Coronavirus Thread

[GoldZ]

Truth of the matter.....IMO, of course. FOX, CNN, ABC, NBC, and CBS, all suck. Some more than others, like CNN.
The excitable, vaudeville, fear like manner in which they all open their broadcasts is pathetic and not helpful. Watching the same topics covered on BBC, most of the time, gives you a completely different experience, while using the same numbers without the fear/panic octave delivered here by personalities. Sure it's boring as hell, but how does being entertained help during this crap? Even better than BBC, would be a Martian robotically presenting the numbers, absent telling you what you should think about said numbers.

 

[bobongo]

Dr Fauci testified against today with his continued lunacy with regards to opening back up, insisting on (For example) 2 straight weeks of declining numbers. What if the numbers were already low?

And what if they are high? Then you would need MORE than 14-days, it would seem. The 14-day number was decided upon by the administration he serves in, and is the product of the President's top coronavirus advisors. Most states do not meet that criteria.

But, time now to throw him under the bus, I guess.

 

[FredJacket]

And what if they are high? Then you would need MORE than 14-days, it would seem. The 14-day number was decided upon by the administration he serves in, and is the product of the President's top coronavirus advisors. Most states do not meet that criteria.

But, time now to throw him under the bus, I guess.

It is a silly metric for any practical use. What is magic about state borders for these purposes... the only magic is the fact states have health departments that aggregate their data. Take Virginia for example. There is far more interaction between folks in northern Va, DC, and Maryland.. than northern Va and any other part of the state. I'm sure this is repeated in nearly every state.

I'm not saying there should not be some way to measure "progress" and "regress" as we make decisions...and you can say it is better than no guidance. I am not so sure.

 

[bobongo]

It is a silly metric for any practical use. What is magic about state borders for these purposes... the only magic is the fact states have health departments that aggregate their data. Take Virginia for example. There is far more interaction between folks in northern Va, DC, and Maryland.. than northern Va and any other part of the state. I'm sure this is repeated in nearly every state.

I'm not saying there should not be some way to measure "progress" and "regress" as we make decisions...and you can say it is better than no guidance. I am not so sure.

Well, you have to use some delineation, it would seem. And states are political entities that can't be ignored. But counties are finer delineations that are certainly more appropriate in many circumstances. However you section it off, most of the population does not live in areas meeting these guidelines.

 

[Supersizethatorder-mutt]

First bolded statement: Those claims are what prompted scientific rigor to assess them, data has shown so far to not support the claims.
Second bolded statement: Fauci himself said we should all be cautious about using this drug, UNTIL TRIALS ARE CONDUCTED.

The left media, as you would call it, was in line with the scientists and doctors urging a cautious, measured approach. FoxNews was blathering nightly about the wonder drug with (at that point) zero scientific proof. Who did Fox have making their case? Ingraham, Oz, D.r Phil (?)!

You think the media calling it a deadly drug is in line with what Fauci has said? Boy, I sure don't see him in anyway saying that the drug kills people.

 

[Supersizethatorder-mutt]

And what if they are high? Then you would need MORE than 14-days, it would seem. The 14-day number was decided upon by the administration he serves in, and is the product of the President's top coronavirus advisors. Most states do not meet that criteria.

But, time now to throw him under the bus, I guess.

Dr. Fauci is obviously a brilliant virologist and epidemiologist, but he is neither a politician nor a sociologist, so he would be better served keeping those OPINIONS to himself and just sticking with what he obviously knows about.

 

[armeck]

Dr. Fauci is obviously a brilliant virologist and epidemiologist, but he is neither a politician nor a sociologist, so he would be better served keeping those OPINIONS to himself and just sticking with what he obviously knows about.

The 14 day period is something an epidemiologist would concern himself with. He goes out of his way to never comment on the political or the economic issues about the virus. I think he has been stellar in his advice and "staying in his lane". Interesting to see people turn on the guy now, kinda despicable really.

 

[armeck]

You think the media calling it a deadly drug is in line with what Fauci has said? Boy, I sure don't see him in anyway saying that the drug kills people.

Link for when someone called it "deadly, 100% do not use" back when it was introduced as opposed to "could be bad or good, let's do some trials and see"? Because I recall a lot of the second and one of the first.

 

[Supersizethatorder-mutt]

Link for when someone called it "deadly, 100% do not use" back when it was introduced as opposed to "could be bad or good, let's do some trials and see"? Because I recall a lot of the second and one of the first.

I am not going to take time looking for more links to what I have heard. I frankly don't recall any of the second, but I know I have heard at least one of the first, and probably more.

 

[Supersizethatorder-mutt]

Very interesting article about "herd immunity" from what I assume is a reputable source, even though I am not familiar with the organization --- https://www.aier.org/article/herd-immunity-is-misleading/

 

[Deleted member 2897]

The 14 day period is something an epidemiologist would concern himself with. He goes out of his way to never comment on the political or the economic issues about the virus. I think he has been stellar in his advice and "staying in his lane". Interesting to see people turn on the guy now, kinda despicable really.

He has gone from advocating and advising flattening the curve to now eradicating the virus. What he is pushing for now has little correlation to flattening the curve. His evolution and inconsistency is what has brought criticism. Not sure how criticizing that is despicable. Such name calling and personal attacks unfortunately are par for the course around here lately.

As many people on here have pointed out (on both sides actually) his current recommendations do not fit the original framework and are illogical in that regard.

 

[armeck]

I am not going to take time looking for more links to what I have heard. I frankly don't recall any of the second, but I know I have heard at least one of the first, and probably more.

Here you go:
https://www.google.com/search?q=hyd...e..69i57j33.6463j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

Everyone was saying be cautious, do trials. Except one particular news station who had Dr. Oz and Dr. Phil opining on the drugs as a treatment.

Here is horrible CNN, saying the following one month ago:

There have been early indications that these drugs may be effective in treating or preventing Covid-19, but the medications haven't endured the due diligence of extensive clinical trials and there have been growing concerns about the impact chloroquine and the closely related hydroxychloroquine can have specifically on the heart.

Here is the New York Slimes, saying this one month ago:

The drug has generated excitement because a laboratory study, with cultured cells, found that chloroquine could block the coronavirus from invading cells, which it must do to replicate and cause illness. But drugs that show promise in the laboratory do not always translate to success in the human body, and other studies have found that it failed to prevent or treat influenza and other viral illnesses.

France have said that hydroxychloroquine, sometimes combined with the antibiotic azithromycin, seemed to help patients. But the studies were small and did not use proper control groups — patients carefully selected to match those in the experimental group but who are not given the drug being tested. Research involving few patients and no controls cannot determine whether a drug works.

Here is the AJMC from a month ago, literally titled, "Caution Strongly Recommended When Using Chloroquine, Hydroxychloroquine in Patients With Cardiovascular Disease, COVID-19" Again, mentioning caution, not 100% don't use it.

Also, JAMA saying be cautious, do testing,gather the science.
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/fullarticle/2765500

 

[armeck]

Very interesting article about "herd immunity" from what I assume is a reputable source, even though I am not familiar with the organization --- https://www.aier.org/article/herd-immunity-is-misleading/

Hold up. You just got done saying Fauci needs to not comment on topics outside his expertise, then you link to an article from an economist about herd immunity?

Dr. Fauci is obviously a brilliant virologist and epidemiologist, but he is neither a politician nor a sociologist, so he would be better served keeping those OPINIONS to himself and just sticking with what he obviously knows about.

 

[takethepoints]

Here's an informative article by Erin Bromage, Immunologist from UMass about risk of exposure to coronavirus in different settings. In it he makes clear that indoor settings carry far more risk than outdoors. His postulate is that the worst places are closed spaces with poor ventilation and high density of people. That's only intuitive, but what is not so intuitive to many is that outdoor settings usually have far less potential for transmission.

https://gvwire.com/2020/05/11/illus...itioning-demonstrates-danger-of-air-droplets/

From the article:
“When assessing the risk of infection (via respiration) at the grocery store or mall, you need to consider the volume of the air space (very large), the number of people (restricted), how long people are spending in the store (workers – all day; customers – an hour). Taken together, for a person shopping: the low density, high air volume of the store, along with the restricted time you spend in the store, means that the opportunity to receive an infectious dose is low. But, for the store worker, the extended time they spend in the store provides a greater opportunity to receive the infectious dose and therefore the job becomes more risky.”

“If I am outside, and I walk past someone, remember it is “dose and time” needed for infection. You would have to be in their airstream for 5+ minutes for a chance of infection. While joggers may be releasing more virus due to deep breathing, remember the exposure time is also less due to their speed.”

Thanks very much for posting this. I sent the original blog post to my list of family/friends that I send virus information. It's the best piece I've read so far on what kinds of environment to avoid and what to do to reduce chances of infection.

Absolutely invaluable.

 

[takethepoints]

Exactly. Did you see where the choir practice that had one person sick. By the time the 2 hour practice was over about 60% of those who were also practicing had also caught it. FYI, the one person did not know they had it. But the deep breathing is a very bad thing for making it really contagious. The exact same thing as a gym.

I might add that just this kind of scenario is probably what will kill off football and basketball season this year. If the contact at practice doesn't get you, the weight room will. All it will take is one athlete at one major school.

Provided that the schools decide to play in the first place, that is. Let's hope more sober heads prevail on that question.

 

[bobongo]

Thanks very much for posting this. I sent the original blog post to my list of family/friends that I send virus information. It's the best piece I've read so far on what kinds of environment to avoid and what to do to reduce chances of infection.

Absolutely invaluable.

It confirmed what I suspected about outside areas being generally safer than enclosed spaces. There's a lot less chance of infection when exercise and recreation are done out-of-doors than there is in a gym.

 

[armeck]

He has gone from advocating and advising flattening the curve to now eradicating the virus. What he is pushing for now has little correlation to flattening the curve. His evolution and inconsistency is what has brought criticism. Not sure how criticizing that is despicable. Such name calling and personal attacks unfortunately are par for the course around here lately.

As many people on here have pointed out (on both sides actually) his current recommendations do not fit the original framework and are illogical in that regard.

Here's my take on this - Fauci has the experience and credentials to talk and advise as he is doing. I don't and so I'm inclined to look to the experts and listen. I won't try and speak as if I know better than those who are truly experts in the topic at hand.

 

[armeck]

I might add that just this kind of scenario is probably what will kill off football and basketball season this year. If the contact at practice doesn't get you, the weight room will. All it will take is one athlete at one major school.

Provided that the schools decide to play in the first place, that is. Let's hope more sober heads prevail on that question.

Possible solution:

 

[takethepoints]

So why has it worked for some patients? And why were the health problems not universally encountered in the previous 70+ years that it has been used for malaria, lupus, rheumatoid arthritis, and other diseases and ailments?

As to the drug working: placebo effects or sheer unadulterated bum luck are probably the reason. That's why you do RCTs. This won't stop doctors from using it - they're desperate and they'll try anything - but it will make them think twice.

As to it's effects: It is used very carefully even for these diseases. The side effects are real, especially if you already have a heart condition. The one it really works for is lupus, but it takes long term use. They watch people on it like a hawk through the whole course.

 

[bobongo]

I might add that just this kind of scenario is probably what will kill off football and basketball season this year. If the contact at practice doesn't get you, the weight room will. All it will take is one athlete at one major school.

Provided that the schools decide to play in the first place, that is. Let's hope more sober heads prevail on that question.

And regarding the fans, at a game people are yelling which even outdoors is a recipe for an explosion of infections. Probably even more infectious than singing in a group.