Post by less1brain on Apr 26, 2020 12:50:15 GMT -8
Interesting articles in the two most prestigious scientific journals in the world, Nature and Science:
Although only about 16% of infections in the US appear to involve persons in the age cohort of 14-25 (and that percentage will likely drop as more testing takes place), the infections in that cohort are on a per capita basis the most consistently serious (meaning at least 7 days in a hospital ICU, with ventilators required). Fortunately, very, very few people in this age cohort die.
The working theory about this phenomenon is that the human immune system continues to change dramatically until people reach the age of 30 (on average). So, this might explain the higher incidence of severe infections and the lower incidence of deaths. The human brain also continues to develop dramatically until the age of 30 as well, which raises a whole other range of policy issues...
I suppose that's the good news. The bad news is that an article in Science estimates that perhaps as many as up to 4,800 "potentially preventable" deaths have occurred in NYC alone because persons over 70 with co-morbid conditions at the greatest risk of death were unable to get proper, timely treatment since so much space and ventilators were used on 14-25 year olds for such prolonged periods of time. The overall lack of ICU beds, ventilators, and available triage doctors and nurses due to hospitals getting overloaded with total cases undoubtedly contributed a great deal to this. Plus, doctors don't want to take chances on anyone dying and some in the 14-25 cohort do die. And this data on 14-25 year olds is relatively recent and still under review, so few frantically overworked, heroic doctors would have known about this until April.
I assume the experience with this pandemic and better planning for future pandemics will take all this into account. But it's important to keep this information in mind when people talk of opening high schools and colleges sooner rather than later (especially because of a desperate demand for sporting events). A massive increase in (the likely very serious) infections in the 14-25 cohort could overwhelm hospitals even more so than the existing crisis and might cause far more deaths due to factors other than the rate of deaths among the younger people who get infected themselves. You can't treat any aspect of this pandemic in isolation. The economy must also be very seriously taken into account, IMO: Nothing is either/or.
No doubt shuttering schools as quickly as possible did save many lives among older persons with co-morbid conditions.
Denmark is opening certain schools this coming week, over the protests of some parents, so perhaps in 3-6 weeks we'll see something happen, one way or another, though that country has been on top of testing, contact tracing and selective quarantines far better than almost every country in the world (Sweden's done better so far and most of its economy has kept on running). Also, at least in the Northern Hemisphere, the approaching summer hopefully will slow the spread of the virus. Until it and the flu come back in the Fall. I hope enough people get flu vaccines before Covid19 rears its ugly head again. Like all vaccines, flu vaccines must be used by 95% of the population or it will fail a lot and harm the immune systems of flu victims.
This year's flu vaccine is expected to be the most effective yet, due to a new protocol that should substantially increase the ability of the manufacturer's scientists and doctors to identify the precise strains of influenza headed our way. My guess is, anti-vaxxers will also be more effective than ever and will sicken and most likely kill many people as a result if their flu victims get Covid19 as well.
There are also interesting articles on the Wuhan Laboratory of Virology and the origins of Covid19 (no, it didn't come from that lab and the pandemic would've been far worse if not for that lab, and it wasn't bioengineered by anyone, including the US Military as falsely claimed by the PRC, Russia and Iran, or the PRC, as falsely claimed by the US). I have the very expensive subscription to the entire archives of every sub-journal, but they do charge for individual articles (sometimes a lot, but mostly under $60). I can't copy the articles here, obviously, but I will provide links where I can if anyone wants to vet this information.
People should also understand that these are scientific journals; unlike many media sources of all stripes, they actually admit mistakes if they get fooled, caution against reading too much into early studies and also require "open sourcing" so that any study or paper submitted must contain full information on every detail so other scientists can vet those materials and be able to accurately reproduce the studies to see if they get the same results.
They're not Laura Ingraham, who just three days ago as I watched asserted that studies show that hydroxychloroquine is "91% effective." No such studies exist. 5 clinical trials on this medication have been completed. Two showed no difference between persons treated with the medication and those with placebo (that means 0% effective). This was both for 400mg to prevent infections and 600mg to treat existing infections, whether mild or serious. The other 3 appeared to be showing the same result, but were shut down because of how many people died of heart attacks or suffered potentially life-threatening arrhythmias, not too uncommon side effects at the lower 500mg dose used to treat malaria and 400mg dose used to treat lupus (the two completed studies also killed people, but they carried on to the bitter end).
Fortunately, after the US acquired mass quantities of this drug, threatening the health and lives of malaria and lupus patients (people die from both and are often unable to work from both without treatment), the US is now releasing large quantities of these drugs to pharmacies at zero charge to be used for malaria and lupus patients. That helps people in the US. People in other countries will suffer because the US bought up so much of the world's supply at inflated prices. Someone will have to explain that decision one day.
Very few publications require open sourcing like Nature, Science and the New England Journal of Medicine. The largest source of scientific literature, Elsevier, doesn't require open sourcing and is also jacking up the price for access to its publications, pricing most universities and colleges as well as individual scientists out of access. The UC system is negotiating with them. The previous contract allowed the universities to subscribe to publications, with scholars and students then able to access them at will without incurring additional costs. Now Elsevier wants to charge per each individual access of any articles...
Thanks, dudes, way to help out in a crisis. And thanks for retarding the advancement of science and knowledge in general forever...
Although only about 16% of infections in the US appear to involve persons in the age cohort of 14-25 (and that percentage will likely drop as more testing takes place), the infections in that cohort are on a per capita basis the most consistently serious (meaning at least 7 days in a hospital ICU, with ventilators required). Fortunately, very, very few people in this age cohort die.
The working theory about this phenomenon is that the human immune system continues to change dramatically until people reach the age of 30 (on average). So, this might explain the higher incidence of severe infections and the lower incidence of deaths. The human brain also continues to develop dramatically until the age of 30 as well, which raises a whole other range of policy issues...
I suppose that's the good news. The bad news is that an article in Science estimates that perhaps as many as up to 4,800 "potentially preventable" deaths have occurred in NYC alone because persons over 70 with co-morbid conditions at the greatest risk of death were unable to get proper, timely treatment since so much space and ventilators were used on 14-25 year olds for such prolonged periods of time. The overall lack of ICU beds, ventilators, and available triage doctors and nurses due to hospitals getting overloaded with total cases undoubtedly contributed a great deal to this. Plus, doctors don't want to take chances on anyone dying and some in the 14-25 cohort do die. And this data on 14-25 year olds is relatively recent and still under review, so few frantically overworked, heroic doctors would have known about this until April.
I assume the experience with this pandemic and better planning for future pandemics will take all this into account. But it's important to keep this information in mind when people talk of opening high schools and colleges sooner rather than later (especially because of a desperate demand for sporting events). A massive increase in (the likely very serious) infections in the 14-25 cohort could overwhelm hospitals even more so than the existing crisis and might cause far more deaths due to factors other than the rate of deaths among the younger people who get infected themselves. You can't treat any aspect of this pandemic in isolation. The economy must also be very seriously taken into account, IMO: Nothing is either/or.
No doubt shuttering schools as quickly as possible did save many lives among older persons with co-morbid conditions.
Denmark is opening certain schools this coming week, over the protests of some parents, so perhaps in 3-6 weeks we'll see something happen, one way or another, though that country has been on top of testing, contact tracing and selective quarantines far better than almost every country in the world (Sweden's done better so far and most of its economy has kept on running). Also, at least in the Northern Hemisphere, the approaching summer hopefully will slow the spread of the virus. Until it and the flu come back in the Fall. I hope enough people get flu vaccines before Covid19 rears its ugly head again. Like all vaccines, flu vaccines must be used by 95% of the population or it will fail a lot and harm the immune systems of flu victims.
This year's flu vaccine is expected to be the most effective yet, due to a new protocol that should substantially increase the ability of the manufacturer's scientists and doctors to identify the precise strains of influenza headed our way. My guess is, anti-vaxxers will also be more effective than ever and will sicken and most likely kill many people as a result if their flu victims get Covid19 as well.
There are also interesting articles on the Wuhan Laboratory of Virology and the origins of Covid19 (no, it didn't come from that lab and the pandemic would've been far worse if not for that lab, and it wasn't bioengineered by anyone, including the US Military as falsely claimed by the PRC, Russia and Iran, or the PRC, as falsely claimed by the US). I have the very expensive subscription to the entire archives of every sub-journal, but they do charge for individual articles (sometimes a lot, but mostly under $60). I can't copy the articles here, obviously, but I will provide links where I can if anyone wants to vet this information.
People should also understand that these are scientific journals; unlike many media sources of all stripes, they actually admit mistakes if they get fooled, caution against reading too much into early studies and also require "open sourcing" so that any study or paper submitted must contain full information on every detail so other scientists can vet those materials and be able to accurately reproduce the studies to see if they get the same results.
They're not Laura Ingraham, who just three days ago as I watched asserted that studies show that hydroxychloroquine is "91% effective." No such studies exist. 5 clinical trials on this medication have been completed. Two showed no difference between persons treated with the medication and those with placebo (that means 0% effective). This was both for 400mg to prevent infections and 600mg to treat existing infections, whether mild or serious. The other 3 appeared to be showing the same result, but were shut down because of how many people died of heart attacks or suffered potentially life-threatening arrhythmias, not too uncommon side effects at the lower 500mg dose used to treat malaria and 400mg dose used to treat lupus (the two completed studies also killed people, but they carried on to the bitter end).
Fortunately, after the US acquired mass quantities of this drug, threatening the health and lives of malaria and lupus patients (people die from both and are often unable to work from both without treatment), the US is now releasing large quantities of these drugs to pharmacies at zero charge to be used for malaria and lupus patients. That helps people in the US. People in other countries will suffer because the US bought up so much of the world's supply at inflated prices. Someone will have to explain that decision one day.
Very few publications require open sourcing like Nature, Science and the New England Journal of Medicine. The largest source of scientific literature, Elsevier, doesn't require open sourcing and is also jacking up the price for access to its publications, pricing most universities and colleges as well as individual scientists out of access. The UC system is negotiating with them. The previous contract allowed the universities to subscribe to publications, with scholars and students then able to access them at will without incurring additional costs. Now Elsevier wants to charge per each individual access of any articles...
Thanks, dudes, way to help out in a crisis. And thanks for retarding the advancement of science and knowledge in general forever...
