GatorPigDog

GatorPigDog

Junior Audioholic
In Florida we can't even count votes. I don't know why people expected our case totals or positivity rates to be accurate.
 
highfigh

highfigh

Audioholic Overlord
If you assume facts you will not be puzzled, but that does not mean you will be correct.
That's the problem with assumptions- they're usually inaccurate unless all of the info is considered and verified. If this was objective, it would be easier to make accurate assumptions.
 
highfigh

highfigh

Audioholic Overlord
I am curious why not a news person asked him how well that Clorox and the light worked out for him, asking for dosages. ;)
Well, he's still alive....still says a lot of stupid things, but he seems to be breathing on his own.
 
panteragstk

panteragstk

Audioholic Ninja
Yeah totally can't say I blame ya well Trump wanted America to be off the world scene guess he's going to get it
Gotta love that Trump didn't want illegals to come into the country and now we aren't allowed to go to any other countries. As someone said "my irony detector just exploded".
 
GO-NAD!

GO-NAD!

Audioholic Ninja
Yeah totally can't say I blame ya well Trump wanted America to be off the world scene guess he's going to get it
A couple of my best friends (a married couple, that is) have elderly parents in Texas and Arizona and are quite concerned about them. But, going to visit them just isn't in the cards.
 
GatorPigDog

GatorPigDog

Junior Audioholic
A couple of hospitals just here in Orlando have confirmed reporting errors that persist in the state reports. Orlando Health confirmed 9.4% positivity vs 98% shown in state report. The VA in Orlando confirmed 6% vs 76%. A lot of people want to tout these reports as gospel, but I truly hope that is yet another instance of Florida's impressively comprehensive incompetence.

State Report
 
mtrycrafts

mtrycrafts

Audioholic Slumlord
Well, he's still alive....still says a lot of stupid things, but he seems to be breathing on his own.
Maybe he is using it secretly hence keeping it away? He needs to share his first hand experience, side effects, etc. ;) :D
 
Swerd

Swerd

Audioholic Spartan
Need some good news about covid-19? Here are six reasons for optimism.


I saw this article in the Washington Post written by Joseph G. Allen, an assistant professor of exposure assessment science, director of the Healthy Buildings program at Harvard University’s T.H. Chan School of Public Health. His six reasons for optimism:
  • Therapeutic treatments (in addition to what we already have for the most sick patients) will arrive before vaccines. When someone contracts the novel coronavirus, his or her body’s immune system launches a defense, including producing antibodies that circulate in the blood to help identify infectious invaders. These circulating antibodies offer some protection against future infection (for how long, we still don’t know). Scientists have now engineered clones of these antibodies — what we call monoclonal antibodies — and they are showing to be effective both therapeutically and to prevent infection. They work by attacking the spike protein of the coronavirus, which is how this virus gets into our cells. Stop that from happening, and the virus can’t replicate inside the body.
  • Rapid, low-cost saliva tests are also coming, and, as my colleague Michael Mina and Laurence J. Kotlikoff recently pointed out, they are a game-changer. Why? These are like home pregnancy tests but for covid-19. Imagine a test you could take at home every day, that gives you an answer in a few minutes after spitting into a vial and costs only $1 to $5. Such a test would change our ability to slow outbreaks where early detection is everything. It would also help consumer confidence and slow down this economic crisis. Want to go to school or work or a Broadway show? Show your rapid test was negative. These tests are not perfectly accurate, but the counterintuitive part is that they don’t have to be. More important than accuracy are speed and frequency of testing.
  • The debate is finally over: Masks work. It took three months, but universal mask-wearing is catching on. What was once awkward and unusual (in the United States, anyway) has now become more accepted. More states and businesses are requiring them. And, what was once political — thanks to our president who said people were wearing masks only to make him look bad — is quickly becoming common sense. We now see leaders in red states urging mask- wearing. (Not all masks are created equal, so fortunately, there is now guidance on what constitutes a good mask.)
  • Consensus has finally emerged that airborne spread is happening. Scientists in my field have been warning about this for months (I wrote about this in early February and more recently argued that airborne transmission is linked to super-spreader events), yet the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the World Health Organization have consistently failed to recognize this. This week, the tide turned when 239 scientists signed a letter to the WHO urging it to acknowledge airborne transmission. And that’s exactly what the WHO did. This means that there will be more messaging coming out from the WHO and other organizations recommending that people add a new control to their toolkit for fighting this virus — healthy building strategies, such as higher ventilation, better filtration and the use of portable air-cleaning devices.
  • There is some science showing that past exposure to common-cold coronaviruses might be playing a protective role for some people. This is a big claim — and I should caution that it is not fully resolved — but several studies are now showing that 20 to 50 percent of people who had never been exposed to the novel coronavirus have immune cells — known as memory T cells — in their body that react to this new virus. The speculation is that this is due to prior exposure to common-cold coronaviruses. We still don’t know why some people fare better than others, or why a few spread the disease to many while others do not spread it at all, but these findings might hold some answers to those questions.
  • Vaccine trials seem to be working, and drug manufacturers have already said they might be able to deliver doses by October. Remember, it was not a given that vaccines would work, so the fact that the early-stage clinical trials are showing positive signs is encouraging. Also a reminder that this is lightning-fast; if we get a vaccine within 12 months, that will be the quickest vaccine ever developed — by several years. There is an important caveat: My colleague Juliette Kayyem likes to point out that vaccines don’t save people, vaccinations do. Once we have a vaccine, the hard task of manufacturing and distributing it comes into play. So, while the signs on vaccines are good, and we might have data in hand in a few months that they work, it will still be a few more months until people have the opportunity to actually receive the vaccine.
I can't repeat this enough: Vaccines Don't Save People, Vaccinations Do.
 
M

Mr._Clark

Full Audioholic
Need some good news about covid-19? Here are six reasons for optimism.


There is some science showing that past exposure to common-cold coronaviruses might be playing a protective role for some people. This is a big claim — and I should caution that it is not fully resolved — but several studies are now showing that 20 to 50 percent of people who had never been exposed to the novel coronavirus have immune cells — known as memory T cells — in their body that react to this new virus. The speculation is that this is due to prior exposure to common-cold coronaviruses. We still don’t know why some people fare better than others, or why a few spread the disease to many while others do not spread it at all, but these findings might hold some answers to those questions.

I can't repeat this enough: Vaccines Don't Save People, Vaccinations Do.
This is probably nuts, but I've actually tried to find live common cold coronaviruses for sale just to see if it would be possible to infect oneself on purpose in an effort to get some immunity. No luck so far.
 
Swerd

Swerd

Audioholic Spartan
This is probably nuts, but I've actually tried to find live common cold coronaviruses for sale just to see if it would be possible to infect oneself on purpose in an effort to get some immunity. No luck so far.
That is nuts. No one who could possibly grow such viruses would try to sell them. The FDA would absolutely forbid distributing known pathogenic viruses to the public. It wouldn’t matter if they are relatively harmless to most people. The FDA would come down hard on that.

When pathogenic viruses are grown in large quantities for vaccines, the FDA is highly interested in how the viruses are inactivated, and want to see exactly how pathogenic they are before and after inactivation.

Not criticizing you, but I thought patent lawyers, who work with pharmaceuticals, would know more about the FDA.
 
Last edited:
TLS Guy

TLS Guy

Audioholic Slumlord
This is probably nuts, but I've actually tried to find live common cold coronaviruses for sale just to see if it would be possible to infect oneself on purpose in an effort to get some immunity. No luck so far.
Yes, it is nuts and would NOT work. I highly doubt there is any cross immunity with common cold viruses and Covid -19. As the receptor binding domain (RBD) of the viral spike (S) protein is poorly conserved between SARS-CoVs and other pathogenic human coronaviruses.

I hope the Oxford group are correct, in that the Covid-19 is a pretty easy target for their vaccine. If you can induce immunity to the S-spike antigen you will have immunity.

So these reports in the press of any immunity from common cold corona viruses are BS in my view. And remember most common colds are caused by rhinoviruses.
 
Swerd

Swerd

Audioholic Spartan
Yes, it is nuts and would NOT work. I highly doubt there is any cross immunity with common cold viruses and Covid -19. As the receptor binding domain (RBD) of the viral spike (S) protein is poorly conserved between SARS-CoVs and other pathogenic human coronaviruses.

I hope the Oxford group are correct, in that the Covid-19 is a pretty easy target for their vaccine. If you can induce immunity to the S-spike antigen you will have immunity.

So these reports in the press of any immunity from common cold corona viruses are BS in my view. And remember most common colds are caused by rhinoviruses.
Maybe not BS. See this recent review article in Nature Reviews Immunology:
 
TLS Guy

TLS Guy

Audioholic Slumlord
Maybe not BS. See this recent review article in Nature Reviews Immunology:
That is speculative at best, and I doubt it is true.
 
Swerd

Swerd

Audioholic Spartan
That is speculative at best, and I doubt it is true.
When Nature invites a review article from noted authorities in a field, they are asked to speculate. I don't think their speculation is out of line with the evidence as we now know it.
 
highfigh

highfigh

Audioholic Overlord
Maybe he is using it secretly hence keeping it away? He needs to share his first hand experience, side effects, etc. ;) :D
From talking about the effects of COVID with someone who spent ten days in the hospital with it, if Trump had it, he wouldn't be seen in public, let alone speaking and he wouldn't be smiling. He would likely have been intubated & in bed and it would be obvious that he's ill. I don't know how strong the effects of Hydroxychoroquin are, but I did read comments from one person who said he felt better very quickly and was released from the hospital shortly after starting it. This guy was in AZ, IIRC. I think I have read more about side effects than successes, but the media doesn't report some things.
 
Swerd

Swerd

Audioholic Spartan
… I don't know how strong the effects of Hydroxychoroquin are, but I did read comments from one person who said he felt better very quickly and was released from the hospital shortly after starting it. This guy was in AZ, IIRC. I think I have read more about side effects than successes, but the media doesn't report some things.
This is what's known as anecdotal evidence. People who don't work in science may not understand that "anecdotal evidence" is an insult to a scientist. It isn't good enough evidence to be convincing. That one sick person's comments are:
  • casual observations or indications rather than rigorous or scientific analysis
  • information passed along by word-of-mouth but not documented scientifically
  • evidence that comes from an individual experience. This may be the experience of a person with an illness or the experience of a practitioner based on one or more patients outside a formal research study.
  • the report of an experience by one or more persons that is not objectively documented or an experience or outcome that occurred outside of a controlled environment
There is strong, convincing, scientific evidence that hydroxychloroquine provides no benefit for critically ill Covid-19 patients. In a risk vs. benefit analysis, hydroxychloroquine fails. The media did report that.
 
highfigh

highfigh

Audioholic Overlord
This is what's known as anecdotal evidence. People who don't work in science may not understand that "anecdotal evidence" is an insult to a scientist. It isn't good enough evidence to be convincing. That one sick person's comments are:
  • casual observations or indications rather than rigorous or scientific analysis
  • information passed along by word-of-mouth but not documented scientifically
  • evidence that comes from an individual experience. This may be the experience of a person with an illness or the experience of a practitioner based on one or more patients outside a formal research study.
  • the report of an experience by one or more persons that is not objectively documented or an experience or outcome that occurred outside of a controlled environment
There is strong, convincing, scientific evidence that hydroxychloroquine provides no benefit for critically ill Covid-19 patients. In a risk vs. benefit analysis, hydroxychloroquine fails. The media did report that.
Thanks for the insult but I do understand that.

As for the guy I know, he said that where he was in the hospital, all of the others nearby were older and died alone, because their family members weren't allowed in. Obviously, not all are affected the same way but he said he wasn't the only one who was miserable and it wasn't only from being intubated.
 
GO-NAD!

GO-NAD!

Audioholic Ninja
This is what's known as anecdotal evidence. People who don't work in science may not understand that "anecdotal evidence" is an insult to a scientist. It isn't good enough evidence to be convincing. That one sick person's comments are:
  • casual observations or indications rather than rigorous or scientific analysis
  • information passed along by word-of-mouth but not documented scientifically
  • evidence that comes from an individual experience. This may be the experience of a person with an illness or the experience of a practitioner based on one or more patients outside a formal research study.
  • the report of an experience by one or more persons that is not objectively documented or an experience or outcome that occurred outside of a controlled environment
There is strong, convincing, scientific evidence that hydroxychloroquine provides no benefit for critically ill Covid-19 patients. In a risk vs. benefit analysis, hydroxychloroquine fails. The media did report that.
Thanks for the insult but I do understand that.

As for the guy I know, he said that where he was in the hospital, all of the others nearby were older and died alone, because their family members weren't allowed in. Obviously, not all are affected the same way but he said he wasn't the only one who was miserable and it wasn't only from being intubated.
Can't forget the placebo effect either.
 

newsletter
  • RBHsound.com
  • BlueJeansCable.com
  • SVS Sound Subwoofers
  • Experience the Martin Logan Montis
Top