COVID-19 (f/k/a "the Coronavirus")

[wadesworld]

Masks were to be used, then they shouldn't, then they should per our medical experts.

There was the story out of Stanford early on that mouthwash killed the virus, then it was debunked as a myth, now yesterday a strong push again that mouthwash may kill the virus and be a treatment (limited) for this.

Virus was contagious person to person, then it wasn't (WHO), then it was.

I feel bad for the medical experts because they do not know.  It is also why people are frustrated because they are used to some MacGyver 1 hour solution. In my opinion it is also why people (including politicians) entertain other ideas that may or may not work in the hope of a magical elixir.  The back and forth of what is or isn't effective and the continual changes by experts doesn't help.

Well it’s a good thing we have a president getting up in front of the country suggesting all of these things work without knowing then, isn’t it?

[forgetful]

forgetful, is the timeline mostly driven by the need to ramp up mass production? Or is there still a lengthy period of testing to prove efficacy and safety?

Monoclonal antibodies shouldn't be too difficult to scale up to a reasonable level. It's not like a vaccine, where the entire population needs it. Just those that are sick. So I think we should be ok on that front, as long as things don't get too crazy.

The limitation on timeline is proving efficacy and safety. Under normal scenarios, I would put the timeline on the order of a couple years. But, things will be accelerated, and their are a lot of irons in the fire.

I think China ends up leading on this, as they will allow for a lot more risk in testing efficacy and safety. They had already made good progress in identifying, and testing (in cells) a wide library of antibodies. They will be moving them into animal/human testing pretty quickly.

My optimism is at in that library, at least one proves efficacy. We then are hoping it is also safe.

Goooo is not wrong in saying that my timeline may be overly optimistic. My normal inclination lies closer to his, but have some friends in this sector, that seem optimistic, so I'll hesitantly align with them.

[tower912]

Masks were to be used, then they shouldn't, then they should per our medical experts.

There was the story out of Stanford early on that mouthwash killed the virus, then it was debunked as a myth, now yesterday a strong push again that mouthwash may kill the virus and be a treatment (limited) for this.

Virus was contagious person to person, then it wasn't (WHO), then it was.

I feel bad for the medical experts because they do not know.  It is also why people are frustrated because they are used to some MacGyver 1 hour solution. In my opinion it is also why people (including politicians) entertain other ideas that may or may not work in the hope of a magical elixir.  The back and forth of what is or isn't effective and the continual changes by experts doesn't help.

Hey, another 'some say, 'both sides' post.    Phew.   I was going into withdrawal.   

The back and forth is due to a couple of things.    From a science perspective, it is because more is being learned about the virus and how to treat it every single day.     As it should be.    So, as more knowledge is gleaned, the message should adjust accordingly.   We should all be very disappointed if, in the face of a new virus, the message had never evolved.    Or, in a phrase near and dear to you, the goalposts have to shift as more becomes known.   

[MU82]

Masks were to be used, then they shouldn't, then they should per our medical experts.

There was the story out of Stanford early on that mouthwash killed the virus, then it was debunked as a myth, now yesterday a strong push again that mouthwash may kill the virus and be a treatment (limited) for this.

Virus was contagious person to person, then it wasn't (WHO), then it was.

I feel bad for the medical experts because they do not know.  It is also why people are frustrated because they are used to some MacGyver 1 hour solution. In my opinion it is also why people (including politicians) entertain other ideas that may or may not work in the hope of a magical elixir.  The back and forth of what is or isn't effective and the continual changes by experts doesn't help.

Can you please point to the medical expert who suggested that injecting Lysol into the human body would cure COVID-19?

Thanks!

[Plaque Lives Matter!]

Masks were to be used, then they shouldn't, then they should per our medical experts.

There was the story out of Stanford early on that mouthwash killed the virus, then it was debunked as a myth, now yesterday a strong push again that mouthwash may kill the virus and be a treatment (limited) for this.

Virus was contagious person to person, then it wasn't (WHO), then it was.

I feel bad for the medical experts because they do not know.  It is also why people are frustrated because they are used to some MacGyver 1 hour solution. In my opinion it is also why people (including politicians) entertain other ideas that may or may not work in the hope of a magical elixir.  The back and forth of what is or isn't effective and the continual changes by experts doesn't help.

https://www.inquirer.com/health/coronavirus/coronavirus-spread-not-curbed-by-mouthwashes-hydrogen-peroxide-20200515.html

found it in 30 seconds.

[TSmith34, Inc.]

Can you please point to the medical expert who suggested that injecting Lysol into the human body would cure COVID-19?

Thanks!

And the medical expert that said masks shouldn't be used.

Sigh. Once again chicos is carpeting bombing Scoop with lies and distortions.

[GooooMarquette]

Can you please point to the medical expert who suggested that injecting Lysol into the human body would cure COVID-19?

Thanks!

Or UV light?

[Uncle Rico]

Or UV light?

I drank a 175 of UV Blue Vodka and all I got was a hangover

[GooooMarquette]

I drank a 175 of UV Blue Vodka and all I got was a hangover

But did you get COVID?

[Uncle Rico]

But did you get COVID?

Might have preferred it?

[Galway Eagle]

I drank a 175 of UV Blue Vodka and all I got was a hangover

I've had to clean that Nasty blue mess up after a girl in college threw that up in my parents Easter decorations. Can't even smell that stuff without feeling nausea after that

[Hards Alumni]

But did you get COVID?

More likely to get hepatitis after a 1.75 of Blue UV than Covid

[MU82]

This is not very good news ...

https://time.com/5837531/sailors-coronavirus-second-time/?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=the-brief-pm&utm_&fbclid=IwAR3rNzlgmafYjdK6hVX6TITYs7xSCV0uD9zhcfgETzA-Guq8CjEFb3y-5mc

(WASHINGTON, D.C.) — Five sailors on the aircraft carrier sidelined in Guam due to a COVID-19 outbreak have gotten the virus for the second time and have been taken off the ship, according to the Navy.

The resurgence of the virus in the five sailors on the USS Theodore Roosevelt underscores the befuddling behavior of the highly contagious virus and raises questions about how troops that test positive can be reintegrated into the military, particularly on ships.

All five sailors had previously tested positive and had gone through at least two weeks of isolation. As part of the process, they all had to test negative twice in a row, with the tests separated by at least a day or two before they were allowed to go back to the ship.

Yep. We still have absolutely no idea how many folks who get infected and recover will be immune. It might be a large percentage, or it might be a lot fewer than everybody hopes.

I hate this shyte!

[Jockey]

Even from one of the most monstrous people on Earth, this is stunning:

“When you test, you have a case. When you test, you find something is wrong with people. If we didn’t do any testing, we would have very few cases."


I'd like to rant or editorialize about this, but I can't find the words.

[GooooMarquette]

Even from one of the most monstrous people on Earth, this is stunning:

“When you test, you have a case. When you test, you find something is wrong with people. If we didn’t do any testing, we would have very few cases."


I'd like to rant or editorialize about this, but I can't find the words.

It really is stunning that the True Believers can brush off this kind of statement and still support him, but I have become resigned to the fact that it is true.

It hearkens back to his statement about shooting someone on 5th Avenue and not losing any support. Back then, I thought it was a load of crap, but with the benefit of time, I have come to see that he was right. Nothing he could do would be a bridge too far for the True Believers.

[Jockey]

It really is stunning that the True Believers can brush off this kind of statement and still support him, but I have become resigned to the fact that it is true.

It hearkens back to his statement about shooting someone on 5th Avenue and not losing any support. Back then, I thought it was a load of crap, but with the benefit of time, I have come to see that he was right. Nothing he could do would be a bridge too far for the True Believers.

That was stunning, but nothing compared to what his lawyers argued in court in October. They argued that the president has that right to commit that murder and it would be illegal to prosecute (or even investigate) him for it.

[StillAWarrior]

It really is stunning that the True Believers can brush off this kind of statement and still support him, but I have become resigned to the fact that it is true.

Honest question:  did you know what he meant?  Because I'm amazed at the number of people who hear him say things -- admittedly often very inarticulately -- and then latch onto the worst possible interpretation.  But I've become resigned to it.

[tower912]

Honest question:  did you know what he meant?  Because I'm amazed at the number of people who hear him say things -- admittedly often very inarticulately -- and then latch onto the worst possible interpretation.  But I've become resigned to it.

I am guilty of that from time to time.   Conversely, I can't imagine a positive interpretation for some of his statements.    I would appreciate the insight on the positive interpretations.   

[StillAWarrior]

I am guilty of that from time to time.   Conversely, I can't imagine a positive interpretation for some of his statements.    I would appreciate the insight on the positive interpretations.

I agree.  Many times, he says stupid things and there are no positive interpretations.  He gives plenty of legitimate ammo for those who want to criticize.  That's one of the reasons I get annoyed.  In the quote above, he was discussing the same thing that has been discussed on this board repeatedly:  using the number of cases to assess how things are going is flawed because the more tests we do, the more cases we identify.  Not a controversial statement.  He said it very poorly, but I think that it's pretty obvious that is what he was talking about.

Edited to add:  I sincerely wish the president was communicating and leading effectively during this crisis.  I don't think he is.  He obviously has many shortcomings.  But I have seen time and time again that his statements are distorted and misrepresented and it becomes very tiresome.

[jesmu84]

I agree.  Many times, he says stupid things and there are no positive interpretations.  He gives plenty of legitimate ammo for those who want to criticize.  That's one of the reasons I get annoyed.  In the quote above, he was discussing the same thing that has been discussed on this board repeatedly:  using the number of cases to assess how things are going is flawed because the more tests we do, the more cases we identify.  Not a controversial statement.  He said it very poorly, but I think that it's pretty obvious that is what he was talking about.

Edited to add:  I sincerely wish the president was communicating and leading effectively during this crisis.  I don't think he is.  He obviously has many shortcomings.  But I have seen time and time again that his statements are distorted and misrepresented and it becomes very tiresome.

Succinct. Excellently stated.

[wadesworld]

I agree.  Many times, he says stupid things and there are no positive interpretations.  He gives plenty of legitimate ammo for those who want to criticize.  That's one of the reasons I get annoyed.  In the quote above, he was discussing the same thing that has been discussed on this board repeatedly:  using the number of cases to assess how things are going is flawed because the more tests we do, the more cases we identify.  Not a controversial statement.  He said it very poorly, but I think that it's pretty obvious that is what he was talking about.

But when you couple that there’s a global pandemic going on that should require an all hands on deck response with the fact that the federal government didn’t use anywhere close to every resource they could (and even cut funding to organizations that are very important to the worldwide response), his actions also seem to back up what his words are and not what he *may* have actually meant instead. If he just had worded a statement poorly but acted in ways where he ramped up testing early and often then yeah. But instead he basically threw his hands up and said, “good luck states! You don’t have the capacity we do at the federal level, but we’ll let you take this one!” He (his administration, which all comes back to him in the end) is acting in the way he worded his statement. More tests = bad look for the US = bad look for him.

But the Chicago Cubs/Arizona Cardinals/Illinois living version of Cheeks will tell me it would’ve been handled identically by any politician in an election year as it would’ve been political suicide to handle it any other way. Both sides, I know.

[Jockey]

Oh, for the good old days when Fox News would explode because President Obama wore a tan suit.

[tower912]

Or speculated on the terrorist fist bump.

[shoothoops]

It's creating and preying upon some people's fears. Those fearful people resort to tribalism to feel stronger. Often times during tribalism, distance is kept between opposing formed groups and the fear of the unknown is manufactured that they are out to get you, your resources etc...an example would be a soldier that finds it much easier to shoot a red dot on a scope in the distance rather than someone you see up close and spend time with etc...

If some of these people instead spent time outside of their tribe, they would find some similarities and common ground. This is bad for tribal leaders who use and count on fear preying, fight or flight responses to fear, etc...facts, knowledge, individuality can reduce their power.

For some, it doesn't really matter what someone such as Trump says, it's how he says it, sounding authoritative, talking tough.....those other people are out to get you and trick you.

Also often times perceived weaker or disenfranchised groups are easy targets for some tribal leaders because they can be perceived to be less supported.

Repeating the same negative buzz words and rallying cries are ways to gaslight or distract from facts that reflect poorly upon the leader. Attacks are often psychological projection in order to avoid self reflection regarding personal inferiority thoughts. The person feels inferior self hate and that is way too difficult for them to explore. It is much easier to attack, and attack less supported groups where you have your tribal support.

[injuryBug]

This is not very good news ...

https://time.com/5837531/sailors-coronavirus-second-time/?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=the-brief-pm&utm_&fbclid=IwAR3rNzlgmafYjdK6hVX6TITYs7xSCV0uD9zhcfgETzA-Guq8CjEFb3y-5mc

(WASHINGTON, D.C.) — Five sailors on the aircraft carrier sidelined in Guam due to a COVID-19 outbreak have gotten the virus for the second time and have been taken off the ship, according to the Navy.

The resurgence of the virus in the five sailors on the USS Theodore Roosevelt underscores the befuddling behavior of the highly contagious virus and raises questions about how troops that test positive can be reintegrated into the military, particularly on ships.

All five sailors had previously tested positive and had gone through at least two weeks of isolation. As part of the process, they all had to test negative twice in a row, with the tests separated by at least a day or two before they were allowed to go back to the ship.

Yep. We still have absolutely no idea how many folks who get infected and recover will be immune. It might be a large percentage, or it might be a lot fewer than everybody hopes.

I hate this shyte!

Could it have been a false positive with those 5?