Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

In 4 US state prisons, 3,300 inmates test positive, 96% without symptoms

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

431–440 of 649 posts

Re: In 4 US state prisons, 3,300 inmates test positive, 96% without symptoms

#431

Post by danieltillett »

Fjolsvith wrote: post #415
danieltillett wrote: post #361

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A prison is very much like a cruise ship from a viral perspective. We know from the cruise ship data like the Diamond Princess that most people had no symptoms initially, but overtime most people became symptomatic [1]. Of course if we are really lucky and the prison was infected with a naturally attenuated strain we should make use of it [2]. 1. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7078829/ 2. https://www.ti…

> A prison is very much like a cruise ship from a viral perspective. Prisons are much worse. Chow line with men almost heel to toe. Commissary line. Med line. Recycled air. Big crowds in small spaces.

Apart from the demographics, they seem to me pretty similar ;)

Re: In 4 US state prisons, 3,300 inmates test positive, 96% without symptoms

#432

Post by joe_the_user »

rubber_duck wrote: post #400
joe_the_user wrote: post #387

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not every death is the same - a 80 year old with weak immune system could have lived 5 years longer without corona, but a healthy 20 year-old dying from cytokine storm caused by influenza has lost potentially 60 years of healthy life - the loss is much worse. In a triage situation, where you have to decide between different people dying, such choices are unavoidable or necessary. But I want highlight that you are tal…

But those discussions happen all the time. If there is a drug that can extend the life of this person for 5 years but it costs X - should it be covered by society ? At what X does it become unacceptable ? The highest numbers I've seen argued are in the 200k/year but realistically it's much lower depending on the country.

Well, there are two kinds of choices that are generally considered radically different.

One choice is providing some opportunity for further life beyond what's expected. That's generally considered something society likes but isn't obligated to provide. Society doesn't obligate it's member to spend money developing some miracle-extend that gives someone five more years.

The other choice is taking life that would normally be expected. That is something that society very much frowns on. If you could protect someone and you don't do it 'cause it would cost you money, you may wind-up in jail for murder.

Very quantitatively oriented people seem to have a hard time grasping why there's a difference here. But I think it's very rational in an evolutionary game-theoretic compact kind of way. Everyone is a member of society and values everyone else's life highly, more highly than immediate material things though maybe not more highly than other people's lives. This gives member of society basic security - you are thinking my insulin might worth just stealing and selling on the open market, me murdering you first might be my best strategy. You can see where things break down? The "social contract" is kind of the way around this.

Re: In 4 US state prisons, 3,300 inmates test positive, 96% without symptoms

#433

Post by [deleted] »

rubber_duck wrote: post #400
joe_the_user wrote: post #387

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not every death is the same - a 80 year old with weak immune system could have lived 5 years longer without corona, but a healthy 20 year-old dying from cytokine storm caused by influenza has lost potentially 60 years of healthy life - the loss is much worse. In a triage situation, where you have to decide between different people dying, such choices are unavoidable or necessary. But I want highlight that you are tal…

But those discussions happen all the time. If there is a drug that can extend the life of this person for 5 years but it costs X - should it be covered by society ? At what X does it become unacceptable ? The highest numbers I've seen argued are in the 200k/year but realistically it's much lower depending on the country.

[deleted]

Re: In 4 US state prisons, 3,300 inmates test positive, 96% without symptoms

#434

Post by ShorsHammer »

standardUser wrote: post #327
ShorsHammer wrote: post #305

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is being done though, virtually everywhere. Huge amount of testing worldwide is confirming case recovery. You are conflating armchair epidemiologists on HN with the reality on the ground. What people say here doesn't reflect what is being done.

Where is the follow up data? Is there a link or reference? Or do you have inside information?

Can you show me the original data sources first? I'll happily send off emails to the various authors and report back to you on what their follows up are.

Re: In 4 US state prisons, 3,300 inmates test positive, 96% without symptoms

#435

Post by lurquer »

dumbfounder wrote: post #391
lurquer wrote: post #363

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's no need to be snarky. It may take years for a person to know if covid will kill them. There is growing evidence that every person who has tested positive will eventually die. I wouldn't be surprised if we discover asymptomatic victims finally succombing to the disease 10, 15, maybe 20 years down the road.

There is definitely a lot of evidence that people who test positive will eventually die. It might take 50-100 years, and they might die of something else, but yes they will definitely die. Plenty of evidence of that. But seriously, what is this evidence you speak of?

Evidence?!

My grandma tested positive two months ago. They CLAIMED she recovered. But. two days ago she had a stroke while getting her chemo treatment for pancreatic cancer. On her 97th birthday no less. If only she had kept her mask on instead of briefly taking it off to blow out the candles. THtis virus is s killer, and you can downvote me all you want, but this is NOT the flu and if estimates of deaths found on Hacker News two months ago seem hysterically absurd, it's only becaue we've yet to count the hundred of throusnds dead people undiscovered in their apartments and homes.

Re: In 4 US state prisons, 3,300 inmates test positive, 96% without symptoms

#436

Post by justnotworthit »

danieltillett wrote: post #361
jwlake wrote: post #137

One of the super-interesting things here, is that apparently everyone was in the specific window where they test positive for the virus. This implies the population was recently infected, had not been previously infected, and it spread almost completely within a tight window. This implies a shocking high R(effective) for that population. In 2 weeks we'll have super interesting data one way of the other on the CFR.

A prison is very much like a cruise ship from a viral perspective. We know from the cruise ship data like the Diamond Princess that most people had no symptoms initially, but overtime most people became symptomatic [1]. Of course if we are really lucky and the prison was infected with a naturally attenuated strain we should make use of it [2]. 1. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7078829/ 2. https://www.ti…

> We know from the cruise ship data like the Diamond Princess that most people had no symptoms initially, but overtime most people became symptomatic [1].

Your wording is too strong. Data is 50% asymptomatic at time of testing, paper models that that number dropped to 20%.

> from paper on 19 February and 50.5% (320/634) on 20 February (Table). Soon after identification of the first infections, both symptomatic and asymptomatic cases were transported to designated medical facilities specialised in infectious diseases in Japan. However, these patients were treated as external (imported) cases, and a detailed description of their clinical progression is not publicly available.

We conducted statistical modelling to derive the delay-adjusted asymptomatic proportion of infections, along with the infections’ timeline. The estimated asymptomatic proportion was 17.9% (95% credible interval (CrI): 15.5–20.2%).

Re: In 4 US state prisons, 3,300 inmates test positive, 96% without symptoms

#437

Post by Fjolsvith »

TylerE wrote: post #423
Fjolsvith wrote: post #415

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> A prison is very much like a cruise ship from a viral perspective. Prisons are much worse. Chow line with men almost heel to toe. Commissary line. Med line. Recycled air. Big crowds in small spaces.

That’s a cruise

I don't see them advertising it like that.

Re: In 4 US state prisons, 3,300 inmates test positive, 96% without symptoms

#439

Post by SilasX »

ivanhoe wrote: post #52

I've read that asymptomatic carriers are though to be less infectious than those with symptoms because of the lower concentration of virus in the saliva. Also, many virologists mentioned in recent texts that the initial concentration of the virus you receive can affect how sick you'll get - the more viruses you're exposed to, the faster they can invade the body and the more severe it will get. Can those two facts be…

I remember Robin Hanson [1] used the second fact to recommend "variolation", injecting everyone with a tiny amount of the virus so that they'll get the immunity without the sickness (making it a "natural vaccine").

[1] http://www.overcomingbias.com/2020/03/variolation-may-cut-co...

Re: In 4 US state prisons, 3,300 inmates test positive, 96% without symptoms

#440

Post by arcticbull »

peteretep wrote: post #401
Bnshsysjab wrote: post #310

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wouldn’t prisons disproportionately have poorer health than average for several reasons?

Basic healthcare in prison is free (I believe?), and I reckon the food is comparatively less likely to give you diabetes?

One would suspect, but one would be wrong. The data bears this out but also food that's bad for you tends to be cheaper than food that's good for you and Bureau of Prisons isn't known for doting upon its charges.
Post reply on HN