Flu + Covid is Happening Now!

[Not_a_Number]

13 minutes ago, Halftime Hope said:

This thread seems to be a bit all over the place, but since you mentioned a single trustworthy source with a unified message:  one of the biggest disappointments in my life, one which has made my cynicism with the medical establishment 10 times worse than it already was, and it was BAD before, is listening to the CDC, Fauci and crew, and JAMA.

I am really not sure what you mean. While Fauci hasn't been prescient, and I think he screwed up over masks, he's mostly fact-based. I'm not enamored of him, but he isn't a political hack. 

 

14 minutes ago, Halftime Hope said:

Who I've come to trust are the doctors who are obviously practicing the art and science of medicine.  The independent voices who are having success treating patients. The voices of logic and reason and "do no harm" and "let's talk about the studies and pre-prints."    And we've hit the point that even these docs are begging for the administrative medical circles to think, to listen, and to start spreading the word about treating people early on.  Yes, after 10 months, we have the Holy Grail of data to back it up.

Where's the data about treating people early on? 

 

15 minutes ago, Halftime Hope said:

I don't know what I'd have done without those voices, because what I'm hearing from media and the COVID task force amounts to propaganda and lies.  When even I can tell you the bureaucrats are wrong -- here's looking at you, Fauci and Birx -- we are in deep, deep doodoo. 

Again, I'm not going to say they are right about everything, but what are you referring to? 

[mathnerd]

4 minutes ago, RootAnn said:

My local, small town (really, county) newspaper doesn't cover big things like Covid other th asdn how it affects life here. So, articles on how in person school is changing, how attendance at sports events is curtailed to only a certain number of close relatives per player, when & how to get tested in our community, pleas from local health providers to wear a mask when you are going about your business & just this last week, a tiny paragraph about our local mayor instituting a mask mandate (with 15 exceptions).

Definitely nothing about how indoor dining isn't safe, especially at the places where the servers/employees don't wear masks at all.

My state's governor told municipalities they could not issue their own mask mandate. He also threatened to withhold state funding if courthouses required masks to enter. Once the two big cities defied the governor & issued mask mandates, some of the other towns& small cities followed--albeit very recently. This is the state that has moved to Do Your Own Contract Tracing because the backlog is too big with the increase in cases. 

As a PSA, most national, regional and statewide newspapers are giving free access to their Covid content as a service to the public during the pandemic. So, please make use of them to keep yourself informed because your small town newspapers are not going to cover things that are potentially polarizing or political.

A couple of examples of free covid content in california:

https://www.latimes.com/topic/health

https://www.sacbee.com/news/coronavirus/

[Scarlett]

Imagine what it must’ve been like during the pandemic of 1918.. There was so much less information available. But even then they were aware that wearing mask helped contain it as well as avoiding crowds of people. I just do not understand what is so complicated about understanding those basic facts

[Scarlett]

8 minutes ago, Not_a_Number said:

I am really not sure what you mean. While Fauci hasn't been prescient, and I think he screwed up over masks, he's mostly fact-based. I'm not enamored of him, but he isn't a political hack. 

 

Where's the data about treating people early on? 

 

Again, I'm not going to say they are right about everything, but what are you referring to? 

Yes same with me. Dr. Fauci has done an excellent job dealing with a very politicized situation. I am not thrilled that he basically lied about mask in the very beginning because they were afraid it would be a run on them. I think that was wrong of him. But overall I think he has been very much in line with facts and science and staying out of politics.

[Scarlett]

And for the record, early on when they were saying that masks only protect the other person not the mask wearer, I did not think that rang true. I just decided then, that even if wearing a mask did not help me, it certainly could not hurt.

Edited December 1, 2020 by Scarlett

[Not_a_Number]

10 minutes ago, Scarlett said:

And for the record, early on when they were saying that masks only protect the other person not the mass wearer, I did not think that rang true. I just decided then, that even if wearing a mask did not help me, it certainly could not hurt.

If I remember correctly (and correct me if I'm wrong!), the data on whether masks help you is mixed, although GOOD masks certainly do -- like, N95s help you. I haven't seen great data about cloth masks and surgical masks, though. 

But they definitely curtail spread in the community. 

[Ausmumof3]

1 hour ago, Choirfarm3 said:

Sent you a pm. Not comfortable putting it out there.

Mind if I ask if you’re new to the forum or are you a previous poster coming back?  Either way, welcome.

[RootAnn]

51 minutes ago, mathnerd said:

So, please make use of them to keep yourself informed because your small town newspapers are not going to cover things that are potentially polarizing or political.

Good PSA, but FWIW, I believe those who want to know more have already been keeping themselves informed. My family refer to me as the "President of COF" (Covid Offensive Force? It has been so long that I don't remember what it stands for) because I spent so much time reading about Covid-19. I keep up with the mega Covid thread. Unfortunately, it is easy to find conflicting info if you are looking for it and/ or interpret info to suit your point of view.  That is what I see the most oo in my area (radio, business owners, bloggers).

[Not_a_Number]

3 minutes ago, RootAnn said:

Good PSA, but FWIW, I believe those who want to know more have already been keeping themselves informed. My family refer to me as the "President of COF" (Covid Offensive Force? It has been so long that I don't remember what it stands for) because I spent so much time reading about Covid-19. I keep up with the mega Covid thread. Unfortunately, it is easy to find conflicting info if you are looking for it and/ or interpret info to suit your point of view.  That is what I see the most oo in my area (radio, business owners, bloggers).

Yeah, I agree with you there. It's not super hard to find reliable sources if you're interested. And if one is statistically minded, like me, you can also look at the raw data. 

[Ausmumof3]

1 hour ago, Halftime Hope said:

This thread seems to be a bit all over the place, but since you mentioned a single trustworthy source with a unified message:  one of the biggest disappointments in my life, one which has made my cynicism with the medical establishment 10 times worse than it already was, and it was BAD before, is listening to the CDC, Fauci and crew, and JAMA.  (Omg, don't get me started on the politicization -- is that a word? -- of medicine!)  

Who I've come to trust are the doctors who are obviously practicing the art and science of medicine.  The independent voices who are having success treating patients. The voices of logic and reason and "do no harm" and "let's talk about the studies and pre-prints."    And we've hit the point that even these docs are begging for the administrative medical circles to think, to listen, and to start spreading the word about treating people early on.  Yes, after 10 months, we have the Holy Grail of data to back it up.

I don't know what I'd have done without those voices, because what I'm hearing from media and the COVID task force amounts to propaganda and lies.  When even I can tell you the bureaucrats are wrong -- here's looking at you, Fauci and Birx -- we are in deep, deep doodoo. 

And the sad part is that nearly everyone in my large circle of acquaintances/customers/clients is 50 and above, and most of them, especially the older ones, are getting their information from the nightly news; what I listen to is too biochem/medicalese-heavy for your regular person.  God help them, the news has had them tied in knots for months. 

Sigh. 

 

 

Do you mind me asking which early treatments you mean?  I’m just wondering because I’ve seen studies showing good results for several drugs once people are hospitalised but I haven’t seen much that’s been demonstrated to work in earlier stages.  Having good levels of vitamin D seems to help but the most recent study showed that supplementing with vitamin D after exposure didn’t seem to make a difference.  So best to get levels up now.

[katilac]

 

7 hours ago, PeterPan said:

That's the point. If he could have taken the shot and chose not to, then he might not want to whine too much. I don't take the shot, and it's on me if I get it and get it on top of something else. Most insurance will do flu shots for free and they've been BEGGING people to take it.

Well, we don't know that he's whining, either, lol. Poor guy is just being discussed on a random message board. There's actually a fair amount of debate on the best time to get it, so some people wait later than others. 

I did get the flu shot, but I promise you I'd be whining anyway if I got covid AND the flu. 

2 hours ago, easypeasy said:

For clarification - the only places they were going to eat are restaurants that have been making every effort to be as safe as possible.  

Yeah, I am not eating in restaurants, but I don't think it's crazy to do so when a lot of precautions are being taken. We all take different types and levels of risks. Other people's choices always seem more reckless than our own, lol. 

[teachermom2834]

I have been amazed at the lack of thinking skills. The fact that there are guidelines and restrictions doesn’t mean things are “safe.” They are guidelines to slow the spread on a public level not guarantees of personal safety. When our state had a guideline of limiting gatherings to ten people or less, people were gathering with nine or ten to be “safe.” It was somehow lost on grown adults that they could catch COVID from even one person. That nothing magical happened when the eleventh person was turned away that guarantees the safety of the others.??? 
 

I would be an outlier on this board in that I don’t really agree with a bunch of restrictions and mandates. But- I totally think people need to think for themselves and make good choices. I want the restaurant open but I’m not going. Not really trying to distract with an argument on that...just saying that I am shocked at the number of people that think because something is allowed that it is safe. That’s just not the way our country rolls. 

I don’t know if it is true cluelessness or just the excuses of people that want to do whatever they want. It is exhausting. 

[Not_a_Number]

6 minutes ago, Ausmumof3 said:

Do you mind me asking which early treatments you mean?  I’m just wondering because I’ve seen studies showing good results for several drugs once people are hospitalised but I haven’t seen much that’s been demonstrated to work in earlier stages.  Having good levels of vitamin D seems to help but the most recent study showed that supplementing with vitamin D after exposure didn’t seem to make a difference.  So best to get levels up now.

I think "vitamin D seems to help" is actually not a great way to interpret the data. You can rather say that "higher vitamin D correlates with better outcomes." But it's not obvious that it's causation -- like, it's entirely possible even getting one's vitamin D levels up months before getting exposed wouldn't do it, because the vitamin D might be a SYMPTOM and not a cause of what makes you vulnerable. 

You know, the same way that sales of beach umbrellas and ice cream are highly correlated 😉 . But if there were suddenly no beach umbrellas for sale, ice cream consumption wouldn't go down... 

Edited December 1, 2020 by Not_a_Number

[Not_a_Number]

On the topic of correlation versus causation... 

https://xkcd.com/552/

[Lecka]

A lot of the coverage I see locally, that I see *without going out of my way,* lists number of cases with no context — and the numbers would sound small with no context — 50 cases a day would be mentioned — it wouldn’t seem like much.  Without context — how is it supposed to mean much?  
 

Our schools are open for 5-day-a-week in-person.  
 

It is really not mentioned that much, and a lot of stories are about how people are overreacting, within the past month the governor said a hospital spokesperson was “fearmongering” and that was reported equally with what the hospital spokesperson said.  
 

The papers are the Norman Transcript and the Daily Oklahoman. 
 

I don’t read them cover to cover — but honestly this is how it is covered!

Its either minimal, or “let’s cover both sides” when one side is against masks or against any restrictions, and both sides are presented, and then — it just doesn’t lend itself to a lot of depth or detail I think.

Its not like it’s covered like it doesn’t exist at all and you wouldn’t know it was happening — but it is covered in a way that is kind-of non-committal or something.

Or maybe that is just me!

[Lecka]

A lot of the coverage is of whether or not the football teams will be able to play!  In the sports section!!!!!!!

[Ausmumof3]

44 minutes ago, Not_a_Number said:

I think "vitamin D seems to help" is actually not a great way to interpret the data. You can rather say that "higher vitamin D correlates with better outcomes." But it's not obvious that it's causation -- like, it's entirely possible even getting one's vitamin D levels up months before getting exposed wouldn't do it, because the vitamin D might be a SYMPTOM and not a cause of what makes you vulnerable. 

You know, the same way that sales of beach umbrellas and ice cream are highly correlated 😉 . But if there were suddenly no beach umbrellas for sale, ice cream consumption wouldn't go down... 

hence my use of the word seems

shorthand for - we don’t have randomised control trials but there’s enough evidence for me personally to give it a go given the low risk and low cost of harm.  
 

https://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/healthreport/is-there-a-link-between-vitamin-d-and-coronavirus/12566324
 

this podcast here is a good summary and there’s a transcript.

eta

https://academic.oup.com/ajcp/advance-article/doi/10.1093/ajcp/aqaa252/6000689

this retrospective study tried to control for some potential factors though obviously not all of them.

Edited December 1, 2020 by Ausmumof3

[MEmama]

1 hour ago, Scarlett said:

Imagine what it must’ve been like during the pandemic of 1918.. There was so much less information available. But even then they were aware that wearing mask helped contain it as well as avoiding crowds of people. I just do not understand what is so complicated about understanding those basic facts

Yeah, I think about this in regards to anti vaxxers too. *Every* generation before us knew what it was like to bury 4 or 6 kids to diseases we are fortunate to prevent easily today. I mean, go to any cemetery and look at how many entire families were buried within days or months if each other. Their suffering would be unfathomable to us today. That we don’t know the horrors of polio today is a freaking miracle, yet so many people are willing to thumb their noses at how we got to this incredibly privileged place. 

Literally one of the best things we the common people can do for ourselves, our families and our communities is wear a little piece of fabric over our mouths and that’s too much to ask? SMH. 

[Halftime Hope]

26 minutes ago, kand said:

I’m curious what medical sources you listen to. I get a lot of my virus information from well known and respected virologists, epidemiologists and immunologists that I follow on Twitter, who post links to their articles and research. What they are saying wouldn’t be likely to untie anyone’s knots right now, though. 

This explanation actually helps give me insight into how people in some parts of the country might get to this point where they are so disconnected to what is actually happening with Covid. If they never hear the truth and don’t go looking for it themself, then 🤷‍♀️

There has been some recent research showing some significant protection to the wearer from cloth and surgical masks as well. 

So from the beginning I listened to the JAMA "podcasts" but it's YouTube, so maybe more accurate to say their "channel".  I've quit listening to them because very little of what they offer now is actually about the medicine.  After that, MedCram, Dr John Campbell (he is a nurse/educator with a doctorate; to my knowledge he isn't practicing), UCSF Grand Rounds, TWIV, MedCram, the pulmonologists and intensivists whose group name (EmCrit?) I can't remember (they haven't done much since the initial NY wave was over), Dr Mobeen Syed (great biochem instruction!), and interviews with Dr Marik. (FLCCC group, but he does interviews).  Recently, a few items by Dr. Peter McCullough, from the Baylor health system.  Early on Dr Mike Hansen and Dr. Yo, but lately Dr Yo is really focused on long-haulers and isn't vlogging much.  Occasionally for the philosophical side of medicine and public health, Dr. Z -- I'm just as likely to agree as to disagree, but I can usually see both viewpoints he's describing.  :-) 

 

 

[Not_a_Number]

1 minute ago, Halftime Hope said:

So from the beginning I listened to the JAMA "podcasts" but it's YouTube, so maybe more accurate to say their "channel".  I've quit listening to them because very little of what they offer now is actually about the medicine.  After that, MedCram, Dr John Campbell (he is a nurse/educator with a doctorate; to my knowledge he isn't practicing), UCSF Grand Rounds, TWIV, MedCram, the pulmonologists and intensivists whose group name (EmCrit?) I can't remember (they haven't done much since the initial NY wave was over), Dr Mobeen Syed (great biochem instruction!), and interviews with Dr Marik. (FLCCC group, but he does interviews).  Recently, a few items by Dr. Peter McCullough, from the Baylor health system.  Early on Dr Mike Hansen and Dr. Yo, but lately Dr Yo is really focused on long-haulers and isn't vlogging much.  Occasionally for the philosophical side of medicine and public health, Dr. Z -- I'm just as likely to agree as to disagree, but I can usually see both viewpoints he's describing.  🙂

Interesting. I've seen some of Dr. John Campbell's stuff -- I don't remember it feeling any less urgent than what Fauci was saying, last I checked. But it's been a while. 

I haven't really spent much time getting into the nitty-gritty of the chemical stuff, though, because I simply don't have the background -- like, I can hear the words, but they don't connect with concepts in my head. So I've mostly focused on the data about how to keep my family safe -- where the virus spreads, how it spreads, how the numbers look, etc. 

[Halftime Hope]

50 minutes ago, Ausmumof3 said:

Do you mind me asking which early treatments you mean?  I’m just wondering because I’ve seen studies showing good results for several drugs once people are hospitalised but I haven’t seen much that’s been demonstrated to work in earlier stages.  Having good levels of vitamin D seems to help but the most recent study showed that supplementing with vitamin D after exposure didn’t seem to make a difference.  So best to get levels up now.

So if you go look at You Tube and find very recent videos with Dr. Paul Marik and Dr. Kory, using the i-MASK protocol which includes ivermectin, they have a slide with a metaanalysis of ivermectin studies.  As opposed to HCQ, the studies all show benefit with various endpoints: in the viral stage, in the inflammatory stage, and as prophylaxis.  There are randomized controlled studies as well as population based public health studies.   I've heard Dr Jatnor (I'm sorry I butchered the spelling on it) from Florida describe how it turned around critically ill patients already in the ICU and on vents, patients who were already on HQC + standard of care, and not getting better, but then when they added ivermectin, it is a very rapid improvement.  And so on.  

[Ausmumof3]

2 minutes ago, Halftime Hope said:

So if you go look at You Tube and find very recent videos with Dr. Paul Marik and Dr. Kory, using the i-MASK protocol which includes ivermectin, they have a slide with a metaanalysis of ivermectin studies.  As opposed to HCQ, the studies all show benefit with various endpoints: in the viral stage, in the inflammatory stage, and as prophylaxis.  There are randomized controlled studies as well as population based public health studies.   I've heard Dr Jatnor (I'm sorry I butchered the spelling on it) from Florida describe how it turned around critically ill patients already in the ICU and on vents, patients who were already on HQC + standard of care, and not getting better, but then when they added ivermectin, it is a very rapid improvement.  And so on.  

Dr Paul Marik is the guy behind Math plus protocol I think?  I hadn’t heard about the recent studies on ivermectin so thanks.

[Halftime Hope]

Just now, Ausmumof3 said:

Dr Paul Marik is the guy behind Math plus protocol I think?  I hadn’t heard about the recent studies on ivermectin so thanks.

Yes, he is world-reknowned ARDS guy, and first came out with the MATH+ protocol.  He is cautious and will only publish what he knows that he knows that he knows. So early on, the MATH+ protocol included HCQ, but then it was removed.  The i-MASK protocol is recent, two weeks or thereabouts.  It is about prophylaxis and early outpatient treatment. 

Dr Peter McCullough in Dallas has a similar published protocol (early October) that he's worked on with a whole large team from Italy and other countries.  Essentially it says the same thing: early ambulatory treatment of patients, so they never go to the hospital.  His new update includes ivermectin, because most of the ivermectin study data is fairly new.  We've known about IVM since April, and Pakistan and Bangladesh were early adopters along with some South American localities (nothing nationwide), but it's only in the last month that the final data has been tallied. 

From early on, I was watching HQC because I believe it's better to treat outpatients aggressively than to adopt a watchful waiting stance when you know the high risk patients are going to fare badly.  I live with someone who will fare badly, so I've got Plan A, Plan B and Plan C, all local doctors who are very successful at treating outpatients.  :-)  But if all I were doing was watching the news and believing the NIH website which says there is no effective early treatment, I'd be tied in knots, too.    

[mathnerd]

2 hours ago, Halftime Hope said:

When even I can tell you the bureaucrats are wrong -- here's looking at you, Fauci and Birx -- we are in deep, deep doodoo. 

As for Fauci and Brix, my opinion is that they have built their entire careers at NIH which is working on these vaccines in both direct and indirect ways. They are touting what they know and what they have worked on in their chosen career paths. So, there is that factor to consider when taking their advise. 

[popmom]

25 minutes ago, Halftime Hope said:

Yes, he is world-reknowned ARDS guy, and first came out with the MATH+ protocol.  He is cautious and will only publish what he knows that he knows that he knows. So early on, the MATH+ protocol included HCQ, but then it was removed.  The i-MASK protocol is recent, two weeks or thereabouts.  It is about prophylaxis and early outpatient treatment. 

Dr Peter McCullough in Dallas has a similar published protocol (early October) that he's worked on with a whole large team from Italy and other countries.  Essentially it says the same thing: early ambulatory treatment of patients, so they never go to the hospital.  His new update includes ivermectin, because most of the ivermectin study data is fairly new.  We've known about IVM since April, and Pakistan and Bangladesh were early adopters along with some South American localities (nothing nationwide), but it's only in the last month that the final data has been tallied. 

From early on, I was watching HQC because I believe it's better to treat outpatients aggressively than to adopt a watchful waiting stance when you know the high risk patients are going to fare badly.  I live with someone who will fare badly, so I've got Plan A, Plan B and Plan C, all local doctors who are very successful at treating outpatients.  :-)  But if all I were doing was watching the news and believing the NIH website which says there is no effective early treatment, I'd be tied in knots, too.    

Well, I'm a bit "tied up in knots". How do you find out which doctors are willing to prescribe Ivermectin? Or which doctors are having success treating outpatient? Are these primary care docs? 

Edited December 1, 2020 by popmom

[Ausmumof3]

22 minutes ago, Halftime Hope said:

Yes, he is world-reknowned ARDS guy, and first came out with the MATH+ protocol.  He is cautious and will only publish what he knows that he knows that he knows. So early on, the MATH+ protocol included HCQ, but then it was removed.  The i-MASK protocol is recent, two weeks or thereabouts.  It is about prophylaxis and early outpatient treatment. 

Dr Peter McCullough in Dallas has a similar published protocol (early October) that he's worked on with a whole large team from Italy and other countries.  Essentially it says the same thing: early ambulatory treatment of patients, so they never go to the hospital.  His new update includes ivermectin, because most of the ivermectin study data is fairly new.  We've known about IVM since April, and Pakistan and Bangladesh were early adopters along with some South American localities (nothing nationwide), but it's only in the last month that the final data has been tallied. 

From early on, I was watching HQC because I believe it's better to treat outpatients aggressively than to adopt a watchful waiting stance when you know the high risk patients are going to fare badly.  I live with someone who will fare badly, so I've got Plan A, Plan B and Plan C, all local doctors who are very successful at treating outpatients.  :-)  But if all I were doing was watching the news and believing the NIH website which says there is no effective early treatment, I'd be tied in knots, too.    

Do you have any links to studies etc.  I’m finding a lot of opinions but not much in the way of science.  It looks like Dr Mariks is a meta analysis rather than RCT?  I found one from Egypt and one from Iran but that was all.  

[Not_a_Number]

1 minute ago, Ausmumof3 said:

Do you have any links to studies etc.  I’m finding a lot of opinions but not much in the way of science.  It looks like Dr Mariks is a meta analysis rather than RCT?  I found one from Egypt and one from Iran but that was all.  

I'm seeing a bunch of RCTs: 

https://c19study.com/i

It looks encouraging 🙂. I'm glad to hear they are finding treatments... this seems like a great lead. 

[Not_a_Number]

3 minutes ago, Not_a_Number said:

I'm seeing a bunch of RCTs: 

https://c19study.com/i

It looks encouraging 🙂. I'm glad to hear they are finding treatments... this seems like a great lead. 

Quoting myself... that site seems sketchy, however. Nice compilation of results, but totally uncritical. (For example, looking through some studies I know about, I see they've listed that bizarre Vitamin D study on the Vitamin D page, and it's really suspicious, that one.) 

But a good source if you want to click through to some studies. I'd ignore all that aren't RCTs, though. 

[Bootsie]

2 hours ago, Scarlett said:

Imagine what it must’ve been like during the pandemic of 1918.. There was so much less information available. But even then they were aware that wearing mask helped contain it as well as avoiding crowds of people. I just do not understand what is so complicated about understanding those basic facts

It is interesting, however, to think about the long-term impact the Spanish Flu had on people.  Both my and DH's grandparents were born around 1900 and would have been young adults around the time of the Spanish flu.  Every time I put a mask on I hear in the back of my mind my grandmother saying not to cover my face because I will suffocate.  I was often lectured as a child about not putting my head under a sheet, not putting a kerchief over my mouth and nose when pretending to be a cowgirl, not wearing a Halloween costume that had anything that covered the mouth or nose, etc.  DH says his grandparents were the same way.  We never talked to our grandparents about the Spanish flu, but they would have been in the hard-hit generation and we never heard them talk about masking or avoiding crowds to avoid the flu or other illnesses.

[Ausmumof3]

22 minutes ago, Not_a_Number said:

Quoting myself... that site seems sketchy, however. Nice compilation of results, but totally uncritical. (For example, looking through some studies I know about, I see they've listed that bizarre Vitamin D study on the Vitamin D page, and it's really suspicious, that one.) 

But a good source if you want to click through to some studies. I'd ignore all that aren't RCTs, though. 

Yeah I could find a few like that but nothing in a medical journal etc.  but if it’s successful I guess that would come in time.

[Ausmumof3]

9 minutes ago, Bootsie said:

It is interesting, however, to think about the long-term impact the Spanish Flu had on people.  Both my and DH's grandparents were born around 1900 and would have been young adults around the time of the Spanish flu.  Every time I put a mask on I hear in the back of my mind my grandmother saying not to cover my face because I will suffocate.  I was often lectured as a child about not putting my head under a sheet, not putting a kerchief over my mouth and nose when pretending to be a cowgirl, not wearing a Halloween costume that had anything that covered the mouth or nose, etc.  DH says his grandparents were the same way.  We never talked to our grandparents about the Spanish flu, but they would have been in the hard-hit generation and we never heard them talk about masking or avoiding crowds to avoid the flu or other illnesses.

I had always assumed those kind of cautions related to cot death.

[Scarlett]

11 minutes ago, Bootsie said:

It is interesting, however, to think about the long-term impact the Spanish Flu had on people.  Both my and DH's grandparents were born around 1900 and would have been young adults around the time of the Spanish flu.  Every time I put a mask on I hear in the back of my mind my grandmother saying not to cover my face because I will suffocate.  I was often lectured as a child about not putting my head under a sheet, not putting a kerchief over my mouth and nose when pretending to be a cowgirl, not wearing a Halloween costume that had anything that covered the mouth or nose, etc.  DH says his grandparents were the same way.  We never talked to our grandparents about the Spanish flu, but they would have been in the hard-hit generation and we never heard them talk about masking or avoiding crowds to avoid the flu or other illnesses.

I don’t really understand. 

[Carol in Cal.]

I keep debating whether to have the flu shot, knowing that it suppresses your immune system for a couple of weeks afterwards.

Re. dining inside a restaurant--I have not chosen to do it since before the official SIP / shutdown.  Once it was reasonable to think that there might be community transmission, I just stopped dead right there.  I have had only three served restaurant meals since then, all outside and pretty distanced from strangers at other tables.  

[Not_a_Number]

25 minutes ago, Ausmumof3 said:

Yeah I could find a few like that but nothing in a medical journal etc.  but if it’s successful I guess that would come in time.

You can click through to the journals from that site. I do prefer things published, but it genuinely does list real papers. 

[Not_a_Number]

24 minutes ago, Carol in Cal. said:

I keep debating whether to have the flu shot, knowing that it suppresses your immune system for a couple of weeks afterwards.

Would you mind citing a reference for this one? I can't find anything with cursory Googling except sites that say that this isn't true. 

Edited December 2, 2020 by Not_a_Number

[Bootsie]

44 minutes ago, Scarlett said:

I don’t really understand. 

Our grandparents, although they lived through the Spanish flu, taught us about dangers of covering the mouth and nose.  They never suggested when someone was ill, or during flu season, that someone should go around masked.  So, I find it difficult to believe that people who experienced the Spanish flu were convinced that masking is an obvious thing to do.  

[vonfirmath]

4 hours ago, Scarlett said:

Imagine what it must’ve been like during the pandemic of 1918.. There was so much less information available. But even then they were aware that wearing mask helped contain it as well as avoiding crowds of people. I just do not understand what is so complicated about understanding those basic facts

Actually, I have just finished Rereading _The Great Influenza_ by John Barry and at the end he concludes the masks did not help contain Spanish flu. The only thing that helped was separation -- not getting close.

 

[Not_a_Number]

3 minutes ago, kand said:

I would love to see good data that ivermectin is effective, and I will keep looking for some. It would be like a miracle if it is, but I also feel like we would know by now. We’ve managed to have multiple vaccines developed and tested in this space is time, in addition to free treatments like proning, so I don’t know why we wouldn’t have sufficient data on ivermectin yet. It doesn’t give me great confidence that most of the places I see touting its effectiveness also appear to think the vaccine is a conspiracy and that HCQ is also effective. That gives me major pause. 

Well, here are some RCTs: 

https://assets.researchsquare.com/files/rs-109670/v1/262874c7-d892-4fba-99c5-289f2b81fae1.pdf

https://assets.researchsquare.com/files/rs-100956/v2/39b225ad-5df4-4da7-9cbd-233bf26a0eb4.pdf

The RCTs do actually seem to be showing good results, but digging around more, I'm not seeing any Western RCTs... I'm not going to dismiss Iranian, Egyptian and Indian studies, but I do wonder about the quality of the data more there. 

However, all the RCTs I've found have found positive results, so I'm more optimistic there than with HCQ. 

[kbutton]

 

6 hours ago, Lecka said:

I think there are also people who are just busy taking care of the basics of their lives who don’t have time to deal with researching and keeping up with this stuff — but there are also people who I think are going out of their way to be willfully ignorant.  I think that is a thing here.  

This, and I think there is still a lot of mixed information. We have friends being quite cautious (as cautious as most boardies), and they are definitely more cautious than most people who live here are being. They are still frustrated though that if masks are such a great solution, why are people getting sick? It's really hard for people to understand the spectrum of droplets to aerosols, and people want to believe that if it was so easily transmitted via aerosol that society/authorities would be doing more to contain the spread. We don't even have the optimum PPE for healthcare workers! The original guidance was for people to encounter this in the "space suit" style PPE. Some healthcare workers do have that, but it's for high risk procedures and ICU workers. 

We've stretched the definition of what is okay and safe to accommodate just how far out of the bag the cat has wandered. Most people aren't primed to think about it that way.

5 hours ago, Innisfree said:

Since we know (and truthfully have known for most of the pandemic, though some individuals  were reluctant to acknowledge the fact, and others never got reliable information) that the virus spreads through the air, sitting in a restaurant for an hour, without a mask on, isn't safe.

But the restaurants were allowed to stay open because the economic toll they would face if they closed was too devastating. It's a trade-off between allowing low-level spread, in order to prevent high-level economic impact. But because that wasn't clearly spelled out, people assumed that dining in restaurants at, say, fifty percent capacity must be deemed safe. But individual safety was never the point of that guideline; reducing, not eliminating, the spread was.

I think a lot of people stopped listening to reliable information before experts looped back around to COVID being aerosol. Our governor trie,s to draw a line between advisable vs. allowed, but he's stuck between those who want to impeach him and have passed laws limiting his power and those who are disappointed he didn't do more. Well, I'm disappointed too, but I think that those actions would've happened sooner if he'd tried to do more. 

Regarding the bolded, the cat is out of the bag, so we have to compromise, and $$$ talks--it's seen as badmouthing people who want/need to make a living if we advocate for stricter measures. And the anti-science crowd seems to think they have the constitution on their side.

41 minutes ago, Not_a_Number said:

Would you mind citing a reference for this one? I can't find anything with cursory Googling except sites that say that this isn't true. 

Regarding the immune system and flu shots...my DH is in healthcare and gets pretty hot about vaccine information. He once told me that when kids get their biggest round of shots, it zaps about 1/4 of 1 percent of their immune function for up to about two weeks. 

Measles on the other hand, zaps your immune system for something like two or more years, if you survive it. (This one I have backup for; I scanned but didn't closely read this article: https://asm.org/Articles/2019/May/Measles-and-Immune-Amnesia#:~:text=One of the most unique,a process called immune amnesia.)

11 minutes ago, vonfirmath said:

Actually, I have just finished Rereading _The Great Influenza_ by John Barry and at the end he concludes the masks did not help contain Spanish flu. The only thing that helped was separation -- not getting close.

I thought they used gauze masks. If so, that might explain why. 

[Not_a_Number]

1 minute ago, kbutton said:

Measles on the other hand, zaps your immune system for something like two or more years, if you survive it. (This one I have backup for; I scanned but didn't closely read this article: https://asm.org/Articles/2019/May/Measles-and-Immune-Amnesia#:~:text=One of the most unique,a process called immune amnesia.)

I've seen that!! It's scary. 

[kbutton]

1 minute ago, Not_a_Number said:

I've seen that!! It's scary. 

And while not all diseases do that, the hit to the immune system is way overhyped for healthy people who don't have a history of vaccine problems.

My mom had whooping cough (or mumps?) and chicken pox the same year she had measles. I've heard older generations discussing illnesses coming in clumps like that as well. The list ALWAYS starts with measles, no matter which diseases follow in the rest of the list. I don't think it's a coincidence! 

[Not_a_Number]

1 minute ago, kbutton said:

And while not all diseases do that, the hit to the immune system is way overhyped for healthy people who don't have a history of vaccine problems.

My mom had whooping cough (or mumps?) and chicken pox the same year she had measles. I've heard older generations discussing illnesses coming in clumps like that as well. The list ALWAYS starts with measles, no matter which diseases follow in the rest of the list. I don't think it's a coincidence! 

Yeah, I think we don't spend enough time talking about "weird side effects" of actual diseases.

And how about shingles, after chicken pox? That's a really unfun aftereffect... 

[kbutton]

Just now, Not_a_Number said:

Yeah, I think we don't spend enough time talking about "weird side effects" of actual diseases.

And how about shingles, after chicken pox? That's a really unfun aftereffect... 

The thing I am most looking forward to when I turn 50 in a few years is my shingles vaccine. I plan to get it the minute I am eligible as part of my celebrating. I had shingles in high school, and I can't imagine what it would be like to have it later in life when permanent pain is a possible result on top of the discomfort of the itching, burning, tingling, yuck that it was when I was young.

The article I posted about measles had this to say about flu:

Quote

Many pathogens suppress immune function; the influenza virus damages airway epithelial cells and increases patient susceptibility to pneumonia-causing bacterial species. 

Maybe this is a good time to trot out the PSA that while the flu shot can sometimes keep you from getting the flu, the purpose of the shot is to keep you from dying from the flu...likely of pneumonia. 

[Pen]

@ someone who asked about Ivermectin 

and

@Plum who I think was interested in Ivermectin 

Dr Been interviewed Dr Marik  around ~November 21st or so with some information on that as a good recent starting point.   
 

There is not big $$$ in it, so you won’t get the sort of studies you probably want.  
 

There are studies from places like Pakistan,  however, and increasing positive clinical experience from many places. 
 

 

Edited December 2, 2020 by Pen

[Not_a_Number]

4 minutes ago, kand said:

We have seen in other studies evidence that HCQ actually increases mortality,

I actually haven't seen this evidence from good RCTs, have you? I've mostly seen "no effect," if I'm remembering correctly. 

But I should look some more. I've mostly been skimming things, too. 

 

[Carol in Cal.]

1 hour ago, Not_a_Number said:

Would you mind citing a reference for this one? I can't find anything with cursory Googling except sites that say that this isn't true. 

I don't have one handy but saw it as a caution early this Fall in articles about Covid.  Maybe it's not true?  

[Not_a_Number]

1 minute ago, Carol in Cal. said:

I don't have one handy but saw it as a caution early this Fall in articles about Covid.  Maybe it's not true?  

I'd be curious! Not an area of expertise for me in any way 🙂 . I already had my flu shot, anyway, so it's not of practical concern, but it'd be good to know for the future either way. 

I hope it's false, though! It's bad enough to have a sore arm... 

[Not_a_Number]

14 minutes ago, kand said:

It didn’t appear to me that the ivermectin plus standard care group  did better than the groups that did not get ivermectin  or HCQ,  which they should have, if ivermectin was the difference.

Looking again, I'm not seeing a "no HCQ" group? Just HCQ and ivermectin, and they are split up by severity. 

[Not_a_Number]

1 minute ago, kand said:

Groups V and VI. And I was mistaken. Group V, which was household contacts receiving ivermectin and using PPE had 2 infections (out of 100) and Group VI, household contacts receiving only PPE had 10 infections (also out of 100).

I think we were looking at different papers, lol. 

You should click through all the RCTs linked on the site earlier in the thread... I think the site isn't really reliable, but it's a great compilation of links. Every RCT I saw except for one teeny one was positive, which is MUCH more than you can say for HCQ. 

[Pen]

43 minutes ago, kand said:

I don’t think this is a fair characterization. Scientists and doctors want to solve this. They want to cure this, not just to make money for themselves. That’s why they have studied free interventions like proning patients and cheap medications like dexamethasone, which was the first one for them to announce had significant reduction in mortality rates. 

 Ivm also has been being studied by doctors seeking solutions. 
 

I mean that my sense is that studies aren’t likely to meet the demands for rigor of many on Wtm in my personal experience. 
 

I am Not trying to be critical of doctors trying to do their best.   I simply do not expect that the majority of “you” reading this will find the studies satisfying.  I am certainly open to being surprised about that. 
 

Nonetheless, Possibly knowing about Ivm or updates on it could be helpful to someone like @easypeasy who indirectly knows someone sick. 
 

If something like IVM or Vitamin D might help a couple of people here or their family or friends that’s wonderful. 
 

And obviously ymmv but I think lack of $$$ to do research does tend to affect the ability to have huge, excellent RCT.