tdhoosier

Would you say a study should be called in to doubt if: It was not randomized and double-blind, meaning doctors can select who they gave the drugs to and knew which patients they were administering HCQ or a placebo to? HCQ was treated with other medicine, which could impact the findings? If it excludes patients who had not yet been discharged from the hospital?

Palermo’s is pretty good.

I will fight somebody over what’s the best deep dish pizza. I’ve put a lot of thought into this over the years so if you want to debate me you better come at me guns blazing. 😎 First, I’ve talked to many people who have developed a negative opinion on deep dish because they either get imposter pizza outside of Chicago or have tried Pizzeria Uno (barf) Or Connies (double barf). If this sounds like you, then give it another try. The best Chicago Deep dish is made with the CORNMEAL CRUST. That’s right, you hear me lovers of Girodanos. I’m sorry, but doughy crust with all that cheese and all that sauce just throws off the ratio and it lacks crispiness. We’re supposed to be eating pizza not triangle shaped lasagna. That leaves you with Lou Malnatis (1A On my list) and Ginos East (1B On my list). Both have great pepperoni and amazing sausage. Lou Malnati’s gets the nod because they have ‘The Lou’ which is a tomato, spinach, mushroom pizza.

We had one where we used to live. The regular pizzas are alright, but they had this excellent one with chicken, tomatoes and green onion with a garlic white sauce - it ended up being the only one we got from Papa Murphys.

It really is sad that this is going to turn into a game of 'told you so' no matter what the final conclusion is on this drug. I just want something to work. Yeah, I just posted the summary, but this article has a little more info. https://medicalxpress.com/news/2020-06-immunity-covid-higher-shown.html

I'll balance that out with some hopeful news: https://www.bbc.com/news/health-53248660 🙂

Not sure anybody thinks we're going to 'beat' this. Quite the contrary. That said, while we aren't going to beat a hurricane, we can board up windows, build houses on stilts, evacuate population, etc. to minimize the damage.

I actually don’t necessarily agree we are catching ‘many’ more case due to increased testing. As I mentioned above, it’s not a black and white thing. I personally think increased testing only plays a small factor into why cases increasing.

We're going to get lost in semantics. If that's what you say then I believe you. Maybe I'm too literal because I have not seen a curve on a graph that incorporates all the factors you mention above. Here's the thing. I don't think every case was identified 2 months ago and I don't believe every case is identified now; there are always going to be outliers. However, the "testing more = more cases" theory is just as speculative as trying to determine how many cases were missed in April. I don't doubt that increasing of testing factors into your theory, but it's impossible to speculate to what degree. We can only go on the data that we have. That said, i think the number isn't as far off as you speculate, but just like you, that is my guess. The reason for this is that the tests were rationed for the truly symptomatic in March and April, thus per the graph you posted above, the higher "percentage positive". As of May and June, test weren't only being rationed for symptomatic, a high percentage of tests were being used as precautionary (and mandatory) tests for elective surgerys, to confirm the previously infected were negative, etc., thus explaining the now decreased "percentage positive". More people are now being tested on a precautionary basis. I know I represent a small sample size but I know quite a few people who have gotten a test in the last month and they all were tested to confirm a negative (none had symptoms). So, what if *50% of the tests administered are being used to confirm a negative right now? I haven't seen any data that distinguishes between the 2 (confirming a positive vs. confirming a negative); they're all lumped in together. Hypothetically, that'd mean we're catching approximately the same amount of cases right now as we were in late April. Yes, some asymptomatic test are caught, but at face value, more tests does not necessarily mean we are catching, say, *twice* as many cases as we did in late April. Maybe we're only catching *10%* more cases. If that were accurate, it'd seem silly to blame increased cases solely on more testing. I think the more logical answer is that a highly contagious virus is reproducing exponentially. *just throwing out 'easy numbers' to explain my reasoning. Furthermore, if a symptomatic person tests positive, but has to have two negatives to come back to work (again, many companies are requiring this), does that mean that 3 tests = 3 new cases? Of course not. Hope that makes sense. If anybody has any numbers on who/why is being tested now, I'd genuinely like to see that info. I doubt hospitals code that differently though.

Yes, I did read. You wrote: "Today the curve has been flattened, deaths are dropping and it's more of a local health emergency in Select places" I read that as three separate points. Because deaths can't drop and remain flat at the same time (a contradiction between point 1 and 2), I assumed you meant the case curve was flattening. Not sure what other curve you'd be referring to or how else I was supposed to take it. If that's not what you meant, then so be it, but that's the reason I posted those graphs. I'm not sure how those graphs are misleading. They are from the NY Times and pretty much all other news organizations are reporting the same exact numbers (within a few hundred cases, depending on when they are updated). They are just straight up numbers. The 'deaths' graph you and @mrflynn03 posted is the same the NY Times is posting and you use it to justify dropping deaths rate. What's the difference? I don't think that graph is wrong or misleading because I think the death rate will rise in the next week or two. Do I think there are twice as many cases? Well, it doesn't add up to that yet, but I do think we'll reach that number soon. Without measures taken the virus will reproduce exponentially because that's what viruses do. You can keep talking about increased testing as much as you want, but how many of those tests were for symptomatic people? Do you have numbers for that? I have taken a precautionary test because I had to get an ablation last month. My wife had to take a precautionary test because she had to get an endoscopy a few weeks ago. If somebody tests positive for COVID many companies are requiring 2 negative test before returning to work. Some companies are requiring a negative test after mandatory quarantines if you've come into contact with a proven positive. Do we have more cases because of these additional tests? My point is that we can keep on going in circles about this, but it's not going to affect the outcome. In the end, I guess we'll just agree to disagree on whether or not this is a national health crisis. If this isn't a health crisis then I don't know what is.

This doesn’t look flat on a national level or a state level. Also keep in mind that a vast number of thoses cases back in April were from NYC. I think you’d have a better argument that it wasn’t a national health emergency back in April....if that’s the stance you want to take. I guess I don’t understand your intention of pushing the narrative of a flattened case curve when it isn’t true. The graph you just posted was test results, not number of cases. Just because you test more or less doesn’t mean that the virus doesn’t exist....it’s still infecting people. Just because you haven’t gone to a dentist for him to tell you that you have a cavity doesn’t mean that you don’t have a cavity. Was that claim supposed to be evidence that we are over-reacting as a country? That we should let this thing run wild? The our country is doing a good job of containing this? Is the virus going to go away by itself? What exactly are you trying to argue? A lot of people are saying that they have no agenda and they’ll play their part in being socially responsible, which I thank them for, but blatantly false and misleading information keeps getting posted in this thread. Whether it was the stance you took 2 weeks ago when you were disputing the claim that cases were rising in Texas. Or that cases are flat now. Or when somebody posted that asymptomatic/presymptomatic spread was a lie. There have been obviously doctored bar graphs posted as well. And yes, deaths are dropping.........for now, but again there’s a delay in deaths because people don’t die the day they test positive. It’s as simple as that. I hope I’m wrong but based on previous trends I don’t think we will be saying ‘deaths are dropping’ later this week or next week. I’m sure you weren’t pointing to the rising death rate in NYC when cases began to fall. It’s because the death rate lags behind the case rate. Will it be a little lower because we know how to treat this better and have remdevisvir (spelling?)? Sure, I will acknowledge that, but the death curve will still follow the case curve. It may be a slightly lesser rate, but deaths aren’t going away if that’s what you are implying.

Finished product. Tastes amazing.#meat

You still are having symptoms?! Dang Scott, that sucks. is it possible the antibodies test was wrong? What did they say about that? hope you are feeling better ASAP.

Maybe a little too irish for the 4th but a first attempt at smoking a corned beef today. Looking forward to seeing how this turns out.

A ton of great new music. If you like Nathaniel Ratliff check out J Roddy Walton and the Business.

In her defense she did blame it on a misunderstanding of semantics between asymptotic and presymptomatic. But people heard what they wanted to hear and ran with it. Even experts in the WHO didn’t agree with how she framed her wording. I think she meant ‘asymptomatic’ as in people who never develop symptoms at all during the entire life span of the virus. Obviously those cases are harder to catch and trace because people don’t get tested. Thus, there’s very little data. Presymptomatic refers the span of 1-3 days before symptoms appear. She never technically disputed presymptomatic spread.

You may want to reread that article you posted. The WHO went back on what they said; the whole point of article. Presymptomatic spread is broadly believed to happen, it’s the whole point of wearing masks. “To some, it came across as if the WHO was suggesting that people without symptoms weren’t driving spread. Some studies, however, have estimated that people without symptoms (whether truly asymptomatic or presymptomatic) could be responsible for up to half of the spread, which is why the virus has been so difficult to contain. Isolating people who are sick, for example, does not prevent the possibility they already passed the virus on to others. Some modeling studies have assumed quite widespread asymptomatic transmission. “The WHO created confusion yesterday when it reported that asymptomatic patients rarely spread the disease,” an email from the Harvard Global Health Institute said Tuesday. “All of the best evidence suggests that people without symptoms can and do readily spread SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes Covid-19. In fact, some evidence suggests that people may be most infectious in the days before they become symptomatic — that is, in the presymptomatic phase when they feel well, have no symptoms, but may be shedding substantial amounts of virus.”

Where did you see that? Everything that I’ve seen says the opposite.

Sticking to music.... Quincy Jones Norah Jones Jesus Jones Tom Jones Freddy Jones (Band) Sharon Jones (& the Dap Kings) Mr. Jones and me tell each other fairy tales and stare at the beautiful women

Fair enough. And i'm not advocating that we blindly have the government shutdown everything when there is a slight rise in cases either.

Yes and no. First, all of these are all different viruses that have reproductive rates and different death rates. So you'll agree that these are all 'apples to oranges' comparisons. The Spanish Flu is most likely worse than Corona. The Asian and Hong Kong Flu are most likely not as worse as Corona....they killed 1 million each and Corona has a death toll of 500k and we're just in the beginning stages. However, concluding that wearing masks and limiting public gatherings didn't work during the Spanish Flu is not accurate. They did not quarantine well. They lacked the medical equipment and knowledge. And newspapers weren't allowed to report on the flu: https://www.history.com/news/spanish-flu-second-wave-resurgence Edit (I hit 'post' too early): Regardless, while I understand your concern, I'm more concerned with the concerns of the experts who actually study this stuff for a living. Call me too trusting if you want. If you can find me a virologist or epidemiologist that thinks slowing this thing down isn't the best course of action then I'll reconsider my stance.

How far off do you think the reporting is? You post informative stats almost daily from worldometer. I look at the NY Times daily report. The NY Times numbers are a few thousand lower, but they generally are the same. I think the fight over reporting is fighting over peanuts. Whether off a little in either direction shouldn't change how we generally view the pandemic. I honestly think the debate over this stuff is trivial, keeps us rolling around in the mud, and hinders us from seeing the big picture.

At least they're adding 8 channels I don't watch.

But there’s a way to slow the spread, contact trace and safely open up everything while we wait for a vaccine. And then you avoid tens of thousands deaths...if America can just take this seriously and take the necessary precautions. Health aside, slowing the spread is good for the economy too. Even if the Government doesn’t shut down everything, during spikes businesses will have to temporarily close on their own because of outbreaks in offices, factories, warehouses, etc. Schools will need to shut down because of outbreaks and parents will be forced to take off work because their children will be home. Even if we let this run rampant we still aren’t going to get out of this until next year and I believe not only will that lead to many unnecessary deaths, it will destroy our economy even more. Remember, we are 4 months in and it still has only infected about 10% of the population. We are still much closer to the beginning than the end. I posted a couple of pages back, one person’s irresponsible behavior set off a chain of events at my wife’s company. 8 employees were forced to take off work (a financial hit for them) and the company shut down 2 PT clinics (a financial hit for the company). And the patients who needed Physical Therapy had to postpone their appointments. This is just one tiny example of the economical and health implications of just 1 case. This happening on a Macro scale, across the country is going to devastate the economy. It will happen more if cases continue to increase. I appreciate you @mrflynn03 and genuinely enjoy chatting with you on a whole host of issues, but i think you are dead wrong on this one. Other countries are deciding it’s the best option to slow the spread. Scientists say it’s best to slow the spread. Many Economists are now saying it’s best to slow the spread. AND we still don’t know how long antibodies last. What happens if it’s only for 3 months? That makes reaching herd immunity a whole lot harder and has fatal consequences.