Coronavirus prep
Replies
-
paperpudding wrote: »Chef_Barbell wrote: »paperpudding wrote: »Chef_Barbell wrote: »Chef_Barbell wrote: »paperpudding wrote: »SummerSkier wrote: »It is starting to feel like I am in the minority for NOT having contracted Covid for the past 2 years... I wonder what the stats are going to look like for the US after this current Omicron wave goes past - even without the home test positives not being in the data most likely.
I imagine the stats are much, much higher. I had it (fully vaxxed) and other family members had it and we did not report it just stayed home and got through it.
what do you mean you didnt report it?
Don't you have to report positive RATS tests and/or follow up with official PCR test?
genuine question - we certainly have to do that here in Aust but I understand rules in different countries are different.
If you dont have to do so or people are not, even though they are meant to - then yes, your official stats will clearly be under what is actually happening
I didn't have to report my positive results but I did get a call from the test and trace corps. They keep track of positive cases here in NYC. But that's only because I got tested at a NYC site. Home testing has no requirements to report. But there aren't many home tests available in stores here.
Did they tell you to retest after symptoms resolved? I tested at a county site and when I spoke to the person from the health department, they specifically told me I didn't need to test again for 6 months--including for things like surgery. That was a bit of a surprise. The old guidance was that you needed 2 negative follow up tests to confirm you were over the infection.
T&T didn't tell me to retest after quarantine. My job which pays separate covid pay said specifically I didn't need to be retested to come back to work. It is strange but I guess they are considering the lack of testing available right now.
I think it is not so much the lack of testing but the fact that antibodies show up, therefore you test as positive even though you are recovered and no longer infectious.
My son who has Covid in Australia was told isolate for 10 days, no need for a clearance test or re testing, if asymptomatic for last 3 days of the 10, can just come out of isolation.
https://wi.mit.edu/news/new-research-reveals-why-some-patients-may-test-positive-covid-19-long-after-recovery
Has nothing to do with antibodies.
well, ok, not antibodies then - but the point of what I was saying is still the case, as others have ratified - ie tests can show up as positive long after person has recovered and is no longer infectious - therefore no point in requiring a negative test in order to get return to work/ come out of isolation clearance
The reason for this is not the lack of available testing but that positive results would be meaningless.
Yup. But the CDC already admitted that the reason they don't require a test after 5 days is partially because of lack of testing. 🤷♀️0 -
cmriverside wrote: »Question for you all.
I am fully vaxed through booster with Pfizer, and as I mentioned I had that lousy long-lasting cold. If I ask my PCP for an antibody test to see if that cold was something more despite my negative home tests. Will the antibody test tell anything of value given my vaccination status?
I was originally thinking it could tell if I did have COVID, now I am wondering if the vaccination would blur that information.
You would need a Nucleocapsid test.
https://www.labcorp.com/tests/164068/sars-cov-2-antibodies-nucleocapsid
Thank you @cmriverside Let's see what my PCP says at my physical on Jan 22. I wonder if insurance will support my interest.
What would be the medial need? If can't identify that highly doubt insurance would pay.0 -
kshama2001 wrote: »I’m a healthcare worker and I am asking that everyone tell all their friends and family to stop coming to the ER for minor illnesses and for testing. Make an appointment for a test and if you can’t get one, just stay home.
The hospitals are getting overwhelmed and the wait times are insane because of all the frivolous ER visits for tests in people with minor illness or no symptoms. Nurses and doctors are getting burnt out with the insanity of it all.
Unless you’re very sick, stay home!!
Great PSA.
Here in Massachusetts, 91% of the total population has had at least one shot and 75% are fully vaccinated, yet our little suburban hospital is overwhelmed and looking forward to help from the National Guard.
None of us have symptoms, but wanted to know how to get tested in case we develop some. I'm with the VA, so checked for my other family members. Possibly they'd use the free test service at CVS. We can't get same day, or next day, or at the closest store, but there are appts available two days out in the next town over.
https://www.cvs.com/minuteclinic/covid-19-testing
I also ordered a two kit test from Amazon, which will arrive in a few weeks.
https://smile.amazon.com/gp/product/B09KZ6TBNY/
And now I see I can request a free at-home kit from my state:
https://www.ondemand.labcorp.com/ma-testing
The thing is, many are coming in for unnecessary tests. For example, a mom with her 2 toddlers who have barely any symptoms came in yesterday. She tested positive and wanted her kids tested. They are not in school or daycare, just at home. I told her that they don’t need to be tested. If someone in the home tests positive and others have symptoms, then they have it too but knowing won’t change the treatment at all. It is still just let it run its course for the most part unless you’re sick enough to require oxygen and hospitalization.
Also, there are a lot of false negatives going on especially if someone tests too early. There is no point coming in and clogging the ER for a test when one barely has symptoms. They should get an appointment for a test even if they have to wait a while. Waiting a few days will lead to a more accurate test result. Coming in one day one or two of symptoms and testing negative when that person had close contact in the home with someone positive……is dangerous. That person might think they don’t have to quarantine because they are negative but in reality, they are still contagious and tested too soon.
I’m trying to educate my patients about these things.
I will say that I have yet to have to hospitalize a single vaccinated person, even the elderly ones with multiple medical issues.
We recently had a young (39) year old otherwise healthy married man and father pass away from Covid and he was unvaccinated. I have had to admit several very sick, young, otherwise healthy unvaccinated patients this past week. It is insane to me how some people are still not vaccinated.
In the previous waves there were quite a few people dying at home or shortly after admission due to silent hypoxia - so I can understand people being concerned enough to go to the hospital if they are aware of that complication even if their symptoms weren't that severe. Not sure if that is an issue with this variant, or in vaccinated people, but I have been hearing all along not to wait too long to go to the hospital, so can't really blame people who are worried.
That was my main concern throughout this, my family didn't even really get any "severe" symptoms, but I still checked them daily with the pulse oximeter to make sure. Those of us who aren't doctors or nurses only know what we have read/heard in the media, and what I heard is that people with Covid were underestimating how sick they were and were presenting at the hospital too late with dangerously low blood oxygen levels.
People are coming in with no symptoms at all. The emergency room is for emergencies.
I was responding to your post regarding the people who came in with "barely any" symptoms. My point was that symptoms that seem like "barely any" to a healthcare professional can still possibly be worrying to a lay person. Especially one who has been exposed to media reports, possibly out of context, for the last two years.
I mean we have had it drilled into our heads the last two years that we need test, isolate and mask - and now suddenly we are being told to just stay home and we will be fine. I get that in your position you think that those seeking healthcare are doing so frivolously - but personally I am empathetic to where their fears may be coming from.
Maybe it was different in Canada, but here in Chicago where we were hit hard in spring '20, we were told from the beginning to just stay home and isolate from those who lived with us as much as possible (and that they should quarantine too) if we had symptoms, since unless we had a bad case (such as trouble breathing), there wasn't much that could be done and going out was more risky and hospitals would easily become overburdened.
Tests weren't available then, of course. When they did become available, it was still never a "you must test" unless you wanted to not quaratine, and it was never expected that one would go to the ER just to test. Of course we were also told (when not sick) to mask and social distance, but I'm not sure what that has to do with the ER stuff.
I do think it's been pretty understood -- in the US, at least -- that having a case for most people wasn't going to need medical intervention.
I'm not saying that people should go to the ER just to test. I am saying that after being bombarded for many months with media reports of deaths, and enduring forced lockdowns and mask restrictions to keep from contracting a "deadly" illness - someone with what a health professional might consider "barely any" symptoms may feel that they are sick enough to seek care.
I guess "trouble breathing" is kind of subjective. As I said before in the first waves there were people who didn't realize how much trouble they were actually in and by the time they got to the hospital it was too late. And those are the ones you hear about on the news. I know we had a couple of young people during the Delta wave die at home because they didn't realize how sick they were. Not saying that everyone should go to the hospital - just saying that if a parent is worried about their child I can see why they would.
Fwiw my family got over their Covid cases at home without medical care or emergency visits
so I am not talking about myself here. Just expressing some empathy and compassion for those who are trying to access care that they obviously feel that they need. It's been a long two years of mixed and ever-changing advice.
And aren't most anti-viral treatments supposed to be given at the beginning of the illness? Wouldn't that mean before you have severe symptoms? If you wait until you are sick enough to be admitted to the hospital then isn't it too late for the antibodies and the new Pfizer pill?
I don't think we even have any early treatments available here in Canada, but I think the US does.
Spend $20 and get an oximeter to check breathing levels to objectively measure.3 -
I decided to look at my cities testing appointments. First, rapid testing is only available to children in a local school or those 65+ of age. Otherwise you have to do the normal test (PCR). Second, the first appointment available is not until Saturday afternoon at one location and the second location has no appointments due to increased needs.
ERs in the area are slammed right now. Some of which are there is get tested or due to mild symptoms. This only puts a bigger strain on services. An overworked staff is only going to be stressed, fatigued, and more likely to make mistakes. What needs to happen is that people who are not actually emergent need to just get turned away. We have to put what little supply we have towards those who REALLY need it and not waste time, personnel, and equipment on those who don't.8 -
paperpudding wrote: »paperpudding wrote: »what do you mean you didnt report it?
Don't you have to report positive RATS tests and/or follow up with official PCR test?
Here in Ontario, public health testing is becoming overwhelmed and the latest guideline restricts eligibility for PCR tests. Contact tracing and testing is out the window at this point. So, no, a positive rapid antigen test will not be followed up with a PCR for the majority of people.
I haven't seen or heard of any requirement to report rapid test results, unless there is something to that effect in whatever literature accompanies the test itself (I've never seen one).
eta I have no idea where Sarah7591 resides, just reporting the current state of testing here
The instructions on the rapid test tell you to follow up with a PCR test, but there is nothing about reporting it. We did follow up with PCR tests - mostly because my rapid tests kept coming back negative even though I obviously had extensive exposures - I wanted to confirm with a more sensitive test. (Our PCR tests were on December 24 so we were using the guidelines at the time - I know they have changed since then.)
Of course my PCR test got lost and never was uploaded to the system. The pharmacist checked with the lab and told me verbally it was negative, but he also said it would be uploaded within 24 hours and it never was so who knows.
well, no, there is nothing about reporting it in patient instructions here in Aust either - patients don't have to report PCR tests, their medical service does so.
They are meant to follow up any positive RATS tests with PCR test though - which if positive then gets reported to Communicable Disease branch by your medical provider
Yes our PCR tests are reported by the provider as well. I was talking about the rapid tests you do at home. Unless you follow up with a PCR (which we can't even do now) they do not get reported anywhere.1 -
Theoldguy1 wrote: »kshama2001 wrote: »I’m a healthcare worker and I am asking that everyone tell all their friends and family to stop coming to the ER for minor illnesses and for testing. Make an appointment for a test and if you can’t get one, just stay home.
The hospitals are getting overwhelmed and the wait times are insane because of all the frivolous ER visits for tests in people with minor illness or no symptoms. Nurses and doctors are getting burnt out with the insanity of it all.
Unless you’re very sick, stay home!!
Great PSA.
Here in Massachusetts, 91% of the total population has had at least one shot and 75% are fully vaccinated, yet our little suburban hospital is overwhelmed and looking forward to help from the National Guard.
None of us have symptoms, but wanted to know how to get tested in case we develop some. I'm with the VA, so checked for my other family members. Possibly they'd use the free test service at CVS. We can't get same day, or next day, or at the closest store, but there are appts available two days out in the next town over.
https://www.cvs.com/minuteclinic/covid-19-testing
I also ordered a two kit test from Amazon, which will arrive in a few weeks.
https://smile.amazon.com/gp/product/B09KZ6TBNY/
And now I see I can request a free at-home kit from my state:
https://www.ondemand.labcorp.com/ma-testing
The thing is, many are coming in for unnecessary tests. For example, a mom with her 2 toddlers who have barely any symptoms came in yesterday. She tested positive and wanted her kids tested. They are not in school or daycare, just at home. I told her that they don’t need to be tested. If someone in the home tests positive and others have symptoms, then they have it too but knowing won’t change the treatment at all. It is still just let it run its course for the most part unless you’re sick enough to require oxygen and hospitalization.
Also, there are a lot of false negatives going on especially if someone tests too early. There is no point coming in and clogging the ER for a test when one barely has symptoms. They should get an appointment for a test even if they have to wait a while. Waiting a few days will lead to a more accurate test result. Coming in one day one or two of symptoms and testing negative when that person had close contact in the home with someone positive……is dangerous. That person might think they don’t have to quarantine because they are negative but in reality, they are still contagious and tested too soon.
I’m trying to educate my patients about these things.
I will say that I have yet to have to hospitalize a single vaccinated person, even the elderly ones with multiple medical issues.
We recently had a young (39) year old otherwise healthy married man and father pass away from Covid and he was unvaccinated. I have had to admit several very sick, young, otherwise healthy unvaccinated patients this past week. It is insane to me how some people are still not vaccinated.
In the previous waves there were quite a few people dying at home or shortly after admission due to silent hypoxia - so I can understand people being concerned enough to go to the hospital if they are aware of that complication even if their symptoms weren't that severe. Not sure if that is an issue with this variant, or in vaccinated people, but I have been hearing all along not to wait too long to go to the hospital, so can't really blame people who are worried.
That was my main concern throughout this, my family didn't even really get any "severe" symptoms, but I still checked them daily with the pulse oximeter to make sure. Those of us who aren't doctors or nurses only know what we have read/heard in the media, and what I heard is that people with Covid were underestimating how sick they were and were presenting at the hospital too late with dangerously low blood oxygen levels.
People are coming in with no symptoms at all. The emergency room is for emergencies.
I was responding to your post regarding the people who came in with "barely any" symptoms. My point was that symptoms that seem like "barely any" to a healthcare professional can still possibly be worrying to a lay person. Especially one who has been exposed to media reports, possibly out of context, for the last two years.
I mean we have had it drilled into our heads the last two years that we need test, isolate and mask - and now suddenly we are being told to just stay home and we will be fine. I get that in your position you think that those seeking healthcare are doing so frivolously - but personally I am empathetic to where their fears may be coming from.
Maybe it was different in Canada, but here in Chicago where we were hit hard in spring '20, we were told from the beginning to just stay home and isolate from those who lived with us as much as possible (and that they should quarantine too) if we had symptoms, since unless we had a bad case (such as trouble breathing), there wasn't much that could be done and going out was more risky and hospitals would easily become overburdened.
Tests weren't available then, of course. When they did become available, it was still never a "you must test" unless you wanted to not quaratine, and it was never expected that one would go to the ER just to test. Of course we were also told (when not sick) to mask and social distance, but I'm not sure what that has to do with the ER stuff.
I do think it's been pretty understood -- in the US, at least -- that having a case for most people wasn't going to need medical intervention.
I'm not saying that people should go to the ER just to test. I am saying that after being bombarded for many months with media reports of deaths, and enduring forced lockdowns and mask restrictions to keep from contracting a "deadly" illness - someone with what a health professional might consider "barely any" symptoms may feel that they are sick enough to seek care.
I guess "trouble breathing" is kind of subjective. As I said before in the first waves there were people who didn't realize how much trouble they were actually in and by the time they got to the hospital it was too late. And those are the ones you hear about on the news. I know we had a couple of young people during the Delta wave die at home because they didn't realize how sick they were. Not saying that everyone should go to the hospital - just saying that if a parent is worried about their child I can see why they would.
Fwiw my family got over their Covid cases at home without medical care or emergency visits so I am not talking about myself here. Just expressing some empathy and compassion for those who are trying to access care that they obviously feel that they need. It's been a long two years of mixed and ever-changing advice.
And aren't most anti-viral treatments supposed to be given at the beginning of the illness? Wouldn't that mean before you have severe symptoms? If you wait until you are sick enough to be admitted to the hospital then isn't it too late for the antibodies and the new Pfizer pill?
I don't think we even have any early treatments available here in Canada, but I think the US does.
Spend $20 and get an oximeter to check breathing levels to objectively measure.
Thank you I have one and that is what I did. Not everyone thinks ahead like I do. I also ordered home rapid tests, and upgraded masks before they were sold out everywhere. I like to be prepared. 6 -
Just a PSA for anyone having trouble with testing. I just discovered Vault Health and they will overnight you a testing kit...I'm not sure if all states are the same, but it was free for me. They have a limited number per day that they send out so get on early to order...once those orders are full, you can pay or I think also they will just put your order in a que for later. You have to send it in for results, but I just ordered 2 to have on hand in the event I need to test for work as my work will only accept tests from a few places...basically DOH, Curative, and Vault Health. It looks like Vault Health also works for travel requirements.
My wife is home sick today and unfortunately she sent all of our in home rapid tests away with her mother and father after Christmas. None are available in store and places like CVS and Walgreens are booked two weeks out for testing which is pointless. The soonest she can get tested is at a Curative site on Friday which means we won't get results until Monday at the earliest and probably Tuesday is more likely...which again, worthless at that point.3 -
Speaking of oximeters. I have one of the little finger ones I bought online also. I also have a feature on my apple watch which will take my blood O2 on my wrist. I don't think either of them are extremely accurate but what is funny was when I went to my PCP last fall I told him about my watch and he hoohawed it saying "that is not a medical equipment valid test". Then he proceeded to bring out one of the online ones for my finger and use it as if it was "medical equipment".
1 -
SummerSkier wrote: »Speaking of oximeters. I have one of the little finger ones I bought online also. I also have a feature on my apple watch which will take my blood O2 on my wrist. I don't think either of them are extremely accurate but what is funny was when I went to my PCP last fall I told him about my watch and he hoohawed it saying "that is not a medical equipment valid test". Then he proceeded to bring out one of the online ones for my finger and use it as if it was "medical equipment".
The finger ones are actually medical equipment. My Dr. uses pretty much the same exact one I have at home when I go in for my annual. It's actually a pretty basic piece of medical equipment that uses infrared light refraction to to measure how well oxygen is binding to your red blood cells in your pulse. The key is the infrared light...which I don't know that an apple watch has. It is likely combining other data in an algorithm to get a proxy, much how they do for calorie expenditure. But the finger devices with infrared light will actually measure oxygen in the blood.4 -
My allergist uses the same one, too. 😂0
-
RetiredAndLovingIt wrote: »My allergist uses the same one, too. 😂
Literally every medical professional does...and has for ages.1 -
I decided to look at my cities testing appointments. First, rapid testing is only available to children in a local school or those 65+ of age. Otherwise you have to do the normal test (PCR). Second, the first appointment available is not until Saturday afternoon at one location and the second location has no appointments due to increased needs.
ERs in the area are slammed right now. Some of which are there is get tested or due to mild symptoms. This only puts a bigger strain on services. An overworked staff is only going to be stressed, fatigued, and more likely to make mistakes. What needs to happen is that people who are not actually emergent need to just get turned away. We have to put what little supply we have towards those who REALLY need it and not waste time, personnel, and equipment on those who don't.
Yes. So much this. I am an ER PA and I support this 100%.6 -
Note re: finger oximeters. If you are a woman who wears dark fingernail polish, it can mess up the reading. I wore black acrylics for Halloween and it wouldn’t read higher than 92. Pop them off, 99. Strangely enough it was fine with dark blue but not black.7
-
SummerSkier wrote: »Speaking of oximeters. I have one of the little finger ones I bought online also. I also have a feature on my apple watch which will take my blood O2 on my wrist. I don't think either of them are extremely accurate but what is funny was when I went to my PCP last fall I told him about my watch and he hoohawed it saying "that is not a medical equipment valid test". Then he proceeded to bring out one of the online ones for my finger and use it as if it was "medical equipment".
I bought an oximeter too, back in the early days of Covid, probably as a result of discussions on this thread. I test every so often to make sure the batteries are still good, and to drive my dogs nuts with the pulse beeps.
Just got a Fitbit Charge 5 which also has the oximeter feature. It consistently reads a bit low, usually 94 or 95, whereas my finger oximeter says 99. I'd trust the finger machine over the Fitbit.3 -
Isn't the Fitbit one overnight when you are "expected" to sometimes drop a little as a you sleep and slow down? Though I can see where 94 to 99 would be a good size spread.0
-
I believe both the fitbit and the watch use the same type of light to measure as the finger but I agree they are definitely not as accurate. What I have found with the watch is that if I measure right after I put it on it is more accurate but if I measure when I have been wearing it several hours it is not. Probably because I keep it pretty tight.
My Dr NEVER took my O2 stat until this past year when I mentioned to him about my watch. I think they don't call the fitbit or watch medical equipment because those companies do not want to deal with the extra rules and regs surrounding that type of product.
2 -
OK I have a possibly stupid question maybe the medical people here can answer.
I keep reading that Omicron infects the upper airway but doesn't infiltrate the lungs like the other variants do - so what are people being hospitalized for in this wave? I know the hospitalization rate is lower but there are still loads of people in the hospital and ICU here - but it doesn't say what they are presenting with. Does Omicron attack other organs or something?
I have read that Covid can push people's pre-existing chronic illnesses "over the edge" so to speak, so they might need hospital care, but does that account for all the hospital cases?2 -
OK I have a possibly stupid question maybe the medical people here can answer.
I keep reading that Omicron infects the upper airway but doesn't infiltrate the lungs like the other variants do - so what are people being hospitalized for in this wave? I know the hospitalization rate is lower but there are still loads of people in the hospital and ICU here - but it doesn't say what they are presenting with. Does Omicron attack other organs or something?
I have read that Covid can push people's pre-existing chronic illnesses "over the edge" so to speak, so they might need hospital care, but does that account for all the hospital cases?
For starters, Delta is still out there. Omicron is the most dominant strain at the moment, but Delta is still out there. Also, it does appear that omicron is less virulent, but also appears far more contagious and spreads much faster which means hospitalizations will likely remain high just given the sheer volume of cases.
Just as an example (these are not real numbers), if you have 10,000 cases of some other less contagious but more virulent variant and 10% of those require hospitalization, that's 1,000 hospitalizations out of 10,000 cases. Now a much more contagious variant comes about and you have 100,000 cases but it is much less virulent and only 1% of cases require hospitalization...that's still 1,000 people in the hospital. Just by sheer volume of cases, even if less of those cases require hospitalization, hospitalization will remain high because there are so many more contracting the virus.
I'm pretty sure my wife and I both have it now. She started displaying minor symptoms on Tuesday evening and I started displaying symptoms yesterday evening. Mine are more pronounced than hers and I feel like I have a bad head cold and with lots of head and nasal congestion and sneezing with some coughing...she pretty much has an annoying runny nose. She is scheduled to get tested tomorrow but I couldn't get a test until Sunday morning.12 -
cwolfman13 wrote: »OK I have a possibly stupid question maybe the medical people here can answer.
I keep reading that Omicron infects the upper airway but doesn't infiltrate the lungs like the other variants do - so what are people being hospitalized for in this wave? I know the hospitalization rate is lower but there are still loads of people in the hospital and ICU here - but it doesn't say what they are presenting with. Does Omicron attack other organs or something?
I have read that Covid can push people's pre-existing chronic illnesses "over the edge" so to speak, so they might need hospital care, but does that account for all the hospital cases?
For starters, Delta is still out there. Omicron is the most dominant strain at the moment, but Delta is still out there. Also, it does appear that omicron is less virulent, but also appears far more contagious and spreads much faster which means hospitalizations will likely remain high just given the sheer volume of cases.
Just as an example (these are not real numbers), if you have 10,000 cases of some other less contagious but more virulent variant and 10% of those require hospitalization, that's 1,000 hospitalizations out of 10,000 cases. Now a much more contagious variant comes about and you have 100,000 cases but it is much less virulent and only 1% of cases require hospitalization...that's still 1,000 people in the hospital. Just by sheer volume of cases, even if less of those cases require hospitalization, hospitalization will remain high because there are so many more contracting the virus.
I'm pretty sure my wife and I both have it now. She started displaying minor symptoms on Tuesday evening and I started displaying symptoms yesterday evening. Mine are more pronounced than hers and I feel like I have a bad head cold and with lots of head and nasal congestion and sneezing with some coughing...she pretty much has an annoying runny nose. She is scheduled to get tested tomorrow but I couldn't get a test until Sunday morning.
Yeah I get that a lower hospitalization rate of a larger number of infections still means more hospitalizations. My questions was what are they being hospitalized for? If Omicron doesn't infect the lungs, and most Covid hospitalizations were for lung involvement - basically I am asking what does a severe Omicron infection that requires hospitalization look like.
Hope you and your wife recover OK. My husband and daughter both had it over Christmas and recovered fine. (We are all vaxx'd).3 -
cwolfman13 wrote: »OK I have a possibly stupid question maybe the medical people here can answer.
I keep reading that Omicron infects the upper airway but doesn't infiltrate the lungs like the other variants do - so what are people being hospitalized for in this wave? I know the hospitalization rate is lower but there are still loads of people in the hospital and ICU here - but it doesn't say what they are presenting with. Does Omicron attack other organs or something?
I have read that Covid can push people's pre-existing chronic illnesses "over the edge" so to speak, so they might need hospital care, but does that account for all the hospital cases?
For starters, Delta is still out there. Omicron is the most dominant strain at the moment, but Delta is still out there. Also, it does appear that omicron is less virulent, but also appears far more contagious and spreads much faster which means hospitalizations will likely remain high just given the sheer volume of cases.
Just as an example (these are not real numbers), if you have 10,000 cases of some other less contagious but more virulent variant and 10% of those require hospitalization, that's 1,000 hospitalizations out of 10,000 cases. Now a much more contagious variant comes about and you have 100,000 cases but it is much less virulent and only 1% of cases require hospitalization...that's still 1,000 people in the hospital. Just by sheer volume of cases, even if less of those cases require hospitalization, hospitalization will remain high because there are so many more contracting the virus.
I'm pretty sure my wife and I both have it now. She started displaying minor symptoms on Tuesday evening and I started displaying symptoms yesterday evening. Mine are more pronounced than hers and I feel like I have a bad head cold and with lots of head and nasal congestion and sneezing with some coughing...she pretty much has an annoying runny nose. She is scheduled to get tested tomorrow but I couldn't get a test until Sunday morning.
Yeah I get that a lower hospitalization rate of a larger number of infections still means more hospitalizations. My questions was what are they being hospitalized for? If Omicron doesn't infect the lungs, and most Covid hospitalizations were for lung involvement - basically I am asking what does a severe Omicron infection that requires hospitalization look like.
Hope you and your wife recover OK. My husband and daughter both had it over Christmas and recovered fine. (We are all vaxx'd).
It can still infect the lungs, it's just not the most prominent symptom. It would still be worrisome for someone who has some kind of lung or other cardiovascular disease. One of my NY resolutions was to get off the little mini filtered cigars I smoke and it's going well along with dry January...but my lungs, while not hugely impacted by my current illness are far more impacted than my wife's. She has no cough at all and I have a slight, raspy dry cough.
Also, even your run of the mill head cold can devolve into worse. A few years ago I had what seemed to be your average head cold...it ultimately went into my lungs about a week later and I had bronchitis that turned into walking pneumonia.
Just with the sheer volume of cases with omicron you're still going to see lung issues, even if it's not the most prominent symptom...COVID is gonna COVID...
ETA: both my wife and I are vaxed and boosted and my kids are both 2x vaxed. I don't feel particularly great, but I've definitely been way worse. I feel good enough to get out with my wife later this afternoon for a nice walk, so not too terribly bad. I'm also working from home and not lying in bed...so I've definitely been worse.12 -
OK I have a possibly stupid question maybe the medical people here can answer.
I keep reading that Omicron infects the upper airway but doesn't infiltrate the lungs like the other variants do - so what are people being hospitalized for in this wave? I know the hospitalization rate is lower but there are still loads of people in the hospital and ICU here - but it doesn't say what they are presenting with. Does Omicron attack other organs or something?
I have read that Covid can push people's pre-existing chronic illnesses "over the edge" so to speak, so they might need hospital care, but does that account for all the hospital cases?
So, math. A study finding that Omicron is 60% less likely to infiltrate the lungs (not actual number but if I recall correctly it was in this ballpark) still leaves 40%. If there are twice as many cases, that’s pretty much the same number of cases infiltrating the lungs. But it’s not twice as many cases - it’s way more than that.
Not too many people are good at thinking through the implications of math. So, for example, if you hear that Omicron is only half as bad, and previously there were several million hospitalized, then you are still dealing with a whole heck of a lot of sick people.4 -
rheddmobile wrote: »OK I have a possibly stupid question maybe the medical people here can answer.
I keep reading that Omicron infects the upper airway but doesn't infiltrate the lungs like the other variants do - so what are people being hospitalized for in this wave? I know the hospitalization rate is lower but there are still loads of people in the hospital and ICU here - but it doesn't say what they are presenting with. Does Omicron attack other organs or something?
I have read that Covid can push people's pre-existing chronic illnesses "over the edge" so to speak, so they might need hospital care, but does that account for all the hospital cases?
So, math. A study finding that Omicron is 60% less likely to infiltrate the lungs (not actual number but if I recall correctly it was in this ballpark) still leaves 40%. If there are twice as many cases, that’s pretty much the same number of cases infiltrating the lungs. But it’s not twice as many cases - it’s way more than that.
Not too many people are good at thinking through the implications of math. So, for example, if you hear that Omicron is only half as bad, and previously there were several million hospitalized, then you are still dealing with a whole heck of a lot of sick people.
Yuppers...0 -
This email of their current stories from the Atlantic Daily amused me: "The coronavirus is spreading like never before. So what now? Then: Let’s talk about eating raw cookie dough."6
-
paperpudding wrote: »paperpudding wrote: »what do you mean you didnt report it?
Don't you have to report positive RATS tests and/or follow up with official PCR test?
Here in Ontario, public health testing is becoming overwhelmed and the latest guideline restricts eligibility for PCR tests. Contact tracing and testing is out the window at this point. So, no, a positive rapid antigen test will not be followed up with a PCR for the majority of people.
I haven't seen or heard of any requirement to report rapid test results, unless there is something to that effect in whatever literature accompanies the test itself (I've never seen one).
eta I have no idea where Sarah7591 resides, just reporting the current state of testing here
The instructions on the rapid test tell you to follow up with a PCR test, but there is nothing about reporting it. We did follow up with PCR tests - mostly because my rapid tests kept coming back negative even though I obviously had extensive exposures - I wanted to confirm with a more sensitive test. (Our PCR tests were on December 24 so we were using the guidelines at the time - I know they have changed since then.)
Of course my PCR test got lost and never was uploaded to the system. The pharmacist checked with the lab and told me verbally it was negative, but he also said it would be uploaded within 24 hours and it never was so who knows.
well, no, there is nothing about reporting it in patient instructions here in Aust either - patients don't have to report PCR tests, their medical service does so.
They are meant to follow up any positive RATS tests with PCR test though - which if positive then gets reported to Communicable Disease branch by your medical provider
Yes our PCR tests are reported by the provider as well. I was talking about the rapid tests you do at home. Unless you follow up with a PCR (which we can't even do now) they do not get reported anywhere.
will be interesting to see how this plays out in Australia now one does not have to follow up a positive RATS test with a PCR test.
PCR tests are reported by your medical provider
You are suppossed to let your medical provider know of positive RATS test so they can report it - whether everyone does so will be another matter.
I guess quite a lot will because they want to do the right thing and/or will want medical certificates for school, work etc - but I doubt everyone will.0 -
Isn't the Fitbit one overnight when you are "expected" to sometimes drop a little as a you sleep and slow down? Though I can see where 94 to 99 would be a good size spread.
Yes, the figure it generates is supposed to be the average of values during sleep.
I don't know enough about what O2 saturation actually means physiologically to say whether it's something that drops during sleep, like heart rate typically does.1 -
rheddmobile wrote: »OK I have a possibly stupid question maybe the medical people here can answer.
I keep reading that Omicron infects the upper airway but doesn't infiltrate the lungs like the other variants do - so what are people being hospitalized for in this wave? I know the hospitalization rate is lower but there are still loads of people in the hospital and ICU here - but it doesn't say what they are presenting with. Does Omicron attack other organs or something?
I have read that Covid can push people's pre-existing chronic illnesses "over the edge" so to speak, so they might need hospital care, but does that account for all the hospital cases?
So, math. A study finding that Omicron is 60% less likely to infiltrate the lungs (not actual number but if I recall correctly it was in this ballpark) still leaves 40%. If there are twice as many cases, that’s pretty much the same number of cases infiltrating the lungs. But it’s not twice as many cases - it’s way more than that.
Not too many people are good at thinking through the implications of math. So, for example, if you hear that Omicron is only half as bad, and previously there were several million hospitalized, then you are still dealing with a whole heck of a lot of sick people.
This is the information I was looking for - and it has nothing to do with me being unable to do the math or understanding the implications. The information I was reading was that Omicron *doesn't* infiltrate the lungs, which led me to wonder if something else was driving hospitalizations. This information that it is 60% less *likely* to infiltrate the lungs explains it - it is likely still lung complications that are driving hospitalizations.
6 -
There are also a lot of people who are hospitalized with covid but not because of covid. So, someone goes in the hospital because of a kidney infection, is tested and has Covid. Covid didn't put them in the hospital, but they are still listed as a covid patient in the hospital. On the news they said that that was often the case with children in the hospital, they tested postitive but were in the hospital for other reasons.4
-
rheddmobile wrote: »OK I have a possibly stupid question maybe the medical people here can answer.
I keep reading that Omicron infects the upper airway but doesn't infiltrate the lungs like the other variants do - so what are people being hospitalized for in this wave? I know the hospitalization rate is lower but there are still loads of people in the hospital and ICU here - but it doesn't say what they are presenting with. Does Omicron attack other organs or something?
I have read that Covid can push people's pre-existing chronic illnesses "over the edge" so to speak, so they might need hospital care, but does that account for all the hospital cases?
So, math. A study finding that Omicron is 60% less likely to infiltrate the lungs (not actual number but if I recall correctly it was in this ballpark) still leaves 40%. If there are twice as many cases, that’s pretty much the same number of cases infiltrating the lungs. But it’s not twice as many cases - it’s way more than that.
Not too many people are good at thinking through the implications of math. So, for example, if you hear that Omicron is only half as bad, and previously there were several million hospitalized, then you are still dealing with a whole heck of a lot of sick people.
This is the information I was looking for - and it has nothing to do with me being unable to do the math or understanding the implications. The information I was reading was that Omicron *doesn't* infiltrate the lungs, which led me to wonder if something else was driving hospitalizations. This information that it is 60% less *likely* to infiltrate the lungs explains it - it is likely still lung complications that are driving hospitalizations.
The math comment wasn’t really meant as a personal insult - this problem with thinking math through is just very common, even among doctors. For example doctors will commonly tell you that if you have a pain in your calf, and it’s a blood clot, it will hurt when you flex your foot. The percentage according to studies is that this happens only about one third of the time. But somehow even though it’s less than half the time, this translates in an ER doctor’s brain to, “No flex hurt, must not be a blood clot,” which is clearly an insane conclusion to draw looking at the math. Going from “Omicron is about half as likely to move into the lungs,” to “So how is anyone ending up in the hospital?” is the same kind of error.
A similar math error I see on anti-vax posts all the time, “So how come if your vaccine protects you, I have to be vaccinated? Why do you even care if I’m vaccinated if your vaccine works?” The answer being that the vaccine works MOST of the time, and most is not all, and if you do the math, what’s left over turns out to be a honking lot of people when expanded to an entire population. Somehow human beings in general don’t seem to be good at grasping the difference between statistical trends and individuals.9 -
spiriteagle99 wrote: »There are also a lot of people who are hospitalized with covid but not because of covid. So, someone goes in the hospital because of a kidney infection, is tested and has Covid. Covid didn't put them in the hospital, but they are still listed as a covid patient in the hospital. On the news they said that that was often the case with children in the hospital, they tested postitive but were in the hospital for other reasons.
Chiming in on this. A friend in a county hospital ER in Houston had a stretch last week where every single ER patient, whether coming in for appendicitis or stitches in a cut foot or gunshot wound or whatever, was testing positive for COVID.5 -
paperpudding wrote: »paperpudding wrote: »paperpudding wrote: »what do you mean you didnt report it?
Don't you have to report positive RATS tests and/or follow up with official PCR test?
Here in Ontario, public health testing is becoming overwhelmed and the latest guideline restricts eligibility for PCR tests. Contact tracing and testing is out the window at this point. So, no, a positive rapid antigen test will not be followed up with a PCR for the majority of people.
I haven't seen or heard of any requirement to report rapid test results, unless there is something to that effect in whatever literature accompanies the test itself (I've never seen one).
eta I have no idea where Sarah7591 resides, just reporting the current state of testing here
The instructions on the rapid test tell you to follow up with a PCR test, but there is nothing about reporting it. We did follow up with PCR tests - mostly because my rapid tests kept coming back negative even though I obviously had extensive exposures - I wanted to confirm with a more sensitive test. (Our PCR tests were on December 24 so we were using the guidelines at the time - I know they have changed since then.)
Of course my PCR test got lost and never was uploaded to the system. The pharmacist checked with the lab and told me verbally it was negative, but he also said it would be uploaded within 24 hours and it never was so who knows.
well, no, there is nothing about reporting it in patient instructions here in Aust either - patients don't have to report PCR tests, their medical service does so.
They are meant to follow up any positive RATS tests with PCR test though - which if positive then gets reported to Communicable Disease branch by your medical provider
Yes our PCR tests are reported by the provider as well. I was talking about the rapid tests you do at home. Unless you follow up with a PCR (which we can't even do now) they do not get reported anywhere.
will be interesting to see how this plays out in Australia now one does not have to follow up a positive RATS test with a PCR test.
PCR tests are reported by your medical provider
You are suppossed to let your medical provider know of positive RATS test so they can report it - whether everyone does so will be another matter.
I guess quite a lot will because they want to do the right thing and/or will want medical certificates for school, work etc - but I doubt everyone will.
In Tasmania and Victoria those who have a positive RAT have to register details to the relevant health department not the patient's medical provider, I assume the same in NSW (if not its coming soon). Numbers are quite high and local clinics would be overrun it people had to report their medical provider.
Tasmania has an online registration page as does Victoria. Not sure what's happening elsewhere.2
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions