A Concerned Scientist @BE@qoto.org
Moved full time to my other account @BE soon as this instance is still having issues.
Joined Nov 2022
Interesting article which said this:
"That's why she recommends, when possible, seeking out a long COVID clinic, which can draw on specialists from multiple backgrounds."
Which sent me down a rabbit hole of researching where the nearest long COVID clinic to me is, and what they actually do. Seriously depressing! They teach you how to log your symptoms, give you 4 one hour tele-visits with a psychologist, teach you how to eat a more nutritious diet and how to use heat and ice to manage your pain.
A long way to go, indeed.
@serenebabe Glad you got Paxlovid and I hope you recover soon!
I know the Huff Post article says he's referring to "Congress" which makes you think the denominator is, roughly, as you calculated. But they referenced the quote as being from a Tulsa World article which states:
"It is the reason, he said, he left the Senate.
“Five or six others have (long COVID), but I’m the only one who admits it,” Inhofe said during a recent interview."
This makes me believe the actual denominator is ~100.
I'm not going to claim to understand the law around this, but, when everyone thought he was going to be indicted in NY in 2021 apparently DeSantis was going to fight his extradition. We'll see if we find out this time or not.
Correct. So it's inverse because when the thymus is high functioning, the disease is low severity. When the thymus is low functioning, the disease is high severity.
I believe the way to read that is that it's inverse because:
high functioning thymus = low severity
low functioning thymus = high severity
So the further reduced it was, the more severe the outcome.
@Teddy103 @Kat @Mathlover @pixplz @originlbookgirl@mastodon.online @Billius27@mstdn.ca
You're changing the topic. This was your question:
"And some feel that Biden is more to blame than Trump, which I think is crazy, what do you think?"
That said, I disagree with your premise entirely here. I think the Dobbs decision and Republican leaning polls that exaggerated their polling numbers heading into the election account for 100% of the change between a "red wave" and whatever it is that happened. I also don't think that mask mandates are unpopular, as numerous polls have said.
All of that said....I don't care about the politics of it. I really don't, and so I'm not going to argue the politics of it. I say that as someone who holds a political science degree. I don't vote for people to win the next election. I vote for them to make the world a better place and do what they said they. would when they campaigned the first time.
Also, I think you kind of proved my point a bit further....it never even made it to the Supreme Court. It was a federal court that overturned the mask mandates. They didn't even fight it at *that* level.
Anyway, thanks for the discussion!
@Teddy103 @Kat @Mathlover @pixplz @originlbookgirl@mastodon.online @Billius27@mstdn.ca
That's fair and I'm honestly focused on the situation as it stands, but, I can certainly understand that the *disappointment* is greater in Biden. I don't think, for instance, he's done the best he could do overall. I do believe he did the best he could without spending any political capital on it.
I'm going to stop outside of my scientific realm here and give a legal example because I read your bio. Be gentle if I say something horribly, legally incorrect :)
So, for example, when the mask mandates were shot down in the courts in early 2022 it was a political decision, not a scientific one, to not even attempt to get a stay on the decision. They waited 9 months, until January 2023, after the 2022 election cycle, to ask the courts to reverse the order. Biden promised to follow the science and if anyone was advising him from the science side of things that pursuing that further was a bad decision, then they were giving him unscientific advice.
Anyway, for me, personally, that's about as far as I dig into it. I'm focused on the science and how we dig ourselves out of this situation as it stands today. 10 or 20 years from now it'll look different through a historical lens if we're around to look at it.
@Teddy103 @Kat @Mathlover @pixplz @originlbookgirl@mastodon.online @Billius27@mstdn.ca
There's plenty of blame to go around. Why even bother trying to assign a certain percent to TFG and a certain percent to Biden? At this stage of the pandemic I'm more of a "here we are, so let's deal with it" person. Let history decide who blew it worse.
Fair lol
I'm thrown by the "immune" in CIRS, because the only one I've heard of is Chronic Inflammatory Response Syndrome. If that's what he meant then this is making me wonder, because I've heard of at least three long COVID patients now who eventually went on the Shoemaker protocol for treating CIRS, had success with it, and then were told by their doctors "It had nothing to do with long COVID after all. It was just mold exposure."
So now I"m wondering what the connection is, exactly, and whether CIRS can be triggered by a virus as well. Or perhaps there's some interplay between COVID and biotoxins.
I worked in toxic waste remediation technologies for a long while a ways back. We were always getting pushback from government scientists. We were looking for ways to safely clean up the environment, and they always parroted the same thing:
Dilution is the solution to pollution.
There was just no winning with them when they believed that there was no pollutant in the world that you couldn't just dilute down, release, and then pretend it didn't exist anymore.
Is this the same CIRS as is generally associated with toxic mold exposure?
The traditional school rewards "read and regurgitate" over thought. I've always felt that the majority of students do exactly that.
Those of us who pay attention and listen to you know how much you care. Thank you for all that you do and I'm so sorry that the system and society today are failing in these ways.
@maggiejk@mstdn.social @augieray
But this is where they've outsmarted you! No one will live to 70 anymore! 😬
Thank you! I absolutely misread the probable-COVID part on the first read. The double parenthesis got me, even on the second read.
Tested negative *and* asymptomatic is definitely a smaller amount than a 30% false-negative rate.
I don't think it's a behavioral issue, like people got used to fewer people on the roads. I can say locally the traffic never changed significantly, not even during the "lockdown" time. It was largely ignored here.
We all know COVID brain fog is a thing, people with long COVID show decreased metabolism in their brains(https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00259-022-06013-2) and unintentional injury deaths are up almost 25%(https://www.ajpmonline.org/article/S0749-3797(22)00431-7/fulltext).
Which is exactly what @fitterhappierAJ said we'd see way back in 2020, I believe.
I think I'd agree. There's a belief out there that RT-PCR picks up everything, but that's really not the case once you get into the literature. If you assume a false-negative rate of around 30% and virtually zero false-positives, which seems to be reasonable based on the numbers I've seen, then the numbers of this study look quite different.
In terms of "following the science" the biggest mistake was obviously not declaring it airborne right off the bat as soon as it became obvious.
I've been beating the drum for a long time that this vaccine-only policy is the second biggest mistake.
Not that there's not plenty of mistakes to choose from at this point...
Moved full time to my other account @BE soon as this instance is still having issues.
Joined Nov 2022
