Bike Forums

Bike Forums (https://www.bikeforums.net/forum.php)
-   Coronavirus/COVID-19 (https://www.bikeforums.net/forumdisplay.php?f=341)
-   -   Posting some info from another member re Coronovirus (https://www.bikeforums.net/showthread.php?t=1195995)

livedarklions 03-18-20 02:49 PM


Originally Posted by Maelochs (Post 21373001)
Well .... unless you have evidence (you know how those stupid scientists work---no data, no conclusion) then all you have is an hypothesis. Yeah, sure .... some of us might be whatever.

But the people who are arguing with actual experts .... and are not providing any data themselves ... and are saying "I think ... " or "I don't believe ...' unsupported by any data .... whatever. Pick a fight elsewhere if that is what you want, and believe whatever makes you happy.

When all the people who can demonstrate that they have studied virology, contagion, whatever for decades say something, and some random guy says, "Naw, I stayed in a Holiday Inn last night, so I know better .... " Choose whatever you like.

They will never take our freedom ... but they might have to bury some of us prematurely because we didn't use reason.


I figure in a field like this, I just try to get familiar with who the top experts are and try to go with the most plausible.

This transmission stuff is so new that I think serious experts are disagreeing, so I'm going with assume the worst and hope the ones who are less pessimistic turn out to be right. Still not wearing masks, though.

Jicafold 03-18-20 02:49 PM


Originally Posted by livedarklions (Post 21373003)
I am, however, a lawyer who has been damned amused by some of the crazy crap posted as "the law" by self-appointed experts on BF.

I'm sure it's source of non-stop entertainment for you. :thumb:

livedarklions 03-18-20 02:53 PM


Originally Posted by Jicafold (Post 21373008)
I'm sure it's source of non-stop entertainment for you. :thumb:


There's one guy in particular who's quite ignorant, very pompous, and unintentionally hilarious. I haven't seen him around lately, but he loves lecturing me about "precedent" and doesn't know what the word means.

Jicafold 03-18-20 02:55 PM


Originally Posted by Maelochs (Post 21373006)
yes, it is important to note that none of those studies actually used corona virus.

umm...that NEJM study quoted in post #45 was on a corona virus. Not this exact one....but a corona virus nonetheless.

livedarklions 03-18-20 02:56 PM


Originally Posted by Maelochs (Post 21373006)
EDIT: I went back and reread the study to make sure i got all of it and it turned out that I missed a crucial point----they renamed Covid-19 to SARS 2. My mistake. yes, it is important to note that none of those studies actually used corona virus.

A couple of things i found:

John Nicholls, a pathology professor at the University of Hong Kong, explained the conditions under which the virus cannot survive. (https://www.accuweather.com/en/healt...-months/679415)

"Sunlight will cut the virus' ability to grow in half so the half-life will be 2.5 minutes and in the dark it's about 13 to 20 [minutes]," Nicholls said. "Sunlight is really good at killing viruses."

Regarding temperatures, Nicholls said the warmer the better for stopping the spread of the virus, according to the transcript of the conference call.```````

"The virus can remain intact at 4 degrees (39 degrees Fahrenheit) or 10 degrees (50 F) for a longer period of time," Nicholls said, referring to Celsius measurements, according to the transcript. "But at 30 degrees (86 degrees F) then you get inactivation. And high humidity -- the virus doesn't like it either," he added, the transcript of the call showed.


Also:

ďThe Journal of Hospital Infection study also found that spikes in temperature made a difference in the lifespans of coronaviruses. An 18-degree Fahrenheit jump, from 68 degrees to 86 degrees, decreased how long SARS lasted on steel surfaces by at least half.Ē (https://www.businessinsider.com/how-...sinfect-2020-3)

So, yes, and with the virus mutating, it is hard to know ... but it does seem that none of the people who only believe what they like, ever cite any studies beyond their own studies of their own opinions. I am sure the guy buying 100 rolls of toilet paper Might be a PhD with numerous Doctorates in disease transmission, etc ....Might be ,......

OK, does that mean you know the NEJM letter study actually used COVID??

livedarklions 03-18-20 02:57 PM


Originally Posted by Jicafold (Post 21373018)
umm...that NEJM study quoted in post #45 was on a corona virus. Not this exact one....but a corona virus nonetheless.

No, it's THE corona virus. Actually tested it against another one.

Jicafold 03-18-20 02:59 PM


Originally Posted by livedarklions (Post 21373024)
No, it's THE corona virus. Actually tested it against another one.

Correct. I see that now. Thank you. I'm guilty as hell too. :(

Maelochs 03-18-20 02:59 PM


Originally Posted by livedarklions (Post 21373024)
No, it's THE corona virus. Actually tested it against another one.

i thought I made it clear in my edit, sorry. "A novel human coronavirus that is now named severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) (formerly called HCoV-19) emerged in Wuhan, China, in late 2019 and is now causing a pandemic.1 We analyzed the aerosol and surface stability of SARS-CoV-2 and compared it with SARS-CoV-1, the most closely related human coronavirus.2

"We evaluated the stability of SARS-CoV-2 and SARS-CoV-1 in aerosols and on various surfaces and estimated their decay rates using a Bayesian regression model (see the Methods section in the Supplementary Appendix, available with the full text of this letter at NEJM.org). " (Emphasis added.)

The story seen here is true. The name was changed to expose those who skim, then reply, then reread.

diverge52rider 03-18-20 03:29 PM

Didn't read the entire thread as a lot of it has been rehashed elsewhere, but I wanted to make it clear I'm not advocating healthy people wear masks. A friend in a dental office gave us a couple small boxes of the regular masks a month ago and I haven't touched them.

My takeaway from the OPs re-posted message was there is NO CHANCE (not Low Chance) of aerosol transmission -- which is inconclusive at best. I agree that many masks are ineffective against small particles or used improperly but potentially posting misinformation about how the virus spreads is wrong when we don't have all the facts and that's not good science. That's my only point of contention.

Off to ride and pickup my mail ...

https://cimg2.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...8fc375b812.jpg

indyfabz 03-18-20 03:31 PM


Originally Posted by Maelochs (Post 21372917)
Seems to me that hand sanitizer is really only useful in places where soap and water are not available.

Some people seem to think ti is magic, and waste it when a simple trip to a nearby sink with soap would work just as well..

So...I come back to the office floor after being out. Take a leak, wash my hands then return to the suite. I have to grab the door handle to open it. I donít know who has touched it and when. (Heard the paper delivery guy come in this morning, and we may be moving soon so prospective tenants sometimes get tours of the suite.) So I use a little sanitizer as a safety precaution. It sits on a table just inside the door. Itís not always one or the other.

freeranger 03-18-20 03:34 PM

All the accurate info we can get is helpful. But won't we all be glad when we can stop talking about it! Can't wait for it to pass, and I hope all can stay well, or if you are unlucky enough to become infected, that it isn't severe and you make a quick recovery. I'm sure we are all taking the necessary precautions, let's hope everyone else is also, and we get thru this ASAP.

Litespud 03-18-20 03:48 PM


Originally Posted by Kapusta (Post 21372942)
A study just published in the New England Journal of Medicine finds that This Coronavirus DOES remain airborne and active in aerosol form for a period of time.

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMc2004973

I think you misunderstand the point of the article, which was to study the viability of the virus under various conditions and surfaces, including when held in an aerosol for a prolonged period. The team used a Goldberg drum apparatus, which maintains an aerosol in suspension for prolonged periods, so that the viability of the virus can be assessed. Also, bear in mind that the aerosol here was generated by a nebulizer apparatus, and there is no comment on whether the average droplet size generated (which is directly related to how long droplets would remain in suspension - the larger the drops, the faster they fall out of suspension) in this study relates to the average droplet size generated by a sneeze or cough. This study is NOT a comment on whether COVID is spread by aerosol, they merely said that it was "plausible" that it could be spread in this manner, given that it survived for several hours in an artificially-maintained aerosol

Maelochs 03-18-20 03:51 PM


Originally Posted by indyfabz (Post 21373067)
So...I come back to the office floor after being out. Take a leak, wash my hands then return to the suite. I have to grab the door handle to open it. I donít know who has touched it and when. (Heard the paper delivery guy come in this morning, and we may be moving soon so prospective tenants sometimes get tours of the suite.) So I use a little sanitizer as a safety precaution. It sits on a table just inside the door. Itís not always one or the other.

i would simply use a piece of typing paper. I will eventually run out of both,but typing paper is not in short supply and is reusable.

But .... Whatever. As long as what you do pleases you and doesn't hurt me .... have a field day. In any case, i will not cough on you so long as you stay far away and we only communicate online.

Litespud 03-18-20 03:53 PM


Originally Posted by Jicafold (Post 21373018)
umm...that NEJM study quoted in post #45 was on a corona virus. Not this exact one....but a corona virus nonetheless.

You're incorrect - the article refers to "(SARS-CoV-2) (formerly called HCoV-19) [which] emerged in Wuhan, China, in late 2019 and is now causing a pandemic" - their study was comparing the relative hardiness of SARS-CoV-2 to SARS-CoV-1, the virus that caused the SARS epidemic in the early 2000's (a veritable pipsqueak of an epidemic compared with the current one, but a big deal at the time)

MiPeGr 03-18-20 04:14 PM

OK...I hate to be *that guy*. But I feel it is important to say this. Has anyone authenticated this message supposedly from Dr. Yang?

The OP himself states that it is at least 3rd-hand information. I think it's important to make sure to authenticate information like this, to avoid spreading mis- or dis-information.

I just did a google search on the supposed author of this piece. Dr. Otto Yang is in fact an infectious diseases doctor at UCLA. But his specialty has something to do with T-cells and HIV. Not to say that he doesn't understand epidemiology and infection vectors. But the first 2 pages of google results point only to biographical/CV ("curriculum vitae") information about him, and it does not seem to indicate that he has made any public statements in the media with regards to the coronavirus pandemic.

Furthermore, I have googled the following distinctive sentence from the first paragraph:


Originally Posted by Miele Man (Post 21372050)
There are reassuring reports, such as two airplane passengers with COVID-19 on a 15-hour flight who did not transmit to anyone on the plane.

This sentence only appears in a couple of specific places...namely one person's facebook page and couple of other forums

I'm not saying that it is fabricated, but just arguing for a reasonable amount of skepticism until the OP, Miele Man can provide some more information to authenticate this message.

Stay healthy, everyone!!! And always check your sources!

tyrion 03-18-20 04:20 PM


Originally Posted by indyfabz (Post 21372233)
Virusforums.net is down the hall.

In a pandemic, every forum is a virus forum.

Jicafold 03-18-20 04:43 PM


Originally Posted by Litespud (Post 21373110)
You're incorrect - the article refers to "(SARS-CoV-2) (formerly called HCoV-19) [which] emerged in Wuhan, China, in late 2019 and is now causing a pandemic" - their study was comparing the relative hardiness of SARS-CoV-2 to SARS-CoV-1, the virus that caused the SARS epidemic in the early 2000's (a veritable pipsqueak of an epidemic compared with the current one, but a big deal at the time)

Yeah. We already established that. I was corrected.

Mad Honk 03-18-20 06:45 PM


Originally Posted by MiPeGr (Post 21373137)
OK...I hate to be *that guy*. But I feel it is important to say this. Has anyone authenticated this message supposedly from Dr. Yang?

The OP himself states that it is at least 3rd-hand information. I think it's important to make sure to authenticate information like this, to avoid spreading mis- or dis-information.

I just did a google search on the supposed author of this piece. Dr. Otto Yang is in fact an infectious diseases doctor at UCLA. But his specialty has something to do with T-cells and HIV. Not to say that he doesn't understand epidemiology and infection vectors. But the first 2 pages of google results point only to biographical/CV ("curriculum vitae") information about him, and it does not seem to indicate that he has made any public statements in the media with regards to the coronavirus pandemic.

Furthermore, I have googled the following distinctive sentence from the first paragraph:



This sentence only appears in a couple of specific places...namely one person's facebook page and couple of other forums

I'm not saying that it is fabricated, but just arguing for a reasonable amount of skepticism until the OP, Miele Man can provide some more information to authenticate this message.

Stay healthy, everyone!!! And always check your sources!

I was the one who provided the information to Miele Man who posted it for me. I was responding to criticism from others who wanted to know what basis I had for saying the virus wasn't likely airborne in nature. They like you questioned the veracity of the information. I received it via E-mail from a friend who knows the doctor, and lives in Pasadena. When I received it it was pretty close to an accurate assessment of the methods of transmission. Yesterday's study suggests that airborne transmission is possible but it was not conclusive, only stating it is possible. They also note half life of airborne particles at 1.2 hours which is giving the virus viability for about four to six hours. The life span they note on plastic and stainless steel is more in the range of days, which is the likely method of transmission.
It is interesting that a quick study replicating one done for Sars1, was done for this virus. As this new information is available I will withdraw my observations from a doctor of note, and also say it is possible to transmit it by aerosol methods but; more than likely to be one from contact as the life expectancy of the virus is higher on SS and Plastics. Smiles, MH

N00b_Cyclist 03-18-20 07:28 PM

I just wanted to let you all know that I'm an actual, licensed, certified....human. Yea, I know...a lot of you will ask for proof, but it's true. 30+ years of experience with the field of "life", and I have to say I'm pretty dang good at it. At least I think so. :D

All joking aside, all I want for everyone is to stay happy, safe, healthy, and sane. We're all in this together, whatever "this" actually is. :)

Cheers all!

Miele Man 03-18-20 08:53 PM

Wearing a mask might help some in the prevention of the spread of this virus by an infected person. However, any mask MUST HAVE AN AIRTIGHT SEAL around the face and over the mouth and nose. Such a seal is usually uncomfortable after some time wearing such a snug fitting mask. Facial hair, such as a beard, will GREATLY reduce the effectiveness of any mask worn by either an infected person or someone hoping to avoid infection. Those N95 masks (not the surgical masks) come in different sizes and must be carefully fitted in order to insure that there is no air gap around the seal.

It seems that the safest thing to do thus far is to avoid going anywhere you might encounter and infected person. Remember too, that a lot of people ONLY think of themselves and not of others. Thus, in my opinion, there will be people who know they have this virus who will still go out and about.

Take care and hopefully stay safe.

Cheers

livedarklions 03-18-20 09:55 PM


Originally Posted by Litespud (Post 21373095)
I think you misunderstand the point of the article, which was to study the viability of the virus under various conditions and surfaces, including when held in an aerosol for a prolonged period. The team used a Goldberg drum apparatus, which maintains an aerosol in suspension for prolonged periods, so that the viability of the virus can be assessed. Also, bear in mind that the aerosol here was generated by a nebulizer apparatus, and there is no comment on whether the average droplet size generated (which is directly related to how long droplets would remain in suspension - the larger the drops, the faster they fall out of suspension) in this study relates to the average droplet size generated by a sneeze or cough. This study is NOT a comment on whether COVID is spread by aerosol, they merely said that it was "plausible" that it could be spread in this manner, given that it survived for several hours in an artificially-maintained aerosol


Originally Posted by Mad Honk (Post 21373340)
I was the one who provided the information to Miele Man who posted it for me. I was responding to criticism from others who wanted to know what basis I had for saying the virus wasn't likely airborne in nature. They like you questioned the veracity of the information. I received it via E-mail from a friend who knows the doctor, and lives in Pasadena. When I received it it was pretty close to an accurate assessment of the methods of transmission. Yesterday's study suggests that airborne transmission is possible but it was not conclusive, only stating it is possible. They also note half life of airborne particles at 1.2 hours which is giving the virus viability for about four to six hours. The life span they note on plastic and stainless steel is more in the range of days, which is the likely method of transmission.
It is interesting that a quick study replicating one done for Sars1, was done for this virus. As this new information is available I will withdraw my observations from a doctor of note, and also say it is possible to transmit it by aerosol methods but; more than likely to be one from contact as the life expectancy of the virus is higher on SS and Plastics. Smiles, MH*

* My undergrad degree is in psychology and was achieved by working in the biology department and laboratories for over six years doing experimental work in genetics. I have a lot more trust in those who work in the field than those who don't. I'm not saying they are always the most authoritative, but usually more so than any guy off the street.


Whether aerosol spread is possible is not just a theoretical issue, and the NEJM letter makes it clear they were studying this to inform control efforts and understand its high rate of communicability. It definitely has revealed the certainty in the Yang email that it is not aerosol to be premature at best. This NEJM letter supports Osterholm's belief that it's spread by a combination of aerosol and contaminated surface exposure.

skookum 03-18-20 10:50 PM


Originally Posted by livedarklions (Post 21373548)
Whether aerosol spread is possible is not just a theoretical issue, and the NEJM letter makes it clear they were studying this to inform control efforts and understand its high rate of communicability. It definitely has revealed the certainty in the Yang email that it is not aerosol to be premature at best. This NEJM letter supports Osterholm's belief that it's spread by a combination of aerosol and contaminated surface exposure.

I dont think there is a consensus on this matter. Best to err on the side of caution.

SHBR 03-18-20 11:41 PM

I'm not that far away from ground zero, it would appear that the authorities have given up on containment.

Most people here (including myself) are still wearing masks in public.

You don't want to be the super spreader that chose not to wear a mask. (the best strategy is to stay home and wait it out)

The economic consequences are likely to be far more problematic than the virus itself.

Suicides are at an all time high too.

79pmooney 03-19-20 12:09 AM


Originally Posted by Jicafold (Post 21373018)
umm...that NEJM study quoted in post #45 was on a corona virus. Not this exact one....but a corona virus nonetheless.

I read that two other corona viruses had much lower transmission rates in contrast with this one; the much deadlier SARS and Ebola. (Thank G**.) Apparently different coronas can be quite different and extrapolating data doesn't necessarily work.

Daniel4 03-19-20 12:31 AM


Originally Posted by Litespud (Post 21372846)
Like I said earlier - Conoraviruses are enveloped viruses. They have an outer lipid membrane which is essential for infectivity. Any disinfectant that kills bacteria (and they pretty much all do this by disrupting the bacterial cell membrane) will also render coronaviruses inactive.

That may be true but the label on the other two doesn't mention viruses.

So you'd also take anti-bacterial medication for virus infections?


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:26 AM.


Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.