Basic identifiable things to do about the Conavirus epidemic. A partial list.
First, we need to have Trump put in psychiatric care as soon as possible and enclosed in Saint Elizabeth hospital. For those who dispute this, see the following: This reality is simply beyond the ability of Donald Trump to comprehend.
I know that Trumpies, DONALD TRUMP, and other "Yellow peril" freaks just were dying to score a big one, a giant TOE (Theory of everything) with Beijing at the axis of a new viral axis of evil, but sorry, TRUMPIES, and TRUMP, this was not and will not ever be true.
But what is so pernicious is the degree of Trumpie driven rage as to finding SOME racially driven TOE to explain how THIS happened to the United States. Here is a fresh clue.
Something you DENY was in the works. In a word, VIRAL evolution. I.e. now get it and weep, Trumpies and D.J. Trump. The Conavirus is a big bad ***ed step above diseases which have been circulating in the animal- human being interface for thousands of years. This time we got whacked. It is as simple as that.
And that TRUMP wants to make this disease , and the VIRUS all about HIM, is the clearest reason why he needs to be put into a psychiatric ward, allowed out alternate leap years, if ever. Failure to do it, will lead to more politically driven denial of support for Democrat run states, and millions of preventable deaths.
Think otherwise? Read then the following, and Guaranteed TRUMP will not ever GET IT:
Quote
As coronavirus spreads, doctors in the ER warn ‘the worst of it has not hit us yet’
By HELEN BRANSWELL @HelenBranswellMARCH 31, 2020
Streets in cities and towns across the country are eerily quiet. Car traffic has dropped so substantially air pollution is abating. In many places, people are hunkered down indoors, trying to avoid contracting Covid-19.
But the true battle against the SARS-CoV-2 virus, which causes the disease, is playing out in hospitals that are currently — or will soon be — engulfed in an onslaught of patients struggling to breathe.
The tsunami has crashed over Seattle, parts of California, New Orleans, and New York City. In Boston and other places along the eastern seaboard, the full force of the wave hasn’t yet hit, but it’s clear it is coming soon.
Hospitals everywhere are surging their capacity, discharging any patients who can safely go home and attempting to conserve dwindling supplies of personal protective equipment, or PPE. Some are resorting to extraordinary measures — even going so far as to sanitize used N95 masks by baking them — to prevent health care workers from becoming Covid-19 patients themselves.
Related: With masks dwindling, a hospital’s Covid-19 crisis team searches for a way out
What does it look like to be on the front lines of that response — and what can we expect to happen in facilities across the country in the weeks to come?
STAT spoke with three clinicians about what is happening in U.S. hospitals: Megan Ranney, an emergency physician at Lifespan Health Systems in Providence, R.I.; Lakshman Swamy, an intensive care doctor at Boston University Medical Center and the VA Boston; and Craig Spencer, an ER physician and director of global health in emergency medicine at NewYork-Presbyterian/Columbia University Medical Center. Spencer has firsthand experience with devastating infectious diseases: He contracted Ebola in West Africa in 2014.
Their comments, compiled here, have been lightly edited for clarity and length.
On the current situation in hospitals:
Ranney: In Rhode Island, just like in emergency departments across the nation, we are seeing the number of cases double, and double, and double again. And that’s even with very limited testing. We are not running out of space at this point. We are really proactively setting up alternative facilities like tents to help us to take care of the increased numbers of patients that are coming in with Covid-like illnesses.
Swamy: We’re not rationing care. But the terrifying thing is that we see it over the horizon. Because the patients keep coming. We’re in Boston, we’re not in New York. We’re hearing terrifying stories from New York. … It’s the same as what we hear in Italy, what we heard in China.
Ranney: What hospitals in my region are seeing is that most patients can be cared for at home. But that’s a tough judgment for people to make on their own. We are, as a state and as a hospital system, working to set up alternative triage mechanisms to help keep people home if they can stay home without ever having to come to the hospital. Like telehealth, like self-triage programs, things like that.
“We are in the storm, but the worst of it has not hit us yet. And we absolutely see it coming.”
LAKSHMAN SWABY, INTENSIVE CARE DOCTOR IN BOSTON
Swamy: We are in the storm, but the worst of it has not hit us yet. And we absolutely see it coming.
Spencer: I didn’t see a single patient with chest pain. Not a single person with abdominal pain. I’m worried about where those patients are. Where are all the regular patients? Where did they go? What the heck is happening with them? And who’s going to be thinking about the non-Covid mortality, the impact of Covid on non-Covid patients?
On how the disease presents:
Ranney: Most people are going to be OK with this disease. Most people get a really bad cough and get some body aches, but go on to recover within seven to 14 days. But there is a portion of people, and it’s unpredictable who those people are, who get really, really sick.
Swamy: When we have a unit full of critically ill patients who are often on ventilators and have medications running, the kind of attention that requires is immense on a moment-to-moment scale. The reason is our interventions are sometimes as dangerous as the disease. The ventilator isn’t something you can just set and forget. Once someone’s on a ventilator, there’s no margin for error. Especially with Covid.
On shortages of PPE and medical equipment:
Ranney: Almost all of our personal protective equipment is meant to be disposable. Instead, we are wearing procedural masks, surgical masks as long as we can. A week. Or two weeks if possible. We are reusing those N95 respirators between patients. So we take them off, we put them in a paper bag, and then we reuse them. These, of course, are all things that the CDC has recommended, so we’re [doing] what has become standard protocol. But it is not the way that this equipment is meant to be used. This does not feel normal. It feels scary. And it feels that there is a potential for error.
Spencer: There are a lot of places that are quite short. So reusing your N95 when you’re not supposed to be or at least it’s not recommended. Trying to find different ways to reuse them. Baking them in the oven, UV light, etc. This is all kind of novel and certainly not ideal. But it’s always better than the latest CDC recommendation of last resort: bandanas and scarves.
Swamy: There are non-invasive ventilation strategies, which can provide some amount of support for breathing and oxygenation, without needing a ventilator or a breathing tube. But the problem is that all of those things have some elevated risk of aerosolizing virus. If we had unlimited supply of protective equipment and if we had a better understanding of what this virus actually does in terms of aerosolizing, and if we had more negative pressure rooms, then we would be able to use more of these things. But right now we just can’t — because the worst thing we could do is spread the virus to more people.
Related: With masks dwindling, a hospital’s Covid-19 crisis team searches for a way out
On the rapidly evolving response:
Ranney: It’s almost impossible to wrap our brains around the degree to which our daily practice of medicine is shifting, truly day by day. The number of patients changes day by day. The protocols change day by day. The CDC’s recommendations change day by day. The treatment options change day by day. So at the same time we’re facing uncertainty about our own risk of getting ill, we’re also facing uncertainty about what the best current protocols are for assessing and taking care of these patients. Because there’s so little scientific evidence. And the patient volume is increasing so quickly.
Spencer: We’re learning on the job. There’s not one single resource that says: “Are you taking care of Covid patients? These are the 78 things that you absolutely need to know.” There’s just so much information and it changes every single day. I remember looking last week at the number of journal articles that had already come out. It was like 12,200. Even if I had the abstracts for all of those, I wouldn’t be able to keep up.
On the personal risk of caring for Covid-19 patients:
Ranney: I have more than a dozen of my physician friends across the country, not in my own hospital but in Massachusetts, in New York, in Washington, in California, who’ve been diagnosed with Covid-19 at this point. So I know that I’m high risk.
Swamy: Every time I go to the ICU I basically hug my family and take a picture of my kids. They don’t know, but in my mind, if I have an exposure, I don’t know if I’ll come home. I don’t know if I should. I don’t know where I’ll go. There’s just a lot of fear about that.
Ranney: I have friends who are doing things like recording videos for their kids just in case they get sick. My colleagues are scared.
Spencer: For me it’s eerily reminiscent of the West Africa Ebola outbreak in 2014-2015, the mental anguish and anxiety of taking care of patients. I’m seeing a lot of my colleagues figuring out how to manage that. It’s really hard for physicians to kind of be vulnerable and we all need to be a little bit vulnerable right now.
Ranney: I have children, I have parents, I have a spouse. We’re having daily discussions about whether I quarantine from them because obviously I’m getting exposed to people constantly in the emergency department. I’m also distancing myself from my parents, which they’re not happy about. But I just can’t risk them getting sick.
Swamy: The tension is really high. I think the biggest fears I have are that my family will get sick, that I’ll make my family sick, that I’ll bring it home. That I’ll get sick. If I get infected, what am I going to do? How am I going to keep my family healthy? I don’t have somewhere to go to quarantine myself away.
Ranney: This pandemic is going to change a generation of health care providers. It is going to change generations of health care providers.
About the Author
Helen Branswell
Senior Writer, Infectious Disease
End of quote
The long and short of it is that Donald Trump is creating conditions which maximize the spread of the Conavirus and on grounds of public safety he needs to be put into a psychiatric hospital. Here are some of the issues our orange hair disaster of a POTUS cannot understand. He is too mentally ill to GET IT.
Quote
Is 6 feet enough space for social distancing?
By Rafi Letzter - Staff Writer 5 hours ago
Not everyone thinks that's enough distance.
Two women keep 6 feet (1.8 meters) apart as they speak to each other from adjacent park benches amidst the novel coronavirus COVID-19 pandemic, in the centre of York, northern England on March 19, 2020.
(Image: ? OLI SCARFF/AFP via Getty Images)
By now, you've probably heard that to slow the COVID-19 pandemic, people need to adopt social distancing measures — including remaining at least 6 feet (about 1.8 meters) apart from anyone they encounter outside their homes. Where does that number come from? And how should you be applying it in your life?
The reason we need to maintain this kind of distance from each other at all is because of how easily the new coronavirus SARS-CoV-2, the microbe responsible for the illness, spreads between people. It can theoretically remain viable in aerosols for 3 hours, can be transmitted through contaminated surfaces, and it easily spreads through coughing and sneezing. The 6 feet of distance is designed to put up a roadblock to the aerosolized and droplet methods of transmission. But that standard is best understood as a reference point — not a hard line beyond which you are absolutely protected, said Krys Johnson, an epidemiologist at Temple University. And another expert told Live Science that that distance is likely not enough to be protected from the virus.
"It's great to keep that distance between yourself and people you don't live with in outdoor settings, and it should be seen as an absolute minimum for indoor settings," when outside of your home, Johnson said.
When moving around outdoors, she said, 6 feet is a good minimum distance at which to pass other people, if you can't give them a wider berth. In indoor settings (think the grocery store), she said, it's more of an "absolute minimum."
"Six feet is the average distance that respiratory droplets from a sneeze or cough travel before they settle and are no longer likely to be inhaled by other people. I have seen estimates for social distancing of up to 10 feet if someone sneezes quite hard, [or] does not cover their sneeze [or] cough," she said. "This allows those particles a little more distance to settle so that you are not breathing them in. As long as someone's not outwardly ill, though, you should be safe maintaining a 6-foot distance."
Proper social distancing, Johnson said, means not just keeping the minimum distance but thinking about how the need to maintain that distance affects others around you.
"You should indeed try to maintain this distance even when passing someone on the sidewalk. Several supermarkets have marked off 6-foot distances in their lines to ensure that people are social distancing," she said. "My recommendation is that people absolutely maintain 6-foot distance from people not in their household when at all possible. Give people a wide berth at the grocery store or pharmacy. Be cognizant of how close you are standing in line. Quickly make your shopping selections so that the next person can select theirs while maintaining social distance."
That said, according to Johnson, it may be possible in certain settings for people to interact as long as they maintain significant social distancing.
Asked by Live Science about stories of people meeting in empty parks to chat while keeping apart, Johnson said, "You should be fine six feet apart talking for an extended period of time as long as no one is outwardly ill. This distance allows any inadvertent spittle to settle to the ground before reaching the other person, reducing the likelihood of asymptomatic transmission."
Still, that's not something she'd be comfortable with in all situations, she said.
"Personally, though, I would only sit and talk for an extended period at 6 feet if I were outdoors, just for my own peace of mind," she said in an email, adding, "If someone is outwardly ill, you should ask them to isolate at home until they feel better (regardless of the ailment), and maintain 10 feet of space when asking them to do so to preserve your own health."
Not everyone is sure that the 6 foot measure is enough for non-outwardly ill, however. And there's at least some reason to be skeptical; for instance, a case of widespread transmission in a choir practice in Washington raises the question of whether SARS-CoV-2 can be spread via tiny aerosols, which can stay suspended in air for long periods. If that's the case, particles could potentially travel more than 6 feet before drying out, as Live Science previously reported.
What's more, even large droplets of mucus expelled with extreme force (as when coughing or sneezing), or carried by the wind can travel farther than 6 feet before falling, Wired.com reported.
"Six feet is probably not safe enough," Raina MacIntyre, a professor of global security and the head of the Biosecurity Program at the Kirby Institute in Australia, told Live Science in an email. "The 3-6 foot rule is based on a few studies from the 1930s and 1940s, which have since been shown to be wrong — droplets can travel further than 6 feet. Yet hospital infection control experts continue to believe this rule. It's like the flat-Earth theory — anyone who tries to discuss the actual evidence is shouted down by a chorus of believers."
So what's the takeaway? The best way to ensure your safety is to stay indoors as much as possible. Step out as needed for responsible trips to collect food and medicine, or, if possible, brief exercise in low-density outdoor spaces. Homemade masks, regular hand-washing and other steps may help reduce the risks of COVID-19 transmission if you must venture out. But the only really sure way to prevent yourself from getting infected is staying indoors and away from other people. This is true whether you're in New York, Washington or Kansas, or anywhere else in the United States.
End of quote
In the world of DONALD Trump where everything is about HIM, and HIS EGO, it is psychologically impossible for this brain damaged POTUS to get information about reasons for social distancing, since if the information does not PRAISE Donald Trump, Donald Trump will not process it, leaving the nation and the world at large at terrible risk. But it does not stop there. See this:
Quote
Test makers are moving fast, but the coronavirus may be moving faster
By MATTHEW HERPER @matthewherperMARCH 31, 2020
In Lake Success, a village on the border of suburban Long Island and the New York City borough of Queens, there is a building that was erected to house defense engineers during World War II. It was designed to withstand enemy bombing, with a pool of water on the roof to help camouflage it in the event of airstrikes.
Today, it is on the front line of a very different war.
The building now serves as the diagnostic testing hub for Northwell Health, a New York health care system with 23 hospitals and 800 outpatient centers. It was one of the first centers to ramp up testing for SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes Covid-19, and can now run almost 2,000 tests a day. It returns results within a day, sometimes less. Inside, the pace has been furious.
“I don’t think I’ve slept more than four hours in weeks,” said Dwayne Allen Breining, a pathologist and the lab’s executive director. “We’re going at this full speed.”
Across the country, many labs are doing the same. After a month of painful failures by U.S. regulators to expand testing for the coronavirus, the Food and Drug Administration has issued a flood of clearances to manufacturers of testing machines, allowing an estimated 100,000 tests to be run a day. It is a vast improvement of the testing situation just weeks ago.
The question is whether it’s enough.
Whereas a few weeks ago 100,000 tests a day might have helped contain the explosion in new cases — by allowing doctors to tell infected patients to quarantine themselves — it is now hardly enough to keep up with an exponential rise in new infections.
Nationally, the number of Covid-19 cases has passed 160,000, with 66,000 of those cases in New York state and 38,000 in New York City. Clusters are blossoming in cities including Miami, Detroit, and elsewhere, submerging hospitals under a wave of patients who are short of breath from viral infections
Over the next few weeks, the country’s testing capacity is likely to increase further, to perhaps several hundred thousand a day, with some tests able to give results in hours or even minutes. The big question, though, is this: Can diagnostic tests outrace the coronavirus?
By now the U.S. failure to expand testing has been well-documented. Efforts by the wealthiest country in the world paled in comparison with those of other countries. And local and state officials have been furious about it.
When New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo toured Northwell’s testing facility at Lake Success three weeks ago, he lambasted U.S. regulators for not having authorized the lab to conduct coronavirus testing.
Northwell “has automated testing, which expands exponentially the number of tests that can be done,” Cuomo said. “CDC has not authorized the use of this lab, which is just outrageous and ludicrous.” The next day, the lab was cleared by the FDA to start testing patients. Its capacity at the time was 90 tests per day.
That number might not seem like a lot — and it isn’t in the context of nationwide spread. But if the pandemic has taught us anything, it’s that diagnostics are complicated.
The initial test at Northwell was based on the one developed by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention itself. That test had accuracy problems that had slowed implementation, but even the later version had another problem: It didn’t allow a laboratory to test a lot of cases at once.
At Northwell, it took a lot of effort to test a very small number of patients. “It takes four of my best techs in the lab working on that thing nonstop for a couple shifts to be able to crank out 70 tests a day,” said Breining, the lab director.
Breining’s tried to automate testing with machines from a company called GenMark, a Carlsbad, Calif.-based firm. He might have been able to use that machine, with his existing manpower, to run 600 tests a day. But, as with many other tests, there were limits in how many tests and reagents were available. In mid-March, the system was allowing the lab to test about 120 patients a day.
On March 16, the FDA granted Hologic, a Marlborough, Mass.-based company, an emergency use authorization for a SARS-CoV-2 test that runs on its Panther Fusion system. That system would allow users to run 1,150 tests in a 24-hour period. For Northwell, the machine would become a workhorse.
But for any new test on a new machine, Breining said, there is an “un-compressible” period of two weeks during which the machine must be put through its paces and validated. So even as the FDA approves new testing systems, laboratories have been racing to catch up.
The Hologic machine now accounts for the largest share of the laboratory’s volume, allowing it to keep on top of daily testing for the patients at its hospitals and of its health care workers. A Northwell spokesman said the company now has “sufficient capacity” in terms of hospital beds, but is making preparations to respond to a further surge in infected patients if necessary.
To control the pandemic, Breining said, you’d want to test enough people that the percent of positive tests falls to about 10%. At Northwell, this “positivity rate” can approach 50% on some days.
“That positivity rate tells us we’re only testing a fifth of the patients we’d want to be testing, ideally, if we had unlimited testing available,” Breining said.
Over the past month, the U.S. has taken dramatic steps to be able to test more patients for SARS-CoV-2. In a statement Monday, FDA Commissioner Stephen Hahn said that the agency had worked with 230 test developers since January, and approved 20 tests. The agency also began relaxing regulations so that laboratories like Northwell’s could get up and running more quickly.
An automated test from Roche was approved on March 13, potentially providing 400,000 tests a week. The next day, the FDA approved a test to run on a machine made by Thermo Fisher, which said it would aim to provide 5 million tests by the end of April. The following week, the agency approved a test from LabCorp and the Hologic test. At the time, Hologic said it would be able to provide about 600,000 tests a month.
Even as capacity expanded, doctors and patients have reported long wait times for results. LabCorp and Quest initially had official turnaround times of several days; some patients still report waiting as much as a week for a result.
The FDA has given emergency clearance for a test from Danaher that takes just 45 minutes and is targeted at emergency rooms. Abbott Laboratories received emergency approval for a test that runs on a small desktop machine and can return results in five minutes. Abbott said it can manufacture 50,000 of the tests a day.
But all that capacity, even if it can deliver results fast, won’t quite make up for lost time. Consider the case of the Stanford Clinical Virology Laboratory, which began working not with the CDC’s test, but with the alternative one that had been developed by German researchers and used by the World Health Organization. By the time the FDA eased regulations, Stanford launched testing in a matter of days, and was soon testing 1,000 patients a day. It hurts to imagine what would have happened had more labs been as prescient.
What will it take to get to a situation that doesn’t require the entire population to be huddled at home, trying to slow the spread of the coronavirus so that the volume of infected people does not overwhelm our hospital system? Experts say that to some extent, the answer is that it’s a waiting game. Spread of the virus must slow enough so that testing can catch up.
It won’t just be a matter of having enough diagnostic tests, but also having public health workers locate people who might be infected to test them as well as being able to return results to patients quickly. These are probably the big bottlenecks, now. A recent report from the American Enterprise Institute co-authored by former FDA Commissioner Scott Gottlieb puts the number of tests needed at 750,000 tests per week. There will also need to be a different kind of test, to detect antibodies against the virus to identify people who have already been infected and may have immunity.
The story of U.S. diagnostic testing in this case hasn’t been a failure of innovation alone, but also of logistics. After the first tests reached the market, there were shortages of other chemicals, including kits for extracting the virus before a test could be run. Then, hospitals started running out nasal swabs.
To make use of the surging test capacity, the U.S. is going to have to do better. And as fast as diagnostic companies have moved, it may not be fast enough.
A virus is a terrible thing to race.
About the Author
Matthew Herper
Senior Writer, Medicine
End of quote
But it is a certified fact that DONALD Trump has denied testing capacity to states who have gov. officials who do not genuflect to Donald Trump and praise how marvelous and how brilliant he is. Hence California, Illinois, and other places run by Democrats not worshiping Donald Trump get pitifully inadequate testing and ventilator support, while FLORIDA, home of a Trump loving chief executive gets ALL it asked for, satisfaction guaranteed.
Furthermore, contrary to the conspiracy theorists beloved by Rush Limbaugh and Donald Trump, the Conavirus DID NOT escape from a BIOWARFARE laboratory in Wuhan , China
https://www.livescience.com/coronavirus-not-human-made-in-lab.html
Quote
The coronavirus did not escape from a lab. Here's how we know.
By Jeanna Bryner - Live Science Editor-in-Chief 10 days ago
The persistent myth can be put to bed.
As the novel coronavirus causing COVID-19 spreads across the globe, with cases surpassing 284,000 worldwide today (March 20), misinformation is spreading almost as fast.
One persistent myth is that this virus, called SARS-CoV-2, was made by scientists and escaped from a lab in Wuhan, China, where the outbreak began.
A new analysis of SARS-CoV-2 may finally put that latter idea to bed. A group of researchers compared the genome of this novel coronavirus with the seven other coronaviruses known to infect humans: SARS, MERS and SARS-CoV-2, which can cause severe disease; along with HKU1, NL63, OC43 and 229E, which typically cause just mild symptoms, the researchers wrote March 17 in the journal Nature Medicine.
"Our analyses clearly show that SARS-CoV-2 is not a laboratory construct or a purposefully manipulated virus," they write in the journal article.
Related: 13 coronavirus myths busted by science
Kristian Andersen, an associate professor of immunology and microbiology at Scripps Research, and his colleagues looked at the genetic template for the spike proteins that protrude from the surface of the virus. The coronavirus uses these spikes to grab the outer walls of its host's cells and then enter those cells. They specifically looked at the gene sequences responsible for two key features of these spike proteins: the grabber, called the receptor-binding domain, that hooks onto host cells; and the so-called cleavage site that allows the virus to open and enter those cells.
That analysis showed that the "hook" part of the spike had evolved to target a receptor on the outside of human cells called ACE2, which is involved in blood pressure regulation. It is so effective at attaching to human cells that the researchers said the spike proteins were the result of natural selection and not genetic engineering.
Here's why: SARS-CoV-2 is very closely related to the virus that causes severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS), which fanned across the globe nearly 20 years ago. Scientists have studied how SARS-CoV differs from SARS-CoV-2 — with several key letter changes in the genetic code. Yet in computer simulations, the mutations in SARS-CoV-2 don't seem to work very well at helping the virus bind to human cells. If scientists had deliberately engineered this virus, they wouldn't have chosen mutations that computer models suggest won't work. But it turns out, nature is smarter than scientists, and the novel coronavirus found a way to mutate that was better — and completely different— from anything scientists could have created, the study found.
Another nail in the "escaped from evil lab" theory? The overall molecular structure of this virus is distinct from the known coronaviruses and instead most closely resembles viruses found in bats and pangolins that had been little studied and never known to cause humans any harm.
"If someone were seeking to engineer a new coronavirus as a pathogen, they would have constructed it from the backbone of a virus known to cause illness," according to a statement from Scripps.
Where did the virus come from? The research group came up with two possible scenarios for the origin of SARS-CoV-2 in humans. One scenario follows the origin stories for a few other recent coronaviruses that have wreaked havoc in human populations. In that scenario, we contracted the virus directly from an animal — civets in the case of SARS and camels in the case of Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS). In the case of SARS-CoV-2, the researchers suggest that animal was a bat, which transmitted the virus to another intermediate animal (possibly a pangolin, some scientists have said) that brought the virus to humans.
Related: 20 of the worst epidemics and pandemics in history
In that possible scenario, the genetic features that make the new coronavirus so effective at infecting human cells (its pathogenic powers) would have been in place before hopping to humans.
In the other scenario, those pathogenic features would have evolved only after the virus jumped from its animal host to humans. Some coronaviruses that originated in pangolins have a "hook structure" (that receptor binding domain) similar to that of SARS-CoV-2. In that way, a pangolin either directly or indirectly passed its virus onto a human host. Then, once inside a human host, the virus could have evolved to have its other stealth feature — the cleavage site that lets it easily break into human cells. Once it developed that capacity, the researchers said, the coronavirus would be even more capable of spreading between people.
All of this technical detail could help scientists forecast the future of this pandemic. If the virus did enter human cells in a pathogenic form, that raises the probability of future outbreaks. The virus could still be circulating in the animal population and might again jump to humans, ready to cause an outbreak. But the chances of such future outbreaks are lower if the virus must first enter the human population and then evolve the pathogenic properties, the researchers said.
End of quote
ONCE AGAIN:
I know that Trumpies, DONALD TRUMP, and other "Yellow peril" freaks just were dying to score a big one, a giant TOE (Theory of everything) with Beijing at the axis of a new viral axis of evil, but sorry, TRUMPIES, and TRUMP, this was not and will not ever be true.
But what is so pernicious is the degree of Trumpie driven rage as to finding SOME racially driven TOE to explain how THIS happened to the United States. Here is a fresh clue. Something you DENY was in the works. In a word, VIRAL evolution. I.e. now get it and weep, Trumpies and D.J. Trump. The Conavirus is a big bad ***ed step above diseases which have been circulating in the animal- human being interface for thousands of years. This time we got whacked. It is as simple as that.
And that TRUMP wants to make this disease , and the VIRUS all about HIM, is the clearest reason why he needs to be put into a psychiatric ward, allowed out alternate leap years, if ever. Failure to do it, will lead to more politically driven denial of support for Democrat run states, and millions of preventable deaths.
This is it. Times up for Trump. And we need to stop this reality show POTUS tenure via the 25 amendment, since if we do not, we will have MILLIONS of preventable deaths.
Andrew Beckwith, PhD