OT: COVID-19 Megathread III (Please limit all COVID discussion to this thread)

[predfan24]

my biggest problem with all this is that it’s not even really “people making the best decisions for themselves and their families”. a person’s opinions on covid and vaccines will primarily fall right down party lines. i put that on the politicians and we all know the person that is the biggest blame for that. this should never have been political and that’s all it is at this point.

(i realize you are an outlier trigg and have your own opinions on the subject. i respect your viewpoints 100% and would no way force my beliefs upon you).

My whole life up until this last year I only mildly paid attention to politics. This last year got me really interested in why people believe what they believe. My conclusion is that people believe the voices closest to them. They believe what their friends post on social media. They believe what their favorite cables news channel anchor tells them. They believe the YouTube personality that others in their community also listen too. They believe whatever helps them fit into their community.

Of course, this is a generalization, and every individual is different, but these are the patterns I've noticed and read about. I think understanding why what was happening was happening helped me come to terms with my incredulity and anger over the whole situation. I think it's just human nature. The key to changing it is skepticism and education, but that's a tough sell.

 

[LCPreds]

That being said with vaccinations available to everyone now things are looking up and I'm ecstatic about the warm months coming. COVID isn't going away but the vaccines should enable us to live normally again.

I’m not convinced. Lots of chatter about already reaching peak vaccination. I’m concerned there are too many people who are simply choosing not to get the vaccine that are basically going to ruin it for the rest of us.

 

[Predsanddead24]

If we did, the vax would be fully approved for use instead of for emergency use only.

This is mostly just a matter of a paperwork for the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines at this point. They've finished their six month studies which was the major hurdle left so barring any crazy revelation in the review process (possible but not probable) they should have full approval within the next couple of months.

Lers get vaxed and drop the puck.

I'm with you here!

 

[Predsanddead24]

My whole life up until this last year I only mildly paid attention to politics. This last year got me really interested in why people believe what they believe. My conclusion is that people believe the voices closest to them. They believe what their friends post on social media. They believe what their favorite cables news channel anchor tells them. They believe the YouTube personality that others in their community also listen too. They believe whatever helps them fit into their community.

Of course, this is a generalization, and every individual is different, but these are the patterns I've noticed and read about. I think understanding why what was happening was happening helped me come to terms with my incredulity and anger over the whole situation. I think it's just human nature. The key to changing it is skepticism and education, but that's a tough sell.

This is a bit old now but found this polling to be particularly interesting. Both from the perspective of the huge partisan differences in peoples understanding of the virus and how massively wrong people were about basic facts about Covid in general. Our information ecosystems are definitely failing us as they are currently set up.

 

[hido]

I’m actually getting my THIRD Pfizer shot Tuesday. I participated in the Phase 3 trial in September and October and found out I was vaxxed in January when they unblinded the study. I think this third shot is a booster. And, no, I don’t mind being a guinea pig. Shoot me up.

An update. I either got just a simple booster or a booster with protection from the S.A. variant. It’s blinded, so I won’t know for a few months. They don’t really tell you too much at the research facility but it sounds like booster shots are inevitable for all the vaccines. Only 30 people in Nashville are allowed to participate in this round of my trial. I had almost no side effects the day after injection, just like after my 2nd shot.

On a side note, my regular doctor who works out of Centennial and has spent a good amount of time in their COVID wing said that if you end up in the hospital due to an extreme case of COVID that there is a very good chance that you will have long-lasting, if not life-long, issues, especially heart and/or lungs. I’m certainly not trying to tell anyone what to do but you may want to keep that in mind.

 

[ILikeItILoveIt]

Truly interested in opinions on prophylaxis treatments to help prevent either contracting Covid or minimizing the effects if you do get it. Keeping people out of the hospital opens up beds for those who have to be there. In the beginning, it felt like they told us to distance, mask, and stay home. Then if we got Covid, stay home and away from people. If it got serious, come to the hospital. If it got more serious, it's ventilator time.

As time went by, highlighted by when Trump got Covid, the Regeneron anti-body cocktail was administered to people with Covid. You had to receive it in the hospital so hospital admittance went up and it took hospital resources.

Why didn't we, and why don't we, allow more liberal use of prophylaxis like those outlined in the 1st article below. It's a little dated but covers a lot of ground.

There is a wide range of assessments on whether this stuff works, but given the pandemic and the lack of hospital resources, what would have been the harm of allowing people to try it. Hydroxy got real political, imo. Not calling any of this stuff a cure for all the ills, but the 2nd link below shows success in Africa (example. Not meant to be authoritative). Just seemed like a missed opportunity. If I got Covid, I'd take Ivermectin or Hydroxy, in hopes it would lesson the progression and keep me out of the hospital. I would try anything that had a chance of success, versus being hospitalized.

Prophylaxis for Covid-19 (prevention protocols)

A COVID-19 prophylaxis? Lower incidence associated with prophylactic administration of ivermectin - PubMed

 

[Predsanddead24]

Truly interested in opinions on prophylaxis treatments to help prevent either contracting Covid or minimizing the effects if you do get it. Keeping people out of the hospital opens up beds for those who have to be there. In the beginning, it felt like they told us to distance, mask, and stay home. Then if we got Covid, stay home and away from people. If it got serious, come to the hospital. If it got more serious, it's ventilator time.

As time went by, highlighted by when Trump got Covid, the Regeneron anti-body cocktail was administered to people with Covid. You had to receive it in the hospital so hospital admittance went up and it took hospital resources.

Why didn't we, and why don't we, allow more liberal use of prophylaxis like those outlined in the 1st article below. It's a little dated but covers a lot of ground.

There is a wide range of assessments on whether this stuff works, but given the pandemic and the lack of hospital resources, what would have been the harm of allowing people to try it. Hydroxy got real political, imo. Not calling any of this stuff a cure for all the ills, but the 2nd link below shows success in Africa (example. Not meant to be authoritative). Just seemed like a missed opportunity. If I got Covid, I'd take Ivermectin or Hydroxy, in hopes it would lesson the progression and keep me out of the hospital. I would try anything that had a chance of success, versus being hospitalized.

Prophylaxis for Covid-19 (prevention protocols)

A COVID-19 prophylaxis? Lower incidence associated with prophylactic administration of ivermectin - PubMed

Just like with the vaccines I will leave it up to the medical professionals to determine what medicines are or are not good for. So far there doesn't seem to be sufficient evidence for almost any of these things to actually be successful and some carry the risk of bodily harm by taking them. If there is a scientific consensus reached that ivermectin is safe and effective I'd take ivermectin. As of now none of these have an EUA so I wouldn't take them. It's very strange to me that people form strong opinions on a drug based on picking and choosing a bunch of random papers about the topic that may or may not be valid.

On a related note why do you feel like we should trust a website such as your first link that is written by a religious writer who compiles data but has no actual training in those fields instead of the doctors themselves? He is literally just picking a smattering of papers that tenuously prove what he wants to believe instead of performing any sort of careful review of the evidence. Where does one even find these websites?

 

[PredsV82]

The simple answer about prophylaxis is lack of compliance. You could probably get nursing home patients to take a prophy regimen every day but most people just dont remember or make the time to take a prophy regimen every day, and if one of the meds requires a Rx then the issue becomes access and possibly cost. Additionally, the studies you cited were interesting one-offs but youd need a much larger database to get accepted for widespread use

 

[bdub24]

Truly interested in opinions on prophylaxis treatments to help prevent either contracting Covid or minimizing the effects if you do get it. Keeping people out of the hospital opens up beds for those who have to be there. In the beginning, it felt like they told us to distance, mask, and stay home. Then if we got Covid, stay home and away from people. If it got serious, come to the hospital. If it got more serious, it's ventilator time.

As time went by, highlighted by when Trump got Covid, the Regeneron anti-body cocktail was administered to people with Covid. You had to receive it in the hospital so hospital admittance went up and it took hospital resources.

Why didn't we, and why don't we, allow more liberal use of prophylaxis like those outlined in the 1st article below. It's a little dated but covers a lot of ground.

There is a wide range of assessments on whether this stuff works, but given the pandemic and the lack of hospital resources, what would have been the harm of allowing people to try it. Hydroxy got real political, imo. Not calling any of this stuff a cure for all the ills, but the 2nd link below shows success in Africa (example. Not meant to be authoritative). Just seemed like a missed opportunity. If I got Covid, I'd take Ivermectin or Hydroxy, in hopes it would lesson the progression and keep me out of the hospital. I would try anything that had a chance of success, versus being hospitalized.

Prophylaxis for Covid-19 (prevention protocols)

A COVID-19 prophylaxis? Lower incidence associated with prophylactic administration of ivermectin - PubMed

So now we are poo pooing EUA vaccines while pushing meds that arent even EUA for treatment of the virus that the vaccines are designed for. Wow.

 

[triggrman]

Well, we all got ours this morning. Pfizer.

 

[ILikeItILoveIt]

I try to read a wide variety of sources. bdub24, I'm not poo pooing vaccines. I got vaccinated. I'm sort of taking an all-of-the-above approach. Also, prior to January, we didn't have a vaccine and early on, it was all about ventilators. AMA actually prevented Docs from prescribing Hyroxy off-label. Many people could still alive today if they didn't prevent its use. The risks were way overblown (70 year old drug with a safe track record) and the potential benefit was huge since the alternative treatments were so ineffective and hospital beds were in short supply. Good people can disagree about those points but not letting people and their doctors make that decision themselves during a pandemic in the Spring and Summer was really frustrating.

Then, at the end of 2020, they changed their minds......
"stating that its potential for good currently may supersede the threat of any potential harmful side effects."


CHICAGO, IL – The American Medical Association (AMA), in a surprising move, has officially rescinded a previous statement against the use of Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) in the treatment of COVID-19 patients, giving physicians the okay to return to utilizing the medication at their discretion.

Previously, the AMA had issued a statement in March that was highly critical of HCQ in regards to its use as a proposed treatment by some physicians in the early stages of COVID-19. In addition to discouraging doctors from ordering the medication in bulk for “off-label” use – HCQ is typically used to treat diseases such as malaria – they also claimed that there was no proof that it was effective in treating COVID, and that its use could be harmful in some instances.

However, on page 18 of a recent AMA memo, issued on October 30, (resolution 509, page 3) the organization officially reversed their stance on HCQ, stating that its potential for good currently may supersede the threat of any potential harmful side effects.

 

[Predsanddead24]

I try to read a wide variety of sources. bdub24, I'm not poo pooing vaccines. I got vaccinated. I'm sort of taking an all-of-the-above approach. Also, prior to January, we didn't have a vaccine and early on, it was all about ventilators. AMA actually prevented Docs from prescribing Hyroxy off-label. Many people could still alive today if they didn't prevent its use. The risks were way overblown (70 year old drug with a safe track record) and the potential benefit was huge since the alternative treatments were so ineffective and hospital beds were in short supply. Good people can disagree about those points but not letting people and their doctors make that decision themselves during a pandemic in the Spring and Summer was really frustrating.

Then, at the end of 2020, they changed their minds......
"stating that its potential for good currently may supersede the threat of any potential harmful side effects."


CHICAGO, IL – The American Medical Association (AMA), in a surprising move, has officially rescinded a previous statement against the use of Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) in the treatment of COVID-19 patients, giving physicians the okay to return to utilizing the medication at their discretion.

Previously, the AMA had issued a statement in March that was highly critical of HCQ in regards to its use as a proposed treatment by some physicians in the early stages of COVID-19. In addition to discouraging doctors from ordering the medication in bulk for “off-label” use – HCQ is typically used to treat diseases such as malaria – they also claimed that there was no proof that it was effective in treating COVID, and that its use could be harmful in some instances.

However, on page 18 of a recent AMA memo, issued on October 30, (resolution 509, page 3) the organization officially reversed their stance on HCQ, stating that its potential for good currently may supersede the threat of any potential harmful side effects.

The portion of the story you posted is not true. Here is the AMA clarifying their position:



This Politifact article talks about the fake story and where it came from in more detail. Essentially it was a resolution put forward at the AMA meeting that was rejected yet some dubious media sources took the portion of the document out of context to try and make some point about hydroxychloroquine. Here is a link to the source of article you posted a section of correcting themselves too.

Like I responded to your previous post why do you believe these sources you are getting your information from?

 

[bdub24]

Well, we all got ours this morning. Pfizer.

Going for Pfizer number two tomorrow. What I learned with shot one:In about three days after getting it, if you wink 3 times with your left eye, your favorite Dominoes pizza order will be delivered where ever you are geo located. Follow me for more vaxhacks!

 

[ILikeItILoveIt]

The portion of the story you posted is not true. Here is the AMA clarifying their position:



This Politifact article talks about the fake story and where it came from in more detail. Essentially it was a resolution put forward at the AMA meeting that was rejected yet some dubious media sources took the portion of the document out of context to try and make some point about hydroxychloroquine. Here is a link to the source of article you posted a section of correcting themselves too.

Like I responded to your previous post why do you believe these sources you are getting your information from?

Because I've listened to the Docs that have performed their own studies and have had first hand success with it.

I'm a fan of Dr. Zelenko and his protocol for early use against Covid before you get to the hospitalization stage. I know there were studies of in-hospital, more serious patients that didn't find results but that was never the intended use of hyroxy with Covid. You'd think with 500K+ people dying with Covid, and a pandemic caused fear in everyone, they'd let people try this stuff with their doctor's approval.

The swift and authoritative beat down of this approach, claiming serious risks if you did it, was not backed by science and studies (the risks, not the results). If people want to experiment with approaches to avoid dying of Covid, with drugs that have a 70 year safety record, in my opinion they should be allowed to. I don't understand why that logic causes such an emotional, stern rebuke from the Med Community. Approved drugs are used off-label all the time.

I guess I don't trust authority just because they are the authority. If I'm told I'm in a pandemic and I could die, I'm going to look for options besides a ventilator.

 

[triggrman]

Going for Pfizer number two tomorrow. What I learned with shot one:In about three days after getting it, if you wink 3 times with your left eye, your favorite Dominoes pizza order will be delivered where ever you are geo located. Follow me for more vaxhacks!

I heard about the strong bourbon cravings

 

[bdub24]

I heard about the strong bourbon cravings

Definitely not to be denied! Listen to your body or something.

 

[Predsanddead24]

Because I've listened to the Docs that have performed their own studies and have had first hand success with it.

I'm a fan of Dr. Zelenko and his protocol for early use against Covid before you get to the hospitalization stage. I know there were studies of in-hospital, more serious patients that didn't find results but that was never the intended use of hyroxy with Covid. You'd think with 500K+ people dying with Covid, and a pandemic caused fear in everyone, they'd let people try this stuff with their doctor's approval.

The swift and authoritative beat down of this approach, claiming serious risks if you did it, was not backed by science and studies (the risks, not the results). If people want to experiment with approaches to avoid dying of Covid, with drugs that have a 70 year safety record, in my opinion they should be allowed to. I don't understand why that logic causes such an emotional, stern rebuke from the Med Community. Approved drugs are used off-label all the time.

I guess I don't trust authority just because they are the authority. If I'm told I'm in a pandemic and I could die, I'm going to look for options besides a ventilator.

Why do you believe Dr. Zelenko and not establishment scientists though? What about his evidence is more convincing to you than the evidence showing it doesn't work? It's very strange to me that you don't trust the medical authority but choose to put your faith in some random doctor.

I'll agree with you that the whole thing got weirdly politicized where it seemed like some wanted hydroxychloroquine not to work because Trump liked it, but that doesn't change that the evidence for it working that has come out over the last year is incredibly weak. You're also misrepresenting the history of what happened with it being allowed to be used. In the wake of the early studies the FDA gave it an EUA but when evidence mounted it didn't work it was determined the risks weren't worth it and they revoked that and stopped authorizing it. That seems to me to be exactly how the process should work in a situation like Covid. When you have no idea what is going on follow any promising idea and then reassess when you can test whether it works more rigorously. Also, you've never been prohibited from getting hydroxychloroquine off label if you really want it and can find a doctor who will prescribe it to you. Not sure why you make the claim that it wasn't possible.

My question about sources was also why you believed an easily disproven article about the AMA changing their minds on hydroxychloroquine. It was patently false yet you parroted it as if it was true.

 

[PredsV82]

Problem of course is if you shop around for a study that you like, you don't know if it's a reliable study, has been peer reviewed, etc.

I agree that in the early days it was reasonable to try things that had some logical premise for possibly being effective, including HCQ. One of the smartest physicians I know, who is boarded in critical care, was using HCQ, Zithromax and Zinc early on. Then as more studies came through, it became clear that HCQ wasnt actually helpful but dexamethasone was, and Dexamethasone quickly replaced HCQ as the immunosuppressant of choice for treating COVID patients.

But now that there is a vaccine, that is the preventive treatment of choice

 

[SniperHF]

Hey all, we've changed the focus of these team board threads. They should be dealing with local Covid issues primarily. IE move on from the HCQ debate and whatever else along those lines.

For all that stuff you should go to the main Covid board.

This thread is for discussing issues pertinent to Tennessee, not the pandemic as a whole.

Thanks.

 

[LCPreds]

Well this thread just died. I enjoyed this discussion with locals. No interest in heading to what I assume is a terrible main board discussion. Stay safe everyone.

 

[FossilFndr]

So much for our Dr's general comments who this thread was started to get their input.

 

[PredsV82]

We really have reached a point where there isnt much left to discuss. The fact is the best chance at returning to "normal" life, or some semblance of it, is to get vaccinated. Adverse reactions to the vaccine are vanishingly rare. And you should vaccinate even if you are young and healthy because young and healthy infections can still lead to mutations and propagation, whereas a fully vaccinated population gives the virus nowhere to live nor mutate.

I said about a year ago that everyone would know someone (friend, family, coworker) who died from COVID. Feel free to check my math.
Personally, a good friend of mine lost her father, aunt and uncle all in one month.

 

[adsfan]

I’m not convinced. Lots of chatter about already reaching peak vaccination. I’m concerned there are too many people who are simply choosing not to get the vaccine that are basically going to ruin it for the rest of us.

I was just reading a story on Yahoo about Michigan. Their COVID-19 cases were high in Detroit and low away from Detroit. The number of cases dropped, so some people decided not to get vaccinated. A 63 year old man caught the "flu". He slowly got worse. He was hospitalized and put on a ventilator. Then the doctors had to crank up his oxygen. He thought he was going to die. He had a chance to get the vaccine but refused because people kept telling him it was a "fake illness". While he was in the hospital, his 61 year old brother in law died of COVID-19.

Now, people 30 to 50 years old are getting a COVID-19 variant in rural Michigan. When I checked a few days ago, Michigan was the #1 state for COVID-19 cases, more than Texas and California combined.

I am concerned that willful ignorance is going to lead to another 400K deaths in the US.

Michigan became hotspot as variants rose and vigilance fell

Michigan was warned about the British COVID-19 variant, but many ignored it

 

[predfan98]

Well this thread just died. I enjoyed this discussion with locals. No interest in heading to what I assume is a terrible main board discussion. Stay safe everyone.

Agree.


I don’t see why we just don’t carry on with our discussions

 

[NoNecksCurse]

our HF preds community is tighter knit than most on here. global mods aren’t going to be able to distinguish between which boards on here can handle the topic and not so the one size fits all policy makes sense.

hard pass on this discussion on the main boards. as said above, that would be intolerable.