Let'm die!

[DaveFromMi]

But wasn’t that specific type of infection the flu? Are you sure that implying the PCR test does not diagnose corona viruses is correct?

A reference would be helpful to those interested...

Here is an example from my family.
I had some symptoms: runny nose, scratchy throat, sinus pressure, less symptoms than a typical cold.
Wife probably caught it from me. She had same symptoms plus a fever, loss of smell. She gets tested and is positive. Oldest son had same symptoms as wife except more severe. Since he works in EMS, they wanted him tested everyday. He got 3 negative tests in a row and EMS agency called him back to work. At a regular scheduled Dr. appointment 2 months later, I requested antibodies test and was negative. Oldest son had antibodies checked and was positive. So my point is that the PCR test is garbage.
I tell that story and most responses are "There is a lot that is unknown about COVID". I call BS!

 

[jimh406]

I hear of the response issues so often, but oftentimes without details. I do business with an MD with similar opinion, yet no detail. You seem to have some informed hypotheses how things should have gone.

If you aren’t hearing the details, may I suggest you need to widen your source of information to some that aren’t censored. Yes, you’ll have to throw out some bad information, but you’ll also get a chance to find out what some of the response issues by the public official/government were. Use your brain to determine if some of the issues are plausible or not.

Here’s a big one that someone touched on. It’s possible to get a test for antibodies, but it doesn’t seem to be a priority to encourage it. We’d have a better idea how many people who are running around with immunities and that number could be added to those who got the vaccine. Many of us wonder why those people are simply ignored and/or being coerced into getting the vaccine.

This noninterest is the case even though people with antibodies have some of the worst reactions to the vaccine, and also need it the least since they have natural antibodies. Instead if someone uses they had covid and active antibodies as a reason not to get the vaccine they are treated by politicians/public figures like they are antivaxers.

 

[motionclone]

"If you like your healthcare plan you can keep it"
You guys remember that lie?

 

[Porcupine]

Curious what you feel the most effective response would have been.

More restriction? less restrictions? And/or? I kind of doubt we would be able to execute the kind of response that other countries like the U.K., New Zealand and others did.

Or would it have been better just to ignore the issue except for offering vaccinations and taking our lumps? Myself, I do not know.

I certainly agree paying people more on unemployment than they earned working is absolutely nuts.

AND I am not a landlord, but forcing landlords to let people keep living in the rented space, under the illusion that they will pay the back rent later, while the property owner still has to pay property taxes and maintenance costs, is unfair too. There are many “mom and pop” type landloards.

As I said earlier:

Quarantine the ill.

Offer accommodations to those at elevated risk to allow them to modify thier routines/work location/schedules to minimize risk of exposure.

When you “Flatten the curve’ as they so famously asked of us, you do not reduce the area under the curve (infections) all you do is stretch out the duration of the event.

I believe what they are doing to landlords (moratorium) is an unconstitutional

Fact check.. https://www.factcheck.org/2021/07/s...resent-cdc-announcement-on-covid-19-pcr-test/

But wasn’t that specific type of infection the flu? Are you sure that implying the PCR test does not diagnose corona viruses is correct?

A reference would be helpful to those interested...

He felt it was inappropriate for CoViD in the statements I read from him.

He may (or not) at some time made a similar statement about the Flu, but that wouldn’t have been readily politicized, so no one would have paid attention.

it’s been a while, but ifi can find a little time time I’ll look for a reference to cite.

The way they used the PCR was also inappropriate, they habitually ran it way past any useful resolution for looking for good data. Look into the changes made in “PCR Cycle Count” for CoViD testing.

BTW- The “Fact Check” above seems to go out of its way to avoid any of those concerns and just says the CDC didn’t disavow PCR testing for CoViD.

 

[Porcupine]

It‘s obvious they want our water. They want to empty our oceans and cart off what is considered liquid gold to the advanced species of the universe. It’s all about profit.

I thought this was a well known fact! Man, what reality am I living in?

LOL!

i love those plots.

“We can trek across galaxies, but we never figured out how to combine two hydrogen atoms with an oxygen atom.”

 

[dlsmith]

My boss says covid is the best thing ever, it cured heart disease, cancer etc, no one died from those illnesses last year.

Have him tell that to my daughter that got breast cancer last year.
What a moron.

 

[Porcupine]

Porcupine-

You obviously have some significant expertise regarding virology and epidemiology.

Henro asked how a response could/should have been. Your response centered on PCR, which I certainly understand.

I used to be involved in communicable disease control many years ago. My understanding of the issues are probably better than the average bear, but that was a long time ago.

I’m curious how you think the response should have gone?

Trust me, the question is not in an adversarial nor derogatory tone in any way. Will not be a point/counterpoint dialogue from me. Just genuine curiosity.

I hear of the response issues so often, but oftentimes without details. I do business with an MD with similar opinion, yet no detail. You seem to have some informed hypotheses how things should have gone.

I’m in New York, which some (especially the Governor) hold out as the example of COVID control, yet the nursing home deaths have been questioned.

Trust me, my governor and I don’t exchange Christmas cards….

Thanks.

I certainly don’t take polite discussion as adversarial.

I’ve had some experience long ago with a secondary MOS as an NBC NCO, some time working in areas tangential to infectious/communicable disease control (kind of like yours I’d guess) and believe it or not lots of experience in poultry, Caprine, and K9 management. Epidemiology at some level is epidemiology.

I’m no where near an expert, but have some related expertise and I’ma pretty practical fellow.

It’s my belief we should have done the following:

Reduced travel from Asia earlier

Quarantine the ill as best possible

Offer accommodations to those at elevated risk to allow them to modify thier routines/work location/schedules to minimize risk of exposure.

Treat the ill appropriately. I couldn’t believe that they were venting people so readily. Then they acted like it was some kind of revelation when the Italians “discovered” that you get a better outcome when you put a patient with respiratory problems on their stomach, not the back. OK, It sucks to be laid up on your stomach, but it beats the hell out of a vent or death.

HCQ was credibly promoted both as a preventive and a treatment early on, but was pushed away for other than medical reasons. Ivermectin was found to be likely to be helpful later, but was again suppressed. As were increased susceptibility due to nutritional deficiencies. All traditional and reasonable treatments were rejected out of hand.

When you “Flatten the curve’ as they so famously asked of us, you do not reduce the area under the curve (infections) all you do is stretch out the duration of the event.

Honestly, by January the cat was likely out of the bag anyway. A (fairly traditional) response as outlined above would have still sucked, but would have minimized casualties and we’d be done by now, without having created a fiscal, moral, and constitutional train wreck.

Interestingly enough, the most restrictive states fared the worst. probably due to cloistering people indoors, and forcing mask compliance, while the least restrictive states did best even when taking population size, and, and climate into account.

I’d love to know what your Doc thinks of my opinion on this.

 

[Porcupine]

Have him tell that to my daughter that got breast cancer last year.
What a moron.

I’m sorry for your daughter, and I hope she’s well, but I think you missed the point.

 

[jimh406]

More coercision in NY. Gov encouraging local businesses to require vaccination, but also vaccinated should wear masks. So, again, what is the point of requiring vaccinations? It seems like the confidence regarding vaccinations seems to be shrinking or is it simply that they like to try to force people into getting vaccinated?

Meanswhile notable politicians are planning very large birthday parties and attending weddings maskless. Something smells …

 

[i7win7]

“We can trek across galaxies, but we never figured out how to combine two hydrogen atoms with an oxygen atom.”

I can do it with just a spark - think hindenburg

 

[RCW]

I certainly don’t take polite discussion as adversarial.

I’ve had some experience long ago with a secondary MOS as an NBC NCO, some time working in areas tangential to infectious/communicable disease control (kind of like yours I’d guess) and believe it or not lots of experience in poultry, Caprine, and K9 management. Epidemiology at some level is epidemiology.

I’m no where near an expert, but have some related expertise and I’ma pretty practical fellow.

It’s my belief we should have done the following:

Reduced travel from Asia earlier

Quarantine the ill as best possible

Offer accommodations to those at elevated risk to allow them to modify thier routines/work location/schedules to minimize risk of exposure.

Treat the ill appropriately. I couldn’t believe that they were venting people so readily. Then they acted like it was some kind of revelation when the Italians “discovered” that you get a better outcome when you put a patient with respiratory problems on their stomach, not the back. OK, It sucks to be laid up on your stomach, but it beats the hell out of a vent or death.

HCQ was credibly promoted both as a preventive and a treatment early on, but was pushed away for other than medical reasons. Ivermectin was found to be likely to be helpful later, but was again suppressed. As were increased susceptibility due to nutritional deficiencies. All traditional and reasonable treatments were rejected out of hand.

When you “Flatten the curve’ as they so famously asked of us, you do not reduce the area under the curve (infections) all you do is stretch out the duration of the event.

Honestly, by January the cat was likely out of the bag anyway. A (fairly traditional) response as outlined above would have still sucked, but would have minimized casualties and we’d be done by now, without having created a fiscal, moral, and constitutional train wreck.

Interestingly enough, the most restrictive states fared the worst. probably due to cloistering people indoors, and forcing mask compliance, while the least restrictive states did best even when taking population size, and, and climate into account.

I’d love to know what your Doc thinks of my opinion on this.

Thanks. Appreciate it.

 

[Porcupine]

Actually they are not saying the opposite…no need for me to tell them anything.

It has been reported that something like 97 percent of current hospitalizations are unvaccinated people. And that around 99 percent of the deaths are unvaccinated.

If one believes the reports it sure looks like the unvaccinated are where the pandemic is currently focused.

Of course if one believes the reports are fabrications and lies, he will come to a different conclusion…

Dr. Faucci disagrees:

Fauci: Amount of Virus in COVID-19 Breakthrough Delta Cases ‘Almost Identical’ to Unvaccinated

m.theepochtimes.com

 

[D2Cat]

Here's the kind of information almost NEVER shown on main stream media. Look at the man's background and credentials, then read the article.


July 12, 2021 (Mercola) – In this interview, Dr. Peter McCullough discusses the importance of early treatment for COVID-19, and the potential motivations behind the suppression of safe and effective treatments.

McCullough has impeccable academic credentials. He’s an internist, cardiologist, epidemiologist, a full professor of medicine at Texas A&M College of Medicine in Dallas. He also has a master’s degree in public health and is known for being one of the top five most-published medical researchers in the United States and is the editor of two medical journals.

COVID jabs, prohibition of Ivermectin are part of 'global collusion' to 'cause as much harm and death as conceivable' - LifeSite

The COVID vaccination campaign 'will go down in history as the biggest medical biological product safety catastrophe in human history, by far. There's nothing close … You can imagine how many heads are going to roll when this thing ultimately comes to its finality,' ~ Dr. Peter McCullough.

www.lifesitenews.com

 

[jimh406]

The latest requirements that vaccinated and nonvaccinated are treated the same with respect to masks implies that it’s likely the vaccinated people are the bigger danger to the unvaccinated and vaccinated than the unvaccinated. After all, they seem to be spreading the virus just as much based on that guidance, but they aren’t feeling the effects as much to tell them they should be quarantined.

Thoughts?

 

[Jchonline]

The latest requirements that vaccinated and nonvaccinated are treated the same with respect to masks implies that it’s likely the vaccinated people are the bigger danger to the unvaccinated and vaccinated than the unvaccinated. After all, they seem to be spreading the virus just as much based on that guidance, but they aren’t feeling the effects as much to tell them they should be quarantined.

Thoughts?

As you mentioned in an earlier post we really don't have a good idea of the folks with natural immunity (have had COVID 1 or more times). Natural combined with derived (vaccinated) should put us over the 75% mark if you believe that as a "scientific" target. So one would think we should not be seeing the spikes in hospitalizations that we are. However we are seeing hospitalization spikes around the country. Once we overwhelm the hospitals the deaths will start going up...this is what I always watch. We are always going to have people sick in the hospital and thats normal (even if they have COVID). What we can't afford is to hit that point where there are no beds for non-COVID patients, or no beds for COVID patients that would have lived if we just had some reasonable supportive care for them. Maybe we won't get there (I hope we don't) but this is what we worry about in the medical community.


The cape cod data the CDC is using for their most recent recommendations hasn't been peer reviewed yet so there are lots of questions... That data reviewed about 110 people (44 of them vaccinated) and the results show that transmissibility in vaccinated was just as high as non-vaccinated. However the power of the study is extremely low (n=110) so many medical experts/researchers are saying it is a fairly weak scientific recommendation at this point. If it ends up being a bunch of nothing (no real spike in deaths) then the CDC will look that much worse.

 

[Porcupine]

The latest requirements that vaccinated and nonvaccinated are treated the same with respect to masks implies that it’s likely the vaccinated people are the bigger danger to the unvaccinated and vaccinated than the unvaccinated. After all, they seem to be spreading the virus just as much based on that guidance, but they aren’t feeling the effects as much to tell them they should be quarantined.

Thoughts?

I mostly agree with this. Although I believe the danger is highly exaggerated. Generally successful viral mutations are more contagious, but less impactful.

 

[Porcupine]

As you mentioned in an earlier post we really don't have a good idea of the folks with natural immunity (have had COVID 1 or more times). Natural combined with derived (vaccinated) should put us over the 75% mark if you believe that as a "scientific" target. So one would think we should not be seeing the spikes in hospitalizations that we are. However we are seeing hospitalization spikes around the country. Once we overwhelm the hospitals the deaths will start going up...this is what I always watch. We are always going to have people sick in the hospital and thats normal (even if they have COVID). What we can't afford is to hit that point where there are no beds for non-COVID patients, or no beds for COVID patients that would have lived if we just had some reasonable supportive care for them. Maybe we won't get there (I hope we don't) but this is what we worry about in the medical community.


The cape cod data the CDC is using for their most recent recommendations hasn't been peer reviewed yet so there are lots of questions... That data reviewed about 110 people (44 of them vaccinated) and the results show that transmissibility in vaccinated was just as high as non-vaccinated. However the power of the study is extremely low (n=110) so many medical experts/researchers are saying it is a fairly weak scientific recommendation at this point. If it ends up being a bunch of nothing (no real spike in deaths) then the CDC will look that much worse.

I fully agree that a sample of 110 is not sufficient to provide safe or strong conclusions.

 

[Henro]

The latest requirements that vaccinated and nonvaccinated are treated the same with respect to masks implies that it’s likely the vaccinated people are the bigger danger to the unvaccinated and vaccinated than the unvaccinated. After all, they seem to be spreading the virus just as much based on that guidance, but they aren’t feeling the effects as much to tell them they should be quarantined.

Thoughts?

Couple thoughts...

It is claimed the Delta variant is considerably more infectious than the original first or two versions. So the situation is dynamic.

I personally believe that wearing masks is more likely to keep what one exhales more local than if he were not wearing a mask. I view my mask as protecting others rather than myself.

It is also claimed that a vaccinated person only spreads the new variant if he becomes a "break through" case. And the chances of that happening is something like 1 in 100. This implies that unvaccinated people are more likely to become infected if the rate of exposure is the same for both cases. Have no idea what that number would be for unvaccinated. Likely much higher than 1 in 100, since nearly all hospitalizations are being reported as unvaccinated.

I have not heard that break through cases in vaccinated people are being treated any differently than cases in unvaccinated people. Both are now (with the delta variant) equally dangerous it seems. I do believe that fully vaccinated people have been treated differently than unvaccinated people. That may be changing now with the delta variant.

At some point we each have to decide where the most accurate and honest information is coming from, and use that as a guide for determining the decisions we make.

It is easy to claim that more should have been done from day one. But seeing how even a simple thing like wearing a mask has become a major talking point and point of resistance, it is hard for me to imagine this country accepting the more restrictive lock downs that some other countries established and enforced.

 

[sheepfarmer]

As you mentioned in an earlier post we really don't have a good idea of the folks with natural immunity (have had COVID 1 or more times). Natural combined with derived (vaccinated) should put us over the 75% mark if you believe that as a "scientific" target. So one would think we should not be seeing the spikes in hospitalizations that we are. However we are seeing hospitalization spikes around the country. Once we overwhelm the hospitals the deaths will start going up...this is what I always watch. We are always going to have people sick in the hospital and thats normal (even if they have COVID). What we can't afford is to hit that point where there are no beds for non-COVID patients, or no beds for COVID patients that would have lived if we just had some reasonable supportive care for them. Maybe we won't get there (I hope we don't) but this is what we worry about in the medical community.


The cape cod data the CDC is using for their most recent recommendations hasn't been peer reviewed yet so there are lots of questions... That data reviewed about 110 people (44 of them vaccinated) and the results show that transmissibility in vaccinated was just as high as non-vaccinated. However the power of the study is extremely low (n=110) so many medical experts/researchers are saying it is a fairly weak scientific recommendation at this point. If it ends up being a bunch of nothing (no real spike in deaths) then the CDC will look that much worse.

Not sure where or which subset of cases you are considering, but number of vaccinated versus unvaccinated is a bigger number in this outbreak, 346/ 469 = 74%. Those sequenced and identified as delta are from only 133 cases, 89%.

Not a cast of thousands, but coupled with estimates of viral density in the nasal swabs of vaccinated versus unvaccinated, enough to get their attention.

 

[motionclone]

it is hard for me to imagine this country accepting the more restrictive lock downs that some other countries established and enforced.

In the USA we value freedom over safety. It used to be 100% of us which is what made us great and strong. Now its about 50% which is why we are divided over these issues and losing our freedoms on a daily basis.