• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Covid-19 - Treatments & Vaccines

My Girldfriends uncle is on the vent and will probably die of Covid-19. He was 50, extremely healthy, and fully vaccinated.

Crazy.
 
Yes, though the small sub-population was by design (which is dictated by time and money), and not by participants refusing blood draw.

The blood test was an IgG test, which assesses previous exposure to COVID, but not active infection. So neither symptoms nor blood tests are "better," they just test different aspects of infection. However, the data from 340,000 participants is certainly more robust than the small subset.

So as a physician, you put more credence on what a patient reports as symptoms over a blood test?

I get the blood test in this study does not indicate active infection, but just trying to wrap my arms around the inconsistency of trusting the symptoms people claim over 'The Science'.

Feels over verifiable facts?
 
He said neither are better and you interpret that as him putting more credence in one over the other?
 
So as a physician, you put more credence on what a patient reports as symptoms over a blood test?

I get the blood test in this study does not indicate active infection, but just trying to wrap my arms around the inconsistency of trusting the symptoms people claim over 'The Science'.

Feels over verifiable facts?

This is an interesting question because it shows a complete lack of understanding of medicine. It's a helpful reminder that people are trying to understand the pandemic but some have no knowledge base to draw upon while trying to comprehend what is happening.

I'm not sure how much of your question is trolling and how much is sincere, but I'm going to assume it is at least somewhat sincere. First, no test (blood, xray, MRI, etc.) is perfect. If you want to understand this further, read about sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value. As a simple example, imagine a family of 5 people that get exposed to COVID and all develop upper respiratory symptoms. 4 of the 5 test positive with a rapid antigen test and the 5th tests negative. The 5th family member has COVID, they just had a false negative test because tests aren't perfect. In this case, the symptoms in the 5th family member are much more important than the rapid antigen test. By the way, this whole family would initially test negative on the IgG antibody test described in the mask study because it takes days to weeks for the IgG antibody to develop.

Second, there are many diseases for which there is not a "blood test," some of which are very severe diseases. ALS (Lou Gehrig's disease) is diagnosed by history and physical examination. The history (you refer to this as "feels") is absolutely critical in making this diagnosis, and no blood test is going to make the diagnosis. Take another example - a 15 year old falls on an outstretched hand and then has pain at the wrist. Blood tests are useless in making this diagnosis. Other tests, like xrays, can even miss the fracture. Let's assume this child had sudden onset pain following the fall and points exactly to the distal radius as the site of pain. You diagnose a fracture and proceed to appropriate treatment. Let's assume in this same scenario, the pain doesn't start until 1 week later and it is vague and he asks to be written out of school. Again, this history is critical, so you investigate the possibility that it may not be a fracture.

On the other hand, there are some diseases in which the blood test is absolutely critical. If a boy presents with weakness and you suspect muscular dystrophy, the key to diagnosis is going to be a genetic blood test.

TL;DR Sometimes the history is critical, sometimes diagnostic testing is critical, and both are often needed in combination.
 
There are few things more frustrating to someone with an actual science degree than seeing someone use "the science" in quotes. You don't deserve the benefit of the doubt on sincerity. You are very clearly trolling and it's insulting as fuck.
 
Think about how dumb you have to be to think you know more about medical studies than a doctor.

Agreed, but it does perfectly fit the mentality of the current Trumpite GOP. Thanks to the internet and social media everyone thinks they're an expert on just about everything, and traditionally recognized experts - that is, people who actually have training in their field and have spent their careers working in that field - are all "overrated", "elitist", and whatever other epithets they can think of. It's the age of the self-made, self-proclaimed, internet-based expert.
 
Agreed, but it does perfectly fit the mentality of the current Trumpite GOP. Thanks to the internet and social media everyone thinks they're an expert on just about everything, and traditionally recognized experts - that is, people who actually have training in their field and have spent their careers working in that field - are all "overrated", "elitist", and whatever other epithets they can think of. It's the age of the self-made, self-proclaimed, internet-based expert.

The destruction of the belief in science, expertise, and learning has really harmed America. The "fair and balanced" bs from fox (when did they stop making that claim but still attacking the msm??) was just the opening Salvo. Primed 40% of Americans for the current state of disinformation abuse we are currently living through.
 
 
So, you are invited to a 6 person dinner party and you KNOW the “other” couple invited is not vaccinated. You don’t believe it’s your place to “out” the couple but you have no interest in going as a result.
How do you respond to the host/hostess who has given you 3-4 dates to choose from? Oh, and you’ve been with them the previous week at a gathering where you knew everyone was vaccinated.
 
So, you are invited to a 6 person dinner party and you KNOW the “other” couple invited is not vaccinated. You don’t believe it’s your place to “out” the couple but you have no interest in going as a result.
How do you respond to the host/hostess who has given you 3-4 dates to choose from? Oh, and you’ve been with them the previous week at a gathering where you knew everyone was vaccinated.

How about ask if everyone is vaccinated? Then they have to out the other couple.
 
Back
Top