Quebec to allow covid positive health care workers to continue working

[ReserveTank]

Did they learn that being vaccinated offers no protection to the patients?

That is false, but I think you already know this. Embellishment doesn’t doesn’t help your arguments, but rather makes you look like a prick.

Then the CDC and WHO also look like pricks...They're the ones who originally stated it! Go on, now, go find the source.

[ReserveTank]

Ontario is still reporting both vax'd/unvax'd numbers. I don't think it matters what side of the fence you are on, it's just scary the rate of spread. Hopefully it's all this new variant that is significantly milder.

https://covid-19.ontario.ca/data

Dec 31st, 2021
Unvaccinated Rate Per 100,000: 59.75
Unvaccinated Cases: 2278

Fully vaccinated Rate Per 100,000: 79.76
Fully vaccinated Cases: 13436

Partially vaccinated Rate Per 100,000: 63.77
Partially vaccinated Cases: 647

Again, vaccines do not prevent one from getting sick, so these numbers are interesting at best and irrelevant at worst.

The key numbers are ICU cases where people are intubated (as someone being hospitalized as a precaution due to symptoms not requiring intervention is, again, irrelevant).

Ontario:
ICU Patients with positive COVID19 Test
Fully vaccinated: 47
Partially vaccinated: 7
Unvaccinated: 89


Number of people
Fully vaccinated: 11,410,550
Partially vaccinated: 798,186
Unvaccinated: 2,581,042


Rate per 100,000
Fully vaccinated: 0.412
Partially vaccinated: 0.877
Unvaccinated: 3.45

That was a nice sleight of hand, the usual tricks. He sourced data that showed the vaxxed have a higher rate of infection, which is entirely the point.
You're right, the vax does nothing to prevent you from getting sick, and statistically appears to cause more symptoms. With a higher rate of cases per, it makes zero statistical sense (also none for his argument) that more unvaxed would be intubated.

[imjustlurking]

That was a nice sleight of hand, the usual tricks. He sourced data that showed the vaxxed have a higher rate of infection, which is entirely the point.
You're right, the vax does nothing to prevent you from getting sick, and statistically appears to cause more symptoms. With a higher rate of cases per, it makes zero statistical sense (also none for his argument) that more unvaxed would be intubated.

Who cares if Joe across the hall is double vaxxed, get's COVID, and has the sniffles for three days.

What matters is if Karen down the street refuses to get vaccinated and ends up with a tube shoved down her throat.

[Vaticinator]

Presumably, Karen knew the risks when she chose to not get vaccinated. Just like how people know the risks associated with smoking, but do it anyways.

[Bingo Fuel]

You're right, the vax does nothing to prevent you from getting sick, and statistically appears to cause more symptoms. With a higher rate of cases per, it makes zero statistical sense (also none for his argument) that more unvaxed would be intubated.

I'd like to see your stats that show that vaccinated people in Ontario are being intubated at a higher rate than the unvaccinated.

You claim their numbers make no sense, and provide none of your own.

[ReserveTank]

That was a nice sleight of hand, the usual tricks. He sourced data that showed the vaxxed have a higher rate of infection, which is entirely the point.
You're right, the vax does nothing to prevent you from getting sick, and statistically appears to cause more symptoms. With a higher rate of cases per, it makes zero statistical sense (also none for his argument) that more unvaxed would be intubated.

Who cares if Joe across the hall is double vaxxed, get's COVID, and has the sniffles for three days.

What matters is if Karen down the street refuses to get vaccinated and ends up with a tube shoved down her throat.

And double vax Joe magically cannot have the same fate? It's the same infection, and now the vaxxed are beginning to catch at higher rates.
2 years in, I've known zero people that have caught a noteworthy case. Even by several degrees of separation---nobody. I have breakfast with a doctor every morning of my life. Same thing. While that's my own testimony from my little bubble, statistically, n should be greater than zero for this sample. It's not.
The news can say whatever it wants. It's no different than a soap opera or movie. They produce fear, and it works because the public is generally weak. This is the same media that gave us Smollett, and was dead serious. A handful of vax enthusiasts (who also own/fund news sources) want to squander your tax money on buying their vax subscription. They learned in 2009 (H1N1) that if people had a choice, few would choose a vax.

Karen

I'd be more careful about being hostile to my own people. We have no idea when we'll need each other.

[ReserveTank]

You're right, the vax does nothing to prevent you from getting sick, and statistically appears to cause more symptoms. With a higher rate of cases per, it makes zero statistical sense (also none for his argument) that more unvaxed would be intubated.

I'd like to see your stats that show that vaccinated people in Ontario are being intubated at a higher rate than the unvaccinated.

You claim their numbers make no sense, and provide none of your own.

I'm discussing a statistical anomaly that can be spotted with little effort. Rise in cases, but no corresponding curve? That's statistical ethics 101...bell curves be like dat. It was an odd argument to specify intubated cases when the original argument was vaxxed cases outpacing unvaxxed. Now, on the subject of ICU, the real question that's being dodged is how many cases are actually intubated out of absolute necessity. Then lies the third rail---How many cases are intubated due to comorbidity? Living a life in any combo of obese, cigarette smoking, alcoholic, drug abusing, diabetic, hypertensive, and many other self-induced disorders can net you a ventilator installation with a wide variety of otherwise mild illnesses. Been like that for a while, nothing new.

[Bingo Fuel]

You're right, the vax does nothing to prevent you from getting sick, and statistically appears to cause more symptoms. With a higher rate of cases per, it makes zero statistical sense (also none for his argument) that more unvaxed would be intubated.

I'd like to see your stats that show that vaccinated people in Ontario are being intubated at a higher rate than the unvaccinated.

You claim their numbers make no sense, and provide none of your own.

I'm discussing a statistical anomaly that can be spotted with little effort. Rise in cases, but no corresponding curve? That's statistical ethics 101...bell curves be like dat. It was an odd argument to specify intubated cases when the original argument was vaxxed cases outpacing unvaxxed. Now, on the subject of ICU, the real question that's being dodged is how many cases are actually intubated out of absolute necessity. Then lies the third rail---How many cases are intubated due to comorbidity? Living a life in any combo of obese, cigarette smoking, alcoholic, drug abusing, diabetic, hypertensive, and many other self-induced disorders can net you a ventilator installation with a wide variety of otherwise mild illnesses. Been like that for a while, nothing new.

I still don't see any numbers backing up your claims.

By the way, what happened to all those refugees you were upset about? I definitely haven't seen any.

[ReserveTank]

I'd like to see your stats that show that vaccinated people in Ontario are being intubated at a higher rate than the unvaccinated.

You claim their numbers make no sense, and provide none of your own.

I'm discussing a statistical anomaly that can be spotted with little effort. Rise in cases, but no corresponding curve? That's statistical ethics 101...bell curves be like dat. It was an odd argument to specify intubated cases when the original argument was vaxxed cases outpacing unvaxxed. Now, on the subject of ICU, the real question that's being dodged is how many cases are actually intubated out of absolute necessity. Then lies the third rail---How many cases are intubated due to comorbidity? Living a life in any combo of obese, cigarette smoking, alcoholic, drug abusing, diabetic, hypertensive, and many other self-induced disorders can net you a ventilator installation with a wide variety of otherwise mild illnesses. Been like that for a while, nothing new.

I still don't see any numbers backing up your claims.

We're using the given numbers and applying simple statistical ethics to them. Do you know what a bell curve is? The given data does not distribute normally (try it on Excel), so someone has supplied spurious data. Usually happens when one party wants to pull a fast one on you. History of rhetoric...BS statistics for at least 2,500 years and counting.

By the way, what happened to all those refugees you were upset about? I definitely haven't seen any.

https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/canada- ... -1.5676552
https://www.canada.ca/en/public-health/ ... sures.html

After January 15, 2022, unvaccinated or partially vaccinated foreign nationals will only be allowed to enter Canada if they meet the criteria for limited exceptions, which apply to certain groups such as agricultural and food processing workers, marine crew members, those entering on compassionate grounds, new permanent residents, resettling refugees and some children under the age of 18. Exempt unvaccinated travellers will continue to be subject to testing, quarantine, and other entry requirements. Non-exempt unvaccinated or partially vaccinated foreign nationals will be prohibited entry into Canada.

LOL, essentially the "rescue boat" crew and the unvaxxed refugees. Enjoy your new country. I heard Italy and Greece are ecstatic with their similar arrangements.

Unvaxxed refugees are here (more coming) and it's completely legal. Because nothing is more important at this moment than unvaxxed foreigners settling in your country in the middle of a pandemic. So logical. Something tells me that you're not willing to put up any opposition to this, though.

[Bingo Fuel]

I'm discussing a statistical anomaly that can be spotted with little effort. Rise in cases, but no corresponding curve? That's statistical ethics 101...bell curves be like dat. It was an odd argument to specify intubated cases when the original argument was vaxxed cases outpacing unvaxxed. Now, on the subject of ICU, the real question that's being dodged is how many cases are actually intubated out of absolute necessity. Then lies the third rail---How many cases are intubated due to comorbidity? Living a life in any combo of obese, cigarette smoking, alcoholic, drug abusing, diabetic, hypertensive, and many other self-induced disorders can net you a ventilator installation with a wide variety of otherwise mild illnesses. Been like that for a while, nothing new.

I still don't see any numbers backing up your claims.

We're using the given numbers and applying simple statistical ethics to them. Do you know what a bell curve is? The given data does not distribute normally (try it on Excel), so someone has supplied spurious data. Usually happens when one party wants to pull a fast one on you. History of rhetoric...BS statistics for at least 2,500 years and counting.

By the way, what happened to all those refugees you were upset about? I definitely haven't seen any.

https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/canada- ... -1.5676552
https://www.canada.ca/en/public-health/ ... sures.html

After January 15, 2022, unvaccinated or partially vaccinated foreign nationals will only be allowed to enter Canada if they meet the criteria for limited exceptions, which apply to certain groups such as agricultural and food processing workers, marine crew members, those entering on compassionate grounds, new permanent residents, resettling refugees and some children under the age of 18. Exempt unvaccinated travellers will continue to be subject to testing, quarantine, and other entry requirements. Non-exempt unvaccinated or partially vaccinated foreign nationals will be prohibited entry into Canada.

LOL, essentially the "rescue boat" crew and the unvaxxed refugees. Enjoy your new country. I heard Italy and Greece are ecstatic with their similar arrangements.

Unvaxxed refugees are here (more coming) and it's completely legal. Because nothing is more important at this moment than unvaxxed foreigners settling in your country in the middle of a pandemic. So logical. Something tells me that you're not willing to put up any opposition to this, though.

So every infectious disease expert is obfuscating data in the exact same way?

Why must ICU admission data follow a bell curve?

Where is the false data here?


As for refugees, I have no problems with them whatsoever. From your source, we only turned back about 500 refugees this year. 500 people doesn't worry me in the least, and I don't worry at all about the "great replacement".

[chowda]

I've seen varying numbers, 70% being the high end. Notably, that was before omicron. Saw a stat today out of Ontario that vaccine effectiveness against omicron is at 15%. Haven't yet dug any deeper on that to confirm.

15% against getting infected is correct but near 100% to avoid the hospital. In other words, like the flu shot. You may get the flu but it lessens the lilkelyhood of a hospital stay.

And that is what is important.

You're full of shit.

BC's latest numbers show half of hospitalization are vaxxed.

Past two weeks cases hospitalized (Dec. 16-29) - Total 180
Not vaccinated: 96 (53.3%)
Partially vaccinated: 3 (1.7%)
Fully vaccinated: 81 (45%)

https://news.gov.bc.ca/releases/2021HLTH0251-002468

[cdnavater]

15% against getting infected is correct but near 100% to avoid the hospital. In other words, like the flu shot. You may get the flu but it lessens the lilkelyhood of a hospital stay.

And that is what is important.

You're full of shit.

BC's latest numbers show half of hospitalization are vaxxed.

Past two weeks cases hospitalized (Dec. 16-29) - Total 180
Not vaccinated: 96 (53.3%)
Partially vaccinated: 3 (1.7%)
Fully vaccinated: 81 (45%)

https://news.gov.bc.ca/releases/2021HLTH0251-002468

Perhaps someone who lacks the simply ability of comprehension should refrain from posting, you don’t see a problem with the FACT, 10% of the B.C population is responsible for over half the hospitalization.
Below is the Dec 31 update, maybe peruse the highlights and try to grasp what it’s saying, I’ll break it down a bit for you.

Of the last week’s reported cases, nearly 15,000 were in fully vaccinated, for some reason they have a two week report of hospitalization, only 81 ended up in the hospital, but of the 2535 unvaccinated 96 went to hospital.
Not going to dig further to see how many cases were reported in that two week period because it will only make you look even more stupid.
Again, explaining it like you’re a two year old, 10% of the people account for MORE than half of the hospitalizations, if you take the 15000 reported case and the two week hospitalization, it ends up as a half percent of the vaccinated going to hospital, so yes nearly 100% effective against hospitalization, got it yet?


https://news.gov.bc.ca/releases/2021HLTH0251-002468

Also, 92.3% (3,993,382) of all eligible adults in B.C. have received their first dose, 89.6% (3,877,423) received their second dose, and 21.0% (908,376) have received a third dose

Past week cases (Dec. 23-29) - Total 17,762

Not vaccinated: 2,535 (14.3%)
Partially vaccinated: 305 (1.7%)
Fully vaccinated: 14,922 (84%)

Past two weeks cases hospitalized (Dec. 16-29) - Total 180

Not vaccinated: 96 (53.3%)
Partially vaccinated: 3 (1.7%)
Fully vaccinated: 81 (45%)

Past two weeks, cases hospitalized per 100,000 population after adjusting for age (Dec. 16-29)

Not vaccinated: 22.2
Partially vaccinated: 2.2
Fully vaccinated: 1.7

[kgb531]

When pilots forget they're just pilots...
No patient is intubated unless it is a necessity.

Stop thinking you possess either the mental capacity or requisite educational background to understand even the simplest level of the subject matter.

You're right, the vax does nothing to prevent you from getting sick, and statistically appears to cause more symptoms. With a higher rate of cases per, it makes zero statistical sense (also none for his argument) that more unvaxed would be intubated.

I'd like to see your stats that show that vaccinated people in Ontario are being intubated at a higher rate than the unvaccinated.

You claim their numbers make no sense, and provide none of your own.

I'm discussing a statistical anomaly that can be spotted with little effort. Rise in cases, but no corresponding curve? That's statistical ethics 101...bell curves be like dat. It was an odd argument to specify intubated cases when the original argument was vaxxed cases outpacing unvaxxed. Now, on the subject of ICU, the real question that's being dodged is how many cases are actually intubated out of absolute necessity. Then lies the third rail---How many cases are intubated due to comorbidity? Living a life in any combo of obese, cigarette smoking, alcoholic, drug abusing, diabetic, hypertensive, and many other self-induced disorders can net you a ventilator installation with a wide variety of otherwise mild illnesses. Been like that for a while, nothing new.

[chowda]

You're full of shit.

BC's latest numbers show half of hospitalization are vaxxed.

Past two weeks cases hospitalized (Dec. 16-29) - Total 180
Not vaccinated: 96 (53.3%)
Partially vaccinated: 3 (1.7%)
Fully vaccinated: 81 (45%)

https://news.gov.bc.ca/releases/2021HLTH0251-002468

Perhaps someone who lacks the simply ability of comprehension should refrain from posting, you don’t see a problem with the FACT, 10% of the B.C population is responsible for over half the hospitalization.
Below is the Dec 31 update, maybe peruse the highlights and try to grasp what it’s saying, I’ll break it down a bit for you.

Of the last week’s reported cases, nearly 15,000 were in fully vaccinated, for some reason they have a two week report of hospitalization, only 81 ended up in the hospital, but of the 2535 unvaccinated 96 went to hospital.
Not going to dig further to see how many cases were reported in that two week period because it will only make you look even more stupid.
Again, explaining it like you’re a two year old, 10% of the people account for MORE than half of the hospitalizations, if you take the 15000 reported case and the two week hospitalization, it ends up as a half percent of the vaccinated going to hospital, so yes nearly 100% effective against hospitalization, got it yet?


https://news.gov.bc.ca/releases/2021HLTH0251-002468

Also, 92.3% (3,993,382) of all eligible adults in B.C. have received their first dose, 89.6% (3,877,423) received their second dose, and 21.0% (908,376) have received a third dose

Past week cases (Dec. 23-29) - Total 17,762

Not vaccinated: 2,535 (14.3%)
Partially vaccinated: 305 (1.7%)
Fully vaccinated: 14,922 (84%)

Past two weeks cases hospitalized (Dec. 16-29) - Total 180

Not vaccinated: 96 (53.3%)
Partially vaccinated: 3 (1.7%)
Fully vaccinated: 81 (45%)

Past two weeks, cases hospitalized per 100,000 population after adjusting for age (Dec. 16-29)

Not vaccinated: 22.2
Partially vaccinated: 2.2
Fully vaccinated: 1.7

Yeah, so its reverting to how many percentage wise are causing hospitalizations. Im so shocked at another attempt to again villify unvaxxed.

Read the big letters again. Its for pinheads that try to comeback with deflective responses.

15% against getting infected is correct but near 100% to avoid the hospital. In other words, like the flu shot. You may get the flu but it lessens the lilkelyhood of a hospital stay.

I provide facts that that is a bullshit provaxx opinion, and right on cue you step up, avoid the point, and attempt to attack with asshole comments about intelligence and try to spin an antivaxx diatribe instead.

By the way, thanks for flying in new variant and spreading the shit out of it to record levels. Too bad you cant intelligently pin blame it on unvaxxed, but that just means you'll just do you and rub one out anyway, right?.

[cdnavater]

Yeah, so its reverting to how many percentage wise are causing hospitalizations. Im so shocked at another attempt to again villify unvaxxed.

Read the big letters again. Its for pinheads that try to comeback with deflective responses.

15% against getting infected is correct but near 100% to avoid the hospital. In other words, like the flu shot. You may get the flu but it lessens the lilkelyhood of a hospital stay.

I provide facts that that is a bullshit provaxx opinion, and right on cue you step up, avoid the point, and attempt to attack with asshole comments about intelligence and try to spin an antivaxx diatribe instead.

By the way, thanks for flying in new variant and spreading the shit out of it to record levels. Too bad you cant intelligently pin blame it on unvaxxed, but that just means you'll just do you and rub one out anyway, right?.

AGAIN, 81(two week’s hospitalization) out of 15,000( one week’s positive cases) is 0.005%, half of one percent is about as close as you can get to 100%, is that not clear to you?

[TG]

Presumably, Karen knew the risks when she chose to not get vaccinated. Just like how people know the risks associated with smoking, but do it anyways.

Karen doesn't have the medical or virology expertise to judge that by herself so technically no, she doesn't know or realize the risk she is taking.

[ReserveTank]

When pilots forget they're just pilots...
No patient is intubated unless it is a necessity.

Stop thinking you possess either the mental capacity or requisite educational background to understand even the simplest level of the subject matter.

I'd like to see your stats that show that vaccinated people in Ontario are being intubated at a higher rate than the unvaccinated.

You claim their numbers make no sense, and provide none of your own.

I'm discussing a statistical anomaly that can be spotted with little effort. Rise in cases, but no corresponding curve? That's statistical ethics 101...bell curves be like dat. It was an odd argument to specify intubated cases when the original argument was vaxxed cases outpacing unvaxxed. Now, on the subject of ICU, the real question that's being dodged is how many cases are actually intubated out of absolute necessity. Then lies the third rail---How many cases are intubated due to comorbidity? Living a life in any combo of obese, cigarette smoking, alcoholic, drug abusing, diabetic, hypertensive, and many other self-induced disorders can net you a ventilator installation with a wide variety of otherwise mild illnesses. Been like that for a while, nothing new.

Nice try. I have a master in Language and Aeronautical Science. I have also earned certificates (at one of the best aviation universities on the planet) in air crash investigation and aeromedical factors. It's a bad look to project your own inadequacies on to others. If your expectations for yourself are low, that's not my problem--and it doesn't take away from my line of questioning.

Discussing statistical anomalies and ethics are basic concepts which are covered in year 1. The given data doesn't distribute normally. What specifically about that are you refuting? Did you try it yourself?

What regarding comorbidities are you refuting? Since 2020 has something changed with people who live an unhealthy lifestyle?

Now about intubation, it's not as if it were some magic.

[photofly]

the real question that's being dodged is how many cases are actually intubated out of absolute necessity. Then lies the third rail---How many cases are intubated due to comorbidity?

People are intubated because they can't breathe unaided; I don't think anyone can answer the question "but for this person's chronic condition, would their acute COVID infection have required them to be intubated?"


Intubation is a violently invasive procedure that requires the patient to be sedated, which carries its own risks, and is only done as a very last resort on the sickest of people. Someone - was it you? - was suggesting that hospitals (doctors at hospitals) were doing it merely to gain revenue or to meet some kind of quota. Seems very conspiratorial, and untrue, to me.

[kgb531]

So zero educational background on the subject matter then. You should know better. An opthamologist/GP/pathologist/cardiologist/stats PhD has no credentials to speak on the subject but you're somehow analyzing and proffering an opinion as though your education has any relevance because you took intro stats?
Thanks for your online studies.

When pilots forget they're just pilots...
No patient is intubated unless it is a necessity.

Stop thinking you possess either the mental capacity or requisite educational background to understand even the simplest level of the subject matter.

I'm discussing a statistical anomaly that can be spotted with little effort. Rise in cases, but no corresponding curve? That's statistical ethics 101...bell curves be like dat. It was an odd argument to specify intubated cases when the original argument was vaxxed cases outpacing unvaxxed. Now, on the subject of ICU, the real question that's being dodged is how many cases are actually intubated out of absolute necessity. Then lies the third rail---How many cases are intubated due to comorbidity? Living a life in any combo of obese, cigarette smoking, alcoholic, drug abusing, diabetic, hypertensive, and many other self-induced disorders can net you a ventilator installation with a wide variety of otherwise mild illnesses. Been like that for a while, nothing new.

Nice try. I have a master in Language and Aeronautical Science. I have also earned certificates (at one of the best aviation universities on the planet) in air crash investigation and aeromedical factors. It's a bad look to project your own inadequacies on to others. If your expectations for yourself are low, that's not my problem--and it doesn't take away from my line of questioning.

Discussing statistical anomalies and ethics are basic concepts which are covered in year 1. The given data doesn't distribute normally. What specifically about that are you refuting? Did you try it yourself?

What regarding comorbidities are you refuting? Since 2020 has something changed with people who live an unhealthy lifestyle?

Now about intubation, it's not as if it were some magic.

[pelmet]

"A lot of these doctors don't believe me."

COURTESY BRUCE TEDESCHI

Bruce Tedeschi, 64, Grand Haven, Mich.

Before the pandemic, Bruce Tedeschi was a fairly active guy. A retired biotech quality director, he enjoyed working on classic cars, fishing and woodworking.

Then, in January 2020, he was hit hard by a variety of bizarre symptoms. His blood pressure skyrocketed and doctors couldn't get it down. He had ringing in his ears, shortness of breath, stomach pain, digestive issues and nerve pain. He went from doctor to doctor, and no one could figure out the problem.

Tedeschi doesn't know for sure if it was COVID-19. At the time, most Americans hadn't heard of it, and there was no testing.

When Tedeschi's symptoms didn't resolve after a few months, he moved to Michigan to be closer to his family. In June, his brother tested positive for coronavirus. Tedeschi also ran a fever at the time, and his doctor advised him to quarantine.

His brother recovered quickly, but Tedeschi continued to experience problems: an irregular heartbeat, circulation problems, digestive issues, migraines, fatigue and nerve attacks.

Some doctors told him they didn't think his health issues could be the result of COVID-19 because he never developed a cough or serious respiratory symptoms. They ordered CAT scans, MRIs, swallowing tests and other screenings. Most were normal.

"I've been to so many doctors the past 14 months it will make your head spin,” Tedeschi says. “A lot of these doctors don't believe me. They would say, ‘Let me give you antidepressants.'”

At the end of August, Tedeschi finally persuaded a physician to give him an antibody test. It was positive – so at least he finally had confirmation he'd been infected with the coronavirus.

Since then, he has continued to see doctors and try medications. He says he has good days and bad days, but on the bad days, the nerve pain in his hips, back and legs can be excruciating. Even just walking is arduous. “Going to the grocery store is like a three-hour workout at the gym for me,” he says. “I can't stand or sit for a prolonged period.”

In February, Tedeschi saw a new doctor who says he may have a name for Tedeschi's condition: multisystem inflammatory syndrome in adults (MIS-A), a rare but serious condition tied to COVID-19. Only recently identified by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), it targets multiple organs and causes increased inflammation in the body.

The doctor referred Tedeschi to an infectious disease specialist for a definitive diagnosis and treatment. Tedeschi doesn't want to get his hopes up yet, but he has to admit it's promising, especially since there's a treatment for the condition.

"It could be the answer,” he says. “At least it's a start.”

[Vaticinator]

Karen doesn't have the medical or virology expertise to judge that by herself so technically no, she doesn't know or realize the risk she is taking.

You need to be a virology expert to understand what the potential symptoms of covid are?

[TG]

Karen doesn't have the medical or virology expertise to judge that by herself so technically no, she doesn't know or realize the risk she is taking.

You need to be a virology expert to understand what the potential symptoms of covid are?

You are right, so let me try to rephrase that.

As much as they think they do, Anti-Vax Karen or Joe Blow don’t have the IQ level to understand the efficiency of a vaccine.

[ReserveTank]

"A lot of these doctors don't believe me."

COURTESY BRUCE TEDESCHI

Bruce Tedeschi, 64, Grand Haven, Mich.

Before the pandemic, Bruce Tedeschi was a fairly active guy. A retired biotech quality director, he enjoyed working on classic cars, fishing and woodworking.

Then, in January 2020, he was hit hard by a variety of bizarre symptoms. His blood pressure skyrocketed and doctors couldn't get it down. He had ringing in his ears, shortness of breath, stomach pain, digestive issues and nerve pain. He went from doctor to doctor, and no one could figure out the problem.

Tedeschi doesn't know for sure if it was COVID-19. At the time, most Americans hadn't heard of it, and there was no testing.

When Tedeschi's symptoms didn't resolve after a few months, he moved to Michigan to be closer to his family. In June, his brother tested positive for coronavirus. Tedeschi also ran a fever at the time, and his doctor advised him to quarantine.

His brother recovered quickly, but Tedeschi continued to experience problems: an irregular heartbeat, circulation problems, digestive issues, migraines, fatigue and nerve attacks.

Some doctors told him they didn't think his health issues could be the result of COVID-19 because he never developed a cough or serious respiratory symptoms. They ordered CAT scans, MRIs, swallowing tests and other screenings. Most were normal.

"I've been to so many doctors the past 14 months it will make your head spin,” Tedeschi says. “A lot of these doctors don't believe me. They would say, ‘Let me give you antidepressants.'”

At the end of August, Tedeschi finally persuaded a physician to give him an antibody test. It was positive – so at least he finally had confirmation he'd been infected with the coronavirus.

Since then, he has continued to see doctors and try medications. He says he has good days and bad days, but on the bad days, the nerve pain in his hips, back and legs can be excruciating. Even just walking is arduous. “Going to the grocery store is like a three-hour workout at the gym for me,” he says. “I can't stand or sit for a prolonged period.”

In February, Tedeschi saw a new doctor who says he may have a name for Tedeschi's condition: multisystem inflammatory syndrome in adults (MIS-A), a rare but serious condition tied to COVID-19. Only recently identified by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), it targets multiple organs and causes increased inflammation in the body.

The doctor referred Tedeschi to an infectious disease specialist for a definitive diagnosis and treatment. Tedeschi doesn't want to get his hopes up yet, but he has to admit it's promising, especially since there's a treatment for the condition.

"It could be the answer,” he says. “At least it's a start.”

Guy could be a 200 kg chain smoker. Besides, the average North American diet gives people incredible amounts of inflammation. Upon a glance, most North Americans have features which exclaim "bad health!" Bad skin, bad posture, huge bellies...and the amount of people that are practically crippled by age 50. As for this guy, without a patient health history, this anecdote has no weight, unfortunately.

[ReserveTank]

Karen doesn't have the medical or virology expertise to judge that by herself so technically no, she doesn't know or realize the risk she is taking.

You need to be a virology expert to understand what the potential symptoms of covid are?

This is really the thing that they go hide behind as their defense in an argument. In their minds, no one can know anything about anything except an expert. It's their weak mic-drop-wannabe culture. Instead of refuting your points with logic, they parrot their prepackaged tripe. These are the thick-rimmed-glasses characters in uniform reciting the script. Better get an aeronautical engineer as a 3rd crewmember on every flight, because my goodness, the pilots aren't experts on every detail of fluid dynamics.

[ReserveTank]

So zero educational background on the subject matter then. You should know better. An opthamologist/GP/pathologist/cardiologist/stats PhD has no credentials to speak on the subject but you're somehow analyzing and proffering an opinion as though your education has any relevance because you took intro stats?
Thanks for your online studies.

When pilots forget they're just pilots...
No patient is intubated unless it is a necessity.

Stop thinking you possess either the mental capacity or requisite educational background to understand even the simplest level of the subject matter.

Nice try. I have a master in Language and Aeronautical Science. I have also earned certificates (at one of the best aviation universities on the planet) in air crash investigation and aeromedical factors. It's a bad look to project your own inadequacies on to others. If your expectations for yourself are low, that's not my problem--and it doesn't take away from my line of questioning.

Discussing statistical anomalies and ethics are basic concepts which are covered in year 1. The given data doesn't distribute normally. What specifically about that are you refuting? Did you try it yourself?

What regarding comorbidities are you refuting? Since 2020 has something changed with people who live an unhealthy lifestyle?

Now about intubation, it's not as if it were some magic.

There's your first problem--Excessive credentialism. It's the wall you hide behind when you want to "win" an argument and "mic drop." Everyone's working with the data that they've been given---isn't that how you formed your view on it? Where's your credentials to have an opinion if that isn't so?
I indicated that the stats don't follow ethics. You can run it on your Excel if you have a moment. Those numbers were from the gov't, not from some "internet whacko." I am well studied in stats, and far beyond intro, thanks. You could have simply refuted it with some other principle but decided to go for the weak credentials route.

online studies

Where did you form your opinions again? I am fortunate enough to have medical professionals in my circle of friends and acquaintances. It nets a whole lot more than simply reading online. I don't subscribe to medical journals, and my aeromedical certification is obviously limited to my field. But, it doesn't mean that only experts can know things. Do you need a physics expert to determine heat transfer every time you put warm beer in the fridge, or do you know it's going to get cold? When you take an ice cold Molson out of the fridge, do you call an MBA to tally it up, or do you trust that you've learned enough through reading, common sense, and practice to do the minus one?

Besides, you should pay closer attention, because dissenting views (on covid, c19 policy, etc.) are few and far between on the net these days. "Online studies" against the mainstream view is dead, IMO.

Again, what about the comorbidities are you refuting?