Face Shields..

Lots of cool graphs that's for sure. How about not comparing countries, how about comparing parts of countries. We could eliminate some geographic and demographic variables right off the bat that way.

Here's two places right next door to each other. Why does Quebec with about 1/2 the population have 50% more cases at 3 times the rate, and twice as many deaths as Ontario? If you can figure that out then maybe you'd have a better understanding how/why there are some of the differences between the countries scattered around the globe.

I isn't all about masks.

comparison.JPG
 
Third Edition said:
Myth 5: Hydroxychloroquine is an effective treatment. Well, given at the right dose at the right time in the disease it is effective.
Myth 6: The Black Lives Matter protests led to increased transmission. They didn't?
Myth 7: Spikes in cases are because of increased testing. They aren't?
Myth 8: We can achieve herd immunity by letting the virus spread through the population. Sure we can. It happens all the time with flu strains. Just too much fear to let that happen these days. The late 50's flu season deaths, adjusted for population growth, still outstrip the deaths from Covid-19.
Click to expand...
MonacoMike said:
Myth 1: The novel coronavirus was engineered in a lab in China.
Do you really expect governments, including ours and the Chinese, to tell you the truth? We know they were playing with coronaviruses. The CDC suspended US research then off shored the research by sending money to the Chinese.

Myth 2: Wealthy elites intentionally spread the virus to win power and profit.
Myth so far...

Myth 3: COVID-19 is no worse than the flu.
A metaphorical point made a myth because it is wrong literally. Covid appears worse that the flu, but by a little or a lot is up to debate as the media and governments have lied to us and incentivized the healthcare industry to report more rather than correctly.

Myth 4: You don’t need to wear a mask.
The masking regulations and so called science are a joke. There are no standards for masks themselves nor for the proper fitting, wearing, removal, and disposal of them. If this was a real emergency all that would be in place and no enforcement would be needed as the death count would drive the fear to do so.

Myth 5: Hydroxychloroquine is an effective treatment.
It has proven to be very effective if prescribed in the early stages. The countries that have used it all along have better outcomes than those not using it. It is not a miracle drug, but rather a tool in our arsenal to combat the virus.

Myth 6: The Black Lives Matter protests led to increased transmission.
Please explain how singing even at an outdoor church is spreading but the protests did not? How factories of thousands never got it?

Myth 7: Spikes in cases are because of increased testing.
Duh! The spikes were coming. Humans cannot stop the spread, only slightly delay it. When a friend says they have it I am not surprised, I have accepted that 80% of the people I know will have to deal with it. Some will get sick, some will not.

Myth 8: We can achieve herd immunity by letting the virus spread through the population.
What other option do we have? None! There is no controlling a virus. Humans have never controlled a virus, though arrogant scientists might have you believe they have. Even a vaccine does not "control" a virus it just tricks the body into creating antibodies to fight the virus. The virus is under no control of humans.

Myth 9: Any vaccine will be unsafe and a bigger risk than getting COVID-19.
Our recent allowances to "fast track" hand sanitizer brought about a massive recall list of dangerous sanitizers that need to be recalled. We definitely are not good at the "fast track" thing. We are trying to protect ourselves from a virus that kiss very few young people and even a low number at risk. Any vaccine will have a death rate of its own, what that will be is a complete unknown, but it is completely rational to balance the affects of covid that we see vs. the unknown affects of a vaccine.

This piece is nothing more than an editorial...
Click to expand...
The article I posted was not an editorial; I'm sorry that real data to think about doesn't fit the narrative we have been told. I counted forty-seven footnotes leading to references with proof points in the article and at least three per myth. One would think you guys between you could have come up with at least one reference refuting one of the myths.
Here are a couple of supplemental references dealing with either the myths or your responses:
upload_2020-8-19_19-27-21.png

Several more including virus-borne measles, rubella and mumps are getting close to eradication. Additionally, the original SARS and MERS. of the same family as the virus causing covid, have both been contained.

An analysis of 194 countries found that places where masks weren't recommended saw a 55 percent weekly increase in coronavirus deaths per capita after their first case was reported, compared with 7 percent in countries with cultures or guidelines supporting mask-wearing.
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.05.22.20109231v5

The body of research on the effectiveness of masks is growing, so the relative effectiveness and proper use is better known. Here's a summary of one of the recent studies. It found that most masks, including home-made fabric, provide good levels of protection. It also found that knit masks not surprisingly were ineffective but somewhat surprisingly, bandannas were among the least effective:
Study: 14 Face Masks, Here Are The Best, Worst For Covid-19 Coronavirus
https://www.forbes.com/sites/brucel...-worst-for-covid-19-coronavirus/#5670811a1e13
 
Apparently the allure of face Masks is not universal.


“Anders Tegnell, chief epidemiologist at Sweden’s Public Health Agency — basically the equivalent of U.S. Dr. Anthony Fauci, an immunologist and director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases who serves on the White House Coronavirus Task Force — says there’s no proof masks actually limit the spread of the virus.”

“The evidence for [masks] is contradictory,” Christian Hoebe, a professor of infectious diseases in Maastricht and member of the advisory team, told The Mail. “In general, we think you must be careful with face masks because they can give a false sense of security. People think they’re immune from disease or stop social distancing. That is very negative.”

https://www.dailywire.com/news/swed...st-wearing-face-masks-could-be-very-dangerous
 
alnav said:
The article I posted was not an editorial; I'm sorry that real data to think about doesn't fit the narrative we have been told. I counted forty-seven footnotes leading to references with proof points in the article and at least three per myth. One would think you guys between you could have come up with at least one reference refuting one of the myths.
Here are a couple of supplemental references dealing with either the myths or your responses:
View attachment 90746
Several more including virus-borne measles, rubella and mumps are getting close to eradication. Additionally, the original SARS and MERS. of the same family as the virus causing covid, have both been contained.

An analysis of 194 countries found that places where masks weren't recommended saw a 55 percent weekly increase in coronavirus deaths per capita after their first case was reported, compared with 7 percent in countries with cultures or guidelines supporting mask-wearing.
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.05.22.20109231v5

The body of research on the effectiveness of masks is growing, so the relative effectiveness and proper use is better known. Here's a summary of one of the recent studies. It found that most masks, including home-made fabric, provide good levels of protection. It also found that knit masks not surprisingly were ineffective but somewhat surprisingly, bandannas were among the least effective:
Study: 14 Face Masks, Here Are The Best, Worst For Covid-19 Coronavirus
https://www.forbes.com/sites/brucel...-worst-for-covid-19-coronavirus/#5670811a1e13
Click to expand...

I love it! New word. Contained. What is it contained in? Suppose we have herd immunity to them?
 
MonacoMike said:
I love it! New word. Contained. What is it contained in? Suppose we have herd immunity to them?
Click to expand...
Not new at all and part of the continuum of strategies to deal with disease. Containment means new cases discovered can be isolated and quarantined to prevent spread. Testing and contact tracing are primary containment tools. You must have missed it, but the US pursued a containment strategy through part of March hampered by inadequate testing; some localities were able to continue on with that but the strategy overwhelmingly shifted to mitigation, which is implemented when there is community spread. Mitigation implies large-scale social distancing and lockdowns. South Korea and some other countries have mostly been in containment for the entire period of the pandemic. Some U.S. localities are either close to or in containment now. Both SARS and MERS were fought with containment. No new SARS cases since 2004. MERS has popped up in 2015 and 2018 but total cases to date are only around 2500 worldwide.
 
Creekwood said:
Third world countries have spikes going on. Most of the developed world does not. We are not magical. We believe that social distancing and wearing masks when you in close proximity, is working. We believe that because it is working. The numbers show it. And looking at the US experience actually helps demonstrate that. Most of the world now looks at the US experience as clear evidence that social distancing and mask wearing and our other processes work. And we are opened up in large part. Almost all businesses are back in operation. Only those that are based on tight crowding are still restricted.

So in a strange way, thank you for being so stubborn about it, so that the numbers can make it clear that we are on the right path north of the 49th parallel.
Click to expand...
Most people in the US are wearing masks and social distancing. Stop falling for the myth that we aren't.
 
Golfman25 said:
Most people in the US are wearing masks and social distancing. Stop falling for the myth that we aren't.
Click to expand...
I certainly agree with you on this. I'm sure the recent downturn in new cases and eventually, deaths, are proof. The problem, as Creekwood points out, is that the rest of the world can't see this as yet. Hopefully we will keep it up and turn around the image that currently exists outside our borders.
 

Attachments

  • upload_2020-8-19_21-31-20.png
    upload_2020-8-19_21-31-20.png
    169.5 KB · Views: 102
alnav said:
Not new at all and part of the continuum of strategies to deal with disease. Containment means new cases discovered can be isolated and quarantined to prevent spread. Testing and contact tracing are primary containment tools. You must have missed it, but the US pursued a containment strategy through part of March hampered by inadequate testing; some localities were able to continue on with that but the strategy overwhelmingly shifted to mitigation, which is implemented when there is community spread. Mitigation implies large-scale social distancing and lockdowns. South Korea and some other countries have mostly been in containment for the entire period of the pandemic. Some U.S. localities are either close to or in containment now. Both SARS and MERS were fought with containment. No new SARS cases since 2004. MERS has popped up in 2015 and 2018 but total cases to date are only around 2500 worldwide.
Click to expand...

SARS and MERS Are not near as easily spread and can be somewhat isolated. Covid is so easily spread that trying to keep it in check is more difficult. It also appears that it is not as potent as it was when it started.
 
alnav said:
Sadly, the rest of the country may have not learned the lessons from the northeast and Canada:
Report: Nursing home cases up nearly 80% in COVID-19 rebound
View attachment 90749
https://apnews.com/ae2b6d71bdc3a9391ae02910d8f0491f
Click to expand...

Is this surprising in any way? The median stay in a nursing home to death is 5 months. Sadly, this is to be expected just like cases are to be expected. Also Covid pays more so you must account for that in the stats.

There is a deadly virus among us and I see absolutely no discussion of what to do to keep the at risk contained from the virus that we know disproportionately kills the weak and infirm elderly. No we argue about masks for healthy people...

https://www.geripal.org/2010/08/length-of-stay-in-nursing-homes-at-end.html?m=1
 
“The article I posted was not an editorial; I'm sorry that real data to think about doesn't fit the narrative we have been told.”

Well, it depends on where you get your ‘narrative’ and ‘real data’.

The experience with Covid-19 has been that today’s ‘facts’ and ‘data’ are often disproved tomorrow. Sometimes they’re proved, disproved, and then resurrected again.

Here are some recent reports on the efficacy, or not, of HQC and comments on the recent HQC studies that may not be in the ‘narrative’ (not editorial) you heard/read.

Lancet, NEJM Retract Surgisphere Studies on COVID-19 Patients
https://www.the-scientist.com/news-opinion/lancet-retracts-surgispheres-study-on-hydroxychloroquine-67613

Hydroxychloroquine lowers COVID-19 death rate, Henry Ford Health study finds
https://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/local/michigan/2020/07/02/michigan-henry-ford-health-study-finds-hydroxychloroquine-lowers-covid-19-death-rate/5365090002/

Newly Published Outpatient Study Finds that Early Use of Zinc, Hydroxychloroquine and Azithromycin Is Associated with Less Hospitalizations and Death
https://www.wfmz.com/news/pr_newswire/pr_newswire_health/newly-published-outpatient-study-finds-that-early-use-of-zinc-hydroxychloroquine-and-azithromycin-is-associated/article_df8761e0-9fa5-5165-b023-ecc3a7b3fa3f.html

HCQ breakthrough: ICMR finds it’s effective in preventing coronavirus, expands its use
https://theprint.in/health/hcq-breakthrough-icmr-finds-its-effective-in-preventing-coronavirus-expands-its-use/427583/

French Doctor Didier Raoult Cites ‘Scientific Misconduct’ in Recent VA Study on Hydroxychloroquin
https://www.redstate.com/elizabeth-vaughn/2020/04/23/french-doctor-didier-raoult-cites-flaws-scientific-misconduct-in-recent-va-study-on-hydroxychloroquine/
Excerpt:
One of the major problems Raoult found was that the HQC and the HQC/Zpak were given after the patients had been intubated. “This is unreasonable at the time of the cytokine storm [after patient is critically ill], as it is unlikely that HCQ alone would be able to control patients at this stage of the disease.”​

Political analysis of the politics behind why HQC is not seen as effective
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2020/05/11/distributed-denial-of-hcq-to-covid-19-victims/

Older study from Stanford and other contributors:
An Effective Treatment for Coronavirus (COVID-19)
https://docs.google.com/document/d/e/2PACX-1vTi-g18ftNZUMRAj2SwRPodtscFio7bJ7GdNgbJAGbdfF67WuRJB3ZsidgpidB2eocFHAVjIL-7deJ7/pub

IMO the bottom line is HQC/Z-pac/Zinc has shown to be effective if administered in the first 24 hours of Covid-19, and if the dosage is not higher than normally prescribed -- both those are failings in some of the studies showing this combo is ineffective. Administered too late, and/or the dose was way too high, or way too little.

REMDESIVIR
Whereas HQC has been used safely for a long time, Remedisivir is new and hasn’t fared well in trials. Just one link of many
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-52406261

The cost of Remdesivir is about $3000 total, $520 per dose. Contrast that with about $5 for HQC treatment. Another reason Remdesivir is the chosen one. Money.

Just my 2c on something that can save lives, or not.
 
MonacoMike said:
Is this surprising in any way? The median stay in a nursing home to death is 5 months. Sadly, this is to be expected just like cases are to be expected. Also Covid pays more so you must account for that in the stats.

There is a deadly virus among us and I see absolutely no discussion of what to do to keep the at risk contained from the virus that we know disproportionately kills the weak and infirm elderly. No we argue about masks for healthy people...

https://www.geripal.org/2010/08/length-of-stay-in-nursing-homes-at-end.html?m=1
Click to expand...
Actually, the article that was posted discusses what needs to be done to protect the vulnerable in nursing homes. There are federal programs for testing and PPE which are behind, plus local measures that have not been taken in some cases. Finally, according to the article, keeping the covid rate down outside the nursing homes would indirectly benefit the vulnerable. “There’s a direct link between COVID in the community and COVID in the building,” therefore why masking and other spread reduction efforts are needed on a universal basis. Some people seem to be having trouble making the connection, but everything is related.
 
Third Edition said:
“The article I posted was not an editorial; I'm sorry that real data to think about doesn't fit the narrative we have been told.”

Well, it depends on where you get your ‘narrative’ and ‘real data’.

The experience with Covid-19 has been that today’s ‘facts’ and ‘data’ are often disproved tomorrow. Sometimes they’re proved, disproved, and then resurrected again.

Here are some recent reports on the efficacy, or not, of HQC and comments on the recent HQC studies that may not be in the ‘narrative’ (not editorial) you heard/read.

Lancet, NEJM Retract Surgisphere Studies on COVID-19 Patients
https://www.the-scientist.com/news-opinion/lancet-retracts-surgispheres-study-on-hydroxychloroquine-67613

Hydroxychloroquine lowers COVID-19 death rate, Henry Ford Health study finds
https://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/local/michigan/2020/07/02/michigan-henry-ford-health-study-finds-hydroxychloroquine-lowers-covid-19-death-rate/5365090002/

Newly Published Outpatient Study Finds that Early Use of Zinc, Hydroxychloroquine and Azithromycin Is Associated with Less Hospitalizations and Death
https://www.wfmz.com/news/pr_newswire/pr_newswire_health/newly-published-outpatient-study-finds-that-early-use-of-zinc-hydroxychloroquine-and-azithromycin-is-associated/article_df8761e0-9fa5-5165-b023-ecc3a7b3fa3f.html

HCQ breakthrough: ICMR finds it’s effective in preventing coronavirus, expands its use
https://theprint.in/health/hcq-breakthrough-icmr-finds-its-effective-in-preventing-coronavirus-expands-its-use/427583/

French Doctor Didier Raoult Cites ‘Scientific Misconduct’ in Recent VA Study on Hydroxychloroquin
https://www.redstate.com/elizabeth-vaughn/2020/04/23/french-doctor-didier-raoult-cites-flaws-scientific-misconduct-in-recent-va-study-on-hydroxychloroquine/
Excerpt:
One of the major problems Raoult found was that the HQC and the HQC/Zpak were given after the patients had been intubated. “This is unreasonable at the time of the cytokine storm [after patient is critically ill], as it is unlikely that HCQ alone would be able to control patients at this stage of the disease.”​

Political analysis of the politics behind why HQC is not seen as effective
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2020/05/11/distributed-denial-of-hcq-to-covid-19-victims/

Older study from Stanford and other contributors:
An Effective Treatment for Coronavirus (COVID-19)
https://docs.google.com/document/d/e/2PACX-1vTi-g18ftNZUMRAj2SwRPodtscFio7bJ7GdNgbJAGbdfF67WuRJB3ZsidgpidB2eocFHAVjIL-7deJ7/pub

IMO the bottom line is HQC/Z-pac/Zinc has shown to be effective if administered in the first 24 hours of Covid-19, and if the dosage is not higher than normally prescribed -- both those are failings in some of the studies showing this combo is ineffective. Administered too late, and/or the dose was way too high, or way too little.

REMDESIVIR
Whereas HQC has been used safely for a long time, Remedisivir is new and hasn’t fared well in trials. Just one link of many
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-52406261

The cost of Remdesivir is about $3000 total, $520 per dose. Contrast that with about $5 for HQC treatment. Another reason Remdesivir is the chosen one. Money.

Just my 2c on something that can save lives, or not.
Click to expand...
I don't disagree with anything you have written but the fact remains that there is no evidence of the quality used to approve drug use that has been presented. The tragedy is that this could have been done for HCQ and other potentially useful therapies like convalescent plasma. But the hype caused patients to demand and doctors to prescribe the drugs outside the context of studies. So, patients don't sign up for the trials since they can get the drug anyway with no chance of getting a placebo instead. There is also understandable reluctance on the part of doctors to take the chance that a therapy they can employ might work. But, in the long run, it would have probably been better to wait on hyping and widely distributing potential therapies until the studies were done, which is exactly what the research community was advocating.
 
MonacoMike said:
SARS and MERS Are not near as easily spread and can be somewhat isolated. Covid is so easily spread that trying to keep it in check is more difficult. It also appears that it is not as potent as it was when it started.
Click to expand...
It's refreshing that you agree some viruses can be controlled, now it's just a matter of scale.
 
alnav said:
I don't disagree with anything you have written but the fact remains that there is no evidence of the quality used to approve drug use that has been presented. The tragedy is that this could have been done for HCQ and other potentially useful therapies like convalescent plasma. But the hype caused patients to demand and doctors to prescribe the drugs outside the context of studies. So, patients don't sign up for the trials since they can get the drug anyway with no chance of getting a placebo instead. There is also understandable reluctance on the part of doctors to take the chance that a therapy they can employ might work. But, in the long run, it would have probably been better to wait on hyping and widely distributing potential therapies until the studies were done, which is exactly what the research community was advocating.
Click to expand...

The same applies to Remdesivir which has less research behind it but is being used widely and touted widely. HQC has a long history of effective use for other ailments. IMO the anecdotal information and the studies that have been done on HQC show it's effectiveness and support its use. Rememdesivir does not have that even, IMO.

Given the choice I'd take the HQC regimen.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Forum statistics

Threads
113,298
Messages
1,430,177
Members
61,161
Latest member
CaptainA320
Back
Top