Page 2 of 24 FirstFirst 123412 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 461

Thread: The new and improved COVID catch-all thread.

  1. #21
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2019
    Location
    US
    Posts
    6,670
    Thanks
    635
    Thanked 896 Times in 688 Posts
    Rep Power
    11

    Default Re: The new and improved COVID catch-all thread.

    Antony Fauci has been misaligned.

  2. #22
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2019
    Location
    US
    Posts
    6,670
    Thanks
    635
    Thanked 896 Times in 688 Posts
    Rep Power
    11

    Default Re: The new and improved COVID catch-all thread.


  3. #23
    Senior Member dneal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Posts
    5,791
    Thanks
    2,341
    Thanked 2,225 Times in 1,266 Posts
    Rep Power
    16

    Default Re: The new and improved COVID catch-all thread.

    Quote Originally Posted by Chuck Naill View Post
    That link is to a bio. Not sure if that's what you intended. It is indeed impressive, and there are many well qualified individuals across the globe.

    Was there an article he wrote you were intending to link to?
    "A truth does not mind being questioned. A lie does not like being challenged."

  4. #24
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2019
    Location
    US
    Posts
    6,670
    Thanks
    635
    Thanked 896 Times in 688 Posts
    Rep Power
    11

    Default Re: The new and improved COVID catch-all thread.

    Just wanted to introduce him to anyone reading the forum. He was the first I remember referring to the virus as an aerosolized virus. Since I had just begun to mask, 4/03/20, it made perfect sense.

  5. #25
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2020
    Location
    Reno-Sparks, Nevada
    Posts
    257
    Thanks
    409
    Thanked 258 Times in 128 Posts
    Rep Power
    4

    Default Re: The new and improved COVID catch-all thread.

    Simple enough. The vaccine, while far from perfect, and while not a failsafe in and of itself, will, with masking consistently and staying the hell away from potentially infected others, has a very good record of keeping you out of the ICU, off a ventilator, and only feeling like crap (or just a cold) if you do get it. That's not a waste of time in my book. Sure, I knew a prominent virologist at the local university who got both doses (he was 81) who caught the delta strain and died very quickly of pneumonia. But if there's even a 50/50 chance of not ending up in the ICU or the morgue, I'll take it. The vaccine works, but like all other vaccines, it's not a guarantee that you won't catch the disease(s) it prevents anyways. It just improves your odds.

  6. #26
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2020
    Location
    Reno-Sparks, Nevada
    Posts
    257
    Thanks
    409
    Thanked 258 Times in 128 Posts
    Rep Power
    4

    Default Re: The new and improved COVID catch-all thread.

    If you do contract severe COVID (and odds are higher if you aren't vaccinated), you are at huge risk of thrombosis. A lot of COVID patients present as stroke, because of hypercoagulability. I would even go so far as to say that the hypercoagulability has visibly distinctive characteristics when thromboelastography testing is performed. And yes, I do thromboelastography (TEG).

    As for why I got the COVID vaccine, even early reports indicated it could be "worse than influenza" for many patients. Even as a young (in rude health would be putting it mildly) woman of 27, able to run all day in full battle gear, and able to easily knock out two miles in less than 14 minutes wearing regular running attire, able to crash around at 7,000 feet or higher on cross-country skis for hours, influenza took me down hard and landed me in the hospital for a week. My temperature was just over 101 at the clinic. By the time I got to the hospital, it was 105.6, and I was batshit crazypants delirious. When I was released from the hospital a week later, I was hard-pressed to cover 2 miles in 20 minutes. It took close to 6 months to recover. If COVID was going to be worse than influenza, then damn skippy I was getting the vaccine. I'm 62 now.

  7. #27
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2019
    Location
    US
    Posts
    6,670
    Thanks
    635
    Thanked 896 Times in 688 Posts
    Rep Power
    11

    Default Re: The new and improved COVID catch-all thread.

    I have had schingles twice in my life (10 or so years ago), the Chicken Pox vaccine was not available for me as a child. Both events I am convinced were stress related. Both events were when I was successful professionally, but stressed out even with that success. As @TFarnon has mentioned, I to was very physically active. I mention this because one way to stay healthy is to reduce stress, depression, andvide anxiety.

    For me, first the mask and distancing was a way to reduce the stress and anxiety. I performed these as I wear hearing protector when operating machines because it provides hearing protection so I can do what I need or enjoy.

    I could have probably gone without getting a vaccine last January 6. When I look back, for me it was because at that time I was still in healthcare. The vaccine benefits was that I couild continue to work, I would not need to quarantine, I could safety travel to my new home in another state, and I was less of a risk of infecting others.

    While it was difficult, I tried to stay informed and listened to people who had made understanding and preventing disease their life's work.

    So, my plan has worked to date, reduce stress, stay active, take precautions, use the science, "respect nature, respect science, respect each other" and avoid listening to people who don't know what they are talking about. I've also had to end relationships.

    I do not expect or am even concerned if no one follows my plan. I think each of us has to decide for themselves what to do, and develope their own plan.

  8. #28
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Location
    Slovenia
    Posts
    555
    Thanks
    54
    Thanked 338 Times in 194 Posts
    Rep Power
    8

    Default Re: The new and improved COVID catch-all thread.

    Quote Originally Posted by Chuck Naill View Post
    I was watching an interview with him back in November 2019 or so, I believe we hadn't even had a single case yet here. He said then already that washing your hands won't do anything and it's just something to keep people busy.

    More than a year later our official recommendation stated that transmission via a contaminated surface is "extremely unlikely" and could happen only by following an ideal scenario of several unfortunate events in succession; such as someone infected sneezing directly onto a surface, you touching that surface within minutes and then immediately putting your finger into your mouth or eyes. And even then it is unlikely that the viral load would be high enough to actually infect someone.

  9. The Following User Says Thank You to adhoc For This Useful Post:

    dneal (September 7th, 2021)

  10. #29
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2019
    Location
    US
    Posts
    6,670
    Thanks
    635
    Thanked 896 Times in 688 Posts
    Rep Power
    11

    Default Re: The new and improved COVID catch-all thread.

    Quote Originally Posted by adhoc View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Chuck Naill View Post
    I was watching an interview with him back in November 2019 or so, I believe we hadn't even had a single case yet here. He said then already that washing your hands won't do anything and it's just something to keep people busy.

    More than a year later our official recommendation stated that transmission via a contaminated surface is "extremely unlikely" and could happen only by following an ideal scenario of several unfortunate events in succession; such as someone infected sneezing directly onto a surface, you touching that surface within minutes and then immediately putting your finger into your mouth or eyes. And even then it is unlikely that the viral load would be high enough to actually infect someone.
    I also remember him saying the same.

  11. #30
    Senior Member dneal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Posts
    5,791
    Thanks
    2,341
    Thanked 2,225 Times in 1,266 Posts
    Rep Power
    16

    Default Re: The new and improved COVID catch-all thread.

    This was posted on social media by a VA hospice worker, who worked the San Antonio VA last year. San Antonio has a very large (if not the largest... I would have to check) retired military population of any area. Primarily Army and Air Force.

    It was a very busy summer.

    The thing about being a hospice worker is that you become intimately familiar with death. The most profound philosophical question, to paraphrase Camus and others. The most profound fear perhaps, since "it comes for us all...". Anyway, a qualified person to speak on a deadly serious topic, I think.

    For my friends and family who have recently gotten their CV shot or who know they will get one soon, good for you! I’m so glad that this option is available for you!
    For my friends who aren’t sure they will get one just yet, or maybe ever, or already know that they never will, awesome for you too! I am happy that you have this choice. Medical freedom is important!
    So whether you choose:
    - A CV shot
    - No CV shot
    OR
    - A Tequila shot
    You’re okay in my books and I respect your decision…
    I know the person who wrote this, and have no question of their motive or compassion. It is a person who knows better than most of us just how precious life is, and how important the quality of that life is, and that no matter how hard we struggle, or shout at our god(s), or shout at each other; it all comes to the same close for each of us.

    Although they know nothing about philosophy or philosophers, this person has learned through hard experience what Stoics, Buddhists, Taoists and others have tried to share. It's uncomfortable, but real truths usually are.

    I can respect that.
    "A truth does not mind being questioned. A lie does not like being challenged."

  12. #31
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2019
    Location
    US
    Posts
    6,670
    Thanks
    635
    Thanked 896 Times in 688 Posts
    Rep Power
    11

    Default Re: The new and improved COVID catch-all thread.

    This is an op-ed regarding the pandemic and suggested reforms plus what we learned.

    "6) We know how to reduce the spread of airborne viruses like Covid.

    Inexplicably, the World Health Organization and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention had been very reluctant initially to embrace the reality that the SARS-CoV-2 virus, like most respiratory viruses, could spread through the air by microscopic particles and remain suspended and travel beyond a close group of people, otherwise known as airborne transmission. This viral transmission can be reduced through the use of high quality N95 or KN95 respirators, by being outdoors and, when indoors, by increasing ventilation and improving indoor air filtration. The federal government needs to provide incentives to local governments to update their building codes to require better indoor air quality.

    7) Vaccines reduce serious disease, but are unlikely to prevent transmission. New therapeutics are needed.

    Vaccinated people are far less likely to get seriously ill or die from Covid than those who are unvaccinated. Many people also benefit from boosters. While the vaccines have reduced the risk of hospitalization and death, we need to develop vaccines that induce broad-spectrum and long-lasting immunity to protect against rapidly mutating viruses. We also need to develop additional monoclonal antibodies, treatments necessary for immune compromised individuals who don’t respond well to vaccines, and broad-spectrum antiviral medications to inhibit the replication of a wide range of viruses."

    https://www.nytimes.com/2023/05/11/o...smid=url-share
    “He has shown you, O man, what is good. And what does the LORD require of you? To act justly and to love mercy and to walk humbly with your God.” Micah 6:8

  13. #32
    Senior Member dneal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Posts
    5,791
    Thanks
    2,341
    Thanked 2,225 Times in 1,266 Posts
    Rep Power
    16

    Default Re: The new and improved COVID catch-all thread.

    You really want to pick this scab?
    "A truth does not mind being questioned. A lie does not like being challenged."

  14. #33
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2019
    Location
    US
    Posts
    6,670
    Thanks
    635
    Thanked 896 Times in 688 Posts
    Rep Power
    11

    Default Re: The new and improved COVID catch-all thread.

    Of course. We’ll be better prepared next time.

  15. #34
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    6,655
    Thanks
    2,026
    Thanked 2,187 Times in 1,417 Posts
    Rep Power
    18

    Default Re: The new and improved COVID catch-all thread.

    Quote Originally Posted by Chuck Naill View Post
    This is an op-ed regarding the pandemic and suggested reforms plus what we learned.

    "6) We know how to reduce the spread of airborne viruses like Covid.

    Inexplicably, the World Health Organization and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention had been very reluctant initially to embrace the reality that the SARS-CoV-2 virus, like most respiratory viruses, could spread through the air by microscopic particles and remain suspended and travel beyond a close group of people, otherwise known as airborne transmission. This viral transmission can be reduced through the use of high quality N95 or KN95 respirators, by being outdoors and, when indoors, by increasing ventilation and improving indoor air filtration. The federal government needs to provide incentives to local governments to update their building codes to require better indoor air quality.

    7) Vaccines reduce serious disease, but are unlikely to prevent transmission. New therapeutics are needed.

    Vaccinated people are far less likely to get seriously ill or die from Covid than those who are unvaccinated. Many people also benefit from boosters. While the vaccines have reduced the risk of hospitalization and death, we need to develop vaccines that induce broad-spectrum and long-lasting immunity to protect against rapidly mutating viruses. We also need to develop additional monoclonal antibodies, treatments necessary for immune compromised individuals who don’t respond well to vaccines, and broad-spectrum antiviral medications to inhibit the replication of a wide range of viruses."

    https://www.nytimes.com/2023/05/11/o...smid=url-share
    Why did you leave out items 1-5? And are there more items after #7?

  16. #35
    Senior Member dneal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Posts
    5,791
    Thanks
    2,341
    Thanked 2,225 Times in 1,266 Posts
    Rep Power
    16

    Default Re: The new and improved COVID catch-all thread.

    Newsweek has a good op-ed for you to start with.

    It's Time for the Scientific Community to Admit We Were Wrong About COVID


    As a medical student and researcher, I staunchly supported the efforts of the public health authorities when it came to COVID-19. I believed that the authorities responded to the largest public health crisis of our lives with compassion, diligence, and scientific expertise. I was with them when they called for lockdowns, vaccines, and boosters.

    I was wrong. We in the scientific community were wrong. And it cost lives.

    I can see now that the scientific community from the CDC to the WHO to the FDA and their representatives, repeatedly overstated the evidence and misled the public about its own views and policies, including on natural vs. artificial immunity, school closures and disease transmission, aerosol spread, mask mandates, and vaccine effectiveness and safety, especially among the young. All of these were scientific mistakes at the time, not in hindsight. Amazingly, some of these obfuscations continue to the present day.

    But perhaps more important than any individual error was how inherently flawed the overall approach of the scientific community was, and continues to be. It was flawed in a way that undermined its efficacy and resulted in thousands if not millions of preventable deaths.

    What we did not properly appreciate is that preferences determine how scientific expertise is used, and that our preferences might be—indeed, our preferences were—very different from many of the people that we serve. We created policy based on our preferences, then justified it using data. And then we portrayed those opposing our efforts as misguided, ignorant, selfish, and evil.

    We made science a team sport, and in so doing, we made it no longer science. It became us versus them, and "they" responded the only way anyone might expect them to: by resisting.

    We excluded important parts of the population from policy development and castigated critics, which meant that we deployed a monolithic response across an exceptionally diverse nation, forged a society more fractured than ever, and exacerbated longstanding heath and economic disparities.

    Our emotional response and ingrained partisanship prevented us from seeing the full impact of our actions on the people we are supposed to serve. We systematically minimized the downsides of the interventions we imposed—imposed without the input, consent, and recognition of those forced to live with them. In so doing, we violated the autonomy of those who would be most negatively impacted by our policies: the poor, the working class, small business owners, Blacks and Latinos, and children. These populations were overlooked because they were made invisible to us by their systematic exclusion from the dominant, corporatized media machine that presumed omniscience.

    Most of us did not speak up in support of alternative views, and many of us tried to suppress them. When strong scientific voices like world-renowned Stanford professors John Ioannidis, Jay Bhattacharya, and Scott Atlas, or University of California San Francisco professors Vinay Prasad and Monica Gandhi, sounded the alarm on behalf of vulnerable communities, they faced severe censure by relentless mobs of critics and detractors in the scientific community—often not on the basis of fact but solely on the basis of differences in scientific opinion.

    When former President Trump pointed out the downsides of intervention, he was dismissed publicly as a buffoon. And when Dr. Antony Fauci opposed Trump and became the hero of the public health community, we gave him our support to do and say what he wanted, even when he was wrong.

    Trump was not remotely perfect, nor were the academic critics of consensus policy. But the scorn that we laid on them was a disaster for public trust in the pandemic response. Our approach alienated large segments of the population from what should have been a national, collaborative project.

    And we paid the price. The rage of the those marginalized by the expert class exploded onto and dominated social media. Lacking the scientific lexicon to express their disagreement, many dissidents turned to conspiracy theories and a cottage industry of scientific contortionists to make their case against the expert class consensus that dominated the pandemic mainstream. Labeling this speech "misinformation" and blaming it on "scientific illiteracy" and "ignorance," the government conspired with Big Tech to aggressively suppress it, erasing the valid political concerns of the government's opponents.

    And this despite the fact that pandemic policy was created by a razor-thin sliver of American society who anointed themselves to preside over the working class—members of academia, government, medicine, journalism, tech, and public health, who are highly educated and privileged. From the comfort of their privilege, this elite prizes paternalism, as opposed to average Americans who laud self-reliance and whose daily lives routinely demand that they reckon with risk. That many of our leaders neglected to consider the lived experience of those across the class divide is unconscionable.

    Incomprehensible to us due to this class divide, we severely judged lockdown critics as lazy, backwards, even evil. We dismissed as "grifters" those who represented their interests. We believed "misinformation" energized the ignorant, and we refused to accept that such people simply had a different, valid point of view.

    We crafted policy for the people without consulting them. If our public health officials had led with less hubris, the course of the pandemic in the United States might have had a very different outcome, with far fewer lost lives.

    Instead, we have witnessed a massive and ongoing loss of life in America due to distrust of vaccines and the healthcare system; a massive concentration in wealth by already wealthy elites; a rise in suicides and gun violence especially among the poor; a near-doubling of the rate of depression and anxiety disorders especially among the young; a catastrophic loss of educational attainment among already disadvantaged children; and among those most vulnerable, a massive loss of trust in healthcare, science, scientific authorities, and political leaders more broadly.

    My motivation for writing this is simple: It's clear to me that for public trust to be restored in science, scientists should publicly discuss what went right and what went wrong during the pandemic, and where we could have done better.

    It's OK to be wrong and admit where one was wrong and what one learned. That's a central part of the way science works. Yet I fear that many are too entrenched in groupthink—and too afraid to publicly take responsibility—to do this.

    Solving these problems in the long term requires a greater commitment to pluralism and tolerance in our institutions, including the inclusion of critical if unpopular voices.

    Intellectual elitism, credentialism, and classism must end. Restoring trust in public health—and our democracy—depends on it.

    Kevin Bass is an MD/PhD student at a medical school in Texas. He is in his 7th year.

    The views expressed in this article are the writer's own.
    "A truth does not mind being questioned. A lie does not like being challenged."

  17. #36
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2019
    Location
    US
    Posts
    6,670
    Thanks
    635
    Thanked 896 Times in 688 Posts
    Rep Power
    11

    Default Re: The new and improved COVID catch-all thread.

    From your post @dneal.

    “My motivation for writing this is simple: It's clear to me that for public trust to be restored in science, scientists should publicly discuss what went right and what went wrong during the pandemic, and where we could have done better” , which is precisely what the link I provided did.

  18. #37
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    6,655
    Thanks
    2,026
    Thanked 2,187 Times in 1,417 Posts
    Rep Power
    18

    Default Re: The new and improved COVID catch-all thread.

    Oh, I figured it out. Here is the entire list:

    1) Human tolerance for lifestyle changes is limited.

    Americans by and large endured substantial changes and restrictions in daily life and social interactions, including taking extra precautions like wearing masks, minimizing interactions and modifying lifestyles. But patience ran out. By September 2022, 30 months into the pandemic, 46 percent of Americans had returned to their prepandemic lives, according to an Axios-Ipsos survey. This was despite the fact on Sept. 1 of that year, an average of 90,000 new cases and more than 500 deaths were being reported a day. Patience appears to have been even shorter during the 1918 influenza pandemic. If the next public health emergency occurs soon, patience may run out sooner. Policymakers need to recognize the limitation in human perseverance and prepare accordingly.

    2) Incentives can change behavior. Social norms can enforce it.

    Habits are hard to change. But people do change with the right incentives, like higher taxes on cigarettes or on sugar sweetened beverages to reduce unhealthy behaviors. During Covid, workplace vaccine mandates were effective in increasing vaccination rates. More creative use of incentives and judicious mandates that do not evoke substantial resistance should be examined.

    People also tend to bend to social norms, those unwritten rules or peer practices that govern behavior in societies. That is why masking was easier in East Asia than in the United States. Masks were common in East Asia during the SARS epidemic of 2002-2003 and are often worn there to protect against transmitting or catching infections. In the absence of such norms, it may become necessary to draw on the persuasion of public officials, celebrities and other social influencers. Policymakers must strive to take public health actions that are translatable into social norms.

    3) Trust is crucial.

    Public trust in government and health organizations can reduce cases and deaths. The United States, already sharply divided politically, failed on this essential element of the response. In 2021, according to Gallup, only 39 percent of Americans had a great deal or fair amount of trust in the federal government to handle either domestic or international affairs. And Pew survey in 2022 found that “fewer than half” of the respondents said the country had “given the right amount of priority to the needs of K-12 students, public health, quality of life.” Trust is easy to lose, but very hard to regain. It requires honesty and transparency. Future policies, especially those based on uncertain or incomplete information — such as whether a Covid vaccine mandate should remain in place — must be evaluated in part by their impact on social trust.

    4) Prepare now.

    Disease surveillance capabilities, governmentwide coordination, the stockpiling of medical supplies and the ability to maintain resilient supply chains are essential preparations.

    5) Reliable, real-time data is vital.

    Data that enables public officials to track a virus also enables them to respond quickly to local outbreaks. But in the United States, a disjointed and poorly funded public health system and fragmented health delivery made collecting data challenging. This difficulty was exacerbated because public and private health systems did not provide complete data to state and local public health agencies. The federal government lacks authority to require real-time data collection unless there is an emergency. The federal government should mandate or create strong incentives for the timely reporting of uniform data by states and localities to a central, open-access data repository, which is essential for an effective response.

    6) We know how to reduce the spread of airborne viruses like Covid.

    Inexplicably, the World Health Organization and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention had been very reluctant initially to embrace the reality that the SARS-CoV-2 virus, like most respiratory viruses, could spread through the air by microscopic particles and remain suspended and travel beyond a close group of people, otherwise known as airborne transmission. This viral transmission can be reduced through the use of high quality N95 or KN95 respirators, by being outdoors and, when indoors, by increasing ventilation and improving indoor air filtration. The federal government needs to provide incentives to local governments to update their building codes to require better indoor air quality.

    7) Vaccines reduce serious disease, but are unlikely to prevent transmission. New therapeutics are needed.

    Vaccinated people are far less likely to get seriously ill or die from Covid than those who are unvaccinated. Many people also benefit from boosters. While the vaccines have reduced the risk of hospitalization and death, we need to develop vaccines that induce broad-spectrum and long-lasting immunity to protect against rapidly mutating viruses. We also need to develop additional monoclonal antibodies, treatments necessary for immune compromised individuals who don’t respond well to vaccines, and broad-spectrum antiviral medications to inhibit the replication of a wide range of viruses.

    8) Responses should be tailored to local circumstances.

    Over the last three years, the virus sometimes spread nationally and other times was limited to a few regions of the country. Viral surges repeatedly erupted in some areas but not others. The appropriate public health response should be modulated and based on viral prevalence, vaccination rates and other circumstances at the local level. Federal coordination is important, but we should rely on locally nuanced responses.

    9) School should not be interrupted or placed online except in rare circumstances.

    In-person education can continue during a respiratory pandemic like Covid, even before a vaccine is developed. Among other things, this would require: improved indoor air quality by opening windows and using better HVAC and enhanced filtration systems; managing how lunch and other group activities are conducted; testing for infections; and wearing high-quality masks during surges. When vaccines become available, teachers and students should be prioritized, although as some countries showed, schools could reopen without vaccines by employing those other public health interventions. In the most severe outbreaks or those particularly deadly for children, closing schools temporarily may be necessary.

    10) Social isolation is harmful and can increase mortality.

    Early in the pandemic, much of society shut down. The result was an increase in social isolation that led to depression and the erosion of social skills.

    While physical distancing is important to reduce the spread of airborne viruses, socializing can occur in parks and on playgrounds, streets, beaches and other outdoor venues where the air circulation is good. Even in pandemics, public spaces should remain open unless they are driving surges.

    11) We need vaccine access and paid sick leave.

    More lives can be saved by prioritizing the vaccination of the vulnerable — older people, for instance, in the case of Covid — and frontline workers in essential industries; improving indoor air quality; properly wearing high-quality N95 or KN95 respirators; and ensuring workers are supported with paid sick leave so they can take time off while they or household members are infectious and in need of care.

    12) Indifference can kill.

    For most of the 20th century, life became much safer as risks of death in car crashes and workplaces and from diseases declined. But Covid upended that narrative in the 21st century. Even so, people seem to have become inured to Covid, though it was the third leading cause of death in the United States in 2020 and 2021, and the fourth leading cause of death last year. Americans seemed to tolerate 200,000 or so Covid deaths a year — more deaths than strokes and diabetes and about five times the number from breast cancer. We worry that this indifference may be related to the fact that more than three-quarters of all Covid deaths have been among older people, minorities and those with obesity and diabetes. That, of course, is unacceptable, and we must redouble our focus on the most vulnerable and treat them as the equals they are.

    13) Covid will not be the last pandemic to strike the United States and the next one could be worse.

    The United States is repeating its “panic and forget” approach to crises. Unless we adopt smart policies, in the next health emergency America will again rely on improvisation, trial-and-error, and luck rather than data, planning and preparedness. And tragically, hundreds of thousands if not millions could suffer and die as a result of our lassitude.

    As the public health emergency ends, we worry that the focus on other crises will push aside the planning and the execution of our recommendations. Future generations will pay the price unless we respond with substantive reforms.
    Last edited by TSherbs; May 11th, 2023 at 12:21 PM.

  19. #38
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2019
    Location
    US
    Posts
    6,670
    Thanks
    635
    Thanked 896 Times in 688 Posts
    Rep Power
    11

    Default Re: The new and improved COVID catch-all thread.

    Quote Originally Posted by TSherbs View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Chuck Naill View Post
    This is an op-ed regarding the pandemic and suggested reforms plus what we learned.

    "6) We know how to reduce the spread of airborne viruses like Covid.

    Inexplicably, the World Health Organization and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention had been very reluctant initially to embrace the reality that the SARS-CoV-2 virus, like most respiratory viruses, could spread through the air by microscopic particles and remain suspended and travel beyond a close group of people, otherwise known as airborne transmission. This viral transmission can be reduced through the use of high quality N95 or KN95 respirators, by being outdoors and, when indoors, by increasing ventilation and improving indoor air filtration. The federal government needs to provide incentives to local governments to update their building codes to require better indoor air quality.

    7) Vaccines reduce serious disease, but are unlikely to prevent transmission. New therapeutics are needed.

    Vaccinated people are far less likely to get seriously ill or die from Covid than those who are unvaccinated. Many people also benefit from boosters. While the vaccines have reduced the risk of hospitalization and death, we need to develop vaccines that induce broad-spectrum and long-lasting immunity to protect against rapidly mutating viruses. We also need to develop additional monoclonal antibodies, treatments necessary for immune compromised individuals who don’t respond well to vaccines, and broad-spectrum antiviral medications to inhibit the replication of a wide range of viruses."

    https://www.nytimes.com/2023/05/11/o...smid=url-share
    Why did you leave out items 1-5? And are there more items after #7?
    The masks and vaccines were the most talked about strategies.

    I’m not trying to open an old wound, but it is important, for me at least, to know I participated in a way to prevent the spread.

  20. #39
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    6,655
    Thanks
    2,026
    Thanked 2,187 Times in 1,417 Posts
    Rep Power
    18

    Default Re: The new and improved COVID catch-all thread.

    It's fine. The list, in its entirety, is reasonable and thoughtful. It's very important to have a strategy ahead of time for most imaginable contingencies. These recent experiences and data will help inform the ongoing efforts to craft such strategies.

  21. #40
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2019
    Location
    US
    Posts
    6,670
    Thanks
    635
    Thanked 896 Times in 688 Posts
    Rep Power
    11

    Default Re: The new and improved COVID catch-all thread.

    I’ve listened and trusted Michael Osterhom since the beginning. Misspelling his name, perhaps…lol!

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •