Oh, I’m not looking for them, nor do I live in those places. However, I’m also not looking for the
Yet, those can’t be avoided. They’re thrown from every angle, every source, and at every volume. They may even be true. It seems curious to me that if the bed / ICU bed situation is so dire, why are they they not also blasting the airwaves with all of the cancellations of elective surgeries.
Because almost nobody cares about elective surgeries. They’re elective and can be postponed. But ICUs are there for non-elective things that can’t be postponed.
I think “elective” is a monomer. Medically it means anything you won’t immediately die from if they don’t do it, like maybe a gun shot wound or aneurysm. But lots of things you will die from soon, or sooner, like cancer or a heart bypass or similar are “elective” and weren’t being done.
That’s part of why more people died than had covid on their cert due to delayed treatment, and many more suffered and had worse complications from the delay.
There’s a local family with a disabled child who needs some invasive brain implant for seizures. As it was not immediately life threatening, it’s considered elective surgery. The hospital would perform it as an outpatient surgery, but being disabled, the kid needs to be admitted/stay at the hospital for a day or two, and the hospital wouldnt allow them an admission for elective surgery. They had to fight for weeks to finally get the hospital to put it on the schedule, all while the kid suffers dozens of seizures daily.
Yes, people do, or should, care about elective surgeries. We’re not talking about boob jobs and tummy tucks.
All I’m hearing right now, as schools start to return to in-person classes, is how there are “10,000 students already quarantined for two weeks due to close contact!” (or some version of that headline) to remind us how in-person classes are so totally unsafe.
I have tried and failed to find any indication of, over the past 18 months, how many of these supposedly necessary 2 week quarantines have actually resulted in infections? I’ve seen some school districts drop the whole mandatory quarantine thing from their protocols because the data shows virtually none of quarantined students end up developing anything, but I cant find any reported data that shows this either way.
It does seem like the number quarantined might be another fearmongering stat, much like the fallacy of “percent positive” (if you’re only testing people who think they might be sick, that number should be pretty high).
I hear separating the left and right hemispheres is one way to stop seizures. But then your life will still suck as two halves develop separate knowledge, beliefs and personalities…
I agree. Yet, as you recall, I wasn’t looking for them, but still heard about them during last year’s hysteria. Since I haven’t heard about it this year (and I called one of my doctors’ offices), elective surgeries haven’t been cancelled in my area.
I suspect that the suppliers are happy to get any federal supplements / bonuses for covid patients, but aren’t willing to give up their current cash cows.
Am I the only person upset that this disease is only attacking men and women?
There have been 0 reports from the 68 other genders.
The bizarre mass psychosis is claiming it’s “horse dewormer”.
Ivermectin is a Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved antiparasitic drug that is used to treat several neglected tropical diseases, including onchocerciasis, helminthiases, and scabies.1 It is also being evaluated for its potential to reduce the rate of malaria transmission by killing mosquitoes that feed on treated humans and livestock.2 For these indications, ivermectin has been widely used and is generally well tolerated.1,3
Other countries are using it as a legit treatment. Americans wouldn’t have to resort to animal doses if certain people weren’t so hell-bent on villianizing an otherwise proven safe drug.
True. Very true.
But I do take Argyll’s point where dose size is considered, which could be far different for a horse than it is for a human being.
Of course. And we all know the math skills of those coming out of the American educational system are less-than-stellar, to make the necessary calculations. Even the so-called studies supposedly debunking it’s use cant get it right, often basing their conclusions on dosages that are closer to animal levels than what is routinely prescribed to humans.
So true. But of course the real purpose and intent of such studies is FUD (fear, uncertainty, and doubt), an effort to dissuade people from seeking out and using inexpensive alternatives to big pharmas overpriced miracle drugs . . . . which too often do not work all that well in reality, and which have countless unwanted side effects!
For anyone who wanted to double check their calculations, here are the currently recommended ivermectin one-day doses based on your body weight.
0.2-0.6 mg/kg body weight depending on if you’re taking it preventively or if you just came down with symptoms and/or tested positive and are using it for early treatment.
Vaccine humor
For the even more math challenged, here are the numbers per pound of body weight
0.1-0.3 mg/pound body weight
Edit:
And for a 120 pound woman, 12-36 mg
For a 150 pound man 15-45 mg.
Edit 2.
This should not be construed as medical advice. Do your own calculations and see your doctor or other medical practitioner
Follow the science, the CDC school edition.
At the end of May, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention published a notable, yet mostly ignored, large-scale study of COVID transmission in American schools. A few major news outlets covered its release by briefly reiterating the study’s summary: that masking then-unvaccinated teachers and improving ventilation with more fresh air were associated with a lower incidence of the virus in schools. Those are common-sense measures, and the fact that they seem to work is reassuring but not surprising. Other findings of equal importance in the study, however, were absent from the summary and not widely reported. These findings cast doubt on the impact of many of the most common mitigation measures in American schools. Distancing, hybrid models, classroom barriers, HEPA filters, and, most notably, requiring student masking were each found to not have a statistically significant benefit. In other words, these measures could not be said to be effective.
No duh – because when the report is submitted they only check the sex on the birth certificate! 
The CDC report says:
Seems effective to me. Here’s the actual meaning of “statistically significant”:
So it’s not statistically significant at the county-level. I’m not sure it’s the same as “not effective.” Cutting the number of infected students in half sounds pretty effective to me, even if it doesn’t significantly change the number of confirmed infections in the county.
What’s more notable, however, is that the study was done last winter, before the much more virulent Delta variant.
Yes, the ventilation improvements were both effective and statistically significant, as were the required teacher masks. it’s the student masking and distancing and other things that often didn’t help and in any event did not meet statistical significance.
See table 1 below, and in particular the far right column and whether the relative risk confidence intervals was below one or not.
So “improved ventilation” had a RR of 0.61, meaning 39% lower risk, and was statistically significant since the 95% range was .43-.87. In contrast, barriers and desk separations had a RR of .97-.98 so nominally a 2-3% risk reduction but with very wide ranges so that could easily have been by chance. Student masks required were .79 or a 21% lower risk but again with a wide range that fails to meet the 95% level for statistical significance.
So for students wearing masks, like the CDC says of ivermectin with similar positive outcomes, “there is no scientific evidence that it works to help against covid”. Both are cheap and nearly risk free when used properly, but student masks are being mandated and ivermectin is being heavily censored and suppressed. Don’t look for consistency here - it’s politics and big pharma money talking, not the science.
