Jump to content

Coronavirus


Reacher

Recommended Posts

I’m not sure what is considered ‘breakthrough’ infection. 2 family members both among the first age groups to be vaccinated had a diagnosis of Covid in July.

As for Ivermectin, a lady in town was among the first hospitalized with COVID-19 in this area. Was on vent for a month and in hospital for 45 days. Family was told 2% chance of recovery. Ivermectin, Zink regimen and yes Hydroxychloroquine  was given to her. This was all before the jab was introduced. She’s been fine for over a year now.

Family members 88yo grandpa passed away recently. Death certificate says COVID-19 which is a complete lie. Sickening. 

Friend in NC lost spouse in an accident. Death certificate says COVID-19. He called and asked for it to be changed and was asked to leave it in exchange for compensation. He took the check straight to a lawyer. Last I heard an out of court settlement was the offer. Sickening.

I hate this thread. I’m more than disgusted with all things Covid and when I hear the name Fauci I want to vomit.

This country is a terrible place for children right now and that Ps me off the most.

End of rant. Thanks for the ear.

  • Like 2
  • Sad 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://www.cdc.gov/media/releases/2021/s0806-vaccination-protection.html

In today’s MMWR, a study of COVID-19 infections in Kentucky among people who were previously infected with SAR-CoV-2 shows that unvaccinated individuals are more than twice as likely to be reinfected with COVID-19 than those who were fully vaccinated after initially contracting the virus. These data further indicate that COVID-19 vaccines offer better protection than natural immunity alone and that vaccines, even after prior infection, help prevent reinfections.

“If you have had COVID-19 before, please still get vaccinated,” said CDC Director Dr. Rochelle Walensky. “This study shows you are twice as likely to get infected again if you are unvaccinated. Getting the vaccine is the best way to protect yourself and others around you, especially as the more contagious Delta variant spreads around the country.”

The study of hundreds of Kentucky residents with previous infections through June 2021 found that those who were unvaccinated had 2.34 times the odds of reinfection compared with those who were fully vaccinated.  The findings suggest that among people who have had COVID-19 previously, getting fully vaccinated provides additional protection against reinfection.

Additionally, a second publication from MMWR shows vaccines prevented COVID-19 related hospitalizations among the highest risk age groups. As cases, hospitalizations, and deaths rise, the data in today’s MMWR reinforce that COVID-19 vaccines are the best way to prevent COVID-19.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Lostin76 said:

Over 2,000 US citizens died of COVID yesterday. It didn’t have to be like this. 

And no, Ivermectin is not the way out of this mess. 

No one is saying Ivermectin is the magical cure. Can you acknowledge that it may be part of the solution? How about it deserves further study and should not be censored by YouTube and others? If not, how do you explain its success elsewhere - like the reports from India and @Inequality?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Inequality said:

I’m not sure what is considered ‘breakthrough’ infection. 2 family members both among the first age groups to be vaccinated had a diagnosis of Covid in July.

As for Ivermectin, a lady in town was among the first hospitalized with COVID-19 in this area. Was on vent for a month and in hospital for 45 days. Family was told 2% chance of recovery. Ivermectin, Zink regimen and yes Hydroxychloroquine  was given to her. This was all before the jab was introduced. She’s been fine for over a year now.

Family members 88yo grandpa passed away recently. Death certificate says COVID-19 which is a complete lie. Sickening. 

Friend in NC lost spouse in an accident. Death certificate says COVID-19. He called and asked for it to be changed and was asked to leave it in exchange for compensation. He took the check straight to a lawyer. Last I heard an out of court settlement was the offer. Sickening.

I hate this thread. I’m more than disgusted with all things Covid and when I hear the name Fauci I want to vomit.

This country is a terrible place for children right now and that Ps me off the most.

End of rant. Thanks for the ear.

I'm with you on everything you said. I have never trusted the covid numbers, especially when it comes to the death numbers/ percentages. No one has tried to account for the people who had covid and didn't know it or those who had it and were never tested. Early on, testing was difficult to get and all of those people were never counted. Including the entire population of people who have had covid would drastically change the percentages. 

The most concerning thing about the current vaccines is that the drug companies were given immunity from inability. They were also probably given some assurance that we would not pursue other alternatives. That's a red flag to me. Once again, I'm not anti vaccine. My wife has received it and I support her completely in making her decision. I am, however anti mandate. 

Personally, I don't like being manipulated by misinformation or misleading statistics. Nor do I like scare or public shaming tactics designed to control and drive behavior. Just be honest with me, give me accurate information and I will make the choice that I believe is best for me.

I am not dismissing the seriousness of covid and for a large portion of the population the vaccine may be the best option currently available. I am not vaccinated and am still gathering information to determine the risk/ benefit for me. At this point, my level of confidence that I am getting that information from "official" sources is pretty low.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, cthomas said:

I'm with you on everything you said. I have never trusted the covid numbers, especially when it comes to the death numbers/ percentages. No one has tried to account for the people who had covid and didn't know it or those who had it and were never tested. Early on, testing was difficult to get and all of those people were never counted. Including the entire population of people who have had covid would drastically change the percentages. 

The most concerning thing about the current vaccines is that the drug companies were given immunity from inability. They were also probably given some assurance that we would not pursue other alternatives. That's a red flag to me. Once again, I'm not anti vaccine. My wife has received it and I support her completely in making her decision. I am, however anti mandate. 

Personally, I don't like being manipulated by misinformation or misleading statistics. Nor do I like scare or public shaming tactics designed to control and drive behavior. Just be honest with me, give me accurate information and I will make the choice that I believe is best for me.

I am not dismissing the seriousness of covid and for a large portion of the population the vaccine may be the best option currently available. I am not vaccinated and am still gathering information to determine the risk/ benefit for me. At this point, my level of confidence that I am getting that information from "official" sources is pretty low.

I see so many stories that make it hard to believe we are getting the whole truth.

Here is one from today-

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2021/09/covid-whistleblower-wu-flu-fraud-vaers-reporting-database-tracking-vaccine-complications-wrong-factor-100/

If the stats are off by a factor of 2, that's 100 percent and a major story, let alone a factor of near 100.

I have no idea who this Dr is and if she is credible but I'm not ready to summarily dismiss it as fantasy either. Hopefully, we can get to the bottom of these issues. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Lostin76 said:

https://www.cdc.gov/media/releases/2021/s0806-vaccination-protection.html

In today’s MMWR, a study of COVID-19 infections in Kentucky among people who were previously infected with SAR-CoV-2 shows that unvaccinated individuals are more than twice as likely to be reinfected with COVID-19 than those who were fully vaccinated after initially contracting the virus. These data further indicate that COVID-19 vaccines offer better protection than natural immunity alone and that vaccines, even after prior infection, help prevent reinfections.

“If you have had COVID-19 before, please still get vaccinated,” said CDC Director Dr. Rochelle Walensky. “This study shows you are twice as likely to get infected again if you are unvaccinated. Getting the vaccine is the best way to protect yourself and others around you, especially as the more contagious Delta variant spreads around the country.”

The study of hundreds of Kentucky residents with previous infections through June 2021 found that those who were unvaccinated had 2.34 times the odds of reinfection compared with those who were fully vaccinated.  The findings suggest that among people who have had COVID-19 previously, getting fully vaccinated provides additional protection against reinfection.

Additionally, a second publication from MMWR shows vaccines prevented COVID-19 related hospitalizations among the highest risk age groups. As cases, hospitalizations, and deaths rise, the data in today’s MMWR reinforce that COVID-19 vaccines are the best way to prevent COVID-19.

 

Interesting enough they CDC left out this observation from the study from their media release. This is what causes problems for people. Selective science...selective facts....they just can't put all the info out there. When they hide info it LOOKS BAD. This is what I have been saying from the start. The way they handle this stuff....under both administrations has been so awful...it doesn't help their cause or honestly the public who are then confused or worse distrustful because they manipulate the data and info they are providing. 

More recently, the CDC made headlines with an observational study aiming to characterise the protection a vaccine might give to people with past infections. Comparing 246 Kentuckians who had subsequent reinfections with 492 controls who had not, the CDC concluded that those who were unvaccinated had more than twice the odds of reinfection.30 The study notes the limitation that the vaccinated are “possibly less likely to get tested. Therefore, the association of reinfection and lack of vaccination might be overestimated.” In announcing the study, Walensky stated: “If you have had covid-19 before, please still get vaccinated.”31

I've said it before. Vaccinated people are not nearly as likely to get tested for Covid...and if they are infected and carry it asymptomatically as we would expect because of their vaccine doing its job they wouldn't think to get tested. Doesn't change the fact that they can just as easily spread it or be infected than a non-vaccinated person.

Edited by dgambill
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, dgambill said:

Interesting enough they CDC left out this observation from the study from their media release. This is what causes problems for people. Selective science...selective facts....they just can't put all the info out there. When they hide info it LOOKS BAD. This is what I have been saying from the start. The way they handle this stuff....under both administrations has been so awful...it doesn't help their cause or honestly the public who are then confused or worse distrustful because they manipulate the data and info they are providing. 

More recently, the CDC made headlines with an observational study aiming to characterise the protection a vaccine might give to people with past infections. Comparing 246 Kentuckians who had subsequent reinfections with 492 controls who had not, the CDC concluded that those who were unvaccinated had more than twice the odds of reinfection.30 The study notes the limitation that the vaccinated are “possibly less likely to get tested. Therefore, the association of reinfection and lack of vaccination might be overestimated.” In announcing the study, Walensky stated: “If you have had covid-19 before, please still get vaccinated.”31

I've said it before. Vaccinated people are not nearly as likely to get tested for Covid...and if they are infected and carry it asymptomatically as we would expect because of their vaccine doing its job they would think to get tested. Doesn't change the fact that they can just as easily spread it or be infected than a non-vaccinated person.

Thanks for saving me some time. I had that open on my desktop to look into further later today.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Reacher

This article from a peer reviewed British medical journal is some of the best information I've found on the topic of natural immunity etc. Notice it gives both sides of the discussion with support from studies and different doctors and also a more global view and not just a US perspective as they source many doctors from other countries etc. It's a very long article but man I appreciate it goes very deep into both positives and negatives of vaccinating those with natural immunity. Best thing is the writer just lets the information speak for itself and makes no conclusions or I can tell takes any particular side as she seems to quote from people on both sides equally. 

https://www.bmj.com/content/374/bmj.n2101

Things I found fascinating....measuring antibodies is a poor way to judge immune response. T & B Cells (these memory cells) are much more important in determining an immune response. So just because your body may not have as high antibody count (after covid infection as per say a vaccination) doesn't mean you aren't still protected. Just as important in my opinion is the need for booster shots. Just because antibody levels have shown to decline over time doesn't mean the vaccine still hasn't created a significant T & B cell response so that you are still protected. This is I imagine a very big reason why the two leaders at the FDA resigned over pressure from the Administration to promote Booster shots. Are these booster shots needed...or do they just add to the bottom line of Pfizer/Moderna?

Finally I'll quote here from the article another part I find interesting and relevent to natural immunity vs forcing them to get vaccinated.

Different risk-benefit analysis?

For Frieden, vaccinating people who have already had covid-19 is, ultimately, the most responsible policy right now. “There’s no doubt that natural infection does provide significant immunity for many people, but we’re operating in an environment of imperfect information, and in that environment the precautionary principle applies—better safe than sorry.”

“In public health you are always dealing with some level of unknown,” says Sommer. “But the bottom line is you want to save lives, and you have to do what the present evidence, as weak as it is, suggests is the strongest defence with the least amount of harm.”

But others are less certain.

“If natural immunity is strongly protective, as the evidence to date suggests it is, then vaccinating people who have had covid-19 would seem to offer nothing or very little to benefit, logically leaving only harms—both the harms we already know about as well as those still unknown,” says Christine Stabell Benn, vaccinologist and professor in global health at the University of Southern Denmark. The CDC has acknowledged the small but serious risks of heart inflammation and blood clots after vaccination, especially in younger people. The real risk in vaccinating people who have had covid-19 “is of doing more harm than good,” she says.

A large study in the UK32 and another that surveyed people internationally33 found that people with a history of SARS-CoV-2 infection experienced greater rates of side effects after vaccination. Among 2000 people who completed an online survey after vaccination, those with a history of covid-19 were 56% more likely to experience a severe side effect that required hospital care.33

Patrick Whelan, of UCLA, says the “sky high” antibodies after vaccination in people who were previously infected may have contributed to these systemic side effects. “Most people who were previously ill with covid-19 have antibodies against the spike protein. If they are subsequently vaccinated, those antibodies and the products of the vaccine can form what are called immune complexes,” he explains, which may get deposited in places like the joints, meninges, and even kidneys, creating symptoms.

Other studies suggest that a two dose regimen may be counterproductive.34 One found that in people with past infections, the first dose boosted T cells and antibodies but that the second dose seemed to indicate an “exhaustion,” and in some cases even a deletion, of T cells.34 “I’m not here to say that it’s harmful,” says Bertoletti, who coauthored the study, “but at the moment all the data are telling us that it doesn’t make any sense to give a second vaccination dose in the very short term to someone who was already infected. Their immune response is already very high.”

Despite the extensive global spread of the virus, the previously infected population “hasn’t been studied well as a group,” says Whelan. Memoli says he is also unaware of any studies examining the specific risks of vaccination for that group. Still, the US public health messaging has been firm and consistent: everyone should get a full vaccine dose.

“When the vaccine was rolled out the goal should have been to focus on people at risk, and that should still be the focus,” says Memoli. Such risk stratification may have complicated logistics, but it would also require more nuanced messaging. “A lot of public health people have this notion that if the public is told that there’s even the slightest bit of uncertainty about a vaccine, then they won’t get it,” he says. For Memoli, this reflects a bygone paternalism. “I always think it’s much better to be very clear and honest about what we do and don’t know, what the risks and benefits are, and allow people to make decisions for themselves.”

That last part is kinda where I sit. Just lay out the facts and let people make decisions for themselves...but it seems the government takes the first part...I actually think more people would get vaccinated if they had all sides of the evidence and not feeling backed into having to take a side or be forced into anything.

Edited by dgambill
  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Reacher said:

Thanks for saving me some time. I had that open on my desktop to look into further later today.

That's the point. Americans shouldn't have to go searching through gobs and gobs of medical journals and studies to find out the WHOLE story. If we could trust our leaders they would lay it all out...both sides of the story and let us make a well informed decision. Instead what they do is seem to take a narrative on the matter...and only push and manipulate information to support it....and then that comes off disengenious and almost like they have something to hide etc. Well....we are so far beyond that now. Now we have leaders calling people idiots/stupid...just all out condescending and basically threatening people. Yeah that sure is going to get people to come over to your side. It's just an awful way to try to win over people. I think as far as the unvaccinated goes....more want to get vaccinated then they admit. They just want to be sure of their choice...and don't want to be forced into something. They want to feel like it was their decision...and just angering them and provoking them sure won't help. All that does is make it difficult for those that seriously want to help and support at-risk adults into making the best medical decision they can. I feel for those that are sincerely pleading for their patients and family members that are seriously at-risk from Covid and can't get through because of the vitriol that has built up by those taking the approaches mentioned earlier.

Edited by dgambill
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, 5fouls said:

Nicki Manaj claims her brothers friend's testicles swelled and he became impotent after receiving the vaccine.

In other, possibly related, news, my wife is now strongly pushing me to get a booster.  

https://www.cnn.com/2021/09/16/americas/nicki-minaj-vaccine-story-false-scli-intl/index.html

At least we can still find some levity to this issue! lol

Do you remember those MTV Celebrity Death Matches?? I would love to see one with Nicki vs Faucci lol!! Maybe I was just immature during those days but I loved them lol!

  • Like 3
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, dgambill said:

Interesting enough they CDC left out this observation from the study from their media release. This is what causes problems for people. Selective science...selective facts....they just can't put all the info out there. When they hide info it LOOKS BAD. This is what I have been saying from the start. The way they handle this stuff....under both administrations has been so awful...it doesn't help their cause or honestly the public who are then confused or worse distrustful because they manipulate the data and info they are providing. 

More recently, the CDC made headlines with an observational study aiming to characterise the protection a vaccine might give to people with past infections. Comparing 246 Kentuckians who had subsequent reinfections with 492 controls who had not, the CDC concluded that those who were unvaccinated had more than twice the odds of reinfection.30 The study notes the limitation that the vaccinated are “possibly less likely to get tested. Therefore, the association of reinfection and lack of vaccination might be overestimated.” In announcing the study, Walensky stated: “If you have had covid-19 before, please still get vaccinated.”31

I've said it before. Vaccinated people are not nearly as likely to get tested for Covid...and if they are infected and carry it asymptomatically as we would expect because of their vaccine doing its job they would think to get tested. Doesn't change the fact that they can just as easily spread it or be infected than a non-vaccinated person.

Sigh. This is pretty much the deal with any paper or any legitimate study. There is a limitations section. Legitimate researchers are trained to constantly question their results. And often over-emphasize the limitations or issues with a study, so when it’s peer reviewed they may head off some of the critiques and comments. The peer review process can be brutal. 

So, the CDC must include every word in a press release, but Joe Rogan, Podcast Pete, or Tucker Carlson can selectively quote things and mislead the public and that’s cool. Got it. 

I have to admit, this thread is difficult for me. I work with researchers, some of the best in the world. I trust them. I do not trust Podcast Pete or on air personalities. In the end, science will be proven right, and the treatment of the day/week pushers will long be forgotten about. 

I get it, many people on here don’t trust science. But, damn it’s depressing. 

I also get that many people don’t trust politicians. I am with you. Am sick of them all. 

Mostly just sick of people constantly questioning proven ways to reduce the spread of this virus. 

I also just simply don’t have the time to scour the internet all day b/c someone is wrong on the internet. 

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, 5fouls said:

Nicki Manaj claims her brothers friend's testicles swelled and he became impotent after receiving the vaccine.

In other, possibly related, news, my wife is now strongly pushing me to get a booster.  

https://www.cnn.com/2021/09/16/americas/nicki-minaj-vaccine-story-false-scli-intl/index.html

My favorite of MANY hilarious tweets about this one. 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, dgambill said:

I don't want to speak for @Reacher but most of the stuff I've read him contribute concludes that there is not a one size fits all solution to this. Vaccines might be the Army but we are going to need support from other areas too. Many people can not be vaccinated due to health issues. Many simply believe that having had COVID already means their immune system did it's job and they don't need a vaccine. Many people worry about long term implications and side effects of the vaccine. Many are yes...anti-vaxxers in general or anti-govt. I may not understand or agree with every side of the arguement but I respect them all as equally important citizens of our society and that we should try to reach people where they are. Instead of forcing them to come to my side is to go meet them where they are at and find a solution that works for them. To do this it may take time and it may take coming up with solutions that work for them that they are comfortable with. Theraputics can be just that. While I think this board has been pretty eager to support all the ways to fight the virus I don't think all of them get equal treatment and equal promotion in the media and with our govt. How many times have they talked about antibody treatments or Ivermectin or any of the positive results even if they aren't a cure. How many times do they come out and talk about ways to improve your immune system. Vitamin D, Zinc, and immune boosting foods and vitamins. About losing weight and lowering risk factors like not smoking or vaping and healthy diet and exercise. I took it serious the first time I heard that overweight people were having a harder time with this. I immediately changed my diet. I've lost almost 35 lbs and dropped 2 pant sizes. Finally dropped below 200lbs and still working at it. It was a wake up call that I needed. I might have carried 6'2 and 235 ok but I knew with things I'd talked to my doctor if I wasn't carrying the extra weight I could really improve my health stats and when I go back to my check up I really think he will take me off my blood pressure medication possibly. I think the point is...we need to keep looking for answers...and we need to help as many people in as many forms as possible. We can start at vaccines...but that doesn't mean the conversation has to end there. I see no harm in providing helpful info that will help people no matter where they fall on this spectrum.

 

Oh and as far as that slide goes...I'd question the 5X infection. I'd say there is pretty good evidence to make a conclusion that since vaccinated people aren't as likely to get seriously ill they probably are much much less likely to get tested and go unreported. Considering the case counts after having over 65% of the country vaccinated is this high....tells me there are tons of vaccinated people spreading it as well. Just more likely assymptomatically.

 

17 hours ago, Reacher said:

If I see relevant information, I like to bring it here and pass it along. Does not necessarily mean I believe it- or support it.  Some people might find it interesting and or beneficial. I know I have found stuff from far right and far left outlets. 

In general, I favor vaccines for those 30+ and or in at risk groups (more the UK model than the Israel model), believe in transparency and more choices are better, along with keeping mandates to a minimum. It is undeniable vaccines have minimized the severity and deaths. I hope they keep improving. I believe natural antibodies are superior to the vaccine and believe they should count (looks the CDC is finally recognizing this) in the US as much as they do in the rest of the world. 

I like to post things that are perhaps new and or on the fringe as they bring more discussion. Some have proved prophetic- and others plain wrong!

Okay. First of all, I was responding to @Reacher who said: 'we don't know how proven/successful the vaccine is 12 months in'. But we do. We don't know exactly how successful it is because the success rate is constantly changing based on how the virus mutates, but it is successful overall. Per the infographic I posted, @dgambill is questioning the case stat (fine, let's throw that out for the sake of the argument), but it's pretty hard to question the hospitalization/death stat. I hope we can agree that the vaccine is very good at keeping vaccinated people out of the hospital. Fair? Is keeping 10 out of 11 people on average out of the hospital successful? I guess it depends on your definition of success.

Secondly, congrats on your weight loss @dgambill. We all know exercising and making healthy choices are not easy. That type of self determination should not be under-estimated. This leads me to my 3rd point.....

I am personally disappointed that very few are talking about health in this pandemic. A majority of the deaths and hospitalizations are the obese. We've had a chance to talk about health so many times in out country but fail to have an honest conversation without it falling into fat shaming, politics, etc. All that said, because this is a long-term solution for a problem we need to dampen immediately, it still should not detract from the need to still take the vaccine. As I mentioned above it's hard to lose weight, and not only eat healthy, but also get the proper nutritional education. Again, let's do both. Protect yourself with what is available now AND begin living a healthy life. It is also important to note that healthy people are also dying, get hospitalized and are having long term effects to the disease. I mentioned earlier my 16 year old niece (healthy and a great athlete) has SVT as a result of an asymptomatic case of COVID. A 11 year old swimming state champion in my area got COVID so bad his lungs are scarred. a year and a half later he has trouble breathing; he can't swim 2 laps without getting completely winded. COVID is also plaguing countries with a much lower obese population. While it does effect mostly unhealthy people, COVID still effects the healthy. It may not be marked by a death or a hospitalization, but there are very real and long term consequences to this disease. 

Lastly....therapeutics. Again, I'm all for studying them, but I think some of us are arguing different things. Yes, therapeutics should be studied. Yes, we should consider all information. That is a no-brainer. BUT there is a problem when people are treating drugs like their favorite sports team. Following them closely, cheering when they make a good trade, get excited over a stat line in a game, etc. These are freaking drugs! And we have a problem in our society when the promotion of drugs, still being studied, are being hailed (by some) as the savior of COVID to the degree that people are taking them without a doctor's prescription and poisoning themselves. 

My stance is let them be studied before we jump the gun. Again, this should be a logical statement that most of us can agree on. 

In the case of Ivermectin, for every study that says it may work, there is a study that doesn't (just 1 example of many). What this means to me is that it's effectiveness is inconclusive at best. And the narrative that our country doesn't want therapeutics to work because of politics or that 'Pfizer won't allow it' (forgot who said that) is just BS. The FDA is currently looking into 78 trials for Ivermectin that they deem important enough to follow. If it's not getting the media coverage you think is warranted, could it possibly be because there's no clear cut answer in either direction? I know the media is outstanding in covering crap they don't know the answer to, but in this case it's potentially dangerous and caution should be exercised. As history has proven: there a few dumb people out there who will take the animal version of ivermectin, will eat a tide pod, will drink bleach, etc. 

In conclusion: yes, there's isn't a 'one-size fits all' solution to this, but NOBODY has said that. However, there are solutions we have right now and there are solutions that will take some time. We need to stop undermining the solutions that are working right now as if they are an apples to apples replacement for a solution that may work sometime in the future. 

 

 

 

 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Lostin76 said:

Sigh. This is pretty much the deal with any paper or any legitimate study. There is a limitations section. Legitimate researchers are trained to constantly question their results. And often over-emphasize the limitations or issues with a study, so when it’s peer reviewed they may head off some of the critiques and comments. The peer review process can be brutal. 

So, the CDC must include every word in a press release, but Joe Rogan, Podcast Pete, or Tucker Carlson can selectively quote things and mislead the public and that’s cool. Got it. 

I have to admit, this thread is difficult for me. I work with researchers, some of the best in the world. I trust them. I do not trust Podcast Pete or on air personalities. In the end, science will be proven right, and the treatment of the day/week pushers will long be forgotten about. 

I get it, many people on here don’t trust science. But, damn it’s depressing. 

I also get that many people don’t trust politicians. I am with you. Am sick of them all. 

Mostly just sick of people constantly questioning proven ways to reduce the spread of this virus. 

I also just simply don’t have the time to scour the internet all day b/c someone is wrong on the internet. 

 

I expect better from the CDC then Hannity or Joe or Tucker or whomever. I personally don't watch or listen to any of those people but I'm sure some do. Certainly wouldn't for medical advice that is for sure. All I'm saying is the CDC and both administrations have handled it very poorly. The very reason the medical researches emphasize the limitations should also be why the CDC should. It brings credibility and honesty in trusting the "science". It's what makes their work objective....and not subjective. If it was just this one thing I guarantee I wouldn't go looking into it...but gosh at this point we are so way beyond that I have to fact check them. They change their websites because of political pressure from teachers unions etc. I hate that. Because in general...on most of this I support vaccination in saving lives. Maybe not for everyone and in every occassion but as the best medical decision for a majority I do. I also think that if you have had covid...and it was pretty rough or if your medical situation has changed you probably should consider getting a round of vaccine. Most importantly I think you should talk to your doctor and formulate a plan. Everyone's situation is different. If you choose to not get vaccinated...know your options...monitor your health closely...take precautions. I'd say the same for those vaccinated. Don't think this is a silver bullet. Be careful...monitor the changing conditions around you. Have a plan with your doctor. Anyways...I don't think anyone here is quoting those people...sourcing those people. I mean most are sourcing medical journals and doctors. I don't often quote the CDC or FDA because even though those are doctors...they are also very much tied to politics and the government. Subject to influence, manipulation, and coersion. I suppose all doctors and researchers are but probably not to the degree of the federal govt. If the federal govt was more trustworthy maybe it might change but I haven't seen an administration yet that I trust fully with something as important as my health/medical. So I question them. Sometimes they are right when I look into it...and sometimes there is more politics then science in it. If that makes me a freak ok I guess. As far as proven ways to reduce the spread....I don't think we have enough evidence that simply vaccination will reduce the spread. Reduce the severity of illness...absolutely! Spread...well we have had a lot of competing science on that. Hard for me to believe that all the cases in America (more now then last year despite almost 70% of the population having been vaccinated) is simply all due to those "dirty" unvaccinated. It's a complicated problem...likely to have a myriad of solutions necessary to overcome it.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, tdhoosier said:

 

Okay. First of all, I was responding to @Reacher who said: 'we don't know how proven/successful the vaccine is 12 months in'. But we do. We don't know exactly how successful it is because the success rate is constantly changing based on how the virus mutates, but it is successful overall. Per the infographic I posted, @dgambill is questioning the case stat (fine, let's throw that out for the sake of the argument), but it's pretty hard to question the hospitalization/death stat. I hope we can agree that the vaccine is very good at keeping vaccinated people out of the hospital. Fair? Is keeping 10 out of 11 people on average out of the hospital successful? I guess it depends on your definition of success.

Secondly, congrats on your weight loss @dgambill. We all know exercising and making healthy choices are not easy. That type of self determination should not be under-estimated. This leads me to my 3rd point.....

I am personally disappointed that very few are talking about health in this pandemic. A majority of the deaths and hospitalizations are the obese. We've had a chance to talk about health so many times in out country but fail to have an honest conversation without it falling into fat shaming, politics, etc. All that said, because this is a long-term solution for a problem we need to dampen immediately, it still should not detract from the need to still take the vaccine. As I mentioned above it's hard to lose weight, and not only eat healthy, but also get the proper nutritional education. Again, let's do both. Protect yourself with what is available now AND begin living a healthy life. It is also important to note that healthy people are also dying, get hospitalized and are having long term effects to the disease. I mentioned earlier my 16 year old niece (healthy and a great athlete) has SVT as a result of an asymptomatic case of COVID. A 11 year old swimming state champion in my area got COVID so bad his lungs are scarred. a year and a half later he has trouble breathing; he can't swim 2 laps without getting completely winded. COVID is also plaguing countries with a much lower obese population. While it does effect mostly unhealthy people, COVID still effects the healthy. It may not be marked by a death or a hospitalization, but there are very real and long term consequences to this disease. 

Lastly....therapeutics. Again, I'm all for studying them, but I think some of us are arguing different things. Yes, therapeutics should be studied. Yes, we should consider all information. That is a no-brainer. BUT there is a problem when people are treating drugs like their favorite sports team. Following them closely, cheering when they make a good trade, get excited over a stat line in a game, etc. These are freaking drugs! And we have a problem in our society when the promotion of drugs, still being studied, are being hailed (by some) as the savior of COVID to the degree that people are taking them without a doctor's prescription and poisoning themselves. 

My stance is let them be studied before we jump the gun. Again, this should be a logical statement that most of us can agree on. 

In the case of Ivermectin, for every study that says it may work, there is a study that doesn't (just 1 example of many). What this means to me is that it's effectiveness is inconclusive at best. And the narrative that our country doesn't want therapeutics to work because of politics or that 'Pfizer won't allow it' (forgot who said that) is just BS. The FDA is currently looking into 78 trials for Ivermectin that they deem important enough to follow. If it's not getting the media coverage you think is warranted, could it possibly be because there's no clear cut answer in either direction? I know the media is outstanding in covering crap they don't know the answer to, but in this case it's potentially dangerous and caution should be exercised. As history has proven: there a few dumb people out there who will take the animal version of ivermectin, will eat a tide pod, will drink bleach, etc. 

In conclusion: yes, there's isn't a 'one-size fits all' solution to this, but NOBODY has said that. However, there are solutions we have right now and there are solutions that will take some time. We need to stop undermining the solutions that are working right now as if they are an apples to apples replacement for a solution that may work sometime in the future. 

 

 

 

 

Well said....I agree about much of what you are saying...and thank you...yes the weight loss has sucked. I haven't ate most of my favorite foods in almost a year. It is very difficult. Probably made more difficult is we are monitoring my thyroid because it's been all over the place the last two years...so anyways..I appreciate the shoutout. I agree with you...I don't think this should be a competition over what is best. I just realize people have different needs, have different situations, some already having had covid (both severe cases and basically some who got the sniffles). People that are adverse to the thought of long term side effects of the vaccines etc. While I myself may have a different reaction and take a different cost-benefit analysis I simply choose to provide information on/about several treatments and even some other vaccines that are coming online soon. Like I said I just want to meet people where they are. Most importantly...they shouldn't be listening to any of us on here. All I'm trying to do is provide info that they can discuss with their doctor. My advise or anyone else's on here shouldn't supersede the conversation and decision they make with their doctor. I'll also include the govt mandating things also shouldn't supersede it. I imagine those that think I'm trying to discredit or support one thing over another would be surprised where I sit with vaccinations/treatments with myself and my family. I purposely leave that out because it isn't relevant to the topic nor when discussing it.

Edited by dgambill
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, dgambill said:

I expect better from the CDC then Hannity or Joe or Tucker or whomever. I personally don't watch or listen to any of those people but I'm sure some do. Certainly wouldn't for medical advice that is for sure. All I'm saying is the CDC and both administrations have handled it very poorly. The very reason the medical researches emphasize the limitations should also be why the CDC should. It brings credibility and honesty in trusting the "science". It's what makes their work objective....and not subjective. If it was just this one thing I guarantee I wouldn't go looking into it...but gosh at this point we are so way beyond that I have to fact check them. They change their websites because of political pressure from teachers unions etc. I hate that. Because in general...on most of this I support vaccination in saving lives. Maybe not for everyone and in every occassion but as the best medical decision for a majority I do. I also think that if you have had covid...and it was pretty rough or if your medical situation has changed you probably should consider getting a round of vaccine. Most importantly I think you should talk to your doctor and formulate a plan. Everyone's situation is different. If you choose to not get vaccinated...know your options...monitor your health closely...take precautions. I'd say the same for those vaccinated. Don't think this is a silver bullet. Be careful...monitor the changing conditions around you. Have a plan with your doctor. Anyways...I don't think anyone here is quoting those people...sourcing those people. I mean most are sourcing medical journals and doctors. I don't often quote the CDC or FDA because even though those are doctors...they are also very much tied to politics and the government. Subject to influence, manipulation, and coersion. I suppose all doctors and researchers are but probably not to the degree of the federal govt. If the federal govt was more trustworthy maybe it might change but I haven't seen an administration yet that I trust fully with something as important as my health/medical. So I question them. Sometimes they are right when I look into it...and sometimes there is more politics then science in it. If that makes me a freak ok I guess. As far as proven ways to reduce the spread....I don't think we have enough evidence that simply vaccination will reduce the spread. Reduce the severity of illness...absolutely! Spread...well we have had a lot of competing science on that. Hard for me to believe that all the cases in America (more now then last year despite almost 70% of the population having been vaccinated) is simply all due to those "dirty" unvaccinated. It's a complicated problem...likely to have a myriad of solutions necessary to overcome it.

You are not a freak at all. Questioning is good and yes, politics can be a problem. I’ve worked with one researcher in all my years that let politics seep in. I talked to him, we disagreed, and I moved on to work with someone else. I hate that politics has got into this so deeply. 

Like you said, very complicated problem. But I will continue to trust real scientists and medical providers. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, dgambill said:

At least we can still find some levity to this issue! lol

Do you remember those MTV Celebrity Death Matches?? I would love to see one with Nicki vs Faucci lol!! Maybe I was just immature during those days but I loved them lol!

I think Nicki would beat him to death with a couple fun bags and then twerk him into a pile of dust. Oh shoot that was a dream I had last night sorry...carry on

  • Like 1
  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, dgambill said:

Well said....I agree about much of what you are saying...and thank you...yes the weight loss has sucked. I haven't ate most of my favorite foods in almost a year. It is very difficult. Probably made more difficult is we are monitoring my thyroid because it's been all over the place the last two years...so anyways..I appreciate the shoutout. I agree with you...I don't think this should be a competition over what is best. I just realize people have different needs, have different situations, some already having had covid (both severe cases and basically some who got the sniffles). People that are adverse to the thought of long term side effects of the vaccines etc. While I myself may have a different reaction and take a different cost-benefit analysis I simply choose to provide information on/about several treatments and even some other vaccines that are coming online soon. Like I said I just want to meet people where they are. Most importantly...they shouldn't be listening to any of us on here. All I'm trying to do is provide info that they can discuss with their doctor. My advise or anyone else's on here shouldn't supersede the conversation and decision they make with their doctor. I'll also include the govt mandating things also shouldn't supersede it. I imagine those that think I'm trying to discredit or support one thing over another would be surprised where I sit with vaccinations/treatments with myself and my family. I purposely leave that out because it isn't relevant to the topic nor when discussing it.

My very good friend is a PA so she's often in the room for these discussions. She says it's frustrating because many of the patients use a lot of bad or outlying data from random information sources about the vaccine. The doctor will tell them what is and isn't true and in a majority circumstances still recommends for them to get the vaccine, but some patients still decide to believe their bad information.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, tdhoosier said:

My very good friend is a PA so she's often in the room for these discussions. She says it's frustrating because many of the patients use a lot of bad or outlying data from random information sources about the vaccine. The doctor will tell them what is and isn't true and in a majority circumstances still recommends for them to get the vaccine, but some patients still decide to believe their bad information.

 

Yep. Unfortunately we have gotten so far dug into sides for some people on this and so much bad information etc it will certainly effect decision making. We all might like to make the decision for everyone and think we know what is best for them but in the end that person has to be sure of what they are buying into. Besides...if they have those convos in a healthy productive environment you will be surprised at how many go home and sleep on it....or see things differently later and come to the conclusion to get vaccinated. We are seeing a pretty significant uptick in vaccinations lately. Just because these people took longer to come to that decision doesn't make them dumb or anything (I know you didn't say that). People are just in such different places on this and it takes time. I know many of my own personal efforts even in something like my faith...planting those seeds in a loving/supportive manner...it may be someone else that reaps the harvest later but it can still make a difference. I also know unfortunately from experience that those that use more manipulative or let's say unhelpful manners of convincing people they are right have hindered my ability to witness as well. Hardening hearts. I hope some (not really talking about this board) sees that and possibly changes their approach.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...