Messages

Subject:
This was my point from the outset...
Response To:
How differences can arise ()

David Weaver
..that a policy with a higher resolution would likely be more appropriate, but the pondering has some to do with political groups, etc, considering perception and wanting to do things that aren't necessarily optimal because they are either afraid of perception, or because they think differences in perception will make a suboptimal policy optimal.

My suggestion was simple - make decisions based on experience and modeling what's occurred against future chances.

The comment about the current policy being open to a wider group was a bit troubling to me while there's division within the CDC and among former officials, and skepticism from physicians about widespread boosting instead of at least a short period of data collection about benefit and side effects.

(I had a conversation with my doc about statins a few years ago because I was sitting on mortality and morbidity data and he said something about the guidelines. I mentioned that prior to age 65 and with no prior events, there was no benefit in life expectancy or morbidity, after that - it may have been after 70, statin prescription had an average life expectancy increase of 2 years. Instead of telling me to can it, he asked if I'd bring the data the next time, I did, and he found it interesting. A year or two later, the guidelines changed. I went and read the studies supporting statin use, and frankly, they sucked. The conclusion from them from generally small number studies was that minor events improved with statin prescription and that lower numbers are correlated with better outcomes. What they failed to report with any large cohort size was the outcome of major events, and what the improvement was for someone who had high numbers made lower with statins).

It turns out that numbers lowered with statins in younger individuals have no correlation with improved outcome (that is, the person with improved cholesterol numbers doesn't have the same outcome in mortality and morbidity as the person with the same lower numbers without taking statins - this would've been easily observable in a study group. *This is true even with high risk individuals who didn't have a prior event*). At the same time as our first conversation, correlation with better mortality and morbidity was found with lower cholesterol numbers below the "action point" that was already established, so there was a push from some cardiology groups to prescribe statins to people who didn't have clinically high cholesterol. Sort of "they're shown to be good for everyone".

...except they're not. Thank goodness that was squashed by outcome data. If an independent analysis and a separate mortality study hadn't been done in the UK, what would've been the next step. *why in the world would we not measure the same outcomes in the US*? The studies relied on didn't ask these questions or ask if the outcomes of the group taking statins improved - why not?

These are easy things to data mine. With electronic records, it should only be easier yet.

In the event that a booster is beneficial, it's something that could be determined in 6 weeks from the vulnerable group. With pfizer above 80% and moderna above 90%, what is the rush? It's not statins, so the outcomes could be different. The fact that the white house group is rushing to act "to stay ahead of the curve" when there isn't consensus within the CDC isn't something I find admirable. It's not nearly as clear as the first two shots (which you obviously don't see me question).

Messages In This Thread

OT - the Delta and Booster Thing
Re: OT - the Delta and Booster Thing
Ditto *NM*
Re: you guys are welcome...
Re: OT - the Delta and Booster Thing
Agree...
Re: Agree...
In short, probably not worth it...
Re: OT - the Delta and Booster Thing
Re: OT - the Delta and Booster Thing
Re: OT - the Delta and Booster Thing
Nomenclature....
Re: Nomenclature....
Yeah...
the last part is often lost...
My dad is 73...so is my mother...
Re: My dad is 73...so is my mother...
I think at 15 months shy of 90...
Re: OT - the Delta and Booster Thing
Re: OT - the Delta and Booster Thing
Re: OT - the Delta and Booster Thing
Vaccination vs. Get-the-disease
Wrong start here....maybe I wasn't clear...
A bit wider picture
I think the study data ...
Re: I think the study data ...
Re: I think the study data ...
His point is pretty clear...
Recorded vs. actual Covid deaths
Absolutely
excess mortality...
Still missing the point..
Pfizer data
I think.....
Re: Pfizer data
Thank Goodness...
Re: OT - the Delta and Booster Thing
Re: OT - the Delta and Booster Thing
Re: OT - the Delta and Booster Thing
Interim Parts vs. Outcomes
measuring the outcomes...
Thanks for a good discussion... *NM*
Re: OT -How(!) memory falters with time
Isn't it amazing?
Re: Isn't it amazing?
Re: Isn't it amazing?
The overall response ...
Re: Not So Amazing, Rather Simple
some of us...
clarity is needed....
not to mention..
That is a distinctly modern effect....
One of the hazards of discussions...
I'm not surprised....
Booster versus no-booster for the vaxxed
Re: Booster versus no-booster for the vaxxed
separately..
Re: separately..
Of course.....
Re: Booster versus ... Seminal Work
you're right...
Re: Booster versus no-booster for the vaxxed
Re: OT - COVID shots - one more thing
Hi, Johanna...
Re: OT - COVID shots - one more thing
Re: OT - COVID shots - one more thing
Re: OT - COVID shots - one more thing
It bothers me less...
Frankly...
Frankly...
How differences can arise
(Message Deleted by Poster)
:( *NM*
Re: Well said
Re: Well said
(Message Deleted by Poster)
To be fair...
Isn't this how we got here?
This was my point from the outset...
Ditto. *NM*
Re: Frankly...
Re: Here are 30 000 reported side effects
Doesn't
The problem
Re: More Bridges! Was: The problem
I will provide more details
Re: I will provide more details
Will post
Re: Will post
Re: I will provide more details
Does roofing count?
we love..
Unfortunately....
Re: OT Doesn't
Well said...
pfizer data and persuasive...
Where did these data come from?
File and preliminary israeli data
Re: pfizer data and persuasive...
side effects...
Re: pfizer data and persuasive...
at 81...
FDA says no to widespread boost
Re: FDA says no to widespread boost
Alternate link to FDA actions
A good conclusion!!
© 1998 - 2017 by Ellis Walentine. All rights reserved.
No parts of this web site may be reproduced in any form or by
any means without the written permission of the publisher.

WOODCENTRAL, P.O. BOX 493, SPRINGTOWN, PA 18081