ADVERTISEMENT

Thread on testing & treatment research for COVID-19


read the article, the title of the article is more fear porn for clicks type of title. to date, still no scientific evidence that the mutations are more deadly as they keep 'implying'. I don't think scientifically they can say they are more contagious either as how do you measure that? Also keeps talking about re-infection which again still no good data showing that either. in fact, Fauci was on the other day and noted 100% (not 95%, not 98%, not 99%, not 99.9999%, BUT 100 PERCENT) of every Phase 2 and Phase 3 person that got a vaccine that none of them have died and only like 1 has even been hospitalized and that is with both the UK variant and the South Africa variant around and those trials occurring in both those countries. So the actual science says that these are just variants that are not appreciably more contagious nor deadly, just variants of the original.
 
read the article, the title of the article is more fear porn for clicks type of title. to date, still no scientific evidence that the mutations are more deadly as they keep 'implying'. I don't think scientifically they can say they are more contagious either as how do you measure that? Also keeps talking about re-infection which again still no good data showing that either. in fact, Fauci was on the other day and noted 100% (not 95%, not 98%, not 99%, not 99.9999%, BUT 100 PERCENT) of every Phase 2 and Phase 3 person that got a vaccine that none of them have died and only like 1 has even been hospitalized and that is with both the UK variant and the South Africa variant around and those trials occurring in both those countries. So the actual science says that these are just variants that are not appreciably more contagious nor deadly, just variants of the original.
I think that researchers write up these in such a way to justify more research, which I am certainly for. But then the writers and press seize upon them and blow them up, taking ‘possibly’ into probably. Researchers are saying this is possible, we need to monitor and prepare.
 
  • Like
Reactions: psualt and bison13
read the article, the title of the article is more fear porn for clicks type of title. to date, still no scientific evidence that the mutations are more deadly as they keep 'implying'. I don't think scientifically they can say they are more contagious either as how do you measure that? Also keeps talking about re-infection which again still no good data showing that either. in fact, Fauci was on the other day and noted 100% (not 95%, not 98%, not 99%, not 99.9999%, BUT 100 PERCENT) of every Phase 2 and Phase 3 person that got a vaccine that none of them have died and only like 1 has even been hospitalized and that is with both the UK variant and the South Africa variant around and those trials occurring in both those countries. So the actual science says that these are just variants that are not appreciably more contagious nor deadly, just variants of the original.


The only reason anyone cares about the UK variant is because some Imperial College (the people who predicted 2.2 million American deaths) computer model spit out an upper range of 70% more contagious, and the world ran with it.
 
^^ Tom, these kinds of garbage studies should not be cited, as it is extremely dangerous - it will literally lead to more unnecessary deaths - to spread this misinformation.

For the sake of the well-being of our population, and to not contribute to more people unnecessarily dying, I beg of you to remove it.

Thank you in advance.

Not going to comment on the paper, but don't you think that the study to which you object has been read by a much larger audience than those who tap on the link Tom provided? Furthermore, I'd also guess that the information contained therein is of limited use to readers of this board, regardless of the conclusions they reach from it.

You should direct your concerns to the editors of JAMA. If they share them, they'll take the article down and you will have done a greater public service.
 
Last edited:
Not going to comment on the paper, but don't you think that the study to which you object has been read by a much larger audience than those who tap on the link Tom provided? Furthermore, I'd also guess that the information contained therein is of limited use to readers of this board, regardless of the conclusions they reach from it.

You should direct your concerns to the editors of JAMA. If they share them, they'll take the article down and you will have done a greater public service.

I have sent the concerns to JAMA as well. And I'm only asking Tom to remove it since my post explaining why the study is flawed was removed. Why only let the flawed/bad info/study remain? That's the worst of the three options.
 
I have sent the concerns to JAMA as well. And I'm only asking Tom to remove it since my post explaining why the study is flawed was removed. Why only let the flawed/bad info/study remain? That's the worst of the three options.

If JAMA removes the paper, then the problem is solved.
 
The only reason anyone cares about the UK variant is because some Imperial College (the people who predicted 2.2 million American deaths) computer model spit out an upper range of 70% more contagious, and the world ran with it.
Yeah it's a little disturbing how news of these variants is dominating the headlines now. The declines in Covid cases in the UK and South Africa have been steady with zero uptick from any variants. Why should we expect anything different here?
 
Israel just released data on a study of 1.2 million people , including a large number over ages 60 and 70. The Pfizer and Moderna vaccine results are awesome !
WSJ 2/15/2021-
The latest data from Israel shows a 94% drop in symptomatic Covid-19 infections among 600,000 people who received two doses of Pfizer Inc. and BioNTech SE’s vaccine, offering important new insights for other countries as they roll out their own campaigns.

The vaccinated group was also 92% less likely to develop severe illness from the disease, according to a study by Clalit, Israel’s largest healthcare provider. Clalit compared 600,000 people who got the shots with a group of the same size who didn’t in what was Israel’s largest vaccine study to date.

Clalit said the study, which was carried out with a team from Harvard University, included 430,000 people who were between 16 and 59 years of age, and 170,000 who were 60 or older. It was the first of its kind to show such a high level of efficacy for Pfizer’s vaccine for those aged 70 and over, due to the limited scope of the earlier clinical trials, according to the healthcare provider.
The study was done so that each vaccinated individual was tested against an unvaccinated person who had a similar profile, including their risk level for infection, risk level of developing serious illness and overall health.

“It is now unequivocal that Pfizer’s vaccine against the coronavirus is incredibly effective in real life one week after the second dose, just as was found in the clinical study,” said Ran Balicer, Clalit’s chief innovation officer and one of the study’s authors, in a Hebrew statement published Sunday with the study. The vaccine is even more effective two weeks after the second shot, he added.
 
Tom...what is the latest on Remesvidir? It was 'the drug' for a while but I thought I read somewhere that it appears it actually doesn't do much.
 
Tom...what is the latest on Remesvidir? It was 'the drug' for a while but I thought I read somewhere that it appears it actually doesn't do much.

I'm not a MD, so the following is not medical advice. We used to have several doctors that contributed to this thread, but for whatever reason they seem to have stopped -- very unfortunate.

Remdesivir has been difficult to follow.

My recollection is the following timeline:

1. a very small study (less than 1,000 patients) showed some promising results about the drug, and the FDA approved it in Oct. 2020 to treat COVID-19
2. a number of scientists took issue with the test results, and the FDA's approval
3. a much larger study (greater than or equal to 5,000 patients) conducted as part of the WHO's Solidarity Trial Consortium, found that remdesivir had little or no effect on hospitalized patients with COVID-19. As such, the WHO recommends against the use of remdesivir to treat COVID-19

Remdesivir is also very expensive, and it must be injected. Also, when given in high dosages over a short timeframe (typical treatments for COVID-19 have been in the 5- to 10-day range), it has some toxicity.

Subsequent studies (by the University of Chicago and by the University of Texas) have shown that remdesivir does block SARS-CoV-2 at the molecular level. It binds to and upsets the RNA polymerase, which is what the coronavirus needs to copy its genetic material for the reproduction of the virus.

Gilead Sciences, which makes remdesivir, is reportedly working on a different compound that is cheaper, easier to manufacture, and is taken as a pill. While they work on this treatment (GS-441524), Gilead Sciences just seems to smile whenever doctors use remdesivir on COVID-19 patients.
 
My Mom was admitted to the hospital in mid December with Pneumonia and COVID. We were pleading for her to allow us to take her, as she couldn't take a breath w/o coughing violently...she finally relented and was immediately admitted. The doctor after examining her, started her on Remdesivir, a steroid, an antibiotic and a clot blocker. 4 days later, she walked out of the hospital good as new, an unbelievable improvement in 96 hours.
 
I've read a few reports about this in recent days. While it only seems to afflict a small portion of those that get COVID-19, it appears to be pretty serious for those kids that get it.

 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT