Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

OT - COVID-19 numbers

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by wierdscience View Post

    The first study involved 48 patients, the second involved 1,061 patients, and a different study group. Just exactly how are those the same????
    Same basic population to draw from, as I understand it.

    You need several studies drawing from unrelated populations, to be sure that you are checking against the general virus, not just whatever odd variant may exist in one location, and that you have a varied population of patients. It is not unknown for diseases, as well as drugs, to react differently against , say, asians, black people, or north europeans and their descendants.

    Do we even know that the virus in europe is the same as the one in the western US? There has been time for local mutations to occur. That itself might affect the results.

    And, it seems that some studies do appear to show efficacy, while others either do not, or have had such a rate of severe to potentially (at least) fatal side effects that the studies had to be terminated.

    IF it works reliably in widely different areas, with different ethnic groups, and all ages, and if it does not threaten to have the cure worse than the disease (which is a definite question at the moment), then that would be great.

    You do not know that, I do not know that, and the medical folks do not know that. It looks as if it may not even be true. This stuff is a lot more complicated than just, "here, take this and you are cured".
    Last edited by J Tiers; 04-15-2020, 01:25 AM.
    CNC machines only go through the motions.

    Ideas expressed may be mine, or from anyone else in the universe.
    Not responsible for clerical errors. Or those made by lay people either.
    Number formats and units may be chosen at random depending on what day it is.
    I reserve the right to use a number system with any integer base without prior notice.
    Generalizations are understood to be "often" true, but not true in every case.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by J Tiers View Post

      Same basic population to draw from, as I understand it.

      You need several studies drawing from unrelated populations, to be sure that you are checking against the general virus, and not whatever variant may exist in one location, and that you have a varied population of patients. It is not unknown for diseases, as well as drugs, to react differently against , say, asians, black people, or north europeans and their descendants.

      Do we even know that the virus in europe is the same as the one in the western US? There has been time for local mutations to occur. That itself might affect the results. This stuff is a lot more complicated than just, "here, take this and you are cured".

      And, it seems that some studies do appear to show efficacy, while others either do not, or have had such a rate of severe to fatal side effects that the studies had to be terminated.
      Which medication was used, the dosage and combinations were different between studies as was the time it was administered. The study in Brasil used Chloroquine instead of the newer, safer Hydroxychloroquine and the Study in China used much higher doses and in combinations with other drugs including strong anti-virals that may have counteracted it's effect. Of course there are variables, in population and in the disease itself, except for one, those who reach the stage of needing hospitalization dying from it is relatively the same.

      Currently we only have this and blood plasma from recovered patients as a means to fight C-19 and the number patients it has helped continues to grow. Should we stop using it and let the bodies pile up while we twiddle our thumbs waiting for a vaccine that may be no better and might be a lot worse if it ever comes?
      I just need one more tool,just one!

      Comment


      • First antibody sampling results came in here from last week, about 4% positive from blood samples that are collected for other purposes (not random but better than nothing)

        extrapolated to countrywide that would mean nearly 100-fold amount of infections compared to tested number.

        edit: further digging revealed that the test sample size was very small, total some 400 people and about 80 people for last week with 5 positive results. Almost useless data as such.
        Last edited by MattiJ; 04-15-2020, 12:13 PM.
        Location: Helsinki, Finland, Europe

        Comment


        • Originally posted by MattiJ View Post

          extrapolated to countrywide that would mean nearly 100-fold amount of infections compared to tested number.
          That was the point I have been harping on since the beginning....no one had any clue what percentage of the population had this and as such really had no clue of the risks. The so called leaders constantly trotted out numbers and more or less flushed their economies based on them, rations where the denominator was about meaningless. Not that Covid is not serious and deserving of a strong response, it obviously was a real problem as the death toll underscores. However the process most of the developed world used to flush their economies and rack up exorbitant debt was based numbers that seemed so obviously meaninglessness its seems highly flawed, even incompetent. All in keeping with my general cynical view of these so called leaders who of course are really just that dirty thing, a politician.
          Last edited by Mcgyver; 04-15-2020, 11:59 AM.
          in Toronto Ontario - where are you?

          Comment


          • One thing I'm fairly committed to as a result of the failure of China to take appropriate steps from the onset: I will no longer buy anything made by the Chinese, unless that is the absolute last resort.

            Dan
            Salem, Oregon

            Comment


            • Originally posted by wierdscience View Post
              .........
              Should we stop using it and let the bodies pile up while we twiddle our thumbs waiting for a vaccine that may be no better and might be a lot worse if it ever comes?
              Typical "argument" technique.... fly to the opposite extreme and suggest that the other person is recommending that, as if it was the only other option. That is a reliable sign of weakness in argument and thinking. At least in this case it is an admission that there is a problem.... a useful first step.

              The variation of results from the use of the drug directly indicates that "we" have no clear idea what is going on, and so "people" should not be pitching the treatment as if it were a known cure-all that is being suppressed by evil medical folks.

              The correct thing is to do what IS being done, to do studies as rapidly as possible to determine what combination works (if any) for different people and different stages or severity of the disease. Discover when the "cure" is more of a poison, and when it is helpful. Find out what dosage works, and what dosage is a problem. Find out if the drug actually DOES work, for that matter. Even that does not seem to be a sure thing.

              Unfortunately, some people are acting as if this is a very simple problem, just give everyone a pill and they will waltz out of bed and back to work (emphasis on the "back to work"). Some of the same people were originally saying that it's just a bad cold, and that there is no reason to do anything about it at all.

              We DO have a couple test cases for that "ignore it" idea, Italy being one (in the beginning), and Sweden now, where essentially no precautions are taken, and no preparations made. In Sweden, they are saying that people testing positive but not showing symptoms should go to work as normal, despite the fact that they are known to be infectious.

              It did not work out so well in Italy, and we will find out how it works in Sweden. Certainly NYC is not doing that well even WITH imposition of precautions (done late).

              And, we have some people, such as the Lt Governor of Texas, suggesting that older folks and other "at risk" people just voluntarily (or otherwise?) sacrifice themselves so that others can be treated. I'm not sure if that is an admission that there is a problem, or what......

              There is a pretty wide spectrum of thoughts as to how to handle the matter. Unfortunately, these thoughts seem to generally vary in predictable ways according to political views, and to not have much to do with medical facts.
              CNC machines only go through the motions.

              Ideas expressed may be mine, or from anyone else in the universe.
              Not responsible for clerical errors. Or those made by lay people either.
              Number formats and units may be chosen at random depending on what day it is.
              I reserve the right to use a number system with any integer base without prior notice.
              Generalizations are understood to be "often" true, but not true in every case.

              Comment


              • Another data point : https://www.msn.com/en-us/health/hea...id=hplocalnews

                Comment


                • Originally posted by J Tiers View Post

                  ...
                  The variation of results from the use of the drug directly indicates that "we" have no clear idea what is going on, and so "people" should not be pitching the treatment as if it were a known cure-all that is being suppressed by evil medical folks.
                  .
                  I think you're greatly exaggerating the situation. I've certainly not read everything written about any of these test treatments - far from it - but my general take has been that they are NOT being touted as any end-all, be-all, cure-all. The general tone of advocacy that I've detected is one of "...hey, we've seen good results from treatment XYZ, you (rest of world) should try it..." Now there may appear some obvious exuberance there, which is to be expected from someone who has a firm belief and high hopes.
                  I seem to detect more of a tone of "...let's reject this snake oil out of hand..." from the nay-sayers, ...almost reflecting a concealed fear that it might actually work.

                  I realize the world works by having both pro-ponents and op-ponents make their cases vigorously, but this is too important to not give every potential solution a full chance to prove itself. If a treatment is in fact worthless, that'll all come out in the wash, but let's first be sure it is worthless..

                  And yes..., I'm sure you can find some "cure-all" claims, so no need for a rebuttal web site link. No doubt the full spectrum would be covered. But I'm speaking in generalities.
                  Lynn (Huntsville, AL)

                  Comment


                  • I'm also speaking in generalities.... and I would like it if there really was a "scientific" approach, and the non-scientists would stay the heck out of it. But, this entire subject has become politicized, all over the world.

                    These threads are corrosive. LOCK THEM UP!
                    CNC machines only go through the motions.

                    Ideas expressed may be mine, or from anyone else in the universe.
                    Not responsible for clerical errors. Or those made by lay people either.
                    Number formats and units may be chosen at random depending on what day it is.
                    I reserve the right to use a number system with any integer base without prior notice.
                    Generalizations are understood to be "often" true, but not true in every case.

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X