Coronavirus in the United States - news and thoughts

Adding to my earlier post: they give the antibiotic as a treatment even though it does not treat the virus. But it treats opportunistic bacteria that complicate treatment and tax the immune system. It is the same idea. It may be that ivermectin is anti inflammatory and helps some. I don’t know. But for inflammation, we have better than that of there are no parasites

 

LOVE this mental image!

 

There are plenty here who fall for the propaganda disguised as “science”…

 

Nematodes tend to live in dirty and/or stagnant water. Nematode infections in humans is something that is all but unheard of here in the US, because our drinking water is treated, and stuff like nematodes are removed. Ivermectin for human consumption in the US is rare, but we use the drug for things like livestock that are more likely to drink untreated water sources.

In a poorer country with less infrastructure, like India, not all the water people drink is treated. Nematode infections are more common, and ivermectin for human use is too. Ivermectin is by far, the best treatment for nematode worms, as it targets them without little to no side effects. And why ivermectin won the Nobel back in 2015.

Ivermectin has shown to have anti-viral properties in lab settings too. But at levels so high, that if given to humans, it would kill them. Ivermectin has shown zero properties at slowing down COVID-19. Ivermectin can help a person who has both COVID-19 and an nematode infection by treating the worms, and allowing the body's immune system to allocate more resources to fight off the viral infection. But there are several studies that show a person with no nematode infection does not benefit from ivermectin when it comes to fighting off COVID-19.

As for why now to start a hopeful return to normalcy? Just look at case numbers. We had a high of over 800k new cases around Jan 14. But since then, that number has been dropping significantly. Last report, 2/8, we had 240k new cases. While our Omicron case "tail" is a little bigger and wider than other country's, the pattern is essentially the same. Big spike, followed by a drop off, with no additional Omicron spikes.

While you can't predict the future with any certainty, Omicron does likely signify the end of the global pandemic stage, and the start of the endemic stage. With so many people now with immunity in places with a high Omicron spike, it's unlikely Omicron will cause any additional spikes, which again, is what we are seeing in places that already had an Omicron spike. It's possible a new variant will arrive on scene, but to cause a major spike, it would have to be both more communicable, and deadlier than Omicron. Never say never, but that too is unlikely. Seems like COVID variants are following a pattern of being able to spread faster, but also being less deadly. Again, the chances of a more deadly, more communicable variant that can also evade immunity seems very remote.

Science doesn't technically change, but scientists change directions based on observations and the scientific method. New variants and other variables, such as the vaccine, change things. Anyone who has followed the science actually understands this. Anyone who doesn't should take some high school science refresher courses.

 

You know that mask effectiveness cannot be inferred from the curve of omicron cases, right?

We can get a much better idea with vaccines and cases (and deaths), which for omicron saw the case numbers for vaxxed slip considerably (about a 28% reduction in protection yet still remain significantly below unvaxxed, at least through the end of December.

 

I mean at first I thought this was Babylon Bee LOL. Just be honest and say this about the Nov elections.

 

She just believes her audience are idiots.

 

An analog to the excess death calculation.

"The head of Indianapolis-based insurance company OneAmerica said the death rate is up a stunning 40% from pre-pandemic levels among working-age people.

“We are seeing, right now, the highest death rates we have seen in the history of this business – not just at OneAmerica,” the company’s CEO Scott Davison said in January. “The data is consistent across every player in that business.”

OneAmerica is a $100 billion insurance company that has had its headquarters in Indianapolis since 1877. The company has approximately 2,400 employees and sells life insurance, including group life insurance to employers nationwide.

Davison said the increase in deaths represents “huge, huge numbers,” and that’s it’s not elderly people who are dying, but “primarily working-age people 18 to 64” who are the employees of companies that have group life insurance plans through OneAmerica."

Life insurance CEO claims deaths are up 40% among people ages 18-64

 

The original lab analysis on masks vs alpha variant was essentially cloth ~10%, surgical ~40%, N95 ~99% in terms of the viral loads they prevented.

I always assumed Delta and especially Omicron must have defeated masking at greater levels, but I never saw any particular lab study as to how much.

 

I hear you. Your first point has been my understanding too, plus the time component.

With omicron being way more transmissible, it's not a bad assumption to think that masking doesn't work as well. But as a measurement issue, we can't infer that from a simple look at the number of cases. However, given the effectiveness of N95s/KN95s and surgical masks, it's quite possible (likely?) that wearing them significantly reduced infections despite the overall number of omicron cases skyrocketing.

 

This is basically like the serial killer lamenting the violence depicted in Hollywood movies.

 

so we need a "Dexter "?

 

A recent study released by Johns Hopkins University indicates that pandemic restrictions like lockdowns and non-pharmaceutical interventions like mask mandates had "little to no effect on COVID-19 mortality."

Additionally, the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) stated in January that cloth masks, commonly worn by many Americans, provide the least amount of protection, The Mayo Clinic said in late December that patients and visitors could no longer wear only a cloth mask and must have a medical-grade face covering. While they recognized that some cloth masks could provide sufficient protection, many commonly worn types did not.

 

If found this revelation interesting. Subsequent spelunking shows it's not all it's cracked up to be:



Did So-Called ‘Johns Hopkins Study’ Really Show Lockdowns Were Ineffective Against Covid-19?

My conclusion to ‘Johns Hopkins study’ about ineffectiveness of lockdowns: It’s as scientific as a Joe Rogan rant

Economists Are Fueling the War Against Public Health

From the Economist op-ed:

"Most of the selected 34 papers were written by economists, rather than public health experts, and only 22 of them have been peer-reviewed. After all of this cherry-picking, the trio further discounts contrary findings by declaring that the methodology of some of these 34 papers are of low quality, according to their vague standards, or cannot be reconciled with higher forms of analysis. This conveniently leaves only a handful of solid papers from which they draw the conclusion favored by right-wing and libertarian politicians: Public health restrictions to curb the spread of the coronavirus are a sham.

There are many reasons, both methodological and analytical, why the new report is wrong, which have been noted elsewhere. But the most obvious evidence that lockdowns—however authoritarian or heinous they may be—stop the spread of SARS-CoV-2 and prevent associated mortality is China. Though the pandemic started in Wuhan in late 2019 and the coronavirus spread widely across the nation of 1.4 billion people, the “zero COVID” policy pushed by President Xi Jinping, which entails the world’s most aggressive lockdowns whenever and wherever a handful of cases are found, leaves it with one of the lowest death rates on earth."

 

Link to study please?

Edit..nm..not actually a study, just a hit piece promoted by FOX..okay

 

I already commented on the JHU meta-analysis but I will some more. It's a not-yet peer reviewed study with several potential immediate flaws (meta-analyses come with a variety of measurement pitfalls). For instance, the authors' excluded over 80 studies, seemingly systematically so. Some PH experts identified that the authors only included economic papers for inclusion. See pkaib's comment above.

There's also a definitional problem with respect to what counts as a lockdown policy and how to measure individual ones. Both of these are real threats to the validity of their findings because a different methodology w/different decisions could produce vastly different findings. In other words, there are extremely good reasons from a science standpoint to be very skeptical of the validity of their estimates.

As far as as masks, I'm very well aware of the CDC's changes. I alluded to them. N95s & KN95s and surgical masks are the recommended and much preferred with omicron. My point was that wearing these masks could very well have reduced the spread of omicron but that this is unmeasured in the CDC or World-O-Meter data and can happen despite the cases spiking.

 

Here's the study. Take caution in any conclusions.

 

Lol, zero covid china.

 

On 1/21, Florida reported 2 covid deaths happening on 1/20.
On 1/28, they reported that 52 covid deaths took place on 1/20.
On 2/4, they reported that 123 deaths took place on 1/20.
As of today, 2/11, they are reporting that 155 deaths took place on 1/20.

 

Correct me if I'm wrong but I think I recall the way FL reported deaths changed sometime last year or maybe even late 2020?

I remember thinking to myself at the time this seems fishy, perhaps to manipulate public perception in a similar way that govt and private entities often go with late *Friday news dumps* to avoid media scrutiny.