Octopus Overlords

malchior wrote: Tue Oct 06, 2020 11:13 pm Wow

https://twitter.com/ProjectLincoln/stat ... 8173404161

Zarathud wrote: Wed Oct 07, 2020 12:50 am We plan on Trick or Yeeting. Kids will have candy thrown on the lawn, dispersing the vectors of disease back into the wild.

Kraken wrote: Wed Oct 07, 2020 12:28 am

Skinypupy wrote: Tue Oct 06, 2020 9:43 pm Turns out the teacher has a daughter who was in quarantine last week because someone in her elementary school class had tested positive. The daughter never displayed any symptoms, and they were told that she could only get tested if she was showing symptoms. So they have no idea if the daughter had it, if the teacher got it from her or from somewhere else, or when or where the teacher may have been infected.

The teacher apparently called the state health dept tonight and was told that only those who she has come in contact with since her diagnosis (I.e. earlier today) are required to quarantine. The state said that the kids from last week should watch for symptoms, but do not need to quarantine. They also will not test those kids, unless they start showing symptoms.

Christ, no wonder this thing is so out of control.

In a few weeks, those little germ bags are going to don disguises and ring doorbells. Don't open your door unless there's a fan behind you blowing out and you have 10' tongs. (edit) And candy, because the tricks could be fatal.

As infectious disease epidemiologists and public health scientists we have grave concerns about the damaging physical and mental health impacts of the prevailing COVID-19 policies, and recommend an approach we call Focused Protection.

Coming from both the left and right, and around the world, we have devoted our careers to protecting people. Current lockdown policies are producing devastating effects on short and long-term public health. The results (to name a few) include lower childhood vaccination rates, worsening cardiovascular disease outcomes, fewer cancer screenings and deteriorating mental health – leading to greater excess mortality in years to come, with the working class and younger members of society carrying the heaviest burden. Keeping students out of school is a grave injustice.

Keeping these measures in place until a vaccine is available will cause irreparable damage, with the underprivileged disproportionately harmed.

Fortunately, our understanding of the virus is growing. We know that vulnerability to death from COVID-19 is more than a thousand-fold higher in the old and infirm than the young. Indeed, for children, COVID-19 is less dangerous than many other harms, including influenza.

As immunity builds in the population, the risk of infection to all – including the vulnerable – falls. We know that all populations will eventually reach herd immunity – i.e. the point at which the rate of new infections is stable – and that this can be assisted by (but is not dependent upon) a vaccine. Our goal should therefore be to minimize mortality and social harm until we reach herd immunity.

The most compassionate approach that balances the risks and benefits of reaching herd immunity, is to allow those who are at minimal risk of death to live their lives normally to build up immunity to the virus through natural infection, while better protecting those who are at highest risk. We call this Focused Protection.

Adopting measures to protect the vulnerable should be the central aim of public health responses to COVID-19. By way of example, nursing homes should use staff with acquired immunity and perform frequent PCR testing of other staff and all visitors. Staff rotation should be minimized. Retired people living at home should have groceries and other essentials delivered to their home. When possible, they should meet family members outside rather than inside. A comprehensive and detailed list of measures, including approaches to multi-generational households, can be implemented, and is well within the scope and capability of public health professionals.

Those who are not vulnerable should immediately be allowed to resume life as normal. Simple hygiene measures, such as hand washing and staying home when sick should be practiced by everyone to reduce the herd immunity threshold. Schools and universities should be open for in-person teaching. Extracurricular activities, such as sports, should be resumed. Young low-risk adults should work normally, rather than from home. Restaurants and other businesses should open. Arts, music, sport and other cultural activities should resume. People who are more at risk may participate if they wish, while society as a whole enjoys the protection conferred upon the vulnerable by those who have built up herd immunity.

Skinypupy wrote: Wed Oct 07, 2020 9:37 amSeems to me that this is simply a nicer version of “Throw the doors wide open. If they die, they die" with a bunch of Stanford, Oxford, and Harvard doctor's signatures attached.

Those who are not vulnerable should immediately be allowed to resume life as normal

Smoove_B wrote: Tue Oct 06, 2020 10:17 pm Yeah, without appropriate testing everything goes out the window. I'm surprised at your State's advice - if she tested positive today it's not like a switch magically flipped and she wasn't infectious before the test results were delivered. Right now someone should be in touch with that teacher and running down all her contacts for the last 14 days - including her current close contacts (i.e. people she's living with).

Watching for symptoms is good advice, but if you're going about your business and not limiting contact, the cycle never breaks as invariably there are asymptomatic spreaders and/or infectious people spreading disease before they develop visible symptoms.

Flat out, if you've had contact with someone that's is a confirmed case, you should be self-quarantining until you're out of the danger window.

When people ask me why I haven't been in a supermarket or restaurant since March, and why I've been avoiding crowds and public spaces like it's my job, this is why.

Smoove_B wrote: Wed Oct 07, 2020 10:29 am

Those who are not vulnerable should immediately be allowed to resume life as normal

I guess I missed the change in classification where we could identify which people were and which were not vulnerable. Do they mean "high risk" here, because if you're a human being, you're vulnerable to this virus. But yeah, this is a verbalization of the general frustration with everything - and an acknowledgement that it doesn't need to be this way. We have all the tools and as I've been saying for months now (in concert with my peers) - on any given day, we're 4-6 weeks away from squashing the virus down to manageable levels. But instead the patchwork response and mitigation techniques along with the political divide making this a referendum on freedom are going to continue to allow the virus to circulate indefinitely in the U.S. until there's a change at the federal level. Collectively this is absolutely unsustainable, but the answer isn't to just throw open the doors.

YellowKing wrote: Wed Oct 07, 2020 10:45 am Their policy was based on the general current Republican philosophy of "if we don't acknowledge it, it doesn't exist." That doesn't extend just to Covid, it also extends to climate change, racism, people who can't afford healthcare, white supremacist terrorist groups, etc.

It's one of the most childish philosophies I can possibly imagine. It's akin to a 2-year old playing peek-a-boo and thinking he's invisible when he covers his eyes.

Jaymon wrote: Wed Oct 07, 2020 10:46 am inside we will do a halloween hunt, like an easter egg hunt, but spookier? and then maybe watch a movie.

malchior wrote: Wed Oct 07, 2020 10:40 am Right. Like the idea there aren't the resources. This was a *complete* failure of leadership - not resources. We have millions of unemployed people sitting in their homes hoping for a paycheck if we need contact tracers. Ready to work with training. We could have put reasonable restrictions in place to tamp down the virus. Instead we are throwing the doors open recklessly. We have business leaders packing offices because they can't manage their people.

hentzau wrote: Wed Oct 07, 2020 10:36 am I am going to go get tested today at a drive up facility, and probably again next week. But man, horrible timing as I'm trying to get my scouting program started up again.

Jaymon wrote: Wed Oct 07, 2020 10:46 am We are opting out of public halloween. no external decorations, and no candy giving. Our house will be dark, to not invite any treaters.

inside we will do a halloween hunt, like an easter egg hunt, but spookier? and then maybe watch a movie.

I can't control what everybody else does, I can only control what we do, and we are staying safe.

Not a pretty picture 41 states are in "uncontrolled spread" or "trending poorly". New states adding to the 3rd US surge beyond the Midwest

Paingod wrote: Wed Oct 07, 2020 11:12 am COVID this year has cancelled our plans to head to the city (and spend the ritualized night of candy hoarding with my mother while the kids went out). Instead we'll be simply buying a few bags of candy and hiding them around the house and property for the kids to hunt for. Its a lot less fun than dressing up, but it's still a good time.

I haven't been in a store since Trump reinforced COVID as a weak nothingburger for his cultists. It should be interesting to see how the mask ratio shifts during the next grocery run. I've been seeing 95-98% compliance when we go out.

Smoove_B wrote: Wed Oct 07, 2020 11:31 amSo..how are we looking nationally, headed into our second full week of October?

Little Raven wrote: Wed Oct 07, 2020 11:42 am Why is Texas "trending poorly?"

Over the last two weeks, our positivity rate has gone from 10.2% to 6.9%, and our average new cases have fallen from 6400 cases a day to 4300 cases a day.

Isn't that the opposite of trending poorly? I mean, maybe that's still horrible, (although Texas has 30 million people) but it certainly seems like a good trend.

Little Raven wrote: Wed Oct 07, 2020 11:42 am Why is Texas "trending poorly?"

For each state, we use a bruised red, red, yellow, green scale to chart the progress towards achieving the gating criteria. This is calculated using a simple rule. The score is as good as the weakest measure. The measures included in the score are: NEW CASES PER MILLION PER DAY, % TEST POSITIVE, % OF TEST TARGET, ICU CAPACITY, and ILI.

noxiousdog wrote: Wed Oct 07, 2020 11:44 am

Little Raven wrote: Wed Oct 07, 2020 11:42 am Why is Texas "trending poorly?"

Over the last two weeks, our positivity rate has gone from 10.2% to 6.9%, and our average new cases have fallen from 6400 cases a day to 4300 cases a day.

Isn't that the opposite of trending poorly? I mean, maybe that's still horrible, (although Texas has 30 million people) but it certainly seems like a good trend.

Hospitalizations and new cases are going up. You might not see it in that graph, but you can see it here. While it looks marginal, the signs are showing up. Our school district has increase active cases 50% in the last week albeit from only 25 cases a week ago.

President Trump started a course of the steroid dexamethasone on Saturday after a drop in blood oxygen levels, his doctor Sean Conley said. The drug treats the symptoms of COVID-19 by targeting the immune system, resulting in relief from fever and a boost in energy.

The corticosteroid is typically reserved for the sickest patients, according to the World Health Organization. Despite the presumed severity of the president's condition, he continues to project an image of good health.

"I feel better than I did 20 years ago!" Trump tweeted on Monday, announcing his discharge from Walter Reed National Military Medical Center. That may have been the steroid talking.

It's possible that dexamethasone could give Trump a false sense of recovery, said Panagis Galiatsatos, MD, a pulmonary physician at Johns Hopkins Bayview Medical Center.

...

The benefits of taking a steroid like dexamethasone come with the cost of potentially extending the course of illness. Steroids target the immune system, not the virus itself, and a weaker immune system will take longer to fight off the virus.

...

Both dexamethasone and remdesivir, another medication that Trump is taking according to his doctors, are meant to curtail the hyperactive immune response, while still allowing the immune system to continue doing what it's supposed to do: fighting off the virus.

"It's like putting up a fence around a bulldog. The bulldog will be there to do its stop and protect, but the fence — a.k.a. the steroid — is meant to not unleash the dog on everyone else," Galiatsatos said.

If prescribed to healthy patients or those with mild symptoms, dexamethasone can destroy a well-functioning immune system, Galiatsatos said. Trump's getting prescribed the steroid would suggest that he's sicker than his doctors are letting on.

LawBeefaroni wrote: Wed Oct 07, 2020 11:55 am "Trump is taking dexamethasone, a steroid that can give patients a false sense of recovery followed by a crash."

Smoove_B wrote: Wed Oct 07, 2020 11:45 ambruised red,

Spoiler:

Isgrimnur wrote: Wed Oct 07, 2020 12:51 pm FIND. A. NEW. JOB.

Octavious wrote: Wed Oct 07, 2020 12:53 pm

Isgrimnur wrote: Wed Oct 07, 2020 12:51 pm FIND. A. NEW. JOB.

Ya assuming people are hiring in the area it should be easier for me now that my HC is through my wife's job. That was one thing that made it worth dealing with this kind of crazy...