Page 17 of 18 FirstFirst ... 715161718 LastLast
Results 161 to 170 of 178

Thread: Corona Virus and Disclosure - Public Reactions

  1. #161
    Lead Moderator calikid's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Sunny California
    Posts
    9,796
    Blog Entries
    19
    Monoclonal antibodies.
    Sounds promising.
    Surprised they would use President Trump as a test subject.
    Not even authorized as an emergency use medication, docs had to apply for a "compassionate use" waiver to obtain it. Reported as in drug trials with 275 users.
    Hope it helps!
    The aim of an argument or discussion should not be victory, but
    progress. -- Joseph Joubert
    Attachment 1008

  2. #162
    I've been using the daily report for my county as a gage. One thing I keep an eye on is the daily "NEW CASES", which immediately effects the infection rate.

    We were down to 0.2 a couple of weeks ago, then school stared and now we're up to 1.3

    When it gets to 3.0 they well close the schools again.

    So everybody should know it ain't gone yet. I think it will be with us for at least another year! I'm still self quarantining as I have since march. Still disinfecting all products that come into the house. Leaving "Corona Shoes" out in garage, while recycling my N-95 mask (4). I am reserving 6 new ones for the future!

    Stay safe everyone!!!
    Last edited by epo333; 10-04-2020 at 06:03 PM.

  3. #163
    Wisconsin State Journal has an article dated 11/24/2020. COVID-19 cases surpass 8,000 in Wisconsin prison system, click here to read.

    I am concerned about possible long-term effects of the virus on people. There are a lot of unknowns...
    Last edited by CasperParks; 11-25-2020 at 02:40 AM.

  4. #164
    I know what you mean and it is going to take them a long time to work out what's going on with the wildly different pathologies. I did see an interesting study lately that showed statistically certain blood types weremore prone to complications as was the +/-. Given this disease can attack the blood I can see why this might be so, since the blood types represent different proteins on the outside. Given we only learnt not that long ago that viruses can cause cancer, I am sure there will be plenty we will learn about this virus in the coming years.

  5. #165
    I believe you are referring to this study: https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1....11.20031096v2
    Readable form for us mortals: https://www.medpagetoday.com/infecti.../covid19/89117

    If you want some extra reading, there is a whole skipped field of medicine concerning cancer treatment covered here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coley%27s_toxins
    The point being, sometimes a decent treatment is already available, but "shiny" tends to beat out more effective treatments (xrays vs the above.) I'm sure many of you will have noticed some interesting problems with pre-existing drugs, which would have been effective, had the trails not been deliberately designed to fail.
    A good case in point: https://www.nih.gov/news-events/nih-...efits-covid-19
    https://edition.cnn.com/2020/11/19/h...nes/index.html
    Of course, when you stack your deck, you are going to look like Boy Wonder. As a result, lots of useless product was sold, and real treatments have been permanently tarnished.

    With the current vaccines, the US ones are describing 95% effectiveness for theirs, but the one from Oxford in the UK is reporting around 70% for their version. Which figure would you trust to be right?

  6. #166
    Quote Originally Posted by pontificator View Post
    I believe you are referring to this study: https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1....11.20031096v2
    Readable form for us mortals: https://www.medpagetoday.com/infecti.../covid19/89117

    If you want some extra reading, there is a whole skipped field of medicine concerning cancer treatment covered here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coley%27s_toxins
    The point being, sometimes a decent treatment is already available, but "shiny" tends to beat out more effective treatments (xrays vs the above.) I'm sure many of you will have noticed some interesting problems with pre-existing drugs, which would have been effective, had the trails not been deliberately designed to fail.
    A good case in point: https://www.nih.gov/news-events/nih-...efits-covid-19
    https://edition.cnn.com/2020/11/19/h...nes/index.html
    Of course, when you stack your deck, you are going to look like Boy Wonder. As a result, lots of useless product was sold, and real treatments have been permanently tarnished.

    With the current vaccines, the US ones are describing 95% effectiveness for theirs, but the one from Oxford in the UK is reporting around 70% for their version. Which figure would you trust to be right?
    They are both probably correct for their respective trials, although the oxford one reported recently they are doing further studay as their trial was split into 2 groups as they was a dosing mistake. One group had an effectiveness of 70% and the other 90%. Even a a lower effectiveness though, the Oxford one has a significant advantage in that it doesn't need to be kept at -70 degrees celsius and from what I saw reported will be significantly cheaper per dose (maybe because of the specialised transport).

    I always take historical cures with a grain of salt as life expectency has almost doubled since 1880, for example, in the US. I really don't think you can compare the remission of one tumour with a cure since there was no way to track metastasis or even if the tumour was entirely gone. I understand your point about existing treatments not being pushed, but they certainly weren't the wonder cures or prevention people talk about... everyone has their own angle. I remember when redemsvir was toured as the saviour of the swine flu, which it wasn't. It did help shorten people's hospital stays, and does the same thing for covid, but it is not a magical cure by any means.

  7. #167
    Lead Moderator calikid's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Sunny California
    Posts
    9,796
    Blog Entries
    19
    Here in the USA, our Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has granted "emergency approval" for use in the general public (age 16 and up) of the first mRNA vaccine for COVID-19.
    This was quickly followed by approval from the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) for distribution.
    The trucks and planes are rolling out the initial shipments today, hopefully we will see some "shots in arms" as early as tomorrow (12/14/20).
    As many already know, the initial inoculation must be followed up 21 days later with a booster shot.
    A second manufacture (also of the mRNA variety) is also under review, and will hopefully soon be providing inventory to the supply line.
    Considering the shear volume needed, it can't happen to quickly.
    It may be months before we see significant drops in new COVID-19 cases/deaths, but as far as I'm concerned Santa delivered early this year on my Xmas wish.
    The aim of an argument or discussion should not be victory, but
    progress. -- Joseph Joubert
    Attachment 1008

  8. #168
    Junior Member theavenger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Lake Eufaula, Ok USA
    Posts
    19
    So are you going to take the immunization when it's available to you? I am a high risk individual thinking of taking it but not sure. The reactions some people are having from the shot doesn't make me feel any better about it.
    There's something happening here. What it is ain't exactly clear.

  9. #169
    Quote Originally Posted by theavenger View Post
    So are you going to take the immunization when it's available to you? I am a high risk individual thinking of taking it but not sure. The reactions some people are having from the shot doesn't make me feel any better about it.
    Thats exactly why I'm gonna wait until August or September, just to see how things pan out. I'm over the 65 mark, so I surely would like to. Haven't physically hugged any of my 9 Grandchildren since Feb of this year . . . And thats a real $%^&tch!

    epo3 . . .

    PS: Long time no see, theavenger

  10. #170
    Lead Moderator calikid's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Sunny California
    Posts
    9,796
    Blog Entries
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by theavenger View Post
    So are you going to take the immunization when it's available to you? I am a high risk individual thinking of taking it but not sure. The reactions some people are having from the shot doesn't make me feel any better about it.
    As a young man I did a series of allergy shots to help with hay fever/pollen allergy.
    It consisted of two weekly injections for three years.
    The medication was a concentrated form of allergen that was gradually increased in strength to acclimate my immune system.
    After each injection I was required to sit in the waiting room for 15-20 minutes before leaving.
    During the three years I had bad reactions twice.
    Each time, approximately five minutes after the injection, I broke out in an itchy rash (once on my chest, and once on my gluts aka butt). I also started to wheeze.
    Both times I immediately reported to the nurse who slammed an epi-pen into my arm. The symptoms cleared within less than one minute.

    Now if I'd just left and collapsed in the parking lot might have been trouble. Hanging out for a few minutes, and enduring a bad reaction was unsettling, but I still went back for my next appointment.

    I will get the COVID19 vaccine ASAP. Compared to a stint in ICU (at 100% capacity, not even a bed available at this time) on a Ventilator, I will take my chances.
    I will not wait.
    The aim of an argument or discussion should not be victory, but
    progress. -- Joseph Joubert
    Attachment 1008

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •