How is it down by you? We've been under mask mandate up here for months so no change for us. Edited to add - It's so weird here. There are two counties that literally touch each other. One county is mask central. You'll see people walking by themselves on a trail wearing a mask. Drive 10 miles over the county line and there isn't a mask in sight.
Some of the symptoms of the omicron variant are pretty much less severe symptoms of covid. Like, “scratchy throat (instead of sore throat)” and “mild muscle aches.” Great for people with seasonal allergies who are also getting old and discovering their new normal of aches and pains (i.e. myself). Looking forward to the future variant where symptoms are “light tickle in your throat and feeling kinda blah a lot of the time.”
So Rogan had Peter McCullough on his podcast Monday. I swear he has a thing for clowns and quacks lately. Here's a good look into this idiots claims: https://forbetterscience.com/2021/10/18/ivermectin-now-against-covid-19-because/
I made it about two paragraphs in to that insufferable claptrap. Can you link something at least trying to pretend they are objective?
Two podcasts released on the same day, bookending the outlook on all things Covid. Link to Peter McCollough on JRE: https://open.spotify.com/episode/0aZte37vtFTkYT7b0b04Qz Link to Nicholas Christakis on Sam Harris: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vod4aOOucaY Both are fascinating to listen to, particularly one right after the other. I would recommend JRE first, because Harris - although he doesn't name Rogan specifically - refers to him often, and the Harris podcast appears to have been released with the intention of opposing the arguments presented with McCollough. My takeaways, for anyone who cares to know: - McCollough's overall tone was a bit too self aggrandizing for me. I don't need to be reminded how accomplished you are or that you're an American hero, thanks. - The JRE podcast brought up some valid points, mainly that all the effort has been pointed at vaccines and there hasn't been much effort trying to curb symptoms in the early stages once you're infected. I think there's some validity that the Ivermectin and monoclonal antibody studies were flawed, because they were examined with late-stage serious covid. It seems that early, strong intervention in the first day or so of exposure can be quite helpful - It was VERY interesting to see both sides wrestle with the social contract portion of this dilemma - At around the 1:05:00 - 1:12:00, Christakis makes an excellent point about what science is, and how to approach the other side with their concerns. Essentially asking, "What research could be produced that would change your mind?" and if the answer is, "None," then you are talking ideology, not science. For both sides. - I wish Harris would be willing to have a debate with an opposing view. What McCollough lacked was an equally informed person to push back against him. To Rogan's credit, he offered in the middle of the conversation to bring another expert on so that the two of them could debate. McCollough readily agreed, so we'll see if that happens. Harris seems to view that kind of engagement as unwise; I disagree. I think it's needed, because when two sides are so diametrically opposed, in a debate it should become obvious who has more compelling evidence on their side. - I think a flaw in McCollough's argument (one of them) is his absolute belief that you cannot be re-infected with Covid and that you cannot transmit the disease when you're asymptomatic but infected. Likely the truth is somewhere in the middle on that one. - Even Harris couldn't come up with a reason for masking kids under the age of 18 - I still have about 30 minutes to go with the Harris podcast but so far he hasn't acknowledged the funding and indemnification conflicts that could lead to bias and mistrust. If Pfizer is one of the biggest sponsors for CNN (they are), and the FDA was a major funder of the vaccine trials, and everyone from the top down has no legal liability...that looks really bad for your credibility. - Harris/Christakis gave the argument that essentially says: "One in 100 people will die upon infection with Covid. If one in 100,000 people are dying from the vaccines, that's a no brainer and the vaccines are the better choice." McCollough took that same argument and said, "I did my part, now I demand that you do your part, too. I demand that you pick the lesser risk, even if the vaccine damages you," and then likened it to how various atrocities that were committed over the course of human history took root in the minds of the people who stood by and let it happen. Really interesting to see two different takes on the same premise. - I'd really like to see a breakdown/debate with regards to VAERS and vaccine safety, because that's the element of this where there's the greatest argument. The self-reporting of doctors in the field says one thing, and the research says another. Without reading an endless statistical breakdown report, if anyone has a link (ideally in an audio form), I'd love to be sent it. TL;DR: Neither side came off as a crackpot. McCollough came off as educated, informed and egotistical. Christakis came off as educated, informed and dismissive of any notion that the other arguments presented may have validity. That's my $0.02. Edit: Forgot to add...I believe Youtube has banned the McCollough clips. Usually there are 1-3 JRE clips on Youtube each episode to let you know it's been released on Spotify. Again, that kind of censorship erodes credibility IMO.
McCollough is a complete quack when it comes to Covid. Hydroxychloroquine doesn't work. We have large scale RCT's showing as much. You damn well can get reinfected with Covid despite his assertion otherwise. Saying no one under 50 should get vaccinated is absurd.
I just said that one of his flawed arguments is that you can't get re-infected with Covid. Saying no on under 50 should get vaccinated is misguided. He could probably make that same point for people under 30, though. At least in Canada, those under 30 account for less than 4% of hospitalizations, less than 5% of ICU visits and minuscule amount of death. However, the only reason I could see adults not getting it just in general is if they have the belief that the cardiovascular risks associated with vaccination are greater than the risks associated with Covid. They don't appear to be, but certainly there's evidence that boys under the age of 18 are at a heightened risk with the vax. I understand some parents who would say that, since the risk is so low in both directions for that demographic, they make the choice that's right for them. Canada just started allowing kids aged 5-12 to get vaccinated in the last two weeks. We're currently sitting at over 90% of the entire eligible population with at least one dose and some provinces have as high as 98%. It's reasonable to assume that, within the next few weeks, most areas will be somewhere between 95-98% partially vaxxed with the single dose people just waiting until they're eligible for the second shot. So all the hysteria of the unvaccinated undoing our system is moot. With those kinds of numbers we should see this thing substantially knocked out, at least in this country.
I can give you another link that lists the falsehoods he's spreading. Call it biased if you want. https://healthfeedback.org/claimrev...nated-contrary-to-claims-by-peter-mccullough/
The man is using VAERS data to try to justify his stance on vaccines. It's beyond idiotic. Stats from Texas for the month of September 2021 only. Sure looks like there is a good reason to vaccinate those age groups to me: Among 18-29 year olds: fewer than 10 vaccinated individuals died of COVID-19. 84 unvaccinated individuals died of COVID-19. Among 30-39 year olds: 12 vaccinated individuals died of COVID-19. 236 unvaccinated individuals died of COVID-19. Among 40-49 year olds: 15 vaccinated died of COVID-19. 496 unvaccinated died of COVID-19. When you adjust for the denominators in each group, the risk of dying from COVID-19 was: 37 times higher in unvaccinated 18-29 year olds. 23 times higher in unvaccinated 30-39 year olds. 55 times higher in unvaccinated 40-49 year olds.
I am of the opinion that listening to Rogan on the subject of Covid is essentially demanding misinformation. He's Goop for dudes, and if this wasn't the leading single cause of death 2 years running, his brand of bullshit wouldn't be so bad. But it is. I miss the days when his brand of "Let's talk about shit you used to find in the back of magazines in the 90s" was benign and silly. He could be an authority on Bigfoot hunting, because no one cared.
Yeah, the data looks great. This should help reduce the strain on hospitals if people get treated early.
McCollough is also a proud member of this group: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Association_of_American_Physicians_and_Surgeons
Post links with hyper partisan infantile, trying desperately to be clever, name calling and yeah it’s going to be called out as biased.
Bullshit. All the MSM info has been on vaccines, but there are huge endeavours trying to tackle this exact problem, because the key issue for "breaking the system" is needing to be intubated in the ICU. Western alone has had huge investigations (and breakthroughs) in protocols to help reduce that transition, which is what is keeping hospitals open. Just about every part of medicine is investigating COVID and the effects and treatments. It's not like people are working on vaccines and then everyone else is doing nothing. Heart specialists are working on their own research to try and figure out how to handle the aftereffects of COVID, not just the vaccine. I know this first hand through the data science project I was working on with @downndirty what seems like forever ago. So yeah... I call bullshit. It's been shown that's it's all about the viral load. If it's small, then you may rebuff it totally. Medium? You'll get symptoms but be OK. Huge? You're full-blown screwed again as it overwhelms the rate your immune response can handle it. And yet every hospital report I've seen shows that 95%+ of those taking up ICU beds and requiring the most care are unvaccinated people.
Not meant to be snarky or adversarial at all...perhaps it's my own ignorance with the media I've seen, but the only advice I've ever been told regarding non-severe Covid is to isolate. My doctor's office doesn't want you to come in and this is a quote from the government of Canada website on what to do if you have Covid: "If you’re infected with COVID-19, even if not ill, follow the advice of your local public health authority for isolating at home. Most people with mild symptoms will recover on their own." (link: https://www.canada.ca/en/public-hea...019-novel-coronavirus-infection/symptoms.html). If there's actually a protocol for early stages that's been adopted and is being universally applied, awesome news and apologies for not knowing about it. I was under the impression that you ought not seek medical help until you're severely ill, at which point it's often too late. Again, a miscommunication. I'm talking absolute numbers, not percentage of population. It's unquestionably the unvaccinated who are falling ill and dying. I mean that, with over 95% of the population vaccinated, the small remainder left - that is scattered across the entire country - shouldn't be enough to overwhelm the system. If it is...if we can have a 95% compliance rate and 5% of the remaining 5% require an ER and we still can't keep up? Then that's on the system. If we still see waves with the absolute numbers we saw a year ago, then that tells me we can't vaccinate our way out of this and we'll need a Plan B.
Vaccination was never the only counter measure. Covid is not the flu. The flu is not covid. Overwhelming the health system isn't the only reason we don't let it run rampant. Preventable deaths are preventable. Jesus. I have never had more in common with Jack Nicholson in the Shining than this thread.