From Facebook

"Despite the heterogeneity observed among the available studies, the results of this meta-analysis show that hemoglobin values are essentially reduced in COVID-19 patients with severe disease, compared to those with milder forms, thus confirming previous evidence garnered from patients with other types of pneumonia.9

Some clinical considerations can hence be made.

First, initial assessment and longitudinal monitoring of hemoglobin values seems advisable in patients with the SARS-CoV-2 infection, whereby a progressive decrease in the hemoglobin concentration may reflect a worse clinical progression."

A bit of help?

Public Health Principles for a Phased Reopening During COVID-19: Guidance for Governors

(With specific industry risk mitigation)

Authors: Caitlin Rivers; Elena Martin; Scott Gottlieb; Crystal Watson; et.al. April 17, 2020

The Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security

As the COVID-19 pandemic continues to progress, most jurisdictions have implemented physical distancing measures to reduce further transmission, which have contributed to reductions in numbers of new cases. As chains of transmission begin to decline, along with new COVID-19 cases, there will need to be decisions at the state level about how to transition out of strict physical distancing measures and into a phased reopening.

This document provides an assessment of the risk of SARS-CoV-2 transmission in a variety of organizations and settings that have been closed during the period in which physical distancing and mitigation measures have been put in place.

We outline steps to reduce potential transmission during the reopening of these organizations and settings, building on the proposed phased approach from the National Coronavirus Response: A Road Map to Reopening.

Reopening businesses and other sectors represents one of many steps that will need to be taken to revitalize communities recovering from the pandemic, restore economic activity, and mitigate the unintended public health impact of the distancing measures that were necessary to confront the epidemic of COVID-19. A discussion of larger community-wide considerations for holistically enhancing recovery can be found in the Appendix.

State-level decision makers will need to make choices based on the individual situations experienced in their states, risk levels, and resource assessments, and they should do so in consultation with community stakeholder groups.

Different parts of the country face varying levels of risk and have different resources available to confront these uncertainties. These decisions will need to be accompanied by clear and transparent communication to gain community engagement around the greatly anticipated reopenings. Individuals, businesses, and communities have a role to play in taking actions to protect themselves and those around them during this time.

In this report, we offer a framework for considering risks regarding the likelihood of transmission and potential consequences of those transmissions. This is accompanied by proposed measures for nonessential businesses, schools and childcare facilities, outdoor spaces, community gathering spaces, transportation, mass gatherings, and interpersonal gatherings.

This is followed by proposed action steps for state-level decision makers on how to utilize risk assessment findings.

Recognition and Management of Medication Excipient Reactivity in Patients With Mast Cell Activation Syndrome

Jill R. Schofield, MD1,2 and Lawrence B. Afrin, MD3

1Center for Multisystem Disease, Denver, Colorado; 2University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, Colorado;
3Armonk Integrative Medicine, Armonk, New York

"Though difficult to learn to recognize due to the extreme complexity of its pathobiology and its extreme clinical heterogeneity, MCAS appears to be common, and medication excipient reactivity is a common problem in MCAS patients.

Reactivity to FD&C dyes and alcohols are the most common, but some MCAS patients react to usually well-tolerated excipients, including those which are used by compounders.

An excipient reaction in an MCAS patient should be suspected if different responsesare seen to different formulations of the same drug, if atypical “side effects” are seen (e.g., hives or headache from steroids), or if there is a reaction to a medication that a patient tolerated well previously.

Different excipients may result in different signs/symptoms, and excipient reactions may present acutely or more insidiously. It also should be kept in mind that reactions may be mixed, i.e., benefit from the active ingredient but worsening from the excipient.

We recommend that when a culprit excipient is identified, it should be added to the patient’s allergy list, rather than listing the medication, but since most modern electronic medical record and electronic pharmacy systems feature drug−allergy interaction checking but not excipient−allergy interaction checking, manual review of medication ingredient lists should be performed by both pharmacists and patients.

We encourage US patients to learn how to use the Daily Med database and to take ownership of knowing what excipients are present in all of their medications and supplements."

Multiple Chemical Sensitivity: Toxicological Questions and Mechanisms

Martin L. Pall

"How can MCS patients be so exquisitely sensitive to low-level chemical exposure, with many estimated to be on the order to 1000 times more sensitive than normal?

Possibly by a series of mechanisms in the brain predicted to lead to long-term changed neural sensitization, increased short-term sensitization, increased levels of neurotransmitter (glutamate) and increased chemical accumulation.

Peripheral sensitivity may involve some of these mechanisms as well and also such mechanisms as neurogenic inflammation and mast cell activation.

Two of the transient receptor potential receptors may also have roles in amplifying sensitivity responses. It is through a combination of such mechanisms, acting synergistically with each other, that such high-level sensitivity may be produced."

http://www.fundacion-alborada.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/SQ-toxicologi%25CC%2581a-y-mecanismos-Pall.pdf

When the Quaratine walls fell

“The effect of public health measures on the 1918 influenza pandemic in U.S. cities”

Or
“Timing is Everything”

https://www.pnas.org/content/104/18/7588/

2007 in PNAS

Martin C. J. Bootsma (Mathematical Institute, Faculty of Sciences, Utrecht University) and Neil M. Ferguson (MRC Centre for Outbreak Analysis and Modeling, Department of Infectious Disease Epidemiology, Imperial College London).

"They put it as the most important conclusion that the timing of interventions had had a profound influence.

For example, it was identified that those American cities which had introduced measures early in their epidemics had achieved moderate but indeed significant reductions in mortality.

And the authors managed not only to show this correlation statistically, but also to demonstrate a plausible quantitative model explaining how such correlations had arisen.

According to the authors’ conclusions, “although attack rates (and thus mortality) can be reduced by 30–40% through transitory controls, to achieve reductions beyond this with public health measures alone requires those measures be sustained for as long as it takes for vaccination of the population to be completed, perhaps as long as 6 months.

The experience of many U.S. cities in 1918 shows us that the social, political, and behavioral challenges in delivering such long-term intensive policies will be considerable.”

https://www.pnas.org/content/104/18/7588/

Mastocytosis: oral implications of a rare disease

T. A. Rama, et.al.

"Within the oral cavity, MCs reside in the connective tissues, in physiologic conditions, and their number is elevated in pathologic situations resulting from immunoinflammatory processes, such as pulpal inflammation and periodontal disease. As MCs influence so many phenomena within the oral cavity, mastocytosis may manifest itself in the oral tissues.

Patients with mastocytosis should be put under special care by dental professionals, in what concerns not only general patient management, but also drug prescription, as they are particularly prone to anaphylaxis and other peri and post-operative complications. Several allergens or mast cell activation triggers such as local anesthetics, zinc oxide, eugenol, penicilins, metals and oral hygiene products are frequently administered or prescribed by dentists.

Patients with mastocytosis may also require stress management, during dental consultation. This review aims to briefly summarize the potential ways in which mast cell disease may affect the oral cavity and the dental management of mastocytosis affected patients." J Oral Pathol Med (2010)

Transmission Potential of SARS-CoV-2 in Viral Shedding Observed at the University of Nebraska Medical Center

Authors: Joshua L. Santarpia, Danielle N. Rivera, et.al.

"Lack of evidence on SARS-CoV-2 transmission dynamics has led to shifting isolation guidelines between airborne and droplet isolation precautions.

During the initial isolation of 13 individuals confirmed positive with COVID-19 infection, air and surface samples were collected in eleven isolation rooms to examine viral shedding from isolated individuals.

While all individuals were confirmed positive for SARS-CoV-2, symptoms and viral shedding to the environment varied considerably.

Many commonly used items, toilet facilities, and air samples had evidence of viral contamination, indicating that SARS-CoV-2 is shed to the environment as expired particles, during toileting, and through contact with fomites.

Disease spread through both direct (droplet and person-to-person) as well as indirect contact (contaminated objects and airborne transmission) are indicated, supporting the use of airborne isolation precautions.

Three types of samples were taken during this survey: surface samples, high volume air samples, and low volume personal air samples. The surface samples fell into three general categories of location: common room surfaces, personal items, and toilets.

Personal items were those items considered to be handled routinely by individuals in isolation and included: cellular phones, exercise equipment, television remotes, and medical equipment. Room surfaces were areas such as ventilation grates, tabletops, and window ledges.

Toilet samples were taken to evaluate the potential for viral shedding during toileting.

Air samples were collected both in isolation rooms and in the hallways of the NBU and NQU during sampling activities. Air samples were collected in the room while patients were present. Air samples were taken in the hallways during sampling activities and samplers were placed on the floor adjacent to rooms where sampling activities were taking place.

Overall, 76.5% of all personal items sampled were determined to be positive for SARS-CoV-2 by PCR (Figure 1B and 2A). Of these samples, 81.3% of the miscellaneous personal items, which included exercise equipment, medical equipment (spirometer, pulse oximeter, nasal cannula), personal computers, iPads and reading glasses, were positive by PCR, with a mean concentration of 0.217 copies/”L.

Cellular phones were 83.3% positive for viral RNA (0.172 copies/”L mean concentration) and remote controls for in-room televisions were 64.7% percent positive (mean of 0.230 copies/”L).

Samples of the toilets in the room were 81.0% positive, with a mean concentration of 0.252 copies/”L.

Of all room surfaces sampled (Figure 1B and 2A), 80.4% were positive for SARS-CoV-2 RNA. This included 75.0% of the bedside tables and bed rails indicating the presence of viral RNA (mean concentration 0.263 copies/”L), as did 81.8% of the window ledges (mean concentration 0.219 copies/”L) sampled in each room.

The floor beneath patients’ beds and the ventilation grates in the NBU were also sampled. All five floor samples, as well as 4 of the 5 ventilation grate samples tested positive by RT-PCR, with mean concentrations of 0.447 and 0.819 copies/”L, respectively.

Samples taken outside the rooms in the hallways were 66.7% positive (Figure 1B and 2B), with a mean concentration of 2.59 copies/L of air. Both personal air samplers from sampling personnel in the NQU showed positive PCR results after 122 minutes of sampling activity (Figure 2B), and both air samplers from NBU sampling indicated the presence of viral RNA after only 20 minutes of sampling activity (Figure 2B).

The highest airborne concentrations were recorded by personal samplers in NBU while a patient was receiving oxygen through a nasal cannula (19.17 and 48.21 copies/L). Neither individuals in the NQU or patients in the NBU were observed to cough while sampling personnel were in the room wearing samplers during these events.

Taken together, these data indicate significant environmental contamination in rooms where patients infected with SARS-CoV-2 are housed and cared for, regardless of the degree of symptoms or acuity of illness.

Contamination exists in all types of samples: high and low-volume air samples, as well as surface samples including personal items, room surfaces, and toilets.

Samples of patient toilets that tested positive for viral RNA are consistent with other reports of
viral shedding in stool (14).

The presence of contamination on personal items is also reasonably expected, particularly those items that are routinely handled by individuals in isolation, such as cell phones and remote controls, as well as medical equipment that is in near constant contact with the patient.

Recent literature investigating human expired aerosol indicates that a significant fraction of human expired aerosol is less than 10 ”m in diameter across all types of activity (e.g. breathing, talking, and coughing; 18) and that upper respiratory illness increases production of aerosol particles (less than 10 ”m; 19).

Taken together these results suggest that virus expelled from infected individuals, including from those who are only mildly ill, may be transported by aerosol processes in their local environment, potentially even in the absence of cough or aerosol generating procedures. "

Well now, uses Influenza like Illness reports, subtracts off confirms Flu cases and predicts a much higher and earlier infection across the US of nearly 28Million cases. That would explain a few things.

Using ILI surveillance to estimate state-specific case detection rates and forecast SARS-CoV-2 spread in the United States

Justin D Silverman, V Nathaniel Hupert, Alex D Washburne

doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.04.01.20050542

Detection of SARS-CoV-2 infections to date has relied on RT-PCR testing. However, a failure to identify early cases imported to a country, bottlenecks in RT-PCR testing, and the existence of infections which are asymptomatic, sub-clinical, or with an alternative presentation than the standard cough and fever have resulted in an under-counting of the true prevalence of SARS-CoV-2.

Here, we show how publicly available CDC influenza-like illness (ILI) outpatient surveillance data can be repurposed to estimate the detection rate of symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infections.

We find a surge of non-influenza ILI above the seasonal average and show that this surge is correlated with COVID case counts across states. By quantifying the number of excess ILI patients in March relative to previous years and comparing excess ILI to confirmed COVID case counts, we estimate the syndromic case detection rate of SARS-CoV-2 in the US to be approximately 1 our of 100.

This corresponds to at least 28 million presumed symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 patients across the US during the three week period from March 8 to March 28. Combining excess ILI counts with the date of onset of community transmission in the US, we also show that the early epidemic in the US was unlikely to be doubling slower than every 3.5 days.

Together these results suggest a conceptual model for the COVID epidemic in the US in which rapid spread across the US are combined with a large population of infected patients with presumably mild-to-moderate clinical symptoms.

We emphasize the importance of testing these findings with seroprevalence data, and discuss the broader potential to use syndromic time series for early detection and understanding of emerging infectious diseases.“”

.https://www.medrxiv.org/
/10
/2020.04.01.20050542v2.full.pdf

Be informed about testing prior to going.

Timing of antibodies and severity of infection is everything. Many China produced rushed up tests faulty and insensitive

That’s how we ‘Getcha’, Muhwahahahaha!

Innate Immunity and its Regulation by Mast Cellsi

Ashley L. St John*† and Soman N. Abraham*†‡§

"Mast cells (MCs), granulated tissue-resident cells of hematopoietic lineage, constitute a major sensory arm of the innate immune system.

This review discusses the evidence supporting the dual role of MCs, both as sentinels for invading pathogens, as well as regulatory cells throughout the course of acute inflammation, from its initiation to resolution.

This versatility is dependent on the MC’s ability to detect pathogens and danger signals and release a unique panel of mediators to promote pathogen-specific clearance mechanisms, such as through cellular recruitment or vascular permeability.

It is increasingly understood that MCs also contribute to the regulated contraction of immune activation that occurs within tissues as inflammation resolves.

This overarching regulatory control over innate immune processes has made MCs successful targets to purposefully enhance or, alternatively, suppress MC responses in multiple therapeutic contexts."

How’s Famotidine, Cimetidine, and Nizatidine working out. Missing my Ranitidine.

Note: Significant error in UV measurement using a UVA/B meter for UVC measurements.

For us geeks in the group, science behind the testing

I too really hope that some level of persistent immunity is generated. We know other corona viruses don’t produce long lasting antibodies.

Lots of folks don’t think yet, that low grade infections generate persistent antibodies.

The current US infection estimate is around ~30M actual current infections versus the reported ~2M (based on 4 or 5 recent serological test screenings for antibodies around the country).

The US population is around 338M. So, If you had a hard enough infection to generate a good dose of IgG antibodies, HERD immunity may start to take hold at around about 70 population percent infection rate or vaccination rate, whichever happens first.

Researchers do know that reinfection is an issue with the four mild seasonal coronaviruses that cause about 10 to 30% of common colds.

These coronaviruses seem to be able to sicken people again and again, even though people have been exposed to them since childhood. “Almost everybody walking around, if you were to test their blood right now, they would have some levels of antibody to the four different coronaviruses that are known”.

Immunity against these mild coronaviruses seems to wane in a matter of months or a couple of years, which is why people get colds so frequently.

For MERS and SARS 1, “We’ve gone back and gotten samples from patients who had SARS in 2003 and 2004, and as of this year, we can detect antibodies,” says Stanley Perlman of the University of Iowa. “We think antibodies may be longer lasting than we first thought, but not in everybody.” Still, it’s hard to predict how those survivors’ bodies would react if they were exposed to the SARS virus again. “There were (only) 8,000 cases, the epidemic was basically brought to an end within six months or eight months of the first case, so we don’t have anyone who was reinfected that we know of,” says Perlman.

So exactly is that HERD immunity thing supposed to happen with out a NY style or New Orleans or Albany Ga runaway again?

If people watch their exposure and practice really good hygiene, it will gradually infect enough people at a slow enough rate that medics can handle it.

80 percent will have mild to no symptoms and just be infection carriers. 20 percent will develop symptoms of which 20 percent of those who develop symptoms will still be hospitalized for 3 to 6 weeks and around 10 percent of those will die.

So open up gradually, just keep distances, wash hands, and wear masks.

Just me speaking without a mask, spews virus sized particles 6 to 13 feet. So get an awesome predator mask and wear it whenever you can in public.