COVID Developments and News

[MuseChaser]

[QUOTE=AnalogMan;3461301]

Originally Posted by Irace86.2.0

Butler County judge orders West Chester Hospital to treat COVID-19 patient with ivermectin, despite CDC warnings



Holy sh!t!!!!



I didn't know a judge could force a physician to administer an unapproved drug (at least not for that indication) to a patient!

The subsequent malpractice suit, and assignment of blame, will be interesting to see. Should be Olympic-class finger pointing.

Or, maybe, we could hope that ivermectin is actually helpful and the patient recovers? That would be better, right? I also seem to recall a fairly HUGE push to mandate vaccines by various entities and people well before any of the vaccines were "approved" other than experimentally.

Apologies if that comes off a little snarky, but sometimes I get a little dizzy trying to keep track of what I'm supposed to think, or what I'm supposed to root for....

[Irace86.2.0]

Originally Posted by MuseChaser

When I wrote that, I wasn't refering to doctors prescribing drugs for money, I was referring to various health care, pharmaceutical corporations, and government interests potentially actively discrediting ivermectin and other cheap readily available drugs for financial reasons. I do believe doctors over- or incorrectly prescribe medications for their own gain. Unfortunately, if that happens, I suppose one should also be open to the possibility that similar poor motivations could and do exist on a much larger scale.

You are really flirting with conspiracy theorist thinking. If a cheap and easily available drug existed in the world that overwhelmingly saved lives, what would it take to keep the genie in the bottle, to suppress that information? Despite the ability to save millions of lives, you are saying it is reasonable to believe multiple different governments, scientists, doctors and pharmaceutical companies have all aligned themselves for a common profit motive around producing more expensive drugs or vaccines or whatever you are claiming. Do you hear how that sounds? It sounds crazy man. It honestly sounds like you are paranoid about the institutions in the world to such an extent that you could believe such a coverup is even possible. This wreaks of Deep State, World Order type of mindset, and it is laced with assumptions that are unfounded. At best, you are making a huge logic fallacy starting with a false supposition that 'money corrupts everything' and then jumping to the conclusion that 'many of the institutions of the world are suppressing a treatment that could save millions for a profit'.

[AnalogMan]

Originally Posted by MuseChaser

"I made a difference to THAT one."

The nature of scientific research is to ask questions, pose a hypothesis, design an experiment, conduct the experiment, analyze the results in a rigorous statistical manner, and then accept and learn from the results.

With analyses of 65+ clinical studies in hand, the results are clear. Scientific principles dictate that objective minds accept the results, not keep doing the experiment over and over again hoping for the outcome one wanted.

Resources are limited. There is not unlimited money, or clinical investigators, or eligible patients, to do every study everyone wants. Every dollar spent on a dead end that has already had dozens of clinical results, is a dollar that isn’t a available for a potentially more promising treatment.

Hoping that something might help one person comes at the cost of the hundreds who would be lost because the treatment was ineffective. Of all the biochemical mechanisms of action that have been tried against the virus, hope has not been shown to be particularly effective.

As the Lakota native wisdom goes, “If you discover you are riding a dead horse, the first thing you must do is, get off.”

[Irace86.2.0]

Originally Posted by MuseChaser

Or, maybe, we could hope that ivermectin is actually helpful and the patient recovers? That would be better, right? I also seem to recall a fairly HUGE push to mandate vaccines by various entities and people well before any of the vaccines were "approved" other than experimentally.

Apologies if that comes off a little snarky, but sometimes I get a little dizzy trying to keep track of what I'm supposed to think, or what I'm supposed to root for....

This is a case of a judge issuing an order to the hospital/doctors to administer what the patient wants despite what the hospital, doctors or CDC have advised. The judge is opening the hospital and doctors up to medical malpractice/liability, but his order might give them a case for immunity in the view of the courts. It might also set a precedence that patients are in charge of their own care to the level of medication administration. Clearly, a person no longer needs to be a physician to write a prescription if the judge can do that in place of a doctor.

Vaccines don't require a prescription. I can walk down to any pharmacy and get a vaccine like for the flu without a physician order. The vaccines weren't FDA approved initially, even though they are approved now, but they were authorized for emergency use, and ivermectin is not authorized for emergency use in the treatment of COVID (see below). Mandating vaccines is a lawful practice that has a long history and has been upheld in court multiple times. This situation is different. While you may find no ethical difference, vaccines are mandated to prevent the public from being exposed against their will to the infected who are unwilling to isolate/quarantine themselves, and who have in them, as an infected agent, the capacity to cause harm to many people easily by simply exposing themselves to others, and in such a way, that others can't easily identify these infected agents to also easily avoid them. Mandates always have exemptions in place. This doctor can't exempt out. This doctor is being told to do something to their patient that could cause that patient harm and that is agains the CDC's and the doctor's position on the matter, and why, because the judge and patient think it is best. If people want to take ivermectin on their own then cool, but forcing providers against the CDC and their medical opinion isn't right.

https://www.fda.gov/animal-veterinar...tended-animals

[Dadhawk]

Originally Posted by Irace86.2.0

This is a case of a judge issuing an order to the hospital/doctors to administer what the patient wants despite what the hospital, doctors or CDC have advised.

So now, judges can not only legislate from the bench, but they can diagnose and prescribe as well. Makes zero sense. If I was the Doc, and I thought it was wrong, I'd fall back on the "do no harm" part of my oath, and tell the patient to find someone else to treat them.

[Opie]

Originally Posted by Irace86.2.0

You are really flirting with conspiracy theorist thinking. If a cheap and easily available drug existed in the world that overwhelmingly saved lives, what would it take to keep the genie in the bottle, to suppress that information? Despite the ability to save millions of lives, you are saying it is reasonable to believe multiple different governments, scientists, doctors and pharmaceutical companies have all aligned themselves for a common profit motive around producing more expensive drugs or vaccines or whatever you are claiming. Do you hear how that sounds? It sounds crazy man. It honestly sounds like you are paranoid about the institutions in the world to such an extent that you could believe such a coverup is even possible. This wreaks of Deep State, World Order type of mindset, and it is laced with assumptions that are unfounded. At best, you are making a huge logic fallacy starting with a false supposition that 'money corrupts everything' and then jumping to the conclusion that 'many of the institutions of the world are suppressing a treatment that could save millions for a profit'.

Sounds like you think that the medical / pharmaceutical field is immune to the greed tactics that every other industry uses....

And don't misread this as I am saying it is actually happening, but I am not blind to believe it could be happening.

[AnalogMan]

Effectiveness of masks in reducing infection

To post some information on another what I'm sure will be completely non-controversial topic... masks. I recently did a literature review for another project on the effectiveness of masks in reducing spread of infection, and thought some might find the information useful, especially since so many epidemiologists and virologists have come out recently saying that vaccination alone is not enough to combat the Delta variant.

Of course, there are caveats. Such as, masks have to be worn properly. Pulled down under the nose, or on the chin, kind of defeats any possible benefit. Type of mask also makes a big difference, especially with the Delta variant (which is addressed in some of the studies). Results will be very different with a N95 (or equivalent) compared with pulling a gaiter over your mouth. With the right mask and worn properly, masks can do two things: protect you from infection, and reduce the spread of infection to others.

The Evidence

This paper published in the Journal of The American Medical Association reviewed 11 separate studies where it was possible to observe the impacts masks had on infection transmission. These studies generally showed a 50%-80% reduction in infection from wearing masks:

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jam...rticle/2776536

Likewise, this paper from the National Academy of Sciences reviewed a number of studies and found mask wearing reduces the spread of infection by 70%-80%. The transmission of infection is 7.5 times higher in countries that do not use masks compared with those that do:

https://www.pnas.org/content/118/4/e2014564118

This study evaluated 335 people in 124 families, and found wearing masks was 79% effective in reducing the spread of infection:

https://gh.bmj.com/content/5/5/e0027...e2=tf_ipsecsha

This study, done by multiple institutions including the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and Massachusetts General Hospital, looked at available data from all 50 states encompassing 77% of the U.S. population, and found that mask mandates significantly reduced new COVID cases, hospitalizations, and deaths:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8221503/

Interestingly, the investigators also found that once mask mandates are lifted, people stop wearing them. Apparently, we can’t be trusted to keep doing what is good for us unless we are advised to do it.

Another study specifically evaluated the ability of masks to block the virus, and found masks do indeed effectively capture virions:

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1....13.21261989v1

A predictive modeling study has even estimated that the pandemic could eventually be eliminated if 80%-90% of people consistently wore masks:

https://arxiv.org/abs/2004.13553

Safety in Children?

Some parents have expressed concerns that children wearing masks all day in school might interfere with their ability to breath and get enough oxygen. There is no suggestion of this, and on the contrary there is evidence showing no negative impact of masks.

The following study conducted at the University of Miami School of Medicine along with two hospitals evaluated the issue and found that air exchange is not affected by masks, even in people with severe lung impairment:

https://www.atsjournals.org/doi/10.1...S.202007-812RL

One of the comments some make about masks is that wearing them should be an individual choice. While individually wearing a mask can protect you, unless it is near universal, it won't work to reduce community spread or infection levels. We all have to do it for it to work.

[Irace86.2.0]

Originally Posted by Opie

Sounds like you think that the medical / pharmaceutical field is immune to the greed tactics that every other industry uses....

And don't misread this as I am saying it is actually happening, but I am not blind to believe it could be happening.

Again, the jump from 'money corrupts' to 'governments, pharmaceutical manufactures, doctors and scientists are all conspiring to make money off drugs at the cost of human lives, while orchestrating a mass coverup of a cheap and viable treatment that could save millions' is ludicrous. This is the very definition of conspiracy theory.

Such a coverup is impossible. Unifying all these institutions is impossible. No one has demonstrated that some natural construct that is unique to each of these institutions is leading to universal subversion. No one has demonstrated that it is even in any of these institutions interests to subvert ivermectin. There are a lot of assumptions that subversion leads to profits, but zero real analysis.

Again, this is the definition of a conspiracy theory: the absence of evidence and the assertion of unsubstantiated claims as facts of conspiring groups acting in implausible ways to cause a particular event or situation.

[Irace86.2.0]

I think it is telling when people ignore points they don't want to debate and search out points they think they can argue against. People are very good about compartmentalizing their thinking. I debate not to win an argument or to get someone to break down those compartments, because like you said, it can be a waste of time, yet that doesn't mean the person on the fence, who is reading in the background, is not taking the arguments to heart. Hopefully these people are seeing sound and logical arguments that stem from reason and evidence and can recognize what is good and what is bad information. If we don't challenge misinformation then all we have is a one-sided, echo chamber, and that has been the biggest problem in this pandemic; 80% of the crap and misinformation has been created and perpetuated by a small handful of people and then it has gone out to different echo chambers where no one there debates the topics, so people get more polar in their views. We need healthy debate and discourse, so we are all less polar, and so we can vet the crap that is out there. It doesn't mean everyone will listen to reason, but it will benefit the vast majority of people.

Sometimes it has been argued that not everything deserves a chance to be debated. We shouldn't really be debating Young Earth Creationists or Flat Earthers. Debating them almost legitimizes them. It gives them an audience, and it presents a dichotomy where it is either this or that, black or white, when it could be grey, or the other perspective is just so wrong it isn't worth debating. I believe it was Richard Dawkins or Sam Harris who said that we don't need to have a debate about whether children come from conception or from the Stork Theory. At the same time, when these ideas start to gain traction for lack of a debate like Flat Earthers, you get a movement around trying to enlighten those who have bought into this nonsense. Similarly, we can't just dismiss these people. We have to challenge any nonsense with logical arguments based on sound reason and solid evidence.

[Capt Spaulding]

I understand completely and an in sympathy with your objectives. I have grown quite weary of responding to inaccurate and inane assertions. My involvement in this discussion started with Pilot”s lie that vaccines altered DNA. Since then, he and others have modded their BS web spinning machinery to greater levels of efficiency. It’s not new. My father fell in with a a bad crowd in his late 70s and would bombard me with emails full of this type of bullshit on a regular basis. I would spend an hour or two refuting the lies but eventually concluded it wasn’t worth the effort. I told him I was tired of playing “liars whac-a-mole” and blocked his address.

I admire your willingness to continue to joust with the phillistines and wish you the best of luck.

[soundman98]

Originally Posted by Irace86.2.0

Butler County judge orders West Chester Hospital to treat COVID-19 patient with ivermectin, despite CDC warnings



https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cin...amp/5647432001

i honestly don't understand how this works. or why anyone would desire to do it.

it'd be like me demanding my mechanic make my fa20 make 1,000hp. he comes back and tells me that it's not possible, and nothing, even the block, can take that kind of force. so i get a court order demanding that he build me a 1,000hp fa20 anyways... like there's only one mechanic that can do anything? there's plenty of unscrupulous people that will proudly agree to anything i say, and gladly take 75% upfront to begin what is really an impossible build..

the liability question really looms over this one. if everything works, great. but if the patient gets worse, or dies, who's liable? the doctor for administering after previously logging a grievance against the persons desired treatment for a number of CDC-viable reasons, or the judge who has minimal-at-best medical training that demanded the treatment?

this looks to be a 'between a rock and a pile of dynamite' situation...

[Irace86.2.0]

Originally Posted by Capt Spaulding

I understand completely and an in sympathy with your objectives. I have grown quite weary of responding to inaccurate and inane assertions. My involvement in this discussion started with Pilot”s lie that vaccines altered DNA. Since then, he and others have modded their BS web spinning machinery to greater levels of efficiency. It’s not new. My father fell in with a a bad crowd in his late 70s and would bombard me with emails full of this type of bullshit on a regular basis. I would spend an hour or two refuting the lies but eventually concluded it wasn’t worth the effort. I told him I was tired of playing “liars whac-a-mole” and blocked his address.

I admire your willingness to continue to joust with the phillistines and wish you the best of luck.

Me to my wife all too often:

[humfrz]

Originally Posted by Dadhawk

Well, after being exposed to the virus pretty much every 12 hour shift for the last 18 months at the behavorial health hospital where my fully vaccinated Son works, he has come down with COVID.

48 hours in, his only symptom is loss of taste and smell. No fever, cough, etc. He's here in the Hawk Nest, isolated in his room for another 8 days. I was around him quite a bit before his symptom showed up so I'm WFH this week out of an abundance of caution (first time a full week since the second week of COVID lockdown).

Of course, every time I get a twitch I'm convinced I've got a breakthrough case as well.

Oh, I hope his case is mild and he recovers soon. Same for you too, old man, like the old fellow said "as long as a different part hurts each day, it ain't too serious."

[reni]

Utah poison control center sees five-fold increase in calls about Ivermectin
https://www.fox13now.com/news/local-...out-ivermectin

Poison control calls jumped 550% in Texas from use of horse and cow dewormer
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...in/5643254001/

Florida Poison Control sees spike in calls from people taking livestock deworming drug ivermectin
https://www.kark.com/news/health/cor...ug-ivermectin/

According to the CDC, there was a five-fold increase in reactions from that drug ivermectin in the month of July nationwide.
https://www.news4jax.com/health/2021...-19-treatment/