I made it from the daily ICU data on
1 Like
Thanks. So, is it correct that there were about 525 staffed ICU beds in use by covid patients in LA county at the beginning of the period you plotted? (The total number of ICU beds in LA county is about 2500, IIRC.) I’m just trying to understand.
I would assume that staffed ICU beds for covid patients would have to be in the infectious diseases ward, with their special ventilation and PPE requirements, so not all ICU beds can be used for covid patients.
Number jumped 20% in four days. “Other” jumped almost as much.
I think I read somewhere that some hospitals have upgraded all of their ICU units’ ventilation to be usable for Covid if necessary.
This is an informed, intelligent preemptive action that should be encouraged broadly wherever hospital budgets permit.
Any hospitals that have already managed to budget and accomplish these upgrades should be both congratulated and recognized. If ICU for covid patients must be increased, this kind of flexibility is essential.
There’s a similar article here:
Not new news after Guangzhou, but an impressively detailed reenactment.
That was published a few months ago already
Key messages
Current rules on safe physical distancing are based on outdated science
Distribution of viral particles is affected by numerous factors, including air flow
Evidence suggests SARS-CoV-2 may travel more than 2 m through activities such as coughing and shouting
Rules on distancing should reflect the multiple factors that affect risk, including ventilation, occupancy, and exposure time
I don’t see a cite for the new Korean study in that piece.
The South Korea study was published after this manuscript went through the review process
Right. It was published on Nov. 23. To my knowledge, there was no prepub. I’m not sure what you’re saying.
If I understand you correctly you were wondering why the BMJ paper didn’t have a reference to the Korean paper but that wouldn’t be possible as the BMJ paper was submitted 5 months prior to the Korean paper
I don’t understand why you said “that was published a few months ago already.”
The comment from DC seemed to indicate that the Korean paper is showing something new regarding that the 6ft rule isn’t based on any solid science when there are papers out for 6 months showing same (which obviously has implications in restaurants)
The Korean paper is newsworthy because one of the people infected was over 21 feet from the infected person and she was at the restaurant for only five minutes, thus invalidating the CDC’s definition of “close contact” as within six feet for 15 minutes. Of course, anyone who understood the implications of the Guangzhou restaurant and Hunan bus studies already knew the CDC’s advice was wrong.
Yes. This “minimum safe distance and time” rule of thumb might apply, more-or-less, in absolutely quiescent air in a cavernous space where someone is heavily coughing or sneezing directly at you constantly for 15 minutes, but not in any realistic enclosed space with induced air movement as in a small store or restaurant with a/c, fans, and/or closed or no windows. Utter B.S., and at least partly based on anecdotal origins, as was pointed out earlier.
No, I pointed to the Zeynep writeup that Robert posted because she had some additional thoughts about the Korean studies, and also brought up the choir incident. (Also, some interesting comments below her post.) Plus, I added my own comment, which is something I’ve said more than once before: Get people to lower their voices by making restaurants quieter (in case there are any remaining). One step in that direction would be to turn down the music…
My intention was simply to supplement the LA Times summary article that ElsieDee posted by pointing to another related summary article posted on a different FTC thread.
I was interested to learn in a news article today (Daily Beast) that Pfizer wasn’t “directly involved” in Operation Warp Speed. I had assumed that it was. More power to them!
1 Like
That was clear from the start - Pfizer always said that they believe to be able to move faster without any external help from CMC and regulatory standpoint (as they had little involvement in the actual discovery of the vaccine)
1 Like
Well, I guess they proved their point.
Kudos are in order. The world owes its thanks to this brave company.
The end isn’t here, but the beginning of the end has come sooner than anyone might have realistically imagined six months ago.
For the first time in what seems like forever, there’s more than a glimmer of hope at the end of this long dark tunnel.