Coronavirus in the United States - news and thoughts

Damn that was awful typing. My bad.

 

Good idea. An issue with COVID is secondary infections. It is why they give Zithromax. Not because and antibiotic works on a virus. But, the congestion produces secondary bacterial infections.

 

What you describe started happening to me three weeks ago. I was in a place that had air quality warnings from the fires out west. Could smell the fire in the smoke. My nose started running. I took a cold pill and it stopped. Then switched to an allergy pill. Which stopped it. When it rained and the smoke cleared, so did the runny nose. I irrigated because I could feel the irritation in my sinuses and nasal passage and could feel the cascade starting. Didn’t feel sick at all.

 

Don't get your hopes up and def don't hold your breathe.

 

I find in addition to mucinex, I'll take 12 HR sudaphed (behind the counter real stuff) in the day and Afrin nasal spray at night. You can use Afrin for a few days safely. If congestion is bad enough use it in the day too. It may held you drain enough that you don't need the antibiotic.

 

I doubt that there are many out there who've done "research" into this than I or the infectious disease specialists and pulmonologists I've asked about this. Like I said, there's no good quality evidence that Ivermectin is effective.

 

AZ Gov implemented a no-mask order, but the colleges are defying it.
Arizona Colleges Institute Mask Requirements, in Potential Defiance of Governor’s Order

Apparently, the colleges might not be out of compliance, as mask rules apply to everyone, not only the unmasked. This is the way to go, imo. We can't enforce mask mandates only for non-vaxed. Making the mask rule for everyone just might encourage more non-vaxers to get the shot.

 

Because very few on board subscribe to the Chronicle of Higher Ed:

Arizona’s three public universities announced Wednesday that they would be instituting face-mask requirements in certain settings, possibly defying legislation that prohibits universities and community colleges from mandating several public-health measures to mitigate the spread of Covid-19.

Arizona State University was the first institution to push back, announcing it would be requiring face coverings in all classrooms and labs and in “close-quarter environments where physical distancing may not be possible.” Northern Arizona University followed soon after, requiring masks in all classrooms, labs, and indoor and outdoor settings where social distancing is not possible. Then the University of Arizona announced a mask requirement, with President Robert C. Robbins stating that masks would be required in all indoor settings where social distancing is not possible.

“We’re in a bit of a standoff right now, which I think can only be refereed by the judicial system, ultimately,” Lake said, referring to Norwegian Cruise Line’s successful challenge to a Florida law banning companies from requiring proof of vaccination. In Texas, several of the state’s largest school districts have issued mask mandates in defiance of Gov. Greg Abbott’s May executive order prohibiting schools from doing so, and a nonprofit education group has sued to block the order.

Lyndel R. Manson, the chair of the Arizona Board of Regents, which governs the three universities, said their mask requirements are not in violation of Ducey’s executive order or the new law because they apply to everyone, regardless of vaccination status (Maricopa County Community College District’s leadership made the same argument in its announcement). When asked whether she is expecting any legal ramifications from the decision, Manson said she could not determine that.

 

If you think about it, it would seem the governors mandates are problematic. While I can see they have powers to do emergency actions in the interest of public health, like a mandate, I don't know that there is a public health interest in banning mask mandates. If they argued there is that could easily be disproven. If an anti vax genernor put in an order banning schools from requiring any vaccines, would that be legal? I'm not a lawyer but often when things defy common sense they probably aren't enforceable.

An actual law passed to ban such measures is probably more enforceable, but still could be overturned if it restricts rights but serves no purpose.

 

It was a research paper done that as of June 2020 apparently does not fit the narrative. So instead of using it...censor it. Not good when research is shelved or buried because it does not fit the narrative. This is the exact kind of research that should be out there for people to build off of.

 

I am very well aware of what we are dealing with. And this disease does is not at a level that should require people to take an experimental drug (not saying you believe that but that is where we are heading with these mandates). No one is talking about other experimental drugs like the Regeneron antibody cocktail. Just like many question these vaccines brought to market it is ironic that those that do not want to question the possibility Ivermectin along with a Vitamin regiment might be a prophylactic approach like this vaccine appears to be. I am not recommending this for anyone either and I am not doing it. But I do think it should be something discussed versus being shot down and vaccine vaccine vaccine.

This is a monster. And it is not going away. Maybe these drugs hold up. But right now they are showing signs of failing. And we still do not have a long term track record. Hence why it takes so long to get approval typically. And unfortunately...we have cut enough corners (Trump and Warp Speed part of it) that many are not going to trust much coming from the government right now.

It should not be a shock that healthy people do not want to take a drug for a disease that is not that dangerous to them when the technology in 30 years has produced three approved drugs and only two are still used (the one that is not is due to a better treatment being found). Especially where there are other options and the ability to try and avoid the disease.

 

Your study looks at a small time from from the beginning of the pandemic April 8 to May 15 of 2020. Now lets go look at the charts over the year following and see how these states did when it comes to the spike in covid cases. I checked DC because that was the one that they listed in the study. And DC actually looked more like a community that would not have had a mask mandate. Which is not the biggest surprise to me. As at the end of the day the mask it really irrelevant. It is just a visual/prop for people to think they are doing something. But if you go look at a California or an Illinois or a Michigan etc...you will see that they all spike much steeper than say a Florida or even DC which would be more of a high compliance community for that matter when the virus hit them.

 

Is it irony, or duplicity that has this poster calling a vaccine that actually has emergency FDA approval into question and then states we should consider treatments that have zero approval. Sounds like an agenda driven, rather than a science driven approach to me.

 

Here is one that goes through September 2020 and found a negative association between mask mandates and cases, hospitalizations, and deaths:

Association between COVID-19 outcomes and mask mandates, adherence, and attitudes

Here is one that goes through December 2020 across communities, again, finding a negative association between implementing a mask mandate and the number of cases:

Association of State-Issued Mask Mandates and Allowing ...

So having looked at those studies, their results are consistent.

 

Hey, being very clear that I am not implying what you are saying is incorrect. I am just asking for clarity. When you say "it was removed", what do you mean. You and then I both easily found it. Was it formerly posted on dome "free server" that it was just taken off of it to make it harder to search for?

 

Don't worry q, it is not something that researchers would be looking to build off of because it's not a scientific study. It's basically an opinion piece that cited multiple studies. Now whether or not a trade mag should have pulled the paper is a different matter.

 

Fully vaccinated Southwest flight attendant, 36, dies from COVID-19 (msn.com)


©


A Southwest Airlines flight attendant has died from COVID-19 despite being fully vaccinated, according to his mother and best friend.

Maurice 'Reggie' Shepperson, 36, died at Henderson Hospital in Las Vegas on Tuesday, nearly two months after he tested positive for the virus following a work trip to Hawaii.

He had reportedly checked himself into the hospital due to difficulty breathing on July 7, and was put on a ventilator weeks after testing positive.

 

What kind of research is it? Can you describe the methodology?

 

Throw the first one out. Anything only going to Sept is garbage. Anyone being objective would know that. But hey, some still buy that first one LOL.