2 More Positive Alaska Tests - Trying To Track COVID-19 In Alaska

The state COVID-19 page replaces yesterday's data with today's data.  So unless you've been screen-saving or otherwise saving the data each day, there's no real way I've found to keep track of things.  So in this post I'm adding a table that allows you to see testing numbers and results over time.

But first, today's report:

Two new confirmed cases showed up in Fairbanks.  According to the State 334 people have been tested.  I have not been able to get an answer to the question:  how many tests does Alaska have and how many do we expect to have soon?   The original number that was bandied about was 500.  We're 166 shy of that number.  It's not clear why people are being cagey about numbers of available tests.

Anyway, here's my first stab at tracking the tests:

Alaska Covid-19 Data by Steve on Scribd

Is everyone who should be tested getting tested?  This Tweet suggests that access to doctors and cost is a factor that might be limiting who gets tested.

Talked to a friend today. She has coworkers who suspect have COVID. They have no health insurance, so won’t/can’t get tested. Oh yeah they work in food service industry

— Sam Snyder (@builditbiggerak) March 17, 2020

107 More Negative Tests In Alaska - Message From Italy On What To Expect

This was posted by the state Friday - 143 people had tested negative and one positive.  That was an increase of one positive and 84 negatives since the day before (I only know this because I had a screen shot from Thursday).  And the day before was the total since January 1.  So they had rapidly increased the testing - more than doubling the people tested.

So here's today's numbers:

They don't post these numbers over the weekend.  All we know is that since the Friday post, they've tested another 107 people all of whom tested negative.   Presumably this includes people tested Friday, Saturday, and Sunday.

In any case, the state is testing people at a much faster rate than they had been.  Though I didn't look at that page before Wednesday when only 60 people had been tested. Since then 4 times that many have been tested.

The only positive person was reported to be a foreign national cargo pilot who went directly to his hotel and then called for medical help.  He would have had contact with only a few people - other crew, customs, van or taxi driver, and the hotel check in desk.  A group small enough to have been contacted and tested.  But I'm only guessing at what should have happened.

Meanwhile I found out today that my email to the state public health department with my questions hadn't actually been sent Friday.  So I've resent it and got a confirmation they received it.

Some obvious questions that arise now:

1.  How many tests does Alaska have?  I was told 500 by a couple of people Friday.  No one could tell me if we got more.  If not, we've used half of them.

2.  Did more come?  I'm guessing there are more tests or they are on the way, since the testing screening has loosened up since I got turned down on Wednesday.

3.  Why test?  One of my questions is about the objective of testing in Alaska.  I couldn't find a stated objective on the website.  It seems there are several overlapping goals:
1.  treat the patient
2.  protect health care providers
3.  protect the general public

So did my doctor, on Friday, when they had ruled out flu and RSV,

1. decide based on her assessment of me as not likely to have COVID-19, turn down my second request for a COVID-19 test?  Or 
2. did she also consider the scarcity of tests and decide my taking a test would not be a good use of the tests?  (At that time I did mention that something had changed because they had tested over 80 people the day before, more than all the tests since they began testing.) Or
3. Was she considering the public health needs to test everyone who has any chance of having the virus to identify all carriers and then all the people they had been in contact with?   

Clearly the last one was not a highly weighted part of her calculation.  Since they were willing to test me for flu and RSV, I have to conclude the decision was made based on her assumption about the availability of tests.  But the model from other places is to test as many as possible to identify carriers and then all their contacts.  

Meanwhile, Anchorage is shutting down.  Schools have been closed.  University is only teaching classes electronically and the campus is pretty much closed.  Public buildings like libraries and museums are closed.  As of this afternoon, restaurants and bars are closed except for take-out and delivery.  Groups of more than 50 people are not allowed.  OLÉ classes I was signed up for at the end of March are cancelled.  The Alaska Press Club Conference in April is postponed.  

The only sporting event I'm aware of that has NOT been cancelled is the Iditarod race which began before people caught on.  The newspaper had an article about the village of Shaktoolik not allowing the mushers into the village, but set a checkpoint and rest place outside the village.  

What the article didn't include was mention of how the 1918/19 influenza wiped out - literally - many Native villages.  In some there were only a few survivors.  So their concern is not overblown.  In fact the report I linked to above says:

"This DHSS analysis also predicts, based on 2016 population data, how many people would die in Alaska if a similar pandemic were to occur today. If we had a flu season with the same rate of death as the epidemic wave in the late fall of 1918, the estimated number of deaths would be 11,970 Alaskans."

Does COVID-19 have the same rate of death as the 1918 flu?  It's complicated to figure out.

For those who are still skeptical about the reactions to the virus - or have family and friends who are still scoffing - I offer you this message from Jason Yanowitz who identifies six stages of the epidemic in Italy.  It was originally on Twitter, I'll just put up a few of the images as he walks through what people were thinking as things went quickly to terrible.

By Stage 3, 25% of Italy was under quarantine, but bars and restaurants were still open.

It's spread to the whole country.  

Stage 6 has everything shut down and people need registration papers to be out on the streets.  If you're out and positive, you can be charged with murder.  

There are so many people who have no concept of math beyond the simplest parts.  So graphs mean nothing to them.  The idea of exponential growth means, if anything, 'big growth'.  So maybe this Twitter thread can get people to understand that, NO, this is not big government ruining your lives, but big government doing what only it can do to save lives.  

Here's the link again to the article that has all these Tweets.

How To Make Quarantine Enjoyable And Productive

There are ways to put a little low cost luxury into your cocoons until we become post COVID-19 butterflies.  Instead of whining about what you don't have.




We started the day off with an out of the ordinary (for us) breakfast.  It was wonderful.  It's not hard to do.  But if you don't have a waffle iron, you can make pancakes or French toast.







And in these months of never-ending hand washing, get some really nice soap.  When we cleaned out my mothers house after she died, we found lots of wonderful soap.

We still have a few bars left.

On top is an I. Magnum French milled bar.  It smells so good, I may just keep it for sniffing now and then.  In the middle is Origins Lime and Geranium, and then the Yardley April violets.  The other three are soaps we bought in the San Telmo weekend market last summer in Buenos Aires.  A husband and wife make the soap, under the name Paskarito.  These are glycerin based soaps.

The price of many good soaps is less than what many people pay for a coffee these days, and a soap can last you several weeks or more.  For example










I went back and found this picture at the market where we bought the soaps.  She's mixing ingredients here.  (I also saw how many pictures I took that never got to the blog!)










And you can also go pull books off the shelves and read.  All those books you've never gotten too.  Or the ones you've promised yourself to read again.  And magazines too.  The only one I intentionally subscribe to is The Sun.  There's always one big interview (this month with Randy Blazak on why white supremacy persists), short stories, poems, a readers write section (a different topic each month and this month is 'shortcuts').  And there are black and white photos, "Sunbeams" (quotes on a selected topic, which this month seems to be 'masculinity').   I'm

"The American ideal of masculinity . . . has created cowboys and Indians, good guys and bad guys, punks and studs, tough guys and softies, butch and faggot, black and white.  It is an ideal so paralytically infantile that it is virtually forbidden - as an unpatriotic act - that the American boy evolve into the complexity of manhood"   - James Baldwin 

"I do like men who come out frankly and own that they are not gods."  - Louisa May Alcott, Jo's Boys

"There be certain times in a young man's life when, through great sorrow or sin, all the boy in him is burnt and seared away so that he passes at one step to the more sorrowful state of manhood."  Rudyard Kipling, "The Dream of Duncan Parrenness"

I've only just started Overstory by Richard Powers.  I love the The Echo Maker  which had sandhill cranes as an integral physical and metaphorical role in the book.  I'm not too far into Overstory but it's clearly about the importance of trees to humans and to the earth.

And for those of you who have little ones home with you, challenge their curiosity.  Make learning an adventure.  There's so much available online that even with the libraries closed, there's lots to do.  For example:

 http://www.sciencekids.co.nz/gamesactivities.html,

http://www.kidsites.com/sites-edu/art.htm

https://www.puzzle-maker.com/CW

https://www.tasteofhome.com/collection/easy-recipes-for-kids-to-make-by-themselves/


And don't forget - forced isolation means you can get your income taxes done on time this year.  Or you can clean out that closet you've been avoiding.

Lists are a good way to get more done in less time.  Just a thought.  While you're eating your waffles.

Beauty Break

Enough of this COVID-19.  Bright sunshine sparkling back from dazzling snow outside.  Small wonders inside.

Alaska Reports 84 New COVID-19 Tests Today - More Than Double The Total from Jan 1- March 12, But Not For Me

Today's state update to their COVID-19 Case Counts shows that since yesterday they have 84 negative tests back and 1 positive test.  You wouldn't know this just from looking up the page because it looks like this:

To know that they reported 84 more cases than yesterday, you'd have to have taken a screenshot of yesterday's page.  Which, fortunately, I did.

The day before that they had a slightly different format which included pending cases as well.  The March 11 page actually had one more case (60)  reported.  The new format now includes State lab tests and commercial and academic lab tests.

So this means that yesterday the state did 70 more tests than they had done since January 1, 2020..  And including the other state facilities, there were 84 more tests than had been done since January 1.  (I'm using January 1, 2020 because that's what's on their site, though it would seem a bit early for the state to have been testing that early in the game.)

The volunteer nurse I spoke to yesterday gave me a number to call to get answers to questions she couldn't answer.   I did that this morning.  I've talked to Jill Lewis, Deputy Director of Public Health.  She wasn't really able to answer the questions I was asking about the numbers that are posted and the ones that aren't posted (like how many people requested tests and were turned down?) and why things had changed so radically in the last day.  She asked that I email my questions and she would have someone get back to me.  I did right away.

I also got to my health care provider and she confirmed that I was also negative for the RSV test (I got the negative for the flu test right after they swabbed me.)

But, the doctor who saw me Wednesday said, based on how I looked Wednesday, she wouldn't send me for testing now.  I had assumed that  now that these two tests had eliminated alternative explanations for my symptoms, I would get the COVID-19 test.   The doctor saw me after the request was made for the test on Wednesday.  At that time she said I looked too healthy.  But, I responded, we're learning that people often have few symptoms or none at all.  And that's why the virus is so dangerous.  I'm guessing that if she's been in Alaska for the last couple of months, she hasn't seen any COVID-19 patients at all.  Maybe she's seen sicker patients who have tested negative.  But did they spend the last month in the Seattle area?

On the other hand, the state has tested 143 cases, people who must have met the criteria, and they've all tested negative.  Just the one person yesterday, who was a foreign national who arrived from an affected area with symptoms.   I got tested for Flu and HSV to eliminate those two possibilities.  Why not do the same for COVID-19?  Eliminate it as a cause.  Then I can go out and not worry about infecting others.  Or, if I do have it, I'll stay in longer.  If it gets worse, the doctors will know.  And if I just naturally get better, I'll know I've had COVID-19 and be less worried about catching it again.

Tests have been limited, but the president promised today that that the scarcity is now over.    Was the doctor still thinking about hoarding the tests for the seriously ill?

This leads to one of the questions I submitted to the State - Do they have a specific stated goal for testing?  Something that would guide how they make these decisions?   Is it to:

• Identify patients for care?
• Identify patients so that health care staff can take adequate precautions?
• To stem the epidemic by identifying the infected and then all the people they've been in contact with so they get isolated?

I imagine it's partly all three.  But the third option really is the most important in my mind and it  requires aggressive testing to find people who may not show any symptoms so they don't infect others.  That does mean lots of negatives, even mostly negatives, until you find infected people.  Then you test all their contacts, and isolate them.

I was given the option of walking into the ER on my own and asking for a test.  But X didn't think they would take me because I don't have a fever any more. (This is the first full day that's true.  I'm still close to 98.6, though my normal is closer to 96.8) I suspect they're right and I don't have COVID-19, though I don't remember ever quite having this set of symptoms before. Coughing got me out of bed several times last night. And they tested me for, and eliminated,  the two most likely alternatives.

I've been pretty much in isolation since Saturday.  I've moved around some snow and chipped some ice and I drove my car after I  got it started (easily) after a month or so in the cold in our neighbor's driveway.  I just drove it around to give it some exercise and juice the battery a bit.

And now it seems much of the population is going to join me in this new period of social introspection.  Those several days after 9/11 when everything stopped and there were no planes flying, people had a chance to glimpse 'the hard to imagine' strangeness of  stepping away from what we now consider normal.  I'm hoping people gain more insights into 'common wisdom' which says that the world has to work a certain way.  It doesn't.  We're just structured for it to work that way.  There are alternatives and it takes emergencies like this to remind us of that.

State Turns Down My Health Care Providers Request To Test Me For COVID-19; I Test Negative For Flu [UPDATED]

This is an update of my post Tuesday about my efforts to get tested for COVID-19 in Alaska.

My daughter, who's been monitoring this virus carefully, and has symptoms in Washington State, but can't get tested, is trying to see if it would be easier for me.  If I'm negative, then she can let her daughter go back to school.  If I'm positive, then she would meet the criteria of close contact with someone positive, so she can get tested.  (My granddaughter has no symptoms, just her parents.)

So she sent me a link to this State of Alaska Health Department Memo which includes this bit about Washington State:

"Testing Criteria for the State Public Health Laboratories  The patient has a clinically compatible illness ANDo Close contact to a laboratory-confirmed case of COVID-19o OR a history of travel within the past 14 days to an affected geographic area(e.g.,the patient just returned from Northern Italy a week ago or Kirkland, WA 3 days ago)without an alternative explanatory diagnosis (e.g., influenza) ."

So, the State of Alaska is acknowledging that the Seattle area is 'an affected geographic area.'

But first I had to eliminate "an alternative explanatory diagnosis (e.g., influenza)."


So I'd emailed this all to the clinic and yesterday morning I had an email back from another doctor acknowledging my concern and saying to come in for a flu test.

"Just walk in" didn't sound like he was taking this seriously as a possible COVID case.

I called the clinic to check that the lab had me down.  But as she got my travel info and symptoms again, she seemed to get more alarmed about my just walking into the clinic.  I said I agreed.  Could I just stay in the car and have someone come out and swab me?  She said she might do that.  But first she had to consult with the doctors.

She called back to say they want to consult with the state on my case.  She wasn't able to get through to a person and left a message.  I asked if I couldn't just get the flu test.  She said they didn't have the COVID and I might need both.  Then I'd have to go to the hospital.

She called back to say the state had said no to the test.

Let me remind you of the president's comments, "Anyone who wants a test can get a test."  I first emailed the doctor over the weekend.  But I'm closer than I thought I'd be.

She had me come in at closing time when there wouldn't be others there and said she'd get me a mask and she'd be in protective clothing.  My daughter had given us official masks as good-bye presents when we left Seattle, so I brought my own.

I got tested for influenza in one nasal passage and RSV in the other.  The influenza test results came back in minutes.  Negative.  The RSV will take a few days.

Then, since I'll have eliminated "alternative explanatory diagnosis," I should be able to ask again for a COVID test.

According to KTUU, the State of Alaska has 500 test kits.  Yesterday the State Website said there had been 60 people tested, 0 positive tests, and 14 pending since January 1, 2020.

Today's update shows a slight different reporting method.  Still 0 cases, but it doesn't mention how many are still pending, though there is one less test (59) than yesterday's 60 total tests given.  And the new one identifies tests by the state v. tests by commercial or academic labs.

from http://dhss.alaska.gov/dph/Epi/id/Pages/COVID-19/monitoring.aspx
note:  the info on this page changes daily

They don't tell us how many health care provider requests have been turned down.

And they don't tell us what they are saving the other 440 tests for.  They could do 40 tests a day for ten days (assuming there are that many legitimate requests) and still have 40 more tests.  In ten days there should be more tests available.

The point of testing is only in part to confirm that the high risk folks have COVID-19 and so health care workers can be protected when the patients come in for treatment.  But for prevention, they need to track down and test all those who have been exposed and to identify those with lesser or no symptoms who would be spreading the virus because they have no symptoms.

The World Health Organization Report on China makes this recommendation for "uninfected countries" which is more or less where Alaska is for now:

"Immediately enhance surveillance for COVID-19 as rapid detection is crucial to containing spread; consider testing all patients with atypical pneumonia for the COVID-19 virus, and adding testing for the virus to existing influenza surveillance systems;"

I have a call into the state to see if I can get some answers about how many tests requests they turn down and why.  But it doesn't look like they're calling back today, so I'll post this now.

[UPDATE March 12, 5pm:  Well as soon as you stop waiting, it happens.  I posted this and then a few minutes later I got a call-back.  The volunteer nurse I spoke to, L, was terrific (211 gets you to health and social service questions, and they gave my number to be called back).  Answered the questions she could and gave me another number to check on the ones she couldn't answer.  She confirmed the change in format today because of the use of non-state labs and the difficulty of keeping the 'pending' number current.  She couldn't tell me anything - other than the general criteria used to screen for testing - about the reasons people got turned down.  She emphasized everything is in flux, every answer is 'just for now' because things are changing so fast, and she mentioned this afternoon's announcement of the closure of Anchorage schools for a week.
Is there a limit on the number of tests they can give a day?  She didn't know.
Does the 500 tests include the 60 (or 59 today) already used?  She was pretty sure that 500 was what the State got total.
When I asked if the State has a specific goal for its testing program, she gave me reasons for testing - to help those at high risk know if they are COVID or not, to alert family members if they have a COVID patient at home, and to generally lower the risk.  When I pointed out that for public health stopping an epidemic, you needed to test lots of people until you find a few who were positive and then start testing all their contacts, she agreed.  We don't have enough tests.
She was very knowledgeable, very open about what she knew and didn't know, and I thank her and the others for stepping up and volunteering to fill in this need with (at least in her case) caring responders.  I'll try the number she gave me tomorrow]

[UPDATE March 12, 2020 6:56pm:  And Alaska's first case was announced after I posted the first update.]

Follow up post for Friday March 13, 2020 is here.

In Case Anyone Doesn't Appreciate What A Medical Giant Dr. Anthony Fauci Is . . .

Fauci, image from NIH

Dr. Anthony Fauci, head of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases testified before the House Oversight and Reform Committee today.  He said a few things that directly contradict the President

• that the death rate from COVID-19 is ten times that of the flu.  
• that it's going to get much worse before it gets better.  

This is the guy who oversaw the fight against AIDS.

People who are just hearing his name for the first time, might think he's just another faceless bureaucratic swamp dweller.

If so, you are wrong.  Really wrong.   This guy is about the best we could have fighting COVID-19.  Not only does he know the epidemiology, he also knows how to make the bureaucracy work.  

But since contradicting this president publicly isn't good for one's job in the government, people need to let your Senators know that you support Fauci over Trump on how to handle the virus.

If Trump retaliates against Fauci, it would be like the Vatican condemning Galileo.

Here's part of his bio listed at National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases:

"Dr. Fauci has advised six presidents on HIV/AIDS and many other domestic and global health issues. He was one of the principal architects of the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR), a program that has saved millions of lives throughout the developing world.
Dr. Fauci also is the longtime chief of the Laboratory of Immunoregulation. He has made many contributions to basic and clinical research on the pathogenesis and treatment of immune-mediated and infectious diseases. He helped pioneer the field of human immunoregulation by making important basic scientific observations that underpin the current understanding of the regulation of the human immune response. In addition, Dr. Fauci is widely recognized for delineating the precise ways that immunosuppressive agents modulate the human immune response. He developed effective therapies for formerly fatal inflammatory and immune-mediated diseases such as polyarteritis nodosa, granulomatosis with polyangiitis (formerly Wegener's granulomatosis), and lymphomatoid granulomatosis. A 1985 Stanford University Arthritis Center Survey of the American Rheumatism Association membership ranked Dr. Fauci’s work on the treatment of polyarteritis nodosa and granulomatosis with polyangiitis among the most important advances in patient management in rheumatology over the previous 20 years.
Dr. Fauci has made seminal contributions to the understanding of how HIV destroys the body's defenses leading to its susceptibility to deadly infections. Further, he has been instrumental in developing treatments that enable people with HIV to live long and active lives. He continues to devote much of his research to the immunopathogenic mechanisms of HIV infection and the scope of the body's immune responses to HIV.
In a 2019 analysis of Google Scholar citations, Dr. Fauci ranked as the 41st most highly cited researcher of all time. According to the Web of Science, he ranked 8th out of more than 2.2 million authors in the field of immunology by total citation count between 1980 and January 2019.​"

I probably should copy the whole bio just in case it doesn't stay up on this site.  

Alaska COVID 19 Testing - No Positives Because So Few People Are Being Tested? [UPDATE]

Thanks Jacob for your long comment yesterday.  Let me follow up yesterday's post here.

I got an email back from the doctor's office this morning.  Here's the response about testing for COVID 19:

"As for the testing for Covid 19. The recommendations are that you stay home and care for yourself as you would with any illness (such as a cold) if you are experiencing trouble breathing and feel you are in danger I encourage you to go to the emergency department. We are not testing unless you have certain symptoms and a qualifying history which based on your first message regarding Covid 19 you do not have. I encourage you to stay home and take care of yourself as you would for any cold. Let us know if you have any other concerns."

Here's the CDC's March 4 update (I was still in Seattle then) on who should be tested:

As availability of diagnostic testing for COVID-19 increases, clinicians will be able to access laboratory tests for diagnosing COVID-19 through clinical laboratories performing tests authorized by FDA under an Emergency Use Authorization (EUA). Clinicians will also be able to access laboratory testing through public health laboratories in their jurisdictions.

So, limiting testing is due to the lack of enough tests and that should change.

This expands testing to a wider group of symptomatic patients. Clinicians should use their judgment to determine if a patient has signs and symptoms compatible with COVID-19 and whether the patient should be tested. Decisions on which patients receive testing should be based on the local epidemiology of COVID-19, as well as the clinical course of illness. Most patients with confirmed COVID-19 have developed fever1 and/or symptoms of acute respiratory illness (e.g., cough, difficulty breathing). Clinicians are strongly encouraged to test for other causes of respiratory illness, including infections such as influenza.

So, I've had fever and cough - but no difficulty breathing.  I'm also in the group at higher risk for severity if I get the illness.

"Epidemiologic factors that may help guide decisions on whether to test include: any persons, including healthcare workers2, who have had close contact3 with a laboratory-confirmed4 COVID-19 patient within 14 days of symptom onset, or a history of travel from affected geographic areas5 (see below) within 14 days of symptom onset.
International Areas with Sustained (Ongoing) Transmission
Last updated February 28, 2020
China (Level 3 Travel Health Notice)
Iran (Level 3 Travel Health Notice)
Italy (Level 3 Travel Health Notice)
Japan (Level 2 Travel Health Notice)
South Korea (Level 3 Travel Health Notice)"

So, you have two routes to a test:

1. close contact with a lab confirmed COVID-19 patient
2. travel to one of those countries

But if no one is being tested, we don't know if someone has had close contact with someone with COVID-19 who didn't show any symptoms or hadn't traveled to one of those countries.
And are places like Seattle (which has had the most COVID-19 cases in the US) NOT on the list because they are significantly different from the countries listed?  Or because the CDC does not want to declare places in the US as problem areas?

[UPDATE 8:07pm:  My daughter emailed me an Alaska State directive which gave "travel to an affected area" like Northern Italy "or Kirkland, WA" as an example of a place where someone might have recently traveled.  It also says we need to rule out influenza, so I've sent the link to that State memo back to the doctor's office, pointing out that I have traveled from a place on the list and that BI had two cases verified today.  And asking how I can get tested for influenza.
 I don't think I'd want to be working at the clinic answering all these emails.]

I'd note that my daughter emailed me today to say there were two confirmed cases on Bainbridge Island where I was for about a month.

The Alaska Corona Virus website tells us:

"In Alaska
Updated March 10, 2020; updates made daily by 12:30pm
Confirmed cases
Current: 0
Cumulative since 1/1/2020: 0
Persons Under Investigation (PUI)*
Current: 16 (pending tests)
Cumulative since 1/1/2020: 47 (includes negative and pending tests)"

Presumably, all these people traveled to one of the target nations, since they couldn't have been exposed to someone in Alaska, because no one here has tested positive.

Despite the President's saying everyone who wants testing, can get tested, we know that's not true.  I can't get tested, for example.  I'm sure someone could do an interesting comparison between now and in the 1980s when people could be tested for HIV.  There are great differences between the two diseases.

• HIV then was a death sentence, while for most people COVID 19 is a minor illness
• HIV had a huge stigma because of society's discrimination against LGBTQ people

It would seem the lack of testing - which would help identify and isolate the non-symptomatic carriers - is due to the federal lack of response in getting tests set up.  It shouldn't be hard to let private companies offer test kits.  It seems the genetic testing companies already have swap kits ready to get the samples.  But without strict verification in place, we could get lots of false positives and false negatives.  In this case, false negatives wouldn't be so bad.  False positives would

The sooner everyone can get tested, the sooner the asymptomatic carriers can stay home and the spread of the virus can be slowed down.

[Let me also add that I suspect the odds of me having contracted COVID-19 are low.  And if I did, the symptoms seem manageable so far.  And I've been pretty much in isolation since we got back last Wednesday night.]

[My testing saga is updated Thursday - here.]

Some Corona Virus Questions I Can't Find Addressed

After suddenly jumping to around 100˚F Saturday afternoon, my temperature bounced around down to 98.8 and up to 100.9.  The book club was supposed to meet here tonight but I cancelled that Saturday.  Last time I checked my temp was 97.4, a little above my 'normal.'  I've emailed my doctor all this.  I'm staying at home.  I'm not going to my book club at its substitute location tonight.  Might be able to Skype in.

There have not been any positive tests in Alaska of the six or so people they tested.  But I was in the Seattle area the last month or so and concern there is high enough that several universities have switched classes to online and cancelled in-person classes.  Two weeks ago I was at a packed Elizabeth Warren rally in downtown Seattle and last weekend I took the train to Vancouver, WA for a conference.

Should I be tested?  Despite what the president says, that doesn't appear to be my decision to make.  My granddaughter has been kept home from school starting today because she was exposed to me and they don't want to expose the other kids.  They want me to test negative so they can send her back to school.

So I have the following questions:

1. If I self quarantine, the CDC and others say I'm safe to go out after the two week period.  BUT if no one is getting tested, we don't know how many people with the virus we're exposed to after we go out.  So I'm only risk free if everyone with symptoms or exposure stays home.  Right?
1. If someone tests positive for COVID 19, but has no symptoms or no serious illness, or even a serious bout, 
2. will they continue to test positive after they've recovered?  (So that they could know after the fact, and possibly because it mean they were probably no longer susceptible or a danger to others.)
3. If so, are they then immune?  The Dr. Campbell tape said few people have gotten reinfected, but he also says there are two strains - S and L.  And that it's possible to get the one strain and then the other.  But they don't really know.  
2. After they've tested positive and been quarantined, they should be safe to others.  Maybe we could have badges that people can wear that say that.  
1. But since we don't have enough tests only a relatively few people will be tested, so people won't know if they've:
2. had the virus with no symptoms 
3. had the virus with some symptoms but didn't get tested
4. never had the virus
3. What would happen if clusters of low risk people were intentionally exposed to the virus and quarantined until the danger of spreading it was over?  Presumably that would develop a pool of people who would pose no danger to anyone else. And this could happen on a rolling basis.  Not sure there is time for something this any more.
4. What if we exposed higher risk people in a way that had them ready for serious medical attention during their quarantine period?  I ask this because there is talk about hospitals and health care workers being overrun.  Could this be a way to space things out a bit more?  Or would it expose people to life and death danger unnecessarily?    It just seems if we could develop enough pockets of virus free people and virus recovered people, it would be easier to slow down the spread and it would help the health care system keep open for non-COVID related health problems.  

I'm putting these questions here because I couldn't find answers online.  All this is supposition and questions.  A lot of epidemic prevention advice is aimed at individuals - wash your hands, etc.  But governments have to organize larger structural ways to prevent epidemics.  I'm sure people have thought of all this, but I just can't find the discussions.

The Supreme Court Can't Declare COVID-19 Unconstitutional, The Senate Can't Vote It Away, And Trump Doesn't Have Sway Over Nature

Trump has several key tactics.  He is good at figuring out how to flatter or goad people.  For whatever reasons he's good at mesmerizing his followers.  He 'negotiates' for everything else.  Negotiate includes bribes and threats if people don't want to play his game.  So he's got the Senate Republicans locked into supporting him.  And he's appointed two of the Supreme Court Justices and lots and lots of other far right judges.

Policies that depend on how the Senate votes, Trump can impact.  Actions requiring court approval, he's working on.  Even if he loses at lower court levels, there's a good chance the Supreme Court will save him.

But viruses (actual virus like COVID-19) follow the laws of nature.  Scientists don't even control that.  They can study and find ways to use the laws of nature to fight the virus, but they can't turn off the virus because the president tells them to.

About three years ago today I asked if people would stay on the bus if the driver were acting like Trump  -  because that is the real test of faith and trust.  Most people don't understand the details of tax laws or trade agreements or health systems to be able to sort out what is and isn't true.  (Well if you have a pre-existing condition or you lose your job, or have an uncovered medical bill, you find out what doesn't work.)

In that post I gave a couple more examples beyond bus driver:

• If your doctor acted like Trump
• If your high school teacher acted like Trump
• If your pilot acted like Trump
• If your boss (of the job you really need) acted like Trump
• If your priest acted like Trump

We all are more susceptible because of the Physician in Chief's ego-centric interpretation of scientific evidence.  Here is a list of responses from Kurt Eichenwald's Trump supporting acquaintances about the virus:

• It's a hoax.
• All places reporting sickness are blue states, and theyre lying. (Theyre not all blue states.)
• Democrats are infecting themselves.
• This is a chinese problem, & we're not Chinese.
• Everyone saying this is serious are anti-Trump and lying..
• A vaccine is almost ready, so there is no reason to worry about it.
• It's been isolated. (In China, they believe)
• WHO is a bunch of foreigners who hate trump for standing up for America. So they are lying to hurt him....
• It's not a serious disease. In fact, people can go to work with it! It's less serious than a cold.

This is from the cult part of his following.

You can believe your doctor, but if he's a quack, you'll pay for those beliefs.  These people are infected by something far worse than COVID-19.  And COVID-19 might be their kool-aid.

Unfortunately, my US Senators voted against me getting rid of this doctor and we all have to wait until November to fire him and January next year for him to leave.  (I did contact them to let them know their refusal to look at more evidence for impeachment has led to this now, where far more people are going to be severely affected by the virus - older folks, other vulnerable folks, and people who have other illnesses but will find doctors and hospitals unable to give them adequate attention.  

Corona Virus Is a Scientific Problem,  Not Susceptible To Political Spin So Trump's In Trouble.  But so are the rest of us.


I'd note that the Washington Post says that Trump's grandfather was an early victim of the Spanish flue in 1918.  But Wikipedia is not as conclusive:

The family story of his death is that "on May 29, 1918, while walking with his son Fred, Trump suddenly felt extremely sick and was rushed to bed. The next day, he was dead. What was first diagnosed as pneumonia turned out to be one of the early cases of the Spanish flu, which caused millions of deaths around the world.[3]:116" However, his death certificate shows this to be untrue as he was being attended by the doctor for a week prior to his death. His status as an early case of the flu requires more research to confirm.[24] He was 49 years old.