CDC releases new guidance ending 5-day isolation period for recovering COVID-19 patients, stay home if sick
CDC releases new guidance ending 5-day isolation period for recovering COVID-19 patients, stay home if sick
People who are recovering from COVID-19 no longer need to remain isolated for five days after symptoms end, according to new guidance from the CDC.
You're viewing a single thread.
Here's the thing - has the science changed? Has the virus and long-COVID risks changed?
These stories never tell me that. I don't care what's "normal," I just want to not be exhausted or have brain fog for life.
I know I'm in the minority, everyone wants to move to "endemic" land and treat this as the new flu, but I still really don't want to get COVID and roll the dice on lifelong problems.
The science hasn't changed. If anything we are now more aware of post-viral syndromes to a greater degree, in SARS-CoV-2, AND Influenza, at the very least. I've managed, so far, with diligent masking, hand washing, HEPA filtration, Neti washing, etc to avoid covid, influenza RSV, parapneumovirus, etc. And I hope to continue doing so. One researcher had the phrase, ARDS Roulette, and it's not a game I want to play. Stay strong. Stay healthy.
That is a whole lot of work.
Are you immunocompromised?
Living is a whole lot of work. And I don't have the time, nor the inclination to get sick. AFAIK, not immunocompromised.
If I may ask, do you set aside time each quarter/each year to be sick? I don't. I have responsibilities to myself and to others. I have zero desire to get sick. It's never been an enjoyable experience, for me. And I have even less interest in getting others sick.I had a client come into the office last Wednesday. Everyone was masked, vaccinated, and the office has a multi-stage HEPA in every room. That client called in on Friday to report that they were covid (+). No one else in the office has tested (+). If we had no rational infectious disease prevention policy, It's quite likely that I would have gotten sick. Are you aware of the recent research associating viral upper respiratory diseases with long term consequences?
With the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic came a review of our understanding of the nature of airborne disease transmission. Research was done in/ around 1937 during the Typhus epidemic, which was mis-interpreted for 78 years. Now it's possible to understand, and behave in a way that markedly reduces airborne disease transmission. One can avail oneself of the current scientific understandings, and significantly reduce the chance of contracting and suffering from airborne disease. Or one can ignore the science. Collectively in the early stages of the pandemic, utilizing Handwashing, Masking, Distancing, and Isolation when sick, humanity was able to make two strains of influenza go extinct. As in gone, forever, from simple behavioral change. Knowing this, can you change? Or will you stick with outdated unscientific understandings, that cause you and others harm? I had to ask myself these questions, and you know what I chose.
I’ll tell you what.
I will continue to wash my hands, like I always have, stay at home when I am sick, like I always have, and if I have to go out when I am sick I will wear my mask.
I will not live my life in fear of getting sick, without getting sick our bodies don’t learn how to defend themselves, then when we do get sick it’s worse than it ever would have been had we built up a normal immune system by catching small things like colds, while also allowing us to learn how to function when we are sick.
When I did get Rona, which was my fault, I put off getting my second booster, it sucked, but even though I felt like shit, through experience in actually being sick, I was still able to take car of two under 10 year old children, one of whom’s nose I actually had to bandage from a dog bite the day before I tested positive.
So yeah, I think my system is working fine.
Knowing this can You change or will you continue to put yourself and others at risk?
You can not live your life in fear friend.
Otherwise you will end up just like the people who are so afraid of everything in life that they carry a pistol everywhere.
Thank you for your reply. I really like the 'small nature' of the Fediverse at this point in time. One small mistake. I never said, and you inferred of your own that I live in fear. One way of looking at it, is that one can move towards what one wants (preference), or move away from what one doesn't want (aversion). Do you live in fear of dehydration? Or do you just get some water when you're thirsty? I prefer to be healthy, life is a lot more fun that way. And I can keep up with my consensual obligations. I'm always refining my approach to staying healthy in the first place. Exercise ( I love to move my body), good diet (healthy, delicious food is such a wonderful thing), a supportive social network (gotta have my dear ones), adequate rest (zomg! sleep! perchance to dream...) are the 'lions share' of my approach. I'm glad your system is "working fine". Bully for you! If you were interested, I think you might really benefit from learning a little more deeply about immunology. Dr. Brianne Barker at Drew University explains this topic in a very accessible fashion - a quick search of brianne barker immunology, would yield some useful lectures. Her website (https://bbarkerdrew.com/immunology-course/). I first came across her from TWiV, which is also quite fascinating and informative. Follow the science, it really is quite fascinating.
The virus has changed quite a bit over the last 4 years. It's pretty common for a deadly virus to get less deadly over time. Killing your host isn't very conducive to survival.
But, I haven't seen data on how the risk of long covid has changed over time.
With vaccination the risk of PASC (long covid) decreases. It is a commonly held belief that viruses become less deadly over time, but that is not supported by the science. The truth is far more complex. Approx. 2300 people die from covid each week in the US. I can't quote numbers for other countries. I can highly recommend TWIV (This Week in Virology, https://www.microbe.tv/twiv/), and related podcasts (https://www.microbe.tv/science-shows-by-scientists/), if you want to keep up to speed on the current science in infectious disease.
A virus doesn't care if the host lives or dies. Just like evolution doesn't care if YOU live or die, so long as it happens after you have kids.
A virus only has to have a living host long enough to spread to others, and the long asymptomatic infectious period observed with this coronavirus already fits that bill.
Think of Rabies, nearly 100% fatal, still incredibly widespread and infectious.
Exactly this. The whole “viruses evolve to be less deadly/severe” trope is just wishful thinking masquerading as science.
Evolution isn’t some sort of get-of-pandemic-free card, no matter how much we all wish it was.
There’s lots of counter examples of viruses that are still as deadly as ever, but I’d go beyond that; I’ve never seen anyone give a concrete example of a virus that actually did evolve to be less deadly.
The closest anyone has come to that is the 1918 flu pandemic, but there’s no evidence that it’s less deadly now due to evolution. It’s more like that it is simply less deadly because there isn’t as much widespread malnutrition as there was in 1918.
killing your host isn't very conducive to survival.
Ebola has entered the chat....
Disclaimer: i'm not a doctor or an epidemiologist....
It doesn’t really matter if the science has changed, public health isn’t (correctly) based exclusively on the science. It’s about risk mitigation, following the best advice regarding morbidity from virologists means nothing if the population you’re attempting to protect won’t follow the guidance. Public health policy is about the possible and finding the most effective part of the curve plotted between pure science and social behavior.
That's a very reasonable and rational response, thank you. I do wish, however, that for people like me who absolutely do want to take the optimal approach and don't care very much about getting back to "normal" if it means materially increasing the risk of COVID, that they would tell me what that best path is. Maybe modeling for multiple types of social behavior is too labor-intensive for them, I don't know.
It's a communicable disease. Like all of them, it's isolation and rest. You can look at the incubation period of the virus and how long you stay infected and go off those things for the best way of preventing the transmission of the disease.
As for managing symptoms, there is paxlovid. But again, like a lot of them, it's just managing it. Rest and medication.