Please wait...
0 files
thread: "@remap_cap
is proud to announce the findings of IL-6 blockade in critically ill patients with #COVID19.
https://medrxiv.org/cgi/content/short/2021.01.07.21249390v1 (1/10)"
https://twitter.com/remap_cap/status/1347317228815806466
This one is different. I've had a few really bad fews, and also had adult Chicken Pox at 45. Swam through all of them.
This one... I think *I* should be careful. I've got a pre-existing condition that seems very vulnerable to the way *this* virus attacks. I think we need more *honesty*. I should be afraid. You probably shoulnd't. Wouldn't that be better? But instead, they use fear as a political wedge and leverage. So you don't know, and I don't, either. Because if you and I get it and you live and I die, that is fuel for their political fire.
Fri Jan 08 2021 08:26:07 EST from Nurb432Just like regular flu or common cold. or most any other ailment. People react differently.
The fact that the % of severe reactions is so low, goes to show you about the overreaction that has been forced upon us. Sure, dont be stupid and use some common sense, just like you should due during a normal flu season anyway, but you dont hide in your house in fear and shut down the world. Will we lose a few people anyway? ya, but we do that with everything else too. Its just part of life, there are no guarantees.
Thu Jan 07 2021 22:03:49 EST from LoanSharkI don't get this virus.
Right. I mean it's kinda crazy how it affects some people not at all, and others brutally.
A friend from the Portland area had "antibiotic resistent pneumonia, probably viral" with multiple ground glass opacities throughout the month of February. Which initially, people thought that couldn't have been covid because of the timing. It was brutal for him. I spoke to him a little about some symptom details details afterward, and I do think it was covid. He had to get on a plane to go see his sick parents. Me: "It was covid. You're immune. Focus on your folks."
I know of perhaps 10 people that have had it personally. ( not friend of a friend sort of event but real people i really have talked to or witnessed )
2 went into ICU due to other major conditions. In their case i suspect any illness would have pushed them over the edge. They were a disaster just waiting to happen. One of them drug it out and refused to go get help when he first got sick. Could have avoided ICU that way i would imagine.
1 also went to ICU within a couple of days of falling ill. i dont think he had anything underlying. After ventilator for a week, then drugs and stuff for perhaps 3, he was back to normal. Other than being weak from being in bed so long of course. Month later, never even knew it happened. This back in march, during the height of 'wtf is going on'
The rest were like me and wife, felt like poo for a couple of weeks then got on with life.
2021-01-09 00:17 from ParanoidDelusions
This one is different. I've had a few really bad fews, and also had
adult Chicken Pox at 45. Swam through all of them.
I have prehypertension or stage 1 hypertension. Fluctuate above and below (mostly above tbh) the 140/90 mark, but not on meds.
Thing is, the virus goes straight for ACE2 receptors and with all these findings--well I'm sure you've read them, no need for me to recap. I did have some BP spikes and tachycardia. My friend from the PDX area who I mentioned, was having continued BP spikes a couple months after recovery. That was why I said to him, "I think it was covid."
Talked to my aunt. She and her husband have recovered now. Whew. She had it pretty bad, he had it kinda mild. She will likely get the vaccine soon-ish, works in a hospital.
2021-01-10 09:03 from LoanShark
Talked to my aunt. She and her husband have recovered now. Whew. She
had it pretty bad, he had it kinda mild. She will likely get the
vaccine soon-ish, works in a hospital.
That is great news.
I have heard some family members got it recently, but so far they are fine.
https://twitter.com/BallouxFrancois/status/1348707529220628489
Thread from @BallouxFrancois, geneticist who I think still has the respect of "both sides."
His comment: "Interesting preprint, which raises more questions than it solves. In particular, why did it take >1 year for more transmissible lineages to evolve? Those mutations have been around for many months (E484K was first observed in March and N501Y in April).
The original comment: "While the single 501Y mutations causes a ~2.5x higher affinity to Ace2, the double mutation results in a ~13x higher affinity to Ace2 compared to the WT version. https://biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.01.06.425392v1.full.pdf
3/n"
Read thread for the rest.
Tweet> "I believe Covid is older than is generally accepted"
Reply> "Every organism or virus currently around is evolutionary 'old', as we can always find related taxa. Though, the most recent common ancestor of all #SARSCoV2 isolates we've sampled dates back to ~October 2019."
https://twitter.com/BallouxFrancois/status/1348716416351039488
The original tweet probably meant, "I think Covid has been transferring among human populations earlier than the conventional wisdom accepts."
Lots of people think this.
Twitter encourages people to say things briefly and hope people will parse the intention correctly, and they hardly ever do. It is one of the reasons Twitter sucks.
Mon Jan 11 2021 16:19:30 EST from LoanShark
Tweet> "I believe Covid is older than is generally accepted"
Reply> "Every organism or virus currently around is evolutionary 'old', as we can always find related taxa. Though, the most recent common ancestor of all #SARSCoV2 isolates we've sampled dates back to ~October 2019."
https://twitter.com/BallouxFrancois/status/1348716416351039488
Good for her.
Tho if she had it, shes got antibodies already.
TSun Jan 10 2021 09:03:13 EST from LoanShark
Talked to my aunt. She and her husband have recovered now. Whew. She had it pretty bad, he had it kinda mild. She will likely get the vaccine soon-ish, works in a hospital.
2021-01-11 19:06 from ParanoidDelusions
The original tweet probably meant, "I think Covid has been
transferring among human populations earlier than the conventional
wisdom accepts."
clearly it did. If the common ancestor dates to Oct19 using the standard models, however, that points to Oct19 as the date that it jumped species.
Sun Jan 10 2021 09:03:13 AM EST from LoanShark
Talked to my aunt. She and her husband have recovered now. Whew. She had it pretty bad, he had it kinda mild. She will likely get the vaccine soon-ish, works in a hospital.
Once you have it you are not immune, you would need to get the vaccine?
Moderna thinks its vaccine will protect against the coronavirus for at least a year.
https://www.cnn.com/2021/01/12/health/moderna-covid-vaccine-protection/index.html
I thought it would be a long term solution.
Imagine you can sell everyone a seasonal flu shot, in the WORLD every year...
Or you can cure it once.
I'm not sure I trust that the science is so good that they can pinpoint the precise DATE when Covid-19 jumped from wherever it originated to humanity.
I would *guess* that "It looks like around October 19th is our best guess, but it could have been months earlier, or even a little later, than we believe."
But even if it was October 19th - That still works within the window of when I suspect it was already travelling through the Western United States.
Reaching as far West as Arizona by the late November.
Tue Jan 12 2021 15:02:01 EST from zooerModerna thinks its vaccine will protect against the coronavirus for at least a year.
https://www.cnn.com/2021/01/12/health/moderna-covid-vaccine-protection/index.html
I thought it would be a long term solution.
Also - they believe the reinfection rate is about 58% right now. 58% of people who had it get re-infected with it.
Last I heard.
Once you have it you are not immune, you would need to get the
vaccine?
that's in question at the moment. I saw an additional study fly by (not as many people involved as the Pfizer post-hoc analysis...)
results where very good though, it was observational study of healthcare workers, maybe ~10,000 uninfected and ~1,000 previously infected? zero reinfections in the previously-infected arm. 2.x% infected in the other arm.
Pfizer data was different. Nonzero reinfections. Seems to me that you get more accurate odds ratios that way...
2021-01-12 16:01 from ParanoidDelusions
Also - they believe the reinfection rate is about 58% right now. 58%
of people who had it get re-infected with it.
Last I heard.
I posted something like that based on the Pfizer data. Think about the Poisson distribution and odds ratios. You get X number of infections in the no-prior-infections, placebo arm of the Pfizer study. And you get Y number of REinfections in the previously-infected, placebo arm of the study. If X and Y are such that prior infection prevented 58% of the reinfections that would otherwise have occurred in the same amount of time (which is where it relates to the Poisson distribution), then was it fair for me to say "57 or 58% effective?" See what I mean?
wish I could be certain which study I was looking at this morning. The David Eyre study pops up a lot when I google right now. Doesn't look quite the same, different graphics in this version. But the numbers look similar.
The problem with the David Eyre study is it just compared two groups by antibody status. But we know there's a substantial minority of people (me included) who lose antibodies quickly after convalescence
I appreciate that I've fooled you into thinking I am capable of following along when you get this deep.
But I'm over here going...
Oh wait... I read it again for comprehension - and I get what you're saying...
I mean, it is a possible conclusion. Let me put it this way - I filed it away and said, "I'm going to proceed as if it IS true that infection MAY only grant partial immunity."
The problem with all the research right now is it hasn't been replicated enough in independent studies.
I also think the partisan split on the virus and how to respond to it is making the science far more imperfect than if there wasn't a partisan split on the issue. If someone comes up with a study that doesn't support the Left agenda on Covid-19, that study gets ruthlessly torn apart. If the study does support the Left agenda - I feel like everyone accepts it through a far less critical process.
So... I'm assuming that prior infection does not necessarily create complete immunity - and that current studies seem to indicate that reinfection rates are as high as 58% - which is disappointing - but I also believe there may be other factors for why that is that haven't been identified or accounted for.
Tue Jan 12 2021 17:01:33 EST from LoanShark2021-01-12 16:01 from ParanoidDelusions
Also - they believe the reinfection rate is about 58% right now. 58%
of people who had it get re-infected with it.
Last I heard.
I posted something like that based on the Pfizer data. Think about the Poisson distribution and odds ratios. You get X number of infections in the no-prior-infections, placebo arm of the Pfizer study. And you get Y number of REinfections in the previously-infected, placebo arm of the study. If X and Y are such that prior infection prevented 58% of the reinfections that would otherwise have occurred in the same amount of time (which is where it relates to the Poisson distribution), then was it fair for me to say "57 or 58% effective?" See what I mean?