Vaccine

Grace T. said:
Anecdotally including Biden I’m aware of no less than 10 bounce back cases on paxlovid. It seems to be quite common. Except for high risk cases (like Biden) they really need to pause it until they can do proper studies on either extending or upping the dose. If you are young and healthy there is zero reason to be on paxlovid and it’s possible we are just encouraging resistance. But they won’t do it because of $$$.
Click to expand...
It's tricky to prescribe. I suspect many prescribers are cheating a bit, upping dosage ( don't ask, don't tell). We will see if it ever emerges from EUA status - the interaction with so many common drugs is sketchy. The culprit is ritonavir - anytime you you mess with liver enzymes, you mess with a boatload of commonly taken drugs ranging from hormone contraceptives to serious stuff like cholesterol meds, antiarrhythmic medications, etc. Stuff that a guy like Biden may be taking (wink wink). You could weakly argue that vitamins and other supplements mess with liver enzymes as well.

No way anyone does additional studies to determine whether upping the dosage gets rid of the rebound. I love how every headline about biden's rebound makes it seem rebouding is soooo uncommon. It's not, plenty of rebouding going around. Most people just stick out the rebound, wait another 5 days or so, test again then move on with life.

By prescribing paxlovid, it shows how worried they were. It likley did it's job of reducing replication. They could have gone with Merck’s oral antiviral molnupiravir, no known other med interaction but likely decided the effectiveness of Pax (88%) was better than the merck product (30%). Go care team!!
 
EvilGoalie 21 said:
For the first paper, which is the least useful one, but has drawn the most media attention, I'm guessing if you put "who" in all caps like Crush that might be close for at least some of it. If you're more serious, the most relevant parts with respect to what you are asking for will be in supplementary files. For the first paper that is here.

Science | AAAS

www.science.org www.science.org

Underlying methodology for the second paper is here.

Science | AAAS

www.science.org www.science.org

My point in bringing up these works earlier in the context of Occam's razor (my God, the places we go) is precisely that as origin stories they are non-definitive. No smooth shaves. Switching the metaphor, short of a smoking gun-a term that itself came from the JFK investigation if I have it right-that is how it will always be. But I thought I'd dig the links up for you anyway because it might be a worthwhile excercise to go "my ifs, ands, and buts are such and such". It would be easy to do. These papers could easily be "shot them" down on provenance, limitations of approach, on the merits, etc. And then go, OK, how would I address/prove/or falsify this. Or you could save yourself most of the trouble and read the blurb article from Nature back when the papers were still preprints. Have fun with it.

www.nature.com

Wuhan market was epicentre of pandemic’s start, studies suggest

Report authors say that the coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 jumped to people from animals sold at the market on two occasions in late 2019 — but some scientists want more definitive evidence.
www.nature.com www.nature.com
Click to expand...
I read the Nature article and haven't read the studies, but based on all the caveats and qualifiers in the article it sounds like these studies are at best educated guesses. Particularly when they can't trace it to a species let alone a specific infected animal. A bigger knock may be the fact that 2 of the studies came from Scripps which doesnt have any Covid credibility after one of its experts claimed that water activities were dangerous because the virus would be carried by sea air. This falsehood led to policies that closed beaches and ocean activities. Scripps needs to stick with oceanography and avoid virology.

The good news is the pangolin seems to be off the hook. I had predicted it was just scapegoated because it was so ugly. The racoon dog is pretty cute.

At this point we have very little evidence to prove either a lab leak or the wet market source. Personally I doubt that we will ever know definitively since China blocked any timely and open investgation.

One thing Covid has exposed is the low bar that has been set for the definition of science.
 
watfly said:
I read the Nature article and haven't read the studies, but based on all the caveats and qualifiers in the article it sounds like these studies are at best educated guesses. Particularly when they can't trace it to a species let alone a specific infected animal. A bigger knock may be the fact that 2 of the studies came from Scripps which doesnt have any Covid credibility after one of its experts claimed that water activities were dangerous because the virus would be carried by sea air. This falsehood led to policies that closed beaches and ocean activities. Scripps needs to stick with oceanography and avoid virology.

The good news is the pangolin seems to be off the hook. I had predicted it was just scapegoated because it was so ugly. The racoon dog is pretty cute.

At this point we have very little evidence to prove either a lab leak or the wet market source. Personally I doubt that we will ever know definitively since China blocked any timely and open investgation.

One thing Covid has exposed is the low bar that has been set for the definition of science.
Click to expand...

Nonsense in service of an agenda.
 
espola said:
Nonsense in service of an agenda.
Click to expand...
you sound like a paid advertisment for the chinese government. they (and those under their thumb/wallet) have danced around this issue since the beginning. Maybe this, maybe that, could be this, could be that, sounds like this, smells like that. Pretty soon the world will stop even thinking about trying to figure out the genesis - at this point it doesn't even matter...what it was then isn't what it is today.
 
Happened again said:
you sound like a paid advertisment for the chinese government. they (and those under their thumb/wallet) have danced around this issue since the beginning. Maybe this, maybe that, could be this, could be that, sounds like this, smells like that. Pretty soon the world will stop even thinking about trying to figure out the genesis - at this point it doesn't even matter...what it was then isn't what it is today.
Click to expand...
More nonsense.
 
kickingandscreaming said:
No, I haven't, but someone posted elsewhere, "Chinese CDC". Is that correct?
Click to expand...

To finish this from my end. You asked the provenance of the data. I suspect a lot of it will be from what the World Health Organization was able to obtain early on. But I don't know. If you want to know, the links to the supplementary information will tell you. For a short format journal like Science that is where most of that detailed information will be found. So I looked up the links to the supplements. For you, in case you wanted to find out for yourself.

But China. Yes, everybody knows. Any data that is available from the earliest events in the pandemic would necessarily come from China. The Chinese government could well have culpability or they may not want to be embarrassed. If they are culpable, they would have both motive and opportunity to cover stuff up, provide an incomplete picture, limit access etc. And obviously they have not been forthcoming. So, a question to ask yourself might be whether any on site data could be considered legitimate. And if not, than nothing will pass the sniff test and your work is done.

Formalism in the origin story and what is provable. This was my interest and so you don't need to read on if you don't care. Whatever the source of the virus, the second of the two Science papers does help show that the phylogeny of the virus can be backtracked to early genomes that were collected in the Wuhan market. The phylogeny can be rooted there. That was the point of that work, not to let China off the hook or prove natural origin. It helps limits the narrative space in ways that help refine this or that scenarios. One way or another the origins of the pandemic required human agency. Natural precursors to lineages A and B could have been transported to the market by wildlife traffickers. Alternatively, the virus could have been the product of a deliberate or accidental release from a lab source/stock, with the Wuhan Institute being the most likely suspect. Is either alternative formally provable? IMO, it will never be possible to prove that it was a spillover. Somebody could ultimately show "here is the cave with a viral population that aligns with A and here, 10 km away, is the cave with a viral population aligning with lineage B". But so what. The Wuhan Institute goes out and collects viral stocks. So maybe they had them to begin with and then covered it up. No way to disprove that, etc. With the correct smoking gun, intelligence product, whatever, it could be possible to prove a lab leak/release beyond what might constitute reasonable doubt. Short of that, for an origin story the simplest explanation will never be a satisfactory one. That was my point.
 
watfly said:
I read the Nature article and haven't read the studies, but based on all the caveats and qualifiers in the article it sounds like these studies are at best educated guesses. Particularly when they can't trace it to a species let alone a specific infected animal. A bigger knock may be the fact that 2 of the studies came from Scripps which doesnt have any Covid credibility after one of its experts claimed that water activities were dangerous because the virus would be carried by sea air. This falsehood led to policies that closed beaches and ocean activities. Scripps needs to stick with oceanography and avoid virology.

The good news is the pangolin seems to be off the hook. I had predicted it was just scapegoated because it was so ugly. The racoon dog is pretty cute.

At this point we have very little evidence to prove either a lab leak or the wet market source. Personally I doubt that we will ever know definitively since China blocked any timely and open investgation.

One thing Covid has exposed is the low bar that has been set for the definition of science.
Click to expand...

The papers getting tossed about come, in part, from the Scripps Research Institute, not Scripps Institute of Oceanography. I appreciate that is likely a distinction without a difference for you but they are administratively distinct. I don't know what beach thing you are talking about, but if you're sure it came from Scripps Oceanography and you want to provide your guidance beyond harrumphing I was recently looking at their organizational structure since my kid was considering UCSD. That structure can be found here.


I suspect if you wrote to the Associate Dean of Marine Sciences and Cced the Director/Dean you would get some response. Since they would both be seeing it they would have to deal with it in some kind of way I suspect. Even if they just redirected to their outreach person. You might get some free swag.
 
EvilGoalie 21 said:
But China. Yes, everybody knows. Any data that is available from the earliest events in the pandemic would necessarily come from China. The Chinese government could well have culpability or they may not want to be embarrassed. If they are culpable, they would have both motive and opportunity to cover stuff up, provide an incomplete picture, limit access etc. And obviously they have not been forthcoming. So, a question to ask yourself might be whether any on site data could be considered legitimate. And if not, than nothing will pass the sniff test and your work is done.
Click to expand...
The chinese government has moved on, they have bigger fish to fry, things to get after. They are happy to leave behind bits and pieces of disjointed information.
 
"Point being? The toothpaste is on the counter and well dried up by now." Quote from a nitwit



The administration continues to prostrate itself when it comes to China, be it Wuhan & Covid 19, Taiwan, giving it our petroleum reserves, or Hunter...
 
Lion Eyes said:
"Point being? The toothpaste is on the counter and well dried up by now." Quote from a nitwit



The administration continues to prostrate itself when it comes to China, be it Wuhan & Covid 19, Taiwan, giving it our petroleum reserves, or Hunter...
Click to expand...
Is that what's on the laptop? You never answered that question.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top