IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Science, Mathematics, Medicine, and Technology
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags Coronavirus , vaccine

Reply
Old 31st December 2020, 11:04 AM   #241
Bob001
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: US of A
Posts: 12,342
Originally Posted by marting View Post
Hey! An actual RCT for vitamin D in high risk patients.

DISCUSSION: COVIT-TRIAL is to our knowledge the first randomized controlled trial testing the effect of vitamin D supplementation on the prognosis of COVID-19 in high-risk older patients. High-dose vitamin D supplementation may be an effective, well-tolerated, and easily and immediately accessible treatment for COVID-19, the incidence of which increases dramatically and for which there are currently no scientifically validated treatments.

Should know something by June 2021

https://www.docwirenews.com/abstract...trolled-trial/

From the link:
Quote:
Participants are randomized either to high-dose cholecalciferol (two 200,000 IU drinking vials at once on the day of inclusion) or to standard-dose cholecalciferol (one 50,000 IU drinking vial on the day of inclusion).
I note that those are almost incomprehensibly larger than the standard RDA of 400-600 IUs.

I also note that the abstract says this:
Quote:
A recent unbiased genomics-guided tracing of the SARS-CoV-2 targets in human cells identified vitamin D among the three top-scoring molecules manifesting potential infection mitigation patterns.
So what are the other two?
Bob001 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st December 2020, 11:12 AM   #242
Planigale
Illuminator
 
Planigale's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: 49 North
Posts: 4,530
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
Science bods - is there science behind this:



At first I thought it might have been a sensible approach but it appears we don’t know the effectiveness of the vaccines after the one dose? (I believe we do for the “Oxford” vaccine.)

Is there solid science behind this?
Yes there is solid science behind this, as good as we have at present. On a population basis this makes sense, I expect to see other European countries following on.
Planigale is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st December 2020, 11:16 AM   #243
Planigale
Illuminator
 
Planigale's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: 49 North
Posts: 4,530
Originally Posted by Bob001 View Post
From the link:


I note that those are almost incomprehensibly larger than the standard RDA of 400-600 IUs.

I also note that the abstract says this:


So what are the other two?
The vitamin D regimes are single dose regimes, as fat soluble vitamins most of the dose will be stored and released over several months. So instead of e.g. 800iu / day you get 50,000iu 3 monthly.
Planigale is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st December 2020, 02:52 PM   #244
lionking
In the Peanut Gallery
 
lionking's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 46,843
Originally Posted by Bob001 View Post
Can you be sure that it was contracted on the plane, and not somewhere else during the visit to the UK? The airlines have been pretty persuasive about their air-filtering measures, and there doesn't seem to be any evidence that airline crews are getting sick at a higher rate than others.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/travel/new...fe/ar-BB199nfz
https://www.cnn.com/travel/article/o...scn/index.html
It’s almost certain it was on the plane as at least one other on the same flight caught covid. Also, this was in March, and, as a very frequent flyer, I’m not convinced of the covid safeness of planes at all. Masks weren’t worn, the plane was crowded, it was a 24 hour flight.
__________________
A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject.

Sir Winston Churchill
lionking is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st December 2020, 03:09 PM   #245
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 96,054
Originally Posted by Planigale View Post
Yes there is solid science behind this, as good as we have at present. On a population basis this makes sense, I expect to see other European countries following on.
But apparently we don’t know the effectiveness after just one dose?
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st December 2020, 05:09 PM   #246
Planigale
Illuminator
 
Planigale's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: 49 North
Posts: 4,530
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
But apparently we don’t know the effectiveness after just one dose?
There is some evidence can look at the difference in infection, morbidity and mortality rates between the vaccinated and placebo groups after the first and before the second dose. One can also look at the antibody and cell mediated immunity levels.

There is no doubt one dose has an effect. There is no doubt a second dose boosts the effect, most importantly in the duration of effect. Delaying the second dose means that people will be at a lower but probably sufficient level of immunity for three rather than one month. a three month booster will be as effective and perhaps more so in prolonging the duration of effectiveness.

As some one who has been affected by this decision I personally am peeved; I did not give consent to this regime. Objectively it is the right decision for the population. At present the limiting factor is likely to be the availability of vaccine not the ability to vaccinate. By concentrating on getting a single dose into the highest risk groups, the impact on hospital bed occupancy and mortality will be maximised. Covid-19 will not be controlled in three months but the community impact will be substantially reduced.
Planigale is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st December 2020, 05:18 PM   #247
Planigale
Illuminator
 
Planigale's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: 49 North
Posts: 4,530
Originally Posted by lionking View Post
My young, fit, athletic son got infected in March on a flight back from LHR to MEL. Amongst other things the virus caused inflammation of his heart. If anyone dares tell me that covid is just a sort of flu, violence may follow.
I think like many people you dismiss flu too easily. Influenza is a serious illness especially in a naive population. Inflammation of the heart is a common consequence of influenza. Probably more people die from the cardiac consequences of flu than the direct lung infection. A novel flu virus could be more deadly than covid-19.
Planigale is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st December 2020, 07:20 PM   #248
The Atheist
The Grammar Tyrant
 
The Atheist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 27,870
Meanwhile, in California...

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/los-a...b6fd33110d76c2
__________________
The point of equilibrium has passed; satire and current events are now indistinguishable.
The Atheist is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st December 2020, 08:29 PM   #249
marting
Master Poster
 
marting's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 2,040
Originally Posted by The Atheist View Post
Hard to tell from the HP piece whether grocery workers are getting infected more than the general population. Just putting out large numbers is hair on fire reporting. Sure the workers are getting infected at larger rates now than in July but so is everyone else.

In the last two months the daily cases in Calif. are about 3x those of the previous peak in July. Deaths are 2x. There wasn't much Covid in the Spring. Covid-19 fatigue has set in.

So far, Calif. has been relatively lucky. Only 11 states have had lower deaths per capita. 38 states have had more. But a few days ago the number was 10.

Deaths per 100k: 66, 23 states are from 100 to 216.
__________________
Flying's easy. Walking on water, now that's cool.

Last edited by marting; 31st December 2020 at 08:35 PM.
marting is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st January 2021, 05:38 AM   #250
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 96,054
Originally Posted by Planigale View Post
There is some evidence can look at the difference in infection, morbidity and mortality rates between the vaccinated and placebo groups after the first and before the second dose. One can also look at the antibody and cell mediated immunity levels.

There is no doubt one dose has an effect. There is no doubt a second dose boosts the effect, most importantly in the duration of effect. Delaying the second dose means that people will be at a lower but probably sufficient level of immunity for three rather than one month. a three month booster will be as effective and perhaps more so in prolonging the duration of effectiveness.

As some one who has been affected by this decision I personally am peeved; I did not give consent to this regime. Objectively it is the right decision for the population. At present the limiting factor is likely to be the availability of vaccine not the ability to vaccinate. By concentrating on getting a single dose into the highest risk groups, the impact on hospital bed occupancy and mortality will be maximised. Covid-19 will not be controlled in three months but the community impact will be substantially reduced.
Your statements about the effectiveness seems to be at odds to the data the vaccine makers have used to get approval? I know of course they are very much profit focused but this seems to be a matter of the UK government claiming “data” that hasn’t been released by anyone? What data have the UK government used?
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st January 2021, 05:41 AM   #251
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 96,054
Originally Posted by Planigale View Post
I think like many people you dismiss flu too easily. Influenza is a serious illness especially in a naive population. Inflammation of the heart is a common consequence of influenza. Probably more people die from the cardiac consequences of flu than the direct lung infection. A novel flu virus could be more deadly than covid-19.
And part of that problem is a matter of misuse of the word “flu”, people use the word to mean a “bit of a bad cold”.
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st January 2021, 05:52 AM   #252
Lplus
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Jul 2018
Posts: 448
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
Your statements about the effectiveness seems to be at odds to the data the vaccine makers have used to get approval? I know of course they are very much profit focused but this seems to be a matter of the UK government claiming “data” that hasn’t been released by anyone? What data have the UK government used?
The MHRA is the regulator which decides if the vaccines are safe, and has issued approval. The MHRA received a data package from AZ with the request for approval. I very much doubt the data we have seen includes all the information in that package, since no data has been promulgated since the delivery of the package, and even if it were issued in full, I doubt you or any other lay person could make informed decisions on the basis of the contents.
Lplus is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st January 2021, 05:58 AM   #253
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 96,054
Originally Posted by Lplus View Post
The MHRA is the regulator which decides if the vaccines are safe, and has issued approval. The MHRA received a data package from AZ with the request for approval. I very much doubt the data we have seen includes all the information in that package, since no data has been promulgated since the delivery of the package, and even if it were issued in full, I doubt you or any other lay person could make informed decisions on the basis of the contents.
Whether true or not doesn’t apply here as we have quite a few ‘non-lay’ people who certainly could comment on the “informed” decisions.
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st January 2021, 06:09 AM   #254
Lplus
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Jul 2018
Posts: 448
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
Whether true or not doesn’t apply here as we have quite a few ‘non-lay’ people who certainly could comment on the “informed” decisions.
One of whom is Planigale - who seems to be a doctor dealing with covid 19 patients somewhere in the UK. So I would tend to take what she says at face value.
Lplus is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st January 2021, 06:43 AM   #255
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 96,054
Originally Posted by Lplus View Post
One of whom is Planigale - who seems to be a doctor dealing with covid 19 patients somewhere in the UK. So I would tend to take what she says at face value.
I’d rather learn why someone has come to a decision than simply the decision itself. The why is what makes this a discussion format.
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st January 2021, 07:43 AM   #256
Planigale
Illuminator
 
Planigale's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: 49 North
Posts: 4,530
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
Your statements about the effectiveness seems to be at odds to the data the vaccine makers have used to get approval? I know of course they are very much profit focused but this seems to be a matter of the UK government claiming “data” that hasn’t been released by anyone? What data have the UK government used?
The detailed data will be with the MHRA. The vaccine was given with a longer gap than the proposed 4 week gap in some trial groups and upto 12 weeks seems as effective. We know from multiple different vaccines that the main benefit from the booster is the duration of protection not the magnitude of protection by the vaccine- whilst this is drawn from general rather than specific experience we would be unwise to insist on awaiting outcomes of one or two year follow up prior to approval. Assessment upto the time of the second dose shows a 60% efficacy, and all serious (requiring hospitalisation) covid-19 cases were in the control arm.

The published paper in the lancet (which I have previously linked to) says

Quote:
1459 (53·2%) of 2741 participants in COV002 in the LD/SD group received a second dose at least 12 weeks after the first (median 84 days, IQR 77—91) and only 22 (0·8%) received a second dose within 8 weeks of the first.
Quote:
In the SD/SD cohorts in the UK and Brazil, vaccine efficacy was similar when analysed in subgroups according to time between vaccines, at 53·4% (−2·5 to 78·8) in participants with less than 6 weeks’ interval between doses and 65·4% (41·1 to 79·6) in participants with at least 6 weeks’ interval (pinteraction=0·56; table 3).
Quote:
Exploratory subgroup analyses included at the request of reviewers and editors also showed no significant difference in efficacy estimates when comparing those with a short time window between doses (<6 weeks) and those with longer (≥6 weeks), although further detailed exploration of the timing of doses might be warranted.
But it is best to read the paper yourself.

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/l...661-1/fulltext
Planigale is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st January 2021, 08:04 AM   #257
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 96,054
Originally Posted by Planigale View Post
The detailed data will be with the MHRA. The vaccine was given with a longer gap than the proposed 4 week gap in some trial groups and upto 12 weeks seems as effective. We know from multiple different vaccines that the main benefit from the booster is the duration of protection not the magnitude of protection by the vaccine- whilst this is drawn from general rather than specific experience we would be unwise to insist on awaiting outcomes of one or two year follow up prior to approval. Assessment upto the time of the second dose shows a 60% efficacy, and all serious (requiring hospitalisation) covid-19 cases were in the control arm.

The published paper in the lancet (which I have previously linked to) says







But it is best to read the paper yourself.

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/l...661-1/fulltext
Am I getting confused about the vaccines - isn’t that paper about the ‘Oxford” vaccine?
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st January 2021, 08:15 AM   #258
Planigale
Illuminator
 
Planigale's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: 49 North
Posts: 4,530
FWIW Pfizer have published their vaccine study. Much cleaner than the AZ Oxford trials, but therefore less robust in some ways.

Of note in this study everyone got the second dose at 3 weeks as opposed to the wide span (4 - 12 weeks) for the Oxford vaccine. They did include a higher proportion of older people than in the AZ Oxford trials. This does mean that people like me who got the Pfizer vaccine and are now due our booster at 12 instead of 3 weeks are in a less evidence based area than those who will get the AZ Oxford vaccine. (As regular readers will know I would have preferred to defer being vaccinated with the Pfizer vaccine and awaited the Oxford vaccine, I've got by so far on PPE and being fundamentally anti-social - who knew social phobia was a survival characteristic? Most of those on the absolute front line would have been happy to wait a bit longer and prioritise the elderly; but there was a lot of pressure from anxious colleagues who don't deal with covid-19 daily to be vaccinated and the ability to actually deliver the Pfizer vaccine to care homes was limited, so it ended up with a lot of the first batch of vaccine going to health care staff - many to be honest of dubious priority).

Pfizer vaccine reported the number of severe cases as one in the vaccine group and nine in the placebo group; this compares with AZ oxford reporting ten participants hospitalised due to COVID-19 including one fatal case. All ten cases were in the control group.

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2034577
Planigale is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st January 2021, 08:20 AM   #259
Planigale
Illuminator
 
Planigale's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: 49 North
Posts: 4,530
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
Am I getting confused about the vaccines - isn’t that paper about the ‘Oxford” vaccine?
Yes because this is the predominant vaccine that will be rolled out in the UK originally due to have a four week booster but now extended to 12 weeks. For the Pfizer vaccine the booster has now been extended from 4 weeks to 12 weeks also. The Pfizer paper linked above gives less info about the efficacy of a single dose partly because booster was at 3 weeks but does say

Quote:
... in the interval between the first and second doses, the observed vaccine efficacy against Covid-19 was 52%, and in the first 7 days after dose 2, it was 91%, reaching full efficacy against disease with onset at least 7 days after dose 2.
Planigale is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st January 2021, 08:30 AM   #260
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 96,054
Originally Posted by Planigale View Post
Yes because this is the predominant vaccine that will be rolled out in the UK originally due to have a four week booster but now extended to 12 weeks. For the Pfizer vaccine the booster has now been extended from 4 weeks to 12 weeks also. The Pfizer paper linked above gives less info about the efficacy of a single dose partly because booster was at 3 weeks but does say
Thanks for the link - hadn’t read that. It was the extension of the gap period with the Pfizer vaccine that I was enquiring about. From the available data my personal view is that it seems more that we hope it will work out rather than based on specific data. The decision could end up causing more problems so I don’t think they should have extended the gap period with that vaccine.

With the Oxford vaccine it seems to be a sensible evidence based decision.
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st January 2021, 08:48 AM   #261
Capsid
Graduate Poster
 
Capsid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,721
https://www.cas.mhra.gov.uk/ViewandA...ment_id=103741


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Capsid is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st January 2021, 08:58 AM   #262
Planigale
Illuminator
 
Planigale's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: 49 North
Posts: 4,530
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
Thanks for the link - hadn’t read that. It was the extension of the gap period with the Pfizer vaccine that I was enquiring about. From the available data my personal view is that it seems more that we hope it will work out rather than based on specific data. The decision could end up causing more problems so I don’t think they should have extended the gap period with that vaccine.

With the Oxford vaccine it seems to be a sensible evidence based decision.
I think all three licensed vaccines (in the UK) have sufficient efficacy (in particular in preventing severe disease) following a single dose to justify maximising the numbers getting a first dose, the public health (or even the individual gain, in the short term) benefit from a second dose is small. Immunogenicity studies show the benefit of a single dose persits to a least 3 months. The reason for the second dose is primarily to improve duration of protection not efficacy, so long as they then give boosters at three months ie beginning in April when we are coming into spring, then I think individuals lose little and the population gains significantly (essentially doubling the number protected). Currently vaccine supply is the biggest issue, not delivering the vaccine, manufacturing will be ramping up, by March we should be able to deliver second doses and continue to vaccinate new at risk groups.

We also need a vaccine trial in children if we want a realistic chance of eradicating the disease, of course if we stop doing all this virtual teaching and send them into their overcrowded poorly ventilated class rooms they may all be naturally immune by the time any childhood vaccine study is completed.
Planigale is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st January 2021, 08:59 AM   #263
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 96,054
Originally Posted by Capsid View Post
https://www.cas.mhra.gov.uk/ViewandA...ment_id=103741


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
That was remarkably clear!

Don’t like the “...snip.. The small, non-random sample and short median follow-up time limits the interpretation of these results. There appears to be some protection against COVID-19 disease following one dose; however, these data do not provide sufficient information about longer term protection beyond 28 days after a single dose.
...snip....“

The document helps me understand why they are going to risk extending the gap on Pfizer doses but I wonder if someone has number crunched the relative risks in doing this?
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st January 2021, 10:50 AM   #264
RecoveringYuppy
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 10,346
Originally Posted by Planigale View Post
Currently vaccine supply is the biggest issue, not delivering the vaccine, manufacturing will be ramping up, by March we should be able to deliver second doses and continue to vaccinate new at risk groups.
Does anyone know if Operation Warp Speed really had any impact here? Starting the manufacturing ramp up early, at government risk, was supposedly the main point. Does anyone know to what extent that happened?

I don't know if the Wikipedia page is complete. It shows some grants for vaccines but only one seems to be to directly fund accelerated mass production, and that is for a vaccine that is still in trial. And if you drill down in to the Novavax article it appears that funding might have been contingent on first demonstrating effectiveness. And, again, I thought the point was to ramp up in parallel with demonstrating effectiveness.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Warp_Speed
RecoveringYuppy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st January 2021, 02:33 PM   #265
The Atheist
The Grammar Tyrant
 
The Atheist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 27,870
Amid all the congratulatory messages about how well Africa has fared so far, there are some troubling signs.

South Africa is clearly in trouble, with their new variant looking to be more contagious, and I see their neighbours Malawi, Namibia and Zambia all showing the start of a surge.

Nigeria also appears to be surging, and while they're not close geographically, they're the biggest trading partnership on the continent, so it may be linked as well.

If this is the case, record numbers will be getting shattered yet again.
__________________
The point of equilibrium has passed; satire and current events are now indistinguishable.
The Atheist is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd January 2021, 06:20 PM   #266
Planigale
Illuminator
 
Planigale's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: 49 North
Posts: 4,530
Originally Posted by The Atheist View Post
Good point.

It's lucky that's how it works or things like HIV would be deadly as hell and kill half a million people a year. It's also why nobody ever needs a rabies shot in the 21st century - I hear it's about equivalent to a cold these days.



You can watch it in real time here, or here.



Wow, you must be amazing Fauci fan to think that one bloke can influence the course of a pandemic and defeat it. I reckon even Superman and Batman together would struggle to do that.
There is only one superhero team who could deal with this; The Legends. Whilst I have utter faith that Sara Lance (indubitably the hottest superhero around) will come up with a plan, I worry that it will be dependant on Rory stealing a pangolin, and given their track record I can't help think they might precipitate something worse, I seem to remember they have already unleashed Genghis Khan on the world although I guess he is in lock down somewhere at the moment.
Planigale is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd January 2021, 07:53 PM   #267
The Atheist
The Grammar Tyrant
 
The Atheist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 27,870
Originally Posted by Planigale View Post
...Sara Lance (indubitably the hottest superhero around)...
I'd never heard of her, but having checked her out, I'll agree with you - beats Gal Godot by a whisker.

And Gal Godot segues nicely into Israel, which is doing remarkably well at vaccinating people, leading the world by miles at this stage.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-55514243
__________________
The point of equilibrium has passed; satire and current events are now indistinguishable.
The Atheist is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd January 2021, 06:43 AM   #268
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 96,054
Mod WarningAs ever - this isn’t the thread for the politics (nor for superhero comparisons).
Posted By:Darat
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd January 2021, 01:23 PM   #269
marting
Master Poster
 
marting's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 2,040
Vitamin D Status and COVID-19 Clinical Outcomes in Hospitalized Patients

Bad news.
Covid-19 outcomes uncorrelated to prior data on 25(OH)D levels

There was no relationship between 25(OH)D as a continuous variable and any outcome, even after controlling for age and pulmonary disease. Conclusions: These preliminary data do not support a relationship between prehospitalization vitamin D status and COVID-19 clinical outcomes.

https://icite.od.nih.gov/covid19/sea...ordId=33380209
__________________
Flying's easy. Walking on water, now that's cool.
marting is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd January 2021, 01:33 PM   #270
rjh01
Gentleman of leisure
Tagger
 
rjh01's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Flying around in the sky
Posts: 26,404
Originally Posted by marting View Post
Vitamin D Status and COVID-19 Clinical Outcomes in Hospitalized Patients

Bad news.
Covid-19 outcomes uncorrelated to prior data on 25(OH)D levels

There was no relationship between 25(OH)D as a continuous variable and any outcome, even after controlling for age and pulmonary disease. Conclusions: These preliminary data do not support a relationship between prehospitalization vitamin D status and COVID-19 clinical outcomes.

https://icite.od.nih.gov/covid19/sea...ordId=33380209
There goes The Atheist's Noble prize. LOL.
__________________
This signature is for rent.
rjh01 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd January 2021, 01:49 PM   #271
Aridas
Crazy Little Green Dragon
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: East Coast, US
Posts: 7,323
Originally Posted by marting View Post
Vitamin D Status and COVID-19 Clinical Outcomes in Hospitalized Patients

Bad news.
Covid-19 outcomes uncorrelated to prior data on 25(OH)D levels

There was no relationship between 25(OH)D as a continuous variable and any outcome, even after controlling for age and pulmonary disease. Conclusions: These preliminary data do not support a relationship between prehospitalization vitamin D status and COVID-19 clinical outcomes.

https://icite.od.nih.gov/covid19/sea...ordId=33380209
Bad, sure. Still, the sample size looks small to me.

Also, just to expand on the results bit of that summary a little...

Quote:
Results: 25(OH)D levels were available in 93 patients [25(OH)D:25(IQR:17-33)ng/mL]. Compared to those without 25(OH)D levels, those with measurements did not differ in age, BMI or distribution of sex and race, but were more likely to have comorbidities. Those with 25(OH)D < 20 ng/mL (n = 35) did not differ from those with 25(OH)D ≥ 20 ng/mL in terms of age, sex, race, BMI, or comorbidities. Low 25(OH)D tended to be associated with younger age and lower frequency of preexisting pulmonary disease. There were no significant between-group differences in any outcome. Results were similar in those ≥50 years, in male/female-only cohorts, and when differing 25(OH)D thresholds were used (<15 ng/mL and <30 ng/mL). There was no relationship between 25(OH)D as a continuous variable and any outcome, even after controlling for age and pulmonary disease. Conclusions: These preliminary data do not support a relationship between prehospitalization vitamin D status and COVID-19 clinical outcomes.
__________________
So sayeth the crazy little dragon.
Aridas is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd January 2021, 02:15 PM   #272
The Atheist
The Grammar Tyrant
 
The Atheist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 27,870
Originally Posted by marting View Post
Bad news.
Covid-19 outcomes uncorrelated to prior data on 25(OH)D levels
Bad news, or not really news at all?

Things like this make me deeply suspicious:

prehospitalization 25(OH)D levels (obtained 1-365 days prior to admission)

Year old data?

Let's wait for the clinical trial to come out.
__________________
The point of equilibrium has passed; satire and current events are now indistinguishable.
The Atheist is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd January 2021, 02:38 PM   #273
Samson
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 9,252
Originally Posted by rjh01 View Post
There goes The Atheist's Noble prize. LOL.
He can have the Noble, just not the Nobel lol
Samson is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd January 2021, 03:07 PM   #274
marting
Master Poster
 
marting's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 2,040
Originally Posted by The Atheist View Post
Bad news, or not really news at all?

Things like this make me deeply suspicious:

prehospitalization 25(OH)D levels (obtained 1-365 days prior to admission)

Year old data?

Let's wait for the clinical trial to come out.
Yeah. There was another similar study with similar results. It was much larger but the data dated back 10 years.

Also, the study noted that people that had their 25(OH)D levels tested also had more co-morbitities. That makes sense. One tests things for a reason. So that may be a factor they didn't fully consider. Also, seasonal effects can certainly change D levels over months, let alone a year.

What's needed is testing D broadly and correlating it to covid-19 infection rates and hospitalization rates.

There's quite a number of observational studies showing a link between low D and Covid-19 severity.
__________________
Flying's easy. Walking on water, now that's cool.
marting is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd January 2021, 03:12 PM   #275
marting
Master Poster
 
marting's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 2,040
Originally Posted by Aridas View Post
Bad, sure. Still, the sample size looks small to me.
The problem with small sample sizes is that "no significant difference" encompasses a wide range since "significant" is, by convention if not definition, .05.

So no "significant" difference could be quite "significant" with larger sample sizes.

"Significant," when a sample size is small, is more meaningful because it takes a larger effect to meet the statistical criteria.

Conversely not "significant," with small sample sizes, doesn't really tell us much.
__________________
Flying's easy. Walking on water, now that's cool.
marting is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd January 2021, 06:28 PM   #276
The Atheist
The Grammar Tyrant
 
The Atheist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 27,870
Originally Posted by marting View Post
Yeah. There was another similar study with similar results. It was much larger but the data dated back 10 years.
My mind boggles that they're conducting research with such worthless parameters - it's just GIGO.

With a period of 1-365 days, it's meaningless, because a lot of the measurements might have been taken in later summer. In fact, you can guarantee that around half will have summer levels, which could be entirely different by the time the study was undertaken.
__________________
The point of equilibrium has passed; satire and current events are now indistinguishable.
The Atheist is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th January 2021, 01:03 AM   #277
Planigale
Illuminator
 
Planigale's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: 49 North
Posts: 4,530
Originally Posted by marting View Post
Yeah. There was another similar study with similar results. It was much larger but the data dated back 10 years.

Also, the study noted that people that had their 25(OH)D levels tested also had more co-morbitities. That makes sense. One tests things for a reason. So that may be a factor they didn't fully consider. Also, seasonal effects can certainly change D levels over months, let alone a year.

What's needed is testing D broadly and correlating it to covid-19 infection rates and hospitalization rates.

There's quite a number of observational studies showing a link between low D and Covid-19 severity.
There are a lot of observational studies associating low vitamin D levels with risk of infection (e.g. measles, TB). What there is lacking is evidence that either treating people acutely impacts on severity of infection or population supplementation impacts on infection rates. However good quality studies are lacking.
Planigale is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th January 2021, 03:38 AM   #278
dann
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 13,259
Vitamin D?! No, it's K for Korona!

Forskere på sporet af spændende corona-hypotese: Hårdt ramte patienter mangler K-vitamin (Videnskab.dk, Jan. 4, 2021)
Researchers on the trail of intriguing corona hypothesis: Severely impacted patients lack vitamin K.
Broccoli, anyone?!

ETA: Low vitamin K status predicts mortality in a cohort of 138 hospitalized patients with COVID-19 (preprint!)
__________________
/dann
"Stupidity renders itself invisible by assuming very large proportions. Completely unreasonable claims are irrefutable. Ni-en-leh pointed out that a philosopher might get into trouble by claiming that two times two makes five, but he does not risk much by claiming that two times two makes shoe polish." B. Brecht
"The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is required for their real happiness. The demand to give up the illusion about its condition is the demand to give up a condition which needs illusions." K. Marx

Last edited by dann; 4th January 2021 at 03:42 AM.
dann is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th January 2021, 04:17 AM   #279
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 46,330
Well, covid is basically a vascular disease, and vitamin K is important to the coagulation process.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.
Rolfe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th January 2021, 05:29 AM   #280
Airfix
Critical Thinker
 
Airfix's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 477
Why aren't flu infection rates rising at the same rate as Covid ? Is flu a lot less infectious ?
__________________
The civil liberties of the individual, so long as they do not harm others, are paramount.
Airfix is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Science, Mathematics, Medicine, and Technology

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:46 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.