Tracking site suggests White House model is overestimating coronavirus hospitalizations

[TBoneTX 45,571]

Interesting.

Quote

Tracking site suggests White House model is overestimating coronavirus hospitalizations

by Daniel Payne
Last Updated: April 5, 2020 - 9:05am

 

A web site that tracks actual hospital beds in use suggests the model used by top White House health officials to project the trajectory of the coronavirus has so far overestimated the number of Americans hospitalized by the disease by tens of thousands. 

 

Those projections, popularly known as [...]

 

Continues here: https://justthenews.com/politics-policy/coronavirus/white-houses-coronavirus-model-has-overestimated-tens-thousands  

 

 

 

[millefleur 5,047]

Maybe it's just me but I think it's better to overestimate than underestimate....better be safe than sorry, that's my motto. We're in uncharted territory here, but I do think we need to bring back the Spanish flu style open-air tents, as fresh air really does seem to help people based on the historic data from that time:

 

Very interesting scientific study on ventilation (as in open fresh air, not the machine) and sunlight: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4504358/

 

 

More about it here: https://medium.com/@ra.hobday/coronavirus-and-the-sun-a-lesson-from-the-1918-influenza-pandemic-509151dc8065

 

Seems like open-air style tent hospitals would be cheap and doable, we should learn from history. I know coronavirus isn't the flu but there are similarities worth considering. The stuffy, dead air of hospitals makes me sick just thinking about it....let the fresh air in, I say. 

Edited April 6, 2020 by millefleur

[TBoneTX 45,571]

Fascinating articles -- read both straight through.

 

This open-air setup would be resisted strongly by some or many:

"We can't allow these people to be out where the wind can carry their infection to others!"

"We have no open space, so we must transport them for many miles!"

And similar.

 

However, given the current desperation and the strong observational correlations of the past, why not?

Edited April 6, 2020 by TBoneTX

[millefleur 5,047]

10 minutes ago, TBoneTX said:

Fascinating articles -- read both straight through.

 

This open-air setup would be resisted strongly by some or many:

"We can't allow these people to be out where the wind can carry their infection to others!"

"We have no open space, so we must transport them for many miles!"

And similar.

 

However, given the current desperation and the strong observational correlations of the past, why not?

Yeah, exactly, I know it seems counter intuitive to just let the infected people outside, but it really does seem to help. It's hard to explain the exact science of why it works, but my hunch is a combo of the sun exposure killing the virus and the fresh air reducing the viral load around the patient (and caretakers too), also fresh air is not stagnant, it is dynamic and that probably helps with breathing too.

 

I hope people will start to get more creative with solutions instead of immediately bemoaning and whining that there won't be enough beds, machines, etc....all that negativity really helps no one and we can actually learn from the past in the case of the Spanish flu.

[OriZ 3,157]

20 minutes ago, millefleur said:

Yeah, exactly, I know it seems counter intuitive to just let the infected people outside, but it really does seem to help. It's hard to explain the exact science of why it works, but my hunch is a combo of the sun exposure killing the virus and the fresh air reducing the viral load around the patient (and caretakers too), also fresh air is not stagnant, it is dynamic and that probably helps with breathing too.

 

I hope people will start to get more creative with solutions instead of immediately bemoaning and whining that there won't be enough beds, machines, etc....all that negativity really helps no one and we can actually learn from the past in the case of the Spanish flu.

I definitely believe in this.

[JonSeattle 202]

Unfortunately science is agonizingly slow in times like this. I'd like to think it is because of widespread use of hydroxychloroquine, but it's too soon to say. I could also be just because the model doesn't take into account various factors like localized running out of hospital beds, even running out of uninfected doctors and nurses, as is happening in Philippines.

 

https://www.contagionlive.com/news/results-from-a-controlled-trial-of-hydroxychloroquine-for-covid19

 

This one sounds extremely promising as well:
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0166354220302011?via%3Dihub

And it's already in widespread use for pets and livestock.

 

[Dashinka 24,628]

5 hours ago, millefleur said:

Yeah, exactly, I know it seems counter intuitive to just let the infected people outside, but it really does seem to help. It's hard to explain the exact science of why it works, but my hunch is a combo of the sun exposure killing the virus and the fresh air reducing the viral load around the patient (and caretakers too), also fresh air is not stagnant, it is dynamic and that probably helps with breathing too.

 

I hope people will start to get more creative with solutions instead of immediately bemoaning and whining that there won't be enough beds, machines, etc....all that negativity really helps no one and we can actually learn from the past in the case of the Spanish flu.

The mainstream media does not seem to talk about viral load too much.  We get stories that this virus will live on surfaces for extended periods, but they don’t talk about half-life and how much viral load is still present after a period of time.

 

As to open air treatment “camps” for lack of a better term, I am also in favor of this.  It is also one of the reasons during this isolation period, we get outside in the sun as much as we can.

[Dashinka 24,628]

4 hours ago, JonSeattle said:

Unfortunately science is agonizingly slow in times like this. I'd like to think it is because of widespread use of hydroxychloroquine, but it's too soon to say. I could also be just because the model doesn't take into account various factors like localized running out of hospital beds, even running out of uninfected doctors and nurses, as is happening in Philippines.

 

https://www.contagionlive.com/news/results-from-a-controlled-trial-of-hydroxychloroquine-for-covid19

 

This one sounds extremely promising as well:
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0166354220302011?via%3Dihub

And it's already in widespread use for pets and livestock.

 

I rad a couple of articles about Invermectin, but not seeing much talk about it yet in the mainstream.  It certainly could,be interesting.

[Dashinka 24,628]

8 hours ago, TBoneTX said:

Interesting.

 

 

I have been following the UW model and they did a major update last evening.  One big change I noticed was they are showing Washington state pst it’s peak.  They also seem to have more realistic numbers on hospital resources.

 

http://www.healthdata.org/covid/updates

[NikLR 13,228]

Wow a dewormer helps reduce the spread of a virus in vitro? 

[Dashinka 24,628]

Just now, NikLR said:

Wow a dewormer helps reduce the spread of a virus in vitro? 

That was my thought as well when I first heard about the lab studies.

[Nature Boy 2.0 8,376]

4 hours ago, NikLR said:

Wow a dewormer helps reduce the spread of a virus in vitro? 

Seems like my dog took that for heart worms 

[NikLR 13,228]

1 hour ago, Nature Boy 2.0 said:

Seems like my dog took that for heart worms 

Yeah they do as a preventive.  Its not very effective against heartworm anymore. 

[TBoneTX 45,571]

17 hours ago, Dashinka said:

That was my thought as well when I first heard about the lab studies.

Labrador studies?