Jump to content

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 13.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

1 minute ago, MiloMorai said:

That is the opposite of what happened in China if the leaked documents are factual.

Also, if you look at mortality statistics in the US, it's pretty obvious that if anything, COVID deaths have been underreported there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not quite sure what Jeff is trying to say here. Are you expecting, with a mod and a wink, for people to infer that influenza rates are suppressed because they're being misdiagnosed as Covid-19? If that's what you mean, come out and say it.

I think that the Southern hemisphere flu season was reported as being completely suppressed during their winter season months ago. It was expected that the Northern hemisphere's would be similarly affected.

Is "suppressed" a term more to your liking, or will you quibble about that one as another piece of misdirection?

Apparently, in the UK, the rhinoviruses are still causing a typical number of common cold cases, so the measures undertaken don't help with that one. That in itself is more interesting than implicit accusations of dishonesty aimed at the global medical profession.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There has been the claim that the number of people exposed to COVID-19 is much higher than indicated by positive PCR tests, and there also has been the claim that exposure to COVID-19 infers some immunity to seasonal virii. So there is the possibility that seasonal flu surveillance is going to show lower seasonal flu rates because of immunological responses as well as behavioral.

And no doubt that in the US, due to the financial incentives for a positive COVID-19 report, some seasonal flu cases will be reported as COVID-19, despite the absence of PCR test results. As always, the question is, how many? 0.1%? 1%? 10%?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://medical.mit.edu/covid-19-updates/2020/11/pcr-test-result

Two interesting takeaways;

Quote

There is some evidence that Ct values may be useful in predicting patients’ infectiousness and prognosis, but we’re not yet at the point where it makes sense for us to include that information in our decision-making process at MIT, says Associate Medical Director Shawn Ferullo. For one thing, Ct values are not absolute. Different machines can produce different Ct values for the same sample, and the same machine can give different Ct values for different samples from the same person. “While it may be useful to know if an individual’s Ct value is on the high or low end of the scale,” Ferullo says, “based on our current knowledge, it would not change quarantine or self-isolation recommendations.”

Quote

“Unfortunately, retesting is not an option,” he explains. “The Massachusetts Department of Public Health will not accept subsequent negatives to clear a previous positive test. The rules are very clear that people should not be retested once they have a positive result.”

Appears to me that there is a clear bias against accuracy, if retesting is verboten. An irony of the article is that the PCR cycles are essentially a retest, yet trying different machines or vendors is no bueno.

As for testing cycles;

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/29/health/coronavirus-testing.html

Quote

 

Any test with a cycle threshold above 35 is too sensitive, agreed Juliet Morrison, a virologist at the University of California, Riverside. “I’m shocked that people would think that 40 could represent a positive,” she said.

A more reasonable cutoff would be 30 to 35, she added. Dr. Mina said he would set the figure at 30, or even less. Those changes would mean the amount of genetic material in a patient’s sample would have to be 100-fold to 1,000-fold that of the current standard for the test to return a positive result — at least, one worth acting on.

 

 

Quote

 

“It’s just kind of mind-blowing to me that people are not recording the C.T. values from all these tests — that they’re just returning a positive or a negative,” said Angela Rasmussen, a virologist at Columbia University in New York.

“It would be useful information to know if somebody’s positive, whether they have a high viral load or a low viral load,” she added.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, DB said:

I'm not quite sure what Jeff is trying to say here. Are you expecting, with a mod and a wink, for people to infer that influenza rates are suppressed because they're being misdiagnosed as Covid-19? If that's what you mean, come out and say it.

I think that the Southern hemisphere flu season was reported as being completely suppressed during their winter season months ago. It was expected that the Northern hemisphere's would be similarly affected.

Is "suppressed" a term more to your liking, or will you quibble about that one as another piece of misdirection?

Apparently, in the UK, the rhinoviruses are still causing a typical number of common cold cases, so the measures undertaken don't help with that one. That in itself is more interesting than implicit accusations of dishonesty aimed at the global medical profession.

Thought I was being rather obvious. COVID diagnosis=money and continued impending doom narrative. Flu diagnosis=nothing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, rmgill said:

Another reason why Brexit was a mistake eh? 

 

A lot of people have attempted to portray it that way. In actual fact in the EU, member states have the right to make emergency approval of medical products if they feel it necessary, so it doesnt seem to have anything to do with it.

Maybe its just a simple case of our medical services running faster than other nations. Typical Britain, upsetting other happier peoples again.

Edited by Stuart Galbraith
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Stuart Galbraith said:

A lot of people have attempted to portray it that way. In actual fact in the EU, member states have the right to make emergency approval of medical products if they feel it necessary, so it doesnt seem to have anything to do with it.

Maybe its just a simple case of our medical services running faster than other nations. Typical Britain, upsetting other happier peoples again.

To be fair, the EU approval process seems a bit slow to me as well. In many cities here in Germany, the infrastructure for the vaccination centers is already set up and ready to go. They're just waiting for the vaccines to arrive. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Jeff said:

Thought I was being rather obvious. COVID diagnosis=money and continued impending doom narrative. Flu diagnosis=nothing.

Thing is Jeff, the trend is international. There is essentially no flu in the UK, and there was no flu in the southern hemisphere. Unless you think that the utterly broken US medical system is repeated everywhere else in the world, accusing doctors worldwide of some kind of conspiracy enrich US doctors by mimicking false claims of COVID versus flu infection rates is absurd.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, DB said:

Thing is Jeff, the trend is international. There is essentially no flu in the UK, and there was no flu in the southern hemisphere. Unless you think that the utterly broken US medical system is repeated everywhere else in the world, accusing doctors worldwide of some kind of conspiracy enrich US doctors by mimicking false claims of COVID versus flu infection rates is absurd.

The narrative must be defended. Everyone is so invested in the COVID thing that the default is "COVID!" Right now, the experts and professionals are all standing around with hammers, whacking everything like it's a nail. When motorcycle accident victims are being listed as COVID deaths, it's pretty bad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/20/2020 at 3:17 PM, Stargrunt6 said:

I just checked AZs stats.  The second wave isn't hitting as hard as before.

The point was what was trying to be suggested in the video clearly isn't true here in AZ... and clearly isn't true in most places from what I've seen.

As for our second wave it's just begun and clearly hasn't peaked.  Who knows how bad it will be.  I'm already a little concerned because our ICU capacity across the state is already back into the 90s.  If you go back to late June/early July where we had similar daily death tallies that ICU capacity was lower (though not by much).  There's more folks with non-COVID issues in ICUs now than there were this summer.

Couple this to the Thanksgiving holiday where so many folks still gathered together (one dumbass at my work was bragging about how he had 60 people over) and things could get real ugly by Christmas time.  I saw a piece about a week ago talking about the new spike up on the Navajo reservation (worse up there now than it was back when this started... and it was pretty bad back then) and the reporter was questioning how it can be spreading when the Navajo nation doesn't have much, if any, bars or restaurants or other public places.  It turns out the Navajos have very tight familial units that on major occasions (in particular funerals... which have understandably been on the rise lately) come together and spend a lot of time near each other.  We just had that same situation with everyone in the nation with the Thanksgiving holiday... shit could still get really bad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/20/2020 at 2:02 PM, Tim Sielbeck said:

 

Am I... supposed to take this vid seriously?  I got about 3m in where he suggests the following - 'protect the vulnerable' (those 55 and older) and let the virus run its course.

First problem with that argument is that current measures are all about protecting the vulnerable.  Since it's possible for some to have the virus and spread it without knowing that's why it's so important for folks to practice proper hygiene, stay distanced from others, wear a mask, and avoid large gatherings.

So the only thing he can be arguing is that we segregate that 'vulnerable' population away from the rest of us.  Umm... ok.  We have those on the Right bitching and moaning that masks are somehow infringing on their rights.  I'm curious how those same folks are ok with the notion of locking away everyone 55 and older in their homes.  Then there's all the issues associated with that (how will you pay for their needs while they're not working, similar business impacts as the shutdowns, etc., suggesting we let the virus run its course when we don't understand the long term impact on those who have caught it).

Oh... and on top of that it's not like the only folks needing the ICUs are those 55 and older and dying.  Letting the virus run its course through 70% of the population with no precautions is still a recipe for folks dying when they didn't need to.

Just... so much stupid in a few minutes of vid.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, Jeff said:

The narrative must be defended. Everyone is so invested in the COVID thing that the default is "COVID!" Right now, the experts and professionals are all standing around with hammers, whacking everything like it's a nail. When motorcycle accident victims are being listed as COVID deaths, it's pretty bad.

Amusing to see you throw out "the narrative must be defended" when you're the one pushing one so hard.

The flu is seasonal.  The pic you highlighted showed that when last season came to an end the pandemic was starting up.  Your pic also showed that the flu didn't go away completely when the new season should be starting up.  It was just drastically flattened.

This same question of "where'd the flu go?" came up on here weeks ago.  It was pointed out then, and it's still true, that the flu is harder to catch than COVID.  Even with so much noncompliance we still have large swathes of the population isolating, avoiding large gatherings, staying distanced from others, wearing masks, actually washing their bloody hands once in a while (one of the saddest things from this whole affair is the realization how nasty so many people are), etc.  All those measures will drastically cut back on the numbers who catch the flu.  Sources posted last time we talked about this also highlighted that flu vaccine use was up, especially amongst the most vulnerable.  In short you have a combination of factors that highlight the pic you posted is exactly what we should be seeing with the flu.

But keep clinging to "motorcycle accident victims died to COVID" bit... as if that explains the jump in mortality this year compared to others, the overrun ICUs, etc. (you all cling to outliers and claim it proves your point... but then brush off legit evidence in other areas such as police misconduct as being outliers... some of you seriously need to go take a long, hard look in the mirror at what the problem is...).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Photo from one of the numerous stories about the Spire nightclub in Houston, wherein some posted video shows much of the crowd not wearing masks;

 

PMYXAUTKBVBTTJVBONM3ANMENU.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Skywalkre said:

Am I... supposed to take this vid seriously?  I got about 3m in where he suggests the following - 'protect the vulnerable' (those 55 and older) and let the virus run its course.

First problem with that argument is that current measures are all about protecting the vulnerable. 

Arguably, the measures are about signaling virtue. That's why ANY mask is satisfactory for mask mandates, regardless of the efficacy of that particular mask. That doesn't not protect anyone. 

If it was about protecting the vulnerable, then you'd not see the virtue signaling and signs saying that Masks show you care. 

2 hours ago, Skywalkre said:

Since it's possible for some to have the virus and spread it without knowing that's why it's so important for folks to practice proper hygiene, stay distanced from others, wear a mask, and avoid large gatherings.

But they're NOT practicing proper hygeiene. It's just "wear a mask" and everything is ok. Wear a cross and you'll be ok (same thing). 

The folks who are not at risk, who don't ahve anyone in their household who is at risk, are not at risk themselves and don't have anyone conencted to them who are at risk, they go about business as normal. Do all the things needed to keep society running. 

Those who DO have someon with COPD or other issues, they stay home and they protect themselves and their at risk family member. 

It's a quetion of where you put the protective resources. Spread them thin everywhere OR you concentrate them where needed. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...