Jump to content

Coronavirus


Reacher
 Share

Recommended Posts

13 hours ago, Reacher said:

I saw this-

The U.N. General Assembly will ignore vaccine requirements for attendees at next week’s big meeting in New York, snubbing NYC rules for convention centers and public gatherings.

And was wondering if you, @Lostin76,  were ok with this. 

I'm fed up with the 2 sets of rules. 

Also don't like the segregation going on. 

I ALWAYS hate the UN General Assembly b/c it creates one long horrible traffic jam in my work neighborhood. But to ignore vaccine requirements makes it even worse. If I have to prove to be vaccinated to eat indoors, they can be vaccinated to attend an all day indoor meeting. Unfortunately, our mayor is a spineless creep and our governor, well we all know how well that turned out! 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Lostin76 said:

I ALWAYS hate the UN General Assembly b/c it creates one long horrible traffic jam in my work neighborhood. But to ignore vaccine requirements makes it even worse. If I have to prove to be vaccinated to eat indoors, they can be vaccinated to attend an all day indoor meeting. Unfortunately, our mayor is a spineless creep and our governor, well we all know how well that turned out! 

That's the type of stuff that creates mistrust. If the elites, mayors, governors, etc don't need masks, why do the rest of us?

Anyways, want to trade for the mayor of Chicago? 😁

  • Like 1
  • Haha 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Reacher said:

Pregnant women should be extra careful about getting the vaccine. From the New England Journal of Medicine-

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMx210017?query=recirc_curatedRelated_article

“Among 827 registry participants who reported a completed pregnancy, 104 experienced spontaneous abortions and 1 had a stillbirth,”

That is a link to a correction of a study that took place last Spring. Here is the full study: https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/nejmoa2104983

Here is the conclusion:

Early data from the v-safe surveillance system, the v-safe pregnancy registry, and the VAERS do not indicate any obvious safety signals with respect to pregnancy or neonatal outcomes associated with Covid-19 vaccination in the third trimester of pregnancy.

Also a clarification, per the correction:

To determine the cumulative risk of spontaneous abortion from 6 to less than 20 weeks of gestation, we used life-table methods to perform an updated analysis, now reported in the Journal, involving 2456 women who received at least one dose of an mRNA Covid-19 vaccine before conception or before 20 weeks of gestation.1 The estimated risks (14.1% overall and 12.8% in age-standardized analyses) are consistent with the risks of spontaneous abortion reported in the general population.1
 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Reacher said:

That's the type of stuff that creates mistrust. If the elites, mayors, governors, etc don't need masks, why do the rest of us?

Anyways, want to trade for the mayor of Chicago? 😁

I have to be honest. I don’t care what they do. Id rather they follow the rules, but I know what works for me and am not concerned about the actions of people I can’t control. Down that way lies madness.

I think I would trade DeBlasio for almost anyone!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Reacher said:

Pregnant women should be extra careful about getting the vaccine. From the New England Journal of Medicine-

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMx210017?query=recirc_curatedRelated_article

“Among 827 registry participants who reported a completed pregnancy, 104 experienced spontaneous abortions and 1 had a stillbirth,”

 

2 minutes ago, tdhoosier said:

That is a link to a correction of a study that took place last Spring. Here is the full study: https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/nejmoa2104983

Here is the conclusion:

Early data from the v-safe surveillance system, the v-safe pregnancy registry, and the VAERS do not indicate any obvious safety signals with respect to pregnancy or neonatal outcomes associated with Covid-19 vaccination in the third trimester of pregnancy.

Also a clarification, per the correction:

To determine the cumulative risk of spontaneous abortion from 6 to less than 20 weeks of gestation, we used life-table methods to perform an updated analysis, now reported in the Journal, involving 2456 women who received at least one dose of an mRNA Covid-19 vaccine before conception or before 20 weeks of gestation.1 The estimated risks (14.1% overall and 12.8% in age-standardized analyses) are consistent with the risks of spontaneous abortion reported in the general population.1
 

 

Speaking as someone who suffered through several miscarriages with my wife and got numerous tests/genetics ran. Pregnancy and child birth are nothing short of God's miracle. We appreciated all the experts that finally discovered a very minor clotting disorder that enabled us to address and have our wonderful little girl. But sitting in fertility clinics just packed full of people and learning the quiet statistics of how many babies don't make it...I can see how this study would be very very hard to make determination. That said....I also could say I can't imagine putting something in my wife's body that could raise the risk of blood clots or other complications like some vaccines have shown to do. It's a very very difficult time to be planning a family. I'd say to get vaccinated long before pregnancy or shortly after if that was the choice. You can always pass the antibodies in your breast milk afterwards. More than likely you are going to be home bound for a couple months regardless and of low risk to get infected with the right precautions. Just my opinion....I don't envy anyone with that decision right now. Heck I don't envy figuring out what I will do with my 2 1/2 year old in the near future...at least there should be plenty of research by the time she goes to actual school and the shots will likely by manditory...even then....geesh. This is all why I DON'T judge anyone's decision in this matter. Each individual has so much to consider they don't need me telling them what to do.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Reacher said:

That's the type of stuff that creates mistrust. If the elites, mayors, governors, etc don't need masks, why do the rest of us?

Anyways, want to trade for the mayor of Chicago? 😁

 

20 minutes ago, Lostin76 said:

I have to be honest. I don’t care what they do. Id rather they follow the rules, but I know what works for me and am not concerned about the actions of people I can’t control. Down that way lies madness.

I think I would trade DeBlasio for almost anyone!

I wouldn't trade Mayor Dorothy Welch for either one of them! 😁

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

48 minutes ago, dgambill said:

That said....I also could say I can't imagine putting something in my wife's body that could raise the risk of blood clots or other complications like some vaccines have shown to do.

Having gone through one myself, I'm sorry for all you and your wife had to go through. I understand your wife is definitely her own unique case, but to the the more general narrative about blood clots: 

https://www.forbes.com/sites/roberthart/2021/08/27/covid-infection-has-much-higher-risk-of-blood-clots-than-vaccines-do-study-finds/?sh=33b1f070372e

Using data from some 29 million people in the U.K., the researchers found a higher risk of stroke after the Pfizer shot and a higher risk of rare blood clotting after the AstraZeneca shot, but found the risks are “substantially higher and more prolonged” after a Covid-19 infection.

As many have said before, it's all about weighing risks. So, unless one is living in a COVID-free bubble, getting a vaccine actually lowers your risk of strokes/clotting in this current environment. 

Edited by tdhoosier
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, tdhoosier said:

That is a link to a correction of a study that took place last Spring. Here is the full study: https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/nejmoa2104983

Here is the conclusion:

Early data from the v-safe surveillance system, the v-safe pregnancy registry, and the VAERS do not indicate any obvious safety signals with respect to pregnancy or neonatal outcomes associated with Covid-19 vaccination in the third trimester of pregnancy.

Also a clarification, per the correction:

To determine the cumulative risk of spontaneous abortion from 6 to less than 20 weeks of gestation, we used life-table methods to perform an updated analysis, now reported in the Journal, involving 2456 women who received at least one dose of an mRNA Covid-19 vaccine before conception or before 20 weeks of gestation.1 The estimated risks (14.1% overall and 12.8% in age-standardized analyses) are consistent with the risks of spontaneous abortion reported in the general population.1
 

 

I didn't say pregnant women should not get vaccinated. Just that they "should be extra careful". 

As @dgambill pointed out, there are a lot of issues to balance (Sorry to hear of those miscarriages and thankful you finally got it worked out!).

I think for something so important, we would have a much larger study.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Reacher said:

I didn't say pregnant women should not get vaccinated. Just that they "should be extra careful". 

As @dgambill pointed out, there are a lot of issues to balance (Sorry to hear of those miscarriages and thankful you finally got it worked out!).

I think for something so important, we would have a much larger study.

I think you're kinda redirecting here. You quoted stats from a study that were out of context. And you made a false conclusion based on those stats. Not sure how I should be understanding that post any differently. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, tdhoosier said:

I think you're kinda redirecting here. You quoted stats from a study that were out of context. And you made a false conclusion based on those stats. Not sure how I should be understanding that post any differently. 

To be fair he didn't post a conclusion. "Just pregnant women should be careful" and linked an article. Glad to see we are continuing to get data and look into this stuff and make corrections when some initial studies are wrong.

Just personal experience but pregnancy especially early pregnancy is fraught with risks and a high percentage already don't end in birth so the numbers don't seem too conclusive really. Problem is we probably don't have enough data and enough studies to conclude much of anything. People that were eligible for vaccination in the 18-40 year old category has only been 5-6 months for most states as the early rollout this year was for seniors mostly. Going to take a longer period to see the true results as we get more and more data over time. I think it is worth monitoring for sure. I personally know two young families that had wanted to have a child that are delaying. There are many women however that can't because of their age. It is definitely on people's minds...so hopefully we can get conclusive results as we continue to study this.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, tdhoosier said:

I think you're kinda redirecting here. You quoted stats from a study that were out of context. And you made a false conclusion based on those stats. Not sure how I should be understanding that post any differently. 

I quoted the correction as it was recent news. The original study was linked in the first link for people that wanted to look further into it. I wanted to bring awareness to the issue.  I quoted the part I thought people might want to know. I created the context so I'm not sure how it could be out of context. It was not contrary to the conclusion, it was part of the conclusion. As @dgambillpointed out, I  made no conclusion. I was merely trying to bring attention to an issue I thought deserved it and provided what was,  hopefully, reliable and relevant data to back that up. 

I think you were reading more into my post than there was.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, FKIM01 said:

So those are the only states currently with increasing case numbers?

I couldn't find the source but remembered it was sourced from John Hopkins. Went to their site and found this-

https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/data/new-cases-50-states

So, yes, only a handful of states currently increasing (although it has changed a bit since last weeks chart I showed).

Hard to believe it from watching the news. I guess we can start taking the masks off?

The map of the states in the link a lot more informative than the chart below, IMO

IN the best state in the country for magnitude of reduction (according to the state map in the link)!
 

Daily new cases per 100k- Updated Sept 21

STATE NAME
7-DAY MOVING AVERAGE
COUNT INCREASE
(PAST WEEK)
% INCREASE
(PAST WEEK)
Alabama 2612 22,013 -40.21%
Alaska 750 5,836 30.84%
Arizona 2513 17,945 -12.77%
Arkansas 1130 9,805 -63.13%
California 8430 59,071 -78.08%
Colorado 1715 13,085 -13.87%
Connecticut 748 5,507 6.78%
Delaware 522 3,143 -1.14%
District Of Columbia 229 1,792 -13.06%
Florida 13707 75,998 -
Georgia 4237 36,291 -40.07%
Hawaii 514 3,559 -6.96%
Idaho 1008 8,222 -15.43%
Illinois 3004 25,219 -8.76%
Indiana 3067 24,573 -27.40%
Iowa 1291 13,071 -
Kansas 1415 9,424 -16.28%
Kentucky 3417 27,932 -16.43%
Louisiana 1344 16,257 100.00%
Maine 326 3,397 -
Maryland 1245 8,590 3.16%
Massachusetts 1692 13,436 -10.78%
Michigan 3723 22,646 14.68%
Minnesota 1273 14,894 -9.08%
Mississippi 1252 12,025 -40.04%
Missouri 1795 14,692 -33.59%
Montana 712 6,404 25.02%
Nebraska 221 4,707 -
Nevada 896 7,577 -28.29%
New Hampshire 375 3,075 -12.60%
New Jersey 2133 15,800 4.81%
New Mexico 567 4,566 -17.76%
New York 5106 36,152 -51.90%
North Carolina 5933 42,926 -50.97%
North Dakota 350 3,282 19.91%
Ohio 6123 47,911 -13.66%
Oklahoma 2031 13,110 -27.54%
Oregon 1349 11,657 -40.93%
Pennsylvania 4471 32,214 -18.67%
Puerto Rico 230 2,096 -20.99%
Rhode Island 344 2,539 -6.77%
South Carolina 4002 27,932 -65.30%
South Dakota 248 3,102 -18.39%
Tennessee 4742 35,723 -141.62%
Texas 10201 105,645 -34.98%
Utah 1286 10,186 -24.17%
Vermont 211 1,500 -15.38%
Virginia 3289 25,061 -3.46%
Washington 2905 21,328 -21.87%
West Virginia 1829 12,729 -7.51%
Wisconsin 2863 21,854 50.08%
Wyoming 464 3,674 23.30%
Edited by Reacher
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Get your kids exercising !

https://www.the74million.org/staggering-new-research-shows-that-child-obesity-has-soared-during-pandemic/

"According to a paper circulated last week by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, body mass index (a common measure of weight relative to height) in a sample of 430,000 children increased between March and November 2020 at nearly double the rate that it did before the pandemic began. The changes were especially prevalent among elementary-aged children, as well as those who were already overweight or obese."

"The CDC’s findings echo those of other research released in the past few months. A study published last month by the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) showed that rates of overweight and obesity have soared among children measured in California between the ages of 5 and 17. Two others — one published in The Lancet and another appearing in the journal Pediatrics — found that the weight gain was greater for certain demographic subgroups, including Hispanic, African American, publicly insured, and low-income children."

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, dgambill said:

image.thumb.png.ccdb18bd04d3ec867dffbea69437dc59.png

 

image.thumb.png.7224e10bbb2216da7b59e6101177102d.png

Just like many forecast, the Delta variant wave seems to be subsiding as quickly as it escalated just as we witnessed in the UK and elsewhere.  Some states (like those in the Northeast) probably still haven't experienced it and will have to get through it.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Reacher said:

Just like many forecast, the Delta variant wave seems to be subsiding as quickly as it escalated just as we witnessed in the UK and elsewhere.  Some states (like those in the Northeast) probably still haven't experienced it and will have to get through it.

It's headed that way no doubt. As the weather gets colder and more people are forced inside together the spread will continue. We've seen the same trend down here. With the heat people are forced inside and together. When people can properly social distance, get more vitamin d by being outside, exercise easier outside, and resume eating outdoors etc the rates have fallen. Unfortunately in Florida we get huge influx of people who travel south for the winter and from Europe. Bringing new variants and the population surges as well. So combine that with our state being the oldest population we don't get as much of a respite from this thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Reacher said:

Get your kids exercising !

https://www.the74million.org/staggering-new-research-shows-that-child-obesity-has-soared-during-pandemic/

"According to a paper circulated last week by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, body mass index (a common measure of weight relative to height) in a sample of 430,000 children increased between March and November 2020 at nearly double the rate that it did before the pandemic began. The changes were especially prevalent among elementary-aged children, as well as those who were already overweight or obese."

"The CDC’s findings echo those of other research released in the past few months. A study published last month by the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) showed that rates of overweight and obesity have soared among children measured in California between the ages of 5 and 17. Two others — one published in The Lancet and another appearing in the journal Pediatrics — found that the weight gain was greater for certain demographic subgroups, including Hispanic, African American, publicly insured, and low-income children."

Gosh...one thing I was hoping we would do as a nation is begin to really work on the pandemic of obesity. I can only imagine how much better outcomes we would have if we really took this seriously. We've put this off (including myself) for so long and now we are paying the piper. The habits we set for our kids will stay with them for their entire lives. We don't have to be the no fun/taste police but gosh we have to teach and model better habits for them.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Definitely seems like we're past the worst of Delta.  Thank God.

Also entirely agree, obesity in this country is unreal.  That's not a shocking statement, I know, but I'm soon to be married to a nutritionist and I've learned more than I care to about nutrition.  So much of what we're taught growing up, the cooking habits we grow into, and what mass media shows as normal is... really bad for our bodies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, HoosierFaithful said:

Definitely seems like we're past the worst of Delta.  Thank God.

Also entirely agree, obesity in this country is unreal.  That's not a shocking statement, I know, but I'm soon to be married to a nutritionist and I've learned more than I care to about nutrition.  So much of what we're taught growing up, the cooking habits we grow into, and what mass media shows as normal is... really bad for our bodies.

My wife had a script for a patient and the doctor asked to remind the patient about the importance of healthy eating when trying to lose weight. When my wife brought it up, the patient she was trying to eat healthy, and was proud about her dinner decision the previous night: a Stouffer's microwave lasagna dinner. 🤦‍♂️

I couldn't believe it. My wife said I'd be surprised at how many people think if you're not eating candy or fast food then you must be eating healthy. 

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, HoosierFaithful said:

Definitely seems like we're past the worst of Delta.  Thank God.

Also entirely agree, obesity in this country is unreal.  That's not a shocking statement, I know, but I'm soon to be married to a nutritionist and I've learned more than I care to about nutrition.  So much of what we're taught growing up, the cooking habits we grow into, and what mass media shows as normal is... really bad for our bodies.

 

6 minutes ago, tdhoosier said:

My wife had a script for a patient and the doctor asked to remind the patient about the importance of healthy eating when trying to lose weight. When my wife brought it up, the patient she was trying to eat healthy, and was proud about her dinner decision the previous night: a Stouffer's microwave lasagna dinner. 🤦‍♂️

I couldn't believe it. My wife said I'd be surprised at how many people think if you're not eating candy or fast food then you must be eating healthy. 

So do either of you think the government will ever assume the responsibility for restricting what an individual eats?

Would either of you be ok with that?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...