CoVID-19 / SARS-CoV-2 Information and Questions

[tabbibus]

David and Justin would be proud

 

[the MfM]

Long live the queen!

Queen Elizabeth II tests positive for COVID

Queen Elizabeth II tested positive for COVID-19 on Sunday and is experiencing mild, cold-like symptoms, Buckingham Palace said. The palace said the 95-year-old British monarch will continue with light duties at Windsor Castle over the coming week. “She will continue to receive medical attention...

www.winknews.com

@crazy4life

 

[crazy4life]

A little perspective on how you can use data to support whatever narrative you want. After the Malaysia Study came out Tabbibus posted a link showing an increase of severe disease when using ivermectin and SOC. This is 100% true. As a matter of fact this was also posted by Alex Berenson and is 100% true.
"A well-designed randomized controlled trial out of Malaysia showed it actually increased the risk of progression to severe Covid by 25% (the results were not statistically significant).
Sorry, folks. There are no magic bullets. (At least it doesn’t cause myocarditis.)
Someone tell Dr. Robert Malone.

Both of these study conclusions are 100% true. What they both failed to mention is that the study also showed a 60% reduction in ICU admissions and a 70% reduction in deaths. Would you rather try something that gave you a 70% reduction in dying or not trying something that would give you a 25% reduction in getting a severe case of an illness but a 70% greater chance of dying. Completely up to you as an adult on which course you would choose.

So the headline on the study could also say that this study showed a 70% reduction in deaths and it would be 100% true, but that would not support the narrative that the authors wanted to sensationalize. It is up to you to filter out the noise and draw your own conclusions when it comes to your health. Neither Jetboat admirals or actual Doctors have your best interest in mind when it comes to protecting YOUR health. All of these conclusions are in the Malaysian Study and just depends on how you want to spin the data to fit your own agenda.

Carry on

 

[Bruce]

@crazy4life, you really should consider educating yourself about significance in clinical study.

Results that do not reach significance are likely to be simply be random. The purpose of clinical significance is to establish that the outcome between two groups varied by more than expected deviation.

When a drug works there will be clinically significant and repeatable effect.

 

[crazy4life]

Could you send that message to Tabby and Alex Berenson. Could be they care what you have to say because I could care less what you think.

 

[Bruce]

@crazy4life, intentional ignorance and belief in conspiracy theory is not a productive path.

 

[Stan M]

CDC Isn't Publishing Large Portions of the COVID-19 Data It Collects

For more than a year, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has collected data on hospitalizations for COVID-19 in the United States and broken it down by age, race and vaccination status. But it has not made most of the information public. When the CDC published the first significant...

news.yahoo.com

For more than a year, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has collected data on hospitalizations for COVID-19 in the United States and broken it dow...

I am not an "anti-vaxxer". I have mine plus booster. This article is certainly not from a conservative leaning publication. But it shows exactly why so many have come to distrust the government on such issues. Always a narrative they want to push, thinking average Americans "can't understand " or will "misinterpret " data they had/have, but refuse to publish. Just my $.02

 

[Farny]

Interesting to go back and review the early comments in this thread and compare to the science that is coming out now. The truth will always eventually come out.

 

[Julian]

Interesting to go back and review the early comments in this thread and compare to the science that is coming out now. The truth will always eventually come out.

That is the great thing about science, understanding evolves with more data.

 

[Bruce]

For more than a year, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has collected data on hospitalizations for COVID-19 in the United States

The difference in data gathering and publishing in the US and other developed countries is remarkable. Some states have done very well while others have been resistant to capturing and providing data. Even in states wanting to provide such data there was variation. We have been much more reactive than proactive to this pandemic.

Ideally we should have had consistent surveillance programs across all states with full reporting. Countries with national healthcare systems have been able to provide more consistent reporting. Especially on vaccination statistics where having the same organization dosing vaccines then treating patients has allowed for more accurate identification of vaccination status of those who required hospitalization. The US version of that has had states receiving vaccination reports, often by fax, then matching those to reports of hospitalizations. The US model is labor intensive, error prone and greatly varied between states.

On the positive side the CDC has been good to make raw, but not patient identifying, data available to the public and researchers. I have downloaded CDC data sets for my own analysis several times.

One point the article does get right is that boosters make the most difference among those who are older or have weaker immune systems. For me getting a booster was primarily a question of do I want to have the mildest symptoms possible if I get the virus. I turned down my first opportunity for a booster but got one as my risk increased. My parents in their mid 70s are boosted. Both tested positive after a few days of mild symptoms. They remained positive for around ten days. They and I are grateful for their vaccination and boosters.

 

[Julian]

The difference in data gathering and publishing in the US and other developed countries is remarkable. Some states have done very well while others have been resistant to capturing and providing data. Even in states wanting to provide such data there was variation. We have been much more reactive than proactive to this pandemic.

Ideally we should have had consistent surveillance programs across all states with full reporting. Countries with national healthcare systems have been able to provide more consistent reporting. Especially on vaccination statistics where having the same organization dosing vaccines then treating patients has allowed for more accurate identification of vaccination status of those who required hospitalization. The US version of that has had states receiving vaccination reports, often by fax, then matching those to reports of hospitalizations. The US model is labor intensive, error prone and greatly varied between states.

On the positive side the CDC has been good to make raw, but not patient identifying, data available to the public and researchers. I have downloaded CDC data sets for my own analysis several times.

One point the article does get right is that boosters make the most difference among those who are older or have weaker immune systems. For me getting a booster was primarily a question of do I want to have the mildest symptoms possible if I get the virus. I turned down my first opportunity for a booster but got one as my risk increased. My parents in their mid 70s are boosted. Both tested positive after a few days of mild symptoms. They remained positive for around ten days. They and I are grateful for their vaccination and boosters.

The US State based system is terrible when it comes to things like healthcare. Every state was required to set up a syndromic surveillance system with their electronic health records systems in hospitals and acute care facilities, but the results was multiple different systems (ugh). This wastes so much money and results is different solutions that the feds then have to coble together (costing more money). Same for cancer registries, immunization registries etc.

So companies like mine get to code to each standard and implement a different solution for every state (some do use the same standard thankfully).

Fortunately our national healthcare system for elderly (Medicare) and the poor (medicaid) can dictate a standard across the country! Now we just need to expand that to all! Unfortunately that likely won't happen before I retire (prior to getting Medicare)....so I'll pay a TON for health insurance in those gap years. :-(

 

[TXsweetcheeks]

I'm a medical coder for facility...county hospital to be exact...there's a lot of things that don't sit right with me but its just a gut/intuition type feeling so I won't elaborate on those feelings.

From a professionals point of view...something I can elaborate on is the coding guidelines...Why did the guidelines change for coding professionals with us being allowed to diagnose a patient with Covid solely from a positive lab test without Dr. documentation? My whole education, training, and the ICD-10- Official Coding Guidelines specifically say I can not code from labs unless it pertains to a Covid lab test. I code as I am told by the official coding guidelines and the hospital specific coding guidelines....just like all the doctors and nurses and specialists treat patients as instructed/taught (without question).

Here...I question just as an American who would like to exercise my first amendment because I know there's got to be others out there that are medical professionals that are going along with everything but are questioning some of the things that are going on...I know I'm not the only one at my facility that feels this way.
Anyone else have insight on the employee climate at their facility due to Covid (other than what main stream media is blasting about professionals being over worked and exhausted due to unvaccinated patients)?

BTW...We finally got our boat (3 Weeks ago) and it's starting to warm up so I hope we can still have a chance to enjoy it before we all die?

 

[Farny]

I'm a medical coder for facility...county hospital to be exact...there's a lot of things that don't sit right with me but its just a gut/intuition type feeling so I won't elaborate on those feelings.

From a professionals point of view...something I can elaborate on is the coding guidelines...Why did the guidelines change for coding professionals with us being allowed to diagnose a patient with Covid solely from a positive lab test without Dr. documentation? My whole education, training, and the ICD-10- Official Coding Guidelines specifically say I can not code from labs unless it pertains to a Covid lab test. I code as I am told by the official coding guidelines and the hospital specific coding guidelines....just like all the doctors and nurses and specialists treat patients as instructed/taught (without question).

Here...I question just as an American who would like to exercise my first amendment because I know there's got to be others out there that are medical professionals that are going along with everything but are questioning some of the things that are going on...I know I'm not the only one at my facility that feels this way.
Anyone else have insight on the employee climate at their facility due to Covid (other than what main stream media is blasting about professionals being over worked and exhausted due to unvaccinated patients)?

BTW...We finally got our boat (3 Weeks ago) and it's starting to warm up so I hope we can still have a chance to enjoy it before we all die?

Congratulations on your boat!!! And thank you for speaking out, however you can. I know how suppressed the medical and front line professionals are. My wife is a nurse for a surgeon, and my daughter is an RN. I hear from them the things going on to hide adverse reactions to vaccines, suppress early treatment and over diagnosis of covid along with the immense payments for covid diagnosed patients, and revenue from remdesivir and vents are extremely odd. Any question of the narrative brings negative attention- so much so many are afraid to speak up. Stay strong and speak the truth!!!

 

[Robconn]

Congrats on the boat. As a front line healthcare provider, answering your question from my perspective, the biggest challenges to date are staffing, and supplies. The administration at my facility have been diligent making sure PPE was always available throughout the pandemic.
as I have access to daily isolation reports, the covid admission rates were close if not exact to what trends were reported in the media. When I looked at reports in greater detail, YES the majority of admissions were non vaccinated and this also held true with mortality rates. Some of the names listed on those reports were people I got to know personally from my interactions involved in their care.
have I witnessed anything sketchy regarding covid? The answer is no. Yes I tested positive for covid being fully vaccinated and boosted.As per cdc guidelines I was automatically out of work for 5 days minimum from time of onset. It only reaffirmed my trust in vaccines. Honestly before covid, I would have arrived ready to work feeling much worse than I did. For me, it was minor in scale compared to co- workers that tested positive without prior vaccinations. Which compounds the already work place shortage because their recovery tended to take longer.
recently, my facility was on divert, one ambulance crew ignored protocol and brought their patient with difficulty breathing. He was in the ED hallway for 45+ minutes on a stretcher with transport CPAP on 100% oxygen. It was eventually it was discovered the spouse lied to the crew about covid status. I placed my last bipap available on him He was struggling. He had been sick at home for a week. He did eventually succumb to covid but not before aggressive care before he died. Ventilator, nitric oxide, proning antivirals ect…Just SAD. That’s just one of many for me.

 

[TXsweetcheeks]

Congrats on the boat. As a front line healthcare provider, answering your question from my perspective, the biggest challenges to date are staffing, and supplies. The administration at my facility have been diligent making sure PPE was always available throughout the pandemic.
as I have access to daily isolation reports, the covid admission rates were close if not exact to what trends were reported in the media. When I looked at reports in greater detail, YES the majority of admissions were non vaccinated and this also held true with mortality rates. Some of the names listed on those reports were people I got to know personally from my interactions involved in their care.
have I witnessed anything sketchy regarding covid? The answer is no. Yes I tested positive for covid being fully vaccinated and boosted.As per cdc guidelines I was automatically out of work for 5 days minimum from time of onset. It only reaffirmed my trust in vaccines. Honestly before covid, I would have arrived ready to work feeling much worse than I did. For me, it was minor in scale compared to co- workers that tested positive without prior vaccinations. Which compounds the already work place shortage because their recovery tended to take longer.
recently, my facility was on divert, one ambulance crew ignored protocol and brought their patient with difficulty breathing. He was in the ED hallway for 45+ minutes on a stretcher with transport CPAP on 100% oxygen. It was eventually it was discovered the spouse lied to the crew about covid status. I placed my last bipap available on him He was struggling. He had been sick at home for a week. He did eventually succumb to covid but not before aggressive care before he died. Ventilator, nitric oxide, proning antivirals ect…Just SAD. That’s just one of many for me.

Thanks we just got our boat numbers and can't wait to take her for a spin. ??

My main question had nothing to do with unvaccinated people but how do I have the authority to diagnose a patient with covid based off a lab result vs Dr. documentation? I don't expect you to know ICD-10 coding guidelines as you are a front-line worker and I am a remote certified medical coder...I am an important part in facility reimbursement but I code off QHCP documentation...not labs unless read and documented by a QHCP....until Covid came along...now I dx positive covid cases all day long as long as the lab shows positive. I can't code positive flu, postive strep, or positive mono labs....Does that sound reasonable to you and if so please enlighten me as to why I have the privilege in diagnosing someone based off a lab test without M.D. behind my name and the documentation to back it up?
If it ain't documented, it ain't done and lab tests are just that...lab tests.

 

[Bruce]

@TXsweetcheeks, it reads as if you are complying with, but trying to draw suspicion of, CDC guidelines however I suspect you are doing so as that is what your employer instructed?

https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/icd/COVID-19-guidelines-final.pdf

 

[TXsweetcheeks]

@TXsweetcheeks, it reads as if you are complying with, but trying to draw suspicion of, CDC guidelines however I suspect you are doing so as that is what your employer instructed?

https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/icd/COVID-19-guidelines-final.pdf

I'm not sure I follow...This is what the guidelines state for Covid: Code only a confirmed diagnosis of the 2019 novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) as documented by the provider, documentation of a positive COVID-19 test result, or a presumptive positive COVID-19 test result.

BUT....for all other tests it states:
B. Abnormal findings Abnormal findings (laboratory, x-ray, pathologic, and other diagnostic results) are not coded and reported unless the provider indicates their clinical significance. If the findings are outside the normal range and the attending provider has ordered other tests to evaluate the condition or prescribed treatment, it is appropriate to ask the provider whether the abnormal finding should be added.

It just goes against every grain of my coding background to code based off a positive lab test when that is the only thing the patient came in for. Yes it was ordered by the provider but I am literally coding Covid for just a positive lab test...no provider documentation to go with that test. I can't do that with a lab only visit for a positive flu test...are you following me??

 

[the MfM]

Mask mandates are going away around my area and most others it seems.

Dr Fauci has been awfully quiet the last couple weeks.

 

[Bruce]

Yes it was ordered by the provider but I am literally coding Covid for just a positive lab test...no provider documentation to go with that test. I can't do that with a lab only visit for a positive flu test...are you following me??

Are you arguing that a positive SARS-CoV-2 or influenza test does not indicate that the subject has those viruses?

I fail to understand the significance of your concern? Are you not just the billing guy? Are you prescribing treatment or just updating the billing records?

 

[Bruce]

Mask mandates are going away around my area and most others it seems.

Dr Fauci has been awfully quiet the last couple weeks.

The new CDC guidance breaks down masking recommendations to the county level. Unfortunately viral spread has not yet dropped low enough in my county for the CDC masking recommendation to be removed. It has for much of the country. Wouldn’t it be nice if this were the end of the pandemic.

If you miss Dr. Fauci you can find his latest advice in