CharonY

The limitation of that study is that the virus had to be pre-treated with the surfactant to become less virulent. In the follow-ups I also only see co-treatment or in vitro assays. It is unclear how you would employ it in an in vivo situation. If the virus is already in, there is a good change it won't do any good (or you may have pump so much into the patient that it becomes harmful). It is sad that folks forgo the health information provided by the same administration.

That is not true at all. In Africa different societies existed ranging from the nomadic groups you mentioned to fairly large empires. One of the best known is the Songhai empire (15th-16th century). Among the cities within that empire Timbuktu and Djenne were powerful commercial entities. There are of course far more examples (Aksum, Kingdom of Ghana, Abyssinia to name a few). What I am saying is that the view of Africans as nomadic tribes is Westernized colonialist view that is not in line with actual history and I would urge caution to build any generalizations from this level of misinformation. And before we get to that, in the New World, it is the same, indigenous people had built complex societies in nations, which, while different than their Western counterparts, were highly complex political and societal system and had various levels of urbanization that were not too different from certain Western nations of the same time. Of course the situation shifted when we come closer to the time of the Atlantic slave trade but it is erroneous assumption that all there was were nomadic (and often also assumed to be primitive) tribes.

There are cases reported there. South Africa is at 554 cases, Nigeria at 44 for example. There are more, but there are not enough tests in a number of countries.

What part do you object to? The only one I can think of is that the persons in question (other than Columbus of course) were born in the 19th century and lived to the 20th. But every person I was familiar with in that group had formal academic education and in the cases of the engineer, additional training on top. I am therefore not sure what the point. Medical professionals have academic training followed by residencies. How is that different? Clearly I am not understanding your point here. Back to OP, self medication is not a good idea, apparently.

Well balance should still be factual. I do not know De Havilland but Parsons received engineering training at an engineering firm after his studies in mathematics. I do not want to derail it further but if one needs to dig back two centuries and still not find plenty of examples it does somehow indicate the rarity of such achievements, no? Meanwhile there are countless unnamed, non-famous with training labouring away to provide all the basic information we have on this and other diseases (at times, at personal risk) which are summarily dismissed because obviously what they do is too mundane and boring. Instead, we long for stories of the untrained underdog saving humanity by having flashes of genius that are misunderstood by those actually working on it. It sure is a great Hollywood story but it sure ain't what's happening.

Basically because there is not enough data to make any meaningful inferences. There is a bigger chance that some more resistant alleles will be found in Africa, but so far no dice. I have no idea what a "new" race is.

She was studying at a time where it was generally prohibited for women and ultimately produced a dissertation. She also taught at university in her 20s. I.e. her whole career was rather academic (not to mention private life, being the daughter of a mathematician).

What you need are antigenic elements, you cannot easily isolate them from people. Or rather it is far easier to propagate it, and then create an inactivated form rather than injecting humans samples which are hopefully inactive (but may also carry other nasty stuff). So much of it is surface removal, too. However, considering that cell are constantly pumping out virus particles, also into the bloodstream and there are mechanisms for cell-to-cell transmission, I doubt that any physical removal would really provide a net benefit. A lavage is mostly used for sampling (at least afaik, we use to obtain lung fluid samples not sure whether there are other medical reasons.).

Indeed, typo on my part, my apologies.

Many other countries in Europe have similar trajectories as Italy or at least China. The optimistic scenario (China delays and in the meantime other countries implement measures and draft plans to slow down or even stop outbreak) clearly has not happened. Responses were conducted after the horses were out of the barn (I.e. rising deaths, which again are a bad indicator unless in retrospective).

I am repeating myself, but I find it extremely confusing (and disappointing) that folks see what is happening elsewhere (good and bad) and somehow decide that it does not apply to them or that there are no lessons to learn. Italy's (and before that Wuhan's) health system is on the brink of collapsing and apparently there are no lessons to be learned from that. Meanwhile there were successful measures elsewhere in use for the last few months and now it is being discussed whether one should consider them in the first place. In world where information transfer is so fast, this seems almost medieval. I have got grad students who are rightly worried and then at the same time undergrads who think the "free time" now is the right opportunity to party. Sometimes I feel that folks only got two modes, ignoring the situation and utter panic. There is apparently no setting for measured response. Edit: again I should say that in Asia a number of countries actually opted for early measured responses (though to be really fair one should add that there were also panic peaks), which makes the current state even more ridiculous.

From what I have read most think that the situation in Japan is still unclear, there is comparable little testing done considering the timeline (one of the few countries testing way below capacity). The latest data indicates that about 20k folks have been tested so far, of which 1k have been found positive. On a different note, rates of detection and deaths are somewhat informative when it comes to active situations (i.e. the slope of the respective curves) and it does seem like in Germany the death rates are slowly catching up. Most cases are still active, unfortunately. Without measures to curb spread, there is a risk of that the situation in Italy (overwhelmed medical system) will be repeated through the rest of Europe.

If you look at the images, it appears that there is a different limit of detection for copper than for all the other substrates (about an order of magnitude). So to me it is not immediately clear whether viability is actually that different. After 4 hours there is only a slightly lower absolute titer than on cardboard. There is a rapid drop even at T0 on cardboard (i.e. folks recover less immediately after deposition), which is probably due to adsorption into the fibers.

The immune system does not only inactivate pathongens and then let's them float around. They basically take them apart. There is no transmission beyond that point.

Just don't use the technical ethanol

Must have been a remnant of something else (can't recall what). That was another explanation, yes. But again that would indicate that so far Germany just has gotten lucky.

In Italy? a Also, what I found symptomatic is that Germany is not doing well in reporting. The number of samples being tested (which do not equal number of patients) is apparently lifted from an media report. Elsewhere there are central data depositories where such data is collected. Due to the Federal system, as well as central coordination information flow has been problematic. It is supposed to begin getting organized now, but of course in pandemics time is of essence.

While elderly are hospitalized at a higher frequency, it is a wrong assumption to think that younger ones don't. The US is heavily undersampled, so likely the actual values are lower, but recent reports show that as much as 20% of hospitalizations in the US are 20-44 year olds. It is likely that most of them have some pre-existing conditions, but we cannot be sure just yet. Also Germany has infection numbers close to Spain, (though Spain is probably more undersampled than Germany), but the deaths are weird. But yes, for now the plan is to keep the number of active cases in a manageable format. Flu, despite the relative high number of fatalities and hospitalization as a whole is manageable as the season is spread out over a longer time. Ideally the infection will reach mostly young and healthy folks, with more preventative measures for the elderly and those with pre-existing conditions. But since folks cannot behave I am not entirely sure what outside a shutdown will actually work. Sure, some countries did make it work but judging from the behaviour of folks (such as the spring breakers, but also apparently death-defying old folks) I am not entirely how else it can be managed. Some countries implemented measures early on which appeared to be mostly well accepted, but much of the rest of the world apparently are unable to learn from others.

Worse, it is less effective at higher concentrations.

Antibacterial and antiviral activity are lower if no water is present. Depending on microbe or virus, maximum effectivity were observed between 60-80%. Standard disinfection in lab is usually carried out with 70%.

The issue is that they started up late, most of the tests started up sometime around the second week of March. The response as a whole was not different from Italy. As such the outcome so far is more unexpected and could be a considered a lucky break rather than the outcome of some specific measures. The age distribution as well as the fact that in Italy there is more intergenerational contact has been speculated to play a role. However, the other issue is that it has circulated for quite a while untracked and that the testing is still way behind the actual rate. Depending on which metrics you use, Germany is about as old or a smidge older (depending on what age brackets you make).

Studies, including those in the link show an exponential decline within hours (with longer time on plastic surface). While you can recover active particles after a day or so, the number is greatly reduced (and will also depend on humidity temperature and other factors). You are also diluting the amount if you touch it and then touch your face, as each time there is less transfer. But as a whole it does not mean much more than wash your hands after touching stuff.

Death rate is a bad measure until towards the end. The most important measure is the increase and coverage of testing. Germany is not doing too well on either of them. The reason being that there are only mitigating measures in severe cases. I.e. once overwhelmed due to high infections, the system crumbles and deaths increases.

Germany is uncertain. They seemed to have a lucky start but were lagging in tracing and testing at the start. They have ramped up now and the next two weeks or so will provide more info. The current growth is still logarithmic.

Hope you dilute it down to 60-80 % first. There is an antibody based test (several actually) but not sure how well it works and whether they are put to test yet. So far all reinfections are suspected to be failure in tests. There is no strong evidence that folks get sick again (for now).