ChiefsPlanet Mobile
Page 2296 of 3903
« First < 1296179621962246228622922293229422952296 229722982299230023062346239627963296 > Last »
Nzoner's Game Room>***NON-POLITICAL COVID-19 Discussion Thread***
JakeF 10:28 PM 02-26-2020
A couple of reminders...

Originally Posted by Bwana:
Once again, don't come in this thread with some kind of political agenda, or you will be shown the door. If you want to go that route, there is a thread about this in DC.
Originally Posted by Dartgod:
People, there is a lot of good information in this thread, let's try to keep the petty bickering to a minimum.

We all have varying opinions about the impact of this, the numbers, etc. We will all never agree with each other. But we can all keep it civil.

Thanks!

Click here for the original OP:

Spoiler!

[Reply]
Bowser 10:32 PM 06-03-2020
Originally Posted by Jesus Christ:
Not until you little weirdos down here stop shoving your penises in each other's assholes or until you cancel The View.

[Reply]
'Hamas' Jenkins 10:33 PM 06-03-2020
Originally Posted by BleedingRed:
http://archive.is/cloVY#selection-1685.0-1693.323
WHO has resumed studies of hydroxychloroquine btw............

After they realized the Study published by Two of the world’s leading medical journals – the Lancet and the New England Journal of Medicine – published studies based on Surgisphere data. The studies were co-authored by the firm’s chief executive, Sapan Desai.

The World Health Organization and a number of national governments have changed their Covid-19 policies and treatments on the basis of flawed data from a little-known US healthcare analytics company, also calling into question the integrity of key studies published in some of the world’s most prestigious medical journals.
A Guardian investigation can reveal the US-based company Surgisphere, whose handful of employees appear to include a science fiction writer and an adult-content model, has provided data for multiple studies on Covid-19 co-authored by its chief executive, but has so far failed to adequately explain its data or methodology.


PAGING HAMAS!!!!!
Your link didn't work, but I read up on this a little bit ago.

I think the biggest question that is raised is their info on hospitalizations in the US, wherein they claim somewhere around 65k hospitalizations as part of the study when there were only around 65k who had been hospitalized total at that point. That does not seem possible, although they claim to have captured data past April 13.

This is what the peer review process should uncover. I do think they need to be fully candid and release the info on where they got their data from.
[Reply]
'Hamas' Jenkins 10:43 PM 06-03-2020
A new study in NEJM about hydroxychloroquine for post-exposure prophylaxis of COVID-19.

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.105...elated_article

People (almost all healthcare workers) who were in close contact with known cases were either given hydroxychloroquine or placebo.

We included participants who had household or occupational exposure to a person with confirmed Covid-19 at a distance of less than 6 ft for more than 10 minutes while wearing neither a face mask nor an eye shield (high-risk exposure) or while wearing a face mask but no eye shield (moderate-risk exposure).

The biggest issue I'd have with this trial is that the drugs (hydroxychloroquine or placebo) were mailed to the patients (who were randomized and double-blinded). As it was not done in clinic, it's difficult to ascertain if people actually took all of the drugs, but as they were double-blind, patients would be no less likely to take the placebo or the active drug and would stop due to side effects.

Full adherence to the trial intervention differed according to trial group, with 75.4% of participants in the hydroxychloroquine group (312 of 414) and 82.6% of those in the placebo group (336 of 407) having taken all 19 prescribed tablets over a period of 5 days (P=0.01)

However, the trial was fully powered (had a sufficient sample size).

Findings:

The incidence of new illness compatible with Covid-19 did not differ significantly between those receiving hydroxychloroquine (49 of 414 [11.8%]) and those receiving placebo (58 of 407 [14.3%]) (P=0.35). The absolute difference was −2.4 percentage points (95% confidence interval, −7.0 to 2.2).

As the confidence interval spanned 0 and the p> 0.05, there was no benefit from taking hydroxychloroquine to prevent COVID-19 after initial exposure.
[Reply]
Jesus Christ 10:53 PM 06-03-2020
Originally Posted by Bowser:
That's alarmingly accurate from the stories I've heard.
[Reply]
O.city 08:33 AM 06-04-2020
Originally Posted by petegz28:
I thought the 14 day thing had been debunked and is now like 11 days?
Last I read it was on average like 5 days to symptoms but could be up to 14? Kind thinking the 14 is an outlier and it's more in the 6-8 day range?

We'll find out soon enough.
[Reply]
petegz28 08:40 AM 06-04-2020
Originally Posted by O.city:
Last I read it was on average like 5 days to symptoms but could be up to 14? Kind thinking the 14 is an outlier and it's more in the 6-8 day range?

We'll find out soon enough.
Okay so what I was thinking of is I guess it's after 11 days you are no longer "infectious" after getting sick

https://www.foxnews.com/science/covi...r-getting-sick
[Reply]
petegz28 08:42 AM 06-04-2020
And for what I was referring to yesterday about lower lows was this..
Attached: acases.png (19.6 KB) 
[Reply]
lewdog 10:26 AM 06-04-2020
My antibody test was “inconclusive” and they’ll likely test me again.
[Reply]
petegz28 10:30 AM 06-04-2020
Originally Posted by lewdog:
My antibody test was “inconclusive” and they’ll likely test me again.
Very interesting. We know you had it and you get that. I was sick as fuck and my antibody came back negative which it may be but with yours coming back that way I way I am curious.
[Reply]
O.city 10:42 AM 06-04-2020
Originally Posted by lewdog:
My antibody test was “inconclusive” and they’ll likely test me again.
You had very mild symptoms IIRC?

I would imagine you cleared it without needing an adaptive response.
[Reply]
petegz28 10:44 AM 06-04-2020
Originally Posted by O.city:
You had very mild symptoms IIRC?

I would imagine you cleared it without needing an adaptive response.
English...what are you saying? That lew is so bad ass he killed the virus and didn't even have to create an antibody to do it?
[Reply]
O.city 10:48 AM 06-04-2020
Originally Posted by petegz28:
English...what are you saying? That lew is so bad ass he killed the virus and didn't even have to create an antibody to do it?
We have innate immune responses and adaptive. Adaptive being b cells creating antibodies. Innate being t cells and NKC that usually wipe out a lot of lesser diseases and such that we never really know we had them.

It's been a while since immunology and virology, but IIRC, even when you use the innate response and don't need the antibodies, you develop some memory b cells that will help with future infections of a recognized antigen.

Again, it's been a while so I may be off ther.
[Reply]
Rausch 11:16 AM 06-04-2020
Not sure if Q.

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news...gn-manipulati/

Australian researchers see virus design manipulation
[Reply]
Rausch 11:23 AM 06-04-2020
Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins:

As the confidence interval spanned 0 and the p> 0.05, there was no benefit from taking hydroxychloroquine to prevent COVID-19 after initial exposure.
My largest complaint with this "controversy" was the idea that using it as a possible treatment was dangerous or deadly.

Physicians are aware (competent one's anyway) of who should or shouldn't be allowed to take the drug and the well known dangers as they relate to heart health. This drug was not proven to be a cure or even a treatment just an experimental one.

IMO both the prospects and the dangers of this drug were overblown cause "muh politics."
[Reply]
Fish 03:51 PM 06-04-2020
Kansas City area has 3rd consecutive day of triple-digit rise in new COVID-19 cases

The metro gained 133 cases Thursday. Seventy-one of the cases were in Kansas City, 20 were in Jackson County, 24 were in Johnson County, 12 were in Wyandotte County, four were in Clay County and two were in Platte County.

The positive test rate ranges from 2.11% in Clay County to 3.96% in Jackson County, 4% in Johnson County, 4.01% in Kansas City and 15.9% in Wyandotte County. The Platte County Health Department does not list this data.
[Reply]
Page 2296 of 3903
« First < 1296179621962246228622922293229422952296 229722982299230023062346239627963296 > Last »
Up