Covid-19

[STL_XUfan]

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/the-lan...dies-covid-19/

Huh, I wonder if the follow the science crowd is still following the science.

Experts reviewed the work, raised questions, and when those questions couldn’t be answered, it was retracted, which will likely spur more research into the question. Seems like a pretty good system

[D-West & PO-Z]

Experts reviewed the work, raised questions, and when those questions couldn’t be answered, it was retracted, which will likely spur more research into the question. Seems like a pretty good system

Yeah I don’t get why people are so confused by how science works?

[Juice]

“They were unable to complete an independent audit of the data underpinning their analysis.”

Why was it published without that audit?

[bobbiemcgee]

Just like there was going to be a HUGE spike after the beaches were reopened, I'm sure that there will be a huge spike after zero social distancing and mediocre mask wearing at the insurrections........uh, wait......
(Apologies to Lamont who I just saw made the same point previously)

4,231 cases in last 3 days in Fl. New Record.

[D-West & PO-Z]

https://www.wsj.com/articles/as-coll...s&page=1&pos=8

“As team sports return, so does the coronavirus”


“ But just this past week, Iowa State, Oklahoma State, Marshall, Mississippi and Alabama disclosed multiple positive cases among athletes and athletic personnel. Arkansas also reported one athlete had contracted Covid-19 and is isolating off campus.”

[xavierj]

4,231 cases in last 3 days in Fl. New Record.

Isn’t that expected as well due to more testing? And with it being no big deal to protest in mass, which I agree with, then the whole thing has been an overreaction. As long as we protect the nursing homes we all should be good.

[noteggs]

“They were unable to complete an independent audit of the data underpinning their analysis.”

Why was it published without that audit?

I have a lot of concerns here as well. When the Lancet and New England Journal of Medicine retract articles because the authors can no longer vouch for the veracity of the primary data sources, it’s a big f’ing deal. Think about it, how many clinical trials were halted because of unsubstantiated data? If it had shown any benefit for Covid, how many patients were denied this treatment? How patients were taken off this drug with other disease states?

Hopefully this might answer some questions on how studies are reviewed.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentis...ld-this-happen

[D-West & PO-Z]

Isn’t that expected as well due to more testing? And with it being no big deal to protest in mass, which I agree with, then the whole thing has been an overreaction. As long as we protect the nursing homes we all should be good.

It’s hard to protect the nursing homes mostly from the people who work in them. In Ohio the national guard is starting to test every nursing home employee. But there isn’t a clear plan for after the test. One test doesn’t do a whole lot (other than catch the positive people in that moment) it’s just a snapshot in time. It’s probably not feasible to do daily testing. They might try weekly testing. Hopefully we can keep getting results quicker. The quickest we have gotten back is in about 6 hours but most of them are still take 48 hours before we find out.

You can’t tell nursing home employees what to do in their personal lives but hopefully they are taking more precautions than the average person knowing the vulnerable group they work with.

[bjf123]

“They were unable to complete an independent audit of the data underpinning their analysis.”

Why was it published without that audit?

Because it fit the desired narrative? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[BlueX]

https://www.medicineuncensored.com/a...ut-of-thin-air
The CBS article doesn't give justice to how bad that study was