Ugh.
But almost all NYC residents ride public transport and move in really crowded spaces (across all socioeconomic classes). Because Covid was spreading undetected in NYC in Feb and early March, the population was infected across the board. Its a different situation in SF since that is not the same situation - 1) infection rates were generally lower overall (spread didnât happen as widely) 2) most of the population doesnât ride public transport - especially from middle socioeconomic class up.
As an example - the CEO of my division rides Metro North every day from Grand Central to his multi-million dollar home in Connecticut, as do 99% of the white collar employees that work in my financial services company (ride various public transport, not necessarily Metro North). I doubt there are very few CEOs in SF that are riding BART or taking buses to get to work.
So the antibody tests in NYC are reflective of the more âgeneral populationâ spread that happened in NYC - caused by transportation density.
Use of BART and other public transit was heavy in SF before the virus and work-from-home, even among higher income workers.
Med school lad was showing me something he got in last night. It said that the west coast and China have the same strain of Covid and the northeast and Europe have the same strain.
I donât recall this morning if it was a sure thing or a proposed thing and heâs not awake yet to ask. (He stays up late to study and gets up later.)
It made sense to me last night as to why weâre seeing the numbers weâre seeing and I know it was proposed before that they could be different strains with Europe/Northeast getting the more deadly one. Does anyone know if itâs proven?
@Creekland - might not be a deadlier strain but the European strain was entering via NY/NJ airports for weeks and transmitting in a very dense area before detection.
Interesting. Iâm glad theyâre testing the vaccines in NY. (At least one is being tested there.)
Itâll be interesting to see if the more transmittable strain is also more deadly or if the rates end up being the same.
About a third of all trips in San Francisco are made by public transit, if you donât count walking as a trip. (If you do count walking, a quarter are walking and a quarter are public transit.) So, a lot of San Francisco residents use public transit. The MUNI bus system is pretty good actually.
Working on antibodies to coronavirus from llamas https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2020/05/200501184301.htm
More on ivermectin, adding it to the cocktail of hydroxychloraquine, azithromycin, and zinc: https://www.nbcmiami.com/news/local/local-doctor-tries-new-coronavirus-drug-treatment/2219465/ (There are more studies on ivermectin underway besides the Indian one I posted upthread, e.g. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04374019?term=ivermectin&cond=covid&draw=2&rank=6)
Agree that almost all CT residents who work in NYC ride the Metro North in from my town and all neighboring ones, but they all stopped doing so the week of March 9th. The train station parking lot was very empty when I picked my NYC-escapee son up at the end of the week. (Some doctors will drive in due to their hours, or the handful of truly wealthy are driven in.)
I also agree that the virus was running rampant throughout the NY metro area prior to March 13th, but transmission that occurred after offices closed was less likely among white collar office workers, as they were SIP, ordering food deliveries via Instacart, etc. My point was that the self-selection of the tested population had to have resulted in skewed outcomes.
So you think that the 19.6% confirmed in NYC via the grocery store shoppers and employees tested may skew higher because the employees are more likely to have had it via their jobs and the customers are more likely to have had it because there may be alot of families where the âshopperâ is a recovered Covid + or a lower socioeconomic person who canât afford instacart, etc.? That makes sense.
I wish they had found a way to get an even more random base of people to test for antibodies.
If one reads the big CV thread the majority of people on it, appear to me, to be constantly going to the supermarket. Many more than those of us doing curbside pickup or delivery. Not only are they going to the market, but they are going to Home Depot and other types of stores constantly - or so it seems to me.
And the people on this thread and CC in general donât skew towards lower socioeconomic people.
In the San Francisco Mission District testing I mentioned upthread, they just attempted to test everyone. They ended up testing 55% of the census tract, which isnât everyone but which is a lot.
Yes! Exactly. Sorry if I was unclear before.
As to a more random testing baseâŠyes, but of course, if testers had gone door to door, they would have encountered people who refused to open their doors. No easy approach in our country.
Having said that, who even knows if antibody tests are accurate or if the antibodies confer immunity. So darn many questions.
Beating the ivermectin drum again, I donât know why I havenât seen this study more widely discussed; I only noticed it this morning. Not easy to find. This study included >700 treated patients and >700 controls. (My cynical side considers that itâs a cheap and easily available drug.)
Exciting news, the professor in the article is a close friend of ours, he and his wife were in our wedding 22 years ago.
He and his team at Northwestern University developed a device that senses the nature, duration and time of coughs, checking for the onset and progression of COVID-19.
https://www.cnet.com/health/new-sensor-you-stick-on-your-chest-can-detect-covid-19/
These results do look promising. One huge plus of ivermectin is that itâs available in an oral formulation too (unlike remdesivir, or the IL-6s)
The ivermectin study looks promising. It wasnât blinded, though. Hopefully a blinded study will follow.
Thanks for pointing out the ivermectin info, @evergreen5 .
I thought the article below was a good explanation for non-scientists about how hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin could work in concert to stop SARS-CoV-2. HCQ could act as a first-level barrier, interfering with the virus binding to host cells. Then, if some virus does bind, ivermectin could stop it from replicating. There are plenty of trials going on both drugs, but I donât know if any are trying them together.
https://www.trialsitenews.com/university-of-naples-federico-ii-physicians-hypothesize-why-not-try-hydroxychloroquine-ivermectin-in-combo-against-covid-19/
In our area, there is a placebo-controlled, double blinded study using HCQ as a preventative in healthcare workers. This is similar to taking a pill to ward off malaria when traveling to certain regions. In fact, HCQ is in a class of medicines first developed as malaria preventatives.
It turns out that it was not a good idea to give high dose HCQ to very sick people, but it has been proven safe when dosed correctly, and people take it regularly for Lupus, rheumatoid arthritis and other autoimmune diseases.
They are also testing HCQ to see if it can minimize hospitalization when given to outpatients who have just tested positive. Itâs an immune-modulator, so even if it is too late to stop the virus from binding, HCQ may stop the cytokine storm.
The trial started in NY, and will be expanding to Ohio and Indiana.
Here is the website for info and sign-up for the trial: https://www.patchstudy.com/s/
Iâve heard about about very good results paring HCQ with zinc, but have read nothing about it in MSM.
I wonder what the deal is.