Phx-Suns.Net

Cap wrote: ↑

Sat Jun 06, 2020 1:38 pm

specialsauce wrote: ↑

Sat Jun 06, 2020 11:36 am

It’s really disappointing that two hydroxychloroquine studies were retracted from NEJM and Lancet.

Why were they retracted?

specialsauce wrote: ↑

Sat Jun 06, 2020 1:46 pm

Cap wrote: ↑

Sat Jun 06, 2020 1:38 pm

specialsauce wrote: ↑

Sat Jun 06, 2020 11:36 am

It’s really disappointing that two hydroxychloroquine studies were retracted from NEJM and Lancet.

Why were they retracted?

The database that they used to run their analysis was uhh....not real?

Completely appropriately retracted. Really upsetting. This is why it’s so important not to rush to conclusions with all these studies being pushed out. They all need to be validated with results that are able to be reciprocated before we make real definitive practice changes.

Indy wrote: ↑

Mon Jun 08, 2020 7:31 am

specialsauce wrote: ↑

Sat Jun 06, 2020 1:46 pm

Cap wrote: ↑

Sat Jun 06, 2020 1:38 pm

specialsauce wrote: ↑

Sat Jun 06, 2020 11:36 am

It’s really disappointing that two hydroxychloroquine studies were retracted from NEJM and Lancet.

Why were they retracted?

The database that they used to run their analysis was uhh....not real?

Completely appropriately retracted. Really upsetting. This is why it’s so important not to rush to conclusions with all these studies being pushed out. They all need to be validated with results that are able to be reciprocated before we make real definitive practice changes.

I thought I read it was a proprietary database so they were not going to share it openly, but were happy to have independent verification done. But that was a week ago. Were they lying?

Cap wrote: ↑

Mon Jun 08, 2020 7:55 am

https://www.12news.com/article/news/hea ... fc7c1275b9

Mori Chu wrote: ↑

Tue Jun 09, 2020 7:08 am

One study finds that, far from being useless, the covid lockdowns may have saved us from 60 million infections and countless lost lives. Berkeley's Global Policy Lab director says, "I don’t think any human endeavor has ever saved so many lives in such a short period of time."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/2 ... udy-finds/

Mori Chu wrote: ↑

Tue Jun 09, 2020 7:08 am

One study finds that, far from being useless, the covid lockdowns may have saved us from 60 million infections and countless lost lives. Berkeley's Global Policy Lab director says, "I don’t think any human endeavor has ever saved so many lives in such a short period of time."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/2 ... udy-finds/

Jennifer Nuzzo, an epidemiologist at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health’s Center for Health Security, said in an email that these new reports show the effectiveness of shutdowns. But she said the economic and social harms of these efforts are considerable, and so societies at this point need to transition to a more focused strategy built around testing, contact tracing and isolation of covid-19 patients.

Nuzzo, who was not involved in either of the two studies, added that the ultimate impact of the shutdowns depends on what happens next: “The lockdowns were a pause button, not a cure,” she said. “Any reduction in the occurrence of cases or deaths is temporary.”

JeremyG wrote: ↑

Wed Jun 10, 2020 3:06 pm

Mori Chu wrote: ↑

Tue Jun 09, 2020 7:08 am

One study finds that, far from being useless, the covid lockdowns may have saved us from 60 million infections and countless lost lives. Berkeley's Global Policy Lab director says, "I don’t think any human endeavor has ever saved so many lives in such a short period of time."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/2 ... udy-finds/

Important quote from the article:

Jennifer Nuzzo, an epidemiologist at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health’s Center for Health Security, said in an email that these new reports show the effectiveness of shutdowns. But she said the economic and social harms of these efforts are considerable, and so societies at this point need to transition to a more focused strategy built around testing, contact tracing and isolation of covid-19 patients.

Nuzzo, who was not involved in either of the two studies, added that the ultimate impact of the shutdowns depends on what happens next: “The lockdowns were a pause button, not a cure,” she said. “Any reduction in the occurrence of cases or deaths is temporary.”

In other words, since the virus is still around and hasn’t magically disappeared, then once you reopen you will still see a spike and get the same number of cases (unless you have already had a huge number of cases and reached a level of herd immunity already, such as in NY).

In other words, we destroyed the economy (causing countless deaths) for basically nothing (except perhaps avoiding some issues of overcrowding hospitals).

The virus can’t just disappear due to a quarantine unless you had a complete and total 100% quarantine (and then everyone would die). The virus can’t go away if essential services are still open and people are still living together and still going to the grocery store, pharmacy, doctors offices/hospitals, etc.

What Nuzzo says about it only being a “pause button” is just plain old logic. Like I said before, at best it slows the spread, it doesn’t reduce the eventual infections.

specialsauce wrote: ↑

Wed Jun 10, 2020 8:05 pm

JeremyG wrote: ↑

Wed Jun 10, 2020 3:06 pm

Mori Chu wrote: ↑

Tue Jun 09, 2020 7:08 am

One study finds that, far from being useless, the covid lockdowns may have saved us from 60 million infections and countless lost lives. Berkeley's Global Policy Lab director says, "I don’t think any human endeavor has ever saved so many lives in such a short period of time."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/2 ... udy-finds/

Important quote from the article:

Jennifer Nuzzo, an epidemiologist at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health’s Center for Health Security, said in an email that these new reports show the effectiveness of shutdowns. But she said the economic and social harms of these efforts are considerable, and so societies at this point need to transition to a more focused strategy built around testing, contact tracing and isolation of covid-19 patients.

Nuzzo, who was not involved in either of the two studies, added that the ultimate impact of the shutdowns depends on what happens next: “The lockdowns were a pause button, not a cure,” she said. “Any reduction in the occurrence of cases or deaths is temporary.”

In other words, since the virus is still around and hasn’t magically disappeared, then once you reopen you will still see a spike and get the same number of cases (unless you have already had a huge number of cases and reached a level of herd immunity already, such as in NY).

In other words, we destroyed the economy (causing countless deaths) for basically nothing (except perhaps avoiding some issues of overcrowding hospitals).

The virus can’t just disappear due to a quarantine unless you had a complete and total 100% quarantine (and then everyone would die). The virus can’t go away if essential services are still open and people are still living together and still going to the grocery store, pharmacy, doctors offices/hospitals, etc.

What Nuzzo says about it only being a “pause button” is just plain old logic. Like I said before, at best it slows the spread, it doesn’t reduce the eventual infections.

Jeremy is partially correct. When you say we shut down the country for basically nothing, it shows that you were not involved in the healthcare side of it and you really do not have the burden or privilege to be speaking about it. The shut down was never meant to eradicate disease- it saved lives because it gave us time to obtain testing and PPE. Because we could not protect ourselves , OR diagnose appropriately , and we had no idea how to manage the disease.

The true purpose now is to flatten the curve, yes it will only delay cases. If we don’t want another shut down with AZ surging people need to get more serious about common sense measures to slow the spread and flatten the curve including masks, distancing, avoiding mass gatherings. Jeremy- I need to know this. How do you feel about masks?

The politicizing of masks and social distancing is one of the biggest embarrassments in recent American history.

Mori Chu wrote: ↑

Wed Jun 10, 2020 3:19 pm

You seem determined to misinterpret every article or study about COVID-19. That quote you bolded doesn't mean that the quarantine was useless. It means that if we just go back to normal now without caution and behavior change, the virus will come right back just as strongly and will still kill millions. If we take great care to reduce our risk of infection/spread after reopening, the total infections will be much less than if we had tried to ignore the virus and behave normally.

JeremyG wrote: ↑

Wed Jun 10, 2020 10:02 pm

specialsauce wrote: ↑

Wed Jun 10, 2020 8:05 pm

JeremyG wrote: ↑

Wed Jun 10, 2020 3:06 pm

Mori Chu wrote: ↑

Tue Jun 09, 2020 7:08 am

One study finds that, far from being useless, the covid lockdowns may have saved us from 60 million infections and countless lost lives. Berkeley's Global Policy Lab director says, "I don’t think any human endeavor has ever saved so many lives in such a short period of time."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/2 ... udy-finds/

Important quote from the article:

Jennifer Nuzzo, an epidemiologist at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health’s Center for Health Security, said in an email that these new reports show the effectiveness of shutdowns. But she said the economic and social harms of these efforts are considerable, and so societies at this point need to transition to a more focused strategy built around testing, contact tracing and isolation of covid-19 patients.

Nuzzo, who was not involved in either of the two studies, added that the ultimate impact of the shutdowns depends on what happens next: “The lockdowns were a pause button, not a cure,” she said. “Any reduction in the occurrence of cases or deaths is temporary.”

In other words, since the virus is still around and hasn’t magically disappeared, then once you reopen you will still see a spike and get the same number of cases (unless you have already had a huge number of cases and reached a level of herd immunity already, such as in NY).

In other words, we destroyed the economy (causing countless deaths) for basically nothing (except perhaps avoiding some issues of overcrowding hospitals).

The virus can’t just disappear due to a quarantine unless you had a complete and total 100% quarantine (and then everyone would die). The virus can’t go away if essential services are still open and people are still living together and still going to the grocery store, pharmacy, doctors offices/hospitals, etc.

What Nuzzo says about it only being a “pause button” is just plain old logic. Like I said before, at best it slows the spread, it doesn’t reduce the eventual infections.

Jeremy is partially correct. When you say we shut down the country for basically nothing, it shows that you were not involved in the healthcare side of it and you really do not have the burden or privilege to be speaking about it. The shut down was never meant to eradicate disease- it saved lives because it gave us time to obtain testing and PPE. Because we could not protect ourselves , OR diagnose appropriately , and we had no idea how to manage the disease.

The true purpose now is to flatten the curve, yes it will only delay cases. If we don’t want another shut down with AZ surging people need to get more serious about common sense measures to slow the spread and flatten the curve including masks, distancing, avoiding mass gatherings. Jeremy- I need to know this. How do you feel about masks?

The politicizing of masks and social distancing is one of the biggest embarrassments in recent American history.

I didn't know that freedom of speech now needs a "privilege to be speaking."

You say it saved lives, but did it kill more than it saved?

I've seen conflicting studies on the effectiveness of non-N95 masks for COVID. But that is irrelevant if people are not using them correctly. Do you really think most Americans are carefully following these lists of Do's and Don'ts? https://www.who.int/emergencies/disease ... -use-masks The most likely scenario, from what I have observed, is that most people, especially those working long shifts (in restaurants, etc.) are cross-contaminating by touching their masks (especially while using gloves). Not only this, but masks can also cause health issues (due to re-breathing in CO2, etc.), including also becoming a breeding ground for viruses. Also, many people are unable to safely wear masks due to underlying health conditions, and I am afraid the summer heat (especially in AZ) could really cause problems for people wearing masks.

I don't believe mask-wearing should be mandated (since when is forced veiling acceptable?), and if people choose to do so they need to at least make sure they are wearing them correctly.

specialsauce wrote: ↑

Thu Jun 11, 2020 3:31 pm