33% Asymptomatic

[Jockey]

And I use we, as the colloquial "the United States," not involving you or I. You and I agree on who bares the blame here. But that doesn't change the fact that a lot of people are dying and will die. Each and every one of us, and our loved ones are at risk, regardless of age.

I realized that, Forgetful and the point of my post wasn't to argue with you. I generally agree with the points you have been making.

As a matter of fact, the only thing I can think of off of the top of my head that we disagree on is China. They are a murderous government who will lie when they want to lie. They don't need a reason. We should never overlook that just because we need them as business partners.

I don't want to make inferences or put words in your mouth. I'm sure you have misgivings about China as well. I just think those misgivings need to be stronger.

[forgetful]

I realized that, Forgetful and the point of my post wasn't to argue with you. I generally agree with the points you have been making.

As a matter of fact, the only thing I can think of off of the top of my head that we disagree on is China. They are a murderous government who will lie when they want to lie. They don't need a reason. We should never overlook that just because we need them as business partners.

I don't want to make inferences or put words in your mouth. I'm sure you have misgivings about China as well. I just think those misgivings need to be stronger.

Oh I think China lies about nearly everything. They are a brutal murderous regime.

But knowing a little about this arena, and recognizing how hard it is to figure this out in the beginning, I think what most are calling lying now, is really just failure to know what they were dealing with, and panicking about the situation. I don't think there was really any intent (not that they wouldn't have used intent if they wanted/were able to).

This was a terrible situation. An almost perfect virus to hide and spread. Most nations would have done far worse in identifying this quickly and stamping it out. We had a month long head start on this, and look where we are.

[MU Fan in Connecticut]

So they were lying... but now they're not lying?

Russia is also lying about COVID. At what point should we say they are no longer lying?

My wife and mother-in-law were just telling me about this and said every in Poland knows he's lying and shared some old Polish saying about Russia that roughly translates to "The evil is always there."

[Coleman]

https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/01/europe/iceland-testing-coronavirus-intl/index.html

Testing in Iceland: 50% asymptomatic

[forgetful]

https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/01/europe/iceland-testing-coronavirus-intl/index.html

Testing in Iceland: 50% asymptomatic

With only 1% being positive, I wonder how many of those are false positives. Or positives due to non-infectious trace contaminants. Similar to what was seen in the dog from Hong Kong.

[mu_hilltopper]

Any doctors out there can explain .. if someone is asymptomatic .. do they fight the virus?   

Would they be carriers for the same amount of time, less, or more?

[The Hippie Satan of Hyperbole]

Any doctors out there can explain .. if someone is asymptomatic .. do they fight the virus?   

Would they be carriers for the same amount of time, less, or more?

They are about half as likely to transmit the disease as those who have symptoms.

https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2020-03-30/asymptomatic-coronavirus-carriers-how-contagious-are-they

[Frenns Liquor Depot]

Does it concern anyone else that Scoop has been on this since since March 22 with a dedicated thread and much earlier in the massive COVID thread, while apparently this is new news to people running the country?

https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/490758-georgia-governor-says-he-didnt-know-asymptomatic-people-could-spread

[Jockey]

Does it concern anyone else that Scoop has been on this since since March 22 with a dedicated thread and much earlier in the massive COVID thread, while apparently this is new news to people running the country?

https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/490758-georgia-governor-says-he-didnt-know-asymptomatic-people-could-spread

I would say "willful ignorance, but really he is just a liar.

[jesmu84]

Does it concern anyone else that Scoop has been on this since since March 22 with a dedicated thread and much earlier in the massive COVID thread, while apparently this is new news to people running the country?

https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/490758-georgia-governor-says-he-didnt-know-asymptomatic-people-could-spread

If he didn't know someone asymptomatic could spread, that would be understandable. Maybe he's not in medicine or have understanding in that field. But it also means he isn't willing to ask or listen to experts.

[mu_hilltopper]

Who has two thumbs and is qualified to be governor? 

[forgetful]

We seem to know very little about the pathogenesis of this disease. It hits some extremely hard (regardless of age or underlying conditions), and others almost not at all. Doctor's are very confused as to what is driving this disparity. I wonder if it could be moderately simple.

Mode of entry, and viral load.

There is evidence that those whose first symptoms are GI related, have more mild cases, whereas those that have respiratory symptoms first, are more likely to be very ill.

It is likely that those with GI symptoms first are infected via an oral/fecal-ish route (this is what they believed was going on in cruise-ship-patients, where death rates are low). The initial infection and subsequent immune response is then in the GI tract, where before it can spread to the lungs, a moderate immune response has been initiated.

In contrast those infected via inhalation of aerosols (worse) or droplets (still bad) will have initial infections in the lungs. Leading to replication and spread in lung tissue before the immune response begins. Leading to potentially catastrophic damage.

On top of this, how much load is present in the initial infection will impact how much spread there is before the immune response. So mild exposure=mild symptoms, high exposure=severe symptoms (maybe why first responders are hit hard).

If this could be confirmed, could we use a limited micro dose of live virus given orally as a potential vaccine?

[jesmu84]

We seem to know very little about the pathogenesis of this disease. It hits some extremely hard (regardless of age or underlying conditions), and others almost not at all. Doctor's are very confused as to what is driving this disparity. I wonder if it could be moderately simple.

Mode of entry, and viral load.

There is evidence that those whose first symptoms are GI related, have more mild cases, whereas those that have respiratory symptoms first, are more likely to be very ill.

It is likely that those with GI symptoms first are infected via an oral/fecal-ish route (this is what they believed was going on in cruise-ship-patients, where death rates are low). The initial infection and subsequent immune response is then in the GI tract, where before it can spread to the lungs, a moderate immune response has been initiated.

In contrast those infected via inhalation of aerosols (worse) or droplets (still bad) will have initial infections in the lungs. Leading to replication and spread in lung tissue before the immune response begins. Leading to potentially catastrophic damage.

On top of this, how much load is present in the initial infection will impact how much spread there is before the immune response. So mild exposure=mild symptoms, high exposure=severe symptoms (maybe why first responders are hit hard).

If this could be confirmed, could we use a limited micro dose of live virus given orally as a potential vaccine?

Of course this brings up another point:

Screening currently asks about fever, cough, shortness of breath, close contact with a positive patient.

But shouldn't they also be asking about GI dysfunction?

[Frenns Liquor Depot]

If this could be confirmed, could we use a limited micro dose of live virus given orally as a potential vaccine?

Who needs to confirm it, lets just go and see what happens!

[Coleman]

We seem to know very little about the pathogenesis of this disease. It hits some extremely hard (regardless of age or underlying conditions), and others almost not at all. Doctor's are very confused as to what is driving this disparity. I wonder if it could be moderately simple.

Mode of entry, and viral load.

There is evidence that those whose first symptoms are GI related, have more mild cases, whereas those that have respiratory symptoms first, are more likely to be very ill.

It is likely that those with GI symptoms first are infected via an oral/fecal-ish route (this is what they believed was going on in cruise-ship-patients, where death rates are low). The initial infection and subsequent immune response is then in the GI tract, where before it can spread to the lungs, a moderate immune response has been initiated.

In contrast those infected via inhalation of aerosols (worse) or droplets (still bad) will have initial infections in the lungs. Leading to replication and spread in lung tissue before the immune response begins. Leading to potentially catastrophic damage.

On top of this, how much load is present in the initial infection will impact how much spread there is before the immune response. So mild exposure=mild symptoms, high exposure=severe symptoms (maybe why first responders are hit hard).

If this could be confirmed, could we use a limited micro dose of live virus given orally as a potential vaccine?

I think you're right on both counts, especially viral load. This is why otherwise healthy doctors in their 30s are getting really sick and/or dying.

A micro dose of live virus could work but it is fraught with ethical and practical implications. How much is enough to trigger necessary antibodies to prevent further infections? How much is too much, which would trigger potentially severe illness and/or death? We don't know yet. And the answers likely vary from person to person. Purposely infecting someone, even if with good intentions, likely flies in the face of the hippocratic oath to do no harm.

A vaccine is a much better option.

[forgetful]

I think you're right on both counts, especially viral load. This is why otherwise healthy doctors in their 30s are getting really sick and/or dying.

A micro dose of live virus could work but it is fraught with ethical and practical implications. How much is enough to trigger necessary antibodies to prevent further infections? How much is too much, which would trigger potentially severe illness and/or death? We don't know yet. And the answers likely vary from person to person. Purposely infecting someone, even if with good intentions, likely flies in the face of the hippocratic oath to do no harm.

A vaccine is a much better option.

Agree on the vaccine being better, and the ethical issues. That's why this is so complicated. I'm actually going to be putting a host of discussions regarding ethics around COVID-19, in one of my courses right now.

[Hards Alumni]

Interesting discussion, guys.