COVID-19 | Effects on Skoolies - No Politics please.

[EastCoastCB]

Aye, well said pal.

[EastCoastCB]

I haven't heard anything about any lockdowns. we're lucky to even get people wearing masks down here.

[cadillackid]

Originally Posted by EastCoastCB

I haven't heard anything about any lockdowns. we're lucky to even get people wearing masks down here.

the media and peeps who dont want to work are calling for them in various cities and states...


lockdowns actually drive the pandemic harder as instead of people gathering in larger spaces they gather in homes.. and i dont know about florida but i know up here in winter everyone house has its windows closed up tight and most residential HVAC has little to None on fresh air circulation.. so people gathering with their friends inside homes as opposed to walking a mall or going to a properly social distanced restaraunt is actually more dangerous..



now packed bars are an issue here that supposedly the governer was going to "enforce with a special reinforcement team" but that hasnt happened.. that said mask wearing is pretty good here.. esp with it being colder peoiple are finding those cloth masks actually feel good..



I was just in chicago and mask wearing was near 100% from what i could see amongst all genders and races, little less masking outdoors but anyplace i went inside was well masked and people were distancing..



that city is supposedly locked down but the magnificient mile was a sigh of relief in that it was actually some signs of normalcy with a somewhat Bustle going on along the streets.. I didnt go in the stores but the store operators were enforcing distancing and maximum counts from what I could tell as i walked the streets.. the rest oif the city was unnervingly dead..

[dwood443]

Originally Posted by TheHubbardBus

I wouldn't trust the opinion of anyone who drew a conclusion on the efficacy of anything based on a sample size of 3. Did all 3 of those people also eat breakfast? If so it must have been breakfast that cured them. Bacon & Eggs for everyone!

I’m not saying my doc drew a conclusion from just three people. I was just saying I trust his opinion.

Back in may 2020 this was all still so new. So I asked if he had any thoughts and since still early in the pandemic he mentioned he diagnosed and treated 3 with hydrocloriquin who did recover

I just thought I’d mention it. I did not think I’d get so much negative feedback

[EastCoastCB]

Originally Posted by cadillackid

the media and peeps who dont want to work are calling for them in various cities and states...


lockdowns actually drive the pandemic harder as instead of people gathering in larger spaces they gather in homes.. and i dont know about florida but i know up here in winter everyone house has its windows closed up tight and most residential HVAC has little to None on fresh air circulation.. so people gathering with their friends inside homes as opposed to walking a mall or going to a properly social distanced restaraunt is actually more dangerous..



now packed bars are an issue here that supposedly the governer was going to "enforce with a special reinforcement team" but that hasnt happened.. that said mask wearing is pretty good here.. esp with it being colder peoiple are finding those cloth masks actually feel good..



I was just in chicago and mask wearing was near 100% from what i could see amongst all genders and races, little less masking outdoors but anyplace i went inside was well masked and people were distancing..



that city is supposedly locked down but the magnificient mile was a sigh of relief in that it was actually some signs of normalcy with a somewhat Bustle going on along the streets.. I didnt go in the stores but the store operators were enforcing distancing and maximum counts from what I could tell as i walked the streets.. the rest oif the city was unnervingly dead..

Why don't you just come down and stay in FL then? No one here will ever utter that terrifying word "lockdown" here and you can enjoy life as 100% normal before covid. Like literally FL is your bastion of freedom and liberty come on and soak it in, man.
You can do whatever here. Packed bars, packed theme parks, sports events, concerts, clubs- we got it all man.

[dwood443]

Originally Posted by cadillackid

The problem with HCQ is it got caught in the politics ..

There isn’t a drug pit there that is 100%, HCQ hurt some worked for others. Science proved it but politics was that Libs said it’s a grump drug so it kills people. Righties said it’s a trump drug it’s the miracle cure..

Both were right and both were wrong.. it’s good for some not for others that’s how medicine has been for 1000s of years..

Even an aspirine or ibuprofen hurts some and helps others.

Doctors use science to help determine when and when not to use it .. politics killed this one just like politics has the virus all wrong.. on both sides..

Libs who want govt to nanny us all and righties who won’t even put on a mask for 20 minutes ...

Science says different .. the virus kills 1.5% overall and masks greatly reduce its ability to spread. Neither sides argument is right. We don’t need locked In a box but we do need to wear masks and social distance.. that’s the science

I agree. I just want to get all this behind us if that’s possible. I have a new to me skoolie I want to explore the country in

[Native]

Originally Posted by dwood443

I agree. I just want to get all this behind us if that’s possible. I have a new to me skoolie I want to explore the country in

So go out and explore! Just like the flu, COVID will be with us for a long time to come, as will the NEXT virus, and the next, etc.

[Oscar1]

I agree. I just want to get all this behind us if that’s possible. I have a new to me skoolie I want to explore the country in.

Amen to that brother

[EastCoastCB]

Originally Posted by Native

So go out and explore! Just like the flu, COVID will be with us for a long time to come, as will the NEXT virus, and the next, etc.

exploring is fine. Please explore safely and reasonably- with some regard for your fellow man.

[TheHubbardBus]

Originally Posted by dwood443

I’m not saying my doc drew a conclusion from just three people. I was just saying I trust his opinion.

Back in may 2020 this was all still so new. So I asked if he had any thoughts and since still early in the pandemic he mentioned he diagnosed and treated 3 with hydrocloriquin who did recover

I just thought I’d mention it. I did not think I’d get so much negative feedback

I didn't intend for my post to come off as negative feedback, & apologize if it did. No ill will or insult was intended. But I'll stand by my statement, which is not directed at you or your doctor but rather anyone who comes to questionable conclusions based on insufficient data. Your post made it sound like your doctor had, in fact, drawn some conclusion over his 3-patient experience. Perhaps I read it wrong. I'd trust someone who said "It had a minimal potential for harm, so I gave it a shot. The patients recovered, so it may or may not have had anything to do with it". That would be a trustworthy statement. But the way I read your post, it seemed like it was more along the lines of "I gave all 3 of my covid patients HCQ because there's a political conspiracy afloat trying to make the president look bad". That would not be a trustworthy statement, because while it could be & maybe even is true, there's no way in hell your doctor could possibly know that, indicating they base their decision-making on emotion and assumptions rather than logic.

[TheHubbardBus]

Originally Posted by cadillackid

The problem with HCQ is it got caught in the politics ..

There isn’t a drug pit there that is 100%, HCQ hurt some worked for others. Science proved it but politics was that Libs said it’s a grump drug so it kills people. Righties said it’s a trump drug it’s the miracle cure..

Both were right and both were wrong.. it’s good for some not for others that’s how medicine has been for 1000s of years..

Forgive me for picking the few bits out of your mouth I disagree with. Most I do, so I'm not trying to be contrary. But I don't believe the parts in bold to be accurate.

Just because some people recover while taking (insert any drug here) doesn't mean the drug was responsible for their recovery. Particularly, in the case of covid, when the majority of those infected don't ever get ill enough to require any treatment, and those ill enough to require treatment are almost invariably too ill to receive only one treatment. The nature of this disease & this pandemic make determining the efficacy of a sole treatment quite difficult.

The type of testing required to show if a drug like HCQ is actually useful, for some or many, is the very type of testing that to date has suggested it to not really be of much use. Saying it's worked for some but not others is basing that belief on anecdotal, low-quality, coincidental evidence which couldn't possibly account for the multitude of factors at play.

If the day comes when someone can demonstrate the mechanism by which HCQ does - not can, could, might, or in-vitro - but does, improve health outcomes in certain people, then your statements could be viewed as correct. Same goes for large scale, randomized controlled-trial results that may counter the conclusions of today's large-scale, randomized controlled-trial results which indicate the opposite. But until that time, I believe a more accurate way to phrase things would be "It hurt a small minority (because it is apparently a relatively benign drug in suggested dosages), and might have had some benefit for others."

Plenty of focus has been placed on HCQ because the President mentioned it, but it's nothing but one of countless therapeutics that have been floated as potential treatments based on the same type of incidental data that brought HCQ to people's attention. Most of those have panned out exactly the same. Which is why you don't hear about them.

To be clear, I'm not advocating against anyone's right to receive HCQ or anything else if they & their doctor feel it's warranted. Particularly when the risk profile is so low. But "probably won't hurt" is a long way from "might help".

[EastCoastCB]

https://www.nbcnews.com/health/healt...ients-n1242652

Researchers at the University of Oxford in the U.K. have concluded that hydroxychloroquine does nothing to prevent Covid-19-related deaths.

The research is a continuation of a major clinical trial that found that the drug — which has previously been touted by President Donald Trump and White House trade adviser Peter Navarro — had no clinical benefit.

The study, published in the New England Journal of Medicine, examined the outcomes of 1,561 patients hospitalized with Covid-19 who received hydroxychloroquine and compared them to 3,155 patients who served as a control group.

Within a month, about a quarter of the patients in each group had died.

There was also a slightly higher number of heart-related deaths in the hydroxychloroquine group; however, that finding was not robust enough to be statistically significant — meaning it could have been due to chance.

"The scientific evidence is clear," said Dr. Caleb Alexander, a professor of epidemiology and medicine at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. "There is no convincing evidence of its effectiveness for treating Covid."

[jayb]

Originally Posted by Native

The quote above is from the link below. There is a video of the doctor testifying in front of Congress. (28 minutes) From: https://covid19criticalcare.com/

Alternately, you may view the video (10 minutes) plus a short introduction and commercials on Youtube here:

Here is Dr. John Campbell's video concerning Ivermectin:

Then there is concern for the Drosten PRC COVID-19 test that is used all over the world.
https://www.globalresearch.ca/corona...EShpOgEoeGoS7g

You're welcome to try it if you want. I have enough to worm three horses on my kitchen counter.

[Native]

Originally Posted by jayb

You're welcome to try it if you want. I have enough to worm three horses on my kitchen counter.

I do not recall hearing or reading any of the DOCTORS in the videos recommending or advocating people take the medicines you have on your counter that were made for horses. They are recommending/advocating for medicines made for human consumption as prescribed by medical doctors.

[Native]

https://www.aier.org/article/who-del...m-its-website/

[EastCoastCB]

Originally Posted by Native

https://www.aier.org/article/who-del...m-its-website/

maybe because that's a lost cause, a sinking ship.

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-02948-4

https://intermountainhealthcare.org/...y-in-covid-19/

https://www.who.int/news-room/q-a-de...s-and-covid-19

What is ‘herd immunity’?
‘Herd immunity’, also known as ‘population immunity’, is a concept used for vaccination, in which a population can be protected from a certain virus if a threshold of vaccination is reached.

Herd immunity is achieved by protecting people from a virus, not by exposing them to it.

Vaccines train our immune systems to create proteins that fight disease, known as ‘antibodies’, just as would happen when we are exposed to a disease but – crucially – vaccines work without making us sick. Vaccinated people are protected from getting the disease in question and passing it on, breaking any chains of transmission. Visit our webpage on COVID-19 and vaccines for more detail.

With herd immunity, the vast majority of a population are vaccinated, lowering the overall amount of virus able to spread in the whole population. As a result, not every single person needs to be vaccinated to be protected, which helps ensure vulnerable groups who cannot get vaccinated are kept safe.

The percentage of people who need to have antibodies in order to achieve herd immunity against a particular disease varies with each disease. For example, herd immunity against measles requires about 95% of a population to be vaccinated. The remaining 5% will be protected by the fact that measles will not spread among those who are vaccinated. For polio, the threshold is about 80%.

Achieving herd immunity with safe and effective vaccines makes diseases rarer and saves lives.

Find out more about the science behind herd immunity by watching or reading this interview with WHO’s Chief Scientist, Dr Soumya Swaminathan.

What is WHO’s position on ‘herd immunity’ as a way of fighting COVID-19?
Attempts to reach ‘herd immunity’ through exposing people to a virus are scientifically problematic and unethical. Letting COVID-19 spread through populations, of any age or health status will lead to unnecessary infections, suffering and death.

The vast majority of people in most countries remain susceptible to this virus. Seroprevalence surveys suggest that in most countries, less than 10% of the population have been infected with COVID-19.

We are still learning about immunity to COVID-19. Most people who are infected with COVID-19 develop an immune response within the first few weeks, but we don’t know how strong or lasting that immune response is, or how it differs for different people. There have also been reports of people infected with COVID-19 for a second time.

Until we better understand COVID-19 immunity, it will not be possible to know how much of a population is immune and how long that immunity last for, let alone make future predictions. These challenges should preclude any plans that try to increase immunity within a population by allowing people to get infected.

Although older people and those with underlying conditions are most at risk of severe disease and death, they are not the only ones at risk.

Finally, while most infected people get mild or moderate forms of COVID-19 and some experience no disease, many become seriously ill and must be admitted into hospital. We are only beginning to understand the long-term health impacts among people who have had COVID-19, including what is being described as ‘Long COVID.’ WHO is working with clinicians and patient groups to better understand the long term effects of COVID-19.

Read the Director-General’s opening remarks at the 12 October COVID-19 briefing for a summary of WHO’s position.

https://www.lung.org/blog/understand...-herd-immunity

As COVID-19 continues to spread through the United States, I have often heard people saying that "it just needs to run its course.” This, coupled with reports, disputed by some, of people attending so-called “COVID parties,” contribute to harmful misperceptions on the concept of herd immunity.

Herd immunity is achieved when large percentages of a population become immune to a disease and therefore indirectly protect those who do not have immunity. If, for example, four out of five of the people who are exposed to someone with an infectious disease are immune to it, the disease is much less likely to spread. However, the percentage of people who must be immune in order to achieve herd immunity varies based on multiple factors including the mode of transmission, and how easily and quickly a given disease spreads. In most cases, herd immunity is not achieved without an effective vaccine. For COVID-19, the percentage of the population that needs to be infected to achieve herd immunity is estimated to be between 70% and 90%, and this is assuming lasting immunity is possible.

Why We Need Vaccines & How Chickenpox is Different from COVID-19
Vaccines are typically required to achieve herd immunity. Childhood illnesses such as measles, mumps, diphtheria, polio, chickenpox, etc., all reached herd immunity through this approach. We have seen measles outbreaks in communities who have lost herd immunity due to anti-vaccine movements.

Prior to vaccines those diseases had a level of herd immunity in adult populations, but outbreaks regularly occurred in children (hence "childhood illness") and the immunocompromised.

When I was a child, some parents would hold chickenpox parties to achieve immunity. While chicken pox (varicella virus) can cause severe disease, the rate of severe illness is much lower than with COVID-19. About 150 people die from chicken pox each year and the virus has also been linked to birth defects if pregnant women get infected. These statistics do not include shingles, which is a reactivation of the chickenpox virus later in life that may occur in adults with compromised immune systems. Luckily, shingles is normally caught and treated early, so it accounts for less than 100 deaths a year. Even with these low rates, the CDC recommends vaccination rather than natural infection.

Sars-CoV2, the virus that causes COVID-19, presents more complicated issues. First, we are unsure how long immunity lasts. Based on other severe coronavirus infections, it probably lasts months to years, but not lifelong. Immunity may also be less protective in patients who had mild or asymptomatic disease. If immunity is not long lasting, or if people with mild infection do not develop immunity, herd immunity without a vaccine cannot be achieved. COVID-19 also has much higher rates of severe illness than many other viral infections with up to 15% of infected people hospitalized and mortality rates estimated at 0.5 to 1%. These rates are 10 times higher than seasonal influenza.

Achieving Herd Immunity
Assuming immunity is long lasting, to achieve herd immunity in the U.S. without a vaccine would likely require more than 230 million Americans become infected. Even if mortality rates are at the low end of the estimates, there would be more than a million deaths.

Mortality is the tip of the iceberg when it comes to this disease. For every death, there are many more hospitalizations and ICU admissions. Patients who are not hospitalized can still have severe illness and be debilitated for weeks. Long term effects of COVID- 19 are just being defined but are likely to be significant in some infected patients. Add to this the risk of strokes and other clotting events in otherwise healthy patients as well as multi-system inflammatory syndrome in children, and the idea of pursuing herd immunity through infection becomes painfully ill-conceived.

Those who believe “COVID-19 parties” are examples of how herd immunity can be achieved are misguidedly thinking that the virus just needs to run its course and it will be gone. One glaring problem with that idea is we don’t know that people are immune once they’ve been infected. Ironically, these may be the same people who oppose or down-play the need to wear masks or social distance. And wearing a mask and physical distancing actually follows the same mathematical concept as herd immunity. If we reduce the spread of the virus, we stop COVID-19 without sickness or death.

Until there is a vaccine, stay home, stay safe, wear a mask and save lives.

[Native]

Originally Posted by EastCoastCB

maybe because that's a lost cause, a sinking ship.

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-02948-4

https://intermountainhealthcare.org/...y-in-covid-19/

https://www.who.int/news-room/q-a-de...s-and-covid-19



https://www.lung.org/blog/understand...-herd-immunity

Interesting ...


The WHO did not change their definition of herd immunity "because that ship has sailed" with respect to COVID. Only the WHO knows why they changed their definition. We as a population have not yet achieved herd immunity to COVID. Herd immunity is a bioogical reality.


... perhaps the following link will clear things up for you.


https://www.webmd.com/lung/what-is-herd-immunity



Per the links you provided, the WHO stated herd immunity as:

What is ‘herd immunity’?
‘Herd immunity’, also known as ‘population immunity’, is a concept used for vaccination, in which a population can be protected from a certain virus if a threshold of vaccination is reached.

Herd immunity is achieved by protecting people from a virus, not by exposing them to it.

Wheras the lung.org quote you also posted stated it as:

Herd immunity is achieved when large percentages of a population become immune to a disease and therefore indirectly protect those who do not have immunity.


Vaccines are typically required to achieve herd immunity.

This link: https://www.aier.org/article/who-del...m-its-website/



... is an article describing how the WHO has changed their definition of herd immunity from a naturally occuring biogical reality (be it from immunization or spread in the wild) to exclusively a vacination strategy.

[EastCoastCB]

It was realized months ago by the scientific community that there was no "herd immunity" without vaccinations. That's been beat to death by now hasn't it?

[EastCoastCB]

we hit 13k cases today. 20%++ positivity rate.

[Oscar1]

Originally Posted by EastCoastCB

we hit 13k cases today. 20%++ positivity rate.

Wow Charlie that's awesome that Floridian's are working so hard to set the bar so high!
Stay safe

Oscar