COVID-19

[NDBoiler]

New England Journal of Medicine just published the study that shows the Pfizer vaccine is 88% effective against the Delta variant.

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2108891

But that’s not a credible source like my ivermectin blog I write in my mom’s basement.

 

[ab2cmiller]

Your source - https://www.cureus.com/articles/64807 had only 4.2% of the participants older than 50 years old. Which amounted to 148 individuals, and the majority of participants 85.7% were 39 or younger.

Better yet, when you and Abmiller were upset at the article that showed ivermectin had no impact you said that age was the biggest factor and you guys dismissed it because "well obviously when a study only has young people it will show no impact".

Calling others "ignorant" is rich.

Haven’t really kept up on the discussion back and forth with Razor.

As it relates to the age factor in the referenced study, it certainly would be better to have a higher percentage than 4.2% in the over 50 category, but it’s studying Ivermectin as a prophylactic. Studying if Ivermectin can prevent infection in a study group that skews younger is probably less important than a study researching outcomes of Ivermectin as a treatment because as was previously discussed, the vast majority of younger study participants will probably not have statistically significant different outcomes regardless of treatment.

 

[Irishize]

Isn't something better than nothing? I have no idea on licensing of production for vaccines, but if you're ACME Pharma Inc. you aren't able to produce one of the vaccines and you produce ivermectin for animals, theoretically you would be able to shift production to make it consumable for humans and make something rather than nothing?

Also if you're a publicly listed company, the good press/momentum gained from putting out this life saving drug would give your stock a huge boost.

Of course this is without knowing the margins made on a generic/legals around production.

It’s a logical question but there’s a lot of variables. Once the patent has expired all bets are off. Typically, after patent expiration, one generic company gets limited exclusivity for six months. This is why the cost doesn’t immediately drop to pennies on the dollar in the US. Once the exclusivity has ended, additional generic companies (like Teva for example) can jump in the fray. This is what drives the cost down b/c of all the competition.

At this point, big Pharma rarely reenters the picture but there have been cases where small biotechs partner w/ big Pharma to look at new indications or reformulations. With ivermectin I can only speculate but I suspect Pharma has kept their distance b/c the juice isn’t worth the squeeze. Yes, they could fund (along w/ NIH & other govt funding) a trial to specifically look at ivermectin in COVID-19 patients. The problem (I suspect) is that if the FDA granted them approval, they know damn well that physicians would simply write the generic formulation for its intended use despite intending it being used for COVID-19. Wouldn’t we all (as consumers) want our HCP to do that?

Big Pharma isn’t as evil as portrayed but they still have to answer to shareholders so the profit motive will always be there. For that, I see the US consumer base as taking one for the team so the rest of the world can enjoy fixed prices for brand name drugs. I suspect most of us have 401K &/or IRA that include pharma cos (along w/ oil companies, etc). Anyways, that’s my theory on it. I could be wrong.

 

[Irish#1]

Yes. Which one would you like to discuss? Time is precious, no one's going to respond to everything in a thread.

You already pointed out the study on 37 year olds for Ivermectin, and I gave a lengthy response why studying any effect on someone who's at virtually no risk of death is child's play. You could have given them skittles and they'd be have the same result (no death) and spun it as "no impact".

Do you have a good anything you'd like to put forward?

 

[PerthDomer]

It’s a logical question but there’s a lot of variables. Once the patent has expired all bets are off. Typically, after patent expiration, one generic company gets limited exclusivity for six months. This is why the cost doesn’t immediately drop to pennies on the dollar in the US. Once the exclusivity has ended, additional generic companies (like Teva for example) can jump in the fray. This is what drives the cost down b/c of all the competition.

At this point, big Pharma rarely reenters the picture but there have been cases where small biotechs partner w/ big Pharma to look at new indications or reformulations. With ivermectin I can only speculate but I suspect Pharma has kept their distance b/c the juice isn’t worth the squeeze. Yes, they could fund (along w/ NIH & other govt funding) a trial to specifically look at ivermectin in COVID-19 patients. The problem (I suspect) is that if the FDA granted them approval, they know damn well that physicians would simply write the generic formulation for its intended use despite intending it being used for COVID-19. Wouldn’t we all (as consumers) want our HCP to do that?

Big Pharma isn’t as evil as portrayed but they still have to answer to shareholders so the profit motive will always be there. For that, I see the US consumer base as taking one for the team so the rest of the world can enjoy fixed prices for brand name drugs. I suspect most of us have 401K &/or IRA that include pharma cos (along w/ oil companies, etc). Anyways, that’s my theory on it. I could be wrong.

There are a few bigger randomized ivermectin trials in progress. The reason interest is low is the decent studies show no impact and mechanistically it doesnt make sense the drug would get to the levels needed to impact COVID without harming your organs.

 

[Cackalacky2.0]

There are a few bigger randomized ivermectin trials in progress. The reason interest is low is the decent studies show no impact and mechanistically it doesnt make sense the drug would get to the levels needed to impact COVID without harming your organs.

Right. Ivermectin's side effects to humans (known and unknown) are much more problematic than say.... a cholesterol regulating pill with decades of usage and known bodily interactions (not to menton healthcare providers trust in the product). Its beyond weird this pushing of ivermectin. Ill take a cholesterol pill over an animal dewormer anyday of the week.

 

[Valpodoc85]

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-02081-w

 

[Cackalacky2.0]

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-02081-w

“I was shocked, as everyone in the scientific community probably were,” says Eduardo López-Medina, a paediatrician at the Centre for the Study of Paediatric Infections in Cali, Colombia, who was not involved with the study and who has investigated whether ivermectin can improve COVID-19 symptoms. “It was one of the first papers that led everyone to get into the idea ivermectin worked” in a clinical-trial setting, he adds.

Latin America’s embrace of an unproven COVID treatment is hindering drug trials....

The paper summarized the results of a clinical trial seeming to show that ivermectin can reduce COVID-19 death rates by more than 90%[SUP]1[/SUP] — among the largest studies of the drug’s ability to treat COVID-19 to date. But on 14 July, after internet sleuths raised concerns about plagiarism and data manipulation, the preprint server Research Square withdrew the paper because of “ethical concerns”.

oof. I bet they are being silenced.

 

[IrishRazor82]

Your source - https://www.cureus.com/articles/64807 had only 4.2% of the participants older than 50 years old. Which amounted to 148 individuals, and the majority of participants 85.7% were 39 or younger.

Better yet, when you and Abmiller were upset at the article that showed ivermectin had no impact you said that age was the biggest factor and you guys dismissed it because "well obviously when a study only has young people it will show no impact".

Calling others "ignorant" is rich.

Your response shows you don't understand the difference between prophylactic and treatment. It's a fundamental necessity in discussing this intelligently.

Anyone can contract COVID, rending age irrelevant when measuring Ivermectin (or anything else). So you pointing out that only 4% were over 50 is irrelevant regarding the meteanalysis which shows Ivermectin is 87% effective as a preventative across 18 different studies.

When discussing it as a treatment, age does matter since we know without a doubt the older you are the more at risk you are of severe hospitalization or death. Which is why in measuring impact as a treatment, studying 37 year olds is laughable and purposely misleading. You could have given the 37 year olds skittles and they'd all live.

 

[Irishize]

There are a few bigger randomized ivermectin trials in progress. The reason interest is low is the decent studies show no impact and mechanistically it doesnt make sense the drug would get to the levels needed to impact COVID without harming your organs.

That makes it even more unlikely. Even if it showed benefits outweighing the risk, I don’t see a pharma company of any stature investing in a generic compound. Like I said, the juice isn’t worth the squeeze.

 

[Trait Expectations]

It's mandated by the UC (University of California) system as well.

Everyone should listen to this:

https://samharris.org/podcasts/256-contagion-bad-ideas/

This is for Razor especially. I've given over 4 hrs to listening to content you've suggested with Rogan/Weinstein and reading your data. Give that a listen and give me your thoughts if you're really willing to consider all the information.

IrishRazor82 - here you go.

 

[TorontoGold]

Your response shows you don't understand the difference between prophylactic and treatment. It's a fundamental necessity in discussing this intelligently.

Anyone can contract COVID, rending age irrelevant when measuring Ivermectin (or anything else). So you pointing out that only 4% were over 50 is irrelevant regarding the meteanalysis which shows Ivermectin is 87% effective as a preventative across 18 different studies.

When discussing it as a treatment, age does matter since we know without a doubt the older you are the more at risk you are of severe hospitalization or death. Which is why in measuring impact as a treatment, studying 37 year olds is laughable and purposely misleading. You could have given the 37 year olds skittles and they'd all live.

"Discuss this intelligently" then saying age is irrelevant for measuring prophylaxis is quite "laughable". You'd want to have a good prophylactic for the most at risk section of the population. The similar vein of thinking with targeting the oldest age group for the initial first doses of the vaccine.

A healthy person does not take prophylactic drugs at the same rates that an unhealthy or at risk person. Being in my late 20's I don't take prohpalytics like someone at the same age with a compromised immune system or my 1000 year old grandparents.

 

[notredomer23]

[TWEET]https://twitter.com/erictopol/status/1425089101926080514?s=21[/TWEET]

boosters for the over 60s are coming

 

[NDPhilly]

Does it bother anyone else that our approach seems exceptionally short sighted?

We are currently 6 months out from when the first vaccine recipients received their second dose and the decline in efficacy over time has been noted by both Pfizer and Moderna. As it feels like we are getting closer and closer to blanket vaccine mandates for all adults, I question what the next step after this is? Are we going to mandate booster shots after 6 months for all Ameicans? It looks increasingly like Delta (or another variant) may be around in some capacity for at least a few years.

I just don't understand the strategy as its unlikely most Americans get a booster unless they are high risk...or are forced to.

 

[notredomer23]

Does it bother anyone else that our approach seems exceptionally short sighted?

We are currently 6 months out from when the first vaccine recipients received their second dose and the decline in efficacy over time has been noted by both Pfizer and Moderna. As it feels like we are getting closer and closer to blanket vaccine mandates for all adults, I question what the next step after this is? Are we going to mandate booster shots after 6 months for all Ameicans? It looks increasingly like Delta (or another variant) may be around in some capacity for at least a few years.

I just don't understand the strategy as its unlikely most Americans get a booster unless they are high risk...or are forced to.

It's pretty likely we're headed towards a yearly recommended booster shot like we are for the flu. After the current Delta wave passes, everyone will have some form immunity that will protect the overwhelming majority of hospitalization. As the next variant will have to be more contagious than Delta, we can only hope that our pre-existing immunity through vaccine and infection holds strong in preventing severe disease, like in all likelihood it well given that is what we are seeing with Delta. I think cities like NYC will realize how silly their vaccine mandates are when vaccine only events result in super spreading. The real point behind the mandate is in an effort to increase overall vaccination, which if you look at NY daily vaccinations, has caused about a 20% increase in vaccine uptake since it was announced. Once COVID is no longer a severe burden on hospitals, mandates should be a thing of the past.

It's easy for these cities/states/companies to make rash decisions in the middle of a surge. But what happens when the surge is over, pressure will only increase on removing these mandates.

 

[ab2cmiller]

In general the strategy has been Vaccines or bust.

Lockdowns went from flattening the curve to trying to prevent every single case. Masks and social distancing help in the short term but are we going to do these things forever? Most peoples immune systems have likely suffered because of the lack of interaction with others.

We've sacrificed freedoms, but I'm not sure if it really will make much difference in the endgame of COVID.

We are likely stuck with this thing. We have to learn to live with it.

 

[NDPhilly]

It's pretty likely we're headed towards a yearly recommended booster shot like we are for the flu. After the current Delta wave passes, everyone will have some form immunity that will protect the overwhelming majority of hospitalization. As the next variant will have to be more contagious than Delta, we can only hope that our pre-existing immunity through vaccine and infection holds strong in preventing severe disease, like in all likelihood it well given that is what we are seeing with Delta. I think cities like NYC will realize how silly their vaccine mandates are when vaccine only events result in super spreading. The real point behind the mandate is in an effort to increase overall vaccination, which if you look at NY daily vaccinations, has caused about a 20% increase in vaccine uptake since it was announced. Once COVID is no longer a severe burden on hospitals, mandates should be a thing of the past.

It's easy for these cities/states/companies to make rash decisions in the middle of a surge. But what happens when the surge is over, pressure will only increase on removing these mandates.

As a healthy 25 year old with "natural" immunity (aka had Covid), being forced to vaccinate myself to appease a government mandate feels like such an intrusion on my rights. The scare tactics have certainly worked and all non-vaccinated people will be demonized and forced to comply regardless of past infection status. The CDC has made it so that Natural Immunity does not exist in the minds of most people.

Looking at the spread in Iceland. Israel, and the UK, I suspect NYC will have a "casedemic" in the winter but will not experience record hospitalizations regardless of vaccination rate because the first wave took out so many of the at risk. I think the data is increasingly showing that vaccination status is doing little to prevent transmission, however the CDC won't say that as it would undermine their entire campaign.

 

[NDPhilly]

In general the strategy has been Vaccines or bust.

Lockdowns went from flattening the curve to trying to prevent every single case. Masks and social distancing help in the short term but are we going to do these things forever? Most peoples immune systems have likely suffered because of the lack of interaction with others.

We've sacrificed freedoms, but I'm not sure if it really will make much difference in the endgame of COVID.

We are likely stuck with this thing. We have to learn to live with it.

My girlfriend has been sick for over a week with a non-Covid virus, her first illness in the past year+. She has never been sick this long in her life. I find it hard to believe that this isn't a result of a weakened immune system.

 

[BrownerandFry]

For those who have studied statistics or grappled with extrapolating the slope of a graph, this data will be, well, daunting:


https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/usa/florida/

 

[Circa]

I officially have the virus... I'm a little underwhelmed by all the hoopla surrounding this thing. Feverish, some body aches around neck primarily, and somewhat lethargic. I have felt like this for 2-3 days. If i take Ibuprofen It cuts my fever and body aches down to hardly noticeable and I'm feeling good.
I'm at a loss of words on so many levels... probably the virus

 

[Sea Turtle]

I officially have the virus... I'm a little underwhelmed by all the hoopla surrounding this thing. Feverish, some body aches around neck primarily, and somewhat lethargic. I have felt like this for 2-3 days. If i take Ibuprofen It cuts my fever and body aches down to hardly noticeable and I'm feeling good.
I'm at a loss of words on so many levels... probably the virus

I'm sorry to hear that circa. I had it last October. I was sick for about 10 days. About the same level of symptoms as you.

My wife's best friend is in the hospital with it. You just don't know how some will respond. Hope you get better soon.

 

[Cackalacky2.0]

I officially have the virus... I'm a little underwhelmed by all the hoopla surrounding this thing. Feverish, some body aches around neck primarily, and somewhat lethargic. I have felt like this for 2-3 days. If i take Ibuprofen It cuts my fever and body aches down to hardly noticeable and I'm feeling good.
I'm at a loss of words on so many levels... probably the virus

Get well soon.

 

[Irish#1]

I officially have the virus... I'm a little underwhelmed by all the hoopla surrounding this thing. Feverish, some body aches around neck primarily, and somewhat lethargic. I have felt like this for 2-3 days. If i take Ibuprofen It cuts my fever and body aches down to hardly noticeable and I'm feeling good.
I'm at a loss of words on so many levels... probably the virus

Hang in there.

 

[RDU Irish]

I officially have the virus... I'm a little underwhelmed by all the hoopla surrounding this thing. Feverish, some body aches around neck primarily, and somewhat lethargic. I have felt like this for 2-3 days. If i take Ibuprofen It cuts my fever and body aches down to hardly noticeable and I'm feeling good.
I'm at a loss of words on so many levels... probably the virus

$12 pulse oximeter off of Amazon and properly placed steroid at the point my levels dropped would have kept me out of the hospital. I had fever for close to two weeks. Stay hydrated, especially if you get the wonderful experience of 10 days liquid poo. If, like most people, your symptoms aren't horrible or getting progressively worse then don't worry about it.

 

[RDU Irish]

As a healthy 25 year old with "natural" immunity (aka had Covid), being forced to vaccinate myself to appease a government mandate feels like such an intrusion on my rights. The scare tactics have certainly worked and all non-vaccinated people will be demonized and forced to comply regardless of past infection status. The CDC has made it so that Natural Immunity does not exist in the minds of most people.

Looking at the spread in Iceland. Israel, and the UK, I suspect NYC will have a "casedemic" in the winter but will not experience record hospitalizations regardless of vaccination rate because the first wave took out so many of the at risk. I think the data is increasingly showing that vaccination status is doing little to prevent transmission, however the CDC won't say that as it would undermine their entire campaign.

Samsies but 45 years old. I am finding a lot of vaccinated folks that are bitter over the vaccinated still get it and spread it. I am pretty sure my vaccinated wife brought it home from the hospital and gave it to me. In early May, we all assumed the vaccinated were not spreaders. Science!!

 

[Cackalacky2.0]

Guys... getting vaccinated doesnt mean you cant get it again. You absolutely can get it agian, be a carrier, and get other sick. Not sure wher ethis vaccine is a cure thing came from. The vaccine only helps to minimize your symptoms and overall illness and it has been clearly shown to be effective at doing that.

The fact that you can still get it and pass it on to others even if you are vaccianted is exactly why masks and social distancing are still important. Im pretty much back to wearing masks everywher again becasue SC cases have skyrocketed and our illustrous Gov. Foghorn Leghorn is doing the exact opposite of what health care officials are asking him to do.

 

[Rogue219]

Guys... getting vaccinated doesnt mean you cant get it again. You absolutely can get it agian, be a carrier, and get other sick. Not sure wher ethis vaccine is a cure thing came from. The vaccine only helps to minimize your symptoms and overall illness and it has been clearly shown to be effective at doing that.

The fact that you can still get it and pass it on to others even if you are vaccianted is exactly why masks and social distancing are still important. Im pretty much back to wearing masks everywher again becasue SC cases have skyrocketed and our illustrous Gov. Foghorn Leghorn is doing the exact opposite of what health care officials are asking him to do.

This country is more selfish than intelligent. Vaccinated or not, people are not very well versed on how it all works.

I get the sense that many people are not getting vaccinated out of some sense of defiance because they don't like government. Or they don't like THIS government.

We never would have beaten polio today. It's maddening how unintelligent and angry society has become, both home and abroad. Maddening and sad.

 

[BrownerandFry]

this is not a joke
this is not a drill

Safety matters
Life and death are at stake

https://www.bostonglobe.com/2021/08...ss-country-especially-less-vaccinated-places/

 

[NDPhilly]

this is not a joke
this is not a drill

Safety matters
Life and death are at stake

https://www.bostonglobe.com/2021/08...ss-country-especially-less-vaccinated-places/

This comparison that every news source loves to highlight is incomplete without a mention of seasonality. The south had the most cases last summer as well. We won't know the true affect on transmission until the winter.

 

[TNUtoNotreDame]

This country is more selfish than intelligent. Vaccinated or not, people are not very well versed on how it all works.

I get the sense that many people are not getting vaccinated out of some sense of defiance because they don't like government. Or they don't like THIS government.

We never would have beaten polio today. It's maddening how unintelligent and angry society has become, both home and abroad. Maddening and sad.

I am vaccinated but I understand why people are hesitant. Our current VP stated she wouldn't take Trump's vaccine. But when they assumed power the push started in earnest. It has become political, because everything is political now. Dems and Repubs play fucking regarded games and wonder why one side does not trust the other. It is a Zero sum game.