ADVERTISEMENT

Dinglefritz - here is an article I just came across in my COVID reading

Status
Not open for further replies.
Hopefully he’s right, but we are up 15% in deaths week over week from 2 weeks ago and multiple states continue to accelerate infections with deaths likely following in 14-28 days. I know our local area is increasing quickly and hospitals locally are getting nervous and asking for masking requirements.
 
@dinglefritz

This sounds similar to what you write on here. Is this where you are getting some of your info?

Interesting article, there is a video in there as well. Worth the read and watch.

https://off-guardian.org/2020/07/07/second-wave-not-even-close/
I don't think I've read any articles from the Guardian. The one I read that was quoting an Oxford Medical school M.D./researcher/epidemiologist was a Reuters article. Charlie can say that one belongs in the garbage if he wants. It was more science based than the Guardian one you just linked. I'm sure Charlie's credentials are much stronger than an Oxford Dr's...... :rolleyes:

The points the guy I read made were logical and consistent with what I was taught in graduate level virology some 40 years ago. Cross protection between serotypes of viruses does occur to varying degrees and the number of asymptomatic cases does seem to fit that scenario. He believed based on the statistics they were seeing that a 20% infection rate added to some T cell acquired immunity to Corona viruses would get us to a population immunity level. As happens every year, we had millions of people have Corona virus colds prior to this China Flu outbreak so it is logical to at least theorize that there is some protective immunity in our population to garden variety Corona viruses including the China Flu. Many people who are in constant contact with people never seem to ever get a cold even though they get exposed to widely varying serotypes of different families of viruses. They're asymptomatic when challenged by a new serotype of Corona virus cold.
 
I don't think I've read any articles from the Guardian. The one I read that was quoting an Oxford Medical school M.D./researcher/epidemiologist was a Reuters article. Charlie can say that one belongs in the garbage if he wants. It was more science based than the Guardian one you just linked. I'm sure Charlie's credentials are much stronger than an Oxford Dr's...... :rolleyes:

The points the guy I read made were logical and consistent with what I was taught in graduate level virology some 40 years ago. Cross protection between serotypes of viruses does occur to varying degrees and the number of asymptomatic cases does seem to fit that scenario. He believed based on the statistics they were seeing that a 20% infection rate added to some T cell acquired immunity to Corona viruses would get us to a population immunity level. As happens every year, we had millions of people have Corona virus colds prior to this China Flu outbreak so it is logical to at least theorize that there is some protective immunity in our population to garden variety Corona viruses including the China Flu. Many people who are in constant contact with people never seem to ever get a cold even though they get exposed to widely varying serotypes of different families of viruses. They're asymptomatic when challenged by a new serotype of Corona virus cold.

I just find it funny that only the Doctors that believe in widespread deaths are to be believed. If you find doctors that believe differently, then it's garbage.
 
I just find it funny that only the Doctors that believe in widespread deaths are to be believed. If you find doctors that believe differently, then it's garbage.
I watched Anderson Cooper grill one of the Dr. spokespersons from the CDC last night about opening schools. Anderson was just beside himself that the CDC has made some adjustments to their opening recommendations from the ones they gave out back in March. Sanjay Gupta just sat there and listened with his mouth open trying to figure out what slant he could give on the topic. Gupta is not a credible commentator on this topic. Neurosurgeons don't do any infectious disease training beyond medical school once they head down the surgery path.
 
I watched Anderson Cooper grill one of the Dr. spokespersons from the CDC last night about opening schools. Anderson was just beside himself that the CDC has made some adjustments to their opening recommendations from the ones they gave out back in March. Sanjay Gupta just sat there and listened with his mouth open trying to figure out what slant he could give on the topic. Gupta is not a credible commentator on this topic. Neurosurgeons don't do any infectious disease training beyond medical school once they head down the surgery path.

Anderson Cooper: America’s favorite douche bag. The media is a complete joke and no one should change their life over them.
 
I just find it funny that only the Doctors that believe in widespread deaths are to be believed. If you find doctors that believe differently, then it's garbage.
To me this is the biggest problem with the Covid issue. You don’t know what or who to believe. Even if you take into account that we have not dealt with anything like this for a hundred years, there is so much of a difference of opinions among doctors that people are struggling to decide what they need to do to get thru this. So we don’t have a united front to guide us. So everybody does their own thing and we muddle thru each day hoping for better news.
 
To me this is the biggest problem with the Covid issue. You don’t know what or who to believe. Even if you take into account that we have not dealt with anything like this for a hundred years, there is so much of a difference of opinions among doctors that people are struggling to decide what they need to do to get thru this. So we don’t have a united front to guide us. So everybody does their own thing and we muddle thru each day hoping for better news.
Like this?
"We know that wearing a mask outside health care facilities offers little, if any, protection from infection." - New England Journal of Medicine
 
Like this?
"We know that wearing a mask outside health care facilities offers little, if any, protection from infection." - New England Journal of Medicine

from the scientists who actually published the piece

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMc2020836

CORRESPONDENCE

Universal Masking in the Covid-19 Era

TO THE EDITOR:

We understand that some people are citing our Perspective article (published on April 1 at NEJM.org)1 as support for discrediting widespread masking. In truth, the intent of our article was to push for more masking, not less. It is apparent that many people with SARS-CoV-2 infection are asymptomatic or presymptomatic yet highly contagious and that these people account for a substantial fraction of all transmissions.2,3 Universal masking helps to prevent such people from spreading virus-laden secretions, whether they recognize that they are infected or not.4

We did state in the article that “wearing a mask outside health care facilities offers little, if any, protection from infection,” but as the rest of the paragraph makes clear, we intended this statement to apply to passing encounters in public spaces, not sustained interactions within closed environments. A growing body of research shows that the risk of SARS-CoV-2 transmission is strongly correlated with the duration and intensity of contact: the risk of transmission among household members can be as high as 40%, whereas the risk of transmission from less intense and less sustained encounters is below 5%.5-7 This finding is also borne out by recent research associating mask wearing with less transmission of SARS-CoV-2, particularly in closed settings.8 We therefore strongly support the calls of public health agencies for all people to wear masks when circumstances compel them to be within 6 ft of others for sustained periods.


Michael Klompas, M.D., M.P.H.
Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA

Charles A. Morris, M.D., M.P.H.
Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston, MA

Erica S. Shenoy, M.D., Ph.D.
Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA

Since publication of their article, the authors report no further potential conflict of interest.

This letter was published on June 3, 2020, at NEJM.org.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: WC_'sker
To me this is the biggest problem with the Covid issue. You don’t know what or who to believe. Even if you take into account that we have not dealt with anything like this for a hundred years, there is so much of a difference of opinions among doctors that people are struggling to decide what they need to do to get thru this. So we don’t have a united front to guide us. So everybody does their own thing and we muddle thru each day hoping for better news.

There are times, like now, where you need to read from both sides and make your own decision... look at facts and actual evidence and then make an educated decision. Know where the sources are from and are credible (not all .gov are credible). Listen to both sides, then ones who scream the loudest are rarely right, but look at the evidence.
 
There are times, like now, where you need to read from both sides and make your own decision... look at facts and actual evidence and then make an educated decision. Know where the sources are from and are credible (not all .gov are credible). Listen to both sides, then ones who scream the loudest are rarely right, but look at the evidence.

Check this out -

This chart shows that 2,291 of the 4,286 deaths reported on the CDC website for the week of July 11, actually occured between April 19 and May 2. Yet we didn't hear that when they report that on the news? Why is that?
 
  • Like
Reactions: OzzyLvr
from the scientists who actually wrote the statement you cherry picked without actually reading the article

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMc2020836

CORRESPONDENCE

Universal Masking in the Covid-19 Era

TO THE EDITOR:

We understand that some people are citing our Perspective article (published on April 1 at NEJM.org)1 as support for discrediting widespread masking. In truth, the intent of our article was to push for more masking, not less. It is apparent that many people with SARS-CoV-2 infection are asymptomatic or presymptomatic yet highly contagious and that these people account for a substantial fraction of all transmissions.2,3 Universal masking helps to prevent such people from spreading virus-laden secretions, whether they recognize that they are infected or not.4

We did state in the article that “wearing a mask outside health care facilities offers little, if any, protection from infection,” but as the rest of the paragraph makes clear, we intended this statement to apply to passing encounters in public spaces, not sustained interactions within closed environments. A growing body of research shows that the risk of SARS-CoV-2 transmission is strongly correlated with the duration and intensity of contact: the risk of transmission among household members can be as high as 40%, whereas the risk of transmission from less intense and less sustained encounters is below 5%.5-7 This finding is also borne out by recent research associating mask wearing with less transmission of SARS-CoV-2, particularly in closed settings.8 We therefore strongly support the calls of public health agencies for all people to wear masks when circumstances compel them to be within 6 ft of others for sustained periods.


Michael Klompas, M.D., M.P.H.
Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA

Charles A. Morris, M.D., M.P.H.
Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston, MA

Erica S. Shenoy, M.D., Ph.D.
Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA

Since publication of their article, the authors report no further potential conflict of interest.

This letter was published on June 3, 2020, at NEJM.org.
The mask wearing I see in public places IMO might be reducing droplet spread to some degree but man there's some really crappy attempts at masks that don't look like they'll do much. The masks the guys wear behind the meat counter at HyVee do make me feel better even if their noses are sticking out over the mask....
 
from the scientists who actually published the piece

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMc2020836

CORRESPONDENCE

Universal Masking in the Covid-19 Era

TO THE EDITOR:

We understand that some people are citing our Perspective article (published on April 1 at NEJM.org)1 as support for discrediting widespread masking. In truth, the intent of our article was to push for more masking, not less. It is apparent that many people with SARS-CoV-2 infection are asymptomatic or presymptomatic yet highly contagious and that these people account for a substantial fraction of all transmissions.2,3 Universal masking helps to prevent such people from spreading virus-laden secretions, whether they recognize that they are infected or not.4

We did state in the article that “wearing a mask outside health care facilities offers little, if any, protection from infection,” but as the rest of the paragraph makes clear, we intended this statement to apply to passing encounters in public spaces, not sustained interactions within closed environments. A growing body of research shows that the risk of SARS-CoV-2 transmission is strongly correlated with the duration and intensity of contact: the risk of transmission among household members can be as high as 40%, whereas the risk of transmission from less intense and less sustained encounters is below 5%.5-7 This finding is also borne out by recent research associating mask wearing with less transmission of SARS-CoV-2, particularly in closed settings.8 We therefore strongly support the calls of public health agencies for all people to wear masks when circumstances compel them to be within 6 ft of others for sustained periods.


Michael Klompas, M.D., M.P.H.
Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA

Charles A. Morris, M.D., M.P.H.
Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston, MA

Erica S. Shenoy, M.D., Ph.D.
Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA

Since publication of their article, the authors report no further potential conflict of interest.

This letter was published on June 3, 2020, at NEJM.org.
Yep. Nothing new, there. The main public argument being mandated mask-wearing, even in venues where they will do little or no good. It seems obvious to wear them in targeted situations, with vulnerable people. When people are getting verbally and physically threatened for not wearing them in non-crowded stores, I think something has gone very wrong (willfully, unfortunately) with the messaging. The sad story, from France, of a bus driver being beaten to death over mask-wearing (assuming true) is a truly terrible counter-example.
 
Last edited:
Check this out -

This chart shows that 2,291 of the 4,286 deaths reported on the CDC website for the week of July 11, actually occured between April 19 and May 2. Yet we didn't hear that when they report that on the news? Why is that?

I’ve been saying this for months, the CDC and NVSS data lags and trying to get an accurate picture of current events from it are a fools errand. It’s clear we need improvement in data standards and reporting to help respond better to these viral threats. When it’s hard to trust data, how can anyone project or make decisions with confidence?
 
  • Like
Reactions: EastOregonHusker
I’ve been saying this for months, the CDC and NVSS data lags and trying to get an accurate picture of current events from it are a fools errand. It’s clear we need improvement in data standards and reporting to help respond better to these viral threats. When it’s hard to trust data, how can anyone project or make decisions with confidence?

Lags???? That was a dump from New Jersey, more than likely "probables". I don't blame the CDC necessarily, they only report what the states send them.

I just don't get why the media just simply can break it down and be remotely transparent. The remaining weeks show a lag, the July 11 report isn't a lag, that is just irresponsible.

By any measure the death rate and the number of deaths has been declining. The one thing that is increasing is the total cases. Of course, any reasonable person would also look at the number of tests as well. In March, April and early May, the only people that could get tested were emergency responders and people exhibiting symptoms. From then on, anyone can go get a test. Of course the numbers of positive tests will go up, considering a vast majority of people experience no symptoms or slight symptoms. Those people weren't being tested in March and April.
 
Lags???? That was a dump from New Jersey, more than likely "probables". I don't blame the CDC necessarily, they only report what the states send them.

I just don't get why the media just simply can break it down and be remotely transparent. The remaining weeks show a lag, the July 11 report isn't a lag, that is just irresponsible.

By any measure the death rate and the number of deaths has been declining. The one thing that is increasing is the total cases. Of course, any reasonable person would also look at the number of tests as well. In March, April and early May, the only people that could get tested were emergency responders and people exhibiting symptoms. From then on, anyone can go get a test. Of course the numbers of positive tests will go up, considering a vast majority of people experience no symptoms or slight symptoms. Those people weren't being tested in March and April.

As it should, and I hope it does. Tests are taking anywhere from 1 day to 10+ for results, the CDC numbers are always in flux for influenza and everything, so it’s no shock that this is the same. Case numbers do worry me, % of tests returning positive worry me. Local hospital had a 1.4% positive rate of tests a month ago, now seeing 9.8% of their tests returning positive. But, so far, average LOS for patients is down from 9.7 days to 4, and deaths have remained low. Still very concerned with local case loads, but outcomes appear to be improving as doctors learn how to fight it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bluenrg
Lags???? That was a dump from New Jersey, more than likely "probables". I don't blame the CDC necessarily, they only report what the states send them.

I just don't get why the media just simply can break it down and be remotely transparent. The remaining weeks show a lag, the July 11 report isn't a lag, that is just irresponsible.

By any measure the death rate and the number of deaths has been declining. The one thing that is increasing is the total cases. Of course, any reasonable person would also look at the number of tests as well. In March, April and early May, the only people that could get tested were emergency responders and people exhibiting symptoms. From then on, anyone can go get a test. Of course the numbers of positive tests will go up, considering a vast majority of people experience no symptoms or slight symptoms. Those people weren't being tested in March and April.
in most places deaths are not declining any more. they are just fairly stable to increasing. the % of tests that are positive have gone way up and are indicative of significantly more virus transmission among the population. its not just increased testing. its increasing % of the population with the virus. thats what is concerning to health officials. the numbers will never be accurate at one point in time. i read yesterday there are several hundred if not thousands of deaths unreported from Indian reservations alone that will never get counted
and not everyone can get a test. in fact most the population can not get a test. many places still require symptoms or contact with a positive person as a requirement. not sure where you live
 
To me this is the biggest problem with the Covid issue. You don’t know what or who to believe. Even if you take into account that we have not dealt with anything like this for a hundred years, there is so much of a difference of opinions among doctors that people are struggling to decide what they need to do to get thru this. So we don’t have a united front to guide us. So everybody does their own thing and we muddle thru each day hoping for better news.
The problem is that a percentage of people follow, just like the pied piper and let the media/talking heads do their thinking for them
 
Lags???? That was a dump from New Jersey, more than likely "probables". I don't blame the CDC necessarily, they only report what the states send them.

I just don't get why the media just simply can break it down and be remotely transparent. The remaining weeks show a lag, the July 11 report isn't a lag, that is just irresponsible.

By any measure the death rate and the number of deaths has been declining. The one thing that is increasing is the total cases. Of course, any reasonable person would also look at the number of tests as well. In March, April and early May, the only people that could get tested were emergency responders and people exhibiting symptoms. From then on, anyone can go get a test. Of course the numbers of positive tests will go up, considering a vast majority of people experience no symptoms or slight symptoms. Those people weren't being tested in March and April.
Imo there is no media anymore, it’s all opinions, you don’t have the reporter going out looking for information, all they do is check someone’s blog and report that as fact. And there is no penalty for giving out false information, nobody gets fired
 
The problem is that a percentage of people follow, just like the pied piper and let the media/talking heads do their thinking for them
The problem is that there is no baseline. We look at results but every variable that gets us to that point is fluid. That makes it too easy for each side to create political narratives about what could have been or what will happen.
 
The problem is that there is no baseline. We look at results but every variable that gets us to that point is fluid. That makes it too easy for each side to create political narratives about what could have been or what will happen.
I agree with you, I’m curious if it wasn’t a election year what this pandemic would be treated like? The same or totally different
 
The problem is that a percentage of people follow, just like the pied piper and let the media/talking heads do their thinking for them
idk. most the people i know are listening mainly to the doctors. you dont really need exact numbers of every kind to know what you need to know to make decisions. does it really matter if 135,000 have died or 155,,000 or 125,000? a lot of people are dying. a lot of people are sick and hospitalized. a lot of people are asymptomatic and at home just quarantining. not sure what the compulsiveness about exact numbers is all about. except politics. in every other part of life a dead person is something to grieve. but in politics they argue if 125,000 dead looks better than 155,000 dead.
 
I agree with you, I’m curious if it wasn’t a election year what this pandemic would be treated like? The same or totally different
well the doctors would all be saying the same thing. its everybody else who thinks of everythings impact on themselves first and others last.
 
I agree with you, I’m curious if it wasn’t a election year what this pandemic would be treated like? The same or totally different
Just wait until November...the coverage of the virus will no longer look like a horror movie, with cryptic music and fast cuts.

It will all of a sudden be covered like a Rom-Com with many many many upbeat stories of overcoming.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT