Re: Coronavirus/COVID-19, Thread 2
Posted: Sat Aug 22, 2020 9:59 am
Sports is our Business
https://forums.realgm.com/boards/
https://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=1955490
ConstableGeneva wrote:
Curmudgeon wrote:According to the folks at Yale, who developed it, the saliva test produces results that are 98% the same as the swab-up-the-nose test. Is this hyperbole?
exculpatory wrote:threrf23 wrote:exculpatory wrote:How many mother freaking posts (including links to HIGH QUALITY, PROSPECTIVE, RANDOMIZED, PLACEBO CONTROLLED STUDIES peer reviewed/published by the most esteemed journals on the planet & NOT some of the earlier irredeemably & fatally flawed studies hyped by a few idiot ‘physicians’ & **** morons in the media & the WH) do I have to post for you to understand that there is a 99% likelihood that HCQ has NO efficacy in early, middle or late COVID, and that if you happen to have a prolonged QTc interval on your EKG for any one of a number of reasons (not very common - but not uncommon), exposure to HCQ (especially together w azithromycin) may result in lethal ventricular tachycardia/torsades de pointes.
I mean, I've seen you post a bunch of studies indicating "no clinical benefit" to HCQ (in at least one or two cases no anecdotal benefit), as well as studies documenting the risk of lethal (and I presume non-lethal) ventricular tachycardias. I don't doubt the legitimacy of any of that. And maybe I have missed something in between where there is clinical proof or even good anecdotal evidence that HCQ leads to more deaths/symptoms/hospitalizations/etc than no HCQ. I'll just take my L.
IIRC, there are at least 2 studies (in inpatients I believe) where HCQ resulted in more mortality & morbidity. When I have the time, I will search the Covid publication folder I created (which I added to my massive endocrinology & critical care folders back in 3/2020).
Beyond that, I will say this (Fauci BTW said the same thing to Congress on Fri 7/31): IF any peer reviewed, properly designed & powered, randomized trial EVER demonstrated statistically significant efficacy in ANY Covid sub-population (post-exposure, asymptomatic outpatient, symptomatic outpatient, non-ICU inpatient, ICU inpatient usually on a vent - which at this point would shock me), & the study was replicated by another A+ group, & baseline EKG & medication history (to R/O other drugs known to prolong the QTc interval) were obtained, I would have NO hesitation whatsoever supporting the use of HCQ (with periodic F/U EKGs at appropriate intervals TBD by how sick the patient is).
Let me conclude with a comment that REALLY matters (and remember, with the HUGE exception of the historically incompetent Covid management cluster ****, I mostly viscerally abhor the policies of the left). As per Dr. Fauci last Friday, & Dr. Birx today, if the WH AND all of our Governors/Mayors AND our millennial protestors AND our Red State citizens who somehow think wearing a mask infringes on their **** civil liberties do not once & for all wake the **** up & put on a **** full court press of masking (including INDOORS in multi-generational households) & social distancing (while we simultaneously continue to mega-maximize quick turnaround & accurate testing & tracing when feasible) during the next few weeks in August (while we hope & pray for a vaccine or vaccines in Q1/Q2 of CY 2021), our already indescribably disastrous death count of 155K will **** double or triple during the next few months. Count on it.
PS I must say that, even though you were wrong on the science, you write very well. :0)
jmr07019 wrote:The **** was Trump talking about last night with plasma? Sounded like BS but maybe it was a legitimate breakthrough and a reason for optimism.... thoughts from people who have been following this thing closely? I get the basic concept of the treatment but 35% does not seem like a number to be excited about.
At least four NBA players who have recovered from COVID-19 plan to donate blood for an experimental treatment that could help high-risk patients overcome the virus, according to Dr. Michael Joyner, a member of the leadership team of the National COVID-19 Convalescent Plasma Project.
Immune cells for common cold may recognize SARS-CoV-2
At a Glance
A study of blood samples taken before the COVID-19 pandemic showed that some people already had certain immune cells that recognize SARS-CoV-2.
These immune cells also reacted with coronaviruses that cause common colds.
The findings suggest that existing immune cells may help account for the wide range of symptoms experienced by people with COVID-19.
Green89 wrote:It's pretty silly to post in giant bold type to get a flu shot but then say you're not going to debate it. The flu shot is extremely ineffective and has one of the highest adverse reactions of any vaccine. It is NOTHING like other vaccines. One doesn't have to be an anti-vaxxer to not like this one. The rewards are not worth the risks.
Last year's shot was a failure, as it was virtually ineffective on one targeted flu strain, and less than 50% effective on the other main targeted strain. It goes by previous year's data and picks the highest occurrences to target, but if three new flu strains are out this winter, the shot does nothing at all for you. Other vaccines have a single targeted virus, and they are highly successful and effective at the targeted virus, and allowing your body to build resistance to it. The fu shot is nowhere near as effective as other vaccines.
I do think the lower occurrences of flu are due to hygiene and covid measures people are doing, that will also help stop the flu spread. All masking, hand washing, and germ awareness should help lower the flu numbers this year.
exculpatory wrote:Green89 wrote:It's pretty silly to post in giant bold type to get a flu shot but then say you're not going to debate it. The flu shot is extremely ineffective and has one of the highest adverse reactions of any vaccine. It is NOTHING like other vaccines. One doesn't have to be an anti-vaxxer to not like this one. The rewards are not worth the risks.
Last year's shot was a failure, as it was virtually ineffective on one targeted flu strain, and less than 50% effective on the other main targeted strain. It goes by previous year's data and picks the highest occurrences to target, but if three new flu strains are out this winter, the shot does nothing at all for you. Other vaccines have a single targeted virus, and they are highly successful and effective at the targeted virus, and allowing your body to build resistance to it. The fu shot is nowhere near as effective as other vaccines.
I do think the lower occurrences of flu are due to hygiene and covid measures people are doing, that will also help stop the flu spread. All masking, hand washing, and germ awareness should help lower the flu numbers this year.
Regardless of the partial truth of what u posted, what I wrote & the recommendation I made is 1000% valid.
Given who I am & what I do for a living, I say again that “I know whence I speak.”
All that said, I respect the fact that you absolutely have the right to make your own choices.
And I wish you well. :0)
Green89 wrote:exculpatory wrote:Green89 wrote:It's pretty silly to post in giant bold type to get a flu shot but then say you're not going to debate it. The flu shot is extremely ineffective and has one of the highest adverse reactions of any vaccine. It is NOTHING like other vaccines. One doesn't have to be an anti-vaxxer to not like this one. The rewards are not worth the risks.
Last year's shot was a failure, as it was virtually ineffective on one targeted flu strain, and less than 50% effective on the other main targeted strain. It goes by previous year's data and picks the highest occurrences to target, but if three new flu strains are out this winter, the shot does nothing at all for you. Other vaccines have a single targeted virus, and they are highly successful and effective at the targeted virus, and allowing your body to build resistance to it. The fu shot is nowhere near as effective as other vaccines.
I do think the lower occurrences of flu are due to hygiene and covid measures people are doing, that will also help stop the flu spread. All masking, hand washing, and germ awareness should help lower the flu numbers this year.
Regardless of the partial truth of what u posted, what I wrote & the recommendation I made is 1000% valid.
Given who I am & what I do for a living, I say again that “I know whence I speak.”
All that said, I respect the fact that you absolutely have the right to make your own choices.
And I wish you well. :0)
No problem, doc. I agree. Anyone who wants it can certainly get it. Between my own personal experiences, and the experiences of others I know, I won't ever get one. I've had the confirmed flu once in my life that I can recall, so that would have been a lot of unnecessary vaccines in my body year after year when I didn't need them.
The elderly and/or those who could be seriously ill from the seasonal flu should strongly consider getting it, as their risks of getting seriously ill would then outweigh the shot's low effectiveness and chance of side effects. Health care workers who are regularly exposed to the flu should also get it. But Baker should have never made it mandatory for all students in the state. Let's just send a million kids and close to a million more parents who have to drive them to the doctors this fall and winter, to stand in lines at clinics, or wait in waiting rooms with covid going around. Great idea.