Covid-19 News

Quote from THHuxleynew

Shane, that is blatently biased / political.

@THH : For a spin doctor you miss some crucial qualities. The first one being well balanced what you never are albeit you try it hard.

Thus please do write a warning or some negative points about the famous and so far never before used drug Remsdesivir. The positive points are well known. You can leave hospital after 11 days instead of 15 and the fat guys will earn a ton of money after the welcome phase ends end of May... But if you early give HCQ + + or Heparin/Ivermectin then you never will end in hospital.

I hope you understand the small difference...

Taking Remsdesivir brings the ultimate risk of you being just a simple test monkey that later, due to taking it, is more sick than of corona...

I hope you also understand that 2'000'000'000 test cases versus some 1'000 is a minor issue only ?!

Quote from Shane D.

No need then, for government to impose their will in a "one size fits all" approach.

Outside of China, parts of Italy and New York City, governments have not done that. In Japan, Georgia and most other places the "stay-at-home" mandate was more of a polite suggestion than a law. There was no enforcement and no penalties. In rural Japanese districts, people paid no attention to it. Some of them I spoke with did not even know it had been imposed. In New York, Cuomo said all along that rural upstate districts were not in as much danger as the cities, and they did not have to impose the rules as rigorously. On the other hand, in Georgia the hardest hit places are rural districts.

The problem is not governments imposing their will. Or not imposing it. The problem is not the public. Roughly 70% of the public in the U.S. and Japan is doing what it should do. 70% must be enough, because the number of cases in Japan is back down to ~50 a day. Something must be very different, because U.S. has 500 times more daily cases than Japan. And 57 times more daily cases per capita than Greece. Greek people are not known for cooperating with the government. Their government is famously incompetent. Yet, it has succeeded in quashing the epidemic. So, it isn't government regulation; it isn't overall competence in government, because Greece; it isn't disobedient or ignorant citizens; it isn't liberal versus conservative, because Japan and its ruling party are very conservative; it sure isn't closing stores, restaurants and bars because they didn't do that in Japan; it isn't even a lock-down because they never did that in Korea . . . So what is it? Why have some countries controlled the virus, while others such as the U.S. and the UK failed to control it, killing hundred of thousands of people, when they could easily have avoided doing that?

The answer is simple. Greece, Japan, Vietnam, Korea and other countries applied traditional, common-sense epidemiology with things like case tracking and quarantine, enhanced with testing and big data internet-based monitoring. That's what you have to do! They told us repeatedly that is what they did. The Koreans in particular published the methods in detail, and urged the U.S. and others to replicate them. The WHO reported on these methods in detail in February. I know a lot about them, because I read the WHO report and watched the Japanese news where they discuss the ongoing project every day, and they start the news with a detailed scorecard.

It will be difficult to do that in the U.S. It will take 300,000 case trackers, and it will cost billions of dollars, because we have let the epidemic get out of hand. But it can be done. Japan can do it with thousands of case trackers and 2,000 tests per million. We have many more cases per day, so we need hundreds of thousands of trackers, and even at 30,000 tests per million, we do not have enough tests. But the methods are scalable. Outside of New York City, the number of cases per capita is low enough to allow case tracking.

Fortunately, Massachusetts, New York and other states are now starting projects to do what the Koreans recommended. Unfortunately, Georgia governor Kemp and the Trump administration has not lifted a finger to do any of these things. So, hundreds of thousands more Americans will die for no reason, and millions more will suffer tortuous agony and fear in hospitals. Many will have lifetime disabilities. Because Kemp and Trump are idiots.

Quote from Shane D.

Another story documenting how poor state policies turned nursing homes into literal death traps, that helped fuel the pandemic in the US.

Perhaps state policies did turn nursing homes into death traps. I don't know the details, but nursing homes have been a terrible problem in Georgia. The nursing homes themselves are partly to blame, because they have reported false numbers and they even tried to hide the deaths. They refuse to tell the press or the public how many cases they have, or how many deaths. They will not even tell the families of other people living in the homes! The Georgia Dept. of Health thought there were no deaths in one nursing home where there were 16 or more. The Dept. of Health has gone along with these abuses.

However, having said all that -- as I explained before -- I do not think nursing homes have "fueled" the pandemic in the U.S. Except in Seattle, WA in the early days. Elsewhere, the outbreaks in nursing homes and hospitals were apparently contained in these facilities, without causing many infections other than the facility patients, doctors and workers. That is definitely the case in Japan, where this subject has been discussed and discussed to death in the news. It is a huge issue, because most of the major hotspots with 20 to 50 cases have been hospitals and nursing homes. The others were bars and live music joints. So the public is anxious. Families are very anxious. All hospitals and nursing homes are closed to the public. The government has repeatedly assured the public that the outbreaks in these facilities are contained. Everyone who is infected has been accounted for and quarantined. It is rather like getting infected on a cruise ship: they know where you are. They put you in a hospital and they don't let you out until you are better. (Except for one young woman who somehow waltzed out the airport quarantine area and went home on another airplane!! Which is sort of like breaking a plexiglass screen and walking out of an Osaka jail, the way a hoodlum did last year. He ended up hundreds of kilometers away, on a stolen bicycle, a few miles from my home away from home in the middle of nowhere. But, I digress.)

Quote from JedRothwell

Because Kemp and Trump are idiots.

News flash. This is a very bad flu - all the epidemiologists of note agree. You cannot stop it - epidemiologists agree. You can rattle on play-by-play about how the sky is falling but you can't stop a bad flu no matter how much you whine about it.

The IFR is probably 0.3% right about now - but if we didn't have a controlled CDC that wants to so obviously make money for their masters - the numbers could be a lot less. We all know there are treatments.

Bringing in politics, is a form of pathological thinking - as if we should have been able to halt a country to slow (remember that's all we are doing) down the spread of a something that cannot be stopped.

Quote from Shane D.

Surely you jest? Here are just a few articles you can chew on:

https://www.mediamatters.org/c…loroquine-and-chloroquine

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/…chloroquine-wars-n2567405

But I do not need someone to tell me what I see, and read every day. This thing has become politicized, and because it is, that is a form of suppression. Yes, HCQ is not proven yet, and even the small portion of the massive media industry conservatives own (Fox News) has been careful to say that. Same goes for Trump. But because the left made it radioactive, doctors are afraid to openly use it, or report their success. Oh yes, if some doctor wants to report it did not work, they are encouraged to say that publicly and are treated as heros. Something positive to report...well, they have to slip that in quietly when no one is looking to avoid the backlash.

Let me tell you how this began from my perspective as a conservative. There were reports of HCQ being effective. After the reports continued, and I started reading Dr. Richards continual promotion of it, I started taking interest. I got hopeful. It is that simple. Same could be said of any conservative. They did not have hope because of their political beliefs. They had hope because they heard good things about a new drug.

We surely did not expect that merely going about our business having hope would set off a political battle, but it sure did. Maybe I should not even call it a battle, as it is only one side fighting. We are now referred to as "HCQ truthers", and this just another right wing conspiracy...just for having hope something works! That our "promoting" a promising new drug, was somehow reckless, and could cost lives.

And you tell me I am biased? Maybe you should start pointing the finger elsewhere.

Display More

Shane, you admit to your bias and that for you it is a political matter (though why: conservatives have a monopoly on hope???)

I'll admit that it has become politicised, that politicians and parts of the media are biassed.

You have no evidence that doctors or scientists - the people who treat patients, decide what drugs should be tested or accredited, are buying into the same political bias that you and others do.

And, here, I've argued the case both for and against HCQ. My current position is mildly positive, I think with the right regime and other drugs there is some chance it will help, and anyway it has low side effects. But the EVIDENCE so far is not good, only retrospective observational studies that give hope. And because it is a powerful drug influencing the immune system it could either help or hinder - maybe both.

I'd expect unbiassed medics to take a similar stance - well aware that buying into drugs on basis of bad evidence has happened before with bad results.

Now: what in my, or those doctors who are highly cautious about HCQ pointing out there is as yet no good evidence, is politically biassed?

THH

Quote from Alan Smith

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/0…39373-049d1dd0f2-44567417

Dr. Raoult....

He Was a Science Star. Then He Promoted a Questionable Cure for Covid-19. The man behind Trump’s favorite unproven treatment has made a great career assailing orthodoxy. His claim of a 100 percent cure rate shocked scientists around the world.

Display More

Sounds about right. Which is why his overblown and unsubstantiated claims are so flakey. Especially because he could have done a decent RCT had he wanted.

5% of the spanish people have antibodies. means death rate of 1.5%

Quote from Navid

News flash. This is a very bad flu - all the epidemiologists of note agree. You cannot stop it - epidemiologists agree. You can rattle on play-by-play about how the sky is falling but you can't stop a bad flu no matter how much you whine about it.

The IFR is probably 0.3% right about now - but if we didn't have a controlled CDC that wants to so obviously make money for their masters - the numbers could be a lot less. We all know there are treatments.

Bringing in politics, is a form of pathological thinking - as if we should have been able to halt a country to slow (remember that's all we are doing) down the spread of a something that cannot be stopped.

Navid - it is no good peddling this stuff.

(1) yes - it is as lethal as very bad once in two generations (no immunity, deadlier because come from a species jump) flu. That is a killer disease.

(2) The IFR is reliably in the range 0.5% - 1% but it skews a lot with demographics. You have zero evidence it is 0.3% in the US. The best evidence comes from NY deaths and NY seropositive tests (outside grocery stores). You will remember that?

(3) None of us (with sense) know there are effective treatments. If there were the NY doctors, desperate for better outcomes, would have worked them out and be using them

(1) is a summary of (2). I'll back up (2) and (3) with evidence - already posted here, but I'll answer any challenge.

I too was hoping for < 0.3% IFR but it is not to be.

Conclusion: Based on a systematic review and meta-analysis of published evidence on COVID-19 until the end of April, 2020, the IFR of the disease across populations is 0.75% (0.49-1.01%).

https://www.medrxiv.org/conten…101/2020.05.03.20089854v1

PS - based on all posted here I actually said 0.5% - 1% before looking up that meta-analysis which coincidentally had the same figures!

Quote from stefan

5% of the spanish people have antibodies. means death rate of 1.5%

I don't think either figures, from Spain, are that accurate yet? Maybe death rate but as you know the devil there is in the detail.

I'd put that a bit high but maybe the large number of retired ex-pats in Spain skew the demographics towards those more susceptible?

Quote from Wyttenbach

@THH : For a spin doctor

Coming from anyone other than you I'd view that as a serious insult.

(Now that was an insult).

Quote from THHuxleynew

I don't think either figures, from Spain, are that accurate yet? Maybe death rate but as you know the devil there is in the detail.

I'd put that a bit high but maybe the large number of retired ex-pats in Spain skew the demographics towards those more susceptible?

yeah, or you are also helped by other antibodies and get very mild symtoms but no corona antibodies. But if a proper sample has been taken then this is the statistic. Anyway this means that it is not over yet in Spain. My exwife told me about cases of people testing positive for corona but nagative for antiboddies (mild case)

Quote from THHuxleynew

You have zero evidence it is 0.3% in the US.

Yes I do.

Dr. Bhattacharya, Stanford, Center for Primary Care and Outcomes Research. “This disease is on the order of the flu.” On May 17, 2020 his expectation (based on antibody testing at various locales) is this on the high end is 0.2% IFR.

The problem with all numbers is we have a poor # of deaths - we were killing people with ventillators and overcounting covid deaths. We have physicians on records for both. With treatments that exist we can probably do a lot better.

Bad flu.

Quote from THHuxleynew

Now: what in my, or those doctors who are highly cautious about HCQ pointing out there is as yet no good evidence, is politically biassed?

Was this HCQ study bad too? https://www.preprints.org/manuscript/202005.0057/v1

Quote from THHuxleynew

I too was hoping for < 0.3% IFR but it is not to be.

All depends on the number of people with antibodies and the number that have a genetic resistance. Even for AIDS 2-10% (later is a rare case) have a "built in" resistance.

Quote from Navid

This is a very bad flu

wrong. Go back to your microbiology books.

Coronavirus are not a flu.

SARS-CoV-2 is “positive sense,” which means that the infected cell can use it as is, recognizing the viral RNA as its own messenger RNA and being fooled into cranking out viral proteins. An influenza virus is “negative sense,” which means that a cell first has to copy it into a complementary form, as RNA is normally transcribed from DNA.