The Playground

  • Switzerland e.g. has a positive rate of 40% with about 110'000 tests/day. So we get much less than 1/10 of the actual infections.

    This is an interesting Wyttenfact. As usual, it is difficult to know exactly what is the argument, but putting in (guessing) the missing pieces:


    Swizerland has 110,000 antigen tests / day with 40% positivity rate => 44,000 tested positive per day.


    We therefore get less than 10% of the actual infections picked up as cases?? No idea what data for number of infections > 440,000 per day that comes from. It might be true. Or very false. Or more likely just unknowable because you need to compare seropositivity before/after a peak to work out real number of infections.


    THH

  • Appalling: Propensity score is all wrong. (And it is that which determines the results).

    Problematic, they do not mention how they chose their propensity score, or why they thing it is appropriate - that would be picked up in any decent peer review.


    Why is the propensity score wrong?


    It bands age into < 30, 30 - 50, > 50. These bands seem to be what they use for the PSM.


    Thus for matching purposes an 80 year old and a 50 year old will match, but the 80 year old has 30X higher risk of mortality.

    "How peer review happened

    Peer review, when other scientists review and attest to the scientific quality of articles, is an essential scientific process. In the case of this study, three independent groups had access to all the data and the manuscript. Subsequently, they contacted the authors anonymously via the Cureus journal communication system. Each group of reviewers was classified with a letter of the Greek alphabet: Alpha, Beta, and Gamma."


    “In addition to peer review, the study goes through three editorial stages. And all three need to accept the work. In our case, due to the relevance of the study, we didn’t even have the opportunity to appoint reviewers. All were completely independent”, says Dr. Flavio Cadegiani."


    "An important conservative bias was present. Major risk factors for severe COVID-19 and mortality due to COVID-19, including aging, diabetes, and hypertension, were more present among ivermectin users, which may have underestimated the benefits of ivermectin as it was demonstrated to be particularly effective in subjects above 49 years old in terms of reduction of absolute risk, which corresponds to the group at the highest risk for COVID-19. This allows the understanding that prophylactic use of ivermectin can be particularly impactful in older subjects. In addition, ivermectin seemed to reduce the exceeding risk of hypertension, T2D, and other diseases."

  • As clowns usually nod the halve day at least - waiting for teh next short "performance"... I repeat it once more albeit clown will not read/understand it...


    Covid-⁠19 Schweiz | Coronavirus | Dashboard
    Covid-⁠19 Pandemie Schweiz und Liechtenstein: Fallzahlen, Virusvarianten, Hospitalisationen, Re-⁠Wert, Spitalkapazitäten, internationale Lage, Zahlen zu Tests,…
    www.covid19.admin.ch

    About 40'000 cases/day about 85'000 PCR tests and the rest antigen tests with about 60% threshold. But total positive rate still 40%...


    Area tests did show that going from 7.5% positive rate to 15% you miss 1/2 of the cases same for going from 1..2% to 7.5%. We can also compare positive rate among countries that do more testing like UK/FR.

    The relation of missing cases is pretty linear 7.5% means 50% missing 15% means 75% missing 30% means 87.5% missing etc...

    But area tests will find all currently infected independent whether these would test today or tomorrow etc...

    So we need to know the roll over factor. How many days will it take until 50% of the infected are replaced by new 50% infected?

    For Omicron this phase is quite short as many have almost no symptoms. So after 1-2 days 50% drop out.

    Omicron is anew virus and only the people with natural immunity - about 25% - are fully protected where as recovered do contribute significantly. Even worse. The vaccinated - as several studies did show - so far did highly 2..4x over contribute to the Omicron infection rate.

    So until 50% had Omicron we will not see a change in the rates. So the highest rate phase typically will last 4 weeks.

    We (CH) have about 6.5 mio vulnerable out of 8.5. 1 mio/week is infected. (Some US hot spot report up to 1/4 infected! at the same time) So this is a conservative "guesstimate" .

  • The Ivermectin Wars Intensify as States Want Access Over the Counter and a Medical Freedom March Commences This Weekend


    The Ivermectin Wars Intensify as States Want Access Over the Counter and a Medical Freedom March Commences This Weekend
    TrialSite recently shared that a handful of states have proposed bills to ensure ivermectin is available to treat COVID-19 via a legitimate physician’s
    trialsitenews.com



    TrialSite recently shared that a handful of states have proposed bills to ensure ivermectin is available to treat COVID-19 via a legitimate physician’s prescription. Those states include Indiana, Kansas, and New Hampshire. Recently, a leading proponent of the use of ivermectin, Dr. Paul Marik, one of the co-founders of the Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance (FLCCC), discussed the pending New Hampshire ivermectin legislation with conservative news platform, America’s Voice Network.


    Marik, board certified in Internal Medicine, Critical Care Medicine, Neurocritical Care, and Nutrition Science, is a key opinion leader who has worked in numerous hospitals and health systems from South Africa, UK, and of course, the United States where he is most recently affiliated with Eastern Virginia Medical School (EVMS) as well as other medical institutions. Not a stranger to controversy, or for that matter, pushing the comfort boundaries of the medical establishment, Marik isn’t a lightweight, with over 400 peer-reviewed journal articles, 50 book chapters, and author credits for four critical care books.


    Recently, he filed a lawsuit against his hospital over the institution’s ban on various therapies including ivermectin, which happens to be a core therapy in he and his colleagues MATH+ Hospital Treatment Protocol for COVID-19. He and colleagues such as Dr. Pierre Kory experienced what they declare is censorship, as key journals had reviewed and accepted manuscripts, such as with the Journal of Intensive Care Medicine, only to see the approvals retracted. Physicians such as those affiliated with the FLCCC represent prominent figures at this weekend’s medical freedom march.


    Background

    In a recent interview DR. PAUL MARIK | NEW HAMPSHIRE IVERMECTIN BILL – Good News | 45 | Data Matter (tvwfc.co.uk) with the conservative media platform America’s Voice Network, Marik shared his opinions on pending legislation, the importance of repurposed therapeutics, and who he thinks has been involved in the attack on ivermectin as an off-label treatment option.



    The alternative media reporter, Heather Mullins, shared that New Hampshire’s bill is now “sponsored” and must still “go through some hurdles to get passed,” but if done so will “essentially make ivermectin available over the counter.” According to the TrialSite report, the proposed bill would authorize access at the pharmacy via a “standing order” which generally indicates an authorization for nurses, pharmacists, and other appropriately credentialed health care professionals that if directed by state law, empowers the direct care and admonition of a vaccine or therapy (in this case ivermectin) based on an approved medical doctor-based approved protocol.


    TrialSite didn’t report that Paul Marik testified for the proposed bill in New Hampshire. Mullins reports that Marik and other front-line physicians have been on the record that if ivermectin had been allowed for use as an early at home prophylactic treatment targeting COVID-19, hundreds of thousands of lives could have been saved.


    The Interview

    Prior to the testimony in New Hampshire, Dr. Marik shared that 3.7 billion doses of ivermectin have been administered around the world, “changing the face of parasitic diseases on this planet.” Marik declared that ivermectin “is probably the second most important drug ever invented” [the drug’s inventors did win a Nobel Prize and the drug is on the World Health Organization Essential Drug List].


    Declaring that the drug is cheap, safe, and “highly effective against SARS-CoV-2, and if used more widely this drug could have saved hundreds of thousands of lives.”


    Referring to its use in many other countries, the critical care physician went on the record that it’s a “lifesaving drug.”


    Why the pushback against ivermectin? Marik, now somewhat liberated given he isn’t dependent on his employer Sentara, let loose declaring, “There are multiple reasons, and this is probably generated by Big Pharma, government, and big corporations who don’t like cheap, repurposed drugs.” He continued, “So this is a war on cheap, repurposed drugs.” Emphasizing the goals of ivermectin’s adversaries, Marik stated, “They want you to use expensive designer drugs which in fact don’t work.”


    In clarifying his understanding of the New Hampshire bill, Marik declared it is proposing to make ivermectin available over the counter [again via standing order] and according to the critical care doctor, it makes sense given the drug’s safety profile— “the drug is safer than Tylenol,” stated Marik. Repeating again the drug’s safety profile makes it safer than Tylenol, he went on the record “People should be given access to this drug in order to prevent and treat COVID.”


    Marik espoused the critical FLCCC view that early treatment for COVID-19 absolutely represents a critical care strategy: simply waiting at home for a symptomatic phase, prompting a trip to the hospital raises significant danger for severe disease and worse.


    The Controversy

    According to Heather Mullins’ report there has been a coordinated effort to censor the robust data pointing to at least some ivermectin-based efficacy around the world. Ivermectin study watchers often point to the website which tracks all ivermectin studies in a clean, orderly series of tables and graphs. While the majority of the 75 completed studies point to positive data points, the mainstream media and medical establishment in North America, Europe, and Australia have limited the number of studies within the research portfolio that they even acknowledge to just a handful. The others? These studies are dismissed because of bad quality.


    A couple of prominent studies showed no benefit, yet, at least one them became surrounded with controversy and allegations among some industry watchers of conflict of interest. TrialSite notes this hasn’t been proven, and one study in Egypt that was part of a couple of meta-analysis studies turned out to have manipulated data. Yet even with the questionable Egyptian study, TrialSite’s Sonia Elijah’s investigation raised some disturbing questions in “How Ivermectin became a Target for the Fraud Detectives.”


    TrialSite has chronicled ivermectin studies all over the world, including the ICON study done in Broward County early on during the pandemic. Of course, this study wasn’t a randomized controlled trial, thus limiting its impact. Interviews with the head of the largest hospital in the Dominican Republic as well as a well-respected investigator in Dhaka, Bangladesh and interactions with doctors in Nigeria, Zimbabwe, South Africa and India found positive data points. TrialSite even sponsored an objective documentary in Peru, one of the first nations to accept use of the drug for the novel coronavirus.


    After numerous interviews, study write-ups, and real-world observations, the case for ivermectin should be taken seriously. The U.S. National Institute of Health is financing an ivermectin-based study called ACTIV-6, while the University of Minnesota led one of the largest ongoing ivermectin studies called COVID-OUT.


    The drug does have a proven safety profile at doses currently approved for parasitic indications. However, claims that higher dosages are just as safe as Tylenol might be a stretch—rather that claim would be associated with current approved indications. Yet, it’s not a stretch to declare the drug is generally safe if taken off-label under the guidance of a licensed, competent physician.


    The FDA’s behavior during this pandemic in association with ivermectin has been questionable to say the least. Issuing warnings to the public not to use the animal variety of the drug, they emphasized that for the human version, it should be used only in clinical trials. TrialSite’s Sonia Elijah’s piece on obtaining FDA emails suggested the possibility of some form of disinformation campaign emanating from the world’s most respected food and drug regulatory body—an activity, if true, is beneath this organization.


    FDA letters to medical and pharmacy boards and medical societies have led to considerable pressure on doctors employed by health systems and pharmacies not to allow ivermectin prescriptions off-label for COVID-19. In addition to a survey substantiating this trend, TrialSite chronicles plenty of instances evidencing efforts to block access. The TrialSite survey evidenced the effectiveness of an ongoing purge.


    While there has been much controversy following the drug, Marik, Kory, and others actually visited the National Institutes of Health COVID-19 Treatment Guidelines Panel to discuss the evidence of efficacy against SARS-Cov-2 in early 2021.


    Just weeks after that meeting the NIH changes its ivermectin recommendation.


    from use only in clinical trials to the following recommendation:


    There is insufficient evidence for the COVID-19 Treatment Guidelines Panel (the Panel) to recommend either for or against the use of ivermectin for the treatment of COVID-19. Results from adequately powered, well-designed, and well-conducted clinical trials are needed to provide more specific, evidence-based guidance on the role of ivermectin in the treatment of COVID-19.

    Yet if the drug is generally safe and a licensed physician along with an appropriately consenting patient agree to an off-label regimen, why would this vary from other standard off-label use cases that no one makes a fuss about? What is it about COVID? TrialSite has observed based on the severity and intensity of the pandemic, more federal involvement and intervention in healthcare. Concerns of ivermectin took off when government, industry, and regulators discovered that prescriptions skyrocketed from 3,000 per week pre-pandemic to nearly 90,000 per week during the second year of the pandemic.


    TrialSite recently reported on a study led by a University of Michigan doctor showing that at least $130 million in insurance claims for the drug treating COVID-19 in 2021—that figure is probably more than double when counting all the cash-based prescriptions.


    Call to Action: What are your thoughts? Is the federal government simply trying to protect people by blocking access to ivermectin or is this part of some regulatory capture movement? Does this mean industry’s interest supersedes patients? Perhaps, the truth is more nuanced. While this TrialSite fact check on the fact checkers (Ivermectin) could be updated, its core arguments are sound.


    DR. PAUL MARIK | NEW HAMPSHIRE IVERMECTIN BILL - Good News | 45 | Data Matter

    How Ivermectin became a Target for the ‘Fraud Detectives.’
    Note that views expressed in this opinion article are the writer’s personal views and not necessarily those of TrialSite. By Sonia ElijahFrom its humble
    trialsitenews.com

    TrialSite News Original | Documentary in Peru about Ivermectin and COVID-19
    TrialSite News productions introduces a new documentary special about Peru, COVID-19, and the acceptance of Ivermectin as a formally approved treatment
    trialsitenews.com

    Feds Coming After Doctors & Pharmacies that Market Ivermectin as Effective & Safe for COVID-19
    The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is coming for any physician or pharmacy that promotes ivermectin as a drug that can “prevent Coronavirus
    trialsitenews.com

    NIH COVID-19 Treatment Guidelines Panel Invites Top Ivermectin Researchers to Discuss the Evidence of Efficacy to Date
    Just on Wednesday, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) invited the Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance (FLCCC) to present to this apex national
    trialsitenews.com

    Medicare & Private Insurance Pay out $130m for Ivermectin COVID-19 Prescriptions in 2021
    A study led by a group of researchers from the University of Michigan Medical School and the University of Boston investigated insurance claims in the
    trialsitenews.com

    Fact Checking the Fact Checkers: The Case of Ivermectin for Publicly-Subsidized Research
    On December 11, TrialSite reported on a US Senate hearing at which, among other things, there was testimony urgently calling for more research and an EUA
    trialsitenews.com

  • UK week 3 report (about the last 4 weeks) https://assets.publishing.serv…ce-report-week-3-2022.pdf


    The ICU/Deaths among vaccinated are raising by 15%. This is expected as vaccines degrade with time. But 10%/week is quite a lot. May be Omicron with no proper treating now shines up.


    Remarkable is also that no more rate data is given for "normal" vaccinated just for 3x vaccinated...

    The data is anyway only here to see a trend as almost all UK people count as recovered or vaccinated with or missing an infection.

    The trend is clear. Vulnerable vaccinated die at a quite high rate without proper treatment. But we don't know how many unvaxx really die from COV-19 (missing hospitalization reason) and not with.

    So its Ivermectin time now!

  • Australian NSW COVID-19 Cases Surge with Omicron as Vaccination Fails to Stop Viral Transmission, Hospitalization, ICU, or Death: But Omicron Variant is Milder


    Australian NSW COVID-19 Cases Surge with Omicron as Vaccination Fails to Stop Viral Transmission, Hospitalization, ICU, or Death: But Omicron Variant is Milder
    Australia’s government has mobilized some of the most austere, some could even argue severe and authoritarian-leaning responses to the COVID-19 pandemic
    trialsitenews.com



    Australia’s government has mobilized some of the most austere, some could even argue severe and authoritarian-leaning responses to the COVID-19 pandemic among Western governments. TrialSite’s team has analyzed the Australian response, likening it in some ways to China’s “Zero-Tolerance’ COVID-19 policy, taking full advantage of the nation (and continent’s) island status. These strict measures involving border control, travel restrictions, and the like worked until the highly infectious Delta variant of concern showed up on the Australian shores. Thereafter, the country’s public health authorities drove an intensive mass vaccination scheme in the hopes of not only stopping viral transmission but also reducing severe infection and death to mitigate potential strains on the health care system. What a turnaround in vaccination status! The nation with 25.6 million people went from highly unvaccinated to one of the most vaccinated places on the planet with nearly 80% of the population fully immunized and about 25% of the people boosted with a third dose. But has mass vaccination worked? Of course, with the Delta variant and the even more transmissible Omicron variant it’s become common knowledge that the COVID-19 vaccines, even the highly touted mRNA-based products developed by Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna, don’t stop viral transmission after just a few months from the date of full vaccination. So, the argument pivoted from a key tool to achieve herd immunity to one that reduces hospitalization and more severe conditions. But is that the case? TrialSite recently analyzed data from Australia’s most populous state, New South Wales for a better understanding.


    Home to the nation’s largest city Sydney, New South Wales has over 8 million people representing about a third of the entire population. Reviewing the state government’s health agency data in a report titled “COVID-19 Weekly Surveillance in NSW Epidemiological Week 01 Ending 8 January 2022” TrialSite reviewed some interesting data and trends that are now made available to the global audience.


    First, it should be noted that new infections driven by Omicron have absolutely exploded. For much of the pandemic Australia and its most populated state avoided the contagion with few infections and even fewer deaths. With 25.6 million people, the nation reports just over 2 million COVID-19 cases alongside 2,984 deaths, according to Our World in Data.


    In both the entire nation and in the NSW state deaths were few and far between until the Delta surge. By August 2021, the number of deaths increased through October then declined again purportedly due to vaccination. By New Year’s Eve, about 80% of the entire population was vaccinated, and bolstering protection with what TrialSite would consider authoritarian-based, with measures in places including forced quarantining of Aboriginals in camps.



    But as the nation entered 2022, it should have seen a drastic reduction in hospitalization and deaths due to heavy vaccination. But in question was the durability of the COVID-19 vaccine products. The effectiveness of the vaccines waned over just a few months with the Delta variant, and emerging data suggests the vaccines perform even worse with Omicron.


    This reality shows up in the numbers as record numbers of cases have been recorded throughout January 2022. There are also record numbers of hospitalizations and even deaths. How could that be possible? The vaccines are supposed to still provide highly effective protection against hospitalization and death?


    What follows is a review of the most recent data provided by the government of NSW state.


    NSW State COVID-19 Data


    Jan 1-20 to June 15, 2021 (pre-delta) June 16, 2021, to Nov 25, 2021 (delta) Nov 26, 2021, to Jan 8, 2022 (omicron) Total

    Total Cases 5,431 (100%) 75,318 (100%) 379,056 (100%) 459,805 (100%)

    Hospitalized * 384 (7%) 7,881 (10%) 4,100 (1%) 12,365 (3%)

    Admitted to ICU* 145 (3%) 1,459 (2%) 395 (<1%) 1,999 (<1%)

    Deaths* 56 (1%) 584 (1%) 98 (<1%) 738 (<1%)

    Tests 6,858,446 15,811,925 4,604,242 27,723,655

    A brief review of NSW data indicates that clearly, the Delta variant surge appears the most dangerous in terms of percentage of hospitalization, ICU, and deaths per case. There were far more tests, and it should be noted that the data associated with categories of hospitalization, ICU, and death were not mutually exclusive, meaning hospitalized cases could also become ICU admissions, etc.


    The data reveals although the number of infections rose (and in fact, in NSW and Australia as a whole the new daily case count started declining), the Omicron variant represents a far milder strain.


    A review of time series shows how the Delta variant was far more dangerous as measured by the number of cases involving the ICU. While hospitalizations are far higher now, ICU cases are lower as are ventilator cases.


    Vaccination Status & Breakthrough Cases in NSW

    But how is the fully vaccinated faring in the last two surges?


    Hospitalizations, ICU admissions, and deaths among cases diagnosed with COVID-19, by vaccination status, NSW, from 26 November 2021 to 8 January 2022


    Vaccine Status Total Cases Hospitalized % of total cases Hospitalized and in ICU (% of total cases) Death (% of total cases)

    Two effective doses 267,381 2,627 (1%) 215 (0.1%) 67 (0.1%)

    One effective dose 2,578 80 (3.1%) 12 (0.5%) 3 (0.1%)

    No effective dose 3,552 315 (8.9%) 55 (1.5%) 21 (0.6%)

    Under investigation 74,878 881 (1.2%) 106 (0.1%) 6 (<0.1%)

    Not eligible (11 or under in age) 30,667 197 (0.6%) 7 (<0.1) 1 (<0.1%)

    Total 379,056 4,100 (1.1.%) 395 (<0.1) 98 (<0.1%)

    Just in the past week 159,127 or 70.2% of all cases received two effective doses, but this of course, reflects the high proportion of vaccination rates–91.5% of all Australians aged 12 and above. Yet, the fully vaccinated are headed to the hospital in far greater numbers than others—881 are under investigation and must still be sorted out.


    In the period from November 26, 2022, to January 8, 2022, the unvaccinated still become hospitalized at greater rates or 8.9% of the unvaccinated compared to 1% of the fully vaccinated. Yet far more fully vaccinated people end up in the hospital. This raises questions about the argument that full vaccination keeps people out of the hospital.


    What about ICU cases? In this case, the unvaccinated end up in the ICU 1.5% of the time with 55 cases compared to 0.1% for the fully vaccinated at 215. While it’s clear the probability of landing in the ICU is higher for the unvaccinated there are still more vaccinated people ending up in the ICU. Yes, there are more people in that category, but these numbers, nonetheless, still counter the “pandemic of the unvaccinated” claim.


    What about deaths? In terms of total numbers, the fully vaccinated die more than any other vaccinated category due to the sheer total number of vaccinated now combined with leaky vaccine products that lead to breakthrough infections—but that also proves the point that the fully vaccinated in Australia are dying more than the unvaccinated in total numbers. Based on the rates, however, the unvaccinated still die at about six times the rate of the fully vaccinated.


    Slide #9 showcases deaths and other risks by age. The overwhelming mortality associated with COVID-19 continues to be the elderly. For example, in the most recent reporting period among the fully vaccinated, 72% of COVID-19 related deaths involve individuals aged 60 and up. Among the unvaccinated for this latest reporting, just under 50% of the deaths were associated with people 60 and above. Death is distributed a little more equitably among the unvaccinated, even with Omicron.


    Politicization Must Stop

    Some key points however suggest despite heavy vaccination in Australia, infections during the last reporting period from late November to January 8 absolutely skyrocketed. While proportionally the fully vaccinated are safer, they are still ending up in the hospital, ICU unit, and morgue in absolute higher numbers than the unvaccinated. Because vaccination after just a handful of months wanes, and thus doesn’t stop viral transmission, the cases surged ahead breaking records. Whether one is vaccinated or unvaccinated, there are a lot of infections, hospitalization, and death.


    Declaring the pandemic one of the unvaccinated is a dangerous, political game that should be stopped immediately


    COVID-19 (Coronavirus)

  • Maybe these parents are just to emotional, right hux?


    COVID Parenting Has Passed the Point of Absurdity

    This was always unsustainable. Now it’s simply impossible.


    COVID Parenting Has Passed the Point of Absurdity
    This was always unsustainable. Now it’s simply impossible.
    amp.theatlantic.com


    Last Thursday, a group of 20 mothers in Boston met up outside a local high school. Their goal wasn’t to socialize, drink wine, or even share COVID-related tips. They were there for one reason and one reason only: to stand in a circle—socially distanced, of course—and scream.

    How do we send our kids back to school when no one can find COVID tests and so many students and teachers are out sick? How do we keep our kids home from school when we’re expected to be back at work? How can we be good parents when we are also required to be employees, teachers, nurses, playmates, chefs, therapists, and spouses? As I write this sentence, Netflix is babysitting my daughter, who is home sick with a fever and runny nose that might be COVID—should I feel guilty that I’m not attending to her every need, or is guilt now a luxury parents cannot afford?


    Parents were defeated long before Omicron. Now we’ve reached a stage of the pandemic where finding the right words to describe our lot is simply an exercise in absurdity. We are broken. We have nothing left in us but screams of anger and pain.

    I knew that we all needed to come together and support each other in our rage, resistance and disappointment,” Sarah Harmon, the group’s organizer, wrote on Instagram before the gathering. Ironically, some 20 other moms who had RSVP’d “yes” had to cancel at the last minute because they or other family members had COVID, Harmon told me.


    When mothers feel there is no more appealing way to spend an evening than to yell into the frigid January darkness, something is very, very wrong. Parents in the United States are living through a universally terrible moment. For two years, we’ve been spending each and every day navigating an ever-changing virus that’s threatening not only our well-being but our livelihoods. The situation has reached a fever pitch during this wave, when we’re expected to function normally even though nothing is normal and none of the puzzle pieces in front of us fit together.

    Some parents have weathered things worse than others. We have different access to support, different senses of what’s best for our kids, different convictions about masks and distancing and vaccines. But the burden has fallen on us all. Even if we’re somehow physically muddling our way through the pandemonium, our mental health is taking a serious hit. In nationwide survey data being collected now, the Indiana University sociologist Jessica Calarco has found so far that 70 percent of moms, and 54 percent of dads, are feeling overwhelmed and stressed; that about half of parents are feeling depressed and hopeless; and that fewer than 15 percent of mothers, and 25 percent of fathers, are getting enough sleep. “There are really high rates of mental-health struggles across the board,” Calarco told me.

    For me, what’s especially hard is that I thought it was all getting better—that the worst was over. Yes, there would be more variants, but our vaccines would protect us. My family could finally exhale. But you know that scene in every horror movie when the main character shoots the bad guy, cries in relief that it’s all over, and walks away? And you yell, “No, damn it, you have to check that he’s dead!” Well, we were that tragic hero, and the coronavirus got right back up again. It got right back up, and then it stabbed us in the heart.


    Case in point: My kids became fully vaccinated in late December, the same week that Omicron began spreading rapidly throughout the U.S. They were so excited to weave some normalcy back into their lives—to go to restaurants, to have sleepovers with friends, to do all the things my husband and I had previously told them were not worth the risk of infection. In fact, we had promised them we would do these things as soon as they were vaccinated. Then, because of Omicron, and the fear that we might inadvertently sicken the grandparents we were supposed to visit over the holidays, we had to go back on our word. They were heartbroken.

    It’s hard to know what “good parenting” is when you have to make decisions like this—when you find yourself grieving the choices you make to keep your family and community safe. In the living room, my daughter just shivered and asked for a blanket.


    Don’t get me wrong; some things are much better than they used to be. For my family, the vaccines are a huge relief—but it is also disorienting and disheartening to have reached this milestone only to discover that life is still very much the same. We’re still wearing masks. Vaccinated people are still getting sick. Kids are still being hospitalized, now in record numbers, even if thankfully most children who catch Omicron do fine, vaccinated or unvaccinated. Millions of children still aren’t eligible for a vaccine, and we don’t know yet when they will be, or exactly how much of a difference those vaccines will make. It feels like we don’t have anything momentous to look forward to. There is no much-anticipated cure just over the horizon anymore. There is merely more of the same. More fretting about school closures. More waiting for a new variant to mess everything up once again.

    Except life’s not really the same, is it? It’s worse. It’s gotten even harder this wave. The early days of the pandemic were devastating, but at least, back then, “there was a consistent story—‘These are the dangers of COVID-19. This is what we have to do,’” Joel Cooper, a psychologist at Princeton who has studied pandemic cognitive dissonance, told me. Now, he said, the messages we are getting seem to contradict one another. We’re expected to go to work, but warned not to get COVID because hospitals are nearly at capacity. We’re told it’s safe to send our kids to school, even as we watch school COVID numbers rise each day. We’re told to get vaccinated, but that vaccines won’t prevent us from getting infected. We’re told to wear masks, but that Omicron is so contagious, they might not protect us.


    “There’s no consistency anymore,” Cooper said when we spoke last week—a conversation that was interrupted by a text from a close friend telling me that her high-risk daughter had just tested positive for COVID. What we have instead is chaos. As another of my friends, the social worker Carla Naumburg, put it, “Parents are being forced to choose between bad and worse, and we have no idea which option is bad and which is worse.”

    Many parents have no choices—and no support—at all. Child care for parents of little kids is next to impossible to find. In December 2021, there were 111,400 fewer Americans working in child-care jobs than there were in January 2020, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Meanwhile, the paid-family-leave mandate created by the Families First Coronavirus Response Act expired back at the end of 2020, and there have been no moves to reinstate them. And although the American Rescue Plan Act, signed into law by President Joe Biden in March, promises $39 billion in funding to support the flailing child-care sector, many states haven’t started using the money yet.


    Parents who are fortunate enough to have day care are hardly able to use it, because their children are being repeatedly exposed to COVID-19. Kjersten Tucker’s 22-month-old son, Zeke, who is enrolled in full-time day care in Lincoln, Nebraska, has received only eight days of care since December 4 because, although he’s remained healthy, he has been quarantined over and over and over again, like in a deranged version of the movie Groundhog Day. “We’ve slogged through this with a combination of help from my mom, my sister, and taking time off—some of it unpaid, as I ran out of paid time off by the end of the year,” Tucker told me. “I don’t know how people are supposed to make this work.”

    We can’t make this work. That’s the thing. That’s why moms are choosing to spend their nights—their precious moments of child-free time before the next endless day begins—screaming into the darkness. We can’t do this. It isn’t fair. It isn’t sustainable. Then we do it anyway. We hope that when this wave ends, we’ll have a brief respite to compose ourselves before the next one comes, and dream—in the few hours we actually sleep—of finally washing up on the shore of that more normal world we’ve been waiting for all this time. We do it because we have no other choice.

  • Deltacron- the variant that wasn't.....


    Deltacron: the story of the variant that wasn’t
    News of a ‘super variant’ combining Delta and Omicron spread rapidly last week, but researchers say it never existed and the sequences may have resulted from…
    www.nature.com


    On 7 January, virologist Leondios Kostrikis announced on local television that his research group at the University of Cyprus in Nicosia had identified several SARS-CoV-2 genomes that featured elements of both the Delta and Omicron variants.

    Named by them as ‘Deltacron,’ Kostrikis and his team uploaded 25 of the sequences to the popular public repository GISAID that evening, and another 27 a few days later. On 8 January, financial news outlet Bloomberg picked up the story, and Deltacron became international news.

    The response from the scientific community was swift. Many specialists declared both on social media and to the press that the 52 sequences did not point to a new variant, and were not the result of recombination — the genetic sharing of information — between viruses, but instead probably resulted from contamination in the laboratory.

    “There is no such thing as #Deltacron,” tweeted Krutika Kuppalli, a member of the World Health Organization’s COVID-19 technical team based at the Medical University of South Carolina in Charleston, on 9 January. “#Omicron and #Delta did NOT form a super variant.”

  • "An important conservative bias was present. Major risk factors for severe COVID-19 and mortality due to COVID-19, including aging, diabetes, and hypertension, were more present among ivermectin users, which may have underestimated the benefits of ivermectin as it was demonstrated to be particularly effective in subjects above 49 years old in terms of reduction of absolute risk, which corresponds to the group at the highest risk for COVID-19. This allows the understanding that prophylactic use of ivermectin can be particularly impactful in older subjects. In addition, ivermectin seemed to reduce the exceeding risk of hypertension, T2D, and other diseases."

    Right, but the point is we do not know the size of this bias, nor the size of the bias introduced by that wide band propensity score. It is juts not informative.


    I did not think, looking at it, that I would initially find such an obvious issue.


    I know what peer review is, I juts wonder who reviewed this one, because they did not ask for clarifications that i think anyone should have. You asked me to address that paper, it is fine if you diasgree with me. My point is that most doctors don't.


    THH

  • “There is no such thing as #Deltacron,” tweeted Krutika Kuppalli, a member of the World Health Organization’s COVID-19 technical team based at the Medical University of South Carolina in Charleston, on 9 January. “#Omicron and #Delta did NOT form a super variant.”

    Thank goodness.


    As far as I know, a variant might emerge that is both highly contagious (like omicron) and very dangerous (like delta). If it also evades the present vaccines, that could be catastrophic. This is why it is essential that first world countries rush to manufacture and distribute vaccines to the entire world population. They should have done that in 2021.

  • Thank goodness.


    As far as I know, a variant might emerge that is both highly contagious (like omicron) and very dangerous (like delta). If it also evades the present vaccines, that could be catastrophic. This is why it is essential that first world countries rush to manufacture and distribute vaccines to the entire world population. They should have done that in 2021.

    I'm not so sure that more of the present vaccines is the answer. Omicrom is not a varient of SARS COV 2, it did not mutate from delta. Delta looks like it's going dormant or possibly extinct. The omicrom strain came from an animal as I suspected in November. New vaccines might be the answer or I kind of like the let it rip that Australia seems to have adopted. Experts say we all will eventually get omicrom, hopefully not at the same time.

  • 300000 to go.


    2022-01-21 07:52 Paul 

    Dear Dr. Rossi,

    What will be the new price of a SKLep once you reach the 1 million SKLeps sold ?

    Kind regards,

    Paul

    2022-01-21 10:08 Andrea Rossi 

    Paul:

    The prices on

    http://www.ecatorders.com

    are valid if we reach the target of 1 000 000 units ordered; if this target will not be reached, we will not start the production.

    Warm Regards,

    A.R.

    2022-01-21 08:58 CC 

    Dr Rossi:

    Did you reach orders for 700000 units ?

    CC

    2022-01-21 10:06 Andrea Rossi 

    CC:

    Yes, right today we reached 700000 ordered units of the Ecat SKLed.

    Warm Regards,

    A.R.

  • I'm not so sure that more of the present vaccines is the answer.

    I am sure they are the answer, and so is just about every doctor and public health experts on God's Green Earth. I do not know why you think you are smarter than these people. They all say that the present vaccines reduce the risk of getting infected, and greatly reduce the risk of serious illness or death. Perhaps re-engineered vaccines would be even better, but these are much better than nothing. They are far better than acquired immunity, because in the course of acquiring it, you might die, you might suffer lifelong disabilities, and you are likely to suffer a few weeks of misery. Whereas the vaccine causes mild symptoms in most people, and no problem in others (including me).


    Actually, I think I do know why you and others here suffer from the delusion that you know better than experts. See the book "The Death of Expertise" that I just reviewed here:


  • I am sure they are the answer, and so is just about every doctor and public health experts on God's Green Earth. I do not know why you think you are smarter than these people. They all say that the present vaccines reduce the risk of getting infected, and greatly reduce the risk of serious illness or death. Perhaps re-engineered vaccines would be even better, but these are much better than nothing. They are far better than acquired immunity, because in the course of acquiring it, you might die, you might suffer lifelong disabilities, and you are likely to suffer a few weeks of misery. Whereas the vaccine causes mild symptoms in most people, and no problem in others (including me).


    Actually, I think I do know why you and others here suffer from the delusion that you know better than experts. See the book "The Death of Expertise" that I just reviewed here:


    The experts you refer to say boosters offer minimal protection. Big pharma has come out and said the same. Try reading the latest studies you obviously need to update your reading list. First on this list is a previous post concerning Australia, just a few posts back. Enjoy the read.

  • U.S. judge blocks Biden vaccine mandate for federal workers in latest blow to White House Covid agenda


    U.S. judge blocks Biden vaccine mandate for federal workers in latest blow to White House Covid agenda
    Biden's rule "amounts to a presidential mandate that all federal employees consent to vaccination against COVID-19 or lose their jobs," the judge wrote.
    www.cnbc.com


    KEY POINTS

    A federal judge in Texas blocked the Biden administration from enforcing an executive order requiring federal employees to be vaccinated against Covid-19.

    Biden's executive order "amounts to a presidential mandate that all federal employees consent to vaccination against COVID-19 or lose their jobs," the judge wrote.

    The ruling marks the latest setback for President Joe Biden, whose efforts to boost U.S. vaccination rates through sweeping workplace safety rules have been repeatedly stymied in the courts.

  • The experts you refer to say boosters offer minimal protection.

    No, they do not. See:


    Booster shots in U.S. have strongly protected against severe disease from omicron variant, CDC studies show


    But uptake has slowed in the U.S., and less than half of vaccinated people have gotten the additional shot


    https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/2022/01/21/cdc-studies-booster-shots-omicron/




    Let me just say this. If you want to pretend you are some sort of genius expert who knows better than the people at the CDC, go ahead! Live the fantasy. Tell us any kind of bullshit that pops into you head. You are not fooling anyone, but it causes no harm, and it is only mildly annoying. It is an ordinary case of the Dunning Kruger effect. But, when you claim the CDC people did not say what they clearly and repeatedly did say, you are distorting matters of fact. That is annoying. Your opinion of yourself is your opinion, and it can be anything -- as we have seen -- but facts are facts.

  • Your right experts believe you are delusional with your cold fusion. So are you going to welcome me to the group?