OSUmetstud

Its a risk calculation at its most basic. I am more likely to get serious complications or die from an authorized vaccine or from covid over the next year or two?

Indeed

I'm glad the infrastructure is in place but this vaccine is not part of operation warp speed. Thats a fact. Derek lowe is a scientist and blogs about vaccines and therapeutics often. That's why I posted it.

The approval process is not exactly normal given the pandemic. This will probably go through EUA like the anthrax vaccine. But that's because we don't have like a year to wait for the longest term efficacy and safety data. We will have the efficacy/safety we have now to base the EUA on. Full approval will likely wait until well into next year.

Theyre not approving the vaccine based on a Pfizer press release.

We haven't seen the data yet. This was a press release.

Yes. And as far as I know the primary end point was disease prevention...not infection prevention.

It doesn't make sense imo for Pfizer to greatly exaggerate the efficacy data because they are going to be going in front of the vaccine advisory board and the fda very soon. Independent scientists and the public will be able to see the data and make an objective decision for an EUA.

For health young people like yourself? Idk maybe late spring into early fall?

True, but I don't believe there was much in the way of scientific studies backing their use.

Agreed on the test itself. I'm making a larger point their role as the preeminent public health organization in the county. They were neutered in that role since March by the administration. It is my opinion that Fauci said no masks early on because we didn't understand how much asymptomatic transmission there was at the time and that the data on the effectiveness of public masking was quite flimsy at the time. That it isn't exactly a flip flop since what we didn't understand at the time that public masking was effective. Since, there have been some, albeit not perfect studies, that have shown some effectiveness. They aren't the golden goose, but they should be warn and used as part of an overall public health strategy. I just don't think what Fauci said in March matters that much about what is going on now. The anti-masking stuff is political theater. It's not genuine scientific confusion.

The CDC never had the ability to make up for the test failure early on because the administration wouldn't let them to take the lead on the pandemic. Public health is what they do, they are supposed to be in charge in all of this. The HHS put political pressure on them often and did political review of scientific literature. Fauci has been serving this country for 50 freaking years. The right hates him. They have done everything to make it political. He's said to wear mask 1000s of times after the initial stuff in March. The anti-mask rhetoric is not about what fauci said in March. It's just another political tool to justify being anti-mask. This sounds a lot like the "scientists are the problem" that couldn't be father from the truth.

There's 61k ballots outstanding in counties that lean much more democratic than the state. It will be close, but I agree, i think Biden takes it. There will almost certainly be a recount there.

I dont believe it ever had a T8.0 look though

Meh

I looked at that for a minute but idk that's a fairly large gyre of low pressure in the SW Caribbean

890mb 155 kt

The same idea came out of CDC's MMWR. We are all interconnected. The virus finds it way into the vulnerable even now even after how much we've supposedly learned.

Remdesivir at the moment only really has shown benefit for the hospital system in reducing length of stay. Theres no good data on reduced mortality for individual patients. Hopefully they can manage more early course studies. The steroids and care has been the main reason for the decrease in mortality in the hospital. I dont think overall mortality has decreased by, let's say more than 40%? Since the beginning. In the second wave, the median age of hospitalization was younger which also helped to reduce mortality from the first wave. This wave already looked worse than the summer one...our baseline is higher than June and Rt (1.12) hasn't begun to go down yet even as cases, hospitalizations, and deaths surge.

I'd have to imagine they'd identify the most at risk people and give this therapy to people in outpatient after they develop symptoms? All the stuff with antivirals and antibodies therapy has been consistently "may work, if given early" but how do you accomplish that?

The October 10th excess death data is now 4.9 to 9 percent. You got to be careful about using the last few weeks as its quite incomplete.

I'm talking about that pandemics end and normal life resumes. Public health people haven't given up and neither should we.

That wasn't the general point. Its that there is a way out. Positive and empathetic public health messaging is important.