Covid 19 (OPEN DISCUSSION)

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
I would also say quoting 10 or so people in the poll who obviously aren't Dr's invalidates all of the rest of the 6000 signatures in the poll (whom the creator specifically asked be Dr's only)
Clearly that didn't work on me, since I signed it 3 times in 5 minutes (and I'm not a doctor).

What do you think is more likely, most of those 6000 people were WA doctors who are super keen to start treating Covid outbreaks, or most of them are anti-vaxxers and anti-McGowan campaigners who shared it on social media with like-minded people?
 
Clearly that didn't work on me, since I signed it 3 times in 5 minutes (and I'm not a doctor).

What do you think is more likely, most of those 6000 people were WA doctors who are super keen to start treating Covid outbreaks, or most of them are anti-vaxxers and anti-McGowan campaigners who shared it on social media with like-minded people?
Why the hell would you deliberately undermine a poll that specifically asked that only Dr's respond?
 
Last edited:

Log in to remove this ad.

News.com.au as always with a balanced, non-clickbaity headline.


I mean, they are not technically incorrect but....

Nobody wins from reading news.com.au.
 
Please tell me you don't honestly believe it was signed by a majority of doctors and not Facebook nuffies...
You dont think that "Facebook nuffies" have the right to take the word of doctors? It's what we do, right? Or do we take the word of politicians and health workers that are aligned with politicians?
 
You dont think that "Facebook nuffies" have the right to take the word of doctors? It's what we do, right? Or do we take the word of politicians and health workers that are aligned with politicians?
Well when 99% of doctors are saying one thing and 1% of doctors are saying another and someone takes the side of the 1% I think facebook nuffies is an apt description
 
You dont think that "Facebook nuffies" have the right to take the word of doctors? It's what we do, right? Or do we take the word of politicians and health workers that are aligned with politicians?

Facebook petition that could have doctors (no way of being certain the majority are even doctors full stop, much less doctors from WA) with roughly 6000 signatures is not a valid source of medical opinion or health advice and I cannot believe you are going down that road.
 
Omicron is here , Buildings in Perth being deep cleaned , the states contract tracing hotspots are days behind , it's well and truly here according to my wife who is on social media site "Facebook COVID exposure sites " .

They haven't updated the exposure sites since the 24th, which is when Cockburn ARC was added. Cockburn ARC themselves announced they were an exposure site (without listing dates/times) and it didn't officially appear until about 8 hours later on healthy WA.

The same happened with Wild Hop. They were informed of being an exposure site and advised their followers but the time it then takes to list it officially with a date/time takes considerably longer.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

You dont think that "Facebook nuffies" have the right to take the word of doctors? It's what we do, right? Or do we take the word of politicians and health workers that are aligned with politicians?

When it comes to a pandemic, I would much rather take the advice of immunologists, epidemiologists and public health experts. What the hell does an anaesthetist know about public policy towards a highly infectious virus?
 
Very large study of reinfection & disease severity from the UK. It does look at cases up to May 2021 so how applicable it would be for Delta & Omicron I've NFI. Reinfections were 3.62% & 34 poor sods actually got it 3 times.


Results​

Deaths reported within 28 days of testing positive were 61% (95% confidence interval: 56% to 65%) lower in suspected COVID-19 reinfection than primary infection cases. In the unvaccinated cohort, reinfections were associated with 49% (37% to 58%) lower odds of hospital admission in cases aged 50 to 65 years in the population not identified at risk of complication for COVID-19, and 34% (17% to 48%) in those at risk. ICU admission at reinfection compared to primary infection decreased 76% (55% to 87%). Individuals at risk and those aged below 50 years, who received at least 1 dose of vaccine against COVID-19, were 62% (39% to 74%) and 58% (24% to 77%) less likely to get admitted to hospital at reinfection, respectively.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top