Posted on 04/14/2020 7:23:35 AM PDT by sickoflibs
Germany has made a bit of name for itself during the world-wide coronavirus outbreak as having a relatively low death rate that some reports attribute to the nation’s dedication to tracing transmission rates and seeking where in the country the outbreak began.
But Germany recently bucked yet another convention in the fight against the virus when it announced that a study it had conducted in one of its hardest hit towns may indicate that COVID-19 is possibly not as deadly as suspected and not spreading through casual contact but rather close, sustained contact over a period of time.
Professor Hendrick Streeck, University of Bonn director of the Institute of Virology and Institute for HIV Research, told CNBC’s Closing Bell that a representative study was conducted in a town with a German town with a high prevalence of COVID-19 cases. The results of the study showed 15 percent of the population had antibodies as a result of contracting coronavirus, but the death rate was much lower than expected when considering the high rate of infection.
“Initial containment is important,” Streeck said, noting that containment at the beginning can stop an even known as “superspreading.” [But] if you’re now in the phase to stop the superspreading event…[and] starting typical measures of hygiene and social distancing…we are now seeing that these are enough measures to contain or control the virus spread.”
Streeck also said as the virus is passed between people, it is shown to become less, virulent, lethal, and severe.
As the virus spreads, it sends a certain percentage of people to the hospital and a few of those to ICUs; a portion of those will die. One of the biggest unanswered questions is exactly what percentage of infected people the coronavirus is killing.
From the result of their blood survey, the German team estimated the death rate in the municipality at 0.37% overall, a figure significantly lower than what’s shown on a dashboard maintained by Johns Hopkins, where the death rate in Germany among reported cases is 2%.
…
The presence of previously infected people in the community, Streeck and colleagues believe, will reduce the speed at which the virus can move in the area. They also outline a process by which social distancing can be slowly unwound, especially given hygienic measures, like handwashing, and isolating and tracking the sick. They think if people avoid getting big doses of the virus—which can happen in hospitals or via close contact with someone infected—fewer people will become severely ill, “while at the same time developing immunity” that can help finally end the outbreak.
According to a piece in Business Insider, Streeck says casual human interaction like buying groceries does not present a significant risk when it comes to catching the virus.
Bachman @ElonBachman Germany joins China and Taiwan in concluding that COVID-19 rarely spreads through casual contact
It spreads through repeated, large doses, such as you get while sheltering in place.
-—— Original Message -——
From: moses
To: Rush Limbaugh
Cc: John muir ; Joe pags
Sent: Monday, April 13, 2020 9:44 AM
Subject: Bonn Univ Study
Leading German Virologist: ”No Transmission Of The Virus In Supermarkets, Restaurants Or Hairdressers Has Been Proved”
RTL Luxembourg ^ | 09.04.2020
Posted on 4/13/2020, 12:52:54 AM by Helicondelta
Mr Streeck is a professor for virology and the director of the Institute of virology and HIV Research at the University Bonn. He explained the methodology of his new study in Heinsberg, the “epicentre” of Germany’s COVID-19 outbreak, and talked about potential plans for a country to move forward gradually in getting back to a “normal” life.
These research findings have already provided some indication on how the virus works, as Streeck clarified:
“There is no significant risk of catching the disease when you go shopping. Severe outbreaks of the infection were always a result of people being closer together over a longer period of time, for example the après- ski parties in Ischgl, Austria.” He could also not find any evidence of ‘living’ viruses on surfaces. “When we took samples from door handles, phones or toilets it has not been possible to cultivate the virus in the laboratory on the basis of these swabs….”(Excerpt) Read more at today.rtl.lu ...
AN HONEST FOLLOWUP HERE ON WHAT BONN UNIV DID IS WELCOME
Nearly everyone in my rural county are wearing masks while they are at our mini WM and stores. Town of about 3000 m/l, plus the rural population (have more cows than people, ha). Am surprised somewhat at their willingness to wear masks, and glad they do.
What is new here?
Good perspectives, thanks for posting this.
Victoria Stodden
Associate Professor of Information Sciences, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Where Did You Get That Fact?
We are being inundated every day with computational findings, conclusions, and statistics. In op-eds, policy debates, and public discussions numbers are presented with the finality of a slammed door. In fact we need to know how these findings were reached, so we can evaluate their relevance, their credibility, resolve conflicts when they differ and make better decisions. Even figuring out where a number came from is a challenge, let alone trying to understand how it was determined.
https://www.edge.org/responses/q2013
if you go...a little more than halfway down on the scroll bar on the right
The scientific method suggests skepticism when interpreting conclusions, and a responsibility to communicate scientific findings transparently, so others may evaluate and understand the result. We need to bring these notions into our everyday expectations when presented with new computational results. We should be able to dig in and find out where the statistics came from, how they were computed, and why we should believe them. Those concepts receive almost no consideration when findings are publicly communicated.
(from same)
Grocery stores are probably the Number One source in spreading Covid 19.
The two times I’ve gone with my wife to shop, I fuss at her for handling meat and produce. Then putting that item back.
She says she is looking for freshness and at sell by dates. I get that, but think.
No one wants picked over fresh items that other people have handled.
In Wuhan and Italy, once the governments realized this was the biggest problem, these workers were made to live on campus with their patients and were not allowed out to ride public transportation or use public restrooms.
The lockdowns should apply to these medical workers - not to the general public. People are not getting COVID-19 from somebody coughing two aisles away at the supermarket. Trump needs to get a team of top doctors to confirm this and get them in front of the cameras ASAP, or the MSM and their Democrat puppets will continue the hysteria unabated.
No random sampling yet in the US. We’re still flying blind. On purpose. We haven’t killed the economy enough yet to stoke a socialist revolution, and bankrupt deplorables. Give it another few weeks, that should do it.
So what, exactly, transmitted the virus to all the DP passengers?
Osmosis?
If I'm not mistaken, I think it's suggesting that small exposure to the virus rather than prolonged contact allows the body to develop antibodies without getting severely ill.
I might be wrong -> but if not, I think that's the first time I've read that.
I picked up a wrong bag of produce recently at the store. I added the right produce and kept the wrong one too. Wasn’t going to put it back.
The first cases and deaths in the USA were in the place where we live in King County east of Seattle directly attributable to the half million Chinese people living here many of whom visit home often and have frequent visitors. We had scary predictions about what was going to happen here after University of Washington researchers discovered early on that we had community spread weeks before the first cases were discovered.
A couple local hospitals had overwhelmed ICUs when the virus hit some local nursing homes, but just before the governor's “stay at home” order went into effect nearly a month ago the hospitals started clearing out and the deaths slowed to a trickle. This is fairly common with respiratory illness epidemics, once the most vulnerable people die, the deaths trickle off quickly.
The fire department that I retired from recently tested every member. 11 were found to be positive, only 1 had any symptoms, and his were so benign that he thought he was just having issues from our extremely high pollen count this year, and still coming to work.
In our area we were the first in the nation to have issues and the peak was over three weeks ago. The deaths since that time have mostly been “presumptive” by CDC guidelines. ie... My brother-in-law had an inoperable cancerous brain tumor; he was being cared for by hospice workers and his family. His cause of death was “respiratory failure”, so by CDC guidelines he was counted as a “presumptive Covid-19 death. Everyone knows this is BS, but when I mentioned this to my neighbors... they couldn't get away from me fast enough. But this is happening all across the country. And the huge increase in testing is making it look like we have a growing number of cases ere even though our number of people actually sick is declining.
Prince George’s County Maryland implements this requirement tomorrow. For the while I will shop in adjacent Howard or Anne Arundel. When they go train robber chic I will keep hopscotching on this cheap gasoline.
Interesting post—good to have some WA inside info.
Thanks.
To wit - forcing everyone to stay home is making the problem worse as it spreads through families faster.
“If I’m not mistaken, I think it’s suggesting that small exposure to the virus rather than prolonged contact allows the body to develop antibodies without getting severely ill.”
That is well known. Basis of vaccines.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.