• "Spreading the ideas of freedom loving people on matters regarding high finance, politics, constructionist Constitution, and mental masturbation of all types"

China Deploys Military to Fight Coronavirus as Confirmed Infections Approach 1,000

glockngold

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Sr Site Supporter
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
3,481
Likes
4,589
‘I’m not a COVID patient:’ Wisconsin woman claims virus diagnosis was fake, threatens lawsuit
POSTED 9:17 PM, MAY 20, 2020, BY BRYAN POLCYN,

MARKESAN -- When Pam Schoenecker left the hospital last month, a doctor said she was infected with COVID-19 and told her to quarantine.


Pam Schoenecker protesting in Madison

Four days later, she was protesting in Madison. She wasn't worried about spreading the virus, because she is convinced the doctor was wrong.

"We are told in this world to believe the science," Schoenecker said. "Why did this doctor ignore the science? I'm not a COVID patient, should've never been labeled one."

Schoenecker has asthma and every spring, she says, allergies make it worse. But this year, there was an added fear: "Gosh, could it be the coronavirus?"

“I’m not a COVID patient, should’ve never been labeled one.”So, when her breathing trouble became a medical emergency on April 16, she drove to a hospital in Columbus where she was swabbed for COVID-19.

The results were negative.


The next morning, they tested her again -- this time for a host of other coronaviruses. Still, the results were negative. Two days later, the doctor ordered a third test. Once again, it was negative.

"And this time he's head to toe in his PPE completely. And he goes, I am absolutely convinced you have COVID-19," Schoenecker said.

So why did the doctor say she was positive?

"I don't know. I really don't know," Schoenecker said at the protest in Madison. "Is it because hospitals receive more money if a doctor labels you COVID-19?"


Schoenecker, who is threatening to sue over what she calls a fake diagnosis, has taken that question to Madison and conservative talk radio.

"Because of this COVID-19 diagnosis, I can't even see my primary care doctor," said Schoenecker on a call to a radio show.
But in a phone call that Schoenecker recorded, Dr. Sam Poser offered an unusual explanation.

"There was a Broadway star that got, he got the pneumonia, he got the whole thing," Dr. Poser said.

Broadway actor Nick Cordero tested negative for COVID-19 twice before a third test came up positive. On April 18, news broke that his leg was being amputated due to COVID-19 complications.


Dr. Sam Poser

The next morning, April 18, Dr. Poser ordered Schoenecker to get a third nasal swab.

"I said why are you so sure of this? And he said, 'I want you to Google this Broadway star,'" said Schoenecker.

Dr. Poser said the same thing -- "If you remember reading about a Broadway star..." -- in a call with FOX6 Investigators.

"The swab tests that have been done have been not only very painful, but not particularly accurate," said Dr. Poser.

One expert who the FOX6 Investigators talked to says otherwise.


Dr. Jeff Pothof

"Even if you have one copy of the COVID-19 RNA on the swab, the test will pick it up and show you as positive," said Dr. Jeff Pothof, chief quality officer for UW-Health.

Dr. Pothof says the odds of a false negative are low -- maybe two out of 100.

"In order to be in that group of two, two times in a row, three times in a row, those are getting to be pretty slim odds that you're actually positive at that point," said Dr. Pothof.

FOX6 asked Dr. Poser: "Is this really just a matter of judgment?"

He responded: "Sometimes you have to go by the clinical presentation."

Dr. Poser recalls Schoenecker having "classic" symptoms, like loss of smell, something she says never happened.

"Classic COVID symptoms are fever, sore throat, a cough that won't go away," Schoenecker said. "Not one time, while I was hospitalized, did I have any one of those."


Pam Schoenecker

Schoenecker believes it was nothing more than aggravated asthma, and she wonders if cases like hers are inflating the state's numbers.

"I know that there's a lot of other people out there just like me," she said.

"That would be an exceedingly rare situation," Dr. Pothof said.

If anything, Dr. Pothof says the state is undercounting cases, but it's hard to blame Schoenecker for being skeptical of the math that somehow turned three negatives into a positive.


Pam Schoenecker

Schoenecker lives in Green Lake County while the hospital she went to is in Columbia County. She says both counties' health offices have told her they received no positive test results related to her hospitalization. That means she would not have been included in the state's totals.

Dr. Poser tells FOX6 that he did not report his diagnosis to the county either.

It wasn't until FOX6 News interviewed Schoenecker at her home in Markesan that we learned the name of her doctor. That is when we discovered Dr. Poser has a relative who works at FOX6 News. As soon as we became aware of that relationship, we took steps to ensure that that employee played no part in the ongoing investigation.
Do they still have Twinkies in Wisconsin?
 

Goldhedge

Moderator
Site Mgr
Sr Site Supporter
GIM Hall Of Fame
Joined
Mar 28, 2010
Messages
49,246
Likes
88,413
Location
Rocky Mountains
i.e. FAIL


THE REMDESIVIR STUDY IS FINALLY OUT: DRUG ONLY HELPED THOSE ON OXYGEN, FINDS MORTALITY TOO HIGH FOR STANDALONE TREATMENT
Posted by Zero Hedge | May 22, 2020 | Business & Economics |


The Remdesivir Study Is Finally Out: Drug Only Helped Those On Oxygen, Finds Mortality Too High For Standalone Treatment

Tyler Durden

Fri, 05/22/2020 – 20:45
Remember when the market soared on several days in April on the Facui-touted Remdesivir study which, according to StatNews and various other unofficial sources of rumors, was a smashing success only for the optimism to fizzle as many questions emerged, and as the Gilead drug quietly faded from the public’s consciousness and was replaced by various coronavirus vaccine candidates such as those made by the greatly hyped Moderna (whose insiders just can’t stop selling company stock).

Meanwhile, those who were waiting for the official version of Remdesivir’s effectiveness had to do so until 6pm on a Friday before a long holiday, and for good reason…
Friday 6 pm. Fking ridiculous. https://t.co/6Ze38BfVgN
— Adam Feuerstein (@adamfeuerstein) May 22, 2020
https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

… According to a pivotal study published in the New England Journal of Medicine late on Friday, Remdesivir, which was authorized to treat Covid-19 in a group of 1063 adults and children (split into two groups, one receiving placebo instead of remdesivir) who need i) supplemental oxygen, ii) a ventilator or iii) extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO), only significantly helped those on supplemental oxygen.

Meanwhile, and explaining the 6pm release on a Friday, the study also found no marked benefit from remdesivir for those who were healthier and didn’t need oxygen or those who were sicker, requiring a ventilator or a heart-lung bypass machine.
The NEJM, almost apologetically, stated that “the lack of benefit seen in the other groups might have stemmed from a smaller number of patients in each group.”

Still, as a result of the partial benefit for patients in the supplemental oxygen group, the study from the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases was evaluated early and led to the authorization of remdesivir before the full trial was completed.

Our findings highlight the need to identify Covid-19 cases and start antiviral treatment before the pulmonary disease progresses to require mechanical ventilation.​
Some more details on the study, which was a “rank test of the time to recovery with remdesivir as compared with placebo, with stratification by disease severity”:

The primary outcome measure was the time to recovery, defined as the first day, during the 28 days after enrollment, on which a patient satisfied categories 1, 2, or 3 on the eight-category ordinal scale. The categories are as follows:
  1. not hospitalized, no limitations of activities;
  2. not hospitalized, limitation of activities, home oxygen requirement, or both;
  3. hospitalized, not requiring supplemental oxygen and no longer requiring ongoing medical care (used if hospitalization was extended for infection-control reasons);
  4. hospitalized, not requiring supplemental oxygen but requiring ongoing medical care (Covid-19–related or other medical conditions);
  5. 5, hospitalized, requiring any supplemental oxygen;
  6. hospitalized, requiring noninvasive ventilation or use of high-flow oxygen devices;
  7. hospitalized, receiving invasive mechanical ventilation or extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO); and
  8. death.
The results are summarized below, highlighting the only group that showed a statistically significant improvement in outcomes as a result of taking the drug vs placebo.



A visual representation of the outcomes is below; it shows that whereas there was a modest benefit only to patients who were receiving oxygen, the results were statistically insignificant vs placebo for patients not receiving oxygen, while in a surprising twist patients on high-flow oxygen or mechanical ventilator/ECMO did modestly better in the placebo group than those taking remdesivir. Also, the overall results showed a very modest, but not statistically significant improvement in the remdesivir group vs placebo (box A).


Another disappointment: the study found that overall “mortality was numerically lower in the remdesivir group than in the placebo group, but the difference was not significant“, in other words the alleged “miracle drug” has largely the same effect as a placebo in terms of overall disease mortality.

The study authors also note that the “findings in our trial should be compared with those observed in a randomized trial from China in which 237 patients were enrolled (158 assigned to remdesivir and 79 to placebo)…. That trial failed to complete full enrollment (owing to the end of the outbreak), had lower power than the present trial (owing to the smaller sample size and a 2:1 randomization), and was unable to demonstrate any statistically significant clinical benefits of remdesivir.

Finally, the study found that while mortality was modestly lower for the remdesivir arm, it was not significantly so, at 7.1% at 14 days on drug versus 11.9% on placebo.

In conclusion, while the “preliminary findings support the use of remdesivir for patients who are hospitalized with Covid-19 and require supplemental oxygen therapy” the study goes on to warn that “given high mortality despite the use of remdesivir, it is clear that treatment with an antiviral drug alone is not likely to be sufficient.”

The study’s recommendation:
Future strategies should evaluate antiviral agents in combination with other therapeutic approaches or combinations of antiviral agents to continue to improve patient outcomes in Covid-19.​
So a generally disappointing outcome, one which would lead to a drop in the market. Nonsense: think of all the spin, and why this is in fact great news for stocks: Remdesivir may be a dud as a “silver bullet” to curing covid, leading to statistically significant improvement in only a very limited subset of infected patients and “high mortality” for those taking it, but at least the algos will have a whole lot of other “miracle drugs” to levitate them as optimism that the next remdesivir is just around the corner. In short: rinse, rumor, and repeat… and then save the bad news for 6pm on a Friday.

Oh, and for those asking about the “official” reason why the NE Journal of Medicine waited until just the right time to make sure nobody reads the results, here it is:

I asked NEJM spox to explain the Friday 6 pm release of the remdesivir study. Her response is below. pic.twitter.com/WjNGyUv7sH
— Adam Feuerstein (@adamfeuerstein) May 22, 2020
https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
The full study is available here.
 

Goldhedge

Moderator
Site Mgr
Sr Site Supporter
GIM Hall Of Fame
Joined
Mar 28, 2010
Messages
49,246
Likes
88,413
Location
Rocky Mountains
Bill covers the above study

New Drug Study - Lackluster Results, 3063 Still reporting

 

Goldhedge

Moderator
Site Mgr
Sr Site Supporter
GIM Hall Of Fame
Joined
Mar 28, 2010
Messages
49,246
Likes
88,413
Location
Rocky Mountains
This Is Strange: Total US Deaths in March 2020 are Actually Down 15% from Average of Prior Four Years
By Joe Hoft
Published April 8, 2020 at 8:05am


What is going on? After shutting down the government and killing the greatest economy in the world due to junk models by specialists on the coronavirus, the data is showing that this was another huge mistake.

Grassfire reports:
According to data obtained from the CDC’s National Center for Health Statistics Mortality Surveillance System website, total U.S. deaths for the first three weeks of March are DOWN 10% from the average of the prior four years for the same three week period.​
The average for weeks 9 through 11 for the four prior years was a total of 170,555 deaths. For weeks 9 through 11 this year, the total is 153,015, meaning 17,540 fewer people died in America during the first three weeks of March than could be reasonably expected. And the gap between historic deaths and weekly deaths is widening. For week 11, just 47,655 Americans died, 8,773 and 15% fewer than the average for week 11 in the prior four years. And while data on week 12 is not complete, it is trending similar to week 11 and will likely be down by 15% (around 8,700 deaths less than expected) even though 1,919 COVID-19 deaths were reported (in week beginning 3/22).​
Now after deaths for the entire month of March are reported, the results show that deaths in the US this March are 15% less than the average of the past four years!

IN MARCH OF 2020 THERE WERE 34,000 (rounded) LESS DEATHS THAN THE AVERAGE NUMBER OF DEATHS IN THE US OVER THE FOUR YEARS PRIOR!

According to the CDC’s website, in March 2020 there were a total of 193,000 deaths in the US. The average number of deaths in the US for March over the four years prior to 2020 (2016 – 2019) is 227,000. The difference between this year and the average for the past four years is 34,000. 2020 deaths are 85% of the average of the prior four years.

The US is experiencing 34,000 less deaths in 2020 than in the prior four years but we are concerned about a virus that to date as of March 31, 2020 that had a total of 4,000 US deaths? What is really going on and who is responsible for the broken estimates and consistent messaging in the President’s ear to shut down the US economy?
 

Goldhedge

Moderator
Site Mgr
Sr Site Supporter
GIM Hall Of Fame
Joined
Mar 28, 2010
Messages
49,246
Likes
88,413
Location
Rocky Mountains
I just took a tour through this thread from the beginning.

The censorship is astounding....
 

Goldhedge

Moderator
Site Mgr
Sr Site Supporter
GIM Hall Of Fame
Joined
Mar 28, 2010
Messages
49,246
Likes
88,413
Location
Rocky Mountains
A Study on Infectivity of Asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 Carriers
Ming Gao 1, Lihui Yang 2, Xuefu Chen 3, Yiyu Deng 4, Shifang Yang 5, Hanyi Xu 6, Zixing Chen 7, Xinglin Gao 8
Affiliations expand
Free PMC article
Abstract
Background: An ongoing outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has spread around the world. It is debatable whether asymptomatic COVID-19 virus carriers are contagious. We report here a case of the asymptomatic patient and present clinical characteristics of 455 contacts, which aims to study the infectivity of asymptomatic carriers.

Material and methods: 455 contacts who were exposed to the asymptomatic COVID-19 virus carrier became the subjects of our research. They were divided into three groups: 35 patients, 196 family members and 224 hospital staffs. We extracted their epidemiological information, clinical records, auxiliary examination results and therapeutic schedules.

Results: The median contact time for patients was four days and that for family members was five days. Cardiovascular disease accounted for 25% among original diseases of patients. Apart from hospital staffs, both patients and family members were isolated medically. During the quarantine, seven patients plus one family member appeared new respiratory symptoms, where fever was the most common one. The blood counts in most contacts were within a normal range. All CT images showed no sign of COVID-19 infection. No severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infections was detected in 455 contacts by nucleic acid test.

Conclusion: In summary, all the 455 contacts were excluded from SARS-CoV-2 infection and we conclude that the infectivity of some asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 carriers might be weak.

Keywords: Asymptomatic carrier; Contacts; Infectivity; SARS-CoV-2.
Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Conflict of interest statement
Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.