Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

on coping with C19 lockdown

Collapse

Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • bambam1729
    replied
    Originally posted by 18.99s View Post

    There's already been 50M confirmed cases in the US since the start of the pandemic. Add the asymptomatic and mild cases which weren't tested, and the true number is probably somewhere around 100M. Then add the cases that would have occurred if the vaccines didn't exist, and that brings the total to maybe 130M. Then add another 35M cases that would have occurred without any precautions (masks, work from home, avoiding crowds, etc.), and that's 165M or half the US population. It's not so far fetched that the total could get close to 100% over 4 or 5 years if everybody followed the anti-vaxxers and Covid deniers, acting as if nothing should be done because the survival rate is 99% (not to mention those who spew BS like "99.9872% survival rate" or claim that Covid is a hoax).
    You're making a lot of assumptions to get the numbers where you want them. I agree there are a lot of cases, probably many that have not been reported. However, massaging the #s as you are doing in the medical journal world is called data dredging and would get your article rejected, if this was an article submitted to a medical journal.

    Please realize something else that isn't talked about in the lay press but the medical world knows about it. Doctors and hospitals are paid by the government in a lot of cases. We/they get paid by submitting diagnosis codes (ICD-10 codes for diagnoses or CPT codes for surgery). Adding a COVID-19 diagnosis to a patient's list of diagnostic codes will benefit the hospital by up to $15,000 in some states (it varies state-to-state because of the "gypsy" [GPCI = geographic practice cost index]), so it is encouraged by hospital administrators, even if such diagnosis has nothing to do with the patient's illness course or treatment, or even if they are minimally symptomatic. When you add in that sort of billing manipulation, it gets even harder to sort out who really has symptomatic disease and who does not.

    Leave a comment:


  • TN1965
    replied
    Man whose wife won a court battle to treat his COVID-19 with ivermectin has died

    https://news.yahoo.com/man-whose-wif...ycsrp_catchall

    Keith Smith, whose wife had gone to court to have his COVID-19 infection treated with ivermectin, died Sunday evening, a week after he received his first dose of the controversial drug.

    Leave a comment:


  • 18.99s
    replied
    Originally posted by bambam1729 View Post

    The only problem with your argument is you're assuming 100% of the population gets infected in the first place with those numbers - its nowhere near that contagious.
    There's already been 50M confirmed cases in the US since the start of the pandemic. Add the asymptomatic and mild cases which weren't tested, and the true number is probably somewhere around 100M. Then add the cases that would have occurred if the vaccines didn't exist, and that brings the total to maybe 130M. Then add another 35M cases that would have occurred without any precautions (masks, work from home, avoiding crowds, etc.), and that's 165M or half the US population. It's not so far fetched that the total could get close to 100% over 4 or 5 years if everybody followed the anti-vaxxers and Covid deniers, acting as if nothing should be done because the survival rate is 99% (not to mention those who spew BS like "99.9872% survival rate" or claim that Covid is a hoax).

    Leave a comment:


  • bambam1729
    replied
    Originally posted by Trickstat View Post
    They also forget that a 99% survival rate for a very highly infectious disease would mean, that without the various mitigating measures, you would be looking at at over 70m deaths worldwide, over 3m in the US, about 650,000 in the UK etc.
    The only problem with your argument is you're assuming 100% of the population gets infected in the first place with those numbers - its nowhere near that contagious.

    Leave a comment:


  • 18.99s
    replied
    Originally posted by Trickstat View Post

    They also forget that a 99% survival rate for a very highly infectious disease would mean, that without the various mitigating measures, you would be looking at at over 70m deaths worldwide, over 3m in the US, about 650,000 in the UK etc.
    And they wouldn't buy a car if they knew 1000 of its 100,000 units had a fatal explosion within the first year. Most wouldn't even buy that car at 60% off. They'd wonder why that model wasn't totally recalled long before the deaths reached that high. 1% is a pretty big deal when it involves death.

    Leave a comment:


  • Trickstat
    replied
    Originally posted by 18.99s View Post

    Meanwhile, the Covid deniers continue to shout "99% survival rate! Nothing to worry about!" as if nonfatal long-term side effects of Covid are unimportant or nonexistent. Meanwhile, they're scared to take a vaccine with a 99.9999% survival rate.
    They also forget that a 99% survival rate for a very highly infectious disease would mean, that without the various mitigating measures, you would be looking at at over 70m deaths worldwide, over 3m in the US, about 650,000 in the UK etc.

    Leave a comment:


  • 1.609
    replied
    Originally posted by Tuariki View Post

    Yep, and unfortunately Pfizer, Astra-Zeneca, and all the other pharmaceutical manufacturers still haven't been able to develop the STUPID vaccine.
    Ha ha, that sounds like a classic anti-vaxxer. I think you mean the stupidity vaccine. ;-)

    Leave a comment:


  • bambam1729
    replied
    Originally posted by Tuariki View Post
    Yep, and unfortunately Pfizer, Astra-Zeneca, and all the other pharmaceutical manufacturers still haven't been able to develop the STUPID vaccine.
    You can't fix stupid.

    Leave a comment:


  • Tuariki
    replied
    Originally posted by 18.99s View Post

    Meanwhile, the Covid deniers continue to shout "99% survival rate! Nothing to worry about!" as if nonfatal long-term side effects of Covid are unimportant or nonexistent. Meanwhile, they're scared to take a vaccine with a 99.9999% survival rate.
    Yep, and unfortunately Pfizer, Astra-Zeneca, and all the other pharmaceutical manufacturers still haven't been able to develop the STUPID vaccine.

    Leave a comment:


  • 18.99s
    replied
    Originally posted by jeremyp View Post
    Hard data is not available and estimates vary widely, but based on published studies and their own experience treating patients, several medical specialists said 750,000 to 1.3 million patients likely remain so sick for extended periods that they can’t return to the workforce full time.

    The government calls it post-acute sequelae of SARS-CoV-2, or PASC. The National Institutes of Health is spending $1.15 billion to study the syndrome. The symptoms sometimes subside, lulling long haulers into a false sense of relief, only to come roaring back after performing simple chores like vacuuming a living room or raking leaves.
    Meanwhile, the Covid deniers continue to shout "99% survival rate! Nothing to worry about!" as if nonfatal long-term side effects of Covid are unimportant or nonexistent. Meanwhile, they're scared to take a vaccine with a 99.9999% survival rate.

    Leave a comment:


  • jeremyp
    replied
    Hard data is not available and estimates vary widely, but based on published studies and their own experience treating patients, several medical specialists said 750,000 to 1.3 million patients likely remain so sick for extended periods that they can’t return to the workforce full time.

    The government calls it post-acute sequelae of SARS-CoV-2, or PASC. The National Institutes of Health is spending $1.15 billion to study the syndrome. The symptoms sometimes subside, lulling long haulers into a false sense of relief, only to come roaring back after performing simple chores like vacuuming a living room or raking leaves.

    But many patients applying for disability insurance benefits are initially denied and require lengthy appeals, according to patients, doctors and lawyers, in part because the medical community is still grappling with how to diagnose their symptoms.
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/busin...rk-unemployed/
    Last edited by jeremyp; 12-09-2021, 08:04 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • jeremyp
    replied
    Meanwhile in Michigan

    Recently a patient in his 70s came seeking care at the small rural hospital in West Michigan where I’ve worked as an emergency physician for two decades. He had tested positive for the coronavirus earlier in the week, was running a high fever and struggled to breathe. When asked if he’d been vaccinated, he snapped back, “I don’t approve of the vaccine.”

    A few days later, a young patient sick with Covid-19 was admitted with dangerously low blood oxygen levels. His spouse and infant child came in to say goodbye just before he was sedated and intubated. “I don’t think I’ll see you again,” he said. He died before the end of the week. He was unvaccinated.

    As of last Monday, nine hospitals in Michigan were 100 percent full, and at least 20 others were at or above 90 percent capacity. Statewide, nearly one in four hospital patients has a confirmed or suspected case of Covid-19. In the last few weeks, my hospital has been consistently at or near capacity and nearly every day the vast majority of those patients are sick with Covid-19. Nearly all have been unvaccinated.

    NYT

    Leave a comment:


  • TN1965
    replied
    Ron Johnson Insists Mouthwash Can Kill Coronavirus. A Mouthwash Company Disagrees (yahoo.com)

    Listerine has also done what it can to tamp down speculation that mouthwash is a Covid cure. The company’s website hasan entire page dedicated to explaining that “the current available data is not sufficient to support a conclusion that the use of LISTERINE mouthwash is helpful against the COVID-19 virus,” adding that Listerine is “a company firmly rooted in science.”

    Leave a comment:


  • TN1965
    replied
    Originally posted by bambam1729 View Post

    Actually the studies have shown it is OK to do that, with the studies having been done on a single-dose vaccine (J&J, AstraZeneca) followed by a double-dose vaccine (Moderna, Pfizer). In fact these have shown that this may provide greater protection than staying with J&J or AZ vaccine for the booster. Not clear, however, if that is because Moderna and Pfizer seem to provide the most protection (in most studies), or if its because you are getting two different forms of protection by using different vaccines.
    If I am not mistaken, AZ is a double-dose vaccine.

    Leave a comment:


  • bambam1729
    replied
    Here's a pretty good summary of the data on heterologous vaccines and boosters - from the European CDC - https://dgalerts.docguide.com/ema-an...erID=305980752

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X