CDC Notifies States, Large Cities To Prepare For Vaccine Distribution As Soon As Late October

[LuvOrlando]

I don't know why you would think it's some red herring and used as a distraction. We've know about different strains, I remember mentioning the D strain months ago, they've been talking about a more infectious strain for months now, the UK studied it as well finding strain there back in Spring and that is the strain the study is discussing made it's way from Europe to parts of here. It's nothing to do with what you want to hear. That's what I was talking about, you can't just use science to suit your viewpoint and use it selectively. They aren't trying to make up some way to go around masks. They studied the results from people's positive results of the genetic makeup of it and happen to see this strain.

If it's not a red herring why do masks come up when it is discussed? Mutation conversations have been around a while and are absolutely valid but sometimes the articles appear to have a slant and are carrying along an undercurrent that says, "Hey look it's not a mask issue, it's a germ thing." I don't like spin in most articles, it comes off as disingenuous.

 

[Jonfw2]

I don't think I'm doing that at all. It seemed as though you were saying that the industry is as pure as new snow and that caution is not deserved. While it's true big business can drive many innovations, such as vaccine development and medicine, to say it's not motivated by profit rings hollow. It's not all that pure, there have been recent offenses where big business has been complicit in exploiting need and fear and that people are justified in being cautious due to the track record.

I know Shkreli wan't part of the medical side of things, but he was capable of driving things in a detrimental way and his influence hurt people. This means there is a gap between caregivers and the cared for that can be occupied by people who do not have the public's interest at heart, the industry doesn't exist in a vacuum.

I absolutely never remotely suggested the industry was as clean as snow. I simply said- correctly- that they have nothing to gain by screwing this up and plenty to lose by doing so.

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

If it's not a red herring why do masks come up when it is discussed? Mutation conversations have been around a while and are absolutely valid but sometimes the articles appear to have a slant and are carrying along an undercurrent that says, "Hey look it's not a mask issue, it's a germ thing." I don't like spin in most articles, it comes off as disingenuous.

Maybe it's the sources you're reading? Nothing I've personally read about this study even mentions masks. The study itself doesn't mention masks. I do understand what you mean about bias and agree it can be prevalent but I tend to look for that and try to identify it as much as possible (I'm sure I miss it from time to time). In this case, finding the Gly614 variant in the genome sequencing is all that they are talking about and it's what I was referring to. To understand the virus better and its adaptability this is pretty important to research what it is doing. I do believe more and more data from around the country should be looked at though too not only for replication of findings but also to see if other areas are experiencing the same strains or not.

 

[LuvOrlando]

The variant has been discussed a lot and I have also been watching it for a long while. Seems doubtful that any conclusions can be reached without being able to drop contact tracing data on top of the infection data. Could be the newer form is more aggressive or it is equally possible that the people who get the newer kind just happened to be super spreaders, really no way to know. Until they can figure out if the volume of variant moving in a population is due to a difference in the actual disease or due to human host behavior it's all just meaningless.

I suppose the thing about the topic that stokes ire is when mutations are mentioned as an alternative reason for increasing cases in a state that has been digging in its heels about prophylactic behaviors.

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

The variant has been discussed a lot and I have also been watching it for a long while. Seems doubtful that any conclusions can be reached without being able to drop contact tracing data on top of the infection data. Could be the newer form is more aggressive or it is equally possible that the people who get the newer kind just happened to be super spreaders, really no way to know. Until they can figure out if the volume of variant moving in a population is due to a difference in the actual disease or due to human host behavior it's all just meaningless.

I suppose the thing about the topic that stokes ire is when mutations are mentioned as an alternative reason for increasing cases in a state that has been digging in its heels about prophylactic behaviors.

With all due respect the conversation appears to be going in circles and I don't know what else I can contribute. I'm going to leave the conversation at that respectfully so please don't take offense at my non-response

 

[Colleen27]

Maybe it's the sources you're reading? Nothing I've personally read about this study even mentions masks. The study itself doesn't mention masks. I do understand what you mean about bias and agree it can be prevalent but I tend to look for that and try to identify it as much as possible (I'm sure I miss it from time to time). In this case, finding the Gly614 variant in the genome sequencing is all that they are talking about and it's what I was referring to. To understand the virus better and its adaptability this is pretty important to research what it is doing. I do believe more and more data from around the country should be looked at though too not only for replication of findings but also to see if other areas are experiencing the same strains or not.

The NY Post and Fox News both headlined their articles about the study something along the lines of "Covid-19 evolving to bypass masks, hand-washing" and used a quote from a researcher that said if the mutation makes it more infectious, the precautions that have worked in the past may become less effective to justify that position.

 

[RamblingMad]

The NY Post and Fox News both headlined their articles about the study something along the lines of "Covid-19 evolving to bypass masks, hand-washing" and used a quote from a researcher that said if the mutation makes it more infectious, the precautions that have worked in the past may become less effective to justify that position.

Both are awful news sources.

Here's the study I mention earlier. It helps you if know how to interpret the data.

https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/pdfs/mm6936a5-H.pdf

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

The NY Post and Fox News both headlined their articles about the study something along the lines of "Covid-19 evolving to bypass masks, hand-washing" and used a quote from a researcher that said if the mutation makes it more infectious, the precautions that have worked in the past may become less effective to justify that position.

That's why I said the news articles I personally read and said the study didn't mention masks. There are definitely sources that don't even bring up anything but discussing the findings which brings back to what sources one is reading.

 

[DCLMP]

My sister who is a nurse will quit, she tells me, as a lot of her nurse friends. They say that now but who knows when it rolls out what they will do.

If you can get Covid 19 after having it already, this shot will be once a year I'm guessing. No lasting immunity.

I predict lawsuits. It may end up in the Supreme Court at some point.

 

[Jonfw2]

According to Johns Hopkins, the positive test rate is the lowest today it's been since mid-June.

https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/testing/individual-states

 

[DLgal]

The NY Post and Fox News both headlined their articles about the study something along the lines of "Covid-19 evolving to bypass masks, hand-washing" and used a quote from a researcher that said if the mutation makes it more infectious, the precautions that have worked in the past may become less effective to justify that position.

I'm sorry, but those claims are just ridiculous. A virus cannot evolve to "bypass" hand washing or mask wearing. The virus isn't physically changing its cell structure or changing size to become smaller. Hand washing will ALWAYS work to inactivate ("kill") coronaviruses. They all have a lipid shell that is susceptible to soap.

This is just dumb media spin.

 

[Jonfw2]

Regeneron has announced very positive results for its antibody cocktail- recovery time reduced by more than half.


Regeneron says its Covid-19 treatment reduces viral levels, improves symptoms
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/09/29/reg...are|com.apple.UIKit.activity.CopyToPasteboard

 

[Jonfw2]

Saturday Night Live will be airing this weekend from its studio WITH A LIVE AUDIENCE.

How are they doing this? On the spot testing.

I believe I predicted this a month ago...and was wildly criticized by a few here.

Also, on CNBC this morning they were discussing the ability to re-open Disneyland using a quick test on all guests. Hmmm....

 

[disneychrista]

Also, on CNBC this morning they were discussing the ability to re-open Disneyland using a quick test on all guests. Hmmm....

And who would pay for these tests? And how much would they cost?

 

[Jonfw2]

And who would pay for these tests? And how much would they cost?

$5 per test.

 

[disneychrista]

$5 per test.

So this is the quick but less accurate “paper test” they were talking about?

 

[Jonfw2]

So this is the quick but less accurate “paper test” they were talking about?

98% accurate.

 

[DLgal]

Saturday Night Live will be airing this weekend from its studio WITH A LIVE AUDIENCE.

How are they doing this? On the spot testing.

I believe I predicted this a month ago...and was wildly criticized by a few here.

Also, on CNBC this morning they were discussing the ability to re-open Disneyland using a quick test on all guests. Hmmm....

Didn't they also do this with the debate audience last night?

 

[DLgal]

98% accurate.

In a way. It will catch 98% of people who have high enough levels of virus to be contagious. This is all that matters, frankly.

The tests overall have an 88% accuracy.

 

[Jonfw2]

In a way. It will catch 98% of people who have high enough levels of virus to be contagious. This is all that matters, frankly.

The tests overall have an 88% accuracy.

As you said, that's all that matters.