To Vaccinate or Not---The Rat Flu Odyssey Continues

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KQ

Helped an elderly neighbor sign up for the jab this morning. Couldn't have been easier. Appts opened up at 8am online. I got on and bing bam boom! it was done. One of the pros of living in a small town.

Friend just messaged me that she's heard westsiders are heading east to get jabbed for that very reason. I suppose it's all good. We need to get people vaxxed. Yes there are those who need it more than others but those same people NEED others to get vaxxed too so they don't have to be so isolated. There should be a priority but in the end we just need to get it done IMO.

---

Tell them not to bother coming to Spokane for it. They're not even allowing appointments right now. For the mass-vax site, they said they would start taking appointments again on Feb 1. Checked this morning, nothing yet. Checked again and the message is to check after 5:00 p.m. With that, I think they're only scheduling 3,000 shots in any one tranche. Other providers like MultiCare haven't taken appointments in several days and Providence has yet to set up a program. It's like there is no vaccine available here. I can't quite figure out what the hold-up is but something's awry.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jono

Thanks for clarifying for those of us who haven't met your mom, even though there's only a couple of us.

---

What I don't get is why she is still charging me if she's "retired."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KQ

At this point my thinking is get the jab if it's offered to you provided that offer is honest as in the case of use or lose it situations as they can't refreeze the vax once a bottle is open.

---

Sure I get that, but why put myself on the list when someone who's around far more people could get it instead of me?

It sounds like this is still being discussed and not certain yet so I can't say if it's a real offer.

I understand vaccinating older people, but since we refused to actually shut things down I think they probably should be in the same tier as grocery store employees for example. I'm sure there are different theories of who to vaccinate first for the most effectiveness. In some way it seems like old people getting vaccinated early is because we are still stuck thinking this mostly kills old people because of the initial deaths in elder care facilities.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mfcf13

She sounds like a winner. The only thing she did that was smart was to marry a guy who worked in oil and gas. I don't think she overcame adversity, more like she found a sugar daddy.

---

Sugar daddy he is not. A line supervisor with a rap sheet.

Jayson was arrested in 2004 after allegedly exposing his penis to two women at a bowling alley, according to an arrest affidavit. Lauren Boebert (then age 17 ) was also there. Jayson Boebert pleaded guilty to public indecency and lewd exposure, earning himself four days in jail and two years’ probation. Weeks later he was booked on a domestic violence charge, against Lauren Boebert. He “did unlawfully strike, shove or kick … and subjected her to physical contact;" they had been dating at the time.

Lauren took her revenge in May 2004 during an altercation with Jayson at his home in which she scratched his face and chest and trashed his residence, according to a police report. She was slapped with third-degree assault, criminal mischief and underage drinking charges. The Boeberts married in 2005, and have four children. In 2010 they lost their then-home in a foreclosure case and were later evicted.

Attachment 360787Attachment 360788

As always, I'm SUPER proud that she's my rep

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Adolf Allerbush

100% agree with you on that front. The district we're in gave all the teachers the opportunity to be part of the 100% distance learning option (i.e., a traditional homeschooling program that is being managed by the district) or the hybrid option where they'd have to be back in person with kids. while I sympathize with their situation, there was an option to keep their job and work at home this entire year, so if they're being prioritized for the vaccine then they should go back.

---

Not necessarily from the perspective of school staff getting sick, but bring in (vaxed) school staff and unvaxed kiddos (including teens) back into schools and not instituting mitigation measures can lead to additional spread. it can lead to bringing infections to homes or bubbles that previously had very low risk of infections (due to general isolation). I’m seeing this in my current area. When I look into the weeds of the North Carolina study, I see infection rates reported lower than many counties (eg SoCal counties), and I see the classic (current) problem of different local/state governments reporting case rates and % positivity rates using different methodologies, which makes useful comparisons difficult.

Also, the messaging of where lines are drawn is poor to non-existent. In the fall in my area, one k-8 small district remained open the entire time. In November and December, as community cases grew rapidly, the school had severe staffing shortages because of potential exposures by staff to those that were testing positive and those staff had to quarantine. Are those same procedures followed once teachers are vaxed and schools fully re-opened? I’d guess, probably, but the messaging protocols are not clear.

https://youtu.be/5GLnAIAsDio

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MTT

https://youtu.be/5GLnAIAsDio

---

His hypothesis that "what if there was a 30yo who had previously been infected and he gets the vax then he's taking it from a 75yo who needs it and that is wasting resources" (paraphrased) isn't going to happen if protocols are followed re: vax the oldest, most critical first.

People... we need to vax everyone. Let's quit quibbling about the minutiae and get it done.


Sinclair:

A 2019 study in the American Political Science Review found that "stations bought by Sinclair reduce coverage of local politics, increase national coverage and move the ideological tone of coverage in a conservative direction relative to other stations operating in the same market."[3][4]



Massie:

Massie supports repealing the Affordable Care Act.[125] In 2017, he criticized the Republican-led efforts to repeal parts of the Affordable Care Act, saying the efforts fell "far short of our promise to repeal Obamacare".[126]

Massie does not support compulsory vaccination. He stated on Twitter, "There is no authority in the Constitution that authorizes the government to stick a needle in you."[127]

How about this instead:

Good Vaccine News

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by old goat

BTW I'm getting real sick of the expression "into people's arms".

---

How about “how fast we can shoot them”

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by glademaster

She's 63 and retired. She is fortunate enough to be able to minimize her interactions with/exposure to other people to an enormous degree. There is no reason to vaccinate people like her before frontline workers who are likely being exposed to the virus on a daily basis given it's prevalence in the US.

"The greatest good for the greatest number" shouldn't include exceptions for relatives. There are multiple paths to get to the eventual inoculation of the population.

IMO, someone like YetiMan/IAS should have the opportunity to get vaccinated before someone like my mom does.

---

Listen you greedy schmuck (your words, not mine)--do you not get it that lots of people over 65 work, because they have to, live with working family members, because they have to, don't have grocery delivery available (a lot of urban poor don't have any neighborhood groceries at all), require caregivers to come into their home, have things break and have to go to the hardware store or have a repairman come in (who may or may not wear a mask), get sent stuff that the post office can't or won't deliver, I could go on and on. Yes, someone like me can wait longer for a vaccine than an essential worker--but not every older person lives the life of a TGR member. It has been clarified over and over that truly isolating the elderly doesn't work. Now I suppose we could have everyone over 65 fill out a questionnaire to see if they can wait or need a shot now. what do you think that will do to the speed of vaccination? I haven't been offered the chance at a shot yet, but when the time comes, and I see young people partying and hitting the bars I'm not going to feel the slightest bit guilty about getting a vaccination. Consider the vaccination my compensation for following the rules for the last year while so many haven't been.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TBS

How about “how fast we can shoot them”

---

Depends who's saying it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by old goat

Listen you greedy schmuck (your words, not mine)--do you not get it that lots of people over 65 work, because they have to, live with working family members, because they have to, don't have grocery delivery available (a lot of urban poor don't have any neighborhood groceries at all), require caregivers to come into their home, have things break and have to go to the hardware store or have a repairman come in (who may or may not wear a mask), get sent stuff that the post office can't or won't deliver, I could go on and on. Yes, someone like me can wait longer for a vaccine than an essential worker--but not every older person lives the life of a TGR member. It has been clarified over and over that truly isolating the elderly doesn't work. Now I suppose we could have everyone over 65 fill out a questionnaire to see if they can wait or need a shot now. what do you think that will do to the speed of vaccination? I haven't been offered the chance at a shot yet, but when the time comes, and I see young people partying and hitting the bars I'm not going to feel the slightest bit guilty about getting a vaccination. Consider the vaccination my compensation for following the rules for the last year while so many haven't been.

---

I think you exactly misunderstand his point.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bodywhomper

Not necessarily from the perspective of school staff getting sick, but bring in (vaxed) school staff and unvaxed kiddos (including teens) back into schools and not instituting mitigation measures can lead to additional spread. it can lead to bringing infections to homes or bubbles that previously had very low risk of infections (due to general isolation). I’m seeing this in my current area. When I look into the weeds of the North Carolina study, I see infection rates reported lower than many counties (eg SoCal counties), and I see the classic (current) problem of different local/state governments reporting case rates and % positivity rates using different methodologies, which makes useful comparisons difficult.

Also, the messaging of where lines are drawn is poor to non-existent. In the fall in my area, one k-8 small district remained open the entire time. In November and December, as community cases grew rapidly, the school had severe staffing shortages because of potential exposures by staff to those that were testing positive and those staff had to quarantine. Are those same procedures followed once teachers are vaxed and schools fully re-opened? I’d guess, probably, but the messaging protocols are not clear.

---

Totally agree. I don't know what the answer is on that. A friend of my is a teacher in FL and she has a plexiglass wall between her and her students. It's pretty wild. the kids are just on their own, with their desks 6 ft apart. She hasn't gotten sick yet, but yeah, spread at school and then take it home and then to others seems likely. People are screaming for the schools to reopen here. It doesn't phase us because we did the 100% homeschool program with no option for sending the kids back until next year.

Point is, the teachers who locked in the hybrid option knew this was a possibility and still signed up for it. I know it sucks, but seems like they have to live up to what they agreed to in this case. Of course, this is just my opinion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by glademaster

With immediate symptoms. We are learning that in a lot of cases, having COVID leads to health problems that last months or years after infection. That's what we should be trying to prevent on as large a scale as possible. Vaccinating retired people who can easily isolate is absurd, and IMO unethical.

How many young(er) frontline workers will end up on disability, or with significantly impaired health/earning potential for the rest of their lives so that some geriatric who can sit home and have groceries delivered to their door can get a fucking jab? It's disgusting.

---

How it it possible to be learning that health problems last years after infection when the disease has been around in humans for at most 14 or 15 months now?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PNWbrit

I think you exactly misunderstand his point.

---

No--I quoted the wrong post. This is the one I meant--
"With immediate symptoms. We are learning that in a lot of cases, having COVID leads to health problems that last months or years after infection. That's what we should be trying to prevent on as large a scale as possible. Vaccinating retired people who can easily isolate is absurd, and IMO unethical.

How many young(er) frontline workers will end up on disability, or with significantly impaired health/earning potential for the rest of their lives so that some geriatric who can sit home and have groceries delivered to their door can get a fucking jab? It's disgusting."

It's similar but more general. And if he wants to say let's vaccinate only the elderly who can't be isolated--in the first place how do you figure out who qualifies and who doesn't? There are infinite degrees of exposure and while we're busy sorting out everybody's place in line nobody is getting a shot. In the second place--as I said before, you can't truly isolate anyone. Given that the likelihood of exposure is inversely proportional to the risk if someone is exposed, coming up with an ideal priority list is fiendishly difficult. The priority should be speed and efficiency.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by old goat

Given that the likelihood of exposure is inversely proportional to the risk if someone is exposed, coming up with an ideal priority list is fiendishly difficult. The priority should be speed and efficiency.

---

^This.

A kinder and simpler way for me to phrase it--the greedy schmuck part was meant as tongue in cheek--we can't afford the time to decide who gets vaccinated first on a person by person basis. We have to aim at broad groups, realizing that not everyone in the group is at the same risk.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Adolf Allerbush

Totally agree. I don't know what the answer is on that. A friend of my is a teacher in FL and she has a plexiglass wall between her and her students. It's pretty wild. the kids are just on their own, with their desks 6 ft apart. She hasn't gotten sick yet, but yeah, spread at school and then take it home and then to others seems likely. People are screaming for the schools to reopen here. It doesn't phase us because we did the 100% homeschool program with no option for sending the kids back until next year.

Point is, the teachers who locked in the hybrid option knew this was a possibility and still signed up for it. I know it sucks, but seems like they have to live up to what they agreed to in this case. Of course, this is just my opinion.

---

Unless your friend in FL is being frequently tested, they may have been infected. I have friends in FL, too.

Observing, in CA, several friends that are union-backed teachers, the circumstances of transitioning to a hybrid model depended on various assumptions made during the summer about what the world would look like when they switch to hybrid, and “strength” of the union versus the parents versus the school board versus the superintendent versus the county public health officer.

CA has a large new guidance manual about opening schools. I have not heard it discussed at all. Maybe I’m not listening well?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by old goat

A kinder and simpler way for me to phrase it--the greedy schmuck part was meant as tongue in cheek--we can't afford the time to decide who gets vaccinated first on a person by person basis. We have to aim at broad groups, realizing that not everyone in the group is at the same risk.

---

Getting back to one of your other, earlier posts...keep it simple but make it fast. Over complicating it only takes too much time and adds inefficiency. Speed to the public is what's crucial.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bodywhomper

Unless your friend in FL is being frequently tested, they may have been infected. I have friends in FL, too.

Observing, in CA, several friends that are union-backed teachers, the circumstances of transitioning to a hybrid model depended on various assumptions made during the summer about what the world would look like when they switch to hybrid, and “strength” of the union versus the parents versus the school board versus the superintendent versus the county public health officer.

CA has a large new guidance manual about opening schools. I have not heard it discussed at all. Maybe I’m not listening well?

---

Good point. This is not exactly what they signed up for I'm sure. I don't mind the teachers telling the district to pound sand...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GoldMember

Getting back to one of your other, earlier posts...keep it simple but make it fast. Over complicating it only takes too much time and adds inefficiency. Speed to the public is what's crucial.

---

All my posts say pretty much the same thing. Apparently the same thing when I talk to my wife as well, or so she says.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by old goat

Given that the likelihood of exposure is inversely proportional to the risk if someone is exposed...

---

This statement is pure conjecture and a gross generalization.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nobody Famous

How it it possible to be learning that health problems last years after infection when the disease has been around in humans for at most 14 or 15 months now?

---

Because as the death rate falls and the odds of recovery increase, something needs to keep us afraid to go outside.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by old goat

All my posts say pretty much the same thing. Apparently the same thing when I talk to my wife as well, or so she says.

---

Do you repeat yourself when under stress? It’s all talk


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KQ

His hypothesis that "what if there was a 30yo who had previously been infected and he gets the vax then he's taking it from a 75yo who needs it and that is wasting resources" (paraphrased) isn't going to happen if protocols are followed re: vax the oldest, most critical first.

People... we need to vax everyone. Let's quit quibbling about the minutiae and get it done.

---

Yep. Only now it's not only let's not complicate things, a new study suggests the hypothesis there's no point in vaccinating the previously infected is wrong. Seropositive individuals who receive a single dose have antibody titers that exceed non infected individuals who receive two vaccinations.

For the estimated 80 to 100 million Americans infected with Covid-19 a single vaccine dose results in rapid uniform antibody titers 10-20 times higher than natural infection within days of vaccination.

If the immune responses are maintained over time then:

1) Single dose folks with pre-existing immunity have the highest number of antibodies
2) Followed by two dose non infected who have high but not as high antibody titers
3) Lastly, natively infected but not vaccinated have the lowest antibody titers

February 1, 2021: https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1...653v1.full.pdf