Wear a freaking mask already

Maybe I can carry it on my clothing. Should I go nude? It's not in my breath or saliva. A mask is useless and interferes with my safety glasses at work. I could get electrocuted if I can't see what I'm doing. I will only wear it when the law tells me to do it and it's being enforced. It's not a law in Texas. It's an order from the governor and only applies in counties with 20 or more active cases. That's about 10-15 counties out of 254.

 

[/QUOTE][/QUOTE]
What you and others forget in your studies is those are conducted among people who present in the ER with serious symptoms. The overwhelming majority of positive cases are asymptomatic or think they have a cold.
.I hope you're right and a very effective vaccine is right around the corner but until that does or doesn't happen we have no choice but to keep on truckin. We can't hide from this virus forever and really the mortality rate is quite low and the fear mongering is rediculous. It reminds me of the AGW hysteria and how we are all gonna die from that, well if covid doesn't kill us first. LOL

 

Indeed even in hospital facing shortage, there's been protocols of reusing masks without washing them if they sit quiet in a paper bag for 7 days. Six is fine. 7 is just more practical as you label each paper bag with a day of the week.

 

No. What part of 67% of them had mild and moderate symptoms and did not need to go into hospitals you don't understand? Have you read the study? I posted it multiple times. What is ridiculous is you LOL'ing about this. Get informed.

 

So many flaws so little time.
They presented with symptoms
The vast majority have no symptoms
One hundred people?
What was their ages?
What was their underlying conditions?
You are grasping at straws to promote hysteria .
Your study is fear mongering bunk.

 

I noticed you used the term deniers. So you are one of those. Nuff said LOL
So what do you think will kill us first, AGW or covid?

Be very afraid!

 

Value yes, worship no. Unfortunately so many so called educated people received more indoctrination than education and everything they say is suspect in that regard.

 

Have you read the study? The answer is no because all these answers are in the study and you still don't know the answers and you keep speculating. How do you dare criticize something you haven't read? You are saying I'm grasping at straws... without reading the freaking study??? How do you know these are straws??? For your information, cardiology trade publications, the American College of Cardiology, and the American Heart Association all got very worried about this study. They know a lot more about the heart than you do.

And how dare you call me a fearmonger when you also say I'm too optimistic about vaccines? You can't have the eggs and the omelette. Either you think I'm a fearmonger in which case I wouldn't be highly optimistic about an essential part of it, the vaccines, or you call me over-optimistic in which case I'm not a fearmonger. See if you can make a logical and reasonable decision, OK?

I am NOT a fearmonger. I'm realistic, and I say, I'm highly optimistic about the vaccines (the same ones YOU keep doubting), so I prefer that people wait for them instead of over-exposing themselves to a virus that has more dangers than they have realized.

 

Why in the hell do you suppose I'm part of the AGW crowd? Are you under the (erroneous) impression that I'm a liberal? For your information, I am for drilling and fracking. Stop putting words in my mouth and assuming stuff about me. You don't know me. The fact that I know a lot about the real dangers of this virus doesn't make of me a liberal, which seems to be your impression of me given your attitude.

I'm talking about covid deniers, not AGW deniers. Stay on topic, will you?

 

When you use the word denier I become naturally suspicious. It is the buzz word of the AGW alarmist.
Beyond that it denotes an attitude of you are right and all argument to the contrary is summarily dismissed.
As for your study a hundred people in Germany presenting with covid symptoms is meaningless.
Beyond that relax buddy. It's just debate and discussion in a forum. Neither you or I are changing the world in here.

 

So, a few answers from the study which you didn't read but love to criticize:

No, it wasn't people who showed up in hospitals. They used unselected patients picked from a test center. Their exams (cardiac MRI, troponin, biopsy) then revealed 78% of patients with cardiac lesions. 60% had ongoing cardiac inflammation. They found that the findings were independent of pre-existing conditions, severity (67% of them were mild and moderate cases that didn't need to be hospitalized), duration of illness, and time of onset. The mean age was 49. SD 14. Compared with healthy controls, the people who had had COVID-19 positive tests, showed up raised myocardial native T1 (n = 73), raised myocardial native T2 (n = 60), myocardial late gadolinium enhancement (n = 32), or pericardial enhancement (n = 22). High-sensitivity troponin T (hsTnT) was detectable (greater than 3 pg/mL) in 71 patients. Endomyocardial biopsy revealed active lymphocytic inflammation. The patients had no previously known heart failure or cardiomyopathy. "Our findings demonstrate that participants with a relative paucity of preexisting cardiovascular condition and with mostly home-based recovery had frequent cardiac inflammatory involvement." "Although the long-term health effects of these findings cannot yet be determined, several of the abnormalities described have been previously related to worse outcome in inflammatory cardiomyopathies." [this is bad]. Conclusion: "Taken together, we demonstrate cardiac involvement in 78 patients (78%) and ongoing myocardial inflammation in 60 patients (60%) with recent COVID-19 illness, independent of preexisting conditions, severity and overall course of the acute illness, and the time from the original diagnosis. These findings indicate the need for ongoing investigation of the long-term cardiovascular consequences of COVID-19."

Now, if you don't find that this is scary, you are really not serious. What this study shows is that even mild cases, even people who stayed home and simply tested positive, had no pre-existing conditions, SHOWED UP WITH SOME FREAKISH HEART LESIONS IN VERY HIGH NUMBERS!!! The illness with the power to cause this, is the illness that you think people would be "better off" (in your words) just catching already, for "herd immunity." Great.

So, the study is fearmongering bunk, says Josephwalker. We should take the word of Josephwalker over that of the cardiologists of the University Hospital Frankfurt in Germany, in a peer-reviewed study accepted by the JAMA-Cardiolgy.

Right. Great. Insert rolling eyes, here.

 

Pray tell, how would you call someone who thinks that this disease is just peachy and almost harmless, and is willing to dismiss (without reading it) as fear mongering bunk, a study showing 78% of heart lesions in random people who just tested positive and had no underlying conditions, some of them quite young (just one standard deviation down from the median age puts people at age 35) - an issue that was previously unknown simply because nobody thought of doing cardiac MRI in recovered COVID-19 patients?

I'd call that person, a denier.

Because every cardiologist on the planet found this study to be pretty darn concerning or downright scary. Hey, 5%, be my guest, not that upsetting. But freaking 78%???

Now, has it been replicated already? No. Is it a large study? No. Only 100 patients, which I said every time that I commented upon it. And I always said *if confirmed.* But if you don't think that this is highly concerning, you are out of this world, or else you have absolutely no clue about cardiology.

Do observe that the study did match these 100 people to 57 controls with similar age, health status, etc., and found that the only difference was the fact that the people with the new onset heart lesions had had COVID-19. We do know that the SARS-CoV-2 has a special predilection for the heart muscle. The myocarditis it causes is precisely why some people ran into trouble with HCQ due to the enhancement of HCQ's cardiac toxicity by the virus' direct effect on the heart. So, the likelihood that this is just an anomaly and a fluke is pretty darn small.

But noooooo, Josephwalker thinks it's fear mongering bunk.

 

Bottom line is
"These findings indicate the need for ongoing investigation of the long-term cardiovascular consequences of COVID-19."

Which is far from your fear mongering insinuated conclusion that most people who contract covid suffer long term debilitating and permanent damage.

 

Where did I say that?
Please point to the post of mine in which I said MOST people suffer long term debilitating and permanent damage.
I've been saying 5%. One in 20. Does that sound like MOST to you? In multiple posts I said, 1% dead, 5% maimed.
*IF* confirmed, this study may change that, though.
The authors were discreet, as good authors are.
Cardiologists reading this, and I've seen the discussion in trade journals, were terrified about the possibility of heart failure down the road. Have you read this part? "Although the long-term health effects of these findings cannot yet be determined, several of the abnormalities described have been previously related to worse outcome in inflammatory cardiomyopathies." Do you have any idea what is a "worse outcome" in inflammatory cardiomyopathies? FYI, it's heart failure. Why they can't be determined? Because the disease is too new. But the lesions found share the characteristics of other inflammatory cardiomyopathies that lead to heart failure.

I'll tell you what: this is flying above your head. You are not equipped to understand the implications.

 

What's fear mongering bunk is someone like you running around screaming the sky is falling because of some obscure study of a hundred people in Germany.
Are people in Sweden who are taking the herd immunity approach dropping like flies from post Covid heart issues? Not that I've heard.

 

My error. If you are saying 5% may suffer some long term heart damage I'd be more accepting of that and it would illicit a so what from me. That's not a number to freak out about.

 

Here is what other sources are saying (and there was a second concerning study in the same number of the JAMA-Cardiology, with heart autopsy results in patients who died of covid-19):

Come again? Not worrisome? Just fear mongering bunk? So these cardiologists don't know anything about the heart, right? You do, instead?

 

Of course they worry, that's their job.
Once again are people in Sweden suffering heart failure post covid? Not that I've heard.

 

I said, that's what I was saying before, but IF THE FINDINGS IN THIS STUDY ARE CONFIRMED, this will obviously change that calculation, like the numerous quotes from cardiologists above are saying.

And 5% of heart failure is not a number to freak out about??? You obviously do not understand public health. Get 1 in 20 post-Covid-19 Americans with heart failure and you'll see what it will do to the economy. At this point, we should hope that i's "just" 5%.

You say, so what? And I'm wrong in calling you a denier?

You want herd immunity. You want most people to get this virus (because herd immunity threshold for the SARS-CoV-2 is 82.5%).

So let's play with the numbers a bit.

82.5% of 331 million people is 273 million people. 5% of this is 13,650,000 people.

Pray tell, you think that 13,650,000 people with heart failure is not a big deal???

And do realize that this is 5%... while the study found 78% of people having the issue, and 60% with ongoing inflammation, all with the wrong kind of markers, the ones associated with bad outcomes (I listed all the markers above).

Come again? Herd immunity is great, huh? 5% of heart failure? No big deal, huh?

Jesus...

 

You are not paying attention. Did you notice that the lead investigator said that people were NOT having symptoms but were showing the severe findings?
But the problem reside with the markers of severe inflammation. They match the bad heart inflammatory diseases that lead to heart failure DOWN THE ROAD. So, this would be a silent killer, for a few years... but would severely curtail life expectancy.

Here, let me repeat for you what she said:

And this one:

So, the Swedes are in the "getting through the acute phase" part - but the problem is, what will be the price to pay, later?

Look, we shouldn't be shouting at each other. Just realize that this is more serious than you thought. Maybe you should just say "OK, you've convinced me, this thing seems nastier than I thought, maybe we should all just remain very cautious until we get a vaccine; it's likely that even for the young and healthy, catching this may result in some pretty serious consequences down the road."

 

Once again you assume the worst case scenario is the likely scenario. You say if confirmed but act like it already is and you assume heart damage is heart failure.
Take a break buddy. Go outside and take a walk. Have a good evening and we can resume the discussion tomorrow if you want.
Think about why Sweden isn't Sweden having a sudden uptick in heart failure though or anyone else for that matter.

 

Lots of I think and maybe. Take a walk! It's good for your heart. LOL

 

My friend, heart failure from inflammatory myocarditis takes a few years to kick in... that's why you're not seeing a sudden uptick in heart failure in Sweden. Again, you're not equipped to understand the implications.

And I'm not worried for me. I know how to take care of myself, and I'll get the vaccine at the first opportunity. I worry more about people like you who think it's not a big deal.

 

This editorial from the freaking Journal of the American Medical Association - Cardiology, one of the top five medical journals in the world, is frankly devastating:

You said you were touched with my optimism for vaccines... my turn to be touched with your optimism for this not being a big deal. Newsflash: it is.

 

No, I'm just showing to you how your herd immunity scenario is imprudent. You think that 5% of heart failure is an acceptable risk. I'm showing to you, if your herd immunity idea was to be implemented, how many Americans would need to catch it, and then, the 5% that YOU said is not a big deal, how many would be in trouble.

Me, no, I don't want the numbers to go so high, because I don't want us to try for herd immunity. Remember, that's how this dialogue started.