Medical Discussion of Coronavirus

[AR]

I don't fall into political Venus fly traps.

I think you might already be trapped, just not in the way you had expected.

[Tim]

I think you might already be trapped, just not in the way you had expected.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/nearly-a-year-later-the-new-york-times-is-still-covering-for-hunter-biden/ar-AAOr3tt

I doubt it.

[Tim]

I was appalled by the Supreme Court Justices comments or questions today for the oral arguments.
I am not an attorney or a doctor.
Ignorance on the actual legal issues and ignorance on the medical issues. Bypass those issues and advocate for a predetermined position.
”We all know....” and then state what they personally believe.

https://www.c-span.org/video/?516920-1/justices-hear-case-vaccine-test-mandate

2 hours. - focused on policy rather than legal or science. I am depressed. People are viewed as machines spewing the virus. Judgement based upon 750k cases per day would immediately drop to zero if workplaces vaccinate. The logic is the ends justify the means. Not the way I expected. Advocacy at its best or worst.
Free form.

[Dermonc]

I'm very pro vaccine, but I question the utility of a 4th vaccine booster of the same shot... If it's to protect from variants, shouldn't we be "boosting" with more variant specific vaccines a la the flu shot? (this was in reference to moderna's ceo in the news).

First the vaccine was 100% effective, then 95%, now efficacy lasts 4-6 months without boosters. Meanwhile NYS is mandating private citizens to take potentially endless boosters for a vaccine with no long term safety record and questionable efficacy (just because an antibody goes up doesn’t make it safe or effective and 2 week unblinded “trials” are not good science). I took the initial vaccine but I never signed up for endless boosters of the same vaccine. At this point it’s clear the CDC is a political organization that will lie through their teeth to doctors and the public for optics.

[CordMcNally]

First the vaccine was 100% effective, then 95%, now effectivity lasts 4-6 months without boosters. Meanwhile NYS is mandating private citizens to take potentially endless boosters for a vaccine with no long term safety record and questionable efficacy (just because an antibody goes up doesn’t make it safe or effective if it’s the wrong antibody). I took the initial vaccine but I never signed up for endless boosters of the same vaccine. At this point it’s clear the CDC is a political organization that will lie through their teeth to doctors and the public for optics.

Not to mention they ignore their previous statements. In May, Fauci told us that vaccinated people are 'dead ends' for the virus. I fully understand that science changes. I don't know if this was accurate information in the first place or if they had evidence to the contrary but made statements against the evidence they had. Either way, they don't acknowledge all these statements they've made in the past that have been incorrect. I don't know how they expect people to continue to trust them when they can't admit when they're wrong or when new evidence points against their previous statements. They've ruined any credibility that they had.

[StarTrekDoc]

. At this point it’s clear the CDC is a political organization that will lie through their teeth to doctors and the public for optics.

When has the CDC NOT been political? The NIH has a much shorter history and ability to stay scientific as possible. CDC, not so much.

Public health is messy. Science intersecting society with change management as its main mission.

Anyone with experience in leading change management knows the challenges. Throw in politics and charged environment....viola you have today's no-win situation.

[Tim]

When has the CDC NOT been political? The NIH has a much shorter history and ability to stay scientific as possible. CDC, not so much.

Public health is messy. Science intersecting society with change management as its main mission.

Anyone with experience in leading change management knows the challenges. Throw in politics and charged environment....viola you have today's no-win situation.

Change management is extremely difficult. However, using “science” and “social sciences” as weapons for political power is dangerous to our society. That is a new tactic. Change the rules, change the definitions, change your life based on political power is not hard. It is a recipe for failure. All change is not for the better.
Good bosses listen. Sometimes they change course. Politics is about power, not good choices.
Ignorance is no excuse. A lot of ignorance on display in the Supreme Court. A lot of ideologies, not facts and laws. Only 9 votes count. At least for now. The Supreme Court should NOT be voting on policy. Their role is to pass judgement on the merits of procedure (and law).
Fine legal scholars aren’t qualified to pass judgement on policy or implementation.
On any specific issue, it is a governance question. Overreach of judicial authority.
If you evolve that way, a 9 member ruling council on every issue. That is a big change.

[StarTrekDoc]

Science and statistics are as malleable as anything else. Don't like Absolute risk reduction? Point out relative risk. Confidence interval look iffy? Scale with meta analysis. There's always two sides of a coin in every subject/arena.

I do believe the question before the SC is rather simple.
1. Did OHSA overstep its authority in what is defined as workplace safety with the mandate (vaccine OR mask --unless healthcare).

2. Does medicare (or any insurance provider/hiring entity for that matter) have a right to dictate to contractors/vendors minimum standards. Can I dictate to my contractor that his employees are minimally vaccinated or may whatever rule as term of payment?

IMHO- it'll be a split decision. OHSA overreach its interpretation. Medicare CAN make rules within its mission of requisite standards for payment

[Tim]

Science and statistics are as malleable as anything else. Don't like Absolute risk reduction? Point out relative risk. Confidence interval look iffy? Scale with meta analysis. There's always two sides of a coin in every subject/arena.

I do believe the question before the SC is rather simple.
1. Did OHSA overstep its authority in what is defined as workplace safety with the mandate (vaccine OR mask --unless healthcare).

2. Does medicare (or any insurance provider/hiring entity for that matter) have a right to dictate to contractors/vendors minimum standards. Can I dictate to my contractor that his employees are minimally vaccinated or may whatever rule as term of payment?

IMHO- it'll be a split decision. OHSA overreach its interpretation. Medicare CAN make rules within its mission of requisite standards for payment

Your questions were much more informed than the Associate Justices. You would make a good judge. My guess is that you have made many decisions you did not personally like, but concluded it was the best solution. On 1. and 2. , my guess is you would make a decision on the facts and questions you outlined. I don't think you would even consider some of the misleading statistics being misused by legal scholars. If nominated, would you accept? I would have confidence in your vote.

[StarTrekDoc]

If nominated, would you accept? I would have confidence in your vote.

Lol. no. perfectly happy to be back 100% clinical.

[Tim]

Lol. no. perfectly happy to be back 100% clinical.

Well then,
Lock downs and restrictions did not work sufficiently.
Vaccines did not work sufficiently.
Natural immunity did not work sufficiently.
Regardless of why, Covid is more widespread than before.
What next? That is the trillion dollar question.
Time for some creative juices.
Not sure if the insanity of doing the same thing over and over and expecting different outcomes is wise.
Clinical diagnosis or speculation. The next step is important. New ideas are needed.

[StarTrekDoc]

Counterpoint --

One will not beat nature. Sometimes we tame it. Most times it's about mitigation. --anyone saying otherwise is selling snake oil.

Vaccines brought down hospitalization and the death rate dramatically, and played a significant role in avoiding completely overwhelming health systems -- that's the win.

[Tim]

Counterpoint --

One will not beat nature. Sometimes we tame it. Most times it's about mitigation. --anyone saying otherwise is selling snake oil.

Vaccines brought down hospitalization and the death rate dramatically, and played a significant role in avoiding completely overwhelming health systems -- that's the win.

More like an improvement or a counter move, I don't think "win" is the right word. Some say "mitigation", some say masks, some say the mutation itself, its all messaging. It really does not matter.
Results are better, yes. Unanswered question is "What is next?" I still think we don't know what we don't know. We sure have a lot of discussions about next steps in this battle. Don't really see anything new. I guess you could call "boosters" new. A mutation of the vaccines to fight mutations of the virus.
The status quo seems to indicate we haven't done enough. Maybe we have? One option is to declare victory. Uncertainty remains.

[xraygoggles]

I was appalled by the Supreme Court Justices comments or questions today for the oral arguments.
I am not an attorney or a doctor.
Ignorance on the actual legal issues and ignorance on the medical issues. Bypass those issues and advocate for a predetermined position.
”We all know....” and then state what they personally believe.
https://www.c-span.org/video/?516920...e-test-mandate
2 hours. - focused on policy rather than legal or science. I am depressed. People are viewed as machines spewing the virus. Judgement based upon 750k cases per day would immediately drop to zero if workplaces vaccinate. The logic is the ends justify the means. Not the way I expected. Advocacy at its best or worst.
Free form.

Both left and right leaning SC justices making egregiously wrong statements about covid just goes to show how polarized and partisan every branch of govt has become, with everyone cloistered in their safe spaces and political bubbles.

& to think these people have no term limits...

[Jaqen Haghar MD]

Not to mention they ignore their previous statements. In May, Fauci told us that vaccinated people are 'dead ends' for the virus. I fully understand that science changes. I don't know if this was accurate information in the first place or if they had evidence to the contrary but made statements against the evidence they had. Either way, they don't acknowledge all these statements they've made in the past that have been incorrect. I don't know how they expect people to continue to trust them when they can't admit when they're wrong or when new evidence points against their previous statements. They've ruined any credibility that they had.

Thats the problem when you have a strong political agenda. You have to tell a series of “white lies” along the way to get people to do what you want, and push your agenda forward. If you tell the whole truth, the opposition will use the details to pick you apart. ….but the white lies eventually catch up to you if you don’t achieve absolute victory.

I think Fauci felt he had to step out, and be a voice of reason, during the past administration. I bet it was a very difficult period for him, also having to tread lightly, knowing he needed to stay on in his role for the good of the country. Now, he appears reluctant to return to the shadows, and is enjoying the limelight quite a bit… too much.

I love the vaccine. I’m very pro vaccine. I think it is very effective, though not perfect. But I’m against government mandates and I’m against destroying people who don’t want to get it. It’s not a medical or scientific argument. That’s obvious. It’s a question of exactly how much power the government should have over your personal decisions. Of course there are a million examples of how they already have such power. It’s all a grey area in the legal world. Perhaps a million and one, is one too many.

It’s easy to say the government should force people to do things you agree with, and it would be very easy for me to wholeheartedly support mandates. Only a fool would forgo the vaccine, with what we’ve all seen. But what happens, in the future, when the political pendulum swings back (as it always does) and it’s something you disagree with…..