|
Which horse film is your favorite? This poll is closed. |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
| Black Beauty |
|
2 | 1.06% |
| A Talking Pony!?! |
|
4 | 2.13% |
| Mr. Hands 2x Apple Flavor |
|
117 | 62.23% |
| War Horse |
|
11 | 5.85% |
| Mr. Hands |
|
54 | 28.72% |
| Total: | 188 votes | ||
|
Professor Beetus posted:Both of them have been linked in the OP pretty much since they were posted. Fritz’s is linked; mine are not. You have a link to the antivaxx bookshelf project, which is a separate thing I haven’t developed yet.
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2021 15:23
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 16:19 |
|
|
Evis posted:Does your government not have a centralized system to keep track of that, if not at the federal level at the provincial or state level? They do at the state level and they typed my name in wrong so I hope that's never a big deal
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2021 15:25
|
|
|
cr0y posted:FWIW, I don't fault anyone for scamming their way into boosters but if the day comes that we do digital passports or something and you have to prove your vaccination level I am just going to say "Ya I had a booster, I lied my way into it because I don't want covid, sorry, here is the relevant paperwork, please update my records". poll plane variant posted:They do at the state level and they typed my name in wrong so I hope that's never a big deal I'm glad we caught the error in our county's records with my wife's vaccination records and fixed it ourselves. They had her birthday wrong on one of the shots, so it went into the database as two separate people. e: the best part is I just found who I thought was the right person on the county health department's website, emailed them, and had them change someone else's vaccination records with no authorization or really any sort of check, lol
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2021 15:27
|
|
|
The Merck pill news is awesome. If I can just pop a couple of pills after getting infected, as a vaccinated person, and basically not have any chance at all of hospitalization or severe covid well that's pretty much the key to getting back to the normal world. We live in dark times, but we also live in miraculous times.
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2021 15:55
|
|
|
quote:They do at the state level and they typed my name in wrong so I hope that's never a big deal I think that's a stealth benefit of public healthcare. Ontario's healthcare record keeping systems completely suck as well (even getting records between specialists and GPs is a nightmare of herding various people to send literal faxes between offices), but at the very least you can count on any residents having a number that can be verified (and healthcare providers have gotten really good at verifying them since they don't get paid otherwise), and for vaccinations at least there's a pretty solid central database. I can't imagine how you would even start to approach a vaccine passport in the U.S. enki42 fucked around with this message at 16:27 on Oct 1, 2021 |
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2021 15:55
|
|
|
Evis posted:Does your government not have a centralized system to keep track of that, if not at the federal level at the provincial or state level? There are two Walgreens in my town. When I got my booster last week, I asked them for an updated card because of course I'd lost mine somewhere. They gave me a new card with just the booster info on it and told me they couldn't fill out the rest for me because I'd gotten my original shots at the other Walgreens and they'd never "scanned in my info" so they couldn't confirm the dates. I thought that was a pretty good encapsulation of where we are, as a country
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2021 16:21
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:Fritz’s is linked; mine are not. You have a link to the antivaxx bookshelf project, which is a separate thing I haven’t developed yet. If you drop a link to your post, I'll slot it in and update the OP again. I think I'll be looking at things I can start rotating out or trimming as well.
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2021 17:40
|
|
|
How are u posted:The Merck pill news is awesome. If I can just pop a couple of pills after getting infected, as a vaccinated person, and basically not have any chance at all of hospitalization or severe covid well that's pretty much the key to getting back to the normal world.
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2021 17:52
|
|
|
It's great news but I don't think it'll save the antivax idiots, since that would require they admit they have COVID and get treatment within a handful of days. Cost is also a factor. It probably won't be something you can afford to just have laying around if it tracks with similar drugs (Remdesivir is like $2-3k a treatment if it's not subsidized).
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2021 18:06
|
|
|
How are u posted:The Merck pill news is awesome. If I can just pop a couple of pills after getting infected, as a vaccinated person, and basically not have any chance at all of hospitalization or severe covid well that's pretty much the key to getting back to the normal world. Definitely a useful tool in the toolbox if it pans out, but not exactly a cure, either. Especially if (as noted above), the cost is high.
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2021 18:23
|
|
|
quote:In June, Merck entered into an agreement to supply the U.S. government 1.7 million courses of the drug for $1.2 billion, or $700 a course. Cool that will last 2 weeks given the current case average.
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2021 18:32
|
|
|
A decent chunk of the antivaxxers have always thought COVID was real but the threat was overblown or that it was effectively treated by the medical quack cure de jour, e.g. HCQ or Ivermectin or z-packs. Recently, they've largely embraced the monoclonals. So I think most of them will, when faced with the reality of a positive COVID test, take a pill that doesn't ALTER THEIR DNA!!!!!
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2021 18:46
|
|
|
brugroffil posted:A decent chunk of the antivaxxers have always thought COVID was real but the threat was overblown or that it was effectively treated by the medical quack cure de jour, e.g. HCQ or Ivermectin or z-packs. Recently, they've largely embraced the monoclonals. So I think most of them will, when faced with the reality of a positive COVID test, take a pill that doesn't ALTER THEIR DNA!!!!! Yep that's my thought too. For idiot, uncurious, low info people the idea of taking a pill is super normal and palatable, while ~mRNA tech~ remains scary and totally developed too fast, maaan.
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2021 18:51
|
|
|
Tibeerius posted:For fuller context on the bolded part (for everyone reading this, not just the OP), the pill reduced the rate of hospitalization or death from 14.1% to to 7.3%. On the flip side the study's primary metric was combined "hospitalization or death" but they do note that in the trial no one at all taking the drug died. All 8 deaths were on the placebo side. (I think they picked a metric to try and make the drug look better than it was but ended up with a better drug than they expected and ended up making it look worse)
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2021 18:51
|
|
|
Pills are not injections. that will be the extent of the thought process.
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2021 18:54
|
|
|
Mr Luxury Yacht posted:Cost is also a factor. It probably won't be something you can afford to just have laying around if it tracks with similar drugs (Remdesivir is like $2-3k a treatment if it's not subsidized). speak for yourself, I will absolutely liquidate magic cards to have magic covid pills on hand. I also keep broad and narrow spectrum antibiotics, specific antivirals, myriad painkillers and other psychotropics on hand. You can never be too sure!
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2021 19:07
|
|
|
How are u posted:The Merck pill news is awesome. If I can just pop a couple of pills after getting infected, as a vaccinated person, and basically not have any chance at all of hospitalization or severe covid well that's pretty much the key to getting back to the normal world. I'd like to see a layman accessible analysis of the likelihood of mutations that render mulnupiravir ineffective. I tried to go down a rabbit hole of scientific papers and found one that seems to imply that they aren't likely but the references for the claims are way over my head. The TWiV host seems to think resistant variants are fairly likely to develop for antivirals in general unless they're used in a cocktail. quote:Treatment with molnupiravir failed to induce viral-resistance mutations, which suggests a high genetic barrier to immune evasion6,7. Notably, in contrast to the antiviral nucleoside analogs fluorouracil (5-FU) and ribavarin11,12,13, molnupiravir is resistant to the proofreading exoribonuclease encoded by coronaviruses7, which makes it an attractive target for further development. I don't know what they're referring to as immune evasion here since it seems the human immune system isn't involved in the equation. It's almost like they're referring to the virus' proofreading enzyme as an immune system. Again, way over my head. I would love to hear a TWiV or Immune about it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2021 19:11
|
|
|
Letmebefrank posted:Luckily there are truly high level peer reviewed stuff available: Yes, peer review is not perfect but this example doesn't at all invalidate it. You need to glance at the credibility of the journal a work is published in as well as the authors, etc. This is all in my little how-to linked in the OP. Here's where the article you link was published: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medical_Hypotheses Fritz the Horse fucked around with this message at 19:33 on Oct 1, 2021 |
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2021 19:28
|
|
|
Fritz the Horse posted:
lol. quote:The most widely cited article[16] from Medical Hypotheses was published in 1991 by Ronald S. Smith in which he proposed the macrophage theory of depression as an alternative to the monoamine theory of depression.[17][18][19] Other famous articles featured in the journal include the proposal from Jarl Flensmark of Malmö, Sweden, that schizophrenia may be caused by wearing heeled shoes,[20] and an article from Svetlana Komarova of McGill University positing that facial hair may play a role in preventing the development of cancer.[21]
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2021 20:02
|
|
|
One thing to be aware of if you're viewing all of this from the outside is to straight up not pursue information about recent studies. The scientific apparatus is supposed to work through critical peer review and interpretation of multiple studies of the same subject over time, and "a recent study" coverage in the general press is never, ever going to give you that, even in a situation where the information environment isn't as contaminated as this one. There is not really a substitute for the level of literacy and individual nuance and expertise that comes with directly reading a study and learning the subject. You need to become somewhat comfortable with uncertainty, because no matter how smart you are, uncertainty is the basic nature of the situation.Professor Beetus posted:If you drop a link to your post, I'll slot it in and update the OP again. I think I'll be looking at things I can start rotating out or trimming as well. Frankensteining the below list of effortposts from a previous post where I had done the same: Caveats about which sources of science to trust: https://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3915397&userid=198104#post503908856 How to read science: https://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3915397&userid=198104&perpage=40&pagenumber=2#post504891860 About unhealthy relationships to information and covid: https://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?noseen=0&threadid=3915397&pagenumber=504&perpage=40#post504210939 Detailed, nonexhaustive explanation of conspiracy theories and takedown of one main root of the Wuhan lab conspiracy: https://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3915397&userid=198104&perpage=40&pagenumber=7#post514737951 Discendo Vox posted:Here are some useful basic sources on regulatory and monitoring issues and covid:
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2021 20:25
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:On the flip side the study's primary metric was combined "hospitalization or death" but they do note that in the trial no one at all taking the drug died. All 8 deaths were on the placebo side. those are common primary outcomes because they're "hard & fast". The utility of focusing on these in particular is debatable, of course
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2021 00:16
|
|
|
I see Sotomayor told the ny teachers against vaccines to pound sand. Great news as you can get rid of the nutjobs.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2021 00:26
|
|
|
lil poopendorfer posted:those are common primary outcomes because they're "hard & fast". The utility of focusing on these in particular is debatable, of course Yeah, it's a perfectly fine metric, I am just sure someone over there is really kicking themselves they didn't swing for the fences more on their primary measurement.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2021 00:41
|
|
|
https://laist.com/news/education/covid-19-pandemic-student-enrollment-decline-los-angeles-lausdquote:The Los Angeles Unified School District has some 27,000 fewer students enrolled this year than last year, according to new data presented to the district's board of education this week. The enrollment decline is about three times the annual decline seen in years prior to the pandemic. Yeah who could have imagined throwing kids into a meatgrinder would be unpopular
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2021 01:13
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:On the flip side the study's primary metric was combined "hospitalization or death" but they do note that in the trial no one at all taking the drug died. All 8 deaths were on the placebo side. I haven't been able to find the full protocol for this phase 2/3 study, but here's my guess as to why they are using "hospitalization or death" as the reported endpoint: - Participants were outpatients so they weren't being constantly monitored for other clinical metrics of severity, so hospitalization is used as an adequate proxy for severe disease. - Significantly reducing the likelihood hospitalization would be sufficient alone to justify use (both as a proxy for "severe disease" and as measure of health resource utilization). Since hospitalization is much more common that death, a smaller sample size is necessary to demonstrate significant effect. That means that trial can be faster (and cheaper for the company), and involves less people if it turns out the treatment is a dud. - Hospitalization alone isn't ideal as a severity proxy, though, because it's possible for deaths to occur without hospitalization. Hence "hospitalization or death". Even with their 775 patients, eight deaths in the placebo arm vs zero in the control arm is marginal evidence of any effect on likelihood of death, let alone good evidence for a large effect. It's extremely plausible that reduction in "hospitalization or death" is highly correlated with a reduction in death, so it's a pretty safe bet that it also reduces death, but that's introducing assumptions beyond basic clinical trial analysis.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2021 02:06
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:Yeah, it's a perfectly fine metric, I am just sure someone over there is really kicking themselves they didn't swing for the fences more on their primary measurement. in general, it's a crude metric, one that's overemphasized in medical research. It's been a known issue for a while. Whether or not this applies to this particular study remains to be seen.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2021 02:06
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:Yeah, it's a perfectly fine metric, I am just sure someone over there is really kicking themselves they didn't swing for the fences more on their primary measurement. The biggest issue is that hospitalization and death are relatively rare from a statistical perspective, so it becomes more difficult to draw statistically significant conclusions especially when controlling for other factors. We saw this with some of the early vaccination papers (AZ specifically I believe), where they ended up with massive 95%CIs for some age groups because there simply weren’t enough people in either group meeting that endpoint.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2021 03:41
|
|
|
Fritz the Horse posted:Yes, peer review is not perfect but this example doesn't at all invalidate it. You need to glance at the credibility of the journal a work is published in as well as the authors, etc. This is all in my little how-to linked in the OP. You are completely right, this is one of the Elseviers, well... more non traditional journals. I thought the quality of the paper (and journal) was apparent from the quotes.. anyhow fair point. Even some more "respected" journals (ie. journals I publish in) sometimes let crap through. The better ones are just not so likely. I have started to get immediate suspicion on any Elsevier publication which I do not know well. I am not working in medical science, so I think all of them are thus suspect 
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2021 07:21
|
|
|
Letmebefrank posted:Even some more "respected" journals (ie. journals I publish in) sometimes let crap through. Well yeah you just said that they publish your stuff. Just kidding.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2021 08:58
|
|
|
TheSlutPit posted:The biggest issue is that hospitalization and death are relatively rare from a statistical perspective, so it becomes more difficult to draw statistically significant conclusions especially when controlling for other factors. We saw this with some of the early vaccination papers (AZ specifically I believe), where they ended up with massive 95%CIs for some age groups because there simply weren’t enough people in either group meeting that endpoint. That, also it’s more difficult to show causality on an outcome that’s 30 days out. Also, very few crucial medicines/treatments in critical care have actually been shown to demonstrate mortality benefit even though they are necessary. Stuff like vasoactive meds and blood transfusions
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2021 12:15
|
|
|
How are u posted:The Merck pill news is awesome. If I can just pop a couple of pills after getting infected, as a vaccinated person, and basically not have any chance at all of hospitalization or severe covid well that's pretty much the key to getting back to the normal world. You're almost definitely not going to be able to just constantly take it prophylactically. I also don't think it's possible to evaluate the possible side effects based on the type of study they announced the results from (a small study of people who already had covid and were at high risk), especially when the main concern is that it might increase your risk of cancer down the line.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2021 13:25
|
|
|
Given the cost, I doubt it’s something anyone aside from the rich will keep on hand in their medicine cabinet.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2021 13:59
|
|
|
That medication is in a weird spot really. It's definitely good if it turns out to halve hospitalizations but if it's too expensive to just keep in the cabinet then people are having to go out and get the medication when they are sick with COVID when ideally you want them and their household to stay home. I'd imagine it would be a net gain in terms of load on the medical system, but it would probably increase people leaving isolation to visit clinics or ERs to get the medication.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2021 14:25
|
|
|
If you think the American response to a drug that halves hospitalization isn’t to allow twice as many infections per day before imposing NPIs then you haven’t been paying attention. Hospitals will still be brimming. The threat of healthcare collapse is the only thing keeping Covid in check
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2021 14:31
|
|
|
It's basically cheaper and easier monoclonal
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2021 14:37
|
|
|
Seems like the big deal with this is that it doesn't depend on your immune system. For a young healthy person the vaccine really does reduce your risk of hospitalization or death astronomically, but not everyone is young or healthy and this drug being a drug that acts directly on the virus instead of on the patient's body is a big deal for that. Like this probably isn't going to super change the risk of someone who is already at low risk, but it potentially would be a huge deal for someone who until now was totally unprotected. If you are some random guy you probably won't keep this randomly in your medicine cabinet, but if you have leukemia or are in a nursing home that becomes very reasonable because you know you are at high risk and know that vaccination is less likely to protect you.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2021 15:03
|
|
|
I'm getting pretty fed up with this covid-19 stuff, anyone else?
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2021 15:08
|
|
|
Puppy Galaxy posted:I'm getting pretty fed up with this covid-19 stuff, anyone else? Yeah, honestly it’s really bad OP. Mental health was used as an excuse to avoid restrictions and lockdowns but I don’t think anyone (in power) ever really reckoned with the mental health impacts of a deadly two-year pandemic. Economic impact was used as an excuse to avoid lockdowns and restrictions but I don’t think anyone (in power) ever reckoned with the economic impacts of a deadly two-year pandemic. It’s poo poo all around, and I see people struggling, and yet we still refuse to stop digging this hole and start trying to climb out.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2021 15:13
|
|
|
Given the fact that something like 10% of severe Covid patients have a rare genetic marker leading to interferon deficiency, I think using the term “young and healthy” as “safe from Covid” is inappropriate.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2021 15:23
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 16:19 |
|
|
PT6A posted:Yeah, honestly it’s really bad OP. I genuinely don't see a way out at this point.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2021 15:32
|
|