I have two large nation wide suppliers from which we typically order. We haven't been able to get n95's since April. Are they available in small amounts from other sources? Perhaps, but that does not mean there is still not a large scale shortage.
COVID-19 Pandemic: Transmissions, Deaths, Treatments, Vaccines, Interventions and More...
- Thread starter Richie O
- Start date
- Status
You really need to come up with a dumb nickname for Birx. It's hard to take your posts seriously when you call her by her real name.
Yes, maybe we should but that is not how things work... who is attacking numbers?
I’m telling you people and N 95 masks can be acquired and I have seen them in stores in the metro area...some people working in specific fields can access them .
Really shameful lies here #####s---you and everybody with a clue knows it was #CryBabyJay that pushed and pushed to have both CE sites shutdown because, heaven forbid, non-lib arguments were being posted. Even though the lib side was at least 50% (and a very rough and insulting bunch of bananas) that's not good enough for some hardcore lefties. And he got is 15 or 5 minutes of twittler fame over it too I guess. And fwiw I didn't find you as objectionable on the CE even though there was 99% disagreement. In the chicomvirus threads you really get triggered and initiate insults and personal attacks. And lies.
Nah bra, dumb nicknames are your thing. When you use her real name it undermines everything you write.
You really need to banned from this thread (as do the other small group of CE trolls) who add no value to this thread other than detailing and causing pointless pages of arguments. It’s always lib this, chicomvirus that. Very immature and nobody will take you seriously. Time for another PM to Richie I guess, so silly.
Another crying, lying post from you...anything to avoid addressing counterarguments to the anti-Trump crusade. You read #####s post to which I replied, no? For the umpteenth time, try the #Ignore function Sally. #Reported.
Interesting preprint (submitted to the Lancet) paper on ivermectin showing a greater than 50% mortality reduction – in a retrospective, observational study, which is typically the lowest rigor kind of clinical trial, although these kinds of trials are much easier to do than the much higher confidence RCTs (randomized, controlled trials) and sometimes are the first indicators that something might really work. Certainly wasn’t expecting this for an anti-parasitic. At least the authors say this means an RCT would be nice to do to confirm their result - would be nice to do one before doing 20 more observational studies, although it's getting harder to find patients to enroll in such studies now that there are some effective treatment options.
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers...Li6rv2tiuellDCBRAwgQV_5HYuR037pOwOjMCawUFjxpQ
Would be very cool for me, personally, to see ivermectin work, since I worked on this drug in the late 80s at Merck (it's almost completely an animal-heath drug - it's the active ingredient in Heartguard and it has been donated to African countries for decades to cure river blindness) - it's a beast to make, but is usually active at very low doses, so it would presumably be pretty cheap and available if it works. It’s also highly toxic to daphnia (tiny mysid shrimp) and other aquatic invertebrates at low ppb levels, which is not surprising for an anti-parasitic.
COVID-19 Pandemic: Transmissions, Deaths, Treatments, Vaccines, Interventions and More...
Finally, some data are starting to trickle in on convalescent plasma from the blood of infected/recovered COVID patients. A study in Italy with 46 patients reported a decrease in mortality from 15% typically observed to 6% for those receiving the plasma, which is huge. Not a "cure" but...rutgers.forums.rivals.com
AAAS
blogs.sciencemag.org
This site picked up the Miami study as well. Definitely some smoke here. I checked clinicaltrials.gov and there are a few RCT’s in motion, a couple that should be completed in the next month or two. Fingers crossed.
Ivermectin Moves Towards Mainstream
Recently, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) got around to formally addressing ivermectin in their COVID-19 Treatment Guidelines. Although their only recommendation is for use in clinical trials, that’s a start. TrialSite has been working tirelessly to chronicle and accumulate data...
www.trialsitenews.com
It's REALLY important to recognize that cases have leveled, but admittedly without checking,I'd bet we're testing a heck of a lot more people. Think of the tens of thousands of college kids that are going in person across the country and the schools are testing them. I'd bet cases are steady but they include a bunch of asymptomatic that would have been otherwise undiscovered if the kid hadn't gone to school.
Wait you mean cases are going up since they don't have a lockdown anymore??? How did they get cases down to only 500 a day for a while if VIRUS IS GONNA VIRUS? Explain your logic on that one. Did virus take a few months off from virusing. Summer holiday?
How many did Trump kill with 15 cases soon to be zero. It will go away by Easter. Nothing to worry about!
bac should stick to his post b-ball game analysis which is a great read. In this convo/thread, it’s like he’s a different person with nothing of value to add.
I'm sorry.. I came on here tonight looking for an update as to the latest advances against this thing... All i'm seeing is the constant political bickering..... Can we all grow up for once and just post the stuff thats really relevant to this thread??? Thanks
From a highly respected MD. I think we have seen this play out over the last several months:
peterattiamd.com
" Randomized controlled trials: when the gold standard leaves you with fool’s gold
If I told you that I read a randomized double-blinded placebo-controlled trial conducted over 5 years and carried out in over 18,000 participants, is there any scenario under which you would not believe it to be an excellent trial?
If you just look on the surface, you might see a large-scale, long-term, randomized double-blinded, placebo-controlled trial and assume whatever it finds provides reliable evidence. But I hope I’ve convinced you that the devil is often in the details, regardless of the type of study conducted."
Randomized controlled trials: when the gold standard leaves you with fool’s gold - Peter Attia
If I told you that I read a randomized double-blinded placebo-controlled trial conducted over 5 years and carried out in over 18,000 participants, is there any scenario under which you would not believe it to be an excellent trial?
peterattiamd.com
" Randomized controlled trials: when the gold standard leaves you with fool’s gold
If I told you that I read a randomized double-blinded placebo-controlled trial conducted over 5 years and carried out in over 18,000 participants, is there any scenario under which you would not believe it to be an excellent trial?
If you just look on the surface, you might see a large-scale, long-term, randomized double-blinded, placebo-controlled trial and assume whatever it finds provides reliable evidence. But I hope I’ve convinced you that the devil is often in the details, regardless of the type of study conducted."
"Lies" would imply Richie and John both told you this directly, which is complete BS, at least for John, since John and I have been friends for 20+ years now and remain good friends and that's not at all what he told me for TOS. Of course it wasn't "only" those three guys who ended that experiment, but they played a major role in it along with several others, although I went a bit hyperbolic with my post last night as I was annoyed with those three guys for acting like jerks.
John had considered shutting down the CE board on this site multiple times before, due to the inappropriate content and its reflection on the board in general and its impact on the bottom line, as very few were paying premium members (which is all the business cares about) and the tenor of that board, which sometimes crept into the football board, pissed off more than a few premium members. I've never spoken to Richie about what, exactly, led to the CE board here being shut down, so I can't say whether your twitter theory is correct or not for this board.
I do know that someone's tweets had nothing to do with shutting the 24/7 CE board down. If you don't believe that you need to read John O's closing post in the locked "ot-ce" thread on the football board on TOS (or any one of DJ Spanky's posts in that thread). I'll leave it at that, since going further would be inappropriate in this thread. As it is, I shouldn't have even made my comments about the CE board in this thread. In hindsight, it would've been better to not engage - my apologies to the posters in this thread for any derailing that caused - been way too much of that going on in this thread, which is why I'll ignore your other childish comments.
Back to more helpful/interesting (I think, lol) posts shortly, folks...
A lot of people are saying that they have "meetings" to co-ordinate their posting here.
A lot of people were saying don't wear masks back then. Only one was the president of this country.
Excellent commentary, thanks - RCTs are not anywhere near perfect, as we've known for decades (especially for indications like depression and pain, where the outcome is so hard to measure well), but done well, they're still the gold standard for clinical science. In addition, it's a huge leap to say that this means the RCTs on COVID drugs suffer from similar issues. First off, these are much shorter duration RCTs with usually a much easier to measure endpoint (a biomarker, time in hospital, mortality, etc.) than depression, which is extraordinarily hard to measure well and most of these RCTs (especially the Recovery Trials on HCQ and dexamethasone) were conducted under very close medical supervision, unlike the depression study (the one exception I recall was Boulware's post exposure prophylaxis study, which relied on surveys to some extent). Many of the observational studies on COVID drugs, though, have been all over the map, which is part of the hazard of trying to do observational studies well and why they're usually considered inferior to RCTs.From a highly respected MD. I think we have seen this play out over the last several months:
Randomized controlled trials: when the gold standard leaves you with fool’s gold - Peter Attia
If I told you that I read a randomized double-blinded placebo-controlled trial conducted over 5 years and carried out in over 18,000 participants, is there any scenario under which you would not believe it to be an excellent trial?
" Randomized controlled trials: when the gold standard leaves you with fool’s gold
If I told you that I read a randomized double-blinded placebo-controlled trial conducted over 5 years and carried out in over 18,000 participants, is there any scenario under which you would not believe it to be an excellent trial?
If you just look on the surface, you might see a large-scale, long-term, randomized double-blinded, placebo-controlled trial and assume whatever it finds provides reliable evidence. But I hope I’ve convinced you that the devil is often in the details, regardless of the type of study conducted."
Should've checked, lol, as tests are actually down, overall, from the July peak, although they've crept back up the past few weeks (but not back to their peak) likely for the reasons you stated (colleges/schools). This is truly one of my favorite graphics for an excellent overview of the US outbreak, as it shows tests, cases, hospitalizations and deaths all on one graph; I usually share this with my long weekly updates, but I could imagine many whose eyes glaze over at those long posts and maybe don't really "see" the content. Will be interesting to see if cases continue to level off and then come back up in response or if they maybe just stay level for awhile or even go down. I doubt we're seeing more asymptomatic cases than we were the past month or two, though, as we've been testing far more per case throughout wave 2 than we did in wave 1.
I usually like Bloomberg, but this article is crazy wrong on Spain. Spain had nowhere near their most cases since April this past Friday, when they had 4503, as they've been having 7-10K per day for a few weeks before that in their wave 2, but they're well on the decline. Doesn't mean they didn't have a big wave and are now seeing deaths rise (but even more muted than the US's wave 2 vs. wave 1), but they ought to get their story right.
Thanks! Glad to be better informed.Should've checked, lol, as tests are actually down, overall, from the July peak, although they've crept back up the past few weeks (but not back to their peak) likely for the reasons you stated (colleges/schools). This is truly one of my favorite graphics for an excellent overview of the US outbreak, as it shows tests, cases, hospitalizations and deaths all on one graph; I usually share this with my long weekly updates, but I could imagine many whose eyes glaze over at those long posts and maybe don't really "see" the content. Will be interesting to see if cases continue to level off and then come back up in response or if they maybe just stay level for awhile or even go down. I doubt we're seeing more asymptomatic cases than we were the past month or two, though, as we've been testing far more per case throughout wave 2 than we did in wave 1.
My kids in three separate schools have all been tested 3x in 5 days when they hit campus. Afterwards, they get tested 1-2x a week. These schools are very focused on test / trace / quarantine.
Have been struggling with the Oak Ridge paper (that the Medium article above is based on) and another paper by a couple of prominent cardiologists, which just came out in the journal Circulation (by the American Heart Association), which seems somewhat complementary, but somewhat contradictory to the Oak Ridge one. And on top of that, there's a recent commentary in JAMA, by some Dutch doctors, saying the "cytokine storm" (over-inflammation reaction from the immune system), which many have said is key to the death spiral in many patients, doesn't really occur in COVID patients, which kind of supports the Oak Ridge paper, but is not in complete agreement with the Circulation paper (although they weren't investigating the inflammatory part of the system). Clearly, there's still some confusion out there amongst the medical experts on what exactly is going on with COVID, especially at the cellular level and how that impacts macro-level patient outcomes.
I think what the Oak Ridge folks are saying is that there is an incredibly complex cascade of effects once the virus enters both lung and vascular endothelial cells, via the ACE2 (angiotensin converting enzymes) pathway, eventually leading to wild swings in the RAS system (renin-angiotensin system), which induce similar effects in the related bradykinin system, leading to "bradykinin storms" featuring massive buildup of bradykinin in the body, leading to many of COVID's deadly effects. At one point, they do say, “the pathology of Covid-19 is likely the result of Bradykinin Storms rather than cytokine storms,” which had been previously identified in Covid-19 patients, but that “the two may be intricately linked.” They also mention that this can lead to increased production of hyaluronic acid (HLA, a molecule that can trap 1000X its weight in water) in the lungs. forming a "hydrogel," and according to the paper, once this happens, “it’s like trying to breathe through Jell-O.”
The Circulation paper makes the case that while COVID is obviously a respiratory disease, at its heart (pun intended) it's more of a microvascular disease: "We propose that severe COVID-19 is a microvascular disease in which coronavirus infection activates endothelial cells, triggering exocytosis, a rapid vascular response that drives microvascular inflammation and thrombosis." This paper goes through a ton of clinical data on progression of the disease, especially in blood vessel epithelial cells, host to countless ACE2 receptors, and talks about how that can lead to the "cytokine storms" and ARDS (acute respiratory distress syndrome), but due to the underlying vascular issues. I would imagine "bradykinin storms" which are part of the vascular system would be consistent with their research (it's just not a detail they looked into, I think).
The Dutch paper was aimed specifically at trying to measure cytokines for patients in the "cytokine storm" phase of severe COVID disease, but their findings were that they didn't really see highly elevated levels of cytokines. As per the authors, "The results from this study show that COVID-19 is not characterized by a cytokine storm....the severe disease observed in critically ill COVID-19 patients is therefore not explained by strongly elevated levels of inflammatory proteins in the blood. This means that critically ill COVID-19 patients likely will not benefit from specific anti-cytokine therapies." Obviously, there are all kinds of systemic effects leading to serious illness and death in many COVID patients, but maybe those aren't driven by a cytokine storm.
I'll admit confusion here. Might be time to "phone a friend," lol. Maybe one of our medical/immunology folks can help make more sense of this (and correct any major errors I might have above). @LETSGORU91 @93RUDoc @RUfubar @UMRU?
A mechanistic model and therapeutic interventions for COVID-19 involving a RAS-mediated bradykinin storm
Gene expression analysis reveals a novel, integrated molecular mechanism for much of the pathogenesis of COVID-19 that provides therapeutic intervention points that can be addressed with existing approved pharmaceuticals.
elifesciences.org
Does the COVID-19 cytokine storm exist? - Research may have an impact on the chances of success of a specific treatment
4 September 2020
Last edited:
Why the Trump brand is toxic for a vaccine | Editorial
What’s needed is absolute fair play, to enhance public confidence. Yet we’re getting exactly the opposite.
This is from nj.com . A few days ago somebody posted about communications. But, the massive opposition to the current gov. continues to undermine any message. Kamala Harris said similar to the nj.com article. How doe this help if we have a vaccine come out and people mistrust it ?
"This won't become a pandemic "
Said in January, you then went back in March to edit your post. 🤔
Page-1
OT: a good friend is STUCK IN CHINA
Guys my buddy Randy “Honkus” Stockstill AND his family (including their 6-month old son) are currently stuck in Wuhan, China. There is a state department plane headed there to bring US Citizens back BUT they could use ANY AND ALL help (if possible) to get on the plane!! Please follow this link...
rutgers.forums.rivals.com
+1"This won't become a pandemic "
Said in January, you then went back in March to edit your post. 🤔
Page-1
OT: a good friend is STUCK IN CHINA
Guys my buddy Randy “Honkus” Stockstill AND his family (including their 6-month old son) are currently stuck in Wuhan, China. There is a state department plane headed there to bring US Citizens back BUT they could use ANY AND ALL help (if possible) to get on the plane!! Please follow this link...
Caught again! 👍
- Status
Similar threads
