Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!
-
@Gurth From what I've heard about the state of the German military...you might be surprised.
And the problem with running German tanks is that you'll never find parts for them, and they're full of tiny little parts that go SPROING a the wrong time.
-
@Benjamin-Hall
Are they still designed by Porche?
-
Warning: WaPo link:
-
-
@Benjamin-Hall said in Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!:
@Gurth From what I've heard about the state of the German military...you might be surprised.
I would not, but that’s a matter of money being tight to maintain them (granted, the SPz Puma appears to have more serious deficiencies). I was joking about basic reliability and ease of maintenance, which British military vehicles have not exactly been known for, like, ever.
-
@Gurth said in Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!:
@Benjamin-Hall said in Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!:
@Gurth From what I've heard about the state of the German military...you might be surprised.
I would not, but that’s a matter of money being tight to maintain them (granted, the SPz Puma appears to have more serious deficiencies). I was joking about basic reliability and ease of maintenance, which British military vehicles have not exactly been known for, like, ever.
Yeah. I was mainly just
-
Idea for maybe preventing a future pandemic, or avoiding false alarm, or just tracking the statistics better:
What if we randomly checked every millionth flu/pneumonia patient if they perhaps contain some weird bacteria or viruses inside them? Is that even remotely feasible? Would that gives us any chance of early detection of potentially epidemic diseases, or getting better fatality rates early on?
-
@Gurth said in Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!:
I was joking about basic reliability and ease of maintenance, which British military vehicles have not exactly been known for, like, ever.
If they're like British cars, all you need is a good fire in the engine bay and you can replace the crappy original parts with third party ones that are actually good.
-
@Gąska said in Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!:
Is that even remotely feasible?
Not really. Trawling for random unknown stuff is very expensive (analytical testing is far cheaper when you're comparing to something known) and you'll see an awful lot of things that actually aren't ever going to amount to a hill of beans because biological systems are really messy and always have been, and lots of stuff naturally dies out without ever going anywhere. Expensive tests that only really pick up noise are basically just a great way to waste money while learning virtually nothing.
-
@Benjamin-Hall said in Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!:
Warning: WaPo link:
My own personal, and totally not based on any scientific evidence, take on all this is that proper hygiene (hand washing etc.) and a bit of social distancing are actually enough to protect us, and would have been in the first place.
Let's face it, before the pandemic really started, most people were somewhat lax on hand washing /face touching (I'm not saying e.g. when coming out of the toilets, although also, but generally speaking when going out, taking public transport etc.), and social distancing was obviously non-existent. If we had done that properly from the start (or probably, from before the start...), we would never have had any epidemic. By the time the public health messages about those came out, and were widely adopted, it was probably too late to actually stop the spread. Now that most people are doing it, at least half-heartedly, that's enough to limit the spread even when relaxing the rest of measures.
That's probably a somewhat optimistic view, but here you go...
Somewhat related, this means that a huge number of "common" diseases could be averted with a bit more prevention and effective public hygiene. Basically, all those thousands of annual deaths by flu, stomach bugs etc. could be hugely reduced by putting hand sanitiser everywhere. Food for thoughts...
-
@remi I don't think the hand sanitizer and hand washing is as important as it's been made out to be. The big factor is large gatherings indoors. A massive problem with this is that large indoor gatherings are fun or (in the case of funerals) socially healthy for us. And outdoor gatherings just don't work year round for most places.
-
@remi let's not forget landscape offices, which are a perfect ground for infectious diseases to spread. When people work from home instead, those offices can't be a major spread vector.
-
@boomzilla I guess that might be where we disagree (and again that's just gut feeling, no real facts here, so I'm not really pushing one way or the other).
Seeing how e.g. NY has been affected compared to e.g. LA or SF, I don't think there was that much difference in social gatherings, but there is a huge difference in public transport, and packing of population overall (of course there are many other differences) -- which means a lot more occasions for people to touch contaminated surfaces (e.g. just the elevator buttons in your building), without necessarily having that much more indoor contacts (ok, mass transport is indoor, but just sharing a building with someone isn't a gathering) and those would be averted with a lot of hand washing (and learning not to pick your nose in public...).
Even for indoor gatherings, I'm not sure how much contamination happens by really directly breathing in viral particles, vs. touching contaminated surfaces. I remember reading an article about Singapore or Taiwan where they tracked down some of the early cases to a church gathering, and crucially the infected ones were not only those who went to the same service as the first person (so who might have breathed it in directly, or touched contaminated surfaces), but also those who went to later services but happened to sit in the same place. It seems unlikely to me that you'd get such a localised contamination if it was not through surfaces (i.e. in between services, viral particles in the air would have moved around, maybe not to the whole church but certainly to more than just a couple of chairs). Those people would likely have been safe(r) with more cleaning (cleaning your hands as you get out of church, maybe also having wipes available and wiping your chair and around before you sit or something similar?).
Though it might be optimism from my part, i.e. trying to convince myself that there won't be any significant change to how we live except just a bit more hygiene, which is certainly more palatable than having long-term restrictions on mass indoor gatherings...
-
@remi said in Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!:
@boomzilla I guess that might be where we disagree (and again that's just gut feeling, no real facts here, so I'm not really pushing one way or the other).
I'm partly basing my position on the fact that the CDC recently "downgraded" transmission by surface. Now, handwashing and avoiding face touching would definitely help in the case of lots of handshaking.
Seeing how e.g. NY has been affected compared to e.g. LA or SF, I don't think there was that much difference in social gatherings, but there is a huge difference in public transport, and packing of population overall (of course there are many other differences) -- which means a lot more occasions for people to touch contaminated surfaces (e.g. just the elevator buttons in your building), without necessarily having that much more indoor contacts (ok, mass transport is indoor, but just sharing a building with someone isn't a gathering) and those would be averted with a lot of hand washing (and learning not to pick your nose in public...).
That's true. But it's also a lot of time in a confined space among people. I think you're more likely to have breathed air from a sick person than to have grabbed a pole that they had used and contaminated.
Even for indoor gatherings, I'm not sure how much contamination happens by really directly breathing in viral particles, vs. touching contaminated surfaces.
I'm not either but that seems to be the focus by the people who have been studying it.
Though it might be optimism from my part, i.e. trying to convince myself that there won't be any significant change to how we live except just a bit more hygiene, which is certainly more palatable than having long-term restrictions on mass indoor gatherings...
Yeah. It's probably going to be pretty grim for a while either way.
-
@remi said in Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!:
but generally speaking when going out, taking public transport etc.
Yeah, this was me.
I keep reminding my daughter (and myself) that the best thing to do to keep safe is wash hands and don't touch her face.
-
@remi said in Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!:
but also those who went to later services but happened to sit in the same place.
I went to training for volunteers at my church yesterday, in preparation for limited reopening. When we arrived, the were signs on some of the seats, socially distanced in both row and column, that we should sit in those seats, and we just sat in whatever such seat was available. After an introduction to the overall reopening process, we broke into groups for further training specific to our volunteer job functions, but before we broke up, we were told to take note of which seat we were sitting in, and after the small-group training, to return to the same seat we had been sitting in previously, to minimize cross-contamination.
Those people would likely have been safe(r) with more cleaning (cleaning your hands as you get out of church, maybe also having wipes available and wiping your chair and around before you sit or something similar?).
Our church seats X people. When we reopen, the social-distance seating will use X/8 seats, with actual occupancy about X/4, presumably due to families who don't need to practice social distancing among themselves. And the entire building will be disinfected before each service, which means visitors will be told to get out and go home immediately (can't even stand around and have a socially-distant conversation outside), so the cleaning crew can get in and spray some toxic chemical on everything. Volunteers will have wipes to disinfect their workspaces before and after doing stuff, and will be required to wear masks at all times in the building (visitors will be encouraged but not required to wear masks; masks will be available for those who want one but don't have one) and some — people who are regularly touching common surfaces like door handles — will be required to wear gloves. Also, all volunteers and staff will be required to take their temperatures and fill out an online health questionnaire before coming to church. In order to limit attendance to X/4, all visitors will be required to make advance reservations. And perhaps worst of all, for many people, there will be no coffee available.
-
@HardwareGeek said in Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!:
people who are regularly touching common surfaces like door handles — will be required to wear gloves.
I've seen that in several places and I'm a bit puzzled by it. The only benefit I can see is to serve as a physical reminder for those people to not touch anything else (and in particular not their face). Other than that, what's the point?
Those gloves are going to get as much virus as their bare hands would (there may be some marginal effect of the virus surviving longer on bare skin than on latex, but if there is I've never heard of it and it's going to be pretty minor overall anyway). If they touch something with those contaminated gloves, they will get as much virus on that other thing than if they hadn't gloves. And taking out the gloves to throw them out isn't really any less work than rubbing your hands with sanitiser (plus if you read guidelines, proper behaviour is to wash hands after having removed gloves anyway, as you might contaminate yourself when removing them!).
(some of those points or similar ones apply to masks, but masks do have some intrinsic efficiency, even if it's arguably not huge, at blocking the virus from entering/leaving your organism, which gloves don't have at all since there is no contamination through skin)
-
@remi said in Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!:
Other than that, what's the point?
COVID virtue signaling?
-
Asymptomatic spread of coronavirus is 'very rare,' WHO says
Government responses should focus on detecting and isolating infected people with symptoms, said the WHO's Dr. Maria Van Kerkhove.
So, about masks and social distancing...
-
@boomzilla said in Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!:
The big factor is large gatherings indoors.
Very likely this, at least for respiratory diseases like COVID-19, and public transit very much counts as “large indoor gathering” in most parts of the world. The masks probably help quite a bit too — the droplets that they're good at stopping are almost certainly a heck of a lot more infectious than the aerosols that they have problems with — but the end to large indoor gatherings is definitely the most useful thing.
-
@lolwhat said in Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!:
Government responses should focus on detecting and isolating infected people with symptoms, said the WHO's Dr. Maria Van Kerkhove.
So, about social distancing...
It's as I thought. People weren't asymptomatic carriers. They were symptomatic, but in denial about it. “It's just a sniffle and a little bit of a cough. Nothing really.”
-
@dkf said in Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!:
@lolwhat said in Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!:
Government responses should focus on detecting and isolating infected people with symptoms, said the WHO's Dr. Maria Van Kerkhove.
So, about social distancing...
It's as I thought. People weren't asymptomatic carriers. They were symptomatic, but in denial about it. “It's just a sniffle and a little bit of a cough. Nothing really.”
Doesn't that describe the common cold, though? If the entirety of your symptoms is just a sniffle and a little bit of a cough, it's nothing really.
-
@dkf said in Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!:
the droplets that they're good at stopping are almost certainly a heck of a lot more infectious than the aerosols that they have problems with
I've heard the exact opposite, that the aerosol is more problematic. But I've probably heard pretty much every possible option by now, so :whonose:
(Rationale: droplets sink fast and only briefly infect people in the vicinity, aerosol stays airborne much longer)
-
@GOG said in Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!:
@dkf said in Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!:
@lolwhat said in Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!:
Government responses should focus on detecting and isolating infected people with symptoms, said the WHO's Dr. Maria Van Kerkhove.
So, about social distancing...
It's as I thought. People weren't asymptomatic carriers. They were symptomatic, but in denial about it. “It's just a sniffle and a little bit of a cough. Nothing really.”
Doesn't that describe the common cold, though? If the entirety of your symptoms is just a sniffle and a little bit of a cough, it's nothing really.
I've had the sniffles all winter and since. Hard to tell when it became covid and when it finished (assuming the antibody test is accurate enough).
-
@GOG said in Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!:
@dkf said in Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!:
@lolwhat said in Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!:
Government responses should focus on detecting and isolating infected people with symptoms, said the WHO's Dr. Maria Van Kerkhove.
So, about social distancing...
It's as I thought. People weren't asymptomatic carriers. They were symptomatic, but in denial about it. “It's just a sniffle and a little bit of a cough. Nothing really.”
Doesn't that describe the common cold, though? If the entirety of your symptoms is just a sniffle and a little bit of a cough, it's nothing really.
The article was about people with no symptoms. Sniffling and cough is a symptom, so it could still be Covid-19, hence I wouldn't do away with social distancing that quickly.
If you let people get away with "it must be nothing" then is when it gets dangerous. I know at least one person who minimizes any kind of disease and just goes to work. No, he wasn't shivering due to fever, "it must have been a draft in the office." Over the next few days everyone sitting around his desk got the flu.
-
@JBert said in Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!:
If you let people get away with "it must be nothing" then is when it gets dangerous.
It's gonna get exciting when the weather cools off in the Fall.
-
@JBert I tend to try to power through things (I took exactly 2.5 sick days in 7 years, and 1.5 of those were kidney stones). But I rarely actually get sick. Constant allergies (until I move out of this hellhole of a jungle tomorrow), which leave me with a dry cough and sneezing nearly year round (plus hives and rashes and itchy skin if I so much as touch a blade of grass or anything that's been near an oak tree). But actual fevers, etc? Rarely. Although a couple of times those allergies have led to getting bronchitis and/or sinus infections. But that usually happens during Spring Break.
-
@Karla said in Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!:
I've had the sniffles all winter and since.
I have some kind of chronic rhinitis with a post-nasal drip. There probably hasn't been a day in the last 50 years or more that I haven't had a slightly runny nose. Some of the excess mucus runs down the back of my throat and contributes to a slight cough. Also, I may have a very mild asthma, or something like that; I have an inhaler — not the kind of "rescue" inhaler that people with serious asthma need for acute attacks, but slower acting and longer lasting, I guess — that I occasionally need for "shortness of breath." And when I do get sick, it has a tendency to turn into bronchitis, and my cough can last for months. I still have a slight trace of the cough from a cold I had in March, and when I came down with that, I still had a trace from a cold in January. If I had to stay quarantined whenever I have a sniffle or a tiny bit of a cough, I could never go out in public, ever, for the rest of my life, probably.
-
@topspin said in Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!:
(Rationale: droplets sink fast and only briefly infect people in the vicinity, aerosol stays airborne much longer)
You've got to balance that against the enormously greater potential for a droplet to infect if it actually makes contact. I don't know why that sort of factor balancing act seems to break so many people's brains, but it clearly does…
-
@Karla said in Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!:
I've had the sniffles all winter and since. Hard to tell when it became covid and when it finished (assuming the antibody test is accurate enough).
That's indeed exactly part of the problem.
If I remember right, the antibody test has a really quite low false positive rate. If it says you've got/had it, it's pretty sure you have it for real. (The false negative rate is too damn high though.) Hopefully you don't have long-term consequences from the infection. Most people don't, but they're awful if they do kick in.
-
@HardwareGeek said in Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!:
@Karla said in Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!:
I've had the sniffles all winter and since.
I have some kind of chronic rhinitis with a post-nasal drip. There probably hasn't been a day in the last 50 years or more that I haven't had a slightly runny nose. Some of the excess mucus runs down the back of my throat and contributes to a slight cough. Also, I may have a very mild asthma, or something like that; I have an inhaler — not the kind of "rescue" inhaler that people with serious asthma need for acute attacks, but slower acting and longer lasting, I guess — that I occasionally need for "shortness of breath." And when I do get sick, it has a tendency to turn into bronchitis, and my cough can last for months. I still have a slight trace of the cough from a cold I had in March, and when I came down with that, I still had a trace from a cold in January. If I had to stay quarantined whenever I have a sniffle or a tiny bit of a cough, I could never go out in public, ever, for the rest of my life, probably.
I think I always have a runny nose when it is cold. I also have both spring and fall allergies which are better after 2 years of shots but I should still be on maintenance shots and the last set of shots I had were in February.
Right now, after biking I get something that makes my throat scratchy causing nasty coughing/gagging. Throat lozenges seem to be the only thing that resolves it. I'm pretty sure that is the allergies.
-
@dkf said in Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!:
@Karla said in Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!:
I've had the sniffles all winter and since. Hard to tell when it became covid and when it finished (assuming the antibody test is accurate enough).
That's indeed exactly part of the problem.
If I remember right, the antibody test has a really quite low false positive rate. If it says you've got/had it, it's pretty sure you have it for real. (The false negative rate is too damn high though.) Hopefully you don't have long-term consequences from the infection. Most people don't, but they're awful if they do kick in.
In this particular case I would rather a false negative than a false positive. The only other positive test that made me happier was a pregnancy test.
I did ask one of my doctors if there was anything I should have checked out and she is extremely thorough. She said if I didn't have any symptoms there isn't anything that needs checking.
-
@Karla said in Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!:
In this particular case I would rather a false negative than a false positive. The only other positive test that made me happier was a pregnancy test.
I did ask one of my doctors if there was anything I should have checked out and she is extremely thorough. She said if I didn't have any symptoms there isn't anything that needs checking.As with most viruses, unless it's causing major problems for you the best thing you can do is just survive it. Try not to spread it further, treat such symptoms as occur as you find a problem, and check what the serious symptoms are so that if you're unlucky and they come to pass, you seek medical help early enough. If you're taking vitamin supplements, make sure you keep on taking them as several vitamins may help keep things from becoming more serious. (Vitamin D is supposedly helpful, and even if that supposition is wrong, it's probably good for people who are inside a lot anyway.)
Best of luck! The odds probably are strongly in your favour.
-
@JBert said in Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!:
@GOG said in Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!:
@dkf said in Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!:
@lolwhat said in Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!:
Government responses should focus on detecting and isolating infected people with symptoms, said the WHO's Dr. Maria Van Kerkhove.
So, about social distancing...
It's as I thought. People weren't asymptomatic carriers. They were symptomatic, but in denial about it. “It's just a sniffle and a little bit of a cough. Nothing really.”
Doesn't that describe the common cold, though? If the entirety of your symptoms is just a sniffle and a little bit of a cough, it's nothing really.
The article was about people with no symptoms. Sniffling and cough is a symptom, so it could still be Covid-19, hence I wouldn't do away with social distancing that quickly.
If you let people get away with "it must be nothing" then is when it gets dangerous. I know at least one person who minimizes any kind of disease and just goes to work. No, he wasn't shivering due to fever, "it must have been a draft in the office." Over the next few days everyone sitting around his desk got the flu.
Because I live in a sane country, if I'm feeling under the weather (typically, this means running a mild fever) I just go to the doctor and take sick leave. It's 80% pay, but it does mean I can get all the bed rest I need and I won't be spreading whatever I have around. I do appreciate that some folks ain't so lucky.
My greater point is that the popular mental model of COVID-19 is "killer disease", not "a mild case of the sniffles" (besides, wasn't it dry cough?) We don't tend to shut down entire countries over a mild case of the sniffles.
The question therefore arises: does COVID-19 mostly manifest as "minor case of the sniffles" or "killer disease"? If the former, how can we minimize the death-toll of the bad cases?
Presently, my best guess is that the places that got hit real bad (i.e. those places where we have seen excess mortality over and above what we'd expect of a 'flu season) had exceptional circumstances and we really should be looking at what those were. It shall be interesting to observe what the effects of a slow return to normal will be.
-
@GOG said in Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!:
Presently, my best guess is that the places that got hit real bad (i.e. those places where we have seen excess mortality over and above what we'd expect of a 'flu season) had exceptional circumstances and we really should be looking at what those were. It shall be interesting to observe what the effects of a slow return to normal will be.
This is mine too. I suspect a significantly higher per-capita in NYC has contracted it compared to the rest of the US at least (I'm most familiar with the stats in the US).
If I had it, the other 5 people in our apartment in addition to my husband's parents, my SIL, her husband, and my niece likely have had it. My in-laws insisted the grandchildren not stop coming over for their benefit. So we've all cross-contaminated no matter how much we wash our hands.
-
@GOG said in Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!:
I live in a sane country
Which Earth are you on?
If the number has not been formally assigned by WTDWTF Many Earth Numbering Taskforce Agency of Like-minded, feel free to submit a proposal for any number you like. Note that several numbers (such as 73) are already reserved for specific individuals and/or inclinations, in which case you may apply for a permanent residence or consider a mutually agreeable non-integer solution. Other conditions and germs may apply.
-
@Applied-Mediocrity said in Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!:
@GOG said in Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!:
I live in a sane country
Which Earth are you on?
If the number has not been formally assigned by WTDWTF Many Earth Numbering Taskforce Agency of Like-minded, feel free to submit a proposal for any number you like. Note that several numbers (such as 73) are already reserved for specific individuals and/or inclinations. Conditions and germs may apply.
The one where Fury Road is a steaming pile of turd.
-
@GOG said in Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!:
@Applied-Mediocrity said in Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!:
@GOG said in Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!:
I live in a sane country
Which Earth are you on?
If the number has not been formally assigned by WTDWTF Many Earth Numbering Taskforce Agency of Like-minded, feel free to submit a proposal for any number you like. Note that several numbers (such as 73) are already reserved for specific individuals and/or inclinations. Conditions and germs may apply.
The one where Fury Road is a steaming pile of turd.
Not this one then.
-
@MrL said in Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!:
@GOG said in Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!:
@Applied-Mediocrity said in Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!:
@GOG said in Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!:
I live in a sane country
Which Earth are you on?
If the number has not been formally assigned by WTDWTF Many Earth Numbering Taskforce Agency of Like-minded, feel free to submit a proposal for any number you like. Note that several numbers (such as 73) are already reserved for specific individuals and/or inclinations. Conditions and germs may apply.
The one where Fury Road is a steaming pile of turd.
Not this one then.
I know. I get your Rotten Tomatoes.
-
This post is deleted!
-
@GOG said in Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!:
Doesn't that describe the common cold, though? If the entirety of your symptoms is just a sniffle and a little bit of a cough, it's nothing really.
+1. I’ve been coughing, on and off, for months now, and I’ve felt under the weather a couple of times as well during that time. Though of course “Is it corona?” crossed my mind, at no point did I feel definitely ill and (aside from the coughing) it went away within a day every time. Since I don’t generally subscribe to the “better safe than sorry” school of going to the doctor’s, I've concluded that it was probably nothing really.
That said, I am kind of interested whether I had it or not. However, what I’ve seen and heard of the way this is tested decidedly does not make me want to run out and get a test done myself.
-
@Gurth said in Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!:
However, what I’ve seen and heard of the way this is tested decidedly does not make me want to run out and get a test done myself.
What, you don't fancy someone sticking something into one of your orifices until it hurts and it comes out covered in some yucky natural secretion?
-
@remi said in Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!:
@Gurth said in Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!:
However, what I’ve seen and heard of the way this is tested decidedly does not make me want to run out and get a test done myself.
What, you don't fancy someone sticking something into one of your orifices until it hurts and it comes out covered in some yucky natural secretion?
Yesterday in local news they mentioned they are starting with some new test that can do with a sample of saliva, so it is much easier to collect the samples, and the test itself should be cheaper too. It didn't have enough details about the principle.
-
@remi said in Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!:
What, you don't fancy someone sticking something into one of your orifices until it hurts and it comes out covered in some yucky natural secretion?
-
Let's start with the fun stuff ...
“Sex workers and punters must wear masks at all times”
The Group of Experts responsible for Belgium’s Exit Strategy from the lockdown has reached agreement with representatives of sex workers with a view to guaranteeing safe working conditions. Sex workers and their customers must always use a mouth mas
And follow up with some boring stuff on the effect of lock downs
Estimating the effects of non-pharmaceutical interventions on COVID-19 in Europe
Nature - Modelling based on pooled data from 11 European countries indicates that non-pharmaceutical interventions—particularly lockdowns—have had a marked effect on SARS-CoV-2...
The effect of large-scale anti-contagion policies on the COVID-19 pandemic
Nature - Analyses of COVID-19 infection rates show that non-pharmaceutical interventions achieved large, beneficial and measurable health outcomes in China, South Korea, Italy, Iran, France and the...
-
@Luhmann said in Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!:
Let's start with the fun stuff ...
“Sex workers and punters must wear masks at all times”
The Group of Experts responsible for Belgium’s Exit Strategy from the lockdown has reached agreement with representatives of sex workers with a view to guaranteeing safe working conditions. Sex workers and their customers must always use a mouth mas
I guess oral is right out, then?
-
@Gurth said in Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!:
That said, I am kind of interested whether I had it or not. However, what I’ve seen and heard of the way this is tested decidedly does not make me want to run out and get a test done myself.
The test for "Did you have it?" requires a drop or so of blood.
That said, I've heard of some PCR tests ("Do I have it now?") that use a mouth swab instead of a back of throat via the nostrils swab.
-
@Luhmann said in Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!:
“Sex workers and punters must wear masks at all times”
The Group of Experts responsible for Belgium’s Exit Strategy from the lockdown has reached agreement with representatives of sex workers with a view to guaranteeing safe working conditions. Sex workers and their customers must always use a mouth mas
Bets on which style will get most popular?
Option A:
Basic medical sterility.
Option B:
Option C:
Full face mask.
-
-
@Luhmann said in Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!:
C could possibly do it via an emergency induction port.
Photo D9_20_519, from Dissolve
Verified News Explorer Channel - VNExplorer