COVID-19 Coronavirus current events

Science magazine has a news article out that summarizes the situation nicely, they even address conspiracy theories. https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/01/mining-coronavirus-genomes-clues-outbreak-s-origins
According to Bedford’s analysis, the bat coronavirus sequence that Shi Zheng-Li’s team highlighted, dubbed RaTG13, differs from 2019-nCoV by nearly 1100 nucleotides. On nextstrain.org, a site he co-founded, Bedford has created coronavirus family trees (example below) that include bat, civet, SARS, and 2019-nCoV sequences. (The trees are interactive—by dragging a computer mouse over them, it’s easy to see the differences and similarities between the sequences.) Bedford’s analyses of RaTG13 and 2019-nCoV suggest that the two viruses shared a common ancestor 25 to 65 years ago, an estimate he arrived at by combining the difference in nucleotides between the viruses with the presumed rates of mutation in other coronaviruses. So it likely took decades for RaTG13-like viruses to mutate into 2019-nCoV.
Content from External Source
In the absence of clear conclusions about the outbreak’s origin, theories thrive, and some have been scientifically shaky. A sequence analysis led by Wei Ji of Peking University and published online by the Journal of Medical Virology received substantial press coverage when it suggested that “snake is the most probable wildlife animal reservoir for the 2019‐nCoV.” Sequence specialists, however, pilloried it.
Content from External Source
So, right now we know that this coronavirus is very similar to bat viruses, but it remains unclear how it jumped to humans. Scientists suspect that the virus may have jumped to another animal first and identifying that intermediary species remains a big priority and challenge.
 
The Chinese tech giant Tencent seems to have temporarily reported (or misreported) a huge number of infections on their website (10x more infections and 80x more deaths), leading some to fear these are the "real" numbers that China is hiding from us:

1580900133-5e3a9f2567c51.jpg
Left to right: "Nationally confirmed cases", "Suspected Cases", "Cured", "Deaths"

TAIPEI (Taiwan News) — As many experts question the veracity of China's statistics for the Wuhan coronavirus outbreak, Tencent over the weekend seems to have inadvertently released what is potentially the actual number of infections and deaths, which were astronomically higher than official figures.

On late Saturday evening (Feb. 1), Tencent, on its webpage titled "Epidemic Situation Tracker", showed confirmed cases of novel coronavirus (2019nCoV) in China as standing at 154,023, 10 times the official figure at the time. It listed the number of suspected cases as 79,808, four times the official figure.

The number of cured cases was only 269, well below the official number that day of 300. Most ominously, the death toll listed was 24,589, vastly higher than the 300 officially listed that day.
Content from External Source
Source: https://www.taiwannews.com.tw/en/news/3871594

I think this is more likely to have been a temporary bug than someone trying to "leak the truth". Not because these numbers themselves are impossible, but the data gathering seems sort of impossible. We have seen a massive mobilization, but even adding around 1200 medical staff brought in to join doctors in the area doesn't seem close to the scale needed to handle 5,000+ new cases per day, tracking an additional 2,600+ people daily, while treating a sick population the size of Dayton Ohio, and confirming 800 deaths a day. Not to mention how difficult it would be to hide the deaths of 24,285 real people with families and connections all over the world. A lie that big would also be extremely dangerous to healthcare workers and scientists racing to find a cure. And all of those lies would lead to exponentially more lies... and the Chinese government would completely lose all legitimacy if those "lies" were revealed.
 
Last edited:
My wife and I have a trip booked for Vietnam and Cambodia in June. Of course we are worried now about whether we really should be traveling to Asia.

I contacted our travel insurance and it seems that we are not covered if we wish to cancel the trip due to Coronavirus. Apparently it is common policy for travel insurance to not cover for cancellations due to global health epidemics.

This leaves us possibly in the precarious position that our tour may be canceled, yet we will have flights booked which we cannot get a refund for.

I’m sure many other people will be in this situation.

Of course this is a first world problem and nowhere near compatible to those directly affected by the outbreak.
 
The Chinese tech giant Tencent seems to have temporarily reported (or misreported) a huge number of infections on their website (10x more infections and 80x more deaths), leading some to fear these are the "real" numbers that China is hiding from us:

1580900133-5e3a9f2567c51.jpg
Left to right: "Nationally confirmed cases", "Suspected Cases", "Cured", "Deaths"

TAIPEI (Taiwan News) — As many experts question the veracity of China's statistics for the Wuhan coronavirus outbreak, Tencent over the weekend seems to have inadvertently released what is potentially the actual number of infections and deaths, which were astronomically higher than official figures.
Content from External Source
I don't think there was an "accidental release of true (or hidden) figures". t seemed like a mistake that was soon corrected.
Because according to the bolstered figures first presented....this means there is a 16% death rate among the infected....in China.
With 154,023 confirmed cases and 24,589 deaths....this results in a 16% death rate.
But in other countries at the same time period as these numbers..... Japan's infected would have had 7 deaths, and Singapore would have had 4 deaths.
But there were Zero (0) deaths in both above respective countries, respective of infected numbers..

Source: https://youtu.be/GT3_A1bf9pU?t=77
 
Last edited:
I also think there needs to be some perspective (as far as explosive virus media paranoia), that there is already a mutating virus that is killing many more people called Influenza.
U.S. CDC estimates were recently reported as:
CDC estimates that so far this season there have been at least 22 million flu illnesses, 210,000 hospitalizations and 12,000 deaths from flu.
https://www.cdc.gov/flu/weekly/index.htm
I'm not trying to distract from a new or novel virus that may be genuinely concerning................. but that public media may be potentially becoming numb or "immune" (bad pun) to an ongoing virus emergency........or that the FLU is somehow not as important or equally worthy of interest.
 
some publications and youtube videos are reporting that the virus is now airborne. since this is a major problem, i went looking for some official source... and at this time, no. there is no evidence at this time coronavirus is airborne.


A researcher with the Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention on Sunday told reporters the novel coronavirus does not suspend or float in the air for a long time.

No evidence has shown that the new virus can be transmitted through aerosol, Xinhua quoted Feng Luzhao as saying.

Content from External Source
https://www.channelnewsasia.com/new...coronavirus-aerosol-transmission-moh-12418446


add: it sounds as if a bureaucrat maybe misunderstood what airborne/aerosol is. (I don't speak Chinese so im going by reporters like Newsweek). I don't want to quote his bunk but the responses from doctors, that NEwsweek also gives:


Shen Yinzhong, the medical director of the Shanghai Public Health Clinical Center, said 2019-nCoV could "in theory" spread through the air. However, Shen said more research is needed to confirm this, according to The New York Times which cited Shanghai's The Paper.

This view was questioned on Sunday, when researcher Feng Luzhao of the Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention told a press conference there is no evidence that the virus can form aerosols. Feng said, according to China Daily, that the most likely route of transmission appears to be direct, where a person breathes in the air of an infected person who has coughed or sneezed, which is different to airborne transmission. In addition, he said it is unlikely the virus can spread through fruit and vegetables.

Content from External Source
https://www.newsweek.com/coronavirus-could-airborne-chinese-official-claims-1486493
 
Last edited:
some publications and youtube videos are reporting that the virus is now airborne. since this is a major problem, i went looking for some official source... and at this time, no. there is no evidence at this time coronavirus is airborne.


A researcher with the Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention on Sunday told reporters the novel coronavirus does not suspend or float in the air for a long time.

No evidence has shown that the new virus can be transmitted through aerosol, Xinhua quoted Feng Luzhao as saying.

Content from External Source
https://www.channelnewsasia.com/new...coronavirus-aerosol-transmission-moh-12418446


add: it sounds as if a bureaucrat maybe misunderstood what airborne/aerosol is. (I don't speak Chinese so im going by reporters like Newsweek). I don't want to quote his bunk but the responses from doctors, that NEwsweek also gives:


Shen Yinzhong, the medical director of the Shanghai Public Health Clinical Center, said 2019-nCoV could "in theory" spread through the air. However, Shen said more research is needed to confirm this, according to The New York Times which cited Shanghai's The Paper.

This view was questioned on Sunday, when researcher Feng Luzhao of the Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention told a press conference there is no evidence that the virus can form aerosols. Feng said, according to China Daily, that the most likely route of transmission appears to be direct, where a person breathes in the air of an infected person who has coughed or sneezed, which is different to airborne transmission. In addition, he said it is unlikely the virus can spread through fruit and vegetables.

Content from External Source
https://www.newsweek.com/coronavirus-could-airborne-chinese-official-claims-1486493

China has a history of downplaying epidemics like SARS, so take anything they say with a big grain of salt.
CDC guidance as of February 3 (bold added for emphasis)
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-nCoV/hcp/infection-control.html
Healthcare professionals entering the room soon after a patient vacates the room should use respiratory protection. Standard practice for pathogens spread by the airborne route (e.g., measles, tuberculosis) is to restrict unprotected individuals, including healthcare professionals, from entering a vacated room until sufficient time has elapsed for enough air changes to remove potentially infectious particles. We do not yet know how long 2019-nCoV remains infectious in the air. In the interim, it is reasonable to apply a similar time period before entering the room without respiratory protection as used for pathogens spread by the airborne route (e.g., measles, tuberculosis).
Content from External Source
They're still debating whether flu is airbone. A 2018 study found that it is.
"Study confirms flu likely spreads by aerosols, not just coughs, sneezes"
http://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-pers...kely-spreads-aerosols-not-just-coughs-sneezes
Michael Osterholm, PhD, MPH, director of the University of Minnesota's Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy (CIDRAP), said the study confirmed the role that respiratory transmission plays in the spread of influenza, challenging the conventional wisdom that large droplets are the main carriers. "This confirms what the epidemiology data have shown for years," he said, adding that infectious virus carrying aerosols can float in the air in any setting where someone is sick with flu, whether it be a building, subway, plane, or a store.
Content from External Source
But then, a 2019 study found that surgical masks were no different from N95 respirators at protecting healthcare workers from the flu.
"Outpatient study finds masks, respirators equally protective"
http://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-pers...dy-finds-masks-respirators-equally-protective
In outpatient settings, surgical masks and more expensive respirator masks appear to be equally effective for protecting health workers against flu and other respiratory viruses, according to a new study based on data over four flu seasons.
Content from External Source
 
Last edited by a moderator:
China has a history of downplaying epidemics like SARS, so take anything they say with a big grain of salt.
Don't get me wrong, if my elderly mother lived in the apartment above a coronavirus infection, I would move her. but this is a debunking site and I can find no medical confirmation that 2019-nCoV is currently airborne.
 
As far as we can currently tell, Covid-19 (now the official name of 2019-nCoV) spreads in a similar manner as SARS, which is thought to be through respiratory droplets or fomites. This means that being in sneezing or coughing range of an infected person or, for example, touching a door handle that they just touched after wiping their nose, coughing into their hand, etc. would be required in order to catch it from that infected individual. https://www.who.int/csr/sars/en/WHOconsensus.pdf
Throughout the outbreak, the primary mode of transmission appears to be direct mucous membrane (eyes, nose, and mouth) contact with infectious respiratory droplets and/or through exposure to fomites. Cases have occurred primarily in persons with close contact with those very ill with SARS in health care and household settings. Transmission to casual and social contacts has occasionally occurred when as a result of intense exposure to a case of SARS (in workplaces, airplanes or taxis) or in high-risk transmission settings, such as health care settings and households. Molecular analysis can help to describe transmission trees.
Content from External Source
mod add: (because I had to look it up) fomite:
objects or materials which are likely to carry infection, such as clothes, utensils, and furniture.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
As far as we can currently tell, Covid-19 (now the official name of 2019-nCoV) spreads in a similar manner as SARS, which is thought to be through respiratory droplets or fomites. This means that being in sneezing or coughing range of an infected person or, for example, touching a door handle that they just touched after wiping their nose, coughing into their hand, etc. would be required in order to catch it from that infected individual. https://www.who.int/csr/sars/en/WHOconsensus.pdf
Throughout the outbreak, the primary mode of transmission appears to be direct mucous membrane (eyes, nose, and mouth) contact with infectious respiratory droplets and/or through exposure to fomites. Cases have occurred primarily in persons with close contact with those very ill with SARS in health care and household settings. Transmission to casual and social contacts has occasionally occurred when as a result of intense exposure to a case of SARS (in workplaces, airplanes or taxis) or in high-risk transmission settings, such as health care settings and households. Molecular analysis can help to describe transmission trees.
Content from External Source
mod add: (because I had to look it up) fomite:
objects or materials which are likely to carry infection, such as clothes, utensils, and furniture.

The CDC recommended respirators back in 2005.
https://www.cdc.gov/sars/clinical/respirators.html
The transmission of SARS appears to occur predominantly by direct contact with infectious material, including dispersal of large respiratory droplets. However, it is also possible that SARS can be spread through the airborne route. Accordingly, CDC has recommended the use of N95 respirators, consistent with respiratory protection for airborne diseases, such as tuberculosis.
Content from External Source
 
The CDC recommended respirators back in 2005.
recommending highest level precautions for health care workers with new diseases, is not the same thing as the medical community declaring something as airborne.

add: cdc commentary during ebola scare (bold added for emphasis)

we provide two options in the university of Nebraska which has done an excellent job of caring and Emory university which has done an excellent job of caring and we allow them to do both. One of them uses an N-95 respirator or face mask. The other uses what’s called a PAPR or positive air pressure respirator. Either option works. Either option is protective. Those of you that follow medical procedures in detail will note on review that we are recommending either of those options, but not a face mask and that’s not because we think that Ebola is airborne, but rather because we think that what gets done in American hospitals can be so risky, whether that’s suctioning or intubation or other things that may not be done in other parts of the world or in Africa where Ebola is spreading now that we wanted to add that extra margin of safety.
Content from External Source
https://www.cdc.gov/media/releases/2014/t1020-ebola-reponse-update.html
 
Last edited:
The CDC recommended respirators back in 2005.
https://www.cdc.gov/sars/clinical/respirators.html
The transmission of SARS appears to occur predominantly by direct contact with infectious material, including dispersal of large respiratory droplets. However, it is also possible that SARS can be spread through the airborne route. Accordingly, CDC has recommended the use of N95 respirators, consistent with respiratory protection for airborne diseases, such as tuberculosis.
Content from External Source
Those masks can also help protect against thick droplets from a fresh sneeze or cough. SARS was never confirmed to be transmissible through lingering aerosols.
 
Those masks can also help protect against thick droplets from a fresh sneeze or cough. SARS was never confirmed to be transmissible through lingering aerosols.

Wasn't the worst SARS outbreak literally fanned by bathroom exhaust fans through air shafts?
 
Wasn't the worst SARS outbreak literally fanned by bathroom exhaust fans through air shafts?
ugh. thanks for making me read that just before I dream. the bottom line (no pun intended) is

Feldmann said there was no evidence the virus itself was airborne, but small droplets can travel up to five feet through the air, perhaps further if helped by a strong wind.
Content from External Source
https://www.foxnews.com/story/who-l...-caused-sars-outbreak-at-hong-kong-apartments
 
Wasn't the worst SARS outbreak literally fanned by bathroom exhaust fans through air shafts?
Is there a source on that? Many SARS outbreaks were initiated by super spreaders (think people like Typhoid Mary except with SARS). In these cases, patients were admitted to hospitals and then spread SARS to hospital staff who then spread it to patients. The spread to hospital staff was thought to happen during intubation. Intubation is when hospital staff tries to insert a breathing tube into a SARS patient's throat when they are having trouble breathing. There are multiple accounts of super spreaders spewing bloody mucus and phlegm during this intubation procedure and the staff subsequently getting sick. These accounts are retold in books like Spillover by David Quamen and Twenty-First Century Plague: The Story of SARS by Abraham Thomas. The topic is also described briefly on Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super-spreader#SARS_outbreak_2003
The first cases of SARS occurred in mid-November 2002 in the Guangdong Province of China. This was followed by an outbreak in Hong Kong in February 2003. A Guangdong Province doctor, Liu Jianlun, who had treated SARS cases there, had contracted the virus and was symptomatic. Despite his symptoms, he traveled to Hong Kong to attend a family wedding. He stayed on the ninth floor of the Metropole Hotel in Kowloon, infecting 16 other hotel guests also staying on that floor. The guests then traveled to Canada, Singapore, Taiwan, and Vietnam, spreading SARS to those locations and transmitting what became a global epidemic.[16]

In another case during this same outbreak, a 54-year-old male was admitted to a hospital with coronary heart disease, chronic renal failure and type two diabetes. He had been in contact with a patient known to have SARS. Shortly after his admission he developed fever, cough, myalgia and sore throat. The admitting physician suspected SARS. The patient was transferred to another hospital for treatment of his coronary artery disease. While there, his SARS symptoms became more pronounced. Later, it was discovered he had transmitted SARS to 33 other patients in just two days. He was transferred back to the original hospital where he died of SARS.
Content from External Source
 
Is there a source on that?

deirdre found it, the outbreak at Amoy Gardens
https://www.foxnews.com/story/who-l...-caused-sars-outbreak-at-hong-kong-apartments
Also here.
http://www.openscar.com/amoygardens.html

They say, "Transmission of the disease by airborne, waterborne route and infected dust aerosols has been examined but these were not supported by the epidemiological picture and laboratory results."
So it was another weird mode of transmission that I don't quite understand.
 
deirdre found it, the outbreak at Amoy Gardens
https://www.foxnews.com/story/who-l...-caused-sars-outbreak-at-hong-kong-apartments
Also here.
http://www.openscar.com/amoygardens.html

They say, "Transmission of the disease by airborne, waterborne route and infected dust aerosols has been examined but these were not supported by the epidemiological picture and laboratory results."
So it was another weird mode of transmission that I don't quite understand.
I see, but this does not conclude that the virus is transmissible through aerosols.
Feldmann said there was no evidence the virus itself was airborne, but small droplets can travel up to five feet through the air, perhaps further if helped by a strong wind.
Content from External Source
 
So it was another weird mode of transmission that I don't quite understand.

sounds to me most of those cases were probably transferred by typical "flu like" means (elevator buttons, door handles etc)
but leaky septic pipes are a good lesson for people to be aware of. :(

droplets (not airborne) are still pretty small. droplets are bigger than (as of a few years ago anyway) 5um.
1581520326019.png


» What is airborne transmission?

Airborne transmission refers to situations where droplet nuclei (residue from evaporated droplets) or dust particles containing microorganisms can remain suspended in air for long periods of time. These organisms must be capable of surviving for long periods of time outside the body and must be resistant to drying. Airborne transmission allows organisms to enter the upper and lower respiratory tracts. Fortunately, only a limited number of diseases are capable of airborne transmission.
Content from External Source
https://eportal.mountsinai.ca/Microbiology/faq/transmission.shtml

this is 2007, but more recent (2018 etc) published papers are still quoting the same numbers. (bold added for emphasis)
The definitions and classification of the different types of infectious respiratory aerosols are evolving, and the implications for the infection control measures are not yet clear. However, for the purpose of this document, infectious respiratory aerosols will be classified into: Droplets: Respiratory aerosols > 5 µm in diameter. Droplet nuclei: Respiratory aerosols ≤ 5 µm in diameter
Content from External Source
https://www.who.int/csr/resources/publications/WHO_CDS_EPR_2007_6c.pdf
 
My personal opinion is that it might depend on atmospheric conditions, but I'm a meteorologist, not a virologist. In cool air with high relative humidity, the virus itself might be a condensation nucleus for fine water droplets, which are themselves much more prevalent in such atmospheric conditions (use a headlamp on a cold foggy night and you'll see what I mean), and that would mean it stays airbourne and alive much longer. Might not be the case in drier air.
 
Last edited:
My personal opinion is that it might depend on atmospheric conditions
You would be right, these factors are in fact thought to affect the spread of influenza virus. Whether or not the same is true for coronavirus remains untested and thus unclear. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6706471/pdf/mSphere.00552-19.pdf
Atmospheric conditions such as relative humidity (RH) can impact the viability of IV [influenza virus] released into the air. To understand how different IV are affected by their environment, we compared the levels of stability of human-pathogenic seasonal and avian IV under a range of RH conditions and found that highly transmissible seasonal IV were less sensitive to decay under midrange RH conditions in droplets. We observed that certain RH conditions can support the persistence of infectious viruses on surfaces and in the air for extended periods of time.
Content from External Source
 
Televangelist Jim Bakker has added coronavirus into his doomsday prophecy, and is now selling $300 "Silver Solution" (aka colloidal silver) to "kill" the coronavirus. His site claims that it uses “catalytic instead of chemical action” to "deactivate" it. This is the same solution he's tried to pass off as an STI cure in the past.



Source: https://twitter.com/nowthisnews/status/1228337601448296448



It probably goes without saying, but colloidal silver doesn't do anything when ingested, and if anything it can cause poor absorption of real medications and potentially cause argyria.

https://nccih.nih.gov/health/colloidalsilver
https://www.iheart.com/content/2017-10-11-health-drink-turns-people-blue-and-it-doesnt-even-work/
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You would be right, these factors are in fact thought to affect the spread of influenza virus. Whether or not the same is true for coronavirus remains untested and thus unclear. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6706471/pdf/mSphere.00552-19.pdf
Atmospheric conditions such as relative humidity (RH) can impact the viability of IV [influenza virus] released into the air. To understand how different IV are affected by their environment, we compared the levels of stability of human-pathogenic seasonal and avian IV under a range of RH conditions and found that highly transmissible seasonal IV were less sensitive to decay under midrange RH conditions in droplets. We observed that certain RH conditions can support the persistence of infectious viruses on surfaces and in the air for extended periods of time.
Content from External Source

The Director of Penn State University's Center of Infectious Disease Dynamics, Elizabeth McGowan, said this:
https://www.accuweather.com/en/heal...not-run-rampant-in-us-in-coming-months/681958
"Coronaviruses are a lot like flu and cold viruses, they’re transmitted in respiratory droplets when people cough and sneeze," she said. "What that means is that for their transmission to work they have to hang in the air often for enough time before they can be inhaled into someone's lungs, and we know that weather affects that. The reason cold viruses and flu viruses like coronavirus can have seasonality is because they hang in the air longer when conditions are dry and cold." Conversely, in warmer spring and summer months, McGowan explained that higher levels of humidity cause those droplets to drop to the ground quicker, lessening the capacity for viruses to spread since the droplets spend less time in the environment.
Content from External Source
If we know that heat and humidity prevent the spread of viruses, does anyone recommend raising the heat and humidity indoors? What about using air purifiers?
 
does anyone recommend raising the heat and humidity indoors?
well you've still got the contact transfer.

this article suggests higher humidity though. the CDC did a study.

At humidity levels of 23 percent, 70 to 77 percent of the flu virus particles were still able to cause an infection an hour after the coughing simulation. But when humidity levels were raised to 43 percent, just 14 percent of the virus particles had the ability to infect. Most of the flu particles became inactive 15 minutes after they were released into the humid air. "The virus just falls apart," at high humidity levels, said study researcher John Noti, of the CDC's National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health.
Content from External Source
https://www.livescience.com/27533-flu-transmission-humidity.html


Can Air Purifiers Remove Bacteria and Viruses?
In general, air purifiers are most effective at removing large particles because these are easier to trap within the filter. Bacteria, if airborne, is large enough for a high-quality HEPA filter to remove. Viruses, on the other hand, are more of a challenge because they are many times smaller than bacteria. However, most viruses are not becoming airborne by themselves. For example, if a sick person sneezes, most viruses expelled from their body will be contained within droplets of moisture. These larger drops of moisture can be captured by your air purifier along with the viruses they may carry. If the droplets are large enough, they will fall out of the air quickly, taking the virus-sized particles that they carry with them.

Content from External Source
https://www.airpurifiers.com/pages/air-purifiers-for-germs


edit add: i'm going to add that humidifiers MUST be cleaned frequently to prevent mold etc. which is bad to breathe and high humidity can make breathing difficult for people with asthma, so pneumonia might be a similar problem. since Covid-19 presents with breathing difficulties/pneumonia, it's best to consult a physician before raising humidity levels too high in the home.
 
Last edited:

Can Air Purifiers Remove Bacteria and Viruses?
In general, air purifiers are most effective at removing large particles because these are easier to trap within the filter. Bacteria, if airborne, is large enough for a high-quality HEPA filter to remove. Viruses, on the other hand, are more of a challenge because they are many times smaller than bacteria. However, most viruses are not becoming airborne by themselves. For example, if a sick person sneezes, most viruses expelled from their body will be contained within droplets of moisture. These larger drops of moisture can be captured by your air purifier along with the viruses they may carry. If the droplets are large enough, they will fall out of the air quickly, taking the virus-sized particles that they carry with them.
Content from External Source
https://www.airpurifiers.com/pages/air-purifiers-for-germs

edit add: i'm going to add that humidifiers MUST be cleaned frequently to prevent mold etc. which is bad to breathe and high humidity can make breathing difficult for people with asthma, so pneumonia might be a similar problem. since Covid-19 presents with breathing difficulties/pneumonia, it's best to consult a physician before raising humidity levels too high in the home.

Raise the humidity to the normal summer level. Use a vaporizer or boil water to raise both temperature and humidity.

Do ionic purifiers help? They're supposed to make particles clump together and stick to surfaces, but they also generate irritating ozone.
 
If we know that heat and humidity prevent the spread of viruses, does anyone recommend raising the heat and humidity indoors? What about using air purifiers?
Hospitals do have to consider humidity. I'm not aware of any doctor recommendations about how to treat your home, though. As far as I'm aware, good hygiene and vaccinations (when available) are the best precautions you can take. https://www.cedengineering.com/userfiles/Intro to HVAC for Med Facilities.pdf
9.4.1 Humidity controls shall be provided as necessary to meet the requirements given for individual spaces at UFC 4-510-01. Humidity controls shall be provided on a room basis for the following critical spaces:
  • Operating Rooms
  • Surgical Delivery Rooms
  • Cystoscopy Rooms
    Humidity controls for all other spaces may be provided on a zone or system basis as determined to be sufficient to maintain the required conditions. Note that for spaces for which precise relative humidity requirements are not stated, humidity controls may be required to maintain an envelope of 30% to 60% RH during normally occupied hours; for such spaces, designers shall determine the likely interior RH, based upon outside air conditions and interior latent loads. Humidifiers are problematic from a maintenance standpoint, and should not be utilized except when analysis indicates that RH will drop below 30% for significant amounts of time.
Content from External Source
 
More mainstream speculation about biolabs.

"Beijing-sponsored South China University of Technology concludes that 'the killer coronavirus probably originated from a laboratory in Wuhan'"
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...-originate-Chinese-government-laboratory.html
A new bombshell paper from the Beijing-sponsored South China University of Technology says that the Wuhan Center for Disease Control (WHCDC) could have spawned the contagion in Hubei province.
'The possible origins of 2019-nCoV coronavirus,' penned by scholars Botao Xiao and Lei Xiao claims the WHCDC kept disease-ridden animals in laboratories, including 605 bats...
It describes how the only native bats are found around 600 miles away from the Wuhan seafood market and that the probability of bats flying from Yunnan and Zhejiang provinces was minimal...
One of the researchers at the WHCDC described quarantining himself for two weeks after a bat's blood got on his skin, according to the report. That same man also quarantined himself after a bat urinated on him.
Content from External Source
Some click-bait
"Coronavirus may have originated in lab linked to China's biowarfare program" (but so far there's no evidence of it)
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2020/jan/26/coronavirus-link-china-biowarfare-program-possible/
The deadly animal-borne coronavirus spreading globally may have originated in a laboratory in the city of Wuhan linked to China’s covert biological weapons program, said an Israeli biological warfare analyst...
Dany Shoham, a former Israeli military intelligence officer who has studied Chinese biological warfare, said the [Wuhan Institute of Virology] is linked to Beijing’s covert bio-weapons program... “Coronaviruses [particularly SARS] have been studied in the institute and are probably held therein,” Mr. Shoham said. “SARS is included within the Chinese bio-weapons program, at large, and is dealt with in several pertinent facilities.”
Asked whether the new coronavirus may have leaked, Mr. Shoham said: “In principle, outward virus infiltration might take place either as leakage or as an indoor unnoticed infection of a person that normally went out of the concerned facility. This could have been the case with the Wuhan Institute of Virology, but so far there isn’t evidence or indication for such incident.
Content from External Source
"China denies lab link to coronavirus as questions over origin mount"
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2020/feb/5/china-denies-lab-link-to-coronavirus-as-questions-/
Global Times, considered the editorial voice of the [Chinese Communist] party, in an in-depth report this week cited Chinese experts who said that the coronavirus could not have been engineered in a laboratory. China’s government officially has been silent on an international debate over whether the coronavirus may have come from a laboratory, or was the result of an animal virus that probably originated in bats and was transferred to humans through another animal.
A third theory is that the virus may have been under study at the Wuhan Institute of Virology, which houses China’s sole Level 4 secure laboratory for conducting research on deadly viruses, and was spread through an infected worker or a test animal that was stolen or sold to a wild animal market in the city where the virus first emerged.
“The 2019 novel coronavirus is a punishment by nature to humans’ unsanitary lifestyle. I promise with my life that the virus has nothing to do with the lab,” declared Shi Zhengli, a research fellow at the Wuhan Institute of Virology on her WeChat account Sunday.
Content from External Source
 
"Beijing-sponsored South China University of Technology concludes that 'the killer coronavirus probably originated from a laboratory in Wuhan'"
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...-originate-Chinese-government-laboratory.html
Here is the link to the actual publication. https://wattsupwiththat.com/wp-cont...possible-origins-of-2019-nCoV-coronavirus.pdf It's not suggesting anything totally crazy, an accidental release from a lab is different from claiming it was engineered. However, this is not a scientific study. All that is discussed in the paper is circumstantial evidence, mainly that a lab that studies coronaviruses is ~12 kilometers away from the Wuhan seafood market. The experiment to prove that their idea is true would be to directly compare the genomes of coronavirus strains in the outbreak to any that were kept in the lab. This has not been done. So, this paper does not test or prove anything.
 
From today: https://www.sciencemag.org/news/202...-conspiracy-theories-about-origin-coronavirus
“We stand together to strongly condemn conspiracy theories suggesting that COVID-19 does not have a natural origin,” says The Lancet statement, which praises the work of Chinese health professionals as “remarkable” and encourages others to sign on as well.
...
The authors of The Lancet statement note that scientists from several countries who have studied SARS-CoV-2 “overwhelmingly conclude that this coronavirus originated in wildlife,” just like many other viruses that have recently emerged in humans. “Conspiracy theories do nothing but create fear, rumours, and prejudice that jeopardise our global collaboration in the fight against this virus,” the statement says.
Content from External Source
 
that jeopardise our global collaboration in the fight against this virus,” the statement says.
this bit seems a bit hyperbolic. I highly doubt the conspiracy believer or spreader types are actually doing anything constructive as far as combatting this virus problem. The serious men and women that ARE working (and risking their lives) to save people* and those trying figure out a way to stop this virus spread don't care about "media" conspiracy theories, they have bigger things to deal with.

* I read, besides the doctor who first alerted about the virus, that the head of the hospital in Wuhan has died too from the virus :( These men and women on the front lines are the true definition of 'heroic'.
 
this bit seems a bit hyperbolic. I highly doubt the conspiracy believer or spreader types are actually doing anything constructive as far as combatting this virus problem.
I don't think it's an inaccurate statement. For example, if people reject the idea that the virus came about as a result of humans' close contact with animals then preventative measures for future outbreaks will be harder to implement.
 
There is a new related article in Science magazine:

Scientists ‘strongly condemn’ rumors and conspiracy theories about origin of coronavirus outbreak
By Jon CohenFeb. 19, 2020 , 7:00 AM

A group of 27 prominent public health scientists from outside China is pushing back against a steady stream of stories and even a scientific paper suggesting a laboratory in Wuhan, China, may be the origin of the outbreak of COVID-19. “The rapid, open, and transparent sharing of data on this outbreak is now being threatened by rumours and misinformation around its origins,” the scientists, from nine countries, write in a statement published online by The Lancet yesterday.
Content from External Source
https://www.sciencemag.org/news/202...-conspiracy-theories-about-origin-coronavirus
 

Dan Wilson posted it a couple of posts above.
https://www.metabunk.org/threads/covid-19-coronavirus-outbreak-in-wuhan-china.11085/post-236717

There's a recent article from Scripps on "The Proximal Origin of SARS-CoV-2"
http://virological.org/t/the-proximal-origin-of-sars-cov-2/398
It is improbable that SARS-CoV-2 emerged through laboratory manipulation of an existing SARS-related coronavirus. As noted above, the RBD of SARS-CoV-2 is optimized for human ACE2 receptor binding with an efficient binding solution different to that which would have been predicted. Further, if genetic manipulation had been performed, one would expect that one of the several reverse genetic systems available for betacoronaviruses would have been used. However, this is not the case as the genetic data shows that SARS-CoV-2 is not derived from any previously used virus backbone. Instead, we propose two scenarios that can plausibly explain the origin of SARS-CoV-2: (i) natural selection in a non-human animal host prior to zoonotic transfer, and (ii) natural selection in humans following zoonotic transfer...
Although genomic evidence does not support the idea that SARS-CoV-2 is a laboratory construct, it is currently impossible to prove or disprove the other theories of its origin described here, and it is unclear whether future data will help resolve this issue.
Content from External Source
 
I've missed his post, sorry about that. I usually check Science magazine on Thursday afternoon, when a new issue comes online.
BTW, in First Release Science Papers one can read about the first Cryo-EM structure of the 2019-nCoV spike and its comparison with SARS spike. This Open Access paper also came out on February 19 (Wednesday)
https://science.sciencemag.org/content/sci/early/2020/02/19/science.abb2507.full.pdf
 
well a personal impact of Coivd 19 my daughters flew to Japan Tokyo today as Amie fans they had hoped to visit the Ghibli Museum but alas to be closed due to C19 contagion fears



https://www.animenewsnetwork.com/ne...-due-to-covid-19-coronavirus-concerns/.156751

The Ghibli Museum announced on Saturday that it will be closed from February 25 to March 17 due to concerns over the COVID-19 coronavirus disease

Oh a Globe vs flat earth observation they flew directly north from Melbourne to meet Tokyo as it moved east to be under them
 
It appears paranoia around Coronavirus is (perhaps justifiably) increasing in Japan, South Korea, Iran, and other asian nations. In Japan, the cruise ship "Diamond Princess" had 690 cases, and 3 deaths. After 14 days under quarantine, they released ~1000 passengers who tested negative to go home on public transport.

Omi, a public health expert who heads the Japan Community Health Care Organization, said it was the best they could do. While some people criticized Japan for confining more than 3,700 passengers and crew on the ship in what they called a botched quarantine, he said it was not feasible to test and relocate all of them for quarantine elsewhere.
...
Japanese passengers who did not share a room with patients, tested negative and had no symptoms at the end of the 14-day quarantine period were allowed to go home on public transportation. The sight of them traveling on bullet trains and buses with other people was viewed as an alarming sign of a Japanese lack of a sense of crisis.
...
The number of patients in the country continues to rise, and Japan is now at a critical juncture, experts say. It has about 160 cases outside the ship, including a dozen new cases reported Monday.
Content from External Source
Source: https://www.pbs.org/newshour/health...y-coronavirus-ship-quarantine-was-not-perfect

And in other places:
South Korea - 231 new cases yesterday alone, bringing the total to 833 (only about 30 last week)
Italy - 215 cases, 7 deaths
Iran - 61 cases, 6 deaths
Source: https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2020...parts-middle-east-europe-200224173916660.html

And global financial market is responding too:

On Wall Street, the Dow Jones Industrial Average plunged more than 1,000 points, or about 3.6%, to around 27,950 as of 1 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday. Other indexes saw similarly significant declines by midday, including the tech-heavy Nasdaq (down 4% as of 1 p.m.) and the broader S&P 500-stock index (down 3.6%).

Finance ministers from the Group of 20 major economies warned during a meeting in Saudi Arabia over the weekend that the coronavirus outbreak could pose a greater threat to the global economy than earlier expected, Bloomberg reported.
Content from External Source
Source: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/stocks-down-as-coronavirus-spreads-in-europe-and-asia/
 
After 14 days under quarantine, they released ~1000 passengers who tested negative to go home on public transport.
Is that actually dangerous though? If they test negative after 14 days, then surely they don't have it?
 
Is that actually dangerous though? If they test negative after 14 days, then surely they don't have it?

Probably not dangerous. It's very unlikely the people who qualified to leave the red zone had any contact or exposure to the virus at all. Even if they were, the incubation period is thought to be around 14 days so they're probably in the clear. The optics aren't great (especially after they admitted it wasn't a perfect quarantine), but the actual threat is very, very low.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top