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

[skiJ]

teletech -

Thank you for your post(s) -

there is an interesting collection of individuals here on the forum -
it appears we have an immunologist, an epidemiologist, a Surgeon (retired), nurses (from all over the country) ; access to a lot of information --


I have spent Time searching for studies about vaccination in children and adolescents -

Pfizer's data from their trials vaccinating more than 2300 children under the age of 12 has been submitted to FDA ;

millions of kids under the age of 18 ( But over 12 ) have received the vaccine ;

my review of the documents available on-line is unsettling - Not about the vaccine , but about the methods that are used to prepared the documents ;

I found only One case of myocarditis reported - and that was from a group from Ages 12 - 39 ;

instead, an information gathering program (AVES) was used to gather data, and data that Should have been comparable had a 27-fold ( twenty-seven ) Range...


My theory is myocarditis was reported last year in covid cases in young males, and
someone had a desire to find myocarditis associated with vaccination ;

several of the articles I reviewed quoted cardiologists as saying, 'Yes, they were aware of reports of myocarditis associated with covid vaccination.'

None of the cardiologists said they had seen a case of myocarditis associated with vaccination.


the study you seek is being prepared. ( the Report of the vaccination trial in those 5-12 years in age )

I am glad that your community is vaccinated.

it will be interesting to see the longevity of immunity, and future developments regarding 'breakthrough' cases.


regarding a couple of recent posts, it is my understanding the tests test for the virus ( or viral antigens ) -

years ago, my Immunology professor said,
' Vaccination is intended to prevent disease; it may not prevent infection. '

a person with effective immunity will not develop clinical disease; they may still carry the virus ( and may actually be infected. ) .

This is Why I am promoting Vaccination to slow the spread of the disease.


Good luck. tj

[jono]

That is from 2017 and is talking about MERS from camels? What am I missing?

The "one world" approach to vaccination has already been proposed as a method of dealing with dangerous viruses by vaccinating reservoirs. Probably more effective with domesticated animals, but the deer have so many anti-maskers. Won't even mask up at Halloween.

[XXX-er]

SO even if someone is vaxed/ doesnt get sick they can still pass on COvid which could ultimately kill someone ?

OR even if they arent vaxed/ don't get sick they can stll pass on Covid which could ultimately kill someone ?

SO its all a crap shoot as to who gets sick/ who dies ?

BUT we know the hospitols are chock full of unvaxed people who are dying ?

re: vaccinating under 12 kids, talking to a grade school teacher aqaintence about vaccine in grade school kids " in grade 6 they pump those kids full of vaccines " and so she didnt see what the difference would be vaccinating school kids ?

[Buster Highmen]

On a side note how do you guys get anything done by constantly posting all day every day?

We manage posting while the oral hygienist is working.

[mcski]

A friend of mine and her husband got Pfizer #3 on Friday and outside of some sore arms and tiredness had no issues. We rode a couple times and didn’t appear to slow them down significantly.

Another friend is a nurse in a hospital in a red area of the state and is encountering a lot of patients lying about being vaccinated. As they get sicker they fess up.

Also, to be clear, originally the vaccines were supposed to protect against all covid (prior to delta), not just keep people out of the hospital and dying. Delta changed that or they were wrong or both, but to suggest the messaging was otherwise is disengenous and lack of forthrightness about it probably created some additional hesitancy

[Adolf Allerbush]

SO even if someone is vaxed/ doesnt get sick they can still pass on COvid which could ultimately kill someone ?

OR even if they arent vaxed/ don't get sick they can stll pass on Covid which could ultimately kill someone ?

SO its all a crap shoot as to who gets sick/ who dies ?

BUT we know the hospitols are chock full of unvaxed people who are dying ?

re: vaccinating under 12 kids, talking to a grade school teacher aqaintence about vaccine in grade school kids " in grade 6 they pump those kids full of vaccines " and so she didnt see what the difference would be vaccinating school kids ?

I'm no expert but here's my understanding on how your questions will be answered by the experts:

1. Yes, but it's less likely because the virus isn't present in the vaccinated for nearly as long as the unvaccinated, so risk of transmission is lower.
2. Yes, and I think the virus can be present in the unvaccinated nonsymptomatic for longer periods of time than the vaccinated, so it can spread more easily.
3. Not really, if you're vaccinated you're something like 98% less likely to get sick and die.
4. Yes.

[funkendrenchman]

Also, to be clear, originally the vaccines were supposed to protect against all covid (prior to delta), not just keep people out of the hospital and dying. Delta changed that or they were wrong or both, but to suggest the messaging was otherwise is disengenous and lack of forthrightness about it probably created some additional hesitancy

I was under the impression that the vaccines were designed to keep people out of the hospital and from dying. Preventing transmission was a bonus.

[Danno]

Also, to be clear, originally the vaccines were supposed to protect against all covid (prior to delta), not just keep people out of the hospital and dying. Delta changed that or they were wrong or both, but to suggest the messaging was otherwise is disengenous and lack of forthrightness about it probably created some additional hesitancy

Not true. From day one, there was not any messaging about vaccines providing a suit of invincibility. The messaging has always been that they offer tons of protection, but are not foolproof. There was never any messaging about 100% effectiveness. Heck, the vaccine effectiveness percentage (which was not 100% effective) was front page news from the get go.

[XXX-er]

A friend of mine and her husband got Pfizer #3 on Friday and outside of some sore arms and tiredness had no issues. We rode a couple times and didn’t appear to slow them down significantly.

Another friend is a nurse in a hospital in a red area of the state and is encountering a lot of patients lying about being vaccinated. As they get sicker they fess up.

Also, to be clear, originally the vaccines were supposed to protect against all covid (prior to delta), not just keep people out of the hospital and dying. Delta changed that or they were wrong or both, but to suggest the messaging was otherwise is disengenous and lack of forthrightness about it probably created some additional hesitancy

In a red state it would be smart to work on the asumption people are NOT vaxed until they prove otherwise, i went for a beer on the weekend and i had to show my passport, they scan the QC code on my phone and then they check my ID to make sure it matches, as opposed to protesting the loss of my freedumbs I chose to be happy that everyone around me was vaccinated

Covid is still been < 2 years and while it hasnt gone exactly as planned the whole thing has gone pretty well really

[The AD]

Also, to be clear, originally the vaccines were supposed to protect against all covid (prior to delta), not just keep people out of the hospital and dying. Delta changed that or they were wrong or both, but to suggest the messaging was otherwise is disengenous and lack of forthrightness about it probably created some additional hesitancy

I remember Mofro discussing this a while back. To paraphrase he said there were two tacks they could take with the vaccine 1. target reducing severity of infection, and 2. target reducing transmission. They went with approach one since that made the most sense at the time: reduce the number of people in hospitals and dying. The emergence of the delta variant has certainly changed the dynamic a bit, but certainly #1 is still very important. Who knows, though, maybe the next step is to adjust the vaccine to target reducing transmission so we don't keep going through wave after wave of infections.

[skiJ]

I'm no expert but here's my understanding on how your questions will be answered by the experts:

1. Yes, but it's less likely because the virus isn't present in the vaccinated for nearly as long as the unvaccinated, so risk of transmission is lower.
2. Yes, and I think the virus can be present in the unvaccinated nonsymptomatic for longer periods of time than the vaccinated, so it can spread more easily.
3. Not really, if you're vaccinated you're something like 98% less likely to get sick and die.
4. Yes.

XXX-er -

Mostly, I concur with Adolph's responses to your questions -

I would like to offer one exception and a broader response to another -

regarding points 1 and 2, I was trying to address the point that Nine vaccinated athletes had tested Positive for the virus -
it is absolutely my understanding that anyone can test positive for the virus, regardless of vaccination status ;

it IS my understanding that someone who has been vaccinated is Much less likely to develop clinical disease, though Delta and 'breakthrough infections' are challenging that confidence --

I would not make general claims about virus transmission ( / shedding the virus ) ; that is all a matter of individual variation -
do I believe it is better to be vaccinated (?), and do I believe vaccination helps prevent the spread of disease (?)

We have an almost hundred year history of the effectiveness of Vaccination, and it is a significant part of my Work.

it is NOT 'a crap shoot' .

Vaccination works. and vaccination against covid is working ( But to reach population immunity, we are still millions short ( and I wonder If it could even be reached as people resume international travel... ) )

mostly, I concur with Adolph's responses.


Thank you. tj

[AK47bp]

In a red state it would be smart to work on the asumption people are NOT vaxed until they prove otherwise, i went for a beer on the weekend and i had to show my passport, they scan the QC code on my phone and then they check my ID to make sure it matches, as opposed to protesting the loss of my freedumbs I chose to be happy that everyone around me was vaccinated

Covid is still been < 2 years and while it hasnt gone exactly as planned the whole thing has gone pretty well really

You fancy canucks all have QR code vaccine records on your phone that can be scanned, which makes that easier. Although I see a lot of paper from Ontario.

Most of America has a piece of shit paper card that any chump can just fill out on their own.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[ill-advised strategy]

That is from 2017 and is talking about MERS from camels? What am I missing?

We all switched to Marlboros 4 years ago

[SumJongGuy]

I think a LOT of the confusion came about back around July when Faucci/CDC/etc said that we were good to go maskless indoors IF fully vaccinated. ... for about a week that was the recommendations.. Then they walked it back to everyone masked indoors again.
I had concert tickets for early August.. Mid July it was communicated that the show was on and masks only required for unvaxxed.. Then it was changed to proof of vax required for everyone.. Then the week of the show it was masks required for all in the venue.. right around the time the state and local folks went back to masks indoors for everyone again..

[mcski]

Not true. From day one, there was not any messaging about vaccines providing a suit of invincibility. The messaging has always been that they offer tons of protection, but are not foolproof. There was never any messaging about 100% effectiveness. Heck, the vaccine effectiveness percentage (which was not 100% effective) was front page news from the get go.

Inacccurate. There was initially zero talk about the vaccines talked about in any way other than preventing transmission. Just some talk about a tiny percentage of breakout cases. It started to shift when the Yankees players were infected and delta started to explode. Prior to that time there was no messaging about no getting sick is a “bonus” and the job being to keep people out of the hospital. No one said anything about invincibility but there was a lot of talk about the efficacy percentages in preventing covid. Your response is arguing against things I’m not saying

[funkendrenchman]

Inacccurate. There was initially zero talk about the vaccines talked about in any way other than preventing transmission. Just some talk about a tiny percentage of breakout cases. It started to shift when the Yankees players were infected and delta started to explode. Prior to that time there was no messaging about no getting sick is a “bonus” and the job being to keep people out of the hospital. No one said anything about invincibility but there was a lot of talk about the efficacy percentages in preventing covid. Your response is arguing against things I’m not saying

That's not true. They constantly talked about how the real goal of the vaccines was to stop serious illness - and I am pretty sure they were designed with that goal in mind.

From 3/22/21

That's what you want to see with any vaccine -- and all of the coronavirus vaccines in use in the US or being considered for use in the US do that, noted Dr. Amesh Adalja, a senior scholar at the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security.
"The whole reason that we even embarked on a vaccination program for Covid-19 was that Covid-19 could cause serious disease, hospitalization and death," Adalja told CNN.
"All of the vaccines that we have seen tested do that extremely well -- much better than any of us expected. The whole reason you want to be vaccinated is so you don't get serious illness from Covid-19," Adalja added.

.......

Dr. Paul Offit of Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, who helps review vaccine safety and efficacy as an outside adviser to the FDA, is more blunt. "The goal is to keep people out of the hospital, the ICU and the morgue," he told CNN.

https://www.cnn.com/2021/03/22/healt...ath/index.html

[old goat]

Sounds like outdoor transmission might be a real thing.

Here ya go:

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27786402/

Why do you think thats outdoors transmission. You've never heard the saying about the camel getting its nose inside the tent?

f

Also, to be clear, originally the vaccines were supposed to protect against all covid (prior to delta), not just keep people out of the hospital and dying. Delta changed that or they were wrong or both, but to suggest the messaging was otherwise is disengenous and lack of forthrightness about it probably created some additional hesitancy

Inacccurate. There was initially zero talk about the vaccines talked about in any way other than preventing transmission. Just some talk about a tiny percentage of breakout cases. It started to shift when the Yankees players were infected and delta started to explode. Prior to that time there was no messaging about no getting sick is a “bonus” and the job being to keep people out of the hospital. No one said anything about invincibility but there was a lot of talk about the efficacy percentages in preventing covid. Your response is arguing against things I’m not saying

You are wrong. In the initial trials they didn't test routinely, so there was no way to know how well the vaccines protected against the asymptomatic carrier state. They only tested symptomatic people, so there was no way anyone could have claimed they protected people from carrying the virus without symptoms. But yes, by the time the CDC said in June that vaccinated people could be unmasked it was hoped that the vaccine would prevent transmission to and from people. That proved not to be the case and the CDC's recommendations were reversed once new data was available. Why that troubles you so much is hard for me to figure. Things change as new variants emerge. Things change as new information becomes available. A lot of people can't cope with change. Personally, when the CDC made its recommendation that I could forego the mask I was happy to do so. When it reversed course I was disappointed of course but I started wearing it again without a whole lot of angst about it.

[The AD]

That recommendation was very short sighted and it was rather obvious at the time.

I think mcski has a point. It certainly wasn't well advertised that breakthrough infections would be common, and I'm sure part of the reason is that it wasn't expected until delta came along. However, I think the CDC temporarily telling the vaccinated that masks were no longer needed gave many people the impression of a panacea that couldn't be fulfilled. Things like this just give the anti-vaxxers more ammo.

[funkendrenchman]

I think mcski has a point. It certainly wasn't well advertised that breakthrough infections would be common, and I'm sure part of the reason is that it wasn't expected until delta came along. However, I think the CDC temporarily telling the vaccinated that masks were no longer needed gave many people the impression of a panacea that couldn't be fulfilled. Things like this just give the anti-vaxxers more ammo.

I agree but to say there was "zero talk" of anything but preventing transmission is flat out wrong. They were always discussing the % 's that it reduced hospitalizations and deaths.

[Kinnikinnick]

Inacccurate. There was initially zero talk about the vaccines talked about in any way other than preventing transmission. Just some talk about a tiny percentage of breakout cases. It started to shift when the Yankees players were infected and delta started to explode. Prior to that time there was no messaging about no getting sick is a “bonus” and the job being to keep people out of the hospital. No one said anything about invincibility but there was a lot of talk about the efficacy percentages in preventing covid. Your response is arguing against things I’m not saying

The old ‘my ignorance is your fault’ argument!

Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[bodywhomper]

Last week, Slavitt and a journalist from the Atlantic discuss the messaging about vax effectiveness, mistakes made in messaging, and how to move forward.

[jono]

Why do you think thats outdoors transmission. You've never heard the saying about the camel getting its nose inside the tent?

Yeah, the camels probably spit right in people's faces. That comment was talking about the deer mentioned in the post above.

The pro-disease set is all excited about the possibility of an animal reservoir. I had a conversation a week or so ago with a guy who described how his blood pressure spikes when he sees someone wearing a mask outdoors and what a bunch of jerks these people are because what possible reason could they have to wear a mask walking around in a park? 5 minutes he was telling me about the deer. Never occurred to him that these deer were evidence that the outdoor masker might have a reason.

Lots of people using "we have no evidence of...." as if it meant "we have evidence that ... doesn't happen." Eventually evidence can show up, as it has here. And to be fair, if not for the Cockapoo set, I never would have noticed (not speaking for actual experts, obviously, although as a member of team aerosol, there are a few I still find suspect).

[mcski]

I think mcski has a point. It certainly wasn't well advertised that breakthrough infections would be common, and I'm sure part of the reason is that it wasn't expected until delta came along. However, I think the CDC temporarily telling the vaccinated that masks were no longer needed gave many people the impression of a panacea that couldn't be fulfilled. Things like this just give the anti-vaxxers more ammo.

This is what I’m trying to get across. And has the temporary mask dropping definitely added to it. They messaging was that breakthrough infections would be a small fraction at most. Either they were over optimistic or delta changed the entire equation or both.

The main point is that all the changes in messaging got converted to more hesitancy and more antivax chatter

[bodywhomper]

The cdc also stopped directly tracking mild cases

[The AD]

Something I still don't understand (and not sure anyone does) is why major outbreaks tend to ramp up so quickly, and then subside just as quickly. Take the recent statistics from Florida for example. In June the state was chugging along at under 1,500 new cases per day. The seven day average then started shooting up and peaked in mid-August at almost 30,000 new cases per day with a single day record of 56,000 new cases on August 16th! Now they are back down to under 5,000 new cases per day. How can this be accounted for? Even with those kind of new cases numbers the total number of cases in Florida is 3.5 million since the start of the pandemic. There are 21.5 million people in Florida, so still only about one in six has tested positive for COVID. So what's going on?