Covid 19 (OPEN DISCUSSION)

[Doggies1972]

You a midget?

Nah.. just scared of a sort throat and sniffles.

 

[Miguel Sanchez]

Don’t we have enough of our own peanuts without importing more from the western suburbs of Melbourne?

 

[Doggies1972]

Don’t we have enough of our own peanuts without importing more from the western suburbs of Melbourne?

It's OK, they are vaccinated.

 

[wadistance]

I would love everyone to have a good listen to this episode of the Peter Attia drive. Was recommended to me by a doctor friend. Put it on whilst your cooking dinner next time. It’s 2h45 long, but it is thorough, and the three doctors talk more sense than the politically motivated s**t we’ve been hearing the last 18 months






In this episode, Peter sits down with Drs. Marty Makary and Zubin Damania (aka ZDoggMD), both previous guests on The Drive. Marty is a Johns Hopkins professor and public health researcher and ZDoggMD is a UCSF/Stanford trained internist and the founder of Turntable Health.

This episode, recorded on December 27, 2021, was in part inspired by some of the shoddy science and even worse messaging coming from top officials regarding COVID-19. In this discussion, Marty and ZDoggMD discuss what is known about the omicron variant, the risks and benefits of vaccines for all age groups, and the taboo subject of natural immunity and the protection it offers against infection and severe disease. Furthermore, they discuss at length the poor messaging coming from our public officials, the justification (and lack thereof) for certain mandates and policies in light of the current evidence, and the problems caused by the highly politicized and polarized nature of the subject.

Themes throughout the conversation include the difference between science and advocacy, the messaging which is sowing mistrust in science despite major progress, and a search for what a possible “end” to this situation might look like.

NOTE: Since this episode was recorded over the holiday and published ASAP, this is an audio-only episode with limited show notes.
We discuss:
• Comparing omicron to delta and other variants [4:15];
• Measuring immunity and protection from severe disease—circulating antibodies, B cells, and T cells [13:15];
• Policy questions: what is the end game and how does the world go back to 2019? [18:45];
• A policy-minded framework for viewing COVID and the problem of groupthink [24:00];
• The difference between science and advocacy [39:00];
• Natural immunity from COVID after infection [46:00];
• The unfortunate erosion of trust in science despite impressive progress [57:15];
• Do the current mandates and policies make sense in light of existing data? [1:02:30];
• Risks associated with vaccines, and the risk of being labeled an anti-vaxxer when questioning them [1:18:15];
• Data on incidence of myocarditis after vaccination with the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines [1:26:15];
• Outstanding questions about myocarditis as a side effect of mRNA vaccination and the benefit of boosters [1:35:00];
• The risk-reward of boosters and recommendations being ignored by policy makers in the US [1:40:30];
• Sowing distrust: lack of honesty and humility from top officials and policy makers [1:43:30];
• Thoughts on testing: does it make sense to push widespread testing for COVID? [1:52:15];
• What is the endpoint to all of this? [1:58:45];
• Downstream consequences of lockdowns and draconian policy measures [2:05:30];
• The polarized nature of COVID—tribalism, skeptics, and demonization of ideas [2:10:30];
• Looking back at past pandemics for perspective and the potential for another pandemic in the future [2:20:00];
• What parents can do if their kids are subject to unreasonable policies [2:25:00];
• Voices of reason in this space [2:28:45];
• Strong convictions, loosely held: the value in questioning your own beliefs [2:32:15];

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Scotland]

McGowan should not leave WA just for a defamation hearing with a known public nuisance. Any legal dispute with Clive Palmer is waste of time. Lose and you lose, win and he won't pay his bills. Totally frivolous use of a state premier's time. Palmer is unvaxxed, 67 years old and morbidly obese so he'll probably, ummm, get a bad flu soon anyway.

If McGowan does leave the state then he should absolutely be subject to the same rules as everyone else.

 

[wadistance]

USA has 1 person dead per 370 people since COVID 19 started .
If Western Australia was like USA and ignored everything we would have
7300 dead from COVID . WA has 9 . If W A was full of (I won't say selfish ) people like the Americans and their Government then maybe your 3 year old would have no Grandparents here anyway . Not to mention the chronic fatigue and other side effects of COVID . Those 7291 people who have lived an extra 2 years would be grateful . As someone who has stared down a differential cancer diagnosis with a 5% chance of surviving 2 years I know how precious 2 years are. I did everything in my power to be in that 5% including high dose vit C . Going full vegan . Juicing 2kg carrots a day and doing Chemo 6 days in hospital every 3 weeks so I could be alive for an 8 year old son and 10 year old daughter . There is nothing flippant about life and a few years separation in another country is no excuse to be flippant with other people's lives

This whole "how many deaths is acceptable" line is such a weird part of the Australian COVID debate. Its first of all a question that you can't answer, as how can you define acceptable? Are only COVID deaths unacceptable? Were the 4300 deaths due to the flu in 2017 unacceptable? Should the aim of society be to prevent all deaths?

At this point, we need to consider the bigger picture - how do we want to live.

 

[ziad]

This whole "how many deaths is acceptable" line is such a weird part of the Australian COVID debate. Its first of all a question that you can't answer, as how can you define acceptable? Are only COVID deaths unacceptable? Were the 4300 deaths due to the flu in 2017 unacceptable? Should the aim of society be to prevent all deaths?

At this point, we need to consider the bigger picture - how do we want to live.

apparently, in WA under the doona with the lights on

 

[the harry]

This whole "how many deaths is acceptable" line is such a weird part of the Australian COVID debate. Its first of all a question that you can't answer, as how can you define acceptable? Are only COVID deaths unacceptable? Were the 4300 deaths due to the flu in 2017 unacceptable? Should the aim of society be to prevent all deaths?

At this point, we need to consider the bigger picture - how do we want to live.

Is that flu death count world wide?

"DEATHS DUE TO INFLUENZA, 2017

In 2017 there were 1,255 deaths due to influenza, recording a standardised death rate of 3.9 per 100,000 persons. This is a significant increase from 2016 where 464 influenza deaths were recorded"

3303.0 - Causes of Death, Australia, 2017

www.abs.gov.au

 

[larrikin]

McGowan should not leave WA just for a defamation hearing with a known public nuisance. Any legal dispute with Clive Palmer is waste of time. Lose and you lose, win and he won't pay his bills. Totally frivolous use of a state premier's time. Palmer is unvaxxed, 67 years old and morbidly obese so he'll probably, ummm, get a bad flu soon anyway.

If McGowan does leave the state then he should absolutely be subject to the same rules as everyone else.

News.com.au as always with a balanced, non-clickbaity headline.

McGowan’s bid to dodge own Covid rules

West Australian Premier Mark McGowan will seek to give evidence at a defamation trial against billionaire Clive Palmer via video link so he can avoid having to quarantine.

www.news.com.au

I mean, they are not technically incorrect but....

 

[bluengold89]

Spoke to my mate in Melbourne yesterday, he said it’s far from business as usual. Streets are much quieter, and the pubs are pretty dead. Everyone who’s out and about has already had Covid, which makes sense, not much risk for them, but those who haven’t had it are laying low, scared to catch it, which is also fair enough. So everyone saying that we’re getting left behind and need to get life back to normal, like over east, it’s not quite the truth. I’d say our lives over here are much more normal than the east coast.

“Life is normal for me, so everything must be fine”

Genuine question, if you're going to take the position you did in the second post i've quoted above, then what was the actual point of your first post above?

It pretty much reads as:

"I'll discount your firsthand account of life in Sydney because you're just one person, but here's some rambling hearsay from one of my mates that fits the narrative I want to believe so I better share it around!"

 

[ziad]

Genuine question, if you're going to take the position you did in the second post i've quoted above, then what was the actual point of your first post above?

It pretty much reads as:

"I'll discount your firsthand account of life in Sydney because you're just one person, but here's some rambling hearsay from one of my mates that fits the narrative I want to believe so I better share it around!"

you do know Sydney and Melbourne are in different states, have a doifferent COVID experienc and are 10 hrs drive apart

 

[bluengold89]

you do know Sydney and Melbourne are in different states, have a doifferent COVID experienc and are 10 hrs drive apart

Read my post again, it's the general logic behind the posts I take issue with - 'i'll discount your firsthand anecdotal evidence that doesn't suit my narrative but also spout my own secondhand anecdotal evidence as it does.'

Also given I did that ten hour drive twice in the last 3 weeks, yes I am aware. Cheers for your input.

 

[MIKE85]

Genuine question, if you're going to take the position you did in the second post i've quoted above, then what was the actual point of your first post above?

It pretty much reads as:

"I'll discount your firsthand account of life in Sydney because you're just one person, but here's some rambling hearsay from one of my mates that fits the narrative I want to believe so I better share it around!"

My second post was a bit of sarcasm directed a post saying that all was fine because the poster was able to go and have a coffee and a massage and that life was normal. Hearing accounts from both Melbourne and Sydney that hospitality and retail are still really struggling and people are choosing to isolate and not going out.

 

[boondy]

This whole "how many deaths is acceptable" line is such a weird part of the Australian COVID debate. Its first of all a question that you can't answer, as how can you define acceptable? Are only COVID deaths unacceptable? Were the 4300 deaths due to the flu in 2017 unacceptable? Should the aim of society be to prevent all deaths?

At this point, we need to consider the bigger picture - how do we want to live.

In answer to flu deaths , this part of the world you cannot visit a nursing home unless you have a current flu shot . So flu deaths are not acceptable here . Before Omicron some countries including China , Australia , New Zealand , reigned the virus in to basically 0. That showed it could be beaten by everyone isolating for 2 weeks at once with essential workers wearing masks and following strict protocols . Saving lives can't be best achieved because we don't have 1 United World Government and we don't have obedient subjects who would stay still for 2 weeks . The fragmented government leaders will try and find their own way to deal with it .

 

[Jezzza]

In answer to flu deaths , this part of the world you cannot visit a nursing home unless you have a current flu shot . So flu deaths are not acceptable here . Before Omicron some countries including China , Australia , New Zealand , reigned the virus in to basically 0. That showed it could be beaten by everyone isolating for 2 weeks at once with essential workers wearing masks and following strict protocols . Saving lives can't be best achieved because we don't have 1 United World Government and we don't have obedient subjects who would stay still for 2 weeks . The fragmented government leaders will try and find their own way to deal with it .

When did the requirement to have a current flu shot to enable you to visit a aged care facility come in? I thought it might have been a measure introduced early in the pandemic.

 

[Ilkka Sinisalo]

This whole "how many deaths is acceptable" line is such a weird part of the Australian COVID debate. Its first of all a question that you can't answer, as how can you define acceptable? Are only COVID deaths unacceptable? Were the 4300 deaths due to the flu in 2017 unacceptable? Should the aim of society be to prevent all deaths?

At this point, we need to consider the bigger picture - how do we want to live.

Again, life has been far closer to normal than it has been in almost everywhere else in the world the last two years. My 70-something parents live in the US and, let me assure you, they would have much preferred the last two years we’ve had here over constantly being afraid of getting the spicy cough, wearing a mask at all times outside of home, frequent closures of hospitality venues, museums, concerts, etc, rarely able to travel to see friends or family, and so on. That is not even mentioning the crippling death toll in the US - it is hard to ask those people how they want to live because they are no longer alive.

 

[Farang83150]

 

[Miguel Sanchez]

Well that was 50 seconds of my life I won’t get back.

 

[Agent93]

Well that was 50 seconds of my life I won’t get back.

Damnit. I got sucked in too.

 

[boondy]

When did the requirement to have a current flu shot to enable you to visit a aged care facility come in? I thought it might have been a measure introduced early in the pandemic.

May 1 2020

 

[Ambrose Burnside]

Good rule. I wouldn't want to visit grandma without one, same as I wouldn't want to cuddle a newborn without the whooping cough shot.

Up to date with both btw.

 

[bzparkes]

Good rule. I wouldn't want to visit grandma without one, same as I wouldn't want to cuddle a newborn without the whooping cough shot.

Up to date with both btw.

Yeah. I didn't even think about it prior but just before my kid was born my mother reminded me to get a whooping cough shot.

 

[Moose1414]

If you are going to advocate for a course of treatment then please, at least know what it does. The advantage of monoclonal antibodies (which again, seem to not be effective against the Omicron variant) is that they reduce hospitalisations when given to people who are suffering from mild or moderate cases. Once a person has deteriorated to the point where they require hospitalisation, the monoclonal antibody treatment is not the preferred course of treatment.

There are many different strains on monoclonal antibodies and yes some have been identified as not effective against Omicron. Which is logical. But also, some still are. Which is also logical, not all antibodies are created equally.

Its common sense that with any kind of medical intervention, earlier is better. What you are saying makes not sense in terms of it being just too late once people present to hospital, for at least 2 reasons. 1. People present to hospital pretty damn early still in terms of how far this disease needs to progress before you land on a ventilator. And 2, I think it is the case that for the majority of people in the states you can't even get monoclonal antibodies outside of the hospital system- and yet, it still managed to save thousands of lives.

But this is all academic anyway, we don't have them here and in the US the FDA has decided after a year of them being the most effective treatment they have, to ban them to make way for Pfizers new antivirals so we are very unlikely to change our minds. Case closed.

Now since you are also the resident expert on Myocarditis, thoughts on what this lunatic is saying?



Now when you reply to say that this guy is dangerous and doesn't know what he's talking about and that the virus is causing myocarditis at 10 times the rate as the vaccine across all age groups or whatever it is you believe. Just note that this guy is not just an extremely experienced Dr of Cardiology but also happens to have published more academic papers in his field, again, of cardiology, that any person in history by a long margin, and is the most sighted person in the field of cardiology. He is literally the most credentialed cardiologist on planet earth. I know that that makes no difference because what he's saying is different to what you read in the news but I just thought I'd mention it.

 

[Moose1414]

Right, so we’ve had 1000 words about how “Getting vaccinated now, and getting boosted, is still the best way to protect ourselves. Vaccines are still the way out” doesn’t mean getting vaccinated now, and getting boosted, is still the best way to protect ourselves. Vaccines are still the way out.

Can we now have 1000 on her Nobel Prize?

Your pretty good at this eh, good enough to be a cadet journalist someplace at least. I'm tipping born 1986-91 graduated from Murdoch with a BA in Multimedia and currently not employed in your field of choice. Keep at it champ.

 

[Ilkka Sinisalo]

I would love everyone to have a good listen to this episode of the Peter Attia drive. Was recommended to me by a doctor friend. Put it on whilst your cooking dinner next time. It’s 2h45 long, but it is thorough, and the three doctors talk more sense than the politically motivated sh*t we’ve been hearing the last 18 months






In this episode, Peter sits down with Drs. Marty Makary and Zubin Damania (aka ZDoggMD), both previous guests on The Drive. Marty is a Johns Hopkins professor and public health researcher and ZDoggMD is a UCSF/Stanford trained internist and the founder of Turntable Health.

This episode, recorded on December 27, 2021, was in part inspired by some of the shoddy science and even worse messaging coming from top officials regarding COVID-19. In this discussion, Marty and ZDoggMD discuss what is known about the omicron variant, the risks and benefits of vaccines for all age groups, and the taboo subject of natural immunity and the protection it offers against infection and severe disease. Furthermore, they discuss at length the poor messaging coming from our public officials, the justification (and lack thereof) for certain mandates and policies in light of the current evidence, and the problems caused by the highly politicized and polarized nature of the subject.

Themes throughout the conversation include the difference between science and advocacy, the messaging which is sowing mistrust in science despite major progress, and a search for what a possible “end” to this situation might look like.

NOTE: Since this episode was recorded over the holiday and published ASAP, this is an audio-only episode with limited show notes.
We discuss:
• Comparing omicron to delta and other variants [4:15];
• Measuring immunity and protection from severe disease—circulating antibodies, B cells, and T cells [13:15];
• Policy questions: what is the end game and how does the world go back to 2019? [18:45];
• A policy-minded framework for viewing COVID and the problem of groupthink [24:00];
• The difference between science and advocacy [39:00];
• Natural immunity from COVID after infection [46:00];
• The unfortunate erosion of trust in science despite impressive progress [57:15];
• Do the current mandates and policies make sense in light of existing data? [1:02:30];
• Risks associated with vaccines, and the risk of being labeled an anti-vaxxer when questioning them [1:18:15];
• Data on incidence of myocarditis after vaccination with the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines [1:26:15];
• Outstanding questions about myocarditis as a side effect of mRNA vaccination and the benefit of boosters [1:35:00];
• The risk-reward of boosters and recommendations being ignored by policy makers in the US [1:40:30];
• Sowing distrust: lack of honesty and humility from top officials and policy makers [1:43:30];
• Thoughts on testing: does it make sense to push widespread testing for COVID? [1:52:15];
• What is the endpoint to all of this? [1:58:45];
• Downstream consequences of lockdowns and draconian policy measures [2:05:30];
• The polarized nature of COVID—tribalism, skeptics, and demonization of ideas [2:10:30];
• Looking back at past pandemics for perspective and the potential for another pandemic in the future [2:20:00];
• What parents can do if their kids are subject to unreasonable policies [2:25:00];
• Voices of reason in this space [2:28:45];
• Strong convictions, loosely held: the value in questioning your own beliefs [2:32:15];

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

When talking about the erosion of trust in science, does he address his criticism of Fauci's claim that 75-80% vaccination was required to achieve herd immunity, and his prediction from February 2021 that natural immunity would cause Covid to be mostly gone by April 2021 - a prediction that, to put it mildly, missed the mark by a bit? Does he address the fact that he is a frequent contributor on Fox News, which has been one of the greatest sources of Covid-related misinformation since the pandemic began? Or that multiple infectious diseases experts at Johns Hopkins have been openly critical about his commentary on cable news shows?

When it comes to Covid I generally am very leery about putting stock in what any doctor says, especially doctors who active seek out media attention. Medical doctors - in this case, Makary is a surgeon who subspecialised in surgical oncology and gastrointestinal surgery - are very knowledgeable about the human body and how to make people better when they get sick. When it comes to policy during pandemics, I am more than happy to listen to doctors regarding how to treat Covid patients, but they have about as much knowledge on preventing and mitigating the spread of a virus as a guy working at Hungry Jack's. Immunologists, infectious disease experts and epidemiologists all have much more relevant knowledge. I think that most doctors who are all over the TV, radio or social media about Covid are pompous windbags who want attention and who, for the most part, have very much gotten out of their lane when discussing public policy in a pandemic.