Can touching a barbell in the gym get you sick with the coronavirus?

[bob357sig]

Give me a waiver bud! I'll sign. That's good news in a sea of garbage

I’m so ready to get back to my normal gym, I will take my chances and use my own precautions! As for the little gym I have been using at work, starting Monday I have to get my temperature scanned before I can enter the building, and I have to wear a mask- even in the little gym room when I’m working out by myself! Sucks, and is going to interfere with the time I have to workout but I can’t complain much, I still have use of the gym “fucking life saver “ not just physically, more mentally!!!
Edit: I have never had to breathe through a mask while working out before, will be interesting

 

[Michael Scally MD]

Androgen Hazards with COVID-19

The emergence of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 [SARS-CoV-2] in December 2019 spurred the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. A notable finding in many affected countries is that men have worse clinical outcomes and COVID-19 deaths compared with women.

Sex differences in smoking do not appear to account for poorer outcomes. Why then are there worse clinical outcomes for men compared with women?

Although the etiology is probably multifactorial, the physiological effects of androgens are one possible reason that may explain these sex-specific differences in outcomes. There are at least two plausible mechanisms by which androgens may drive clinical outcomes in COVID-19.

The first possible mechanism is linked to the expression of TMPRSS2, a cellular co-receptor required for SARS-CoV-2 infection.

The second possibility is androgen-driven immune modulation. Androgen regulation of the immune response may also partake in noted geographic variations in COVID-19 associated clinical outcomes.

Here, we discuss these possible mechanistic scenarios by learning from examples of androgen manipulation in prostate cancer and other disease processes.

…

Sharifi N, Ryan C. Androgen hazards with COVID-19 [published online ahead of print, 2020 Apr 1]. Endocr Relat Cancer. 2020;ERC-20-0133. doi:10.1530/ERC-20-0133 Androgen hazards with COVID-19 in: Endocrine-Related Cancer - Ahead of print

 

[Michael Scally MD]

A preliminary observation: male pattern hair loss among hospitalized COVID-19 patients in Spain - A potential clue to the role of androgens in COVID-19 severity

A preliminary observation of high frequency of male pattern hair loss among admitted COVID-19 patients, and suggest that androgen expression might be a clue to COVID-19 severity.

During the continuing SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) pandemic, several studies have reported a significant difference in the rate of severe cases between adult females and adult males (42% vs 58%). Among children under the age of 14, the rate of severe cases was reported to be extremely low. To explain this difference, several theories have been proposed including cigarette smoking and lifestyle habits.

However, no theory fits both the gender difference in severe cases as well as reduced risk in pre-pubescent children. Our past research on male androgenetic alopecia (AGA) has led us to investigate an association between androgens and COVID-19 pathogenesis. In normal subjects, androgen expression demonstrates significant variation between men and women as well as between adults and pre-pubescent children.

…

In conclusion, based on the scientific rationale combined with this preliminary observation, we believe investigating the potential association between androgens and COVID-19 disease severity warrants further merit. If such an association is confirmed, anti-androgens could be evaluated as a potential treatment for COVID-19 infection.

Goren A, Vano-Galvan S, Wambier CG, et al. A preliminary observation: male pattern hair loss among hospitalized COVID-19 patients in Spain - A potential clue to the role of androgens in COVID-19 severity [published online ahead of print, 2020 Apr 16]. J Cosmet Dermatol. 2020;10.1111/jocd.13443. doi:10.1111/jocd.13443 Error - Cookies Turned Off

 

[Michael Scally MD]

Men contending with coronavirus infection may have a pair of vulnerabilities that could increase their risk of longer, more severe illness: their testicles.

A pilot study that tracked the clearance of the virus from patients in Mumbai, India, offered further evidence that men are indeed harder hit by the pathogen. And it offered a theoretical explanation for that gender disparity that focuses on the cells that the coronavirus is most drawn to.

…

Still, the hypothesis has three important things going for it.

First, there are many precedents for a pathogen taking up residence in a quiet corner to elude the body’s immune defenses. The Ebola virus was found to hide in the pigment cells of the human retina, leaving even recovered patients with lingering virus.

Second, it is a biologically plausible explanation for an observed gender disparity in COVID-19 infections. The coronavirus is known to bind to ACE2 receptors, which are plentiful in just a handful of tissues, including those of the testicles.

Third, it may help explain a clear pattern emerging from the COVID-19 epidemic. While rates of confirmed cases are running close to even by gender, men have died of COVID-19 at notably higher rates than women in China, South Korea, Italy and the United States. In New York City, 68% of deaths attributed to COVID-19 have been in men, and 32% in women.

It’s a trend that Dr. Deborah Birx, the White House coronavirus coordinator, has called “concerning.”

What the hypothesis does not yet have is clear evidence to support the link between testicles and COVID-19.

…

 

[master.on]

Only idiots would flock to the gyms now.

Not only they are enclosed public spaces (well, gyms are privately owned), you're also breathing very heavily which increases the chance of you inhaling the virus.
#COVIDIOTS

 

[ickyrica]

Only idiots would flock to the gyms now.

Not only they are enclosed public spaces (well, gyms are privately owned), you're also breathing very heavily which increases the chance of you inhaling the virus.
#COVIDIOTS

You do realize there are more than a fair share of people who would rather get the virus and move right along with life? This list is growing day by day.

We all know the infection/death numbers by now, and they're realistically inflated because the number of infected is hedged down on a massive scale due to the amount of testing, or lack thereof.

I'd take the chance in a heartbeat.

 

[master.on]

The REAL death rate is about 20%
You calculate it by dividing (dead) / (dead + recovered)

With a 20% death odds you'll be "safer" playing russian roulette.
1/6 = 16.66%

... and many people will suffer severe health ailments for many years, if not for life from it.

Darwinism: COVIDIOTS die, the intelligent (or just not dumb) ones survive, which improves the human race.

 

[ickyrica]

The REAL death rate is about 20%
You calculate it by dividing (dead) / (dead + recovered)

where did you get your kool-aid? Timothy Leary?

 

[Old]

The solution seems simple enough: Those who don't care if they get it should be allowed to go out as they please. Those who do care should stay home.

The real question is liability. Many countries blame China and want to sue for damages. However any country that didn't heed advance warnings have effectively forfeited any claims to compensation. The USA is among the latter.

Those who don't mind getting sick, should not get treated if they do get sick. And should not get any share in the Covid19 stimulus funds or unemployment compensation if they lose their job.

Those who do care should receive stimulus funds, job protection, health care, etc. If they do get sick, they should be able to sue the person they got it from because of the other persons negligence.

The United States Declaration of Independence speaks of "Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness". But what if one persons liberty/pursuit infringes on another persons "unalienable rights"?

In come the politicians and lawyers ...

There are already laws in many states about spreading HIV. HIV-Specific Criminal Laws | Law | Policy and Law | HIV/AIDS | CDC If you don't have HIV and your prospective partner tells you in advance that they are HIV+, then it is effectively your own fault if you do get HIV from them. No liability ... but some states still make it criminal.

 

[ickyrica]

A test of 200 people just outside Boston found that 32% had been exposed to the coronavirus, compared to an official rate of 2%

The numbers aren't reflective of what's actually happening. Chelsea reports 2% infection rates but when 200 people are randomly sampled 65 of them have antibodies. Far cry from 2%

Chelsea is a town about the size of 10 football fields. It's tiny and packed together. You can't take a shit without he other side of town smelling it, fuck I think they all shop at the same 6 bodegas. My guess is they would see a bigger margin if everyone in that town was tested.

What this tells me is that:
A) the known infection rate is in all actuality unknown
B) the known death rate is in fact so much lower than what is being reported.

Stop the fear mongering.

The United States Declaration of Independence speaks of "Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness". But what if one persons liberty/pursuit infringes on another persons "unalienable rights"?

if the people who are afraid just stay home then nobody is infringing on their humans rights. Do you see it another way? I'd say my rights are being infringed upon by those that are afraid because I've now been mandated to stay at home. Not my choice at this point but still my hands are tied. That's imposition. That's infringing on another humans rights based on fear of the unknown. The unknown is the virus. It's clearly a much smaller burden on the vast majority of people but isn't being reported as such.

Those who don't mind getting sick,

Those who do care should receive stimulus funds,

So now the financial burden is amplified because someone isn't afraid of the unknown? You do realize when the tide goes in and out all boats move up and down with it?

Sometimes our opinions are just that, opinions. There are too many unknowns to be developing hard baked opinions. People don't even have the slightest clue what the real numbers are, publicly anyway. Opinions mean shit when your facts are off by 30% regarding infection rates. That means your death total is dropping through the floorboards, too.

And sue people for what? Not acting quickly enough? Knowing they might have covid but went out to get food so they didn't starve? Sue for not getting a covid test yet? Sue because the info about social distancing and masks wasn't what you wanted it to be? I see this with Patriots fans every Monday. "Brady should have done this, well that's what I would have done." "If I was Edelman I would have undercut that coverage..."

Sure you would have.

I'd ask how you would have handled the global pandemic as the leader of the Free world but I'm not ready to handle such wisdom this early in the a.m.

Stop fear mongering.

Solutions or bust 2020

 

[Old]

Stop fear mongering.

Curious how suggestions that this virus should be taken seriously is met with "Fear Mongering". Your post echos the fellow who believes HIV isn't so serious. Anyone afraid of my posts should simply not read them, or block me altogether.

Post #349 merely shows the conflict of 'rights' and 'liabilities' in any society, not just ours.

Bottom line: Liberty always comes with a price - as ironic as that sounds. There is no such thing as absolute liberty. Freedom is more a fantasy than reality.

I'd say my rights are being infringed upon by those that are afraid because I've now been mandated to stay at home.

Clearly they are.

The very definition of a democracy is majority rules. Individual rights get no regard unless you happen to land with the majority. Dictatorships are no better. Socialism/communism ... same problems. All governments fail. They are just a compromise - often fertilized by greed/self-interest of leaders.

It is the leaders who have imposed lock downs, and currently that is what the majority wants. Some polls regarding majority opinions (rights) in America:

• Mar 25, 2020 Poll: Americans want a national lockdown
• Apr 16, 2020 Poll: Americans are afraid of ending the coronavirus lockdowns too soon

So really, nobody cares about your rights, my rights, meso's rights, or god's rights.

 

[ickyrica]

So really, nobody cares about your rights, my rights, meso's rights, or god's rights.

with that being said why are you posting anything even remotely editorialized? Do you feel like you're finding an outlet in Meso that supports and bolsters your fear mongering? Plenty of ways to communicate about the virus without trending the way you are. And fwiw, HIV isn't that scary. It's a far, far cry from a death sentence and in most every case, people live full lives with it. If we were living in 1983 I might feel differently but it's 2020. We've come a long way. Are you not reading updated wiki pages or something?

Try focusing on a solution for a change. You're the guy that has brown tap water and just bitches about it, not really caring if and how it gets fixed. Just want to bitch about that tap water...

I'm part of a company that has multiple offices across the Northeast. All told, family member included, we have around 250 people that depend on the companies success so they can put food in their mouths and keep a roof over their heads. What you focus on has zero effect on those issues. What you focus on relies heavily on dragging people into the mud as to show blame and accountability. All that does is take up more time and resources. We have a handful of lawyers and about 8 people dealing with this daily. Not once has the line of though been in lock step with how you think. For every finger you point follow it up with a realistic action plan to overcome the need to point the finger in the first place, just a suggestion. I can only imagine what the state of affairs at my place if employment would look like if all we did was talk about how serious the virus was. I wish I had that luxury, but I don't. Wheels have to keep turning and a death rate of far less than 1% means, to me at the very least, that people have to die. Stop acting like it's anything more than a short term virus that has already worked it's way through a vast majority of society.

Imo, your mindset is a day late and a dollar short.

Let me ask you this,
When a tornado hits do we take up arms and threaten the national weather service? If the 100 year flood plain gets its almost prescribed disaster do we sue Houston TX for not being able to stop the Earth's forces of water? With your logic the weather service should have a way to stop tornados and Texas should have a way to stop biblical flooding. It only makes sense to shutter relief progress to debate the failure of our government and the failure of the world to prevent this stuff from happening, right? It's only right to sue everyone that we can for these failures, right?

Again, I knew Brady should have thrown deep to Gronk on that one play but he threw to Devlin instead.

Aren't Monday mornings great?

Just out of curiosity, who did you vote for in 16 and who do you anticipate voting for in 20?

 

[Michael Scally MD]

 

[Old]

View attachment 128842

Buff and Svelte

 

[Michael Scally MD]

 

[Millard]

There are too many unknowns to be developing hard baked opinions. People don't even have the slightest clue what the real numbers are, publicly anyway. Opinions mean shit when your facts are off by 30% regarding infection rates. That means your death total is dropping through the floorboards, too.

Mass testing. To give real numbers. Sooner rather than later would have been nice. January? February? March? April? Today? Tomorrow? It would be useful any day. Better decisions can be made with more data. We still don't have enough.

 

[Old]

Mass testing. To give real numbers. Soon rather than later would have been nice. January? February? March? April? Today? Tomorrow? It would be useful any day. Better decisions can be made with more data. We still don't have enough.

 

[ickyrica]

Mass testing. To give real numbers. Sooner rather than later would have been nice. January? February? March? April? Today? Tomorrow? It would be useful any day. Better decisions can be made with more data. We still don't have enough.

Agreed, 100%. it's as if that info isn't really wanted tbh

 

[Michael Scally MD]

Mass testing. To give real numbers. Sooner rather than later would have been nice. January? February? March? April? Today? Tomorrow? It would be useful any day. Better decisions can be made with more data. We still don't have enough.

Pandemic Resilience Roadmap
Pandemic Resilience Roadmap

(APRIL 20, 2020) -- Today, a bipartisan group of experts in economics, public health, technology and ethics from across the country released the nation’s first comprehensive operational roadmap for mobilizing and reopening the U.S. economy in the midst of the COVID-19 crisis.

“Roadmap to Pandemic Resilience,” a report released by Harvard University’s Edmond J. Safra Center for Ethics with support from The Rockefeller Foundation, lays out how a massive scale-up of testing, paired with contact tracing and supported isolation, can rebuild trust in our personal safety and re-mobilize the U.S. economy. https://ethics.harvard.edu/files/center-for-ethics/files/roadmaptopandemicresilience_final_0.pdf

Among the report’s top recommendations is the need to deliver at least 5 million tests per day by early June to help ensure a safe social opening. This number will need to increase to 20 million tests per day by mid-summer to fully re-mobilize the economy and keep it open.

Goals:

1. The level of testing and supported isolation needed depends on how effectively we can trace people’s contacts, warn those contacts about their exposure and need for a test, then test them and support isolation for those who are COVID-positive.

2. To succeed, isolation must be supported with job protection, resource support – including care packages, grocery and food deliveries — and necessary health care services.

3. Testing and public health response in programs established by states and administered by local health authorities can and should be fully aligned with civil liberties, due process, data and health privacy protections, health ethics and non-discrimination.

To achieve these goals, the report lays out a detailed summary — a roadmap — of what is needed, including:

• Innovation in testing methodologies that permit scaling up the supply of tests;

• A Pandemic Testing Board established by the federal government, with strong but narrow powers, that has the job of securing adequate testing supply and the infrastructure necessary for deployment.
• Federal and/or state guidance for state testing programs that align with due process, civil liberties, equal protection, non-discrimination, and privacy standards;
• Readiness frameworks to support local health leaders, mayors, tribal leaders, and other public officials in establishing test administration processes and isolation support resources;
• Organizational innovation at the local level--linking cities, counties, and health districts, with specifics varying from state to state;
• Massively scaling up the nation’s contact tracing personnel, starting by adding 100,000 contact tracers across the U.S.;
• Pre-emptive regulation of peer-to-peer warning-sharing apps to ensure security; maximum privacy protection; system audits by federal agencies accountable to the electorate via officeholders; and prohibitions on commercialization of any data to which firms supporting the apps have access;
• Support for quarantine and isolation in the form of jobs protection and material support for time in quarantine and isolation as well as access to necessary health care services;
• An expanded Medical (or Health) Reserves Corps (paid service roles), and addition of Health Reserves Corps to the National Guard units in every state;
• Creation of a National Infectious Disease Forecasting Center to modernize disease tracking.

 

[Old]

The delayed and lack of testing here seems to boarder on belligerence. And reveals a deep underlying weakness in the health system and lack of preparation.

Epidemiologists have warned about the possibility of such an epidemic (or even worse) for decades ... and we have had serious near-misses in the recent past with Ebola, SARS, and MERS - which are considered more lethal than Covid19.

South Korea responded quickly because they began (at least logistic) planning a few years ago in response to the MERS threat.

Germany has high case count but they've tested a lot. Their death-rate is lower. Their medical system was always developed with extra beds and equipment. Also, they start treating quicker than here rather than waiting until the person is in critical condition.