The takeaway from this, I think, is that from the start the politicians and “experts” have been winging it. And still are. See COVID – What have we learned? (Hat tip, Dave Lull.)
We have learned that medical science is not a pure thing – not in the slightest. We have also learned that the world of research has not come together to conquer COVID, it has split apart.
Those wanting to make money, have distorted and damaged research for their own ends. Those who want to vaccinate the world, forever, have seen a door open to the promised land. Those who wanted lockdown, are inflating the numbers of those killed.Dr. Kendrick is obviously a more qualified observer than I and many others. But I have some expertise in the matter of reporting. And the reporting in this case has been all over the place from the start.
Addendum: I should add that, given the inconsistency and contradiction of the information, it is easy to pick and choose factoids to support whatever position one favors for whatever reason. My position from the start has been and remains that there are few grounds for certainty in this matter and that the policies have been improvised, often ignorantly and ineptly. Please spare me the sanctimony about saving lives. Tell that to the families of the thousands of persons whom certain governors shunted off to nursing homes, where they died. Those governors have blood on their hands and ought to be made to pay, though I doubt they will be.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteRight, so we should listen to the Dr. Trumps of the world, shall we? Never mind, I'm not going to argue with a convicted--sorry, I meant convinced--contrarian. However, after living and working for 18 years in Africa, I have no patience with any medicine man who even hints that vaccination is unwise.
ReplyDeleteNonetheless, I did have an interesting experience today: at a medical consultation, I was told that the number of hospital-acquired infections has been significantly reduced since the advent of covid-19. Apparently, hospital staff are following hygiene guidelines far more closely. There must be a way of calculating how this affects the overall recovery and/or mortality rate of patients. A pity that science is so complex...
I'm blocked from the WSJ article.
ReplyDeleteHowever, Malcolm Kenrick is a medical doctor, not an epidemiolost, so is thoroughly unqualified to comment on what we have learned. Even as a medical doctor, he is known as a quack. Here a quote, as he offer the world dangerous medical lies: "I don't happen to think that saturated fats are in any way damaging or dangerous. If they were, they wouldn't taste so damn delicious. Nature tends to warn us off dangerous foods by making them taste bitter and icky." You may want to remove the post, Frank, or just somehow link to the WSJ article.
On the evolution of knowledge of Covid-19, we began at square one, with the basics, with what we already knew about viruses: cover your mouth, keep your distance, and wash your hands, what your mother said to do when you were a child. Nothing has changed. This is the stuff people did over a hundred years ago with the 1918-20 influenza.
What's been added through research are the peculiarities of Covid-19, for instance, the aerosol transmission, that rooms get filled with the virus like with second hand smoke, and just recently that masks can help the wearer. But we should have all been wearing masks anyway, and not creating indoor crowds, where, of course, common sense, this deadly virus spreads most. The virus cannot spread if people do not act stupidly.
An example of where too many news outlets and talk shows hosts (not researchers), but even the CDC and WHO have allowed themselves to be persuaded, is the advertisement that science has not found that the virus is transmitted through surfaces. Yet, logically speaking, science cannot discount what is common knowledge about viruses, that surface transmission happens. Preprints often talk about the danger of fomite transmission, but never that there is none in the case of Covid-19. Here's a preprint on the subject, as an example, just out today: Role of interfering substances in the survival of coronaviruses on surfaces and their impact on the efficiency of hand and surface disinfection.
And here is a quote from the pdf: "With regards to disinfection, antiseptic hand hygiene including use of alcohol-based hand sanitizer is one of the most important measures in preventing outbreak-associated viral infections." And yes, the researchers studied how this is so with SARS-CoV-2.
We went all year before finding out a couple weeks ago that masks help prevent wearers from catching the virus. We went months before that, only able to say that it keeps the wearer from spreading the virus -- based on droplet research. Researchers are simply searching for specifics about Covid-19, and offering up info as it comes. In both cases, the masks, and the surfaces, we go back to common sense: Of course it's just what you'd think, what your mother could tell you, wash your hands, and wear a mask.
A licensed M.D. is obviously better qualified to pass judgment on such matters than any layperson. Also, read the addendum to the post.
DeleteThe MDs depend on the science coming from epidemiologists and virologists on this matter. Malcolm Kendrick does not know what he is talking about, even in his own field of expertise. If he is smart, then he has sold out for the sake of selling books, giving speeches, and little citations that get his name out there. He acts the fool or is the fool. Either way, he is a fool -- one who does not mind killing people, whether by heart attack or coronavirus. Please don't associate with him this way. It does not make you look good either. Go with what's real.
DeleteI don’t care how I look. And I have more pressing things to do than continue discussing this matter. Think as you like and grant me leave to do the same.
DeleteJust being a friend, Frank. You spilled food on your tie. Maybe you cannot see it, maybe you have, maybe it's your style somehow, but I told you what was obvious to most everyone else. You brought the topic up for discussion.
DeleteLee,
ReplyDeleteNo one is opposing vaccination. They are cautioning against testing one prematurely. If you’re up for being one of the test subjects, be my guest. I’ll wait myself.