05-10-2020, 06:33 PM
A chart FOR ILLUSTRATIVE PURPOSES ONLY that I found useful is in
http://www.diazyme.com/covid-19-antibody-tests
showing the relation of the IgG, IgM,
(The levels and days are illustrative and not necessarily real.)
I was listening to a This Week in Virology (#608) a few days ago. It seems that the first week after symptoms arrives is usually not threatening (but the person is shedding the virus the most, and is most infectious).
Toward the latter part of the 2nd week is when decompensation may occur (8:20 in that audio, more at 17:05) and you can go downhill very fast (so, don't wait to get into care!) with breathing issues (the pneumonia). By this time, the viral levels are much lower.
Beyond the end of the 2nd week (possibly independent of the severity of breathing issues) may include clotting problems (thrombosis, strokes, etc.) This is at 19:35 in the audio. By this point, the virus is pretty much gone. [Reminder: don't change meds except by consultation with your doctor.]
There is a good bit of discussion (beginning about 22:00) about the completed remdesivir trial from Wuhan (no significant effect) and the teaser of reduced time to recovery for the not-yet-finished trial (Gilead trial, reported by NIH). I believe Stanford Hospital is one of many sites in this trial.
Remdesivir is an anti-viral. If you start treating with it when decompensation occurs and the viral levels are already low, how much good can it do? So the question would seem to be, will it be beneficial for high-risk individuals if given shortly after symptoms occur?
Btw, in a discussion I was in, the question came up that essentially was "If I come down with symptoms, why should I bother getting a test? There's really no change in treatment, is there?"
In case anyone else is thinking that....
1) If you test positive, you will probably be more cautious about risking others (often those in your household) by exposing them, and they will treat it more seriously. No thoughts of "Well, he might not really have it."
2) If those you've been in contact with may choose to self-isolate KNOWING that you have the disease and may have exposed them. That may save the life of someone that they could have exposed otherwise.
3) As described above, if you have the disease, your condition may turn much worse within hours (think Saturday 10PM). You want to have done all the things so you can seek medical care immediately and have the information (medical, insurance, etc. Now, even if you don't get the pneumonia, you want to know to be on the look out for the circulatory problems.
http://www.diazyme.com/covid-19-antibody-tests
showing the relation of the IgG, IgM,
(The levels and days are illustrative and not necessarily real.)
I was listening to a This Week in Virology (#608) a few days ago. It seems that the first week after symptoms arrives is usually not threatening (but the person is shedding the virus the most, and is most infectious).
Toward the latter part of the 2nd week is when decompensation may occur (8:20 in that audio, more at 17:05) and you can go downhill very fast (so, don't wait to get into care!) with breathing issues (the pneumonia). By this time, the viral levels are much lower.
Beyond the end of the 2nd week (possibly independent of the severity of breathing issues) may include clotting problems (thrombosis, strokes, etc.) This is at 19:35 in the audio. By this point, the virus is pretty much gone. [Reminder: don't change meds except by consultation with your doctor.]
There is a good bit of discussion (beginning about 22:00) about the completed remdesivir trial from Wuhan (no significant effect) and the teaser of reduced time to recovery for the not-yet-finished trial (Gilead trial, reported by NIH). I believe Stanford Hospital is one of many sites in this trial.
Remdesivir is an anti-viral. If you start treating with it when decompensation occurs and the viral levels are already low, how much good can it do? So the question would seem to be, will it be beneficial for high-risk individuals if given shortly after symptoms occur?
Btw, in a discussion I was in, the question came up that essentially was "If I come down with symptoms, why should I bother getting a test? There's really no change in treatment, is there?"
In case anyone else is thinking that....
1) If you test positive, you will probably be more cautious about risking others (often those in your household) by exposing them, and they will treat it more seriously. No thoughts of "Well, he might not really have it."
2) If those you've been in contact with may choose to self-isolate KNOWING that you have the disease and may have exposed them. That may save the life of someone that they could have exposed otherwise.
3) As described above, if you have the disease, your condition may turn much worse within hours (think Saturday 10PM). You want to have done all the things so you can seek medical care immediately and have the information (medical, insurance, etc. Now, even if you don't get the pneumonia, you want to know to be on the look out for the circulatory problems.