SARS-CoV-2 Coronavirus (COVID-19)

hmmm never heard of the sponsor of the web site posting that read .... organization called Annenberg . a search says they're byproduct of Rupert Murdoc - media mogul - whose media in turn gets a benefit from running a continuation of hysteria (sometimes). Not saying the source read is bad or good - just connecting the dots so as to give weight accordingly. Vitamin C ?? iduno if it's the silver bullet that doctor says it is either. 3 psychiatrists in our family and they're WAY into the B's, fish oil, C, antioxidants, etc.
BUT
where do the vitamin C tabs come from now? And the face maskes? Paper towels? TP? Syringes? Sneakers? Suddenly it becomes obvious ... the downside of outsourcing - & the panic of not finding what you want on the shelves - brought to you via 'just-in-time' supply chains. If i take off my rose colored glasses, I might wonder if the vitamin C recommending MD has stock in the vitamin manufacturing industry. Nothing wrong with asking, "what's the person's or company's or politician's end game".
.

 

Supermarket was empty today, especially cleaning supplies

 

Hopefully my daughter will make a killing on cleaning products and such as her company's products? they are made in the USA. Salt Lake city Utah. Woo hoo go USA!
.

 

For a more friendly review of the "dead doctor", I will point to the description of Dr. Robert Cathcart in https://riordanclinic.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/Medical_Mavericks_Vol3-riordan-clinic-web.pdf . It starts at pdf page 21, book page 1. The rest of the book is a good read if you have the time and can tolerate ideas outside the mainstream.

 

Great choice of words!

 

You mean like the California lab that has an antidote 1 week after the virus was made public? Proof they already had specimens long before

 

Where do you find those dots? I'm not seeing them.

Or are you scrambling some alphabet soup to create a nasty smear?

I've long heard of the Annenberg Foundation, founded in 1989 by (former Ambassador) Walter and Lenore Annenberg. If you notice the sponsors of enough PBS programs, you should spot the Annenberg Foundation name.

One of the programs it funds is the Annenberg Public Policy Center for the study of public policy at the Annenberg School for Communication at the University of Pennsylvania.

The only Murdoch connection I'm seeing is that Walter Annenberg sold his Triangle Publications Inc., inherited from his father in 1942 but since riddled with debt, to Murdoch's News Corp for $3 billion in 1988. In itself, that does not make the other Annenberg entities any sort of Murdoch byproduct, unless one tries to reverse the direction of some causality arrows.

If you see any other Annenberg - Murdoch connections, please let me know.

 

When working with DNA, you don't need an actual specimen, just the DNA or RNA sequence. A lab in China could sequence the virus is as little as a day, email the file to California, and that lab could resequence the entire DNA strand in less than a day. They don't have too as coronaviruses are well studied, so they know were to look on the strand for parts that code for the virus' shell, which is all they, or the body, needs to make antibodies against the virus.

 

accusing someone of a smear can easily be construed a smear ... so don't expect that tactic from yours truly. No dog in any fight here. The thought was to make it clear that a neutral person truly doesn't know which way to lean.
[QUOTE="fuzzy1, post: 3011119, member: 48224 create a nasty smear? [/QUOTE] I've long heard of the Annenberg Foundation, founded in 1989 by (former Ambassador) Walter and Lenore Annenberg. One of the programs it funds is the Annenberg Public Policy Center, established in 1993. If you notice the sponsors of enough PBS programs, you should spot the Annenberg Foundation name.
[/QUOTE] spotting PBS sponsors is certainly not many folks Forte, including yours truly. However the last time I researched was a doctor Amon who regularly uses PBS to Hawk his brain scans. PBS gets a boatload of fund raising money through such instruments, and I don't fault them for any methods they use. Just saying, doctor Amen's brain scans are not recognized by 98% of the medical community - instead - they find him to be somewhat of a charlatan, taking advantage of football players and other such poor slobs that have brain injuries. That should say boatloads to most people, not just of dr. Amen, but also how people ought to know what side of the bread that anyone's butter is on.
[QUOTE ] The only Murdoch connection I'm seeing is that Walter Annenberg sold his Triangle Publications Inc., inherited from his father .....snip.....[/QUOTE] Fox was sold to Disney - and similar to Murdoch, things change in subtle ways - especially over time. Will that be the case with all Murdoch Holdings? Who can say. Not i
.

 

See also PolitiFact: "Says the coronavirus can be slowed or stopped with the “immediate widespread use of high doses of vitamin C.”


"If Your Time is short

• The claim was originally shared on an alternative medical website that promotes nutritional supplementation.
• There’s currently no vaccine or medicine recommended to treat the current coronavirus, and there’s no evidence high doses of vitamin C has any effect."

However, there IS a proposed clinical to test Vitamin C treatment:

NIH -> U.S. National Library of Medicine ClinicalTrials.gov
Official Title: Vitamin C Infusion for the Treatment of Severe 2019-nCoV Infected Pneumonia: a Prospective Randomized Clinical Trial

Estimated study start date: a couple weeks ago. Estimated study completion date: September 30. Sorry, it shows no update to indicate if it was approved or initiated.

 

Does Annenberg Anything fall under Murdoch Holdings? These particular entities do not.

Notice that FOX has become many distinct pieces with different ownerships. Many mergers / acquisitions / splits / sales. As best I can unscramble, the film portion is currently owned by Disney, which recently dropped the Fox portion of the name.

While Fox TV News is still owned and chaired by Murdoch.

 

The epidemiology surrounding the natural experiment presented from cruise ships does provide substantially more accurate morbidity and mortality data (outcome studies as you say); agree this would likely represent worst case transmission scenarios as well:

COVID-19 isn’t as deadly as we think.

...This is where the Diamond Princess data provides important insight. Of the 3,711 people on board, at least 705 have tested positive for the virus (which, considering the confines, conditions, and how contagious this virus appears to be, is surprisingly low). Of those, more than half are asymptomatic, while very few asymptomatic people were detected in China. This alone suggests a halving of the virus’s true fatality rate.

On the Diamond Princess, six deaths have occurred among the passengers, constituting a case fatality rate of 0.85 percent. Unlike the data from China and elsewhere, where sorting out why a patient died is extremely difficult, we can assume that these are excess fatalities—they wouldn’t have occurred but for SARS-CoV-2. The most important insight is that all six fatalities occurred in patients who are more than 70 years old. Not a single Diamond Princess patient under age 70 has died. If the numbers from reports out of China had held, the expected number of deaths in those under 70 should have been around four.

The data from the Diamond Princess suggest an eightfold lower mortality amongst patients older than 70 and threefold lower mortality in patients over 80 compared to what was reported in China initially. But even those numbers, 1.1 percent and 4.9 percent respectively, are concerning. But there’s another thing that’s worth remembering: These patients were likely exposed repeatedly to concentrated viral loads (which can cause worse illness). Some treatments were delayed. So even the lower CFR found on the Diamond Princess could have been even lower, with proper protocols. It’s also worth noting that while cruise passengers can be assumed to be healthy enough to travel, they actually tend to reflect the general population, and many patients with chronic illnesses go on cruises. So, the numbers from this ship may be reasonable estimates...​

 

anecdotally, it looks like the death rates are highest for people over 60, males, and those with underlying health conditions.
i don't think this makes it any less serious though

 

A bit more on the Diamond Princess cruise ship. 1/3 of passengers were over age 70 and almost 60% were over age 60. Apparently ~everyone got tested and to this date only 6 people have died. That's a fatality rate of 0.85 percent with a heavy weighting to an elderly population in that large sample. Quite reassuring that the widely reported ~3% fatality rate is much too high.

To answer the question about men, this is likely largely testing artifact. Per the article I posted:

During the peak of the outbreak in China in January and early February, around 25 patients per day were dying with SARS-CoV-2. Most were older patients in whom the chronic diseases listed above are prevalent. Most deaths occurred in Hubei province, an area in which lung cancer and emphysema/COPD are significantly higher than national averages in China, a country where half of all men smoke. How were doctors supposed to sort out which of those 25 out of 25,000 daily deaths were solely due to coronavirus, and which were more complicated? What we need to know is how many excess deaths this virus causes.​

 

I worry that the trial of IV C will not use a high enough dosage to show maximum effect. A friend of mine got IV C from Dr. Cathcart at a level that he admitted was at least 100 grams. That was on an outpatient basis - just an ordinary doctor visit. Vitamin C doesn't last long in the human body, maybe just an hour or two. If you're sick enough to be in the ICU, the proper dosage would be continuous IV at a rate sufficient to maintain a therapeutic blood level. The total dosage per 24 hours would be more than 100 grams.

The dosage reported above by the doctor was 10 grams IV per day. Apparently enough for that case, but way below the maximum that could be used. If that 10 grams lasted 2 hours, what about the other 22 hours per day? It's easy to prove that vitamin C doesn't work by using too little, too late.

A similar question is how much water does it take to put out a fire? Depends on the fire.

Vitamin C has been used therapeutically for over 70 years. In 1949, there was a Dr. Klenner who used injections of vitamin C to cure polio. He attended conferences and published his experience, and was totally ignored. The "real" doctors were more interested in the vaccine that was just available. The problem is that a vaccine is for prevention - it is useless on an active case. How Dr. Klenner figured out that C was worth trying is lost to medical history, but somehow the clues were available 70+ years ago.

 

Somebody else reporting from China. @tochatihu how does that square up against your experience, specifically the timeline you've shared in #578?