Cozumel COVID-19 updates

[yle]

Just curious... anyone here have any direct experience with exposure to the virus, i.e. close relatives or yourselves? I ask because until recently all I had to go on was statistics and reports of how terrible the situation is. But direct experience has really cast the issue in a new light for me.

I think when widespread antibody testing becomes available, we'll find that there were (and are) a tremendous number of asymptomatic carriers. It's possible that the virus will actually spread to a majority of the population before a vaccine is available, but that the vast majority of people show no symptoms or mild symptoms at the most (Take a look at the stats of any country... compare total cases to "serious cases".) Which could mean that this virus is transmitted much more easily that a typical flu virus, but that it's also less dangerous (I know, hard to believe that last bit with pop media screaming about all the people dying... which is why I ignore the screaming and focus on the stats.)

 

[yle]

Article at Náuticos aumentan las tarifas de tours y otras actividades turísticas en Cozumel (Spanish) indicating that some water sport tourist operators are increasing prices by 20% because of reduced capacity (currently limited to 30%) and new sanitation requirements. The article seems to be addressing snorkel trips, which are now $500-600 pesos ($23-28 US), but one has to wonder if dive operators won't be doing the same. 20% hardly seems like enough to cover the increased costs.

I was looking at one dive op's website and they said exactly this: their prices for dive trips would be $15 more (which is about 20%) as long as they were restricted to reduced capacity, but that they will return to normal prices when the restriction are lifted.

 

[Ukmc]

I was looking at one dive op's website and they said exactly this: their prices for dive trips would be $15 more (which is about 20%) as long as they were restricted to reduced capacity, but that they will return to normal prices when the restriction are lifted.

Financially it makes sense.

 

[Ukmc]

Just curious... anyone here have any direct experience with exposure to the virus, i.e. close relatives or yourselves? I ask because until recently all I had to go on was statistics and reports of how terrible the situation is. But direct experience has really cast the issue in a new light for me.

I think when widespread antibody testing becomes available, we'll find that there were (and are) a tremendous number of asymptomatic carriers. It's possible that the virus will actually spread to a majority of the population before a vaccine is available, but that the vast majority of people show no symptoms or mild symptoms at the most (Take a look at the stats of any country... compare total cases to "serious cases".) Which could mean that this virus is transmitted much more easily that a typical flu virus, but that it's also less dangerous (I know, hard to believe that last bit with pop media screaming about all the people dying... which is why I ignore the screaming and focus on the stats.)

Is this the statistics you are looking for? It appears that COVID-19 is 20 times more deadly.

Assessment of Deaths From COVID-19 and From Seasonal Influenza
Jeremy Samuel Faust, MD, MS1; Carlos del Rio, MD2,3
Article Information

• 1Harvard Medical School, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Division of Health Policy and Public Health, Department of Emergency Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts
• 2Department of Medicine, Division of Infectious Diseases, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, Georgia
• 3Hubert Department of Global Health, Rollins School of Public Health of Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia

JAMA Intern Med. Published online May 14, 2020. doi:10.1001/jamainternmed.2020.2306

 

[Pillpusher]

Just curious... anyone here have any direct experience with exposure to the virus, i.e. close relatives or yourselves? I ask because until recently all I had to go on was statistics and reports of how terrible the situation is. But direct experience has really cast the issue in a new light for me.

I think when widespread antibody testing becomes available, we'll find that there were (and are) a tremendous number of asymptomatic carriers. It's possible that the virus will actually spread to a majority of the population before a vaccine is available, but that the vast majority of people show no symptoms or mild symptoms at the most (Take a look at the stats of any country... compare total cases to "serious cases".) Which could mean that this virus is transmitted much more easily that a typical flu virus, but that it's also less dangerous (I know, hard to believe that last bit with pop media screaming about all the people dying... which is why I ignore the screaming and focus on the stats.)

I agree 100% with most of what you said, except that this has already killed 4x as many people as the flu does over an entire year, and in a much shorter period of time. A virus being "dangerous" is a combination of its lethality as well as its transmit-ability. The point of shutting everything down wasn't to try to choke out the virus... The intent was to slow it so that hospital resources weren't overwhelmed, which would have escalated the mortality rate from it. IMO, hospital bed and vent utilization rates are a key factor to look at. So, the only realistic options are a vaccine at some point, herd immunity, or a combination of both with an imperfect vaccine. Until then, what we are seeing now will likely be the "new normal" for a while, and people will have to choose their own risk and activity levels accordingly.

 

[ChuckP]

I agree 100% with most of what you said, except that this has already killed 4x as many people as the flu does over an entire year, and in a much shorter period of time. A virus being "dangerous" is a combination of its lethality as well as its transmit-ability. The point of shutting everything down wasn't to try to choke out the virus... The intent was to slow it so that hospital resources weren't overwhelmed, which would have escalated the mortality rate from it. IMO, hospital bed and vent utilization rates are a key factor to look at. So, the only realistic options are a vaccine at some point, herd immunity, or a combination of both with an imperfect vaccine. Until then, what we are seeing now will likely be the "new normal" for a while, and people will have to choose their own risk and activity levels accordingly.

This vaccine talk, is that hopeful talk? I thought other covid type viruses didn't ever get a vaccine developed, like SARS?

The other thing, herd immunity, did I see somewhere that a very low number of people have been exposed to this, like under 5%?? How many need exposed for herd immunity?

 

[morecowbells]

Just curious... anyone here have any direct experience with exposure to the virus, i.e. close relatives or yourselves? I ask because until recently all I had to go on was statistics and reports of how terrible the situation is. But direct experience has really cast the issue in a new light for me.

I work in a hospital in St. Louis. In March, we encountered several Covid patients whom were critically ill. Despite proning these patients, and as a last resort, placing on a ventilator many succumbed to this virus. We were not over capacity, nor resorted to using parking lot tents, we were full, not overflowing. After a month, things started to slow down. Now we are seeing levels increasing again. Who knows, between the lift of some lock downs, Ozark rednecks or protesters, a rise is inevitable. Although, interestingly enough, hospitalizations are way down and we don't see as many critical patients. My hope is that this virus is losing some of it's punch.

 

[Pillpusher]

This vaccine talk, is that hopeful talk? I thought other covid type viruses didn't ever get a vaccine developed, like SARS?

The other thing, herd immunity, did I see somewhere that a very low number of people have been exposed to this, like under 5%?? How many need exposed for herd immunity?

It's definitely hopeful. SARS was much more difficult to transmit, and couldn't be passed on when someone is asymptomatic or pre-symptomatic. So, squashing it was as simple as "If you're stick, stay home". That's not the case with this. I don't remember a mad rush for vaccine development like there is with this. There are probably more companies working on this right now than there are working on cancer treatments.

I would definitely guess that WAY more than 5% of the population has been exposed. Around 30% of cases only have very minimum/mild symptoms, and lots are completely asymptomatic. But, then the issue becomes even if you have antibodies, that may not prevent you from getting it again. The only thing we know for sure at this point is that nobody knows anything for sure...lol.

 

[ChuckP]

I work in a hospital in St. Louis. In March, we encountered several Covid patients whom were critically ill. Despite proning these patients, and as a last resort, placing on a ventilator whey succumbed to this virus. We were not over capacity, nor resorted to using parking lot tents, we were full, not overflowing. After a month, things started to slow down. Now we are seeing levels increasing again. Who knows, between the lift of some lock downs, Ozark rednecks or protesters, a rise is inevitable. Although, interestingly enough, hospitalizations are way down and we don't see as many critical patients. My hope is that this virus is losing some of it's punch.

Ok Dr Fauchi - I've really been wondering about that myself, the idea that's it's less potent maybe even less transferable. I remember watching that Johns Hopkins site and watching it literally blow up across the world. It was so exponential at first but seems much more linear today. I haven't been paying lots of attention to the US but down here, they give us state updates everyday and in boredom, I've been keeping track of data.

Now, our testing is really lacking, our death rate is 18% today and has been there for the last six weeks. They are also using available hospital beds as a metric for this continued opening so I don't know how much that plays into numbers. The mainland has had very few restrictions as compared to the island, they've had no curfew and I just have to assume people have always been moving around more - folks were pretty good here till mid May.

Even though cases have gone up and they certainly aren't exploding like they would exponentially, the amount of hospitalizations has remained real flat - also, there has been a big increase in cases in Chetumal, like 100 more in the last two weeks, that has effected the sate numbers.

Look at the individual cities too, relitively flat in the number of cases - yea, something happened in Chetamul (Othon) but who knows, maybe they had been staying inside and just started going out. I expected Cancun to big spike with the opening and it hasn't happened - is it less contagious?

 

[Pillpusher]

All the potential causation vs correlation issues makes my head spin...lol. If you just look at positive case counts, a lot of times it’s closely correlated with an increase in testing. But maybe more people are getting tested because more people are getting it. I tend to look at the positive test rate ratio, but that has the same variables.

How readily available are tests on Cozumel, and are they free? All I’ve seen in the data are the number of cases, deaths, and hospitalization utilization rates, but nothing on the number of tests or positive test ratios.