of students as for hospital staffs?

Yes, they would. Which raises the question, what makes the football teams so special? Other than the fact that they are an easily tested cohort? Why not a single dorm or the hospital residents? I mean we know answer and it's not without merit but it's uncomfortable.

LawBeefaroni wrote:

ImLawBoy wrote: Tue Sep 22, 2020 11:07 pm Also, since Isg didn't grab all of my post when he pulled this from the NCAA thread in EBG, I think it's worth noting that I also said:

If this is accurate, it means that it's no more dangerous for them to play football than it would be for them to be on campus. Of course, there's always the question of whether they should actually be on campus, but if the rest of the school is there, it's hard to say the football players shouldn't be there.

I did see that. It's probably less dangerous because they and everyone around them are tested daily. Not so great for the "regular" students.

The Success Center has received notification that [student name] has been/will be away from in-person classes for medical reasons. The student will be able to attend classes remotely at this time but that is subject to change.

Paingod wrote: Wed Sep 23, 2020 10:46 am A CEO from a Kentucky hospital is asking people to please wear masks.

For some reason, a message from a CEO resonates poorly. My cynical side looks at this and says "Of course the CEO wants you to wear a mask. All those sick and dying people are clogging up the hospital and aren't as profitable as elective procedures and other care."

Dr. Fauci has had just about enough of Rand Paul, basically calls him a moron.

"This happens with Senator Rand all the time... If you believe 22% is herd immunity, I believe you’re alone in that.

Smoove_B wrote: Wed Sep 23, 2020 1:22 pm I'm glad to see that if I ever get to meet Dr. Fauci, we'll have a point of agreement to build a conversation from.

https://twitter.com/justinbaragona/stat ... 9417954305

Dr. Fauci has had just about enough of Rand Paul, basically calls him a moron.

"This happens with Senator Rand all the time... If you believe 22% is herd immunity, I believe you’re alone in that.

The idea that he's trying to out-science Dr. Fauci in this is...something.

The official #COVID19 milestone of 200,000 deaths was weeks ago. As mentioned previously the reported count of deaths is ~25% off from the true estimated excess deaths. The real toll of preventable current deaths is quarter of a million. 250,000.

Smoove_B wrote: Wed Sep 23, 2020 1:22 pm I'm glad to see that if I ever get to meet Dr. Fauci, we'll have a point of agreement to build a conversation from.

https://twitter.com/justinbaragona/stat ... 9417954305

Dr. Fauci has had just about enough of Rand Paul, basically calls him a moron.

"This happens with Senator Rand all the time... If you believe 22% is herd immunity, I believe you’re alone in that.

The idea that he's trying to out-science Dr. Fauci in this is...something.

Smoove_B wrote: Wed Sep 23, 2020 2:56 pm

Or, as Trump referred to them, "virtually nobody".