Cozumel COVID-19 updates

[Ukmc]

Don't most trials need double blind studies to be valid?

That is not true. There are a lot of different designs that can provide you with good quality evidence. Furthermore, double blind randomized study, while providing you with highest quality of data, may not yield a useful data. In some circumstances it can even mislead you. For example, a study may show that COVID vaccine is effective because it is measuring antibodies at 2 months after vaccine administration and it would be a statistically significant result. However, antibodies may not play a significant role in immunity to Covid or may just disappear after 4 months. The last two statements, by the way, are just hypothetical. Either way, there are many examples in history of medicine where double blind randomized studies mislead physicians and/or patients.

 

[Snoweman]

That is not true. There are a lot of different designs that can provide you with good quality evidence. Furthermore, double blind randomized study, while providing you with highest quality of data, may not yield a useful data. In some circumstances it can even mislead you. For example, a study may show that COVID vaccine is effective because it is measuring antibodies at 2 months after vaccine administration and it would be a statistically significant result. However, antibodies may not play a significant role in immunity to Covid or may just disappear after 4 months. The last two statements, by the way, are just hypothetical. Either way, there are many examples in history of medicine where double blind randomized studies mislead physicians and/or patients.

Ok. What's a better study design in your example?

 

[diver0008]

...double blind randomized study, while providing you with highest quality of data, may not yield a useful data.

Personally, looking for high quality data. There has been so much flip flopping, corruption, and blatant incompetence for me to bother with anything else. Glad I am familiar with tanks and regulators so that I do not have to hold my breath.

 

[BRT]

Well yes, as a matter of fact.

Don't most trials need double blind studies to be valid?[/QUOTE

 

[chillyinCanada]

Dang. I have a first cousin on last stages of a vent. Fourth Covid pos relative to date. Three gone.

So very sorry

 

[chillyinCanada]

 

[Joneill]

Shows how poor the WHO messaging has been on this disaster. Unfortunately, the conflicting guidance and changing stories have just fed the doubters and conspiracy theorists out there.

Hopefully a lesson will be learned for the future on how to get more unified guidance from the scientific community when issues arise so as not to confuse the general public.

 

[cvchief]

Speaking of studies, did you read the syrian hamster one? No seriously, something about syrian golden hamster being perfect for human transmission studies. I digress...

Anywho, one possible thing they suggested they were seeing was the size of the viral load you inhale can affect the severity of your covid course. Like maybe a mask cutting down the amount you suck in can maybe mean you get less sick. Like maybe you get the 'bad cold' instead of the 'dead' kind of covid. That seems interesting. Kind seems to knock the crap outta 'masks don't work perfectly, so they don't work at all' and 'it doesnt help me, so.....'

Of course, we really aren't built to follow along right? Give us your final answer RIGHT NOW....

 

[DandyDon]

Actress Sharon Stone has a sister with lupus and auto-immune disease, only been to the pharmacy during the outbreak, and now hospitalized with Covid-19. She posted this message...

Actress Sharon Stone blames 'non-mask wearers' for sister's illness

 

[Ukmc]

Ok. What's a better study design in your example?

Haha. I see where you going with that. Everybody is sick and tired of corona and searching for resolution as fast as possible by virtually any means. There is no single study that can solve all the questions. My point is that while double blind randomized study is the highest level of evidence it is not always most appropriate design. Cohort study of certain population, let’s say Italy or Texas, would be a good design to see who is most susceptible and what are long term side effects if any of corona infection. Cohort study of divers, seeing if there is a spike in cases of lung over-expansion injuries or even DCS (studying indirect effects) would be an excellent study (would need tons of divers for such a study). Non randomized and non-blinded study of presence of antibodies 6 months after initial infection would be very relevant and most useful right now. Case series study of people who had been infected with COVID and followed for 2 years for signs of re-infection - is Level III study but would be most helpful under circumstances.
So there are a lot of designs out there that can help us with data, the problem, of course, is that COVID-19 is so new we have not had long enough time to figure things out. Furthermore, some of the early data that was given to us was not entirely correct so it eschewed some early recommendations.
And of course, just like everybody else I am keeping my fingers crossed for a functional vaccine. I really want one and I hope they will get it right from the getgo , but not too optimistic. Remember, flu has been around for hundreds of years, we get flu season once or twice a year, it kills tons of people, we have had many people working on universal vaccine for many years and they still can not figure it out...