- Joined
- Dec 19, 2010
- Messages
- 10,255
- Reaction score
- 13,584
Don't forget the thank all the online doctors spreading the same hysteria.
What do I need to know about coronavirus?
- Thread starter Angry Birds
- Start date
- Status
- Joined
- Mar 19, 2005
- Messages
- 7,704
- Reaction score
- 7,467
I work with several who regularly post on FB. Rather than reassure people that we will get through this and that most people are going to be okay, they constantly quote anecdotes as well as new "studies" that reveal how deadly and dangerous the virus is to anyone. Regardless of the actual facts, they are doing a disservice by spreading fear.
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2010
- Messages
- 10,255
- Reaction score
- 13,584
I know. It's appalling and embarrassing. They're doing it all over and online here on SDN, too, and just keep coming with the garbage. They know the overwhelming likelihood is that they and their kids will be just fine and conducting their lives as if the risk to those under 50 without comorbidities is negligible. At the same time they're publicly repeating virtue-signaling panic to increase their status with their social groups. It's phony as hell.
I see their facebook posts: At the country club, running their kids all over town for playdates, posing for massive group pics at family gatherings ("It's okay, cause we're all family! All 50 of us!"), working the past 5 months with no problems. All those posts are nicely mixed in with panicked ruminations like, "Next wave coming & worse!" "Long-haul COVID hidden killer?" and "Never any immunity even with vaccine?!" just to signal to the group that they're safely in the social herd.
- Joined
- Mar 19, 2005
- Messages
- 7,704
- Reaction score
- 7,467
You forgot about the dreaded "re-infection" they always post every case report. If you have virus that's infected millions of people, and you have to look really, really, really hard to find one or two re-infections, then it's probably not something anyone should worry about.
These doctors are doing more damage than the virus. For some reason people still respect our opinions to some degree. While I may disagree with some of the viral mitigation measures, I don't publicly post to the muggles how I disagree with them. Likewise those on the other end shouldn't be stirring up fear, which will just prolong the unnecessary restrictions.
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2010
- Messages
- 10,255
- Reaction score
- 13,584
Yes. And they're all hypocrites, too. They only support lockdowns because they know they apply to everyone else's job, but theirs. The minute any lockdown resulted in them being laid off, they'd reverse their stance immediately.
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2010
- Messages
- 10,255
- Reaction score
- 13,584
Yes, about 1 "reinfection" per 1 million cases, which is negligible even if real, but more likely someone with one of the tests being a false positive.
- Joined
- Sep 19, 2004
- Messages
- 2,950
- Reaction score
- 3,277
Looks like HCQ just keeps coming back from the dead lol
Use of hydroxychloroquine in hospitalised COVID-19 patients is associated with reduced mortality: Findings from the observational multicentre Italian CORIST study
30% reduction in mortality
Use of hydroxychloroquine in hospitalised COVID-19 patients is associated with reduced mortality: Findings from the observational multicentre Italian CORIST study
30% reduction in mortality
- Joined
- Jun 9, 2016
- Messages
- 1,242
- Reaction score
- 2,209
A retrospective cohort study where the no-HCQ group was older and with more significant comorbidities, and they didn't even include obesity as one of their comorbidities to control for?
- Joined
- Mar 19, 2005
- Messages
- 7,704
- Reaction score
- 7,467
Still don't understand the fixation with HCQ. Where did this originally come from, and why does it keep getting promoted?
- Joined
- Jul 28, 2004
- Messages
- 27,966
- Reaction score
- 56,404
Trump
- Joined
- Sep 19, 2012
- Messages
- 5,149
- Reaction score
- 4,608
What I find frustrating is the dichotomy in my residency. On the hospital side, my patients don't even get screened when they're admitted, there's no social distancing and the patients don't wear masks (hard to enforce). Now that I'm on outpatient year I'm working from home in my boxers...I'm in psychiatry. I feel like it reflects the rest of what's going on in America.
- Joined
- Mar 19, 2005
- Messages
- 7,704
- Reaction score
- 7,467
No he got it from somewhere. He doesn't have original ideas.
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2010
- Messages
- 10,255
- Reaction score
- 13,584
I hope you’re joking and haven’t been hypnotized so deeply with the “Orange Man Bad” stuff that you literally can’t remember the facts of where HCQ vs COVID-19 actually came from. Certainly, you haven’t.
But let me remind others, HCQ use vs coronaviruses goes back over 15 years when it showed promise in vitro vs SARS-COV-1.
Then, as early as February of this year, the concept was picked up again for that reason and became an area of research in China, in the early days of the fight against SARS-COV-2. It had nothing to do with Trump. Unless it was Trump doing in vitro HCQ vs SARS research in early 2000’s and conducting multiple cltrials in China, February 2020.
It wasn’t his Trump’s idea. It was the idea of hundreds of virologists going back more than a decade across the world.
HCQ vs Coronaviruses, a timeline.
Why does it keep getting life?
Because the studies can't decide which direction to settle on. It seems every time it's declared dead by virtue of another negative study, someone comes out with a positive study. It doesn't seem fair to blame Average Joe for being confused, when the scientists can't figure out the science.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2010
- Messages
- 10,255
- Reaction score
- 13,584
Estimation of Individual Probabilities of COVID-19 Infection, Hospitalization, and 2 Death From A County-level Contact of Unknown infection Status
Objective: Our objective is to demonstrate a method to estimate the probability of a laboratory confirmed COVID19 infection, hospitalization, and death arising from a contact with an individual of unknown infection status.
Methods: We calculate the probability of a confirmed infection, hospitalization, and death resulting from a county-level person-contact using available data on current case incidence, secondary attack rates, infectious periods, asymptomatic infections, and ratios of confirmed infections to hospitalizations and fatalities.
Results: Among US counties with populations greater than 500,000 people, during the week ending June 13,2020, the median estimate of the county level probability of a confirmed infection is 1 infection in 40,500 person contacts (Range: 10,100 to 586,000). For a 50 to 64 year-old individual, the median estimate of the county level probability of a hospitalization is 1 in 709,000 person contacts (Range: 177,000 to 10,200,000) and the median estimate of the county level probability of a fatality is 1 in 6,670,000 person contacts (Range 1,680,000 to 97,600.000).
Conclusions and Relevance: Estimates of the individual probabilities of COVID19 infection, hospitalization and death vary widely but may not align with public risk perceptions. Systematically collected and publicly reported data on infection incidence by, for example, the setting of exposure, type of residence and occupation would allow more precise estimates of probabilities than possible with currently available public data. Calculation of secondary attack rates by setting and better measures of the prevalence of seropositivity would further improve those estimates.
Objective: Our objective is to demonstrate a method to estimate the probability of a laboratory confirmed COVID19 infection, hospitalization, and death arising from a contact with an individual of unknown infection status.
Methods: We calculate the probability of a confirmed infection, hospitalization, and death resulting from a county-level person-contact using available data on current case incidence, secondary attack rates, infectious periods, asymptomatic infections, and ratios of confirmed infections to hospitalizations and fatalities.
Results: Among US counties with populations greater than 500,000 people, during the week ending June 13,2020, the median estimate of the county level probability of a confirmed infection is 1 infection in 40,500 person contacts (Range: 10,100 to 586,000). For a 50 to 64 year-old individual, the median estimate of the county level probability of a hospitalization is 1 in 709,000 person contacts (Range: 177,000 to 10,200,000) and the median estimate of the county level probability of a fatality is 1 in 6,670,000 person contacts (Range 1,680,000 to 97,600.000).
Conclusions and Relevance: Estimates of the individual probabilities of COVID19 infection, hospitalization and death vary widely but may not align with public risk perceptions. Systematically collected and publicly reported data on infection incidence by, for example, the setting of exposure, type of residence and occupation would allow more precise estimates of probabilities than possible with currently available public data. Calculation of secondary attack rates by setting and better measures of the prevalence of seropositivity would further improve those estimates.
- Joined
- Jun 6, 2002
- Messages
- 13,873
- Reaction score
- 4,421
@Birdstrike Thanks for sharing this.
- Joined
- Jul 28, 2004
- Messages
- 27,966
- Reaction score
- 56,404
I was answering why it keeps coming back up. He was a proponent of it at first and the idiot fringe on the right hasn't let it go since then.
- Joined
- Mar 19, 2005
- Messages
- 7,704
- Reaction score
- 7,467
Yeah not sure why anyone is still on that bandwagon as a miracle elixir. Sure, give it a try on someone who's critically ill, but the amount of attention it's gotten with lackluster and contradictory study results is amazing.
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2010
- Messages
- 10,255
- Reaction score
- 13,584
I personally have no opinion on HCQ one way or the other. If I had to bet, I'd bet it doesn't work. But people keep publishing on the this drug and as recently as a few days ago, a positive study came out (above posted by @bravotwozero):
Here are the authors in the European Journal of Internal Medicine. Are you saying these researchers, by name, are the "idiot fringe"?
Augusto Di Castelnuovo: Conceptualization, Data curation, Investigation, Supervision, Writing - review & editing, Writing - original draft. Simona Costanzo: Investigation, Supervision, Writing - review & editing. Andrea Antinori: Investigation, Supervision, Writing - review & editing. Nausicaa Berselli: Investigation, Supervision, Writing - review & editing. Lorenzo Blandi: Investigation, Supervision, Writing - review & editing. Raffaele Bruno: Investigation, Supervision, Writing - review & editing. Roberto Cauda: Investigation, Supervision, Writing - review & editing. Giovanni Guaraldi: Investigation, Supervision, Writing - review & editing. Lorenzo Menicanti: Investigation, Supervision, Writing - review & editing. Ilaria My: Investigation, Supervision, Writing - review & editing. Giustino Parruti: Investigation, Supervision, Writing - review & editing. Giuseppe Patti: Investigation, Supervision, Writing - review & editing. Stefano Perlini: Investigation, Supervision, Writing - review & editing. Francesca Santilli: Investigation, Supervision, Writing - review & editing. Carlo Signorelli: Investigation, Supervision, Writing - review & editing. Enrico Spinoni: Investigation, Supervision, Writing - review & editing. Giulio G. Stefanini: Investigation, Supervision, Writing - review & editing, Formal analysis. Alessandra Vergori: Investigation, Supervision, Writing - review & editing. Walter Ageno: Investigation, Supervision, Writing - review & editing. Antonella Agodi: Investigation, Supervision, Writing - review & editing. Luca Aiello: Investigation, Supervision, Writing - review & editing. Piergiuseppe Agostoni: Investigation, Supervision, Writing - review & editing. Samir Al Moghazi: Investigation, Supervision, Writing - review & editing. Marinella Astuto: Investigation, Supervision, Writing - review & editing. Filippo Aucella: Investigation, Supervision, Writing - review & editing. Greta Barbieri: Investigation, Supervision, Writing - review & editing. Alessandro Bartoloni: Investigation, Supervision, Writing - review & editing. Marialaura Bonaccio: Investigation, Supervision, Writing - review & editing. Paolo Bonfanti: Investigation, Supervision, Writing - review & editing. Francesco Cacciatore: Investigation, Supervision, Writing - review & editing. Lucia Caiano: Investigation, Supervision, Writing - review & editing. Francesco Cannata: Investigation, Supervision, Writing - review & editing. Laura Carrozzi: Investigation, Supervision, Writing - review & editing. Antonio Cascio: Investigation, Supervision, Writing - review & editing. Arturo Ciccullo: Investigation, Supervision, Writing - review & editing. Antonella Cingolani: Investigation, Supervision, Writing - review & editing. Francesco Cipollone: Investigation, Supervision, Writing - review & editing. Claudia Colomba: Investigation, Supervision, Writing - review & editing. Francesca Crosta: Investigation, Supervision, Writing - review & editing. Chiara Dal Pra: Investigation, Supervision, Writing - review & editing. Gian Battista Danzi: Investigation, Supervision, Writing - review & editing. Damiano D'Ardes: Investigation, Supervision, Writing - review & editing. Katleen de Gaetano Donati: Investigation, Supervision, Writing - review & editing, Writing - original draft. Paola Del Giacomo: Investigation, Supervision, Writing - review & editing. Francesco Di Gennaro: Investigation, Supervision, Writing - review & editing. Giuseppe Di Tano: Investigation, Supervision, Writing - review & editing. Giampiero D'Offizi: Investigation, Supervision, Writing - review & editing. Tommaso Filippini: Investigation, Supervision, Writing - review & editing. Francesco Maria Fusco: Investigation, Supervision, Writing - review & editing. Ivan Gentile: Investigation, Supervision, Writing - review & editing. Alessandro Gialluisi: Investigation, Supervision, Writing - review & editing. Giancarlo Gini: Investigation, Supervision, Writing - review & editing. Elvira Grandone: Investigation, Supervision, Writing - review & editing. Leonardo Grisafi: Investigation, Supervision, Writing - review & editing. Gabriella Guarnieri: Investigation, Supervision, Writing - review & editing. Silvia Lamonica: Investigation, Supervision, Writing - review & editing. Francesco Landi: Investigation, Supervision, Writing - review & editing. Armando Leone: Investigation, Supervision, Writing - review & editing. Gloria Maccagni: Investigation, Supervision, Writing - review & editing. Sandro Maccarella: Investigation, Supervision, Writing - review & editing. Andrea Madaro: Investigation, Supervision, Writing - review & editing. Massimo Mapelli: Investigation, Supervision, Writing - review & editing. ******** Maragna: Investigation, Supervision, Writing - review & editing. Lorenzo Marra: Investigation, Supervision, Writing - review & editing. Giulio Maresca: Investigation, Supervision, Writing - review & editing. Claudia Marotta: Investigation, Supervision, Writing - review & editing. Franco Mastroianni: Investigation, Supervision, Writing - review & editing, Methodology. Maria Mazzitelli: Investigation, Supervision, Writing - review & editing. Alessandro Mengozzi: Investigation, Supervision, Writing - review & editing. Francesco Menichetti: Investigation, Supervision, Writing - review & editing. Marianna Meschiari: Investigation, Supervision, Writing - review & editing. Filippo Minutolo: Investigation, Supervision, Writing - review & editing. Arturo Montineri: Investigation, Supervision, Writing - review & editing. Roberta Mussinelli: Investigation, Supervision, Writing - review & editing. Cristina Mussini: Investigation, Supervision, Writing - review & editing. Maria Musso: Investigation, Supervision, Writing - review & editing. Anna Odone: Investigation, Supervision, Writing - review & editing. Marco Olivieri: Investigation, Supervision, Writing - review & editing, Software. Emanuela Pasi: Investigation, Supervision, Writing - review & editing. Francesco Petri: Investigation, Supervision, Writing - review & editing. Biagio Pinchera: Investigation, Supervision, Writing - review & editing. Carlo A. Pivato: Investigation, Supervision, Writing - review & editing. Venerino Poletti: Investigation, Supervision, Writing - review & editing. Claudia Ravaglia: Investigation, Supervision, Writing - review & editing. Massimo Rinaldi: Investigation, Supervision, Writing - review & editing. Andrea Rognoni: Investigation, Supervision, Writing - review & editing. Marco Rossato: Investigation, Supervision, Writing - review & editing. Ilaria Rossi: Investigation, Supervision, Writing - review & editing. Marianna Rossi: Investigation, Supervision, Writing - review & editing. Anna Sabena: Investigation, Supervision, Writing - review & editing. Francesco Salinaro: Investigation, Supervision, Writing - review & editing. Vincenzo Sangiovanni: Investigation, Supervision, Writing - review & editing. Carlo Sanrocco: Investigation, Supervision, Writing - review & editing. Laura Scorzolini: Investigation, Supervision, Writing - review & editing. Raffaella Sgariglia: Investigation, Supervision, Writing - review & editing. Paola Giustina Simeone: Investigation, Supervision, Writing - review & editing. Michele Spinicci: Investigation, Supervision, Writing - review & editing. Enrico Maria Trecarichi: Investigation, Supervision, Writing - review & editing. Amedeo Venezia: Investigation, Supervision, Writing - review & editing. Giovanni Veronesi: Investigation, Supervision, Writing - review & editing, Formal analysis. Roberto Vettor: Investigation, Supervision, Writing - review & editing. Andrea Vianello: Investigation, Supervision, Writing - review & editing. Marco Vinceti: Investigation, Supervision, Writing - review & editing. Laura Vocciante: Investigation, Supervision, Writing - review & editing. Raffaele De Caterina: Conceptualization, Investigation, Supervision, Writing - review & editing, Writing - original draft. Licia Iacoviello: Conceptualization, Data curation, Investigation, Investigation, Supervision, Writing - review & editing, Writing - original draft.
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2010
- Messages
- 10,255
- Reaction score
- 13,584
That fact that the study results are contradictory mean something. Unanimously negative or positive means one thing, repeatedly contradictory studies means something entirely different.
- Joined
- Jul 28, 2004
- Messages
- 27,966
- Reaction score
- 56,404
I have no idea, but I will refer you to this post:
So while maybe not idiot fringe (though they could be, I wouldn't know) definitely not great at study design.
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2010
- Messages
- 10,255
- Reaction score
- 13,584
And you expect regular folks to easily know that, how exactly?
- Joined
- Jul 28, 2004
- Messages
- 27,966
- Reaction score
- 56,404
I don't. Here's what I expect regular folks to know:
Hydroxychloroquine Shouldn’t Be Used at All for Covid, IDSA Says
Hospitals should drop using the anti-malarial drug hydroxychloroquine altogether to treat Covid-19 patients, even if it’s in a clinical trial, according to new medical guidelines.
www.bloomberg.com
WHO drops hydroxychloroquine from Covid-19 clinical trial
The WHO will drop the malaria drug hydroxychloroquine from its massive study of coronavirus treatments, after available data indicated the drug was not effective for Covid-19.
www.statnews.com
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2010
- Messages
- 10,255
- Reaction score
- 13,584
How can you expect non-medical people to pick and choose which information to believe when they read an article about a positive study one day and a negative one, the next? And they another negative and positive one, the next week? They're supposed to know because Wheezybaby said so?I don't. Here's what I expect regular folks to know:
Hydroxychloroquine Shouldn’t Be Used at All for Covid, IDSA Says
Hospitals should drop using the anti-malarial drug hydroxychloroquine altogether to treat Covid-19 patients, even if it’s in a clinical trial, according to new medical guidelines.
WHO drops hydroxychloroquine from Covid-19 clinical trial
The WHO will drop the malaria drug hydroxychloroquine from its massive study of coronavirus treatments, after available data indicated the drug was not effective for Covid-19.
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2010
- Messages
- 10,255
- Reaction score
- 13,584
On a more positive note, both of my kids actually set foot in school today, after six months. I couldn't be happier about that. Although it is a "hybrid" situation for the time being, it's better than nothing. They're smart and social kids, so their brains need the stimulation and enrichment.
- Joined
- Jul 28, 2004
- Messages
- 27,966
- Reaction score
- 56,404
I don't, that's why we have the IDSA and the WHO...
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2010
- Messages
- 10,255
- Reaction score
- 13,584
The general public gets their info from Facebook, twitter, instagram or click-bait articles, not the IDSA and WHO. I don't think it's fair to consider non-medical people that don't get their information from IDSA and WHO as the lunatic fringe. That's just not realistic. In fact, lots of doctors and nurses get their information from social media, and aren't exactly reading journal articles. I see it on here everyday. I post an 20 page article. Some keyboard warrior "debunks" it 30 seconds after I post it, way too quick to possibly read it. What's their analysis? Usually, echo chamber talking points they read online, from their "team." They've decided what to believe first, then are picking and choosing "facts" to fight the opinion they're already formed.
- Joined
- Jul 28, 2004
- Messages
- 27,966
- Reaction score
- 56,404
Maybe that's true, but the ones who still actively support HCQ are the same ones who claim that anyone saying it doesn't work only says that because they want Trump to lose.
I have a handful of patients/week ask me about it. I tell them what we know: conflicting evidence but doesn't seem to help. Most are OK with that. I have a handful who still demand a prescription for if they get COVID.
Those are the ones who are the lunatic fringe, not the ones who aren't sure what to believe.
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2010
- Messages
- 10,255
- Reaction score
- 13,584
From Emory Univ. and Penn. State. Once COVID-19 has been around awhile and becomes endemic...
"Immunological characteristics govern the changing severity of COVID-19 during the transition to endemicity
As prospects for eradicating CoV-2 dwindle, we are faced with the question of how the severity of CoV-2 disease may change in the years ahead. Will CoV-2 continue to be a pathogenic scourge that, like smallpox or measles, can be tamed only by ongoing vaccination, or will it join the ranks of mild endemic human coronaviruses (HCoVs)? Our analysis of immunological and epidemiological data on HCoVs shows that infection-blocking immunity wanes rapidly, but disease-reducing immunity is long-lived. We estimate the relevant parameters and incorporate them into a new epidemiological model framework which separates these different components of immunity. Our model recapitulates both the current severity of CoV-2 and the relatively benign nature of HCoVs; suggesting that once the endemic phase is reached, CoV-2 may be no more virulent than the common cold. The benign outcome at the endemic phase is contingent on the virus causing primary infections in children. We predict a very different outcome were a CoV like MERS (that causes severe disease in children) to become endemic. These results force us to re-evaluate control measures that rely on identifying and isolating symptomatic infections, and reconsider ideas regarding herd immunity and the use of immune individuals as shields to protect vulnerable groups."
"Immunological characteristics govern the changing severity of COVID-19 during the transition to endemicity
As prospects for eradicating CoV-2 dwindle, we are faced with the question of how the severity of CoV-2 disease may change in the years ahead. Will CoV-2 continue to be a pathogenic scourge that, like smallpox or measles, can be tamed only by ongoing vaccination, or will it join the ranks of mild endemic human coronaviruses (HCoVs)? Our analysis of immunological and epidemiological data on HCoVs shows that infection-blocking immunity wanes rapidly, but disease-reducing immunity is long-lived. We estimate the relevant parameters and incorporate them into a new epidemiological model framework which separates these different components of immunity. Our model recapitulates both the current severity of CoV-2 and the relatively benign nature of HCoVs; suggesting that once the endemic phase is reached, CoV-2 may be no more virulent than the common cold. The benign outcome at the endemic phase is contingent on the virus causing primary infections in children. We predict a very different outcome were a CoV like MERS (that causes severe disease in children) to become endemic. These results force us to re-evaluate control measures that rely on identifying and isolating symptomatic infections, and reconsider ideas regarding herd immunity and the use of immune individuals as shields to protect vulnerable groups."
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jun 9, 2016
- Messages
- 1,242
- Reaction score
- 2,209
I wonder what the longterm implications of endemic COVID will be on American travel abroad
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2010
- Messages
- 10,255
- Reaction score
- 13,584
I think the article answers that question.
- Joined
- Jun 9, 2016
- Messages
- 1,242
- Reaction score
- 2,209
Maybe I'm missing it, where abouts?
- Joined
- Sep 27, 2008
- Messages
- 3,015
- Reaction score
- 2,223
That’s pretty much in line with what I think will happen (although I have no evidence to back it up). But I don’t know they mean by ‘immune shields’ or whatever. Mildly affected, but still infected, children and young adults can certainly pass it onto more vulnerable adults.
- Joined
- Jan 14, 2016
- Messages
- 223
- Reaction score
- 353
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2018
- Messages
- 538
- Reaction score
- 897
I work for one of those schools. This school is only reporting positive results that are self reported by the patient. They state this on the their COVID19 webpage. This is obviously being done to keep the numbers down so they don't feel pressured to close. I can only speak the one school though.
- Joined
- Nov 6, 2011
- Messages
- 3,565
- Reaction score
- 3,654
The interesting thing about those numbers is that its essentially schools testing for COVID among a group of asymptomatic healthy people.
Goes to show that the rate of COVID hospitalizations is extremely low among young adults without any underlying medical problems.
Goes to show that the rate of COVID hospitalizations is extremely low among young adults without any underlying medical problems.
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2010
- Messages
- 10,255
- Reaction score
- 13,584
- Joined
- Jun 9, 2016
- Messages
- 1,242
- Reaction score
- 2,209
Among the endemic population. How does that pertain to virulence among the non-endemic population, ie individuals outside the US, which would be pertinent for international restrictions on US travel abroad? Maybe I'm being dense
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2010
- Messages
- 10,255
- Reaction score
- 13,584
My assumption is that other countries will reach endemic status around the same time as us and that there would be no reason to restrict international travel once the lethality becomes negligible everywhere at about the same time. But I could be wrong.
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2010
- Messages
- 10,255
- Reaction score
- 13,584
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2010
- Messages
- 10,255
- Reaction score
- 13,584
"Projected Deaths Of Despair" - from Robert Graham Center, American Academy of Family Physicians. Up to "154,037 deaths of despair" predicted, from "massive unemployment, mandated social isolation for months and possible residual isolation..."
Top two solutions: "Get people working...Get people connected"
Top two solutions: "Get people working...Get people connected"
- Joined
- Mar 6, 2005
- Messages
- 21,377
- Reaction score
- 17,905
It would be nice if people posting figures, charts, graphs, etc here would cite their sources. Especially the ones that look like they were created in MS Paint.
I'm not arguing with the data, but it would be nice to see where it came from and the context.
- Joined
- Jun 9, 2016
- Messages
- 1,242
- Reaction score
- 2,209
My understanding is you need to have a high prevalence of low severity infection to breed immunogenicity that's going to tamper the response future infections on a population basis. For countries that have done well controlling their case prevalence, where does that come from? Exposure to a case would just lead to what were seeing now as the manifestations of COVID. Would be predicated on the development and widespread dissemination of an effective vaccine. Again, correct me if I'm misunderstanding
- Joined
- Jan 14, 2016
- Messages
- 223
- Reaction score
- 353
COVID-19 Health and Exposure updates | University Health Center
The University Health Center, a department in the Division of Student Affairs at the University of Georgia, is a state-of-the-art outpatient facility, accredited by the Joint Commission, and designed to meet the health care needs of University of Georgia students.
uhs.uga.edu
COVID-19 Information - Magers Health and Wellness Center - Missouri State
COVID-19 Dashboard (archived)
Information for Employees | Coronavirus (COVID-19) Information | University of Miami
Review answers to some of the most frequently asked questions related to COVID-19 from members of the University community. This is a rapidly evolving event and responses below are based on currently known information and are subject to change.
Campus update: How COVID-19 spreads, new ventilation practices, number of self-reported cases, student activity/event reminder
Reminder: How COVID-19 spreads University of Iowa Health infectious disease physician and epidemiologist Dan Diekema explains how COVID-19 is spread. Reminder: New ventilation practices Before the start of the fall 2020 semester, University of Iowa Facilities Management (FM) changed ventilation
and it goes on if you would like them all they are listed on
He put them into a chart (MS Paint). He is updating daily.
- Joined
- Jun 9, 2016
- Messages
- 1,242
- Reaction score
- 2,209
Hoity toity MD PhD over here who wants graphs from SPSS and references. This is America. You'll take my word art pie chart and love it
- Joined
- Sep 19, 2004
- Messages
- 2,950
- Reaction score
- 3,277
Russians publish early covid vaccine results
So according to researchers at Yale, the study was well designed, with promising data. However, no phase III trials have been completed.
PutinVax anyone?
Also, a ED doc got tested for covid at his employer, employer billed his insurance company $10k, and the insurance company actually paid it!
Why would an insurance company pay $10,000 for a covid test?
A Doctor Went to His Own Employer for a COVID-19 Antibody Test. It Cost $10,984.
So according to researchers at Yale, the study was well designed, with promising data. However, no phase III trials have been completed.
PutinVax anyone?
Also, a ED doc got tested for covid at his employer, employer billed his insurance company $10k, and the insurance company actually paid it!
Why would an insurance company pay $10,000 for a covid test?
A Doctor Went to His Own Employer for a COVID-19 Antibody Test. It Cost $10,984.
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2010
- Messages
- 10,255
- Reaction score
- 13,584
SHOCK AUDIO: Medical Director Largest U.S. County Caught On Tape Repeatedly Saying, Not Reopening Schools Until After "The Election"
As reported by investigative reporter Bill Melugin. The audio, from KFI radio in L.A. (starts at 2:40). For every one caught on tape, there's probably a hundred saying it and doing it without being caught or admitting it. If only we had an ignorant science denier around to say school closures were political and had nothing to do with science.
As reported by investigative reporter Bill Melugin. The audio, from KFI radio in L.A. (starts at 2:40). For every one caught on tape, there's probably a hundred saying it and doing it without being caught or admitting it. If only we had an ignorant science denier around to say school closures were political and had nothing to do with science.
- Joined
- Nov 2, 2004
- Messages
- 4,461
- Reaction score
- 5,244
I listened and it doesn't sound like they're saying school closures are motivated by the election. It's simply saying they don't expect the situation to improve before November. It's like someone said they didn't expect things to improve until "after Christmas" and you then conclude that they're trying to cancel Christmas.
This is far from the most shocking covid-related audio to come out this week.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2010
- Messages
- 10,255
- Reaction score
- 13,584
Unusual Features of the SARS-CoV-2 Genome Suggesting Sophisticated Laboratory Modification Rather Than Natural Evolution and Delineation of Its Probable Synthetic Route
"Abstract
The COVID-19 pandemic caused by the novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 has led to over 910,000 deaths worldwide and unprecedented decimation of the global economy. Despite its tremendous impact, the origin of SARS-CoV-2 has remained mysterious and controversial. The natural origin theory, although widely accepted, lacks substantial support. The alternative theory that the virus may have come from a research laboratory is, however, strictly censored on peer-reviewed scientific journals. Nonetheless, SARS-CoV-2 shows biological characteristics that are inconsistent with a naturally occurring, zoonotic virus. In this report, we describe the genomic, structural, medical, and literature evidence, which, when considered together, strongly contradicts the natural origin theory. The evidence shows that SARS-CoV2 should be a laboratory product created by using bat coronaviruses ZC45 and/or ZXC21 as a template and/or backbone. Building upon the evidence, we further postulate a synthetic route for SARS-CoV-2, demonstrating that the laboratory-creation of this coronavirus is convenient and can be accomplished in approximately six months. Our work emphasizes the need for an independent investigation into the relevant research laboratories. It also argues for a critical look into certain recently published data, which, albeit problematic, was used to support and claim a natural origin of SARS-CoV-2. From a public health perspective, these actions are necessary as knowledge of the origin of SARS-CoV-2 and of how the virus entered the human population are of pivotal importance in the fundamental control of the COVID-19 pandemic as well as in preventing similar, future pandemics. "
FULL TEXT
In case the original link goes down > > backup copy.
"Abstract
The COVID-19 pandemic caused by the novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 has led to over 910,000 deaths worldwide and unprecedented decimation of the global economy. Despite its tremendous impact, the origin of SARS-CoV-2 has remained mysterious and controversial. The natural origin theory, although widely accepted, lacks substantial support. The alternative theory that the virus may have come from a research laboratory is, however, strictly censored on peer-reviewed scientific journals. Nonetheless, SARS-CoV-2 shows biological characteristics that are inconsistent with a naturally occurring, zoonotic virus. In this report, we describe the genomic, structural, medical, and literature evidence, which, when considered together, strongly contradicts the natural origin theory. The evidence shows that SARS-CoV2 should be a laboratory product created by using bat coronaviruses ZC45 and/or ZXC21 as a template and/or backbone. Building upon the evidence, we further postulate a synthetic route for SARS-CoV-2, demonstrating that the laboratory-creation of this coronavirus is convenient and can be accomplished in approximately six months. Our work emphasizes the need for an independent investigation into the relevant research laboratories. It also argues for a critical look into certain recently published data, which, albeit problematic, was used to support and claim a natural origin of SARS-CoV-2. From a public health perspective, these actions are necessary as knowledge of the origin of SARS-CoV-2 and of how the virus entered the human population are of pivotal importance in the fundamental control of the COVID-19 pandemic as well as in preventing similar, future pandemics. "
FULL TEXT
In case the original link goes down > > backup copy.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jun 9, 2016
- Messages
- 1,242
- Reaction score
- 2,209
‘Whistleblower’ Claiming China Created Covid-19 Coronavirus Has Ties To Steve Bannon
Li-Meng Yan appeared on the Fox News show “Tucker Carlson Tonight” and made a number of unsubstantiated claims.
www.google.com
- Joined
- Mar 19, 2005
- Messages
- 7,704
- Reaction score
- 7,467
It doesn't really matter to me whether or not China created the virus. It's indisputable that China has a large degree of blame in this. At worst they allowed it to maliciously spread. At best they are just incredibly incompetent and corrupt......
- Status
