In 4 US state prisons, 3,300 inmates test positive, 96% without symptoms • Hacker News Board

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

#211

Post by Retric » Sat, Apr 25, 2020, 10:41 PM UTC

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.

Covid-19 fatalities takes up to 2 months after infection, symptoms have a median of just over 5 days from first exposure.

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

#212

Post by RangerScience » Sat, Apr 25, 2020, 10:42 PM UTC

ilamont wrote: post #109

96% are without symptoms yet . There was a nursing home in Massachusetts which had 51 out of 98 residents testing positive but asymptomatic in early April. While this sounded encouraging in the sense no one was critically ill because of coronavirus, a few weeks later 19 had died and about 30 more had tested positive. Let’s wait a month until there is a clearer picture about the impact of the virus on a particular pop…

...Let's also ask if the tests have a high false positive rate?

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

#213

Post by edmundsauto » Sat, Apr 25, 2020, 10:42 PM UTC

Zach_the_Lizard wrote: post #151

wegs wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, it isn't proof. It is evidence, though. And in two weeks, we will have a lot more evidence. A lot of this is like Russian Roulette -- there's a huge amount about this virus which we don't know, and it could be super-bad or not-that-bad. It could also be there are bad and not-so-bad strains. Or it could be bad down-the-line. Until we do have proof, I'm advocating being conservative. In 2 weeks, we'll know if peo…

> A lot of this is like Russian Roulette -- there's a huge amount about this virus which we don't know, and it could be super-bad or not-that-bad. I think at this point we know enough to say: 1) For most of the population, the virus is not that serious 2) For a subset of the population the virus is seriously deadly. For example, ~20% of NY state coronavirus deaths were from nursing homes, ~37% are 80 or older. By con…

On 1), what do you consider "not that serious"? IE, what are your metrics of choice, and what are the acceptable values?

Regarding the cost-benefit discussion, my perspective is that people only want to discuss the downsides from a reduced economy. Second order effects include reduced vehicle deaths, reduced deaths from pollution, etc. IE, my discussions has felt agenda driven because it considers first order effects only.

If we're going to compare apples-to-apples, I'm willing to have that conversation. If the conversation is limited to "people die during recessions", it's a pretty clear signal that agenda is driving and would not be a productive use of my time.

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

#214

Post by vosper » Sat, Apr 25, 2020, 10:43 PM UTC

crazygringo wrote: post #149

Every article I see about people testing asymptomatic is followed by comments insisting they were asymptomatic when tested , with no idea of whether they stayed asymptomatic or whether virtually all of them had symptoms a few days later, thus basically invalid. But this doesn't seem like a hard problem to solve, folks . Is nobody bothering to follow up with the asymptomatic people a week later? Just take their mobile…

> Just take their mobile phone number, and text them en masse with a quick Y/N question as to whether or not they got sick?

I've been wondering why this isn't just being done for everyone in the country, every few days?

"The main symptoms of COVID-19 are X, Y, Z. If you think you may have COVID-19 please respond "Yes" to this text message. This is free. Your response is private and used to understand the spread of COVID-19 in our country. Please visit http://some.link for more information"

If someone responds "yes" you could follow up with some more questions, if that was useful. And then text them a few days later to see if they're feeling better or worse, or maybe ask them to describe how they feel.

There are lots of problems with this idea: people lying or not taking it seriously; people not responding; not everyone has a cellphone; some people will be worried about privacy, etc etc...

But surely there'd be something useful to learn from it? And it seems like it should be easy to do, really, if you got the mobile providers on board (or just order them to help).

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

#215

Post by hartator » Sat, Apr 25, 2020, 10:44 PM UTC

Retric wrote: post #211

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.

Covid-19 fatalities takes up to 2 months after infection, symptoms have a median of just over 5 days from first exposure.

Median of 10 days though.

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

#216

Post by alexbanks » Sat, Apr 25, 2020, 10:44 PM UTC

edmundsauto wrote: post #213

Zach_the_Lizard wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> A lot of this is like Russian Roulette -- there's a huge amount about this virus which we don't know, and it could be super-bad or not-that-bad. I think at this point we know enough to say: 1) For most of the population, the virus is not that serious 2) For a subset of the population the virus is seriously deadly. For example, ~20% of NY state coronavirus deaths were from nursing homes, ~37% are 80 or older. By con…

On 1), what do you consider "not that serious"? IE, what are your metrics of choice, and what are the acceptable values? Regarding the cost-benefit discussion, my perspective is that people only want to discuss the downsides from a reduced economy. Second order effects include reduced vehicle deaths, reduced deaths from pollution, etc. IE, my discussions has felt agenda driven because it considers first order effects…

It seems kind of ridiculous to cite "reduced deaths from pollution" as an upside while people are also being forced into confinement, no?

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

#217

Post by MrPatan » Sat, Apr 25, 2020, 10:44 PM UTC

jfasi wrote: post #91

cwillu wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They started with the Marion Correctional Institution, which houses 2,500 prisoners in north central Ohio, many of them older with pre-existing health conditions. After testing 2,300 inmates for the coronavirus, they were shocked. Of the 2,028 who tested positive, close to 95% had no symptoms.

This is the relevant response. What the commenter is trying to imply is that the authors of this study are so staggeringly stupid that they overlooked the possibility of false positives when designing this experiment. In reality, this test would need a false positive rate of over eighty percent to explain this kind of asymptomatic infection rate. Also, prisons are useful because due to the close quarters it can be ta…

As someone else has said on another comment, it just needs the experimenter to be infected and a bit careless, and there is your high percentage of positive results.

Plus yeah, to be honest, you dismiss staggering stupidity leading to juicy headlines at your own risk.

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

#218

Post by 13415 » Sat, Apr 25, 2020, 10:44 PM UTC

SN76477 wrote: post #181

prussian wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Am I the only one who is still confused by what they're finding in these antibody tests? Are they looking for antibodies that attach to specific features unique to SARS-CoV-2? Because I'm pretty sure even HCoV-NL63 enter lung cells through ACE2 as well. How can they tell antibodies for these viruses apart? Also aren't antibodies effectively developed in a sort of random process?

I am confused as can be about all of it now. First it was stay locked in, then heard immunity, now they say heard immunity may not happen.

If you're confused by this, you may need to check your news sources. Experts have been explaining all of this for months. First, people need to stay locked in and keep distance in order to slow down the spreading so health care systems don't get overwhelmed. Second, the disease itself can only be stopped once herd immunity is reached. Ideally, herd immunity is achieved by vaccination, once there is one. Until then, social distancing is needed to limit the number of deaths and keep the health system working. Third, it is not yet clear whether long-lasting immunity can be achieved at all. It's very likely, but there is not yet enough data. Immunity may last from 2 months to 2 years or longer. We don't know yet for sure.

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

#219

Post by axguscbklp » Sat, Apr 25, 2020, 10:46 PM UTC

code_duck wrote: post #145

vanniv wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nah, that has too much risk of admitting that eternal house arrest isn't a good solution, so we can be certain that won't be the media narrative.

I’m confused about this version of events that some are supporting. In your view, why does the media have a motive to engage in a secret conspiracy to not present any solutions other than an endless shutdown? How would that benefit ‘The media’?

The media is not monolithic, but a large subset of it is fervently against Trump, against Trump supporters, and against Republicans in general. The worse the pandemic and shutdown get, the more this subset of the media can use it to bash Trump, Trump supporters, and Republicans. Generally speaking, the worse the economy gets, the less likely that the incumbent president will be re-elected. I don't think that this media slant is the result of a conspiracy, though, at least not for the most part. I'd guess that probably most of the slant comes from subconscious bias, not conscious intent.

I'm against Trump too, for various reasons - for example, I don't like his authoritarian mindset, his stance on torture, his stance on surveillance, and his foreign policy towards Iran - but I'm not a fan of the constant hysterics of the anti-Trump media either. Some of those people would claim that Trump was somehow being deceitful and evil even if he just said that 2 + 2 = 4.

There are, I'm sure, other sources of media bias on this matter as well, but this is the one that immediately comes to my mind.

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

#220

Post by edmundsauto » Sat, Apr 25, 2020, 10:46 PM UTC

vanniv wrote: post #180

code_duck wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m confused about this version of events that some are supporting. In your view, why does the media have a motive to engage in a secret conspiracy to not present any solutions other than an endless shutdown? How would that benefit ‘The media’?

I don't really have enough karma to be able to waste responding, but I'll make an exception for you, since you asked more politely than most. First, there's not much secrecy involved. It isn't a secret at all that, Hollywood, the American mainstream media, and the political left are all on the same side. It's been obvious for 30 years now. What we are currently living through is a left-authoritarian consolidation of…

It's interesting to see the effect of a strong confirmation bias at play. I appreciate you taking the time to respond, and would challenge you to think through your perceptions if you started from a different assumption.

Narratives drive how we see the world. In concrete, objective, measurable terms -- what do you mean by a "left-authoritarian consolidation of power"? From my perspective, the right is the one really good at consolidating and protecting their power, while the left is a little ADD about what they care about. (And are thus less effective at being in charge, even if more Americans profess those beliefs.)