Just curious, anyone have a plan, or preps for global pandemic?

[Ron Put]

13 hours ago, AlanPater said:

Airborne transmission of COVID-19 and the role of face mask to prevent it: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Tabatabaeizadeh SA.

I took a quick look and the author appears to be almost spinning some of the included studies' findings. For example, here is exactly what Rengasamy says about cloth masks:
"Common fabric materials and cloth masks showed a wide variation in penetration values for polydisperse (40–90%) as well as monodisperse aerosol particles in the 20–1000 nm range (40–97%) at 5.5 cm s−1 face velocity." 

Speaking of masks, this is a good overview of the significant recent mask effectiveness studies, and of the absurd change in masking recommendations that swept through the mysterious monolithic group referred to as "the scientists.

Masks: Before and After They Became Political
"If one actually takes the time to consider the preponderance of evidence regarding universal masking, it becomes extremely difficult to conclude that it has had, or was ever expected to have, a significant effect on the course of the pandemic. The evidence certainly doesn’t come even close to matching the quasi-religious fervor exhibited by the popular media, mask-mandating helicopter politicians, or your judgy virtue-signaling neighbor. And all of the new evidence that supports universal masking should be even more suspect considering the stratospheric bias of the media, public health agencies, politicians, and a terrified public all clamoring for studies that report positive effects, despite their obvious limitations. 

In contrast to evidence, it is much more easy to conclude that safety culture politics trampled our understanding of this intervention so completely and at a level previously unknown in our lifetime, that it will take years to sort out its real-world effects. And it doesn’t take a PPE expert to realize that."
 

1 hour ago, mccoy said:

This of course does not mean that a natural infection bestows no protection.

You might be interested in this:

Infection-acquired versus vaccine-acquired immunity in an SIRWS model

And, perhaps this:

T cells from common colds cross-protect against infection with SARS-CoV-2
 

[mccoy]

1 hour ago, Ron Put said:

You might be interested in this:

Infection-acquired versus vaccine-acquired immunity in an SIRWS model

And, perhaps this:

T cells from common colds cross-protect against infection with SARS-CoV-2

Ron, I like the mathematics described in the first link, even though don't understand much of it!

Natural immunity of course has its robust role in protection against viruses, it has been known for decades and there has always been a consensus about that, except in the absolutist, absurd, antidemocratic behaviour of governments in recent times.

T-cells appear to rule in the medium-long term!!!

[mccoy]

A very suggested video focusing on T-cells behaviours in SARSCOV2 and omicron. T-cells activity is conserved in variants, even if with some decrease in activity.

This may suggest the positive effects of natural immunity and alpha-specific vaccines on further variants like omicron. This is a very informative video that deserves to be seen with attention at least a couple of times.

 

 

Edited January 24, 2022 by mccoy

[mccoy]

At 54 minutes, Alessandro Sette talks about the observed differences between vaccination an natural infection.

'Natural infection', who know the various details, a lot of other variables less uniform than vaccination.

At the end of the day, the point is not what's better, natural infection and vaccination, the point is that vaccination after natural infection gives a sort of super immunity.

Vaccination after natural infection is advised by Dr Sette.

[mccoy]

7 minutes ago, mccoy said:

At the end of the day, the point is not what's better, natural infection and vaccination, the point is that vaccination after natural infection gives a sort of super immunity.

The above is why I'm supremely annoyed that my government compelled me to have a boost given to my autistic son, who had a previous natural infection plus a double vaccination.

According to science, he had a super immunity, according to politics, he had nothing and without a booster, he cannot go in shops or cannot be allowed into rehab centers. And, by the way, the booster was associated with a nasty meltdown, I had to stand against a vicious 220 pounds brute transformed by totally useless government regulation.

Hate is a feeling I experience very rarely, but when thinking about the present government, the banker who is the prime minister now in Italy and the minister of health, the vaccine-fixated left-wingers, I can sense this nasty feeling of hate growing up and nurtured. I know that's wrong, but I also know that not only my next vote but possibly some activism has been gained by the opposing party, the only one which strongly rejected vaccine mandates.

Edited January 24, 2022 by mccoy

[mccoy]

A very eloquent slide from Alessandro Sette. Vaccines protect in a double fashion:

1. Protection against infection mainly by neutralizing antibodies and to a lesser extent by CD4 and CD8 T-cells. 
2. Protection against hospitalization and death by the contribution of neutralizing antibodies and/or CD4 and/or CD8 and/or memory B-cells

We know that #1 prevails with the booster dose, especially so when the booster constitutes a 4th dose, whereas if the booster is a remedy against a closely spaced double dose it will contribute significantly to the maturation of T-cells cross-response.

In #2, protection from death and serious illness, the role of antibodies is minor. T-cells rule here.

The above explains why boosters, whose main effect is to spike neutralizing antibodies, will have as a main consequence that of decreasing the number of detectable infections (positive results of samples), which is a good political result, not a good medical outcome, definitely a waste of money in many cases.

 

Edited January 24, 2022 by mccoy

[mccoy]

6 hours ago, BrianA said:

I'm still waiting to hear anyone in my government and/or large corporations here in the USA mention "hey, maybe we should like, I dunno, actually do something about fixing the indoor ventilation problem?" This and all other airborne viruses will continue to endlessly spread and mutate and infect folks until we do a better job of filtering/cleaning our indoor air. It's a fundamentally broken part of our building codes/infrastructure IMO. And so far not a peep about it, even from "smart" companies like the tech giants, other than "we expect our employees back in the office soon." Where's the leadership on this issue?

Probably and unfortunately we are going to wait longer. Presently governments are focused on political targets, like slumping down the number of positive tests results, like keeping low the score of the adversary team in a basketball match, which has not much to do with a decrease in hospitalization and death, so little to do with the health of the citizens. But this deranged narrative still rules supreme.

[AlanPater]

Do vaccines protect against long COVID? What the data say.
Ledford H. Nature. 2021 Nov;599(7886):546-548. doi: 10.1038/d41586-021-03495-2.
PMID: 34815580 No abstract available.
https://media.nature.com/original/magazine-assets/d41586-021-03495-2/d41586-021-03495-2.pdf

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
“It is noticeably less common
than  in  unvaccinated  people,  but  it’s  still  
there,” he says. He thinks that clinics could see
more such cases as the months tick by.
Vaccines reduce the risk of long COVID by
lowering the chances of contracting COVID-
19  in  the  first  place.  But  for  those  who  do  
experience a breakthrough infection, studies
suggest that vaccination might only halve the
risk of long COVID — or have no effect on it at
all1,2

[AlanPater]

7 hours ago, mccoy said:

Natural immunity of course has its robust role in protection against viruses, it has been known for decades and there has always been a consensus about that, except in the absolutist, absurd, antidemocratic behaviour of governments in recent times.

I believe governments are aware of the protection against further infection by a virus due to previous infection.  They just do not want people to suffer the often serious consequences of the primary infection.

If it were put to democratic decisions, anti-vaxxers would fare poorly:

https://www.cp24.com/news/irresponsible-and-selfish-new-poll-finds-rising-tension-between-vaccinated-and-unvaccinated-canadians-1.5601596

[AlanPater]

Name no names.

Of pandemics, politics, and personality: The role of conscientiousness and political ideology in the sharing of fake news.
Lawson MA, Kakkar H.
J Exp Psychol Gen. 2021 Oct 25. doi: 10.1037/xge0001120. Online ahead of print.
PMID: 34694858
Abstract
Sharing misinformation can be catastrophic, especially during times of national importance. Typically studied in political contexts, the sharing of fake news has been positively linked with conservative political ideology. However, such sweeping generalizations run the risk of increasing already rampant political polarization. We offer a more nuanced account by proposing that the sharing of fake news is largely driven by low conscientiousness conservatives. At high levels of conscientiousness there is no difference between liberals and conservatives. We find support for our hypotheses in the contexts of COVID-19, political, and neutral news across eight studies (six preregistered; two conceptual replications) with 4,642 participants and 91,144 unique participant-news observations. A general desire for chaos explains the interactive effect of political ideology and conscientiousness on the sharing of fake news. Furthermore, our findings indicate the inadequacy of fact-checker interventions to deter the spread of fake news. This underscores the challenges associated with tackling fake news, especially during a crisis like COVID-19 where misinformation impairs the ability of governments to curtail the pandemic.

Edited January 24, 2022 by AlanPater

[mccoy]

33 minutes ago, AlanPater said:

I believe governments are aware of the protection against further infection by a virus due to previous infection.  They just do not want people to suffer the often serious consequences of the primary infection.

Alan, I understand what you say but the truth is that Italian-like or California-like medieval-like obscurantist governments are focusing on one single part of the problem: the neutralizing antibodies.

Who knew that previous infections have an expiry date, like fresh milk in a bottle? In Italy, a previous infection is considered worthy until 4 months after its occurrence. This means that only neutralizing antibodies are evaluated, yet a very important long-term defense against serious disease are T-cells and memory B cells. The Italian government has erased the presence of such entities.

This is because, if we (the ruling politicians) count the positive PCR test outcomes and we are rigid enough in applying ruthless lockdowns and vaccine mandates, we'll be able to score well against positive PCR tests, and we'll be able to show off our victory to the citizens.

The above is presently the strategy applied by what I in my naivete believed were democratic governments, religiously adhering to the constitutional rights of freedom and free speech.

Edited January 24, 2022 by mccoy

[AlanPater]

9 minutes ago, mccoy said:

Alan, I understand what you say but the truth is that Italian-like or California-like medieval-like obscurantist governments are focusing on one single part of the problem: the neutralizing antibodies.

Who knew that previous infections have an expiry date, like fresh milk in a bottle? In Italy, a previous infection is considered worthy until 4 months after its occurrence. This means that only neutralizing antibodies are evaluated, yet a very important long-term defense against serious disease are T-cells and memory B cells. The Italian government has erased the presence of such entities.

This is because, if we count the positive PCR test outcomes and we are rigid enough in applying ruthless lockdowns and vaccine mandates, we'll be able to score well against positive PCR tests, and we'll be able to show off our victory to the citizens. 

The above is presently the strategy applied by what I in my naivete believed were democratic governments, religiously adhering to the constitutional rights of freedom and free speech. 

Thanks, McCoy,

I am no immunologist, but it seems to me that the PCR test result is the final product of what the body does or does not do to fight the virus.

When personal freedom and community public health clash, which should prevail?

[Ron Put]

2 hours ago, AlanPater said:

I am no immunologist, but it seems to me that the PCR test result is the final product of what the body does or does not do to fight the virus.

When personal freedom and community public health clash, which should prevail?

No, you are no immunologist, yet you have very strong opinions on forcing the rest of us to be subjected to invasive medical procedures, lockdowns, and masking mandates when there is reasonably good evidence that the latter two do little or nothing to prevent infections, hospitalizations, or deaths.

For the vast majority of people without comorbidities, Covid is not much different than the flu, and in fact for kids and young adults, the flu is deadlier.

For those who are vulnerable, voluntary vaccines and common-sense precautions are of course advisable. But neither your dubious beliefs nor your personal fears give you the right to lock up the rest of us or to force us to mask around you in public spaces or to inject us against our will.

You are free to wear three masks and gloves alone in your car, or to get vaccinated every two weeks, or to wrap yourself in bubble wrap, of course. Knock yourself out.

The problem is when you insist that you can make such decisions for the rest of us. Especially when "the science" is not really what your tightly controlled information bubble makes you believe it is. And that nonsense that you posted attempting to justify censorship by calling everything that contradicts your narrative "fake news" is is a good illustration of just how absurd your critical theory steeped thinking leads to authoritarianism. True believers have often ushered in the darkest times in human history.

[Ron Put]

2 hours ago, mccoy said:

This is because, if we (the ruling politicians) count the positive PCR test outcomes and we are rigid enough in applying ruthless lockdowns and vaccine mandates, we'll be able to score well against positive PCR tests, and we'll be able to show off our victory to the citizens.

PCR tests were used to drive fear and loathing in 2020, when the Left weaponized the pandemic against Trump. Notably, as soon as Biden took office, the CDC quietly dropped the recommended cycles from 40 to 32 (if I recall) and it's now at 27, One does not have to like Trump to question if this is a coincidence, or why the mainstream media essentially buried the drops almost as deep as the Hunter Biden emails.

Study: Only 1 of 32 COVID survivors testing positive had live virus

It may also explain some of the Covid deaths claims that raised eyebrows and are part of the history written by the media by now.

But it doesn't explain the significantly higher cancer deaths reported in the UK last year, or the excess mortality among middle-aged adults in the US which has more to do with deferred medical visits and treatments because of the fearmongering and the lockdowns. And yes, lone medical professionals raised such concerns back then, but they were quickly drowned and often canceled by the mobs and "journalists" calling for censorship. My guess is that illegal drugs offered a respite to some amidst the mayhem, lockdowns, and CNN's ticker-tape counting every death in a country of 330 million.

This is an interesting story that has received zero coverage in the press here:

Indiana life insurance CEO says deaths are up 40% among people ages 18-64

[BrianA]

Wow, around 50% of first wave cases in Sweden have lasting damage to the sense of smell. Can you imagine if we had not developed vaccines and/or let the "let 'er rip" folks have their way, and just let the virus rampage through the entire world population - we'd have 50% of the world population not being able to smell properly. Freaky.

 

Also of interest here is they ran a control group and found apparently around 20% of never-infected Swedes also can't smell properly. I was surprised that percentage was so high, and I wonder what other viruses might be damaging our smell.

 

Half of first-wave Covid cases may have lasting harm to sense of smell

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2022/jan/23/nearly-half-of-first-wave-covid-cases-may-suffer-lasting-harm-to-sense-of-smell

[Mike41]

18 hours ago, AlanPater said:

Not related to vaccines, but:

https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-d&q=Peter+Attia

What does Peter Attia eat?

 

 

 

 

I consume only modest amounts of fruit (one serving per day, at most, and only in the form of berries, which contain the least amount of fructose). I eat vegetables, but primarily because they are a great way to get more fat (e.g., high-fat salad dressings, butter), not because I “need” them.Dec 19, 2011

Sounds like a crack pot! Eats vegetables ONLY TO GET MORE FAT??

[Ron Put]

12 minutes ago, Mike41 said:

Sounds like a crack pot! Eats vegetables ONLY TO GET MORE FAT??

True, IMO. But still absolutely irrelevant to the point that was being made, which AP did not address, but went straight to the above character assassination.

Edited January 24, 2022 by Ron Put

[Saul]

Hi Ron!

I think you're much too negative in your opinions about Al Pater.  Al probably has the best background in biology of anyone on this List, with the possible exception of Michael Rae.

Concerning Peter Attiya -- I've never thought much of his opinions.

  --  Saul

[mccoy]

Just now, AlanPater said:

Thanks, McCoy,

I am no immunologist, but it seems to me that the PCR test result is the final product of what the body does or does not do to fight the virus.

When personal freedom and community public health clash, which should prevail?

Alan, no, it's not so simple, the immune system did not evolve to decrease the number of positive PCR tests, it evolved to prevent death and serious disease, infection is a very natural occurrence which no vaccine, except the HPV vaccine, can effectively prevent so far on the long term.

When personal freedom and community public health clash, common sense should prevail. Trying to persuade skeptics by reasons and proper communication methods, not by force. At the end, in many countries like Italy even before the mandates about 80% of people were double vaccinated. The dictatorial methods radicalized the behavior of no-vaxxers, they shook the beliefs in the democracy of many citizens, me including.

Hospital occupancy could have been improved after the first wave. I believe it's taken as an excuse of government incompetence, even as the no-vaxxers are presently constituting a scapegoat for the inadequacies of government policies.

At the end, the no-vaxxer takes its own risks, the vaccinated population is sufficiently protected, there would be no need to make a fuss about it.

 

 

[mccoy]

51 minutes ago, Mike41 said:

Sounds like a crack pot! Eats vegetables ONLY TO GET MORE FAT??

Yes, since at that time he was following the keto narrative and, weird as it sounds, vegetables were considered unnecessary accessories.

[mccoy]

Another exceptionally informative TWIV episode on the hypercomplex world of immunity. What happens after a RNA vaccine is injected, how the immune system evolved and optimized to prevent death but not infection, I'll have to listen to it another 2-3 times. First few minutes as usual spent in idle conversation, then John Yewdell dives full speed into a world which is still in part unknown.

 

 

[AlanPater]

6 hours ago, Ron Put said:

Study: Only 1 of 32 COVID survivors testing positive had live virus

What the heck does this prove?  People go in to be tested for virus because they are sick, i.e., have replicating virus.  This study looked at recovered patients, who had no symptoms and found what was probably surviving remnants of virions and showed most could not replicate.  People who were infected and recover assume they are not carrying actively replicating virus and do not bother testing for what are in almost all cases viral RNA remnants.  So do not look under rocks for replicating virus, as almost every infected person does after recovery, and it will never matter at all.

[Sibiriak]

11 hours ago, AlanPater said:

...the PCR test result is the final product of what the body does or does not do to fight the virus.

 A PCR test is used  to detect  simply the presence of viral genetic material in an individual.   So how is a PCR test result the " final product of what the body does or does not do to fight the virus"?

Edited January 25, 2022 by Sibiriak

[AlanPater]

COVID-19 blamed for greatest drop in life expectancy in Canada since 1921
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/life-expectancy-covid-decrease-1.6326089
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Pandemic was 3rd leading cause of death in 2020 in Canada
The Canadian Press · Posted: Jan 24, 2022
"That made COVID-19 the third leading cause of death in Canada in 2020, though Statistics Canada added that the pandemic may have also contributed indirectly to a number of other deaths across the country."
"Some countries, including Spain, Italy and the United States saw greater impact on life expectancy from the pandemic, with declines up to 1.5 years."

[AlanPater]

11 hours ago, Sibiriak said:

 A PCR test is used  to detect  simply the presence of viral genetic material in an individual.   So how is a PCR test result the " final product of what the body does or does not do to fight the virus"?

Maybe I could have explained it more clearly. 

Even a virus is a complex structure that is not infectious without its exact structure being intact.  After recovery from an infection, there may be viral "body parts" around, including viral RNA, but the PCR result identifying the remnant RNA would be insignificant.

If you find a human skeleton, examine its bone marrow and find human DNA, it does not mean there is a live person.

Most people getting tested are symptomatic and then getting a positive PCR test is meaningful to distinguish the infection from say the flu.  Infectious virus quickly is lost after someone recovers.

Edited January 25, 2022 by AlanPater