People who did the right thing will get screwed

[Deleted User 89]

I don't know this - can donated plasma antibodies have a vaccine-like effect in donees?

see my post about just such a study published monday in PNAS

[Mjl]

I can't wait until Trump touts this...

Congrats. You got me to leave.

Over that?

A pretty anodyne post.

It's accusing people of wanting Trump to fail more than wanting good news against the virus. Accusing those that point out his shortcomings of being truly evil.

[PhDhawk]

I don't know this - can donated plasma antibodies have a vaccine-like effect in donees?

see my post about just such a study published monday in PNAS

From your link:

In this work, we explore the feasibility of convalescent plasma (CP) transfusion to rescue severe patients. The results from 10 severe adult cases showed that one dose (200 mL) of CP was well tolerated and could significantly increase or maintain the neutralizing antibodies at a high level, leading to disappearance of viremia in 7 d. Meanwhile, clinical symptoms and paraclinical criteria rapidly improved within 3 d. Radiological examination showed varying degrees of absorption of lung lesions within 7 d. These results indicate that CP can serve as a promising rescue option for severe COVID-19, while the randomized trial is warranted.

This is a treatment for those already sick.

There's no evidence that it could be used like a vaccine to protect unifected people. And if one recovered individual can only provide antibodies for 3 others, you can't really afford, in the near future, a second spike and hope to treat everyone with antibodies.

We're approaching 500,000 confirmed cases in the US. We know the real number is higher than that, let's assume a couple to several million, that leaves ~325 Americans who are going to not have antibodies. Who are going to have to remain under some level of lock down.

[DCHawk1]

Congrats. You got me to leave.

Over that?

A pretty anodyne post.

It's accusing people of wanting Trump to fail more than wanting good news against the virus. Accusing those that point out his shortcomings of being truly evil.

You have A-MA-ZING glasses to be able to see all that in those 7 short words.

But, for what it's worth, fuck you.

[jhawks99]

Who 86'd themselves?

[jfish26]

I don't know this - can donated plasma antibodies have a vaccine-like effect in donees?

see my post about just such a study published monday in PNAS

From your link:

In this work, we explore the feasibility of convalescent plasma (CP) transfusion to rescue severe patients. The results from 10 severe adult cases showed that one dose (200 mL) of CP was well tolerated and could significantly increase or maintain the neutralizing antibodies at a high level, leading to disappearance of viremia in 7 d. Meanwhile, clinical symptoms and paraclinical criteria rapidly improved within 3 d. Radiological examination showed varying degrees of absorption of lung lesions within 7 d. These results indicate that CP can serve as a promising rescue option for severe COVID-19, while the randomized trial is warranted.

This is a treatment for those already sick.

There's no evidence that it could be used like a vaccine to protect unifected people. And if one recovered individual can only provide antibodies for 3 others, you can't really afford, in the near future, a second spike and hope to treat everyone with antibodies.

We're approaching 500,000 confirmed cases in the US. We know the real number is higher than that, let's assume a couple to several million, that leaves ~325 Americans who are going to not have antibodies. Who are going to have to remain under some level of lock down.

But, not indefinitely. And not even until there's a preventative treatment, or even a specific therapeutic treatment. There's going to be a lot of risk undertaken by those who, to your point, were able to avoid infection to this point.

[PhDhawk]

Congrats. You got me to leave.

Over that?

A pretty anodyne post.

It's accusing people of wanting Trump to fail more than wanting good news against the virus. Accusing those that point out his shortcomings of being truly evil.

The partisanship is sad and predictable and has been present at every step of this process. It's sad. And it cuts both ways.

When Trump et al. say facemasks aren't that effective, opponents say he doesn't get it and that every little bit helps flatten the curve and should be used while his supporters dismiss masks as being useless.

When Trump et al. say chloroquinone is an exciting possible treatment, his opponents look for every possible reason to bash him and discount this, while his supporters say every little bit helps flatten the curve and should be used.

Trump has taken misteps at nearly every turn and should be held accountable. But I don't think there's any question there are sides in this and everything that entails. I hope we can get past it. I wish people would both wear facemasks and allow conversation to be had about off-label treatments, etc.

[PhDhawk]

see my post about just such a study published monday in PNAS

From your link:

In this work, we explore the feasibility of convalescent plasma (CP) transfusion to rescue severe patients. The results from 10 severe adult cases showed that one dose (200 mL) of CP was well tolerated and could significantly increase or maintain the neutralizing antibodies at a high level, leading to disappearance of viremia in 7 d. Meanwhile, clinical symptoms and paraclinical criteria rapidly improved within 3 d. Radiological examination showed varying degrees of absorption of lung lesions within 7 d. These results indicate that CP can serve as a promising rescue option for severe COVID-19, while the randomized trial is warranted.

This is a treatment for those already sick.

There's no evidence that it could be used like a vaccine to protect unifected people. And if one recovered individual can only provide antibodies for 3 others, you can't really afford, in the near future, a second spike and hope to treat everyone with antibodies.

We're approaching 500,000 confirmed cases in the US. We know the real number is higher than that, let's assume a couple to several million, that leaves ~325 Americans who are going to not have antibodies. Who are going to have to remain under some level of lock down.

But, not indefinitely. And not even until there's a preventative treatment, or even a specific therapeutic treatment. There's going to be a lot of risk undertaken by those who, to your point, were able to avoid infection to this point.

I'm having a tough time seeing that this is the case, unless the virus is seasonal, or for some other reason, just goes away.

I don't have a ton of confidence in being able to contain a virus this infective, that has a long asymptomatic period where it can be spread, and has asymptomatic carriers. Even with more widespread testing and better contact tracing efforts.

Even if we get beyond the peaks, I don't see how you avoid immediate increases in cases when you lift restrictions unless you have a treatment, or a large portion of the population with immunity.

[DCHawk1]

Over that?

A pretty anodyne post.

It's accusing people of wanting Trump to fail more than wanting good news against the virus. Accusing those that point out his shortcomings of being truly evil.

The partisanship is sad and predictable and has been present at every step of this process. It's sad. And it cuts both ways.

When Trump et al. say facemasks aren't that effective, opponents say he doesn't get it and that every little bit helps flatten the curve and should be used while his supporters dismiss masks as being useless.

When Trump et al. say chloroquinone is an exciting possible treatment, his opponents look for every possible reason to bash him and discount this, while his supporters say every little bit helps flatten the curve and should be used.

Trump has taken misteps at nearly every turn and should be held accountable. But I don't think there's any question there are sides in this and everything that entails. I hope we can get past it. I wish people would both wear facemasks and allow conversation to be had about off-label treatments, etc.

It was such a stupid and self-centered interpretation as well.

I mean...take it easy, Warren. You'd have to be pretty vain to think this post is about you.

[CrimsonNBlue]

Trump has taken misteps at nearly every turn and should be held accountable. But I don't think there's any question there are sides in this and everything that entails. I hope we can get past it. I wish people would both wear facemasks and allow conversation to be had about off-label treatments, etc.

This is the most reasonable take.

I felt like some of Trump's statements re: Hydroxychloroquine are more endorsement-y than some want to admit, especially with weird people in his ear pushing it, Dr. Oz, et al. I think that's odd coming from someone in Trump's position.

But, there are a ton more valid reasons to take issue with Trump's handling of this thing. The Navarro memos alone are enough to question his fitness.

[jfish26]

From your link:



This is a treatment for those already sick.

There's no evidence that it could be used like a vaccine to protect unifected people. And if one recovered individual can only provide antibodies for 3 others, you can't really afford, in the near future, a second spike and hope to treat everyone with antibodies.

We're approaching 500,000 confirmed cases in the US. We know the real number is higher than that, let's assume a couple to several million, that leaves ~325 Americans who are going to not have antibodies. Who are going to have to remain under some level of lock down.

But, not indefinitely. And not even until there's a preventative treatment, or even a specific therapeutic treatment. There's going to be a lot of risk undertaken by those who, to your point, were able to avoid infection to this point.

I'm having a tough time seeing that this is the case, unless the virus is seasonal, or for some other reason, just goes away.

I don't have a ton of confidence in being able to contain a virus this infective, that has a long asymptomatic period where it can be spread, and has asymptomatic carriers. Even with more widespread testing and better contact tracing efforts.

Even if we get beyond the peaks, I don't see how you avoid immediate increases in cases when you lift restrictions unless you have a treatment, or a large portion of the population with immunity.

You know how I tend to view these things, and even I think that is socially and economically unfeasible.

Unfortunately, the rational path here is to develop much greater surveillance capabilities and get back to work, with rolling, perhaps recurring, localized shutdowns as necessary to squelch an outbreak.

But we're weeks - and many orders of surveillance capability magnitudes - away from this point.

[jfish26]

Trump has taken misteps at nearly every turn and should be held accountable. But I don't think there's any question there are sides in this and everything that entails. I hope we can get past it. I wish people would both wear facemasks and allow conversation to be had about off-label treatments, etc.

This is the most reasonable take.

I felt like some of Trump's statements re: Hydroxychloroquine are more endorsement-y than some want to admit, especially with weird people in his ear pushing it, Dr. Oz, et al. I think that's odd coming from someone in Trump's position.

But, there are a ton more valid reasons to take issue with Trump's handling of this thing. The Navarro memos alone are enough to question his fitness.

This ends up at the same point, but his abject illiteracy (for, at least, practical purposes) certainly is.

[DCHawk1]

Trump has taken misteps at nearly every turn and should be held accountable. But I don't think there's any question there are sides in this and everything that entails. I hope we can get past it. I wish people would both wear facemasks and allow conversation to be had about off-label treatments, etc.

This is the most reasonable take.

I felt like some of Trump's statements re: Hydroxychloroquine are more endorsement-y than some want to admit, especially with weird people in his ear pushing it, Dr. Oz, et al. I think that's odd coming from someone in Trump's position.

But, there are a ton more valid reasons to take issue with Trump's handling of this thing. The Navarro memos alone are enough to question his fitness.

OF COURSE they were endorsement-y. And OF COURSE they were politically motivated endorsements. And OF COURSE he should let the medical professionals deal with medical advice.

But the idea that he is killing people or that he should be referred for war crimes to the Hague (thank you, Tavia Galonski) is just so much silliness.

And while I do NOT think that people are responding negatively to Trump's comments because they want people to die and for him to fail, I do think that this episode is a case study in the damage that can be done by emotive moral judgments -- i.e. "I dislike this; therefore this is evil."

[PhDhawk]

But, not indefinitely. And not even until there's a preventative treatment, or even a specific therapeutic treatment. There's going to be a lot of risk undertaken by those who, to your point, were able to avoid infection to this point.

I'm having a tough time seeing that this is the case, unless the virus is seasonal, or for some other reason, just goes away.

I don't have a ton of confidence in being able to contain a virus this infective, that has a long asymptomatic period where it can be spread, and has asymptomatic carriers. Even with more widespread testing and better contact tracing efforts.

Even if we get beyond the peaks, I don't see how you avoid immediate increases in cases when you lift restrictions unless you have a treatment, or a large portion of the population with immunity.

You know how I tend to view these things, and even I think that is socially and economically unfeasible.

Unfortunately, the rational path here is to develop much greater surveillance capabilities and get back to work, with rolling, perhaps recurring, localized shutdowns as necessary to squelch an outbreak.

But we're weeks - and many orders of surveillance capability magnitudes - away from this point.

Exactly, we're talking about what might happen 6-24 months from now and we don't yet know what is going to happen 2-4 months from now with any certainty.

I do think there will be slow rollbacks, you can't stay this restricted for a long period of time. I can't see us allowing football stadiums with 85,000 fans in them for games this fall, unfortunately, but I do think some restrictions will be lifted. Maybe find a way to get schools going again, some of the businesses that are currently closed could re-open, etc. etc.

And, I get there's excitement that we may have this portion of our society that we can rely on who are immune, and I don't think we should waste it. I'm just saying, if we aren't careful that's going to have a lot of unintended negative consequences, particularly for the uninfected.

[CrimsonNBlue]

And while I do NOT think that people are responding negatively to Trump's comments because they want people to die and for him to fail, I do think that this episode is a case study in the damage that can be done by emotive moral judgments -- i.e. "I dislike this; therefore this is evil."

It's clearly a coping mechanism for some.

And, it's helping Trump, b/c he's got his own crowd that swallow whole his "I did an excellent job, they just hated me from the beginning" piece.

I don't know the right answer, b/c you can't allow him to not answer for the actual and costly mistakes.

[DCHawk1]

And while I do NOT think that people are responding negatively to Trump's comments because they want people to die and for him to fail, I do think that this episode is a case study in the damage that can be done by emotive moral judgments -- i.e. "I dislike this; therefore this is evil."

It's clearly a coping mechanism for some.

And, it's helping Trump, b/c he's got his own crowd that swallow whole his "I did an excellent job, they just hated me from the beginning" piece.

I don't know the right answer, b/c you can't allow him to not answer for the actual and costly mistakes.

Yeah. That's the other half of it: "I like this; therefore this is good." The binary nature of the choices from which we have to choose for leadership exacerbates this exponentially. In a JUST world, there would be a way to say: Trump fucked up and Trump has lost the right to lead, without having to acquiesce to the preposterous notion that Joe Biden is the cure for what ails us.

[Deleted User 89]

i’m not convinced, even at the ballot box, that he’ll be made to account for his missteps

[jfish26]

in not convinced, even at the ballot box, that he’ll be made to account for his missteps

The playbook was run yesterday, in Wisconsin.

[Mjl]

Over that?

A pretty anodyne post.

It's accusing people of wanting Trump to fail more than wanting good news against the virus. Accusing those that point out his shortcomings of being truly evil.

You have A-MA-ZING glasses to be able to see all that in those 7 short words.

But, for what it's worth, fuck you.

You're intentionally crytic and get hysterical when people interpret that cryptic comment in a way that you don't like.

[DCHawk1]

It's accusing people of wanting Trump to fail more than wanting good news against the virus. Accusing those that point out his shortcomings of being truly evil.

You have A-MA-ZING glasses to be able to see all that in those 7 short words.

But, for what it's worth, fuck you.

You're intentionally crytic and get hysterical when people interpret that cryptic comment in a way that you don't like.

lulz

There wasn't anything cryptic about it. It was a throw-away quip.

You are, of course, free to "interpret" it any way you want -- not that there's much to interpret.

Still, if your mad hermeneutic-interpretation skills reveal a guilty conscience, that's on you.

Talk about hysteria.