Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Coronavirus - worldwide breaking news, discussion, stats, updates and more

elbows said:
Only in the sense that sometimes more than one infection can happen at the same time, so sometimes other things are given to prevent these co-infections. But it wont actually do anything to prevent coronavirus infection.
Click to expand...

Does the coronavirus tend towards pneumonia in worst case scenarios?
I'm just wondering if there's a way to prevent the pneumonia developing.

Eta. Sorry if I am being totally thick about this...
 
Last edited:
Lupa said:
Does the coronavirus tend towards pneumonia in worst case scenarios?
I'm just wondering if there's a way to prevent the pneumonia developing.

Eta. Sorry if I am being totally thick about this...
Click to expand...

Pneumonia is a feature of many of the cases that were bad enough to come to the attention of the Chinese health system in the first known stages of this outbreak, yes. And its been a feature of other things like SARS and MERS in the past.

Pneumonia can vary quite a lot in its severity, and a less severe pneumonia is likely to be a feature of quite a lot of the somewhat less severe (but still hospitalised) cases too. Even some mild cases may show evidence of some lung changes associated with pneumonia, just like with some common illnesses where some pneumonia happens in people more often than we realise, but requires no medical intervention to overcome.

Preventing this sort of lung damage is one of the holy grails, since its often a feature of severe cases of various emerging respiratory diseases. There is probably more than one reason why this damage occurs though, so more than one preventative or treatment solution may be required. I dont know if there are many promising candidates in the pipeline, but I dont think there is much that can help at the moment.

So all the advice will be the general stuff thats already given for viral pneumonia. Which is mostly about hygiene and preventing infection in the first place, trying to optimise overall health as much as possible, and recognising when a case of pneumonia is reaching the point where medical intervention is required.

You arent being thick, you are being very sensible due to understandable concern. I wish I could give you a nice useful answer that is reassuring. I cannot, and in my own case I have to use my own ways of coming to terms with these things, especially since stress is not good for our bodies any more than it is for our minds. And what works for me is reliant on my own particular worldview and the way I come to terms with life and death, so I can't just throw it out there and expect it to work for evweryone else, in some cases I expect it would have completely the opposite effect.
 
Lupa said:
Does the coronavirus tend towards pneumonia in worst case scenarios?
I'm just wondering if there's a way to prevent the pneumonia developing.

Eta. Sorry if I am being totally thick about this...
Click to expand...

The pneumonia vaccine doesn't actually protect against pneumonia, it protects against the most common causes of it, all of which (I think) are bacteria. The one for kids protects against 13 organisms, for adults 23 (NHS). So what it does is put dead versions of those bacteria (it's not a live vaccine) into you, so your immune system can identify them and be better able to get rid of them. Viruses can also cause pneumonia, but protection from those is through vaccines specific to those viruses, like the flu vaccine. Of course there is no vaccine for this coronavirus yet, so there's no protection. As elbows just said, there's not really any general protection against lung damage yet.
 
T & P said:
I am clearly not getting something here. The Guardian is making a big issue of the fact that the first ‘person to person’ case has been confirmed in the US. But isn’t that how the virus has been spreading all along anyway?

www.theguardian.com

Coronavirus: officials confirm first US case of person-to-person transmission

Individual married to Chicago woman diagnosed with virus after she returned from a trip to Wuhan, China
www.theguardian.com www.theguardian.com
Click to expand...

I think it's relevant to whether it gets classed as a pandemic. But yeah, at this point it seems a bit redundant to get excited about someone getting a virus that's know to be infectious off their spouse.
 
T & P said:
I am clearly not getting something here. The Guardian is making a big issue of the fact that the first ‘person to person’ case has been confirmed in the US. But isn’t that how the virus has been spreading all along anyway?

www.theguardian.com

Coronavirus: officials confirm first US case of person-to-person transmission

Individual married to Chicago woman diagnosed with virus after she returned from a trip to Wuhan, China
www.theguardian.com www.theguardian.com
Click to expand...

I think it is significant because it shows it has spread within the US, and it isn't just people arriving from China who have confirmed cases. So the implication is that there are likely many more cases.
 
Cid said:
I think it's relevant to whether it gets classed as a pandemic. But yeah, at this point it seems a bit redundant to get excited about someone getting a virus that's know to be infectious off their spouse.
Click to expand...

Yes.

Well, I havent even looked at how it would end up classed as a pandemic yet, first there will be PHEIC. And with PHEIC the actual spread abroad, as opposed to the only cases abroad having been originally infected at original source country, will be a factor behind the decision (and was one of the justifications for not declaring a PHEIC last week).

Its an Associated Press story so the Guardian havent spun up this one in particular. Its an inevitable media feature of this stage I think. If the outbreak goes in a certain direction then things will move on to a different stage of reporting and focus, as happened with swine flu. There will still be grim statistics, but less 'firsts' to report on about any given country, and various fears will also become more generalised and hopefully far less spiky along nation and race lines. What wont go away is blatantly different attitudes towards deaths and scale of deaths depending on where in the world the people in question are, a feature of societies and regimes that manifests in the media routinely, and disease outbreaks are no exception.
 
I work for a manufacturer and today I received a call from someone who wanted a part urgently made in the UK. It turns out, up until now, they have been sourced from China and now they're worried.
 
weltweit said:
elbows, what are the implications of this?
Click to expand...

There are a big bunch of international legal implications for a start. Some acts some countries take run contrary to some of these, but I'm not clued up on the detail. If its not reported on properly in the next day then I'll try to do my own research.

For example WHO is against travel and trade restrictions in general, and this was just restated by the WHO director general in the WHO press conference I am sort of half-watching right now as I type this.
 
My new job means I am in 5 different GP surgeries per week. A big meeting today at one and we were briefed on how suspected cases should be dealt with. The WHO statement was expected, also expecting one from NHS England.
 
elbows said:
..
For example WHO is against travel and trade restrictions in general, and this was just restated by the WHO director general in the WHO press conference I am sort of half-watching right now as I type this.
Click to expand...
But surely that is against common sense? Surely preventing the spread would be a primary requirement of WHO and others. I am sure in China they are keen to restrict the spread as much as others are internationally.
 
weltweit said:
elbows, what are the implications of this?
Click to expand...

Basically it alerts countries to be on high alert, which they were anyway, WHO is just coming to the party late as usual.

It took them 8 months to declare a 'Public Health Emergency of International Concern' after the Ebola virus epidemic, I guess they are learning lessons & starting to move a little faster.
 
I'm curious as to why some airlines have stopped flying to China, while others (Turkish Airlines) are still going.

I have a few friends working in that part of the world - all of them are currently out of the country because they're teachers and on winter break. Very interesting observing what they decide to do. One couple with a baby staying away and will work online, one couple based in Hong Kong have gone back because they feared losing their jobs, one other friend in the process of deciding. Another friend was meant to start a new job next week but that's now cancelled/postponed.
 
Any particular brands or types of soap for hand washing that one should favour over others? Apart from just washing hands frequently after contact with public surfaces and thoroughly. Stocks of face masks are becoming difficult to acquire within the UK too atm for what effectiveness they can offer:

The demand for face masks in the UK appears to be on the rise, PA Media reports.

On the Boots website, a six-pack of “safe & sound” surgical face masks is sold out, with a note saying they will not be receiving any further stock.

Another product on the Boots website, a box of 50 masks, is also sold out and carries the same message about not being restocked.

Boots said surgical face masks are available to order in stores as a special line from the pharmacy counter, adding that they are “working to make additional stock available for customers to purchase in store and on boots.com which we hope will land over the next week”.

A branch of B&Q in London appeared to be low on stocks of face masks, with racks empty on Wednesday evening.

Meanwhile, on amazon.co.uk, a pack of 12 “anti virus” flu surgical face masks is sold out, with the online retailer saying they do not know when, or if, the item will be back in stock, although there are other masks available on the site.

In China the shortage of masks has led to some improvising solutions.



www.theguardian.com

Virus death toll reaches 213 in China – as it happened

More than 9,320 people infected globally, as WHO director says decision comes amid concern for countries with weaker health systems
www.theguardian.com www.theguardian.com
Click to expand...
 
weltweit said:
But surely that is against common sense? Surely preventing the spread would be a primary requirement of WHO and others. I am sure in China they are keen to restrict the spread as much as others are internationally.
Click to expand...

Their stance will be based on a number of different things. Such as:

Standing against arbitrary decisions regarding border closures, visa refusals, and wide quarantine nets. They will question such decisions and will probe whether particular decisions have a genuine scientific basis, whether they are proportionate etc.

International politics, the prevailing global order, global trade, neoliberalism, etc. Other political sensitivities.

For example the Director General has spent quite a long time praising China in the press conference. Some of this is 'diplomacy', and some of it is a completely reasonable response given that a number of aspects of the Chinese response and data sharing have been quite impressive, and some of the criticism of them unfair or unrealistic. But there will be contradictions, eg some steps China have taken are unlikely to be considered to be proportionate by WHO doctrine in normal times.

As it happens the bit of the press conference I heard included the Director General going too far when expressing his confidence in Chinas capacity to control this outbreak, but thats just my opinion, and again if it was an error its one I consider was made because of the context - these political and diplomatic angles rather than the actual characteristics of the spread and humanities ability to prevent it.
 
pinkychukkles said:
Any particular brands or types of soap for hand washing that one should favour over others? Apart from just washing hands frequently after contact with public surfaces and thoroughly. Stocks of face masks are becoming difficult to acquire within the UK too atm for what effectiveness they can offer:
Click to expand...
I've written this before...
2hats said:
The key part of hand washing is the mechanical process - the water and detergent are just helping to dislodge foreign bug carrying material from yours hands - but it's the thorough rubbing of hands together in a stream of suitable solvent that does almost all the work. You can use alcohol based washes (or some other anti-bacterial solution) to kill most bacteria as well but they won't do anything to a wide range of viruses - nor will hot water. Hence the thorough scrubbing ritual practised by surgeons pre-op to physically shift potential sources of infection. Rinsing ones hands under a stream of hot water is next to useless. Using a detergent at least promotes some effort on the part of user to rub their hands together in order to apply and then remove it.
Click to expand...
At the loo sinks of one of the labs I work in we have these on the soap dispensers:
Hand-washing-1.png
 
Since I am a bit lacking in time for this particular angle right now, I will just offer this quote from a WHO page on the International Health Regulations (IHR 2005) to illustrate my previous point. As far as I know those regulations are also where the whole Public Health Emergency of International Concern comes from.

While international transport, travel and trade contribute to economic development and welfare of populations, they may also pose public health risks. Today’s high traffic at airports, ports and ground crossings can play a key role in the international spread of diseases through persons, conveyances and goods.

Under the International Health Regulations (IHR 2005), Member States are requested to maintain public health measures and response capacity at designated airports, ports and ground crossings. This protects the health of travellers and the population, keeps ports, airports and ground crossings running, and ensures ships, aircrafts and ground transportation are in sanitary condition so that no unnecessary health-based restrictions are placed on international traffic and trade.

WHO supports Member States in putting into action event management and preparedness plans at points of entry and facilitates the implementation of appropriate measures in response to public health risks that do not impose unwarranted restrictions on travel and trade. We also produce, update, and disseminate technical guidance and training tools to support Member States in developing competencies to fulfill their IHR requirements at points of entry.
Click to expand...

www.who.int

Minimizing health risks at airports, ports and ground crossings

While international transport, travel and trade contribute to economic development and welfare of populations, they may also pose public health risks. Today’s high traffic at airports, ports and ground crossings can play a key role in the international spread of diseases through persons...
www.who.int www.who.int

So as well as aspects that can just make me cynically refer to neoliberalism or diplomacy, the WHOs role is made complicated by the fact they are trying to encourage a balance between preventing the damage an outbreak causes, and discouraging the damage countries disproportionate responses to it may cause. Real human damage if things are not proportionate. So dont be expecting them to clap every draconian measure or support the wrong sort of overabundance of caution expressed crudely by particular countries.
 
elbows said:
Pneumonia is a feature of many of the cases that were bad enough to come to the attention of the Chinese health system in the first known stages of this outbreak, yes. And its been a feature of other things like SARS and MERS in the past.

Pneumonia can vary quite a lot in its severity, and a less severe pneumonia is likely to be a feature of quite a lot of the somewhat less severe (but still hospitalised) cases too. Even some mild cases may show evidence of some lung changes associated with pneumonia, just like with some common illnesses where some pneumonia happens in people more often than we realise, but requires no medical intervention to overcome.

Preventing this sort of lung damage is one of the holy grails, since its often a feature of severe cases of various emerging respiratory diseases. There is probably more than one reason why this damage occurs though, so more than one preventative or treatment solution may be required. I dont know if there are many promising candidates in the pipeline, but I dont think there is much that can help at the moment.

So all the advice will be the general stuff thats already given for viral pneumonia. Which is mostly about hygiene and preventing infection in the first place, trying to optimise overall health as much as possible, and recognising when a case of pneumonia is reaching the point where medical intervention is required.

You arent being thick, you are being very sensible due to understandable concern. I wish I could give you a nice useful answer that is reassuring. I cannot, and in my own case I have to use my own ways of coming to terms with these things, especially since stress is not good for our bodies any more than it is for our minds. And what works for me is reliant on my own particular worldview and the way I come to terms with life and death, so I can't just throw it out there and expect it to work for evweryone else, in some cases I expect it would have completely the opposite effect.
Click to expand...


Thank you... :)
 
And the WHO Director Generals statement is here:

www.who.int

IHR Emergency Committee on Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV)

www.who.int www.who.int

I will not quote the lengthy opening where the diplomatic aspects are on full and repeated display.

But I will quote the summary of recommendations from the committee, the first of which again makes very clear my previous point, and then the others move on to all the other areas. Also supporting countries with weak healthcare systems is one of the key purposes of declaring the PHEIC, so it is not surprising to see this aspect highlighted today.

First, there is no reason for measures that unnecessarily interfere with international travel and trade. WHO doesn’t recommend limiting trade and movement.

We call on all countries to implement decisions that are evidence-based and consistent. WHO stands ready to provide advice to any country that is considering which measures to take.

Second, we must support countries with weaker health systems.

Third, accelerate the development of vaccines, therapeutics and diagnostics.

Fourth, combat the spread of rumours and misinformation.

Fifth, review preparedness plans, identify gaps and evaluate the resources needed to identify, isolate and care for cases, and prevent transmission.

Sixth, share data, knowledge and experience with WHO and the world.

And seventh, the only way we will defeat this outbreak is for all countries to work together in a spirit of solidarity and cooperation. We are all in this together, and we can only stop it together.
Click to expand...

And his final remarks (although there was also a Q&A afterwards which is what I saw a bit of live via a stream and is not transcribed on that particular page)

This is the time for facts, not fear.

This is the time for science, not rumours.

This is the time for solidarity, not stigma.
Click to expand...
 
Again continuing my same WHO travel ban etc theme, I would expect the UK quarantine measures to also come under stuff being highlighted in these tweets.

 
Johnson & Johnson on Wednesday unveiled its “multi-pronged” response that includes a vaccine R&D effort in a "skunkworks" in the Netherlands, according to Chief Scientific Officer Paul Stoffels. It's also testing whether existing medicines could tackle the novel virus and donating antiviral drugs to Chinese hospitals.


Meanwhile, AbbVie's HIV drug Kaletra was plucked out by Chinese authorities for use against the pneumonia triggered by the novel virus. AbbVie in turn announced a $1.5 million donation of the drug.
Moderna Therapeutics and Inovio are scrambling to develop vaccines of their own, and local outbreak preparedness group CEPI has pledged funding for their early-stage efforts. The group formed in response to prior outbreaks and has doled out hundreds of millions of dollars for outbreak prep efforts. Inovio and Moderna are only two of the early vaccine efforts that have been announced; Moderna believes its mRNA vaccine technology could "serve as a rapid and flexibleplatform" to respond to emerging pathogens, including the new coronavirus.
 
Lupa sorry to divert the conversation but I believe the "pneumonia vaccine" you have mentioned is nothing to do with the general condition pneumonia but against a specific organism (Streptococcus pneumoniae) which is a common cause (especially in the old and immunocompromised) of respiratory infections and pneumonia. I think where Cid's link talks of different types it relates to the fact that you can have different strains/variations of S. pneumoniae.

To my knowledge there is no pneumonia vaccine as it is caused by such a wide range of viruses/bacteria/fungi that it would not be possible.

I don't know how likely a vaccine against a Coronavirus is. If they are able to sufficiently mutate regularly there may not be much chance to find a suitable target to make the vaccine for to trigger a good immune response.
 
Supine said:
Meanwhile, AbbVie's HIV drug Kaletra was plucked out by Chinese authorities for use against the pneumonia triggered by the novel virus. AbbVie in turn announced a $1.5 million donation of the drug.
Click to expand...

If anyone remembers the expert who thinks he got infected via his eyeball, that someone posted about earlier in the thread, he pops up in this story too!

I google translated a long story about him, and as well as the eyeball stuff, there is this:

During the interview, his attending doctor greeted him outside the door, and Wang Guangfa blurted out: "You are my life-saving benefactor."

Wang Guangfa told reporters that this is because the doctor suggested that he use a drug called "lopinavirlitonavir tablets", which is an antiviral drug for AIDS. This drug is effective in his case, but it is unclear whether it will be effective in other patients and follow-up observations are needed. Earlier, Academician Zhong Nanshan once said that currently there is no specific medicine for this new type of pneumonia.
Click to expand...

(taken from a translation of 独家专访王广发：我是怎么被感染的？-中新网 )

I suppose I'm not surprised to hear of drugs originally licensed for other purposes, that had shown some sort of potential in past studies, end up getting given to patients at times like these, especially if the patient works in the profession!

Missing is not just info about whether its been tried on anyone else, but also I dont think I have read anything that indicated to me quite how sick from the coronavirus this man had become in the first place.

Also I consider that the word pneumonia is often used as shorthand for broader aspects of the infection in these sorts of things, so it can cause confusion. eg I dont know as this drugs potential is for pneumonia prevention specifically, as opposed to generally tackling the coronavirus infection, which will invariably improve symptoms such as pneumonia.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

editor
Professional football and coronavirus
Replies
6
Views
580
elbows
elbows
hipipol
Vitamin D and coronavirus
2 3 4
Replies
114
Views
5K
SheilaNaGig
S
weltweit
Omicron news
27 28 29 30 31
Replies
908
Views
39K
elbows
elbows
editor
  • Poll
Have you had Covid-19/coronavirus and how bad was it?
2
Replies
51
Views
3K
editor
editor
Sasaferrato
  • Sticky
Coronavirus in the UK - news, lockdown and discussion
1588 1589 1590 1591 1592
Replies
48K
Views
2M
gentlegreen
gentlegreen
Back
Top Bottom