[76lsjumb]

spickets

Spigots.

And if you don't think that the conduct described in that article is outrageous then I don't know what to tell you. OF isn't calling for storming the Bastille, he's calling for congressional investigations when the worst is over. That seems pretty level-headed to me.

Because, of course, Congressional investigations have done so much good for the country over the past several years...

[76lsjumb]

spickets

Spigots.

And if you don't think that the conduct described in that article is outrageous then I don't know what to tell you. OF isn't calling for storming the Bastille, he's calling for congressional investigations when the worst is over. That seems pretty level-headed to me.

Because, of course, Congressional investigations have done so much good for the country over the past several years...

[martyup]

Just to clarify, it looks like the Washington state ban on public gatherings over 250 will only apply to 3 counties in the Seattle vicinity.

[martyup]

Just to clarify, it looks like the Washington state ban on public gatherings over 250 will only apply to 3 counties in the Seattle vicinity.

[cardcrimson]

And if you don't think that the conduct described in that article is outrageous then I don't know what to tell you. OF isn't calling for storming the Bastille, he's calling for congressional investigations when the worst is over. That seems pretty level-headed to me.

An interesting set of quotes at the end of the article:
"Looking back, Dr. Chu said she understood why the regulations that stymied the flu study’s efforts for weeks existed. “Those protections are in place for a reason,” she said. “You want to protect human subjects. You want to do things in an ethical way.”


The frustration, she said, was how long it took to cut through red tape to try to save lives in an outbreak that had the potential to explode in Washington State and spread in many other regions. “I don’t think people knew that back then,” she said. “We know it now.”"

Guess we can blame Kennedy, Kassebaum and Clinton for HIPAA and the patients' privacy it requires.

[cardcrimson]

And if you don't think that the conduct described in that article is outrageous then I don't know what to tell you. OF isn't calling for storming the Bastille, he's calling for congressional investigations when the worst is over. That seems pretty level-headed to me.

An interesting set of quotes at the end of the article:
"Looking back, Dr. Chu said she understood why the regulations that stymied the flu study’s efforts for weeks existed. “Those protections are in place for a reason,” she said. “You want to protect human subjects. You want to do things in an ethical way.”


The frustration, she said, was how long it took to cut through red tape to try to save lives in an outbreak that had the potential to explode in Washington State and spread in many other regions. “I don’t think people knew that back then,” she said. “We know it now.”"

Guess we can blame Kennedy, Kassebaum and Clinton for HIPAA and the patients' privacy it requires.

[BostonCard]

Can I kindly (and perhaps futily) try to refocus the conversation on the topic at hand, specifically considerations about the epidemic.  As I mentioned earlier in the thread, while there isn't a ton of space between descriptions of what happened and who is to blame for it, let's try to keep this thread focused on the what.

The temperature in this thread is starting to rise, and I fear the epidemic will further strain on an already tense situation.

BC

[BostonCard]

Can I kindly (and perhaps futily) try to refocus the conversation on the topic at hand, specifically considerations about the epidemic.  As I mentioned earlier in the thread, while there isn't a ton of space between descriptions of what happened and who is to blame for it, let's try to keep this thread focused on the what.

The temperature in this thread is starting to rise, and I fear the epidemic will further strain on an already tense situation.

BC

[M T]

Wow, this has changed from a place where people posted information that they thought was important and relevant, to more of a mob discussing who to go after next.  

Something I did not expect:   Apparently Santa Clara County(SCC) had only 2 new cases yesterday.  I don't fully understand that aberration.  It was 43 cases + 1 death when I looked yesterday.  Today it is 45 cases + 1 death.  (I don't recall that anyone posted about the death.  The death was #3, the woman in her 60s that was the first case of community spread in SCC.)    Any restriction on exposure to people (such as suggesting protocols or banning mass/large/1000+ gatherings) won't have an impact on cases found for about a week. 

SCC new cases by date of announcement, from Feb 28:
1, 1, 3, 2, 2, 3, 6, 4, 8, 5, 2
I hope this isn't an artifact of limitations on testing, or a change in the process of announcing cases.
[re the TSA staff - they would be counted by where they live, not work]

SCC indicated 21 of the 43 yesterday were believed to be community spread (no known contact with another case).  I was surprised by that number.  To me, it doesn't make sense.   If it were that 21 was the total number in, say, 10 clusters of the disease (say, 10 pairs of husband&wife plus one other household member), that would be believable.   But if 21 are actually single cases, with all other household members that are sick are in the other 22, that seems high to me.

Unfortunately, SCC has been changing their way of presenting their info almost daily.  Yesterday, they had a nice graphic with number of cases, hospitalized, ICU, deaths (and maybe released).  But that's gone today, or at least it isn't available at this time.   I'm sure they are overwhelmed, so don't take this as saying they should present good graphics!

Suggestion:  Obviously, the public health offices are not staffed to the levels needed for this once a century task of tracking down contacts.  But for everyone's health, this would be a good idea.   I would urge the governor to call out the National Guard to do this task.  Limit the interviewers to be those under 40, or under 30.  The state presumably can use the Guard for this purpose.  The issues of liability and such are already in established.   (For this, I think everyone would support the idea that legal status in the US shall not be noted.)

[M T]

Wow, this has changed from a place where people posted information that they thought was important and relevant, to more of a mob discussing who to go after next.  

Something I did not expect:   Apparently Santa Clara County(SCC) had only 2 new cases yesterday.  I don't fully understand that aberration.  It was 43 cases + 1 death when I looked yesterday.  Today it is 45 cases + 1 death.  (I don't recall that anyone posted about the death.  The death was #3, the woman in her 60s that was the first case of community spread in SCC.)    Any restriction on exposure to people (such as suggesting protocols or banning mass/large/1000+ gatherings) won't have an impact on cases found for about a week. 

SCC new cases by date of announcement, from Feb 28:
1, 1, 3, 2, 2, 3, 6, 4, 8, 5, 2
I hope this isn't an artifact of limitations on testing, or a change in the process of announcing cases.
[re the TSA staff - they would be counted by where they live, not work]

SCC indicated 21 of the 43 yesterday were believed to be community spread (no known contact with another case).  I was surprised by that number.  To me, it doesn't make sense.   If it were that 21 was the total number in, say, 10 clusters of the disease (say, 10 pairs of husband&wife plus one other household member), that would be believable.   But if 21 are actually single cases, with all other household members that are sick are in the other 22, that seems high to me.

Unfortunately, SCC has been changing their way of presenting their info almost daily.  Yesterday, they had a nice graphic with number of cases, hospitalized, ICU, deaths (and maybe released).  But that's gone today, or at least it isn't available at this time.   I'm sure they are overwhelmed, so don't take this as saying they should present good graphics!

Suggestion:  Obviously, the public health offices are not staffed to the levels needed for this once a century task of tracking down contacts.  But for everyone's health, this would be a good idea.   I would urge the governor to call out the National Guard to do this task.  Limit the interviewers to be those under 40, or under 30.  The state presumably can use the Guard for this purpose.  The issues of liability and such are already in established.   (For this, I think everyone would support the idea that legal status in the US shall not be noted.)

[BostonCard]

The WHO just declared the coronavirus a pandemic. Duh.

BC

[BostonCard]

The WHO just declared the coronavirus a pandemic. Duh.

BC

[Goose]

I believe it is important to recognize the the efforts made on the "front lines" are very important. The county health offices, physicians and health care staff at hospitals, lab techs, etc. are what will hopefully slow this down and prevent overload. The "troops in contact" and the local and state officials (tactical leaders) will be the ones who win this battle (or not). We are going to do what we can with what we have or can scrape together in the short term.
Lots of decisions will be made with incomplete information in the presence of differing goals and contradictory advice. My friends in Italy say the failure of the initial lockdown in the north was mostly due to people not taking it seriously and going on as if it weren't there or didn't apply to them. The second country-wide lockdown actually introduced some panic in areas with no or small numbers of sick people, because they feared for the food supply. Now that everybody is pretty sure the grocery stores will remain open, things are calming down. We here need to avoid both these problems as much as possible.
There is going to be significant economic fallout from this disease outbreak no matter what is done to mitigate it. May levers normally open to stimulate the economy won't even work, as people aren't going to be in a rush to start new efforts in the presence of great uncertainty. Hiring lots of new people when  "work from home" is the norm isn't happening.

[Goose]

I believe it is important to recognize the the efforts made on the "front lines" are very important. The county health offices, physicians and health care staff at hospitals, lab techs, etc. are what will hopefully slow this down and prevent overload. The "troops in contact" and the local and state officials (tactical leaders) will be the ones who win this battle (or not). We are going to do what we can with what we have or can scrape together in the short term.
Lots of decisions will be made with incomplete information in the presence of differing goals and contradictory advice. My friends in Italy say the failure of the initial lockdown in the north was mostly due to people not taking it seriously and going on as if it weren't there or didn't apply to them. The second country-wide lockdown actually introduced some panic in areas with no or small numbers of sick people, because they feared for the food supply. Now that everybody is pretty sure the grocery stores will remain open, things are calming down. We here need to avoid both these problems as much as possible.
There is going to be significant economic fallout from this disease outbreak no matter what is done to mitigate it. May levers normally open to stimulate the economy won't even work, as people aren't going to be in a rush to start new efforts in the presence of great uncertainty. Hiring lots of new people when  "work from home" is the norm isn't happening.

[burger]

Until widespread testing begins (it's been a week away for about a month now), take no comfort in low numbers of positive tests.  They are not testing enough people to get any real sense of the actual numbers positive.

(My job largely involves analyzing survey data, and the lack of any real surveillance of this disease is making me crazy.)

[burger]

Until widespread testing begins (it's been a week away for about a month now), take no comfort in low numbers of positive tests.  They are not testing enough people to get any real sense of the actual numbers positive.

(My job largely involves analyzing survey data, and the lack of any real surveillance of this disease is making me crazy.)

[2006alum]

Amen. This is what we want to avoid: "Coronavirus Has Northern Italy's Hospitals on the Brink of Collapse."

As someone was saying elsewhere, we can all be heroes during this pandemic by social distancing, cancelling any non-necessary outings, and staying calm. Another adage I like: "There is a space between tune out and panic and that is planning." 

Even for those of us who are low-risk (as I myself am) can contribute to mitigation by social distancing and therefore reducing the pace of the spread. 

Check in on elderly friends and relatives frequently, as they are both more vulnerable and more at risk of the mental health consequences of long-term isolation. 

Stock up on anything you'd need for 2 months, especially essential prescriptions and medical supplies. 

And as they say in the twitterverse, my PMs are open if you want to rant, rail, kvetch, etc. I'm an open ear.

[2006alum]

Amen. This is what we want to avoid: "Coronavirus Has Northern Italy's Hospitals on the Brink of Collapse."

As someone was saying elsewhere, we can all be heroes during this pandemic by social distancing, cancelling any non-necessary outings, and staying calm. Another adage I like: "There is a space between tune out and panic and that is planning." 

Even for those of us who are low-risk (as I myself am) can contribute to mitigation by social distancing and therefore reducing the pace of the spread. 

Check in on elderly friends and relatives frequently, as they are both more vulnerable and more at risk of the mental health consequences of long-term isolation. 

Stock up on anything you'd need for 2 months, especially essential prescriptions and medical supplies. 

And as they say in the twitterverse, my PMs are open if you want to rant, rail, kvetch, etc. I'm an open ear.

[cardcrimson]

You know it's serious when Wendy Williams has no public studio audience for her daily show. Just the show's staff in the seats cheering as she ridicules Naomi Campbell for flying commercial yesterday wearing a hazmat suit.

And no, I don't regularly watch, the show comes on after the local news that I have on in the background most mornings when working at home. Though I have to admit, she's pretty dang funny.

[cardcrimson]

You know it's serious when Wendy Williams has no public studio audience for her daily show. Just the show's staff in the seats cheering as she ridicules Naomi Campbell for flying commercial yesterday wearing a hazmat suit.

And no, I don't regularly watch, the show comes on after the local news that I have on in the background most mornings when working at home. Though I have to admit, she's pretty dang funny.

[82lsju]

interesting read on exponential spread and how it was contained in some regions of China but so far not well elsewhere

https://medium.com/@tomaspueyo/coronavir...d3d9cd99ca

[82lsju]

interesting read on exponential spread and how it was contained in some regions of China but so far not well elsewhere

https://medium.com/@tomaspueyo/coronavir...d3d9cd99ca

[Langdude]

I really appreciate the assiduousness with which so many on this board are striving to understand this situation. With four kids now at home taking classes online on borrowed laptops, and me trying to write out my own lectures for students so they can prepare for final exams next week, it's been difficult for me to keep up with the news, research best practices, and ponder how we as a family can intentionally respond.

I wonder if there are some of you who would be prepared to provide a summary of things to do or think about as we go about our daily lives. Some of you are doctors or researchers that can provide some tips. I know I need to wash my hands and avoid large gatherings; anything else? Anything I should keep on-hand as I go places? Anything I should be worried about the store running out of (as of yet, we have not joined the CostCo swarm)? And, as I asked before, do I need to worry about our savings or IRA?

Thanks, friends. I hope that the individualization that this sort of pandemic encourages will not militate against humanity's greatest strength, which is its capacity for empathy, mutuality, and edification.

-m.

[Langdude]

I really appreciate the assiduousness with which so many on this board are striving to understand this situation. With four kids now at home taking classes online on borrowed laptops, and me trying to write out my own lectures for students so they can prepare for final exams next week, it's been difficult for me to keep up with the news, research best practices, and ponder how we as a family can intentionally respond.

I wonder if there are some of you who would be prepared to provide a summary of things to do or think about as we go about our daily lives. Some of you are doctors or researchers that can provide some tips. I know I need to wash my hands and avoid large gatherings; anything else? Anything I should keep on-hand as I go places? Anything I should be worried about the store running out of (as of yet, we have not joined the CostCo swarm)? And, as I asked before, do I need to worry about our savings or IRA?

Thanks, friends. I hope that the individualization that this sort of pandemic encourages will not militate against humanity's greatest strength, which is its capacity for empathy, mutuality, and edification.

-m.

[Goose]

Until widespread testing begins (it's been a week away for about a month now), take no comfort in low numbers of positive tests.  They are not testing enough people to get any real sense of the actual numbers positive.

(My job largely involves analyzing survey data, and the lack of any real surveillance of this disease is making me crazy.)

The problems with doing widespread random testing are many. First, it uses up the limited PCR machine and technician time, and to a lesser expend "rare" (fixable with effort) testing materials. Second, and more important, the test has limited sensitivity. There will be a significant number of people who test negative that are in early stages of the disease and don't have high enough counts to test positive.  Therefore any number we measure regarding infection rate is going to be low by an unknown value. If we had lots of historical data about this, we MIGHT be able to infer how many people are actually infected, but we don't.  Third, the distribution of who is sick/will be sick is very non-random. There are localized "pockets" where the disease is epidemic and other much larger areas where apparently there is no disease. The location of these pockets is non-random but unknown until somebody shows symptoms.

These are some of the reasons that testing asymptomatic people is a questionable practice. A negative test doesn't necessarily mean they aren't sick. A negative test  following isolation for the "incubation period" (whatever that actually is/should be) is probably reliable. Anything less isn't. If we could test everybody and isolate all the positives, we could really slow down the infection rate, but it wouldn't go to zero. If we could test a large sample, we would know a lot more about the infection rate, especially if it is "significant". However, it is IMHO improbable this type of testing would tell us much with a very low overall infection rate with high density pockets. This later situation is where we currently find ourselves.

[Goose]

Until widespread testing begins (it's been a week away for about a month now), take no comfort in low numbers of positive tests.  They are not testing enough people to get any real sense of the actual numbers positive.

(My job largely involves analyzing survey data, and the lack of any real surveillance of this disease is making me crazy.)

The problems with doing widespread random testing are many. First, it uses up the limited PCR machine and technician time, and to a lesser expend "rare" (fixable with effort) testing materials. Second, and more important, the test has limited sensitivity. There will be a significant number of people who test negative that are in early stages of the disease and don't have high enough counts to test positive.  Therefore any number we measure regarding infection rate is going to be low by an unknown value. If we had lots of historical data about this, we MIGHT be able to infer how many people are actually infected, but we don't.  Third, the distribution of who is sick/will be sick is very non-random. There are localized "pockets" where the disease is epidemic and other much larger areas where apparently there is no disease. The location of these pockets is non-random but unknown until somebody shows symptoms.

These are some of the reasons that testing asymptomatic people is a questionable practice. A negative test doesn't necessarily mean they aren't sick. A negative test  following isolation for the "incubation period" (whatever that actually is/should be) is probably reliable. Anything less isn't. If we could test everybody and isolate all the positives, we could really slow down the infection rate, but it wouldn't go to zero. If we could test a large sample, we would know a lot more about the infection rate, especially if it is "significant". However, it is IMHO improbable this type of testing would tell us much with a very low overall infection rate with high density pockets. This later situation is where we currently find ourselves.

[M T]

A really GOOD article.   I suggest everyone read it.

He explains pretty well the impact of health measures taken, and how the statistics are delayed measures of the spread.
He shows stats that dramatically show how China's quick & drastic actions resulted in a much better outcome than other countries.

He uses case count AND death count to estimate the number of cases (and eventual CFR), in multiple countries.
He uses a model to suggest that a 1-day delay in instituting controls (here, social distancing) may cause a 40% increase in cases.
He points out that a 40% increase will mean a much higher increase in number of deaths if the health care system is overloaded.

I have a few minor quibbles, but I won't voice them now as it would detract from the message.

interesting read on exponential spread and how it was contained in some regions of China but so far not well elsewhere

https://medium.com/@tomaspueyo/coronavir...d3d9cd99ca

[M T]

A really GOOD article.   I suggest everyone read it.

He explains pretty well the impact of health measures taken, and how the statistics are delayed measures of the spread.
He shows stats that dramatically show how China's quick & drastic actions resulted in a much better outcome than other countries.

He uses case count AND death count to estimate the number of cases (and eventual CFR), in multiple countries.
He uses a model to suggest that a 1-day delay in instituting controls (here, social distancing) may cause a 40% increase in cases.
He points out that a 40% increase will mean a much higher increase in number of deaths if the health care system is overloaded.

I have a few minor quibbles, but I won't voice them now as it would detract from the message.

interesting read on exponential spread and how it was contained in some regions of China but so far not well elsewhere

https://medium.com/@tomaspueyo/coronavir...d3d9cd99ca

[OutsiderFan]

Watching the Washington presser is quite sobering.

They are saying that even with these limits on gatherings, they expect a severe outbreak in the next few weeks. This suggests they KNOW there are many cases not detected that will be exploding. Can't even imagine the frustration of not knowing where the infected are.

The WHO emphasized how critical surveillance testing is and implored countries to drop the bar on who can get a test, pointing out requiring symptoms and recent travel to test is just not enough.

The Quest Diagnostics website right now says they can test, but only if:

- you have symptoms
- have recently travelled to a certain country
- contact your doctor to arrange a test

This is just totally inadequate, especially since the NBA is saying "we aren't seeing enough cases to really know what to do." Of course, even if everyone could qualify for a test, we're now running out of testing agents anyway. 

Absent surveillance testing, we have no choice but to social distance like crazy and cancel all events possible.

[OutsiderFan]

Watching the Washington presser is quite sobering.

They are saying that even with these limits on gatherings, they expect a severe outbreak in the next few weeks. This suggests they KNOW there are many cases not detected that will be exploding. Can't even imagine the frustration of not knowing where the infected are.

The WHO emphasized how critical surveillance testing is and implored countries to drop the bar on who can get a test, pointing out requiring symptoms and recent travel to test is just not enough.

The Quest Diagnostics website right now says they can test, but only if:

- you have symptoms
- have recently travelled to a certain country
- contact your doctor to arrange a test

This is just totally inadequate, especially since the NBA is saying "we aren't seeing enough cases to really know what to do." Of course, even if everyone could qualify for a test, we're now running out of testing agents anyway. 

Absent surveillance testing, we have no choice but to social distance like crazy and cancel all events possible.

[2006alum]

I really appreciate the assiduousness with which so many on this board are striving to understand this situation. With four kids now at home taking classes online on borrowed laptops, and me trying to write out my own lectures for students so they can prepare for final exams next week, it's been difficult for me to keep up with the news, research best practices, and ponder how we as a family can intentionally respond.

I wonder if there are some of you who would be prepared to provide a summary of things to do or think about as we go about our daily lives. Some of you are doctors or researchers that can provide some tips. I know I need to wash my hands and avoid large gatherings; anything else? Anything I should keep on-hand as I go places? Anything I should be worried about the store running out of (as of yet, we have not joined the CostCo swarm)? And, as I asked before, do I need to worry about our savings or IRA?

Thanks, friends. I hope that the individualization that this sort of pandemic encourages will not militate against humanity's greatest strength, which is its capacity for empathy, mutuality, and edification.

-m.

Here's a few useful primers: 

[tweet]https://twitter.com/SecAzar/status/1237465735196225541?s=20[/tweet]

And here's what I personally have learned from reading pretty widely about this, going from less extreme to more extreme:

Stockpile essential medicines: Lots of our pharmaceutical drugs are sourced overseas in countries like India and China that have put restrictions into place on exports in order to protect their own populations. Anything you need for basic health, I would encourage stockpiling at least two months' worth. Even if we get the virus spread under control, the supply chain ramifications will last much longer. Ask for a 3-month refill instead of a 1-month refill, which many insurers will approve if the doctor requests it.

Nitrite Gloves: Apart from masks, wearing nitrite gloves when going out in public is another excellent way to limit your risk - both because they can be discarded (by removing them by pinching in the palm of the first glove so that it comes off inside out, and then using your clean hand to pull off the second glove from the inside out. As of this morning, Amazon still seems to have plenty in stock. The gloves are also useful because one is less tempted to touch one's face when wearing gloves.

Zinc Lozenges: Apparently, these are especially good at combating coronavirus infections, which take hold in the nasal passages and throat. If you start to feel anything coming on, take one immediately and let it rest in the back of your throat.

Sanitize anything that comes in the house: COVID-19 can apparently persist for days on plastic and paper surfaces, which means that if you bring something contaminated into the house and touch it, and then touch your face, you're still at risk. Clorox wipes are great for this and one wipe can cover a bag full of groceries.

Stockpile non-perishable sources of fruits and vegetables: It's one thing to have lots of cans of beans, bags of rice, and bottles of water. But that's not complete nutrition. In the event of widespread supply shortages, shelf-stable canned fruits and vegetables (or soups) and frozen fruits and vegetables can take you a long way to complete nutrition if you need to cook in for several weeks. Same with frozen meats and fruit juices.

Check/Enhance your emergency kit: Not to go FULL chicken little on folks, but one thing that worries me is any other sort of natural disaster hitting on top of this. In California, that's a fire or earthquake, either of which can short power for days at a time. I would encourage you to have a charged power bank on hand so power phones and other necessary devices to communicate with the outside world. I got this one, which also powers laptops and other AC-powered devices. Also consider a car cigarette-lighter power inverter, which allows you to charge devices from your car battery. And in case the power and heat are off, be sure to have a long-lasting source of light and emergency blankets for warmth.

Your mileage may very for how far down this list you want to go, but from reading pretty widely about this that's what I've arrived at. Worse case scenario, I don't need to go grocery shopping for a while and I'm well stocked for the inevitable earthquake/fire/blizzard/etc. that will hit sooner or later.

[2006alum]

I really appreciate the assiduousness with which so many on this board are striving to understand this situation. With four kids now at home taking classes online on borrowed laptops, and me trying to write out my own lectures for students so they can prepare for final exams next week, it's been difficult for me to keep up with the news, research best practices, and ponder how we as a family can intentionally respond.

I wonder if there are some of you who would be prepared to provide a summary of things to do or think about as we go about our daily lives. Some of you are doctors or researchers that can provide some tips. I know I need to wash my hands and avoid large gatherings; anything else? Anything I should keep on-hand as I go places? Anything I should be worried about the store running out of (as of yet, we have not joined the CostCo swarm)? And, as I asked before, do I need to worry about our savings or IRA?

Thanks, friends. I hope that the individualization that this sort of pandemic encourages will not militate against humanity's greatest strength, which is its capacity for empathy, mutuality, and edification.

-m.

Here's a few useful primers: 

[tweet]https://twitter.com/SecAzar/status/1237465735196225541?s=20[/tweet]

And here's what I personally have learned from reading pretty widely about this, going from less extreme to more extreme:

Stockpile essential medicines: Lots of our pharmaceutical drugs are sourced overseas in countries like India and China that have put restrictions into place on exports in order to protect their own populations. Anything you need for basic health, I would encourage stockpiling at least two months' worth. Even if we get the virus spread under control, the supply chain ramifications will last much longer. Ask for a 3-month refill instead of a 1-month refill, which many insurers will approve if the doctor requests it.

Nitrite Gloves: Apart from masks, wearing nitrite gloves when going out in public is another excellent way to limit your risk - both because they can be discarded (by removing them by pinching in the palm of the first glove so that it comes off inside out, and then using your clean hand to pull off the second glove from the inside out. As of this morning, Amazon still seems to have plenty in stock. The gloves are also useful because one is less tempted to touch one's face when wearing gloves.

Zinc Lozenges: Apparently, these are especially good at combating coronavirus infections, which take hold in the nasal passages and throat. If you start to feel anything coming on, take one immediately and let it rest in the back of your throat.

Sanitize anything that comes in the house: COVID-19 can apparently persist for days on plastic and paper surfaces, which means that if you bring something contaminated into the house and touch it, and then touch your face, you're still at risk. Clorox wipes are great for this and one wipe can cover a bag full of groceries.

Stockpile non-perishable sources of fruits and vegetables: It's one thing to have lots of cans of beans, bags of rice, and bottles of water. But that's not complete nutrition. In the event of widespread supply shortages, shelf-stable canned fruits and vegetables (or soups) and frozen fruits and vegetables can take you a long way to complete nutrition if you need to cook in for several weeks. Same with frozen meats and fruit juices.

Check/Enhance your emergency kit: Not to go FULL chicken little on folks, but one thing that worries me is any other sort of natural disaster hitting on top of this. In California, that's a fire or earthquake, either of which can short power for days at a time. I would encourage you to have a charged power bank on hand so power phones and other necessary devices to communicate with the outside world. I got this one, which also powers laptops and other AC-powered devices. Also consider a car cigarette-lighter power inverter, which allows you to charge devices from your car battery. And in case the power and heat are off, be sure to have a long-lasting source of light and emergency blankets for warmth.

Your mileage may very for how far down this list you want to go, but from reading pretty widely about this that's what I've arrived at. Worse case scenario, I don't need to go grocery shopping for a while and I'm well stocked for the inevitable earthquake/fire/blizzard/etc. that will hit sooner or later.

[Mick]

Wow, this has changed from a place where people posted information that they thought was important and relevant, to more of a mob discussing who to go after next.  

Something I did not expect:   Apparently Santa Clara County(SCC) had only 2 new cases yesterday.  I don't fully understand that aberration.  It was 43 cases + 1 death when I looked yesterday.  Today it is 45 cases + 1 death.  (I don't recall that anyone posted about the death.  The death was #3, the woman in her 60s that was the first case of community spread in SCC.)    Any restriction on exposure to people (such as suggesting protocols or banning mass/large/1000+ gatherings) won't have an impact on cases found for about a week. 

SCC new cases by date of announcement, from Feb 28:
1, 1, 3, 2, 2, 3, 6, 4, 8, 5, 2
I hope this isn't an artifact of limitations on testing, or a change in the process of announcing cases.


As I recall, SCC indicated 21 of the 43 yesterday were believed to be community spread (no known contact with another case).  I was surprised by that number.  To me, it doesn't make sense.   If it were that 21 was the total number in, say, 10 clusters of the disease (say, 10 pairs of husband&wife plus one other household member), that would be believable.   But if 21 are actually single cases, with all other household members that are sick are in the other 22, that seems high to me.

Unfortunately, SCC has been changing their way of presenting their info almost daily.  Yesterday, they had a nice graphic with number of cases, hospitalized, ICU, deaths (and maybe released).  But that's gone today, or at least it isn't available at this time.   I'm sure they are overwhelmed, so don't take this as saying they should present good graphics!

Suggestion:  Obviously, the public health offices are not staffed to the levels needed for this once a century task of tracking down contacts.  But for everyone's health, this would be a good idea.   I would urge the governor to call out the National Guard to do this task.  Limit the interviewers to be those under 40, or under 30.  The state presumably can use the Guard for this purpose.  The issues of liability and such are already in established.   (For this, I think everyone would support the idea that legal status in the US shall not be noted.)

I thought that three TSA agents at SJ Airport tested positive yesterday.  When were they counted?

[Mick]

Wow, this has changed from a place where people posted information that they thought was important and relevant, to more of a mob discussing who to go after next.  

Something I did not expect:   Apparently Santa Clara County(SCC) had only 2 new cases yesterday.  I don't fully understand that aberration.  It was 43 cases + 1 death when I looked yesterday.  Today it is 45 cases + 1 death.  (I don't recall that anyone posted about the death.  The death was #3, the woman in her 60s that was the first case of community spread in SCC.)    Any restriction on exposure to people (such as suggesting protocols or banning mass/large/1000+ gatherings) won't have an impact on cases found for about a week. 

SCC new cases by date of announcement, from Feb 28:
1, 1, 3, 2, 2, 3, 6, 4, 8, 5, 2
I hope this isn't an artifact of limitations on testing, or a change in the process of announcing cases.


As I recall, SCC indicated 21 of the 43 yesterday were believed to be community spread (no known contact with another case).  I was surprised by that number.  To me, it doesn't make sense.   If it were that 21 was the total number in, say, 10 clusters of the disease (say, 10 pairs of husband&wife plus one other household member), that would be believable.   But if 21 are actually single cases, with all other household members that are sick are in the other 22, that seems high to me.

Unfortunately, SCC has been changing their way of presenting their info almost daily.  Yesterday, they had a nice graphic with number of cases, hospitalized, ICU, deaths (and maybe released).  But that's gone today, or at least it isn't available at this time.   I'm sure they are overwhelmed, so don't take this as saying they should present good graphics!

Suggestion:  Obviously, the public health offices are not staffed to the levels needed for this once a century task of tracking down contacts.  But for everyone's health, this would be a good idea.   I would urge the governor to call out the National Guard to do this task.  Limit the interviewers to be those under 40, or under 30.  The state presumably can use the Guard for this purpose.  The issues of liability and such are already in established.   (For this, I think everyone would support the idea that legal status in the US shall not be noted.)

I thought that three TSA agents at SJ Airport tested positive yesterday.  When were they counted?

[Snorlax94]

I wonder if there are some of you who would be prepared to provide a summary of things to do or think about as we go about our daily lives. Some of you are doctors or researchers that can provide some tips.Anything I should be worried about the store running out of (as of yet, we have not joined the CostCo swarm)? And, as I asked before, do I need to worry about our savings or IRA?
-m.

1) In terms of "things to do", I think the best posts on practices were by akiddoc on the top of page 6 starting with
"As a physician on the front line, I have a few comments"

And 2006alum forwards tips from a molecular biologist about 3/4 of the way down page 15 starting with
"FWIW, congestion is an uncommon COVID-19 symptom."

In particular, I have been taking akiddoc's advice to get tons of sleep to heart -- many of my previous colds and flus came after being sleep deprived.

2)  In terms of supplies, I don't think it's about medical advice. If you have not been to a Costco or Target recently, you are in for a big surprise. About 2 weeks ago, when I went to CostCo, I noticed there was little TP, and no hand sanitizer, no rice, no dry pasta multi-packs, no quinoa, but plenty of everything else, and I have never seen those items in stock again. 1 week ago when I went to Target, on Sunday night the store looked looted but by Tuesday morning around opening it looked well-stocked with almost everything. Yesterday when I went to Target in the morning, it looked looted. Even frozen foods now were running out. 4-packs of TP were in stock, but larger packages of many paper products were out. Regardless of whether all this buying has a rational basis, it is difficult to buy supplies now in the South Bay.

3) In terms of the stock market, I mean, who knows. One of my degrees in Economics and I've been watching the markets and frequently texting an ibanker friend, and I have felt the markets were crazy not adequately factoring in the virus a couple of weeks ago. From my perspective, I think the market is getting close to reflecting to the relative upside to the relative downside -- which is not to say I don't think the markets won't move -- I think it's getting closer to where it's 50/50 that the S&P 500 could go up 1,000 in 2 years and could go down 1,000.  But I wouldn't panic sell in these markets. I think it's unlikely that this will be a zombie apocalypse where the world enters a global recession for 10 years. If your horizon until retirement is more than 10 years, I would't recommend selling now, but, for example, if you felt your portfolio was weighted too heavily toward stocks and international stocks, you could specify your future contributions for the next year to go more toward lower-risk investments. From an investment perspective, separate from the tragic human toll, even if the US is capable of keeping US deaths to under 10,000, I would be happily surprised if there aren't MANY cases like Italy's (or worse -- like Iran's) in the next year or so. A leadership role by the US to stem this crisis, along with a generosity by the US people to help poorer nations for the good of the world could help reduce the tragic global impact, but unfortunately, I do not think this is coming, so I'd think there's >50% chance the virus will rage across the world for the next year+ . I have been keeping some funds on the sidelines looking for a buy opportunity, and I do not think that time has yet come.

BTW, I don't get why people are stocking up on food and water so much. It's always handy to have some water in case of an earthquake, but I'm not aware of anyplace in the world hit by the virus where people could no longer get water by simply turning a faucet. I could see having several week's supply of food especially if one has a family to care for, but I can't even fathom a scenario where people in CA need to stock up on more than 8 weeks of food or a year of TP. Last I checked, CA produces more than half of the fresh produce for North America and was the #1 producer of even beef. It might get difficult to get food for a brief while during a lock down if transportation is restricted, but I expect there will be plenty of fresh food in California. (In the US, I could see more significant short-term disruptions in places like Hawaii or Alaska). If 99-99.9% of people under 50 survive, there will be plenty of people to pick crops and keep the water running.

[Snorlax94]

I wonder if there are some of you who would be prepared to provide a summary of things to do or think about as we go about our daily lives. Some of you are doctors or researchers that can provide some tips.Anything I should be worried about the store running out of (as of yet, we have not joined the CostCo swarm)? And, as I asked before, do I need to worry about our savings or IRA?
-m.

1) In terms of "things to do", I think the best posts on practices were by akiddoc on the top of page 6 starting with
"As a physician on the front line, I have a few comments"

And 2006alum forwards tips from a molecular biologist about 3/4 of the way down page 15 starting with
"FWIW, congestion is an uncommon COVID-19 symptom."

In particular, I have been taking akiddoc's advice to get tons of sleep to heart -- many of my previous colds and flus came after being sleep deprived.

2)  In terms of supplies, I don't think it's about medical advice. If you have not been to a Costco or Target recently, you are in for a big surprise. About 2 weeks ago, when I went to CostCo, I noticed there was little TP, and no hand sanitizer, no rice, no dry pasta multi-packs, no quinoa, but plenty of everything else, and I have never seen those items in stock again. 1 week ago when I went to Target, on Sunday night the store looked looted but by Tuesday morning around opening it looked well-stocked with almost everything. Yesterday when I went to Target in the morning, it looked looted. Even frozen foods now were running out. 4-packs of TP were in stock, but larger packages of many paper products were out. Regardless of whether all this buying has a rational basis, it is difficult to buy supplies now in the South Bay.

3) In terms of the stock market, I mean, who knows. One of my degrees in Economics and I've been watching the markets and frequently texting an ibanker friend, and I have felt the markets were crazy not adequately factoring in the virus a couple of weeks ago. From my perspective, I think the market is getting close to reflecting to the relative upside to the relative downside -- which is not to say I don't think the markets won't move -- I think it's getting closer to where it's 50/50 that the S&P 500 could go up 1,000 in 2 years and could go down 1,000.  But I wouldn't panic sell in these markets. I think it's unlikely that this will be a zombie apocalypse where the world enters a global recession for 10 years. If your horizon until retirement is more than 10 years, I would't recommend selling now, but, for example, if you felt your portfolio was weighted too heavily toward stocks and international stocks, you could specify your future contributions for the next year to go more toward lower-risk investments. From an investment perspective, separate from the tragic human toll, even if the US is capable of keeping US deaths to under 10,000, I would be happily surprised if there aren't MANY cases like Italy's (or worse -- like Iran's) in the next year or so. A leadership role by the US to stem this crisis, along with a generosity by the US people to help poorer nations for the good of the world could help reduce the tragic global impact, but unfortunately, I do not think this is coming, so I'd think there's >50% chance the virus will rage across the world for the next year+ . I have been keeping some funds on the sidelines looking for a buy opportunity, and I do not think that time has yet come.

BTW, I don't get why people are stocking up on food and water so much. It's always handy to have some water in case of an earthquake, but I'm not aware of anyplace in the world hit by the virus where people could no longer get water by simply turning a faucet. I could see having several week's supply of food especially if one has a family to care for, but I can't even fathom a scenario where people in CA need to stock up on more than 8 weeks of food or a year of TP. Last I checked, CA produces more than half of the fresh produce for North America and was the #1 producer of even beef. It might get difficult to get food for a brief while during a lock down if transportation is restricted, but I expect there will be plenty of fresh food in California. (In the US, I could see more significant short-term disruptions in places like Hawaii or Alaska). If 99-99.9% of people under 50 survive, there will be plenty of people to pick crops and keep the water running.

[M T]

I wonder if there are some of you who would be prepared to provide a summary of things to do or think about as we go about our daily lives. Some of you are doctors or researchers that can provide some tips. I know I need to wash my hands and avoid large gatherings; anything else? Anything I should keep on-hand as I go places? Anything I should be worried about the store running out of (as of yet, we have not joined the CostCo swarm)? And, as I asked before, do I need to worry about our savings or IRA?

I assess my risk as about 20% for death if I get the disease.   My one, overriding necessity is to not get sick.  At the very least, I want to duck under the wave of illness that is currently rising.   My concerns & effort & inconvenience is much higher than someone in your position.

Except for a few required instances, I am not going anywhere.   I am working from home only.  Groceries were delivered to my house, and I thoroughly disinfected them.  US mail or any delivery (and the mail box) is treated as potential infection sources (I don't put them on shared or eating surfaces; I wash my hands after handling them).  We have a gardener, and I am conscious of what he might touch that could potentially have virus from him.  No one is going to come in my house.  When I have gone out in public and come home, my shoes are left at the door, my clothes into the washer, and me into the shower.   If I'm out I have a mask & gloves & disinfectant wipes with me, if I feel I need them.

For someone in their 30s or younger, I don't think you stand much risk other than an illness.  Just don't interact with any 50+.  Call, don't visit, the grandparents.  Do their shopping for them, but leave the items on the doorstep (or at least take off your shoes) and remind them to clean them off and then wash their hands.   For their own good, don't hug them.    If you're under 30 and don't have contact with 50+, don't hoard.  You don't need 10 sets of disinfectant wipes.    if you might be sick, don't go out in public.

If your kids are cared by older people, find a different solution.

One of the problems with the numbers we have seen is a lack of information about age versus seriousness of the disease.  For instance, what is the rate of a serious case of the illness for under-40 per case.  If that were less than 1% (as deaths are), then it doesn't much matter public-health-wise if you get sick.  The critical thing for you is not to expose the 50+ people.
[See my post a few posts later where I give some numbers]

I am not a physician.  These are just my opinions.

[M T]

I wonder if there are some of you who would be prepared to provide a summary of things to do or think about as we go about our daily lives. Some of you are doctors or researchers that can provide some tips. I know I need to wash my hands and avoid large gatherings; anything else? Anything I should keep on-hand as I go places? Anything I should be worried about the store running out of (as of yet, we have not joined the CostCo swarm)? And, as I asked before, do I need to worry about our savings or IRA?

I assess my risk as about 20% for death if I get the disease.   My one, overriding necessity is to not get sick.  At the very least, I want to duck under the wave of illness that is currently rising.   My concerns & effort & inconvenience is much higher than someone in your position.

Except for a few required instances, I am not going anywhere.   I am working from home only.  Groceries were delivered to my house, and I thoroughly disinfected them.  US mail or any delivery (and the mail box) is treated as potential infection sources (I don't put them on shared or eating surfaces; I wash my hands after handling them).  We have a gardener, and I am conscious of what he might touch that could potentially have virus from him.  No one is going to come in my house.  When I have gone out in public and come home, my shoes are left at the door, my clothes into the washer, and me into the shower.   If I'm out I have a mask & gloves & disinfectant wipes with me, if I feel I need them.

For someone in their 30s or younger, I don't think you stand much risk other than an illness.  Just don't interact with any 50+.  Call, don't visit, the grandparents.  Do their shopping for them, but leave the items on the doorstep (or at least take off your shoes) and remind them to clean them off and then wash their hands.   For their own good, don't hug them.    If you're under 30 and don't have contact with 50+, don't hoard.  You don't need 10 sets of disinfectant wipes.    if you might be sick, don't go out in public.

If your kids are cared by older people, find a different solution.

One of the problems with the numbers we have seen is a lack of information about age versus seriousness of the disease.  For instance, what is the rate of a serious case of the illness for under-40 per case.  If that were less than 1% (as deaths are), then it doesn't much matter public-health-wise if you get sick.  The critical thing for you is not to expose the 50+ people.
[See my post a few posts later where I give some numbers]

I am not a physician.  These are just my opinions.

[cardcrimson]

Stockpile non-perishable sources of fruits and vegetables: It's one thing to have lots of cans of beans, bags of rice, and bottles of water. But that's not complete nutrition. In the event of widespread supply shortages, shelf-stable canned fruits and vegetables (or soups) and frozen fruits and vegetables can take you a long way to complete nutrition if you need to cook in for several weeks. Same with frozen meats and fruit juices.

Helpful, thanks. 

Out of curiosity, what about fresh fruit and veggies? Anyone concerned that the produce section at your local Safeway could be like the meat market in Wuhan? How would one clean a carrot, not very tasty to use a Clorox wipe?

[cardcrimson]

Stockpile non-perishable sources of fruits and vegetables: It's one thing to have lots of cans of beans, bags of rice, and bottles of water. But that's not complete nutrition. In the event of widespread supply shortages, shelf-stable canned fruits and vegetables (or soups) and frozen fruits and vegetables can take you a long way to complete nutrition if you need to cook in for several weeks. Same with frozen meats and fruit juices.

Helpful, thanks. 

Out of curiosity, what about fresh fruit and veggies? Anyone concerned that the produce section at your local Safeway could be like the meat market in Wuhan? How would one clean a carrot, not very tasty to use a Clorox wipe?