new deadly human-to-human-transmissible coronavirus emerges out of China
POSTED BY: 1KIKI
UPDATED: Tuesday, May 5, 2026 22:21
VIEWED: 203741
PAGE 18 of 283
Quote:One thing they COULD do is remove people to a better, land-based facility, to be quarantined - kind of like how the US is quarantining people from China in military facilities.
Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
It sounds like they don't even have enough test kits to screen a fraction of the souls aboard the ship. Testing the people who have symptoms is the prioritization they are using.
If they had a supply of test kits, then your complaint would have merit.
The ship is no better than a cauldron of close quarters and shared air, with crew potentially shuttling the virus from room to room. There are more effective and humane ways of dealing with it.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
https://www.theepochtimes.com/the-mysterious-origin-of-the-wuhan-coron
avirus-and-the-call-for-chinese-authorities-to-release-animal-sample-testing-data_3231298.html
The Mysterious Origin of the Wuhan Coronavirus
China continues to refuse to release animal sampling testing data
This article has many cogent points to make as well as interesting details - for example, that China is testing for coronavirus DNA and not just antibodies (possibly by PCR). I think it would be good to read in its entirety, because a simple summary doesn't do it justice.
That said, the author makes the argument that China needs to release its data about animal testing for 2019-nCoV. The reason is that if there's a common intermediate host (and so far the other deadly coronaviruses SARS and MERS have intermediate hosts) - like rats - it makes no sense to quarantine people while the rats roam free and unaddressed. It also examines the potential role of the BSL4 lab near Wuhan.
I'd also say it makes sense for the US to start testing on its own.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
China has the social control to be able to manage this virus, the USA does not. But China seems to be stuck in a hospital-based model which is counterproductive.
If the USA were to get hit with an epidemic, I would suggest the following:
Self quarantine. Everyone who can stay at home, stay at home. When you go out, go out with a mask and remove your mask .... and then sanitize your hands ... when you get back home. That means working in a mask too.
Shut down all schools and all unnecessary workplaces. Utilities, fire/police/hospital, gocery stores (and, for those underserved neighborhoods, restaurants and fast-food places) post office and banks stay open.
Develop teams that can test people at home. If necessary give them nearlyindestructable metal bracelets or temporary back-of-hand inks on which can be recorded their status, and don't take it off until they'e been cleared. DON'T make them come to a doctor's office or hospital room to be tested!
Set up special hospital wards for treating postive patients.
-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake
Happy New Year, WISHY. I edited out your psychopathic screed!
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
KIKI: Great article, thanks for the link! You're right, it would be hard to summarize.
From ZH:
Quote:
And, as has been the case for the past weeks, the number of cases remains within spitting distance of 3,000, rising from yesterday's 2,652 to 2,973, however this number is largely irrelevant: as Dr. Scott Gottlieb the increase in the number of confirmed cases is likely a function of China's "testing reporting capacity", which is roughly 3,000 per day . This means that every suspected case eventually becomes a confirmed cases, and only logistics limit how many new cases are actually being added any given day. As such, any change in the number of new cases is not only irrelevant but misleading for all those who actually trade on this as an indicator of whether the Coronavirus has peaked.
https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/were-totally-dark-japan-not-doi
ng-enough-contain-outbreak-diamond-princess-passengers
-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake
Happy New Year, WISHY. I edited out your psychopathic screed!
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:I think a lot of people will do that, what I call 'hunkering down'. But the vast, vast majority of people can't afford to stay home from work, being 2 paychecks away from economic disaster. So they'll go to work, no matter what. I presume that if it escapes into the general population, it'll be city-by-city, or region by region. The government may be able to order non-essential companies to shut on a limited geographic basis, and do the Andrew Yang $1000/ mo for everybody on that same basis, as well as shut down non-essential travel.
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Self quarantine. Everyone who can stay at home, stay at home.
Quote:Well, wearing a disposable medical mask is only minimally protective when it comes to catching the virus, imo because it prevents hand-to-mouth and hand-to-nose activities, and may remind people to not do hand-to-eye activities. An N95 mask might be actually protective from breathing in most of the virus - it would certainly filter out aerosols! - and it may or may not filter out individual virus particles, depending on their size (which I haven't looked up). But the caveat is that it has to be well-fitted and well sealed to work at all. So - no facial hair! And it's best if you have an average nose, chin, and face-length, otherwise you'll have gaps. A reusable N95 mask with disposable cartridges is able to be fit-tested, but a generic disposable N95 mask from a hardware store isn't. And neither will protect your eyes. There will be a certain fraction of people who won't benefit from wearing that kind of mask. And going for an N95 mask is expensive enough, bothersome enough, and technical enough, that I can't see it being applied across the board. OTOH those disposable surgical masks, while not designed to keep people from getting the virus, are designed to keep people from giving it. If everyone! had to wear a mask in public, I think it could go a long way to keep asymptomatic, or nearly asymptomatic, and unsuspecting carriers from spreading it around.
When you go out, go out with a mask and remove your mask .... and then sanitize your hands ... when you get back home. That means working in a mask too.
Quote:I agree!!
Shut down all schools and all unnecessary workplaces. Utilities, fire/police/hospital, grocery stores (and, for those underserved neighborhoods, restaurants and fast-food places) post office and banks stay open.
Quote:The big flaw in this is the development and production of test kits. I imagine something like a war-time effort where people are pressed into service (for pay) might work.
Develop teams that can test people at home. If necessary give them nearly-indestructible metal bracelets or temporary back-of-hand inks on which can be recorded their status, and don't take it off until they've been cleared. DON'T make them come to a doctor's office or hospital room to be tested!
Quote:As I see it, if the virus gets out into the general population, it'll require a war-time all-hands-on-deck response to keep it contained until a treatment is developed, or a vaccine is developed, or both. Half-measures like what they initially did in China won't work - as we've seen. Segregating people who test positive would be a good idea, if you could meaningfully keep up with it! When it comes to treatment, sadly, at present, there doesn't seem to be a one that'll consistently work to keep people alive. Looking at the one JAMA study, there were I think 18 people, who all went on to smooth, unremarkable recoveries. Then there was the other JAMA study of - I think roughly 160 people - with a 4.6% fatality rate. It seems like either you get better, or you don't.
Set up special hospital wards for treating positive patients.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
So, having a science degree but no background in biology at all(!), what I got out of the article is that ... combing thru the bat virus antecedents (SARS, MERS) there were intermediate animals which allowed the virus to mutate and spread to people.
The closest bat virus found so far is too far away, sequence-wise, to be a direct ancestor of the wuhan virus (I just find it easier to type Wuhan than the current nomenclature), the latest "match" seems a little too conveniently-found.
Looking at bat virus function, all of the bat viruses studied so far need mutations in a certain area of the sequence to recognize and dock onto human ACE2 (whatever THAT is!) meaning that a direct bat-to-human transmission is unlikely.
-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake
Happy New Year, WISHY. I edited out your psychopathic screed!
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Oh, this is just from wiki. ACE 2 is what you'd expect - its one kind of angiotensin converting enzyme.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angiotensin-converting_enzyme_2
Angiotensin-converting enzyme 2
Angiotensin converting enzyme 2 is an exopeptidase (wiki: an exopeptidase is any peptidase that catalyzes the cleavage of the terminal peptide bond; the process releases a single amino acid or dipeptide from the peptide chain. Depending on whether the amino acid is released from the amino or the carboxy terminal, an exopeptidase is further classified as an aminopeptidase or a carboxypeptidase, respectively.) that catalyses the conversion of angiotensin I to the nonapeptide (nine amino acids) angiotensin[1-9], or the conversion of angiotensin II to angiotensin 1-7. ACE2 has direct effects on cardiac function,? and is expressed predominantly in vascular endothelial cells of the heart and the kidneys. ACE2 receptors have been shown to be the entry point into human cells for some coronaviruses, including the SARS virus, and the Novel coronavirus.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
ARGH! I answered my own question ...
But here's some more information on where ACE(nzymes) are located (from wiki): It is located mainly in the capillaries of the lungs but can also be found in endothelial and kidney epithelial cells.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
DANG!
136 people on cruise ship test positive for virus
Obviously they weren't sufficiently timely in testing for and removing infected people, because this looks like secondary transmission to me. And maybe there are limits to the test, leaving infected people undetected even if they're infectious.
Death rates by some sources are put at 5% of those identified as infected.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Wow, that's some sick (but well thought-out) humor!!! I guess it takes a comedian to go where no one has dared to go before!
All I can say is... it's a good thing I don't like the idea of taking a cruise!
Yeah. Burr can get pretty dark sometimes.
I'm a big fan of his work. I love the style a lot of comedians use today where they're really up there just being story tellers instead of cracking dumb jokes. I keep meaning to listen to his podcast, but I always forget to do it.
I thought it was pretty funny when you find out that when he finally settled down it was a black woman he married. She was actually part of a lot of the stories he told in earlier shows he did, whether it was things like the massive and dangerous rescue dog she took in while he was out on the road, or the first time he felt like an adult when he didn't go to his family's house for holiday dinners and instead had his own party with her. I would think that most people were surprised that this 100% Irish dude that would spontaneously combust if he went on a cruise and says the things that he says married a black woman, especially since it's probably more surprising that he got married in the first place.
He never once mentioned his wife's race in a show until the latest comedy special, and I think the only reason that he did was for a funny story he told about them getting into an argument over an Elvis documentary.
The bit starts at 40:00
I found it on YT, but if you want to watch it I'd do it sooner than later. Somebody changed the audio and made some weird camera shots on it to get past the algorithm.
Do Right, Be Right. :)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME