COVID-19: Chapter 4 - OPEN FOR BUSINESS

Untrue. If your boss tells you this is now part of your uniform, you do what they say regardless.

Were they symptomatic before? I hadnā€™t seen that reported yet. Iā€™m pretty sure the navy tested the whole crew. Itā€™s <2% of the positive cases on board. Very possible some small percent will never build lasting immunity to Covid. Possible this was an abnormally long incubation period with a dip in viral load to < detectable levels. Its possible asymptotic people donā€™t build up a strong immune response and can quickly get it again if exposed. Iā€™d say very likely some combination of the above happened to give us these 13. Or maybe society is dead, but Iā€™m thinking there are more likely options.

6 Likes

We didnā€™t do enough stressing of the ā€œraise the lineā€ part.

I always understood flattening the curve as a trade-off of reducing the peak in exchange for extending the tail to avoid deaths caused by hospitals being overwhelmed.

The goal as I understand it should be to keep the curve low enough so that if there is an outbreak, we can respond fast enough to be able to lock things down and avoid stressing the system. I do tend to be conservative about bankroll management in poker, so I am inclined to leave a healthy amount of space under the line for unused capacity.

Iā€™m a bit more pessimistic about how long it will take to get a vaccine. so I donā€™t believe in sitting out until there is one. There does need to be a gradual reopening, just nowhere near as fast as some people want it to be.

Instead of ā€œnot the fluā€, maybe we should have been telling people itā€™s the AIDS version of the flu.

3 Likes

I donā€™t think we have that information yet. This is the full CNN article: https://www.cnn.com/2020/05/16/politics/uss-theodore-roosevelt-sailors-coronavirus/index.html

One of the other articles indicates they are symptomatic now. Canā€™t find information on whether they were symptomatic or just positive the first time around. Could also be false positives the first time around or false negatives on the retest as you say. Still though, there seem to be a growing number of these reports of people testing positive again after testing negative.Also the Roosevelt gives us a unique base as itā€™s putting them back into an infectious environment so we know they are likely to have been exposed to it a second time.

I think I am going to say something to these morons next time along the lines of ā€œwell if thatā€™s true you are an idiot for wearing that pussy maskā€

1 Like

Seems like that play is -EV.

1 Like

Really bad idea leaning on 30 year old prejudice around HIV/AIDS.

Yeah maybe so

I donā€™t get this new guidance about not spraying disinfectant spray in open areas of your home. Weā€™ve been doing that forever even before the coronavirus.

If lack of immunity was a big problem then weā€™d hear a lot more stories about it, not just the smattering we have heard. Probably itā€™s something like people fighting the virus off without the body having gotten around to a full immune response.

2 Likes

Eh, if it gets the job doneā€¦

No, no, it absolutely MUST be the end of the world.

Let me guess, judging from the number of hidden replies on my TL its some deplorable bell end whoā€™d get a huge kick out of millions of American deaths proving his Armageddon scenario right, right?

Iā€™m going to guess the 38 million HIV positive people might disagree.

If doing so would prevent Trump from being re-elected, would you stick to your principles?

So far most, but not all of the people Iā€™ve heard about testing positive a second time after being recovered were in populations getting lots of testing: South Korea, the navy ship, Chinaā€¦ So that should increase the likelihood of false positives being the explanation. Obviously we wonā€™t know for sure for a long time, if ever.

The reason I say this is that in order to be a false positive, you need to actually be negative - so testing large populations via contact tracing does increase the likelihood of that.

2 Likes

Roosevelt gives us a pretty big sample of people being watched very closely, unlike ~everyone else. Unfortunately they arenā€™t representative of the population. Much too young and much too male. Itā€™s not surprising to see some low probability events happening with a group this big. Unfortunately the government wonā€™t bother learning anything from it, the Navy probably is pissed itā€™s being reported.

You made a bad suggestion. How about just admitting it?

Nah, Iā€™m fine with it. I anticipated your objection and still made it.