Covid II: Medical Info and Implications

[Danzo]

11 minutes ago, Calm said:

It is not all kids, it is those that get sick:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7927578/

 

Not just those that got sick, those that got sick enough to be tested. This is a highly unrepresentative sample. The article says most children in get mild symptoms. No one is going to take their kids to get a stick shoved up their nose unless they have pretty severe symptoms. My children just got their first covid test today, for international travel purposes and they aren't going to volunteer for that again anytime soon.

Edited July 30, 2021 by Danzo

[Calm]

2 minutes ago, Danzo said:

Not just those that got sick, those that got sick enough to be tested. This is a highly unrepresentative sample. The article says most children in get mild symptoms.

It is a highly unrepresentative sample of children in general, but that wasn’t what was being claimed. 
 

So your point?

[Danzo]

14 minutes ago, Calm said:

It is not all kids, it is those that get sick:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7927578/

 

Pogo didn't make that distinction in his post, you have to read through the article to get that.  Carless statements erode confidence and make it seem like he just wants to scare people.

[Danzo]

5 minutes ago, Calm said:

It is a highly unrepresentative sample of children in general, but that wasn’t what was being claimed. 
 

So your point?

4 hours ago, pogi said:

.  Up to 50 percent of kids are experiencing symptoms of long-haulers.

This statement is ridiculously untrue. 

[Calm]

59 minutes ago, Danzo said:

Pogo didn't make that distinction in his post, you have to read through the article to get that.  Carless statements erode confidence and make it seem like he just wants to scare people.

I read it different than you:

Quote

 I don't want them getting sick.  Up to 50 percent of kids are experiencing

I assumed he was talking about the sick kids he had mentioned in the previous sentence, not his kids he had mentioned earlier or kids in general. 

[pogi]

8 hours ago, Danzo said:

And statements like these are why people don't trust public health officials.  Anyone who spends any time around children knows that half of them aren't experiencing long haul covid.  

8 hours ago, Calm said:

It is not all kids, it is those that get sick:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7927578/

 

8 hours ago, Danzo said:

Pogo didn't make that distinction in his post, you have to read through the article to get that.  Carless statements erode confidence and make it seem like he just wants to scare people.

8 hours ago, Danzo said:

Not just those that got sick, those that got sick enough to be tested. This is a highly unrepresentative sample. The article says most children in get mild symptoms. No one is going to take their kids to get a stick shoved up their nose unless they have pretty severe symptoms. My children just got their first covid test today, for international travel purposes and they aren't going to volunteer for that again anytime soon.

8 hours ago, Danzo said:

This statement is ridiculously untrue. 

Danzo, I thought that it was a given that I was talking about those children who actually get infected, and not all children. 

The article suggests that it is not just those children who have symptoms either, but studies are showing that asymptomatic children are getting long-haulers too, according to the article and others I have since read. 

So far, there is very limited data and studies on long-haulers in children.  Based on the data we do have, it could be "upwards of 50%" who have long term symptoms.  That is what the data shows.  It could be lower than that, but we don't have enough data yet to completely discount this study - so we have to keep it as an upper limit.  Some studies suggest 1/3, some 1/4, some lower than that, but the upper limit is 50% at present.  Hence "up to 50%".  That is the worst case scenario.  I thought that was clear, but I guess I could have spelled that out further.

I don't know why you are making this about public health officials.  They did not perform the study. The NCBI is not even about public health, per se, nor did they perform the study.  They are just reporting on the studies. The study I was referring to was performed at the Gemelli University Hospital in Rome.  So why would you distrust public health officials because of "statements like this"?

I have been accused of fear mongering from the very beginning.  Many here really got after me for stating how infectious and deadly this virus is and how severe this pandemic could be, potentially leading to hundreds of thousands of deaths.  People said exactly what you are saying now, that these statements erode confidence and are scare tactics.  Unfortunately, I was right.  It was not less severe than the flu after all.  It really has overwhelmed health care systems across the globe.  I have been pretty spot on and careful in my statements.  Backing up what I say with data.  It has mostly played out as I have worried it would.  Is my purpose to create some sense of fear, concern, and maybe even some civic duty in caring for others by showing what could happen if we don't act?  Yes.  Are the things I say unfounded?  No.  People should take this seriously!  I am tired of being accused of fear mongering when I have demonstrated that I am pretty reliable and trustworthy.  Perhaps we would be in a much better situation now if the world would have taken this stuff seriously and not downplayed and discounted the virus that has taken millions of lives and left countless others debilitated and disabled (including children). 

Regardless of what the actual rate of long Covid is in children, no one can deny that it is happening.  THAT is enough for us to take this seriously, when these children have no means of protecting themselves.  To not give attention to this very serious problem is a shame.  When only around 50% of the population in Utah is fully vaccinated and almost 0% are wearing masks at church - this tells me that we are not taking this serious enough. It is so sad to watch.  I won't be attending church for a while I think, unless something changes.  Case rates are getting too high.  My children are not safe at church anymore. 

 

 

 

Edited July 30, 2021 by pogi

[The Nehor]

Keep up the good work Pogi.

It is pretty clear that in the US the number of people who are ‘too scared’ are dwarfed by those who are ‘not concerned enough’.

[Tacenda]

1 hour ago, pogi said:

Danzo, I thought that it was a given that I was talking about those children who actually get infected, and not all children. 

The article suggests that it is not just those children who have symptoms either, but studies are showing that asymptomatic children are getting long-haulers too, according to the article and others I have since read. 

So far, there is very limited data and studies on long-haulers in children.  Based on the data we do have, it could be "upwards of 50%" who have long term symptoms.  That is what the data shows.  It could be lower than that, but we don't have enough data yet to completely discount this study - so we have to keep it as an upper limit.  Some studies suggest 1/3, some 1/4, some lower than that, but the upper limit is 50% at present.  Hence "up to 50%".  That is the worst case scenario.  I thought that was clear, but I guess I could have spelled that out further.

I don't know why you are making this about public health officials.  They did not perform the study. The NCBI is not even about public health, per se, nor did they perform the study.  They are just reporting on the studies. The study I was referring to was performed at the Gemelli University Hospital in Rome.  So why would you distrust public health officials because of "statements like this"?

I have been accused of fear mongering from the very beginning.  Many here really got after me for stating how infectious and deadly this virus is and how severe this pandemic could be, potentially leading to hundreds of thousands of deaths.  People said exactly what you are saying now, that these statements erode confidence and are scare tactics.  Unfortunately, I was right.  It was not less severe than the flu after all.  It really has overwhelmed health care systems across the globe.  I have been pretty spot on and careful in my statements.  Backing up what I say with data.  It has mostly played out as I have worried it would.  Is my purpose to create some sense of fear, concern, and maybe even some civic duty in caring for others by showing what could happen if we don't act?  Yes.  Are the things I say unfounded?  No.  People should take this seriously!  I am tired of being accused of fear mongering when I have demonstrated that I am pretty reliable and trustworthy.  Perhaps we would be in a much better situation now if the world would have taken this stuff seriously and not downplayed and discounted the virus that has taken millions of lives and left countless others debilitated and disabled (including children). 

Regardless of what the actual rate of long Covid is in children, no one can deny that it is happening.  THAT is enough for us to take this seriously, when these children have no means of protecting themselves.  To not give attention to this very serious problem is a shame.  When only around 50% of the population in Utah is fully vaccinated and almost 0% are wearing masks at church - this tells me that we are not taking this serious enough. It is so sad to watch.  I won't be attending church for a while I think, unless something changes.  Case rates are getting too high.  My children are not safe at church anymore. 

 

 

 

People like Danzo and my children and some of my siblings are in denial I believe. Some are making it political as well. Which is very, very sad. I listened to an excellent podcast last night that you may or may not like on Radiowest: https://radiowest.kuer.org/post/george-packer-america-s-last-best-hope

[Danzo]

1 hour ago, pogi said:

Danzo, I thought that it was a given that I was talking about those children who actually get infected, and not all children. 

The article suggests that it is not just those children who have symptoms either, but studies are showing that asymptomatic children are getting long-haulers too, according to the article and others I have since read. 

So far, there is very limited data and studies on long-haulers in children.  Based on the data we do have, it could be "upwards of 50%" who have long term symptoms.  That is what the data shows.  It could be lower than that, but we don't have enough data yet to completely discount this study - so we have to keep it as an upper limit.  Some studies suggest 1/3, some 1/4, some lower than that, but the upper limit is 50% at present.  Hence "up to 50%".  That is the worst case scenario.  I thought that was clear, but I guess I could have spelled that out further.

I don't know why you are making this about public health officials.  They did not perform the study. The NCBI is not even about public health, per se, nor did they perform the study.  They are just reporting on the studies. The study I was referring to was performed at the Gemelli University Hospital in Rome.  So why would you distrust public health officials because of "statements like this"?

I have been accused of fear mongering from the very beginning.  Many here really got after me for stating how infectious and deadly this virus is and how severe this pandemic could be, potentially leading to hundreds of thousands of deaths.  People said exactly what you are saying now, that these statements erode confidence and are scare tactics.  Unfortunately, I was right.  It was not less severe than the flu after all.  It really has overwhelmed health care systems across the globe.  I have been pretty spot on and careful in my statements.  Backing up what I say with data.  It has mostly played out as I have worried it would.  Is my purpose to create some sense of fear, concern, and maybe even some civic duty in caring for others by showing what could happen if we don't act?  Yes.  Are the things I say unfounded?  No.  People should take this seriously!  I am tired of being accused of fear mongering when I have demonstrated that I am pretty reliable and trustworthy.  Perhaps we would be in a much better situation now if the world would have taken this stuff seriously and not downplayed and discounted the virus that has taken millions of lives and left countless others debilitated and disabled (including children). 

Regardless of what the actual rate of long Covid is in children, no one can deny that it is happening.  THAT is enough for us to take this seriously, when these children have no means of protecting themselves.  To not give attention to this very serious problem is a shame.  When only around 50% of the population in Utah is fully vaccinated and almost 0% are wearing masks at church - this tells me that we are not taking this serious enough. It is so sad to watch.  I won't be attending church for a while I think, unless something changes.  Case rates are getting too high.  My children are not safe at church anymore. 

 

 

 

Do you believe that 50% of all children who get a COVID infection will have long haul Covid?

[Danzo]

29 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

Keep up the good work Pogi.

It is pretty clear that in the US the number of people who are ‘too scared’ are dwarfed by those who are ‘not concerned enough’.

The problem with jumping out of the shadows to scare people is that it tends to get less effective over time, as anyone who has watched alot of horror movies can tell you. 

[The Nehor]

2 minutes ago, Danzo said:

Do you believe that 50% of all children who get a COVID infection will have long haul Covid?

He just answered that in his post.

Just now, Danzo said:

The problem with jumping out of the shadows to scare people is that it tends to get less effective over time, as anyone who has watched alot of horror movies can tell you. 

And the problem with those who “see through” everything is that it is impossible to reach them about real danger.

[ksfisher]

2 hours ago, pogi said:

almost 0% are wearing masks at church

Do you have any information to back this up or is this anecdotal or your personal observation.  My ward has never stopped wearing masks and my observation is that the noncompliance rate is below 5%.

[pogi]

1 hour ago, ksfisher said:

Do you have any information to back this up or is this anecdotal or your personal observation.  My ward has never stopped wearing masks and my observation is that the noncompliance rate is below 5%.

I am jealous.  This is anecdotal based on my Draper ward.  My family is literally the only family who wears masks in my ward.  That is not an exaggeration either.  I was assuming it is similar in other Utah wards based on mask wearing rates in restaurants etc. - almost non existent any more.  It is sad that people only wear them when mandated.  

Where do you live?  Does your stake still encourage masks?  Our stake has lifted all Covid precautions, just as the Delta variant was picking up.  It is nonsensical.  They were super good when numbers were very low and the Delta variant was not around, but as soon as numbers started picking up and the delta variant became problematic, they lifted all precautions.  Singing is back.  No distancing.  No sacrament passing precautions.  No masks.  Nothing!  It is very disheartening knowing that statistically only around 50% of the congregation is fully vaccinated.  It is also disheartening knowing that health care workers have no relief in sight with hospitals filling up again.  The depressing part is that it is mostly avoidable.

Edited July 30, 2021 by pogi

[Danzo]

41 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

He just answered that in his post.

And the problem with those who “see through” everything is that it is impossible to reach them about real danger.

Or we can talk about actual danger, actual data and actual risk, as well as the degree of uncertainty in those projections.  You would be supprised how much credabilty increases when you have the ablilty to admit you just don't know, and you are making your best attempt.  I have found people are much more likely to follow my recommentations when I am upfront with them on my uncertainty of a position.  

People who work for the government like to project a degree of certainty that really just isn't there.  I happen to make my living off of the fact that the government is often spectacularly wrong, despite the degree of certainty it tries to project.  One government agency I work with has changed their intrepretation of recent legislation at least four times in the last few months and I expect to change a few times more. Each time the change is made, the government publications express their new interpretation with complete certainty.  Each change is backed up with a rehearsal of all the facts and reasons that lead to the change in interpretation. 

The CDC is not immune to this.

When they changed their mask reccomendations for vaccinations a few months ago, I remember commenting to my children to expect a new wave within a month or two.   I remember  explaining to them that the mask recommendations didn't change because the virus had changed,  it was because the political pressures and risk tolerances of the agency had changed.  Now the CDC has changed their reccomendations again.  For Vaccinated people.  Did they not know what they were talking about earlier when they told everyone to stay masked when they were vaccinated? Were they mistaken when they told vaccinated people they didn't have to wear masks? Or when they recently told us to put the mask back on?

I suspect that the CDC really had no Idea when they made each of those reccomendations and the change in recomendations were a change in the risk tolerance of those making the recomendations rather than changes in  how viruses actually behave.  

 

[Danzo]

6 minutes ago, pogi said:

I am jealous.  This is anecdotal based on my Draper ward.  My family is literally the only family who wears masks in my ward.  That is not an exaggeration either.  I was assuming it is similar in other Utah wards based on mask wearing rates in restaurants etc. - almost non existent any more.  It is sad that people only wear them when mandated.  

Where do you live?  Does your stake still encourage masks?  Our stake has lifted all Covid precautions, just as the Delta variant was picking up.  It is nonsensical.  They were super good when numbers were very low and the Delta variant was not around, but as soon as numbers started picking up and the delta variant became problematic, they lifted all precautions.  Singing is back.  No distancing.  No sacrament passing precautions.  No masks.  Nothing!  It is very disheartening knowing that statistically only around 50% of the congregation is fully vaccinated.  It is also disheartening knowing that health care workers have no relief in sight with hospitals filling up again.  The depressing part is that it is mostly avoidable.

To give some perspective, I recently attend church in the state of Oaxaca mexico for a few weeks.  In that branch, someone took everyone's temprature, you had to step in a container of disinfectant, to disinfect shoes,  then they sprayed you with some sort of disinfectant and you had to be masked to attend. 

One other difference in mexico was the reccomendation for seperation was 1.5 meters (about 4.5 feet) rather than the 6 feet here.

In the states where I live, I stopped wearing a mask when I was vaccinated (according to guidlines) currently it seems about 10-20% of the people attending were masked.   I currently attend a small branch in a big building so there is a whole lot more than six feet seperation between families. 

[ksfisher]

17 minutes ago, pogi said:

Where do you live?  Does your stake still encourage masks?

Salt Lake.

The stake has left the decision up to the bishops.  I can't speak to what the other wards in the stake are doing. 

17 minutes ago, pogi said:

No distancing.  No sacrament passing precautions.

People are sitting every other row and the deacons hold the tray for each person.

We were doing the sacrament bread in a cup thing up until a couple of weeks ago.  Do you think doing that really makes any difference?

Edited July 30, 2021 by ksfisher

[The Nehor]

37 minutes ago, Danzo said:

Or we can talk about actual danger, actual data and actual risk, as well as the degree of uncertainty in those projections.  You would be supprised how much credabilty increases when you have the ablilty to admit you just don't know, and you are making your best attempt.  I have found people are much more likely to follow my recommentations when I am upfront with them on my uncertainty of a position.  

I agree this would be ideal from an informational and moral standpoint but in terms of practicality during this pandemic I have seen every admission of uncertainty or that this is a placeholder until we get more information lead to many people treating the counsel with contempt.

39 minutes ago, Danzo said:

People who work for the government like to project a degree of certainty that really just isn't there.  I happen to make my living off of the fact that the government is often spectacularly wrong, despite the degree of certainty it tries to project.  One government agency I work with has changed their intrepretation of recent legislation at least four times in the last few months and I expect to change a few times more. Each time the change is made, the government publications express their new interpretation with complete certainty.  Each change is backed up with a rehearsal of all the facts and reasons that lead to the change in interpretation. 

The CDC is not immune to this.

When every admission of uncertainty leads people to dangerous behavior it is hard to see why you should tell the truth.

41 minutes ago, Danzo said:

When they changed their mask reccomendations for vaccinations a few months ago, I remember commenting to my children to expect a new wave within a month or two.   I remember  explaining to them that the mask recommendations didn't change because the virus had changed,  it was because the political pressures and risk tolerances of the agency had changed.  Now the CDC has changed their reccomendations again.  For Vaccinated people.  Did they not know what they were talking about earlier when they told everyone to stay masked when they were vaccinated? Were they mistaken when they told vaccinated people they didn't have to wear masks? Or when they recently told us to put the mask back on?

Good Lord. (Prayer, not blaspheming)

They didn’t change the recommendation right after the vaccine came out because while they already had studies of the effectiveness of the vaccine in preventing the disease they didn’t have much data on the transmissibility and whether people were contagious when infected and vaccinated so they left the mask mandate in place until they had more data. As more information came out and it was found that vaccine did reduce people’s ability to transmit the virus to very low levels or eliminated it they changed the guidelines so that vaccinated (only) people could stop wearing masks. Then the delta variant came along and evidence is piling up that because it is much more contagious it can transmit from people who are vaccinated whether they develop symptoms or not so the advice to wear masks was put back in place due to changing conditions.

45 minutes ago, Danzo said:

I suspect that the CDC really had no Idea when they made each of those reccomendations and the change in recomendations were a change in the risk tolerance of those making the recomendations rather than changes in  how viruses actually behave.  

Or they were different viruses (the delta variant changed things) that the guideline change accounted for which is exactly what happened. Speculating that they are, in essence, just changing their minds due to personnel changes or by what their magic 8-ball says instead of changing them due to changing conditions that are not in any way a secret makes it seem like you want to believe the worst of the organization.

On one hand you insist that they should admit their uncertainty and say this is guesswork and subject to change but when they do by changing things as they figure things out you accuse them of malfeasance. What happened to all that credibility in your first paragraph they were supposed to get?

[Danzo]

14 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

When every admission of uncertainty leads people to dangerous behavior it is hard to see why you should tell the truth.

I disagree.

In the long run, credibility is more inportant than saying things just to manipulate people.

I'll wager I've convinced more hesitant people to vaccinate by listening to their concerns, acknowledging where thy have valid points and pointing out the pros and cons of getting vaccinated as I see it and explaining how I saw the upside of vaccination for my self and my family to be significant and the downsides to be minimal.

I think my approach more effective than saying that they killed everyones grandma, disabed childern and are going to die by not wearing a mask that one time.

That seems to be message kids these days are getting, even if it isn't what is intended

You might be supprised by the anxiety COVID is causing in youth these days. They learn that they were such a threat to their teachers and peers that they were sent home for a year.

I had to explain to my kid that the risk of him getting a drivers license worried me much more (and should worry him much more) than  his chance of dying of COVID. 

 

 

[Tacenda]

1 hour ago, pogi said:

I am jealous.  This is anecdotal based on my Draper ward.  My family is literally the only family who wears masks in my ward.  That is not an exaggeration either.  I was assuming it is similar in other Utah wards based on mask wearing rates in restaurants etc. - almost non existent any more.  It is sad that people only wear them when mandated.  

Where do you live?  Does your stake still encourage masks?  Our stake has lifted all Covid precautions, just as the Delta variant was picking up.  It is nonsensical.  They were super good when numbers were very low and the Delta variant was not around, but as soon as numbers started picking up and the delta variant became problematic, they lifted all precautions.  Singing is back.  No distancing.  No sacrament passing precautions.  No masks.  Nothing!  It is very disheartening knowing that statistically only around 50% of the congregation is fully vaccinated.  It is also disheartening knowing that health care workers have no relief in sight with hospitals filling up again.  The depressing part is that it is mostly avoidable.

Watched church via Zoom last Sunday (liked it and the couple who spoke) and no one was wearing masks up at the podium or stand. Not sure about the audience since they don't show them on Zoom during Sacrament meetings. They did show the Sacrament being passed but the sound went off, and the bread was served exactly how it has in the not too distant past, no separation.  

[Danzo]

37 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

Or they were different viruses (the delta variant changed things) that the guideline change accounted for which is exactly what happened. Speculating that they are, in essence, just changing their minds due to personnel changes or by what their magic 8-ball says instead of changing them due to changing conditions that are not in any way a secret makes it seem like you want to believe the worst of the organization.

OR 

The CDC had faced criticism, even from public health officials, that it has been too cautious in its guidance. Critics have said people need to see more benefit of getting vaccinated in terms of returning to normal activities.

In my experience working with  government agencies, I suspect the criticism had a lot of influence.

[bsjkki]

The vaccine is working. There are breakthrough cases but the vaccine does a good job lowering deaths.

 

 

[bsjkki]

The messaging around covid has not been consistent nor have the experts always been upfront. This is great article about these 'noble lies' and why they are so dangerous.

https://slate.com/technology/2021/07/noble-lies-covid-fauci-cdc-masks.html

 

[Calm]

6 hours ago, ksfisher said:

Do you have any information to back this up or is this anecdotal or your personal observation.  My ward has never stopped wearing masks and my observation is that the noncompliance rate is below 5%.

I applaud your ward.  There are a few that are reporting this, but the vast majority of my friends and others reporting are saying very limited masks (some immune compromised individuals still wear them in low compliance wards), it is all anecdotal of course.  It seems it is dependent on the attitude of the bishop…but that is a guess and this is anecdotal. Maybe those with compliant wards don’t need to talk about it.

Edited July 30, 2021 by Calm

[The Nehor]

3 hours ago, Danzo said:

I disagree.

In the long run, credibility is more inportant than saying things just to manipulate people.

I'll wager I've convinced more hesitant people to vaccinate by listening to their concerns, acknowledging where thy have valid points and pointing out the pros and cons of getting vaccinated as I see it and explaining how I saw the upside of vaccination for my self and my family to be significant and the downsides to be minimal.

I think my approach more effective than saying that they killed everyones grandma, disabed childern and are going to die by not wearing a mask that one time.

That seems to be message kids these days are getting, even if it isn't what is intended

You might be supprised by the anxiety COVID is causing in youth these days. They learn that they were such a threat to their teachers and peers that they were sent home for a year.

I had to explain to my kid that the risk of him getting a drivers license worried me much more (and should worry him much more) than  his chance of dying of COVID. 

 

 

Your straw man is not what the CDC is saying either. You seem to think that news pundits are the CDC. The hysteria was whipped up by people after ratings.

I still think you overestimate credibility. Being trusted is great but most of those who are terrified or disdainful of CDC recommendations aren’t listening to what they are saying. They have already decided they are all liars anyways because government or they have been poisoned by parts of the media who have decided to go full-on death cult.

I have seen scared children. My niece was terrified. Some anxiety is good until you figure out what should be done and you do the best you can and trudge on. Some have taken the “don’t fear” message and have decided that adjusting anything in their life is letting the virus win. These people will not be reached by you or by me. They are the cases giving some schadenfrade as they posted about the fake virus or how the vaccines are a hoax and then their social media switches over to having to go to the hospital, requests for prayers, and then gone.

[The Nehor]

3 hours ago, Danzo said:

OR 

The CDC had faced criticism, even from public health officials, that it has been too cautious in its guidance. Critics have said people need to see more benefit of getting vaccinated in terms of returning to normal activities.

In my experience working with  government agencies, I suspect the criticism had a lot of influence.

How does telling people they should wear masks even when vaccinated make a vaccination more a return to normal activities?

I am not worried about getting back to normal right now. I am in Texas and our hospitals are almost full again. I am more worried about avoiding more lockdowns if possible or, probably worse, not implementing lockdowns when they are needed and people die who didn’t have to because we have too many cases at once.