Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Medicine United States

Omicron Surge Shows Signs of Easing in States Hit Early by the Fast-spreading Variant (cnbc.com) 110

Posted by msmash from the closer-look dept.
Following weeks of soaring infections, the latest Covid surge is showing signs of slowing in a handful of areas hit earliest by the omicron variant -- offering a glimmer of hope that this wave is starting to ease. From a report: The U.S. has reported an average of nearly 800,000 cases per day over the past week, according to data compiled by Johns Hopkins University, more than three times the level seen during last winter's previous record. But in a handful of states and cities, particularly on the East Coast, cases appear to have plateaued or fallen in recent days. In New York, the seven-day average of daily new cases has been declining since hitting a record high of 85,000 per day on Jan. 9, according to Hopkins data. Cases there doubled during a number of seven-day periods in late December and early January, but are down sharply from last week to an average of 51,500. In New York City, average daily cases have fallen by 31% over the past week, state health department data shows. "There will come a time when we can say it's all over," Gov. Kathy Hochul said at a press conference Friday. "We're not there yet, but boy, it's on the horizon and we've waited a long time for that." New York is still reporting a high level of daily infections, ranking 15th out of all states, according to a CNBC analysis of population-adjusted case counts, down from the second-most just a few days ago. New Jersey also recently fell out of the top five, now ranking 20th, as the state has seen a 32% drop in average daily cases over the past week.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Omicron Surge Shows Signs of Easing in States Hit Early by the Fast-spreading Variant More

Omicron Surge Shows Signs of Easing in States Hit Early by the Fast-spreading Variant

Comments Filter:

  • WOOO (Score:3, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 17, 2022 @03:09PM (#62181733)

    Piss drinking for the win! https://www.usatoday.com/story... [usatoday.com]

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by skogs ( 628589 )

      I approve of this method for all anti-vax peoples

      • I approve of this method for all anti-vax peoples

        You have to admit, losing your sense of taste and smell is a big advantage if you drink your piss.

    • Piss drinking for the win! https://www.usatoday.com/story... [usatoday.com]

      I prefer a hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin smoothy with a splash of bleach.

  • Everybody got it. This is how waves of virus work. Just like a flu or a cold. After you get it, then you don't for a while.

    • Nobody's surprised that it happened. But the estimated peak was only an estimate. This is hard data on the timing.

      • Nobody's surprised that it happened. But the estimated peak was only an estimate. This is hard data on the timing.

        Yup. Although it was known in South Africa that it washed through and ended pretty quickly.

        This is really good news, however it happened.

    • Re:No shit (Score:5, Insightful)

      by quonset ( 4839537 ) on Monday January 17, 2022 @03:27PM (#62181799)

      Everybody got it. This is how waves of virus work. Just like a flu or a cold. After you get it, then you don't for a while.

      Let us know when either the flu or common cold kills 2,000 per day in this country.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by skogs ( 628589 )

        You're confusing sheer numbers of infection with the impact of the infection.
        Nobody is making light of covid itself, and thankfully omicron is significantly less impactful on lungs so less people dying.
        I'm making fun of clickbait ridiculous articles heralding that states hit hard first are the first to show signs of waning ... no shit...

      • Everybody got it. This is how waves of virus work. Just like a flu or a cold. After you get it, then you don't for a while.

        Let us know when either the flu or common cold kills 2,000 per day in this country.

        We can't because we have never tested for either at the scale we're testing for COVID-19. Honestly, it wouldn't surprise me if the flu killed more than 2000 people per day, but the cause of death is attributed to pneumonia, CHF and COPD. It's quite rare for influenza to be listed as the cause of death.

        • Just to be clear, I'm not trying to downplay the severity of COVID-19. I just want people to be aware that influenza is no walk in the park.
        • 2000 deaths per day were January 8, 2021, a nice thing it did drop in the last week at least for deaths. You can blame the death on the Unvaxxed and Christmas family gatherings. Almost all the Deaths in the US have been the Unvaxxed, I guess the unvaxxed like to win darwin awards.

        • Re:No shit (Score:5, Informative)

          by zeeky boogy doog ( 8381659 ) on Monday January 17, 2022 @04:55PM (#62182087)
          There is definitely underreporting of "the flu," or generally Influenza-Like Illnesses (ILI), in terms of cases because most people don't go to the doctor because they have the flu. But on the other hand, people who get sick enough to see a physician with flu-like symptoms DO get a standardized battery of antigen tests that check for the most common upper respiratory pathogens: various flu strains, RSV, and the 4 (now 5) human coronaviruses. That's how we know that there basically was zero flu season in 2020-21 (and the lack of data on circulating human-infecting strains is a large part of why this year's flu vaccine isn't particularly effective).

          But deaths in general are pretty hard to not report in any even remotely functional country.
          https://www.statista.com/stati... [statista.com]
          The number of pneumonia deaths was relatively consistent for nearly the whole of the 2010s at around 45K per year, or a crude average of 125 per day.

          2K/day is 700K/year, which would make any hypothesized cause the 3rd leading cause of death in the entire US after heart attacks and cancer. That's... pretty hard to miss.

        • Re:No shit (Score:5, Informative)

          by quantaman ( 517394 ) on Monday January 17, 2022 @05:16PM (#62182169)

          Everybody got it. This is how waves of virus work. Just like a flu or a cold. After you get it, then you don't for a while.

          Let us know when either the flu or common cold kills 2,000 per day in this country.

          We can't because we have never tested for either at the scale we're testing for COVID-19. Honestly, it wouldn't surprise me if the flu killed more than 2000 people per day, but the cause of death is attributed to pneumonia, CHF and COPD. It's quite rare for influenza to be listed as the cause of death.

          I disagree, I think it's quite obvious that (modern) flu never killed at the rate of COVID-19.

          Just look at excess deaths [cdc.gov]. Flu is a seasonal illness, meaning the upper bound for deaths is the delta between summer and winter. During the peaks the jump from COVID-19 exceeds the seasonal variation meaning COVID-19 deaths clearly exceed those of influenza.

    • Everybody got it. This is how waves of virus work. Just like a flu or a cold. After you get it, then you don't for a while.

      Well I haven't got it*.

      Sure, we all new the wave would eventually peak then subside, but the fact it's declining now is newsworthy and was not necessarily easy to predict. It just as well could have gone on increasing for another week or two or even longer. It's not even 100% clear that it's peaked now, the wave last December/January also had a couple false peaks [worldometers.info], probably due to testing gaps during holidays (or mini-waves caused by holidays) but it's not a firm rule. I wouldn't even be shocked if people sa

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by skogs ( 628589 )

        Yes it was easy to predict. That is why they predicted it. It passes quicker, it lasts shorter length of time, and for the most people aren't dying this time.
        This time nobody was told to isolate or locked in their homes, thus allowing it to simply spread normally ... and yes the obvious boom right after all the family get togethers made sure to spread it fully. Literally nobody out there saying 'flatten the curve' this time, because everybody understands we aren't dying form this one, and the faster it is

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by dgatwood ( 11270 )

          Yes it was easy to predict. That is why they predicted it. It passes quicker, it lasts shorter length of time, and for the most people aren't dying this time.

          This is likely in large part because almost everybody is now either doubly vaccinated (63%) or previously infected (16% confirmed cases, 44% estimated cases [cdc.gov]). So in all likelihood, at least 80% of people have some immunity, and the CFR of omicron is about 20% that of previous variants. Imagine that. :-)

    • Re:No shit (Score:4, Insightful)

      by AleRunner ( 4556245 ) on Monday January 17, 2022 @03:45PM (#62181851)

      Everybody got it. This is how waves of virus work. Just like a flu or a cold. After you get it, then you don't for a while.

      Wow, listen to the virologist. How deep.

      Except it isn't. It's not even useful guesswork. "Not even wrong". This is working differently from many previous viruses we have dealt with. Nothing like "everybody" has been infected yet. We get more like 20-40% of the population and then another wave and another 20-40% and so on. The waves get more infectious and each one, so far, changes the genetics just enough to partially get around our immune response from before. We know that ancient coronaviruses co-evolved with people in East Asia [sciencedirect.com] causing genomic change which means they kept killing large percentages of people for a long time. Beyond that there isn't much you can say for sure yet. We know that SARS-CoV-1 and MERS had much higher death rates, so this virus may (or may not) evolve to a more deadly form.

      At this point we have a novel situation with a much bigger amount of bio-mass for the virus to infect than has ever been infected by such a pandemic - we have almost an order of magnitude more people than in 1918. About three orders of magnitude more than at the time of that ancient epidemic. We also have novel tools like vaccines and modern medicine.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by skogs ( 628589 )

        Yet another guy that can't seem to stay on topic.

        Paragraph summary:
        1) started with an insult
        2) wandered off topic while repeating standard known things about genetic mutations and how virii never really go away or stay the same
        3) tried to back up his point with saying wild numbers have been infected

        Still hasn't figured out that very contagious viruses sweep through populations...and then are over...and somehow thinks he is arguing it.

        • 1) started with an insult

          You rushed in to make a point that is boring, repeated everywhere and is, fundamentally, just anecdotal.

          Still hasn't figured out that very contagious viruses sweep through populations...and then are over...and somehow thinks he is arguing it.

          Some animals have been made completely extinct by viruses. Bats appear to have co-evolved with some viruses that their immune systems just don't bother killing. Sometimes viruses sweep through populations and dissappear. Sometimes, like measles, they keep coming back again and again and again in waves of epidemics. You are just looking at our most common viruses - influenza and rhinoviruses and assuming

          • Still off topic. Please move back over to reddit.
            This isn't a place for bats or ebola.

            • Keep digging ... by the time you are going ad hominem you are clearly seen to be more than a bit desperate. If you want to succeed in this you should try addressing the simple point, in my last post, that viruses can have different outcomes from the one you predicted.

              • Re: (Score:2)

                by skogs ( 628589 )

                Keep digging for what? You're literally arguing on the internet, making extra points that are off topic.

                The OP states common news about how omicron vairent is already showing easing. You've starting arguing for some reason with religeous level zeal about how all viruses are different and think you have a point.

                Nobody said virus effects aren't different. I also didn't predict anything beyond the obvious fact that if a population catch a virus first it tends to get over it first. I made it a simple summary

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by mjwx ( 966435 )

        Everybody got it. This is how waves of virus work. Just like a flu or a cold. After you get it, then you don't for a while.

        Wow, listen to the virologist. How deep.

        Except it isn't. It's not even useful guesswork. "Not even wrong". This is working differently from many previous viruses we have dealt with. Nothing like "everybody" has been infected yet. We get more like 20-40% of the population and then another wave and another 20-40% and so on. The waves get more infectious and each one, so far, changes the genetics just enough to partially get around our immune response from before. We know that ancient coronaviruses co-evolved with people in East Asia [sciencedirect.com] causing genomic change which means they kept killing large percentages of people for a long time. Beyond that there isn't much you can say for sure yet. We know that SARS-CoV-1 and MERS had much higher death rates, so this virus may (or may not) evolve to a more deadly form.

        At this point we have a novel situation with a much bigger amount of bio-mass for the virus to infect than has ever been infected by such a pandemic - we have almost an order of magnitude more people than in 1918. About three orders of magnitude more than at the time of that ancient epidemic. We also have novel tools like vaccines and modern medicine.

        Vaccinations are what stopped Omicron from becoming much worse. South Africa and the UK implemented accelerated vaccination and booster programs which had a huge effect. However the peak was likely due to Christmas and so many people being in close proximity for extended periods of time. I know two people who were infected, both from family events.

        Now that is behind us, people aren't gathering in large groups as frequently (it's winter, people tend to stay home anyway), masks are being worn, social dista

        • Vaccinations are what stopped Omicron from becoming much worse. South Africa and the UK implemented accelerated vaccination and booster programs which had a huge effect. However the peak was likely due to Christmas and so many people being in close proximity for extended periods of time. I know two people who were infected, both from family events.

          Totally agree on the vaccines. The UK's booster program was astounding just before Christmas. So much excellent work done by the NHS. However I'm not so sure about Christmas. Definitely there was an effect, however its different from last year since this year most people had Lateral Flow Tests. I think lots of people used them before meeting elderly relatives and I know several people personally who cancelled their Christmas meetings at the very last moment. There's also the effect of school children not m

  • While those places which were hit earliest are starting to slowly see a decrease, hospitalizations as a whole will continue to increase, putting even more strain on an already taxed medical system. Deaths are also increasing. Roughly 2,000 people are dying each day from covid. As a result, the next few weeks will be tough [cnn.com].

    And contrary to popular uninformed opinions, there is no reason to suspect any new variants will be less infectious or deadly [marketwatch.com].

    “These huge unvaccinated swaths in the U.S., Africa, Asia, Latin America and elsewhere are basically variant factories,” said Dr. Prabhat Jha of the Centre for Global Health Research at St. Michael’s Hospital in Toronto. “It’s been a colossal failure in global leadership that we have not been able to do this.”

    In the meantime, new variants are inevitable, said Louis Mansky, director of the Institute for Molecular Virology at the University of Minnesota. With so many unvaccinated people, he said, “the virus is still kind of in control of what’s going on.”

    • Re:Hospitalizations to surge over next few weeks (Score:4, Informative)

      by JoeyRox ( 2711699 ) on Monday January 17, 2022 @03:45PM (#62181855)
      From https://www.medrxiv.org/conten... [medrxiv.org]:

      91% lower mortality
      62% reduction in hospital admissions
      70% decrease in hospital stay length


      All compared to Delta

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by HiThere ( 15173 )

        IIUC, those are per case number. If the number of cases increases sufficiently it can still break the system.

        OTOH, the pattern seen in South Africa with omnicron was a rapid rise to a peak followed by a rapid drop. This seems to be replicating that pattern, though I still haven't seen a good explanation of why it happens. Still, it's happened in multiple countries, so it's *probably* something that can be relied upon.

    • And contrary to popular uninformed opinions, there is no reason to suspect any new variants will be less infectious or deadly [marketwatch.com].

      I agree that it's too early to get complacent, but there absolutely is reason to believe that new variants will be less of an issue - there's a big selection pressure on viruses to become more contagious, but no real selection pressure for them to become more deadly. What's more, once you get to an insanely contagious variant like Omicron, the virus ceases to be novel, because everybody has been either vaccinated, infected, or killed. So it becomes endemic at that point, and every immune system a new varian

      • Finally, there's some simple logic at play here, regression to the mean and whatnot... if it was a serious possibility to have airborne viruses mutate to become worse and worse over time, we would see that happening regularly throughout history. Instead, we see the opposite - a novel virus shows up, causes big problems, infects all susceptible targets, and stops being a problem after a few years. That's not to say that we couldn't have some new, nasty variant show up, because predicting the future is notoriously hard.

        Exactly. There will be new viruses showing up. There will be pandemics in the future. That's how this thing works. And initial bad viruses do tend to mutate into forms that are no where near as virulent. The 2012 SARS virus had a much higher kill rate, but turned out to be very difficult to transmit. So it sorta died out as a pandemic. Covid-19 bog standard had a lower kill rate, but was easier to transmit. So more died. The Omicron variant was apparently even easier to transmit. And a lesser kill rate.

        • And initial bad viruses do tend to mutate into forms that are no where near as virulent

          Didni't bother to read the article, did ya? Had you done so your repeating of lie wouldn't have occurred. Here, I'll point out the relevant part so you can ignore it again.

          Because omicron appears to cause less severe disease than delta, its behavior has kindled hope that it could be the start of a trend that eventually makes the virus milder like a common cold. It’s a possibility, experts say, given that viruses don’t spread well if they kill their hosts very quickly. But viruses don’t always get less deadly over time.

          A variant could also achieve its main goal – replicating – if infected people developed mild symptoms initially, spread the virus by interacting with others, then got very sick later, Ray explained by way of example.

          “People have wondered whether the virus will evolve to mildness. But there’s no particular reason for it to do so,” he said. “I don’t think we can be confident that the virus will become less lethal over time.”

          • And initial bad viruses do tend to mutate into forms that are no where near as virulent

            Didni't bother to read the article, did ya? Had you done so your repeating of lie wouldn't have occurred. Here, I'll point out the relevant part so you can ignore it again.

            Way to go - call someone a liar. I wrote tend. You apparently believe they only become more virulent.

            What happens in your world, where viruses don't tend to mutate into less virulent forms?

            They become more virulent. Mutating over time, until infection is 100 percent, and infections are 100 percent fatal. The end of humanity. Covid!

            Viruses can mutate in any direction. They aren't inherently stable. Perhaps Covid-19 will become the perfect virus with no outcome other than fatality. But it isn't likel

          • "Viruses don't always get less deadly over time" is not the same thing as "viruses get more deadly over time".

            There's one massive change that's about to happen thanks to Omicron - COVID is going to stop being a novel disease for the human race. Everybody will have been exposed. There won't be any naive immune systems left for COVID to run rampant in.

            Don't forget, a coronavirus is just a category of virus, and mostly tends to cause seasonal colds. All the coronoviruses that float around and mostly cause mino

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by HiThere ( 15173 )

        If you're going for historical perspective, you should say "stops being a problem after a century or so, sometimes longer". I don't think the conditions that allowed that to happen still exist, but I'm not certain they don't. E.g. lots of species of wild animal, like white tail deer, seem to catch and carry COVID, and spread it to other wild animals, like mice. And mice ... well, hantavirus is still a problem.

        • And mice ... well, hantavirus is still a problem.

          Sure, it's a problem, but it's a problem that's easily mitigated. We live with risks to life every day from stairs, automobiles, choking, heart disease, cancer. Most of them have straightforward remedies that we either take advantage of or don't, depending on how risk-averse/responsible we are. COVID's risk profile is likely to drop down into a similar level in the near future. It will still be advisable to get boosters and stay at home when things are surging, but it will stop being something that dominate

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by HiThere ( 15173 )

            You're missing the point. Mice spread hantavirus to people, so they may be able to spread COVID to people. Covid is a LOT more contagious (among people) than hantavirus are. So there can be repeated zero-day outbreaks. And if the virus has changed significantly while in non-human hosts, the outbreak *may* have significantly different features.

            I'm not claiming this is certain to happen. I tend to consider it of low probability. But I sure can't rule it out.

            There is no particular reason to think that CO

            • There is no particular reason to think that COVID will mutate to become milder.

              Except that coronaviruses are extremely common, and the primary thing that made COVID dangerous is that it was a novel coronavirus, and soon COVID will stop being novel. Mutating to become more contagious/less deadly was kind of expected, just because that's what most coronaviruses end up as. We don't see any coronaviruses out in the wild that behave like smallpox and stay consistently deadly for centuries, but we see many, many examples that cause common colds. Lo and behold, omicron appears and seems to b

    • The data from the UK, which is now well past the peak of Omricon, is that the hospitalisations are half of what we had in the wave last year but with 4x as many cases. Vaccines and possibly milder disease anyway made a massive difference.

      https://coronavirus.data.gov.u... [data.gov.uk]

    • While those places which were hit earliest are starting to slowly see a decrease, hospitalizations as a whole will continue to increase, putting even more strain on an already taxed medical system. Deaths are also increasing. Roughly 2,000 people are dying each day from covid. As a result, the next few weeks will be tough [cnn.com].

      And contrary to popular uninformed opinions, there is no reason to suspect any new variants will be less infectious or deadly [marketwatch.com].

      Of course! It would take a fool of pee drinking level to think that once this round passes, that there won't ever be another round of viruses.

      Before I go into this - make no mistake. I'm vaccinated 1,2,3 of Pfizer.

      But in what seems to be your suggestion that Covid-19 will be killing us forever and anon, and there will be no respite, vaccination is the exact wrong thing to to . In your scenario, we must stop vaccinations, and let every variant run through the population, and hope there are survivors t

  • Maybe it's different in the USA, but here in Quebec, we told people to stop getting tests unless they're really sick. We simply don't have the testing capacity. We hit PCR testing limits weeks ago, and the rapid tests have been in short supply. So new cases dropped, but is that because fewer people are getting sick, or because fewer people are testing at all?

    Hospitalizations are still creeping up, so if you backsolve for positive cases, I'm not sure that the number of new cases is dropping yet.

    • The UK has often been ahead of the northern US in these waves. A random sampling infection survey performed by the UK Office for National Statistics has shown positivity has fallen in sync with that of the overall case numbers.

      Given historical patterns, it's a pretty good inference that the dropoff seen in the US is real as well.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by kbahey ( 102895 )

      Maybe it's different in the USA, but here in Quebec, we told people to stop getting tests unless they're really sick. We simply don't have the testing capacity. We hit PCR testing limits weeks ago, and the rapid tests have been in short supply.

      The exact same situation is in neighbouring, and more populous, Ontario: we no longer have accurate daily case numbers since about January 1st.

      Some municipalities have wastewater monitoring, e.g. the Region of Waterloo [regionofwaterloo.ca], which shows the unreal spike in spread of the vi

      • In Ontario and Quebec, daily case numbers are no longer an indicator of anything.

        And here in MB we are 20% above our previous hospitalization record from a year ago and still climbing. This variant being less virulent is clearly not making up for the fact it is so much more contagious.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by kbahey ( 102895 )

          And here in MB we are 20% above our previous hospitalization record from a year ago and still climbing.

          Here in Ontario, hospitalization [ontario.ca] is also at record levels.
          About 2,400 was the previous record, but in this wave it is 3,950.

          This variant being less virulent is clearly not making up for the fact it is so much more contagious.

          And that is what I have been saying to people: it is a numbers game. Is half a muffin more than a quarter of a pie? Obviously not, when it is extremely spreading fast. That is exactly

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by dgatwood ( 11270 )

        Some municipalities have wastewater monitoring, e.g. the Region of Waterloo [regionofwaterloo.ca], which shows the unreal spike in spread of the virus. But it is not updated daily.

        The southern part of the SF Bay Area has a dashboard [sccgov.org] that's updated daily. It's pretty cool. Apart from rural areas, the detected levels peaked on January 7 pretty consistently, and have been declining ever since. This pretty much tells us what we already knew — that people ignore social distancing during the holidays.

        What's particularly cool is that their website talks about how they normalize the numbers by using a common plant virus that's extremely common in human solid waste as a way of estima

        • The normalization against plant viruses is smart, but it doesn't make sense why you need that to correct for the dilution by non-toilet water. I'm sure the wastewater plants have a good idea of how much volume per day they process; you can just multiply the measured concentration by the daily volume. The plant virus they're testing for is specific to bell/chili peppers, so now you also have to normalize against seasonal variations in pepper consumption and virus concentration.

          It is useful for a different re

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by kbahey ( 102895 )

          What's particularly cool is that their website talks about how they normalize the numbers by using a common plant virus that's extremely common in human solid waste as a way of estimating what percentage of sewage comes from human solid waste, to compensate for variations in other types of water use from day to day (e.g. more laundry on weekends). Worth a read.

          Yeah, it is the virus that infects peppers and passes through humans. Learned about that from the "This Week in Virology" podcast.

          What has happened i

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by dgatwood ( 11270 )

            Another interesting thing is that the COVID spike in California appears to be almost entirely s-gene positive, assuming those tables are actually saying what I think they're saying. So assuming it is an omicron spike, it is largely from an earlier omicron line that branched off prior to the s-gene dropout.

            I don't know about that.

            Omicron has so many changes in spike, and if it mutates enough to NOT have S-Gene Test Failure, it is no longer Omicron.

            Could be that the wave was due to Delta, or another as yet to be described variant?

            It's possible that California is the one place on earth where delta is re-peaking while omicron spikes, but I doubt it.

            There are three omicron sublineages: BA.1/B.1.1.529.1, BA.2/B.1.1.529.2, and BA.3/B.1.1.529.3. Of those, BA.1 and BA.3 both have s-gene dropout. BA.2 does not. If the majority of omicron cases in California are BA.2, it would explain those numbers. Or it could just be that the PCR test they're using doesn't detect the s-gene dropout. Not all do, IIRC, and without more detailed informat

            • Re: (Score:2)

              by kbahey ( 102895 )

              There are three omicron sublineages: BA.1/B.1.1.529.1, BA.2/B.1.1.529.2, and BA.3/B.1.1.529.3. Of those, BA.1 and BA.3 both have s-gene dropout. BA.2 does not. If the majority of omicron cases in California are BA.2, it would explain those numbers.

              That is new information (for me). Good to know.

              Or it could just be that the PCR test they're using doesn't detect the s-gene dropout. Not all do, IIRC, and without more detailed information, there's no way to know for sure.

              I know that some places do not test the S

              • Re: (Score:2)

                by dgatwood ( 11270 )

                I know that some places do not test the S-gene. It may be that the company they ordered the reagents from do not include that gene at all.

                In this case, the sewage testing site specifically mentions the s-gene. But the s-gene is the gene that constructs the spike. S-gene dropout doesn't mean that the spike is missing. It means that a couple of key markers on the spike are missing, causing some PCR tests for the spike protein gene to fail to detect that gene. So even though they're looking for the spike protein gene, you'll only see it "disappear" if they're using a PCR tests that fails to detect the entire spike protein gene when amino aci

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by pz ( 113803 )

      If your local municipality is measuring and publishing the concentration of viral particles found in the wastewater, that is the best indication of the number of actual infections combined with their severity, in other words, a proxy for the total load on the society. Where I live, it has also been a remarkably good leading indicator of the number of cases eventually detected through testing.

    • In my area (Santa Clara CA) they measure the quantity of coronavirus in the sewage. It's dropped off from its peak from a few weeks ago. So that's an alternative datapoint that is meaningful.

    • Here in Seattle PCR testing has been generally available, but it can take a while to get tested and longer to get results because the facilities are slammed. I was exposed to the virus on New Year's Eve (Friday). I couldn't get in for testing until Wednesday the 5th, and didn't get results until Sunday the 9th. So I basically had my 10-day quarantine before I got the confirmation that I needed it. Previously, it was not hard to get a testing appointment and I'd get results in less than 48 hours every time.

      T

    • It's not different in the USA, although I don't know the answer to your question. Biden has promised to send everyone who wants it a test (maybe two!) any day now.

  • Massachusetts Wastewater Data (Score:5, Informative)

    by crow ( 16139 ) on Monday January 17, 2022 @04:10PM (#62181945) Homepage Journal

    It's really hard to get good numbers, as early in the pandemic, it was almost impossible to get tested, so we missed lots of cases, and now many people are testing at home, so those numbers aren't reported, and the availability of testing changes significantly from time to time and state to state. Hospitalizations are a good metric, but those shift based on the demographics getting hit, and different strains hit differently, with vaccination status also impacting differently over time and strains.

    But one metric seems very consistent: virus counts in wastewater. In Massachusetts, the MWRA handles the sewage from much of the eastern part of the state, and they do routine testing and report the levels. With Omicron, they had to massively rescale the Y axis, but now it's dropping back down into the range of the spike from a year ago.

    https://www.mwra.com/biobot/bi... [mwra.com]

    • Re: (Score:3)

      by hey! ( 33014 )

      I've been watching the same data; it successfully predicted the spike in omicron cases weeks in advance. Cases haven't dropped yet but they will. I don't find the sudden drop in the wastewater figures surprising. The state has a 75% full vaccination rate and 95% have at least one dose, plus we were hit hard early by ancestral COVID (thanks Biogen!). The virus faces a population with very high levels of immunity, so it tore through the relatively small population of people who had no immunity.

      Given omicron'

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by kackle ( 910159 )
      (In a dramatic narrator's voice) Yes, but dead men don't pee.
      • Camera pans over to the man's just killed body and zooms into crotch area as it slowly wettens -- disproving the anecdote "Dead Men Don't Pee". Uniquely though, this one last pee didn't provide the usual satisfaction.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by kackle ( 910159 )
          With the requisite text "The End?" fading in on the screen as the music reaches a crescendo: 'Dum dum dummm!' I think we have a movie, here...

          ('Sad that the bots down-modded your innocuous post, but thank you for your participation.)

  • This is working out the same as previous waves .. large cities get hit hard, than suburban, than rural areas over the course of weeks to months.

    The problem is the rural areas don't think its their problem until it is, in which case the inadequacies of rural hospitals become even more glaring.

    Its to bad the US didn't have comprehensive science education in primary schools, such that this could be explained without any of the antivaxxer and science denying that has come with communications up to this point.

    • If you were a Never-Trumper, or a dyed-in-the-wool progressive, would you trust a vaccine promoted by Donald Trump?

      I can only wonder how many of the anti-vaxxers are progressives who'd rather die than admit Trump did anything right.

      And they just might.

      • If you were a Never-Trumper, or a dyed-in-the-wool progressive, would you trust a vaccine promoted by Donald Trump?

        I am neither, but my answer to that is No. I'd check other more trustworthy sources for information on the vaccine.

        If Trump said the sky was blue I'd look out the window to check for myself.

      • If you were a Never-Trumper, would you trust a vaccine promoted by Donald Trump?

        You could call me a never Trumper because he is too much of a loose cannon to be allowed Presidential power. I am double dosed with the Pfizer vaccine (and infected with Omicron).

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by dryeo ( 100693 )

        Why the fuck would you trust any politician, they're barely more trustworthy then reality TV stars. Anyone sane checks out what the medical community recommends.
        If Trump recommended something to you and no one else agreed, would you follow his advice?

    • What is "comprehensive science education?" The science I don't know is much larger than the science I do know.

      • The science I don't know is much larger than the science I do know.

        Stephen Hawking and Albert Einstein would both have said the very same thing.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by dryeo ( 100693 )

        A sign of a comprehensive science education.
        As for traveling back in time, smallpox and take lots of antibiotics along with you.

        • and take lots of antibiotics along with you.

          Yeah actually, I think I might actually teach myself how to manufacture some antibiotics before taking the time trip.

Slashdot Top Deals

Technology is dominated by those who manage what they do not understand.

Close