Page 170 of 208
Re: Coronavirus General Discussion
Posted: Sun Jun 20, 2021 7:20 pm
by pp4me
Tortoise wrote: ↑Fri Jun 18, 2021 12:34 am
tomfoolery wrote: ↑Thu Jun 17, 2021 6:53 pm
Vaccines good people. Get vaccinated. Get everyone you love vaccinated. Donate to charities who facilitate vaccinations. We can win this, people. We're nearing the finish line.
Set to music
That brought tears to my eyes.
Haven't been moved so much since those "We are the world" commercials.
Re: Coronavirus General Discussion
Posted: Sun Jun 20, 2021 8:24 pm
by jalanlong
pp4me wrote: ↑Sun Jun 20, 2021 7:20 pm
Tortoise wrote: ↑Fri Jun 18, 2021 12:34 am
tomfoolery wrote: ↑Thu Jun 17, 2021 6:53 pm
Vaccines good people. Get vaccinated. Get everyone you love vaccinated. Donate to charities who facilitate vaccinations. We can win this, people. We're nearing the finish line.
Set to music
That brought tears to my eyes.
Haven't been moved so much since those "We are the world" commercials.
Or Hands Across America.
Re: Coronavirus General Discussion
Posted: Mon Jun 21, 2021 6:48 am
by Xan
SomeDude wrote: ↑Wed Jun 16, 2021 12:00 pmAt my work you have a choice now:
1. Get Vaxxed and get a special green sticker on your badge
2. Wear a mask in the office and cancel all future business travel.
I'm putting my own green sticker on my badge this weekend.
SomeDude, are you okay with lying to all your bosses and co-workers?
Re: Coronavirus General Discussion
Posted: Mon Jun 21, 2021 8:20 am
by flyingpylon
Ivermectin for Prevention and Treatment of COVID-19 Infection: A Systematic Review, Meta-analysis, and Trial Sequential Analysis to Inform Clinical Guidelines
https://journals.lww.com/americantherap ... 98040.aspx
Background: Repurposed medicines may have a role against the SARS-CoV-2 virus. The antiparasitic ivermectin, with antiviral and anti-inflammatory properties, has now been tested in numerous clinical trials.
Areas of uncertainty: We assessed the efficacy of ivermectin treatment in reducing mortality, in secondary outcomes, and in chemoprophylaxis, among people with, or at high risk of, COVID-19 infection.
Data sources: We searched bibliographic databases up to April 25, 2021. Two review authors sifted for studies, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. Meta-analyses were conducted and certainty of the evidence was assessed using the GRADE approach and additionally in trial sequential analyses for mortality. Twenty-four randomized controlled trials involving 3406 participants met review inclusion.
Therapeutic Advances: Meta-analysis of 15 trials found that ivermectin reduced risk of death compared with no ivermectin (average risk ratio 0.38, 95% confidence interval 0.19–0.73; n=2438; I2=49%; moderate-certainty evidence). This result was confirmed in a trial sequential analysis using the same DerSimonian–Laird method that underpinned the unadjusted analysis. This was also robust against a trial sequential analysis using the Biggerstaff–Tweedie method. Low-certainty evidence found that ivermectin prophylaxis reduced COVID-19 infection by an average 86% (95% confidence interval 79%–91%). Secondary outcomes provided less certain evidence. Low-certainty evidence suggested that there may be no benefit with ivermectin for "need for mechanical ventilation," whereas effect estimates for "improvement" and "deterioration" clearly favored ivermectin use. Severe adverse events were rare among treatment trials and evidence of no difference was assessed as low certainty. Evidence on other secondary outcomes was very low certainty.
Conclusions: Moderate-certainty evidence finds that large reductions in COVID-19 deaths are possible using ivermectin. Using ivermectin early in the clinical course may reduce numbers progressing to severe disease. The apparent safety and low cost suggest that ivermectin is likely to have a significant impact on the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic globally.
Re: Coronavirus General Discussion
Posted: Mon Jun 21, 2021 9:56 am
by WiseOne
So a few questions here...
What's the number needed to treat, to prevent one COVID death when used after clinical COVID infection is identified?
What's the downsides of long-term ivermectin treatment? Compared to vaccines? Because that's what the article is hinting at. Not that this would be at all realistic...few people will comply with a daily medication no matter how cheap it is, when it doesn't have any immediate visible benefits.
For the vaccines...we of course can't know about long-term effects like we do with ivermectin, but the short term data can be compared.
Re: Coronavirus General Discussion
Posted: Mon Jun 21, 2021 2:10 pm
by SomeDude
Xan wrote: ↑Mon Jun 21, 2021 6:48 am
SomeDude wrote: ↑Wed Jun 16, 2021 12:00 pmAt my work you have a choice now:
1. Get Vaxxed and get a special green sticker on your badge
2. Wear a mask in the office and cancel all future business travel.
I'm putting my own green sticker on my badge this weekend.
SomeDude, are you okay with lying to all your bosses and co-workers?
Of course i would never do that Xan. In a week I'll have a home office so I'll just work from rather than wear a silly face diaper.
Hopefully all this goes away ASAP. Even the official covid new case numbers have collapsed to such a level that the most diehard Covid believers should be admitting its not a thing to worry about now. At least i hope they would.
I doubt anyone in my entire county has it or maybe even the state. Officially i think 1/200 people are being counted as cases so maybe 1/2,000 have symptoms if that. I've still never heard of anyone even knowing anyone who got sick (apart from the internet and TV). I go to a large Catholic church with several thousand elderly parishioners. If anyone got sick it hasn't been communicated. Same thing with my company of several thousand. A few people weren't allowed to work because they testes positive but i haven't heard of anyone who got sick.
I guess we've been lucky.
Re: Coronavirus General Discussion
Posted: Tue Jun 22, 2021 5:00 am
by flyingpylon
News from the WHO...
Children should not be vaccinated for the moment.
There is not yet enough evidence on the use of vaccines against COVID-19 in children to make recommendations for children to be vaccinated against COVID-19. Children and adolescents tend to have milder disease compared to adults. However, children should continue to have the recommended childhood vaccines.
https://www.who.int/emergencies/disease ... nes/advice
Re: Coronavirus General Discussion
Posted: Tue Jun 22, 2021 8:26 am
by WiseOne
flyingpylon wrote: ↑Tue Jun 22, 2021 5:00 am
News from the WHO...
Children should not be vaccinated for the moment.
There is not yet enough evidence on the use of vaccines against COVID-19 in children to make recommendations for children to be vaccinated against COVID-19. Children and adolescents tend to have milder disease compared to adults. However, children should continue to have the recommended childhood vaccines.
https://www.who.int/emergencies/disease ... nes/advice
And they just discovered the science behind this when??
I wonder what's going to happen now, with school requirements and such in the U.S. My guess is they'll completely ignore this.
Re: Coronavirus General Discussion
Posted: Tue Jun 22, 2021 9:10 am
by Xan
The article also says that vaccinated people should keep on masking and distancing. Which parts are they right about?
So recommending against childhood vaccination is half of the equation: what are they saying that kids have to do instead of being vaccinated? When do they get to take the masks off, and play inside with their friends? Is it never?
Re: Coronavirus General Discussion
Posted: Tue Jun 22, 2021 10:19 am
by flyingpylon
And then there's this:
The COVID-19 vaccines are safe for most people 18 years and older, including those with pre-existing conditions of any kind, including auto-immune disorders. These conditions include: hypertension, diabetes, asthma, pulmonary, liver and kidney disease, as well as chronic infections that are stable and controlled.
What % is "most"? What people do not fall into the category of "most"?
What happens on one's 18th birthday that makes the vaccines safe?
Re: Coronavirus General Discussion
Posted: Tue Jun 22, 2021 11:58 am
by WiseOne
Sorry Xan I didn't mean to imply that WHO is infallible. You can always go with the CDC's recommendation instead. That says that fully vaccinated people can dispense with masks unless their governor or workplace says they need it. Because, you know, the governor and your boss know more about COVID transmission than the CDC.
I've always been in favor of each individual assessing the data & their personal risk and making their own decision, which should NOT be subject to any form of government or social coercion - particularly when the authorities in question can't articulate a consistent, science-based set of recommendations. Because the vaccine is EXPERIMENTAL. Should I put that in big bold letters 10 feet high, or is plain regular capital letters obnoxious enough?
Re: Coronavirus General Discussion
Posted: Tue Jun 22, 2021 6:20 pm
by SomeDude
tomfoolery wrote: ↑Tue Jun 22, 2021 12:49 pm
flyingpylon wrote: ↑Tue Jun 22, 2021 10:19 am
What happens on one's 18th birthday that makes the vaccines safe?
The same thing that makes them mentally capable to consent to sex and to own an AR15 fully automatic assault rifle.
It's fully semi-automatic.
Re: Coronavirus General Discussion
Posted: Tue Jun 22, 2021 7:05 pm
by flyingpylon
Update to the update from the WHO. Make of it what you will.
Instead of "Children should not be vaccinated for the moment.", they now say:
Children and adolescents tend to have milder disease compared to adults, so unless they are part of a group at higher risk of severe COVID-19, it is less urgent to vaccinate them than older people, those with chronic health conditions and health workers.
More evidence is needed on the use of the different COVID-19 vaccines in children to be able to make general recommendations on vaccinating children against COVID-19.
WHO's Strategic Advisory Group of Experts (SAGE) has concluded that the Pfizer/BionTech vaccine is suitable for use by people aged 12 years and above. Children aged between 12 and 15 who are at high risk may be offered this vaccine alongside other priority groups for vaccination. Vaccine trials for children are ongoing and WHO will update its recommendations when the evidence or epidemiological situation warrants a change in policy.
Re: Coronavirus General Discussion
Posted: Wed Jun 23, 2021 2:58 pm
by flyingpylon
CDC safety group says there’s a likely link between rare heart inflammation in young people after Covid shot
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/06/23/cdc-rep ... shots.html
A CDC safety group said there’s a “likely association” between a rare heart inflammatory condition in adolescents and young adults mostly after they’ve received their second Covid-19 vaccine shot, citing the most recent data available.
There have been more than 1,200 cases of a myocarditis or pericarditis mostly in people 30 and under who received Pfizer’s or Moderna’s Covid vaccine, according to a series of slide presentations published Wednesday for a meeting of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices.
In the past, what level of adverse reactions have stopped the testing or rollout of new vaccines?
Re: Coronavirus General Discussion
Posted: Wed Jun 23, 2021 10:24 pm
by yankees60

- Capture.JPG (32.23 KiB) Viewed 5996 times
Re: Coronavirus General Discussion
Posted: Wed Jun 23, 2021 10:28 pm
by Xan
yankees60 wrote: ↑Wed Jun 23, 2021 10:24 pmCapture.JPG
I'm not sure that's particularly useful without some absolute numbers. Even if Covid goes to almost zero, there will be a "top 10 states for new cases".
Re: Coronavirus General Discussion
Posted: Wed Jun 23, 2021 10:39 pm
by yankees60
Xan wrote: ↑Wed Jun 23, 2021 10:28 pm
yankees60 wrote: ↑Wed Jun 23, 2021 10:24 pmCapture.JPG
I'm not sure that's particularly useful without some absolute numbers. Even if Covid goes to almost zero, there will be a "top 10 states for new cases".
I did see some raw numbers for top ten but those were not as meaningful for me as "per".
But, in general, I do like to see both absolute and rate numbers the best. That combination usually presents the best story....
Re: Coronavirus General Discussion
Posted: Wed Jun 23, 2021 10:45 pm
by yankees60
Xan wrote: ↑Wed Jun 23, 2021 10:28 pm
yankees60 wrote: ↑Wed Jun 23, 2021 10:24 pmCapture.JPG
I'm not sure that's particularly useful without some absolute numbers. Even if Covid goes to almost zero, there will be a "top 10 states for new cases".
Is it possible everything you'd want to know might be here?
https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/us/
Re: Coronavirus General Discussion
Posted: Thu Jun 24, 2021 5:50 am
by boglerdude
Re: Coronavirus General Discussion
Posted: Mon Jun 28, 2021 7:28 pm
by Kriegsspiel
15:00 talk by a Texas Tech economist about how economists would look at the coronavirus response. I especially liked his thoughts starting around 7:10 on why, if anyone, old and vulnerable people should have been the ones locked away instead of young healthy people (but that really, everyone should have been left to their own choices).
Re: Coronavirus General Discussion
Posted: Mon Jun 28, 2021 10:46 pm
by yankees60
From the book: Preventable
"As the death toll climbed in March, Trump began to use the worst-case numbers to make the claim that his actions—primarily banning travel from China—saved many lives: in late March it was “tens of thousands”; by early April it was “hundreds of thousands”;13 in July that number was millions.14 Of course, Trump didn’t actually ban all travel from China. As mentioned in the introduction, nearly 40,000 people traveled to the United States from China without quarantine in the months after the supposed travel ban.15 And much of the worst of the virus came to the United States not from China but from Europe.16 Some parts of the world that maintained travel with China, such as Hong Kong, did far better than the United States. In truth, Trump didn’t do much of anything to reduce the spread."
Re: Coronavirus General Discussion
Posted: Wed Jun 30, 2021 5:45 am
by boglerdude
"The speaker slammed President Trump, claiming, “His denial at the beginning was deadly.”
hmm
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eFCzoXhNM6c
https://www.latimes.com/california/stor ... sk-indoors
We're vaccinated. It's over. I dont know if LA Times has an agenda, or is so broke they resort to clickbait/fear-porn. I mean, millions of people DO want the lockdown to continue.
Re: Coronavirus General Discussion
Posted: Wed Jun 30, 2021 7:53 am
by I Shrugged
Well Trump lives inside the heads of millions of progressives. Every time he says something or even gets mentioned, they have a collective blood pressure rise.
Re: Coronavirus General Discussion
Posted: Wed Jun 30, 2021 12:15 pm
by jalanlong
This last week was the first week in over a year I haven't seen someone in their car by themselves or out walking alone wearing a mask. Most places I go now (with the exception of a large grocery store) people are maskless. The masked are definitely becoming the minority here.
I did find this funny:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UMAWx4mYdxg
Re: Coronavirus General Discussion
Posted: Wed Jun 30, 2021 6:42 pm
by Tortoise
Looks like JAMA just published a German study showing that schoolchildren shouldn't be forced to wear masks since the evidence supporting it is "weak", and doing so tends to elevate inhaled CO2 to unsafe levels as defined by the German government:
Experimental Assessment of Carbon Dioxide Content in Inhaled Air With or Without Face Masks in Healthy Children
We measured means (SDs) between 13 120 (384) and 13 910 (374) ppm of carbon dioxide in inhaled air under surgical and filtering facepiece 2 (FFP2) masks, which is higher than what is already deemed unacceptable by the German Federal Environmental Office by a factor of 6.