Coronavirus outbreak

[JoeyJoeJoeJr. Shabadoo]

1 hour ago, Playoff Beered said:

No I have not seen any other valid studies, but then I haven't looked for them either, so again, all I'm going to say is that if the evidence is brought forth to validate Ivermectin, then I'm willing to change my mind.

 

[Playoff Beered]

7 minutes ago, JoeyJoeJoeJr. Shabadoo said:

 

The new study in the vid I posted was on thousands of cases and it showed a different result. More studies are underway so in due time there will be a clearer understanding. I'm not a medical professional so allot of this is over my head. Will keep watching and learning.

[JoeyJoeJoeJr. Shabadoo]

36 minutes ago, Playoff Beered said:

The new study in the vid I posted was on thousands of cases and it showed a different result. More studies are underway so in due time there will be a clearer understanding. I'm not a medical professional so allot of this is over my head. Will keep watching and learning.

Which study was that? 

 

[Playoff Beered]

6 minutes ago, JoeyJoeJoeJr. Shabadoo said:

Which study was that? 

 

It's in the vid I posted 1 page back. International Journal of Infectious Diseases.

 

Edited March 8, 2022 by Playoff Beered

[thedestroyerofworlds]

6 minutes ago, Playoff Beered said:

It's in the vid I posted 1 page back. International Journal of Infectious Diseases.

 

 

 

So, instead of actually posting the article, you just repost the video.  

 

Here is the actual article.  Not a clinical trial.  And looks to be pre-Delta ish data that the researchers analyzed (Jan 2020 to July 2021).  

 

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1201971221009887#

 

Decreased Mortality in COVID-19 Patients: Analysis of a National Federated Database

 

Purpose

To evaluate the difference in mortality of patients treated with ivermectin vs patients treated with remdesivir with COVID-19 in United States using TriNetX Research network, a federated EMR network of over 44 healthcare organizations and 68 million patients from US, from 2009-2021.

Methods & Materials

We retrospectively identified adults (≥18 years) with a recorded COVID-19 infection between January 1, 2020 and July 11, 2021. We compared those with recorded use of ivermectin, but not remdesivir, against those with recorded use of remdesivir, but not ivermectin. We controlled for the following demographics, comorbidities, and treatments that may affect COVID-19 survival outcomes: age, gender, race, ethnicity, nicotine use diabetes mellitus, obesity, chronic lower respiratory disease, ischemic heart diseases, tocilizumab, glucocorticoids, or ventilator use. We measured association with mortality as the primary outcome, with significance assessed at p<0.05.

Results

There were a total of 1,761,060 possible COVID-19 patients based on ICD-10 diagnostic terms and confirmatory lab results. Prior to controlling, our analysis yielded 41,608 patients who had COVID-19 resulting in two unique cohorts that were treated with either ivermectin (1,072) or remdesivir (40,536). Within the ivermectin cohort, average age was 51.9 + 17.8 years, 43% were male, 60% had glucocorticoids and 1% required ventilator support. In the remdesivir cohort, average age was 62.0 + 16.0 years, 54% were male, 64% had glucocorticoids and 2% required ventilator support. After using propensity score matching and adjusting for potential confounders, ivermectin was associated with reduced mortality vs remdesivir (OR 0.308, 95% CI (0.198,0.479)),Risk Difference -5.224%, CI (-7.079%,-3.369%), p <0.0001.

Conclusion

Ivermectin use was associated with decreased mortality in patients with COVID-19 compared to remdesivir. To our knowledge, this is the largest association study of patients with COVID-19, mortality and ivermectin. Further double-blinded placebo-controlled RCTs with large samples are required for definite conclusion. In the future, if more publications are published with the similar result to the current analyses, the certainty of evidence will increase.

[RUPERTKBD]

4 hours ago, JM_ said:

or people learn what "MD" means. 

"Mister Doctor"....right?

[JM_]

2 hours ago, RUPERTKBD said:

"Mister Doctor"....right?

Mike Duffy 

[-Vintage Canuck-]

B.C. COVID-19 pandemic update:

 

As of Tuesday, March 8, 2022, 90.7% (4,520,355) of eligible people five and older in B.C. have received their first dose of COVID-19 vaccine and 86.5% (4,312,590) have received their second dose.

 

In addition, 93.3% (4,325,764) of eligible people 12 and older have received their first dose of COVID-19 vaccine, 90.8% (4,209,620) received their second dose and 56.3% (2,607,514) have received a third dose.

 

Also, 93.7% (4,051,249) of all eligible adults in B.C. have received their first dose, 91.2% (3,946,519) received their second dose and 58.2% (2,516,766) have received a third dose.

 

B.C. is reporting 254 new cases of COVID-19, including one epi-linked case, for a total of 351,141 cases in the province.

 

Note: Although 254 new cases are being reported, the total number of cases have only increased by 200 from Monday, March 7. This has resulted in no new cases reported in Fraser Health and Vancouver Coastal Health and a decrease in the overall total number of cases in these health authorities, compared to yesterday. This is due to data reconciliation from the preliminary numbers reported yesterday.

 

The new cases include:

• Fraser Health: N/A
• Vancouver Coastal Health: N/A
• Interior Health: 131
• Northern Health: 54
• Island Health: 69
• People who reside outside of Canada: zero

There are 419 individuals hospitalized with COVID-19 and 63 are in intensive care.

 

In the past 24 hours, one new death (Fraser Health) has been reported, for an overall total of 2,915.

 

There have been no new health-care facility outbreaks. The outbreaks at Three Links Manor (Interior Health), Amica on the Gorge and Nanaimo Seniors Village (Island Health) are over, for a total of 14 facilities with ongoing outbreaks, including:

 

long-term care:

• Ponderosa, Overlander Residential Care, Hillside Village, Mission Creek Landing, Williams Lake Seniors Village, Gillis House (Interior Health)
• Sidney Care Home, Selkirk Seniors Village, Berwick House Gordon Head, The Heights at Mt. View, Greenwoods and Parkwood Court (Island Health)

acute care:

• Mission Memorial Hospital (Fraser Health)

assisted or independent living:

• Fischer Place (Interior Health)

Note: Due to a delayed refresh in BC Centre for Disease Control data, the update on cases and hospitalizations by vaccination status is unavailable today.

 

Since December 2020, the Province has administered 11,382,631 doses of Pfizer-BioNTech, Moderna, AstraZeneca and Pfizer Pediatric COVID-19 vaccines.

 

https://news.gov.bc.ca/releases/2022HLTH0078-000313

[thedestroyerofworlds]

I'm liking the way those hospitalizations and ICU numbers are heading.   

[thedestroyerofworlds]

Breakdown of reported adverse events from the mRNA vaccines.  They even broke down the deaths.  Most of the deaths (just over 64%) occurred in people 60 and older.

 

 

edit:  they didn't just use the raw reports.  

 

Processed reports were quality checked, and submitted text on the adverse event was coded using Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities (MedDRA) terminology.

⁸

 Each VAERS report was assigned at least one and possibly more than one MedDRA preferred term; preferred terms do not necessarily indicate medically confirmed diagnoses and they include signs and symptoms of illness and the ordering and results of diagnostic tests.

 

Based on the Code of Federal Regulations,

¹⁵

 VAERS reports were classified as serious if any of the following outcomes were documented: inpatient hospitalisation, prolongation of hospitalisation, permanent disability, life-threatening illness, congenital anomaly or birth defect, or death. Prespecified adverse events of special interest were selected for enhanced monitoring of COVID-19 vaccine safety on the basis of biological plausibility, previous vaccine safety experience, and theoretical concerns related to COVID-19, such as vaccine-mediated enhanced disease.

¹⁶

 VAERS staff requested death certificates and autopsy reports for reports of death. CDC physicians reviewed VAERS reports and available death certificates for each death to form an impression about cause of death. Impressions were assigned to one of the following categories: one of the 15 most common diagnostic categories from the International Classification of Disease, Tenth Revision, reported on US death certificates,

¹⁷

 COVID-19 related, other (ie, impression was not included in prespecified categories), or unknown or unclear if not enough information were available to determine a cause of death.

 

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3099(22)00054-8/fulltext

 

Safety of mRNA vaccines administered during the initial 6 months of the US COVID-19 vaccination programme: an observational study of reports to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System and v-safe

 

Summary

Background

In December, 2020, two mRNA-based COVID-19 vaccines were authorised for use in the USA. We aimed to describe US surveillance data collected through the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), a passive system, and v-safe, a new active system, during the first 6 months of the US COVID-19 vaccination programme.

Methods

In this observational study, we analysed data reported to VAERS and v-safe during Dec 14, 2020, to June 14, 2021. VAERS reports were categorised as non-serious, serious, or death. Reporting rates were calculated using numbers of COVID-19 doses administered as the denominator. We analysed v-safe survey reports from days 0–7 after vaccination for reactogenicity, severity (mild, moderate, or severe), and health impacts (ie, unable to perform normal daily activities, unable to work, or received care from a medical professional).

Findings

During the study period, 298 792 852 doses of mRNA vaccines were administered in the USA. VAERS processed 340 522 reports: 313 499 (92·1%) were non-serious, 22 527 (6·6%) were serious (non-death), and 4496 (1·3%) were deaths. Over half of 7 914 583 v-safe participants self-reported local and systemic reactogenicity, more frequently after dose two (4 068 447 [71·7%] of 5 674 420 participants for local reactogenicity and 4 018 920 [70·8%] for systemic) than after dose one (4 644 989 [68·6%] of 6 775 515 participants for local reactogenicity and 3 573 429 [52·7%] for systemic). Injection-site pain (4 488 402 [66·2%] of 6 775 515 participants after dose one and 3 890 848 [68·6%] of 5 674 420 participants after dose two), fatigue (2 295 205 [33·9%] participants after dose one and 3 158 299 participants [55·7%] after dose two), and headache (1 831 471 [27·0%] participants after dose one and 2 623 721 [46·2%] participants after dose two) were commonly reported during days 0–7 following vaccination. Reactogenicity was reported most frequently the day after vaccination; most reactions were mild. More reports of being unable to work, do normal activities, or of seeking medical care occurred after dose two (1 821 421 [32·1%]) than after dose one (808 963 [11·9%]); less than 1% of participants reported seeking medical care after vaccination (56 647 [0·8%] after dose one and 53 077 [0·9%] after dose two).

Interpretation

Safety data from more than 298 million doses of mRNA COVID-19 vaccine administered in the first 6 months of the US vaccination programme show that most reported adverse events were mild and short in duration.

Edited March 9, 2022 by thedestroyerofworlds

[Alflives]

1 hour ago, thedestroyerofworlds said:

Breakdown of reported adverse events from the mRNA vaccines.  They even broke down the deaths.  Most of the deaths (just over 64%) occurred in people 60 and older.

 

 

edit:  they didn't just use the raw reports.  

 

Processed reports were quality checked, and submitted text on the adverse event was coded using Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities (MedDRA) terminology.

⁸

 Each VAERS report was assigned at least one and possibly more than one MedDRA preferred term; preferred terms do not necessarily indicate medically confirmed diagnoses and they include signs and symptoms of illness and the ordering and results of diagnostic tests.

 

Based on the Code of Federal Regulations,

¹⁵

 VAERS reports were classified as serious if any of the following outcomes were documented: inpatient hospitalisation, prolongation of hospitalisation, permanent disability, life-threatening illness, congenital anomaly or birth defect, or death. Prespecified adverse events of special interest were selected for enhanced monitoring of COVID-19 vaccine safety on the basis of biological plausibility, previous vaccine safety experience, and theoretical concerns related to COVID-19, such as vaccine-mediated enhanced disease.

¹⁶

 VAERS staff requested death certificates and autopsy reports for reports of death. CDC physicians reviewed VAERS reports and available death certificates for each death to form an impression about cause of death. Impressions were assigned to one of the following categories: one of the 15 most common diagnostic categories from the International Classification of Disease, Tenth Revision, reported on US death certificates,

¹⁷

 COVID-19 related, other (ie, impression was not included in prespecified categories), or unknown or unclear if not enough information were available to determine a cause of death.

 

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3099(22)00054-8/fulltext

 

Safety of mRNA vaccines administered during the initial 6 months of the US COVID-19 vaccination programme: an observational study of reports to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System and v-safe

 

Summary

Background

In December, 2020, two mRNA-based COVID-19 vaccines were authorised for use in the USA. We aimed to describe US surveillance data collected through the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), a passive system, and v-safe, a new active system, during the first 6 months of the US COVID-19 vaccination programme.

Methods

In this observational study, we analysed data reported to VAERS and v-safe during Dec 14, 2020, to June 14, 2021. VAERS reports were categorised as non-serious, serious, or death. Reporting rates were calculated using numbers of COVID-19 doses administered as the denominator. We analysed v-safe survey reports from days 0–7 after vaccination for reactogenicity, severity (mild, moderate, or severe), and health impacts (ie, unable to perform normal daily activities, unable to work, or received care from a medical professional).

Findings

During the study period, 298 792 852 doses of mRNA vaccines were administered in the USA. VAERS processed 340 522 reports: 313 499 (92·1%) were non-serious, 22 527 (6·6%) were serious (non-death), and 4496 (1·3%) were deaths. Over half of 7 914 583 v-safe participants self-reported local and systemic reactogenicity, more frequently after dose two (4 068 447 [71·7%] of 5 674 420 participants for local reactogenicity and 4 018 920 [70·8%] for systemic) than after dose one (4 644 989 [68·6%] of 6 775 515 participants for local reactogenicity and 3 573 429 [52·7%] for systemic). Injection-site pain (4 488 402 [66·2%] of 6 775 515 participants after dose one and 3 890 848 [68·6%] of 5 674 420 participants after dose two), fatigue (2 295 205 [33·9%] participants after dose one and 3 158 299 participants [55·7%] after dose two), and headache (1 831 471 [27·0%] participants after dose one and 2 623 721 [46·2%] participants after dose two) were commonly reported during days 0–7 following vaccination. Reactogenicity was reported most frequently the day after vaccination; most reactions were mild. More reports of being unable to work, do normal activities, or of seeking medical care occurred after dose two (1 821 421 [32·1%]) than after dose one (808 963 [11·9%]); less than 1% of participants reported seeking medical care after vaccination (56 647 [0·8%] after dose one and 53 077 [0·9%] after dose two).

Interpretation

Safety data from more than 298 million doses of mRNA COVID-19 vaccine administered in the first 6 months of the US vaccination programme show that most reported adverse events were mild and short in duration.

All true and varified, but antivaxxers will still argue that getting Covid is a safer method for developing immunity because there's horsey dewormer and drinking urine to use as medicine to protect from any illness.  

[-Vintage Canuck-]

B.C. COVID-19 pandemic update:

 

As of Wednesday, March 9, 2022, 90.7% (4,521,087) of eligible people five and older in B.C. have received their first dose of COVID-19 vaccine and 86.6% (4,315,064) have received their second dose.

 

In addition, 93.3% (4,326,413) of eligible people 12 and older in B.C. have received their first dose of COVID-19 vaccine, 90.8% (4,210,619) have received their second dose, and 56.3% (2,610,544) have received a third dose.

 

Also, 93.7% (4,051,827) of all eligible adults in B.C. have received their first dose, 91.3% (3,947,377) have received their second dose, and 58.2% (2,519,018) have received a third dose.

 

B.C. is reporting 274 new cases of COVID-19, for a total of 351,415 cases in the province.

 

The new cases include:

• Fraser Health: 48
• Vancouver Coastal Health: 36
• Interior Health: 84
• Northern Health: 29
• Island Health: 77
• People who reside outside of Canada: zero

There are 405 individuals hospitalized with COVID-19 and 58 are in intensive care.

 

In the past 24 hours, 14 new deaths have been reported, for an overall total of 2,929.

 

The new deaths include:

• Fraser Health: six
• Vancouver Coastal Health: three
• Island Health: five

There has been one new health-care facility outbreak at Luther Court (Island Health), for a total of 15 facilities with ongoing outbreaks, including:

 

long-term care:

• Ponderosa, Overlander Residential Care, Hillside Village, Mission Creek Landing, Williams Lake Seniors Village, Gillis House (Interior Health)
• Sidney Care Home, Selkirk Seniors Village, Berwick House Gordon Head, The Heights at Mt. View, Greenwoods, Parkwood Court and Luther Court (Island Health)

acute care:

• Mission Memorial Hospital (Fraser Health)

assisted or independent living:

• Fischer Place (Interior Health)

From March 1-7, people not fully vaccinated accounted for 18.7% of cases and from Feb. 22 to March 7, they accounted for 30.4% of hospitalizations.

 

Past week cases (March 1-7) - Total 2,306

• Not vaccinated: 374 (16.2%)
• Partially vaccinated: 58 (2.5%)
• Fully vaccinated: 1,874 (81.3%)

Past two weeks cases hospitalized (Feb. 22 to March 7) - Total 398

• Not vaccinated: 100 (25.1%)
• Partially vaccinated: 21 (5.3%)
• Fully vaccinated: 277 (69.6%)

Past week, cases per 100,000 population after adjusting for age (March 1-7)

• Not vaccinated: 103.9
• Partially vaccinated: 35.7
• Fully vaccinated: 40.3

Past two weeks, cases hospitalized per 100,000 population after adjusting for age (Feb. 22 to March 7)

• Not vaccinated: 27.0
• Partially vaccinated: 19.6
• Fully vaccinated: 5.9

Since December 2020, the Province has administered 11,388,672 doses of Pfizer-BioNTech, Moderna, AstraZeneca and Pfizer Pediatric COVID-19 vaccines.

 

https://news.gov.bc.ca/releases/2022HLTH0079-000318

[-DLC-]

I don't know why they continue to post case numbers when they're totally irrelevant. Hospitalizations and ICU, sure. But no one knows the actual daily case count because no one's testing and rapid tests are fairly useless unless positive.

 

I, for one, don't give any credence to the daily number count as a result.

[bishopshodan]

So if Bhen announces the end to vaxpass and masks today...

 

Will we still see the convoy's?

 

I saw a dude on telly yapping about more people heading to Victoria to honk and what not going forward.

[JM_]

57 minutes ago, -DLC- said:

I don't know why they continue to post case numbers when they're totally irrelevant. Hospitalizations and ICU, sure. But no one knows the actual daily case count because no one's testing and rapid tests are fairly useless unless positive.

 

I, for one, don't give any credence to the daily number count as a result.

the only ones that have really ever mattered has been hospitalization, ICU, and long term care. The population numbers were always a general guideline. 

[JM_]

13 minutes ago, bishopshodan said:

So if Bhen announces the end to vaxpass and masks today...

 

Will we still see the convoy's?

 

I saw a dude on telly yapping about more people heading to Victoria to honk and what not going forward.

for sure we will, they will come up with some other stupid thing to honk and tailgate. 

[bishopshodan]

Just now, JM_ said:

for sure we will, they will come up with some other stupid thing to honk and tailgate. 

They should get jobs and make something out of their life. 

[JM_]

Just now, bishopshodan said:

They should get jobs and make something out of their life. 

not all hero's wear capes. Some wear Pool hats. 

[thedestroyerofworlds]

I thought this was about control.   I thought that once government gets a "power",  it won't let go.

 

If most/all the restrictions get tossed, I guess the Tinfoil hatters fantasies are up in smoke. 

[Gurn]

5 minutes ago, thedestroyerofworlds said:

I thought this was about control.   I thought that once government gets a "power",  it won't let go.

 

If most/all the restrictions get tossed, I guess the Tinfoil hatters fantasies are up in smoke. 

Nope, the tin hatters merely say "If we hadn't protested, we wouldn't have got those rights back".

Mainly because they will never understand the simple concept, of correlation not being causation.