Thank you for returning a sense of normalcy.

@Madetoshop wrote:

Before this pandemic, the supermarket and bank that I use always had disinfectant wipes at entry and the bank had a Purell dispenser as well. Of course, not available now. I don't think I will feel comfortable once we are free to out for awhile. My Ziploc bag of Clorox wipes will be forever a part of me.

I have just one question: by now, only a few people would question a need to avoid COVID-19. But while everyone is (or should be) at home more than they are elsewhere, are we losing immunity that we have built up over the years to various other germs? I hope this is just a wee wonderment and that once immune, always immune...

I doubt it. There are generally plenty of household pathogens lurking about, and in your food as well from soil and such.

Immunity varies in how long it lasts and of course it varies somewhat from individual to individual. I don't remember the exact number of years, but after initial shots for D/P/T you don't renew the Pertussis again but may need the Diphtheria as a booster and do need a Tetanus booster about every decade. The measles/mumps/chicken pox needs to be renewed every once in a while. Pneumonia shots get a booster every decade or so. Shingles shot is once in a lifetime (the new shingles shot is 2 shots a month apart but then for a lifetime). This does not mean that the immunity turned off entirely but rather that the body needs a reminder to perk up its immunity in enough individuals that the booster is recommended for all who care to preserve their immunity.

I found a general reference to free roaming and possible immune protection. It might be best to consider this as meant for any time other than the COVID-19 era. This new disease might negate otherwise useful information. Cited studies are from China and Europe, where this new disease might be altering immunity temporarily or permanently. I thought it was intriguing and found that it hints at my question without answering it completely.

It is plausible, according to Doctor Elizabeth Matsui, prof of pediatrics, epidemiology, and environmental sciences at Johns Hopkins University, that growing up rural, especially in the first year of life, gives kids less risk for asthma, allergies and hay fever. But when rural kids go to live in ultra-sterilized, germophobic America for a decade or longer, the earlier immune benefit diminishes and the risks increase.

I will try to find the references and learn more about relocating. Was America a generic example, or does moving into Chinese and European cities where varying degrees of sterilization might exist also diminish the immunity? Inquiring minds want to know. Meanwhile, is it okay to let kids have flora and fauna now, or not?

The article I paraphrased and linked, titled 'This is How Living in a City Affects Your Immune System: kids exposed to critters and their germs might be better off', is found in the health section of something called Vice. There are different types of resources for different types of searchers. I chose this short article for here.

[www.vice.com]



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 04/13/2020 05:58PM by Shop-et-al.

I received a sign from my employer that identifies me as an essential worker. I was told to display it on my dashboard because more and more areas are stopping people on the roads. Who would have ever thought we would have to do something like that?

@Shop-et-al

There are aspects of this that have been 'discovered' and reported on over and over. There are different concentrations of various pathogens in rural and urban environments. Generally the observations are made by pediatricians attempting to discover why there is such poor health prognosis for urban poor children. The findings are that living conditions for the poor in urban areas are almost always rentals in older buildings that are likely to still have lead paint, possibly lead solder in the pipes, and generally have high infestation of vermin, which may be dealt with on a monthly basis by the landlord with pesticides and poisons but meanwhile leave droppings and germs throughout the building including air ducts, behind walls and in the apartments themselves. Then there are the plumbing problems that don't get addressed promptly as they do in higher rent buildings, so there is likely to be mold and mildew damage as well as spores present from those blights. Poor kids in urban environments can't catch a break.

On the other hand, a group of Danish pediatricians a couple of decades ago found that children raised in as antiseptic an environment as parents could possibly provide were highly subject to allergies, asthma and infections because they had very little exposure to dirt, foods that might possibly cause allergies and had parents helicoptering to keep them safe. Asthma often is a psychological response to stresses, such as helicoptering parents. A new treatment for peanut and other allergies is to give the allergic child miniscule doses of the offending substance and over time increase the dose so that dangerous allergic reactions don't endanger the child. The thought is that if children are exposed to peanuts, eggs and other potential allergans at an early age, they won't develop food allergies at all. If they get to play in the dirt, over time they will develop immunities to dust and many of the pathogens that share our environment.

When all of this is over and done with and the pendulum swings the other way, I wonder how many superbugs will surface as a result of the overuse of sanitizers.

@HonnyBrown wrote:

When all of this is over and done with and the pendulum swings the other way, I wonder how many superbugs will surface as a result of the overuse of sanitizers.

That, unfortunately, is a likely outcome. The other concern I have is that an anecdotal study of women stressed during the last trimester of pregnancy are more likely to have an autistic child. I suspect we may have a spike in autism due to COVID concerns and home confinement. (There was a PBS documentary of late pregnancy women who were stressed by power outage for some weeks due to a winter snow/ice storm. It would be unethical to deliberately stress women to see how much stress over how long a period would increase production of autistic children.)

Roxy1: Your argument to let everyone work except the old, or the people who severely compromised immune systems has its flaws. In Fort Valley Ga a 29-year-old college lecturer died of COVID 19. I have a 28-year-old daughter in Sioux Fall S. Dakota. She is the mother of my 3 grandkids. S Dakota was "less impacted" than the rest of the country "until" recently. They just had 300 employees at the Smithfield pork factory test positive. That factory is now shut down.
[www.13wmaz.com]
[www.usnews.com]

I have an 18-year-old, a 19-year-old, and a 21-year-old, and a 24-year-old. I don't want any of my kids to die from COVID.
If you want to work go ahead, I don't have a problem with it. But personally I prefer my kids to stay HOME!
I fully understand the economic ramifications of giving people money to survive, PUA and Stimulus payments It will decrease the value of the dollar as the government prints more money to compensate for it. But it will keep people alive to rebuild the economy. I already explained the economic impact in another post if a million taxpayers died.
As for all the economic discussions, one thing I find to be consistent in all lines of investment is that each has its own ups and downs. I agree with the synopsis of "Diversify, Diversify, Diversify". Personally, I wish I had some money because I think it's an awesome time to buy while stock prices are down. Will some businesses crash because of this universal "Pause'. Yes, but nine out of ten of these failures will be of businesses that would have failed anyway. Don't forget:
[www.fundera.com]
20% of small businesses fail in their first year, 30% of small businesses fail in their second year, and 50% of small businesses fail after five years in business. Finally, 70% of small business owners fail in their 10th year in business.
Why do you believe that major manufacturers jumped on the chance to retrofit their factories to produce the commodities needed to fight the virus? Because wise businessmen wanted their companies to continue making money throughout this crisis. Alas, the major CEO's are all quarantining and the average Jane's and John's are the ones going to work every day. The CEO's risk your life but stay at home in their mansions think about it.
The only foolproof way to survive is to not be exposed.

For some reason or reasons, persons of all ages and stages die from and survive COVID-19.
Contracting COVID-19 is not necessarily a death sentence. At the very least, COVID-19 is a life-altering experience for those who survive it, and people are telling their stories. They are alive and telling their stories! Their stories are new for today, and they belong with other, precious, earlier survivor stories that teach us about earlier times and situations. I hope that all people who contract this disease are accessing health resources and other possible factors that contribute to their survival.

@F and L TeleComm wrote:

The only foolproof way to survive is to not be exposed.

Shop:
I said foolproof. People have died with no preexisting conditions. If jumping off the roof you have 50% of surviving (let's say two stories, not a skyscraper), would you take that 50% chance just to see what it felt like to fall through the air???

Thank you.

At this juncture, it is probably impossible for most people to avoid exposure. So what are we going to do if we have been exposed? Will we argue about the odds, or will we do what we need to do for our individual strengths and our individual challenges? I know what I am doing...


Foolproof is a pipe dream.

@F and L TeleComm wrote:

Shop:
I said foolproof. People have died with no preexisting conditions. If jumping off the roof you have 50% of surviving (let's say two stories, not a skyscraper), would you take that 50% chance just to see what it felt like to fall through the air???

That's exactly the whole entire point. By staying home you MINIMIZE your chances of exposure. Every time I go out I'm nervous-ish a little bit till a few more days go by without incident. I CAN'T live under delusions of invincibility when I HAVE preexisting conditions. I'm fairly strong and rarely get sick, but that's a 3 % risk that I'm trying to not take. (Supposedly, a 3% risk of death). I'm not perfect, I do out once every week to 10 days. I wish I had the money to not go out period for maybe once a month. I want to live to enjoy the backside of this. Who knows I could be one of the asymptomatic people or one who has minimum symptoms but I don't know.

There are no guarantees. There were no guarantees before COVID-19, either. You cite a 97% chance of life. (What was the chance of life before COVID-19? *ponders*)

Obviously if the likelihood of any individual dying in any particular year was 3%, few would survive to age 50 yet these days more and more of us are surviving alert, if a little worn out, until 100 and beyond. Had my Dad developed his fatal condition ten years later it would not have been fatal as new techniques routinely cured it.

One has to recognize that many people are responsible for their own health and safety. If they drive a motorcycle they wear a helmet and don't weave in and out of traffic. If they cross the street they look both ways before crossing. If they are sick they stay home, not just perhaps to protect others, but also so that they can get the rest and fluids and medications they need to recover. I see in the community that in more middle class areas of town people wear masks and keep social distancing. If I need groceries I go to stores in those areas with my mask and gloves and keep social distancing because I have noted in both highly affluent and in lower income areas there is little if any attention to social distancing, few masks and no gloves. (The zip codes in the highly affluent and lower income areas have the highest numbers of confirmed cases of Corona and of deaths. Perhaps caution works??)

I think it is more like skin. Some people will effortlessly have good skin due to their genes. Others will struggle with various conditions. In this situation, caution and precaution are not as important as the basic makeup of the person. Stretching a bit from skin, I think that some people have stronger [something yet to be identified] that helps them avoid sickness even when people near them are ill.

Mind you, this is not an instruction to ditch masks, gloves, and sanitizers and/or to throw tomatoes at me. It is just an observation of people over the span of a few decades.

Can any of us make even small changes that will result in our ability to carry on in our way (in our masks and gloves and brandishing sanitizers while shedding and bolstering) while COVID-19 is carrying on in its way?

Note to self: "Practice what you preach . . ."

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/15/2020 10:26PM by Flash.

@Shop-et-al wrote:

There are no guarantees. There were no guarantees before COVID-19, either. You cite a 97% chance of life. (What was the chance of life before COVID-19? *ponders*)

Being a realist, the chance of death is 100% -- it is just a matter of when.

There is a good chance of feeling at least relatively safe to go out and about in the fairly near future. Gilead Sciences is reporting that their drug, Remdesivir, is actually working against COVID. You may remember conversations about using a drug developed for Ebola to treat COVID. It works by messing up the RNA chain that is the virus and killing it.

My sense is that we will still need a vaccine because even if we can predictably recover from COVID, far better would be for us not to get it in the first place. At present the possible long term damages of COVID seem to include brain, heart and lung issues.

I would be more than happy to go out and continue my daily life right now if everything was open. But then I have no existing health conditions and am a somewhat risky person by nature. I have to put myself in danger at work anyway, and we put ourselves in danger every day by simple things like driving. My worry would be who else I might be putting at risk.

@katiew27 wrote:

My worry would be who else I might be putting at risk.

Thank you for that! While they are 'selling' social responsibility being to protect "your grandmother" or people with underlying conditions, when I am exercising caution, I am helping protect you and appreciate your efforts to help protect me. Together we are helping protect folks like a young man who died here from COVID a few weeks ago. He had no known underlying conditions. He had been married a dozen years or so and they had three youngish children. He was not a first responder but he was employed in a line of work where he would have been disqualified if he had been involved with drugs, alcoholic excesses or unlawful behaviors. He was 34 years old.

It's interesting. Were the elderly fatality statistics replaced with children under 12, I could see people across America taking social distancing and other measures much more seriously.

Lockdown might even be more severe, as what parent would want to go to work and possibly bring home the virus to their young child?

Could we stomach 20,000-30,000 deaths of children by now (Sandy Hook was 20 - albeit, for much more sinister reasons than an act of nature of course)?

It's just a thought experiment, but interesting to think about in terms of how we react as a society to things based on who it affects. If the statistics were flipped...I think America may have adopted Bill Ackman's total 30-day national shutdown proposal.

Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 04/17/2020 03:38AM by shoptastic.

Hmm.

Masks, gloves, and distancing are helpful overall, but they should not become weaponized or chanted mindlessly. Some people need more than these in order to survive.

Think of people who are in physical or psychological danger in their home environments. Of these, some can put together some resources and attempt to escape. I read or heard recently that people can leave unsafe situations and go to safer environments without legal penalty. But what about a social penalty from self-appointed judges who would jeer or attempt to interfere with this mobility and apparent violation of a remain in place order? Would this intimidation be enough to cause someone to remain in danger instead of seeking safety? Would this seemingly mindless chanting of 'stay home' derail an escape attempt and lead to deaths?
And then there are people who have cowed for such a long time that they probably will not even risk the social punishment from uninformed people who are not minding their own business and would shame or intimidate them for daring to dare to dare to improve their situations and increase their chances at longevity.

COVID-19 is not the only consideration. Being safe people for others is important, too.

@shoptastic wrote:

It's just a thought experiment, but interesting to think about in terms of how we react as a society to things based on who it affects. If the statistics were flipped...I think America may have adopted Bill Ackman's total 30-day national shutdown proposal.

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/17/2020 04:46AM by Shop-et-al.

While the statistics started out with the elderly and infirm, especially those in nursing and retirement homes, being most vulnerable, it would appear that trying to have these loved ones cared for in a group environment has been a disaster. There frankly needs to be a bunch of licenses pulled and facilities and individuals held responsible. There appears to have been a cover up of sickness in too many of these facilities. If the reasoning was to preserve profits then criminal charges should be considered. We see the parade of ambulances lined up outside such facilities to take away 16 elders, 23 elders, 5 elders, 31 elders and there has been no reporting that COVID was even in the facility. The horror story for today was that 17 bodies were found in a makeshift morgue in one facility where the families had not yet been notified. Facilities are required to notify a specified relative of an illness or death but in most states you will learn of the deaths from ambulance chasing newscasters because the facility will not discuss any death or illness except with the specified relative of the 'patient'. My state will not reveal which facilities have had a COVID case as supposedly due to HIPPA requirements. One nursing home in a county near me is responsible for more deaths than my entire county in all age groups.

In my county we have had COVID cases confirmed in folks from 0 years to 99 years, The median age here is 59 so half are younger and half are older than 59. I think it is fair to say that all ages are equally vulnerable. Having the kids out of group environments such as schools or camps or child care is probably what is keeping them from being a disproportionate part of the victims. My gut reaction is that there are lots of things the kids can learn just by shadowing an adult at home or being set loose to explore a topic of interest on their own with minimal adult involvement. If they have to learn 5th grade specific skills, they are generally capable of doing that at age 9, 10, 11, 12 or 13. It is not necessary to do that while 11 years of age or the child will never be able to learn it. Though parents will rebel that they haveta gotta go back to work, I would wish that kids were kept out of group environments until there is a vaccine and every kid was vaccinated or had to provide a certificate of immunity except those for whom it would be medically dangerous.

@Flash wrote:

While the statistics started out with the elderly and infirm, especially those in nursing and retirement homes, being most vulnerable, it would appear that trying to have these loved ones cared for in a group environment has been a disaster. There frankly needs to be a bunch of licenses pulled and facilities and individuals held responsible. There appears to have been a cover up of sickness in too many of these facilities. If the reasoning was to preserve profits then criminal charges should be considered. We see the parade of ambulances lined up outside such facilities to take away 16 elders, 23 elders, 5 elders, 31 elders and there has been no reporting that COVID was even in the facility. The horror story for today was that 17 bodies were found in a makeshift morgue in one facility where the families had not yet been notified. Facilities are required to notify a specified relative of an illness or death but in most states you will learn of the deaths from ambulance chasing newscasters because the facility will not discuss any death or illness except with the specified relative of the 'patient'. My state will not reveal which facilities have had a COVID case as supposedly due to HIPPA requirements. One nursing home in a county near me is responsible for more deaths than my entire county in all age groups.

Nursing homes are especially vulnerable. There is the obvious age (and all the higher probability infirmities correlated with it) factor, but also making residents more exposed are:

a.) living in close quarters
b.) communal living
c.) staff who may be bringing bringing the virus with them***

[www.theguardian.com]

***In this Guardian piece, they mention that nursing home caregivers are low-wage workers, who are overwhelmingly African American, Hispanic, or immigrants. They often have to work multiple jobs to support themselves. As a result, they can be picking up and/or spreading the virus between workplaces.

@ wrote:

In Europe, about half of coronavirus-related deaths in some countries have occurred in care homes. The situation is less clear in the US where the government is not issuing figures and some states, such as Florida, are refusing to identify which nursing homes have confirmed infections. A rough tally of states where figures are available suggests that at least one in five of the country’s 15,000 residential care facilities has been hit by the virus, resulting in about 4,800 deaths. However, health specialists warn that is almost certainly an undercount.

The crisis can be seen in one nursing home after another from Massachusetts and Tennessee to West Virginia. In Iowa, nearly half of Covid-19 deaths have been in care homes. In Texas, nearly 80% of the residents of one San Antonio nursing home were diagnosed with Covid-19 along with eight staff members. The national guard helped evacuate a nursing home outside Nashville after about 100 people contracted the virus and four died.

At the Ambassador home in Detroit, carers worried they could carry the virus home to their families. If they fell sick, they wouldn’t be able to work and most lived close to hand to mouth. Others were concerned that they were the ones carrying Covid-19 into the nursing home and endangering the very people they spent their days caring for.

This is extremely heart-breaking.

@ wrote:

Mayors in Tennessee and Texas have even blamed care workers for exacerbating the danger by moving between jobs in different nursing homes or going to work despite showing Covid-19 symptoms. But care home staff are often paid minimum wage or close to it, and say they have had little choice but to carry on just to survive.

They also say that many nursing home owners refuse to pay sick leave without a confirmed coronavirus diagnosis. The nursing assistant who spoke to the Guardian said that she works at the Ambassador home and also for a second firm seeing individual patients.

“Nursing staff are living in fear. Some of them are sick but they are pushing it because this is all that they have and they don’t have the means to just to walk away. They’re providing for their families … they don’t have any other options,” she said.

Should college dormitories open back up in the Fall, I do wonder if we see a new wave of outbreaks from people living in close-quartered communal spaces. This type of "set-up" is definitely a magnet for outbreaks.

Vitamin D3, oranges and zinc help boost the immune system. I'd guess after a vaccine is available, we will need one yearly. Speaking of aging homes, our Jewish home is doing an amazing job of keeping over 500 residents safe, these are in Independent living, however, there has been one death and one staff member sent home for the 2 weeks.There are three seperate buildings on the property. The Max Factor property houses sick folks with weak immune systems and other problems, including lung problems. I heard they closed the dining room and are serving meals in their room, with no visitors allowed in, and everyone must wear a mask. This is now a California law. They should be commended. I know several living there, and have spoken to them, those with zoom are connected to their families through this social media, but (again), no visitors, including family. My family gave to this facility in San Francisco, and my ex donated a car to the one in L.A.
They do a fabulous job caring for the aged. I forgot to mention, staff and

Answering the thread's question....I will feel safe wearing a mask, and staying 6 feet away.
I will not feel safe going to a movie as we know them. I'm sure when things open, it will be in a different way, and we will get used to it....



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 04/19/2020 12:00AM by Irene_L.A..

@shoptastic wrote:

Should college dormitories open back up in the Fall, I do wonder if we see a new wave of outbreaks from people living in close-quartered communal spaces. This type of "set-up" is definitely a magnet for outbreaks.

If I still had school age kids I would be looking for ways to keep them out of group environments such as a classroom. As a single mom, that would have required some creativity to be able to earn a living while home schooling. Shamelessly I would enlist grandparents, trusted friends and thoughtful employers after carefully training the kids to quietly stay on task with their laptops on education tasks with the understanding that once they got back to the privacy of our home they could be loud and hyper to get all that pent up energy out of their systems.

If I had college age kids I would encourage them to take a leave of absence for a year to live at home and if possible continue their classes on line. It was easy enough to remind the kids that anyone they had unprotected sex with was the equivalent of having unprotected sex with any of their previous partners. Choices are involved there. Useful guidelines for staying safe from COVID in a dormitory or classroom would be tough because you can't really wear a mask 24/7 while you are trying to concentrate on learning.

I will just treat this like everyone is sick around me: mask, gloves, wash hands, stay 6 feet away from everyone. I always thought it was silly when i saw pictures of Japanese people with masks on. Now i am sewing masks and i am treating it like any other fashion accessory.

Air pollution + SARS in Asia has made masks totally normal for them (even pre-COVID-19).

Perhaps post-COVID-19, we'll see ppl wearing masks more commonly here in the U.S. I could imagine a creative designer(s) making lots of money off of such a trend.