Our Covid Response

Worgen

Follower of the Glorious Sun Butt.
Legacy
Apr 1, 2009
14,415
3,393
118
Gender
Whatever, just wash your hands.
I've got a question for everyone

Why is trust so important to people?

Does TRUSTING the person/ institution help you determine your level of understanding of the research?
Reasonable trust of institutions is important since without it something like the CDC has as much credibility as your local healing crystal vendor. There are levels of healthy skepticism, but lately it seems like a lot of skepticism is at a poisonous level.
 

Phoenixmgs

The Muse of Fate
Legacy
Apr 3, 2020
8,915
783
118
w/ M'Kraan Crystal
Gender
Male
Comparing rates of symptoms and cross referencing it with rates of covid and non-covid infections is literally the only way research could be done on this.

You can complain about the limits of the methodology all you like, but it's the only one available. And I'll trust the conclusions of peer-reviewed researchers rather than your armchair gripes about limitations.



Obviously. Why would it be? Other infections can also cause long-lasting symptoms over the same timescale.



"Why would I make that argument"? In case you missed the context, another poster explicitly compared wearing masks to wearing the star of David in 1930s Germany.

That's what I was responding to. And then you interjected.
I know that, that study didn't do that. Nor has any study tried to figure the frequency of say long flu so even if you found of the frequency of long covid, we'd have no context for how often it occurs in comparison to another virus. It would be like me telling you a console is capable of X amount of teraflops when you have no idea what the other consoles are capable of so you have no clue if that's high or low or average. Then of course, you'd have to have the same criteria for long flu and long covid so you're actually comparing apples to apples vs oranges. What conclusions did I jump to? I just said the very basic thing the study found and that's it. I can link to what 2 professional peer reviewers think of the long covid studies but you'd probably complain about them.

So finally we're on the same page I think. I thought you've been saying long covid is some unique phenomenon to covid. With the fact that long symptoms happen from other endemic respiratory viruses, why is long covid raised up as being any more important to worry about than say long flu? That has been my point the whole time. Show me why I should care about long covid more than I care about long flu.

My fault, I didn't quite catch the context of that discussion.


I said that if the origins didn't really matter, then it's in our best interests to not let racists use it to be xenophobic
No, it's not, and classifying that way is not helpful
It is much easier for a layperson to tell if they have measles than covid. Hell, you thought you had mild covid a couple times last week because, what, you woke up a bit stuffed up a few times?
Yeah, why would a country want to mandate it's citizens protect itself from severe disease and death. That's crazy.
I have specifically never made an argument about fat and will continue to not make an argument about fat

Bullshit, and not what you said originally.

If i find the source of that quote and you're taking it out of context, you owe me $20
Sure thing, Papa Nurgle
Neat. They also don't know why there's an uptick to begin with
"The exploding segment of the population suffering from certain food ailments is skyrocketing, and experts are stumped on the reasons why."
The origin does matter, just not to the vast majority of the population. And regardless of where it came from, it wasn't going to change anything with regards to the response so it was rather meaningless in the present (when the pandemic was happening). And, again, the wet market has more use for racism.

But many people knew they had covid, why make them get vaccinated? Why make anyone get vaccinated with no community effect? Covid was the only thing going around in the summer, it probably was some exposure to covid being fought off, not that it really matters much if it was. But I've never had those issues in the summer before (I've never gotten sick in the summer once in my life) and the time my nose felt like it was going to be stuffy, it was literally 2 days after I played board games sitting next to someone that tested positive the next day.

For much of the population, covid is hardly severe death and disease, it's less deadly than the flu to most people. Are people mandated to get the flu shot every year? NOPE.

Why would you blindly trust official recommendations from anyone without seeing evidence of why it's the recommendation?

You said blanket immunization is good policy and then I said this below several posts back. How is that not what I said originally?
There's data literally showing several groups of people are put at more risk getting just vaccinated once (vs an actual covid infection).
The quote is right here. All you had to do was google that in quotes to find it, literally the first result.

It's like you don't want to believe in actual science only because I said something that is basic scientific knowledge. And by the way, I'm gonna go out on a limb and claim the earth is round, I guess you'll have to disagree with that squarely because I said it and no other reason.

Because the guidelines were to not expose kids early to peanuts...



This was published in February of 2022, but it is possible that cloth masks might not help as much against the current variant.
CDC studies are notoriously bad, even this study literally admits it's bad but you have to read the fine print. The CDC even published that one study from Kansas IIRC where they said natural immunity was weaker than vaccine immunity (when literally every other study in the world said the opposite). And then the CDC released data showing that in fact natural immunity was indeed stronger. Notice the pound sign right after Cloth Mask and when you follow it down it says "not statistically significant"? That basically means the study whether size and/or methods/whatever weren't good enough to actually prove the result in any way.
1667796646617.png






"Determining the titer for neutralizing antibodies, which are specialized antibodies that bind pathogens and prevent them from spreading infection, is another important aspect to ensure protection against a particular disease.

Neutralizing antibody titers in the blood closely correlate with the protection provided by an effective vaccination."
Just looking at that first study it says "may" so that's a bad sign already. Then, looking at the patient pool, 8 of the non-survivors were on dialysis so these people weren't healthy. There's a reason why booster data only shows it working in old and vulnerable people because they have health issues meaning their immune systems are likely not working normally. Thus, the vulnerable probably need those antibodies because their immune systems aren't good enough on their own to fend off the virus (that's why catching the flu can be devastating for them as well). Here is Paul Offit talking about the importance of T-cells (just ctrl+f t-cells in the transcipt) to see what Paul says about t-cells and how they are the main thing protecting you. The problem is the vulnerable's immune system is no longer operating like normal. The reason the mRNA vaccines were 2 doses and the J&J was one dose was because the J&J produced a t-cell response in one dose while it took a 2nd dose for that to occur in the mRNA vaccines, it was never about antibody numbers, it's just that the media kept acting like antibodies are important.


I've got a question for everyone

Why is trust so important to people?

Does TRUSTING the person/ institution help you determine your level of understanding of the research?
Trust isn't important for me, I ask for the same level of evidence whether I trust you or not. I even ask "why?" at work all the time when there's some new thing/change at work and at best, 10% of the time it actually makes sense, and 90% of the time it doesn't (and my boss is like I'm just the messenger), which means then I basically don't have to do it.
 

Worgen

Follower of the Glorious Sun Butt.
Legacy
Apr 1, 2009
14,415
3,393
118
Gender
Whatever, just wash your hands.
CDC studies are notoriously bad, even this study literally admits it's bad but you have to read the fine print. The CDC even published that one study from Kansas IIRC where they said natural immunity was weaker than vaccine immunity (when literally every other study in the world said the opposite). And then the CDC released data showing that in fact natural immunity was indeed stronger. Notice the pound sign right after Cloth Mask and when you follow it down it says "not statistically significant"? That basically means the study whether size and/or methods/whatever weren't good enough to actually prove the result in any way.
Well, feel free to go find your own study.
 

TheMysteriousGX

Elite Member
Legacy
Sep 16, 2014
8,300
6,798
118
Country
United States
The origin does matter, just not to the vast majority of the population. And regardless of where it came from, it wasn't going to change anything with regards to the response so it was rather meaningless in the present (when the pandemic was happening). And, again, the wet market has more use for racism.
So don't post the wet market stuff either. The origin doesn't matter far as social media goes
But many people knew they had covid, why make them get vaccinated? Why make anyone get vaccinated with no community effect? Covid was the only thing going around in the summer, it probably was some exposure to covid being fought off, not that it really matters much if it was. But I've never had those issues in the summer before (I've never gotten sick in the summer once in my life) and the time my nose felt like it was going to be stuffy, it was literally 2 days after I played board games sitting next to someone that tested positive the next day.
Means nothing without a lab test. Just because you don't think you get summer colds doesn't mean summer colds, allergens, etc don't exist at all.
For much of the population, covid is hardly severe death and disease, it's less deadly than the flu to most people. Are people mandated to get the flu shot every year? NOPE.
Covid is demonstrably far more deadly than the flu, based on the fact that it killed and is killing at least an order of magnitude more people, several orders of magnitude more at the height of the pandemic
Why would you blindly trust official recommendations from anyone without seeing evidence of why it's the recommendation?
It's in a nation's best interest to keep its citizens alive. Due to CDC fuckery, black people and other minority groups have valid beef and reasons for mistrust, *but* if the CDC is recommending white suburbanites do something, it's probably something the CDC genuinely believes is necessary or useful
You said blanket immunization is good policy and then I said this below several posts back. How is that not what I said originally?


The quote is right here. All you had to do was google that in quotes to find it, literally the first result.
Is this gonna be another one of those things you're gonna owe me money for for misrepresenting?
It's like you don't want to believe in actual science only because I said something that is basic scientific knowledge. And by the way, I'm gonna go out on a limb and claim the earth is round, I guess you'll have to disagree with that squarely because I said it and no other reason.
You are also incorrect, the earth is an oblate spheroid. "Round" isn't nearly specific enough
Because the guidelines were to not expose kids early to peanuts...
Literally quoted the part of the article that said experts were stumped.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BrawlMan

TheMysteriousGX

Elite Member
Legacy
Sep 16, 2014
8,300
6,798
118
Country
United States
Getting online chatter about people thinking immunity debt is a thing, so thread

Sorry its on Twitter, but the doctor involved doesn't have a much more credible youtube channel
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kwak

Silvanus

Elite Member
Legacy
Jan 15, 2013
11,025
5,794
118
Country
United Kingdom
I know that, that study didn't do that. Nor has any study tried to figure the frequency of say long flu so even if you found of the frequency of long covid, we'd have no context for how often it occurs in comparison to another virus.
The study quite explicitly shows the rate of LC-associated symptoms in those who had covid, and those who had non-covid infections.

This is the only way the research could be done.

What conclusions did I jump to? I just said the very basic thing the study found and that's it.
The study you posted merely said there were unknowns and uncertainties. You've been quite definitive in stating that covid and LC aren't actually connected, which is absolutely not a conclusion the researchers came to.

So finally we're on the same page I think. I thought you've been saying long covid is some unique phenomenon to covid. With the fact that long symptoms happen from other endemic respiratory viruses, why is long covid raised up as being any more important to worry about than say long flu? That has been my point the whole time. Show me why I should care about long covid more than I care about long flu.
Why would anyone think the symptoms are unique to that one disease!? The acute symptoms of covid itself aren't all unique either.

The reason you should care more is because covid has killed millions of people in the last two years, many more than the average flu season, and we don't know much about the severity of Long Covid.

Also the incidence of LC appears to be significantly higher than the incidence of "long flu" among those infected with the respective source diseases.
 

Phoenixmgs

The Muse of Fate
Legacy
Apr 3, 2020
8,915
783
118
w/ M'Kraan Crystal
Gender
Male
Well, feel free to go find your own study.
In Spain, they masked kids 6 and up and when looking back at the covid transmissions between 5 and 6 year olds, and the 6 year olds showed more covid incidence. The study looked at more kids and found that masks did not do anything and age was the only factor in the difference of incidences.


So don't post the wet market stuff either. The origin doesn't matter far as social media goes
Means nothing without a lab test. Just because you don't think you get summer colds doesn't mean summer colds, allergens, etc don't exist at all.
Covid is demonstrably far more deadly than the flu, based on the fact that it killed and is killing at least an order of magnitude more people, several orders of magnitude more at the height of the pandemic
It's in a nation's best interest to keep its citizens alive. Due to CDC fuckery, black people and other minority groups have valid beef and reasons for mistrust, *but* if the CDC is recommending white suburbanites do something, it's probably something the CDC genuinely believes is necessary or useful
Is this gonna be another one of those things you're gonna owe me money for for misrepresenting?
You are also incorrect, the earth is an oblate spheroid. "Round" isn't nearly specific enough
Literally quoted the part of the article that said experts were stumped.
Why not? People can't talk about things that might possibly lead to racism? Are we not even allowed to say it originated in China? That is beyond stupid.

And what about all the people that had confirmed covid, why are you going to force them to do get something they don't need?

Covid was more deadly than the flu to CERTAIN GROUPS. Covid is currently less deadly than the flu in all age groups now.

AGAIN, THERE'S SOME GROUPS OF PEOPLE WHERE THE VACCINE IS RISKIER THAN A COVID INFECTION. WHY WOULD YOU FORCE PEOPLE TO TAKE SOMETHING THAT GIVES THEM WORSE MEDICAL OUTCOMES? WHY CAN'T YOU ANSWER THAT QUESTION?

So you still didn't read the thing about what Paul Offit said? It seems to be a trend that you don't read things.

If experts are stumped, why'd they change the guidelines?


Getting online chatter about people thinking immunity debt is a thing, so thread

Sorry its on Twitter, but the doctor involved doesn't have a much more credible youtube channel
Really? Don't you see all those logical contradictions in there? There's no evidence of the immunity gap so it doesn't exist. Then goes on to say covid weakens the immune system with no evidence of that either [solid evidence of that cuz there's a study for covid saying it does literally everything at this point]. Then goes on to say with public health measures like masking no longer in play viruses are running wild when we didn't mask pre-covid and kids weren't filling hospitals with RSV. Then says "Given we have had a break from these, most of the population is susceptible & exposed again at the same time"... Isn't that literally what you're saying isn't happening?


The study quite explicitly shows the rate of LC-associated symptoms in those who had covid, and those who had non-covid infections.

This is the only way the research could be done.



The study you posted merely said there were unknowns and uncertainties. You've been quite definitive in stating that covid and LC aren't actually connected, which is absolutely not a conclusion the researchers came to.



Why would anyone think the symptoms are unique to that one disease!? The acute symptoms of covid itself aren't all unique either.

The reason you should care more is because covid has killed millions of people in the last two years, many more than the average flu season, and we don't know much about the severity of Long Covid.

Also the incidence of LC appears to be significantly higher than the incidence of "long flu" among those infected with the respective source diseases.
You'd have to know which infections, not just non-covid infections (how many from flu or RSV or whatever?). You have way too many variables to do the math. The point of the study was showing long symptoms aren't isolated to covid and that was about it.

I'm using a LC as a catch all for long-term symptoms from any infection (that's how the study used it) because people thought covid was creating this new phenomenon that you had to be worried about. The study found LC was not associated with just covid. Covid can cause long symptoms just like several other infections. LC was not unique to covid. Technically if you get long symptoms from flu, it would be long flu, and if you get it from covid, it's long covid. In that technicality sense, of course long covid is from and connected to covid. In the long covid (catch all version which would include long flu and long whatever elses) being some new covid specific phenomenon, then it's not. Kinda hard to explain via text, and that is what the study was saying as long covid was only associated with the belief of having had covid.

It wasn't common knowledge of long flu and long whatnot. People were made to believe it was some new thing or at least a new danger. Covid when it's not novel anymore is less deadly than the flu as I just posted the link above in this post. Once you either got over covid (pre-vaccine) or when the vaccines became readily available, every single covid restriction should've stopped right there but it didn't. For kids, there should have not been a single covid restriction for them ever. Where's this data saying long covid happens more. We have no clue about long flu frequency (or long covid frequency) and CFS is hypothesized to be long flu (or long something). There's no way we have data there to say any of this you're claiming.
 
Last edited:

Silvanus

Elite Member
Legacy
Jan 15, 2013
11,025
5,794
118
Country
United Kingdom
You'd have to know which infections, not just non-covid infections (how many from flu or RSV or whatever?). You have way too many variables to do the math. The point of the study was showing long symptoms aren't isolated to covid and that was about it.
No, that categorically was not all that was shown.

You can say you want more in-depth research if you like. That's fine. But what you're asking for would require a massively broader study, way beyond the scope that's expected anywhere else in modern medical research. You're essentially asking for long-term follow-up studies, for hundreds of people, comparing all prevalent infections over the same timeframe as with a novel virus. That's borderline impossible. A comparison with 'non-covid infections' of similar viral types is more than enough.

It is sufficient to show that covid has a greater propensity to cause those symptoms than other similar extant viruses. Which, coupled with the biological indicators that 3 studies have identified, is absolutely more than enough to link covid to long covid.

I'm using a LC as a catch all for long-term symptoms from any infection (that's how the study used it) because people thought covid was creating this new phenomenon that you had to be worried about. The study found LC was not associated with just covid. Covid can cause long symptoms just like several other infections. LC was not unique to covid. Technically if you get long symptoms from flu, it would be long flu, and if you get it from covid, it's long covid. In that technicality sense, of course long covid is from and connected to covid. In the long covid (catch all version which would include long flu and long whatever elses) being some new covid specific phenomenon, then it's not. Kinda hard to explain via text, and that is what the study was saying as long covid was only associated with the belief of having had covid.

It wasn't common knowledge of long flu and long whatnot. People were made to believe it was some new thing or at least a new danger. Covid when it's not novel anymore is less deadly than the flu as I just posted the link above in this post.
Nobody-- none of us here, and none of the studies-- ever said the symptoms of LC are unique. That's a ridiculous statement, and I don't know why you've chosen to fixate now on that.

But that obviously doesn't mean "long covid" and "long flu" are the same damn thing. Covid and the flu are not exactly the same. They have superficially similar symptoms. But they can have drastically different impacts nonetheless. Hence why Covid killed >5 million more people than flu over the last 2 years. Similar symptoms: very different impact, because of various other features of the virus/circumstances.

So, LC and "LF" might have superficially similar symptoms. That's no reason to say, "well, we already do nothing about LF, so we might as well not bother to do anything about LC either!" -- the impact could be far greater for all we know.

After all, the rate of Long-term symptoms among covid sufferers is higher than it is for flu sufferers. And after all, the acute symptoms of Covid were worse than acute flu symptoms. And after all, we haven't had enough time to study it in-depth over a long timeframe. All these datapoints indicate caution.
 

TheMysteriousGX

Elite Member
Legacy
Sep 16, 2014
8,300
6,798
118
Country
United States
Covid was more deadly than the flu to CERTAIN GROUPS. Covid is currently less deadly than the flu in all age groups now.
That is a lie, and your evidence is a pull quote with no sourcing on a subscription page
AGAIN, THERE'S SOME GROUPS OF PEOPLE WHERE THE VACCINE IS RISKIER THAN A COVID INFECTION. WHY WOULD YOU FORCE PEOPLE TO TAKE SOMETHING THAT GIVES THEM WORSE MEDICAL OUTCOMES? WHY CAN'T YOU ANSWER THAT QUESTION?
Because it's not true
If experts are stumped, why'd they change the guidelines?
Treatments are different than causes
Really? Don't you see all those logical contradictions in there? There's no evidence of the immunity gap so it doesn't exist. Then goes on to say covid weakens the immune system with no evidence of that either [solid evidence of that cuz there's a study for covid saying it does literally everything at this point]. Then goes on to say with public health measures like masking no longer in play viruses are running wild when we didn't mask pre-covid and kids weren't filling hospitals with RSV. Then says "Given we have had a break from these, most of the population is susceptible & exposed again at the same time"... Isn't that literally what you're saying isn't happening?
No, it's not. You aren't as logical as you think you are. People didn't get it before, somthere's a wave of people getting it now. That's not "immunity debt", that's just how disease *works* and is not proof that we need to be sicker all of the time.
 

Trunkage

Nascent Orca
Legacy
Jun 21, 2012
8,684
2,879
118
Brisbane
Gender
Cyborg
Trust isn't important for me, I ask for the same level of evidence whether I trust you or not. I even ask "why?" at work all the time when there's some new thing/change at work and at best, 10% of the time it actually makes sense, and 90% of the time it doesn't (and my boss is like I'm just the messenger), which means then I basically don't have to do it.
No, trust is very important to you. I don't even know why you are pretending otherwise. You are the whole reason I asked this question because you keep brining up trust like it matter

Nor do you ask for the same level of evidence. One paper can overturn 100. Or any side of effect of the vaccine make the vaccine super dangerous even though getting COVID is 37 times deadlier. You have done the exact same thing on multiple topics. If you did ask for the same level of evidence, we wouldnt even be having this discussion

Reasonable trust of institutions is important since without it something like the CDC has as much credibility as your local healing crystal vendor. There are levels of healthy skepticism, but lately it seems like a lot of skepticism is at a poisonous level.
Yeah... I'm not very trusting of this. And the alternative is not crystal vendors. My discussion about what I did with COVID was based on CDC combined with all the other countries variants of the CDC. I'm also looking for items brought up from outside the government system on the outside chance that 100 countries can be conned... and I am never that trusting of governments. Eg. What are hospitals saying. Then I notice how many millions of people were agreeing in one direction (similar to climate change there are many scientists who different on specific areas but most are agreeing in one direction). I notice what the other side is saying which is maybe 100 professionals and in particular everyone's critiques of each other. I noticed how the first groups prediction were pretty true and the other groups were almost always false.

I know, you were probably just talking about one institution and answering my question based on that. My overly long answer here was probably more than what you were expected as an answer. I just don't have that trust in institutions. Which makes me similar at least what Pheonixings pretends to be.... until you realise that he just believes in a couple of doctors/scientists. They just trust certain individuals, not even a whole institution who have checks and balance. And they have to trust them because they've been generally wrong for the whole pandemic
 

Worgen

Follower of the Glorious Sun Butt.
Legacy
Apr 1, 2009
14,415
3,393
118
Gender
Whatever, just wash your hands.
Yeah... I'm not very trusting of this. And the alternative is not crystal vendors. My discussion about what I did with COVID was based on CDC combined with all the other countries variants of the CDC. I'm also looking for items brought up from outside the government system on the outside chance that 100 countries can be conned... and I am never that trusting of governments. Eg. What are hospitals saying. Then I notice how many millions of people were agreeing in one direction (similar to climate change there are many scientists who different on specific areas but most are agreeing in one direction). I notice what the other side is saying which is maybe 100 professionals and in particular everyone's critiques of each other. I noticed how the first groups prediction were pretty true and the other groups were almost always false.

I know, you were probably just talking about one institution and answering my question based on that. My overly long answer here was probably more than what you were expected as an answer. I just don't have that trust in institutions. Which makes me similar at least what Pheonixings pretends to be.... until you realise that he just believes in a couple of doctors/scientists. They just trust certain individuals, not even a whole institution who have checks and balance. And they have to trust them because they've been generally wrong for the whole pandemic
When I say reasonable trust of institutions I mean reasonable and not blind trust. Like if we only saw the CDC talking about certain steps against covid but no other countries health agency agreed with those steps, especially countries that would have a vested interest in disagreeing with them and all went in a different direction then you start looking very critically at them.

Or society is built on our institutions, doesn't mean you should have blind faith in them but that even a wanna be tin pot dictator like trump could only do so much without strong pushback shows how strong our institutions really are. Not sure they can stand up to someone like that again, but they weathered it once.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Thaluikhain

Trunkage

Nascent Orca
Legacy
Jun 21, 2012
8,684
2,879
118
Brisbane
Gender
Cyborg
When I say reasonable trust of institutions I mean reasonable and not blind trust. Like if we only saw the CDC talking about certain steps against covid but no other countries health agency agreed with those steps, especially countries that would have a vested interest in disagreeing with them and all went in a different direction then you start looking very critically at them.

Or society is built on our institutions, doesn't mean you should have blind faith in them but that even a wanna be tin pot dictator like trump could only do so much without strong pushback shows how strong our institutions really are. Not sure they can stand up to someone like that again, but they weathered it once.
Well, that what I meant in the second paragraph. I did make the original question seem like an on/off switch, without nuance. Hence that lead you to an answer that was more definitive than what I was expecting

I realised my framing was not great by looking at your answer
 

Seanchaidh

Elite Member
Legacy
Mar 21, 2009
5,241
3,062
118
Country
United States of America

That which does not kill you can make you weaker. Repeatedly.
 

Phoenixmgs

The Muse of Fate
Legacy
Apr 3, 2020
8,915
783
118
w/ M'Kraan Crystal
Gender
Male
No, that categorically was not all that was shown.

You can say you want more in-depth research if you like. That's fine. But what you're asking for would require a massively broader study, way beyond the scope that's expected anywhere else in modern medical research. You're essentially asking for long-term follow-up studies, for hundreds of people, comparing all prevalent infections over the same timeframe as with a novel virus. That's borderline impossible. A comparison with 'non-covid infections' of similar viral types is more than enough.

It is sufficient to show that covid has a greater propensity to cause those symptoms than other similar extant viruses. Which, coupled with the biological indicators that 3 studies have identified, is absolutely more than enough to link covid to long covid.



Nobody-- none of us here, and none of the studies-- ever said the symptoms of LC are unique. That's a ridiculous statement, and I don't know why you've chosen to fixate now on that.

But that obviously doesn't mean "long covid" and "long flu" are the same damn thing. Covid and the flu are not exactly the same. They have superficially similar symptoms. But they can have drastically different impacts nonetheless. Hence why Covid killed >5 million more people than flu over the last 2 years. Similar symptoms: very different impact, because of various other features of the virus/circumstances.

So, LC and "LF" might have superficially similar symptoms. That's no reason to say, "well, we already do nothing about LF, so we might as well not bother to do anything about LC either!" -- the impact could be far greater for all we know.

After all, the rate of Long-term symptoms among covid sufferers is higher than it is for flu sufferers. And after all, the acute symptoms of Covid were worse than acute flu symptoms. And after all, we haven't had enough time to study it in-depth over a long timeframe. All these datapoints indicate caution.
The study did show what I claimed that LC is not a covid specific phenomenon. The stuff I would like know (and most likely the vast majority of people) about frequency/severity vs other similar viruses would take study(ies) covering a lot more than the study I posted. I literally said many times that we don't know much of the information so I don't see why you're claiming that I said the study did any of that. And without that information, there's no reason to have made long covid some catalyst to keep covid restrictions in place and scared very low risk groups. We have very little understanding of long term symptoms associated with viral infections whether flu or covid. NO, THE STUDY I POSTED LITERALLY SHOWED THERE WAS NO ASSOCIATION WITH COVID SPECIFICALLY AND LONG-TERM SYMPTOMS, THAT WAS LITERALLY THE THING IT SHOWED.

I'm not saying the symptoms of long covid are unique and I never did, I've repeated this a few times because you've said this a few times now. People were lead to believe the LENGTH of said symptoms were unique to covid, not the symptoms themselves. And it's not covid or the flu that are actually causing these symptoms, you can say triggering. It's your immune system continuing to attack harmless things that is causing the symptoms so LC and LF are much more similar they you think, both covid and the flu viruses are long gone in these long cases.

I didn't say to do nothing about it, I said to stop fear mongering about something we know very little about. It's still not even known what chronic fatigue syndrome is and it's probably basically long covid (but triggered from something that wasn't covid obviously). So if you figure out CFS or LC, you probably figured out both of them. WHERE'S YOUR DATA TO BACK UP YOUR CLAIM THAT LC RATE IS HIGHER THAN LF? WHAT DATA POINTS INDICATE CAUTION? There is literally no data to back up that claim. I'm pretty sure we'd have data already telling us if LC is some major thing we have to worry about. Then, you'd need group specific data on top of that because LC kept being brought up as some bullshit reason to keep covid restrictions in place for younger people and kids. Then, you'd also need data about the rates of LC post first infection or vaccine because it's pretty damn logical that LC would happen more often when the covid is novel to your body vs when it's no longer novel (and we're at that point of it only being novel to probably well under 10% of the population).


That is a lie, and your evidence is a pull quote with no sourcing on a subscription page
Because it's not true
Treatments are different than causes
No, it's not. You aren't as logical as you think you are. People didn't get it before, somthere's a wave of people getting it now. That's not "immunity debt", that's just how disease *works* and is not proof that we need to be sicker all of the time.
LMAO, it's from official UK data.

Thank god I already posted this here because I couldn't re-find this at all. So why are you forcing worse medical outcomes on people? Isn't that what you're staunchly against? Parents have been surprisingly smart in not vaccinating their children as the rates are pretty low considering the mainstream media and CDC and White House keep pushing the message that literally everyone should be vaccinated when that has no scientific backing. Funny how people can generally see what's happening (or not happening in this case) around them and follow basic common sense.
Weighing post-vaccination myo/pericarditis against COVID-19 hospitalization during delta, our risk-benefit analysis suggests that among 12-17-year-olds, two-dose vaccination was uniformly favourable only in nonimmune girls with a comorbidity.

Huh? The guideline saying to not expose kids early to peanuts and then changing that to expose kids early to peanuts has nothing to with treatments.

Her post has logical contradictions in it. That doesn't mean her statement itself is wrong, just means how she got there is wrong like a math problem where you got the answer right but the work getting there was wrong. She could be right but she totally showed no proof of it. And she made some pretty unsubstantiated claims in there. She literally said this doesn't explain why a larger percentage of children are having severe illness from RSV and provided a single hypothesis that had extremely weak reasoning and no proof of said reasoning. I'm willing to bet that covid throwing the normal seasonal viruses out of whack and there being more cases and more severity of those cases now as those viruses come back is just not some mere coincidence.


No, trust is very important to you. I don't even know why you are pretending otherwise. You are the whole reason I asked this question because you keep brining up trust like it matter

Nor do you ask for the same level of evidence. One paper can overturn 100. Or any side of effect of the vaccine make the vaccine super dangerous even though getting COVID is 37 times deadlier. You have done the exact same thing on multiple topics. If you did ask for the same level of evidence, we wouldnt even be having this discussion
To the public trust is important as you see with how bad the CDC has been with covid, people aren't even trusting stuff like the normal childhood vaccines as much and their rates are quite down. For me, personally, I expect the same level of proof no matter if the CDC said something or some rando on the street said something. If you're claiming something to be true (not just an opinion but a fact), then I presume you can prove your point. When have I claimed a vaccine side effect is super dangerous? I've always said everyone not prior infected with covid should get the vaccine. I have always said we should wait on kids because kids are different; they were known to be so low risk for covid, why force vaccination on them we it could potentially be problematic? And as you can see in the link I posted in this reply up above that the risk benefit analysis for children vaccinations in most groups, the vaccine is actually more dangerous than getting covid because the benefits to kids are so low that just some small risk from the vaccine could easily tip the scales and it has.
 

Silvanus

Elite Member
Legacy
Jan 15, 2013
11,025
5,794
118
Country
United Kingdom
The study did show what I claimed that LC is not a covid specific phenomenon.
That's not what you were originally saying, though. You were initially claiming it didn't have anything to do with covid-- and insinuating it's psychosomatic. You've shifted dramatically to now merely saying the symptoms aren't unique-- which nobody claimed they were to begin with.

The research provided doesn't support the idea it's unconnected to covid. It shows a greater incidence of the symptoms for those who had covid, and several studies also found biological indicators linking covid to those long-term symptoms.
 

Phoenixmgs

The Muse of Fate
Legacy
Apr 3, 2020
8,915
783
118
w/ M'Kraan Crystal
Gender
Male
That's not what you were originally saying, though. You were initially claiming it didn't have anything to do with covid-- and insinuating it's psychosomatic. You've shifted dramatically to now merely saying the symptoms aren't unique-- which nobody claimed they were to begin with.

The research provided doesn't support the idea it's unconnected to covid. It shows a greater incidence of the symptoms for those who had covid, and several studies also found biological indicators linking covid to those long-term symptoms.
The literal conclusion of the study divorces LC (catch all version) from covid, "The findings of this cross-sectional analysis of a large, population-based French cohort suggest that persistent physical symptoms after COVID-19 infection may be associated more with the belief in having been infected with SARS-CoV-2 than with having laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 infection." There's a heated debate over whether CFS is psychosomatic or not and that's been going on for decades. You think some shitty covid studies magically just figured it out in like 2 years? Science doesn't act nearly as fast as you think it does. It's almost certainly at least partially psychosomatic. Also markers don't mean it's not psychosomatic. The study was not powered to have shown if covid leads to LC any more than anything else, you keep saying that without any evidence.


Really? Someone (that's not China) is still trying for a zero covid strategy that's not possible and never gonna happen? That's so quaint. Also, why? Covid is now less deadly than the flu so why are we going to all these lengths for someone less deadly than the flu when we never went to these same lengths to get rid of the flu? The public is not gonna wear N95s for something so very low risk.
 

Silvanus

Elite Member
Legacy
Jan 15, 2013
11,025
5,794
118
Country
United Kingdom
The literal conclusion of the study divorces LC (catch all version) from covid, "The findings of this cross-sectional analysis of a large, population-based French cohort suggest that persistent physical symptoms after COVID-19 infection may be associated more with the belief in having been infected with SARS-CoV-2 than with having laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 infection."
...And, in typical fashion, you've taken that cautious, "possibility" conclusion and extrapolated your own definite, 100% version from it.

There's a heated debate over whether CFS is psychosomatic or not and that's been going on for decades. You think some shitty covid studies magically just figured it out in like 2 years? Science doesn't act nearly as fast as you think it does. It's almost certainly at least partially psychosomatic. Also markers don't mean it's not psychosomatic. The study was not powered to have shown if covid leads to LC any more than anything else, you keep saying that without any evidence.
Of course they haven't "magically just figured it out"-- it's been known for decades that numerous respiratory diseases can have long-lasting effects after the acute infection. There's no "heated debate" over whether it's entirely psychosomatic-- it's categorically not.

There may be a psychosomatic element. Again you've looked at one factor, offering a partial explanation for the phenomenon, and extrapolated a definite 100% conclusion that the researchers never did.
 

tstorm823

Elite Member
Legacy
Aug 4, 2011
6,468
923
118
Country
USA
Really? Someone (that's not China) is still trying for a zero covid strategy that's not possible and never gonna happen? That's so quaint. Also, why? Covid is now less deadly than the flu so why are we going to all these lengths for someone less deadly than the flu when we never went to these same lengths to get rid of the flu? The public is not gonna wear N95s for something so very low risk.
Don't you get it? If we just wear masks 24/7, all of the world's cold viruses will be eradicated from nature in no time! /s