- Joined
- Jan 3, 2013
- Messages
- 5,207
Today's numbers.
Wow! That NY deaths number!!
My DD's friends father just passed away. He was my age...
Are you worried about the Coronavirus?
- Thread starter Snowdrop13
- Start date
Wow! That NY deaths number!!
My DD's friends father just passed away. He was my age...
- Joined
- Jun 8, 2008
- Messages
- 54,809
Wow! That NY deaths number!!
My DD's friends father just passed away. He was my age...
I am so sorry
My girlfriend who is a pediatrician lost 2 colleagues. Both physicians. One a pulmonologist and one an urgent care physician and one of their wives died too. Horrific doesn't begin to describe this.
And I just found out one of my therapists who is in her twenties lost her dad who is in his 40s.
All in NY/NJ
- Joined
- Aug 4, 2008
- Messages
- 15,290
Has he eaten or taken anything new that he doesn't usual take?
I had the same thing and after a bunch of tests and finding nothing I figured out I was allergic to the red coloring in the cough drops I was taking.
- Joined
- Jun 8, 2008
- Messages
- 54,809
@missy and anyone else in NY area. Friend sent me this link of wholesalers to restaurants that are currently selling direct to consumers. Many deliver to NYC and surrounding areas.
We are way out in Long Island so our choices were limited but I was able to find one that would deliver, with $250 min. I placed my order yesterday and they should arrive Friday, hopefully it won't get cancelled for whatever reason. They had pretty wide selection of everything we needed, including milk and eggs, only trouble was since they're wholesaler many of their items were too large for a single family house.
Wanted to share as I know so many are finding it impossible to get groceries delivered.
A Guide to Restaurant Wholesalers Now Selling Groceries to the Public
Crab, scallops, lamb, beef, and lots and lots of produce usually reserved for restaurants are available for delivery to New Yorkers’ homesny.eater.com
Thank you @Babyblue033 ! I will check these out. Very helpful of you to link these for everyone and I appreciate it!
My big conundrum is do we stay here (Brooklyn) or go to the Shore where Greg's urologist is and his hospital should we need to go to the ER. Then all food delivery services change and i is no longer possible to walk to the local grocery. Ugh. I just want to stay here near my parents and where we are settled but of course no path is smooth.
So glad you are keeping well stocked! My sister is out on Long Island too and I know she is running to the store every week. I will share this with her. Thank you!
chemgirl
Ideal_Rock
- Joined
- Sep 16, 2009
- Messages
- 2,345
I fell down the stairs yesterday and had to go to the ER (I’m ok though!). It was interesting. Maybe 3 people there. No use of common spaces for anything. Everyone was kept separate.
We’re still not overwhelmed here and I hope it stays that way.
I seriously laid on the basement floor for an hour deciding if I could get away with staying at home. In the end I couldn’t walk so it was pretty obvious. I suppose everyone has similar thought process because the hospital was eerily calm.
We’re still not overwhelmed here and I hope it stays that way.
I seriously laid on the basement floor for an hour deciding if I could get away with staying at home. In the end I couldn’t walk so it was pretty obvious. I suppose everyone has similar thought process because the hospital was eerily calm.
- Joined
- Dec 18, 2014
- Messages
- 1,677
Have you assessed the situation in the hospitals near you? If someone gets sick and ends up in the ER are they allowed to have an accompanying person there with them?
I think perhaps you could get a lot out of a pros and cons list for staying vs leaving. And a critical assessment of just how severe the impact of each pro and con is (like a breakdown of what you think would actually happen if the concerning event X did occur. Many of them may not be that irremidiable in reality, as you may just be able to drive back to New York if something didnt quite go according to plan.).
- Joined
- Jun 8, 2008
- Messages
- 54,809
The urologist wants us at his hospital. At the jersey shore. We could drive there in 90 minutes or maybe even less time if there’s no traffic.
My family (all in NY) is pressuring me to get out of NY and head to our jersey shore house.
You’re right there are pros and cons. My head can’t process it all and what’s best for us right now.
Thanks @qubitasaurus for chiming in. I am still working the options through.
- Joined
- Jun 8, 2008
- Messages
- 54,809
- Joined
- Sep 1, 2009
- Messages
- 10,295
- Joined
- Mar 22, 2017
- Messages
- 1,121
I'm so sorry you both are going through this. Sending healing dust. Gentle hugs to you both.
- Joined
- Sep 1, 2009
- Messages
- 10,295
- Joined
- Sep 17, 2008
- Messages
- 9,345
what type of inhaler? albuterol or some sort of inhaled steriod (hope its not a steroid)
- Joined
- Sep 1, 2009
- Messages
- 10,295
Albuterol
BMI
Shiny_Rock
- Joined
- Apr 17, 2014
- Messages
- 274
@TooPatient I am so glad to hear that your husband does not have pneumonia! (and that you are no longer in the car by yourself having to worry about what's going on)
Like some others on this thread I had a very similar bug in January/February with tightness in my chest, painful cough, exhaustion, possible low grade fever (I never actually checked it but I frequently had chills). My husband, disabled adult daughter and I were all at a Sutter Health building (in northern California) in mid January to see a family doctor for a form we needed filled out and all three of us got sick shortly thereafter. My daughter and I rarely ever get sick, but whatever it was lasted about a month with the cough lingering even longer and felt unlike anything I've ever had before.
Has your husband been coughing ever since February? (I went back and reread your older posts)
Did the hospital say it is possible that the blood in his mucus is from badly irritated bronchial tubes or throat? I coughed up phlegm with a pink tinge from blood on a couple of days at the peak of my symptoms.
I used menthol ointment on my chest, neck and face to help me breathe and took OTC expectorant/cough medicine for a week or two. I felt like I wasn't getting enough air in my chest without them. I also used Riccola sugar free lemon mint drops which contain vitamin c and menthol. (They have aspartame which I normally do not ingest but they worked better for me than any of the other types.) I still use them occasionally when that tight feeling or pesky cough tries to rear it's ugly head.
I am praying that your husband is going to start seeing a marked improvement in the next few days!
Last edited:
- Joined
- Sep 1, 2009
- Messages
- 10,295
Yes, coughing since February. I took a look at his throat and saw no obvious irritation. (I get bad allergies and bronchitis routinely so am used to that bit of blood.) ER didn't comment on it other than just yuck. (My information comes from a very tired DH who is bad at passing on details in the best of times!)
Been drinking hot tea with local raw honey. He also uses a great sinus rinse.
BMI
Shiny_Rock
- Joined
- Apr 17, 2014
- Messages
- 274
Oh yeah, I drank a LOT of hot peppermint tea all day long too.
How long until the CV test results are back?
- Joined
- Aug 16, 2007
- Messages
- 5,821
I've heard there's a lot of false negatives. If it gets labored go back please. Did they do the chest x-ray?
- Joined
- Jun 8, 2008
- Messages
- 54,809
Oh no, I am sorry @TooPatient ! Hoping your DH is feeling better today and I am keeping you all in my thoughts and prayers. (((HUGS))).
- Joined
- Sep 1, 2009
- Messages
- 10,295
I have read that too. Just recently, I saw mention of a teenager who tested negative twice and the third test was the only to come up positive. He died....
The doctors say the same thing about going back. I'm not quite clear what is labored in such a way that he should go back compared to "just" uncomfortable and okay to keep at home. We have a pulse oximeter so doing our best to keep an eye on everything.
Yes, they did do a chest x-ray. I don't know what the results mean other than no pneumonia. The ER Dr didn't say anything more than that and I don't know how to read the report regarding other things checked for.
FINDINGS:
Lungs/Pleura: No focal opacities evident. No pleural effusion. No pneumothorax.
Mediastinum: Within exam limitations, the cardiomediastinal contour is normal.
Other: None.
IMPRESSION:
Normal single view chest.
- Joined
- Sep 1, 2009
- Messages
- 10,295
Results were quick! I was going to say I have no idea as he wasn't told how long to expect and didn't ask. (How do men not ask this sort of thing!?!)
Just checked the online chart and have a pile of tests in from the last few hours.
COVID-19: negative
Influenza A: negative
Influenza B: negative
Urinalysis: normal
Lots of blood results. All in normal range except these...
Hemoglobin: 17.0
WBC: 11.1
Lymphocytes: 4.22
Monocytes: 1.33
Eosinophils: 0.44
No interpretation from any doctors yet. Looks like an infection, maybe? I am only so-so on identifying what all of this means! I love having the detailed breakdown. It is fascinating to see all of the information and learn little bits about what it all means.
- Joined
- Jun 8, 2008
- Messages
- 54,809
Wonderful news @TooPatient continuing healing vibes and lots of good thoughts your way!!!
- Joined
- Jun 8, 2008
- Messages
- 54,809
FYI:
www.nytimes.com
"
Li Wenliang, the doctor in China who raised early awareness of the new coronavirus, died of the virus in February at 34. His death was shocking not only because of his role in publicizing the developing epidemic but also — given that young people do not have a high risk of dying from Covid-19 — because of his age.
Is it possible that Dr. Li died because as a doctor who spent a lot of time around severely ill Covid-19 patients, he was infected with such a high dose? After all, though he was one of the first young health care workers to die after being exposed up close and frequently to the virus, he was unfortunately not the last.
The importance of viral dose is being overlooked in discussions of the coronavirus. As with any other poison, viruses are usually more dangerous in larger amounts. Small initial exposures tend to lead to mild or asymptomatic infections, while larger doses can be lethal.
From a policy perspective, we need to consider that not all exposures to the coronavirus may be the same. Stepping into an office building that once had someone with the coronavirus in it is not as dangerous as sitting next to that infected person for an hourlong train commute.
This may seem obvious, but many people are not making this distinction. We need to focus more on preventing high-dose infection.
Both small and large amounts of virus can replicate within our cells and cause severe disease in vulnerable individuals such as the immunocompromised. In healthy people, however, immune systems respond as soon as they sense a virus growing inside. Recovery depends on which wins the race: viral spread or immune activation.
Virus experts know that viral dose affects illness severity. In the lab, mice receiving a low dose of virus clear it and recover, while the same virus at a higher dose kills them. Dose sensitivity has been observed for every common acute viral infection that has been studied in lab animals, including coronaviruses.
Humans also exhibit sensitivity to viral dose. Volunteers have allowed themselves to be exposed to low or high doses of relatively benign viruses causing colds or diarrhea. Those receiving the low doses have rarely developed visible signs of infection, while high doses have typically led to infections and more severe symptoms.
It would be unethical to experimentally manipulate viral dose in humans for a pathogen as serious as the coronavirus, but there is evidence that dose also matters for the human coronavirus. During the 2003 SARS coronavirus outbreak in Hong Kong, for instance, one patient infected many others living in the same complex of apartment buildings, resulting in 19 dead. The spread of infection is thought to have been caused by airborne viral particles that were blown throughout the complex from the initial patient’s apartment unit. As a result of greater viral exposure, neighbors who lived in the same building were not only more frequently infected but also more likely to die. By contrast, more distant neighbors, even when infected, suffered less.
Low-dose infections can even engender immunity, protecting against high-dose exposures in the future. Before the invention of vaccines, doctors often intentionally infected healthy individuals with fluid from smallpox pustules. The resulting low-dose infections were unpleasant but generally survivable, and they prevented worse incidents of disease when those individuals were later exposed to smallpox in uncontrolled amounts.
Despite the evidence for the importance of viral dose, many of the epidemiological models being used to inform policy during this pandemic ignore it. This is a mistake.
People should take particular care against high-dose exposures, which are most likely to occur in close in-person interactions — such as coffee meetings, crowded bars and quiet time in a room with Grandma — and from touching our faces after getting substantial amounts of virus on our hands. In-person interactions are more dangerous in enclosed spaces and at short distances, with dose escalating with exposure time. For transient interactions that violate the rule of maintaining six feet between you and others, such as paying a cashier at the grocery store, keep them brief — aim for “within six feet, only six seconds.”
Because dose matters, medical personnel face an extreme risk, since they deal with the sickest, highest-viral-load patients. We must prioritize protective gear for them.
For everyone else, the importance of social distancing, mask-wearing and good hygiene is only greater, since these practices not only decrease infectious spread but also tend to decrease dose and thus the lethalness of infections that do occur. While preventing viral spread is a societal good, avoiding high-dose infections is a personal imperative, even for young healthy people.
At the same time, we need to avoid a panicked overreaction to low-dose exposures. Clothing and food packaging that have been exposed to someone with the virus seem to present a low risk. Healthy people who are together in the grocery store or workplace experience a tolerable risk — so long as they take precautions like wearing surgical masks and spacing themselves out.
A complete lockdown of society is the most effective way to stop spread of the virus, but it is costly both economically and psychologically. When society eventually reopens, risk-reduction measures like maintaining personal space and practicing proper hand-washing will be essential to reducing high-dose infections. High-risk sites for high-dose exposure, like stadiums and convention venues, should remain shuttered. Risky but essential services like public transportation should be allowed to operate — but people must follow safety measures such as wearing masks, maintaining physical spacing and never commuting with a fever.
Now is the time to stay home. But hopefully this time will be brief. When we do begin to leave our homes again, let’s do it wisely, in light of the importance of viral dose."
Opinion | These Coronavirus Exposures Might Be the Most Dangerous (Published 2020)
As with any other poison, viruses are usually deadlier in larger amounts.
"
Li Wenliang, the doctor in China who raised early awareness of the new coronavirus, died of the virus in February at 34. His death was shocking not only because of his role in publicizing the developing epidemic but also — given that young people do not have a high risk of dying from Covid-19 — because of his age.
Is it possible that Dr. Li died because as a doctor who spent a lot of time around severely ill Covid-19 patients, he was infected with such a high dose? After all, though he was one of the first young health care workers to die after being exposed up close and frequently to the virus, he was unfortunately not the last.
The importance of viral dose is being overlooked in discussions of the coronavirus. As with any other poison, viruses are usually more dangerous in larger amounts. Small initial exposures tend to lead to mild or asymptomatic infections, while larger doses can be lethal.
From a policy perspective, we need to consider that not all exposures to the coronavirus may be the same. Stepping into an office building that once had someone with the coronavirus in it is not as dangerous as sitting next to that infected person for an hourlong train commute.
This may seem obvious, but many people are not making this distinction. We need to focus more on preventing high-dose infection.
Both small and large amounts of virus can replicate within our cells and cause severe disease in vulnerable individuals such as the immunocompromised. In healthy people, however, immune systems respond as soon as they sense a virus growing inside. Recovery depends on which wins the race: viral spread or immune activation.
Virus experts know that viral dose affects illness severity. In the lab, mice receiving a low dose of virus clear it and recover, while the same virus at a higher dose kills them. Dose sensitivity has been observed for every common acute viral infection that has been studied in lab animals, including coronaviruses.
Humans also exhibit sensitivity to viral dose. Volunteers have allowed themselves to be exposed to low or high doses of relatively benign viruses causing colds or diarrhea. Those receiving the low doses have rarely developed visible signs of infection, while high doses have typically led to infections and more severe symptoms.
It would be unethical to experimentally manipulate viral dose in humans for a pathogen as serious as the coronavirus, but there is evidence that dose also matters for the human coronavirus. During the 2003 SARS coronavirus outbreak in Hong Kong, for instance, one patient infected many others living in the same complex of apartment buildings, resulting in 19 dead. The spread of infection is thought to have been caused by airborne viral particles that were blown throughout the complex from the initial patient’s apartment unit. As a result of greater viral exposure, neighbors who lived in the same building were not only more frequently infected but also more likely to die. By contrast, more distant neighbors, even when infected, suffered less.
Low-dose infections can even engender immunity, protecting against high-dose exposures in the future. Before the invention of vaccines, doctors often intentionally infected healthy individuals with fluid from smallpox pustules. The resulting low-dose infections were unpleasant but generally survivable, and they prevented worse incidents of disease when those individuals were later exposed to smallpox in uncontrolled amounts.
Despite the evidence for the importance of viral dose, many of the epidemiological models being used to inform policy during this pandemic ignore it. This is a mistake.
People should take particular care against high-dose exposures, which are most likely to occur in close in-person interactions — such as coffee meetings, crowded bars and quiet time in a room with Grandma — and from touching our faces after getting substantial amounts of virus on our hands. In-person interactions are more dangerous in enclosed spaces and at short distances, with dose escalating with exposure time. For transient interactions that violate the rule of maintaining six feet between you and others, such as paying a cashier at the grocery store, keep them brief — aim for “within six feet, only six seconds.”
Because dose matters, medical personnel face an extreme risk, since they deal with the sickest, highest-viral-load patients. We must prioritize protective gear for them.
For everyone else, the importance of social distancing, mask-wearing and good hygiene is only greater, since these practices not only decrease infectious spread but also tend to decrease dose and thus the lethalness of infections that do occur. While preventing viral spread is a societal good, avoiding high-dose infections is a personal imperative, even for young healthy people.
At the same time, we need to avoid a panicked overreaction to low-dose exposures. Clothing and food packaging that have been exposed to someone with the virus seem to present a low risk. Healthy people who are together in the grocery store or workplace experience a tolerable risk — so long as they take precautions like wearing surgical masks and spacing themselves out.
A complete lockdown of society is the most effective way to stop spread of the virus, but it is costly both economically and psychologically. When society eventually reopens, risk-reduction measures like maintaining personal space and practicing proper hand-washing will be essential to reducing high-dose infections. High-risk sites for high-dose exposure, like stadiums and convention venues, should remain shuttered. Risky but essential services like public transportation should be allowed to operate — but people must follow safety measures such as wearing masks, maintaining physical spacing and never commuting with a fever.
Now is the time to stay home. But hopefully this time will be brief. When we do begin to leave our homes again, let’s do it wisely, in light of the importance of viral dose."
Niffler75
Brilliant_Rock
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2020
- Messages
- 1,112
@TooPatient Gosh, just caught up with posts a d saw your news. Sending best wishes your way! 
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2013
- Messages
- 5,207
@TooPatient Sending healing dust your and your husbands way. I am happy his X-ray was clear and normal.
- Joined
- Jun 8, 2008
- Messages
- 54,809
- Joined
- Jun 8, 2008
- Messages
- 54,809
- Joined
- Jan 26, 2003
- Messages
- 22,155
- Joined
- Jun 8, 2008
- Messages
- 54,809
300x240.png)