[teejers1]

All bets became off for me after hearing about Von Miller getting infected. He was interviewed and said he was absolutely staying inside his house with the exception of going out for food maybe 4 times over the last month.  He said he took every precaution and still ended up with this coronavirus.  

The CDC's own website says the virus can spread in the air as far as 13 feet. Face coverings take that down considerably.

Von Miller also said his symptoms were "a little cough" and he "is not uncomfortable."  The report on Miller is hardly "jarring" (as the ESPN interviewer termed it, and if you only read the article you'd never know that Miller is fine).  And I find it as likely that he contracted it through expected channels (i.e., he may have forgotten or downplayed an interaction) as he was hit by a 6+ foot passerby tossing air in his general direction.  

But go ahead and wear a mask at all times when outside.  That's certainly your prerogative.

BTW, does wearing a mask more often require you to purchase more of them, or can one mask last for weeks/months/forever?

[teejers1]

All bets became off for me after hearing about Von Miller getting infected. He was interviewed and said he was absolutely staying inside his house with the exception of going out for food maybe 4 times over the last month.  He said he took every precaution and still ended up with this coronavirus.  

The CDC's own website says the virus can spread in the air as far as 13 feet. Face coverings take that down considerably.

Von Miller also said his symptoms were "a little cough" and he "is not uncomfortable."  The report on Miller is hardly "jarring" (as the ESPN interviewer termed it, and if you only read the article you'd never know that Miller is fine).  And I find it as likely that he contracted it through expected channels (i.e., he may have forgotten or downplayed an interaction) as he was hit by a 6+ foot passerby tossing air in his general direction.  

But go ahead and wear a mask at all times when outside.  That's certainly your prerogative.

BTW, does wearing a mask more often require you to purchase more of them, or can one mask last for weeks/months/forever?

[oregontim]

BTW, does wearing a mask more often require you to purchase more of them, or can one mask last for weeks/months/forever?

My daughter has a pack of n95 masks she bought last summer for gardening. The instructions on the package say they are safe for re-use after 5 days wait.

[oregontim]

BTW, does wearing a mask more often require you to purchase more of them, or can one mask last for weeks/months/forever?

My daughter has a pack of n95 masks she bought last summer for gardening. The instructions on the package say they are safe for re-use after 5 days wait.

[BostonCard]

Generally the reason to wear a mask outside of a healthcare setting is to protect other people rather than yourself.  If you are infectious but presymptomatic/asymptomatic the mask will reduce the amount of droplets and aerosols you give off.

I don't think it is clear that the mask will protect the wearer unless used properly (most that I've seen out and about are not) and in conjunction with other protection measures (frequent hand washing).

BC

[BostonCard]

Generally the reason to wear a mask outside of a healthcare setting is to protect other people rather than yourself.  If you are infectious but presymptomatic/asymptomatic the mask will reduce the amount of droplets and aerosols you give off.

I don't think it is clear that the mask will protect the wearer unless used properly (most that I've seen out and about are not) and in conjunction with other protection measures (frequent hand washing).

BC

[magnus]

BTW, does wearing a mask more often require you to purchase more of them, or can one mask last for weeks/months/forever?

My daughter has a pack of n95 masks she bought last summer for gardening. The instructions on the package say they are safe for re-use after 5 days wait.

@teejers, I think the masks that OF is talking about are homemade cloth ones.  Those are likely washable.  
In general, you probably don't want to wear the same mask for too long as even the best ones will degrade over time, not to mention get really raunchy if you put them on right after you had some odoriferous (garlicky?) meal.  

It sounds like all the official hospital specs (1 time use only) for N95s and surgical masks are getting thrown out the window in these lean times.  But that 1 time use only is in a healthcare setting so it might be more lax for everyone else (as oregontime wrote).

[magnus]

BTW, does wearing a mask more often require you to purchase more of them, or can one mask last for weeks/months/forever?

My daughter has a pack of n95 masks she bought last summer for gardening. The instructions on the package say they are safe for re-use after 5 days wait.

@teejers, I think the masks that OF is talking about are homemade cloth ones.  Those are likely washable.  
In general, you probably don't want to wear the same mask for too long as even the best ones will degrade over time, not to mention get really raunchy if you put them on right after you had some odoriferous (garlicky?) meal.  

It sounds like all the official hospital specs (1 time use only) for N95s and surgical masks are getting thrown out the window in these lean times.  But that 1 time use only is in a healthcare setting so it might be more lax for everyone else (as oregontime wrote).

[OutsiderFan]

If Von Miller wasn't telling the truth, that is quite unfortunate. We simply can't tolerate misinformation when trying to figure out something so serious.

As for masks and face coverings...

BC's point is spot on. Face coverings aren't to protect the one wearing from getting infected. It is to protect others who may be carrying the virus from spreading it to others.

My face covering regime:

- I have 2 surgical masks 
- I have two cutoff Cotton T-shirt sleeves
- When walking around neighborhood I wear a sleeve only, and alternate them every day
- When I go to store, I put on a surgical mask and then the sleeve covering over the top of it
- I wash the sleeves on Sundays

Have a feeling I'll be expanding my collection with some more made for the job ones like this:
https://stringking.com/ppe/face-masks/cloth-face-mask/

[OutsiderFan]

If Von Miller wasn't telling the truth, that is quite unfortunate. We simply can't tolerate misinformation when trying to figure out something so serious.

As for masks and face coverings...

BC's point is spot on. Face coverings aren't to protect the one wearing from getting infected. It is to protect others who may be carrying the virus from spreading it to others.

My face covering regime:

- I have 2 surgical masks 
- I have two cutoff Cotton T-shirt sleeves
- When walking around neighborhood I wear a sleeve only, and alternate them every day
- When I go to store, I put on a surgical mask and then the sleeve covering over the top of it
- I wash the sleeves on Sundays

Have a feeling I'll be expanding my collection with some more made for the job ones like this:
https://stringking.com/ppe/face-masks/cloth-face-mask/

[akiddoc]

All bets became off for me after hearing about Von Miller getting infected. He was interviewed and said he was absolutely staying inside his house with the exception of going out for food maybe 4 times over the last month.  He said he took every precaution and still ended up with this coronavirus.  

The CDC's own website says the virus can spread in the air as far as 13 feet. Face coverings take that down considerably.

Miller was lying. He got a tattoo like a week earlier, and in a video from it there were a bunch of people in his house. Maybe it's true that he never left, but he definitely had people coming in.

Miller admitted that people came over to his house. I don't think everyone really understands that social distancing means no visitors at all.

[akiddoc]

All bets became off for me after hearing about Von Miller getting infected. He was interviewed and said he was absolutely staying inside his house with the exception of going out for food maybe 4 times over the last month.  He said he took every precaution and still ended up with this coronavirus.  

The CDC's own website says the virus can spread in the air as far as 13 feet. Face coverings take that down considerably.

Miller was lying. He got a tattoo like a week earlier, and in a video from it there were a bunch of people in his house. Maybe it's true that he never left, but he definitely had people coming in.

Miller admitted that people came over to his house. I don't think everyone really understands that social distancing means no visitors at all.

[Goose]

Miller admitted that people came over to his house. I don't think everyone really understands that social distancing means no visitors at all.

I think they understand it. However, it has been a long time since our society was "rules based". Most people seem to believe that they get to decide on a case-by-case basis and a moment-to-moment basis whether a given"rule" really applies to them. The idea that ones personnel opinion just doesn't matter and you do what you are told just doesn't resonate.

[Goose]

Miller admitted that people came over to his house. I don't think everyone really understands that social distancing means no visitors at all.

I think they understand it. However, it has been a long time since our society was "rules based". Most people seem to believe that they get to decide on a case-by-case basis and a moment-to-moment basis whether a given"rule" really applies to them. The idea that ones personnel opinion just doesn't matter and you do what you are told just doesn't resonate.

[teejers1]

Miller admitted that people came over to his house. I don't think everyone really understands that social distancing means no visitors at all.

I think they understand it. However, it has been a long time since our society was "rules based". Most people seem to believe that they get to decide on a case-by-case basis and a moment-to-moment basis whether a given"rule" really applies to them. The idea that ones personnel opinion just doesn't matter and you do what you are told just doesn't resonate.

I'm still waiting for someone to report on the harm caused by Miller contracting the disease.  As far as I can tell, it's a net good thing.  He is fine, and check one person off for future "herd immunity" to the extent there is any down the road.  

And remember the party Dak Prescott threw?  I just can't get that worked up about younger adults knowingly taking that risk.  Does it increase the overall risk of virus spread?  Yes.  Has there been any reporting to this effect?  Is the Dallas area a hot spot where slight upticks in infections can overrun hospitals?  Haven't seen anything to that effect, either.

And hypothetically, let's just say 5 people got it at the party - had some symptoms but didn't require hospitalization - and didn't spread it beyond that (most of invitees were single adults, at least that's my impression).  Again, that's a societal net positive . . . isn't it?

[teejers1]

Miller admitted that people came over to his house. I don't think everyone really understands that social distancing means no visitors at all.

I think they understand it. However, it has been a long time since our society was "rules based". Most people seem to believe that they get to decide on a case-by-case basis and a moment-to-moment basis whether a given"rule" really applies to them. The idea that ones personnel opinion just doesn't matter and you do what you are told just doesn't resonate.

I'm still waiting for someone to report on the harm caused by Miller contracting the disease.  As far as I can tell, it's a net good thing.  He is fine, and check one person off for future "herd immunity" to the extent there is any down the road.  

And remember the party Dak Prescott threw?  I just can't get that worked up about younger adults knowingly taking that risk.  Does it increase the overall risk of virus spread?  Yes.  Has there been any reporting to this effect?  Is the Dallas area a hot spot where slight upticks in infections can overrun hospitals?  Haven't seen anything to that effect, either.

And hypothetically, let's just say 5 people got it at the party - had some symptoms but didn't require hospitalization - and didn't spread it beyond that (most of invitees were single adults, at least that's my impression).  Again, that's a societal net positive . . . isn't it?

[Leftcoast]

Flouting rules is just as much anti-social behavior and just as dangerous whether you are an anonymous Miami spring-breaker or a rich group of celebrities and athletes, no? I see no relevant difference and fail to see the positive aspect of either.

Why would we condemn the first and give the second a pass?

[Leftcoast]

Flouting rules is just as much anti-social behavior and just as dangerous whether you are an anonymous Miami spring-breaker or a rich group of celebrities and athletes, no? I see no relevant difference and fail to see the positive aspect of either.

Why would we condemn the first and give the second a pass?

[2006alum]

Unless someone knows Miller personally, this feels like some pretty bad thread drift.

[2006alum]

Unless someone knows Miller personally, this feels like some pretty bad thread drift.

[BostonCard]

Moreover, we don't know who, if anyone, Miller infected or who else might have been infected in the party Miller hosted.  Let's say Miller got sick during the party he hosted, and one of his other friends also got sick.  The friend goes home, gets his girlfriend sick, and the girlfriend who cares for his elderly grandmother gets grandma sick.  If grandma dies, is there no harm in Miller contracting the disease?

BC

[BostonCard]

Moreover, we don't know who, if anyone, Miller infected or who else might have been infected in the party Miller hosted.  Let's say Miller got sick during the party he hosted, and one of his other friends also got sick.  The friend goes home, gets his girlfriend sick, and the girlfriend who cares for his elderly grandmother gets grandma sick.  If grandma dies, is there no harm in Miller contracting the disease?

BC

[teejers1]

Moreover, we don't know who, if anyone, Miller infected or who else might have been infected in the party Miller hosted.  Let's say Miller got sick during the party he hosted, and one of his other friends also got sick.  The friend goes home, gets his girlfriend sick, and the girlfriend who cares for his elderly grandmother gets grandma sick.  If grandma dies, is there no harm in Miller contracting the disease?

BC

Yeah, waiting for that predictable (and valid) hypothetical.  (And it was Prescott, not Miller, who allegedly hosted a party).

But here's the deal:  there is ALWAYS going to be risk when we "open up," no matter how much (or little) the dial is turned.  That is a given.  So unless you think we are all going to remain on lockdown until a vaccine is found, then you're going to have to accept some increased risk and the negatives that come with that.

And recall, the whole point of lockdown was to save our hospitals from getting overrun - which supposedly would have its own disastrous economic consequences (in addition to increased deaths).  So it all comes back to that, for me, anyway, when it comes to loosening the reins.  How is Area X doing capacity-wise; how reasonable is the proposed activity (i.e., how likely is it to lead to wildfire run on hospitals?).

That's it.

If the goal and intent is to prevent any "grandmas" from dying . . . well, we might as well all go home.  And stay there.  We can all peek outside again after  vaccine is developed.

[teejers1]

Moreover, we don't know who, if anyone, Miller infected or who else might have been infected in the party Miller hosted.  Let's say Miller got sick during the party he hosted, and one of his other friends also got sick.  The friend goes home, gets his girlfriend sick, and the girlfriend who cares for his elderly grandmother gets grandma sick.  If grandma dies, is there no harm in Miller contracting the disease?

BC

Yeah, waiting for that predictable (and valid) hypothetical.  (And it was Prescott, not Miller, who allegedly hosted a party).

But here's the deal:  there is ALWAYS going to be risk when we "open up," no matter how much (or little) the dial is turned.  That is a given.  So unless you think we are all going to remain on lockdown until a vaccine is found, then you're going to have to accept some increased risk and the negatives that come with that.

And recall, the whole point of lockdown was to save our hospitals from getting overrun - which supposedly would have its own disastrous economic consequences (in addition to increased deaths).  So it all comes back to that, for me, anyway, when it comes to loosening the reins.  How is Area X doing capacity-wise; how reasonable is the proposed activity (i.e., how likely is it to lead to wildfire run on hospitals?).

That's it.

If the goal and intent is to prevent any "grandmas" from dying . . . well, we might as well all go home.  And stay there.  We can all peek outside again after  vaccine is developed.

[BostonCard]

The more transmission chains are interrupted, the faster the case counts can go down and the sooner we can reopen society.  I'm sympathetic to the desire to not make things too onerous (which may cause a backlash), but the more people follow guidelines, the better, and the sooner you can relax restrictions.

BC

[BostonCard]

The more transmission chains are interrupted, the faster the case counts can go down and the sooner we can reopen society.  I'm sympathetic to the desire to not make things too onerous (which may cause a backlash), but the more people follow guidelines, the better, and the sooner you can relax restrictions.

BC

[2006alum]

Again, important debate, but there are probably a half dozen threads better suited to it than this one, which contains some members’ quite personal, sensitive, and apolitical acts of compassion.

[2006alum]

Again, important debate, but there are probably a half dozen threads better suited to it than this one, which contains some members’ quite personal, sensitive, and apolitical acts of compassion.

[Snorlax94]

This is a discussion that fell kind of silent since April but it has suddenly become more relevant.

In just the last two weeks, one of my friends, who is a former executive in the tech industry and lives in an upscale part of SCC, posted on Facebook that his entire family tested positive for Covid. His wife and kids recovered quickly. He said he had a persistent fever -- which I thought was worrisome -- but a few days later he said he was feeling better.

Then just two days ago, I was in touch with my cousin in LA, who revealed she and her husband have Covid. I asked her permission to post her experience(s), because I think it's eye-opening.

I've mentioned on early threads that I feel now is the most dangerous time in California and here in SCC. I really hope people -- rather than feeling burnt out by restrictions -- can now be at the maximum most careful for just a few more months and hopefully the vaccine will distributed and accepted widely. I also think some people felt kind of "safe" because Covid was something that happened to people in other industries and who lived in "other areas." I always felt like that was a pretty cavalier perspective, but now not even that is true anymore. We have been so lax in CA lately that now Covid is everywhere -- spreading across well-educated households with grad degeres, white collar teleworkers, and wealthy, isolated neighborhoods. It shouldn't take that to finally become more cautious, but maybe now all households will support more safety measures.

My cousin from LA's emails:

"LA is crazy. [Spouse] got it from work. 60 out of 200 coworkers got it. The CDC even showed up at one point to find out why they have such a high incidence of infection. He wears masks all the time but there’s only so much a mask can do. He works at <a retailer selling essential goods>. 

[He] first experienced symptoms 12/8 then tested positive 12/10. I started experiencing symptoms 12/12 and tested negative on 12/13. I didn’t get tested again cuz I was feeling so ill and experienced basically all the COVID symptoms. I couldn’t handle the idea of waiting in a long line to get tested a second time. My doctor said there’s no point since I have so the symptoms. 

That’s great that you guys are so safe. 

I almost had to go to the ER because my o2 level kept dipping below 90 again and again. My doctor prescribed me azithromycin and albuterol. It took about 3 days before my o2 level started staying consistently above 90. It really took 7 days of constant bed rest and lots of fluids before I started feeling better. The first 7 days I teleworked which wasn’t a wise idea. I should’ve rested the first 7 days too but I kept working even through my 3 days of fevers. 

We ordered so much delivery! So expensive! I really lost my appetite for awhile too. I couldn’t keep anything down except fruit and raw vegetables. My body couldn’t handle with grease or oil. 

Today is really the first day I am finally feeling normal. I still have this cough which sometimes becomes a coughing fit. 

[Her husband] and I both still have a little big of a cough but per the CDC guidelines we can both go back to work. 

My parents are both very careful. I think it’s cuz they both worked in healthcare that they’re taking this very seriously. My dad basically banned me from their house back in March 2020. When I did visit, it was always through a screen door and I always mask. I remained outside and just dropped stuff off. I started wearing double masks in November cuz I <had a work task that had to be done inside a building>. 

...

2 coworkers got covid and their symptoms were so mild. They each had symptoms that lasted 2 days. Minor headaches and minor fevers. 

Another friend of mine and her husband got Covid. He had bad flu symptoms for 21 days. She had a really bad headache and nausea for 2-3 weeks also. They are both in their 40s, my age

So glad your parents haven’t gotten sick. My parents stopped going to church. Their church stopped going to church. "


[next email]

"I am feeling better but this cough is exhausting. I keep having these coughing fits where i feel like I am coughing out an organ or something. It’s a violent cough. That’s how a coworker described it. 

I am teleworking but not doing that much work cuz I get so tired. 

Covid was worse than I expected. I thought I would only get mild symptoms but last week, I felt like I would rather die than have to endure it anymore. It was a weird pain. It wasn’t sharp but the headache and body aches and this general horrible feeling were very grating, like Chinese water torture. 

"

[Snorlax94]

This is a discussion that fell kind of silent since April but it has suddenly become more relevant.

In just the last two weeks, one of my friends, who is a former executive in the tech industry and lives in an upscale part of SCC, posted on Facebook that his entire family tested positive for Covid. His wife and kids recovered quickly. He said he had a persistent fever -- which I thought was worrisome -- but a few days later he said he was feeling better.

Then just two days ago, I was in touch with my cousin in LA, who revealed she and her husband have Covid. I asked her permission to post her experience(s), because I think it's eye-opening.

I've mentioned on early threads that I feel now is the most dangerous time in California and here in SCC. I really hope people -- rather than feeling burnt out by restrictions -- can now be at the maximum most careful for just a few more months and hopefully the vaccine will distributed and accepted widely. I also think some people felt kind of "safe" because Covid was something that happened to people in other industries and who lived in "other areas." I always felt like that was a pretty cavalier perspective, but now not even that is true anymore. We have been so lax in CA lately that now Covid is everywhere -- spreading across well-educated households with grad degeres, white collar teleworkers, and wealthy, isolated neighborhoods. It shouldn't take that to finally become more cautious, but maybe now all households will support more safety measures.

My cousin from LA's emails:

"LA is crazy. [Spouse] got it from work. 60 out of 200 coworkers got it. The CDC even showed up at one point to find out why they have such a high incidence of infection. He wears masks all the time but there’s only so much a mask can do. He works at <a retailer selling essential goods>. 

[He] first experienced symptoms 12/8 then tested positive 12/10. I started experiencing symptoms 12/12 and tested negative on 12/13. I didn’t get tested again cuz I was feeling so ill and experienced basically all the COVID symptoms. I couldn’t handle the idea of waiting in a long line to get tested a second time. My doctor said there’s no point since I have so the symptoms. 

That’s great that you guys are so safe. 

I almost had to go to the ER because my o2 level kept dipping below 90 again and again. My doctor prescribed me azithromycin and albuterol. It took about 3 days before my o2 level started staying consistently above 90. It really took 7 days of constant bed rest and lots of fluids before I started feeling better. The first 7 days I teleworked which wasn’t a wise idea. I should’ve rested the first 7 days too but I kept working even through my 3 days of fevers. 

We ordered so much delivery! So expensive! I really lost my appetite for awhile too. I couldn’t keep anything down except fruit and raw vegetables. My body couldn’t handle with grease or oil. 

Today is really the first day I am finally feeling normal. I still have this cough which sometimes becomes a coughing fit. 

[Her husband] and I both still have a little big of a cough but per the CDC guidelines we can both go back to work. 

My parents are both very careful. I think it’s cuz they both worked in healthcare that they’re taking this very seriously. My dad basically banned me from their house back in March 2020. When I did visit, it was always through a screen door and I always mask. I remained outside and just dropped stuff off. I started wearing double masks in November cuz I <had a work task that had to be done inside a building>. 

...

2 coworkers got covid and their symptoms were so mild. They each had symptoms that lasted 2 days. Minor headaches and minor fevers. 

Another friend of mine and her husband got Covid. He had bad flu symptoms for 21 days. She had a really bad headache and nausea for 2-3 weeks also. They are both in their 40s, my age

So glad your parents haven’t gotten sick. My parents stopped going to church. Their church stopped going to church. "


[next email]

"I am feeling better but this cough is exhausting. I keep having these coughing fits where i feel like I am coughing out an organ or something. It’s a violent cough. That’s how a coworker described it. 

I am teleworking but not doing that much work cuz I get so tired. 

Covid was worse than I expected. I thought I would only get mild symptoms but last week, I felt like I would rather die than have to endure it anymore. It was a weird pain. It wasn’t sharp but the headache and body aches and this general horrible feeling were very grating, like Chinese water torture. 

"

[M T]

Again, let me emphasize that everyone needs to see their doctor ASAP if they think they have COVID.  There ARE therapeutic drugs.  Why take a gamble whether you will be one of the unlucky ones that winds up in a hospital, on a ventilator, or dead?

Therapeutic drugs are a response to "My doctor said there’s no point [in getting tested] since I have so the symptoms."

Don't wait to get your test back.  By then, it may be too late.
Better yet, decide NOW what you will do if you get COVID.  When you get sick, you'll be rushed & confused & sick.

I believe there are therapeutic drugs outside of trials, but I'm not 100% sure.

Stanford clinical trials for treatment:
  https://racetoacure.stanford.edu/clinical-trials
Stanford clinical trials related to COVID:
  https://med.stanford.edu/covid19/research.html
All clinical trials related to COVID:
  https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/covid_view

[M T]

Again, let me emphasize that everyone needs to see their doctor ASAP if they think they have COVID.  There ARE therapeutic drugs.  Why take a gamble whether you will be one of the unlucky ones that winds up in a hospital, on a ventilator, or dead?

Therapeutic drugs are a response to "My doctor said there’s no point [in getting tested] since I have so the symptoms."

Don't wait to get your test back.  By then, it may be too late.
Better yet, decide NOW what you will do if you get COVID.  When you get sick, you'll be rushed & confused & sick.

I believe there are therapeutic drugs outside of trials, but I'm not 100% sure.

Stanford clinical trials for treatment:
  https://racetoacure.stanford.edu/clinical-trials
Stanford clinical trials related to COVID:
  https://med.stanford.edu/covid19/research.html
All clinical trials related to COVID:
  https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/covid_view

[Snorlax94]

Again, let me emphasize that everyone needs to see their doctor ASAP if they think they have COVID.  There ARE therapeutic drugs.  Why take a gamble whether you will be one of the unlucky ones that winds up in a hospital, on a ventilator, or dead?

Therapeutic drugs are a response to "My doctor said there’s no point [in getting tested] since I have so the symptoms."

Don't wait to get your test back.  By then, it may be too late.
Better yet, decide NOW what you will do if you get COVID.  When you get sick, you'll be rushed & confused & sick.

I believe there are therapeutic drugs outside of trials, but I'm not 100% sure.

Stanford clinical trials for treatment:
  https://racetoacure.stanford.edu/clinical-trials
Stanford clinical trials related to COVID:
  https://med.stanford.edu/covid19/research.html
All clinical trials related to COVID:
  https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/covid_view

Actually, when the friend in Silicon Valley mentioned Covid on Facebook, I messaged him whether he had contacted his physician about getting monoclonal antibodies. He said he DID, but that his physician said his case was mild and it wasn't appropriate. He is a fit person in his 50s, but he had a persistent fever which is supposed to be correlated with poor outcomes. Anyway, last I saw, he said he was improving.

So maybe the advice about therapeutics would fit for someone in their 70s who is obese, or someone in their 80s, but my sense is that doctors won't give them to middle-aged people.

And the kicker is that the scenario of my cousin in LA, who was absolutely miserable, would probably be reported in the statistics as a mild case that resolved itself at home. 

And even if people do take therapeutics, it may shorten the duration, it may reduce the risk of a severe case, but it won't necessarily mean it's going to be a walk in the park. And if you participate in a clinical trial, you're flipping a coin as to whether you're just getting saline or a sugar pill.

Sure, yes, I think it's good advice for people to get tested as soon as possible, to have a plan in place, and to be aware of therapeutics. But I also think it's dangerous if people think there are these miracle cures out there that will fix everything. Because I have heard cases of middle aged people being denied EUA therapeutics. And even if you get therapeutics, it may risk the chance of death, but it doesn't reduce it to 0. And even if you got therapeutics and have one of those "mild" cases that resolve themselves at home without going in to the ER, it could be absolute misery with long-lasting health detriments. And it's not like my cousin was unaware that she probably should've gone to an ER with a low blood o2. The doctors were telling her NOT to go to the ER in LA probably because when there is no space left in the hospitals, maybe in LA there's no room for people with blood o2 in the mid to high 80s. And I can't imagine a middle aged person who got tested promptly is going to just waltz along and get monoclonal antibodies in LA -- there's not even enough hospital room for severe cases, let alone making space for an EUA prophylactic treatment for a relatively low-risk person with mild symptoms. And the Bay Area is approaching LA-like numbers. Depending on what people did on Christmas, we may already be on our way to an LA-style collapse.  

Again, I was in touch with people who had Covid, and they were in touch with their doctors, and in at least one of those cases, they confirmed they requested EUA therapeutics, but did not get any. I don't discourage anyone from asking -- people should definitely get tested early and should consider inquiring -- I'm just saying people shouldn't expect that they will get some, or that all of those "self-resolving mild cases" are a walk in the park.

[Snorlax94]

Again, let me emphasize that everyone needs to see their doctor ASAP if they think they have COVID.  There ARE therapeutic drugs.  Why take a gamble whether you will be one of the unlucky ones that winds up in a hospital, on a ventilator, or dead?

Therapeutic drugs are a response to "My doctor said there’s no point [in getting tested] since I have so the symptoms."

Don't wait to get your test back.  By then, it may be too late.
Better yet, decide NOW what you will do if you get COVID.  When you get sick, you'll be rushed & confused & sick.

I believe there are therapeutic drugs outside of trials, but I'm not 100% sure.

Stanford clinical trials for treatment:
  https://racetoacure.stanford.edu/clinical-trials
Stanford clinical trials related to COVID:
  https://med.stanford.edu/covid19/research.html
All clinical trials related to COVID:
  https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/covid_view

Actually, when the friend in Silicon Valley mentioned Covid on Facebook, I messaged him whether he had contacted his physician about getting monoclonal antibodies. He said he DID, but that his physician said his case was mild and it wasn't appropriate. He is a fit person in his 50s, but he had a persistent fever which is supposed to be correlated with poor outcomes. Anyway, last I saw, he said he was improving.

So maybe the advice about therapeutics would fit for someone in their 70s who is obese, or someone in their 80s, but my sense is that doctors won't give them to middle-aged people.

And the kicker is that the scenario of my cousin in LA, who was absolutely miserable, would probably be reported in the statistics as a mild case that resolved itself at home. 

And even if people do take therapeutics, it may shorten the duration, it may reduce the risk of a severe case, but it won't necessarily mean it's going to be a walk in the park. And if you participate in a clinical trial, you're flipping a coin as to whether you're just getting saline or a sugar pill.

Sure, yes, I think it's good advice for people to get tested as soon as possible, to have a plan in place, and to be aware of therapeutics. But I also think it's dangerous if people think there are these miracle cures out there that will fix everything. Because I have heard cases of middle aged people being denied EUA therapeutics. And even if you get therapeutics, it may risk the chance of death, but it doesn't reduce it to 0. And even if you got therapeutics and have one of those "mild" cases that resolve themselves at home without going in to the ER, it could be absolute misery with long-lasting health detriments. And it's not like my cousin was unaware that she probably should've gone to an ER with a low blood o2. The doctors were telling her NOT to go to the ER in LA probably because when there is no space left in the hospitals, maybe in LA there's no room for people with blood o2 in the mid to high 80s. And I can't imagine a middle aged person who got tested promptly is going to just waltz along and get monoclonal antibodies in LA -- there's not even enough hospital room for severe cases, let alone making space for an EUA prophylactic treatment for a relatively low-risk person with mild symptoms. And the Bay Area is approaching LA-like numbers. Depending on what people did on Christmas, we may already be on our way to an LA-style collapse.  

Again, I was in touch with people who had Covid, and they were in touch with their doctors, and in at least one of those cases, they confirmed they requested EUA therapeutics, but did not get any. I don't discourage anyone from asking -- people should definitely get tested early and should consider inquiring -- I'm just saying people shouldn't expect that they will get some, or that all of those "self-resolving mild cases" are a walk in the park.

[lex24]

Again, let me emphasize that everyone needs to see their doctor ASAP if they think they have COVID.  There ARE therapeutic drugs.  Why take a gamble whether you will be one of the unlucky ones that winds up in a hospital, on a ventilator, or dead?

Therapeutic drugs are a response to "My doctor said there’s no point [in getting tested] since I have so the symptoms."

Don't wait to get your test back.  By then, it may be too late.
Better yet, decide NOW what you will do if you get COVID.  When you get sick, you'll be rushed & confused & sick.

I believe there are therapeutic drugs outside of trials, but I'm not 100% sure.

Stanford clinical trials for treatment:
  https://racetoacure.stanford.edu/clinical-trials
Stanford clinical trials related to COVID:
  https://med.stanford.edu/covid19/research.html
All clinical trials related to COVID:
  https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/covid_view

Actually, when the friend in Silicon Valley mentioned Covid on Facebook, I messaged him whether he had contacted his physician about getting monoclonal antibodies. He said he DID, but that his physician said his case was mild and it wasn't appropriate. He is a fit person in his 50s, but he had a persistent fever which is supposed to be correlated with poor outcomes. Anyway, last I saw, he said he was improving.

So maybe the advice about therapeutics would fit for someone in their 70s who is obese, or someone in their 80s, but my sense is that doctors won't give them to middle-aged people.

And the kicker is that the scenario of my cousin in LA, who was absolutely miserable, would probably be reported in the statistics as a mild case that resolved itself at home. 

And even if people do take therapeutics, it may shorten the duration, it may reduce the risk of a severe case, but it won't necessarily mean it's going to be a walk in the park. And if you participate in a clinical trial, you're flipping a coin as to whether you're just getting saline or a sugar pill.

Sure, yes, I think it's good advice for people to get tested as soon as possible, to have a plan in place, and to be aware of therapeutics. But I also think it's dangerous if people think there are these miracle cures out there that will fix everything. Because I have heard cases of middle aged people being denied EUA therapeutics. And even if you get therapeutics, it may risk the chance of death, but it doesn't reduce it to 0. And even if you got therapeutics and have one of those "mild" cases that resolve themselves at home without going in to the ER, it could be absolute misery with long-lasting health detriments. And it's not like my cousin was unaware that she probably should've gone to an ER with a low blood o2. The doctors were telling her NOT to go to the ER in LA probably because when there is no space left in the hospitals, maybe in LA there's no room for people with blood o2 in the mid to high 80s. And I can't imagine a middle aged person who got tested promptly is going to just waltz along and get monoclonal antibodies in LA -- there's not even enough hospital room for severe cases, let alone making space for an EUA prophylactic treatment for a relatively low-risk person with mild symptoms. And the Bay Area is approaching LA-like numbers. Depending on what people did on Christmas, we may already be on our way to an LA-style collapse.  

Again, I was in touch with people who had Covid, and they were in touch with their doctors, and in at least one of those cases, they confirmed they requested EUA therapeutics, but did not get any. I don't discourage anyone from asking -- people should definitely get tested early and should consider inquiring -- I'm just saying people shouldn't expect that they will get some, or that all of those "self-resolving mild cases" are a walk in the park.

A little perspective.  If you are under 65, the crude morbidity rate is 0.00020803.  About 21 out of 100,000 have died of Covid.  If you are under 54, the rate drops precipitously.  (0.00009546. About 9.5 out of 100,000).

A bad virus of any kind is not a “walk in the park”. I was sicker than a dog in Nov 2019.  104 fever.  Chills. Aches. Cough. For several days. Sickest I had been in decades. Even went on advice from advice nurse (hence the name!) to an Urgent Care facility. Dr tested for flu and X-rayed for pneumonia.  Nope. Dr said - you just have a virus.  Not sure what.   Hmmm. (Too early) Took me about three weeks to feel completely “normal”.

I don’t for a second underplay the severity of this virus. Not in the least.  But I also look beyond the “scoreboard “ that CNN and others prop up constantly. So, to put it another way, I “respect” this virus.  But I don’t fear it.  Mostly, if I do get it, I don’t want to give it to anyone. Confident at 62 and relatively healthy, that if I get it, I’ll eventually be fine.  If I’m wrong so be it.  There’s always potentially a truck with my name on it anyway.

[lex24]

Again, let me emphasize that everyone needs to see their doctor ASAP if they think they have COVID.  There ARE therapeutic drugs.  Why take a gamble whether you will be one of the unlucky ones that winds up in a hospital, on a ventilator, or dead?

Therapeutic drugs are a response to "My doctor said there’s no point [in getting tested] since I have so the symptoms."

Don't wait to get your test back.  By then, it may be too late.
Better yet, decide NOW what you will do if you get COVID.  When you get sick, you'll be rushed & confused & sick.

I believe there are therapeutic drugs outside of trials, but I'm not 100% sure.

Stanford clinical trials for treatment:
  https://racetoacure.stanford.edu/clinical-trials
Stanford clinical trials related to COVID:
  https://med.stanford.edu/covid19/research.html
All clinical trials related to COVID:
  https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/covid_view

Actually, when the friend in Silicon Valley mentioned Covid on Facebook, I messaged him whether he had contacted his physician about getting monoclonal antibodies. He said he DID, but that his physician said his case was mild and it wasn't appropriate. He is a fit person in his 50s, but he had a persistent fever which is supposed to be correlated with poor outcomes. Anyway, last I saw, he said he was improving.

So maybe the advice about therapeutics would fit for someone in their 70s who is obese, or someone in their 80s, but my sense is that doctors won't give them to middle-aged people.

And the kicker is that the scenario of my cousin in LA, who was absolutely miserable, would probably be reported in the statistics as a mild case that resolved itself at home. 

And even if people do take therapeutics, it may shorten the duration, it may reduce the risk of a severe case, but it won't necessarily mean it's going to be a walk in the park. And if you participate in a clinical trial, you're flipping a coin as to whether you're just getting saline or a sugar pill.

Sure, yes, I think it's good advice for people to get tested as soon as possible, to have a plan in place, and to be aware of therapeutics. But I also think it's dangerous if people think there are these miracle cures out there that will fix everything. Because I have heard cases of middle aged people being denied EUA therapeutics. And even if you get therapeutics, it may risk the chance of death, but it doesn't reduce it to 0. And even if you got therapeutics and have one of those "mild" cases that resolve themselves at home without going in to the ER, it could be absolute misery with long-lasting health detriments. And it's not like my cousin was unaware that she probably should've gone to an ER with a low blood o2. The doctors were telling her NOT to go to the ER in LA probably because when there is no space left in the hospitals, maybe in LA there's no room for people with blood o2 in the mid to high 80s. And I can't imagine a middle aged person who got tested promptly is going to just waltz along and get monoclonal antibodies in LA -- there's not even enough hospital room for severe cases, let alone making space for an EUA prophylactic treatment for a relatively low-risk person with mild symptoms. And the Bay Area is approaching LA-like numbers. Depending on what people did on Christmas, we may already be on our way to an LA-style collapse.  

Again, I was in touch with people who had Covid, and they were in touch with their doctors, and in at least one of those cases, they confirmed they requested EUA therapeutics, but did not get any. I don't discourage anyone from asking -- people should definitely get tested early and should consider inquiring -- I'm just saying people shouldn't expect that they will get some, or that all of those "self-resolving mild cases" are a walk in the park.

A little perspective.  If you are under 65, the crude morbidity rate is 0.00020803.  About 21 out of 100,000 have died of Covid.  If you are under 54, the rate drops precipitously.  (0.00009546. About 9.5 out of 100,000).

A bad virus of any kind is not a “walk in the park”. I was sicker than a dog in Nov 2019.  104 fever.  Chills. Aches. Cough. For several days. Sickest I had been in decades. Even went on advice from advice nurse (hence the name!) to an Urgent Care facility. Dr tested for flu and X-rayed for pneumonia.  Nope. Dr said - you just have a virus.  Not sure what.   Hmmm. (Too early) Took me about three weeks to feel completely “normal”.

I don’t for a second underplay the severity of this virus. Not in the least.  But I also look beyond the “scoreboard “ that CNN and others prop up constantly. So, to put it another way, I “respect” this virus.  But I don’t fear it.  Mostly, if I do get it, I don’t want to give it to anyone. Confident at 62 and relatively healthy, that if I get it, I’ll eventually be fine.  If I’m wrong so be it.  There’s always potentially a truck with my name on it anyway.

[akiddoc]

Don't expect your doctor to see you in person. We're generally going to do this over the phone or with a video visit. I've probably seen 5 or 6 cases in person and close to 100 over the phone. That's just too many exposures for in person visits.

When I needed a quick test my physician met me in his parking lot and handed me 3 antigen tests to do at home. I still have 2 just in case. Hope to be vaccinated next week. 

It's really too bad the board is going down. I would have liked to hear how the vaccine availability went for people on here. 

[akiddoc]

Don't expect your doctor to see you in person. We're generally going to do this over the phone or with a video visit. I've probably seen 5 or 6 cases in person and close to 100 over the phone. That's just too many exposures for in person visits.

When I needed a quick test my physician met me in his parking lot and handed me 3 antigen tests to do at home. I still have 2 just in case. Hope to be vaccinated next week. 

It's really too bad the board is going down. I would have liked to hear how the vaccine availability went for people on here. 

[M T]

A little perspective.  If you are under 65, the crude morbidity rate is 0.00020803.  About 21 out of 100,000 have died of Covid.  If you are under 54, the rate drops precipitously.  (0.00009546. About 9.5 out of 100,000).

Your perspective is badly distorted.  Anyone, including yourself, who blindly accepts that as their chance is basing their opinion on inaccurate information.  Based solely on your age which you mentioned, YOUR chance of dying if you get a positive COVID result is more than 50x the crude morbidity rate you quoted.

The rate you quoted is valid only if you don't know the age of someone other than that they are under 65.   But everyone knows their age, so those numbers are not applicable to them.  Those numbers aren't accurate for an 18yo nor for a 64yo.

If one includes all the 50yo, 51yo, ... 64yo in the US, their combined CFR is 1.18% (34K died out of 2.8M confirmed, or 1180 out of 100K).  For the 65-74yo group, the CFR is 4.54%.   The 64yo's chance of dying, based purely on age alone, is somewhere between those two numbers.    If the 64yo doesn't have any comorbidities (44% of the all-ages US population - I expect much smaller for 64yo), then his/her chance of dying is less.  If the 64yo is in the majority and has comorbidities, then his/her chance is higher. 

Per the SSA, in 2016, the chance of a 64yo male dying in a year was about 1.5% (0.9% for female), whether by truck or whatever.  So, if a 64yo male gets COVID, his chance of dying increases to between 0.0118 + (0.9882 * 0.015) = 0.0266  and 0.0454 + (0.9546 * 0.015) = 0.0597.  (Computing this for females is left as an exercise for the reader.)

If a 64yo male gets diagnosed with COVID, his chance of dying in the next year has increased by between 77% and 398% (again, based on age alone).

I don't know the effect upon survival of any therapeutic for any class of cases.  But, for purposes of illustration, I'll use an arbitrary effectiveness that is easy to calculate:
If a therapeutic would halve the 64yo's chance of dying from COVID and he can get and will take that therapeutic drug, his chance of dying in the next year is between 0.0208 and 0.0374, or has increased by between 39% and 249%.   That's significantly down from what it was if he doesn't take the therapeutic. 

---

By the way, it appears that the chance of your dying by being hit by a truck in the coming year is less than the probability of being killed as a pedestrian by truck, car, bus, or motorcycle, which is about 1/(541*75).    That's very small compared to even the crude morbidity rates you quoted.  Just the same, please do look both ways before stepping out where trucks might venture.

I hope you remain healthy, but if COVID catches you, please do reconsider taking the therapeutics.

[M T]

A little perspective.  If you are under 65, the crude morbidity rate is 0.00020803.  About 21 out of 100,000 have died of Covid.  If you are under 54, the rate drops precipitously.  (0.00009546. About 9.5 out of 100,000).

Your perspective is badly distorted.  Anyone, including yourself, who blindly accepts that as their chance is basing their opinion on inaccurate information.  Based solely on your age which you mentioned, YOUR chance of dying if you get a positive COVID result is more than 50x the crude morbidity rate you quoted.

The rate you quoted is valid only if you don't know the age of someone other than that they are under 65.   But everyone knows their age, so those numbers are not applicable to them.  Those numbers aren't accurate for an 18yo nor for a 64yo.

If one includes all the 50yo, 51yo, ... 64yo in the US, their combined CFR is 1.18% (34K died out of 2.8M confirmed, or 1180 out of 100K).  For the 65-74yo group, the CFR is 4.54%.   The 64yo's chance of dying, based purely on age alone, is somewhere between those two numbers.    If the 64yo doesn't have any comorbidities (44% of the all-ages US population - I expect much smaller for 64yo), then his/her chance of dying is less.  If the 64yo is in the majority and has comorbidities, then his/her chance is higher. 

Per the SSA, in 2016, the chance of a 64yo male dying in a year was about 1.5% (0.9% for female), whether by truck or whatever.  So, if a 64yo male gets COVID, his chance of dying increases to between 0.0118 + (0.9882 * 0.015) = 0.0266  and 0.0454 + (0.9546 * 0.015) = 0.0597.  (Computing this for females is left as an exercise for the reader.)

If a 64yo male gets diagnosed with COVID, his chance of dying in the next year has increased by between 77% and 398% (again, based on age alone).

I don't know the effect upon survival of any therapeutic for any class of cases.  But, for purposes of illustration, I'll use an arbitrary effectiveness that is easy to calculate:
If a therapeutic would halve the 64yo's chance of dying from COVID and he can get and will take that therapeutic drug, his chance of dying in the next year is between 0.0208 and 0.0374, or has increased by between 39% and 249%.   That's significantly down from what it was if he doesn't take the therapeutic. 

---

By the way, it appears that the chance of your dying by being hit by a truck in the coming year is less than the probability of being killed as a pedestrian by truck, car, bus, or motorcycle, which is about 1/(541*75).    That's very small compared to even the crude morbidity rates you quoted.  Just the same, please do look both ways before stepping out where trucks might venture.

I hope you remain healthy, but if COVID catches you, please do reconsider taking the therapeutics.