Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
I don't hope to gain anything. Just questioning the lack of data and trying to understand why.
Fair enough. When his thoughts appears in a reputable forum, I’ll address them. JRE isn’t that.
Because strain testing isn’t done routinely. That doesn’t mean it’s never done, or can’t be inferred from standard tests.
Great. Publish your results in a peer-reviewed journal, and have them duplicated in multicenter prospective clinical trials.
No idea. Also don’t think it’s critical to find out. What would you do with that information?
Trials fail for many reasons and a failed trial doesn't necessarily mean that drug isn't useful for the affliction being investigated. By the same token, trials that achieve a p-value <0.05 don't guarantee that the drug works. Personally, I think in the time of a pandemic, more leeway should be given to small companies that don't have the resources to run thousand+ person trials but have approaches that are supported by peer reviewed publications and anecdotal evidence.Can't speak to Maraviroc, as I haven't seen a single study on it (maybe there are some, IDK), but ivermectin has yet to produce a SINGLE large scale study proving it's benefit. Last I saw, there were still one or two ongoing, but the largest one showing any conclusive benefit was removed from publication because they fudged the numbers. The few doctors that I personally have seen "vilified" in social media was because they were pushing something that had not been proven to show benefit other than anecdotal evidence, as we know is sometimes JUST anecdote.
Link?RavenFan said:
That brings up another question. Can some people just never get infected from covid?
I find podcasts and long form interviews the best way to get information assuming the guest or host has some expertise in said subject. The longer some talks the easier it is to spot intentions/bias/expertise. I agree it can be hard to filter through all the info, but I like to hear as much as I can on both sides of an issue. For example, Terminalxylem posted a name of a doctor that has debunks the JRE Dr. Peter McCullough podcast. I googled it and just spent an hour watching it. I took some good stuff away just like I did from the McCollough podcast. Essentially I created my own debate, because it’s not happening anywhere else. It helps me form my opinions.
Several of their claims have been shown to be wrong and misleading - plus concerns about financial and political motives behind their claims. You can find several articles or long form podcasts outlining these things.
I wonder where you got this ridiculousness. No one "re-regulates" this stuff. What you are saying basically nonsense, much like the "tech talk" on shows like Star Trek.
But if you really actually want to know, try this on.
Sorry....was going by this....which they have:
If you want categorical breakdowns within those categories you're going to have a myriad of privacy issues to overcome legally plus the fact that we have thousands of decoupled "systems" across the country. The privatization of our system makes this virtually impossible.
You're the problem I am referring to. Out of hand you, dismiss these peer reviewed findings as ridiculous and label my claims as nonsense without any proof. I don't blame you for your ignorance and idiocy--you've simply been brainwashed into believing what you want to believe and apparently lash out at anyone who disagrees with your narrative. Arrogance, as is often the case, is dangerous.
Way different than the doctor who faked the autism results. You will have to do better than provide a Facebook funded rebuke to convince me that Malone is a quack. Big tech are part of the group who are trying to de-platform him. Again, you've bought into the narrative to assassinate his character hook, line and sinker--but you haven't acknowledged the people writing these stories are being paid by big tech and have a vested interest to deny his claims.
“What's the issue listening to these doctors?”
Link? Many are saying this but no one has posted any credible sources attempting to debunk Malone. One of his main claims is that the vaccines haven't been adequately tested on children and Pfizer's FDA submission was missing this info. Show me that's wrong and I will back down.
Have you even watched the podcast? If you have, you're badly mischaracterizing Malone's points.
I never said all his claims were wrong. I don’t know if I’ve read anything specific about adequate testing on children but I’m not going to bother looking for it because the person I trust, my pediatrician, told me to get my kids vaccinated. Not some guy who has espoused conspiracy theories. Maybe he’s right about the testing. When you throw enough crap against a wall eventually something will stick.
Without even knowing his claims, I find it hard to believe nearly the entire scientific community worldwide is against Malone. Such a coordinated smear effort seems impossible.
I think those are reasons why it would be difficult to do but not good enough reasons why they can't be done. Having accurate statistical breakdowns can only be beneficial, especially years down the road if another pandemic happens. I would hate to see this happen again and for people to say "oh, we should have started to get this together last time" The same goes for trying to find the origin of this. Clearly, the WHO failed to prevent this pandemic but a system should be in place to make sure it never happens again, or at least not to this extent. The next one might not be this mild. We would need a much faster response.
Because of our privacy laws as I said before. To get to that level of detail in anything meaningful would require significant changes to our medical privacy laws.
You don't have to link to personal information. Why are there positive case breakdowns but not death breakdowns?
Cause of death is a privacy matter....as I've stated three times now. Simply knowing positive/negative results to generic testing questions are not privacy issues. Your issue here is with privacy law. I'm just explaining the difference.
So how do we know if anyone died from covid? Wouldn't that be a privacy issue too?
No....anything that can be found on the death certificate is public knowledge. Details like you are looking for aren't found on death certificates. The answer to your second question is because they don't take the time to break things down by variant and even if they did, that's a detail that isn't commonly disclosed on a death certificate.
OK. You seem to accept that. I don't and think it would be an important distinction. Seeing the differences in the variants seems like it would be important to track.
Breaking down death by variant is not economically feasible. They are not genetically sequencing each and every patient that tests positive for covid to see what variant they have. One of the most frustrating things about this pandemic is that people just want to somehow “weaponize” the unknowable. It’s a new disease that is rapidly mutating—it’s long term effects are still a question mark—and yet people expect to have all of the data and answers in front of them instantly. I want to make clear that I’m not trying to attack you or come at you—I think you actually are asking some really good questions. With that said—the reality of the situation is that there are clear reasons why your questions cannot be clearly answered right now. The worlds doctors and scientists are more concerned about treating patients and trying to predict the virus’s next move more than they are satisfying peoples curiosities. Our countries desire to collect covid data has been laughable at best. This is why we are looking at data from Israel, South Africa and Europe as some of the guidelines of what to expect over here.
None of my answers are my opinion on this. They are simply stating why things are the way they are. Doesn't mean I agree or disagree with our current state of affairs. If you're asking my opinion, then I would say there is a lot I see as "inept" from the healthcare industry as it's set up in this country and this is one of the minor problems and it's been primarily behaving as designed because of the legislators and big pharma companies.
Thanks!
The bolded is what I'm getting at.
Well, to the bold, there's a solution, but requires "sides" coming together and we know that's not happening anytime soon.
![[icon]](/data/avatars/m/5/5167.jpg?1660313464){kind=avatar}
How much does it cost to genetically sequence a case to determine variant? More importantly, how many man hours would this add to an already overwhelmed testing system.
The trillions of dollars that have been spent have not been all spent on data collection and direct treatment of the disease. A large majority of that money was spent on keeping businesses afloat, trying to keep markets in tact, and keeping healthcare systems from collapsing. That’s just the reality—I would bet that only a tiny fraction of the money spent on covid is actually allocated towards data collection and contact tracing. I agree that many aspects of how our country and the world have handled covid is not acceptable. We are aligned in our thoughts there—but with that said the reality of the situation is going to be that many data driven questions about covid will not be able to be answered completely and accurately until we are further down the road.
I don't believe that death rates by variant are an irrelevant statistic, at least from a scientific standpoint. Maybe a shlub like me doesn't need to know but you can't say there isn't a benefit in an analysis of the differences in the variants. If they aren't keeping accurate records as they happen, due to funding or political differences, that is a failure. I could see it when Covid first came about, but 2 years in, this shouldn't be impossible.
I kind of wish I had done one before I got vaccinated, but at this point the antibody test wouldn't be able to distinguish between vaccination and previous infection, right?
I asked @Terminalxylem this a while back if such a test existed that would distinguish antibody type, and he can correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe he told me it would require a specific lab test, but that could identify antibody type. So that said, I doubt the OTC tests will do that.
