Coronavirus COVID-19

[houndawg]

The problem with the Ivermectin thing is that it doesn't work. Here is a fact check on it: https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/fac ... 566216001/

I've been able to find results of one really high quality controlled experiment on it. It's at https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/f ... le/2777389. A quote:



There is no way anybody would've gotten results like that while testing the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines. Those two vaccines were shown to be dramatically effective in clinical trials with large samples sizes but it's clear they'd have been shown to be effective at the sample sizes used in that Ivermectin experiment. The effect size is so large that there is no way it'd be missed. Yet we have a bunch of people who refuse to believe the vaccines are effective while believing Ivermectin is.

It's not. It's an anti parasitic agent. It's like taking an antibiotic thinking it is going to cure the flu. Not going to happen.

Ivermectin displays antiviral and antiinflammatory properties as well. I'll take the word of practicing physicians over a USA today fact check. It may not be a world beater, but improvement is improvement.

There is more than one type of Ivermectin, Jose.

[kalm]

Mask efficiency study. Wide variance between the types but even cloth appears to help…

https://aip.scitation.org/doi/10.1063/5.0057100

[89Hen]

TL;DR

[UNI88]

TL;DR

The results show that a standard surgical and three-ply cloth masks, which see current widespread use, filter at apparent efficiencies of only 12.4% and 9.8%, respectively. Apparent efficiencies of 46.3% and 60.2% are found for KN95 and R95 masks, respectively, which are still notably lower than the verified 95% rated ideal efficiencies.

[Ibanez]

Pfizer vaccine just got fully approved by the FDA..

FWIW I heard earlier this month that about 1/4 of the people who hadn’t gotten the vaccine would if it got fully approved by the FDA.Just heard someone else claim polls show 30% would.

Yup - can't complain that they're " experimental" anymore. That isn't directed at you, BDK.

[89Hen]

TL;DR

The results show that a standard surgical and three-ply cloth masks, which see current widespread use, filter at apparent efficiencies of only 12.4% and 9.8%, respectively. Apparent efficiencies of 46.3% and 60.2% are found for KN95 and R95 masks, respectively, which are still notably lower than the verified 95% rated ideal efficiencies.

So kind of like an air mattress will cushion your fall from 5 stories at least a little.

[89Hen]

Pfizer vaccine just got fully approved by the FDA..

FWIW I heard earlier this month that about 1/4 of the people who hadn’t gotten the vaccine would if it got fully approved by the FDA.Just heard someone else claim polls show 30% would.

Yup - can't complain that they're " experimental" anymore. That isn't directed at you, BDK.

I don't think I will be getting a third booster when available. Even though my reaction to the second was only 24 hours, I would imagine it would be a lot worse for a third shot. Pass.

[kalm]

So kind of like an air mattress will cushion your fall from 5 stories at least a little.

No.

[Winterborn]

Links to the 14 studies listed are in the 11 august 2021 article that does a pretty good job of summation of each of the studies.

In sum, of the 14 RCTs that have tested the effectiveness of masks in preventing the transmission of respiratory viruses, three suggest, but do not provide any statistically significant evidence in intention-to-treat analysis, that masks might be useful. The other eleven suggest that masks are either useless—whether compared with no masks or because they appear not to add to good hand hygiene alone—or actually counterproductive. Of the three studies that provided statistically significant evidence in intention-to-treat analysis that was not contradicted within the same study, one found that the combination of surgical masks and hand hygiene was less effective than hand hygiene alone, one found that the combination of surgical masks and hand hygiene was less effective than nothing, and one found that cloth masks were less effective than surgical masks.

https://www.city-journal.org/do-masks-w ... e-evidence

[Winterborn]

Yup - can't complain that they're " experimental" anymore. That isn't directed at you, BDK.

I don't think I will be getting a third booster when available. Even though my reaction to the second was only 24 hours, I would imagine it would be a lot worse for a third shot. Pass.

Most accounts are saying that the third shot is similar to the second.

Even though I had zero reaction to either shot, I will not get the third shot unless the EU requires it for travel.

[Ibanez]

Yup - can't complain that they're " experimental" anymore. That isn't directed at you, BDK.

I don't think I will be getting a third booster when available. Even though my reaction to the second was only 24 hours, I would imagine it would be a lot worse for a third shot. Pass.

I hadn't thought of that. I'll wait to see what the general consensus is. The 2nd shot had me asleep and in pain for 24 hours.

[UNI88]

So kind of like an air mattress will cushion your fall from 5 stories at least a little.

Hyperbole. A 10% reduction decreases the chances someone will contact the disease and I would think could also decrease the severity of the disease if they do catch it. I don't think an air mattress is going to be 10% effective in preventing injury/death from a 5 story fall.

[CID1990]

So you ARE an Ivermectin guy

It is complete baloney

Every single “study” on Ivermectin has ridiculously small study groups. Literally in the low hundreds.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

As stated previously, if it offers a reduction in illness, you bet.

I watch HCQ as well to see if it is being used. Doesn't mean I think they should be used as the main line of defense, but give doctors options, especially the smart ones.

Wished I could find the article, but it was written by one of the top doctors in his field. He got together with 5 other really high powered doctors in the field and they developed a protocol others could use to help prevent COVID from taking off.

Everything they used was really cheap and readily available. Of course this was at the very beginning, so things might have changed, but it made me wonder why these 6 guys who specialize in their fields would recommend Ivermectin.

Maybe I'm being mislead, but reading stories like this doesn't help. I tend to take real world observation as important, especially in countries like India which doesn't have the expensive options the US does. Regardless the article is a little sensationalist, it sounds as if India is using Ivermectin and getting good results.

https://www.thedesertreview.com/opinion ... b4dfa.html

Specific charges included the running of a disinformation campaign against Ivermectin and issuing statements in social and mainstream media to wrongfully influence the public against the use of Ivermectin despite the existence of large amounts of clinical data showing its profound effectiveness in both prevention and treatment of COVID-19.

You are always wishing you can find some article.

All of the “studies” over Ivermectin have been roundly trashed because they are, in fact, garbage.

The pharmaceutical tests that confer validity have test group sizes that are literally hundreds to thousands of times the size of these Ivermectin studies that are circulating out there.

Even the disinformation that is out there is laughable to anyone with even the most elementary grasp of pharmaceutical trials - less than a TOTAL of 30,000 subjects across a spectrum of over 100 trials. That is a complete sham.

This whole thing is a bunch of modern day snake oil sales.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[CID1990]

Mask efficiency study. Wide variance between the types but even cloth appears to help…

https://aip.scitation.org/doi/10.1063/5.0057100

Barely marginal. Any barrier helps, even cloth masks. But as I have told JSO (who won’t reply), the difference between wearing a cloth mask or no mask at all when it comes to viral particles is statistically insignificant.

In fact, cotton cloth masks are so relatively ineffective that they could actually be used as a placebo in a study of N95 effectiveness.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[CID1990]

Pfizer vaccine just got fully approved by the FDA..

FWIW I heard earlier this month that about 1/4 of the people who hadn’t gotten the vaccine would if it got fully approved by the FDA.Just heard someone else claim polls show 30% would.

Yup - can't complain that they're " experimental" anymore. That isn't directed at you, BDK.

They only had a 4.96 billion subject trial.

Hey SG ^^^^ this is a drug trial.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[SeattleGriz]

Yup - can't complain that they're " experimental" anymore. That isn't directed at you, BDK.

They only had a 4.96 billion subject trial.

Hey SG ^^^^ this is a drug trial.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Did you see they dissolved the control groups by giving them the vaccine? Those findings were supposed to be discussed before approval according to FDA rules. How are they going to give us final numbers on the vaccines if we don't have the control groups to compare to anymore? I get what you are saying about sample size, but if this is normal for a drug trial, I'm a little perplexed.

https://www.npr.org/sections/health-sho ... ing-immuni

On a separate note, who will pay for a large ivermectin trial? That's got to be a hurdle. Big reason why I'm willing to go with real world data, especially if Ivermectin does no harm to try.

[CID1990]

They only had a 4.96 billion subject trial.

Hey SG ^^^^ this is a drug trial.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Did you see they dissolved the control groups by giving them the vaccine? Those findings were supposed to be discussed before approval according to FDA rules. How are they going to give us final numbers on the vaccines if we don't have the control groups to compare to anymore? I get what you are saying about sample size, but if this is normal for a drug trial, I'm a little perplexed.

https://www.npr.org/sections/health-sho ... ing-immuni

On a separate note, who will pay for a large ivermectin trial? That's got to be a hurdle. Big reason why I'm willing to go with real world data, especially if Ivermectin does no harm to try.

If you or anybody else wants to take Ivermectin then by all means - have at it

At least you’ll be free of roundworms

As long as we are clear that there are no scientifically legitimate large group studies that support the claim that Ivermectin controls symptoms .. or even more fanciful - prevents infection from the virus that causes COVID-19


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[SeattleGriz]

Did you see they dissolved the control groups by giving them the vaccine? Those findings were supposed to be discussed before approval according to FDA rules. How are they going to give us final numbers on the vaccines if we don't have the control groups to compare to anymore? I get what you are saying about sample size, but if this is normal for a drug trial, I'm a little perplexed.

https://www.npr.org/sections/health-sho ... ing-immuni

On a separate note, who will pay for a large ivermectin trial? That's got to be a hurdle. Big reason why I'm willing to go with real world data, especially if Ivermectin does no harm to try.

If you or anybody else wants to take Ivermectin then by all means - have at it

At least you’ll be free of roundworms

As long as we are clear that there are no scientifically legitimate large group studies that support the claim that Ivermectin controls symptoms .. or even more fanciful - prevents infection from the virus that causes COVID-19


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Fully agreed on that point.

[kalm]

Mask efficiency study. Wide variance between the types but even cloth appears to help…

https://aip.scitation.org/doi/10.1063/5.0057100

Barely marginal. Any barrier helps, even cloth masks. But as I have told JSO (who won’t reply), the difference between wearing a cloth mask or no mask at all when it comes to viral particles is statistically insignificant.

In fact, cotton cloth masks are so relatively ineffective that they could actually be used as a placebo in a study of N95 effectiveness.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

They also could increase risky behavior and reduce more effective social distancing.

Still not a big ask to save lives IMHO.

[UNI88]

Barely marginal. Any barrier helps, even cloth masks. But as I have told JSO (who won’t reply), the difference between wearing a cloth mask or no mask at all when it comes to viral particles is statistically insignificant.

In fact, cotton cloth masks are so relatively ineffective that they could actually be used as a placebo in a study of N95 effectiveness.

They also could increase risky behavior and reduce more effective social distancing.

Still not a big ask to save lives IMHO.

I worry about masks giving people a false sense of security. That's why I think our leaders (political & medical) need to be more forthcoming about their effectiveness.

They're only a big ask to Karens.

[CID1990]

Barely marginal. Any barrier helps, even cloth masks. But as I have told JSO (who won’t reply), the difference between wearing a cloth mask or no mask at all when it comes to viral particles is statistically insignificant.

In fact, cotton cloth masks are so relatively ineffective that they could actually be used as a placebo in a study of N95 effectiveness.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

They also could increase risky behavior and reduce more effective social distancing.

Still not a big ask to save lives IMHO.

If we want to mandate masks then mandate masks that actually help. At best cotton masks stop 14.5% of viral particles. That does not mean they provide a 14.5% greater protection from in infection rates. The real increase in protection over infection likely resides somewhere in the neighborhood of 2 - 3%. That is why the information is deceiving about mask efficacy. To have more than a negligible effect, you need a mask stopping better than 50% of viral particles.

Mandating masks without specifying actual masks that are effective is unnecessary overreach, polarizes people, and reenforces the idea that government is adversarial to basic liberties (because mandates that are not effective are arbitrary). I’m all for emergency mandates that have an actual effect but not these typical useless edicts.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Gil Dobie]

In other news, the Pfizer vax was approved today by the FDA.

[Winterborn]

They also could increase risky behavior and reduce more effective social distancing.

Still not a big ask to save lives IMHO.

If we want to mandate masks then mandate masks that actually help. At best cotton masks stop 14.5% of viral particles. That does not mean they provide a 14.5% greater protection from in infection rates. The real increase in protection over infection likely resides somewhere in the neighborhood of 2 - 3%. That is why the information is deceiving about mask efficacy. To have more than a negligible effect, you need a mask stopping better than 50% of viral particles.

Mandating masks without specifying actual masks that are effective is unnecessary overreach, polarizes people, and reenforces the idea that government is adversarial to basic liberties (because mandates that are not effective are arbitrary). I’m all for emergency mandates that have an actual effect but not these typical useless edicts.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

And reinforces.

[Gil Dobie]

Mask efficiency study. Wide variance between the types but even cloth appears to help…

https://aip.scitation.org/doi/10.1063/5.0057100

Barely marginal. Any barrier helps, even cloth masks. But as I have told JSO (who won’t reply), the difference between wearing a cloth mask or no mask at all when it comes to viral particles is statistically insignificant.

In fact, cotton cloth masks are so relatively ineffective that they could actually be used as a placebo in a study of N95 effectiveness.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Cloth mask are suggested to trap the droplets, not individual viral particles, per the Mayo Clinic excert below.

Cloth masks
A cloth mask is intended to trap respiratory droplets that are released when the wearer talks, coughs or sneezes. It also acts as a barrier to protect the wearer from inhaling droplets released by others.

The most effective cloths masks are made of multiple layers of tightly woven fabric like cotton. A mask with layers will stop more droplets from getting through your mask or escaping from it.

[SeattleGriz]

In other news, the Pfizer vax was approved today by the FDA.

Now is when they start putting the mind control chips into production.