OT: Covid-19 (Part 50) You Better Watch Out

[Licou]

You seem like a very educated guy but believe me while I am not very articulate I am deeply involved in local politics, my school board and spend alot of time researching.
You sent 3 articles that I can find 3 articles to counter in seconds. So, what articles are factual?

This topic of Covid is deeply passionate for all of us but I keep wondering of the longterm damage we are doing by isolating kids, keeping them away from their friends, not having a normal childhood.
Who the hell thinks putting a mask on a 2 year old on a plane is good science? The filtration systems on a plane provides new air every 2-3 minutes.

Sorry for the tangent.

The ones that are based on facts? Like papers basing their findings on double blinded randomized controlled trials?

Can you show us some examples of your articles?

I understand your point about finding ways to live with the virus, that's understandable and this is something we will all need to do eventually. But you have to realize that there are no such things as two sets of facts. Proving or disproving theories in the scientific domain requires specific and laborious work. If you want to start "researching" factual information, you need to learn to recognize credible studies and spot the charlatans...

Truth matters.

Edit: I keep forgetting that this guy likely muted me

 

[sandviper]

Hopefully that vaccine from the US army will be ready to go in spring.

I've seen the articles also. Think this is legit? Sounds great and all, but given how crap the past 2 years have been, I'm getting used to being disappointed.

 

[Deebs]

US Army Creates Single Vaccine Effective Against All COVID & SARS Variants, Researchers Say

It's definitely interesting and hopefully it works out

 

[sandviper]

I'm not doing anything but celebrating Christmas with my family.

Btw, you may want to reread and then edit what you wrote. =) Things like "while government regulations may not stop one from getting covid, taking unnecessary risks may." make no sense whatsoever. Taking unnecessary risks will not stop one from getting covid.

You're right. I guess what I'm saying is lockdowns, gathering limits, border crossings won't stop people from getting covid. Taking unnecessary risks will put you at risk. Not sure what I was saying before either... I'm trying but typing in English so early in the morning is tough I guess for me.

 

[cajmonkey]

I'm trying but typing in English so early in the morning is tough I guess for me.

That is exactly what I figured. =)

 

[Licou]

I've seen the articles also. Think this is legit? Sounds great and all, but given how crap the past 2 years have been, I'm getting used to being disappointed.

It's definitely interesting and hopefully it works out

As far as second generation covid vaccines are concerned here is what I *think* is the panacea:

T-cell vaccines could top up immunity to COVID, as variants loom large
This one is a T cell boosting vaccine. T cells are pretty much the guys Carey Pricing the f*** out of omicron right now, while the vanilla strain antibodies are able to correctly attach to the mutated spike protein of omicron. This is really promising and furthermore, IF I recall correctly, these things do not require a needle (I might be wrong).

 

[L4br3cqu3]

All vaccines have had "immunity" over side effects in Quebec via the vaccine compensation program since 1987. Canada finally made one too in 2020, the last country in the G7 to do so.

Thanks for the clarification, but it doesn't make it any less rotten, they shouldn't have any immunity over that to begin with.

 

[OnTheRun]

Who are we to say if a doctor believes it will help a patient?
Doctors are pushing therapeutic medicine but the world governments keep rinsing and repeating. They should be leading the way.

Look,
I am not an ivermectin fan or expert, I do trust my doctor and if he prescribed it I would take it because that is his skilled set.
A pharmacist is not qualified to step in and overrule a doctor/patient decision.

Because clinical trials exist to determine if a treatment will help a patient or not. It's not the doctors job to go experimental or to prescribe stuff on the basis of "well, it can't hurt to try".

 

[OnTheRun]

Thanks for the clarification, but it doesn't make it any less rotten, they shouldn't have any immunity over that to begin with.

They only have "immunity" over side effects that aren't the results of negligence or falsification. So as long there is no wrongdoing they are in the clear.

 

[BenchBrawl]

I've seen the articles also. Think this is legit? Sounds great and all, but given how crap the past 2 years have been, I'm getting used to being disappointed.

Yes I think this is legit but I'm not an expert so my opinion is worthless.

What I have heard:

- A few experts praised their effort, so no reason to think it's not serious as of now, and the institution working on it is credible
- They apparently decided to work on an "all-variant" vaccine from the get go, which would explain why it took them longer to come up with it.

People like @Treb and @Licou might have more to say on the matter

Just on gut feeling, I'd take this vaccine in a heartbeat (assuming it passes testing). And I have very little more than gut feelings to go with when it comes to medical dilemmas, which is a field I know absolutely nothing about (except for psychiatry to some extent).

 

[Treb]

Thanks for the clarification, but it doesn't make it any less rotten, they shouldn't have any immunity over that to begin with.

Adverse events with vaccine are very tricky as it is hard to really associate them with the vaccine in most cases. That would lead to countless "waste of time and money" cases where people sure companies for effects they think are related to the vaccine but can't prove it.

Pharma companies wouldn't bother doing vaccines if they had to fend off thousands of cases a year (with maybe only a small percentage being actually relevant).

 

[1909]

You can't blame people for having had enough and simply accepting that they have to live with the virus.
I am done with these restrictions which haven't worked, yet they keep doing the same crap that hasn't and won't work.

They worked very well... but too many people did not care when some were lifted to please them. That is why we are back (almost) to square 1. In the name of the economy, schools were not kept closed long enough. Kids were not vaccined early enough. And it was written in the sky that opening gyms, bars and dance clubs would re-ignate the problems. Not enough people, expecially in the US had not been vaccinated completely or not at all.

 

[solidaritypucks]

It harms the patient because he is trusting ivermectin over other treatments.

There are many people who died because they placed all their eggs in the ivermectin basket and it failed.

On the other hand, if various treatment protocols including ivermectin or other banned treatments did in fact have positive health effects as many doctors and studies claimed, those responsible for banning them as treatment options have the blood of thousands or even millions on their hands. It's not as though there were a host of other amazing therapeutic options available for prophylactic prevention or early symptom treatment... there were not even vaccines available at the early stage of the pandemic when these treatments were banned.

The bizarre broad-spectrum media campaign around ivermectin being a dangerous 'horse dewormer' when it won the Nobel Prize for it's treatment of river blindness in humans in 2015 is exceptionally difficult to rationalize.

 

[BenchBrawl]

Adverse events with vaccine are very tricky as it is hard to really associate them with the vaccine in most cases. That would lead to countless "waste of time and money" cases where people sure companies for effects they think are related to the vaccine but can't prove it.

Pharma companies wouldn't bother doing vaccines if they had to fend off thousands of cases a year (with maybe only a small percentage being actually relevant).

I agree it would be unworkable if Pharma companies had to deal with lawsuits left and right for their vaccines. What's different this time is that governments are strongly discriminating and infringing on the rights of a % of the population based on taking the vaccine, if not literally force them to take it in some places. I'm not dogmatic, it may be that drastic measures must be taken, but what I'm seeing all over the world right now is governments glossing over the ethical questions with the seriousness of a stoned teenager half-assing his homework.

 

[Licou]

People like @Treb and @Licou might have more to say on the matter

Going to stop you right there, @Treb is an actual expert in the subject! Don't put us in the same boat

I can somewhat understand medical papers, but I am basically parroting what's in them. My only skill is spotting the more serious papers from the frivolous ones

 

[Treb]

Yes I think this is legit but I'm not an expert so my opinion is worthless.

What I have heard:

- A few experts praised their effort, so no reason to think it's not serious as of now, and the institution working on it is credible
- They apparently decided to work on an "all-variant" vaccine from the get go, which would explain why it took them longer to come up with it.

People like @Treb and @Licou might have more to say on the matter

Just on gut feeling, I'd take this vaccine in a heartbeat (assuming it passes testing). And I have very little more than gut feelings to go with when it comes to medical dilemmas, which is a field I know absolutely nothing about (except for psychiatry to some extent).

Cautiously optimistic, but I have to see the data against Omicron which I haven't been able to find.

 

[Treb]

I agree it would be unworkable if Pharma companies had to deal with lawsuits left and right for their vaccines. What's different this time is that governments are strongly discriminating and infringing on the rights of a % of the population based on taking the vaccine, if not literally force them to take it in some places. I'm not dogmatic, it may be that drastic measures must be taken, but what I'm seeing all over the world right now is governments glossing over the ethical questions with the seriousness of a stoned teenager before doing his homework.

There are vaccine compensation programs for adverse events. Those programs are made to replace all the lawsuits.

 

[BenchBrawl]

There are vaccine compensation programs for adverse events. Those programs are made to replace all the lawsuits.

The situation is exceptional in that if there was a systemic problem, too many people would require compensation. Like insurance companies, useless in a case of systemic blow up.

But if we do nothing, the virus might blow us up.

Tough spot. That's why I'd expect more serious politicians than those memeing their way on Twitter.

 

[Treb]

On the other hand, if various treatment protocols including ivermectin or other banned treatments did in fact have positive health effects as many doctors and studies claimed, those responsible for banning them as treatment options have the blood of thousands or even millions on their hands. It's not as though there were a host of other amazing therapeutic options available for prophylactic prevention or early symptom treatment... there were not even vaccines available at the early stage of the pandemic when these treatments were banned.

The bizarre broad-spectrum media campaign around ivermectin being a dangerous 'horse dewormer' when it won the Nobel Prize for it's treatment of river blindness in humans in 2015 is exceptionally difficult to rationalize.

Newton's third law: If an object A exerts a force on object B, then object B must exert a force of equal magnitude and opposite direction back on object A.