Covid19/2021-22 OMICRON/ VIRUS "IHU" FRANCE:P13310/NEWEST VIRUS: "NEOCOV" HIGH INFECTION RATE+1 IN 3 DIE !?! P13315

Italy seems to be doing a good job so far

[link to twitter.com (secure)]

Leaked video in US of an empty shipping port. Trucks there to receive shipments, but nothing to get. A woman narrates the video explaining what it's usually like compared to as she's videoing.

The one thing that is really playing on my mind is, when do we say fuck it, and bunker down. My boss is so misinformed on this, it's like talking to a wall...I dont want to put my family in danger...but fuck, I still have a mortgage and Bill's to pay

I'm tempted to call this an ELE...
It just feels like its heading towards that route

Here's a video from passengers on the Grand Princess Cruise Ship:

I personally want to see follow ups soon to those mild cases who recovered to see if the virus is still there. Whatever the medical term is I don't know. I'm shocked they aren't following up with these people after the stories coming out of so many reinfected patients. Seems that would be a high priority event to do.

That part of this saga is truly troublesome. The leaked information out of China has been confirmed back when the doctors said reinfected patients were showing up and dying later due to heart problems from antivirals. That shit needs to be studied. 14% have returned infected yet they say they can't infect anyone and they aren't sure what to make of it.

Then we hear of the lady whose husband was fine and dandy for two weeks, released on a negative test twice and dies two days after returning home.

A virus won't act the same in everybody as iris a random act each time but to find out what percentage will relapse and suffer needs to be known fast.

Korea has 40 deaths. South China News reports from south Korea CDC. 40 deaths and 88 recovered.

A real death rate of 31% as the other cases aren't resolved. How people can't understand this is one of the strangest aspects of this whole thing.

Firstly, you don’t need “negative pressure rooms” for isolation. You’ve been on GLP too long. It’s a hospital not a bioweapon lab.

Secondly, you actually don’t have more beds per capita. Remember there are many private hospitals in the UK out with the NHS

They truly are.

Thank you Leader. Thank you Rouhani.

Doing a good job informing others on their WuFlu situation

The same will await us later.

From a recent (preprint) paper, some useful information:

The chances of infection depend on viral source, viral concentration, viral
activity level, manner or routes of infections, times of exposures, duration of
exposure, health condition, post-exposure remedial measures, post-infection
mitigating measures, innate immunity, immune system response, etc.

1. Preventive measures should be consider to increase personal ability to
resist COVID-19 infection. The best strategies are strengthening the innate
immunity, blood micro-circulation in the lungs, and immune surveillance
function. Due to the phase lag between the lung infection and the immune
response, maintaining strong innate immunity is the most important. Since
immune cells migrate into lung tissues by squeezing themselves, improving lung
micro-vascular networks is the most important measure to mitigate damages to
the lungs. A large number of things can be used to increase the density of
capillaries, reduce the fat coats in capillaries, increase elasticity of capillaries,
increase the space for accommodating blood vessel expansion, and reduce blood
viscosity. Those measures should be taken before an infection.

2. Avoid exposure to low temperatures, avoid excessive fatigues, and avoid
exposure to cold and humid environment in an outbreak season. If exposure to
virus is suspected, avoid exposure to temperature until the infection is resolved
or no infection has taken place in reasonable days.

3. Reduce inhalation of viral particles and wash hands frequently.
Breathing viral-containing air only one time is better than breathing 100 times.
Exposure to an infectious environment for many days is worse than exposure for
one day. Shortening time of exposure if exposure is unavoidable, and strictly
reduce the total number of inhaled viral parties to the minimum for a time
period.

4. The manners of initial infection and repeating infections are vitally
important. One cannot avoid viruses in a city where a large number of people
have been infected. Risk of infections cannot be evaluated according to the yesor-
no rule. Do not think that every infection is same. An important strategy is
avoiding exposure to a massive viral particles in a short time. People should
learn avoiding direct exposure to air containing fresh droplets and airborne
particles, avoid breathing air from the vicinity of infected patients, and
shortening exposure duration.

5. A large number of factors could be used in several days before exposure
to several days after exposure, during treatment, during recovery, and even after
recovery. General guidance can be developed for reducing direct lung damages
in all kinds of lung infections, and detailed guidance can be tailored for this virus
when more knowledge about the virus is known.

6. In an outbreak reason, reduce time in public places, avoid getting too
closer to strangers, walk away from air flow or wind containing coughed droplets
and avoid getting close to strangers who are talking. Withhold breath for
seconds to avoid coughed air and resume breathing after walking a few steps
away from the coughing area.

7. Stores, schools, and hospitals should take measures to reduce human
density or improve air ventilation. Ventilation condition is especially important in
areas where customers stand in line. If fresh air cannot be provided, a ventilation
system should be used to filter out viral particles from the air. A reduction of
viral concentration and removal of large particles from the air can make
differences even though their benefits are not be reflected in disease incidence
rates.

8. Airborne particles differ greatly in infection power and infection scale.
Fresh droplets from the lungs of persons under infection are the most risky
sources; droplets from the mouth of an infected person is the second; air exhaled
from an infected person may contain a small number of viral particles; viruses in
in particles lose infectious power with time and the decay of viral activity shapely
depends on temperature. The risk level of dusts generated from things that have
been used by infected persons would depend on how viral particles are diluted.
We recommend use of ballpark dilution factor: the fresh viral discharge from an
infected person as a reference concentration, and dilution by at least 1,000 times
to a million times can make differences. Double dilution by a million time each
can make viral source safer for health people.

9. Per the classical model, a low viral concentration and a long exposure
time would achieve a similar level of infection. However, under this two phase
infection model, extended duration of the infection has an effect of postponing some individual infection actions to later times. The delays cause some viral
reproduction activities to take place after the immune system has been scaled
up. Later infections are less harmful. Therefore, disease severity cannot be
accurately predicted by simple product rule.

10. Lung infection and non-lung infection may be caused by two
independent exposures. Their relative timings and routes are important. If a
patient gets a lung infection first and later gets an eye infection from other
source, the eye infection does not mitigate the lung infection. If the eye infection
takes place a few days before the lungs infection, the eye infection may work to
shorten the phase lag between lung viral development and the immune response.
If the eye infection is caused by a lung infection, the eye infection only add a
burden to the immune system. If a person is expected to expose the lungs to high
concentration of virus inevitably, a possible strategy is infecting the digestive
track so that the immune system can protect the lungs.


[link to www.preprints.org (secure)]

Would be a scoop for journalists to interview a recovered, serious patient. They could do the usual disguise to protect that person's identity. I'm baffled as to why they have not interviewed a single 'survivor'

I wonder if the escaping story was a lie and indeed this virus.

Agreed.

And that scary number will just get worse with time, since those "recovered" cases are really just "recovered for now" cases.


Also think we should rename "recovered" as "recovered for now"