Now the CDC guidelines are based on public opinion???
The CDC Might Recommend Asymptomatic People Test Negative For COVID-19 Before Breaking Isolation
Anthony Fauci says the CDC is aware of recent pushback to its changes to isolation guidelines and may soon alter them.
The CDC Might Recommend Asymptomatic People Test Negative For COVID-19 Before Breaking Isolation
Display MoreNow the CDC guidelines are based on public opinion???
The CDC Might Recommend Asymptomatic People Test Negative For COVID-19 Before Breaking Isolation
Anthony Fauci says the CDC is aware of recent pushback to its changes to isolation guidelines and may soon alter them.
Think about it. Public Health policy depends on individual behaviour, which is variable. Even if some measures in the abstract would be best, if no-one follows them they must be changed. In a democracy we do not have secret police to go beat up the whole population and enforce compliance.
In the UK our advisory group is half behavioural scientists trying to predict how the population will behave - since for example if we behave like US anti-mask "let's have a COVID mass spreader to stand up for our rights and get wonderful natural immunity" people the consequences for public health are different from if nearly all of us of us work from home as much as possible and don't go to covid-spreaders when that is advisory but not required.
BTW I don't think the behavioural scientists are much good at prediction...
You might also see CDC and political statements in the light of a PR campaign. Based on what is said, people do different things. It works pretty well in the UK even though everyone knows Boris lies the whole time, because we trust the doctors. Maybe not so much in the US?
It’s no wonder people don’t ‘trust the science’ anymore
Politicians, health experts and pundits pushing for various policies regularly demand that we “trust the science” as we enter the third year of a lingering pandemic… as if science was somehow synonymous with a certain political outlook or policy agenda.
More than merely growing tiresome, this trope has also inflicted significant damage to the trust Americans have for the very institutions that are ostensibly working to keep the nation safe from the risks of the virus.
To be sure, the distrust people have for actual facts was already a worrisome trend in our modern Twitter-driven political culture. With the great democratization of knowledge ushered into existence by the internet, came a lamentably post-truth political landscape — where half-truths, cherry-picked data and even flat-out falsehoods are circulated as gospel throughout bubble-wrapped echo chambers, deteriorating our ability to have reasonable, nuanced and intelligent conversations about crucial policy topics.
However, while it’s easy to blame the absurdity of social media for much of the misinformation regarding the novel coronavirus, the actions of public health experts over the last two years may have done more to erode trust in “science” than any crackpot conspiracy theory emanating from some basement-dweller’s Facebook page.
From the beginning, public health experts in the highest echelons of government have played politics with their messaging, rather than fulfilling their role as purveyors of information and facts. As lawmakers delegated policymaking to white-coat experts, the status of such experts was politicized during a time when accurate and dispassionate facts are more needed than ever.
It began early in the pandemic, when Dr. Anthony Fauci famously crafted the noble lie that masks were unnecessary — a lie concocted to protect against a run on much needed medical supplies. However, even noble lies erode credibility and foster disdain for those who utter them — and his fib about the efficacy of masks wasn’t his only attempt at leveraging his reputational largess to manipulate the masses.
His estimation of what percentage of Americans would need to receive the vaccine to induce herd immunity was similarly crafted to incentivize behaviors rather than inform the populace. In a New York Times interview, Dr. Fauci admitted that the number he provided was chosen with the intention of encouraging vaccination, rather than being based on some epidemiological reasoning. Likewise, his recent suggestion that the U.S. might soon consider vaccine requirements for air travel was based not on factual data regarding the transmission of the virus on airplanes, but on the notion that making life further inconvenient for the unvaccinated might produce his preferred social outcome.
Time and again, Dr. Fauci has shown that he is willing to use his authoritative position as an opportunity to propagandize rather than inform — and yet, many in the political and national-media class continue to exalt him as if he were some infallible scientific prophet. Among many, his policy recommendations are hailed as indistinguishable or inseparable from scientific fact — a notion he, himself, tacitly endorsed when he argued that those who criticized him were “really criticizing science, because I represent science.”
Policy, however, is separate from science. And while the latter can inform the former, the two are not inextricably tied together. Taking issue with an expert’s preferred policy recommendations is not scientific heresy. However, it has become fashionable for pundits, politicians and health experts to conflate the two — branding all who oppose their preferred political action as scientific apostates.
The objection to vaccine mandates, for example, doesn’t require a rejection of scientific truths or disdain for known facts. One can believe wholeheartedly that vaccines are the greatest tool at our disposal for reducing the risks of COVID, while simultaneously believing that the government has neither the justification nor the moral imperative to coerce individuals into receiving it.
In fact, such a position is entirely consistent with the scientific literature related to the efficacy of the coronavirus vaccines — vaccines that, unlike those of smallpox or polio, are not highly effective at eliminating transmission of the virus. After all, the entire justification for vaccine mandates in a free society is that such a coercion is necessary to guard others against continued transmission of the disease, not merely to save individuals from their own poor decisions.
As a result, the policy disagreements about vaccine mandates aren’t really about whether or not vaccines are good. (Vaccines most definitely are a miracle of modern medicine.) Instead, it’s about the degree to which government coercion should be used to ensure individuals are protecting themselves (and potentially others) against the virus.
In other words, people can understand “the science” and still disagree on the proper role of government. That is why Colorado’s Democratic governor, Jared Polis, has resisted the urge to implement new mandates or further COVID restrictions, despite concern regarding the Omicron surge. Like the Nevada Republicans who refused to extend a vaccine mandate for students and state workers, Polis isn’t denying scientific facts — he merely believes in limiting the government’s role at this stage of the pandemic.
Such policy positions are sure to be contentious and divisive — but they’re certainly not areas of public discourse where a thorough understanding of scientific principles demand political conformity. And yet, for many who have elected to treat certain institutional experts as infallible purveyors of fact, “trust the science” has become a euphemism for “agree with the policy recommendations of my preferred expert or be branded a science-denying troglodyte.”
Unfortunately, many Americans have bought into this simplistic reduction of the current discourse — and it has generated a sizable, and worrisome, contingent of people who have grown reluctant to accept anything uttered from the medical or scientific communities as fact. Such a phenomenon was evident recently, when a room full of Trump supporters expressed incredulity as the former president announced he is, in fact, fully vaccinated — as if his embrace of vaccine technology made him a heretic among those who vociferously oppose government-imposed mandates.
Clearly, the political tactic of couching policy preferences as immutable scientific conclusions simply hasn’t generated the kind of unanimous support for certain social behaviors that many hoped it would. Instead, it has generated contempt, skepticism and distrust — even encouraging the proliferation of misinformation and conspiracy theories. As the World Economic Forum argued, given the state of our modern era and the speed with which misinformation is spread online, restoring trust in science is more necessary now than ever before.
Before we’re able to do that, however, we’re going to have to learn how to stop politicizing it.
From the beginning, public health experts in the highest echelons of government have played politics with their messaging, rather than fulfilling their role as purveyors of information and facts. As lawmakers delegated policymaking to white-coat experts, the status of such experts was politicized during a time when accurate and dispassionate facts are more needed than ever.
It began early in the pandemic, when Dr. Anthony Fauci famously crafted the noble lie that masks were unnecessary — a lie concocted to protect against a run on much needed medical supplies. However, even noble lies erode credibility and foster disdain for those who utter them — and his fib about the efficacy of masks wasn’t his only attempt at leveraging his reputational largess to manipulate the masses.
I agree. It is better to say: we need masks for health workers, they don't protect you personally much, than to say "masks do no good at all". In the end honesty is important. Note that "they don't protect you personally much" is true even though also they do protect everyone else, so mass mask-wearing offers significant protection.
But messaging is very important - and if you get it wrong everyone hoards masks and then there are none of hospitals.
We had more or less the same messaging in the UK, for the same reasons, but no-one is blaming the scientists for it over here...
In particular messaging over vaccines matters. It is a well know psychological fact that if you tell people in concrete terms the risks of vaccines, not matter how low those risks are, people think "vaccine - risk" and that idea outweighs for most any rational consideration of whether they personally are better off getting vaccinated. It is OK having all the info out there, but the sound bites, and the way they are reported in media, matter.
THH
Display MoreI agree. It is better to say: we need masks for health workers, they don't protect you personally much, than to say "masks do no good at all". In the end honesty is important. Note that "they don't protect you personally much" is true even though also they do protect everyone else, so mass mask-wearing offers significant protection.
But messaging is very important - and if you get it wrong everyone hoards masks and then there are none of hospitals.
We had more or less the same messaging in the UK, for the same reasons, but no-one is blaming the scientists for it over here...
In particular messaging over vaccines matters. It is a well know psychological fact that if you tell people in concrete terms the risks of vaccines, not matter how low those risks are, people think "vaccine - risk" and that idea outweighs for most any rational consideration of whether they personally are better off getting vaccinated. It is OK having all the info out there, but the sound bites, and the way they are reported in media, matter.
THH
It's much more than masks, confusing guidelines on school openings, business openings, distancing, quarantine and lockdowns. As for following the science, they were caught making up mask science concerning school openings and have continued to disregard the science being reported from other nations only to follow the present administration vaccine only policy. It not about the science, it's about present administration policy. The head of the CDC is politically appointed, do i have to get into that?
More about face from health experts. Is it really science they follow or are they just seeing what authorities can get away with?
Quebec dog owners howl over COVID-19 curfew rules, ministry backtracks
Health ministry officials in Quebec, Canada had their tails between their legs Saturday after facing backlash for new coronavirus-related curfew rules that don’t allow dog owners to walk their pets between 10 p.m. and 5 a.m.
A previous version of the curfew rules allowed residents to help their pets take care of business in the overnight hours, provided they remained within 1 kilometer (3,280 feet) of their home, CTV News reported. Why the exception wasn’t included in the newest rules wasn’t clear, the outlet reported.
“What if you can’t walk your dog [before curfew] because of work or other restraints?” asked Louise Makovsky, a dog owner and animal activist, according to CTV News.
Other previously existing exceptions, such as allowing residents to visit a gas station or go to the aid of someone in need of help, were preserved in the revised rules, the Montreal Gazette reported.
Just a small correction. Face shields + masks makes sense in some cases.
Yes in ICU with a very intense coughing patient for hospitals in third world that cannot afford the proper full mask equipment...
Instead, it has generated contempt, skepticism and distrust — even encouraging the proliferation of misinformation and conspiracy theories.
Most prominent is lying to children. Once these children will understand that their vaccine did not protect grand daddy then in case of a damage a new terrorist is born...
Of course we do allow our clowns to post lies as it is the clowns profession . 99.99% of all CoV-19 infections happen by aerosols that pass all standard face mask and quickly move around any shield. Aerosol propagate at least 10 meters in a closed rooms as different studies did show. E.g. Chinese restaurant German meat factory,
Good news from Switzerland: We are now over the Omicron peak... Because doing ski and testing are mutually exclusive. The positive rate is now at 30%!! what indicates we are still at about 100'000 cases a day with about 1/8 diagnosed.
Even better news from hospitals:: Admissions did go down by 56. This despite record high cases. This is a clear Omicron effect. (Now anywhere between 85..95% of cases) Deaths are stable at 15/Day.
Yes in ICU with a very intense coughing patient for hospitals in third world that cannot afford the proper full mask equipment...
Face Shields were early on endorsed by the CDC . Many people in retail suffered the Consequences of that stupid decision, which was quickly followed by the ok to use cloth masks. These endorsements have led to a continuing pandemic and a rise in unnecessary deaths.
Mexico Authorizes Cuba’s Abdala Protein Subunit COVID-19 Vaccine as Cases Appear to Rise
Recently TrialSite tracked the vaccination efforts in Cuba where the Caribbean island nation has developed not one or two or even three but four COVID-19 vaccines via various state-backed research centers. Most recently the Mexican health safety council approved one of those vaccines known as the Abdala COVID-19 vaccine. The three-dose regimen was deemed safe, and effect was authorized on an emergency basis meaning the nation may or may not actually acquire the investigational product. In fact, Mexico has already approved ten vaccines but not necessarily buying large volumes of product—an example of a vaccine authorized but not used much would be China’s Sinopharm. The Abdala vaccine has also been authorized and exported to Vietnam and Venezuela.
With 130 million people, both its big neighbor to the north (USA) and Mexico have been hit especially hard by the COVID-19 pandemic. More pandemic-related deaths occurred in the U.S. than any other country currently at 847.048 according to Worldometers while Mexico ranks fifth worldwide with nearly 300,000 deaths.
The nation has experienced multiple surges in cases, the most severe of which was the Delta variant-driven spike from June through September of 2021. With a full (2 doses) COVID-19 vaccination rate of about 57%, cases are on their way up again with 9,193 new infections reported on January 2 of the new year. As reported in Los Angeles Times however, the Mexican government hasn’t been too concerned. While Europe imposes lockdowns, the recent piece authored by Leila Miller emphasized that some scientists in the country share growing concern that the country may be unprepared for a post-holiday surge in Omicron cases. Mexico doesn’t do a lot of testing now and its essentially “business as usual” per the Los Angeles Times. Could the crisis erupt again?
What’s the Abdala vaccine?
A protein subunit COVID-19 vaccine developed by Cuba’s Center for Genetic Engineering and Biotechnology; this investigational product consists of COVID-19-derived proteins used to elicit an immune response. With no peer-reviewed, published results yet, the product has gone through Phase 3 clinical trials, receiving emergency use authorization in that country reported Associated Press.
Mexican Health Access
While Mexico maintains a diversified, decentralized health care system marked by not only public institutions and government agencies, private hospitals, and clinics not to mention private physicians represent a substantial diversified, dynamic system. The country does commit to universal health coverage with the Mexican constitution guaranteeing no cost access to healthcare and medicine backed by the Institute of Health for Well-being or INASBI.
Yet the country’s health system poses challenges for many of the people, especially poor to working class segments of society. Dominated by what some scholars call “corporatist” social insurance-based organizations overseen by employer and employer trade unions in close relationship with the nation’s federal government, the poor are covered by government-based services while a large private sector of doctors thrives. According to one recent account published in the European Journal of Public Health about 50% of Mexico’s population is covered by social insurance yet that coverage remains “sporadic” in many cases.
Addressing COVID-19
Along with vaccination efforts Mexico’s health authorities authorized monoclonal antibodies but these may be difficult to access. For example, on December 1 of 2021 the national regulator, Cofepris, authorized Eli Lilly’s antibody treatment (bamlanivimab and estevimab) targeting COVID-19 on an emergency basis.
Local agencies have used Ivermectin successfully. TrialSite reported on a major real-world initiative sponsored by Mexico City for example. Involving over 200,000 participants in the public health initiative in one of the world’s most populated metropolitan areas, the study involved an intensive combination of testing, early treatment with ivermectin and monitoring. The effort was considered a success but completely ignored by U.S. and European media
You have it wrong! I am vaccinated, JJ in April not boosted, I wear an n 95 mask in public buildings and I keep my distance.
No, I have it right. You are vaccinated, meaning you are sane. However, you are also advocating the use of honey and ivermectin, which do not work. If you think they work, you are stupid. If you don't think they work, and you are recommending them anyway, you are destructive.
Also, even though you are vaccinated, you have posted many antivaxx references here. Again, if you believe these references, you are stupid. If you don't believe them, you are destructive. You should not spread deadly misinformation during the worst pandemic of the last 100 years. You, and others like you, are killing thousands of people. Don't go around telling people that honey will cure them. It is not even slightly true.
You have an ivy league education but you are still southern stupid!!!
I am not even slightly southern. Neither is the part of Atlanta where I live. This neighborhood is more like Seoul than any southern city.
Most prominent is lying to children. Once these children will understand that their vaccine did not protect grand daddy then in case of a damage a new terrorist is born...
I can't see either part of that. No-one has promised vaccine give complete protection against infection. It is STILL true (omicron) that with 10 weeks booster gives 60% - 75% protection against infection, that boosters gives 50% reduction in household transmission. That looks to me like 50% lower COVID rate for grand-daddies. You have to be pretty weird therefore to become a terrorist juts because it is not 100%.
99.99% of all CoV-19 infections happen by aerosols that pass all standard face mask and quickly move around any shield. Aerosol propagate at least 10 meters in a closed rooms as different studies did show. E.g. Chinese restaurant German meat factory,
This Wytten-sound-bite mixes up three different things:
(1) masks protect (personally) against direct exhaled droplets - e.g. when talking to somone. Not 100% protection - but a lot better than no mask. This is a significant source of transmission.
(2) masks DO NOT protect (personally) against small-droplet-size aerosols
(3) masks DO significantly reduce aerosol emmission
So: masks provide some personal protection - but the main issue is that if everyone in an indoor space wears marks the overall aerosol content of the air is significantly lower. That protects everyone.
None of this stuff is secret - it is what the standard public health guidance says - and it is correct.
Good new from Switzerland: We are now over the Omicron peak... Because doing ski and testing are mutually exclusive. The positive rate is now at 30%!! what indicates we are still at about 100'000 cases a day with about 1/8 diagnosed.
Even better news from hospitals:: Admissions did go down by 56. This despite record high cases. This is a clear Omicron effect. (Now anywhere between 85..95% of cases) Deaths are stable at 15/Day.
Switzerland case rate. I don't know the situation there - but I do know that nothing can be said for certain based on case rate of Christmas holiday. What matters is what happens when everyone goes back to work/school. So not much point counting chickens now.
THH
Local agencies have used Ivermectin successfully. TrialSite reported on a major real-world initiative sponsored by Mexico City for example. Involving over 200,000 participants in the public health initiative in one of the world’s most populated metropolitan areas, the study involved an intensive combination of testing, early treatment with ivermectin and monitoring. The effort was considered a success but completely ignored by U.S. and European media
Testing is a big deal and if combined with isolation works really well. We see COVID rates rising and falling for many reasons (including FM1's weather obsession) so working out what works well from population COVID rates alone, without a lot of careful analysis, is almost impossible.
No evidence that ivermectin had any effect - which is why it is ignored.
Overall - people outside Mexico don't see Mexico City as a success. it looks like it got hit very hard indeed by the alpha and delta waves, after which omicron-survivor immunity suppressed infection nicely till now and omicron.
THH
No, I have it right. You are vaccinated, meaning you are sane. However, you are also advocating the use of honey and ivermectin, which do not work. If you think they work, you are stupid. If you don't think they work, and you are recommending them anyway, you are destructive.
Also, even though you are vaccinated, you have posted many antivaxx references here. Again, if you believe these references, you are stupid. If you don't believe them, you are destructive. You should not spread deadly misinformation during the worst pandemic of the last 100 years. You, and others like you, are killing thousands of people. Don't go around telling people that honey will cure them. It is not even slightly true.
I am not even slightly southern. Neither is the part of Atlanta where I live. This neighborhood is more like Seoul than any southern city.
You need Viagra, it helps for your dementia. I don't endorse ivermectin but do post studies and opinions on ivermectin. If asked I would endorse Nigella sativa, honey, vitamin d vitamin c and mellitonin. you Huxley and a few are the only ones endorsing anything and that's a vaccine that is not all it's suppose to be! By the way my wife and I tested positive today with a home test. I think it's possible one of your family members went rogue and infected us. I sent an email to the times letting them know the Rothwells have gone rogue!!!
, and I certainly think the current high quality large RCTs will deliver evidence - positive or negative - that is definitive. So far all we have is the Interim evidence - not properly published - from the TOGETHER trial.
I think you should mention the possibility that Bitterman et al. describe, which is that some of the positive data is real, and ivermectin really does help, but only in populations with a lot of undiagnosed parasite infections. (It has be undiagnosed. I assume that if the condition is diagnosed, the patient would be given ivermectin with the doctor's knowledge, removing that patient from participation in a double-blind test.) Bitterman thinks that some of the positive studies are honest, and valid. I wouldn't know about that. But if that is the case, I can see that these studies were conducted in countries with a lot of parasitic infections.
Israel sick & hospital rates. Fist got wrong picture...
The conclusion is the same. In all relevant age groups except 80+ More vaccinated are in hospital and counted as active patients- Light green are the vaccinated with no refresh after 6 months...The vaccination in Israel is about 69%. So vaccine protection is about 50% overall.
Unluckily we can also say the vulnerable age 80+ are already dead...
Luckily the death rate is now extremely low at about 0.5/day. So the question is: What can vaccines add?
By the way my wife and I tested positive today with a home test.
I can try as hard I can ,but didn't yet manage to get it (CoV-19). May be I once should do an antibody test.
Luckily I was in Japan when the alpha version of CoV-19 has been tested. For me it was 3 days Sutherlandia for my wive 3 weeks pains. This is the main reason for the low death count in Japan.
This would be worth a medical examination like Italy did. Lock for old biopsies that might contain the alpha version...
If asked I would endorse Nigella sativa, honey, vitamin d vitamin c and mellitonin.
That's medieval. I mean literally, you are "endorsing" quack medicine. No educated person after the Renaissance or Enlightenment era would believe these things work, because any scientific, objective test would show they have no effect.
RSA news:: Strong decline (about 40%)in hospital admissions last week!
No more need for vaccines!! Yehhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!
That's medieval. I mean literally, you are "endorsing" quack medicine. No educated person after the Renaissance or Enlightenment era would believe these things work, because any scientific, objective test would show they have no effect.
And you call yourself a man of science. Botanicals don't make the grade? You are a fraud! I posted a study with data, you deny the science! FRAUD!!!
