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

[GooooMarquette]

https://www.who.int/news/item/14-12-2020-who-information-notice-for-ivd-users

Wondering if Gooo or Forgetful can break this down in more layman’s terms?

Is PCR testing no longer a reliable trusted way of identifying infection?

To coin a phrase from a different realm, “you’ve seen one PCR test, you’ve seen one PCR test.“

PCR testing is highly variable because it is customized by each lab. Essentially, the lab “cycles“ the sample numerous times, thereby amplifying any nucleic acids in that sample. In simple terms, the more cycles you run, the more likely you are to find nucleic acids...but the more likely you are to have false positives. The fewer cycles you run, the less likely you are to find nucleic acids...but the more likely you are to have false negatives.

Ultimately, in answer to your question, I would say that PCR testing is still extremely useful. However, the experts analyzing the results need to understand the number of cycles run by that specific test, and thus the possibility of false positives or false negatives.

[Frenns Liquor Depot]

I actually think you all should check out Michael Mina for PCR info on Twitter.  The problem is that PCR is going to pick up when you are infectious not when you are infected.  So if used right it could be a better test if your intent is to come into close contact with others. 

So its a problem of how and what you are using a testing method for, not the testing method itself.

That is really over simplified and i am sure precisely wrong but directionally what he has to say on the topic.

[GooooMarquette]

I actually think you all should check out Michael Mina for PCR info on Twitter.  The problem is that PCR is going to pick up when you are infectious not when you are infected.  So if used right it could be a better test if your intent is to come into close contact with others. 

So its a problem of how and what you are using a testing method for, not the testing method itself.

That is really over simplified and i am sure precisely wrong but directionally what he has to say on the topic.

You are correct – it is very possible to get false positives.

PCR is one of those tests where the quality of the lab where it is performed and interpreted makes a huge difference. A highly experienced and qualified lab knows when to take into account the possibility and likelihood of incorrect results.

[Frenns Liquor Depot]

You are correct – it is very possible to get false positives.

PCR is one of those tests where the quality of the lab where it is performed and interpreted makes a huge difference. A highly experienced and qualified lab knows when to take into account the possibility and likelihood of incorrect results.

Sorry I was reversing it too.  Antigen is what I meant.  PCR can pick up virus before and after you are infectious. 

[cheebs09]

I know this is a very speculative/difficult question, but what’s the general thought on when we will be back in the world having maskless, normal interactions? I saw tweets talking maybe 2022. That struck me as my hope was mid-2021.

I’ve got friend’s weddings in the spring and didn’t think we’d still be making tough decisions about traveling. However, it seems extremely unlikely it will be safe by then.

[MUfan12]

I know this is a very speculative/difficult question, but what’s the general thought on when we will be back in the world having maskless, normal interactions? I saw tweets talking maybe 2022. That struck me as my hope was mid-2021.

The most optimistic scenario would be late fall, but I'm setting my expectations for 2022. But the vax rollout really has to kick into gear ASAP.

[Hards Alumni]

I know this is a very speculative/difficult question, but what’s the general thought on when we will be back in the world having maskless, normal interactions? I saw tweets talking maybe 2022. That struck me as my hope was mid-2021.

I’ve got friend’s weddings in the spring and didn’t think we’d still be making tough decisions about traveling. However, it seems extremely unlikely it will be safe by then.

Fall probably.  I'm optimistic that school is back to normal next year... but I may be huffing serious amounts of Hopium.

[GooooMarquette]

I know this is a very speculative/difficult question, but what’s the general thought on when we will be back in the world having maskless, normal interactions? I saw tweets talking maybe 2022. That struck me as my hope was mid-2021.

I’ve got friend’s weddings in the spring and didn’t think we’d still be making tough decisions about traveling. However, it seems extremely unlikely it will be safe by then.

Exact timelines are difficult, but I would be VERY surprised if we are back to normal by the spring. I also think it is very pessimistic of folks to say we won’t be back to normal until 2022.

Ultimately, it depends on the (1) pace of vaccine rollout, and (2) the willingness of most Americans to get vaccinated. I suspect that the first part will be solved soon, as both production and vaccination will speed up in the coming months as the kinks get worked out of the system. The second part - the willingness of far right groups and “anti-vaxxers“ to get vaccinated- is more uncertain.

Taking it all together and putting it in my blender...I think we can get back to relatively “normal“ life by late summer or sometime in the fall.

[Galway Eagle]

Exact timelines are difficult, but I would be VERY surprised if we are back to normal by the spring. I also think it is very pessimistic of folks to say we won’t be back to normal until 2022.

Ultimately, it depends on the (1) pace of vaccine rollout, and (2) the willingness of most Americans to get vaccinated. I suspect that the first part will be solved soon, as both production and vaccination will speed up in the coming months as the kinks get worked out of the system. The second part - the willingness of far right groups and “anti-vaxxers“ to get vaccinated- is more uncertain.

Taking it all together and putting it in my blender...I think we can get back to relatively “normal“ life by late summer or sometime in the fall.

Doesn't it also sort of depend on who you generally surround yourself with? I mean if I'm in an area that's heavily vaccinated then bars, restaurants, festivals should open more quickly than say events, bars restaurants in areas that may have a low vaccine rate.

[The Hippie Satan of Hyperbole]

I think we will largely be back to normal by early to mid summer.  Honestly even if I am not vaccinated by summer, and most vulnerable people are, I am probably going to do a lot of the things I haven't been doing for the last year while still mitigating by wearing a mask in a crowded room and such.

[Hards Alumni]

Exact timelines are difficult, but I would be VERY surprised if we are back to normal by the spring. I also think it is very pessimistic of folks to say we won’t be back to normal until 2022.

Ultimately, it depends on the (1) pace of vaccine rollout, and (2) the willingness of most Americans to get vaccinated. I suspect that the first part will be solved soon, as both production and vaccination will speed up in the coming months as the kinks get worked out of the system. The second part - the willingness of far right groups and “anti-vaxxers“ to get vaccinated- is more uncertain.

Taking it all together and putting it in my blender...I think we can get back to relatively “normal“ life by late summer or sometime in the fall.

I will candidly reveal that my employees who are declining the vaccine are not right wing.  They are also not, 'anti-vaxx'ers.  My only anti-vaxx employee is signed up to get this vaccine.  So yeah, there is a broad range of people who are not easily categorized.

I think we can thank social media for the stupidity.

[pacearrow02]

Add mayor bowser with the completely coincidental timing of opening up restaurants despite yesterday having the worst Covid death total yet.....yiiipppeeeee!!

[rocky_warrior]

Add mayor bowser with the completely coincidental timing of opening up restaurants despite yesterday having the worst Covid death total yet.....yiiipppeeeee!!

DC is actually on the downswing, 2 deaths yesterday:
https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/usa/district-of-columbia/

You're not very good with #s are you?

[GooooMarquette]

Doesn't it also sort of depend on who you generally surround yourself with? I mean if I'm in an area that's heavily vaccinated then bars, restaurants, festivals should open more quickly than say events, bars restaurants in areas that may have a low vaccine rate.

Yes, there are definitely lots of variables. My prediction is just my best guess as to when the country as a whole will be back to normal.

[pacearrow02]

DC is actually on the downswing, 2 deaths yesterday:
https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/usa/district-of-columbia/

You're not very good with #s are you?

You look at their trend lines and tell me how she can justify opening now and not say in July?  Their 7 day avg of daily deaths wasnt above 4 for about 10 of the 12 months this thing has been going on.

So based off your analysis they should have probably never closed down.  Which we would be in agreement on.

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/usa/district-of-columbia/

[reinko]

You look at their trend lines and tell me how she can justify opening now and not say in July?  Their 7 day avg of daily deaths wasnt above 4 for about 10 of the 12 months this thing has been going on.

So based off your analysis they should have probably never closed down.  Which we would be in agreement on.

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/usa/district-of-columbia/

Restaurants were open in July (I know because I live here) and they closed indoor dining on 12/23/2020 to combat rising #s.

🤡 🤡 🤡

[pacearrow02]

Restaurants were open in July (I know because I live here) and they closed indoor dining on 12/23/2020 to combat rising #s.

🤡 🤡 🤡

I obviously don’t live there so wasn’t aware of the back and forth policy but I was wrong.  Thought it might have been motivated by something else, glad I was wrong.  Lo siento amigo!

How is it living in DC?  Would be my personal hell.

[jesmu84]

I obviously don’t live there so wasn’t aware of the back and forth policy but I was wrong.  Thought it might have been motivated by something else, glad I was wrong.  Lo siento amigo!

How is it living in DC?  Would be my personal hell.

Lol.

Mr. Disingenuous strikes again!

[pacearrow02]

Lol.

Mr. Disingenuous strikes again!

I apologized for making an incorrect assumption.  Rare around these parts but how is that disingenuous?

[GooooMarquette]

Dr. Fauci says he feels liberated now that he can speak about the science without fear of repercussions.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/white-house/dr-anthony-fauci-says-he-now-feels-liberated-speak-freely-n1255220

"It was very clear that there were things said, be it regarding things like hydroxychloroquine and other things like that, that really was uncomfortable because they were not based in scientific fact," Fauci told reporters, speaking about the Trump administration.

"The idea that you can get up and talk about what you know, what the evidence is, what the science is," Fauci continued, "it is somewhat of a liberating feeling."

[TSmith34, Inc.]

How is it living in DC?  Would be my personal hell.

Living in your own Private Idaho

[Spotcheck Billy]

I was wrong. 

this is almost sig worthy

[TSmith34, Inc.]

Dr. Brix retires, as expected.

#etttd

[GooooMarquette]

While still not certain, officials in the UK now believe that the UK variant may be more lethal than the original SARS CoV2 virus.

https://www.bbc.com/news/health-55768627

Previous work suggests the new variant spreads between 30% and 70% faster than others, and there are hints it is about 30% more deadly.

——————


I hope this does not turn out to be true, because the UK variant is expected to be the dominant strain in the US soon.

[rocket surgeon]

Dr. Fauci says he feels liberated now that he can speak about the science without fear of repercussions.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/white-house/dr-anthony-fauci-says-he-now-feels-liberated-speak-freely-n1255220

"It was very clear that there were things said, be it regarding things like hydroxychloroquine and other things like that, that really was uncomfortable because they were not based in scientific fact," Fauci told reporters, speaking about the Trump administration.

"The idea that you can get up and talk about what you know, what the evidence is, what the science is," Fauci continued, "it is somewhat of a liberating feeling."

  but gooo, there are a number of well respected doctors who believed in "the science" as well.  there was a method to other procedures that if followed, were very successful  fauci was not a "hands on " doc" and therefore was not privy to first hand efficacy of these treatments.  understand, when we were in the intial and secondary phases of treating this virus as we were getting to know more and more about it's wide ranging effects on different people.  some of these epidemiologists were using different approaches as they made sense and were showing success for them.  now remember the context were were in. we didn't have the luxury of time and double blinds to follow all of these.  but there are docs who had successes with some "non traditional" approaches. nope, toe the line and keep your mouth shut, you will be cancelled.  who does that?

  let's just say doc warrior and i came up with a "non traditional' way to treat toothaches. toothaches have become a sudden, mysterious, "pandemic-like" issue with some people with compromised immune systems, etc and actually dying as a result.   let's just imagine that doc and i found that cat piss was a very effective medicament when used with a certain type of tooth ache with patients in a specific age group at a certain stage of the tooth ache.  if it was not harmful, it was effective in most cases and its main ingredient was readily available and cheap, he and i are going to talk about it.  others may or may not use it on some of their patients.  word gets out and of course there is no science and/or double blind studies supporting it, but we felt comfortable using it in "certain" situations because it was bring people relief.  well, the higher ups get word of it and you know it's going to be critiqued and downplayed, with doc and i getting a letter from the "guru's" warning us of straying from the "standards of care"  but we saw with our own eyes, up front the efficacy.  now, more docs and patients want this treatment.  remember, we are in a crisis NOW and don't have time for double blinds.  the vaccines we are getting right now, we are the phase 3 studies. of course you know, phase 3 studies are normally done under more controlled circumstances. 

how many covid patients did fauci actually treat?  how many influenza patients has he treated within the past, oh, 5 years?  how many tummy aches has he treated?  most of dentistry's most well respected are still hands on guys.  they are apolitical and you won't see them on tv   if i had covid, i would not want dr fauci as my treating doc.  i'd much rather have dr harvey risch(top epidemiologist at yale) dr steven smith(smith center for infectious diseases) these guys had actual patients lives in their hands

   much of the "science" of treating covid that we were initially going by has been debunked, but guys like fauci continue to adhere to it-which science?  masks? lockdowns? there have been many dissenting opinions from the beginning about these 2 basic things, but they were strongly admonished and chastised with some being strongly reprimanded.  today, the studies are showing that those who were minimized are showing to be right...the science.  all depended on who your "expert" voted for and that's the science unfortunately.