|
Post by hcpride on Nov 5, 2021 6:21:12 GMT -5
Chu, any death is tragic. But weighing the options for my children, how many confirmed contracted cases for children versus those that died? How many more might we surmise were so mild they were never tested and contribute to that confirmed number? It's clear the country (and some parts of the planet, if not many) have not banded together in a unified fashion to eradicate this disease, with either a full and global shut-down for the months required (impractical, not feasible, wouldn't have been accepted at the time) or via vaccination. I'm not chomping at the bit for my children to take on the risk of a vaccine when they've already had the affliction, have the antibodies, and the chances are infinitesimal for them to be harmed without it. They may ultimately have to because of school, and then we'll bend to the compulsion I suppose. But there are too many yahoos and crazies that aren't taking it for far more ridiculous reasons, so it's not like we'd be holding up national progress here. MMR, polio, chicken pox, TB, even flu, all those, my kids are first in line. That sounds reasonable. Your point regarding unconfirmed (via tests) Covid cases amongst kids is well taken - I wouldn't be shocked if EVERY kid in my school contracted it. The only ones who test - and it is still at the parents' discretion outside the school - are those contact traced and those with symptoms. A tiny fraction of those infected, of course. Hard for at least one poster to grasp the notion that kids are not 'masking' in k-12 schools in the conventional medical/clinical sense (in other words, they wear VERY porous material and frequently sport the chin diaper...the most diligent cover the mouth and leave the nose exposed...and there is the usual spit/snot/smooch exchange beyond that ). So of course (at least in my experience), it spreads through a building. The virus (including but not limited to the Delta variant) is quite contagious. Fortunately, we are talking kids and Covid and parents do the risk/benefit analysis as usual in terms of attendance (and vaccines) My assumption, since your kids are in school, was that they already had been infected. ________________ It is certainly true that following the Wuhan lab leak (or, in the alternative following the natural outbreak in Wuhan) there is just one one country that possibly could have contained it and prevented five million deaths worldwide. But that is another point for another day.
|
|
|
Post by Tom on Nov 5, 2021 7:03:52 GMT -5
Actually the real little ones K-3ish are more compliant than you'd think. They're more or less used to doing what they're told. In general, the little ones are pretty good about wearing the mask covering both mouth and nose.
That being said, the little ones are also fairly likely to come home with a different mask than the one they went to school with. I'm pretty sure trading masks with your buddy is not in the CDC guideline
|
|
|
Post by hcpride on Nov 5, 2021 7:12:00 GMT -5
Actually the real little ones K-3ish are more compliant than you'd think. They're more or less used to doing what they're told. In general, the little ones are pretty good about wearing the mask covering both mouth and nose. That being said, the little ones are also fairly likely to come home with a different mask than the one they went to school with. I'm pretty sure trading masks with your buddy is not in the CDC guideline Hmmmm. My wife teaches kindergarten. Her district 'masks'. Her entire class was infected (as were all the other classes and teachers it seems). I agree that many very little kids want to comply (on the bus, in the classroom, while eating lunch, sneezing, talking, etc.) for as long as possible each day. It turns out (who knew?) that the little ones fidget, poke, and remove masks (porous face coverings and otherwise) all day long. They do like to trade (and lick) masks. On the bright side, the kids often trade back for their own masks later in the week - so that favorite unwashed 'mask' the kid wears every day usually winds up back with its original owner. Like Linus' blanket. But, the district 'masks'.
|
|
|
Post by efg72 on Nov 5, 2021 20:22:13 GMT -5
No I wouldn't change my mind There is not enough data for young kids In fact we don't design enough clinical trials for women, Kids, Hispanics, African Americans or Asians to know we have it right All of my family and teenage grandkids are vaccinated-- benefit risk decision For the others under 12, the benefit risk doesn't work for them mrna is a new science and a critical innovation for the future. For those over 60 it is an easy call. For all others not as clear until we see longer term data. If we look at these vaccines they are not your traditional vaccine, but only a blocker of the virus-- which is incredible for all of us. In the future we need a vaccine with the memory T cells that will attack and defeat the virus and they are probably a year away I am not a physician or an expert so please don't follow what I have recommended to my kids and their spouses, but I encourage anybody to speak with their physician about their younger children and grandchildren and make your decision based on that conversation. Happy to discuss with anybody offline. That is only my opinion and I don't suggest others follow but instead do their own evaluations
|
|
|
Post by efg72 on Nov 5, 2021 20:28:18 GMT -5
In an earlier post i spoke to the issue of clinical trials and diversity - for those that want a better view into the reason for my comments
Ed Silverman has written about these issues for years. I believe in the incredible work and contributions of biopharma- a noble industry, but not perfect
Clinical trial sites face challenges in diversifying personnel and participants, study finds Ed Silverman By Ed Silverman Nov. 5, 2021 clinical trial circle ADOBE 0 As demands for diversity and equity increase across the globe, a new analysis finds nearly 75% of patients who are enrolled in industry-sponsored clinical trials in academic medical centers and community hospitals are white.
Yet the proportion of a given race or ethnicity among clinical trial personnel closely aligns with the corresponding race or ethnicity of study participants, according to the Center for Study of Drug Development at Tufts University, which conducted the analysis of nearly 3,200 trial sites that are regulated by the Food and Drug Administration.
The findings suggest that clinical research organizations and drug makers face stiff challenges in order to diversify both trial personnel and participants, according to center director Ken Getz.
ADVERTISEMENT
To wit, more than 90% of clinical trial staffs at medical centers, hospitals, dedicated trial sites, and physician practices in Europe are white. In the U.S. 68% of the staffs at academic centers and community hospitals are white, as are 56% of the personnel at private physician practices and dedicated trial sites.
Related: Clinical research doesn’t reflect the Alzheimer’s population. That needs to change “There’s a lot of interest in recruitment and retention of trial site personnel, and in messaging that’s directed at study participants, all of which is more culturally sensitive,” Getz told us. “But given the urgency that companies are placing on diversity, equity, and inclusion, (the findings) only amplify the magnitude of the problem.”
Not surprisingly, sites that have more diverse personnel are more likely to view diversity as a critical success factor and developed standard procedures to encourage and support diversity. In addition, the analysis also found that sites with more diverse personnel tend to be based in urban settings and serve lower-income patients, while also achieving enrollment targets.
Diversity in clinical trials has received growing attention in recent years for different reasons. For one, there is a medical imperative to recruit study participants who more broadly reflect the larger patient population. Meanwhile, many drug companies more than a decade ago shifted some trial work overseas where expenses were lower, although the trend has since reversed somewhat, according to Getz.
“This report highlights the importance of addressing chronic clinical trial diversity issues in the patient population. It’s widely known that many people first learn about clinical trials from a trusted healthcare professional,” said Jennifer Byrne, a member of the Association of Clinical Research Professionals board of trustees and CEO of Javara. “We must do a better job at developing a diverse clinical trial workforce to better connect with a more representative swath of the population in order to improve health outcomes for all.”
We asked the Society for Clinical Research Sites and PhRMA, the industry trade group, for comment and will update you accordingly. We should note, by the way, that the Tufts center receives financial backing from the pharmaceutical industry.
Related: To ensure equity and accuracy, clinical research must reflect the diversity of patients The center queried 3,462 trial investigators, site directors, and study coordinators. Of nearly 3,200 distinct trial sites, 52% are based in academic medical centers, large health systems and community hospitals. The rest were dedicated sites and physician practices. Half of the sites operate in the U.S., 33% in Europe, and 17% in South and Central America, the Asia Pacific region, and other parts of the world.
The analysis underscored weaknesses in the clinical trial apparatus. One reason this matters: Representation of site personnel by race and ethnicity varies by therapeutic area. Black people comprise just 5.2% of those working in trials testing oncology drugs, suggesting fewer Black individuals are among study participants, as well.
Currently, 85% of all funding for clinical trials testing drugs comes from the pharmaceutical industry and more than 60% of these trials are channeled to dedicated trial sites and private physician practices, according to Getz. That bodes well for the U.S., since site personnel based in dedicated sites and private practices have the highest levels of proportional representation by race and ethnicity.
Meanwhile, academic medical centers and community hospitals may be skewing in the other direction because these institutions receive more funding from the U.S. government than drug makers. This, in turn, may prompt a higher proportion of white professionals to work at trial sites in such locations, although Getz noted this is more discernible outside the U.S., particularly in Europe.
“I think a lot of that has to do with access among professionals to different employment areas,” Getz explained. “Industry-funded clinical research is less attractive to these professionals than the ability to secure NIH funding or a foundation grant. Your career gets a bigger boost if you get funding from NIH than industry.”
|
|
|
Post by longsuffering on Nov 6, 2021 0:34:15 GMT -5
In an earlier post i spoke to the issue of clinical trials and diversity - for those that want a better view into the reason for my comments Ed Silverman has written about these issues for years. I believe in the incredible work and contributions of biopharma- a noble industry, but not perfect Clinical trial sites face challenges in diversifying personnel and participants, study finds Ed Silverman By Ed Silverman Nov. 5, 2021 clinical trial circle ADOBE 0 As demands for diversity and equity increase across the globe, a new analysis finds nearly 75% of patients who are enrolled in industry-sponsored clinical trials in academic medical centers and community hospitals are white. Yet the proportion of a given race or ethnicity among clinical trial personnel closely aligns with the corresponding race or ethnicity of study participants, according to the Center for Study of Drug Development at Tufts University, which conducted the analysis of nearly 3,200 trial sites that are regulated by the Food and Drug Administration. The findings suggest that clinical research organizations and drug makers face stiff challenges in order to diversify both trial personnel and participants, according to center director Ken Getz. ADVERTISEMENT To wit, more than 90% of clinical trial staffs at medical centers, hospitals, dedicated trial sites, and physician practices in Europe are white. In the U.S. 68% of the staffs at academic centers and community hospitals are white, as are 56% of the personnel at private physician practices and dedicated trial sites. Related: Clinical research doesn’t reflect the Alzheimer’s population. That needs to change “There’s a lot of interest in recruitment and retention of trial site personnel, and in messaging that’s directed at study participants, all of which is more culturally sensitive,” Getz told us. “But given the urgency that companies are placing on diversity, equity, and inclusion, (the findings) only amplify the magnitude of the problem.” Not surprisingly, sites that have more diverse personnel are more likely to view diversity as a critical success factor and developed standard procedures to encourage and support diversity. In addition, the analysis also found that sites with more diverse personnel tend to be based in urban settings and serve lower-income patients, while also achieving enrollment targets. Diversity in clinical trials has received growing attention in recent years for different reasons. For one, there is a medical imperative to recruit study participants who more broadly reflect the larger patient population. Meanwhile, many drug companies more than a decade ago shifted some trial work overseas where expenses were lower, although the trend has since reversed somewhat, according to Getz. “This report highlights the importance of addressing chronic clinical trial diversity issues in the patient population. It’s widely known that many people first learn about clinical trials from a trusted healthcare professional,” said Jennifer Byrne, a member of the Association of Clinical Research Professionals board of trustees and CEO of Javara. “We must do a better job at developing a diverse clinical trial workforce to better connect with a more representative swath of the population in order to improve health outcomes for all.” We asked the Society for Clinical Research Sites and PhRMA, the industry trade group, for comment and will update you accordingly. We should note, by the way, that the Tufts center receives financial backing from the pharmaceutical industry. Related: To ensure equity and accuracy, clinical research must reflect the diversity of patients The center queried 3,462 trial investigators, site directors, and study coordinators. Of nearly 3,200 distinct trial sites, 52% are based in academic medical centers, large health systems and community hospitals. The rest were dedicated sites and physician practices. Half of the sites operate in the U.S., 33% in Europe, and 17% in South and Central America, the Asia Pacific region, and other parts of the world. The analysis underscored weaknesses in the clinical trial apparatus. One reason this matters: Representation of site personnel by race and ethnicity varies by therapeutic area. Black people comprise just 5.2% of those working in trials testing oncology drugs, suggesting fewer Black individuals are among study participants, as well. Currently, 85% of all funding for clinical trials testing drugs comes from the pharmaceutical industry and more than 60% of these trials are channeled to dedicated trial sites and private physician practices, according to Getz. That bodes well for the U.S., since site personnel based in dedicated sites and private practices have the highest levels of proportional representation by race and ethnicity. Meanwhile, academic medical centers and community hospitals may be skewing in the other direction because these institutions receive more funding from the U.S. government than drug makers. This, in turn, may prompt a higher proportion of white professionals to work at trial sites in such locations, although Getz noted this is more discernible outside the U.S., particularly in Europe. “I think a lot of that has to do with access among professionals to different employment areas,” Getz explained. “Industry-funded clinical research is less attractive to these professionals than the ability to secure NIH funding or a foundation grant. Your career gets a bigger boost if you get funding from NIH than industry.” I have some odd behaviors. One of them is I often decline to answer demographic survey questions asking what my race is. I see the logic in trying to diversify clinical trials enough to spot health trends in different races, genders and age groups, but in general I am uncomfortable segregating by race. I came of age with MLK, not Jemele Hill.
|
|
|
Post by efg72 on Nov 6, 2021 7:44:23 GMT -5
In an earlier post i spoke to the issue of clinical trials and diversity - for those that want a better view into the reason for my comments Ed Silverman has written about these issues for years. I believe in the incredible work and contributions of biopharma- a noble industry, but not perfect Clinical trial sites face challenges in diversifying personnel and participants, study finds Ed Silverman By Ed Silverman Nov. 5, 2021 clinical trial circle ADOBE 0 As demands for diversity and equity increase across the globe, a new analysis finds nearly 75% of patients who are enrolled in industry-sponsored clinical trials in academic medical centers and community hospitals are white. Yet the proportion of a given race or ethnicity among clinical trial personnel closely aligns with the corresponding race or ethnicity of study participants, according to the Center for Study of Drug Development at Tufts University, which conducted the analysis of nearly 3,200 trial sites that are regulated by the Food and Drug Administration. The findings suggest that clinical research organizations and drug makers face stiff challenges in order to diversify both trial personnel and participants, according to center director Ken Getz. ADVERTISEMENT To wit, more than 90% of clinical trial staffs at medical centers, hospitals, dedicated trial sites, and physician practices in Europe are white. In the U.S. 68% of the staffs at academic centers and community hospitals are white, as are 56% of the personnel at private physician practices and dedicated trial sites. Related: Clinical research doesn’t reflect the Alzheimer’s population. That needs to change “There’s a lot of interest in recruitment and retention of trial site personnel, and in messaging that’s directed at study participants, all of which is more culturally sensitive,” Getz told us. “But given the urgency that companies are placing on diversity, equity, and inclusion, (the findings) only amplify the magnitude of the problem.” Not surprisingly, sites that have more diverse personnel are more likely to view diversity as a critical success factor and developed standard procedures to encourage and support diversity. In addition, the analysis also found that sites with more diverse personnel tend to be based in urban settings and serve lower-income patients, while also achieving enrollment targets. Diversity in clinical trials has received growing attention in recent years for different reasons. For one, there is a medical imperative to recruit study participants who more broadly reflect the larger patient population. Meanwhile, many drug companies more than a decade ago shifted some trial work overseas where expenses were lower, although the trend has since reversed somewhat, according to Getz. “This report highlights the importance of addressing chronic clinical trial diversity issues in the patient population. It’s widely known that many people first learn about clinical trials from a trusted healthcare professional,” said Jennifer Byrne, a member of the Association of Clinical Research Professionals board of trustees and CEO of Javara. “We must do a better job at developing a diverse clinical trial workforce to better connect with a more representative swath of the population in order to improve health outcomes for all.” We asked the Society for Clinical Research Sites and PhRMA, the industry trade group, for comment and will update you accordingly. We should note, by the way, that the Tufts center receives financial backing from the pharmaceutical industry. Related: To ensure equity and accuracy, clinical research must reflect the diversity of patients The center queried 3,462 trial investigators, site directors, and study coordinators. Of nearly 3,200 distinct trial sites, 52% are based in academic medical centers, large health systems and community hospitals. The rest were dedicated sites and physician practices. Half of the sites operate in the U.S., 33% in Europe, and 17% in South and Central America, the Asia Pacific region, and other parts of the world. The analysis underscored weaknesses in the clinical trial apparatus. One reason this matters: Representation of site personnel by race and ethnicity varies by therapeutic area. Black people comprise just 5.2% of those working in trials testing oncology drugs, suggesting fewer Black individuals are among study participants, as well. Currently, 85% of all funding for clinical trials testing drugs comes from the pharmaceutical industry and more than 60% of these trials are channeled to dedicated trial sites and private physician practices, according to Getz. That bodes well for the U.S., since site personnel based in dedicated sites and private practices have the highest levels of proportional representation by race and ethnicity. Meanwhile, academic medical centers and community hospitals may be skewing in the other direction because these institutions receive more funding from the U.S. government than drug makers. This, in turn, may prompt a higher proportion of white professionals to work at trial sites in such locations, although Getz noted this is more discernible outside the U.S., particularly in Europe. “I think a lot of that has to do with access among professionals to different employment areas,” Getz explained. “Industry-funded clinical research is less attractive to these professionals than the ability to secure NIH funding or a foundation grant. Your career gets a bigger boost if you get funding from NIH than industry.” I have some odd behaviors. One of them is I often decline to answer demographic survey questions asking what my race is. I see the logic in trying to diversify clinical trials enough to spot health trends in different races, genders and age groups, but in general I am uncomfortable segregating by race. I came of age with MLK, not Jemele Hill. When looking at disease it is important to know if the medicines being tested and reviewed work for everybody—today we don’t have a clear picture-that was the point
|
|
|
Post by timholycross on Nov 6, 2021 9:53:32 GMT -5
Yes, what I'm surprised at, but not refuting; is that the personnel running the trials are included in the diversity issues....not just the subjects (which, I would say for most trials, is 100% essential).
|
|
|
Post by Pakachoag Phreek on Nov 20, 2021 10:03:57 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by WCHC Sports on Nov 22, 2021 9:29:54 GMT -5
So you can have the same viral load on a nasal swab, but you have a more dramatic and immediate response to the virus to probably limit infection of other people. But you can still infect other people. And you can still get mildly sick. So it prevents those who possibly would have died from dying, but those who would only get mildly sick will still likely get mildly sick...
It sounds like the same story for other coronaviruses and the common cold. There is no CURE. So either we give people shots and let society move on, or we lock everyone down regardless of vaccination status. The half of both approaches is the most frustrating.
|
|
|
Post by Chu Chu on Nov 22, 2021 14:26:42 GMT -5
So you can have the same viral load on a nasal swab, but you have a more dramatic and immediate response to the virus to probably limit infection of other people. But you can still infect other people. And you can still get mildly sick. So it prevents those who possibly would have died from dying, but those who would only get mildly sick will still likely get mildly sick... It sounds like the same story for other coronaviruses and the common cold. There is no CURE. So either we give people shots and let society move on, or we lock everyone down regardless of vaccination status. The half of both approaches is the most frustrating. Immunization greatly decreases your risk of infection and limits the spread, and If you DO get a subsequent positive test, Greatly decreases the severity. In fact, you may not even realize you have it at all.
|
|
|
Post by mm67 on Nov 22, 2021 14:50:44 GMT -5
I consulted my MD at Columbia-Pres at the dawn of the pandemic. His analysis and recommendations are mirrored by those of ChuChu & others in the medical profession. Why is there a discrepancy between mainstream highly accomplished MDs, those who know and untrained pundits & fringe folks? As I was taught by my physician uncle, follow doctors' advice. Peace to all.
|
|
|
Post by longsuffering on Nov 22, 2021 20:37:07 GMT -5
I consulted my MD at Columbia-Pres at the dawn of the pandemic. His analysis and recommendations are mirrored by those of ChuChu & others in the medical profession. Why is there a discrepancy between mainstream highly accomplished MDs, those who know and untrained pundits & fringe folks? As I was taught by my physician uncle, follow doctors' advice. Peace to all. My maternal grandfather arrived from Ireland as a teenager then graduated from Holy Cross in 1898, then from McGill University Medical School and then worked as a family Physician until his death in 1945. He practiced during the Spanish Flu. I wished I could have asked him about that when it was widely discussed at the dawn of the pandemic but unfortunately I never met him.
|
|
|
Post by timholycross on Nov 26, 2021 22:28:00 GMT -5
So, there's a new variant and the WHO named it Omicron, skipping what should have been the next letter in the Greek alphabet.
What was the one they skipped- Xi. Coincidence or further proof WHO's in the bag?
|
|
|
Post by hcpride on Nov 27, 2021 5:41:46 GMT -5
US travel restrictions (those are OK now) on several African countries in hopes of hindering/preventing the spread of the omicron variant.
As far as names go, nu was considered too confusing (“new”) and Xi too ‘stigmatizing’ so omicron was up next.
|
|
|
Post by sader1970 on Nov 27, 2021 6:20:51 GMT -5
Tim may have a point but wouldn’t the U.S. make a stink if the next name up was Trump or Biden? Wacky coincidence.
|
|
|
Post by bfoley82 on Nov 27, 2021 15:59:50 GMT -5
So, there's a new variant and the WHO named it Omicron, skipping what should have been the next letter in the Greek alphabet. What was the one they skipped- Xi. Coincidence or further proof WHO's in the bag? It is just a name, why does it matter that they skipped a few letters to avoid confusion around the world?
|
|
|
Post by efg72 on Nov 27, 2021 20:54:36 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by efg72 on Dec 3, 2021 8:48:19 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by longsuffering on Dec 3, 2021 14:23:18 GMT -5
I appreciate these posts even though they are hard to wade through. One snippet I heard on the car radio this morning was crisp enough to register in the pea brain however: daily cases in South Africa have risen from 300 to 11,000 since omicron. That little bugger means business.
|
|
|
Post by Chu Chu on Dec 3, 2021 18:17:18 GMT -5
I appreciate these posts even though they are hard to wade through. One snippet I heard on the car radio this morning was crisp enough to register in the pea brain however: daily cases in South Africa have risen from 300 to 11,000 since omicron. That little bugger means business. The good news thus far, and it is very good news, is that although this new variant seems to be much more transmissible, or easy to catch, it has not caused an increase in disease severity. Individuals who have been vaccinated are having a mild illness so far.
|
|
|
Post by efg72 on Dec 3, 2021 19:26:24 GMT -5
Pm if you want other info
|
|
|
Post by timholycross on Dec 3, 2021 21:02:34 GMT -5
I appreciate these posts even though they are hard to wade through. One snippet I heard on the car radio this morning was crisp enough to register in the pea brain however: daily cases in South Africa have risen from 300 to 11,000 since omicron. That little bugger means business. The good news thus far, and it is very good news, is that although this new variant seems to be much more transmissible, or easy to catch, it has not caused an increase in disease severity. Individuals who have been vaccinated are having a mild illness so far. Yeah, when the statement "it's just like the flu" is true, it changes everything once and for all. No doubt the flu shot will have an annual "co-shot", for covid.
|
|
|
Post by hcpride on Dec 4, 2021 21:40:41 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Crucis#1 on Dec 14, 2021 14:29:22 GMT -5
|
|