Avatar universal

Fever reported in most hospitalized Covid patients

Lots of sites list it in the top 3 most common symptoms. One says it is the most common:
Fever: 99%
A dry cough: 59%
Loss of appetite: 40%
Body aches: 35%
Shortness of breath: 31%
Mucus or phlegm: 27%
7 Responses
Avatar universal
Just saw a report that compares flu symptoms with covid symptoms.  Pretty much the same, including fever, but where covid really differs and tells docs it's covid is the difficulty breathing, chest pressure that goes along with that, and the loss of taste and smell.  Those are the dead giveaways.
Avatar universal
Companies are working on developing fast temperature checks for mass temperature readings in high traffic areas. The ones I looked at have a portal you walk through like an airport scanner or at least walk past and the owner of the space would get a notice that a feverish person walked in. Some people will get angry when they get detected so I can see calling in the police in those cases.
This would catch a lot of infected people (even those that might have tested negative earlier in the day) and like the potential rapid scanners (in development because they are targeting high accuracy)  would force people to be tested if the building set them up at the entrances - if you want in, you have to go through the test.
These are the only 2 ways I can see of stopping Covid transmission from the many people who don't care about others. Until the infection ends, the gym is not on my list of safe places.
From the interviews I've seen with epidemiologists and those on the front lines treating patients, temperature checks aren't considered all that useful because a lot of the spread isn't by people with symptoms and the symptoms vary so widely.  I does catch some, and some is better than none, for sure, but I'm not sure this will be a big step forward.  In democratic countries you will also possibly run into many civil rights issues randomly testing people without their permission, so it will end up in the courts and you can always find a judge now that the court is filled with Trump appointees who will make sure the case takes a long time to resolve.  Mask orders would be better legally because they affect everyone equally and are not random, but that too is impossible in the US right now because one political party doesn't believe in them.  Which means the best way to deal with this at least in the US is to VOTE.  I did find it interesting, though, that when I recently went to the doctor they did take my temperature but they didn't give me a quick test.  Of course, the quick tests are so full of false negatives and also don't actually tell you the person isn't infected, just that it's not at the point yet where it registers on a test.  I think it's really too late to fix this in the US.  We had to do this months and months ago, lock down everyone and wait until the curve was flattened before we opened up again.  All the countries that did this still have big problems, but it's easier to react to them and they are nowhere near the level of problem the countries with populist leaders have had.  I know, we're not supposed to talk politics, but as I've said, in this particular cases, you just can't separate our health from our gov'ts.  That's not true for most issues we discuss on here, as disease isn't usually a political issue and it's very weird this one is.  But again, our laws probably would make it very hard if not impossible to do what you're suggesting.  Peace.  
Avatar universal
You refer to outdated failed quick test technology which is irrelevant since  the scientific world advances technology, instead of sitting on dead tech ideas forever- I referred to the newer tech the FDA is reviewing. No idea what this is about " also don't actually tell you the person isn't infected, just that it's not at the point yet where it registers on a test. " -  

Getting the 80 - 85% of people who have symptoms would be a big improvement and stop them at the point they are interacting with others on the job etc. so people would feel safer on the job etc. I agree it isn't going to solve it on its own but would make a big dent in the spread including helping contact tracing because people would get identified for testing faster. https://www.upi.com/Health_News/2020/09/23/4-out-of-5-people-with-COVID-19-develop-symptoms-study-says/7151600811291/
We've been down this road before. Anxious, and MedHelp just keep taking this stuff down after we've taken the time out of our busy lives to have a conversation.  It's very hard to jive the info you say about new tech being so much better, because if it isn't in use yet, we can't know that.  We can only go by what's in use. and all quick tests have a high rate of false negatives and some false positives.  I get my info from interviews with epidemiologists, and that's what I go by.  We also have the practicality issue in the US, which is, the current Administration has a relationship with Abbott Labs, and just bought millions of Abbott's new quick test to distribute through the country.  A test developed in Europe or a university might be better, but it also has to be available to everyone for your plan to work.  As far as the other part, I guess you aren't paying attention.  If you get tested early in your disease process, you can test negative and still be infected and contagious.  One emergency room doc I saw interviewed says it takes 4 tests before he's sure he has an accurate test result, and that's with the PCR tests.  Given he actually treats covid patients and you and I don't, that's who I listen to, not companies trying to sell a product by pre-announcing things.  When it's in use and proves out in real time, that's when we know.  We can keep going down this road, but it isn't helpful to anyone.  What is helpful is that people know that one test isn't good enough, and tests alone aren't a solution because you can test negative and become exposed ten minutes later.  Peace, and out.  
Avatar universal
The NFL has proven that frequent mass testing of the players only goes so far in preventing transmission, with 22 Tennessee Titans recording 16 positives in the last week, but these players are in a high risk close contact setting and only requires an individual or 2 to be careless when venturing into the the public which is in the midst of a pandemic with many people in the general population shedding virus not even knowing it in many cases.
If mass temperature testing and rapid test results can be put in place in high traffic areas in the US, it seems lots of infections wouldn't be occurring. Preventing large infections from happening by mass testing helps create the same sort of effect as herd immunity although it would require a big rollout to get to that point. The flu vax ability to wipe out a flu strain for the current season depends on a large % of the people taking the shot to become immune to the disease and create herd immunity at some point if enough people bought into the concept to do it - someday maybe that will happen - and mass testing might provide enough help for the vax to get to that point.
Again, Anxious, the flu vaccine will never confer herd immunity because it doesn't confer immunity long enough, and it doesn't work very well.  Some years it misses entirely.  At best it only works 50% of the time.  That means even if every living soul got it you would only have 50% coverage, which isn't enough for herd immunity, and next year's flu will be a completely different strain.  Flu has been around a very long time and mutates very very quickly.  In contrast, I believe the measles and polio vaccines, just as examples., are 90-95% effective, and if everyone got them, those diseases might well be wiped off the face of the Earth.
And as for testing, again, it would be better than what we have now, but refer to my comments above.  Remember the head of the CDC saying wearing a mask and social distancing would be as effective as a vaccine?  But testing has some problems.  I agree with you, we should do it as much as possible, and I agree, if we did we'd have less covid, but not no covid, and therefore it would still be around and just waiting for us to tire of getting tested.  Wear those masks, social distance, and pray the vaccine works a lot better than the flu vaccine.  The people with the highest rate of getting the flu vaccine are the elderly, and they are also the group who every year dies the most from the flu.  Peace again.
Avatar universal
",,Again.... vaccine will never confer herd immunity because it doesn't confer immunity long enough,..." You misinterpreted my comments, again.
"head of the CDC saying wearing a mask and social distancing would be as effective as a vaccine" Yeah those 2 might do the job except for the problem that many people won't do those things. Only forced fixes like mass vax imposed by buildings or companies will get massive numbers of unconcerned carriers out of the way enough that vax, masks and sd can together do an effective job.
Oops. sb  Only forced fixes like mass testing imposed by .....
There are too many people who don't care. In Canada the daily new infections have gone from small numbers in the summer to higher than at the peak in the spring, but the death and hospitalization rates are down because the infected are mainly under 40s now.
Anxious, every time we get to the same point.  I'm just waiting for this to be another waste of our time because MedHelp takes this stuff down.  I was talking about the flu vaccine, which you keep confusing with other vaccines.  We have no idea how well a covid vaccine will work because we don't have one, and we have a much better chance if we don't rush of getting a more effective vaccine because covid hasn't been in humans very long and so has far fewer mutations so far.  So again, when you talk about the flu vaccine, I talk about the flu vaccine.  When you talk about the covid vaccine, so do I.  The flu vaccine doesn't confer lasting immunity.  The covid vaccine is for now a theoretical concept because nobody has one that has been confirmed to be successful yet.  Two different diseases, two different vaccines and we probably should just stop comparing the two.  The death rates are down everywhere, even in the US, because doctors know better now how to fight the illness.  A lot of people died, as people always do, by overly aggressive medicine, and that isn't being done anymore because docs learned.  And you're absolutely right, in the US and everywhere else, when lockdowns were eased, it was the young who started getting the most illness, as they have less to fear -- not nothing to fear, but less though we don't know what will happen to them in the long term when the damage done manifests itself -- and have been very reckless.  
Avatar universal
I am not confused, and don't mind what you write even if it is wrong. I just correct some of what you say I have said. Anyway, maybe someone else will write their opinion here about the future which is why I started this thread.  
Avatar universal
sb ...and don't mind what you write whether or not I feel it is wrong. Peace and may someone else post here too.
Vaccines don't give "herd immunity" they give you immunity by the vaccine . Herd immunity is when a large number of people, such as 60-70% get the disease itself not a vaccine. As I mentioned in a message you sent too many people will die before we get herd immunity. Thus getting a vaccine is important. There are several vaccines in the works. Two vaccines will come out at the end of year in the U.S. and I think in Canada, but only for front line workers and then those over 65 years old. That is ONLY, if the data looks good. Thus it has to give good enough immunity or "efficacy"  and doesn't harm people. This means the side effects can't cause symptoms that are bad.  These two front running vaccines are new technology. We don't know yet how long they will work (how long we will have immunity). Probably, in these new ones they will only have about 60% efficacy. So that means you will still get the disease if you don't wear a mask and but it probably won't kill you and they symptoms won't be as bad as if you got the disease. In addition, if these pass safety, we may have to get the vaccine every 6 months. So we will see. Does that answer your question? Later next year we will have other vaccines (hopefully).
I just heard an interview with a premier epidemiologist, and all of the vaccines currently being studied are expected to be no more than 40-60% effective.  I have heard them use the term herd immunity for vaccinated populations.  I also heard an expert interviewed the other day who said something I certainly didn't know, if true, which is human beings have never achieved herd immunity without a vaccine from any disease.  They also often compare this vaccine to the flu vaccine, which has been around a long time and there is still tons of flu.  So for the vaccines being worked on now to work best, a huge percentage of the world's population will have to take them, and that seems highly unlikely given the current attitude toward vaccines in general.  It's not just that bogus study about the measles vaccine, it's also religious extremism all over the world and a host of conspiracy theories.  Which means, as stated above, we're still in for a long difficult ride even if one of the vaccines works.  I'd also like to know what the story is behind the claims by Russia and China that they already have vaccines in use.  I know India has bought millions of doses.  Is there any evidence at all that they work or are safe, given no Phase 3 trials were done on either?  I mean, they're injecting the stuff into people right now and we hear nothing about it because the US has put all its cards in the baskets of a few companies.  I also heard someone who works at a university in Texas who has already got a vaccine completed, so there are others working on vaccines besides the companies the US gov't has invested in.  And I have a fear based on the economics of drug distribution, which is, once there is a drug on the market large companies that are capable of manufacturing a lot of them stop working as much on better drugs and put most of their efforts behind me too products that are easier and cheaper to produce and provide a quicker bonus to the CEO.  We saw that when Prozac came out -- it actually didn't work all that well but within a short period of time there were several SSRIs out there.  It happened with statins.  So I do worry that that better vaccine might be forgotten about for awhile.  Hope not.  Peace.
Have an Answer?

You are reading content posted in the Coronavirus Community

Didn't find the answer you were looking for?
Ask a question
Popular Resources
Learn more with our FAQ on Ebola.
For people with Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder (OCD), the COVID-19 pandemic can be particularly challenging.
A list of national and international resources and hotlines to help connect you to needed health and medical services.
Here’s how your baby’s growing in your body each week.
These common ADD/ADHD myths could already be hurting your child
This article will tell you more about strength training at home, giving you some options that require little to no equipment.