When talking points stray outside the bubble and immediately get run over by a bus.

(transcript here) https://www.cbsnews.com/news/covid-1...es-2020-11-08/

I dunno, I have more faith in this guy who's actually in charge of vaccine distribution than this woman who just seems to be doing a thought experiment about how hard it's going to be.

For one thing some places like ND and SD are practically at herd immunity already. So I expect their cases should start crashing soon even w/o a vaccine. In other places with some fraction of herd immunity - I would think the vaccine should start making a dent in cases pretty quick. You don't need to be anywhere near 100% vaccine coverage before you see cases start to dwindle. Maybe even 30% vaccine penetration could really help.

Although on the flip side I think it's about two months from the day you take the first shot to when you're supposed to be immune. That sucks. But like everything biological - it's probably a sliding scale and right after the second shot you have some immunity.

https://www.the-scientist.com/news-o...19-cases-68146

I had COVID back in March (along with a couple of high-risk conditions) - and was convinced that it didn't throttle me for more than a few days in small part due to:

a) having gotten a flu shot back in October
b) having had recovered from an awful case of stomach flu that felt like it was going to kill me

Graph ends on April 11th

Neither thing really makes sense.

You have made my day! I have never seen a more idiotic 2p2 post. EVER. Congrats.

Respect the hustle, but this bet is obviously terrible as there will still be a ton of COVID deaths in 2021.

If you wanted to bet 2022 vs 2019 death rate or 2021 Q4 vs 2019 Q4 death rate this would come closer to making the point you think you're making.

I know, thats the point.

People like Sir Huntington make the point that the "Wuhan Flu" just takes 6-12 months off a few old peoples lives. Which if that is the case, means that 2021 should be light on the death front as many who were supposed to die that year already did this year.

Obviously anyone with 2 braincells to rub together understands that isn't the case.

I can name that tune in one brain cell.

for your wish list



https://www.discovermagazine.com/the...s-in-your-life

Its only a small study but a new scanning method has found lung damage in 8 out 10 post covid subjects, none of whom required hospitalisation. This damage was not detected by conventional scans.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-55017301

From 58m 30 on here is quite interesting with regards to mortalities etc.

For those not clicking the link, these arent asymptomatic cases, but people who still had shortness of breath 3 months later. So it makes a bit of sense. It isnt damaging the lungs of someone who never shows symptoms.

Yea they got sick with C19 but not enough to need hospital, recovered, but still reported some problems.

The contribution to the bigger picture, is not just a problem for old people with a few months life left.

Feels like total lockdown is imminent for my area (NYC/NJ). Cuomo talking about hospitals potentially being overrun.

People argue against lockdowns but we simply cannot let people start dying in the street in the United States. First wave was localized so it was possible to get nurses, doctors, equipment from other parts of the country. Now it's nationwide and every location is essentially on their own. I'd expect lockdowns in many locations over the next 8-12 weeks.

Yep fully on board with the lockdown prediction. This one might be a bit more targeted now that we have more data on how the virus is spread (beaches, parks, golf courses etc stay open).

I think Howard or someone may have mentioned this before but my friend pointed me toward coviddash.org . Apparently you can still sign up for Pfizer or AZ trials? I volunteered for a Pfizer trial, would be awesome if I get selected; presumably a 50% chance of getting the Pfizer vaccine right now.

I'm in the Pfizer trial. I actually thought they had already reached their target number but it is possible they are still adding participants. I am hoping that once it gets FDA approval they will unblind the study and tell me if I got the vaccine or not. Although I'm pretty sure I did thanks to some pretty strong side effects especially after dose #2.

As I understand it, the danger that forces governments into lockdowns is that acute care services become overwhelmed, leading to progressive failure of the entire medical system, so that deaths from all causes, not just Covid, spiral up.

Lockdowns are such obvious economic bad news that governments just wouldn't do them unless the alternative was catastrophic, which it seemingly is.

Entirely possible that they left the sign up form up but aren't actually taking anyone new -- I'm not getting my hopes fully up.

I assume you're not allowed to get an antibody test, as that would defeat the purpose of a placebo?

I suppose there is nothing stopping me from getting one, they did not specifically tell me not to. Never thought of it actually.

Interestingly Pfizer uses normal saline as the placebo so given the common side effects from actual vaccine, it's easier to know (or guess at least) which arm of the trial you are in. I think I read that the AZ trials in the UK used some other vaccine as the placebo, which gives similar side effects, to help keep the participants from guessing which arm of the trial they are in. Not sure why Pfizer did not follow that route. Perhaps the US frowns on giving volunteers a vaccine as a placebo? I'm not really sure.

Some in the epidemiology community have been complaining about people getting unblinded when their jobs get them tested. I know there was at least one study participant who found out he was in the vaccine arm when he took a test for work (he's a cop and was assigned to security for a Trump campaign stop) and they initially told him it looked like he was just getting over a severe case. There is sort of a conundrum about what to do with people from the trials. Traditionally, once the vaccine is approved, placebo arm participants get the first doses. But in normal times, they would already have got lots of long-term side effect information. The medical ideal is to leave the arms separate for like 18-24 months, but that is obviously not cool right now. The last thing I read said that participants would likely be notified and vaccines offered to the placebo arm.

Yes I found an interesting article about this subject. Basically it seems as though those in the placebo arm will eventually be unblinded and allowed to get the vaccine, however the question is when. It seems several regulatory bodies may have some say in when that can happen. Also they may not want trial participants to skip the line ahead of healthcare workers etc.

https://www.statnews.com/2020/11/12/...s-complicated/

When I asked this question at the clinic, I was told that they "hoped" Pfizer would let everyone in the trial know which arm they were in once EUA was obtained, but they didn't know for sure. I was also told I could still get a vaccine if one (either from Pfizer or another manufacturer) became available.

Although, I would think that would mess up the trial integrity just as much as unblinding everyone... how can you measure the long-term effects of the Pfizer vaccine, if many of the trial participants are also getting a vaccine from Moderna or Astrazeneca, etc.? Or even if members of the placebo group go out and get the Pfizer vaccine through regular channels? Or what about those who got the real vaccine getting it again, would that possibly impact the safety data?

Seems to me it makes sense in this compressed timeframe to just unblind the participants and give the placebo group the vaccine. Not ideal in a perfect world but this is definitely not a perfect world.

I've had loss of smell/taste for most every cold/flu since I was a kid. Other people don't?