johnh wrote:
I got frustrated by the standard epidemiological models
Most of these guys have to justify their jobs. Common sense be damned.
You had two cruise ships who had infection early on when the pandemic started. Both were quarantined. The People on board the crew mostly age below 40 the passengers mostly > than 60. Here is a closed cell or isolated laboratory from which one can draw numbers.
Did any of the brainiacs study the results of the infection rate on the ships? The death Rate? Did they use that laboratory to give us some useful numbers? Now understand this was before we had any idea of which therapeutics would work. Before we had the study of HCQS Zn and Azithromycin. Before we had information about Pulmicort, Budesonide or Clorthromycin breathing treatments.
The sad thing is that this disease has been so politicized that anyone (Drs) who want explain their findings, are shut down by Fakebook Twitter and Youtube. Even google puts their thumb on what they consider is acceptable information. Look at the White Coats symposium. They disappeared from MSM. Yet it was a scientific meeting of hundreds of Drs exchanging ideas and results. The fascists that run the media shut down any information about it.
Did any of the brainiacs study the results of the infection rate on the ships? The death Rate? Did they use that laboratory to give us some useful numbers?
Yes, yes and yes. If you search on Google Scholar you will find some papers.
After reviewing this paper the one thing you will come away with is the 1% death rate which vindicates my earlier statements about the lethality of the virus.
With that said, reviewing the paper in more detail, it creates a lot of questions due to some critical omissions. If they had given any information about the crew, maybe the public heath officials might have realized early on that it was the elderly that are more at risk. By omitting the crew in the results of the study it fatally flawed this paper.
https://publichealth.jmir.org/2020/2/e18821/
That’s a bit of a straw man. We always knew that the CFR is much higher in older age groups. Secondly, the paper is about “Preparation for Quarantine on the Cruise Ship Diamond Princess in Japan due to COVID-19” rather than an epidemiological study.
If you use google scholar as I suggested and typed in COVID Diamond Princess you will find at least 30-40 papers about COVID on the Diamond Princess. Many of them are epidemiological studies. So why pick a paper about something different and complain that it doesn’t discuss the epidemiology in sufficient detail?
Deaths are merely the tip of the iceberg. There are far more people – according to some recent papers – that are showing cardiac damage from even mild cases of the disease.
If you want to retain your medical, you definitely don’t want to get exposed to COVID, it would seem.
Came across this today, interesting read but probably more for the doc’s we have here in the forum.
alioth wrote:
Deaths are merely the tip of the iceberg. There are far more people – according to some recent papers – that are showing cardiac damage from even mild cases of the disease.
https://twitter.com/MJAckermanMDPhD/status/1301599183544160263
Michael J. Ackerman MD,PhD
@MJAckermanMDPhD
Unfortunately, it is deja vu all over again. I last tossed down the physician’s RED FLAG & cried FOUL on this #COVID19 #myocarditis issue on August 11th and now forced to do it again. There is no way that 30-35% of #Athletes with COVID19 have myocarditis.
https://twitter.com/andrewbostom/status/1301857021000585217
1/ C19 myocarditis panic porn in sobering flu perspective: “Studies have found that ~10% of otherwise healthy patients who become infected with influenza will develop inflammation of the heart known as myocarditis” https://newspapers.com/image/245147921
https://twitter.com/BallouxFrancois/status/1301832576307523584
Prof Francois Balloux
@BallouxFrancois
The lack of evidence for the ‘1/3 of athletes develop myocarditis’ saga is intriguing. Besides rumours, it seems to be based just on a single case, Eduardo Rodriguez (Red Sox), who’s been diagnosed with mild, reversible symptoms, possibly #COVID19 related.
Mooney_Driver wrote:
Came across this today, interesting read but probably more for the doc’s we have here in the forum.
I wonder where you may have found that?
Mooney_Driver wrote:
Came across this today, interesting read but probably more for the doc’s we have here in the forum.
Thank you for linking this, very interesting read.
hmng wrote:
The lack of evidence for the ‘1/3 of athletes develop myocarditis’ saga is intriguing. Besides rumours, it seems to be based just on a single case, Eduardo Rodriguez (Red Sox), who’s been diagnosed with mild, reversible symptoms, possibly #COVID19 related.
Myocarditis is a rare complication of a large number of previously existing viruses. The coronavirus family, even the ones that only cause a cold usually, are long since known to cause it, though never on the scale discussed for SARS-CoV2. It was always an unlikely claim that a large number of patients develops myocarditis. Even if so, most of it would reverse to normal within weeks.
