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

Outbreak of common colds at Antarctic base after 17 weeks of isolation (1973)

ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 79 posts

Re: Outbreak of common colds at Antarctic base after 17 weeks of isolation (1973)

#51

Post by abfan1127 »

sjg007 wrote: post #47
lurquer wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Drive through windows and me going to the store have been our only exposures. Let me reword this for you: "interacting with a teenager who deals with about a thousand people a day, and going to a facility that is frequented by tens of thousands of people a week, has been my only exposure."

I think the issue is that we are wearing masks and gloves so despite those protections you still can get sick while maintaining 6 foot social distance and even strictly limiting the time in a store (if ever)... Also the vector is one adult here max.

short of N95 masks, masks don't help you at all. In fact, they make it worse from the standpoint that as you touch it, you are applying various yuck on it to inhale.

Re: Outbreak of common colds at Antarctic base after 17 weeks of isolation (1973)

#52

Post by AnotherGoodName »

samatman wrote: post #50
y-c-o-m-b wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If we could somehow confirm that most (>95%) of gastro based infections result in mild symptoms, I wonder if that would be one way (although not a great way) to "immunize" the public vs a vaccine? Swallow the pill containing the virus and let it run its course to develop immunity?

This general strategy is called inoculation, or variolation. It is, indeed, not a great way to immunize the public, as the patient becomes contagious, and can pass on full-blown infection to other people. It's also dangerous in its own right; 'mild' infections can progress to full-blown infections.

If the risk could be reduced 10-100X it may be worth consideration. I could imagine one of the crazier/more desperate countries trying this in order to get ahead long term (North Korea?).

Re: Outbreak of common colds at Antarctic base after 17 weeks of isolation (1973)

#53

Post by lurquer »

sushid wrote: post #45
lurquer wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Drive through windows and me going to the store have been our only exposures. Let me reword this for you: "interacting with a teenager who deals with about a thousand people a day, and going to a facility that is frequented by tens of thousands of people a week, has been my only exposure."

Seriously, how is this not comprehensible to people? If you or your family members are going outside, you HAVE NOT been in isolation. You've been interacting with people outside and bringing in germs from your visits.

As Jeff Goldblum would say, "Life finds a way."

I'm avoiding Covid conversations as my self-esteem is too fragile to tolerate downvotes. ;) But, if I were opining on the subject, I'd say that masks, social distancing, lock-downs, etc. are absolutely and utterly worthless and unecessary. But, if it makes some people feel virtuous to wear their placebo masks while cowering in the apartments, so be it. As for me, I'll be at the river this weekend tubing with several hundred others, drinking a Corona, and thinking of you all.

Re: Outbreak of common colds at Antarctic base after 17 weeks of isolation (1973)

#54

Post by m463 »

avar wrote: post #10

It's interesting that the "Environment" section mentions this in passing: > Food comes mainly from packets or tins [...] There is a daily bread bake, and special occasions merit the thawing of a small amount of meat from a -20 C. freezer or from an ice cave in the nearby glacier. Then in the "Discussion" section: > The occurrence of a common cold during isolation, when the chances of introduction of new infection fro…

I watched that video early on about handling your groceries.

One part mentioned how long covid could persist on things.

- aerosol form - 3 hours

- on cardboard - 1 hour

- on plastic/metal - 3 days

Later in the video they mention heat and cold

- heat in microwave - kills it

but then...

- some coronavirus species can live frozen for up to 2 years

https://youtu.be/sjDuwc9KBps

Re: Outbreak of common colds at Antarctic base after 17 weeks of isolation (1973)

#55

Post by Natsu »

marktangotango wrote: post #30
sjg007 wrote: post #20

I noticed this in my own family of four. We've been in isolation for 2 months and we've all had colds for a week. You'd expect after 4 weeks for it to stop but nope. We've been social distancing and only one person goes out to pick up groceries curb side. We've been wiping stuff down too. I think this is one reason they say sars-cov-2 aka covid-19 is inevitable..

Same here, two weeks in 3 of 4 in our family had mild fevers (99 I also discovered my temp is generally 96-97, rarely goes up to "normal".

Average body temperature seems to have been dropping for a long time now.

Also, validate that yours give consistent readings. There's been some evidence of a bunch of them going out un or poorly calibrated recently and being off by a couple of degrees, and we're not talking about low end models, either.

Re: Outbreak of common colds at Antarctic base after 17 weeks of isolation (1973)

#56

Post by ComputerGuru »

cpncrunch wrote: post #32
nelaboras wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Viruses also can stay inactive in the body for years, see herpes as an obvious example. No idea if that can also be true for flu viruses though.

True for herpesviruses as they infect the immune system, but rhinovirus and coronavirus don't reactivate.

And chickenpox infects the nervous system.

Re: Outbreak of common colds at Antarctic base after 17 weeks of isolation (1973)

#57

Post by [deleted] »

lurquer wrote: post #53
sushid wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seriously, how is this not comprehensible to people? If you or your family members are going outside, you HAVE NOT been in isolation. You've been interacting with people outside and bringing in germs from your visits.

As Jeff Goldblum would say, "Life finds a way." I'm avoiding Covid conversations as my self-esteem is too fragile to tolerate downvotes. ;) But, if I were opining on the subject, I'd say that masks, social distancing, lock-downs, etc. are absolutely and utterly worthless and unecessary. But, if it makes some people feel virtuous to wear their placebo masks while cowering in the apartments, so be it. As for me, I'll b…

[deleted]

Re: Outbreak of common colds at Antarctic base after 17 weeks of isolation (1973)

#58

Post by knicholes »

jansan wrote: post #15

Does anybody else here have tonsilloliths? By their awful smell I assume that they may contain all kinds of bacteria or virii. Is it possible that they can survive in there and reactivate several months later again? Warning: You will need a strong stomach if you intend to search for "tonsilloliths" on Google or Youtube.

Yeah, I hock one up every couple months. I know I shouldn't, but something inside me makes me squish and smell it. It's always as disgusting as I know it will be, yet here we are.

Re: Outbreak of common colds at Antarctic base after 17 weeks of isolation (1973)

#59

Post by LolWolf »

Cactus2018 wrote: post #35
michrassena wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've tried to find this paper, but I can't. There's a Paul Thomas Young, who did study rats in that timeframe. https://www.jstor.org/stable/1421573?seq=1

I've look too. Couldn't find. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Cargo_cult_science#Rat-ru... https://www.realclearscience.com/blog/2014/02/the_rat_experi...

Indeed, the closest things I've been able to find have been these two studies [0, 1] which investigate a large number of different possible incidental stimuli (from lights all the way to the placement of the assistants during the experiment). Neither of these mention sand as far as I can tell nor were they written by a "Young". There is a paper that does, though, found here [2], which used it in the walls of the maze, but it does not mention a reason for doing this.

For fun, I also found this 1938 paper as I was looking around that I haven't read. It's interesting what random things scientists were doing during this time and what debates were had [3].

-----

[0] "The effect of incidental stimuli on maze learning with the white rat" https://doi.org/10.1037/h0071189

[1] "Further studies of the effect of incidental stimuli on maze learning with the white rat" https://doi.org/10.1037/h0075810

[2] "Correlations between conditioning and maze learning in the white rat" https://doi.org/10.1037/h0053662

[3] "The effect of a native Mexican diet on learning and reasoning in white rats" https://doi.org/10.1037/h0061906 (The study found that the rats had less body mass, but did not find a statistically significant difference in maze solving ability.)

Re: Outbreak of common colds at Antarctic base after 17 weeks of isolation (1973)

#60

Post by jansan »

knicholes wrote: post #58
jansan wrote: post #15

Does anybody else here have tonsilloliths? By their awful smell I assume that they may contain all kinds of bacteria or virii. Is it possible that they can survive in there and reactivate several months later again? Warning: You will need a strong stomach if you intend to search for "tonsilloliths" on Google or Youtube.

Yeah, I hock one up every couple months. I know I shouldn't, but something inside me makes me squish and smell it. It's always as disgusting as I know it will be, yet here we are.

Why shouldn't you? I have been removing them with water (syringe with plastic tip) for quite a while and haven't seen any negative effects. I also feel more confident that I do not have a bad breath.
Post reply on HN