All things CoronaVirus

[MDlaxfan76]

The message?

(1) Get the COVID-19 vaccine.

(2) Wear a mask in accordance with CDC guidance.

(3) Do NOT take ivermectin for COVID-19, or for any reason without a physician’s prescription.

(4) Stop being ignorant and stupid—stop listening to right-wing media.

(5) Do the above and LIVE.

DocBarrister

OK genius... show us where anyone on this board has "promoted" or suggested anyone take IVM without a physician's prescription!

What I posted this morning is information found on the public NIH Library of Medicine site. It's not political and is obviously considered relevant or the NIH would not have posted it. You better let your buddy Fauci know right away so he can cancel it!

It's an opinion article by two people, not a study, it's not endorsed by anyone much less the FDA. And the FDA has explicitly warned against off-label usage and specifically said there's no evidence of appropriateness for Covid. In other words, "Don't prescribe it, docs"... Sheesh.

Yes, are are promoting ivermectin's usage when you try to pawn this stuff off as meaning more than it does.

Wrong. The IVM information on the NIH site is an abstract.

An abstract is a short statement about your paper designed to give the reader a complete, yet concise, understanding of your paper's research and findings.

Abstracts are designed to highlight key points from major sections of the paper and to explain what the paper includes. Effective abstracts provide sufficient details to expedite classifying the paper as relevant (or not) to readers' clinical work or research interests.

Opinion? This is not the NYT, it's the NIH. Also, I have never tried to pawn any stuff off "as meaning more than it does." Why do you lie about it? I post information I find relevant. If it upsets you, stop reading.

No, it is merely a review of past studies, none of which were on Covid. And indeed, here's the bottomline:

In vivo studies of animal models revealed a broad range of antiviral effects of ivermectin, however, clinical trials are necessary to appraise the potential efficacy of ivermectin in clinical setting.

It is certainly not "opinion"... as usual, just silly on your part. I understand the "bottomline"...have so all along. My reason for posting is to show that the NIH, Fauci's own institution, is still providing research information re IVM/Covid. If you happened to scan down the page, you will find many other abstracts from other researchers, the sort of people you like to call "experts" when it's convenient.

Here's another:
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32251768/

And before you post another dumb and/or snarky comment, I understand IVM is FDA approved for other reasons.

... so why are all the folks proselytizing on the virtues of IVM claiming there is a conspiracy among the government and medical establishment to not consider IVM seriously?

As you know full well... because the "cancel crowd" (including people here on this board), crazed on partisan politics, want to discredit/ridicule anything that isn't mainstream and/or promoted/mandated by the Biden administration.

tech, I don't know why I continue to take you seriously, maybe it's just trying to be polite on this forum, but this is really nonsense. You can't have it both ways, NIH posts articles and studies of ivermectin yet is suppressing its usage for Covid for some nefarious conspiratorial reason. Nope, they post serious work, including what I consider to be 'opinion' that suggests ivermectin has potential usage against viruses, thus ought to be at least examined for Covid (which it has), and they post the actual studies that have made pretty darn clear that there's no real efficacy against Covid...wish it were different, but that's the way it is.

So, why don't we (FDA etc) want docs prescribing for Covid? Because ivermectin, like all drugs, does have negative side effects and there's simply no basis for such usage other than in a controlled study.

I'd also suggest that selling false hope to people is morally wrong. And, moreover, the notion that there's a miracle prevention for Covid, other than vaccines, is bound to feed into the notion that we don't need to get vaccinated...just drink some Root Tonic and you be good...

Up above I said "wish it were different"...I'd posit that we all wish it to be different, that ivermectin or some other drug was indeed a miracle cure, but what the conspiracy mongers and promoters of snake oil in general would suggest is that there's some vast conspiracy to suppress knowledge of such a cure...full out BS.

[jhu72]

The message?

(1) Get the COVID-19 vaccine.

(2) Wear a mask in accordance with CDC guidance.

(3) Do NOT take ivermectin for COVID-19, or for any reason without a physician’s prescription.

(4) Stop being ignorant and stupid—stop listening to right-wing media.

(5) Do the above and LIVE.

DocBarrister

OK genius... show us where anyone on this board has "promoted" or suggested anyone take IVM without a physician's prescription!

What I posted this morning is information found on the public NIH Library of Medicine site. It's not political and is obviously considered relevant or the NIH would not have posted it. You better let your buddy Fauci know right away so he can cancel it!

It's an opinion article by two people, not a study, it's not endorsed by anyone much less the FDA. And the FDA has explicitly warned against off-label usage and specifically said there's no evidence of appropriateness for Covid. In other words, "Don't prescribe it, docs"... Sheesh.

Yes, are are promoting ivermectin's usage when you try to pawn this stuff off as meaning more than it does.

Wrong. The IVM information on the NIH site is an abstract.

An abstract is a short statement about your paper designed to give the reader a complete, yet concise, understanding of your paper's research and findings.

Abstracts are designed to highlight key points from major sections of the paper and to explain what the paper includes. Effective abstracts provide sufficient details to expedite classifying the paper as relevant (or not) to readers' clinical work or research interests.

Opinion? This is not the NYT, it's the NIH. Also, I have never tried to pawn any stuff off "as meaning more than it does." Why do you lie about it? I post information I find relevant. If it upsets you, stop reading.

No, it is merely a review of past studies, none of which were on Covid. And indeed, here's the bottomline:

In vivo studies of animal models revealed a broad range of antiviral effects of ivermectin, however, clinical trials are necessary to appraise the potential efficacy of ivermectin in clinical setting.

It is certainly not "opinion"... as usual, just silly on your part. I understand the "bottomline"...have so all along. My reason for posting is to show that the NIH, Fauci's own institution, is still providing research information re IVM/Covid. If you happened to scan down the page, you will find many other abstracts from other researchers, the sort of people you like to call "experts" when it's convenient.

Here's another:
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32251768/

And before you post another dumb and/or snarky comment, I understand IVM is FDA approved for other reasons.

... so why are all the folks proselytizing on the virtues of IVM claiming there is a conspiracy among the government and medical establishment to not consider IVM seriously?

As you know full well... because the "cancel crowd" (including people here on this board), crazed on partisan politics, want to discredit/ridicule anything that isn't mainstream and/or promoted/mandated by the Biden administration.

tech, I don't know why I continue to take you seriously, maybe it's just trying to be polite on this forum, but this is really nonsense. You can't have it both ways, NIH posts articles and studies of ivermectin yet is suppressing its usage for Covid for some nefarious conspiratorial reason. Nope, they post serious work, including what I consider to be 'opinion' that suggests ivermectin has potential usage against viruses, thus ought to be at least examined for Covid (which it has), and they post the actual studies that have made pretty darn clear that there's no real efficacy against Covid...wish it were different, but that's the way it is.

So, why don't we (FDA etc) want docs prescribing for Covid? Because ivermectin, like all drugs, does have negative side effects and there's simply no basis for such usage other than in a controlled study.

I'd also suggest that selling false hope to people is morally wrong. And, moreover, the notion that there's a miracle prevention for Covid, other than vaccines, is bound to feed into the notion that we don't need to get vaccinated...just drink some Root Tonic and you be good...

Up above I said "wish it were different"...I'd posit that we all wish it to be different, that ivermectin or some other drug was indeed a miracle cure, but what the conspiracy mongers and promoters of snake oil in general would suggest is that there's some vast conspiracy to suppress knowledge of such a cure...full out BS.

... tech's response was really weak.

[jhu72]

... the UK has declared a 5th variant, originating in Columbia, a "variant of concern". The Mu variant. The concern is it may be able to resist vaccinations.

[jhu72]

... over 1 million new cases of COVID last week -- IN CHILDREN!

[Typical Lax Dad]

... over 1 million new cases of COVID last week -- IN CHILDREN!

https://www.cnn.com/2021/08/31/health/c ... index.html

[kramerica.inc]

It's almost like the thing they said earlier...was completely wrong.
Like the last 3 things they said...that were wrong.

If every instinct they have ever had is wrong... Time to do the opposite.

[lagerhead]

... over 1 million new cases of COVID last week -- IN CHILDREN!

Can they track the variants in testing and then report those , it would be interesting to know. How many are Covid, Delta and as you highlight are there any Mu strains here. Are we chasing our tail as the virus mutates faster than vaccines can be developed. We are seeing more breakthrough and anecdotally are the breakthroughs in people who get the vaccine earliest?

[Typical Lax Dad]

It's almost like the thing they said earlier...was completely wrong.
Like the last 3 things they said...that were wrong.

If every instinct they have ever had is wrong... Time to do the opposite.

It’s almost like you were not listening or paying attention.


What was said earlier:

1) stay away from other people
2) keep the spread down by staying away from other people….it lowers the risk of mutations
3) the virus will mutate (it’s what viruses do) Let’s hope we get enough people vaccinated before we get a bad mutation.
4) we may need booster shots or annual vaccines (like the flu)

Those were considerations 15-16 months ago.

[jhu72]

A real world mask study.

[jhu72]

... over 1 million new cases of COVID last week -- IN CHILDREN!

https://www.cnn.com/2021/08/31/health/c ... index.html

... a television pediatrician talking head is claiming 1M. Your report seems to set a lower limit of 200,000. Big difference. Thinking about it, the 1M is clearly high, unless she meant 1M total current cases. The 200K is probably closer to the truth.

[jhu72]

... over 1 million new cases of COVID last week -- IN CHILDREN!

Can they track the variants in testing and then report those , it would be interesting to know. How many are Covid, Delta and as you highlight are there any Mu strains here. Are we chasing our tail as the virus mutates faster than vaccines can be developed. We are seeing more breakthrough and anecdotally are the breakthroughs in people who get the vaccine earliest?

They can certainly get a statistical sample. Which currently points to almost all being delta. Time consuming and expensive I would think to nail every infection to a specific variant. I would think there is very little Mu in the US. Very little in the UK. Early days worrying about Mu. We apparently don't have much if any gamma running around the US either.

My theory: Delta is a pretty good virus. It has properties that make it very capable to compete for victims. It spreads very efficiently, but is not so deadly that it kills an outsized number of those who it infects (in a world of modern medicine). Any variant that kills more efficiently than delta, would likely lose the competition to delta.

[MDlaxfan76]

... the UK has declared a 5th variant, originating in Columbia, a "variant of concern". The Mu variant. The concern is it may be able to resist vaccinations.

well, that would obviously be horrible.

If it's got a high transmissibility, yikes.

[MDlaxfan76]

... over 1 million new cases of COVID last week -- IN CHILDREN!

Can they track the variants in testing and then report those , it would be interesting to know. How many are Covid, Delta and as you highlight are there any Mu strains here. Are we chasing our tail as the virus mutates faster than vaccines can be developed. We are seeing more breakthrough and anecdotally are the breakthroughs in people who get the vaccine earliest?

They can certainly get a statistical sample. Which currently points to almost all being delta. Time consuming and expensive I would think to nail every infection to a specific variant. I would think there is very little Mu in the US. Very little in the UK. Early days worrying about Mu. We apparently don't have much if any gamma running around the US either.

My theory: Delta is a pretty good virus. It has properties that make it very capable to compete for victims. It spreads very efficiently, but is not so deadly that it kills an outsized number of those who it infects (in a world of modern medicine). Any variant that kills more efficiently than delta, would likely lose the competition to delta.

Assuming that getting Delta or vaccine creates at least some immunity to Mu?

Otherwise, Delta burns out and Mu or other variant takes over?

[jhu72]

Lambda is only considered a variant of interest (not concern) and it is more efficient at resisting anti-bodies than delta (IRCC). Delta out competes it apparently. Delta is not going to just burn out for no reason, we need herd immunity for that to happen -- make it burn out.

[lagerhead]

... over 1 million new cases of COVID last week -- IN CHILDREN!

Can they track the variants in testing and then report those , it would be interesting to know. How many are Covid, Delta and as you highlight are there any Mu strains here. Are we chasing our tail as the virus mutates faster than vaccines can be developed. We are seeing more breakthrough and anecdotally are the breakthroughs in people who get the vaccine earliest?

They can certainly get a statistical sample. Which currently points to almost all being delta. Time consuming and expensive I would think to nail every infection to a specific variant. I would think there is very little Mu in the US. Very little in the UK. Early days worrying about Mu. We apparently don't have much if any gamma running around the US either.

My theory: Delta is a pretty good virus. It has properties that make it very capable to compete for victims. It spreads very efficiently, but is not so deadly that it kills an outsized number of those who it infects (in a world of modern medicine). Any variant that kills more efficiently than delta, would likely lose the competition to delta.

I asked a friend the same question, he is more statistically inclined. This link tracks the variants, part of the CDC website. Make of it what you want.

https://covid.cdc.gov/covid-data-tracker/#nowcasting

[jhu72]

... over 1 million new cases of COVID last week -- IN CHILDREN!

Can they track the variants in testing and then report those , it would be interesting to know. How many are Covid, Delta and as you highlight are there any Mu strains here. Are we chasing our tail as the virus mutates faster than vaccines can be developed. We are seeing more breakthrough and anecdotally are the breakthroughs in people who get the vaccine earliest?

They can certainly get a statistical sample. Which currently points to almost all being delta. Time consuming and expensive I would think to nail every infection to a specific variant. I would think there is very little Mu in the US. Very little in the UK. Early days worrying about Mu. We apparently don't have much if any gamma running around the US either. (or lambda either)

My theory: Delta is a pretty good virus. It has properties that make it very capable to compete for victims. It spreads very efficiently, but is not so deadly that it kills an outsized number of those who it infects (in a world of modern medicine). Any variant that kills more efficiently than delta, would likely lose the competition to delta.

I asked a friend the same question, he is more statistically inclined. This link tracks the variants, part of the CDC website. Make of it what you want.

https://covid.cdc.gov/covid-data-tracker/#nowcasting

... looks like 99% delta in the US.

[lagerhead]

... over 1 million new cases of COVID last week -- IN CHILDREN!

Can they track the variants in testing and then report those , it would be interesting to know. How many are Covid, Delta and as you highlight are there any Mu strains here. Are we chasing our tail as the virus mutates faster than vaccines can be developed. We are seeing more breakthrough and anecdotally are the breakthroughs in people who get the vaccine earliest?

They can certainly get a statistical sample. Which currently points to almost all being delta. Time consuming and expensive I would think to nail every infection to a specific variant. I would think there is very little Mu in the US. Very little in the UK. Early days worrying about Mu. We apparently don't have much if any gamma running around the US either. (or lambda either)

My theory: Delta is a pretty good virus. It has properties that make it very capable to compete for victims. It spreads very efficiently, but is not so deadly that it kills an outsized number of those who it infects (in a world of modern medicine). Any variant that kills more efficiently than delta, would likely lose the competition to delta.

I asked a friend the same question, he is more statistically inclined. This link tracks the variants, part of the CDC website. Make of it what you want.

https://covid.cdc.gov/covid-data-tracker/#nowcasting

... looks like 99% delta in the US.

The Nowcast unweighted variants of concern table, state by state, shows 97% and 3% different variants and the highest variant has not been identified as of yet.

[PizzaSnake]

Lambda is only considered a variant of interest (not concern) and it is more efficient at resisting anti-bodies than delta (IRCC). Delta out competes it apparently. Delta is not going to just burn out for no reason, we need herd immunity for that to happen -- make it burn out.

If double-dose vaccinated individuals are contracting "breakthrough" infections with an initial high viral load for the first few, asymptomatic days, how will herd immunity be reached? Not to mention there will still be a segment of the population that cannot (immuno-compromised) or will not (intellectually compromised) receive the vaccine? Playing Russian roulette with a fewer rounds in the chambers?

Don't forget the law of large numbers -- in any game, played long enough, all possible outcomes occur.

[PizzaSnake]

The message?

(1) Get the COVID-19 vaccine.

(2) Wear a mask in accordance with CDC guidance.

(3) Do NOT take ivermectin for COVID-19, or for any reason without a physician’s prescription.

(4) Stop being ignorant and stupid—stop listening to right-wing media.

(5) Do the above and LIVE.

DocBarrister

OK genius... show us where anyone on this board has "promoted" or suggested anyone take IVM without a physician's prescription!

What I posted this morning is information found on the public NIH Library of Medicine site. It's not political and is obviously considered relevant or the NIH would not have posted it. You better let your buddy Fauci know right away so he can cancel it!

It's an opinion article by two people, not a study, it's not endorsed by anyone much less the FDA. And the FDA has explicitly warned against off-label usage and specifically said there's no evidence of appropriateness for Covid. In other words, "Don't prescribe it, docs"... Sheesh.

Yes, are are promoting ivermectin's usage when you try to pawn this stuff off as meaning more than it does.

Wrong. The IVM information on the NIH site is an abstract.

An abstract is a short statement about your paper designed to give the reader a complete, yet concise, understanding of your paper's research and findings.

Abstracts are designed to highlight key points from major sections of the paper and to explain what the paper includes. Effective abstracts provide sufficient details to expedite classifying the paper as relevant (or not) to readers' clinical work or research interests.

Opinion? This is not the NYT, it's the NIH. Also, I have never tried to pawn any stuff off "as meaning more than it does." Why do you lie about it? I post information I find relevant. If it upsets you, stop reading.

No, it is merely a review of past studies, none of which were on Covid. And indeed, here's the bottomline:

In vivo studies of animal models revealed a broad range of antiviral effects of ivermectin, however, clinical trials are necessary to appraise the potential efficacy of ivermectin in clinical setting.

It is certainly not "opinion"... as usual, just silly on your part. I understand the "bottomline"...have so all along. My reason for posting is to show that the NIH, Fauci's own institution, is still providing research information re IVM/Covid. If you happened to scan down the page, you will find many other abstracts from other researchers, the sort of people you like to call "experts" when it's convenient.

Here's another:
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32251768/

And before you post another dumb and/or snarky comment, I understand IVM is FDA approved for other reasons.

... so why are all the folks proselytizing on the virtues of IVM claiming there is a conspiracy among the government and medical establishment to not consider IVM seriously?

As you know full well... because the "cancel crowd" (including people here on this board), crazed on partisan politics, want to discredit/ridicule anything that isn't mainstream and/or promoted/mandated by the Biden administration.

"Cancel crowd"? Hardly. The sh&t doesn't work. So, "smoke up, Johnny", just don't expect any medical care when you overdose. Don't really care what stupid shite you do, just stay in your house, away from society, and accept the consequences.

"Well, well, well, if it isn't the consequences of my own actions."

Tsk, tsk... so classy pizza. You sure come off as a hateful, miserable sod. I always believed people of true intelligence rise above that sort of affliction. Also, I have no idea whom you're quoting...

Curious as to what you come across as?

As for the quote, Google is your friend.

[jhu72]

... over 1 million new cases of COVID last week -- IN CHILDREN!

Can they track the variants in testing and then report those , it would be interesting to know. How many are Covid, Delta and as you highlight are there any Mu strains here. Are we chasing our tail as the virus mutates faster than vaccines can be developed. We are seeing more breakthrough and anecdotally are the breakthroughs in people who get the vaccine earliest?

They can certainly get a statistical sample. Which currently points to almost all being delta. Time consuming and expensive I would think to nail every infection to a specific variant. I would think there is very little Mu in the US. Very little in the UK. Early days worrying about Mu. We apparently don't have much if any gamma running around the US either. (or lambda either)

My theory: Delta is a pretty good virus. It has properties that make it very capable to compete for victims. It spreads very efficiently, but is not so deadly that it kills an outsized number of those who it infects (in a world of modern medicine). Any variant that kills more efficiently than delta, would likely lose the competition to delta.

I asked a friend the same question, he is more statistically inclined. This link tracks the variants, part of the CDC website. Make of it what you want.

https://covid.cdc.gov/covid-data-tracker/#nowcasting

... looks like 99% delta in the US.

The Nowcast unweighted variants of concern table, state by state, shows 97% and 3% different variants and the highest variant has not been identified as of yet.

The table I saw said 99% delta, with a lot of others a 0 to .3%. It did not breakdown into states.