Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I agree. Nobody seems to want to talk about the future of this. It's all flatten the curve, flatten the curve. Which we have to do obviously, but then what?
I predict the lockdown will be extended at the end of April, and likely at that time for longer than a month.
Some are predicting the virus, like similar ones, will slow down this summer, then come back in fall and winter. Maybe even next year. We don't have time for that, we can't keep shutting down every time the virus flares up.
There needs to be a better way forward than that, that is not a way forward at all.
I agree there needs to be a world organization that can use strategies others have learned in other countries. Not impressed at all with the way this is going, on BOTH accounts, not just one party or the other. They need to stop blaming each other for this, we are where we are. We need to move forward from where we are, using common sense, and some kind of strategy, we can't go back to what should have been done three months ago.
There is hope, regardless. Remember while SARS didn't spread like this has, it also disappeared. Let's hope this stuff does the same, or they reach a vaccine.
I'm fairly certain that the vaccine is the plan, and the hope.
Ever since, that estimate of 12-18 months has become gospel, its appearance in media stories ubiquitous. But medical experts and scientists with firsthand experience developing vaccines are skeptical.
"I don't think it's ever been done at an industrial scale in 18 months," said Dr. Amesh Adalja, a senior scholar focused on emerging infectious disease at the Center for Health Security at Johns Hopkins University. "Vaccine development is usually measured in years, not months."
Historically, the timelines for bringing vaccines to bear on other pathogens show a much longer arc than 18 months.
In 2006, the vaccine co-developed by Offit was introduced for rotavirus -- which caused severe diarrhea in infants -- significantly blunting the disease. The entire effort spanned 26 years; the trial period took 16 years, he told CNN.
The vaccine under examination was created using a new, potentially revolutionary technology platform that, if successful, could indeed cut months from the development process. However, the technology -- called a messenger RNA vaccine -- has never been approved as a product for distribution; this would be the first.
The World Health Organization estimates that vaccines save between 2 and 3 million lives a year. But vaccine history is dotted with devastating failures, in which people who got a dose fared far worse than they would have without it.
This is going to make its rounds and there is no stopping it. We are delaying its peak so our medical teams can have a chance at treating people. I don't feel there is any other plan other than pretend this is going to end. The only hope we can have if it is seasonal and it will go away for a while so scientists can work on a solution.
Or we can test massive amounts of people fast, but with over 320 million people I don't think that is realistic.
I have to be honest. I can't believe anything CNN puts out. Just too distorted. Sorry. Best to stick with WHO and CDC.
If you actually read the article, they have many quotes from multiple experts in the vaccine field including from the NIAID and overall the article is quite blunt and honest when it comes to this new potential vaccine and the history of vaccines in general.
I have to be honest, the way the WHO has handled all of this is both laughable and sad!
This is going to make its rounds and there is no stopping it. We are delaying its peak so our medical teams can have a chance at treating people. I don't feel there is any other plan other than pretend this is going to end. The only hope we can have if it is seasonal and it will go away for a while so scientists can work on a solution.
Or we can test massive amounts of people fast, but with over 320 million people I don't think that is realistic.
I agree. We will be given pretend dates on which the situation will be supposed to be better and things will start reopening, and when we get there, we'll be told it's not time yet and a new pretend date will be set. Flattening the curve (i.e. keeping the spread of contagion down to a certain level) keeps the medical system from being overwhelmed, but will mean it takes years before enough people have achieved immunity to make it "safe" to resume ordinary life.
The more I read about how each country is handling the virus the more I believe we should go with the Netherlands approach of herd immunity. They are not implementing a lockdown, they are asking people to go out but use precautions and safe hygiene. This will ensure people will slowly get the virus as a whole. People will get sick but hopefully it's the ones that recover that will give people a bit of less active virus to adapt their immune system to.
The way China and the rest are going about will only work if everyone locks down for several months until the infected are treated and released without any infected people with active virus spreading. That isn't going to work in the long run. There will be outbreaks again and again.
They should send everyone masks and a full treatment dose of hydroclorquinine and Z packs and a home test kit for cv to have at home that they can use if they get it. Suggest social distancing, and elderly or those with preexisting conditions limit outside exposure, and send everyone back to work.
That could be accomplished in a month.
A: We don't have enough hydroxychloriquine and azithromyocin in stock to do that.
B: We don't have any actual proof that that drug combination even works. There are formal trials underway right now, but the results aren't in yet. And assuming it does, we don't know what dosage of each drug is most effective, or when it should be administered for optimum effect. (It could be like Tamiflu; take it too late in the course of the disease process, and it is ineffective. Or take it at the wrong dosage or for the wrong length of time, and it's ineffective.)
Right now, we simply have no drug treatments that have been proven to be effective. And wishing it were otherwise doesn't make it so.
Our government is stumbling from crisis to crisis and using their best "good info" technique to get them to the next day's briefing. If this had not happened in an election year we might have had a leader with the balls to stop, consult the experts, and offer the best plan which was the consensus thinking among them all.
If we could just wrest the microphone away from said leader, we might get some better briefings.
But vaccine history is dotted with devastating failures, in which people who got a dose fared far worse than they would have without it.
One of which, ironically, was SARS, which is the kissing cousin of this current virus. A SARS vaccine was developed and tested on animals; the animals which received the experimental vaccine and were then exposed to the SARS virus developed much worse lung damage than the immunonaive controls did when they caught SARS. Oops!
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
