I’d recommend bookmarking this post to circle back to if it becomes relevant for you or a loved one, especially anyone with risks for Covid complications.
After coming down with Covid at the end of July and navigating first-hand some very confusing medical advice, Andy Slavitt did an entire episode on the current treatment recommendations.
What he experienced is why it’s important to bump what your health care provider advises up against reputable sources:
This was their recap for actions upon testing positive:
Isolate, including from people in your own household, even if they’ve already been exposed to you. (Household attack rate is ~35%, possible a bit higher with BA.5.)
Notify everyone you’ve had close contact with over the last 4-5 days.
Determine whether you have risk factors that make you eligible for Paxlovid or other treatments that will prevent the disease from potentially progressing to something serious. Remember these generally need to be started within 5 days of initial symptoms as a preventative, rather than something you do after symptoms have become serious. (Listen to the episode linked below for more details.)
Monitor your oxygenation level, temperature, etc to know if your symptoms progress and warrant treatment. (Listen to the episode for more details.)
Determine if you want to get a PCR test to have a more official record of your infection. This could be helpful to expedite things if your symptoms worsen and you need treatment. It will also get you into the official case counts. (Not mentioned in this podcast, but could also be helpful in case of Long Covid, especially if a disability claim is needed.)
Best practice is to remain in isolation 5 days and then use an at-home antigen test to make sure you are negative before ending isolation. If you are unable to isolate as long as you should, wear a mask, ideally an N95. If you get rebound symptoms, resume testing and isolate if positive.
@amvanhoose_701479, is this a new website or platform being linked here? On another thread I reported to @david that Norton is warning me that “this is an unsafe site” when I open this thread. When David had me dig into what Norton is flagging it is
Following up on this, the fact that Norton is flagging this topic as unsafe has nothing to do with ads. Instead, the issue is that someone put a Lemonada Media link in a post in this topic.
Norton does not trust that website. We don’t know why, and we have no control over Norton. If you don’t like what Norton is doing, you may want to consider adding an exception or removing that Norton software.
I wish we were funding more long covid research - it feels like we’re still pretty in the dark, despite having a number of folks publishing studies and research. I do get that there are always more projects worth supporting that there is funding to go around, though.
I grabbed the device you’ve @DWJoe been using b/c I want it for an upcoming trip to Aulani. Just doing some initial readings. Yesterday I had 1138 in my home office, outside it was 615. This morning in same office it’s 410. That WIDE range between yesterday and today is confounding to me.
I appreciate all your details you’ve been sharing over the past few months on this topic.
The device pictured in your post isn’t the same as mine, I use a Triplett GSM400, it looks like you’re using an Inkbird.
Give your meter some time to steady down, the reading can fluctuate a bit at first.
600ppm for outdoors is oddly high, unless it’s very crowded. Low 400’s would be normal. If not crowded, and the ~600 reading persists, your CO2 meter may need to be recalibrated.
Widely differing readings for your home office at different times is plausible. For example, in my home office, I could have a very low reading at beginning of day, when it hasn’t been used for many hours, and be in the low 1000’s midday after I’ve been there several hours.
Two things that have caught my eye reading today’s papers.
First, this picture in a story about all the crap we put up with in the UK. Benches in public places were ludicrously taped off lest two people from different bubbles recklessly chose to sit on the same bench.
Looking back, it’s amazing how pliant we were. Partly out of fear. Not of COVID, but of the overzealous attitude of the police and the sometimes life-changing fines imposed on COVID law-breakers. Meanwhile, of course, the UK prime minister was partying like it was 1999.
Second, this letter in today’s (London) Times about the utility, or otherwise, of masks.
Yeah, once Delta came along with the huge step-up in transmissibility, the landscape changed and we all needed to upgrade our masks. What might have been somewhat adequate with the original variant no longer was. It’s a shame cohesive messaging on that never happened. Politics, economics, misinformation…plenty of blame to go around.
I would guess the taping off of benches was when they thought surface transmission outranked airborne transmission. Something like that, with a novel virus, was a misassumption that I can somewhat understand. How long it took them to regroup on actual transmission routes is more concerning.
And the clandestine partying is a on a whole ‘nother level of
CO2 monitoring update… return to NYC edition
<500 ~outdoors, 1000-2000 stale, >2000 bad.
I didn’t wear an N95 in the office today b/c the building was very empty, say <10% full with a lot of people on vacation, and readings were generally <525. There was one situation I was unsure about - meeting someone in their 8’x10’ office, ~6’ distancing, for about 15 mins. But the professional relationship is an important one, and I can make a better personal connection unmasked. So I started the meeting with N95 off, and luckily the reading stayed under 500, so I kept it off.
Related observation - when readings rise in a small indoor space, with a low number of people, my own CO2 is probably a significant part of the reading. e.g. in a small office or elevator with 1 other person. So that gives me a bit more leeway, I feel.
The NJTransit single-level train to NYC was moderately crowded and had an unusually high CO2: 1250. Glad I had my N95 on.
Side topic - I don’t feel crime is more of a problem in NYC-Manhattan-Midtown than it was pre-COVID. I haven’t encountered any situation that makes me feel unsafe. Maybe a subway turnstile jumper or two, but that’s it.
. Except the level of CO2 isn’t the actual problem? It’s a marker of the amount of ventilation. So whose CO2 it is doesn’t matter when you are measuring ventilation. It’s that the CO2 isn’t being carried away. The issue is that the other person’s exhalations aren’t going to be carried away like they would if you were outside. Your own CO2 exhalations are helping determine that, but they don’t really mitigate it?
The best way I’ve seen this handled is to take it down with a fresh tweet explaining why it was taken down. Not just to leave incorrect info hanging forever.
I agree that the CO2 level over time, for the usual number of people in the space, is a marker of ventilation. But a CO2 point-in-time reading is also a marker of the level of accumulated exhalations to be ventilated. And if the number of people in the space is small, then my own exhalations are a significant fraction of that, and can be discounted from a COVID risk standpoint. Does that make sense?
Solo Examples to illustrate:
Elevator lobby reading: 475
On boarding elevator, I’m the sole occupant: 475
After 25 floors descended alone: 550
On entering my office, I’m the sole occupant: 460
After working a few hours alone, door closed: 550
I’m not concerned about the rise in CO2 level since it’s likely from my own exhalations.
2-person example:
Hallway: 460
On entering their office, door open: 460
Over the next 15 mins: slowly rises to 490
I argue about half of the CO2 increase is my own exhalations.
Practically speaking, I’d have my N95 off in all these examples. What do you think?
If it goes to say, 900, with you and one other person in an elevator, and if 450 of that is you and 450 is the other person, the fact that half the CO2 is likely yours isn’t probably the critical bit. It’s not “my 450 doesn’t really count, so this is roughly as well ventilated as outdoors”. Especially if that happens quickly, over the course of a longish elevator ride, that’s not a good ventilation situation.
. Except the level of CO2 isn’t the actual problem? It’s a marker of the amount of ventilation. So whose CO2 it is doesn’t matter when you are measuring ventilation. It’s that the CO2 isn’t being carried away. The issue is that the other person’s exhalations aren’t going to be carried away like they would if you were outside. Your own CO2 exhalations are helping determine that, but they don’t really mitigate it?
