COVID-19 - Wuhan Coronavirus (a non-political thread, see pg. 36 #1778)

[tarcone]

It started with a hack on Tuesday, then a runny nose, by Friday it turned into nausea, diarrhea, puke with the hack so bad my mid section muscles started getting strained and hurting terribly when I coughed. Saturday was all nausea and hacking and blowing my nose, Sunday I felt better, some nausea, some hacking and I took a home covid test, it was negative.
Went to CVS minute clinic today as the nausea and hacking will not stop. Covid and flu test negative there. Nurse said it was a random virus/.

My goodness, if random viruses are getting this bad, we are in a world of hurt.

[Brian Swartz]

Originally Posted by HerRealName

I'm not sure why it matters, though. Rogan is just a charismatic (to some people) dumbass, he's in no way qualified to evaluate MRNA vaccines vs. Johnson and Johnson vs the measles vaccine.

It has nothing to do with Rogan being qualified though. If you just dismiss Rogan because he isn't qualified then it doesn't matter what he says about any vaccine. It matters because he has an impact, without that there would never be any point in making this type of comparison/video/etc.

[HerRealName]

Originally Posted by HerRealName

It says the clip was from March 2020.

Edit: I get now that you're talking about the Rational National guy. I'm not sure why it matters, though. Rogan is just a charismatic (to some people) dumbass, he's in no way qualified to evaluate MRNA vaccines vs. Johnson and Johnson vs the measles vaccine.

Originally Posted by Brian Swartz

It has nothing to do with Rogan being qualified though. If you just dismiss Rogan because he isn't qualified then it doesn't matter what he says about any vaccine. It matters because he has an impact, without that there would never be any point in making this type of comparison/video/etc.

I'm just saying that the different technologies used by 2 of the Covid vaccines doesn't justify Rogan's current vaccine stance. It has nothing to do with the vaccines themselves and everything to do with conspiratorial thinking and faux-intellectualism.

[CrimsonFox]

[Edward64]

I've been popping the 1-a-day multi-vitamin. The vitamin D is 125% of daily recommended. Like to think this has helped me.

Study Identifies Link Between Vitamin D Levels and COVID-19 Severity

Israeli scientists said they found "striking" differences in the chances of getting seriously ill from COVID-19 when they compared patients who had sufficient vitamin D levels prior to contracting the disease with those who didn't.

A study published on Thursday in the research journal PLOS One found that about half of people who were vitamin D deficient before getting COVID-19 developed severe illness, compared to less than 10% of people who had sufficient levels of the vitamin in their blood.

We know vitamin D is vital for bone health, but its role in protecting against severe COVID-19 is less well established.

Research compiled before the emergence of COVID-19 and published in The Lancet found that vitamin D cut the risk of other respiratory infections, compared with dummy drugs.

Not conclusive but no harm in taking it.

The Israeli researchers cautioned that vitamin D was "one piece of the complex puzzle" underlying severe COVID-19, in addition to comorbidities, genetic predisposition, dietary habits, and geographic factors.

"Our study warrants further studies investigating if and when vitamin D supplementation among vitamin D deficient individuals in the community impacts the outcome of an eventual COVID-19 episode," they said.

[RainMaker]

Was just about to post that. Seems like a good habit to get into for those shut inside because of the cold.

[Ksyrup]

I take a multi-vitamin and my wife gives me D3 so I'm probably overloaded on D. Maybe part of the reason I haven't gotten Covid yet (though will die from some D-related thing in the next decade...).

[SirFozzie]

​
So, funny moment here (Funny ha-ha and Funny Uh-Oh)

As fo9lks know, my brother has been living in a hotel suite for the last week, because of his COVID diagnosis. He originally booked until today (the 9th), but needed to know if he was still contagious. (if he was barely contagious he could just hide in his room for a day after he checked out). So, he came home, and took one of the rapid COVID tests that the government provides. I'll let him describe.

"If you're still contagious, it's supposed to show red within 20 minutes or so. Within a minute, it was deep BRIGHT Red."

*So, he promptly had to turn around (after spraying everything down that he might have touched) and extend his stay at the suite for a couple more days at least. It was this in real life.

Grandpa Simpson walking in and out. - YouTube
*



​

[CrimsonFox]

you know what a rabbit hole is? The Herman Cain awards. they are everywhere!

[Ksyrup]

Got an email that my Covid tests will be delivered by Monday.

[Thomkal]

Originally Posted by Ksyrup

Got an email that my Covid tests will be delivered by Monday.

I also got my email for delivery by Monday today

[Edward64]

Just checked and no emails yet on delivery date. I signed up on the first day available.

[albionmoonlight]

It is understandable, but people seem to have this sense that ending COVID restrictions means that we will end COVID.

The reason things don't feel "back to normal" is because there is still a very serious virus out there disrupting things by making people sick.

Having governments go from "You don't have to wear a mask at Arby's, but it'd be cool if you did" to "We formally don't care if you wear a mask at Arby's" isn't going to normalize things as much as people subconsciously expect.

[Edward64]

Restaurants, fast food, grocery chains, retail etc. is one thing. But going back into work vs remote will be a big thing. Right now my company is all remote but they will be asking folks to come back in with a modified schedule.

Also international travel. I've been monitoring travel restrictions. Western Europe has pretty much opened up to vaccinated just as long as you can show negative test before boarding. Asia is also doing this. The world is definitely opening up.

IMO, we are at the beginning of the new normal where masks are voluntary, acceptance of incremental deaths due to the virus etc. I do think the Biden admin is behind the curve here. Not going to ding them for being conservative now ... but they should lay the ground work for easing mask mandates in next month or two.

But all of this can come crumbling down again if there is a new variant that is deadlier.

[Ksyrup]

I think governments, federal and state, are simply trying to manage tolerance levels at this point.

We told everyone "get vaccinated so we can get back to normal," and a bunch of people did - plus got a booster - and then we went back to masking when Omicron hit, but Omicron was different in that it spread easier but didn't hit as hard. Now, that wave has clearly crested and is on the downslope and there's just no more patience/tolerance for keeping the old restrictions up when so many people are vaccinated against a current strain that isn't as serious.

As that wave continues to recede, we will be in the new normal - until the next strain. But I think there's going to have to be some heavy evidence that "the next big one" is deadlier before most people will be OK with going back to Delta restrictions. We'll be farther down the path to vaccinations for children (although some of what I've seen suggests people aren't as willing to jump on that, so I think numbers will be low) and there's just going to be an acceptance that the largest portion of the people bearing the brunt of the virus are the unvaccinated, and that's their choice to be free from living. And yes, there will be collateral loss of life of vaccinated or those who can't be vaccinated for whatever reason, but that's unavoidable and we've done as much as we can to minimize that risk.

[JPhillips]

My big problem with both the imposition of mandates and the removal of mandates is the lack of metrics. Set a range of cases or hospitalizations or deaths or something measurable and then when those lines are met discuss with advisors what to do. Right now it looks like decisions at every level, pro and con, are made just because the right people are making a stink.

[albionmoonlight]

Originally Posted by Edward64

But going back into work vs remote will be a big thing. Right now my company is all remote but they will be asking folks to come back in with a modified schedule.

That's the other aspect of this. The people agitating are focusing on governments. But there was never a ton of government restrictions in this country. And what little there were pretty much went away after Spring 2020.

Most of what's out there that hasn't gotten back to "normal" is private businesses allowing remote work, etc. And they will do what is best for their customers/employees/bottom lines. And that may or may not be pretending that it is 2018 again.

[Ksyrup]

My company has definitely loosened up on remote work. I was the only employee in the company allowed to work remote before Covid, and now we are implementing a "work from home" policy and considering it on a case-by-case basis. But honestly, I hope there is some measure of in-office attendance, even if not 100%. Downtown Louisville sucks right now - restaurants closed, none of the food trucks are here anymore, the place is semi-deserted. Having Humana employees back, for instance, would stimulate some activity and make things around here better.

[QuikSand]

The human psychology element of this is really complicated.

I manage a staff of traditionally in-office workers, who for the most part were capable of doing their jobs remotely, we learned in 2020. We did the full shutdown, then were back in the office for a while. Following our December 21 conference, I agreed we'd wait until a negative COVID test for everyone before bringing staff back in. During that week-after, Omicron swelled, and we have been working from home ever since.

The management challenge of calling employees back to their office is really hard. I miss the personal interaction, and my organization is way less of a "team" while we're on these Zoom room islands, etc. We are losing something, but it's hard to translate that to "you must be here every day" and I don't really even want to do that.

Clear safety is relatively easy. Clear productivity is relatively easy. Where we seem to be approaching, and may be some some time ahead, is some gray area where the arguments in either direction are rather diffuse and far less easy.

[albionmoonlight]

Originally Posted by QuikSand

The human psychology element of this is really complicated.

I manage a staff of traditionally in-office workers, who for the most part were capable of doing their jobs remotely, we learned in 2020. We did the full shutdown, then were back in the office for a while. Following our December 21 conference, I agreed we'd wait until a negative COVID test for everyone before bringing staff back in. During that week-after, Omicron swelled, and we have been working from home ever since.

The management challenge of calling employees back to their office is really hard. I miss the personal interaction, and my organization is way less of a "team" while we're on these Zoom room islands, etc. We are losing something, but it's hard to translate that to "you must be here every day" and I don't really even want to do that.

Clear safety is relatively easy. Clear productivity is relatively easy. Where we seem to be approaching, and may be some some time ahead, is some gray area where the arguments in either direction are rather diffuse and far less easy.

100% right there with you.

The head of our office has twice now planned to re-open. Once was right before Delta. And once was right before Omicron. So both plans were scrapped before they were implemented. We are now on a you-can-come-in-but-you-don't-have-to plan.

There is a real divide that we have noticed. The newer employees want to come in more, and the more experienced do not. That makes sense, I think, because a lot of what happens in person is informal mentoring, etc. There's a fair amount of learning/growth that happens with hallway conversations that just cannot be replicated over zoom.

And when some more experienced employees say that they are more productive at home, I think that they are 100% telling the truth. But we also have to consider that part of that increased productivity comes from not having those conversations where they are helping others in the office. So it might be more productive for them personally inasmuch as they can just focus on their stuff. But is it more productive for the office overall if means that newer employees are getting less support? Very hard questions to answer.

The management studies we have looked at have said that part-time teleworking maximizes value at either 1 or 2 days remote per week. Less than that, and people treat it as a day "off." More than that, and you lose the value of being in the office and/or people really resent their days in the office.

So, long term, I think that that is what we will shoot for. Allowing formal part-time telework at ~1-2 days per week.

But there's a lot of speculation in how this is all going to work out going forward.

[bob]

Originally Posted by albionmoonlight

And when some more experienced employees say that they are more productive at home, I think that they are 100% telling the truth. But we also have to consider that part of that increased productivity comes from not having those conversations where they are helping others in the office. So it might be more productive for them personally inasmuch as they can just focus on their stuff. But is it more productive for the office overall if means that newer employees are getting less support? Very hard questions to answer.

This is exactly where I sit. I switched jobs about 6 months ago and no one on my team comes into the office. We have an incredibly large code base that is incredibly poorly documented, and due to the remote nature of things and the weird hours people are working (I suspect some are working multiple jobs), I have no one to ask about things. I'm frustrated enough that I'm about to re-open my job search.

[PilotMan]

Originally Posted by Ksyrup

I think governments, federal and state, are simply trying to manage tolerance levels at this point.

We told everyone "get vaccinated so we can get back to normal," and a bunch of people did - plus got a booster - and then we went back to masking when Omicron hit, but Omicron was different in that it spread easier but didn't hit as hard. Now, that wave has clearly crested and is on the downslope and there's just no more patience/tolerance for keeping the old restrictions up when so many people are vaccinated against a current strain that isn't as serious.

As that wave continues to recede, we will be in the new normal - until the next strain. But I think there's going to have to be some heavy evidence that "the next big one" is deadlier before most people will be OK with going back to Delta restrictions. We'll be farther down the path to vaccinations for children (although some of what I've seen suggests people aren't as willing to jump on that, so I think numbers will be low) and there's just going to be an acceptance that the largest portion of the people bearing the brunt of the virus are the unvaccinated, and that's their choice to be free from living. And yes, there will be collateral loss of life of vaccinated or those who can't be vaccinated for whatever reason, but that's unavoidable and we've done as much as we can to minimize that risk.

This is exactly where I've come to find myself lately. Especially that 2nd paragraph and the overall feeling in the 3rd. Instead of a measurable "we must have this met, before we do that" metric, we need a much more top down view of it. I don't think it's measurable anymore. My job is quite unique in all this, but it's gotten much, much more complicated with Covid. There's no telecommuting, people are on edge, flight attendants are having a much harder time just doing their jobs with everyone's faces covered, communication in the airport is a problem, then there's the angry contingent who both want to ignore the rules, and flaunt that they are.

Top down means overall, big picture, and at some point we do need to stop testing, stop fussing and understand that the new reality is here. I'm ready to be done with Covid. Omicron is the variant that we've been waiting for. It's communicable enough that it will be very hard to tamp down, and it's so much less dangerous than Ver 1.0, that to me, it's reached a level where it's time to start pulling back on some of this stuff, like full time masking, testing and the such. I'm not sure if it's all just my exhaustion with it, or living in a very red state with fairly minimal restrictions, or the traveling, or just the larger understanding that we were always looking at a transition from pandemic to endemic. But I think we're there now. At least to start pulling the covers back and loosening things up. But the issue then becomes the group of people who want keep masking and such until it's gone, and that, to me, just isn't a responsible option. People can get vaxxed, they can get boosted, they have plenty of opportunities to protect themselves (unless they can't, but again, there's a limit to what society can do there) but if you choose not to do those things, there's not much in the way to stop you, and I just don't particularly care if you get sick at this point.

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

My big problem with both the imposition of mandates and the removal of mandates is the lack of metrics. Set a range of cases or hospitalizations or deaths or something measurable and then when those lines are met discuss with advisors what to do. Right now it looks like decisions at every level, pro and con, are made just because the right people are making a stink.

This should have been done from the start: Here are tangible metrics, here is what you have to do if test positivity rate/case levels/hospitalizations are here. Level 1 restrictions are this, level 2 restrictions are this, level 3 are this, etc. Once we get back below X%, restrictions ease to lower level. It even incentivizes people to take collective actions as they feel like they can contribute to going back to more normalcy. But we had the orange man-baby in charge and he wanted to deny it away so there was no competent strategy like this.

SI

[QuikSand]

I'm seeing this pop up a bit more recently, and I'm ashamed that it didn't occur to me earlier. Like at all.

The number of people who don't see any connection between the COVID "vaccine" and all the various kids' "shots" that have been effectively required for years and years is... well, embarrassingly high.

Didn't occur to me this would be a thing, but it's kinda a thing. As in the language used left a lot of people very open to persuasion that this whole "vaccine" concept was completely new. And nothing like the "shots" that they used to fully support, and eagerly got for their kids to safely avoid rubella and whatnot.


But now that they have embraced anti-vax conspiracy-laden mindsets, we are going to see red states move dangerously in the direction of abandoning basic and universal notions of prophylactic public health, and will start banning any kind of mandate or encouragement to vaccinate for all the things that we've been doing for decades.

Holy cow(pox).

[albionmoonlight]

I'd be a white hot ball of rage right now if I had a kid < 5 at home.

https://www.cnn.com/2022/02/11/healt...ing/index.html

[Ksyrup]

Originally Posted by QuikSand

I'm seeing this pop up a bit more recently, and I'm ashamed that it didn't occur to me earlier. Like at all.

The number of people who don't see any connection between the COVID "vaccine" and all the various kids' "shots" that have been effectively required for years and years is... well, embarrassingly high.

Didn't occur to me this would be a thing, but it's kinda a thing. As in the language used left a lot of people very open to persuasion that this whole "vaccine" concept was completely new. And nothing like the "shots" that they used to fully support, and eagerly got for their kids to safely avoid rubella and whatnot.


But now that they have embraced anti-vax conspiracy-laden mindsets, we are going to see red states move dangerously in the direction of abandoning basic and universal notions of prophylactic public health, and will start banning any kind of mandate or encouragement to vaccinate for all the things that we've been doing for decades.

Holy cow(pox).

This has been a thing for a few months. I believe TN and FL legislators, at least, have made noise about introducing legislation to eliminate all vaccine mandates. It appears to be solely due to the fact that their logic was called into question for being so anti-Covid vaccine given the routine vaccine requirements we've all had for decades, so the Trumpy thing to do is double-down and not admit the logical error, but make it go away by taking the consistent position that all vaccine mandates should be eliminated.

[RainMaker]

What mandates are they even talking about? Everything is open, the federal mandate was shot down by the courts, they control the states they are passing laws in.

[Ksyrup]

School immunization requirements, like HPV, tetanus, hepatitis, etc. They want them abolished because, you know, they look silly arguing against Covid vaccine requirements when they and their kids have been getting immunized for decades.

[Edward64]

Initial findings on how well boosters do between 2 to 4 months with small sample size. Hospitalization is a good gauge but would also like to know mortality rate. I really hope we can keep this to 1 booster a year.

https://www.cnbc.com/2022/02/11/covi...udy-shows.html

But researchers also found that during the time that the omicron variant has been predominant, vaccine effectiveness against outpatient visits was 87% in people who had gotten a booster two months earlier, but to 66% at four months after. Vaccine effectiveness against hospitalization fell from 91% at two months to 78% by the fourth month.

Those results, however, were based on only a small number of patients — fewer than 200 — who had been boosted four months earlier at the time of the omicron wave. And it’s unclear if those people had gotten boosters early for medical reasons that may have made them more vulnerable to severe illness.

But Schaffner also said he’d like to see more research abut the durability of booster protection, adding “let’s take this with a grain of salt.”

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by albionmoonlight

I'd be a white hot ball of rage right now if I had a kid < 5 at home.

https://www.cnn.com/2022/02/11/healt...ing/index.html

The is just disheartening. I know a number of parents of kids this age and I know I've told anyone who had a kid at least 4 that I'd just lie if we were in that same situation and say the kid was 5.

SI

[Coffee Warlord]

Originally Posted by Ksyrup

School immunization requirements, like HPV, tetanus, hepatitis, etc. They want them abolished because, you know, they look silly arguing against Covid vaccine requirements when they and their kids have been getting immunized for decades.

If you take out the crazies who want all school vaccines gone for a moment...

We're talking about a vaccine that:
- Is still very, very new in comparison to current required school vaccines .(I'm actually curious as I write this, what's the most "recently" developed vaccine that's the norm for schools? Need to dig.)
- Was understandably pushed through at breakneck speeds, so long term effects, particularly in children, are unknown.
- Was just recently even approved for children at all.
- Combats a virus that children overwhelmingly have mild symptoms from.
- Seems to have an ever-increasing number of boosters needed.

Yeah. I entirely get why there's gonna be major pushback against any attempt to require it in schools next fall.

[flere-imsaho]

Originally Posted by Coffee Warlord

(I'm actually curious as I write this, what's the most "recently" developed vaccine that's the norm for schools? Need to dig.)

Probably HPV, but it's only mandated in 3 states & DC, so doesn't 100% fit your criteria.

[Solecismic]

Originally Posted by Coffee Warlord

If you take out the crazies who want all school vaccines gone for a moment...

Yeah. I entirely get why there's gonna be major pushback against any attempt to require it in schools next fall.

It's important to remember this. As tempting as it is to reduce people we don't agree with to trembling little masses of tin foil and conspiracy ranting, it is reasonable to expect officials to justify these actions.

Vaccination has always been about accepting a certain risk to obtain a certain benefit - the constant being the health of the child getting the shot.

So, when the risk of adverse effects caused by a disease exceeds the risk of side-effects from the vaccine, you pull the plunger.

With measles and some other contagious diseases, there's the added societal benefit, but the above equation still works out in favor of the children getting the shot.

With the COVID vaccines, maybe it doesn't. So maybe you're asking parents to accept an equation that may not work in favor of the children for an uncertain societal benefit (which may not exist since COVID mutates and people who are at risk can still get the virus from vaccinated people who are only mildly ill).

I think these parents have a good point, and ridiculing them will not work the way the media seems to think it will work. More importantly, ridicule seems to be the cover for burying your head in the sand and refusing to ask reasonable questions.

So now we get ridiculous responses like trying to keep masks on five-year-olds and blocking bridges, which seem to delight the politicians and delight the media on both sides, but isn't helping us come together as a people and address serious issues.

[PilotMan]

If every adult who could was vaccinated I doubt we'd even need to worry about vaccines for children.

Even if Covid has long term effects on children, is the incidence rate greater than other childhood illnesses or risks?

It's time to let those who wish to be exposed be exposed and live with their consequences. The rest of us have held up our end of the societal responsibility, we're done and our patience has run out.

[Thomkal]

Originally Posted by Thomkal

I also got my email for delivery by Monday today

And they have arrived

[Solecismic]

Originally Posted by PilotMan

If every adult who could was vaccinated I doubt we'd even need to worry about vaccines for children.

Even if Covid has long term effects on children, is the incidence rate greater than other childhood illnesses or risks?

It's time to let those who wish to be exposed be exposed and live with their consequences. The rest of us have held up our end of the societal responsibility, we're done and our patience has run out.

Is that true, though? If the virus didn't mutate, maybe. But lots of vaccinated people are getting COVID.

The key, though... they survive at a much, much greater rate.

I look at it differently. I don't want to die from COVID or get seriously ill. I know I will be exposed to it because it mutates and it's extremely contagious, like the common cold.

Therefore, I stop worrying about who might be carrying it and I focus on myself. I'm vaccinated and I really don't give a damn whether you are.

[bhlloy]

Originally Posted by Solecismic

Is that true, though? If the virus didn't mutate, maybe. But lots of vaccinated people are getting COVID.

The key, though... they survive at a much, much greater rate.

I look at it differently. I don't want to die from COVID or get seriously ill. I know I will be exposed to it because it mutates and it's extremely contagious, like the common cold.

Therefore, I stop worrying about who might be carrying it and I focus on myself. I'm vaccinated and I really don't give a damn whether you are.

The problem with that is still there are many people who can't get vaccinated or can't build up immunity via the vaccination. People undergoing cancer treatment, people immunocompromised, the elderly etc...

Maybe that's just a reflection of society, fuck you I've got mine and I'm not going to die. But I would like to think that we'd think of the weaker members of society and when doctors and scientists tell us to get vaccinated and socially distance to protect ourselves lessen the spread and lessen the burden on hospitals, we'd be willing to do it for others sake.

[CrimsonFox]

why are people mad about this?

[Solecismic]

Originally Posted by bhlloy

The problem with that is still there are many people who can't get vaccinated or can't build up immunity via the vaccination. People undergoing cancer treatment, people immunocompromised, the elderly etc...

Maybe that's just a reflection of society, fuck you I've got mine and I'm not going to die. But I would like to think that we'd think of the weaker members of society and when doctors and scientists tell us to get vaccinated and socially distance to protect ourselves lessen the spread and lessen the burden on hospitals, we'd be willing to do it for others sake.

If vaccinated people were unable to catch or transmit COVID, different ballgame. Those percentages seemed vastly different before Omicron took over, now, not so much.

We know that there's natural immunity from having had it, but there are indications that natural immunity plus a shot is better. But how much better? And how does Omicron figure into this.

The answer is increasingly looking like an annual shot tailored to the strain or strains that are currently out there.

Those who are "burdening" hospitals by becoming severely ill because they didn't get vaccinated - that's a lesson they've learned that came at a greater cost to themselves than to the rest of us.

The only point I'm trying to make, and it's one you'll rarely find emanating from a politician or a journalist, is that this is still new and our scientists' knowledge of it changes daily and is often contradictory.

Time will help solve this, but absolutes and ridicule and general asshattery is unquestionably a bad approach. It's a nasty virus. We're all in this together. Only politicians benefit when we start hating each other.

[bhlloy]

Originally Posted by Solecismic

Those who are "burdening" hospitals by becoming severely ill because they didn't get vaccinated - that's a lesson they've learned that came at a greater cost to themselves than to the rest of us.

Again, that's not really true though is it. It's certainly true for you, and maybe your family - but tell that to people who have had their surgery or even life saving cancer treatment put off. Hell, I got incredibly lucky I was able to get transferred to a specialist cancer hospital and even they were a couple of wards down because they'd had to convert them to deal with COVID.

The other thing I'll say is you say Omnicron changed everything, like there wasn't a giant swathe of society that wasn't willing to get vaccinated even when we were being told that being vaccinated could stop the spread and lead to the end of the pandemic. Yes, science is changing and the message is changing every day, but let's not be dishonest and say at any point the advice hasn't been getting this is the best thing for you, your family and others or isn't likely to be the advice in the future. Anything else is just intellectually dishonest.

[flere-imsaho]

Originally Posted by CrimsonFox

why are people mad about this?

Plenty of reasons. Here's a good one that has nothing to do with your stance on the vaccine:

Originally Posted by bhlloy

tell that to people who have had their surgery or even life saving cancer treatment put off. Hell, I got incredibly lucky I was able to get transferred to a specialist cancer hospital and even they were a couple of wards down because they'd had to convert them to deal with COVID.

Originally Posted by Solecismic

Those who are "burdening" hospitals by becoming severely ill because they didn't get vaccinated - that's a lesson they've learned that came at a greater cost to themselves than to the rest of us.

Remains to be seen. We know COVID substantially increases risk of heart disease, impacts cognitive ability, and makes more likely a wide range of negative health effects, including Type 1 diabetes in children and, on the lighter side, hair loss.

Do you feel all of this will have no effect on society?


Meanwhile there are 3 vaccines with over 10 billion doses administered and a still pristine safety record. Someone not getting vaccinated by now is simply prioritizing their own personal belief system over both society as a whole and those who will be directly impacted by their likely utilization of the health care system. There's a word for this, and it's "selfish".

[HerRealName]

Originally Posted by flere-imsaho

Meanwhile there are 3 vaccines with over 10 billion doses administered and a still pristine safety record. Someone not getting vaccinated by now is simply prioritizing their own personal belief system over both society as a whole and those who will be directly impacted by their likely utilization of the health care system. There's a word for this, and it's "selfish".

It's not just selfish, it's stupid. There's no logical reason not to get vaccinated..

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by Solecismic

With the COVID vaccines, maybe it doesn't. So maybe you're asking parents to accept an equation that may not work in favor of the children for an uncertain societal benefit (which may not exist since COVID mutates and people who are at risk can still get the virus from vaccinated people who are only mildly ill).

We have a mountain of evidence that says it does. Do you have any evidence to support your stance?

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by bhlloy

Again, that's not really true though is it. It's certainly true for you, and maybe your family - but tell that to people who have had their surgery or even life saving cancer treatment put off. Hell, I got incredibly lucky I was able to get transferred to a specialist cancer hospital and even they were a couple of wards down because they'd had to convert them to deal with COVID.

You are correct. They don't care about your health. They don't care about the health of vulnerable people. Heck, they often don't care about their own family and friends.

But it goes beyond health. Think of the billions in tax dollars we have to continue to devote to unnecessary health care costs. Or the businesses (restaurants, entertainment, events) that have been decimated by this pandemic continuing. The psychological toll of missed weddings, school dances, funerals, and other social gatherings.

A generation of sociopaths who are getting precisely what they want out of the world.

[Coffee Warlord]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

We have a mountain of evidence that says it does. Do you have any evidence to support your stance?

This is specifically geared to the discussion of mandating the vaccine for children.

There's very little evidence the vaccine does much, if anything, to slow transmission of Covid, particularly for omicron. There is plenty of evidence vaccine DOES lessen symptoms for those infected. There is also plenty of evidence that children are by far the least impacted by Covid. Cases in children tend towards mild, much more than any other age group.

So if we're talking about a vaccine that mitigates symptoms, but does not prevent transmission, what's the point of mandating it on the least vulnerable age group?

For adults, the risk vs benefit has far more positives. For children, there's a lot more room for debate.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by Coffee Warlord

This is specifically geared to the discussion of mandating the vaccine for children.

There's very little evidence the vaccine does much, if anything, to slow transmission of Covid, particularly for omicron. There is plenty of evidence vaccine DOES lessen symptoms for those infected. There is also plenty of evidence that children are by far the least impacted by Covid. Cases in children tend towards mild, much more than any other age group.

So if we're talking about a vaccine that mitigates symptoms, but does not prevent transmission, what's the point of mandating it on the least vulnerable age group?

For adults, the risk vs benefit has far more positives. For children, there's a lot more room for debate.

Vaccine effectiveness was 91% in children 5-11 years of age. In a study of children who were hospitalized, every single one who went on life support was unvaccinated. That alone should be enough to have a child vaccinated if you care about their health (which I understand is asking a lot in this country).

Every major study has shown transmission rates are lower among vaccinated. Not surprising as vaccinated people are shown to be infectious for shorter periods of time.

You said open for debate. If you'd like to post studies that show a risk in childhood vaccinations compared to remaining unvaccinated, please post them so that we can have that debate you are talking about.

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by Solecismic

If vaccinated people were unable to catch or transmit COVID, different ballgame. Those percentages seemed vastly different before Omicron took over, now, not so much.

Originally Posted by Coffee Warlord

There's very little evidence the vaccine does much, if anything, to slow transmission of Covid, particularly for omicron. There is plenty of evidence vaccine DOES lessen symptoms for those infected. There is also plenty of evidence that children are by far the least impacted by Covid. Cases in children tend towards mild, much more than any other age group.

This is not true. Not at all.

Good News: Full Vaccination Protects Against Omicron Hospitalization And Death
From the UK data set, triple vaccinated (i.e.vaccine + booster) gives 50% protection from omicron and 25% from unboosted.

Why are so few people in the Bay Area getting COVID booster shots?
In Cali, it is 95.6/100K (boosted) vs 229.5/100K (vaccinated) vs 712.7/100K (unvaccinated). So boosted cuts your rate of infection by 86%. Even vaccination cuts it by 2/3rds.

Vaccines are still more than 50% effective so that could be half or more of the population not transmitting omicron /at all/.

SARS-CoV-2 Omicron VOC Transmission in Danish Households | medRxiv
And, in a study of Danish households, when a family member did catch omicron, they were half as likely to transmit it to other family members if vaccinated.

This isn't some "it gives you a little protection". I feel like I've started hearing over the past month" "omicron makes vaccines worthless for transmission but it's for hospitalizations" which seems paired with this subtle subtext of "so make your personal decision about the vaccine because you have no societal responsibility here". I mean, look, we've seen massive failings on a societal level throughout this pandemic, but, well, it's often espoused by those who have been most vaccine, lets say, hesitant, throughout this whole thing - so it feels a bit disingenuous.

However, more importantly, in this case - it's just factually flat out wrong. Yes, it's not the 90-95% infection protection of the initial vaccine vs the initial variant. Though, of course, it is that for serious infection/hospitalization, but that's not what we're talking about here. We're talking about transmissibility, right? It's still more than a 50% improvement on transmissibility, and even greater when you take a lower infection rate of those infected into account. On both an individual and societal level, those are huge numbers. So let's dispense with this narrative that vaccines are not a public health decision and only some fake personal responsibility thing. It's simply not true.

SI

[CrimsonFox]

I have been told about a rather deep dark rabbit hole called The Herman Cain awards...it is endless!

[Lathum]

I have tried checking it out but Reddit just hurts my brain, it is too busy

[CrimsonFox]

Originally Posted by Lathum

I have tried checking it out but Reddit just hurts my brain, it is too busy

there are groups on facebook