*** OFFICIAL *** COVID-19 CoronaVirus Thread. Fresh epidemic fears as child pneumonia cases surge in Europe after China outbreak. NOW in USA (11 Viewers)

[FairWarning]

Hospitals in Maryland are losing tens of millions of dollars and facing an unprecedented decline in moral as we have to compete nationwide for the clinical workforce.  The workforce that's been stretched thin for coming up on two years and faces increasing hostility from a large segment of our population who even when sick remain hostile and combative in the hospital demanding quack treatments they've read about on social media. 

Our healthcare system will take years to recover and re-supply needed clinical workers when covid is finally behind us or actually "just the flu."

I hope we as a nation learn a lesson from this experience and remember social media that does nothing but reinforce your own, often political ideas, is a terrible way to make health decisions.  Many many people have died and will die that did not have to. 

I agree with everything here.  Just wondering what role did Big Pharma play in this for their benefit (if any?)

 

[FairWarning]

Unfortunately people do get news from social media when they don’t trust the MSM.

 

[James Daulton]

I agree with everything here.  Just wondering what role did Big Pharma play in this for their benefit (if any?)

What role did Big Pharma play in developing vaccines?  Why does no one wonder about Big Pharmas role when it comes to developing chemotherapies that cure or put cancers in remission at rates unheard of even 10 years ago?

Obviously Big Pharma doesn't have a sterling reputation and are most interested in maximizing profits but to link them to the divisiveness and misinformation surrounding this pandemic and the response a significant portion of the population has had to it doesn't make sense to me. 

To me, social media companies are far more responsible for the divide and spread of just nonsense in this country than any other corporate entity.  I don't know how to walk the line between censorship and the free exchange of ideas, but man it's apparently easy to get sucked down rabbit holes of lies and political agendas and conspiracy theories if you spend too much time on social media.  

I think this country is in real trouble going forward. 

 

[James Daulton]

Unfortunately people do get news from social media when they don’t trust the MSM.

So true.  But this mistrust of the media is a fairly recent phenomenon and came to rise with the rise to power of a certain politician.  Obviously the media is far from blameless but to suggest that storied media companies like the washington post and ny times are less credible than some blogger or random Youtuber is nuts to me. 

 

[FairWarning]

So true.  But this mistrust of the media is a fairly recent phenomenon and came to rise with the rise to power of a certain politician.  Obviously the media is far from blameless but to suggest that storied media companies like the washington post and ny times are less credible than some blogger or random Youtuber is nuts to me. 

I think there is a lot of blame to be had by both sides here.  I’m a News Nation guy personally.

What role did Big Pharma play in developing vaccines?  Why does no one wonder about Big Pharmas role when it comes to developing chemotherapies that cure or put cancers in remission at rates unheard of even 10 years ago?

Obviously Big Pharma doesn't have a sterling reputation and are most interested in maximizing profits but to link them to the divisiveness and misinformation surrounding this pandemic and the response a significant portion of the population has had to it doesn't make sense to me. 

To me, social media companies are far more responsible for the divide and spread of just nonsense in this country than any other corporate entity.  I don't know how to walk the line between censorship and the free exchange of ideas, but man it's apparently easy to get sucked down rabbit holes of lies and political agendas and conspiracy theories if you spend too much time on social media.  

I think this country is in real trouble going forward. 

I think there are a lot of politicians with interests in these companies thru stock or political donations.  Just two days ago, Nick Saban made it known that he was a donor to rhe WV senator and was upset about his stance on filibusters.  

 

[IvanKaramazov]

So true.  But this mistrust of the media is a fairly recent phenomenon and came to rise with the rise to power of a certain politician.  Obviously the media is far from blameless but to suggest that storied media companies like the washington post and ny times are less credible than some blogger or random Youtuber is nuts to me. 

You're getting a lot of mileage out of the word "random" here.  I agree that JustAFlu187's YouTube channel isn't a good source of pandemic-related information, but there are lots of folks on social media who consistently outperformed the NYT.  

It's worth remembering that when the rest of us were watching covid whip through China and Italy and then the rest of Europe, it was the legacy media who was telling us that actually we should be more worried about the seasonal flu than this weird "coronavirus" thing that everybody was all upset about.  

 

[ZADO]

Regulators in Europe say getting too many COVID-19 booster shots may actually weaken your immune system.

Scientists in Israel also report that a fourth vaccine dose doesn’t appear to produce enough antibodies to protect against an Omicron variant infection.

Experts explain that our bodies need time to process the stimulation from a vaccine or infection.

They recommend that people still practice safety protocols such as mask-wearing and physical distancing even if they are fully vaccinated.

https://www.healthline.com/health-news/why-a-4th-covid-19-shot-likely-wont-provide-more-protection

bump

are you guys paying attention?

 

[ZADO]

Regulators in Europe say getting too many COVID-19 booster shots may actually weaken your immune system.

Scientists in Israel also report that a fourth vaccine dose doesn’t appear to produce enough antibodies to protect against an Omicron variant infection.

Experts explain that our bodies need time to process the stimulation from a vaccine or infection.

They recommend that people still practice safety protocols such as mask-wearing and physical distancing even if they are fully vaccinated.

https://www.healthline.com/health-news/why-a-4th-covid-19-shot-likely-wont-provide-more-protection

bump

are you guys paying attention?

 

[sho nuff]

Unfortunately people do get news from social media when they don’t trust the MSM.

Yes...social media or other sources that are even less trustworthy than the MSM.  Sources that make things up...don't retract or apologize...just move on to their next "theory".  Its the fallout from the MSM screwing up royally.

 

[IvanKaramazov]

bump

are you guys paying attention?

Yes.  Some other troll tried this same line of attack last week.  

The PSF is a great place for this kind of stuff.  I recommend taking your act there.

 

[ZADO]

Yes.  Some other troll tried this same line of attack last week.  

The PSF is a great place for this kind of stuff.  I recommend taking your act there.

what??? 

Its a legit study warning about getting too many boosters in close proximity of each other ,how is that an act? I`m confused.

This seems pretty important and shouldnt be dismissed,unless some just dont want to accept that study

 

[Coach Morris Buttermaker]

what??? 

Its a legit study warning about getting too many boosters in close proximity of each other ,how is that an act? I`m confused.

This seems pretty important and shouldnt be dismissed,unless some just dont want to accept that study

More trolling probably

Natural immunity more protective than vaccines during Delta surge

 

[ZADO]

More trolling probably

Natural immunity more protective than vaccines during Delta surge

i dont troll , adding content to a discussion isnt trolling . If you dont agree thats fine ,but dont insult people .

 

[dnurk]

Yes.  Some other troll tried this same line of attack last week.  

The PSF is a great place for this kind of stuff.  I recommend taking your act there.

I try to be super open minded and look at all sources of info on these topics and I’m generally curious why you’d call this trolling?  Just his approach of bumping and asking if one is paying attention? The actual studies and information seems relevant and open for discussion, no? 

 

[Zod]

Yes.  Some other troll tried this same line of attack last week.  

The PSF is a great place for this kind of stuff.  I recommend taking your act there.

How is he trolling?  He posted a study done and it seems like legit discussion on the topic.  Our top health experts have messed this up from the start so let's not pretend we have all the answers.

 

[uwillbsoon]

I don't want to bet or manifest anything negative, but my guess would be your 9yr old.

This seems correct. Update:

9 year old had a low grade fever and slight sore throat that turned into upper respiratory congestion overnight.

J&J+Moderna had sore throat/minor upper respiratory congestion overnight. No fever.

3 Pfizer was good overnight but starting to get sore throat.

Unvaxed 4 year old's fever is more low grade, now, but he's very congested and can't keep anything down. Still worried about him.

My way too early conclusion: vaccines certainly didn't prevent infection, but have seemed to minimize symptoms so far. Fingers crossed that continues.

 

[ignatiusjreilly]

I was serious.  

OK, only reason I asked was because her risk factors had an almost "Can You Top This?" kind of vibe: 87, lives in a group home, one-shot J&J ...

Anyway, I want to echo what Alex said: I'm glad that you came here and asked the question. I also have parents in their 80s, and I know how stressful and confusing the past couple years have been. Wishing her good health.

By the way, I can't remember if this was posted in the thread when it came out back in September (presumably it was), but for anyone who missed it, I encourage you to read this eye-opening article from NYMag about Covid and age:

According to an analysis of British data by the Financial Times, a vaccinated 80-year-old has about the same mortality risk as an unvaccinated 50-year-old, and an unvaccinated 30-year-old has a lower risk than a vaccinated 45-year-old. 

[...]

To be clear: They should get [vaccinated] since doing so reduces disease transmission significantly, thereby limiting the future course of the disease, and because it would reduce their own risk of death from COVID by such a dramatic degree that it doesn’t even make sense to call it a degree. But it’s a sign of just how large the age skew is to begin with that getting vaccinated doesn’t deliver you into an entirely new category of pandemic safety — safer and more protected than anyone who hasn’t gotten vaccinated — but simply pushes you down the slope of mortality risk by the equivalent of a few decades.

Think of your 87-year-old mom with one shot as being like a 65-year-old unvaccinated woman. If she gets the booster, maybe her risk profile is more like that of a 50 year old unvaccinated woman: still not completely out of the woods, but way safer than before she was boosted.

 

[BroadwayG]

what??? 

Its a legit study warning about getting too many boosters in close proximity of each other ,how is that an act? I`m confused.

This seems pretty important and shouldnt be dismissed,unless some just dont want to accept that study

I did not see any study referenced in the article you linked, it just linked to a press conference. Do you have a link to this study?

 

[FairWarning]

OK, only reason I asked was because her risk factors had an almost "Can You Top This?" kind of vibe: 87, lives in a group home, one-shot J&J ...

Anyway, I want to echo what Alex said: I'm glad that you came here and asked the question. I also have parents in their 80s, and I know how stressful and confusing the past couple years have been. Wishing her good health.

By the way, I can't remember if this was posted in the thread when it came out back in September (presumably it was), but for anyone who missed it, I encourage you to read this eye-opening article from NYMag about Covid and age:

Think of your 87-year-old mom with one shot as being like a 65-year-old unvaccinated woman. If she gets the booster, maybe her risk profile is more like that of a 50 year old unvaccinated woman: still not completely out of the woods, but way safer than before she was boosted.

I asked the nurse at the Home and she said it’s personal preference.  As her guardian, I needed some facts.  Thanks to you and the others who answered.

 

[matuski]

Yes.  Some other troll tried this same line of attack last week.  

The PSF is a great place for this kind of stuff.  I recommend taking your act there.

You guys dismissing any evidence that doesn't follow the thread's group think is amazing to watch, even as moments before you were propping up social media's performance versus legacy media.

 

[jobarules]

More trolling probably

Natural immunity more protective than vaccines during Delta surge

Told ya so

@IC FBGCav and myself aren't gonna hold our breath for apologies from @Terminalxylem or @[icon]

 

[jobarules]

@jamny

A good friend of mine told me that he got his antibody levels checked and they were 300+ (whatever that means) and his doctor said NOT to get the booster. Just wanted to let you know your doctor isnt the only one giving that advice.

 

[Doug B]

More trolling probably

Natural immunity more protective than vaccines during Delta surge

Told ya so

Not saying their findings are wrong ... but I'm having trouble determining the meaningfulness of the claim. "Protection" from what? Infection? Noticeable symptoms? Hospitalization?

"Better protected" without qualification doesn't mean a ton.

Reading 2/3 of the way through the piece, I finally get to:

It showed that people who survived a previous infection had lower rates of COVID-19 than people who were vaccinated alone.

That represented a change from the period when the Alpha variant was dominant, Silk told the briefing.

"Before the Delta variant, COVID-19 vaccination resulted in better protection against a subsequent infection than surviving a previous infection," he said.

In the summer and fall of 2021, however, when Delta became the predominant circulating iteration of the virus in the United States, "surviving a previous infection now provided greater protection against the subsequent infection than vaccination," he said.

And the prospect of "infection", itself" is a continuum, not a yes/no state.

 

[jobarules]

All these fights I had my wife to get vaccinated when she kept saying she wasnt going to because she previously infected, she was right all along. 

 

[jobarules]

Not saying their findings are wrong ... but I'm having trouble determining the meaningfulness of the claim. "Protection" from what? Infection? Noticeable symptoms? Hospitalization?

"Better protected" without qualification doesn't mean a ton.

Reading 2/3 of the way through the piece, I finally get to:

And the prospect of "infection", itself" is a continuum, not a yes/no state.

Dude, it clearly says protection from infection. And if you are not infected with Covid you cant goto the hospital or die from Covid. You were clearly wrong all along. Stop trying to spin this. Its a bad look (not only for you but for many others in this thread that abused me for NOT FOLLOWING THE SCIENCE).

 

[jobarules]

People in this thread that disagree with the groupthink of this thread have been called trolls since day 1. Many times, those same people have been proven right all along with no apologies from the groupthinkers. And yet it keeps happening. "Fool me once, shame on — shame on you. Fool me — you can't get fooled again.”

 

[Doug B]

Dude, it clearly says protection from infection.

Not in the first several paragraphs.

As an aside: I'll take the 50% of being infected with light symptoms over the 0.01% chance of getting infected with something and being hospitalized. Is protection "from infection" really all that?

 

[ZADO]

I did not see any study referenced in the article you linked, it just linked to a press conference. Do you have a link to this study?

https://www.healthline.com/health-news/why-a-4th-covid-19-shot-likely-wont-provide-more-protection

It even says fact checked at the top of the page  ,if that still means anything 

 

[Doug B]

Dude, it clearly says protection from infection. And if you are not infected with Covid you cant goto the hospital or die from Covid.

Sure, but they're talking about rates and probabilities ... not that vaccinated people are/were highly susceptible to Delta infection while people with previous infections were bulletproof against Delta.

Generally speaking, not applied to anyone in this thread: And there will be people reading these kinds of articles superficially and thinking that their summer 2020 COVID infection gives them lifelong sterilizing immunity. Can't do anything about those mindsets, but there will be people getting blindsided eventually.

 

[Dr_Zaius]

Apologies as I can't find the link, but from a screenshot of the study, incidence rates in the CA/NY study were as follows:

Infection:

Vaccinated, no previous infection - 15.5

Vaccinated, previous infection - 3.6

Unvaccinated, no previous infection - 128.5 (!)

Unvaccinated, previous infection - 5.0

Hospitalization:

Vaccinated, no previous infection - 0.7

Vaccinated, previous infection - 0.3

Unvaccinated, no previous infection - 11.5 (!)

Unvaccinated, previous infection - 0.3

Again, this was for the delta strain.  So it definitely reinforces the idea that if you have no prior infection, you are really playing with fire by staying unvaccinated.  On the other hand, it really calls into question the repeated bludgeoning of those who have a documented infection to get vaccinated or else.

The data was from 5/30-11/20, so I have no idea how the handled the start of the booster campaign in the study.

 

[ZADO]

People in this thread that disagree with the groupthink of this thread have been called trolls since day 1. Many times, those same people have been proven right all along with no apologies from the groupthinkers. And yet it keeps happening. "Fool me once, shame on — shame on you. Fool me — you can't get fooled again.”

I`m new here and ive already seen this in full display ,its kind of crazy . I`ve only posted things i read that may or may not help,i dont come here to debate or argue ,yet still im called a troll? What kind of outfit are they running here ? 

 

[jobarules]

Sure, but they're talking about rates and probabilities ... not that vaccinated people are/were highly susceptible to Delta infection while people with previous infections were bulletproof against Delta.
 

I never said that but keep spinning

 

[BroadwayG]

https://www.healthline.com/health-news/why-a-4th-covid-19-shot-likely-wont-provide-more-protection

It even says fact checked at the top of the page  ,if that still means anything 

I'm asking about the 'legit study' you referenced. I didn't see mention of it in the article. Just the press conference where they warned that 3-4 month boosters might be not long enough time between boosters.

 

[baymen]

Not in the first several paragraphs.

As an aside: I'll take the 50% of being infected with light symptoms over the 0.01% chance of getting infected with something and being hospitalized. Is protection "from infection" really all that?

Not going to argue, but the bolded is really all that.

 

[jobarules]

I'm asking about the 'legit study' you referenced. I didn't see mention of it in the article. Just the press conference where they warned that 3-4 month boosters might be not long enough time between boosters.

@ZADO

This is also what they do. If you post a legit news source that doesnt agree with the groupthink, first they call you a troll, then they say that the data was not peer reviewed or start poking holes in the data based on their own perceptions. Basically they become the experts. @Doug B is famous for this. @Terminalxylem is also famous for this. He says "listen to your doctor" until the doctor tells you something he doesnt agree with (such as everyone needs a booster).

 

[Doug B]

https://www.healthline.com/health-news/why-a-4th-covid-19-shot-likely-wont-provide-more-protection

It even says fact checked at the top of the page  ,if that still means anything 

IMHO, there's nothing wrong with the information in the article. It's just not game-changing info:
 

European regulators say giving COVID-19 booster shots too frequently may weaken immune response.

At a press briefing, experts from the European Medicines Agency (EMA) argued that COVID-19 booster shots should not be given too close together.

“We are rather concerned about a strategy that entangles repeated vaccination within a short term. We cannot really continuously give a booster dose every 3 or 4 months,” Marco Cavaleri, the head of Biological Health Threats and Vaccines Strategy at the EMA, said at the briefing.

“If we have a strategy in which we give boosters, let’s say every 4 months approximately, we will end up potentially having a problem with the immune response, and the immune response may end up not being as good as we would like it to be. So we should be careful in not overloading the immune system with repeated immunization,” Cavaleri added.

The underlined portions don't say the same thing IMHO. Weakened immune response, to me, means that you had a level of protection -- and then you took a booster only to end up with less protection. Cavalieri instead seems to be saying something more like a fourth shot won't give you as much juice as we would hope for.

In addition, researchers in Israel say a fourth COVID-19 shot doesn’t appear to produce enough antibodies to prevent infection from the Omicron variant.

This comes as Israel is offering a fourth doseTrusted Source of COVID-19 vaccination to those who work in healthcare and people who are over age 60.

Yes, we know this already. As I write this, there is no vaccine out there that gives sterilizing immunity against Omicron.
 

Dr. William Schaffner, an expert in infectious diseases at Vanderbilt University in Tennessee, says it is crucial to give the immune system time to process what it receives in the initial vaccination series.

“It’s just well established that the immune system needs some time to process the information that it gets: the stimulus from a vaccine or a natural infection. And then if you want to boost it, you have to give it a certain amount of time to ‘digest’ that information so that it can respond optimally,” Schaffner told Healthline.

“For example, the traditional hepatitis B vaccine is given as a three-dose series,” he explained. “The first two doses are given a month apart, and then you wait 6 months, or even later, you could wait 2 years. And then the immune system, when it’s stimulated by that third dose, will respond. But you don’t want to give that third dose before 6 months. It’s a little bit counterintuitive, but the immune system often needs some time to process this new information, and in effect, train its troops to respond optimally to that booster dose.”

Schaffner is not supporting the first line of the article, either. He's just saying that taking a fourth shot soon-ish after a third shot will lead to diminished returns. That's NOT the same as saying "a fourth shot will never be useful" -- he's saying more like "give it time ... make it more like an annual thing or something".

In early January, the CDC issued guidelines stating that those who are moderately or severely immunocompromised and have difficulty retaining immunity should get a booster and additional primary shot, for a total of 4 shots. That extra dose is recommended to be at least 5 months after a third shot.

“In the case of Israel, they’re trying to build a very robust population-level immunity to, in essence, eliminate COVID-19 as a problem. The question is… is it not enough with a third dose, the booster dose?” Dr. Edward C. Jones-Lopez, an assistant professor of clinical medicine at Keck School of Medicine of USC, told Healthline.

“It’s really about public health authorities trying to understand which is the best strategy here to try and get us out of this mess. Israel has the means to do it,” he said. “They have a relatively small number of people that they can… implement this in an easier way, let’s say compared to other large, somewhat more chaotic countries like the U.S. and some countries in Europe and so on. Each country is pushing, in their own way… trying to get out of this mess.”

Dr. Otto O. Yang, an infectious disease expert at the University of California Los Angeles, says the four-shot offering occurring in Israel may be a good idea.

“Based on the fact that immunity against this virus seems intrinsically short-lived, which is why immunity from the vaccines is short-lived, this is probably a good idea. The fact that the virus has evolved into Omicron is what has sped up the need for boosters — the antibodies against the vaccine are targeted against the original strain, and so much higher levels are needed against Omicron,” Yang told Healthline.

“If the vaccines were adapted against Delta and Omicron, immunity would last much longer because lower levels of antibodies would be needed since those antibodies are directly targeted against those variants,” he added.

This is really the meat of the article, and yet it is buried beneath the more sensationalist content pushed to the top.

The EMA guy Cavalieri was talking about something which has not come to pass or even been suggested by any public agency -- the general population taking boosters every three or four months. In short, he was speaking speculatively, and off the cuff -- one of the press probably asked him directly if boosters every few months was now warranted.

Everything in the bolded part above (the current CDC guidance for fourth shots) goes counter to what Cavalieri was talking about. Not fourth shots for everyone, but instead fourth shots for the immunocompromised and otherwise medically vulnerable. Not every 3-4 months, but instead 5 months after last booster.

So, again ... the information and the points in Healthline's article is not incorrect taken separately. But the overall article is couched a certain way to suggest an unwarranted conclusion (that additional boosters are a bad idea for everyone).

 

[jamny]

@jamny

A good friend of mine told me that he got his antibody levels checked and they were 300+ (whatever that means) and his doctor said NOT to get the booster. Just wanted to let you know your doctor isnt the only one giving that advice.

Interesting...thanks!

While my doctor didn't say not to get the booster, he did feel it wasn't necessary yet for me. I'm happy to wait and see what the future holds with variants and such.

 

[Doug B]

Sure, but they're talking about rates and probabilities ... not that vaccinated people are/were highly susceptible to Delta infection while people with previous infections were bulletproof against Delta.
 

I never said that but keep spinning

Do you disagree that people take those kinds of articles and use them to support more extreme conclusions? It's very good that you never said that ... but you're but one of many millions of minds that are out there digesting this kind of information.

 

[Doug B]

Not in the first several paragraphs.

As an aside: I'll take the 50% of being infected with light symptoms over the 0.01% chance of getting infected with something and being hospitalized. Is protection "from infection" really all that?

Not going to argue, but the bolded is really all that.

Well, yes, if it were available. At present, a guarantee of sterilizing protection against Omicron infection is off the table.

 

[BroadwayG]

@ZADO

This is also what they do. If you post a legit news source that doesnt agree with the groupthink, first they call you a troll, then they say that the data was not peer reviewed or start poking holes in the data based on their own perceptions. Basically they become the experts. @Doug B is famous for this. @Terminalxylem is also famous for this. He says "listen to your doctor" until the doctor tells you something he doesnt agree with (such as everyone needs a booster).

I'm legit trying to figure out if I'm missing something in the article. Sorry dude.

 

[AAABatteries]

This is probably a really dumb question but let’s say we end up having a standard yearly COVID shot similar to a Flu shot and let’s say that shot is 100cc of vaccine (I’m totally making that up).  Is the idea of getting vaccines too often them saying don’t get a 100cc shot twice in a year or is it still a problem if it’s 25cc shots quarterly?

Hopefully, my question makes sense.

 

[Doug B]

This is probably a really dumb question but let’s say we end up having a standard yearly COVID shot similar to a Flu shot and let’s say that shot is 100cc of vaccine (I’m totally making that up).  Is the idea of getting vaccines too often them saying don’t get a 100cc shot twice in a year or is it still a problem if it’s 25cc shots quarterly?

Hopefully, my question makes sense.

I don't think we know ...it would have to be trialed and that would be a long-term trial for sure.

 

[Leeroy Jenkins]

My district just sent an email out that they are no longer contact tracing, no longer informing individuals or students of whether they were in close contact with anyone or whether there was a positive case in their classroom, and no longer sending emails out stating whether there were any new cases in the school.

This is based on the county saying they are so overwhelmed with cases and that spread is so fast, that contract tracing is less effective, so they are only continuing their efforts in childcare centers (not schools????), senior care, congregate facilities (what is that?), and prisons. 

So the school (and county) says that it is the responsibility of the individual to reach out to their close contacts.  How is an elementary school student supposed to do that?????  If the school/teacher isn't informing parents, how am I supposed to know who my kid was near and how do I contact them?  How is the teacher or school not at least informing a classroom that there was a positive case in it?

 

[skol asylum]

Told ya so

@IC FBGCav and myself aren't gonna hold our breath for apologies from @Terminalxylem or @[icon]

Umm...of course it is. If you got infected with Delta you obviously would have better immunity towards reinfection of Delta. You know, given that the vaccines weren't developed for Delta, but rather for Alpha. This isn't a gotcha moment at all as much as it seems you'd like it to be. There still seems to be a disconnect in logic for those that have an agenda to throw vaccines under the bus that were developed for the primary variants at the time. They still are doing a stellar job in largely preventing the worst if outcomes, regardless of the variant. But keep on beating that dead horse if you'd like I guess.

 

[ericttspikes]

"See, I told you getting infected by a possible Chinese bio weapon was better than getting a vaccine from a 'new' vaccine platform developed in the 1960's"

 

[jobarules]

"See, I told you getting infected by a possible Chinese bio weapon was better than getting a vaccine from a 'new' vaccine platform developed in the 1960's"

Nope not at all what I said but nice try

 

[song]

My district just sent an email out that they are no longer contact tracing, no longer informing individuals or students of whether they were in close contact with anyone or whether there was a positive case in their classroom, and no longer sending emails out stating whether there were any new cases in the school.

This is based on the county saying they are so overwhelmed with cases and that spread is so fast, that contract tracing is less effective, so they are only continuing their efforts in childcare centers (not schools????), senior care, congregate facilities (what is that?), and prisons. 

So the school (and county) says that it is the responsibility of the individual to reach out to their close contacts.  How is an elementary school student supposed to do that?????  If the school/teacher isn't informing parents, how am I supposed to know who my kid was near and how do I contact them?  How is the teacher or school not at least informing a classroom that there was a positive case in it?

a congregate facility is a formal setting where a bunch of people live.  like personal care, assisted living, group home, shelter, maybe nursing home, some may overlap the senior care category.

sounds like the school is throwing up their hands and saying, without saying, omicron is everywhere, just assume your kid has been exposed.  one might have the thought, as i did, that maybe they are trying to minimize potential liability for not effectively tracing and reporting. but maybe they are just overwhelmed and realistic.

assuming your kid, or everyone, is exposed, suggests paying close attention to symptoms is going to be important, maybe frequent temperature monitoring, and testing if that's a good option for you.

i'll also suggest, knowing i'll be viciously attacked, that besides vaccination, there may be simple, somewhat helpful therapeutics available.  vitamin D3 may be a useful prophylactic.  at early sign of illness, zinc AND quercetin (or ECG, the stuff in green tea) have been reported to reduce severity of disease.  personally, i have found oregano oil (make sure it's meant for internal use), to be extraordinarily effective in knocking out other corona viruses, so take that for what it's worth.

lots of people suggest lots of other stuff, but i'll leave that to whatever your curiosity deems worth investigating.  good luck

 

[beer 30]

I can't wrap my head around what motivates a person to do this when vaccines are readily available.  (It would be a very bad idea in a world without vaccines too, but I would at least get what they're trying to accomplish.)

I can, I'm surrounded by them. Heck, just read the last page or so of replies here. 

 

[jamny]

How does a variant like omicron hit so fast and decrease just as quickly?

It's not like there aren't more people capable of getting infected, especially since the vaccines don't block it completely. Why doesn't something like this last many months instead of weeks?

 

[The Z Machine]

Dude, it clearly says protection from infection. And if you are not infected with Covid you cant goto the hospital or die from Covid. You were clearly wrong all along. Stop trying to spin this. Its a bad look (not only for you but for many others in this thread that abused me for NOT FOLLOWING THE SCIENCE).

It's a single study.  I'm not saying it's wrong, but rather that I'd like to see some corroboration from other groups using other datasets.  MMR reports can be wrong.