Coronavirus prep
Options
Replies
-
@lynn_glenmont and @T1DCarnivoreRunner
I get both your positions, I brought it up initially as a "hmmmm" from something I remembered hearing last week. My giving the link and its references today was just to provide where I encountered it since there actually seemed to be interest in discussion its possible validity. At this point in time, I do not have the background to read that study (reference #2). Did either of you have better luck? I would have had to sit with a dictionary all day to even attempt it. The only comments I can add to this discussion are that a study was actually done, a doctor bothered to read and reference it (she had plenty to talk about without referencing it), and then an organization chose to write and article on the paper after reading it. It very well could be a case of garbage in garbage out, but it is worth a pause to see if there is anything of value in that study. I hope someone can actually read it!
My understanding is that they created models of the virus and then tried to figure out how to make antibodies that circumvent the spike proteins. It doesn't sound like they had success, but still learned more about the structure of the virus and the spike proteins. Did you understand something different?2 -
@lynn_glenmont and @T1DCarnivoreRunner
I get both your positions, I brought it up initially as a "hmmmm" from something I remembered hearing last week. My giving the link and its references today was just to provide where I encountered it since there actually seemed to be interest in discussion its possible validity. At this point in time, I do not have the background to read that study (reference #2). Did either of you have better luck? I would have had to sit with a dictionary all day to even attempt it. The only comments I can add to this discussion are that a study was actually done, a doctor bothered to read and reference it (she had plenty to talk about without referencing it), and then an organization chose to write and article on the paper after reading it. It very well could be a case of garbage in garbage out, but it is worth a pause to see if there is anything of value in that study. I hope someone can actually read it!
Or, as is often the case in popularizing of scientific studies, it could very well be a case of a reasonable study with limited conclusions pointing to a need for further research coming out the end of the equivalent of the old "telephone game" as HOLEY MOLEY! RESEARCHERS HAVE JUST DISCOVERED THIS MASSIVELY IMPORTANT NEW THING THAT NO ONE HAD EVERY SUSPECTED BEFORE BUT THAT WE SHOULD BASE DECISIONS ON EVEN THOUGH IT HASN'T BEEN REPLICATED YET!! PLEASE CLICK HERE TO INCREASE MY AD REVENUE!!
9 -
at this point, I am wishing I never brought the comment up.8
-
T1DCarnivoreRunner wrote: »@lynn_glenmont and @T1DCarnivoreRunner
I get both your positions, I brought it up initially as a "hmmmm" from something I remembered hearing last week. My giving the link and its references today was just to provide where I encountered it since there actually seemed to be interest in discussion its possible validity. At this point in time, I do not have the background to read that study (reference #2). Did either of you have better luck? I would have had to sit with a dictionary all day to even attempt it. The only comments I can add to this discussion are that a study was actually done, a doctor bothered to read and reference it (she had plenty to talk about without referencing it), and then an organization chose to write and article on the paper after reading it. It very well could be a case of garbage in garbage out, but it is worth a pause to see if there is anything of value in that study. I hope someone can actually read it!
My understanding is that they created models of the virus and then tried to figure out how to make antibodies that circumvent the spike proteins. It doesn't sound like they had success, but still learned more about the structure of the virus and the spike proteins. Did you understand something different?
That's pretty much what I got, except for the part about it not sounding like they had success. It sounded to me like the modeling and gaining insight from the modeling was their goal, and that they intended all along for that insight to be used by other researchers who work on antibody and vaccine development.3 -
at this point, I am wishing I never brought the comment up.
I'm sorry if you feel like you have to defend or respond to every comment on it. I kept trying to make the point that I was addressing the material about fructose that you posted, not anything you said about it. I think it's perfectly fine for people to bring ideas or content to the discussion without being responsible for defending it or responding to every post about it. I intentionally wasn't "@" -ing you.9 -
Donald Trump and his wife test positive for Covid-19.7
-
missysippy930 wrote: »Donald Trump and his wife test positive for Covid-19.
Wow, just one more dynamic added to this already crazy election.
3 -
missysippy930 wrote: »Donald Trump and his wife test positive for Covid-19.
Wow, just one more dynamic added to this already crazy election.
I'm sure they will be fine as he has access to levels of treatment that most people don't.9 -
T1DCarnivoreRunner wrote: »missysippy930 wrote: »Donald Trump and his wife test positive for Covid-19.
Wow, just one more dynamic added to this already crazy election.
I'm sure they will be fine as he has access to levels of treatment that most people don't.
But 1 month from Election Day, quarantine for 14 days, so no campaigning around the country. They will have medical attention most people don’t receive, but no one is immune and he’s in the age group for risk factor.9 -
missysippy930 wrote: »T1DCarnivoreRunner wrote: »missysippy930 wrote: »Donald Trump and his wife test positive for Covid-19.
Wow, just one more dynamic added to this already crazy election.
I'm sure they will be fine as he has access to levels of treatment that most people don't.
But 1 month from Election Day, quarantine for 14 days, so no campaigning around the country. They will have medical attention most people don’t receive, but no one is immune and he’s in the age group for risk factor.
Maybe so but I firmly believe his care and monitoring will be best of the best vs. that poor little 90 yo 100 lb. old lady in the nursing home that's merely someone's mom or grandma who's...well, old already and clearly dispensable.
Bitter much? Oh yeh.
15 -
missysippy930 wrote: »T1DCarnivoreRunner wrote: »missysippy930 wrote: »Donald Trump and his wife test positive for Covid-19.
Wow, just one more dynamic added to this already crazy election.
I'm sure they will be fine as he has access to levels of treatment that most people don't.
But 1 month from Election Day, quarantine for 14 days, so no campaigning around the country. They will have medical attention most people don’t receive, but no one is immune and he’s in the age group for risk factor.
Maybe so but I firmly believe his care and monitoring will be best of the best vs. that poor little 90 yo 100 lb. old lady in the nursing home that's merely someone's mom or grandma who's...well, old already and clearly dispensable.
Bitter much? Oh yeh.
Clearly dispensable? Wow harsh! I’m bitter too, btw. Even sarcastically. (I hope)
My neighbors 95 yo mother, in a nursing home survived covid.9 -
T1DCarnivoreRunner wrote: »missysippy930 wrote: »Donald Trump and his wife test positive for Covid-19.
Wow, just one more dynamic added to this already crazy election.
I'm sure they will be fine as he has access to levels of treatment that most people don't.
I am sure that you are correct. But I can just imagine all that is going to go on in the news now. As it was, I regretted turning on the TV way too often these days.4 -
missysippy930 wrote: »T1DCarnivoreRunner wrote: »missysippy930 wrote: »Donald Trump and his wife test positive for Covid-19.
Wow, just one more dynamic added to this already crazy election.
I'm sure they will be fine as he has access to levels of treatment that most people don't.
But 1 month from Election Day, quarantine for 14 days, so no campaigning around the country. They will have medical attention most people don’t receive, but no one is immune and he’s in the age group for risk factor.
That was just discussed a bit on the news. Quarantine (I think they mentioned only 10?) or two negative tests over 24 hours apart. Speculation is that the second will be the faster path to returning to public campaigning. There was also speculation that President Trump may need to change his rally format. Time will tell.
1 -
missysippy930 wrote: »T1DCarnivoreRunner wrote: »missysippy930 wrote: »Donald Trump and his wife test positive for Covid-19.
Wow, just one more dynamic added to this already crazy election.
I'm sure they will be fine as he has access to levels of treatment that most people don't.
But 1 month from Election Day, quarantine for 14 days, so no campaigning around the country. They will have medical attention most people don’t receive, but no one is immune and he’s in the age group for risk factor.
Maybe so but I firmly believe his care and monitoring will be best of the best vs. that poor little 90 yo 100 lb. old lady in the nursing home that's merely someone's mom or grandma who's...well, old already and clearly dispensable.
Bitter much? Oh yeh.
The nursing home stories were terrible and sad. In Massachusetts some people are being prosecuted and then NY state made some bad bad decisions when it came to the NYC nursing home. On the other hand, there are plenty of nursing homes that managed to properly protect and care for their residents.
2 -
Quarantine? No such thing in my little world. For work purposes (community hospital), even if we’ve been directly exposed to someone with covid (either patients or community exposure) we are supposed to show up to work. Only if we have a fever over 100 will they consider us unfit to work 😑18
-
MadDogManor wrote: »Quarantine? No such thing in my little world. For work purposes (community hospital), even if we’ve been directly exposed to someone with covid (either patients or community exposure) we are supposed to show up to work. Only if we have a fever over 100 will they consider us unfit to work 😑
Same here. We get tested and if negative, don't have to quarantine or miss work.9 -
missysippy930 wrote: »T1DCarnivoreRunner wrote: »missysippy930 wrote: »Donald Trump and his wife test positive for Covid-19.
Wow, just one more dynamic added to this already crazy election.
I'm sure they will be fine as he has access to levels of treatment that most people don't.
But 1 month from Election Day, quarantine for 14 days, so no campaigning around the country. They will have medical attention most people don’t receive, but no one is immune and he’s in the age group for risk factor.
That was just discussed a bit on the news. Quarantine (I think they mentioned only 10?) or two negative tests over 24 hours apart. Speculation is that the second will be the faster path to returning to public campaigning. There was also speculation that President Trump may need to change his rally format. Time will tell.
But if he is already positive, he will likely be positive for over 14 days anyways unless it was a false positive.3 -
Well, it is what it is. Science trumps politics.14
-
This is a turning point either way, I'm concerned, or optimistic. Either it will be a brief illness and the message will be, "see it was just the flu..." Which would be an absolutely catastrophic message. Or nearly everyone that was in that close group will test positive and start a more consistent message to take this serious, which has been drastically needed all along. And that would save lives. I have a feeling it will be the former, not the latter.11
-
Noreenmarie1234 wrote: »missysippy930 wrote: »T1DCarnivoreRunner wrote: »missysippy930 wrote: »Donald Trump and his wife test positive for Covid-19.
Wow, just one more dynamic added to this already crazy election.
I'm sure they will be fine as he has access to levels of treatment that most people don't.
But 1 month from Election Day, quarantine for 14 days, so no campaigning around the country. They will have medical attention most people don’t receive, but no one is immune and he’s in the age group for risk factor.
That was just discussed a bit on the news. Quarantine (I think they mentioned only 10?) or two negative tests over 24 hours apart. Speculation is that the second will be the faster path to returning to public campaigning. There was also speculation that President Trump may need to change his rally format. Time will tell.
But if he is already positive, he will likely be positive for over 14 days anyways unless it was a false positive.
Not necessarily. From the reading I did earlier this week, testing is no where near as accurate as we all would hope. There is apparently a window during which one typically will test positive. Too early, negative, too late, negative. Then again, we have all heard those bizarre stories about a person testing positive for 100 days. Those are not the typical and who knows why one is different from the other. The links I shared here that are worth reading IMO are these. They definitely caught me by surprise:
https://medical.mit.edu/covid-19-updates/2020/07/when-should-i-be-tested
https://medical.mit.edu/covid-19-updates/2020/06/how-does-covid-19-antigen-test-work
https://medical.mit.edu/covid-19-updates/2020/08/did-we-have-covid-192
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.6K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 387 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.2K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 916 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions