On Lockdown

This area is for the discussion of what's new, what's on your mind, and general photographic topics. A place to meet, make comments on this site, and get the latest community news.

Moderators: Pau, rjlittlefield, ChrisR, Chris S.

ray_parkhurst
Posts: 2805
Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2010 10:40 am
Location: Santa Clara, CA, USA
Contact:

Post by ray_parkhurst »

There is also a potential blood type correlation. This was indicated early in the Wuhan epidemic, indicating that type O were least susceptible, and types A, B, and AB were most susceptible. I have not seen data on Rhesus factor, but perhaps there is some correlation there as well.

ray_parkhurst
Posts: 2805
Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2010 10:40 am
Location: Santa Clara, CA, USA
Contact:

Post by ray_parkhurst »

New Jersey is probably not the best place to implement what Inslee is proposing below since the gun ownership rate is very high there.

Image

ChrisR
Site Admin
Posts: 8574
Joined: Sat Mar 14, 2009 3:58 am
Location: Near London, UK

Post by ChrisR »

Half an hour in an oven at 70°C "kills" the virus on a mask, and the materials apparently survive that OK.

Other treatments are available...

Claims -

Use of far-UV (~220nm) may develop - its penetration at around 1µm isn't enough to get through the tear layer on the eye so it's claimed to be safe.
The photons at that wavelength are punchy enough to to "do a number" on airborne virions and bacteria even in aerosol.
Swallowing of lamps, not recommended though ;)

I wonder if that may find application in aeroplane air circulation systems.
Chris R

ray_parkhurst
Posts: 2805
Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2010 10:40 am
Location: Santa Clara, CA, USA
Contact:

Post by ray_parkhurst »

ChrisR wrote:Half an hour in an oven at 70°C "kills" the virus on a mask, and the materials apparently survive that OK.

Other treatments are available...

Claims -

Use of far-UV (~220nm) may develop - its penetration at around 1µm isn't enough to get through the tear layer on the eye so it's claimed to be safe.
The photons at that wavelength are punchy enough to to "do a number" on airborne virions and bacteria even in aerosol.
Swallowing of lamps, not recommended though ;)

I wonder if that may find application in aeroplane air circulation systems.
I'm not sure what method is used by the commercial disinfection units that have been touted by the Trump administration, but they can supposedly do a very large bulk volume, quickly. I don't see any other practical way to require wearing of masks if self-protection is the goal. Otherwise archaeologists thousands of years from now will end up finding a strange layer composed of fabric interspersed with small stainless steel clips, and held together by decomposed rubber. They won't know what to call it, but we can name it the "Covid layer" in anticipation.

ray_parkhurst
Posts: 2805
Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2010 10:40 am
Location: Santa Clara, CA, USA
Contact:

Post by ray_parkhurst »

Lou Jost wrote:
No, testing is not needed. It is too late for testing or contact tracing. What would you do with that information?
No, it is essential, and I see you partially agree. ...
To be clear, let me elaborate on the testing I believe is both required and legally justifiable in the US:

- Businesses should be required by regulation or law to test employees and customers upon entry for temperature and other outward symptoms such as uncontrolled coughing. Customers would be denied entry, and employees would be told to get tested for the virus and only allowed to return to work after a negative result is presented.

- Antibody and active virus testing for asymptomatic folks should be made available for anyone who wishes it, with only anonyous reporting of the results for data collection purposes

No mandatory testing, either for virus or antibodies, nor any form of vaccination or other medical treatment, would be required.

Every state has the testing capacity to implement this protocol now.

JAIMEMACH1
Posts: 2
Joined: Thu Apr 09, 2020 6:32 am
Location: CUCUTA. COLOMBIA

Post by JAIMEMACH1 »

Well, this Epidemic, like so many that humanity has gone through, has its evolution at a high cost, as long as it is about lives. And as long as there is no Vaccine, with treatments as precarious as those existing up to now, we have to wait until we gradually immunize ourselves until the virus finds no host to colonize and reproduce. Two months of Quarantine in Cúcuta, Colombia, has been a time in which I have been able to extract something positive from this plague. Get started in Macro photography. I am a gynecologist in retirement and with many years of love for photography. But only now I start my first steps in Macro.

At first, I put together a Nikon Macro 200mm lens that I had and a warped Nikon bellow not a few years ago. I rode on some RRS rails and took my first photos and I was "stung" by the pass to make Macro. Then long hours of reading began, with the principles of Distance, focal, magnification, types of lenses, objectives, etc, etc and I was amazed at how interesting the subject was, regardless of the photos I managed to take. I admire the ability of all of you veterans at Macvro. What capacity and generosity to share their knowledge. It is quite a "roll" to understand the joints in the extension tubes, the tube lenses, the distances, the bullets, the aberrations, etc., etc. but very, very, very interesting. I hope in a short time to finish setting up my desk and share my first photos. While so many I think I have extracted something good from this confinement and above all, I thank you very much for all the discussions and teachings of this Forum, without which it is possible that I would not have been encouraged to start. Thank you.
PS: My English is very poor. Sorry if there are errors in the Google translation.

Lou Jost
Posts: 4727
Joined: Fri Sep 04, 2015 7:03 am
Location: Ecuador
Contact:

Post by Lou Jost »

Esta muy bien la traduccion. !Que bueno que usted ha utilizado este tiempo para aprender la fotografia macro! Espero que Colombia puede manejar el virus mejor que Ecuador, donde estamos sufriendo mucho.

JAIMEMACH1
Posts: 2
Joined: Thu Apr 09, 2020 6:32 am
Location: CUCUTA. COLOMBIA

Post by JAIMEMACH1 »

Lou, it was not easy. Two months of confinement but I think it was worth it. There is no collapse in health systems. On the other hand, this has served for the political system to update intensive care units and teams and to better value the medical union. "Every cloud has a silver lining". Now I am popco little by little reintegrating ourselves to produce again, but gradually and subject to the curves of new cases. But I think in its entirety quite well.

ray_parkhurst
Posts: 2805
Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2010 10:40 am
Location: Santa Clara, CA, USA
Contact:

Post by ray_parkhurst »

JAIMEMACH1 wrote:Well, this Epidemic, like so many that humanity has gone through, has its evolution at a high cost, as long as it is about lives. And as long as there is no Vaccine, with treatments as precarious as those existing up to now, we have to wait until we gradually immunize ourselves until the virus finds no host to colonize and reproduce. Two months of Quarantine in Cúcuta, Colombia, has been a time in which I have been able to extract something positive from this plague. Get started in Macro photography. I am a gynecologist in retirement and with many years of love for photography. But only now I start my first steps in Macro.
At first, I put together a Nikon Macro 200mm lens that I had and a warped Nikon Bellow not a few years ago. I rode on some RRS rails and took my first photos and I was "stung" by the pass to make Macro. Then long hours of reading began, with the principles of Distance, focal, magnification, types of lenses, objectives, etc, etc and I was amazed at how interesting the subject was, regardless of the photos I managed to take. I admire the ability of all of you veterans at Macvro. What capacity and generosity to share their knowledge. It is quite a "roll" to understand the joints in the extension tubes, the tube lenses, the distances, the bullets, the aberrations, etc., etc. but very, very, very interesting. I hope in a short time to finish setting up my desk and share my first photos. While so many I think I have extracted something good from this confinement and above all, I thank you very much for all the discussions and teachings of this Forum, without which it is possible that I would not have been encouraged to start. Thank you.
PS: My English is very poor. Sorry if there are errors in the Google translation.
Welcome to the forum! This is a great place to learn, with many very knowledgeable and helpful folks. You can feel comfortable in asking for help, sharing results, and leveraging the collective knowledge.

Your point about lack of a vaccine has been on my mind lately as well. Folks have tried for many years to develop a vaccine for the cold, another coronavirus, and for nearly the last 2 decades for the SARS-1 variant, with no success. I very much doubt a viable vaccine will ever be available, and expect that as you describe, most everyone will eventually contract SARS-2. As we know, most folks will not develop COVID-19, and only a fraction of those (mostly folks with co-morbidities) will die from it. I guess the fear has gotten the best of us. Are we all cowering in our houses and behind our masks, hoping to keep from catching the virus, until the miracle vaccine comes around?

Lou Jost
Posts: 4727
Joined: Fri Sep 04, 2015 7:03 am
Location: Ecuador
Contact:

Post by Lou Jost »

most folks will not develop COVID-19
This depends entirely on the strength of the mitigation measures you keep criticizing.

One sick person can infect dozens of people per hour:
https://www.businessinsider.com/coronav ... ths-2020-5

ray_parkhurst
Posts: 2805
Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2010 10:40 am
Location: Santa Clara, CA, USA
Contact:

Post by ray_parkhurst »

Lou Jost wrote:
most folks will not develop COVID-19
This depends entirely on the strength of the mitigation measures you keep criticizing.
Do you have any data to prove this? The data I have seen says that less than half (and perhaps far less) of the folks who contract SARS-2 end up developing COVID-19, with most folks being asymptomatic. Do you have any data to the contrary? Also, I have no data saying that mitigation in the form of social distancing, wearing masks, etc changes the course of the disease. There is some data saying that how you catch it, ie in the eye, breathing it in, rubbing your nose, etc may change the course (seems that it would), I don't see obvious correlation to social distancing, though mask wearing my indeed do something. Why do you say so emphatically that mitigation has impact on the course of the disease?

Lou Jost
Posts: 4727
Joined: Fri Sep 04, 2015 7:03 am
Location: Ecuador
Contact:

Post by Lou Jost »

The data I have seen says that less than half (and perhaps far less) of the folks who contract SARS-2 end up developing COVID-19, with most folks being asymptomatic. Do you have any data to the contrary?
That's right, but that's exactly why mitigation and real testing is so important, and why mere symptom-testing is not enough. You have to remember that asymptomatic carriers are also infectious.
There is some data saying that how you catch it, ie in the eye, breathing it in, rubbing your nose, etc may change the course (seems that it would)
The example I just cited shows how contagious it is. Lockdown measures would stop such spreading events.

ray_parkhurst
Posts: 2805
Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2010 10:40 am
Location: Santa Clara, CA, USA
Contact:

Post by ray_parkhurst »

Lou Jost wrote:
The data I have seen says that less than half (and perhaps far less) of the folks who contract SARS-2 end up developing COVID-19, with most folks being asymptomatic. Do you have any data to the contrary?
That's right, but that's exactly why mitigation and real testing is so important, and why mere symptom-testing is not enough. You have to remember that asymptomatic carriers are also infectious.
There is some data saying that how you catch it, ie in the eye, breathing it in, rubbing your nose, etc may change the course (seems that it would)
The example I just cited shows how contagious it is. Lockdown measures would stop such spreading events.
Masks reduce transmission from asymptomatic carriers. That is really their only purpose. Unless you're saying that asymptomatic carriers will be forcibly quarantined (which would be illegal), you can't do much better, so why test them? At least testing for symptoms would help keep the most obvious carriers out of the public.

The contagiousness of the virus implies that it will eventually infect virtually everyone, maybe multiple times with different strains, just like the common cold, and there probably won't be an effective vaccine, just like the common cold. If the virus stays with us for a while (years), and is as ubiquitous as the cold, I don't see any practical way to do quarantining, testing, contact tracing, etc regardless of the legal implications.

rjlittlefield
Site Admin
Posts: 21199
Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 8:34 am
Location: Richland, Washington State, USA
Contact:

Post by rjlittlefield »

ray_parkhurst wrote:Masks reduce transmission from asymptomatic carriers. That is really their only purpose. Unless you're saying that asymptomatic carriers will be forcibly quarantined (which would be illegal), you can't do much better, so why test them?
Because, quite a few people who knew that they were asymptomatic carriers would choose to self-quarantine, which is surely more effective than wearing a mask. Suggesting that there's no point in testing is essentially saying that people don't care if they're infectious. Surely there are people like that, but I like to think that most do.
Are we all cowering in our houses and behind our masks, hoping to keep from catching the virus, until the miracle vaccine comes around?
It's more like prudently avoiding a large number of deaths while we figure out what our options are.

As I mentioned earier in this thread, the numbers from New York City indicate an infection fatality rate around 1%. Closer to home, for me, is the Tyson meat packing plant in Wallula, just a few miles down the road. Due to concerns about their working environment, the entire workforce in the plant was tested. Out of 1400 employees, over 250 tested positive, and 3 have died. There's that pesky 1% number again, and not a nursing home in sight.

Best indications from early studies were that the virus has a replication factor R_0 of around 3 (or higher) under life-as-normal conditions. It does not take an elaborate model to predict that with R_0 = 3, and no change in behavior, the infection will rapidly spread until 1-1/R_0 = 2/3 of the population has become immune. At 1% infection fatality rate, that also means roughly 7 in every 1000 people will have died.

Now, it may eventually turn out that that's just the way things are, and we do have to eat the cost in deaths, in addition to whatever costs we incurred by looking for better outcomes. In that case we could look back and say "You know, in retrospect, we would have been better off to just let people get sick, take care of them as best we could, and let the weak ones die."

On the other hand, to me it seems at least equally likely that something better will happen.

A vaccine is one possibility, and I actually think that's pretty likely because of the huge resources being thrown at it. Previous examples like SARS, MERS, and the common cold coronavirus were either not taken very seriously in the first place (common cold) or the efforts were cut short because breakouts were small and controlled by other means. There's a very recent report (April 2020, HERE), that one candidate vaccine against the MERS virus in fact is safe and effective at producing antibodies and targeted T cells.

Better treatment protocols is another. Again, lots of resources being thrown at that problem, with an assortment of encouraging results.

I've scratched my own head a lot, Ray, trying to figure out what's going on inside yours. At the moment, my best guess is that you're being gnawed by thoughts of what for you is the worst possible outcome -- some infringement of your personal liberties -- and you're doing a bang-up job of finding analyses that would avoid that.
ray_parkhurst wrote:New Jersey is probably not the best place to implement what Inslee is proposing below since the gun ownership rate is very high there.

Image
Jay Inslee is the governor of Washington, where I live, so I'm going to feel free to respond to your comment.

First, we here in Washington have plenty of guns. In fact, per capita, we have more registered firearms than New Jersey does. Unregistered, who knows?

But it doesn't matter, because most of us who live here -- and I suspect in most other places too -- are well enough socialized to not think of our guns as a method for protesting public policy and rule of law. We have courts for that.

Speaking of that, Inslee is being sued as we speak, by a group of people including some members of the state legislature, who are seeking to have his stay-at-home order declared unconstitutional. I expect that they'll fail, and I also expect that for the most part they'll abide by that decision.

In the meantime, Inslee is enjoying the support of something like 3/4 of the state's occupants, who think that he's coping very well with a challenging situation.

Speaking for myself, I see the chart that you've shown us as representing a set of services that I would welcome to have available. I do not expect there will be any storm troopers involved. Even in the current "mandatory" shutdown, there have been basically no enforcement actions taken against businesses that came up with specious reasons to argue they were essential, or even simply ignored the mandate altogether.

As a matter of practice, the orders were mostly an effective means of communicating that in the opinion of the folks that we hired to make decisions about this stuff, the best course of action was to shut down a bunch of contagion paths for a while. Best available models, running on then current data, indicated that individual actions were not going to be enough, so some businesses got closed. Now they're gradually being re-opened, with some regulations on business practices that will be more or less acceptable according to each person's tastes.

For restaurants, the Seattle Times writes that "Servers will likely don masks and gloves. You’ll order from a disposable paper menu while your server stands 6 feet away. If you leave your seat to use the restroom, you will be asked to put on your face covering. And in what will likely ignite the biggest controversy, restaurants will be required to record your personal data — name, number, email address and the time of your visit — and maintain those records for 30 days." That should be interesting.

But now I need to go. It's time to write another check to the food bank. YMMV.

--Rik

ray_parkhurst
Posts: 2805
Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2010 10:40 am
Location: Santa Clara, CA, USA
Contact:

Post by ray_parkhurst »

rjlittlefield wrote: I've scratched my own head a lot, Ray, trying to figure out what's going on inside yours. At the moment, my best guess is that you're being gnawed by thoughts of what for you is the worst possible outcome -- some infringement of your personal liberties -- and you're doing a bang-up job of finding analyses that would avoid that.
Rik, I appreciate the long response, though I think you missed my point. It is likely, and was predicted early, that this virus is going to eventually infect most everyone. There is no getting around it given its high transmission. It may not be this season, but will happen over several seasons and years. Ultimately herd immunity may marginally help, but just like the cold it seems to easily mutate, and each strain can re-infect folks who had the previous strain(s). Because of this (among other factors) a vaccine is nearly impossible.

As you can see from my earlier responses, I favored mitigation as it related to "flattening the curve", but only to minimize the impact on the healthcare system. Overall, the number of deaths is probably not going to drop much, just get spread more over time.

You have a much more liberal view of humanity than I do. I expect that few folks on their own would self-quarantine if they were asymptomatic. They could be compelled with peer pressure or incentives but most folks think mainly of themselves.

You also have me wrong regarding motivations. On a personal level, the shutdown has made little impact to my life. In fact honestly I sort of like the light traffic, social distancing, etc. The air quality has improved, and it's quieter. My true motivation for wanting to end the shutdowns is to save the country.

The one area I don't have a solution for is the food supply. Like many others, I was unaware of the exclusivity of the twin industries of consumer vs wholesale food distribution. It is unfathomable to me that crops are getting plowed-under, milk being dumped, chickens being euthanized, etc due to lack of wholesale demand while consumer food prices soar. I don't see large demand increases from restaurants and cruise ships anytime soon, even if the shutdown was completely lifted, so this will be a continuing problem.

The processing plants shutting down due to the virus is an area where this all comes together, and another where I don't have enough knowledge of the details to even propose a solution. I hope there are intelligent and thoughtful folks working out a solution, because if the food supply crashes, it truly will be orders of magnitude worse than the virus.
But it doesn't matter, because most of us who live here -- and I suspect in most other places too -- are well enough socialized to not think of our guns as a method for protesting public policy and rule of law. We have courts for that.

Speaking of that, Inslee is being sued as we speak, by a group of people including some members of the state legislature, who are seeking to have his stay-at-home order declared unconstitutional. I expect that they'll fail, and I also expect that for the most part they'll abide by that decision.
My comment about guns was not related to the "normal times" where polite socialization keeps us all in line. With the high and rising unemployment, potential for food shortages, and the government talking about quarantining us until the virus is eradicated (ie forever), we're sitting on a powder keg of social unrest.

And finally, you must realize that indeed these orders are unconstitutional. Some courts have already found this way, and at some point the SCOTUS will hear a case and almost certainly find the same. This is not the place for political discussion (in spite of some Trump-bashing that has happened even in this thread) but for sure there will be political fallout to this all, though I can't say with any conviction which way it will go.

Locked Previous topicNext topic