# COVID VACCINE - The Megathread



## Itomaschik (Dec 12, 2020)

Hey, brothers and sisters. My agency is making the vaccine available to us 12/28. What are your thoughts on the Pfizer vaccine. Will you get it if you have a choice?


----------



## mgr22 (Dec 12, 2020)

Yes. I think the benefits outweigh the risks, but I can understand the uncertainty many feel.


----------



## PotatoMedic (Dec 12, 2020)

I'd prefer Moderna... Mostly because I have stock in the company.  But really DILLIGAF.


----------



## GMCmedic (Dec 12, 2020)

Undecided if I will get it, we don't even know if it will be offered to us in the next year. 

This vaccine tech is not new, I suspect there will be little health risks associated with it after I looked into it more.


----------



## NomadicMedic (Dec 12, 2020)

Yes. Without reservation. Side effects are minimal, compared to an 8.0 ET.


----------



## Peak (Dec 12, 2020)

Hesitantly yes, I’m supposed to get mine early next week.

I’m concerned about the long term efficacy, at this point we don’t know that it can prevent transmission for more than a couple of months. I’m concerned that like influenza and other single strand RNA viruses that good efficacy only will last a few months and sustained efficacy will be well under a year.

Naturally I have concern about risks of a vaccine that hasn’t had a long study period. We don’t know that the vaccine won’t have some long term risk that we don’t know of now. We also don’t know that the rona can’t cause those same problems. There are plenty of viruses that are know to increase the risk of cancer or cause infertility, and we really don’t know the long term effects of Covid infection either.


----------



## cruiseforever (Dec 12, 2020)

Yes I will get it.  Sounds like in the next couple of weeks.


----------



## akflightmedic (Dec 12, 2020)

I am in charge of the vaccine program for the entire county where I work. My service was tasked by the state to control, deliver, and administer...I was tasked by my agency to be point man. Yay me! Zoom meetings out the *** thus far, info forthcoming. But yes, I will be getting the vaccine. Amazing how many of my peers who are completely against it.

Due to my food allergies I had great concern hearing the very broad "if you have ever reacted to food..." do not take it or take it with extreme caution. This annoyed me because every freaking article kept saying "food" and not which food. I think that would be very useful information ya know.


----------



## Akulahawk (Dec 12, 2020)

Yes, and I will likely be getting my first dose within the next week or so. I really don't care if I get the Pfizer or Moderna vaccine, either will do. I also would not mind doing blood draws every 3 months or so for 'rona titers to see how long the immune responses last and contribute to that particular effort. Vaccine effects < 'Rona effects. That's my take on it.


----------



## Jim37F (Dec 12, 2020)

My Department just sent out a sign up form for the vaccine. I did fill it out and submit it, so sounds like they're expecting it to start being available within a couple weeks or so.

My biggest concern right now is actually will it show a false positive on testing? I'm planning a vacation to see my family i hadn't seen in a year(plane tickets bought already) and to avoid mandatory quarantine, they require a pre travel nasal swab test 36hr before the flight (and then on top of that, my City, explicitly for first responders, requires a 2nd nasal swab test showing negative 3 days after flying back in)


----------



## Itomaschik (Dec 13, 2020)

Peak said:


> Hesitantly yes, I’m supposed to get mine early next week.
> 
> I’m concerned about the long term efficacy, at this point we don’t know that it can prevent transmission for more than a couple of months. I’m concerned that like influenza and other single strand RNA viruses that good efficacy only will last a few months and sustained efficacy will be well under a year.
> 
> Naturally I have concern about risks of a vaccine that hasn’t had a long study period. We don’t know that the vaccine won’t have some long term risk that we don’t know of now. We also don’t know that the rona can’t cause those same problems. There are plenty of viruses that are know to increase the risk of cancer or cause infertility, and we really don’t know the long term effects of Covid infection either.


Great reasoning. Thank you!


----------



## Bishop2047 (Dec 13, 2020)

Sure. No doubt I have put worse things into my body.

I have little fears about the time it took to approve or the rushed nature of the rollout.


----------



## Itomaschik (Dec 13, 2020)

Bishop2047 said:


> Sure. No doubt I have put worse things into my body.
> 
> I have little fears about the time it took to approve or the rushed nature of the rollout.


Ha!!!  Amen, brother


----------



## VFlutter (Dec 13, 2020)

Yes, I am getting the Pfizer next week.

Although it may feel rushed compared to previous vaccines I do feel that mRNA process appears to be solid.


----------



## Summit (Dec 13, 2020)

The vast majority of all vaccine adverse reactions for any vaccine ever are seen immediately or short term. Pfizer and Moderna have immediate and short term data showing that adverse effects are almost entirely mild to moderate.

mRNA as a process is well understood and not new. mRNA as a mode of immunogenic antigen expression is cleaner than previous vaccine tech.

It may seemed rushed, but it wasn't in terms of creating the vaccine. Lots of work was already done on SARS-CoV-1. Unlike previous vaccines, this one was made in the modern era where the entire viral genome was fully genetically sequenced and sent to labs world wide via email in January. No other vaccine push in history has had so many labs, so many companies, and so much effort and resources dumped into it putting everything else on the back burner.  There are FIFTY EIGHT vaccines for COVID in various stages of testing! The mRNA vaccines are out first because they take the least effort to get right and put in testing. It really only takes a few days of work to decide on the sub sequence from the viral genome to build the mRNA that will cause the desired antigen.  It is actually much simpler to do this than older vaccine development methods. Phase I/II/III testing looks like other vaccines, except more expansive. The only difference is the EUA during phase III after excellent studies with ongoing results showing great efficacy and safety were evaluated in the setting of a pandemic. 

The risk is vastly outweighed by the benefit. This is a no-brainer for folks to get. Healthcare providers should be singing this from the tree tops. Vaccine is the only path to herd immunity, the end of the pandemic, the end of all the COVID restrictions and suffering, and restoring normalcy we all crave.

I'm heavily involved in county level vaccine planning and distribution.

I'm getting my Pfizer shot on Tuesday. I hope you choose to get your shot as soon as you are able.


----------



## PotatoMedic (Dec 13, 2020)

And the CDC gave their final stamp of approval.  So the shot is a go.









						CDC gives green light to administer Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine
					

The CDC has accepted an advisory committee’s recommendation of the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine, meaning the shots can now be administered in the United States.




					fox8.com


----------



## ffemt8978 (Dec 13, 2020)

Summit said:


> Vaccine is the only path to herd immunity, the end of the pandemic, the end of all the COVID restrictions and suffering, and restoring normalcy we all crave.


Unfortunately, normalcy will never return because one thing we've done is establish a new baseline for when the next pandemic comes along.  In addition to herd immunity we've created herd expectations in how to deal with the next global disease.

 I will be getting the vaccine once it works it's way down to my level which will probably take awhile because the trucking industry is not a high priority even though we've been considered essential and high risk workers from the start.


----------



## akflightmedic (Dec 13, 2020)




----------



## OceanBossMan263 (Dec 14, 2020)

Frustrating being on social media and seeing people in healthcare being so adamant about not wanting the vaccine, expressing displeasure with proposed state mandates, etc. I hope their resumes are in order.

I'll be getting it as soon as allowed.


----------



## DorothyBower (Dec 14, 2020)

I'd generally speaking put it in order to be free


----------



## jgmedic (Dec 14, 2020)

DorothyBower said:


> I'd generally speaking put it in order to be free


What?

And yes 100% will get.


----------



## Carlos Danger (Dec 14, 2020)

OceanBossMan263 said:


> Frustrating being on social media and seeing people in healthcare being so adamant about not wanting the vaccine, expressing displeasure with proposed state mandates, etc. I hope their resumes are in order.
> 
> *I'll be getting it as soon as allowed.*


Good for you. Your virtue signaling game is tight 👊.

Meanwhile, some of those who you are hoping get fired over not wanting the vaccine have truly been on the front lines (to correctly use an over-used phrase) of putting themselves at risk to take care of sick, infectious COVID patients every day of the past year: the intensivists, RNs, RRTs and CNAs who have worked double shifts and 7 day weeks at times because of the need. More than a few of whom actually got COVID, recovered, and went back to work as soon as they could. Even if you don't respect the ideas of autonomy and self-determination for normal people, do you really think that THESE FOLKS at least haven't earned the right to have some say in whether or not they are one of the guinea pigs?

I mean, does the vaccine really work in the real world, or not? If we aren't confident that it does, then we shouldn't be pushing it on anyone. If we are confident that it works, then all we really need to do in order to cut way down on M&M is to vaccinate the highest-risk populations, and anyone else that (voluntarily) takes the vaccine is just gravy. I just read about a poll that reported that about 60% of people said they will willingly take the vaccine, and 60% just happens to be roughly the percentage of the population that we need vaccinated in order to attain herd immunity (not that we really need "herd" immunity; we really just need older and sicker people to be immune). So perhaps the hard working, selfless healthcare workers who have been bearing most of the brunt of this all along don't really need to get "their resumes in order" after all.


----------



## GMCmedic (Dec 14, 2020)

Guess im getting one on wednesday


----------



## Peak (Dec 15, 2020)

I’m scheduled to get mine this week.

So far we have paid any of our staff who contract COVID and have been working clinically to stay home and quarantine, in several cases for 5-6 weeks. I wonder if staff decline vaccination will they still be allowed to collect quarantine pay or get cut off? We don’t hire anyone who refuses MMR and TDaP, and will terminate those who don’t stay up to date (which we give for free) unless they have a valid and documented reason (which basically only includes a very strict list of medical conditions). Another group made the flu vaccine mandatory this year rather than optional. I wouldn’t think it is that far off to think that some systems may make vaccination a condition of employment.


----------



## GMCmedic (Dec 15, 2020)

OceanBossMan263 said:


> Frustrating being on social media and seeing people in healthcare being so adamant about not wanting the vaccine, expressing displeasure with proposed state mandates, etc. I hope their resumes are in order.
> 
> I'll be getting it as soon as allowed.



I doubt you'll see many employers mandating it anytime soon. Pfizer and moderna are likely shielded from lawsuits. Your employer wont be. 

Also, dont worry about other people.


----------



## DrParasite (Dec 15, 2020)

I'm signed up to get mine once they become available to us in NC


----------



## johnrsemt (Dec 18, 2020)

The surprising thing is they are not making it mandatory for DoD Dept of Health Civilians at this point (Military medical is).  Since it is considered an emergency medication administration they won't.  When it hits the point that it is available for everyone they may change the policy.

Prior to that, it will probably be optional.
At my part-time job, they are coming out to give it to the FT people today, but not to the part-time people yet.


----------



## PotatoMedic (Dec 18, 2020)

I was reading some literature from my health system that I work for, and vaccines under an EUA cannot be made mandatory at all.


----------



## BobBarker (Dec 18, 2020)

I want and will get it but will not be the first in line to do it.
Just like buying a new car, phone, medication, etc. I don't want to be the first to do it. Wait it out a little bit and make sure things are OK and get it. We have 1-3 confirmed covid patients every shift and have good PPE, so I'm not too worried.


----------



## akflightmedic (Dec 18, 2020)

Already have been 100K + who were first in line....between the two top makers...and now roll out on top of that.

When is it no longer "first in line"? Legit question I have asked others in different forums and they never come back to me with a reply. What is your personal definition or time line for "it has been long enough and now I will get it"?


----------



## BobBarker (Dec 18, 2020)

akflightmedic said:


> Already have been 100K + who were first in line....between the two top makers...and now roll out on top of that.
> 
> When is it no longer "first in line"? Legit question I have asked others in different forums and they never come back to me with a reply. What is your personal definition or time line for "it has been long enough and now I will get it"?


I would say a couple months is good for me to see what happens to people in a non controlled clinical trial. It normally takes a lot longer than what it took now to develop, test and roll a vaccine out.


----------



## Alan L Serve (Dec 18, 2020)

My dear friends,
A vote of "no"
is a vote for death.


----------



## BobBarker (Dec 18, 2020)

PotatoMedic said:


> I was reading some literature from my health system that I work for, and vaccines under an EUA cannot be made mandatory at all.


Yea, but in California where I am at, employers can make it mandatory and terminate you for not getting it.


----------



## akflightmedic (Dec 18, 2020)

Bob (just picking on you mostly cause you are replying in earnest and I appreciate it)......while I agree in the past it has taken a lot longer to develop, test and roll out...some of the more significant vaccine rollouts (Hep A and B) were over 25 years ago. Yes we have rolled out rotovirus, Shingles and ebola since then...but prior to Hep A and B, polio of the 50s was the amazing one that changed the world!

Do you think research and science has not changed in that time period? I have heard so many people keep saying "in the past, it took X years to roll out"....but yes, in the past we can make all kinds of comparisons about many things from vaccines to technology to you name it...and it will not be a fair comparison. One has to give science and ongoing research credit and acknowledge that there has been a lot of ongoing background work for years regarding SARS (Covid) and acknowledge that the scientific community was not starting from scratch on this vaccine. 

Most importantly, since this was a "global pandemic"...all research, all known details was shared around the world. Literally, 100s of 1000s of the best and brightest all had same info delivered to them and damn near unlimited funding was provided immediately. This has NEVER been done before in our vaccine development history. Not even when polio was crippling and killing kids we did not make it a priority nor did we share info.

The collaboration and the intelligence factors alone of who worked on this vaccine....it blows my mind, in a good way!

So thank you for sharing your timeline. You and others do provide fairly random, arbitrary timelines, but those are yours to determine. I acknowledge you have that "right", but at the same time being a healthcare provider, the lack of confidence in modern technology, science, research and the application of completely illogical rationales for not doing it often baffles me.


----------



## akflightmedic (Dec 18, 2020)

This is an interesting timeline to review for additional info.



			https://pink.pharmaintelligence.informa.com/PS143127/What-Came-Before-COVID-19-Two-Centuries-Of-Vaccine-Development


----------



## BobBarker (Dec 18, 2020)

akflightmedic said:


> Bob (just picking on you mostly cause you are replying in earnest and I appreciate it)......while I agree in the past it has taken a lot longer to develop, test and roll out...some of the more significant vaccine rollouts (Hep A and B) were over 25 years ago. Yes we have rolled out rotovirus, Shingles and ebola since then...but prior to Hep A and B, polio of the 50s was the amazing one that changed the world!
> 
> Do you think research and science has not changed in that time period? I have heard so many people keep saying "in the past, it took X years to roll out"....but yes, in the past we can make all kinds of comparisons about many things from vaccines to technology to you name it...and it will not be a fair comparison. One has to give science and ongoing research credit and acknowledge that there has been a lot of ongoing background work for years regarding SARS (Covid) and acknowledge that the scientific community was not starting from scratch on this vaccine.
> 
> ...


No problem at all, I love conversations. I have confidence in technology and science, but not 100% enough to be the first in line to get it. Our workplace hasn't even gotten the vaccine yet so by the time we are to get it (priority before the public but probably not first) it might be one/two months since implementation and I will get it. I'm not an anti-vaxxer by any means, I have gotten all required vaccines but personally don't get the flu vaccine. Believe me, I won't say my opinion is backed by any facts, I'm just saying I don't like to be the first person in line for many things. I also wear all PPE, take precautions and regularly get covid tested even though it's not mandatory because I care. I feel a lot of these people who don't want the vaccines at all in healthcare don't wear masks outside of their healthcare job, are relaxed about PPE and only get tested when symptoms arise or they are required to. I by no means am a bare minimum person and my decision is completely personal.


----------



## DrParasite (Dec 18, 2020)

BobBarker said:


> Yea, but in California where I am at, employers can make it mandatory and terminate you for not getting it.


interesting... can you be fired for not getting your flu shot?  what about your hep B vaccine?  what about Remdesivir or hydroxychloroquine?  Aside from the whole "your an at-will employee who can be fired for any reason or no reason at all" I can't see any employer firing someone for not getting the covid vaccine.  And if that were to happen, I can see a decent wrongful termination lawsuit being filed. Forcing an employee to be injected with anything or else they are fired could also be interpreted as a hostile workplace.


----------



## akflightmedic (Dec 18, 2020)

Parasite....several articles say you are incorrect. I mean the precedents are already there for many health care employers and schools. It seems absolutely yes healthcare workers can be mandated and can be fired for refusing. 









						Can I Be Required to Get a Covid Vaccine?
					






					www.bloomberg.com
				












						Could COVID-19 vaccines become mandatory in the U.S.?
					

While there is legislative precedent for vaccine mandates, legal and public health expert Joanne Rosen says other strategies could help U.S. states achieve widespread vaccination for COVID-19




					hub.jhu.edu
				












						Can an employer mandate the COVID-19 vaccine?
					

Can the government or your employer make the COVID-19 vaccine compulsory?




					www.today.com
				












						Can COVID-19 vaccinations be mandated? Short answer: Yes
					

Employers could require their workers to get vaccinated against COVID-19 via both workplace policies and existing laws. Neither option, however, is simple or straightforward.




					theconversation.com
				




These were all short and easy reads...


----------



## SandpitMedic (Dec 18, 2020)

The safety mechanisms put in place were bypassed, rubber stamped, rushed, or done in phases concomitantly when they normally are not. Atop that, with the government shielding liability of the manufacturers and so much money to be made.... Well, let's just say I trust in the scientific method. It was circumvented in the development of these vaccines. I hardly ever trust a corporation to do the right thing instead of make billions in profits.

People are free to make their own choices. I am in a low-low risk category being young and healthy, and with the updates in CFR I choose to wait and see what happens with these vaccines. How long? TBD. I wear my mask and I follow CDC guidelines and that is supposed to work to limit spread. At work I wear my PPE when around patients to limit being both a vector and becoming infected.

Besides, if enough of you guys who are gung ho, no questions asked, all-in for it are immune we will have herd immunity in no time. (Which I would probably be also if I were high risk or cared for someone high risk). I hope that it works and I hope that there are little side effects to those receiving it.


----------



## hpclayto (Dec 19, 2020)

Work highly recommended it. I highly declined.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Dec 19, 2020)

Alan L Serve said:


> My dear friends,
> A vote of "no"
> is a vote for death.


Not necessarily.  It could just be a dose if healthy skepticism.


----------



## akflightmedic (Dec 19, 2020)

SandpitMedic said:


> The safety mechanisms put in place were bypassed, rubber stamped, rushed, or done in phases concomitantly when they normally are not. Atop that, with the government shielding liability of the manufacturers and so much money to be made.... Well, let's just say I trust in the scientific method. It was circumvented in the development of these vaccines. *I hardly ever trust a corporation to do the right thing instead of make billions in profits.*



I would think for many of those on the "right" and those of "independent" ideology, this would be ideal. As in, see how fast stuff gets done when there is no government regulation??  Just saying, if these safety issues were ignored in coal industry, power plants, or even Wall Street, it would be hailed as a "win"! 

Anyways, I digress. The last sentence is exactly why I have full confidence in the science and the manufacturers. There IS so much money to be made, if they screw up, they are out of the game. They lose potential billions in revenue. If they get it right, if they are successful, they lock up the market forever going forward....earning trillions over time for their endeavor. 

They have way too much profit and subsequent professional credibility at risk to not get it done right. Otherwise, the others in the rear will take the lead and win. Just my personal takeaway on this.


----------



## silver (Dec 19, 2020)

SandpitMedic said:


> The safety mechanisms put in place were bypassed, rubber stamped, rushed, or done in phases concomitantly when they normally are not. Atop that, with the government shielding liability of the manufacturers and so much money to be made.... *Well, let's just say I trust in the scientific method. It was circumvented in the development of these vaccines.* I hardly ever trust a corporation to do the right thing instead of make billions in profits.
> 
> People are free to make their own choices. I am in a low-low risk category being young and healthy, and with the updates in CFR I choose to wait and see what happens with these vaccines. How long? TBD. I wear my mask and I follow CDC guidelines and that is supposed to work to limit spread. At work I wear my PPE when around patients to limit being both a vector and becoming infected.
> 
> Besides, if enough of you guys who are gung ho, no questions asked, all-in for it are immune we will have herd immunity in no time. (Which I would probably be also if I were high risk or cared for someone high risk). I hope that it works and I hope that there are little side effects to those receiving it.


Safety and Efficacy of the BNT162b2 mRNA Covid-19 Vaccine
The hundred something page study protocol and statistical plans are available there to peruse too. 

Let me know where they deviated from GCP or modern standards of the scientific method.


----------



## Summit (Dec 19, 2020)

Hey Sandpit, you got a Bachelors of Science or Bachelors of Conspiracy? Because what you are spinning is not in alignment with reality.

What you have to remember is that vaccination is not meant to a purely selfish benefit. It is a common benefit where the protection of all inoculations is greater than the sum of the individual risk reductions. You protect others as well as yourself.

The liability consideration is not to do with COVID vaccine. It is a general protection because of the massive social good provided by vaccines, thus the liability is socialized to keep cost affordable and thus access equitable.

What you are missing in terms of timeframes is that the reason it takes so long to reach primary endpoints in normal times for a phase 3 trial in other vaccine studies is low prevalence of the studied disease. In a panedemic, reaching the primary endpoint (enough infected study participants out of, say the 44K in the Pfizer trial, that you can then unblind and compare for efficacy) was reached faster. And this is a good thing in terms of providing safety and efficacy data in a timely manner to provide the benefit needed to end this pandemic. These safety and efficacy statistics are from THIS vaccine. That aside, the process of these two EUA vaccine's mechanism of action is not only well understood, but it is a "cleaner" process in the body than most previous vaccines.

In the mean time, one can sit and wring hands about rare potential side effects not yet seen, and that is valid, but not if it means pretending that such potential somehow outweighs the risk of ongoing COVID-19 infections and the impacts required to mitigate the pandemic.

Over 1.1 million vaccine doses given... no deaths. How many deaths for 1.1 million COVID cases, even in lower risk groups? 

And what about morbidity and long term effects of COVID? Dead or alive is a shortsighted way to measure impact of illness:


			https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7654356/pdf/main.pdf


----------



## jgmedic (Dec 19, 2020)

The anti-vaxxers have really come out in force with this one, aligning themselves with right wing groups claiming infringement on their rights to push more pseudoscientific BS on people. What I cant fathom is how this has become a political issue, when really it is a public health emergency of the greatest magnitude.


----------



## Peak (Dec 19, 2020)

jgmedic said:


> The anti-vaxxers have really come out in force with this one...



It has surprised me how many healthcare providers are coming out as not being willing to participate in the vaccine.






Never had a meme been so true.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Dec 19, 2020)

jgmedic said:


> The anti-vaxxers have really come out in force with this one, aligning themselves with right wing groups claiming infringement on their rights to push more pseudoscientific BS on people. What I cant fathom is how this has become a political issue, when really it is a public health emergency of the greatest magnitude.


Shutting down economies worldwide is absolutely a political issue, and has political, economic and health consequences.  The consequences are not a zero sum game, which means all things must be considered when choosing a course of action.  Ignoring non-health related consequences results in socioeconomic side effects that have public health side effects (such as increased depression, suicide and substance abuse).

Our world is not a single issue world, and making decisions as if it is or even should be, will have serious and often unforseen repercussions.


----------



## Carlos Danger (Dec 19, 2020)

akflightmedic said:


> I would think for many of those on the "right" and those of "independent" ideology, this would be ideal. As in, see how fast stuff gets done when there is no government regulation??  Just saying, if these safety issues were ignored in coal industry, power plants, or even Wall Street, it would be hailed as a "win"!


If you really think that, then you don't understand the simple mechanics of non-statist or free market viewpoints. No one - even in the more anarcho-libertarian circles - believes that there shouldn't be any regulation on drug development or workplace safety or the financial markets. They simply differ on whether or not that regulation is best instituted by the federal government. Personally, I think the feds have repeatedly demonstrated themselves far too incompetent and corrupt to be trusted with pretty much anything - nevemind something as important as drug development - but that's another discussion.



akflightmedic said:


> Anyways, I digress. The last sentence is exactly why I have full confidence in the science and the manufacturers. There IS so much money to be made, if they screw up, they are out of the game. They lose potential billions in revenue. If they get it right, if they are successful, they lock up the market forever going forward....earning trillions over time for their endeavor.
> 
> They have way too much profit and subsequent professional credibility at risk to not get it done right. Otherwise, the others in the rear will take the lead and win. Just my personal takeaway on this.


Professional credibility? Out of the game? What are you talking about? These are massively profitable, widely diversified corporations that stand to make billions if the vaccines work out, but will do just fine if they don't. The feds have already paid for the drugs, first of all. Second, no pharmacy refuses to buy inventory from the best-priced distributor because of who makes the drugs. These corporations have plenty of profit motive - you are right about that - but they are bound by none of the restraints typical imposed by informed consumers or the threat of civil liability. This is anything but a free market scenario.



silver said:


> Safety and Efficacy of the BNT162b2 mRNA Covid-19 Vaccine
> The hundred something page study protocol and statistical plans are available there to peruse too.
> 
> Let me know where they deviated from GCP or modern standards of the scientific method.


And did you actually read any of that? Do you really know how to interpret it objectively? I didn't think so. Either does the vast majority of the population. People are left to trust the authorities, which a growing percentage of the population is finding harder and harder to do. It isn't as if health authorities have never been wrong, and prestigious medical journals have never hid the truth in order to forward an agenda. You can believe what you are told by those in charge if you want, and that's fine. If you are being completely honest though, you'll admit that your biases are where all of your confidence comes from, not from any actual analysis or understanding of the data. Some others see things differently, and admit that they don't know what it all means and choose not to blindly trust those who say "it's all good - just trust us". And their choice is no less rational than yours - perhaps it is more so.



Summit said:


> The liability consideration is not to do with COVID vaccine. It is a general protection because of the massive social good provided by vaccines, thus the liability is socialized to keep cost affordable and thus access equitable.


The liability consideration is very much to do with the vaccine. Liability is one of the primary motivations in pharm development. It is a powerful tool ensuring safety. Take that away, and…..you do the math. There is very limited liability for the producers of these vaccines, and they do not care at all about "social good". Two words: Purdue Pharma.


Summit said:


> In the mean time, one can sit and wring hands about rare potential side effects not yet seen, and that is valid, but not if it means pretending that such potential somehow outweighs the risk of ongoing COVID-19 infections and the impacts required to mitigate the pandemic.
> 
> Over 1.1 million vaccine doses given... no deaths. How many deaths for 1.1 million COVID cases, even in lower risk groups?


But what about the principles of self determination and autonomy? It really sucks that so many people have gotten sick and died from COVID, but almost all of those deaths have been in well-defined, easily identifiable groups which could have been well protected given a more thoughtful and measured approach than what we've seen in the US over the past 10 months. Where is the moral imperative for someone who has no contact with those groups to take a vaccine that they don't statistically need, and aren't completely convinced of it's safety and necessity?


jgmedic said:


> The anti-vaxxers have really come out in force with this one, aligning themselves with right wing groups claiming infringement on their rights to push more pseudoscientific BS on people. What I cant fathom is how this has become a political issue, when really it is a public health emergency of the greatest magnitude.


Anti vaxxers? Right wing groups? WTH are you talking about?

Remember, this is a brand new vaccine being distributed under emergency authorization that we do not have any long-term data on, and which purportedly protects against a virus which has a very small chance of making anyone outside of a high risk group seriously ill - never mind dying. The fact that anyone who is skeptical of the need to take that vaccine is painted as some kind of extremist is completely inexplicable, and is likely a political statement in itself.

Coronavirus has been heavily politicized from day one. Don't forget the massive screwups by CDC and FDA very early on, and the repeated mistakes, miscalculations, outright lies, and politically motivated manipulations from all levels of government since then. Don't forget that the spread and toll of this thing has been repeatedly blamed on the skeptics and never on those who purport to have the power to effect it's course (but somehow aren't able to), or on the nature of the virus itself.  To think that none of that could possibly have had any influence on the vaccine and related recommendations is completely absurd.


----------



## RedBlanketRunner (Dec 19, 2020)

Presently contraindicated. I'm awaiting allergy testing and possibly further information from manufacturer. (History of mild to severe anaphylactic reactions)


----------



## silver (Dec 20, 2020)

Carlos Danger said:


> And did you actually read any of that? Do you really know how to interpret it objectively? I didn't think so. Either does the vast majority of the population. People are left to trust the authorities, which a growing percentage of the population is finding harder and harder to do. It isn't as if health authorities have never been wrong, and prestigious medical journals have never hid the truth in order to forward an agenda. You can believe what you are told by those in charge if you want, and that's fine. If you are being completely honest though, you'll admit that your biases are where all of your confidence comes from, not from any actual analysis or understanding of the data. Some others see things differently, and admit that they don't know what it all means and choose not to blindly trust those who say "it's all good - just trust us". And their choice is no less rational than yours - perhaps it is more so.


I mean I do have a MD, have a masters, and worked in the pharma industry prior to medicine. I did mostly cardiac and vascular device research for US and EU clinical trials in a group that did contracted full service management from protocol development all the way to writing manuscripts. Do I consider myself an expert on clinical trials? Not really, but I definitely still can interpret studies and give medical recommendations.

It brings me sadness that many people conflate science with their own feelings and politics during the pandemic especially those in health care who potentially can influence others.


----------



## VentMonkey (Dec 20, 2020)

silver said:


> It brings me sadness that many people conflate science with their own feelings and politics during the pandemic especially those in health care who potentially can influence others.


Had The Rona myself, as I know others on here have as well. I agree.


----------



## DesertMedic66 (Dec 20, 2020)

Girlfriend, ICU nurse, and myself both had the rona. She had it back in March and I had it in July. She has already received her first vaccine dose and I am on the list to get mine.

After having it, I don’t want anyone to have this virus or pass it along myself. If I get webbed feet from it hey, at least I will swim better.


----------



## jgmedic (Dec 20, 2020)

Carlos Danger said:


> Anti vaxxers? Right wing groups? WTH are you talking about?











						Anti-vaccine and alt-right groups team up to stoke fears of COVID-19 vaccine
					

Part of California's anti-vaccine movement has expanded its reach during the pandemic. Now it is focused on new COVID-19 vaccines, and working with others to sow government mistrust.




					www.latimes.com


----------



## akflightmedic (Dec 20, 2020)

Carlos Danger said:


> If you really think that, then you don't understand the simple mechanics of non-statist or free market viewpoints. No one - even in the more anarcho-libertarian circles - believes that there shouldn't be any regulation on drug development or workplace safety or the financial markets. *They simply differ on whether or not that regulation is best instituted by the federal government*. Personally, I think the feds have repeatedly demonstrated themselves far too incompetent and corrupt to be trusted with pretty much anything - nevemind something as important as drug development - but that's another discussion.
> 
> 
> Professional credibility? Out of the game? What are you talking about? These are massively profitable, widely diversified corporations that stand to make billions if the vaccines work out, but will do just fine if they don't. The feds have already paid for the drugs, first of all. Second, no pharmacy refuses to buy inventory from the best-priced distributor because of who makes the drugs. These corporations have plenty of profit motive - you are right about that - but they are bound by none of the restraints typical imposed by informed consumers or the threat of civil liability. This is anything but a free market scenario.



So if they do not agree with NO regulation, they only disagree if regulation should be by the Feds....then who else is there? Which "independent" regulatory body would ultimately have everyone's best interests in mind? Just curious...if not the Fed Govt, then who? Careful, you may find yourself falling into the rabbit hole of conspiracies. 

Yes, professional credibility. As any product of theirs would be considered non-trustworthy going forward if they put out a vaccine that was absolute shyte. Did I really need to explain this to you?

Yes, out of the game. As in your vaccine failed, therefore Company X over there who is having no webbed feet development will now control the market, and the future revenue of trillions of dollars over the next few decades...cause this is a long term game proposition. Again, odd how you speak so intelligently yet need these basic explanations regarding business. Sure, they are profit driven which is exactly why they will pump out the best product. Sure, they are a diversified company...which billion dollar company isnt? But do you think the shareholders are all sitting around saying "look guys, we are all bazillionaires...and we could have been trillionaires, but we aren'tt because our vaccine sucked, but that's fine...we are all ok"?? Of course not...

And yes, the feds bought SOME of the vaccines up front....not all, as Trump refused to do so but is now attempting to prevent the other sales to other countries from going where they should. But this discussion is NOT about these particular immediate sales...this is the roll out. It is all about the long term race and having a quality product is the only thing which is going to win.

*This week, Chipotle opened in a location that has held three other CHAIN stores in the past 6 years. Krispy Kreme came and went, Taco Bell came and went, these were not small names with no big bucks behind them or diversified portfolios. I remember when TB and KK opened, massive back ups. Cars in long lines, everyone excited. At the end of the day, the excitement fizzled, less people went, cause ultimately the quality and location just plain sucks. It really does, especially the location. It is just so difficult to get in and out of and not worth the time. Now that Chipotle has opened, they have hired the police to shut down part of the lane of traffic during their opening hours, they have vehicle lines over an hour long right now. It is even crazier than when the others opened!!! Chipotle for this area is "better quality" and it has a higher price point than what most people in this area are used to or can even afford on a regular basis. 

All of them got that immediate cash dump, so far none have survived. Will chipotle survive longer than 2 years in this location? Will they make it 5 or even 10 years? I am sure that is their plan, they will just have to keep pumping out quality product as if it is their first week. But yes, even when Krispy Kreme and TB were closing, they had all kinds of sales, damn near tried to give away food to get people in the door...yet people refused to buy the cheap quality.


----------



## SandpitMedic (Dec 20, 2020)

OxyContin maker Purdue Pharma pleads guilty in criminal case
					

Purdue Pharma pleaded guilty Tuesday to three criminal charges, formally taking responsibility for its part in an opioid epidemic that has contributed to hundreds of thousands of deaths but also angering critics who want to see individuals held accountable, in addition to the company...




					apnews.com
				






> Purdue acknowledged that it had not maintained an effective program to prevent prescription drugs from being diverted to the black market, even though it had told the DEA it did have such a program, and that it provided misleading information to the agency as a way to boost company manufacturing quotas. It also admitted paying doctors through a speakers program to induce them to write more prescriptions for its painkillers. And it admitted paying an electronic medical records company to send doctors information on patients that encouraged them to prescribe opioids.



But they'll do the right thiiing! Think of all the pain and suffering and death associated with the opioid crisis..... they have to have done right for the sake of common decency..... except- they willfully and knowingly did not for profit.

How about this COVID vaccine development event in Aussie land where they were using HIV protein to complete part of the sequence of the spike protein. It was caught, after some people began popping HIV+ in testing. (They later tested negative.) The trial was abandoned. They did the right thing here, but would you have known there was HIV sequenced in your vaccine if they didn't tell you? Is there HIV protein in your vaccine today?





__





						Science | AAAS
					






					www.sciencemag.org
				




Here are some other big pharma mishaps. I mean, we can go back and forth all day- there are surely numerous positive outcomes form big pharma also, but I never put it past them.... I'm not pumping out conspiracy theories. As I've said before, I hope it works, but I'm going to wait and see. I don't insult you guys for getting it, I don't think you are less intelligent either. I think it's all about personal choice.









						The Ten Worst Drug Recalls In The History Of The FDA – 24/7 Wall St.
					

This year’s recall of certain types of Tylenol and Motrin by Johnson & Johnson (NYSE: JNJ), which began in January, brought back memories of the 1982 Tylenol recall. It affected as many as 21 million packages which were in circulation at the time. Johnson & Johnson’s reaction set the bar for...




					247wallst.com
				












						Fen-Phen Maker to Pay Billions In Settlement of Diet-Injury Cases (Published 1999)
					

American Home Products Corp agrees to pay $3.75 billion in total to thousands of people who contend they were injured by taking popular diet pill combination fen-phen; under settlement--one of largest ever in product liability case--people who used one of diet drugs for 60 days or less would be...




					www.nytimes.com
				












						Vioxx | Treatment for Arthritis & Recall for Patient Deaths
					

Learn the history of the once popular NSAID pain reliever, Vioxx. Read about Merck's withdrawal of Vioxx due to its link to heart attacks, strokes & death.




					www.drugwatch.com
				












						Anthrax Vaccine: Five Things You Need To Know About The Leaked Army Memo
					

The Army memo about the bad batches of the Anthrax Vaccine circulating the web over the past week caused a great deal of confusion. Myself and another attorney created a video to explain the memo H…




					www.disabledveterans.org
				












						FDA Recalls All Ranitidine (Zantac) Products, Citing Increased Risk of Cancer
					

The FDA has requested all ranitidine (Zantac) products be pulled from the market immediately. The recall includes all prescription and over-the-counter ranitidine drugs as ongoing investigations uncovered levels of N-Nitrosodimethylamine (NDMA), a probable human carcinogen, increase over time.



					www.ajmc.com
				












						Seldane Removed From U.S. Market Over Safety Concerns
					

Seldane Removed From U.S. Market Over Safety Concerns




					www.medicinenet.com


----------



## SandpitMedic (Dec 20, 2020)

There are a lot of points here- and I don't want to post a long tangent. So here:
1.) I am not anti-vax, nor anti-science, nor anti-govt. I am not a member of a "right-wing" anti-vaccination conspiracy group either.

2.) I did not espouse any conspiracy theories. (Conspiracy theories would be like- lizard people want you to take the vaccine, the vaccine causes sterility, the shadow govt is injecting tiny microchips in you, etc.) Simply not going all-in on a rushed process by big pharma which is shielded from liability is hardly conspiracy theory.

3.) I don't know what Chipotle has to do with any of this, but it should also be a poll. I vote for Cafe Rio.

4.) I have not insulted anyone's intelligence or credentials. In this circumstance I simply would like to observe, gather data, and make my own conclusions before just believing what I hear. I am just having a discussion on the board and presenting my thoughts, questions, data.

4.5) My risk-benefit analysis at this point is that I am a low risk for complications from COVID, I don't blindly trust the development, and I follow all safety precautions to avoid becoming a vector, and there are unknown risks with the vaccines (due to limited data so far) as well as known risks (Identified here for the Moderna vaccine)https://www.fda.gov/media/144434/download                                                      (and here for Pfizer) https://www.fda.gov/media/144245/download (Mind you, these reports were generated by the guys who did the studies, who were paid or received grants; not independent replicated studies).

5.) Re: professional medical opinions: mine is consult your primary care provider if you have questions about getting the vaccine.


----------



## SandpitMedic (Dec 20, 2020)

DesertMedic66 said:


> Girlfriend, ICU nurse, and myself both had the rona. She had it back in March and I had it in July. She has already received her first vaccine dose and I am on the list to get mine.
> 
> After having it, I don’t want anyone to have this virus or pass it along myself. If I get webbed feet from it hey, at least I will swim better.


Quick question. Did either of you get antibody titers for COVID?
If not, why not? If so, were they negative?


----------



## Alan L Serve (Dec 20, 2020)

ffemt8978 said:


> Not necessarily.  It could just be a dose if healthy skepticism.


My dear friend,
COVID does not discriminate
from skeptics and believers


----------



## RedBlanketRunner (Dec 20, 2020)

jgmedic said:


> The anti-vaxxers have really come out in force with this one, aligning themselves with right wing groups claiming infringement on their rights to push more pseudoscientific BS on people. What I cant fathom is how this has become a political issue, when really it is a public health emergency of the greatest magnitude.


If you figure it out...
There seems to be a threshold, a division between rational thinking and the irrational. Take climate change. A significant consensus of qualified reputable scientists have determined X, Y and Z. For the rational mind, that's good enough. Science is never perfect or absolute, so we have to accept the consensus. With the vaccine it's even simpler. As several people have mentioned in this thread, it's basic math. Part of the solution or part of the problem. Yet even with something as simple as running the numbers, this irrational element over-rides the pre-frontals. The same with the anti mask, or swallowing unfounded false information wholesale. A mindset, a mentality not just willing to be duped, but all the way out to rabidly insisting the inane BS being blown must be believed.
Has it always been like this? A part of human nature?


----------



## akflightmedic (Dec 20, 2020)

I did get antibody titers in March or April, I will have to recheck the paperwork. I did this because when I returned from an international cruise in January, both me and my SO were exceptionally sick. I was laid up for a couple weeks sucking on a nebulizer no less than 8x a day, fever, body trashed. Have never been in this bad of shape, ever. I probably should have went to the ER, however I am stubborn. My GF who is epitome of health and never gets sick was laid up for over a week. Anyways, I was negative for antibodies. I have not gone back to be tested again.

And for the record, CR and myself worked very hard on that Chipotle analogy, and I think it is still relevant this morning...even in the absence of CR.


----------



## RedBlanketRunner (Dec 20, 2020)

Alan L Serve said:


> My dear friends,
> A vote of "no"
> is a vote for death.


Or a vote for heading for a cave and being seriously antisocial and paranoid until the allergy tests come back.


----------



## PotatoMedic (Dec 20, 2020)

akflightmedic said:


> And for the record, CR and myself worked very hard on that Chipotle analogy, and I think it is still relevant this morning...even in the absence of CR.


It did make me hungry.  So there is that victory at least.


----------



## DesertMedic66 (Dec 20, 2020)

SandpitMedic said:


> Quick question. Did either of you get antibody titers for COVID?
> If not, why not? If so, were they negative?


Girlfriend was never tested for COVID when she was sick back in March with none of the major Covid symptoms. Her hospital offered it back in November and was found to have the antibodies.

I got a positive PCR test when I was sick which was followed by a negative test 2 months later for me to return to work. I have not done any titers.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Dec 20, 2020)

Alan L Serve said:


> My dear friend,
> COVID does not discriminate
> from skeptics and believers


Neither do mistakes or unknowns in the vaccine creation process.  But you're free to continue believing that having a healthy dose of skepticism is the same as death, just as the skeptics are free to continue believing that blind acceptance of a new vaccine may not be the best idea at the moment.


----------



## DrParasite (Dec 20, 2020)

akflightmedic said:


> Parasite....several articles say you are incorrect. I mean the precedents are already there for many health care employers and schools. It seems absolutely yes healthcare workers can be mandated and can be fired for refusing.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


you know what? I stand corrected.  I was not aware that there was prior caselaw behind mandatory vaccinations (Jacobson v. Massachusetts in 1905 for anyone interested)



> It’s a different story for orders issued by states, cities or businesses, but even then, mandatory vaccination wouldn’t be forced vaccination.
> 
> “Nobody's talking about coming to your house, holding you down and vaccinating you,” Dorit Reiss, a law professor at the University of California Hastings College of the Law in San Francisco, told TODAY.
> 
> Refusing to follow a mandate could mean a fine, tax or other penalty, said Reiss, who studies legal and policy issues related to vaccines.



I can admit when I was wrong, and this was one of those situations.  You can be fired for refusing a Covid vaccine.  and fined.  and banned from going into a store (although, admittedly, that will be difficult to enforce).

I still think it's a slippery slope, but if the government can make a case.....


----------



## DrParasite (Dec 20, 2020)

Carlos Danger said:


> And did you actually read any of that? Do you really know how to interpret it objectively? I didn't think so. Either does the vast majority of the population. People are left to trust the authorities, which a growing percentage of the population is finding harder and harder to do. It isn't as if health authorities have never been wrong, and prestigious medical journals have never hid the truth in order to forward an agenda. You can believe what you are told by those in charge if you want, and that's fine. If you are being completely honest though, you'll admit that your biases are where all of your confidence comes from, not from any actual analysis or understanding of the data. Some others see things differently, and admit that they don't know what it all means and choose not to blindly trust those who say "it's all good - just trust us". And their choice is no less rational than yours - perhaps it is more so.


I did not read the study, and am faaaar from qualified to interpret it objectively.  I'm assuming you are though, as are a couple of people on this site who are smarter than me and faaaaaar more educated.  I will gladly differ to your expertise on what you think of the study.

Will I differ to the "experts"? absolutely. IIRC you're a CRNA; so I'm going to trust you in managing what drugs I get during surgery.  the vast majority wouldn't know anything about them.  Are you saying you shouldn't be trusted, as an expert in your area, and competent to do your job?  Why should this be any different?


Carlos Danger said:


> Coronavirus has been heavily politicized from day one. Don't forget the massive screwups by CDC and FDA very early on, and the repeated mistakes, miscalculations, outright lies, and politically motivated manipulations from all levels of government since then. Don't forget that the spread and toll of this thing has been repeatedly blamed on the skeptics and never on those who purport to have the power to effect it's course (but somehow aren't able to), or on the nature of the virus itself.  To think that none of that could possibly have had any influence on the vaccine and related recommendations is completely absurd.


No arguments there.  I still say for the majority of the US, the virus isn't the doomsday pandemic that CNN is saying it is.  Is it a virus?  yes.  does it suck and will you get sick?  yep.  will people die?  as they always do, some people do die from pathogens.  Are certain populations more susceptible?  definitely.  Has the left (and their media allies) been making it out to be the president's faults, to hurt him during his re-election attempt?  absolutely.  And there right wing idiots who think it's all a conspiracy?  I'm sure.

Mistakes were made at all levels of government, as was manipulation of the public's opinion of the virus.  And some politicians took advantage of the virus for their political gain (one even won an emmy and wrote a book about it).

But at the end of the day, we can't shut down forever.  We need a solution, and that solution starts with a vaccine to prevent future infections.  Especially for those high risk populations. Even if it's only 95% effective, that's still better than 0 in my opinion.


----------



## PotatoMedic (Dec 20, 2020)

Also if you read the vaccine fact sheet for the EUA that is required to be given to all who receive the shot, it says that it is voluntary.  Vaccines via an EUA cannot be manditory per the FDA.

On another note, it has been three hours and my arm still feels fine!  And no webbed feet.


----------



## DrParasite (Dec 20, 2020)

PotatoMedic said:


> On another note, it has been three hours and my arm still feels fine!  And no webbed feet.


what about webbed hands?  can you stick to walls?  any spider-sense?  or increased strength?


----------



## DesertMedic66 (Dec 20, 2020)

DrParasite said:


> what about webbed hands?  can you stick to walls?  any spider-sense?  or increased strength?


What about the ability for echolocation? That could be very useful.


----------



## akflightmedic (Dec 20, 2020)

PotatoMedic said:


> Also if you read the vaccine fact sheet for the EUA that is required to be given to all who receive the shot, it says that it is voluntary.  Vaccines via an EUA cannot be manditory per the FDA.
> 
> On another note, it has been three hours and my arm still feels fine!  And no webbed feet.



This article with my limited legal awareness seems to indicate it could go either way, it just has not been really tried...yet.









						Under an EUA, Can Businesses Require Employees and Customers to Get Vaccinated? | Bill of Health
					

Can private businesses mandate that employees and customers receive COVID-19 vaccines authorized for emergency use?




					blog.petrieflom.law.harvard.edu
				






			https://www.fda.gov/media/142749/download
		



Interesting thought exercises though...


----------



## wtferick (Dec 20, 2020)

If you as an individual are willing to accept Covid treatment with any of the experimental medications, then I have no clue why the same individuals would not get the vaccine. Blows my mind.
I’m getting mine tomorrow, all while a family member is admitted due to Covid. It hurts.


----------



## MackTheKnife (Dec 20, 2020)

Not getting it.  Not done my own research, but I've read some news articles where they mention 6 months efficacy.  I also think back to SARS, MERS, H1N1 and no vaccines for them, as far as I remember, and they all passed away eventually.  And perhaps so will COVID.  My 2 cents.


----------



## akflightmedic (Dec 20, 2020)

Well....there actually IS a vaccine for H1N1, I have had it, it is typically included in the flu vaccine.

As for SARs and MERs (both of which are coronaviruses), there has been extensive research and development done on these, however the virus was quickly stomped on and transmission was quite limited.

COVID 19 (in the SARs group) has already far exceeded both ease of transmission and death rate globally...not too many of us are messing with camels, nor are we in households with those who do, so throwing MERs in the discussion as being relevant, actually is not. 

"There has been evidence of limited, but not sustained spread of MERS-CoV from person to person, both in households as well as in health care settings like hospitals.[12][28] Most transmission has occurred "in the circumstances of close contact with severely ill persons in healthcare or household settings" and there is no evidence of transmission from asymptomatic cases.[29] Cluster sizes have ranged from 1 to 26 people, with an average of 2.7" Wikipedia


----------



## E tank (Dec 20, 2020)

wtferick said:


> If you as an individual are willing to accept Covid treatment with any of the experimental medications, then I have no clue why the same individuals would not get the vaccine. Blows my mind.
> I’m getting mine tomorrow, all while a family member is admitted due to Covid. It hurts.


Which 'experimental' medications are being used on humans for the first time?


----------



## PotatoMedic (Dec 20, 2020)

They only have duration for effectiveness for about 3 months as they are not evaluating the people from phase 1 trials for long term effectiveness.  (Least from what I have read and understand). And the reason it is only 3 months is because that is how long it has been since the phase 3 trial has been going.


----------



## PotatoMedic (Dec 20, 2020)

akflightmedic said:


> This article with my limited legal awareness seems to indicate it could go either way, it just has not been really tried...yet.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I'm glad you found that!  I've been looking for something like that for a while.  I think employers would have a hard time, in this specific case, mandating the vaccine when masks have shown to be effective alternatives to a vaccine.  (As section III talks about).  But I'm no lawyer so what do I know.


----------



## wtferick (Dec 20, 2020)

E tank said:


> Which 'experimental' medications are being used on humans for the first time?


mRNA isn’t being used for the first time either.


----------



## Fezman92 (Dec 20, 2020)

We’re getting ours until next month.


----------



## Carlos Danger (Dec 20, 2020)

For the record, I am voluntarily getting the first dose tomorrow. I have never said that I don't think it's safe or that folks shouldn't get it or that any of the wild conspiracy theories are true.

My whole point is that it is entirely rational to be skeptical of both the fed and state governments and the pharma industry, and it is entirely rational to decide that you'd rather not get a vaccine that has no track record at all (good or bad) when the illness that the vaccine protects against has well below a 1% chance (for anyone not in a high-risk group) of ever making you seriously ill. You can disagree with that reasoning all you want, but on an individual level it is perfectly sound. It doesn't make someone a science denier to disagree with you, or even to disagree with authorities. The authorities have been wrong many times.

As I said before, most individual's viewpoint on this issue (as well as on many others) is influenced much more by their biases than by science. Unless you are a trained scientist or clinical statistician and you yourself have carefully studied and analyzed all the data, you can't say that you "know" something is true because you are "pro-science". No, you are simply accepting what you are told by the authorities and _assuming_ that what they tell you is true.  Your opinion is no more educated or rational than anyone else's.


----------



## Carlos Danger (Dec 20, 2020)

akflightmedic said:


> So if they do not agree with NO regulation, they only disagree if regulation should be by the Feds....then who else is there? Which "independent" regulatory body would ultimately have everyone's best interests in mind? Just curious...if not the Fed Govt, then who? Careful, you may find yourself falling into the rabbit hole of conspiracies.


There are many examples of very successful and credible independent, non-governmental accrediting agencies in various fields, as well as many examples of when governmental agencies which supposedly "have everyone's bests interest's in mind" (lol) failed miserably and in some cases repeatedly, because they face essentially no consequences, unlike a private entity..



akflightmedic said:


> Yes, professional credibility. As any product of theirs would be considered non-trustworthy going forward if they put out a vaccine that was absolute shyte. Did I really need to explain this to you?


So every time a pharm corporation has ever launched an unsuccessful product they went out of business shortly thereafter because no one would ever again buy their other products - even the ones that had already been profitably on the market long before the failure - simply because they lacked credibility? Investors never fund the development of products that promise returns just because not everything the company brought to market in the past worked out? Aren't there something like 13 different companies seeking approval for essentially the same COVID vaccine? Are you saying that we will completely lose a huge chunk of our pharm industry because all of those companies will have to shut down if time proves that the efficacy is not what we really need it to be or some long-term negative effects are found that dissuade people from taking the vaccine?

You do realize that even Purdue Pharma still made billions in profits even as they were demonized in the media and dogged by massive lawsuits? That they just recently filed for bankruptcy not because no one was buying their products because they "lacked credibility", but because of the sheer weight of the record settlements against them? And that even in the face of that, it isn't clear that the company will need to actually dissolve? How does that work, if what you are claiming is true?

Yes, you do need to explain this to me.


----------



## Peak (Dec 20, 2020)

I got mine today. My arms a bit sore and I have some nasal congestion, both of which I get with the flu quad every year.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Dec 20, 2020)

Now that I've removed a bunch of posts related and responding to personal opinions of the judcial system that were, quite honestly, factually devoid and more of a political commentary than anything else let me remind everyone:

This is not the forum for thar type of commentary.  Keep it EMS related, keep it on topic, and be ready to back up your claims without changing the definitions when you get called out on it.


----------



## VentMonkey (Dec 20, 2020)

Peak said:


> I got mine today. My arms a bit sore and I have some nasal congestion, both of which I get with the flu quad every year.


Someone’s spouse in a class I took the other day said they’d had fevers and tachycardia. So def sounds like (at the least) it’s been attenuated?...


----------



## Peak (Dec 20, 2020)

MackTheKnife said:


> ...I also think back to SARS, MERS, H1N1 and no vaccines for them, as far as I remember, and they all passed away eventually...



We have a vaccine for H1N1, it is included in your annual flu shot. H1N1 is also now endemic which is why it is covered in routine administration. At this point SARS 2 will most likely end up being endemic as well.

SARS 1 and MERS had a different symptom profile which garnered a much different response. The R0 is higher in SARS 2 which lead to a much quicker spread thwarting the initial attempts at isolation. Clinical presentation is also challenging as many patients with SARS 2 have mild clinical symptoms making it difficult to quickly isolate them. The lower R0 and higher acuity presentation of MERS and SARS 1 lead to an effective containment rather that the virus self extinguishing.


----------



## E tank (Dec 20, 2020)

wtferick said:


> mRNA isn’t being used for the first time either.


That so? What is the distinction between 'first time' and 'new' and 'experimental use' of known agents used for several years (at least) for disease processes other than C-19? I would suggest that mRNA vaccines and use of known agents used in other dz processes are not even in the same zip code.....


----------



## Peak (Dec 20, 2020)

VentMonkey said:


> Someone’s spouse in a class I took the other day said they’d had fevers and tachycardia. So def sounds like (at the least) it’s been attenuated?...



We suspect that a large number of staff working on one of our units, myself included, got exposed to COVID 19 in late February/early March. We all tested negative on RVPs but I was coughing and fatigued for over 3 weeks. At the time the same source patient we took care of didn’t meet the criteria for the very limited number of Covid tests available in the state, and it was several months before antibody testing became available to us.

Those of us who were sick back then have had essentially zero symptoms so far after vaccination. Those that weren’t seem to have a lot more chills, fever, fatigue, et cetera.


----------



## SandpitMedic (Dec 20, 2020)

@akflightmedic


wtferick said:


> mRNA isn’t being used for the first time either.


In humans, yes it is, outside of research. Look at past posts on mRNA R&D.


----------



## SandpitMedic (Dec 20, 2020)

DesertMedic66 said:


> Girlfriend was never tested for COVID when she was sick back in March with none of the major Covid symptoms. Her hospital offered it back in November and was found to have the antibodies.
> 
> I got a positive PCR test when I was sick which was followed by a negative test 2 months later for me to return to work. I have not done any titers.


Why in your opinion would you elect to a vaccine if you have already had the wild type infection? You don’t think your immune system has a better chance at building immunity to a natural pathogen than a synthetic? If you have antibodies already there is no need for a vaccine, especially one with such limitations currently. That’s why I inquired about the titers.

Interested in your thought process.


----------



## E tank (Dec 20, 2020)

ffemt8978 said:


> Now that I've removed a bunch of posts related and responding to personal opinions of the judcial system that were, quite honestly, factually devoid and more of a political commentary than anything else let me remind everyone:
> 
> This is not the forum for thar type of commentary.  Keep it EMS related, keep it on topic, and be ready to back up your claims without changing the definitions when you get called out on it.


Good advice for anyone that'll take it...


----------



## PotatoMedic (Dec 20, 2020)

SandpitMedic said:


> Why in your opinion would you elect to a vaccine if you have already had the wild type infection? You don’t think your immune system has a better chance at building immunity to a natural pathogen than a synthetic? If you have antibodies already there is no need for a vaccine, especially one with such limitations currently. That’s why I inquired about the titers.
> 
> Interested in your thought process.


Vaccines produce a predictable immune response where natural immunity can vary much more.  I just read an article that they estimate 10% of the people who contract covid do not develop a strong immunity.   Also note that vaccines are fallible as well.  I have a coworker who has had 3 complete rounds of the hepB vaccine and still they do not show immunity.


----------



## wtferick (Dec 21, 2020)

At the end of the day. They are the scientists and researchers. No point of going back and forth with those who aren’t.


----------



## DesertMedic66 (Dec 21, 2020)

SandpitMedic said:


> Why in your opinion would you elect to a vaccine if you have already had the wild type infection? You don’t think your immune system has a better chance at building immunity to a natural pathogen than a synthetic? If you have antibodies already there is no need for a vaccine, especially one with such limitations currently. That’s why I inquired about the titers.
> 
> Interested in your thought process.


While my knowledge of vaccines is extremely limited, many of the infection disease docs that I have met and also major ones online still recommend those who already had COVID to get the vaccine. I don’t have enough education to fully understand it so I do rely on the opinions of those who have spent dozens of years researching this specific topic. 

Just because I had a “moderate” presentation of the virus doesn’t mean much. I have a couple of coworkers who had similar symptoms to me when they first got it but ended up in the ED when they got it again. So if I can avoid that, I will gladly do it.


----------



## SandpitMedic (Dec 21, 2020)

DesertMedic66 said:


> While my knowledge of vaccines is extremely limited, many of the infection disease docs that I have met and also major ones online still recommend those who already had COVID to get the vaccine. I don’t have enough education to fully understand it so I do rely on the opinions of those who have spent dozens of years researching this specific topic.
> 
> Just because I had a “moderate” presentation of the virus doesn’t mean much. I have a couple of coworkers who had similar symptoms to me when they first got it but ended up in the ED when they got it again. So if I can avoid that, I will gladly do it.


Roger that.


----------



## Jim37F (Dec 22, 2020)

Hmm. Apparently we're getting the Moderna vaccine, not the Pfizer one. Not sure of there's any substantial difference though.

Funny enough they auto scheduled me about 2 hours before my flight is supposed to leave for my vacation. I emailed and got it rescheduled to earlier that day, 9am. Or about an hour after I get off shift. Me and one other guy from my Engine are both scheduled same time, the rest of my crew are also scheduled same day... but they wouldn't let them reschedule to be the same time as well when our Captain tried heh


----------



## Akulahawk (Dec 22, 2020)

Jim37F said:


> Hmm. Apparently we're getting the Moderna vaccine, not the Pfizer one. Not sure of there's any substantial difference though.
> 
> Funny enough they auto scheduled me about 2 hours before my flight is supposed to leave for my vacation. I emailed and got it rescheduled to earlier that day, 9am. Or about an hour after I get off shift. Me and one other guy from my Engine are both scheduled same time, the rest of my crew are also scheduled same day... but they wouldn't let them reschedule to be the same time as well when our Captain tried heh


I suspect that the only practical difference is that you'll have a 28 day interval between injections instead of a 21 day interval. Very good on them to reschedule/accommodate you for the flight conflict.


----------



## Jim37F (Dec 22, 2020)

Akulahawk said:


> I suspect that the only practical difference is that you'll have a 28 day interval between injections instead of a 21 day interval. Very good on them to reschedule/accommodate you for the flight conflict.


Yeah, they've told us the window for the second dose is anywhere from 28 days later (🤔) to six months after the initial shot.


----------



## PotatoMedic (Dec 22, 2020)

Jim37F said:


> Yeah, they've told us the window for the second dose is anywhere from 28 days later (🤔) to six months after the initial shot.


That's a long window.  The Pfizer window is 21-26 days after I believe.


----------



## Peak (Dec 22, 2020)

PotatoMedic said:


> That's a long window.  The Pfizer window is 21-26 days after I believe.



We are doing 17-21 days, although that may be with the primary goal of accelerating disease resistance in critical care staffing


----------



## PotatoMedic (Dec 22, 2020)

Oh yes it is 21 days plus or minus 4


----------



## Summit (Dec 22, 2020)

It depends who you ask on the window. Per CDC for Pfizer, it is 17-21, but if you go earlier or later, no additional dosing. 

There isn't data on how wide to make the window. Vs other vaccines, a super tight window doesn't make sense.


----------



## Peak (Dec 22, 2020)

I suspect part of the reason they want to push on a strict dosing regimen is to make it easier to manage the logistics. It’s a lot easier for a system to know to prepare 1000 doses that are only stable for 5 days if you know your staff has a 4 day window to get it.


----------



## Summit (Dec 22, 2020)

Peak said:


> I suspect part of the reason they want to push on a strict dosing regimen is to make it easier to manage the logistics. It’s a lot easier for a system to know to prepare 1000 doses that are only stable for 5 days if you know your staff has a 4 day window to get it.


While you are correct, the guidance for 21-4 is already a problem when we have people trying to schedule +17 but we aren't expecting it to  be available until +21. Nobody has scheduled second dose delivery. The state just told us again that CDC is holding back 50% of the doses for the follow up logistics, we don't have delivery timeframes.


----------



## akflightmedic (Dec 22, 2020)

I am becoming well versed in Moderno as that is what the program I am running is utilizing. Two doses, second one is 28 days later.

It does NOT have to be kept at sub zero temps, a regular fridge will do. It is also good for 30 days once unpacked from the shipping container. Makes logistics WAY easier! So Moderno has a 6 month freezer life at normal freezer temps and a 30 day fridge life once thawed.

The only real molecular difference in very basic layman's terms is Pfizer chose a different fat cell to utilize for carrying the mRNA. If I am incorrect, feel free to educate me.


----------



## Peak (Dec 22, 2020)

Summit said:


> While you are correct, the guidance for 21-4 is already a problem when we have people trying to schedule +17 but we aren't expecting it to  be available until +21. Nobody has scheduled second dose delivery. The state just told us again that CDC is holding back 50% of the doses for the follow up logistics, we don't have delivery timeframes.



We are scheduled for our 2nd dose deliveries of the pfizer vaccines.


----------



## BobBarker (Dec 22, 2020)

Just throwing out a question because I thought it would be interesting: Is there any benefit or purpose of getting vaccines from both companies? I think we are scheduling our staff in 2 weeks


----------



## akflightmedic (Dec 22, 2020)

Some places have. Several hospitals in my area have both on site. It is just a logistical issue more than anything, they take what they can get when they can. 

Also I forgot to mention earlier, the dosing is different on the two which added another layer of complexity. Apparently the Pfzier is a .3ml dose or something (I have not seen it in person yet) and requires a special needle or syringe. The Moderno is the standard vaccine dose of .5ml and no special equipment required.


----------



## Summit (Dec 22, 2020)

Peak said:


> We are scheduled for our 2nd dose deliveries of the pfizer vaccines.


We have our second delivery of first doses for Pfizer scheduled but not our first delivery of second doses


----------



## Aprz (Dec 23, 2020)

I'm getting my first dose on Sunday. I hope that it doesn't make me lose hair, lol.


----------



## Alan L Serve (Dec 23, 2020)

ffemt8978 said:


> Neither do mistakes or unknowns in the vaccine creation process.  But you're free to continue believing that having a healthy dose of skepticism is the same as death, just as the skeptics are free to continue believing that blind acceptance of a new vaccine may not be the best idea at the moment.


My dear friend
Many thousands have been vaccinated
Without a single death,
yet COVID continues to kill


----------



## ffemt8978 (Dec 23, 2020)

Alan L Serve said:


> My dear friend
> Many thousands have been vaccinated
> Without a single death,
> yet COVID continues to kill


There haven't been any vaccine related deaths ... Yet.  And hopefully there never will be.

But there may be other side effects and consequences of this vaccine that we don't know about yet simply because it hasn't been around long enough and given to enough people to adequately determine if there are issues.


----------



## Summit (Dec 23, 2020)

ffemt8978 said:


> There haven't been any vaccine related deaths ... Yet.  And hopefully there never will be.
> 
> But there may be other side effects and consequences of this vaccine that we don't know about yet simply because it hasn't been around long enough and given to enough people to adequately determine if there are issues.



*Vaccines, Worry, and Risk*

I wrote the second half of this post first. Then I reflected on the fact that those with higher levels of professional education relating to vaccines, epidemiology, public health, immunology, genetic engineering, and/or risk management with an understanding of biostatistics tend to be those who have the least vaccine hesitancy. I thought I was in a good position to write the first part.

*PART 1 The Problem With Risk*

Physicians, Epidemiologists, Infection Preventionists, and Public Health pros exemplify support for vaccination. Why are the SMEs far more comfortable?

*The answer is  NOT that everyone with concerns is a fool. *

While I still practice ICU and EMS, my primary professional expertise for the past several years is epidemiology, infection prevention, and risk management across multiple fields from healthcare to rescue to objective hazards to small/large group human factors. People naturally think they are really good at judging risk as it is almost an automatic action we do every day, even subconsciously. There is an inescapable reality at play: people, including smart people, tend to be terrible at judging risk, worse at comparing (qualifying) risk, and beyond abysmal at quantifying risk. Unfortunately, cognitive biases dominate human risk assessment at a far greater level of influence than our standard logical analysis which are subject to all kind of biases and fallacies.

While I could go on for hours about the details, there are some major factors that drive the disparity between people's perceived and real risk assessment ability.

Low frequency or unknown risks are particularly hard to integrate into risk analysis.
Knowlede gaps: A cursory knowledge of a concept instills overconfidence, often towards components where there is understanding while discounting areas that are not. Expert level understanding and experience greatly improves ability, but is not proof against error.
Attention bias to risk factors independent of quantifiable data - we see this from media and social media.
Probability neglect bias driving excessive adherence / misapplication of the precautionary principle: this is often seen as overweighting constrainable uncertainty to discount risk mitigation strategies for known risks.
*PART 2 Risk Assessment and Mitigation*

Those who have expertise in the field with a deeper understanding of the science, math and risk are the ones who are most likely to say this is a good idea. But ultimately it is the individual who must decide whether to listen to the din of authoritative non-experts preaching caution on risk mitigation vs experts saying the benefit outweighs the risk.

Vaccine Risk

All available data on 70 years of vaccines shows that *any non-rare long term effects were related to immediate short term effects well observed in the first 60 days post vaccination. We have this data.*
These mRNA vaccines are simpler in process with the fewest additives and no preservatives, and have the least amount of extraneous immunogenic material. They are objectively lower risk by their very nature vs other vaccines.
Vaccine AE are short term and limited to mild/moderate effects for the vast majority of cases, and are actually manifestations of reactogenicity (the vaccine getting the immune system to train itself).
COVID Risk

We know that COVID can cause severe illness including hospitalization, even in low risk groups, and at rates much higher than a severe vaccine complications in those low risk groups.
We DO know that viral illnesses can cause long term effects in survivors.
COVID appears to be causing some long term effects even those who are low mortality risk
COVID is pandemic, so your chance of being infected along with the morbidity risk, including long term effects, and mortality risk consistent with your individual risk factors is very high.

No action is risk free! To the experts, the *concern about unrecognized 1 in 100K to 1 in 1MM effects of a vaccine, while sensible to attend in a vacuum, is a relatively misvalued concern in a pandemic even for those who are in low risk groups*. The benefit of preventing risk of COVID vastly outweighs the risk of vaccine INCLUDING the constrained unknowns.


----------



## Alan L Serve (Dec 24, 2020)

ffemt8978 said:


> There haven't been any vaccine related deaths ... Yet.  And hopefully there never will be.
> 
> But there may be other side effects and consequences of this vaccine that we don't know about yet simply because it hasn't been around long enough and given to enough people to adequately determine if there are issues.


My dear friend,
The vaccine works,
and does not kill,
and stops COVID.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Dec 24, 2020)

Alan L Serve said:


> My dear friend,
> The vaccine works,
> and does not kill,
> and stops COVID.


I never said it didn't work or that it doesn't stop COVID.  I took issue with this comment


Alan L Serve said:


> My dear friends,
> A vote of "no"
> is a vote for death.


Being cautious or skeptical is NOT a vote for death as you put it.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Dec 24, 2020)

@silver , that is very well said and should serve as an example of how to make a solid argument for getting the vaccine.


----------



## Alan L Serve (Dec 24, 2020)

ffemt8978 said:


> I never said it didn't work or that it doesn't stop COVID.  I took issue with this comment
> 
> Being cautious or skeptical is NOT a vote for death as you put it.


My dear friend,
There is no legitimacy
in vaccine-skepticism
at all


----------



## E tank (Dec 24, 2020)

Alan L Serve said:


> My dear friend,
> There is no legitimacy
> in vaccine-skepticism
> at all


There is major moral concern that a lot of people may have to violate their consciences to receive the vaccine because of the ethically problematic use of aborted fetal cell lines used in production of the AstraZeneca vaccine and in testing of the other 2. That you may not share that concern doesn't make it invalid or illegitimate.


----------



## Jim37F (Dec 24, 2020)

Well its official, I am not getting the Pfizer shot.

I did however, just get a dose of the Moderna shot this morning


----------



## Carlos Danger (Dec 24, 2020)

Alan L Serve said:


> My dear friend,
> There is no legitimacy
> in vaccine-skepticism
> at all


First, skepticism does not equal denial. Reflexive denialism is just as bad as (but probably no worse than) reflexively accepting what you are instructed by authority. But those are both different than skepticism.

Second, skepticism is really just demanding that objectively and sufficiently convincing information and justification be provided before an individual grants support or consent. I struggle to see how that is ever a bad thing.

Third, there are many more historical examples of times that lack of skepticism was regretted than there are examples of times that skepticism itself was regretted.

Lastly, do individuals own their own bodies or not? Does self-determination actually exist? Are people free to make choices that may not - in the opinion of others -  be in their own self interests? Think about the potential ramifications of answering “no” to any of those questions.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Dec 24, 2020)

Alan L Serve said:


> My dear friend,
> There is no legitimacy
> in vaccine-skepticism
> at all


Wow...just wow.  Do you seriously believe that your viewpoint is the only one people are allowed to have?  Up to now, the only backing you've given your points boils down to "I'm right, everyone who disagrees with me is wrong because I say so".  That may work with your kids, but it doesn't and shouldn't work with adults.  Think long and hard about @Carlos Danger 's last paragraph above.

No "legitimacy in vaccine-skepticism at all", huh?  Then why does the CDC maintain this webpage?





__





						Historical Safety Concerns | Vaccine Safety | CDC
					

Read more about past vaccine safety concerns, how they have been resolved, and what we have learned.




					www.cdc.gov
				




Blind acceptance of something is just as bad as blind rejection of it.  There's been more than enough rhetoric about this pandemic and vaccine to prove some healthy skepticism along the way would have been beneficial to us all.


----------



## Summit (Dec 24, 2020)

Carlos Danger said:


> Second, skepticism is really just demanding that objectively and sufficiently convincing information and justification be provided before an individual grants support or consent. I struggle to see how that is ever a bad thing.
> 
> ...
> 
> Lastly, do individuals own their own bodies or not? Does self-determination actually exist? Are people free to make choices that may not - in the opinion of others -  be in their own self interests? Think about the potential ramifications of answering “no” to any of those questions.



Healthy skepticism is a good thing. However, one can be overly demanding in that you need all uncertainties constrained to near nothingness in timeframes that abrogates responsibility and benefits. This is hazardous thinking. As there is risk in every action, there is also risk in every inaction. This heuristic trap in decision-making is very easy to fall into, and very difficult to escape, but it must be negotiated.

People owning their own bodies? I will harp on you now for repeatedly trotting out this strawman of self-determination. Nobody is _forcing_ people to vaccinate for COVID! If it were so, we could have that debate, which has strong arguments for and against. But since that isn't so, that point of discussion is just silly to lean on.

People are being asked to make a risk vs benefit decision (self-determination) with surprisingly good amounts of information available such that the decision should ideally be fairly straight forward for most people if they would listen to the risk analysis in unemotional terms from reliable source. I argue that it is straightforward for most even if you only look at risk-benefit selfishly and not from a greater good viewpoint. Sadly, it is external influences distorting the discussion that have made this a hard decision when piled upon natural cognitive biases.


----------



## GMCmedic (Dec 24, 2020)

Carlos Danger said:


> Lastly, do individuals own their own bodies or not? Does self-determination actually exist? Are people free to make choices that may not - in the opinion of others - be in their own self interests? Think about the potential ramifications of answering “no” to any of those questions.



At the risk of going down a political rabbit hole, the normal "my body my choice" crowd is nowhere to be found lately.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Dec 24, 2020)

GMCmedic said:


> At the risk of going down a political rabbit hole, the normal "my body my choice" crowd is nowhere to be found lately.


Depends on the cause, I'd say.  But I agree we probably shouldn't go down that rabbit hole.


----------



## Emily Starton (Dec 24, 2020)

Itomaschik said:


> Hey, brothers and sisters. My agency is making the vaccine available to us 12/28. What are your thoughts on the Pfizer vaccine. Will you get it if you have a choice?


If I only have it but If not, I would likely not since I don't have the virus. I always at home since the pandemic started so I can guarantee my safeness and I also maintain cleanliness in my place.


----------



## Carlos Danger (Dec 24, 2020)

Summit said:


> People owning their own bodies? I will harp on you now for repeatedly trotting out this strawman of self-determination. *Nobody is forcing people to vaccinate for COVID!* If it were so, we could have that debate, which has strong arguments for and against. But since that isn't so, that point of discussion is just silly to lean on.


Not yet, of course. There isn't enough available now, and the vaccine is being administered under EUA. But what happens when more is available and full approval has been granted? The idea of compulsory vaccination for _everyone_ has already been floated by some state officials. If the courts disallow an outright government mandate, another idea is to incentivize employers to mandate vaccination for employees. It is also a popular idea in some circles that the public should have to show proof of vaccination to attend concerts and other public events. If any of those things happen, and public schools and colleges require the vaccine for attendance, then people ARE kind of being forced, aren't they? All that notwithstanding the constant attempts at placing undue social pressure and shame on those who may be able to articulate some pretty good reasons why they are skeptical of the necessity of them getting the vaccine. Trying to coerce someone to do something they don't want to do with their own body is a violation of autonomy, period. It doesn't matter if that coercion comes from a government official or a social media mob.



Summit said:


> People are being asked to make a risk vs benefit decision (self-determination) with surprisingly good amounts of information available such that the decision should ideally be fairly straight forward for most people if they would listen to the risk analysis in unemotional terms from reliable source. I argue that it is straightforward for most even if you only look at risk-benefit selfishly and not from a greater good viewpoint. Sadly, it is external influences distorting the discussion that have made this a hard decision when piled upon natural cognitive biases.


Surprisingly good amounts of information available to who? The average Joe Citizen who does not regularly peruse JAMA or NEJM? The amount and quality of data means nothing to them. To most people, a decision like this comes down to whether or not they trust the source advising them to do something. I suspect that the large majority of reasonable folks who care enough about their own health to have a regular relationship with a primary care provider will eventually take the vaccine once reassured by that PCP. But in the minds of many people, the public authorities who right now are taking to the media to implore us all to take this vaccine as soon as possible haven't exactly done a lot to earn trust lately. We can easily think of several times in recent memory that the authorities did not seem to know what they were doing, and many more that they generally did not appear to many to have the best interest of the public at heart. Even seemingly unrelated political issues have bearing on people's general trust in what the government tells them. People might reasonably wonder why they should believe these officials on the necessity of getting this vaccine when they have such good reason to distrust them on so many other issues.

But none of that is even the main problem, because it isn't even really about trust to a lot of people. The fact is, after doing that risk vs benefit analysis that you mention, many people just aren't convinced that they personally need to get the vaccine. It isn't that they necessarily think the vaccine is unsafe, it's that they know that if they aren't in a high risk group, their chance of becoming seriously ill with COVID is extremely small, and they also know that as convincingly positive as all the trial data may be, there is still NO knowledge of the long-term efficacy and safety of the vaccine. So an individual who is young and healthy and who doesn't work in healthcare or regularly have contact with high-risk individuals could very reasonably wonder, "Why should I rush out to get this? All the people likely to get really sick with COVID will be vaccinated soon as will their healthcare providers, so what is the harm in me just passing on it at least until it's been around for a while?". You can blame that skepticism on cognitive biases or external influences if you want, but that thinking seems quite rational to me.


----------



## VentMonkey (Dec 24, 2020)

It’s Christmas Eve. **** Covid, bros. Just for one night...


----------



## jgmedic (Dec 25, 2020)

Emily Starton said:


> If I only have it but If not, I would likely not since I don't have the virus. I always at home since the pandemic started so I can guarantee my safeness and I also maintain cleanliness in my place.


Huh? So you wont get the vaccine unless you get COVID? That kinda defeats the purpose of a vaccine.


----------



## jgmedic (Dec 25, 2020)

The problem here isn't the people in this thread making the argument pro or con. You guys all have reasonable educational levels and a basic understanding of the medicine behind this. That's at least a semi-informed decision you're making. There are FB posts galore about mRNA changing your DNA, or the govt using the vaccine to track people and take away their rights, or give them some sort of other diseases. These are the people I worry about, who've taken a hardline stance based on misinformation and/or pseudo-science. Just like your standard "dO yOuR OwN rEsEaRcH" anti-vaxxer.


----------



## medichopeful (Dec 25, 2020)

I got Step 1 of the Pfizer vaccine.  The only thing I noticed is better cell phone coverage from the 5G chip they implanted.

In all seriousness, the only side effects I had was a little arm tingling that went away, a little dizziness that went away, and feeling like a took a pretty good punch in the arm for about 36 hours.  That's it.  I'm sure Step 2 will be worse, but I'd rather feel like crap for a bit than get the Rona.


----------



## Melch (Dec 25, 2020)

Hell yes!!!!!

Covid killed more people these last three hours than if the entire population of the US got the worst vaccine of the last 60 years. This vaccine is a no-brainer. Just get it.

This vaccine is particularly safe, but some of the side effects can be more than disconcerting. I had a sore arm (Pfizer, first dose only) and a little "malaise" for two days, but an acquaintance, who is an anesthesiologist, and one of the smartest doctors I ever met, actually had symptoms that mimicked a stroke and went to the ER. That was followed by a migraine.

But she is going back for the second dose. 

And now that I have the microchip (are people really that stupid?), I can watch old movies and YouTube training in my head.


----------



## Melch (Dec 25, 2020)

akflightmedic said:


> I am in charge of the vaccine program for the entire county where I work. My service was tasked by the state to control, deliver, and administer...I was tasked by my agency to be point man. Yay me! Zoom meetings out the *** thus far, info forthcoming. But yes, I will be getting the vaccine. Amazing how many of my peers who are completely against it.
> 
> Due to my food allergies I had great concern hearing the very broad "if you have ever reacted to food..." do not take it or take it with extreme caution. This annoyed me because every freaking article kept saying "food" and not which food. I think that would be very useful information ya know.


There were 10 paramedics and four nurses administering the vaccine, and in Vermont, even EMTs can administer Epinephrine from our stock with online approval. So having a shellfish allergy, I was fairly sure that if I did go into anaphylaxis, it wouldn't be a problem.


----------



## Melch (Dec 25, 2020)

Carlos Danger said:


> Good for you. Your virtue signaling game is tight 👊.
> 
> Meanwhile, some of those who you are hoping get fired over not wanting the vaccine have truly been on the front lines (to correctly use an over-used phrase) of putting themselves at risk to take care of sick, infectious COVID patients every day of the past year: the intensivists, RNs, RRTs and CNAs who have worked double shifts and 7 day weeks at times because of the need. More than a few of whom actually got COVID, recovered, and went back to work as soon as they could. Even if you don't respect the ideas of autonomy and self-determination for normal people, do you really think that THESE FOLKS at least haven't earned the right to have some say in whether or not they are one of the guinea pigs?
> 
> I mean, does the vaccine really work in the real world, or not? If we aren't confident that it does, then we shouldn't be pushing it on anyone. If we are confident that it works, then all we really need to do in order to cut way down on M&M is to vaccinate the highest-risk populations, and anyone else that (voluntarily) takes the vaccine is just gravy. I just read about a poll that reported that about 60% of people said they will willingly take the vaccine, and 60% just happens to be roughly the percentage of the population that we need vaccinated in order to attain herd immunity (not that we really need "herd" immunity; we really just need older and sicker people to be immune). So perhaps the hard working, selfless healthcare workers who have been bearing most of the brunt of this all along don't really need to get "their resumes in order" after all.


There are enough people that should not take these vaccines that anyone who can should, and those who will not need to be out of circulation until COVID 19 is gone. 60% leaves room for it to stay alive and mutate meaning everyone has to take it again.

More people were killed these last three hours from Coronavirus than would be killed if every American was forced to take the worst vaccine of the last 60 years! If you can, do it.

Besides, I hear the microchip comes with a free year of Amazon Prime.


----------



## Carlos Danger (Dec 25, 2020)

Melch said:


> There are enough people that should not take these vaccines that anyone who can should, and those who will not need to be out of circulation until COVID 19 is gone. 60% leaves room for it to stay alive and mutate meaning everyone has to take it again.
> 
> More people were killed these last three hours from Coronavirus than would be killed if every American was forced to take the worst vaccine of the last 60 years! If you can, do it.
> 
> Besides, I hear the microchip comes with a free year of Amazon Prime.


Congratulations on missing the point completely.


----------



## Melch (Dec 25, 2020)

Carlos Danger said:


> Congratulations on missing the point completely.


I reread your post and think I got the point. 

We need to do our duty. Our duty is to get vaccinated!!!!!!!

I qualify for two of the slots on your list and have about 40 employees who qualify on one or two points. 

No one deserves anything. We are here to do our duty and stop this thing My employees, like me need to get vaccinated as soon as possible. In my state, my active volunteer EMT status got me the first shot on the 22cd (two weeks early, so I'm scared people are staying away in droves) and I'll be replacing any employee who refuses, except for medical reasons. They won't.

My father was an officer on a ship in WWII and he would be apoplectic at the thought of people who couldn't get a low-risk shot to help humanity. He gave up 3 years to help save the world; this is a much smaller request.


----------



## Summit (Dec 25, 2020)

@VentMonkey I'm spending my day taking care of ICU COVID patients. Kind of hard not to think about it.


Carlos Danger said:


> Not yet, of course. There isn't enough available now, and the vaccine is being administered under EUA. But what happens when more is available and full approval has been granted?


Not only is there not enough available, but mandating an EUA drug or vaccine is not kosher (unless you are the military). At the point of full FDA approval there will be orders of magnitude more safety data to go with it. In the meantime, you are hand-wringing about what people might maybe possibly do in the future... maybe. It is completely irrelevant to the current choices that Phase 1 recipients have... actually to anyone in any Phase until there is some sort of government mandate, which I don't expect. As far as private company requirements, as a good libertarian, I assume you are on board with "their business their rules," and a fully approved vaccine wouldn't be any different than influenza, varicella, MMR, Tdap or Hep B requirements by an employer. But at this point and in this thread, the topic is really just a speculative nonsequitor.



Carlos Danger said:


> Surprisingly good amounts of information available to who? The average Joe Citizen who does not regularly peruse JAMA or NEJM?


To the Phase 1 recipients who are not average Joe Citizens! That is who is getting the vaccine now. That is who is in this thread. People who work in healthcare or public safety who typically have good access, if they want it, to information and experts.




Carlos Danger said:


> The amount and quality of data means nothing to them. To most people, a decision like this comes down to whether or not they trust the source advising them to do something. I suspect that the large majority of reasonable folks who care enough about their own health to have a regular relationship with a primary care provider will eventually take the vaccine once reassured by that PCP. But in the minds of many people, the public authorities who right now are taking to the media to implore us all to take this vaccine as soon as possible haven't exactly done a lot to earn trust lately. We can easily think of several times in recent memory that the authorities did not seem to know what they were doing, and many more that they generally did not appear to many to have the best interest of the public at heart. Even seemingly unrelated political issues have bearing on people's general trust in what the government tells them. People might reasonably wonder why they should believe these officials on the necessity of getting this vaccine when they have such good reason to distrust them on so many other issues.


This is a well stated summary of some issues facing our society. I'll reemphasize your point about trusting PCPs. Studies suggest they are the most trusted source for the individual on the matter of vaccines.



Carlos Danger said:


> they also know that as convincingly positive as all the trial data may be, there is still NO knowledge of the long-term efficacy and safety of the vaccine.


I've outlined why this is not an accurate statement. There is knowledge and strongly suggestive data. There is NOT incontrovertible proof. There IS a difference between those things. You know this. Many do not. When healthcare professionals conflate these things, they create unrealistic expectations that cause people to default inappropriately to their innate precautionary principle.



Carlos Danger said:


> So an individual who is young and healthy and who doesn't work in healthcare or regularly have contact with high-risk individuals could very reasonably wonder, "Why should I rush out to get this? All the people likely to get really sick with COVID will be vaccinated soon as will their healthcare providers, so what is the harm in me just passing on it at least until it's been around for a while?". You can blame that skepticism on cognitive biases or external influences if you want, but that thinking seems quite rational to me.


The young healthy people who aren't involved in healthcare or high exposure are not going to even have a chance to get the vaccine until probably May or June. By then, 100s of million of people will have been vaccinated and there will be a year of data. The vaccine might even reach full FDA approval next summer or fall.

The reasonableness of the wonder should be easily answered by the very reasonable response: even for the lowest risk group for getting COVID, the cumulative chances of getting COVID are high! *The risk of negative outcomes from COVID for the lowest risk adults is still orders of magnitude lower than the risk of negative outcomes for receiving the vaccine. The benefit of the vaccine is still strong for the low risk individual and the community.*

The fact that there may be large amounts of wonder remaining is all about the attention bias from distortions perpetuated by loud authoritative non-experts, social media, and inherent distrust (which you well discussed above) even of actual experts, and the various other biases I have mentioned plus more.  Biases can lurk, or they can shine like a bunch of spotlights at tinsel town gala. You've even mentioned several in your posts... it seems odd that you find them well reasoned.


----------



## NomadicMedic (Dec 25, 2020)

We talk about the phase 1 people, the people in this thread, being relatively well informed. It’s worth noting that those of us who take part in EMS forums and discuss evidence-based medicine are outliers. The barriers for entry to EMS are so low that we are flooded with ill-informed, poorly educated low information voters. These are the ones that are dangerous. Others believe them because they sport an EMT patch and are perceived as some type of “expert”. These are the ones that scare me.


----------



## Summit (Dec 25, 2020)

Summit said:


> The reasonableness of the wonder should be easily answered by the very reasonable response: even for the lowest risk group for getting COVID, the cumulative chances of getting COVID are high! *The risk of negative outcomes from COVID for the lowest risk adults is still orders of magnitude lower than the risk of negative outcomes for receiving the vaccine. The benefit of the vaccine is still strong for the low risk individual and the community.*



Gotta get better at proof reading. That should read:

*The risk of negative outcomes from COVID for the lowest risk adults is still orders of magnitude HIGHER than the risk of negative outcomes for receiving the vaccine. The benefit of the vaccine is still strong for the low risk individual and the community.*


----------



## Jim37F (Dec 25, 2020)

Well it's been a little over a day since I got my first dose. No webbed feet or gills yet. I had a bit of a scratchy throat for a while. Biggest side effect was my being sore. Not major, like maybe a 1 or 2, just enough to be noticeable and slightly annoying. Most shots the arm soreness dissipated fairly quickly. My arm was sore all day, but waking up thats pretty much gone. 

Don't feel anymore or less tired than normal, and my microchip tracker isn't allowing me to access any 5G network myself lol


----------



## NomadicMedic (Dec 25, 2020)

For information.


----------



## wtferick (Dec 25, 2020)

Update from my first dose on Monday. 
Eating ham and watching TV.


----------



## hpclayto (Dec 25, 2020)

Do what you want. Don’t preach at others for not doing what you think they should do.


----------



## Peak (Dec 25, 2020)

hpclayto said:


> Do what you want. Don’t preach at others for not doing what you think they should do.



I agree. How dare those of us who have education in statistical analysis, epidemiology, public health, drug development, and so on make a recommendation based on our knowledge and experience. 🙄


----------



## ffemt8978 (Dec 25, 2020)

Melch said:


> More people were killed these last three hours from Coronavirus than would be killed if every American was forced to take the worst vaccine of the last 60 years! If you can, do it.


Source for this claim?


----------



## Carlos Danger (Dec 26, 2020)

Summit said:


> @VentMonkey I'm spending my day taking care of ICU COVID patients. Kind of hard not to think about it.
> 
> Not only is there not enough available, but mandating an EUA drug or vaccine is not kosher (unless you are the military). At the point of full FDA approval there will be orders of magnitude more safety data to go with it. In the meantime, you are hand-wringing about what people might maybe possibly do in the future... maybe. It is completely irrelevant to the current choices that Phase 1 recipients have... actually to anyone in any Phase until there is some sort of government mandate, which I don't expect. As far as private company requirements, as a good libertarian, I assume you are on board with "their business their rules," and a fully approved vaccine wouldn't be any different than influenza, varicella, MMR, Tdap or Hep B requirements by an employer. But at this point and in this thread, the topic is really just a speculative nonsequitor.
> 
> ...


I'm not going to continue arguing about it. The fact that you think the widespread skepticism is "all about" the "loud, authoritative non-experts" reeks of tone-deafness and a fundamental lack of understanding of just how deep of a hole government and health officials dug themselves into this past year, in terms of their credibility with much of the public. It's just like the boy who cried wolf. You can only cite "the data" as justification for nonsensical and self-contradictory measures so many times before citing "the data" becomes not just meaningless, but actually a warning of incompetence to follow and an invitation for disdain. If you cannot understand why reasonable folks would be skeptical of the advice of authorities at the end of 2020, then I am not going to put any more effort into trying to convince you that you should.


----------



## Carlos Danger (Dec 26, 2020)

Peak said:


> I agree. How dare those of us who have education in statistical analysis, epidemiology, public health, drug development, and so on make a recommendation based on our knowledge and experience. 🙄


I know! Like when that time when those who have education in statistical analysis, epidemiology, public health, drug development, and so on made a recommendation to send COVID positive patients back to their long-term care facilities? Or when they said that arresting surfers on deserted beaches and people attending parking-lot Easter church services in their cars with the windows rolled up was necessary to #flattenthecurve? Or do you mean when they first said that we shouldn't wear masks because they don't help, and then said we aren't allowed to go anywhere without masks? Maybe you mean when they deemed it was unsafe for small businesses to stay open, but totally fine if Walmart did? Or do you mean even before all that when the CDC and FDA spent critical weeks delaying the development and deployment of test and trace strategies? Or even before THAT, when the CDC said there was no reason to curtail international travel to and from COVID hotspots or even perform screening on people arriving in the US from those places? Oh, I know: you must be referring to the situation in NYC where people were herded into homeless shelters and forced to sleep practically on top of each other on the lobby floors in order to, you know, keep them from contracting COVID? 

How could anyone ever question the recommendations of those who have education in statistical analysis, epidemiology, public health, drug development, and so on!?!?


----------



## Summit (Dec 26, 2020)

Carles, We certainly would agree that the worst mistake leaders could make in a pandemic is to tell halftruths or mistruths because the moment the public believes that is happening, they will assume the worst. 1918 proved that. Unfortunately, in a pandemic, every mitigative action will be judged as too little too late by one perspective and a gross abusive overreach by another (particularly if it averts bad outcomes at notable cost).

While some of the things you claimed happened did and some only kinda did, few things happened with all the malice and incompetence you are implying. Much of the incompetence was due to political influence and interference against the wishes of the experts, particularly by the current Federal administration which lived a cloud of denial, state and local politicians too, other supposed malice was desperation often stemming from (often longstanding) inadequate preparation.

*As much as we can parse out the successes AND failures of this pandemic response, and there are many, of each, the greatest success in the entire response is the vaccine. *

Your continuous posting that can be accurately thematically summarized as: how everything is/was done wrong, nothing can be trusted, multiple hypothetical future maybes combined with a very narrow or alternative views on failures, and all of these as validation for vaccine hesitancy as "reasonable." Given that, one would then be very _reasonable_ if they were to interpret your posts as either nihilistic, immature, or thinly veiled antivaxxer crap. Except, you expect us to give you the benefit of the doubt because we know that you are a mature adult with a graduate degree in healthcare. So, I'm calling on you to validate that benefit because your repeat posts have elevated my doubts in you. I'll ask you flat out, what the in the world do you think the solution here is? What do you think, medic cum CRNA, is the right thing to be doing with respect to vaccine, combatting doubt, and why do you think it to be the right course?


----------



## Peak (Dec 26, 2020)

Carlos Danger said:


> I know! Like when that time when those who have education in statistical analysis, epidemiology, public health, drug development, and so on made a recommendation to send COVID positive patients back to their long-term care facilities? Or when they said that arresting surfers on deserted beaches and people attending parking-lot Easter church services in their cars with the windows rolled up was necessary to #flattenthecurve? Or do you mean when they first said that we shouldn't wear masks because they don't help, and then said we aren't allowed to go anywhere without masks? Maybe you mean when they deemed it was unsafe for small businesses to stay open, but totally fine if Walmart did? Or do you mean even before all that when the CDC and FDA spent critical weeks delaying the development and deployment of test and trace strategies? Or even before THAT, when the CDC said there was no reason to curtail international travel to and from COVID hotspots or even perform screening on people arriving in the US from those places? Oh, I know: you must be referring to the situation in NYC where people were herded into homeless shelters and forced to sleep practically on top of each other on the lobby floors in order to, you know, keep them from contracting COVID?
> 
> How could anyone ever question the recommendations of those who have education in statistical analysis, epidemiology, public health, drug development, and so on!?!?



No need to be so defensive. The post that I had quoted essentially said I’ll do what I want don’t tell me anything without any form of evidence or rational behind their decision making.

A professional should be able to separate their political frustrations and the ability to interpret data. Personally I’ve been very frustrated with the in effectiveness of political interventions being made, but I don’t allow that to skew that data that I get through the DDU.


----------



## Alan L Serve (Dec 26, 2020)

ffemt8978 said:


> Wow...just wow.  Do you seriously believe that your viewpoint is the only one people are allowed to have?  Up to now, the only backing you've given your points boils down to "I'm right, everyone who disagrees with me is wrong because I say so".  That may work with your kids, but it doesn't and shouldn't work with adults.  Think long and hard about @Carlos Danger 's last paragraph above.
> 
> No "legitimacy in vaccine-skepticism at all", huh?  Then why does the CDC maintain this webpage?
> 
> ...


My dear friend,
Vaccines are safe
and effective,
otherwise prove otherwise.


----------



## Tigger (Dec 26, 2020)

Carlos Danger said:


> First, skepticism does not equal denial. Reflexive denialism is just as bad as (but probably no worse than) reflexively accepting what you are instructed by authority. But those are both different than skepticism.
> 
> Second, skepticism is really just demanding that objectively and sufficiently convincing information and justification be provided before an individual grants support or consent. I struggle to see how that is ever a bad thing.
> 
> ...





ffemt8978 said:


> Wow...just wow.  Do you seriously believe that your viewpoint is the only one people are allowed to have?  Up to now, the only backing you've given your points boils down to "I'm right, everyone who disagrees with me is wrong because I say so".  That may work with your kids, but it doesn't and shouldn't work with adults.  Think long and hard about @Carlos Danger 's last paragraph above.
> 
> No "legitimacy in vaccine-skepticism at all", huh?  Then why does the CDC maintain this webpage?
> 
> ...


I guess I am confused as to why I should be so skeptical? I do not have an appreciation for vaccine science. I can and do read about it, but I am hardly educated in it. It would take an education for my opinion to be remotely meaningful when presented with "the data" (quotes are mine) related to the vaccine. 

What I can do is appreciate that the very vast majority of the medical community thinks this is safe and effective. The actual experts here don't seem to be in much disagreement. There are risks, which nobody seems to be really denying. So why does my opinion really matter again? I have a degree in political science and a paramedic certificate. I am no expert.

Often, I ask my patients to trust me when I say I have their best interests in mind when we get to some medical decision making. I have the information and some knowledge to guide decision making that they do not. It is a joint decision of course, but I think we all hope that our words carry a bit more weight than the average person's. So why is the vaccine so different? Am I just a sheep because I trust what the medical community, many who are employed by the government, has to say?

The world is exhausting enough for me without doubting the intentions of the very people who are trying to help me, especially since again, I am not even qualified to doubt!

Occam's Razor: the simplest explanation is usually the right one. I take this to heart. The people that are supposed to look out for me usually do. Sometimes they fail, but not usually out of malicious intent.


----------



## Carlos Danger (Dec 26, 2020)

Summit said:


> While some of the things you claimed happened did and some only kinda did, few things happened with all the malice and incompetence you are implying. Much of the incompetence was due to political influence and interference against the wishes of the experts, particularly by the current Federal administration which lived a cloud of denial, state and local politicians too, other supposed malice was desperation often stemming from (often longstanding) inadequate preparation.


I do wonder which specific things you think "only kinda" happened (or how you know that), but rather than go back and forth about the details of events that neither of us have first hand knowledge of, suffice it to say that, while our government has long been a bloated bureaucracy populated largely by those whose competence is significantly overestimated by both themselves and much of the public, this past year has provided us with numerous examples which are unique in their transparency and impact. I never claimed or implied that any of it was done with malice (though I think there are at least a few examples where you can very reasonably question motives), but a general lack of competence and dramatic over-estimation of their ability to control events is baked into the government at every level, regardless of politics, though politics does, of course, often make it worse. It certainly is not unique to the current administration.



Summit said:


> *As much as we can parse out the successes AND failures of this pandemic response, and there are many, of each, the greatest success in the entire response is the vaccine. *


On that point, we are in complete agreement.



Summit said:


> Your continuous posting that can be accurately thematically summarized as: how everything is/was done wrong, nothing can be trusted, multiple hypothetical future maybes combined with a very narrow or alternative views on failures, and all of these as validation for vaccine hesitancy as "reasonable."


First, let us make a clear distinction here between what _I _personally believe is true, and what I think are reasonable reservations for others to have, given both their limited understanding of things scientific and medical, and their current perspective on the (un)trustworthiness of our governments and health authorities.

As I've grown older and more educated and hopefully a little wiser, one thing that keeps making itself apparent to me is just how limited my knowledge really is. There are few things that I really _know_. Most of what I always thought I knew were really just things that I had been led to believe by some authority figure in my life, or something that I inferred after subconsciously querying an observation against a mental model that my brain had developed based on earlier experiences and teachings. Once you start to think about this, your biases become more apparent, and I think you become more open minded. You begin to wonder about the reasons and motivations behind every type of authority and much of what others believe and say. You take less at face value and become a skeptic in general. Not in a paranoid, tin-foil-hat way, and not necessarily in a negative way, but just in a I-wonder-if-that-is-really-the-whole-truth kind of way, which I think it pretty healthy. Maybe this is Maslow's self-actualization stage? I don't know. But add this to my libertarian political leanings and my strong beliefs in self-ownership and personal responsibility, and I am able to see things from other's point of view much better than I used to, and have real respect for their choices even if I think they are bad ones.



Summit said:


> Given that, one would then be very _reasonable_ if they were to interpret your posts as either nihilistic, immature, or thinly veiled antivaxxer crap.


I'm definitely not an anti-vaxxer. I voluntarily took the first shot of the two-part Pfizer vaccine at the first opportunity, and I have encouraged my family and friends to do the same. Nihillistic? No....I don't think anyone who knows me would describe me that way. Immature? Now that sounds like something you are throwing in just because you can't think of any other low-key insult that isn't too brash. Please.



Summit said:


> Except, you expect us to give you the benefit of the doubt because we know that you are a mature adult with a graduate degree in healthcare. So, I'm calling on you to validate that benefit because your repeat posts have elevated my doubts in you.


I don't expect the benefit of any doubt, and I promise that I will sleep just fine no matter how you view my comments. No one should listen to a word that I have to say just because I have a graduate degree. I do have a good understanding of physiology and pharmacology and a lot of practical experience making rapid assessments and using drugs to manipulate physiology acutely, but outside of anesthesia & resuscitation, my expertise drops off quickly. Because of that, my arguments should be taken at face value and if you don't think they stand on their own logic, then you should disregard them. I have never stated or implied that anyone should give my opinion on COVID or the vaccine any extra weight because I am any kind of authority.



Summit said:


> I'll ask you flat out, what the in the world do you think the solution here is? What do you think, medic cum CRNA, is the right thing to be doing with respect to vaccine, combatting doubt, and why do you think it to be the right course?


With respect to the vaccine, I think most people should take it, just like I think most people should exercise hard a few times a week and eat lots of vegetables and lean protein. That is very different than thinking that anyone should be forced to take it, or even shamed into taking it. It is also different than thinking someone is a science denier just because they aren't well educated on these things and don't have enough trust in the current system to take it.

With high-risk patients making up the vast majority of those hospitalized with COVID, we should see severe cases, hospitalizations, and deaths fall off precipitously once most of the high-risk population is vaccinated. Seeing the numbers improve quickly may make people more resistant to getting vaccinated. If they don't see a reason now, they really won't see a reason once the number of people getting sick with it decreases significantly.

Combatting doubt? I'm just a paramedic and CRNA who likes spending time with his family, shooting his guns, hanging at the beach, riding his dirt bike, and watching funny videos on YouTube. I'll tell anyone who asks me that I think the benefits of the vaccine easily outweigh the risks, but I'll leave the public health propaganda to someone else. I don't think it's gonna work right now. As I said before, I think once it's been out for a few months and people see that no one has grown a third eye and people start having conversations with their PCP's about it, more people who are currently against it will get it. But in the meantime, as I've argued ad nauseam, *distrust in the government on anything related to COVID is just too high right now. Like a drunk blowing most of his paycheck at the bar and then not having enough left to pay the rent, government blew it's credibility capital earlier this year on miscalculations, overreach, and outright lies and now doesn't have enough left to convince people to trust them on this.  As they say, "it is what it is".


*What you have to keep in mind is that, even before 2020, trust in government (Pew does a poll every year or two) had been eroding for decades and was at an all time low, I think 13% or 14%, in 2019. I would argue that people are totally correct for feeling that way. So once you superimpose the huge SNAFUs of 2020 onto the already dismal amount of trust, well, here you go. Actions have consequences for governments as well as for individuals.


----------



## Carlos Danger (Dec 26, 2020)

Peak said:


> No need to be so defensive. The post that I had quoted essentially said I’ll do what I want don’t tell me anything without any form of evidence or rational behind their decision making.


Defensive? Not being defensive in the least. I just can't help but call out _argumentum ad verecundiam_ when I see it. Sorry.



Tigger said:


> I guess I am confused as to why I should be so skeptical? I do not have an appreciation for vaccine science. I can and do read about it, but I am hardly educated in it. It would take an education for my opinion to be remotely meaningful when presented with "the data" (quotes are mine) related to the vaccine.



Has someone said or implied that YOU should be skeptical? What reason did they give?



Tigger said:


> What I can do is appreciate that the very vast majority of the medical community thinks this is safe and effective. The actual experts here don't seem to be in much disagreement. There are risks, which nobody seems to be really denying. So why does my opinion really matter again? I have a degree in political science and a paramedic certificate. I am no expert.


I feel the same. "Trust" that we are being given good information on which to base a good decision is all most of us can do. Few of us really "know" the science well enough to "know" that any given thing is the right thing to do.

The thing is, some people just don't have the confidence in the medical community right now to trust them on this. Whether we think that is right or wrong, those folks have reasons for feeling the way they do. It doesn't make them stupid or "science deniers". It just means they have a different perspective, and they deserve more respect than I think they've been given by a lot of our community.


----------



## Peak (Dec 27, 2020)

Carlos Danger said:


> Defensive? Not being defensive in the least. I just can't help but call out _argumentum ad verecundiam_ when I see it. Sorry.



Unless you have more than one log in, I didn’t call you out on anything. You replied to a statement I made to another poster.


----------



## DrParasite (Dec 27, 2020)

ffemt8978 said:


> Source for this claim?


I'm guessing @Melch was referring to the flu vaccine of 1976, which caused 3 people to die from heart attacks and dozens of vaccine recipients were diagnosed with Guillain-Barré syndrome.  This was out of 45 million people (source: https://www.history.com/news/swine-flu-rush-vaccine-election-year-1976)

now, compare that to the hourly deathrate of 125/hr, as per https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/u...-weekly-fatalities-reach-new-high/ar-BB1bYZg6

So if there were 5 dozen with the syndrome, and the 3 who died from MIs, that's 63 people.  in the past 3 hours, 375 people died from COVID.

Unless he meant another vaccine, in which case, I'll let him provide that information.


----------



## Tigger (Dec 27, 2020)

Carlos Danger said:


> Defensive? Not being defensive in the least. I just can't help but call out _argumentum ad verecundiam_ when I see it. Sorry.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I suppose I interpreted "Third, there are many more historical examples of times that lack of skepticism was regretted than there are examples of times that skepticism itself was regretted. As well as:


> Blind acceptance of something is just as bad as blind rejection of it. There's been more than enough rhetoric about this pandemic and vaccine to prove some healthy skepticism along the way would have been beneficial to us all.


I am not sure who is supposed to be skeptical then if these were not directed at all of us. And again, I am not sure why I am qualified to be questioning much related to the vaccine. I suppose you can argue there is a spin on everything and to try and take that away, I guess I trust the public health community to avoid doing this. 

And yes, some of my coworkers have told me that I should "be careful" around the vaccine and to be skeptical at anything provided by the government. They do not believe that public health or the government has their best interest at heart, and feel that they will be harmed by the vaccine. They feel that the "fast rollout" indicates a conspiracy is at a play and that mRNA vaccines are going to rewrite DNA in their body which will harm them. They also do not believe that they have any responsibility to receive _any_ vaccinations despite routinely coming into contact with immunocompromised people regularly who may not have had "normal" vaccinations. I am not sure why I am supposed to provide equal weight to their opinions when they cannot be bothered to deal in facts. 

Frankly if you cannot provide some science as to why the vaccine is harmful, why again do I need to give them the benefit of the doubt?


----------



## ffemt8978 (Dec 27, 2020)

DrParasite said:


> I'm guessing @Melch was referring to the flu vaccine of 1976, which caused 3 people to die from heart attacks and dozens of vaccine recipients were diagnosed with Guillain-Barré syndrome.  This was out of 45 million people (source: https://www.history.com/news/swine-flu-rush-vaccine-election-year-1976)
> 
> now, compare that to the hourly deathrate of 125/hr, as per https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/u...-weekly-fatalities-reach-new-high/ar-BB1bYZg6
> 
> ...


Except the Smallpox vaccine and its 1 in 1 million mortality rate fell within his time frame.

Edit to follow my own comments:  








						Smallpox Vaccine: Contraindications, Administration, and Adverse Reactions
					

Since the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, and the anthrax exposures in the following weeks, concern that smallpox could be used as a biologic weapon has increased. Public health departments and the U.S. military have begun the process of vaccinating soldiers and civilian...




					www.aafp.org


----------



## ffemt8978 (Dec 27, 2020)

Alan L Serve said:


> My dear friend,
> Vaccines are safe
> and effective,
> otherwise prove otherwise.


Why do I need to prove something I never claimed?  You're the one making claims without offering any proof.  I'm just calling you out on your rhetoric and hyperbole because this issue is too important for such nonsense.

But here you go...no vaccine is 100% safe and effective.  Every one has risks, no matter how small.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Dec 27, 2020)

Tigger said:


> I suppose I interpreted "Third, there are many more historical examples of times that lack of skepticism was regretted than there are examples of times that skepticism itself was regretted. As well as:
> 
> I am not sure who is supposed to be skeptical then if these were not directed at all of us. And again, I am not sure why I am qualified to be questioning much related to the vaccine. I suppose you can argue there is a spin on everything and to try and take that away, I guess I trust the public health community to avoid doing this.
> 
> ...


My point about rhetoric and skepticism was directed at the early stages when a little skepticism and caution in the early days by agencies and experts like the WHO may have gone a long ways in reducing the impact of this pandemic.

To be clear...I am not an anti-vaxer, nor am I against this vaccine.  What I am against is the extremism of both side of the arguments.  I am against the concept of if you don't agree with me or do things I approve of then you are wrong, evil, or even "vote for death" no matter what side is using those tactics.

I am all for reasonable and intelligent discussions where each side presents their arguments, their logic and facts supporting those arguments, and their rebuttal to the other side's arguments.  A core principle of that is that if you make the claim, you need to prove it.  It is not up to the rest of us to Google-Fu your support.

I don't even have an issue with personal opinions like "I'm getting the vaccine because I feel it is safe" or "I'm not getting the vaccine because I don't trust it yet."  Those are positions that only apply to the person making the statement and are receptive to reasonable and intelligent discussions.  I do have a problem with opinions like being against the vaccine is a "vote for death".  Those types of opinions attempt to use emotion, rhetoric, hyperbole, and group pressure to force complaince with either sides viewpoint without allowing any room or tolerance for opposing views.


----------



## Summit (Dec 27, 2020)

ffemt8978 said:


> Except the Smallpox vaccine and its 1 in 1 million mortality rate fell within his time frame.
> 
> Edit to follow my own comments:
> 
> ...


 absolutely. And smallpox was a high-risk horror of a disease. This goes back to risk vs benefit. Thatrisk stopped being worth the benefit when smallpox was eliminated by global vaccination efforts. Now no one gets the smallpox vaccine Except for some researchers and military. 

Similarly, what polio vaccine is used in a region depends on what the status of polio is (endemic or eradicated) because different levels of benefit vs risk.


----------



## PotatoMedic (Dec 27, 2020)

Summit said:


> absolutely. And smallpox was a high-risk horror of a disease. This goes back to risk vs benefit. Thatrisk stopped being worth the benefit when smallpox was eliminated by global vaccination efforts. Now no one gets the smallpox vaccine Except for some researchers and military.
> 
> Similarly, what polio vaccine is used in a region depends on what the status of polio is (endemic or eradicated) because different levels of benefit vs risk.


Also what can be easily transported to those regions.


----------



## Tigger (Dec 27, 2020)

To add, we are healthcare providers. We have a duty to educate the public to an extent. If the science is good, we should be saying that and not "well it's up to you." It's of course up to the patient, but people look to healthcare providers for advice and we best not forget that.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Dec 27, 2020)

Tigger said:


> To add, we are healthcare providers. We have a duty to educate the public to an extent. If the science is good, we should be saying that and not "well it's up to you." It's of course up to the patient, but people look to healthcare providers for advice and we best not forget that.


Agreed, with the caveat our advice shouldn't be along the lines of do it because I said so.


----------



## SandpitMedic (Dec 27, 2020)

Unpopular opinion here- Anyone asking an EMT or paramedic for serious detailed medical advice on vaccines is asking the wrong “healthcare provider.”

The main duty we have in EMS is to slam that bang energy drink and quit loitering around in the EMS room because there are calls holding. Public education on virology isn’t our domain


----------



## Tigger (Dec 28, 2020)

SandpitMedic said:


> Unpopular opinion here- Anyone asking an EMT or paramedic for serious detailed medical advice on vaccines is asking the wrong “healthcare provider.”
> 
> The main duty we have in EMS is to slam that bang energy drink and quit loitering around in the EMS room because there are calls holding. Public education on virology isn’t our domain


Not serious detailed medical advice, more along "most of the medical community believes this is safe and the data supports that." Like I have said ad nauseum, I am not an expert and will not pretend to be one. I will support the conclusions of the experts and not let my own lack of understanding cloud _their_ message.  Whether or not we should be in this position, we are. Not to an extensive degree, but it would be quite naive to think that no one will ever ask you about a vaccine. 

But you call, we haul, that's all, right?


----------



## Aprz (Dec 28, 2020)

I got my shot earlier this afternoon. I didn't lose all my hair.


----------



## GMCmedic (Dec 28, 2020)

Is there amy guidance on going past 21 days between doses for pfizer? Best I can do is 28 unless I change my schedule around.


----------



## Carlos Danger (Dec 28, 2020)

Tigger said:


> I am not sure who is supposed to be skeptical then if these were not directed at all of us. And again, I am not sure why I am qualified to be questioning much related to the vaccine. I suppose you can argue there is a spin on everything and to try and take that away, I guess I trust the public health community to avoid doing this.
> 
> Frankly if you cannot provide some science as to why the vaccine is harmful, why again do I need to give them the benefit of the doubt?


I've never argued that you or that anyone else on this forum or elsewhere should be skeptical about the vaccine. Not with a single word. Why would I do that if I were going to be one of the first folks in line to get the vaccine myself?

What I have done is repeatedly given examples of why so many people out there feel skeptical about the vaccine (not even necessarily about the safety of the vaccine; often just about the necessity of them personally receiving it), and justify why feelings that way doesn't make those people stupid. 

If I have failed to convince you that skepticism is a rational reaction for many people given their knowledge and perspective on things right now, that's fine.



Tigger said:


> To add, we are healthcare providers. We have a duty to educate the public to an extent. If the science is good, we should be saying that and not "well it's up to you." It's of course up to the patient, but people look to healthcare providers for advice and we best not forget that.


Completely disagree that it is appropriate for me to try to "educate people" into making a decision on anything that I do not myself thoroughly understand and cannot confidently explain throughly.  

If it comes up, I'll tell anyone who asks - family member, friend, patient - that the trial data and real world experience thus far appears to indicate that the vaccine is very safe, and that the benefits appear to easily outweigh the risks, especially for patients who are at high risk of developing severe COVID. I'll even voluntarily disclose that I received it and had no issues at all and that I feel good about my choice. If that helps someone make their own decision, great. But that information is all easily accessible in the media. I won't be telling them anything they haven't already been told repeatedly. 

What I won't do is try to talk someone into receiving a drug that doesn't even have full FDA approval and that I can't explain anything about or answer any questions about. I'll refer them to their PCP, who presumably has done a lot more reading on this than I and is well versed in routinely recommending all manner of things as a matter of protocol.  

Even when it comes to anesthesia - something with which I have actual expertise - I don't ever try to talk patients into anything that I don't know inside and out. I have to not only feel strongly that this thing is in their best interest, but also be able to explain it thoroughly in simple or technical terms, including being able to answer pretty much any conceivable questions that they may have.


----------



## DrParasite (Dec 28, 2020)

My FD (through the county public health dept) is offering the vaccine, and several of our officers (Captains and Lts) are opting out, as well as line firefighters.  Chief isn't thrilled (he's getting it, and thinks others should too), but he respects their decision, and he isn't going to force anyone to get it.

however, masks are now mandatory from the moment you enter the station until you leave (exception if you are isolated in the bunk rooms, actively eating, or sleeping).

masks are mandatory when you are in the apparatus.

and if you don't receive the shot, you will be required to sign a covid release form, releasing the department from any liability if you contract the virus, releasing the department from any workers compensation claims and any sick time lability that the department may incur.

But here is some information directly from the Pfizer fact sheet:


> The Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine is a vaccine and may prevent you from getting COVID-19. There is no U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved vaccine to prevent COVID-19.


So other than the standard legal disclaimers, take that statement to mean whatever you want.

I'm getting the first shot a week from Saturday.    I'm hoping it makes me lose 20 lbs, let me sleep better, and grant me the ability to leap tall buildings in a single bound.  Bonus will be X ray vision


----------



## Alan L Serve (Dec 29, 2020)

ffemt8978 said:


> Why do I need to prove something I never claimed?  You're the one making claims without offering any proof.  I'm just calling you out on your rhetoric and hyperbole because this issue is too important for such nonsense.
> 
> But here you go...no vaccine is 100% safe and effective.  Every one has risks, no matter how small.


My dear friend,
These vaccines are
safe
and effective. Period.


----------



## Ensihoitaja (Dec 29, 2020)

GMCmedic said:


> Is there amy guidance on going past 21 days between doses for pfizer? Best I can do is 28 unless I change my schedule around.


Our hospital is saying you can go over 21 days if your schedule doesn't permit getting the second dose in the "ideal 17-21 day window"


----------



## ffemt8978 (Dec 29, 2020)

Alan L Serve said:


> My dear friend,
> These vaccines are
> safe
> and effective. Period.


They may be, or they may have side effects we're not aware of yet. 

Either way, that is still a far cry from your claim that a vote against getting vaccinated is a vote for death.

I've yet to see you offer any supporting evidence to back up your beliefs, so at this point it appears as if you think everyone should believe and agree with you simply because you stated your opinion.

You're the one stating personal opinions as facts, and repeatedly stated that there is no legitimacy in vaccine related skepticism, being cautious about a new vaccine is voting for death and a general intolerance of any viewpoint that does not mirror your own.

Why should anyone listen to you?  What are your qualifications to determine what other people should do with their lives?  What is the source for your beliefs?  Have you actually read the medical studies on the vaccine or are you just parroting what you hear in the media?

I've said it before and I'll say it again.  "Do it because I said so" may work with your kids, but will not and should not work with adults.  This subject is too important to handle with anything other than logic, supporting facts and reason.

Period.


----------



## GMCmedic (Dec 29, 2020)

Ensihoitaja said:


> Our hospital is saying you can go over 21 days if your schedule doesn't permit getting the second dose in the "ideal 17-21 day window"


I finally got a hold of someone, 21-24 days no exceptions. Buuuuut, my company just dropped the 48 hours off requirement for med crew. Pilots are still held to it by the FAA.


----------



## Alan L Serve (Dec 30, 2020)

ffemt8978 said:


> They may be, or they may have side effects we're not aware of yet.
> 
> Either way, that is still a far cry from your claim that a vote against getting vaccinated is a vote for death.
> 
> ...



My dear friend,
COVID is not
benign. Vaccinate
and be safe.


----------



## NomadicMedic (Dec 30, 2020)

Getting mine on Saturday


----------



## Akulahawk (Dec 30, 2020)

Aprz said:


> I got my shot earlier this afternoon. I didn't lose all my hair.


So you only lost _most_ of your hair. Hopefully you haven't grown any new appendages...


----------



## Akulahawk (Dec 30, 2020)

NomadicMedic said:


> Getting mine on Saturday


I'm due to get mine on Monday. 2nd dose 3 weeks after that.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Dec 30, 2020)

Akulahawk said:


> So you only lost _most_ of your hair. Hopefully you haven't grown any new appendages...


Don't you have to have hair to lose in the first place?


----------



## Akulahawk (Dec 30, 2020)

ffemt8978 said:


> Don't you have to have hair to lose in the first place?


I was politely assuming there was hair available to be lost...


----------



## Aprz (Dec 31, 2020)

@Akulahawk  When you said appendages, I didn't know how to say it nicely. I've been joking with all my friends about it, haha!!!

If I could, I'd whip you guys with my hair, but I don't want to damage the ends.


----------



## NomadicMedic (Jan 2, 2021)

Got vaccinated today. cell phone reception marginally better.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Jan 2, 2021)

NomadicMedic said:


> Got vaccinated today. cell phone reception marginally better.


How is your browsing speed here at EMTLife.com?


----------



## NomadicMedic (Jan 2, 2021)

ffemt8978 said:


> How is your browsing speed here at EMTLife.com?



I think tonight when I go to sleep I’m updating to windows 10.


----------



## CbrMonster (Jan 2, 2021)

I am opting not to get it, I don’t trust it, it was rushed with no long term testing.

this may not be a well founded argument but I feel the first batch of people are the test for long term side effects.

I don’t trust big pharmaceutical, they’re like politicians they’re going to lie cheat steal do what ever to get their way. I do not think they have anyone’s best interest in their minds but only the monetary gain. 

I am not an anti vaxxer I’m up to date on everything else we generally vaccinate for.

however I did not know as someone else mentioned that the flu shot has h1n1 in it.

I opted out of my flu shot this year due to the fact that I semi suspected that they would try to throw some covid vaccine in it to.

I may be diving to deep in the conspiracy pond but I also feel that I’m looking at it logically with common sense.


----------



## Fezman92 (Jan 2, 2021)

I should be getting mine on Monday.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Jan 2, 2021)

NomadicMedic said:


> I think tonight when I go to sleep I’m updating to windows 10.


🤮

So the vaccine does have negative side effects.


----------



## Atherthor (Jan 2, 2021)

Peak said:


> I got mine today. My arms a bit sore and I have some nasal congestion, both of which I get with the flu quad every year.


Same. Sore arm, light fatigue. Back on the truck the next day.


----------



## Summit (Jan 2, 2021)

CbrMonster said:


> the flu shot has h1n1 in it.
> 
> I opted out of my flu shot this year due to the fact that I semi suspected that they would try to throw some covid vaccine in it to.
> 
> I may be diving to deep in the conspiracy


I have no words... that post is an embarrassment to yourself and EMS.


----------



## CbrMonster (Jan 2, 2021)

Summit said:


> I have no words... that post is an embarrassment to yourself and EMS.


Why?


----------



## Summit (Jan 2, 2021)

CbrMonster said:


> Why?


I was going to say that as a healthcare professional you should be able to realize or easily glean through some rudimentary self education those statements are factually inaccurate.

But that's wrong and my post was partially wrong.

You are an EMT and we do not prepare EMTs to self-educate, nor teach anything about vaccines other than you have to get your Hep B titer/series. We barely teach EMTs anything about the immune system, just mention some white cells and a complaint/finding based treatment of sepsis, and just a smidgen of critical thinking. That's not a dig on you, just matter of fact assessment of EMS education. Some EMTs are educated in these things through other means, but not EMT school.

So, it is wrong for me to hold it against an EMT not knowing that the flu shots do not contain live virus, or that containing inactivated H1N1 is the very means through which your body learns to fight it without suffering the infection. It is wrong for me to hold it against and EMT for not self-educating.

But not getting a flu shot because you thought "they" would "sneak in a COVID vaccine" is just... wow... seriously?


----------



## CbrMonster (Jan 2, 2021)

I will say I am by no means extremely versed in the knowledge of vaccines but I understand the general principal of how they work.

I self educate, maybe I need to do more on vaccines, specifically on Covid. But I do seek out things I generally do not understand for simple self betterment or to improve my patient care.

So I didn’t know previous year flu vaccines included h1n1 I don’t see how that makes me an embarrassment to myself or ems.

I have a strong distrust against a vaccine that the government has said that we the general public can not hold it liable for adverse health effects. That doesn’t seem just a little fishy to you? I don’t run around wearing a tinfoil hat but that raises some red flags in my books.

big pharmaceutical companies have lied to the public about what’s in its medications or what side effects it may cause before so why blindly trust them now? Especially when there is such a hard push for it.

I don’t see that as totally irrational

clearly i’m not the only healthcare provider that seems to think it’s best to wait and see 









						Alarming number of US health care workers are refusing COVID-19 vaccine
					

US health care workers are first in line to receive the COVID-19 vaccine — but an alarming number across the country are refusing to do so.  Earlier this week, Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine disc…




					www.google.com


----------



## Mufasa556 (Jan 2, 2021)




----------



## hpclayto (Jan 3, 2021)

Well I’ve never gotten a flu shot either. I guess that makes me a doubly bad person.


----------



## Alan L Serve (Jan 3, 2021)

CbrMonster said:


> I am opting not to get it, I don’t trust it, it was rushed with no long term testing.
> 
> this may not be a well founded argument but I feel the first batch of people are the test for long term side effects.
> 
> ...


My dear friend,
Your position
is the position
of death.


----------



## akflightmedic (Jan 3, 2021)

Unsure if I posted in here or not with regards to the COVID vaccine...regardless, here is my story. I am high risk by all the scare stories being placed out there. I have battled severe allergies my entire life, I am allergic to shell fish, dyes, and tree nuts. At age 17 I went into anaphylactic shock after receiving my allergy shots, went into pulseless V-Tach, and was on a ventilator for two days. I have carried an epi-pen my entire life and have had to use it a few times over the decades.

So yes, I was scared to get the vaccine because out of 2 Million doses given, there had been FIVE reactions at the time. FIVE! LOL I figure I cannot win the lottery, but I will sure as heck win this statistical improbability.

Anyways, I am in charge of our administration program in my county, I set up the drive throughs, got all the area Chiefs briefed, appts scheduled and the clinics have been going well. So in prep for myself, I researched the heck out of the vaccine to the best of my ability. I researched what I could learn of the prior reactions, the ingredients of Moderna, and made a personal informed decision from there.

There is only ONE ingredient someone can be allergic to in Moderna. ONE. And that single ingredient is in darn near every food product, plastic, and who knows what else. I also learned the reactions were mild or pseudo. I do not mean these people faked it, I mean that our bodies are very strange in the sense that we can manifest symptoms, very real symptoms, just by overthinking them. Think about people who break out in stress hives, or work themselves into a panic attack. I myself have had exposures over the years where I did not react severely, but until I calmed myself down and realized I was not actually reacting, I only felt like I was reacting.

With all that in mind, I prepped my team. I was the last shot of the day. I had them place an IV, I took my shot laying on a stretcher, and they had all airway equipment and meds ready to roll. I was surrounded by 6 Paramedics who all were very kind and sympathetic to my situation. No jokes were made about me, just distractor jokes while we prepped and then waited after I got my shot. 

I got my injection and yes, I started feeling funny and got tight in my throat. This was me being anxious, 100%. I just square breathed, let a minute pass and the symptoms dissipated. And if you are laughing right now, that's cool...you should have seen me when I had to get my JE vaccine! 

I had no reactions to the vaccine. I had site injection tenderness, that is it. No sore arm, no sore muscle, not a single symptom of any kind. The next morning, the site no longer hurt either. Many of my colleagues all reported similar results. Ever being the skeptic, I wonder how many of the symptoms being reported are "true" in nature? I know how I can bring on stuff, so I unfairly apply that same possibility to others.

Regarding the vaccine itself, it may only last a few months, a year, few years, or not at all. I am ok with that, as I see the first hand negative effects of COVID almost daily in my line of work. Why on earth would I not take a vaccine which may prevent that? A vaccine that is nothing more than lipids/fats and will be broken down in no time at all. A vaccine that does not inject the virus in any form and is devoid of microchips. 

I will get my second dose in a few weeks and then 2 weeks or so after that, in theory I should be 95% +/- immune to catching COVID. Only time will tell. Does it mean I will relax my PPE standards and caution with social distancing? Not at all! Until we have many more months of the vaccine program, that thought will not cross my mind. I do however rest easier knowing that I have done all I can do to protect myself. I fail to see how big Pharma, the Govt, or scientists have any benefit from conspiring together to inject me with the vaccine.


----------



## akflightmedic (Jan 3, 2021)

On day 1 of the clinic, I was able to give the first dose to Carl. He gave permission for me to share as he thinks this should be blasted everywhere. I will post his blurb and our pics.

"Carl Blondell, Paramedic aged 68, active Frontline 911 Medic, wicked smart, world traveler, avid skier, currently building his own house in a remote location, first became an EMT in 1973....requested to be our first recipient of Moderna COVID vaccine today. All went well, and the clinic is off to a great start!!"


----------



## ffemt8978 (Jan 3, 2021)

Alan L Serve said:


> My dear friend,
> Your position
> is the position
> of death.


Unless you can offer some proof of that claim, it is just a position you do not support.

Seriously, stop trying to influence people with factless, emotional arguments for getting the vaccine.  You're doing more harm than good trying to convince people to get vaccinated.


----------



## Summit (Jan 3, 2021)

@Alan L Serve c'mon guy, we've always smiled and nodded at your poetic posts, but you are not changing anyone's mind by repeating the same exhortations. Add some actual content maybe?

@CbrMonster  asked me for info to read/watch. I gave him a few journal articles, briefs, and some youtubes including one my lectures. 

I'm posting that in this thread because I was not nice yet his reaction is not what I was expecting, it is commendable. 

This forum has always been about promoting education. We should always commend those seeking knowledge. That is how EMS progresses.


----------



## MMiz (Jan 3, 2021)

Thankful for a vaccine, but wondering how we speed up the vaccination process.

What do we need to do at the national, state, and local levels to vaccinate more people?


----------



## NomadicMedic (Jan 3, 2021)

It was incredibly slow and inefficient when I got it. I expected a gym full of people getting stuck. It was very slow. Like a doctors appointment


----------



## DesertMedic66 (Jan 3, 2021)

I was the only one during the 30 minutes I was there. Took about 5 minutes of filling out paperwork then about 10 seconds for the injection and then the policy at the place I went to is to monitor you for 15 minutes


----------



## akflightmedic (Jan 3, 2021)

The drive thru I set up is very fast. I bring in 3-4 cars at a time, the people have already pre-filled their paperwork with some of the necessary info I need for the State report. They hand over their paper and Driver's license, one guy with iPad gets to inputting data. 2nd guy hands the laminated paper copy to the patient to read since this is what they will finger sign in the iPad, COVID Vaccine card is handed to patient for them to write their name and DOB on, the card is already pre-filled with LOT #/exp/location/next appt, and they are asked if they have any other questions or concerns. At this point, iPad guy is ready to ask the mandatory screening questions and get finger signature. iPad guy then places green card or yellow card in their windshield wiper. Injector guy then knows that person is ready for injection, green is 15 min wait, yellow is 30 min wait. After the injection, mandatory vaccine sheet given and time of injection written on the card. They then exit the bay and outside marshall puts them in the 15 min queue or has them park in the 30 minute lot.

Quick and easy....longest part is the wait post injection. We have them in and out of the bay in approximately 6-8 minutes or less.

Forgot to mention, the State EMS board has us do a "run sheet" on every single individual. However, they set up in the online system a single vaccine clinic option and once in that tab, we scan their DL barcode and it imports their info into the report. There is minimal data needed. After getting the basics, I can hit "next patient" and the report will auto generate a run number for each individual patient within that day's clinic. I then can go back at the end of the clinic to update/input any missed info. Also, the State wrote the narrative for us and it auto-populates once a patient's DL bar code is scanned.


----------



## MMiz (Jan 3, 2021)

I'm not sure what I was expecting, but I imagined that the vaccine would be rolled out with military-like speed, manpower, and consistency.

It seems like every site has their own plan/process.

@akflightmedic What are your limiting factors?  What's holding you back?

Doses available?  Manpower?  Patients?  Space?


----------



## akflightmedic (Jan 3, 2021)

Doses available is the only limiting factor.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Jan 3, 2021)

MMiz said:


> I'm not sure what I was expecting, but I imagined that the vaccine would be rolled out with military-like speed, manpower, and consistency.


🤣🤣🤣🤣

As any veteran can tell you, the military invented hurry up and wait, so all those terms are like unicorns as far as the military is concerned.


----------



## Akulahawk (Jan 4, 2021)

I just got my 1st dose this morning. Aside from some very minor soreness, I'm doing great so far. I had the choice of either the Pfizer or the Moderna vaccine and I chose the Pfizer. The outcomes are basically the same between these two, but the Pfizer option is 1 week quicker so I went with that. At my hospital the actual process was pretty efficient. It seemed that that the longest time I spent waiting for something was the 15 minute wait for discharge.


----------



## Akulahawk (Jan 4, 2021)

MMiz said:


> Thankful for a vaccine, but wondering how we speed up the vaccination process.
> 
> What do we need to do at the national, state, and local levels to vaccinate more people?


National level: Not much, just ensure that there's enough vaccine reserved for the 2nd dose and get that out to the states in a timely manner so that those 2nd doses can be given on time. State: Ensure that vaccine injection sites are properly stocked for 1st (and as appropriate) 2nd doses. If you know how many 1st doses are given each day, you know how many doses to give in 21-ish or 28-ish days later. Local: have a plan for actually being able to herd cats. Make sure that you order and have enough vaccine supplies on hand, keep track of actual vaccinations given so you can order the 2nd dose and have it delivered on time. The locals that have an efficient delivery system, the limiting factor in all this is vaccine supply. 

Once we start vaccinating the public, the national pharmacies will probably do a fantastic job keeping track of all this stuff as for them, it's not much different than any other med they order and do refills for.


----------



## DrParasite (Jan 5, 2021)

got my first dose today... if i grow a third leg, I guess I will just end up running faster


----------



## ffemt8978 (Jan 5, 2021)

DrParasite said:


> got my first dose today... if i grow a third leg, I guess I will just end up running faster


Or tripping more often.

🤪


----------



## Alan L Serve (Jan 5, 2021)

ffemt8978 said:


> Unless you can offer some proof of that claim, it is just a position you do not support.
> 
> Seriously, stop trying to influence people with factless, emotional arguments for getting the vaccine.  You're doing more harm than good trying to convince people to get vaccinated.


My dear friend,
COVID is serious
and deadly, yet you're
not serious.


----------



## Tigger (Jan 5, 2021)

akflightmedic said:


> Doses available is the only limiting factor.


I am happy to hear that in your area. I have no faith that we can really standup an actual public vaccination program here locally which sucks. We've done an ok job for healthcare (very slow for those outside a hospital), but currently the only doses are with the hospitals and community vaccination programs will be a struggle for them unless public health takes the control back.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Jan 6, 2021)

Alan L Serve said:


> My dear friend,
> COVID is serious
> and deadly, yet you're
> not serious.


1) I've been serious in this entire thread unless it was in response to another member's post using humor

2) Humor can be a very effective tool in dealing with and educating others


----------



## DrParasite (Jan 6, 2021)

Alan L Serve said:


> My dear friend,
> COVID is serious
> and deadly, yet you're
> not serious.


My dear friend,
the flu is serious
and deadly, yet you're
not serious.

My dear friend,
the common cold is serious
and deadly, yet you're
not serious.

Every disease is deadly to someone.  Give it a rest


----------



## Luno (Jan 7, 2021)

Well, I tend to drop in here every now and then, but this particularly caught my attention.  Interestingly, we have healthcare professionals (I use that term loosely) that appear to have lost their focus.  In the end, our job is to advocate for our patients.  The unfortunate piece is that we have so little information.  I've had to have this conversation with other healthcare professionals who were second guessing whether to give the vaccine series simply because of lack of informed consent. (We can chase this rabbit hole, but the essence is can they consent with so many unknowns and the vaccine being in an EUA status.)  But plain english and honesty seem to be the best approach when we're advocating for the health of our communities and patients.  The truth, we have *no FDA approved vaccine for COVID-19*, this is explicitly stated in the EUA information sheet that is handed to our patients.  This *may* prevent the recipient from contracting COVID-19.  We are getting way ahead of ourselves even by stating that it is "safe" or "effective," because it has not been approved.  Additionally, *there is no definitive proof* that you cannot be a carrier after being vaccinated.  That all being said, I've reviewed the data gathered so far, and I believe that it does support the basis of the EUA, that the potential benefits outweigh the potential risks.  I believe that each person should make an informed decision based on their personal health and with the additional consideration that it may affect both those they care about and those patients that they care for.  Based on that, and the need for information, side effects and long term effects, I decided to get the vaccine.  I'm almost two weeks after dose one and I am enrolled in the vsafe program.  The responsibility is higher on those of us who accepted the opportunity to be part of this and we owe the rest of the world clear and accurate data.  Our participation in this allows those who can receive the vaccine later, a clear path with reliable information.  The key to health is information and informed consent, not shame or ridiculous half informed claims.


----------



## Luno (Jan 7, 2021)

Also, if anyone has any questions, feel free to PM me.


----------



## Summit (Jan 7, 2021)

CDC reports 1.1 anaphylaxis cases per 100K doses.


----------



## MMiz (Jan 7, 2021)

@Luno Good to see you!  What's up with your post seemingly contradicting your response to the poll?


----------



## Alan L Serve (Jan 8, 2021)

DrParasite said:


> My dear friend,
> the flu is serious
> and deadly, yet you're
> not serious.
> ...


My dear friend,
Imitation is the greatest
form of flattery. Yet,
you're very wrong.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Jan 8, 2021)

Alan L Serve said:


> My dear friend,
> Imitation is the greatest
> form of flattery. Yet,
> you're very wrong.


Prove it.

You've made the claim, now back it up.

Everyone else has managed to provide the basis for their arguments, yet you persist in using the discussion tactics of a toddler.  Your whole argument has been, " I'm right and you're wrong, and if you disagree with me I'll keep saying you're wrong."  Repeatedly saying something does not make it a fact, no matter how hard you try or how many times you repeat it.


----------



## Luno (Jan 8, 2021)

MMiz said:


> @Luno Good to see you!  What's up with your post seemingly contradicting your response to the poll?


Moderna...


----------



## SandpitMedic (Jan 9, 2021)

Luno said:


> Moderna...


Stock options. Haha!


----------



## Akulahawk (Jan 9, 2021)

My second vaccine injection is now on my calendar. I get mine in a couple weeks.


----------



## NomadicMedic (Jan 9, 2021)

Akulahawk said:


> My second vaccine injection is now on my calendar. I get mine in a couple weeks.


Mine is 1/30.


----------



## GMCmedic (Jan 9, 2021)

Im well over 72 hours since my second dose. Symptom free.


----------



## PotatoMedic (Jan 9, 2021)

I get pfizer number two tomorrow.  Almost exactly 24 hours from now


----------



## ffemt8978 (Jan 9, 2021)

The immune system and COVID: It’s still confusing
					

Antibodies may help, inflammation may hurt, but immunosuppressants are irrelevant?




					arstechnica.com
				




Well, that makes everything clear as mud.


----------



## Alan L Serve (Jan 10, 2021)

ffemt8978 said:


> Prove it.
> 
> You've made the claim, now back it up.
> 
> Everyone else has managed to provide the basis for their arguments, yet you persist in using the discussion tactics of a toddler.  Your whole argument has been, " I'm right and you're wrong, and if you disagree with me I'll keep saying you're wrong."  Repeatedly saying something does not make it a fact, no matter how hard you try or how many times you repeat it.


My dear friend,
You claim danger
from this vaccine,
Yet bring no proof.


----------



## PotatoMedic (Jan 10, 2021)

Alan L Serve said:


> My dear friend,
> You claim danger
> from this vaccine,
> Yet bring no proof.


My dear troglodyte,
You must live under a rock.
There have been multiple reports of anaphylaxis from the vaccine.
The vaccine has some danger.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Jan 10, 2021)

Alan L Serve said:


> My dear friend,
> You claim danger
> from this vaccine,
> Yet bring no proof.


Where did I claim danger from this vaccine?  I just went back and re-read every post in this thread.  I never claimed this vaccine was dangerous which is why I never proved it.  What I did say was that there may be some risks about it we don't know yet.

The rest of my responses to you have been to get you to offer proof for your claims.  You claimed that @DrParasite was wrong when he posted proof that the flu cold were serious and deadly yet offered no proof of your own.  You claimed that a vote against the vaccine was a vote for death, that there is no legitimacy in vaccine skepticism, and that the vaccine is safe, stops Covid and does not kill.

This is your last chance ... Prove it.  You've misrepresented what I and others have said in this thread enough.  It is beyond time for you to back up your statements.  This isn't reddit, we require you to be able to back up your claims here.

Seriously...this is your very last chance to prove what you've said.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Jan 10, 2021)

Source for the anaphylaxis comments so there is some risk with the vaccine:








						Allergic Reactions Including Anaphylaxis...
					

As of January 3, 2021, a total of 20,346,372 cases of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and 349,246 associated deaths have been reported in the United States.




					www.cdc.gov
				




There's some speculation that this may be the first vaccine related death although it is too early to say for sure:








						Death of Florida doctor after receiving COVID-19 vaccine under investigation
					

Pfizer says there is no indication its COVID-19 vaccine is connected to the condition that led to the death of Miami OB-GYN Gregory Michael.



					www.usatoday.com


----------



## Carlos Danger (Jan 10, 2021)

Got the second Pfizer shot yesterday morning. Around 9pm I started feeling really fatigued and had the chills. Woke up this morning feeling like I didn’t sleep at all. Whole body aches, head hurts, and I feel foggy like when you drink too much the night before (which I didn’t). This sucks. I hope it goes away later today.


----------



## PotatoMedic (Jan 10, 2021)

I'm getting the second dose this afternoon.  Was supposed to be this morning but had to push it back.  Hopefully I fair better than you.


----------



## Peak (Jan 10, 2021)

Got my second a bit over 24 hours ago. My arm hurt pretty good from about 3-16 hours in, but otherwise I feel fine.

Did have some chills and body aches with the flu shot months ago, but nothing with the Covid ones.


----------



## Jim37F (Jan 10, 2021)

One of my nurse friends just got the second dose, reported sore arm and fatigue for a day but that was it.

Still waiting on my second dose.


----------



## akflightmedic (Jan 10, 2021)

My 2nd dose will be Jan 27th...but as stated before, no issues from the first (Moderna).


----------



## PotatoMedic (Jan 10, 2021)

And second dose in my arm.  7 ish hours in and it is a little sore.  That is all so far.  Hopefully it stays that way.


----------



## DrParasite (Jan 11, 2021)

ffemt8978 said:


> Source for the anaphylaxis comments so there is some risk with the vaccine:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


To be completely fair, everything has an anaphylaxis risk; people have them to flu shots every year.  and it's usually not the vaccine that people are allergic too, but an inactive ingredient.  I have heard of people who are allergic to sunlight, cold weather and hair dye too.  And here are 32 weird things people are allergic too: 
https://www.health.com/condition/allergy/weird-allergens
As for the second example, assuming the vaccine did kill him (and that's a big assumption, and there is no proof or cause of death), out of the millions of vaccines administinistered, if it saves a million lives, but kills 1, is it an acceptable risk?  remember, every time you have surgery there is a risk of death, it's just a small risk.


----------



## wtferick (Jan 11, 2021)

2nd dose on Friday. Spiked a fever later that night and all the way till Sunday evening. Very fun.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Jan 11, 2021)

DrParasite said:


> To be completely fair, everything has an anaphylaxis risk; people have them to flu shots every year.  and it's usually not the vaccine that people are allergic too, but an inactive ingredient.  I have heard of people who are allergic to sunlight, cold weather and hair dye too.  And here are 32 weird things people are allergic too:
> https://www.health.com/condition/allergy/weird-allergens
> As for the second example, assuming the vaccine did kill him (and that's a big assumption, and there is no proof or cause of death), out of the millions of vaccines administinistered, if it saves a million lives, but kills 1, is it an acceptable risk?  remember, every time you have surgery there is a risk of death, it's just a small risk.


I only provided the first link to show that there is some risk with the vaccine, even though it is a small one.  This is a relatively quick onset risk, and we're still not sure if there will be any long term risks associated with it.  Even though these risks are minimal at this point, we can not dismiss them by simply claiming that there is no legitimacy in people being skeptical of it.  We need to educate these people instead of dismissing their concerns with comments like " a vote against the vaccine is a vote for death" as others have put it.

I'd say it is up to the individual to determine what level of risk they're willing to take with this vaccine.  It may seem like an acceptable risk until you become that one person out of the millions.

At this point, I doubt the vaccine will be found to be what killed the doctor.    However, we can not ignore the possibility and must be prepared to counter those who point to it as a reason not to get vaccinated with something more than a poetic comment of how they are wrong.


----------



## Summit (Jan 11, 2021)

I'm 5 days out from my 2nd dose.

First dose was 1.5 day of mild arm pain.
Second Dose was 2.5 days of mild to moderate arm pain, joint/muscle pain, headache, fatigue, perceived fever/chills (but no measurable fever).

Tylenol eliminated these side effects or reduced to mild so I could function normally including working ICU shifts and high level athletic activity.

Of course, these increased effects from the second shot are very much within the expected reactogenicity (the immune system is training itself, we should expect it to act like it) so the minor inconvenience was well worth it. There were some callouts, but over 40K first and second dose data I access, no serious adverse events.


----------



## Summit (Jan 11, 2021)

ffemt8978 said:


> I'd say it is up to the individual to determine what level of risk they're willing to take with this vaccine.  It may seem like an acceptable risk until you become that one person out of the millions.


That's the key but tough point to hit.  For the 1 in 100K person, it is a very real thing and sucks. However, anaphylactoid reactions are short and manageable in the healthcare setting. That is why nobody died.

To the person with that concern I would say: The chances of getting COVID are high if you don't vaccinate. Even for the lowest risk folks, the risk of negative outcomes from COVID is orders of magnitude worse than the risk from the vaccine. Meanwhile the benefit of the vaccine is strong for individual and the community.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Jan 11, 2021)

Alan L Serve said:


> My dear friends,
> A vote of "no"
> is a vote for death.





Summit said:


> To the person with that concern I would say: The chances of getting COVID are high if you don't vaccinate. Even for the lowest risk folks, the risk of negative outcomes from COVID is orders of magnitude worse than the risk from the vaccine. Meanwhile the benefit of the vaccine is strong for individual and the community.



If I may take a moment to point out the difference between these two posts advocating for getting vaccinated.  If you were the patient, which one would you be more likely to accept?  Which one is more likely to convince someone to get vaccinated?  Which one better serves the patients, the public and EMS?

To everyone who has made the effort to convince people the right way, thank you.


----------



## Carlos Danger (Jan 11, 2021)

Summit said:


> Even for the lowest risk folks, the risk of negative outcomes from COVID is orders of magnitude worse than the risk from the vaccine. Meanwhile the benefit of the vaccine is strong for individual and the community.


What is the overall risk of serious morbidity or mortality from COVID for an individual who is not in a high risk group?


----------



## mgr22 (Jan 11, 2021)

Carlos Danger said:


> What is the overall risk of serious morbidity or mortality from COVID for an individual who is not in a high risk group?


Regarding morbidity, research on "long COVID" (long-term disability associated with COVID) is still scarce, but here are abbreviated results from two studies:

- Among 3700 COVID patients from 56 countries, 65% reported the following symptoms most commonly for at least six months: fatigue, post-exercise malaise, "brain fog," neurological sensations, headaches, memory issues, muscle aches, insomnia, heart palpitations, shortness of breath, balance issues, and speech issues.

- More than 75% of 1733 COVID patients discharged from a hospital in Wuhan had at least one symptom six months later, including fatigue, insomnia, depression, anxiety, and diminished lung function.

Neither study focused on patients in high-risk groups or not in high-risk groups.

Anecdotally, I've seen dozens of reports of long-term COVID-related disability among patients not in high-risk groups.


----------



## PotatoMedic (Jan 11, 2021)

Well the day after I was quite miserable.  Tired, felt sick but no fever, headache.  Took some tylenol and ibuprofen together and felt back to normal outside of mild soreness at the injection site.


----------



## Carlos Danger (Jan 11, 2021)

mgr22 said:


> Regarding morbidity, research on "long COVID" (long-term disability associated with COVID) is still scarce, but here are abbreviated results from two studies:
> 
> - Among 3700 COVID patients from 56 countries, 65% reported the following symptoms most commonly for at least six months: fatigue, post-exercise malaise, "brain fog," neurological sensations, headaches, memory issues, muscle aches, insomnia, heart palpitations, shortness of breath, balance issues, and speech issues.
> 
> ...


I appreciate the reply, but that doesn't really answer my question. I was more curious about the overall risk of death (or also, as I said, significant morbidity) to any random member of the general public who is not in a high risk group. They say that overall mortality rates have increased by about 10% in the US over the past year, but that is almost entirely accounted for by older folks.

 Is any of this sequelae that you mention unique among from other viral respiratory pathologies of sufficient severity to warrant hospital admission?


----------



## Carlos Danger (Jan 11, 2021)

PotatoMedic said:


> Well the day after I was quite miserable.  Tired, felt sick but no fever, headache.  Took some tylenol and ibuprofen together and felt back to normal outside of mild soreness at the injection site.


I rarely get sick and I'll be first to admit that when I do, I'm not very stoic about it, hence my whining on here yesterday. My symptoms started about 12 hours after I got the second shot and lasted about 24 hours. I can't believe how lousy I felt. It was like I imagine I'd feel if I had the flu and a bad hangover at the same time. Still not 100% today, but way better than yesterday.


----------



## mgr22 (Jan 11, 2021)

Carlos Danger said:


> I appreciate the reply, but that doesn't really answer my question. I was more curious about the overall risk of death (or also, as I said, significant morbidity) to any random member of the general public who is not in a high risk group. They say that overall mortality rates have increased by about 10% in the US over the past year, but that is almost entirely accounted for by older folks.
> 
> Is any of this sequelae that you mention unique among from other viral respiratory pathologies of sufficient severity to warrant hospital admission?


To answer that last question, I'd have to be familiar with all viral respiratory pathologies of sufficient severity to warrant hospital admission. I'm not. I doubt anyone else here is. But I get your point.

As for mortality rates, the only fresh knowledge I can contribute is that in Tennessee, COVID deaths in the over-60 age group have been increasing relative to the 0-20 age group.


----------



## VentMonkey (Jan 13, 2021)

Moderna shot #1. I’m curious to see if I’ll present with any symptoms given the fact that I am still within my 90 day bubble.


----------



## VentMonkey (Jan 14, 2021)

VentMonkey said:


> Moderna shot #1. I’m curious to see if I’ll present with any symptoms given the fact that I am still within my 90 day bubble.


Welp, woke up early this morning with some pretty good body aches, and a temp.

All symptoms seemed to have subsided after I downed some Tylenol though.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Jan 15, 2021)

There is no COVID vaccine reserve. Trump admin already shipped it
					

"This is a deception on a national scale."




					arstechnica.com
				




Not good.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Jan 15, 2021)

Hackers alter stolen regulatory data to sow mistrust in COVID-19 vaccine
					

Post titled “Astonishing fraud! Evil Pfffizer! Fake vaccines!” found on the Dark Web.




					arstechnica.com
				




Keeps getting worse.


----------



## MMiz (Jan 15, 2021)

ffemt8978 said:


> There is no COVID vaccine reserve. Trump admin already shipped it
> 
> 
> "This is a deception on a national scale."
> ...



I've been trying to digest this for a good hour now.


----------



## GMCmedic (Jan 16, 2021)

The government screwed up, let me go find my shocked face.


----------



## akflightmedic (Jan 16, 2021)

This should have been privatized from the start....if they wanted it done right. Just sayin...


----------



## akflightmedic (Jan 16, 2021)

I even know a guy....LOL


----------



## MMiz (Jan 16, 2021)

Someone help me work through this.  The Washington Post reports the reserve was exhausted in December.  Pfizer reports to have doses on hand and expects no US supply problem.  Many states are having significant supply problems.

I see Biden says he's renaming "Operation Warpspeed" but don't see much else beyond that.

Where is the hang up?  What parts should be privatized?  

I remember during Hurricane Katrina Walmart was helping the federal government with logistics.  I would imagine Walgreens, CVS, and Walmart have the supply chain experience to make this happen better than we're seeing right now.


----------



## Carlos Danger (Jan 16, 2021)

MMiz said:


> Someone help me work through this.  The Washington Post reports the reserve was exhausted in December.  Pfizer reports to have doses on hand and expects no US supply problem.  Many states are having significant supply problems.
> 
> I see Biden says he's renaming "Operation Warpspeed" but don't see much else beyond that.
> 
> ...


I can't say what I think exactly should have been done differently because I don't know the whole process and it seems like no one knows what has gone wrong (SHOCKING!!), but it seems like minimizing the moving parts and attaching a profit to it being done efficiently is always the best recipe for having things done right. 

I envision a simple system where the doses are shipped directly from the manufacturers to ONE (or no more than 2 or 3, in the case of the geographically larger states) warehouse in each state. Then a private logistics company is contracted to deliver from the state warehouse directly to the hospitals and clinics per that state's distribution plan for the first rounds of doses to LTC residents and healthcare workers. This would require a fair amount of coordination between hospital systems and their local LTC facilities and local health authorities, but local planning and coordination is always better than top-down. After that initial phase, CVS, Walgreens, WM, etc could have been made responsible for retrieving their own doses from that warehouse once cleared for distribution to the general public.


----------



## NomadicMedic (Jan 16, 2021)

The idea that states are being punished with fewer does of vaccine for failing to expeditiously deliver vaccines is mind boggling to me.

The administration of doses should have been privatized. We should have allocated 30 days for 1a then start moving on. If you don’t get it, you have to get to the back of the line. in PA we are still struggling with 1a vaccines. 

“Given the logistical issues associated with the vaccines, in conjunction with the recent announcement from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services that states already lagging behind will be penalized with fewer doses, it's more important than ever for allocation to be as seamless as possible.“









						States rely on wide range of IT systems to manage COVID-19 vaccines
					

In lieu of a federal vaccine management system – at least for now – states have turned to their own technology for allocating and tracking the COVID-19 vaccine. As states begin to expand eligibility beyond healthcare providers alone, local officials are relying on a wide variety of tools to help...




					www.healthcareitnews.com


----------



## ffemt8978 (Jan 16, 2021)

How soon we seem to have forgotten the wisdom of the late President Ronald Reagan.



> "The nine most terrifying words in the English language are: I'm from the Government, and I'm here to help. "


----------



## OceanBossMan263 (Jan 16, 2021)

NomadicMedic said:


> The idea that states are being punished with fewer does of vaccine for failing to expeditiously deliver vaccines is mind boggling to me.
> 
> The administration of doses should have been privatized. We should have allocated 30 days for 1a then start moving on. If you don’t get it, you have to get to the back of the line. in PA we are still struggling with 1a vaccines.
> 
> ...



I'm in NY where the process is being run, well like it's being run by the State. Website crashes at almost every turn, not prepared for the traffic. Appointments being cancelled because doses are being diverted to other facilities.

They opened up 1A and they had their own time for a bit, but now it seems like every other day they just keep adding eligible groups while the previously open groups hadn't been able to make any arrangements yet.

Should have been privatized with actual time blocks set up for different priority groups. Large enough employers (municipalities) could have their own events set up separate from the public. It seems nice to make it convenient for everyone, but it should have been a registration and then vaccine time assigned by the company/state. State should kick in with an order for paid time off for the purpose of vaccines like they did with quarantine time.


----------



## akflightmedic (Jan 17, 2021)

I will write about my own state since I am heavily involved at both the Private and Public Level. As for the public level, here is how our rollout went.

1. The Maine CDC receives and houses all the vaccine.
2. Any entity wishing to be a vaccine administrator has several approval steps involving a lot of paperwork. Pictures, checklists, signatures, license verifications, and so much more.
3. TRAINING! There were mandatory videos and quizzes for all levels of administrator who were to be involved. Top down training from the CDC, the State, and the Manufacturers. 
4. Then State EMS is involved in the roll out. Yay, more cooks in kitchen. An office which has 4 full time staff.
5. The State EMS scrambles to ensure everyone knows how to give an IM, also rapidly trying to alter its online EMS reporting system to ensure a report is generated on every patient in order to extract the data required to be reported to Maine and Fed CDC. Website has glitches...other glitches are found AFTER roll out and clinics start. 
**Important comment I keep making from the Top Down is this....everyone had a FULL TIME job BEFORE all of this...developing, rolling out and overseeing this IS a new full time job. So either hire new people with skills and experience or privatize it!!
6. State EMS develops a roll out plan which they try to apply equally across the state, in every county which is just stupid. Put out some suggested guidelines and then let each county chase their own success. 
7. The slowdown....is because the State EMS and Maine CDC are trying to have each county complete each phase entirely prior to moving to next phase. I will toot my own horn here...I kicked ARSE in my county!! I have been done with Phase 1 for two weeks yet prohibited from moving on because other counties had not. So what is the solution?? The Maine CDC stops sending me vaccine, they withhold it. Even though other counties were sent enough to do their phase 1, I stopped getting shipments. So they are trying to regulate how much vaccine is out there which is plain stupid. If we want herd immunity, let me start with developing it as fast as possible.
8. I am now getting 400 more doses this coming Mon and Tues. I could already have pumped out 1000s.
**As of this past Friday, the State of ME had NOT distributed even HALF of what it has received from CDC.

And regulatory compliance!! I have a 40 page document on how to store and transport the vaccine. 40 pages!!

And while the big pharmacy chains are great, have infrastructure, not every state has one of those on every corner FYI...my state is littered with mom and pop pharmacies. And again, even the little places, even the big places...they all had jobs prior to this. Staffing is an issue...even using off duty EMS staff, staffing is an issue.

**Remember kids...the vaccine is FREE !! The CDC sends you the vaccine and thee supplies to administer it for FREE. We can NOT charge for the vaccine or the supplies. We can bill insurance if available, can NOT collect copays or balance billing. We can NOT turn away anyone without insurance.

So all these costs associated with these services are upfront and out of pocket! Remember that !!! All my labor costs, benefits, equipment (iPads, storage for vaccine, building space) etc...NOT FREE and out of pocket up front in order to give the vaccine. So this hinders a lot of businesses unless you are one of those billion dollar chains or a publicly funded entity.

The staff I use for my public role, I pay time and half rates. I will be able to seek reimbursement at a later date from The Cares Act...however, the government will first see how much I collected from the insurance companies and then subtract that from the OT I sought reimbursement for. And how much will the insurance pay me??? It is between $18-$28 per shot.

Do the math and you will see where additional slow downs are and why.

I am meeting'd out...we have these mandatory Zoom meetings several times a week. WHY!? We sit and discuss BS. Just give me the vaccine and let me push it out. It is becoming so mundane and stupid and painfully obvious none of these people are qualified to be making these types of decisions or plans. 

Meanwhile I am fielding phone call after phone call, emails and in person visits of businesses and people needing the vaccine. Yet here I sit on my thumbs.

Anyways..being the solutions guy and the entrepreneur I am...I have done a thing.  

I actually have done mass vaccine roll out programs...in Afghanistan. In my former business owner life...I actually imported vaccines to Afghan. My staff administered in excess of 100K+ vaccines all over the country. What we need here in my state is the easiest shlT ever compared to what I did before. Cold chain concerns....really?? I have that nailed. Assembly line, Warp Speed administration...I got it covered. 

Anyways, like I said, I know a guy...and he should get his CDC approval number this week and then he will be in it to win it.


----------



## DrParasite (Jan 17, 2021)

It's amazing... the Trump administration is being blamed for the lack of available vaccines.  Not the States that are actually handling the administration.  Not big pharma that is actually manufacturing the vaccine.  And don't forget DHHS, the state's CDC, and local public health officials... all Trump's fault...

The is a failure at the local level, as they are in charge of distribution.  There are conflicting reports on numbers (WaPo says there are none left, yet pfizer says they got plenty), with some states reporting shortages.  and then you have states like New York, where they are simply discarding unadministered vaccines.  And it's happening in other states, such as Mass and Oregan, where reports of thousands of doses were trashed.  

It's not easy to do, but it's also not impossible: and this is what public health departments are for.  And as was mentioned above, there are costs to this "free" vaccine, esp when the private industry gets involved. storage costs, manpower costs, training costs (even though it should be minimal), and while a government entity can use existing staff, doing so in the private world would take people away from their day jobs.

However, as the supply chain gets more developed, and with less misinformation floating around from the media, things will get better... hopefully


----------



## akflightmedic (Jan 17, 2021)

DrParasite said:


> It's not easy to do, but it's also not impossible: and this is what public health departments are for.  And as was mentioned above, there are costs to this "free" vaccine, esp when the private industry gets involved. storage costs, manpower costs, training costs (even though it should be minimal), and while a government entity can use existing staff, doing so in the private world would take people away from their day jobs.



I think you missed my point regarding this section. The costs I mentioned exist whether you are public or private. Without listing point by point the Federal requirements, their are many requirements which must be adhered to, policies and procedures which must be followed, and all have a cost regardless of public or private.

I emphatically restate, a private initiative would have been better as that entity and its labor would have been focused on ONE single agenda. Get the vaccine out and administer it. No distractions. The public options are burdened with their existing full time duties. 

Lets discuss my service with regards to labor costs. There are rules on who I can use, how many I can use, and when I can use. For example, they can NOT be on duty staff. They must be off duty and in no way be part of the daily operational staff. I also have to have certain emergency back ups which do NOT involve planning with the thought that I will just use one of the on duty trucks should things go sideways. The vaccine clinics must have proper stand alone resources which do not negatively impact routine 911. 

So while the clinics are paying time and half, people are growing tired of the OT. That happens even when it is just normal station coverage OT. We were already understaffed and there is an area shortage of providers. So there are not people just waiting in the wings to be utilized in an administrator of vaccine role. This applies to ALL the pharmacies as well. 

The pharmacies have recruitment agencies applying heavy EVERYWHERE right now. Why? Cause there are not enough people. CVS, WG, etc. they do not have surplus staff. So now they are depleting both local and out of town work forces. Example...As a RN, I can fly to S. FL right now and work 12 hours a day 7 days a week (yes that is the schedule) giving vaccines and earn $77/hour plus Overtime. While this sounds great, why do you think they offer this much? This same stupid money exists in parts of CA as well. 

Anyways, not to sidebar too much, but I think we are on opposite sides of the fence. I am very much pro-government, however in this particular situation, it should have been contracted out. 

My own personal opinion not based on any fact is I suspect prior to the release of the full national stock (which I label as "mostly true"), I do think once it hit each hand in the chain, there was hoarding. Maine CDC got their stock and sat on it, they are still sitting on it and dolling out bits at a time. Which then got Maine EMS concerned who slowed the clinics cause maybe there is not enough. And then when the vaccines hit the pre-approved providers, they are now holding back cause of what they have seen in regards to the delays (hypothetically speaking)...because they want to ensure there is enough on hand to at least complete the second dose as opposed to having tons of people with only first dose cover and no knowledge of when a second will show up if ever.


----------



## fm_emt (Jan 18, 2021)

"Example...As a RN, I can fly to S. FL right now and work 12 hours a day 7 days a week (yes that is the schedule) giving vaccines and earn $77/hour plus Overtime. While this sounds great, why do you think they offer this much? This same stupid money exists in parts of CA as well. "

Been trying to get in on some of that here in CA but keep running into roadblocks and dead ends. :/

"Anyways, not to sidebar too much, but I think we are on opposite sides of the fence. I am very much pro-government, however in this particular situation, it should have been contracted out."

Yeah, they could have contracted it out to whoever does Spirit Halloween stores and the Chick Fil-A drive thru and we'd have it done by the end of the month. ;-)


----------



## FiremanMike (Jan 18, 2021)

So, I got my first dose of the vaccine at the end of December, then a week later I got COVID..

Lucky me, lol


----------



## DrParasite (Jan 18, 2021)

akflightmedic said:


> I think you missed my point regarding this section. The costs I mentioned exist whether you are public or private. Without listing point by point the Federal requirements, their are many requirements which must be adhered to, policies and procedures which must be followed, and all have a cost regardless of public or private.
> 
> Anyways, not to sidebar too much, but I think we are on opposite sides of the fence. I am very much pro-government, however in this particular situation, it should have been contracted out.


I think I got your point...  but I think you missed mine.  If the public runs the distribution, they should have the staff and resources to administer the vaccine (aka, your tax dollars at work).  If the private sector runs the distribution, someone needs to pay for the "free" vaccine.

I agree with you, let Walgreens, CVS, and all of the local pharmacies administer the vaccine.  they often have the technological infrastructure already in place.  give them money to buy the equipment needed to store, track and administer the vaccine, as well as the funding for time and a half for staff.  

The public sector can set up "vaccine clinics" which require infrastructure, power, shelter, etc...  pharmacies already exist, and the big chains have the IT infrastructure in place to handle reservations.  Even though there are costs involved, the private sector is much better equipped to handle the distribution, provided the local and state governments provide them the funding to the job right.


----------



## akflightmedic (Jan 18, 2021)

We still disagree on existing capabilities and stand up costs. 

If the public runs it, they do NOT have the existing resources to do this massive roll out. If the private does it, the up front costs are still the same. Which is why it should be subcontracted to an entity that can focus on this single task.

Unsure what is confusing about that...up front costs to both public and private. The privates could focus solely on it. And arguably do it better.


----------



## Aprz (Jan 18, 2021)

FiremanMike said:


> So, I got my first dose of the vaccine at the end of December, then a week later I got COVID..
> 
> Lucky me, lol


I was so afraid of that happening to me. I had an exposure the night before my first dose of the vaccine! They were debating about giving it to me or waiting a bit. They ultimately decided to give it to me. No COVID and I just got my second dose yesterday. Some people have been getting vaccines and still catching it so people will try to argue the vaccine doesn't work or give it to you, like they argue with the flu vaccine "Everytime I get the flu vaccine, I catch the flu." People forget you need to give the vaccine time to build up antibodies to work.

I hope you have a smooth recovery. Hopefully a week of building some antibodies will lessen your symptoms.


----------



## OceanBossMan263 (Jan 18, 2021)

akflightmedic said:


> We still disagree on existing capabilities and stand up costs.
> 
> If the public runs it, they do NOT have the existing resources to do this massive roll out. If the private does it, the up front costs are still the same. Which is why it should be subcontracted to an entity that can focus on this single task.
> 
> Unsure what is confusing about that...up front costs to both public and private. The privates could focus solely on it. And arguably do it better.


There is also the option of using tax credits or other financial maneuvering to encourage the private business to get on board. Doesn't all have to be cash up front.


----------



## akflightmedic (Jan 18, 2021)

OceanBossMan263 said:


> There is also the option of using tax credits or other financial maneuvering to encourage the private business to get on board. Doesn't all have to be cash up front.



Solid plan for "big business", horrible plan for small business...just saying, as a prior and now new small business owner, those incentives do not do much for me and others in similar position.


----------



## Jim37F (Jan 18, 2021)

Aprz said:


> I was so afraid of that happening to me. I had an exposure the night before the my first dose of the vaccine! They were debating about giving it to me or waiting a bit. They ultimately decided to give it to me. No COVID and I just got my second dose yesterday. Some people have been getting vaccines and still catching it so people will try to argue the vaccine doesn't work or give it to you, like they argue with the flu vaccine "Everytime I get the flu vaccine, I catch the flu." People forget you need to give the vaccine time to build up antibodies to work.
> 
> I hope you have a smooth recovery. Hopefully a week of building some antibodies will lessen your symptoms.


Yeah, I was reading an article talking about how after the first dose of the vaccine, you're only 50% protected, then after the second dose, it goes up to 95%, but takes a week or two after that dose to get there. So definitely not an immediate thing, hence people getting the first shot but still getting COVID a week or two later.

Supposedly there's a new Johnson & Johnson vaccine about to be released that only requires 1 shot, but still takes about a month afterwards for your body's reaction to result in the 95ish% immunity.


----------



## Akulahawk (Jan 18, 2021)

FiremanMike said:


> So, I got my first dose of the vaccine at the end of December, then a week later I got COVID..
> 
> Lucky me, lol


I might be in almost the same boat. I got my first dose and 15 days later I started having some vague symptoms. Mostly fever, chills. I also developed some urinary frequency and urgency along with some mid-back discomfort. Kind of sounds like a UTI but all the usual labs came back looking good. I'm feeling a mite bit better today than I did two days ago, but for two solid days I was kind of doing a SIRS/not SIRS yo-yo. I'll be taking another COVID19 test in a few days to confirm or refuse this. Aside from some minor nasal congestion, no respiratory symptoms at all. 

Lucky me too...


----------



## FiremanMike (Jan 19, 2021)

Aprz said:


> I was so afraid of that happening to me. I had an exposure the night before my first dose of the vaccine! They were debating about giving it to me or waiting a bit. They ultimately decided to give it to me. No COVID and I just got my second dose yesterday. Some people have been getting vaccines and still catching it so people will try to argue the vaccine doesn't work or give it to you, like they argue with the flu vaccine "Everytime I get the flu vaccine, I catch the flu." People forget you need to give the vaccine time to build up antibodies to work.
> 
> I hope you have a smooth recovery. Hopefully a week of building some antibodies will lessen your symptoms.





Akulahawk said:


> I might be in almost the same boat. I got my first dose and 15 days later I started having some vague symptoms. Mostly fever, chills. I also developed some urinary frequency and urgency along with some mid-back discomfort. Kind of sounds like a UTI but all the usual labs came back looking good. I'm feeling a mite bit better today than I did two days ago, but for two solid days I was kind of doing a SIRS/not SIRS yo-yo. I'll be taking another COVID19 test in a few days to confirm or refuse this. Aside from some minor nasal congestion, no respiratory symptoms at all.
> 
> Lucky me too...


Mine hit hard like a truck, but it was only really for the first day.  Day 1 felt like the worst flu I've ever had, I went to bed with all the blankets I had and didn't move for about 14 hours..  The next few days were like a bad head cold with an annoying cough and then it's been pretty much back to normal since then..  I did lose taste for about 12 hours.. 

I have a sporadic "smokers cough" and about 1-2 times per day I'll have a coughing fit.. My biggest lingering affect is fatigue.  I just don't have the same level of energy.  Those around me who've had it say this was their experience as well..


----------



## Akulahawk (Jan 19, 2021)

FiremanMike said:


> Mine hit hard like a truck, but it was only really for the first day.  Day 1 felt like the worst flu I've ever had, I went to bed with all the blankets I had and didn't move for about 14 hours..  The next few days were like a bad head cold with an annoying cough and then it's been pretty much back to normal since then..  I did lose taste for about 12 hours..
> 
> I have a sporadic "smokers cough" and about 1-2 times per day I'll have a coughing fit.. My biggest lingering affect is fatigue.  I just don't have the same level of energy.  Those around me who've had it say this was their experience as well..


If I have the 'Rona, I haven't had the same experience. While I do have some of the symptoms, I don't have very many of them and they're lightening up quite a bit to the point where I feel nearly normal as I type this. That's NOT typical of 'Rona and I know it. My last bout with fever/chills was very early yesterday morning and I haven't used meds to control anything since the day prior to that because my symptoms weren't that bad. I definitely got hit with fatigue and that let up last night. Even my joint and muscle aches are gone at the moment. Again, that's not normal for 'Rona. I only hope that if it is/was, that the 1st shot of the vaccine had already reached its peak effectiveness (not close to 90%) by the time I got exposed and thus shortened my illness. I never did lose my sense of taste though I did experience something similar to it when I ate my daughter's corn flakes. Those things are so bland that I hoped that I wouldn't lose my sense of taste because I don't want _everything_ to be that bland. Ick!!


----------



## Kavsuvb (Jan 21, 2021)

I would not be able to take the Vaccine because I have two rare diseases such as Kallmann's syndrome and Vitiligo.


----------



## akflightmedic (Jan 22, 2021)

Kavsuvb said:


> I would not be able to take the Vaccine because I have two rare diseases such as Kallmann's syndrome and Vitiligo.



Interesting...neither of those conditions seem to be contraindications for the vaccine, just saying. Who told you that?





__





						Kallmann Syndrome | Children's Hospital of Philadelphia
					

Kallmann syndrome combines an impaired sense of smell with a hormonal disorder that delays or prevents puberty. Find information about the causes, signs and symptoms, and treatment options.




					www.chop.edu
				




Undescended, or partially descended, testicles
Small penile size
Facial defects, such as cleft lip or palate
Short fingers or toes, especially the fourth finger
Development of only one kidney
Hearing loss
Color blindness
Abnormal eye movements
Abnormal development of the teeth
Mirror hand movements (bimanual synkinesis), in which the movements of one hand are mirrored by the movements of the other


----------



## FlorianFred (Jan 22, 2021)

I had the first shot (Moderna) on 12/28 -- second shot is scheduled for 1/25.   First shot was just 2 days of arm pain....discomfort really, didn't stop me from using the arm.


----------



## Kavsuvb (Jan 22, 2021)

akflightmedic said:


> Interesting...neither of those conditions seem to be contraindications for the vaccine, just saying. Who told you that?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


My endocrinologist and dermatologist with the backing from NIH and Mass General Hospital. It’s because of the two rare diseases I have and they are concerned that it would affect my DNA which is already altered. On top of that, I have vitiligo and they don’t know what the vaccine would do to it.

And also with Kallmann’s syndrome, I can’t smell anything and I have right sensorineural hearing loss as well. I have the Kal-1 version of kallmann’s syndrome. https://rarediseases.info.nih.gov/diseases/10771/kallmann-syndrome


----------



## akflightmedic (Jan 22, 2021)

Obviously, I am no where near educated at the level of the people you are quoting...however, in my limited understanding, I absolutely fail to see what connection "altered DNA" has in relation to the vaccine. I mean technically, we all have altered DNA in one way or another, your disease process is not going to change and mRNA is not going to alter DNA, as again from my limited knowledge this is scientifically impossible.


----------



## Kavsuvb (Jan 22, 2021)

akflightmedic said:


> Obviously, I am no where near educated at the level of the people you are quoting...however, in my limited understanding, I absolutely fail to see what connection "altered DNA" has in relation to the vaccine. I mean technically, we all have altered DNA in one way or another, your disease process is not going to change and mRNA is not going to alter DNA, as again from my limited knowledge this is scientifically impossible.


It's because with my DNA, i have XXY.

In fact, you can find clinical trials for every condition and rare disease. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/home


----------



## Peak (Jan 22, 2021)

Kavsuvb said:


> It's because with my DNA, i have XXY.
> 
> In fact, you can find clinical trials for every condition and rare disease. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/home



Also not a contraindication to the Covid vaccines on the market.


----------



## Kavsuvb (Jan 22, 2021)

Peak said:


> Also not a contraindication to the Covid vaccines on the market.


I still won't take it because the RISK is VERY HUGE because of Kallmann's syndrome and Vitiligo


----------



## silver (Jan 22, 2021)

Kavsuvb said:


> It's because with my DNA, i have XXY.
> 
> In fact, you can find clinical trials for every condition and rare disease. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/home


You have Klinefelters too? Dang thats a lot.


----------



## Peak (Jan 23, 2021)

Kavsuvb said:


> I still won't take it because the RISK is VERY HUGE because of Kallmann's syndrome and Vitiligo



I don’t recall either of those being a contraindication by any drug manufacturer or regulatory agency.

Can you please enlighten me with the pathophysiology of why any of the diseases you listed would increase your risk of adverse vaccine over the general population?


----------



## Kavsuvb (Jan 23, 2021)

silver said:


> You have Klinefelters too? Dang thats a lot.


Your confusing Klinefelters with Kallmann's
One of the major differences between the two are the levels of the hormones produced by the pituitary gland.

The gonadotropin hormones LH and FSH control puberty, sperm production and testosterone production in males.

In Klinefelter syndrome the levels of LH and FSH are higher than normal, known as hypergonadotropism.

In Kallmann syndrome the levels of LH and FSH are much lower than normal, known as hypogonadotropism.

In Klinefelter syndrome you have partial to normal puberty but the testicles do not function correctly.

In Kallmann syndrome there is partial to no puberty.

The biggest Difference is that in Klinefelter's, they can smell things. In Kallmann's which I have, I am born with NO ability to Smell or Hear. Think how huge that is.

The other big difference is that Klinefelter's are able to reproduce vs Kallmann's they are sterile and can't reproduce without medical intervention.


----------



## Kavsuvb (Jan 23, 2021)

Peak said:


> I don’t recall either of those being a contraindication by any drug manufacturer or regulatory agency.
> 
> Can you please enlighten me with the pathophysiology of why any of the diseases you listed would increase your risk of adverse vaccine over the general population?


It's because in consultation with my Endocrinologist and Dermatologist, they don't want to take the risk on me with the Vaccine. It's bad enough I have Kallmann's syndrome and Vitiligo. Also Vitiligo is suspected to be autoimmune and they would rather err on the side of precaution.


----------



## Peak (Jan 23, 2021)

Kavsuvb said:


> It's because in consultation with my Endocrinologist and Dermatologist, they don't want to take the risk on me with the Vaccine. It's bad enough I have Kallmann's syndrome and Vitiligo. Also Vitiligo is suspected to be autoimmune and they would rather err on the side of precaution.



That doesn’t explain any pathophysiology what so ever.

The current general convention is that the risk of Covid infection is greater than that of immunization in those with immunosuppression with the mRNA vaccines. Even given that concern that only would apply to vitiligo if you are on an immunosuppressant, and does not apply to Kallmann or Klinefelter (XXY) syndrome.

What is the actual disease process in which your specialists think that your prior diagnosis are inappropriate to have you receive COVID vaccination?


----------



## ffemt8978 (Jan 23, 2021)

We're getting close to crossing the line of giving medical advice even though it hasn't been crossed yet.


----------



## Peak (Jan 23, 2021)

ffemt8978 said:


> We're getting close to crossing the line of giving medical advice even though it hasn't been crossed yet.



Sorry.

For clarity my intent is not to offer any medical advice. I do want to prevent any kind of misinformation being presented to readers of this thread, particularly those who do not often follow the site, who may take away some idea that there is some a current practice recommendation against vaccination in the above referenced populations.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Jan 23, 2021)

Peak said:


> Sorry.
> 
> For clarity my intent is not to offer any medical advice. I do want to prevent any kind of misinformation being presented to readers of this thread, particularly those who do not often follow the site, who may take away some idea that there is some a current practice recommendation against vaccination in the above referenced populations.


I understand the difference, but objectively that doesn't mean much.  Like I said, it got close to the line but didn't cross over it which is why the posts were allowed to remain.


----------



## Kavsuvb (Jan 23, 2021)

Peak said:


> Sorry.
> 
> For clarity my intent is not to offer any medical advice. I do want to prevent any kind of misinformation being presented to readers of this thread, particularly those who do not often follow the site, who may take away some idea that there is some a current practice recommendation against vaccination in the above referenced populations.


Like I have said it's all depends on what your doctor or specialist advises you and everyone should check with their doctor or specialist. Mines in my case because of my two rare disease, they are advising against it for ME until they get more data from university professors. As of right now, the data is inconclusive and still many unknowns.


----------



## Kavsuvb (Jan 23, 2021)

Peak said:


> What is the actual disease process in which your specialists think that your prior diagnosis are inappropriate to have you receive COVID vaccination?


It's because my DNA is already messed up. Their concern is that the mRNA vaccines could do more harm to me then good.

My advice, if you ever get a chance, take a college level principle of genetics class. You'll learn alot about Genetics and Genetic disorders including mines.


----------



## Peak (Jan 23, 2021)

Kavsuvb said:


> Like I have said it's all depends on what your doctor or specialist advises you and everyone should check with their doctor or specialist. Mines in my case because of my two rare disease, they are advising against it for ME until they get more data from university professors. As of right now, the data is inconclusive and still. many unknowns.





Kavsuvb said:


> It's because my DNA is already messed up. Their concern is that the mRNA vaccines could do more harm to me then good.
> 
> My advice, if you ever get a chance, take a college level principle of genetics class. You'll learn alot about Genetics and Genetic disorders including mines.



I already have, my first bachelors was in human and cellular biology. To be clear on the science, mRNA does not enter the nucleous or or mitochondria, and therefore does not alter DNA. It is transcribed by ribosomes in the ER.

Just so I have a clear understanding, you don’t have a scientific reason to present beyond the reported recommendation by your physicians?


----------



## FiremanMike (Jan 23, 2021)

Kavsuvb said:


> Your confusing Klinefelters with Kallmann's
> One of the major differences between the two are the levels of the hormones produced by the pituitary gland.
> 
> The gonadotropin hormones LH and FSH control puberty, sperm production and testosterone production in males.
> ...


I'm curious about how you've been able to overcome being completely deaf to work as a firefighter/emt?


----------



## Aprz (Jan 24, 2021)

I'd be interested in hearing about that too, I've always wondered about how people with visual/auditory disabilities being able to work in the medical field (and firefighting!), but probably not appropriate for this thread.


I got my second shot on the 17th. Pfizer. I have had zero symptoms from both shots. No pain in my arm or anything. It makes me worried that I was given a bad batch that didn't work or do anything. The second shot, I could feel the coolness go into my arm when they injected, but the first one, I didn't feel a thing. The first one was done by a nursing student. They also are having EMTs give shots out here, which is unusual since our EMTs cannot give shots on the ambulance. Our EMTs weren't even able to check blood sugars until last year. It makes me concern that I could've been given an empty syringe since I didn't watch them inject me. Remember that happening on the news?


----------



## DrParasite (Jan 24, 2021)

Aprz said:


> They also are having EMTs give shots out here, which is unusual since our EMTs cannot give shots on the ambulance. Our EMTs weren't even able to check blood sugars until last year. It makes me concern that I could've been given an empty syringe since I didn't watch them inject me. Remember that happening on the news?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


The video isn't playing, but if you have anyone injecting you with an empty syringe, you have bigger issues, and their level of training has nothing to do with it.  That's simply gross incompetence, border lining on criminal

What the big deal about EMTs giving the shots?  Are your EMTs not able to give IM EPI to treat anaphylaxis?  How is this any different, other than the stuff inside the syringe is a different liquid?  Why are you making this a bigger deal than it should be?


----------



## MonkeyArrow (Jan 24, 2021)

With my first dose of Modena, just had some injection site soreness that lasted 36 hours after the injection.

With my second dose, I also had similar injection site soreness but with myalgias, fatigue, subjective chills and fever, and this very weird chest soreness that kept me awake overnight on day one. Most of that resolved by 24 hours


----------



## OceanBossMan263 (Jan 24, 2021)

DrParasite said:


> The video isn't playing, but if you have anyone injecting you with an empty syringe, you have bigger issues, and their level of training has nothing to do with it.  That's simply gross incompetence, border lining on criminal
> 
> What the big deal about EMTs giving the shots?  Are your EMTs not able to give IM EPI to treat anaphylaxis?  How is this any different, other than the stuff inside the syringe is a different liquid?  Why are you making this a bigger deal than it should be?


In NY the state reached out to all paramedics seeking help giving the vaccine at state sites. There is some training involved but it's more about procedure.


----------



## Aprz (Jan 24, 2021)

@DrParasite  In my county, EMTs still cannot give epinephrine IM. Until last year, they couldn't even check blood sugars. This vaccine is the first time they could give any sort of injection. Rhode Island EMTs might have a bigger scope of practice than California paramedics.

I was just saying that I had zero symptoms after both shots so it makes me nervous that I got injected with nothing like the guy in the video (I fixed the link). The first shot, I didn't even feel. I am not saying anything wrong did happen. I'm just thinking since I had no symptoms while most people did.


----------



## PotatoMedic (Jan 24, 2021)

Idaho is allowing EMT's to give the vaccine if trained and allowed by the medical director.


----------



## NomadicMedic (Jan 24, 2021)

PA is using Paramedics that have taken the online course and received medical director approval as jabbers. 

The eastern region is paying $30/hour for paramedics to administer vax.


----------



## Summit (Jan 24, 2021)

Peak said:


> I already have, my first bachelors was in human and cellular biology. To be clear on the science, mRNA does not enter the nucleous or or mitochondria, and therefore does not alter DNA. It is transcribed by ribosomes in the ER.
> 
> Just so I have a clear understanding, you don’t have a scientific reason to present beyond the reported recommendation by your physicians?


Exactly

As my virologist friend says: mRNA does not homologously recombine with DNA - the change from DNA (Thymidine) to RNA (Uracil) prevents the proper hydrogen bonding from occurring. Morever, RNA translation occurs in the cytoplasm and the rough ER, not in the nucleus.


----------



## Kavsuvb (Jan 24, 2021)

FiremanMike said:


> I'm curious about how you've been able to overcome being completely deaf to work as a firefighter/emt?


I make due with alot of assisted technology like amplify stethoscope, Live transcribe apps. Technology is out there to make it easy for deaf folks to work in EMS and Fire. I use one app called Live transcribe to be able to understand what they are saying. I also have an Iphone that has tons of apps that help people like me out.


----------



## Kavsuvb (Jan 24, 2021)

Peak said:


> Just so I have a clear understanding, you don’t have a scientific reason to present beyond the reported recommendation by your physicians?


It's based on what my doctor's are telling me and everyone is different and you would have to talk to your doctor and see if they are ok with you in getting the Vaccine.


----------



## Kavsuvb (Jan 24, 2021)

Here's an example of why people with Rare diseases have so much concern over the vaccine








						Rare disease community group leader in Central Texas raises concerns about COVID-19 vaccine
					

An Austin Woman with a rare disease is raising concerns about the COVID-19 vaccine, as it’s expected to reach the city this week.




					www.kxan.com


----------



## Kavsuvb (Jan 24, 2021)

Here's the Video for NORD


----------



## Peak (Jan 24, 2021)

Kavsuvb said:


> Here's an example of why people with Rare diseases have so much concern over the vaccine
> 
> 
> 
> ...



1: That is a non-scholarly opinion/article.

2: While an extremely rare antecedent to GBS there is some theory that a vaccination may precipitate it. You cannot simply lump all “rare diseases” together and expect a similar clinical presentation, outcome, or risk stratification.


----------



## DrParasite (Jan 25, 2021)

Kavsuvb said:


> It's based on what my doctor's are telling me and everyone is different and you would have to talk to your doctor and see if they are ok with you in getting the Vaccine.


Listen to your doctor, as they know your particular situation.  You might have some weird stuff going on, and your doctor might not be comfortable with you getting the vaccine, however that doesn't mean there is any reason not for you to take the vaccine, other than your doctor is not comfortable.  And you should listen to your doctor, but also ask questions, as I do think some of the points made are valid (mRNA is translated in the rough ER, so even if your DNA is abnormal, the vaccine shouldn't have any effect on it).  But also think of what can happen if you catch the virus, and what it will do to your body.  Its your choice, but there are risks to both options.

I'm scheduled for shot #2 a week from Tuesday.  I've heard the following day or two suck, but I am also looking to do some traveling for work out of state in May, and some vacation in November, and want to be as protected as possible.



Aprz said:


> @DrParasite  In my county, EMTs still cannot give epinephrine IM. Until last year, they couldn't even check blood sugars. This vaccine is the first time they could give any sort of injection. Rhode Island EMTs might have a bigger scope of practice than California paramedics.


Wow, I did not know that.  NJ EMTs have been able to give EpiPens for almost 13 years, and I know we were behind several other states on that one.  I can't speak for Rhode Island EMTs, but North Carolina EMTs have been able to do that too (we actually carry epi 1:1000 and an insulin needle, because it's so much cheaper and easier to replace than an epi pen; and before you ask, yes, some of our city FFs still find ways to screw it up, but I chalk that up to being over-eager FFs, not due to lack of training)


----------



## Aprz (Jan 25, 2021)

DrParasite said:


> Listen to your doctor, as they know your particular situation.  You might have some weird stuff going on, and your doctor might not be comfortable with you getting the vaccine, however that doesn't mean there is any reason not for you to take the vaccine, other than your doctor is not comfortable.  And you should listen to your doctor, but also ask questions, as I do think some of the points made are valid (mRNA is translated in the rough ER, so even if your DNA is abnormal, the vaccine shouldn't have any effect on it).  But also think of what can happen if you catch the virus, and what it will do to your body.  Its your choice, but there are risks to both options.
> 
> I'm scheduled for shot #2 a week from Tuesday.  I've heard the following day or two suck, but I am also looking to do some traveling for work out of state in May, and some vacation in November, and want to be as protected as possible.
> 
> ...


My area has always been always very saturated with paramedics and a lot of hospitals close by. There has been very little reason to let both paramedics and EMTs be able to do anything unfortunately.


----------



## FlorianFred (Jan 29, 2021)

MonkeyArrow said:


> With my first dose of Modena, just had some injection site soreness that lasted 36 hours after the injection.
> 
> With my second dose, I also had similar injection site soreness but with myalgias, fatigue, subjective chills and fever, and this very weird chest soreness that kept me awake overnight on day one. Most of that resolved by 24 hours


My experience closely mirrors yours, with the exception of the chest soreness.  My 1st Moderna shot on Dec 28th and 2nd shot on Jan 25.


----------



## CCCSD (Jan 29, 2021)

First Faucci Ouchi. Moderna. No issues.


----------



## Jim37F (Jan 29, 2021)

Just got my second shot (Moderna). Finished the 15 min evaluation time, mayybbee a bit of a sore throat developing, maybe just my imagination lol.

No arm soreness even, unlike my first dose.

Its funny, the vaccine administration site is in my stations first in district, and yesterday we actually responded to a guy who had a syncopal episode during his post shot 15 min eval time. By the time we got on scene, he was already awake and talking to the AMR Medic unit on standby.

All we ended up doing was transferring him to a City&County EMS unit for transport (why AMR didn't just transport idk. Guess they decided to keep them for standby and since a City EMS unit was already there...

As far as I'm aware no one else has had any similar negative reactions at this site (at least not any generating a response from us), and yeah I feel fine so far.


----------



## FiremanMike (Jan 29, 2021)

My second shot was yesterday..  woke up last night at about 4am and felt like I had fallen out of a tree..

spent most of the day lounging around the house.. I’m mostly back to normal now, some mild body aches remain but I’m up and moving now..


----------



## Akulahawk (Jan 29, 2021)

As I write this, I'm now about 4 days post 2nd injection of the Pfizer/BnT vaccine. I had a little bit of numbness for less than 1 hour after the injection and after that, a palpable but not very sore bump at my injection site. This persists to today, it's not sore at all unless I push on it a bit, and it's a firm bump, but otherwise I have no lingering symptoms. I _may_ have had a very minor vaccine reaction about 15 hours afterward with a very mild, subjective fever, but never any chills, body aches, or anything like that. _If_ I did have COVID19 a week or so ago, I would have had a much, much stronger response to the 2nd shot than I did. At this point, I'm mostly convinced that I probably had some kind of infection, but not COVID19, the flu, or even possibly a cold. Whatever it was, I was definitely in and out of SIRS for a couple-three days for sure. Now I'm back to my usual self. 

I figure that in about another week, I'll be as protected against COVID19 as I will likely ever be...


----------



## NomadicMedic (Jan 30, 2021)

3 hours post 2nd Moderna. A little arm soreness. In the middle of moving to a new house before a snow storm hits. I don’t have time for vax reactions.


----------



## Achilles (Jan 30, 2021)

NomadicMedic said:


> 3 hours post 2nd Moderna. A little arm soreness. In the middle of moving to a new house before a snow storm hits. I don’t have time for vax reactions.


good thing you’re getting a tractor to clear the snow...


----------



## CCCSD (Jan 30, 2021)

24 hrs post Moderna. Arm still sore at injection point. Had a slight headache last night. Tylenol took care of it.


----------



## Jim37F (Jan 30, 2021)

I'm right about 24hrs post second Moderna shot. Arm soreness at the injection site developed as the day went on and is still around. Nothing major, and is pretty much the only thing I still notice.

Yesterday afternoon I felt.... wonky I believe is the official term? lol Kinda of a minor general malaise, kinda about the same as the day after a shift where we would keep getting calls in the middle of the night. I did notice a bit of a scratchy throat, just that vague "I might be coming down with something" feeling. I was also fairly thirsty. Ended up crashing around 7pm, taking like a 3 hour nap, waking up just to shut everything down and go to bed proper, slept in, woke up just fine, just the arm soreness. And even that is really only there if I think about it, poke my arm, etc lol

My Captain, who got his shot a few hours before me, did report that he woke up in the middle of the night with chills and feeling feverish, but he felt fine just grabbing an extra blanket he said. By morning that had resolved. Our Engineer only reported minor tiredness and a bit of a headache, but nothing major.

So probably not the worst idea my department had to schedule our shots on our day off (getting off shift). But ultimately I feel like I can go work a shift right now and be just fine


----------



## FlorianFred (Jan 31, 2021)

Jim37F said:


> I'm right about 24hrs post second Moderna shot. Arm soreness at the injection site developed as the day went on and is still around. Nothing major, and is pretty much the only thing I still notice.
> 
> Yesterday afternoon I felt.... wonky I believe is the official term? lol Kinda of a minor general malaise, kinda about the same as the day after a shift where we would keep getting calls in the middle of the night. I did notice a bit of a scratchy throat, just that vague "I might be coming down with something" feeling. I was also fairly thirsty. Ended up crashing around 7pm, taking like a 3 hour nap, waking up just to shut everything down and go to bed proper, slept in, woke up just fine, just the arm soreness. And even that is really only there if I think about it, poke my arm, etc lol
> 
> ...


I followed your Captain's path with my second shot.  You had the reaction I was hoping for, but my chills/fever thing wasn't horrible, and so far my station's reactions seem to run the same range as your station's:  "felt a little off", "really enjoyed my sleep", "had a naggy headache but killed it with Excedrin" and "woke up with chills and a mild fever, but a blanket and a few hours of sleep made it go away".  Net net, not an awful experience.


----------



## NomadicMedic (Jan 31, 2021)

Achilles said:


> good thing you’re getting a tractor to clear the snow...



I bought a self propelled snow blower instead. And 24 hours later, I feel fine. Woke up with chills about 5 this morning, but I think that was a lack of blankets and temp management in the new house. My arm is sore but no worse than the flu vaccine. Luckily, I dodged a bullet with both the move during a blizzard and a nasty vaccine reaction.


----------



## Tigger (Jan 31, 2021)

I felt awful after my second moderna shot. Arrived at the fire academy at 545 which didn’t help but I barely remember the day I felt so fatigued and sore. No fever but ripping headache. Was in bed at like 730. Next day was fine.


----------



## akflightmedic (Feb 1, 2021)

I had my 2nd Moderna this past Thursday. I had site injection soreness x 24 hours. The night of the injection, I "felt sick"...not symptomatic, but just that internal I do not feel well, I will have full on cold soon type of sick feeling. Drank a few rum juice cocktails, slept great. Next day, no issues.


----------



## NomadicMedic (Feb 1, 2021)

akflightmedic said:


> I had my 2nd Moderna this past Thursday. I had site injection soreness x 24 hours. The night of the injection, I "felt sick"...not symptomatic, but just that internal I do not feel well, I will have full on cold soon type of sick feeling. Drank a few rum juice cocktails, slept great. Next day, no issues.



rum and juice fix about everything.


----------



## Fezman92 (Feb 3, 2021)

Still waiting to get mine because NJ can't figure out distribution.


----------



## DrParasite (Feb 3, 2021)

Got the second Pfizer dose on monday....  no real side effects, no real soreness, other than waking up at 230am very thirsty and deciding to go to sleep early.  woke up yesterday tired, with my back hurting, and with some nasal congeestion, and got ready for the work day (aka a normal day for me).

my aunt spiked a fever after she got her second dose, so maybe I just got lucky where I had minimal side effects?


----------



## Fezman92 (Feb 9, 2021)

So I go and check what places near me have the vaccine available. Find one place that’s offering it. Go to register. See that the earliest date available is Aug 11th. Call them and leave a message. About an hour later I get a voicemail back saying that they’re going to call me later this week to set up an appointment at an earlier date.


----------



## VentMonkey (Feb 9, 2021)

Had second dose yesterday, back at work today. So far it seems a lot like the first shot.

The same Covid-like symptoms (body aches, chills, fever, fatigue, night sweats) that I had after the first shot, but a tad more prolonged. 

It’s not unbearable, but definitely not my idea of a good time either. At least it’s not weeks worth.


----------



## CCCSD (Feb 19, 2021)

Due for my second. Just finished an “equity“ seminar (required). Apparently, I’m “privileged“, so I’m supposed to be ashamed for getting the vaccine...


----------



## ffemt8978 (Feb 20, 2021)

It now appears as if the Pfizer vaccine doesn't require ultra-cold storage after all.









						Pfizer vaccine doesn’t need ultra-cold storage after all, company says
					

The pharma giant and partner BioNTech have asked FDA to revise the vaccine's label.




					arstechnica.com


----------



## Carlos Danger (Feb 20, 2021)

ffemt8978 said:


> It now appears as if the Pfizer vaccine doesn't require ultra-cold storage after all.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


And also that it is effective after one dose.


----------



## mgr22 (Feb 20, 2021)

Carlos Danger said:


> And also that it is effective after one dose.


Same with Moderna.


----------



## akflightmedic (Feb 20, 2021)

And instead of celebrating evolving, changing, positive information such as this...I have seen so many posting negative about it and saying they have even more reason to distrust it, cause of all the flip flopping.

I reiterate...this is as real time scientific process as we have ever been along with the keyboard and instant global bullhorn. But this IS science! This is the beauty of it. Changing position, adapting position, putting out new information....it is amazing.


----------



## cruiseforever (Feb 20, 2021)

2nd dose of the Pfizer vaccine was no problem.  Just got my 2nd dose of the shingles vaccine, that one kicked my butt.


----------



## mgr22 (Feb 20, 2021)

cruiseforever said:


> 2nd dose of the Pfizer vaccine was no problem.  Just got my 2nd dose of the shingles vaccine, that one kicked my butt.


This is a little off topic, but I'm hoping your mention of Shingrix, the newer shingles vaccine, will remind less-young viewers not to overlook it.


----------



## PotatoMedic (Feb 20, 2021)

mgr22 said:


> This is a little off topic, but I'm hoping your mention of Shingrix, the newer shingles vaccine, will remind less-young viewers not to overlook it.


I'm just wondering, if I've never had chicken pox, but I've had the vaccine, do I need the shingles vaccine?  Now I have a few decades before it is relevant but still a curiosity.


----------



## mgr22 (Feb 20, 2021)

PotatoMedic said:


> I'm just wondering, if I've never had chicken pox, but I've had the vaccine, do I need the shingles vaccine?  Now I have a few decades before it is relevant but still a curiosity.


I don't know. Before I got the Shingrix vaccine, I'd had chicken pox plus two chickenpox vaccines (I couldn't prove to various employers that I'd had the disease or been vaccinated).

I also got three smallpox vaccines and three for measles (same reasons as above). Once I get the COVID shot(s), I should auction my plasma.


----------



## Fezman92 (Feb 27, 2021)

Finally managed to get my first appointment. I’m getting my first shot on the 10th.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Mar 10, 2021)

Company medical just called and scheduled my first Moderna vaccine for the 19th.


----------



## Fezman92 (Mar 10, 2021)

I got my Bill Gates sterlization tracking chip today.


----------



## Fezman92 (Mar 11, 2021)

So I got it yesterday and took off work just to be safe. Haven’t felt any of the side effects.


----------



## Akulahawk (Mar 12, 2021)

Fezman92 said:


> So I got it yesterday and took off work just to be safe. Haven’t felt any of the side effects.


First shot usually isn't bad at all. It's the second shot that _might_ be a butt-kicker for a day or two. I had minimal side effects after my 2nd shot, but at least I had some so I know that my body was mounting a defense...


----------



## CCCSD (Mar 12, 2021)

Second put me down with body aches for 24 hours. I DID walk my dog for our daily four miles...maybe should have taken the day off...

Right as rain the next day. Took some Advil and Tylenol for the aches.


----------



## Fezman92 (Mar 13, 2021)

My parents managed to schedule their first shot on April 3rd which is great. My dad is a transplant recipient so he’s in one of the higher risk groups.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Mar 18, 2021)

ffemt8978 said:


> Source for the anaphylaxis comments so there is some risk with the vaccine:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


A little further information into the doctor's death:









						Officials Investigate  Physician's Death After COVID Vaccination
					

Onset of rare blood disorder should not be interpreted as causal, experts say




					www.medpagetoday.com


----------



## ffemt8978 (Mar 21, 2021)

Got the first dose of the Moderna yesterday..
No side effects yet.


----------



## CCCSD (Mar 21, 2021)

28 days later...


----------



## akflightmedic (Mar 21, 2021)

Humor break....I admit I have had fun with certain patients after reminding them of all the potential side effects, and then after injecting them saying "oh yeh, there is the 6 month sexual dysfunction as well"...that momentary look of horror on their face is priceless. Keep in mind, I am professional, I did this with a lot of the Firefighters, EMS workers, and other patients who I had decent rapport with and knew I could get away with it. But yeh, still funny!


----------



## EMT4LIFE2020 (Mar 28, 2021)

Itomaschik said:


> Hey, brothers and sisters. My agency is making the vaccine available to us 12/28. What are your thoughts on the Pfizer vaccine. Will you get it if you have a choice?


Yes, I will also be getting the vaccine as soon as it's available to me. I was hesitant a few months back but now I am looking forward to getting vaccinated.


----------



## Fezman92 (Apr 3, 2021)

Should I laminate my vaccine card now that I have both shots?


----------



## NomadicMedic (Apr 3, 2021)

Fezman92 said:


> Should I laminate my vaccine card now that I have both shots?



The current word is no, in the event that boosters are required, they'll use the "other" spots on that card.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Apr 3, 2021)

NomadicMedic said:


> The current word is no, in the event that boosters are required, they'll use the "other" spots on that card.


We were told to take pictures if our card with our phones in case we lose it.


----------



## akflightmedic (Apr 3, 2021)

Meh. I been telling everyone to laminate. If boosters come theN Get second card.
Right now laminate it cause it is your passport to make dinner reservations at Applebee’s.  Lol


----------



## PotatoMedic (Apr 4, 2021)

It's also your ticket to a free doughnut at Krispy Kreme


----------



## Seirende (Apr 11, 2021)

Janssen one-dose yesterday. Was fine for approx. the first twelve hours and then started feeling very rundown and achy. Feel a bit better but still poorly this afternoon


----------



## EpiEMS (Apr 11, 2021)

akflightmedic said:


> Meh. I been telling everyone to laminate. If boosters come theN Get second card.
> Right now laminate it cause it is your passport to make dinner reservations at Applebee’s.  Lol


I went with "take a picture and keep the card safe for now, at a minimum" when vaccinating at a mass site. In retrospect I think you're right - we filled out a few lost cards for folks who were getting second doses based on the VAMS records, so no reason we couldn't do that for boosters.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Apr 11, 2021)

akflightmedic said:


> Meh. I been telling everyone to laminate. If boosters come theN Get second card.
> Right now laminate it cause it is your passport to make dinner reservations at Applebee’s.  Lol


Wouldn't that make it a Vaxport?


----------



## DrParasite (Apr 11, 2021)

EpiEMS said:


> I went with "take a picture and keep the card safe for now, at a minimum" when vaccinating at a mass site. In retrospect I think you're right - we filled out a few lost cards for folks who were getting second doses based on the VAMS records, so no reason we couldn't do that for boosters.


dammit... I already lost both my cards...  I think one is stuffed in my winter jacket... maybe?

Thankfully, I was able to log onto the county covid database and downloaded my records to my dropbox folder.

Realistically speaking, how hard would it be to falsify those vaccine cards?


----------



## DesertMedic66 (Apr 11, 2021)

DrParasite said:


> dammit... I already lost both my cards...  I think one is stuffed in my winter jacket... maybe?
> 
> Thankfully, I was able to log onto the county covid database and downloaded my records to my dropbox folder.
> 
> Realistically speaking, how hard would it be to falsify those vaccine cards?


People have already been selling them online from $5-$20 per card.

I advised all my family and friends to take pictures of their cards and luckily I was able to keep a handful of blank cards should any of them misplace their cards.

The cards are not very complicated. Give someone an hour on a computer and some card stock and they could easily make/print them.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Apr 13, 2021)

J&J COVID vaccine use paused due to one-in-a-million complication
					

An extremely rare clotting problem that's also seen with the AstraZeneca vaccine.




					arstechnica.com
				




Appears as if J&J vaccine has similar problems to AstraZeneca


----------



## RedBlanketRunner (Apr 14, 2021)

With my past history the doc consensus is they want me to check into the hospital for 24 hours post shot.  Weird me out, will they? If I'm going that route I want to add my hernia laparoscopy and carpal tunnel release jobs in with the package. Nothing quite like asking the medical profession to get real in taking care of business to grind things to a dead halt.


----------



## CarSevenFour (Apr 14, 2021)

Like sheep to the slaughter, no way would I get the vaccine. People say, "Ohhh! If I get a vaccine, I can get my rights back!" Nobody, especially some jive politician or doctor has the right to strip your rights from you. They can take their silly Vaccine Passport and shove it.


----------



## Carlos Danger (Apr 14, 2021)

CarSevenFour said:


> Like sheep to the slaughter, no way would I get the vaccine. People say, "Ohhh! If I get a vaccine, I can get my rights back!" Nobody, especially some jive politician or doctor has the right to strip your rights from you. They can take their silly Vaccine Passport and shove it.


Is this guy for real?


----------



## CCCSD (Apr 14, 2021)

CarSevenFour said:


> Like sheep to the slaughter, no way would I get the vaccine. People say, "Ohhh! If I get a vaccine, I can get my rights back!" Nobody, especially some jive politician or doctor has the right to strip your rights from you. They can take their silly Vaccine Passport and shove it.


Scientifically based answer there skippy.


----------



## EpiEMS (Apr 14, 2021)

ffemt8978 said:


> J&J COVID vaccine use paused due to one-in-a-million complication
> 
> 
> An extremely rare clotting problem that's also seen with the AstraZeneca vaccine.
> ...


Digging in a bit, it looks like there's an immensely low rate of complications (J&J even lower than AZ). I wonder if the messaging around the "pause" is really the right approach.


----------



## mgr22 (Apr 14, 2021)

CarSevenFour said:


> Like sheep to the slaughter, no way would I get the vaccine. People say, "Ohhh! If I get a vaccine, I can get my rights back!" Nobody, especially some jive politician or doctor has the right to strip your rights from you. They can take their silly Vaccine Passport and shove it.


Or, you could keep your right to say no, but get the vaccine anyway, and maybe avoid a rough time with a disease that sometimes causes long-term disability, not to mention long-term death.


----------



## VentMonkey (Apr 14, 2021)

mgr22 said:


> not to mention long-term death.


That’s pretty funny.


Carlos Danger said:


> Is this guy for real?


Smile and nod...smile and nod.


----------



## silver (Apr 14, 2021)

mgr22 said:


> Or, you could keep your right to say no, but get the vaccine anyway, and maybe avoid a rough time with a disease that sometimes causes long-term disability, not to mention long-term death.



And death isn't even the worst outcome from COVID...

Being totally healthy one day and then you get sick and nearly die with multi system organ failure. You get intubated, need dialysis, ECMO, trach and spend months in ICU to be subsequently discharged bed bound and barely conscious to an LTACH w/ respiratory failure, heart failure, kidney failure...

I think I'd just take the vaccine instead.


----------



## CarSevenFour (Apr 15, 2021)

silver said:


> And death isn't even the worst outcome from COVID...
> 
> Being totally healthy one day and then you get sick and nearly die with multi system organ failure. You get intubated, need dialysis, ECMO, trach and spend months in ICU to be subsequently discharged bed bound and barely conscious to an LTACH w/ respiratory failure, heart failure, kidney failure...
> 
> I think I'd just take the vaccine instead.


Or maybe you die from the vaccine instead. Lots of medical people have already, mostly neurological problems sec to the vaccine.


----------



## DesertMedic66 (Apr 15, 2021)

CarSevenFour said:


> Or maybe you die from the vaccine instead. Lots of medical people have already, mostly neurological problems sec to the vaccine.


Please site you sources for this claim that is not on a anti-vax website. I’ll wait


----------



## akflightmedic (Apr 15, 2021)

DesertMedic66 said:


> Please site you sources for this claim that is not on a anti-vax website. I’ll wait


Don't be silly Desert...anti-vax websites will be the ONLY place you will get the truth. All the other sources lie, wake up sheeple. 

Circular reasoning or circular logic they call it...

"The Bible is true, because the Bible says it is..."


----------



## ffemt8978 (Apr 15, 2021)

akflightmedic said:


> Don't be silly Desert...anti-vax websites will be the ONLY place you will get the truth. All the other sources lie, wake up sheeple.
> 
> Circular reasoning or circular logic they call it...
> 
> "The Bible is true, because the Bible says it is..."


Honestly there has been the same circular reasoning on both sides of the vaccination argument.


----------



## CCCSD (Apr 15, 2021)

CarSevenFour said:


> Or maybe you die from the vaccine instead. Lots of medical people have already, mostly neurological problems sec to the vaccine.


“Lots”?
Really...


----------



## ffemt8978 (Apr 17, 2021)

Second Moderna dose yesterday...headache, neck ache, chills and arm soreness with general malaise today


----------



## Akulahawk (Apr 17, 2021)

ffemt8978 said:


> Second Moderna dose yesterday...headache, neck ache, chills and arm soreness with general malaise today


Typical experience. Likely some similar symptoms tomorrow. Next day, nearly all symptoms should be gone.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Apr 18, 2021)

Second dose really knocked me for a loop.  I probably could have gone back to work today but since I still had a headache decided to hold off one more day.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Apr 22, 2021)

Something like this was bound to happen sooner or later, and will likely provide some validity to the arguments of those skeptical of the vaccine.









						Contractor that ruined 15M doses of J&J vaccine hiked price of another by 800%
					

FDA releases damning inspection report as lawmakers question ties to Trump admin.




					arstechnica.com


----------



## Chimpie (Apr 22, 2021)

ffemt8978 said:


> Second dose really knocked me for a loop.  I probably could have gone back to work today but since I still had a headache decided to hold off one more day.



I had the second shot yesterday, and yes, it knocked me for a loop as well. I'm working from home today.


----------



## CCCSD (Apr 22, 2021)

Hydrate.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Jun 24, 2021)

Here’s all the data on myocarditis cases linked to COVID-19 vaccines
					

Experts stress the need for everyone to get vaccinated as the Delta variant spreads.




					arstechnica.com
				




As more and more side effects show up, do you think it's possible we reach the point of the risk of the vaccine outweighs the risk of Covid, and why do you think so?  Here we have a low risk of a lifelong side effect in the younger population, which is generally at lower risk of the worst effects of Covid.


----------



## MackTheKnife (Jun 24, 2021)

ffemt8978 said:


> Honestly there has been the same circular reasoning on both sides of the vaccination argument.


The Bible is true.


----------



## MackTheKnife (Jun 24, 2021)

The vaccine is still under emergency approval, not full.  4000 people in Massachusetts that were vaccinated now have COVID.  Go figure.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Jun 24, 2021)

MackTheKnife said:


> The vaccine is still under emergency approval, not full.  4000 people in Massachusetts that were vaccinated now have COVID.  Go figure.


Source?


----------



## EpiEMS (Jun 24, 2021)

MackTheKnife said:


> The vaccine is still under emergency approval, not full. 4000 people in Massachusetts that were vaccinated now have COVID. Go figure.


4,000 people vaccinated in Mass got COVID, of over 4 million vaccinated. It's widely known fact that some vaccinated people will get the disease, but of those, basically many fewer will die than had they not been vaccinated...which is an important outcome.

The EUA is a meaningless distinction at this point.


----------



## mgr22 (Jun 24, 2021)

ffemt8978 said:


> Here’s all the data on myocarditis cases linked to COVID-19 vaccines
> 
> 
> Experts stress the need for everyone to get vaccinated as the Delta variant spreads.
> ...


Just looking at the current situation, I don't think the risk of the vaccine outweighs the risk of COVID. To quote the article you linked, "Nearly all the cases [of myocarditis] recover quickly with limited treatment..." The same cannot be said for many COVID "long-haulers" -- i.e., those with long-term disability secondary to COVID. I've accumulated lots of literature on the topic if anyone's interested.

Should we continue to study the prevalence of myocarditis or any other side effects among vaccinated patients? Of course.


----------



## Akulahawk (Jun 25, 2021)

ffemt8978 said:


> Here’s all the data on myocarditis cases linked to COVID-19 vaccines
> 
> 
> Experts stress the need for everyone to get vaccinated as the Delta variant spreads.
> ...


My bottom-line answer to your question at this point in time is no, I don't think the risks of the vaccine will prove to outweigh the risks (in terms of both mortality and morbidity) over the long-term. 

I think that the older or more co-morbidities you have, the more you should consider getting vaccinated and though younger folks tend to NOT get severe disease, they can spread it reasonably well, so if that population remains relatively unvaccinated, it'll remain a viable reservoir. Therefore, I suggest that while older folks get the vaccine to prevent severe illness/long-term problems/death, younger folks should get it to remove themselves from becoming a reservoir.


----------



## FiremanMike (Jun 25, 2021)

So there’s been lots of discussion about annual boosters..  I wonder if those boosters will suck as bad as the original vaccine..


----------



## Carlos Danger (Jun 25, 2021)

ffemt8978 said:


> Here’s all the data on myocarditis cases linked to COVID-19 vaccines
> 
> 
> Experts stress the need for everyone to get vaccinated as the Delta variant spreads.
> ...


I think it's pretty clear right now that on a population level, the benefits of the vaccine very much outweigh the negatives of it. It is very much a net positive that so many Americans voluntarily took the vaccine as soon as it was available to them.

No one ever said that there would be zero side effects or that it would be 100% effective. Now that we're actually seeing those things though, maybe some people will start to have more interest in a risk-based approach to managing the next pandemic rather than the ham-fisted one that we've been using. But I'm not holding my breath.


----------



## MackTheKnife (Jun 25, 2021)

EpiEMS said:


> 4,000 people vaccinated in Mass got COVID, of over 4 million vaccinated. It's widely known fact that some vaccinated people will get the disease, but of those, basically many fewer will die than had they not been vaccinated...which is an important outcome.
> 
> The EUA is a meaningless distinction at this point.


Yeah, but it's a group in one geographic location. Interesting, to say the least.


----------



## MackTheKnife (Jun 25, 2021)

FiremanMike said:


> So there’s been lots of discussion about annual boosters..  I wonder if those boosters will suck as bad as the original vaccine..


Good guestion. One of the important unknowns is how long antibodies last. Early on it was thought to be possibly 3-6 weeks, then it was maybe several months. I had COVID last year and when I donate blood, they check for antibodies. Last donation, no antibodies.


----------



## DrParasite (Jun 25, 2021)

MackTheKnife said:


> The vaccine is still under emergency approval, not full.  4000 people in Massachusetts that were vaccinated now have COVID.  Go figure.


sure... and how many millions don't?  how many people get the flu shot and still get the flu?  It's more common than you might want to admit, and with covid, it's likely the 4000 people were infected under similar circumstances.  Let's not forget the JJ vaccine was only 70% effective, at least compared to the 90% rates shown by moderna and pfizer (or something like that, my numbers might be off).


mgr22 said:


> Just looking at the current situation, I don't think the risk of the vaccine outweighs the risk of COVID. To quote the article you linked, "Nearly all the cases [of myocarditis] recover quickly with limited treatment..." The same cannot be said for many COVID "long-haulers" -- i.e., those with long-term disability secondary to COVID. I've accumulated lots of literature on the topic if anyone's interested.
> 
> Should we continue to study the prevalence of myocarditis or any other side effects among vaccinated patients? Of course.


absolutely we should.  there WILL be side effects, for almost any drug.  most are manageable, and people recover quickly with few long-term after effects.  the elderly people who contracted covid were not at lucky.


----------



## mgr22 (Jun 25, 2021)

MackTheKnife said:


> Yeah, but it's a group in one geographic location. Interesting, to say the least.


I wonder if those doses were manufactured, shipped, or stored together. Massachusetts probably knows by now.

I'm thinking of an ex-employer who froze a batch of flu vaccine instead of refrigerating it. If we hadn't caught that error, there would have been hundreds of people vaccinated with a less effective product.


----------



## Summit (Jun 25, 2021)

MackTheKnife said:


> Yeah, but it's a group in one geographic location. Interesting, to say the least.


A state with a large population is not really a geographic location of interest unless the results are unexpected.

So, no, it's NOT at all interesting unless you tell me there is some correlation with a new variant or if you told me that all the breakthrough cases got vaccinated at the same location or from the same lot indicating improper handling of the vaccine... THEN that would be interesting. Otherwise, 60% of an entire state is fully vaccinated, >4M people, so a breakthrough incidence of 0.1% is completely uninteresting and expected.


----------



## Summit (Jun 25, 2021)

FiremanMike said:


> So there’s been lots of discussion about annual boosters..  I wonder if those boosters will suck as bad as the original vaccine..


Unknown, and there is better opportunity to do some dose finding now which might manage adverse effects vs efficacy.

Looks like Pfizer gives 79% reduction in risk for Delta (B.1.617.2 India) _infection_ vs 92% against Alpha (B.1.1.7 UK) and protection against hospitalization is halved from 99% to 96%.

So that is good individual coverage still against Delta (similar better than we think it might be for Gamma Brazil P1 and Beta SA B1351, but some people need higher protection. The primary individual beneficiaries for boosters is going to be the highest risk individuals: those with risk factors for severe illness (especially nursing home residents and workers) or with risk factors for poor vaccine response (immunocompromised).

*For population protection (herd immunity) the drop in coverage with the variant is concerning because you have less Ve against a variant with a higher R0 (more contagious) so you need better vaccine uptake (or a higher Ve in the form of a booster). *I am concerned with plateauing vaccination rates and the virtual elimination of masking/distancing rules vs the reduced efficacy against Delta and its imminently becoming the dominant variant by prevalence.



MackTheKnife said:


> Good guestion. One of the important unknowns is how long antibodies last. Early on it was thought to be possibly 3-6 weeks, then it was maybe several months. I had COVID last year and when I donate blood, they check for antibodies. Last donation, no antibodies.


*tldr; We think that immunity is very long lived, at least a year, perhaps lifetime, although natural infection appears somewhat less protective than the mRNA vaccines, particularly against variants, if you had been infected with the original China Wuhan Wild Type. Remember that immunity is not solely based on antibodies and negative qualitative antibody tests absolutely do not rule out immunity for someone previously infected.

Longer Read: I wrote this up for a similar question on another forum...*

In Feb/March when they were investigating thousands and thousands of suspected reinfection in SA. Dr. Swaminathan (WHO Chief) was announcing the worry and there was also super concerning serology data from the Novavax placebo arm indicating previous infection was not protective in SA. We had plenty of in vitro data showing lower neutralization rates... this was following the January SA case spikes and partial collapse of the SA heatlhcare system. A few colleagues had family practicing back home and the stories of catastrophic surges were heartbreaking.

*The questions was whether N501Y variants with the Eek mutation (E484K) like Beta Brazil and Gamma SA were going to have concerning reinfection rates... I did a lite review!* There are some interesting case studies but no great epi data to give rates except the inferred data from the Novavax serology.

Some things I did find.... Manaus Brazil where high seroprevalence in didn't stem the surge, but was this due to reinfection or better transmission in the (more fit than wild type) Beta P1 variant? This preprint suggested 28% of cases were reinfections, and they accounted for the higher tranmission rates, but it was model based, so whatever, potential for weaksauce study in my book is strong. Was it the same thing in SA? And the same story appears in Dhaka where they surged with the Gamma B1351 variant and they had high rates of previous infection with reports of reinfection.

This was an interesting read in Cell.
Cross neutralizing between variants across 4 waves in Japan showed the weakest final reactivity against the Gamma B1351 SA variant.

This preprint shows great (96% relative reduction) protection at 13 months after infection against reinfection but suggests reduced anti-S for Gamma B1351.

Preprint Theory on CD4/CD8 response "picking up the slack" with the Gamma B1351 variant in the face of reduced antispike activity from antibodies.

There are so many limitations. The lack of WGS availability... lack of validation of previous infection... limitation on knowing if previous infections were wild type or something else... surmising with time/location based inference based on previous prevalence rates. All that makes it hard to put an efficacy rate on previous infection against particular variant... but the vulnerability exists and MAYBE (likely?) it is higher for certain variants.

*SINGLE DOSE FOR PREVIOUS INFECTIONS?*

For those previously infected, it does really seem that a single dose of mRNA vaccine is all that is needed. The idea is a popular one.

Few studies I read on this topic were this one from the Lancet:
"Among previously uninfected, seronegative individuals, anti-S titres after one vaccine dose were comparable to peak anti-S titres in individuals with a previous natural infection who had not yet been vaccinated. Among those with a previous SARS-CoV-2 infection, vaccination increased anti-S titres more than 140-fold from peak pre-vaccine levels (figure). This increase appears to be at least one order of magnitude greater than reported after a conventional prime-boost vaccine strategy in previously uninfected individuals.3"

Nature Medince
"spike-specific IgG antibody levels and ACE2 antibody binding inhibition responses elicited by a single vaccine dose in individuals with prior SARS-CoV-2 infection (n = 35) were similar to those seen after two doses of vaccine in individuals without prior infection (n = 228)"

IJID article:
"One dose boosts NtAbs in previously infected more than two doses in uninfected HCWs."

And this preprint:
"A single dose of BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine up to 15 months after SARS-CoV-2 infection provides neutralizing titers exceeding two vaccine doses in previously uninfected individuals. "

I thought there was another one that did a reanalysis of some subgroups from another large dataset, but can't find it... ah here it is in a NEJM letter.

This is a preprint addressing in a limited way vaccination vs previous infection:

Their data shows that vaccines work very very well and previous infection is protective.
2139 infection in the unvaccinated uninfected group (n=22777 attack rate 9.4%)
15 infections in the vaccinated uninfected group (n=26882, attack rate 0.56%)
0 infection in the vaccinated previously infected group (n=1220)
0 infection in the UNvaccinated previously infected group (n=1359)

A safe conclusion is that while vaccine is in short supply, previous infection should offer sufficient protection. What was the prevalent variant in Ohio (study site) during their study period of Dec '20 through May '21? Alpha B117 (UK) appears dominant by April. But Gamma B1351 (SA) and Beta P1 were not very prevalent and Delta India was not present.


----------



## Summit (Jun 25, 2021)

For myocarditis AE, as per the article posted:

"The highest case rate was for males ages 12 to 17, which had a crude estimate of 66.7 cases per million mRNA doses given."

So pretty similar to the chance that you will get struck by lightning in your life... 

Know what has a way way way higher risk of myocarditis? COVID-19 infection!

Myocarditis is interesting and worth studying in terms of expectation and treatment. That it is spawning risk vs benefit conversations is ****ing laughable.


----------



## MackTheKnife (Jun 25, 2021)

Summit said:


> A state with a large population is not really a geographic location of interest unless the results are unexpected.
> 
> So, no, it's NOT at all interesting unless you tell me there is some correlation with a new variant or if you told me that all the breakthrough cases got vaccinated at the same location or from the same lot indicating improper handling of the vaccine... THEN that would be interesting. Otherwise, 60% of an entire state is fully vaccinated, >4M people, so a breakthrough incidence of 0.1% is completely uninteresting and expected.


Thanx for telling me what I find interesting is NOT. Didn't say there any SIGNIFICANCE to it, just interesting as it has NOT been seen elsewhere. I suppose if I find the clots and the myocarditis interesting, even if it's not clinically significant, it's not unless you say it is. I'll keep that it mind.


----------



## NomadicMedic (Jun 25, 2021)

MackTheKnife said:


> What is this?


It’s spam. Report them when you see them.


----------



## akflightmedic (Jun 25, 2021)

And dont quote them! LOL


----------



## DrParasite (Jun 25, 2021)

MackTheKnife said:


> What is this?


----------



## MackTheKnife (Jun 25, 2021)

NomadicMedic said:


> It’s spam. Report them when you see them.


Oh, I reported it!


----------



## ffemt8978 (Jul 13, 2021)

FDA adds warning about rare reaction to J&J COVID-19 vaccine
					

WASHINGTON (AP) — U.S. regulators on Monday added a new warning to Johnson & Johnson’s COVID-19 vaccine about links to a rare and potentially dangerous neurological reaction, but said it’s not entirely clear the shot caused the problem.




					apnews.com
				




Another possible side effect from the J&J vaccine.  As more and more issues like these crop up, at what point do we realize that the testing for vaccines was rushed through before we understood all the possible issues with them?


----------



## DrParasite (Jul 13, 2021)

ffemt8978 said:


> FDA adds warning about rare reaction to J&J COVID-19 vaccine
> 
> 
> WASHINGTON (AP) — U.S. regulators on Monday added a new warning to Johnson & Johnson’s COVID-19 vaccine about links to a rare and potentially dangerous neurological reaction, but said it’s not entirely clear the shot caused the problem.
> ...


from the article:


> 100 people developing the syndrome after receiving the one-dose vaccine. Almost all of were hospitalized and one person died, the FDA said.


Sounds serious
 oh wait...


> The number of cases reported in connection with J&J’s vaccine represents a tiny fraction of the nearly 13 million Americans who have received the one-dose shot.


that means, you have a 0.00076923076% chance of being affected by this, with  0.0000076923076% having a fatal reaction.

To put this in perspective, 150 people die every year from Tylenol, and research found that there were 12.7 events per 1,000 person-years among those who took aspirin.  but I don't see anyone advocating for the removal of tylenol and aspirin from the shelves.


----------



## mgr22 (Jul 13, 2021)

ffemt8978 said:


> FDA adds warning about rare reaction to J&J COVID-19 vaccine
> 
> 
> WASHINGTON (AP) — U.S. regulators on Monday added a new warning to Johnson & Johnson’s COVID-19 vaccine about links to a rare and potentially dangerous neurological reaction, but said it’s not entirely clear the shot caused the problem.
> ...


I realize the testing was rushed. I got vaccinated anyway, because I felt COVID was more risky than the vaccine. I haven't changed my mind about that, given the chances of death or disability from COVID.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Jul 13, 2021)

DrParasite said:


> from the article:
> Sounds serious
> oh wait...
> that means, you have a 0.00076923076% chance of being affected by this, with  0.0000076923076% having a fatal reaction.
> ...


You're right, but are we going to ignore the cumulative risks as more and more are discovered?  Each individual issue with the vaccines so far has had a very low risk associated with it, but we're ignoring the fact that quantity has a quality of its own.  Or do we keep dismissing each individual issue as a minor low risk problem until it's too late?

As far as your Tylenol and aspirin analogy goes, I'm not aware of any employers mandating that you take them or lose your job, nor am I aware of any restrictions in public that apply to those who don't take them and those who do.  If we're going to treat Covid and it's vaccines as different than other vaccines, then we need to stick with it being different than other meds.


----------



## DrParasite (Jul 13, 2021)

ffemt8978 said:


> You're right, but are we going to ignore the cumulative risks as more and more are discovered?  Each individual issue with the vaccines so far has had a very low risk associated with it, but we're ignoring the fact that quantity has a quality of its own.  Or do we keep dismissing each individual issue as a minor low risk problem until it's too late?


absolutely not... every drug has risks and side effects, with the vast majority being minor. 





but the number of lives saved by the vaccine does outweigh those that died.


ffemt8978 said:


> As far as your Tylenol and aspirin analogy goes, I'm not aware of any employers mandating that you take them or lose your job, nor am I aware of any restrictions in public that apply to those who don't take them and those who do.  If we're going to treat Covid and it's vaccines as different than other vaccines, then we need to stick with it being different than other meds.


That's a fair point... know any hospitals that mandate flu shots?








						How many people die from flu shots in the United States every year?
					

Answer (1 of 13): There are so many questions on Quora asking how many people die from flu shots. Not a single one of these questions asks for the necessary comparison with how many people die from not getting flu shots.  But many Quorans supply this information anyway even when the OP isn’t aski...




					www.quora.com
				







__





						Flu Shots – Deadly Risks | Abundant Life Chiropractic
					

Flu Shots – Deadly Risks - Flu shots are medical procedures that come with deadly risks. by Craig Stellpflug (NaturalNews) New data presented at IDWeek 2012 shows a small mortality




					healthsourcelombard.com
				




But I do think the benefits do outweigh the risks


----------



## ffemt8978 (Jul 13, 2021)

DrParasite said:


> absolutely not... every drug has risks and side effects, with the vast majority being minor.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I agree that *at this time* the benefits outweigh the risks.  I'm concerned about what we're going to do when and if that balance shifts the other way.  I'm concerned that these particular vaccines haven't been around long enough to determine if they have more serious long term effects.  How many drugs have gone through the full length testing and approval process and years later they are connected to previously unknown side effects?  I'm concerned that we're ignoring that possibility in an effort to push this vaccine.

What I'm most concerned about is what we'll do when the next pandemic inevitably hits, now that we've established a new base line in our response.


----------



## mgr22 (Jul 13, 2021)

ffemt8978 said:


> I agree that *at this time* the benefits outweigh the risks.  I'm concerned about what we're going to do when and if that balance shifts the other way.  I'm concerned that these particular vaccines haven't been around long enough to determine if they have more serious long term effects.  How many drugs have gone through the full length testing and approval process and years later they are connected to previously unknown side effects?  I'm concerned that we're ignoring that possibility in an effort to push this vaccine.
> 
> What I'm most concerned about is what we'll do when the next pandemic inevitably hits, now that we've established a new base line in our response.


Since the mid-50s, there haven't been many issues with vaccines. Here's a link to an article with specifics:



			https://www.hmpgloballearningnetwork.com/site/emsworld/article/1225726/covid-vaccine-look-evidence


----------



## ffemt8978 (Jul 13, 2021)

mgr22 said:


> Since the mid-50s, there haven't been many issues with vaccines. Here's a link to an article with specifics:
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.hmpgloballearningnetwork.com/site/emsworld/article/1225726/covid-vaccine-look-evidence


How many of those vaccines had a shortened testing and approval process like the Covid vaccines?


----------



## MackTheKnife (Jul 13, 2021)

DrParasite said:


> from the article:
> Sounds serious
> oh wait...
> that means, you have a 0.00076923076% chance of being affected by this, with  0.0000076923076% having a fatal reaction.
> ...



To put this into perspective, the incidence of Guillian-Barre Syndrome in J&J-vaccinated patients is FIVE TIMES HIGHER than in the normal population.  And yes, all drugs and vaccines have risks to varying degrees.  BTW, I'm not saying J&J shouldn't be used.  Just a point in deciding which of the 3 vaccines to choose. Such as Pfizer has a 30mcg dose while Moderna uses a 100mcg dose.  Should one choose the higher dose despite relatively equal efficacy versus the lower dose? Or vice versa?


----------



## mgr22 (Jul 13, 2021)

ffemt8978 said:


> How many of those vaccines had a shortened testing and approval process like the Covid vaccines?


I don't know, but does it matter? We're talking about lots of time and lots of recipients -- i.e., actual use of those vaccines and the opportunity to observe side effects over many years would have been pretty much the same as extensive testing.


----------



## DrParasite (Jul 13, 2021)

mgr22 said:


> Since the mid-50s, there haven't been many issues with vaccines. Here's a link to an article with specifics:
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.hmpgloballearningnetwork.com/site/emsworld/article/1225726/covid-vaccine-look-evidence


yeah, but do you think we can trust the author? 

this is another graphic (from April) where lists risk of all the covid vaccines









						One in a million: Comparing the potential side effects of COVID-19 vaccines
					

A visual explainer about the possible side effects from the COVID-19 vaccines




					graphics.reuters.com


----------



## mgr22 (Jul 13, 2021)

DrParasite said:


> yeah, but do you think we can trust the author?


😆


----------



## Summit (Jul 13, 2021)

ffemt8978 said:


> How many of those vaccines had a shortened testing and approval process like the Covid vaccines?


No vaccine in human history prior to COVID has had the scrutiny and close study with the best knowledge that we have placed onto COVID vaccines.

*The testing was NOT rushed. Shortening is not rushing or unsafe. Why is that?*

1. The parts of the testing that were cut out were not safety oriented, they were testing regimes that pharma usually does to see if the vaccine is likely to work well enough to pour in more money. In this case the gov said "here is some $ so you don't have to worry about the $."

2. The reason things went fast is most vaccine test regimes are longer than would otherwise be required because it takes that long to reach primary endpoints in the study (ie enough of the study group gets infected), and as it turns out during a pandemic, that doesn't take as long.

Vaccine hesitant folks have this idea that in the 1950s or 1960s we were doing so much more testing with vaccines that we didn't do here. Vaccine hesitant folks also usually assume we had as much understanding then as we do now, but we didn't. We knew so much less back then, had far less diagnostic capability to work up cases and AE, didn't look at things like asymptomatic infection and transmission in Phase III data, and Phase IV (we are in IV) was not technologically enabled by VAERS and VSAFE.

The RARE Adverse Effects (AE) we are now finding are NOT because the testing timeframe of safety studies was too short. It wasn't. These rare AEs are short term onset (days to weeks) which is what virtually every vaccine AE ever has ever been (and when we see delayed AE from vaccine they are related to the short term AE). The reason we are finding rare AE now is that nobody does a Phase III trial with 1 million participants needed to see a rare AE with certainty. The COVID vaccine Phase III trials were huge with 30K or 60K participants!

Now we have given 10s or 100s of millions of doses of each vaccine in the US. So we are finding AE that are occurring in the 1 in 100K or 1 in 1M ranges of AE.

*Why is that enough? Because if you are trying to make a vaccine, you are making it for something that is dangerous enough that you power your Phase III to detect rates of serious AE several order of magnitude lower than the risk of the disease the vaccine targets. *

You could literally kill 1 in 10K vaccine recipients and still have the vaccine be a very good idea against a disease that kills more than 1 in 100. We would have seen that signal in Phase III. Happily, it appears the vaccines kill less than 1 in 1M. Your chances of being struck by lightening are higher. (I'm going outside, how about you?)



ffemt8978 said:


> You're right, but are we going to ignore the cumulative risks as more and more are discovered?  Each individual issue with the vaccines so far has had a very low risk associated with it, but we're ignoring the fact that quantity has a quality of its own.  Or do we keep dismissing each individual issue as a minor low risk problem until it's too late?


Too late for what???? Nobody dismisses that individual bad outcomes are bad for those individuals. This is risk versus benefit!

Let me tell you the quality of the quantity of cumulative rare AE discovered: SUPER LOW compared to the vaccine's benefit.

We are discovering things that happen to around 1 in 100K people or fewer.  So if we discover 20 of those rare AE, then you might have enough things happening that it would have been a safety signal in the Phase III data.

And if you did discover 20 of them, would that be enough to say "vaccine bad?"  Nope. Why not? Here's why:

*1. The overall risk from COVID is much much higher than than for the rare AEs being identified, even in populations at lower risk for COVID complications.
2. The specific vaccine AEs identified are also caused by COVID at a rate many (many!) times higher than the vaccine (such as myocarditis, blood clots, and GBS). *Myocardial complications occur in more than 1 in 100 COVID cases. The number one cause of myocarditis is viral infection, and the same for GBS.
*3. COVID is pandemic and likely to become endemic.*

Vaccines are never zero risk. We do stop giving them though when the risk outweighs the benefits. When have we seen that?

1. Smallpox!
That vaccine gave people myocarditis, even killed people. But Smallpox was horrible. We eradicated it (except for some samples at CDC Atlanta and Biopreparat Kolstovo (and whoever the Soviets slipped it to?). So, we stopped giving Smallpox vaccine to the public because the benefit was zero and the risk remained.

2. Polio!
Polio is horrible. We have riskier Oral Attenuated Vaccine OAV that works better and longer but with higher AE, and we  Inactivated (injected) Polio Vaccine IPV with lower AE. In countries where Polio is endemic or importation risk is high, they give OAV because the benefit is worth the risk. In countries where Polio is eradicated (USA) and importation risk is low, we give IPV.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Jul 14, 2021)

Summit said:


> No vaccine in human history prior to COVID has had the scrutiny and close study with the best knowledge that we have placed onto COVID vaccines.
> 
> *The testing was NOT rushed. Shortening is not rushing or unsafe. Why is that?*
> 
> ...


Thank you for proving my point about dismissing each individual risk as a low probability while ignoring the question of how each low risk adds to the total.  I never said the vaccine wasn't worth the risk compared to the benefits it provides, but at the same time I am not dismissing those risks with tropes about being struck by lightning.  I am asking what do we do if the vaccine risks become more than the benefit and where do we draw the line?  Especially considering mRNA vaccines are now being tested for use against other diseases like Alzheimer's.


----------



## DrParasite (Jul 14, 2021)

ffemt8978 said:


> Thank you for proving my point about dismissing each individual risk as a low probability while ignoring the question of how each low risk adds to the total.  I never said the vaccine wasn't worth the risk compared to the benefits it provides, but at the same time I am not dismissing those risks with tropes about being struck by lightning.  I am asking what do we do if the vaccine risks become more than the benefit and where do we draw the line?  Especially considering mRNA vaccines are now being tested for use against other diseases like Alzheimer's.


You know what?  I see your point, but you have an issue seeing the forest for the trees.

Every year, 32,000 people are killed in MVAs.  That works out to about 87 per day.  along with 2 million injuries.

your article says "100 people developing the syndrome after receiving the one-dose vaccine. Almost all of were hospitalized and one person died, the FDA said."  even if the issues you reported were 10 times as bad, you wouldn't even come close to the effects of MVAs, yet, I don't hear anyone saying we should ban cars, nor does anyone take a person seriously who refuses to get into a vehicle because of the risk of death or injuries.

Everything has risk.  life has risk.  eating food has risks, and every 5 days a child dies from choking on food.  You can't avoid it, but you can manage it, and take steps to mitigate it.

Does it suck when you happen to be the unlucky person that gets the 1 in a million fatal side effect?  sure, but that doesn't mean you were wrong to get the vaccine.  the risk, even the cumulative risk of all the side effects, of taking the vaccine is still better than dealing with catching an infectious virus that has permanent and long term side effects for those who are infected.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Jul 14, 2021)

DrParasite said:


> You know what?  I see your point, but you have an issue seeing the forest for the trees.
> 
> Every year, 32,000 people are killed in MVAs.  That works out to about 87 per day.  along with 2 million injuries.
> 
> ...


Have I said anything about what I believe about this vaccine, or have I been asking questions to get us thinking about how to answer some of these issues before they become a problem?  Too often I see people dismiss concerns with the vaccine with the response of Covid is worse and the side effects are very low risk.

But here you go:

Yes, it sucks if you are one of the people who develop an adverse side effect from the vaccine.  Yes, people should still get vaccinated.  Yes, there are risks associated with everything in life.

If we're going to use the reward is greater than the risks arguments to convince people to get vaccinated, we need to do a better job of explaining why and not dismiss them with generic responses.  Especially when it comes to a vaccine where not getting it may cost someone their job because their employer has decided everyone must be vaccinated.  

There's a reason I appreciate @Summit 's, yours and a few other members responses.  They provide factual objective evidence of why this vaccine is important, and by posting those responses here I hope that somebody may find this thread on their favorite search engine and learn something...maybe even convince them to get vaccinated.


----------



## Summit (Jul 14, 2021)

I thought I addressed the exact points asked, but they are being asked again. Let me try again again a different way:

We care about what happens to individual if they have the vaccine.
We care about what happens to individuals if they have COVID.

_We have to balance those: _

If you have serious vaccine AE that occur at a rate many times (or orders of magnitude) less often than serious outcomes of the disease targeted by the vaccine, and the disease is pandemic/endemic, then the vaccine benefit of disease prevention outweighs the risk
You can analyze whole population risk/benefit and realize bonus benefit by high vaccination rates having a population benefit greater than the sum of the individual benefits due to herd immunity, prevention of breakdown of societal systems, and reduction of costly public health interventions.
You can also risk/benefit stratify to subpopulations and this can be more individual focused in recommendations.

_Let's look at young versus old subpopulations:_
You could ignore the transmission caused by these sub-populations (secondary whole population risk) and just look at outcomes. Actually let's just look at ONE outcome, a sub-set of serious COVID, hospitalization. We won't count the folks on outpatient oxygen, dexamethasone, and monoclonal antibody therapy. Let's say you have a 14mo COVID hospitalization incidence for 18-29 yo of 226/100K vs 1703/100K for 65+ (these are actual US stats). Those are hospitalizations normalized to population (rather than all COVID cases, for simplicity's sake, though we know most of the population hasn't had COVID). 

_NNT vs NNH_
If you wanted to do some simple ballpark math, you calc number needed to treat (NNT) vs number needed to harm (NNH). If we have 99% Ve for reduction of COVID hospitalization, you calc NNT: you need to vaccinate about 60 people in the 65+ range to prevent 1 hospitalization over that timeframe all else being equal. NNT for 18-29 y/o is 445 vaccinations to prevent one hospitalization due to COVID. If you add together to get the CUMULATIVE rate of ALL reported serious AE in vaccine recipients (minus the background rate in the population) then you get the NNH. This is simplified math only looking at a narrow set of outcomes, but you can see the point I think.

_So when do we not recommend the vaccine? 
I_f you only cared about serious outcomes, if you are hospitalizing significantly less than NNT of 1 in 445 18-29 year old vaccine recipients due to vaccine AE (and we are hospitalizing WAY WAY WAY less than that), then you are preventing more serious outcomes due to COVID than you are causing with the vaccine, and you keep recommending the vaccine. Discovering another 1 in a million AE sucks for that one in a million person, but it doesn't change the best recommendations to individuals unless we discern a significant identifiable risk factor for the AE.

_Individuals do matter!_
We care about individual bad outcomes both from COVID and vaccine, but we cannot know individuals' specific outcomes ahead of time. We have to make recommendations for the whole population, subpopulations, and individuals with the best data and consideration for each. Right now, it is clearly in favor of getting the vaccine for all but a small minority of eligible people.


----------



## dutemplar (Jul 15, 2021)

OK, it’s months late but Ive been super busy, distracted and not paying attention to some threads.  Both my wife and I took the Pfizer (free).  After the first one, I wanted to rip my arm off and beat the person who have the shot to me with it.  Second, no problem.  Mild general ache but meh.  Wife had mild general malaise and general ache but meh.

i’m 50, smoked cigars since Somalia and had a mild MI in ‘18.  Wife 48, HTN.  Two 18 month old boys, so didn’t hesitate.  I was holding an epipen, but hey….


----------



## ffemt8978 (Jul 15, 2021)

Feds arrest CA homeopath for selling COVID pellets, fake CDC vaccine cards
					

Homeopath: "It is like an energy medicine... made from the disease particles themselves."




					arstechnica.com
				




Surprised it took this long for something like this to happen.


----------



## CarSevenFour (Jul 15, 2021)

DesertMedic66 said:


> Please site you sources for this claim that is not on a anti-vax website. I’ll wait


Glad you waited. Check the VAERS stats, and add anywhere from 10 to 100% to the listed numbers. Adverse reactions to the Covid-19 (or any other vaccine) cases tend to be greatly underreported to VAERS simply because of the way it is set up and the voluntary nature of reporting. I could send you to Mike Adams' Natural News site but since it doesn't support your POV, there's nothing there for you, but the TRUTH. But do visit his extensive site and get an alternative view that contradicts the official narrative. Adams started out with Covid-19 coverage from the POV of one who really believed that Covid was real and he projected mass death based on the medical reporting he was seeing. He changed his point of view quickly when his research turned up many unanswered questions about the veracity of the federal, state, and local government Covid reports.

I've seen the aftermath of the VAX and it isn't pretty. Neighbors (2), relatives (at least 3) who are suffering serious side effects of the jab. A very close relative, a healthy vibrant woman I've known for 30 years, is suffering from a sudden onset of what sounds like pericarditis. She is healthy and showed absolutely no cardiac symptoms until after taking the jab.  Another relative just died from a CVA directly attributed to the Covid-19 vaccine. Sudden onset, a healthy young individual, he was required by his job to be vaccinated. He thought he was doing the right thing and officially died of complications from the vaccine. I realize these are just personal instances, but that's an awful lot of people adversely affected by the vaccine in just one guy's life and a small circle of family, friends, and acquaintances. Just looking at people I know, or know of, negatively affected by the jab got me to thinking that never before have I seen this many people that I know having adverse effects from ANY vaccine. I've been following mass vaccination campaigns since I was a child when Polio reared its ugly head in the 1950s on our elementary school grounds. This whole thing with Covid-19 strikes me as unique and full of government and official medical-political disinformation.

So believe what you want, just inform yourself, and don't rely on the "experts" that the government fronts on the nightly news as "authorities." Look into Dr. Fauci's smarmy history, his government-granted patents, and exactly how much dough he is making off the Covid vaccines. His relationships with the Communist Chinese in gain of function research is nothing short of chilling. Check out the excellent investigative work Polly St. George (Amazing Polly) in Canada is doing to expose the serious failings of the medical industry, and it is a failure of competence and truth, a money-making enterprise that only cares about death and disability to make a buck, lots of bucks. Another researcher, and ex-Emergency Room physician, Dr. Sherri Tenpenny, DO, AOBEM(95-06), AOBNMM, ABIHM, is a vaccine researcher with excellent knowledge on the subject. Finally, if you want a professional journalist's take on the subjects of vaccines, Covid, and government cover-ups, Charyl Atkisson (late of CBS News), has an excellent website with real news. Or you could go to a pro-vax site (because anti-vax is verboten to you) and simply reinforce what you already believe. Follow any of these alternative sites and researchers and you will find a rabbit hole that goes deep. 

What got me to question the ethics of the medical profession was a curbside interview with a couple of NYC-EMS paramedics sitting in their rig. They were asked by the cameraman how bad it was inside the NYC hospital because the nightly news said the ER and nursing floors were inundated with Covid-19 patients and were near the breaking point. The ambulance driver stated, "Aw, it's packed in there..." The cameraman got inside and filmed a vastly different scenario than that painted by EMS, an empty hospital with no patients in the ER or on the floors. This was repeated by citizen videographer-journalists in Southern California (Los Angeles), and London, England with the same results: empty hospitals because people were advised to "stay away" so they wouldn't add to the overwhelming workload of the "Heroic Frontline Workers."

As for the paramedics' evaluation of the non-existent situation inside a hospital they were just leaving, it makes me wonder about EMS' role in the great Covid-19 untruth.

The easiest lie to believe is the Big Lie--coming from "reliable sources" Research like your life depends on the results.


DesertMedic66 said:


> Please site you sources for this claim that is not on a anti-vax website. I’ll wait


----------



## CarSevenFour (Jul 15, 2021)

CCCSD said:


> Scientifically based answer there skippy.


I'm getting tired of your dehumanizing name-calling. Just so you know, my name is Victor. I reported your post.


----------



## Fezman92 (Jul 15, 2021)

I was talking to a guy who said he isn’t getting it because he doesn’t trust any kind of vaccine since he believes that he autism and ADHD were caused by vaccines.


----------



## DrParasite (Jul 15, 2021)

Fezman92 said:


> I was talking to a guy who said he isn’t getting it because he doesn’t trust any kind of vaccine since he believes that he autism and ADHD were caused by vaccines.


I would ask that guy if he would rather be dead from whatever he could be vaccinated against, or have autism and/or ADHD?  My son has autism...  Even though there is no proven connection between Autism /  ADHD and vaccines, I would much rather me and/or my loved one be diagnosed with Autism than be dead.


----------



## Fezman92 (Jul 15, 2021)

I did and he just ignored me. People are strange.


----------



## CarSevenFour (Jul 15, 2021)

mgr22 said:


> Since the mid-50s, there haven't been many issues with vaccines. Here's a link to an article with specifics:
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.hmpgloballearningnetwork.com/site/emsworld/article/1225726/covid-vaccine-look-evidence


The only problem; you have an apple vs orange case here. The Covid "vaccine" is not a traditional vaccine, it is gene therapy using nanoparticles (graphene) and aborted human fetus cells. I would never allow this to be put into my body. The Covid "Vaccine" is an untried, unique form of medication that is being tested on a largely unknowing and unaware population who have no recourse in a court of law to sue for damages.


----------



## GMCmedic (Jul 15, 2021)

CarSevenFour said:


> aborted human fetus cells.



Oh this one again. It's simply not true.


----------



## mgr22 (Jul 15, 2021)

CarSevenFour said:


> The only problem; you have an apple vs orange case here. The Covid "vaccine" is not a traditional vaccine, it is gene therapy using nanoparticles (graphene) and aborted human fetus cells. I would never allow this to be put into my body. The Covid "Vaccine" is an untried, unique form of medication that is being tested on a largely unknowing and unaware population who have no recourse in a court of law to sue for damages.


Ok, but how do you feel about the chance of death or disability from COVID compared to the chance of death or disability from the vaccine, given the literature on both?


----------



## ffemt8978 (Jul 15, 2021)

CarSevenFour said:


> The only problem; you have an apple vs orange case here. The Covid "vaccine" is not a traditional vaccine, it is gene therapy using nanoparticles (graphene) and aborted human fetus cells. I would never allow this to be put into my body. The Covid "Vaccine" is an untried, unique form of medication that is being tested on a largely unknowing and unaware population who have no recourse in a court of law to sue for damages.



Everything I could find says fetus cells may have been used in testing but are not present in the vaccine.  Try again.









						Fact Check-Johnson & Johnson’s COVID-19 vaccine does not contain aborted fetal cells
					

Social media users have been sharing posts online that claim the COVID-19 vaccine produced by Johnson & Johnson contains aborted fetal DNA as an ingredient. This claim is false. While the vaccine used lab-replicated fetal cells (known as fetal cell lines) during its production...




					www.reuters.com
				




Oh look....the CDC says you're wrong about the graphene too. Matter of fact they specifically state the vaccines contain no carbon particles.





__





						Interim Clinical Considerations for Use of COVID-19 Vaccines | CDC
					

Find interim clinical considerations for the use of COVID-19 vaccines for the prevention of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in the United States.




					www.cdc.gov


----------



## Akulahawk (Jul 15, 2021)

CarSevenFour said:


> The only problem; you have an apple vs orange case here. The Covid "vaccine" is not a traditional vaccine, it is gene therapy using nanoparticles (graphene) and aborted human fetus cells. I would never allow this to be put into my body. The Covid "Vaccine" is an untried, unique form of medication that is being tested on a largely unknowing and unaware population who have no recourse in a court of law to sue for damages.


As above, aside from the "no recourse" part, do you have a _reputable source _for the claims you allege? A 20 second (or less) search shows from reputable sources that there is no graphene in the Covid 19 vaccines and furthermore that graphene hasn't been shown to be toxic even if it is present. A couple of the vaccines use non-pathogenic vector viruses (a well-known strategy) along with DNA (again, a well-known strategy) to get the body to (ultimately) produce antibodies to the SARS-CoV2 virus. A couple that use a nano_lipid_ technology both use mRNA to deliver their payload. 

As to the claim of "aborted  human fetus cells" being present in the vaccine, that's absolutely NOT the case. There are some well-established stem cell lines that did come from that source, but those cells are used in the research side, you know, the side where they figure out how to get the payload INTO a cell and for that, they need cells... They don't need those cells to be present in any number in the actual vaccine because there's no purpose for those cells to be there. 

Also, there isn't _one_ Covid19 vaccine, there's quite a few of them. Pfizer, Moderna, Johnson & Johnson, and Astra Zenica are the 4 most well-known manufacturers of them. From what I understand, there are/were _hundreds _of vaccine candidates in various stages of research. 

So, again, do you have _any_ actual reputable sources for your claims?


----------



## Tigger (Jul 15, 2021)

CarSevenFour said:


> The only problem; you have an apple vs orange case here. The Covid "vaccine" is not a traditional vaccine, it is gene therapy using nanoparticles (graphene) and aborted human fetus cells. I would never allow this to be put into my body. The Covid "Vaccine" is an untried, unique form of medication that is being tested on a largely unknowing and unaware population who have no recourse in a court of law to sue for damages.


Good look there, sport.

I don’t have a lot to offer here. There’s a lot of folks here that are much better at breaking down the nuances of the science than I ever could. Take some time to read their responses that are grounded in well, science.


----------



## Akulahawk (Jul 15, 2021)

CarSevenFour said:


> As for the paramedics' evaluation of the non-existent situation inside a hospital they were just leaving, it makes me wonder about EMS' role in the great Covid-19 untruth.


Or you could simply listen to actual people who were working in hospitals that actually did receive and treat COVID 19 patients. Mine got full of these patients more times than I can count. I actually work in the ED.


----------



## Akulahawk (Jul 15, 2021)

CarSevenFour said:


> Dr. Sherri Tenpenny, DO,


Wouldn't that be the same person that claimed that the COVID 19 vaccines magnetized people somehow in the presence of 5G towers? 

Short answer: yes. While she is a DO, she's not a reliable source of information. Where's her published, peer-reviewed research?


----------



## Fezman92 (Jul 15, 2021)

Akulahawk said:


> magnetized people somehow in the presence of 5G towers?


----------



## DrParasite (Jul 16, 2021)

Akulahawk said:


> Wouldn't that be the same person that claimed that the COVID 19 vaccines magnetized people somehow in the presence of 5G towers?
> 
> Short answer: yes. While she is a DO, she's not a reliable source of information. Where's her published, peer-reviewed research?











						'5G towers,' other conspiracies flourish at hearing on vaccine bill - Ohio Capital Journal
					

The five-hour hearing, limited to proponent testimony, dissolved into a forum of fear-stoking, speculation, and conspiracy theorizing around the COVID-19 vaccine.




					ohiocapitaljournal.com
				












						She says vaccines make you magnetized. This West Chester lawmaker invited her testimony, chair says.
					

Dr. Sherri Tenpenny gained nationwide ridicule for her testimony that the COVID-19 vaccine magnetized people. Here's why she got to testify.



					www.cincinnati.com
				












						Sherri Tenpenny: 5 Fast Facts You Need to Know
					

Sherri Tenpenny is an Ohio doctor who went viral after her testimony at a COVID-19 vaccine hearing. Tenpenny has been called a prominent purveyor of misinformation and conspiracy theories.




					heavy.com


----------



## ffemt8978 (Jul 16, 2021)

Maybe she meant the tinfoil on their heads could become magnetized?


----------



## DrParasite (Jul 16, 2021)

ffemt8978 said:


> Maybe she meant the tinfoil on their heads could become magnetized?


stop spreading fake news.... Tin foil is actually made of aluminum, which cannot be magnetized.  Get your facts straight before you spread BS

Geez, you're almost as bad as this quack doctor or some of her supporters that frequent these EMS forums!


----------



## CarSevenFour (Jul 16, 2021)

mgr22 said:


> Ok, but how do you feel about the chance of death or disability from COVID compared to the chance of death or disability from the vaccine, given the literature on both?


I don't wear a mask and refuse to become a shill for the "medical" establishment or brainwashed EMT. I see BS and call it. Do your own research and see the outright unscientific stupidity of WHO, CDC, NIAID and follow their ever-changing guidelines. Wear a mask, don't wear a mask. children should be vaccinated to death because getting pericarditis is MUCH BETTER than getting a case of the flu. The last one I saw was that you'll have to take 3 jabs, really?! DO YOUR OWN RESEARCH-I JUST GAVE YOU THE BASICS.


----------



## CarSevenFour (Jul 16, 2021)

DrParasite said:


> stop spreading fake news.... Tin foil is actually made of aluminum, which cannot be magnetized.  Get your facts straight before you spread BS
> 
> Geez, you're almost as bad as this quack doctor or some of her supporters that frequent these EMS for
> 
> ...


----------



## CarSevenFour (Jul 16, 2021)

Akulahawk said:


> Wouldn't that be the same person that claimed that the COVID 19 vaccines magnetized people somehow in the presence of 5G towers?
> 
> Short answer: yes. While she is a DO, she's not a reliable source of information. Where's her published, peer-reviewed research?





GMCmedic said:


> Oh this one again. It's simply not true.


So I guess because you said so, an anon. guy on some backwater EMS site, it must be true. Here's a tip for you, look up her peer-reviewed research, it's out there.


----------



## CarSevenFour (Jul 16, 2021)

DrParasite said:


> stop spreading fake news.... Tin foil is actually made of aluminum, which cannot be magnetized.  Get your facts straight before you spread BS
> 
> Geez, you're almost as bad as this quack doctor or some of her supporters that frequent these EMS forums!


Your comments mean nothing to me. Just another knee-jerk negative reaction from you.


----------



## DesertMedic66 (Jul 16, 2021)

CarSevenFour said:


> So I guess because you said so, an anon. guy on some backwater EMS site, it must be true. Here's a tip for you, look up her peer-reviewed research, it's out there.


Since we are on the topic of crazy, I’ve got beach front property in Arizona to sell to you.


----------



## CarSevenFour (Jul 16, 2021)

GMCmedic said:


> Oh this one again. It's simply not true.


So, show me some proof that "it's simply not true.". Because you say it isn't true, we're supposed to believe you? I can show proof that there are aborted fetal cells used to manufacture these vaccines. It's out there if you take the time to do real research. https://www.health.nd.gov/sites/www... Page/COVID-19_Vaccine_Fetal_Cell_Handout.pdf

Which begs the question of who is selling and buying this tissue? It's bad enough we kill the unborn, we sell their body parts as well so Planned Parenthood harvesters can profit off death. Even The Vatican has weighed in on the issue. When the Pope talks about fetal cells used in Covid-19 manufacturing, Catholics take note.


----------



## CarSevenFour (Jul 16, 2021)

DesertMedic66 said:


> Since we are on the topic of crazy, I’ve got beach front property in Arizona to sell to you.


Crazy, huh? Where did you get your degree in diagnosing over the internet? A lowly medic working out in the desert is now an internet psychiatrist.


----------



## DrParasite (Jul 16, 2021)

CarSevenFour said:


> Wear a mask, don't wear a mask. children should be vaccinated to death because getting pericarditis is MUCH BETTER than getting a case of the flu.


Woooow.... this is scary, because it's not made up.  You're right, it's a documented complication.





__





						DEFINE_ME
					





					journal.chestnet.org
				












						Recurrence of pericarditis after influenza vaccination: a case report and review of the literature - BMC Pharmacology and Toxicology
					

Background This case report describes a patient with pericarditis likely attributed to influenza vaccination (positive rechallenge), with a literature review. Case presentation A 87-year old patient developed pericarditis after influenza vaccination, with acute chest pain, without ECG...




					bmcpharmacoltoxicol.biomedcentral.com
				












						COVID-19 Vaccination
					

COVID-19 vaccines protect against COVID-19. Get safety info and more.




					www.cdc.gov
				












						COVID-19 as a Possible Cause of Myocarditis and Pericarditis - American College of Cardiology
					






					www.acc.org
				




but as all of the smart people say, it's rare.... out of 177 million shots, maybe 1000 cases.

Now if we compare that to influenza, we find "CDC estimates that influenza has resulted in between 9 million – 45 million illnesses, between 140,000 – 810,000 hospitalizations and between 12,000 – 61,000 deaths annually since 2010."









						Burden of Influenza
					

Learn about how CDC estimates the burden of seasonal influenza in the U.S.




					www.cdc.gov
				




So please, stop the hyperbole, because it's a RARE complication.  If you want to get technical, you are more likely to die from the flu itself (at least if you look at the actual numbers), compared to developing a form of pericarditis following the flu shot.


----------



## DrParasite (Jul 16, 2021)

CarSevenFour said:


> Your comments mean nothing to me. Just another knee-jerk negative reaction from you.


knee jerk reaction???  I actually had to research my response to @ffemt8978's post to make sure it was factually accurate!


----------



## CarSevenFour (Jul 16, 2021)

Akulahawk said:


> Or you could simply listen to actual people who were working in hospitals that actually did receive and treat COVID 19 patients. Mine got full of these patients more times than I can count. I actually work in the ED.


Or maybe they just had the flu. In case you did not understand, this journalist interviewed 2 medics who ACTUALLY WERE just coming from the ER. In another instance, a videographer interviewed security at the ER just after an L.A.  local news broadcaster stated that the emergency rooms all over the city were packed with Covid victims and people should stay away. When asked about that assertion, the security guard said, "No, it's been very quiet all day. We haven't even had a single trauma case today, either." This cameraman also went inside and got footage of the ER and it was actually empty when it was widely reported on Los Angeles TV stations that the local trauma center was filled with Covid patients.


----------



## DrParasite (Jul 16, 2021)

let me quote what you said:


CarSevenFour said:


> The Covid "vaccine" is not a traditional vaccine, it is gene therapy using nanoparticles (graphene) and aborted human fetus cells.


So, you made a claim, and when you were called out on it for being BS, and provided a source to back up your claim (props to you for doing some research).


CarSevenFour said:


> So, show me some proof that "it's simply not true.". Because you say it isn't true, we're supposed to believe you? I can show proof that there are aborted fetal cells used to manufacture these vaccines. It's out there if you take the time to do real research. https://www.health.nd.gov/sites/www/files/documents/COVID Vaccine Page/COVID-19_Vaccine_Fetal_Cell_Handout.pdf
> 
> Which begs the question of who is selling and buying this tissue? It's bad enough we kill the unborn, we sell their body parts as well so Planned Parenthood harvesters can profit off death. Even The Vatican has weighed in on the issue. When the Pope talks about fetal cells used in Covid-19 manufacturing, Catholics take note.


did you even bother to read it?  because the handout you linked says "While fetal cell lines may be used to develop or manufacture COVID-19 vaccines, the vaccines themselves do not contain any aborted fetal cells".  That on the second page, first paragraph.

So, as per your own source, this covid vaccine doe not contain "any aborted human fetus cells"


----------



## DrParasite (Jul 16, 2021)

CarSevenFour said:


> Or maybe they just had the flu. In case you did not understand, this journalist interviewed 2 medics who ACTUALLY WERE just coming from the ER. In another instance, a videographer interviewed security at the ER just after an L.A.  local news broadcaster stated that the emergency rooms all over the city were packed with Covid victims and people should stay away. When asked about that assertion, the security guard said, "No, it's been very quiet all day. We haven't even had a single trauma case today, either." This cameraman also went inside and got footage of the ER and it was actually empty when it was widely reported on Los Angeles TV stations that the local trauma center was filled with Covid patients.


Wow... are you sure about that?  Because your statement appears to be factually inaccurate, at least as per the people that were actually there









						Yes, L.A. Hospitals Were Packed With COVID-19 Patients, Contrary To Viral Video’s Claims
					

A video flagged by Facebook users claimed there are “absolutely no patients” at Martin Luther King Jr. Community Hospital in Los Angeles despite recent media reports that it was inundated with patients following the coronavirus surge.




					www.capradio.org
				




Don't worry, the video you saw was addressed too:

The video was filmed at the hospital’s outpatient center, which is not where COVID-19 patients arrive. They come in through separate emergency department and ambulance entrances.

A deceptive and widely viewed Facebook video claimed Los Angeles hospitals did not face a recent surge of COVID-19 patients. The footage made the rounds and was believed by Facebook users despite strong evidence to the contrary from health officials and media reports.

The anti-mask activist who shot the video made a sweeping conclusion: There are “absolutely no patients” at Martin Luther King, Jr. Community Hospital in Los Angeles, according to the video, posted on New Year’s Day. The activist also referred to hospital staff as “useful idiots.”

A hospital representative rejected the video’s assertions as baseless.

The footage mostly shows the hospital’s deserted outpatient center. But this is not where COVID-19 patients arrive, as pointed out by some of the comments on the video.

Most patients arrive through separate ambulance and emergency department entrances, said Gwendolyn Driscoll, spokesperson for MLK Jr. Community Hospital.


----------



## GMCmedic (Jul 16, 2021)

CarSevenFour said:


> So, show me some proof that "it's simply not true.". Because you say it isn't true, we're supposed to believe you? I can show proof that there are aborted fetal cells used to manufacture these vaccines. It's out there if you take the time to do real research. https://www.health.nd.gov/sites/www... Page/COVID-19_Vaccine_Fetal_Cell_Handout.pdf
> 
> Which begs the question of who is selling and buying this tissue? It's bad enough we kill the unborn, we sell their body parts as well so Planned Parenthood harvesters can profit off death. Even The Vatican has weighed in on the issue. When the Pope talks about fetal cells used in Covid-19 manufacturing, Catholics take note.


Again from your own link, beyond what @DrParasite pointed out. These are fetal cells lines. Which are dozens if generations removed from the aborted fetal cells.

Fetal cells lines are not equal to aborted fetal cells








						You asked, we answered: Do the COVID-19 vaccines contain aborted fetal cells?
					

Do the COVID-19 vaccines contain aborted fetal cells?




					www.nebraskamed.com


----------



## mgr22 (Jul 16, 2021)

CarSevenFour said:


> I don't wear a mask and refuse to become a shill for the "medical" establishment or brainwashed EMT. I see BS and call it. Do your own research and see the outright unscientific stupidity of WHO, CDC, NIAID and follow their ever-changing guidelines. Wear a mask, don't wear a mask. children should be vaccinated to death because getting pericarditis is MUCH BETTER than getting a case of the flu. The last one I saw was that you'll have to take 3 jabs, really?! DO YOUR OWN RESEARCH-I JUST GAVE YOU THE BASICS.


Thanks, I already have the basics and much more. I have done my own research, as you suggest -- meta research, to be more precise -- because I can't do my job well without it. Based on that research, I'm comfortable concluding that the risk of death or disability from the vaccine is much less than the risk of catching the virus and suffering death or disability from it.

You mentioned brainwashing. Who do you think is responsible for deceiving so many medical professionals about COVID? What's in it for them?


----------



## CCCSD (Jul 16, 2021)

I’d hate to see his argument against Polio vaccination…


----------



## jgmedic (Jul 16, 2021)

CCCSD said:


> I’d hate to see his argument against Polio vaccination…


He refers to vaccines as jabs, said do your own research(classic anti-vax tropes), and actually referenced Tenpenny, a disproven quack, right up there with Mercola. Anything said after that doesnt really matter.









						Fact check: COVID-19 vaccines aren't magnetic
					

All three coronavirus vaccines approved for emergency use in the United States are free from metals.



					www.usatoday.com
				




Fun article about Tenpenny's latest claim.

EDIT:I missed the part where everyone called this out. My fault.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Jul 16, 2021)

CarSevenFour said:


> So I guess because you said so, an anon. guy on some backwater EMS site, it must be true. Here's a tip for you, look up her peer-reviewed research, it's out there.


So her "peer reviewed" research means more to you than official CDC and FDA information that can be independently verified?


----------



## ffemt8978 (Jul 16, 2021)

DrParasite said:


> knee jerk reaction???  I actually had to research my response to @ffemt8978's post to make sure it was factually accurate!


The effort is appreciated.


----------



## Akulahawk (Jul 16, 2021)

CarSevenFour said:


> So I guess because you said so, an anon. guy on some backwater EMS site, it must be true. Here's a tip for you, look up her peer-reviewed research, it's out there.


So far, I have looked and found precious little (to say none) of any viral / immunological research done by her, and by extension, therefore no peer-reviewed research published by her in those fields. I did find a "paper" by her, that was poorly written, contradicted itself, and was not peer-reviewed. 

I did find expensive books, DVDs and seminars that promote an anti-vax ideology though... and I'm sure she profits nicely from the sales of these products. I would normally expect that she would make much of her material available at a very low price to enhance sales and thus drive her profits but if her viewpoint is true, she's only making her material to those with money (because her material is expensive) and writing-off the less wealthy because they cannot afford the material. 

The reality is she's making money off people that can both afford proper medical care _and_ have the means to buy her material.


----------



## jgmedic (Jul 17, 2021)

I have found that most followers of Tenpenny and her ilk can not be convinced of any other viewpoint. Most seem to think any and all scientific research is "shills" for Big Pharma and "allopathic" medicine. The constant braying of "do your own research" meaning google and naturalnews.org is about all the response you can usually hope for.

I do not have a problem with questioning the efficacy of certain medical practices or treatments, but IMO if you a true follower of these people you have no business in healthcare.


----------



## Carlos Danger (Jul 17, 2021)

jgmedic said:


> The constant braying of "do your own research" meaning google and naturalnews.org is about all the response you can usually hope for.


Personally I love the phrase "do your research" because it tells you everything you need to know about the credibility of the person saying it. Not unlike "the science is settled" and "all we have to do is....".

It's actually pretty funny until you stop and think about how many people believe that "doing research" simply means reading content from sources that support their biases.


----------



## Fezman92 (Jul 17, 2021)

They always do it when you ask to back up their claims then accuse you of being lazy when you refuse to do the ‘research’


----------



## CarSevenFour (Jul 17, 2021)

DrParasite said:


> Wow... are you sure about that?  Because your statement appears to be factually inaccurate, at least as per the people that were actually there
> 
> 
> 
> ...





Fezman92 said:


> They always do it when you ask to back up their claims then accuse you of being lazy when you refuse to do the ‘research’


OK, I'll help you out, check the latest VAERS stats. Still want to get vaxxed? No vaccines have EVER been allowed to stay on the market with this many serious adverse reactions across all age groups. especially not experimental vaccines like mRNA variants.


----------



## CarSevenFour (Jul 17, 2021)

Carlos Danger said:


> Personally I love the phrase "do your research" because it tells you everything you need to know about the credibility of the person saying it. Not unlike "the science is settled" and "all we have to do is....".
> 
> It's actually pretty funny until you stop and think about how many people believe that "doing research" simply means reading content from sources that support their biases.


And you support your own biases by refusing to do your own work. I gave you easy sources that you can springboard to however deep you want to go. Sorry, I refuse to hold your hand. Do your own research, I'm not here to do anything other than offer my own findings that are linked to deeper scientific papers. I'd suggest you start with the VAERS stats https://vaers.hhs.gov/ updated regularly and know that these only scratch the surface because there's often underreporting, but the numbers are generally accepted by the scientific community.


----------



## CarSevenFour (Jul 17, 2021)

Carlos Danger said:


> Personally I love the phrase "do your research" because it tells you everything you need to know about the credibility of the person saying it. Not unlike "the science is settled" and "all we have to do is....".
> 
> It's actually pretty funny until you stop and think about how many people believe that "doing research" simply means reading content from sources that support their biases.


Or like your sig line says (and I paraphrase), " Life is hard; it's even harder if you're lazy."


----------



## Carlos Danger (Jul 17, 2021)

CarSevenFour said:


> And you support your own biases by refusing to do your own work. I gave you easy sources that you can springboard to however deep you want to go. Sorry, I refuse to hold your hand. Do your own research, I'm not here to do anything other than offer my own findings that are linked to deeper scientific papers. I'd suggest you start with the VAERS stats https://vaers.hhs.gov/ updated regularly and know that these only scratch the surface because there's often underreporting, but the numbers are generally accepted by the scientific community.


I don't know what you are talking about. Did I quote you or address you in any way?


----------



## jgmedic (Jul 17, 2021)

VAERS? You mean the self-reported system that CDC states cannot be used to determine vaccine efficacy or safety. I could go on there right now and make as many false/misleading reports as I want. The scientific community does not accept VAERS data alone because it is completely unscientific.


----------



## PotatoMedic (Jul 17, 2021)

VAERS.  Yelp for vaccines?


----------



## ffemt8978 (Jul 18, 2021)

CarSevenFour said:


> And you support your own biases by refusing to do your own work. I gave you easy sources that you can springboard to however deep you want to go. Sorry, I refuse to hold your hand. Do your own research, I'm not here to do anything other than offer my own findings that are linked to deeper scientific papers. I'd suggest you start with the VAERS stats https://vaers.hhs.gov/ updated regularly and know that these only scratch the surface because there's often underreporting, but the numbers are generally accepted by the scientific community.


You make the claim, it is your responsibility to back it up.  It's not up to us to Google-Fu your research supporting your position.


----------



## CarSevenFour (Jul 18, 2021)

ffemt8978 said:


> You make the claim, it is your responsibility to back it up.  It's not up to us to Google-Fu your research supporting your position.











						(UPDATED) Exclusive Summary: Covid-19 Vaccine Concerns | Sharyl Attkisson
					






					sharylattkisson.com


----------



## jgmedic (Jul 18, 2021)

It's because there are no true sources that back up that position. By true, I mean scientifically based, peer-reviewed that do not come from obviously biased sources.


----------



## akflightmedic (Jul 19, 2021)

CarSevenFour said:


> * Even The Vatican has weighed in on the issue. When the Pope talks about fetal cells used in Covid-19 manufacturing, Catholics take note.*


Sorry folks...I could not allow this little gem to fly by....I mean the poster is the one who brought this "fact" to the table to support his position. He invoked the Pope and Catholics....so let's take a stroll and see what the Vatican has to say shall we...

This is only one story of but many, all reporting the same, cheers!





__





						Pope Francis suggests people have moral obligation to take coronavirus vaccine | National Catholic Reporter
					






					www.ncronline.org
				




"Pope Francis suggested that people have a moral obligation to receive one of the new coronavirus vaccines as soon as possible, revealing in a new interview that he expects to get his own first dose this week."

"I believe that morally everyone must take the vaccine," the pontiff said in a Jan. 10 interview for Italy's TG5 news program. "It is the moral choice because it is about your life but also the lives of others."

Francis' remarks are the latest in a series of firm signals to the world's 1.3 billion Catholics that he and the Vatican strongly support the global vaccination effort.

And the Vatican's own health service is about to begin offering the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine to the city-state's residents, staff members, and their families.


----------



## CarSevenFour (Jul 19, 2021)

jgmedic said:


> It's because there are no true sources that back up that position. By true, I mean scientifically based, peer-reviewed that do not come from obviously biased sources.


If I followed the science, I'd be bound up in indecision. Fauci: masks only work for medical professionals, no need to mask up, wear a mask, wear two masks, wear three masks, vaccinate children who seem to have a natural immunity to Covid, get vaccinated-but still wear a mask. Maybe I should buy stock in mask maker 3-M and pick up a few shares of Pfizer and Moderna for good luck as well....


----------



## CarSevenFour (Jul 19, 2021)

ffemt8978 said:


> You make the claim, it is your responsibility to back it up.  It's not up to us to Google-Fu your research supporting your position.


I'm not a scientist and have no responsibility other than to myself. You decide on your own. As the OP asked, my answer is "no" to the vax.


----------



## CarSevenFour (Jul 19, 2021)

Back to the OP. Wow, 58 votes total and you guys got your shorts all in a wad. I don't think the vast majority of EMTs care one way or the other or the tiny sampling represents much ado about nothing. Or maybe the vast majority of EMTs are on some other website.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Jul 19, 2021)

CarSevenFour said:


> I'm not a scientist and have no responsibility other than to myself. You decide on your own. As the OP asked, my answer is "no" to the vax.


If you're going to make some of the claims you've made in this thread, then you need to back them up.  If you're stating an opinion like "I'm not getting vaccinated because I don't want to/trust it/against my religion" then that's another matter entirely.  Neither you or anybody else gets to make factually incorrect claims then get out of proving them by stating do your own research.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Jul 19, 2021)

Before we go down a dark rabbit hole, let's leave politics and religion out of this thread.  Those topics generally don't end well.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Jul 20, 2021)

What part of keep religion and politics out of this thread was I unclear about?

If I have to remove any more of those types of posts, it will be accompanied by a ban.


----------



## NomadicMedic (Jul 20, 2021)

ffemt8978 said:


> Before we go down a dark rabbit hole, let's leave politics and religion out of this thread.  Those topics generally don't end well.



is there any part of this threat that even remotely shows any promise of it ending well? It’s a ****e show.


----------



## jgmedic (Jul 21, 2021)

We have someone who comes in here and posts blatant misinformation, but since it's tied in with religion or politics, we cant talk about it? Hate to break it to you, but unfortunately, the vaccine has become a political issue, as much as it shouldnt be.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Jul 21, 2021)

jgmedic said:


> We have someone who comes in here and posts blatant misinformation, but since it's tied in with religion or politics, we cant talk about it? Hate to break it to you, but unfortunately, the vaccine has become a political issue, as much as it shouldnt be.


Correcting blatant misinformation is allowed.

Challenging somebody's political or religious beliefs never ends well, and almost always results in members getting banned because someone always forgets to be polite about it. If you can't challenge blatant misinformation with facts, science, logic and reason then do you think you will be able to convince anyone by attacking their politics or religion?


----------



## CCCSD (Jul 21, 2021)

Flying Spaghetti Monster out?


----------



## DrParasite (Jul 22, 2021)

CCCSD said:


> Flying Spaghetti Monster out?


don't you go picking on my religion!!




__





						The Gospel of the Flying Spaghetti Monster – Spaghetti Monster
					





					spaghettimonster.com
				




I proudly support my fellow colander wearers


			https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2019/09/20/pastafarian-opened-council-meeting-wearing-spaghetti-strainer-he-says-its-about-separation-church-state/
		










						Israeli Pastafarian fights for his right to wear a colander on his head
					

***




					www.haaretz.com
				




and I will defend all religions as equally valid.

but it has nothing to do with the COVID vaccine, so we should all stop trying to inject any religion or politics into a matter of science.


----------



## SandpitMedic (Jul 22, 2021)

I got the J&J today. Uptick in younger patients admitted to ICUs in my area. Figured there is enough data available and the possible benefit > risk.

New variants are flying in from all over the globe.

I had hesitated for a litany of reasons, but if I throw a clot or develop GBS y’all know I’m gonna be mighty upset. I have been up to neck in COVID patients since this kicked off, at times with sub par PPE, and I have avoided (I believe) infection so far. I did check for antibodies/infection prior to being vaccinated.


----------



## Fezman92 (Jul 23, 2021)

GBS?


----------



## mgr22 (Jul 23, 2021)

Fezman92 said:


> GBS?


Probably Guillain Barre.


----------



## CCCSD (Jul 23, 2021)

God Being Silly….
Ban in 3…2…1…


----------



## EpiEMS (Jul 23, 2021)

Anybody looking into boosters? Would be curious to hear if anybody is in one of the trials.


----------



## Summit (Jul 23, 2021)

I'm not convinced yet that we will need boosters outside of healthcare and high risk... the vaccines seem pretty darn effective against the variants apart from a few small n studies. We aren't going for herd immunity anymore with all the vaccine resistance... endemic disease is all but guaranteed


----------



## PotatoMedic (Jul 23, 2021)

Summit said:


> I'm not convinced yet that we will need boosters outside of healthcare and high risk... the vaccines seem pretty darn effective against the variants apart from a few small n studies. We aren't going for herd immunity anymore with all the vaccine resistance... endemic disease is all but guaranteed


Israel is reporting about a 39% effectiveness for Phizer against Delta infection.  But nearly 100% prevention in hospitalization.


----------



## GMCmedic (Jul 23, 2021)

I'm terrible about remembering to schedule appointments. You know how it goes, you cancel a dentist appointment cause it interferes with your child being born, then on her 7th birthday you remember that you never rescheduled. 


Pretty much 0% chance I go for a booster within a year unless its required. 60% chance I remember to do both shots next year (assuming they don't get it down to one) especially if I have to have 48 hours off afterwards.


----------



## luke_31 (Jul 23, 2021)

PotatoMedic said:


> Israel is reporting about a 39% effectiveness for Phizer against Delta infection.  But nearly 100% prevention in hospitalization.


That’s not too bad. Since the whole point of the vaccine is more for the prevention of hospitalization and not just not getting the virus. I think they would have had a better time if they concentrated on making people understand that preventing hospitalization is the reason they are pushing the vaccine so hard.


----------



## Summit (Jul 23, 2021)

We want to prevent people from getting the disease and spreading it.

BUT the justification for any of the consequential interventions (like restricting commerce) was entirely about preventing hospitalizations and death.

So if you still get it and it is now the common cold in terms of virulence, well, that's annoying but not consequential and thus new restrictions are not justified.

I saw UK data showing 88% Ve for asymptomatic/mild Delta IF you were fully vaccinated, 96% Ve against severe illness and death. Ve for single dose was like 30something percent.


----------



## CCCSD (Jul 24, 2021)

it’s not all bad…









						More than 200 people being monitored for monkeypox in the U.S.: CDC
					

More than 200 individuals in 27 states are being monitored for possible exposure to monkeypox after they came into contact with an American man who contracted the rare disease after returning from a trip to Nigeria, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has confirmed.




					www.ctvnews.ca
				












						Cases of the plague confirmed in Colorado, including in the death of a 10-year-old
					

“While it’s rare for people to contract plague, we want to make sure everyone knows the symptoms.”




					thehill.com


----------



## ZootownMedic (Jul 24, 2021)

Cool reads, and alot of info. Just like the CDC this thread is full of facts, tales, yarns, padded numbers, speculation, outright lies, and fear mongering. The problem with this vaccine, and all of the pandemic is the lack of truth, facts, and competency that has come out of the government, CDC and the medical community in general. We have trusted, experienced and renknown virologists and epidemiologists saying the vaccine works, and others that say to avoid it. I've seen people with covid have minor symptoms, and some that died. I have personally seen COVID numbers padded, and outright fradulently doctored. 

The vaccine pushers have an agenda, and it isn't public health. As others have mentioned, the same people pushing vaccines are partially responsible for the virus. The gain of function research that was authorized by Fauci, through the Wuhan lab, is indisputable. The emails are there for all to read. You can call us conspiracy theorists, and that we aren't following the science, but we all know that isn't true. Some conspiracies floating around are crazy, and some have proven correct. There is no trust, and despite that sheep are gonna do sheep things. If you are high risk, have pre-existing diseases, are elderly, or just feel like getting an experimental vaccination that hasn't been properly vetted than by all means get it. I will not talk down on anyone who wants it. 

I however will not be getting the vaccine, and I still have antibodies from getting the virus in October. Please explain why the vaccine is more effective than natural immunity? Why are the 30+ million Americans who contracted COVID not being included in herd immunity statistics? Why is a disease with a 99.5% survival rate being hailed as the next plague? This is AMERICA people. Seems alot of the doctors, nurses, paramedics, emts, firefighters and clowns here seem to be forgetting that. The worst atrocities in the world have been committed under the guise of the 'common good'. Forcing people to inject an experimental vaccine into their body is insanity. Pure and simple. You want it, you get it. Want to force me to get it? Well, myself and millions of others like me will like just have to remind many of you why this country is still free, and why we have the second amendment.


----------



## CCCSD (Jul 24, 2021)

Cool. Gonna shoot people. That’s what your message is. So if your employer mandates it, you’re gonna rise up and shoot?

Cool, cool, cool. Thanks for the warning.


----------



## SandpitMedic (Jul 24, 2021)

I think he means like the .gov forcing it. 
Which I also oppose. 
if you don’t want it you shouldn’t have to get it. Plain and simple.


----------



## akflightmedic (Jul 25, 2021)

ZootownMedic said:


> Why is a disease with a 99.5% survival rate being hailed as the next plague?


Meh...what's 2,000,000 deaths +/-  ....as long as it is not you or yours, right?

Anyways, looks like I am getting ready to deploy to a GOP/Bible Belt heavy state to stand up 2 field hospitals due to recent spikes, and there will be many more to come.

A state with 35% vaccination rate. A state now depleting federal dollars (your tax money) and paying out the wazoo for providers and care to COVID patients who statistically would either not have become COVID + or might not have required hospitalization if the vaccination rates were higher.

Anyone want to take the conversation in that direction? Pure dollars and allocation of your taxes? Do we, a non single payer health care nation, continue to pick up the tab for states/people who refuse to vaccinate? Do we have any obligation to these states and their residents? If we do, then why not mandate vaccines OR regulate where the unvaccinated work or travel? If we do not have obligation, then let's stop responding, stop sending money at federal level and let Darwin do his thing, right?

And another tangent, if you are against mandates, yet feel we (nationally) have an obligation, do you apply this to all other forms of relief? Why or why not? Relief meaning food assistance, utility assistance, and any other federally funded or subsidized program that you may be against because it is an abuse of your tax dollars and you have no say in how or where those funds are allocated.


----------



## Carlos Danger (Jul 25, 2021)

akflightmedic said:


> A state with 35% vaccination rate. A state now depleting federal dollars (your tax money) and paying out the wazoo for providers and care to COVID patients who statistically would either not have become COVID + or might not have required hospitalization if the vaccination rates were higher.
> 
> Anyone want to take the conversation in that direction? Pure dollars and allocation of your taxes? Do we, a non single payer health care nation, continue to pick up the tab for states/people who refuse to vaccinate? Do we have any obligation to these states and their residents? If we do, then why not mandate vaccines OR regulate where the unvaccinated work or travel? If we do not have obligation, then let's stop responding, stop sending money at federal level and let Darwin do his thing, right?


The problem with that line of thinking is that you could easily apply the logic of "the greater good" to mandate pretty much anything. It's happened before.

Perhaps the best approach here is to NOT pay federal dollars (tax money) to fund the current crisis and instead let the state residents face the consequences of their own decisions?

It seems to me that isolating an individual or population from the consequences of their decisions is a great way to encourage them to keep making similar decisions. I think there are countless examples of this throughout history as well as much a lot of supporting evidence in the sociological and psychological realms.




akflightmedic said:


> And another tangent, if you are against mandates, yet feel we (nationally) have an obligation, do you apply this to all other forms of relief? Why or why not? Relief meaning food assistance, utility assistance, and any other federally funded or subsidized program that you may be against because it is an abuse of your tax dollars and you have no say in how or where those funds are allocated.


Yes. I am against federal mandates of any kind, including (though definitely not limited to) every one that you mentioned here.


----------



## FiremanMike (Jul 25, 2021)

SandpitMedic said:


> I think he means like the .gov forcing it.
> Which I also oppose.
> if you don’t want it you shouldn’t have to get it. Plain and simple.


To what end, though?  The poster makes a not so thinly veiled threat to commit homicide in order to resist a vaccine..


----------



## Akulahawk (Jul 26, 2021)

ZootownMedic said:


> Why is a disease with a 99.5% survival rate being hailed as the next plague?


One of the things that is quite often forgotten by those bringing up this particular number is that death isn't the only problem. If you survive but you were unlucky enough that you were on the more severe end of the disease spectrum, your quality of life isn't going to be the same. You can survive but you might end up with some anoxic brain damage. You might survive but you might end up with severe lung disease. While I don't have those numbers in front of me, it's nearly a guarantee that the number of survivors that have long-term sequelae is going to be higher than 0.5%. 

Don't get me wrong, even with that, there will be huge numbers of asymptomatic and mild disease cases of C19 and those people will very much likely recover with few, if any, long-term effects.


----------



## Fezman92 (Jul 26, 2021)

Some people have permanently lost their sense of smell.


----------



## SandpitMedic (Jul 26, 2021)

People make statements about things like that all the time. One common one is about coming for the guns. People often go the old American adage of “if they take our freedoms there will be blood.” Now it is applied to the government forcing a vaccine.

The independent in me is against any government mandates “for the greater good.” People are free to make their own bad choices. “Omg but COVID costs and time and manpower and risk to others…” is the counter. Okay, well, hamburgers, ETOH, non-compliance with medication, smoking, other drugs, flu shots, etc… all cost trillions in man hours, dollars, hospitalizations, etc. Oh and over time many many lives. Risks lives and put other at risk as well. How many people die of famine and illness in the third world. Yet there are no mandates for the greater good in those regards.

Maybe I’m just rambling now. Anyways my point is after all that is, basically, there isn’t going to be a shooting war over this. So you all can relax. Besides, you heard the old man say you’d better have nukes to take on the gubment.

Although that vaccine got me sick as a dog for 24 hours, I’ll tell you that. That **** was rough.


----------



## mgr22 (Jul 26, 2021)

Akulahawk said:


> One of the things that is quite often forgotten by those bringing up this particular number is that death isn't the only problem. If you survive but you were unlucky enough that you were on the more severe end of the disease spectrum, your quality of life isn't going to be the same. You can survive but you might end up with some anoxic brain damage. You might survive but you might end up with severe lung disease. While I don't have those numbers in front of me, it's nearly a guarantee that the number of survivors that have long-term sequelae is going to be higher than 0.5%.


To me, that's the scariest part of not getting vaccinated. Here are the most recent studies I've seen:

From the UK's National Institute for Health Research, "up to 1 in 3 people infected by [COVID-19] reported persistent symptoms lasting at least 12 weeks."

From _The Lancet_, of >73,000 patients admitted to hospitals with COVID-19 from January to August 2020, 39% of those aged 19-49 and 51% of those older developed at least one complication, the most common of which were "renal, complex respiratory and systemic."

There's much more literature out there on "long COVID."


----------



## CCCSD (Jul 26, 2021)

SandpitMedic said:


> People make statements about things like that all the time. One common one is about coming for the guns. People often go the old American adage of “if they take our freedoms there will be blood.” Now it is applied to the government forcing a vaccine.
> 
> The independent in me is against any government mandates “for the greater good.” People are free to make their own bad choices. “Omg but COVID costs and time and manpower and risk to others…” is the counter. Okay, well, hamburgers, ETOH, non-compliance with medication, smoking, other drugs, flu shots, etc… all cost trillions in man hours, dollars, hospitalizations, etc. Oh and over time many many lives. Risks lives and put other at risk as well. How many people die of famine and illness in the third world. Yet there are no mandates for the greater good in those regards.
> 
> ...


I hear you. However…thinking that, which is human nature, and posting it, are two different things. Especially today, when going nuclear is the be-all, end-all to disagreements.

I take those type of threats just as seriously as the totality of the circumstances dictate.

Just curious as to how many Polio vaccinators have been gunned down in the US? Chicken Pox? Measles? TDAP?


----------



## Summit (Jul 26, 2021)

SandpitMedic said:


> Maybe I’m just rambling now. Anyways my point is after all that is, basically, there isn’t going to be a shooting war over this. So you all can relax. Besides, you heard the old man say you’d better have nukes to take on the gubment.


Maybe a bit, but please stop comparing INFECTIOUS disease to chronic diseases of modern "affluence" like type 2 diabetes, heart disease, and obesity. I cannot catch morbid obesity from my patient and then give morbid obesity to 6 other people and so on. The "epidemic" of chronic illnesses does not increase exponentially over a period of weeks and months by spreading person to person to overwhelm the health system.

I could use a mediocre analogy of the right to freedom of speech not covering falsely screaming FIRE in a crowded theater, but it is better to point out we do ban smoking in enclosed common spaces because of second hand smoke, not because of the individual is forbidden to poison themselves. Infectious disease is like that. We have mandated vaccines and other public health interventions for well over a century for the common good because it is by definition not an individual issue no matter how much some want to pretend that it is.

The idea that has been repeated by more than one poster in this thread that we cannot justify any abrogation of individual rights in the name of the common good because then anything could be so justified is an easily rejected appeal to the slippery slope. The individual matters greatly, but not to the exclusion of all else.  The supreme court agreed over and over that when it comes to public health and vaccination, individual liberty is not absolute. It isn't just about you.

I'm a pro 1A pro 2A mountain guy with a strong libertarian lean, but I am not a libertarian fundamentalist and I cannot stand inaccurate and selective application of libertarian ideals. We live in a society that is an imperfect free democratic republic, not a libertarian anarchy. The founders never intended the latter.


----------



## Carlos Danger (Jul 26, 2021)

Summit said:


> Maybe a bit, but please stop comparing INFECTIOUS disease to chronic diseases of modern "affluence" like type 2 diabetes, heart disease, and obesity. I cannot catch morbid obesity from my patient and then give morbid obesity to 6 other people and so on. The "epidemic" of chronic illnesses does not increase exponentially over a period of weeks and months by spreading person to person to overwhelm the health system.
> 
> I could use a mediocre analogy of the right to freedom of speech not covering falsely screaming FIRE in a crowded theater, but it is better to point out we do ban smoking in enclosed common spaces because of second hand smoke, not because of the individual is forbidden to poison themselves. Infectious disease is like that. We have mandated vaccines and other public health interventions for well over a century for the common good because it is by definition not an individual issue no matter how much some want to pretend that it is.
> 
> ...


Yes, we all are well aware that individual liberty is not absolute. No one has argued otherwise. I don't think anyone on this website is hoping for a return to a state of nature as Hobbes envisioned it.  

One individual's liberty ends where it begins to infringe on the liberty of other individuals. That is the general idea; the philosophical basis for our system of governance and traditional American culture. Following that, we all know and accept that you can't shout "fire" in a crowded theater, that you can't drive on public roadways drunk, that you can't dump dangerous chemicals into the water supply, and that you can't shoot your guns in crowded suburban neighborhoods. Restrictions on those types of activities are well accepted because the externalities of those actions and the ways that they infringe on the rights of other individuals are clear and obvious.

Since you brought up the founders, I would say that while you are correct that they never intended a libertarian anarchy, they certainly were very libertarian on the whole (radically so, by today's political standards) and they definitely did not believe in the existence of any kind of positive rights, which is exactly what you are asserting when you as an individual claim that another person must receive a vaccine in order for you to feel safe. 

The vaccines provide very nearly 100% protection from severe disease, which essentially means that anyone who doesn't want to get COVID can protect themselves completely by simply getting vaccinated themselves. When you have the ability to provide yourself with a very high degree of protection, why do you even care what other people do? If you are vaccinated, why does it matter to you at all who else is? Why can't we just let those who want to be protected protect themselves, and let those who don't want protection deal with the consequences of their own choices? It's so simple that I really can't even comprehend looking at it any other way.



*Yes, I know that there are some people who can't receive the vaccine or who don't develop the desired immune response. This is a very small percentage of the population, and there are other ways to protect these folks. What I've never mentioned on this forum before is that almost three years ago, I lost my youngest daughter to a rare form of sarcoma. During the year and a half that she was going through chemotherapy, there were times that her ANC was dangerously low and we had to seriously restrict where we went and who we had contact with. I even stayed away from the house on several occasions because her count was in the low triple digits and as hard as it was to be away from her, I couldn't take the chance on bringing something home from work to her. So I have some idea of what it might like right now if you are one of the people who can't get the vaccine or who it doesn't work on. Here's the thing, though: even if it were somehow possible, I would never in a million years have considered trying to force a majority of the population to accept a vaccine that would have protected her and allowed her to go out and do the things that she couldn't do. Would I have asked folks to do it? Of course. Implored, even? Sure. Begged? Perhaps. But try to _make_ them, under threat of losing their livelihood or worse? No way. Not ever.


----------



## silver (Jul 26, 2021)

Carlos Danger said:


> The vaccines provide very nearly 100% protection from severe disease, which essentially means that anyone who doesn't want to get COVID can protect themselves completely by simply getting vaccinated themselves. When you have the ability to provide yourself with a very high degree of protection, why do you even care what other people do? If you are vaccinated, why does it matter to you at all who else is? Why can't we just let those who want to be protected protect themselves, and let those who don't want protection deal with the consequences of their own choices? It's so simple that I really can't even comprehend looking at it any other way.



Natural selection though. Higher numbers of unvaccinated individuals increase the number of available hosts. The more hosts, the faster a particular viral strain may become dominant and increase the risk of escape/lack of immune protect from the vaccine. Thus limit the number of available hosts by vaccinating.


----------



## SandpitMedic (Jul 28, 2021)

John’s Hopkins study concludes zero percent mortality from COVID in healthy children. With a sample size of 48,000 (<18 y/o) I’d say that’s pretty darn good data.
I would not vaccinate my healthy children given the actually moderate numbers of adverse reactions (mainly myocarditis) I’m sure some of you will argue, but the data speaks for itself. The limits of this study is that it is retrospective to the original virology and not the new variants. Still… darn strong data.









						Johns Hopkins Study Found Zero COVID Deaths Among Healthy Kids
					

'A tremendous number of government and private policies' regarding the vaccination of children are dependent upon one questionable data point, doctor says.




					thefederalist.com


----------



## Tigger (Jul 28, 2021)

I think I’ll just read the study rather than the Federalist’s take on it. We can do better.


----------



## SandpitMedic (Jul 28, 2021)

Tigger said:


> I think I’ll just read the study rather than the Federalist’s take on it. We can do better.


The data is the data. 👍 however you want to get it is all good. But would you say the same thing if it was CNN or MSNBC? I imagine not. Be better.


----------



## CarSevenFour (Jul 28, 2021)

ffemt8978 said:


> If you're going to make some of the claims you've made in this thread, then you need to back them up.  If you're stating an opinion like "I'm not getting vaccinated because I don't want to/trust it/against my religion" then that's another matter entirely.  Neither you or anybody else gets to make factually incorrect claims then get out of proving them by stating do your own research.


I offered what I consider reputable sources, especially Dr. Tenpenny and was mocked for my choices. You guys shot them down with derision because they didn't match your idea of researchers. I also have religious beliefs based on The Book of Revelations in the Holy Bible. 

Now, then, here's another physician who is warning the CDC to halt the use of the Covid-19 vaccine because she has deep reservations. She does the science, and I am but a lowly ex-EMT the "Artist in the Ambulance." Here's a direct quote from Life Site dotcom, which happens to be a Bible based website, but they are simply reporting like any other news organization would. The scientist, Dr. Janci Chunn Lindsay, is a respected toxicologist-quote:

_"Late last month, Lindsay told a meeting of the CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) in Atlanta that the vaccines “must be halted immediately due to safety concerns on several fronts.” ACIP had convened to discuss blood disorders linked to the Johnson & Johnson COVID-19 vaccine. Dr. Janci Chunn Lindsay, Ph.D, who holds a doctorate from the University of Texas and has more than three decades of scientific experience, cited potential blood clot, fertility, and immune issues related to the jabs."_

And-why, lookee here, the highly politicized CDC is reversing it's Opinion about masks, again. Next week it will probably be yet another decree reversing itself. There is no science here, just a bunch of MDs throwing darts at a problem that actually wasn't that serious at all. It appears politics and money is what is driving Covid hysteria. 

I also brought up in my statements that I do not trust hospitals to tell the truth about Covid. If they were so busy last year with all the Covid cases why did nurses even have the time to make dance videos while patients were dying, literally in the hallways? At least that's what the "Frontline Heroes" told us, we even have an MD lying about her patients dying and begging for the "too late" vaccine as she intubates them. Mauldlin to say the least. Even the so-called jam packed ER footage run on the nightly news turned out to be footage from Italy that was falsely represented by the media as taking place in the United States. I was raised around hospitals and know what busy is, there's certainly no time for nurses to put on skits, there's barely time for the nurses to take a pee, let alone prance their scrubs on YouTube. I ain't buyin' it.

And where was the Flu last year? Why, it suddenly disappeared to puff up Corona numbers, no doubt. Bill Gates and George Soros just bought a Covid testing lab that has developed an alternate test to replace the widely used PCR test-they'll be rolling in dough before long on their astute investments while promoting bi-weekly testing for people who will not get vaccinated. I'm not taking the Corona vaccine because there is no science here. I make no claims, certainly not "factually incorrect" ones, I just read what I read, take it all with a grain of salt and decide. That's all I'm saying. Oh, I mentioned religion as well today. I guess that's grounds to ban me if you want to shut me up, Mr EMT, I'll trust the researchers raising the alarm, at least they have PHD and MD degrees.


----------



## akflightmedic (Jul 28, 2021)

"where is the flu...?"

Ummm, masks, handwashing, social distancing...worked. Duh! Surely you asked that question in jest, right?

As an ER RN, we actually are having massive spikes now due to precautions ending. Spike in colds, URIs, pneumonia, COVID...


----------



## Akulahawk (Jul 28, 2021)

CarSevenFour said:


> Dr. Tenpenny and was mocked for my choices. You guys shot them down with derision because they didn't match your idea of researchers.


The problem with Dr. Tenpenny is that she isn't a researcher of any kind. What do I mean by that? She has done no actual research. She misrepresents findings of those that have done the research. She claimed that the vaccines made people magnetic. She's a DO. She should know this is not possible. That's what makes her non-credible. 


CarSevenFour said:


> And where was the Flu last year? Why, it suddenly disappeared to puff up Corona numbers, no doubt.


The measures used to prevent spread of COVID19 also happened to be very effective in stopping another droplet-spread problem: influenza. If you look at the flu rates last year, you'll find that within about a week or so of the "2 weeks to stop the spread" for COVID19, influenza stopped and we effectively ended a typical season about 6 weeks early. We didn't have any significant flu season this year because of the continuing efforts to stop the COVID19 spread. This flu season I saw less than a dozen influenza cases. Usually I'd see hundreds, if not in the low thousand-ish, cases of influenza.

Almost all of the COVID19 cases I'm seeing now are in unvaccinated people. I have seen (literally) a couple re-infections and a couple symptomatic infections among the fully vaccinated crowd. None of the cases involving fully vaccinated that I saw needed to be hospitalized. I've seen an entire family need to be hospitalized because of COVID19 and NONE of them were vaccinated, NONE of them were ineligible for a vaccine.


----------



## Tigger (Jul 28, 2021)

SandpitMedic said:


> The data is the data. 👍 however you want to get it is all good. But would you say the same thing if it was CNN or MSNBC? I imagine not. Be better.


I would say the same thing to anyone that posted something in the context of a news article. This is a medical community, just post the study.


----------



## CCCSD (Jul 28, 2021)

Damn Science. Always gets in the way of drama…


----------



## Carlos Danger (Jul 28, 2021)

Tigger said:


> I would say the same thing to anyone that posted something in the context of a news article. This is a medical community, just post the study.


Huh? I'm quite sure that more than a few times folks have posted links to media write-ups that discussed research, and I don't remember you are anyone else ever having an issue with it.


----------



## Johdic (Jul 28, 2021)

CarSevenFour said:


> Glad you waited. Check the VAERS stats, and add anywhere from 10 to 100% to the listed numbers. Adverse reactions to the Covid-19 (or any other vaccine) cases tend to be greatly underreported to VAERS simply because of the way it is set up and the voluntary nature of reporting. I could send you to Mike Adams' Natural News site but since it doesn't support your POV, there's nothing there for you, but the TRUTH. But do visit his extensive site and get an alternative view that contradicts the official narrative. Adams started out with Covid-19 coverage from the POV of one who really believed that Covid was real and he projected mass death based on the medical reporting he was seeing. He changed his point of view quickly when his research turned up many unanswered questions about the veracity of the federal, state, and local government Covid reports.
> 
> I've seen the aftermath of the VAX and it isn't pretty. Neighbors (2), relatives (at least 3) who are suffering serious side effects of the jab. A very close relative, a healthy vibrant woman I've known for 30 years, is suffering from a sudden onset of what sounds like pericarditis. She is healthy and showed absolutely no cardiac symptoms until after taking the jab.  Another relative just died from a CVA directly attributed to the Covid-19 vaccine. Sudden onset, a healthy young individual, he was required by his job to be vaccinated. He thought he was doing the right thing and officially died of complications from the vaccine. I realize these are just personal instances, but that's an awful lot of people adversely affected by the vaccine in just one guy's life and a small circle of family, friends, and acquaintances. Just looking at people I know, or know of, negatively affected by the jab got me to thinking that never before have I seen this many people that I know having adverse effects from ANY vaccine. I've been following mass vaccination campaigns since I was a child when Polio reared its ugly head in the 1950s on our elementary school grounds. This whole thing with Covid-19 strikes me as unique and full of government and official medical-political disinformation.
> 
> ...


Thanks for speaking truth. I will not take the vaccine even when mandated. I will not be forced and rather like to live in freedom. I may have to give up my jobs in the medical field but I can handle that.


----------



## MMiz (Jul 28, 2021)

Have there been any talks of medical providers receiving "booster" shots?


----------



## SandpitMedic (Jul 29, 2021)

MMiz said:


> Have there been any talks of medical providers receiving "booster" shots?


Pfizer is about to debut their booster. Touro University in Las Vegas is conducting a study currently on the viability of immunity in vaccinated, previously infected, and non-previously infected persons. They are trying to find out if a booster is necessary while at the same time they will discover if the vaccines are effectively creating enough antibodies in a RCT. I am eagerly awaiting those results.
No doubt, there is a spike. I too am seeing mostly unvaccinated people coming down with severe symptoms. I have run across more than a few who have gotten infected after vaccination and after having natural COVID once. So there is some proof in the pudding that the vaccine does work to minimize severity. Although, they could just be people who would have had mild symptoms anyhow. Again, I await what this study concludes.


----------



## mgr22 (Jul 29, 2021)

Just to build on SandpitMedic's post, here's a link to a piece in today's NY Times that discusses the Pfizer booster:









						Citing New Data, Pfizer Outlines Case for Booster Shots
					

Pfizer’s coronavirus vaccine may become slightly weaker over time, the company reported. But experts said that most people won’t need boosters anytime soon.




					www.nytimes.com
				




Here are my takeaways from that:

1. There isn't a broad consensus about whether a booster is needed for the Pfizer vaccine.
2. The Pfizer vaccine's effectiveness seems to weaken by about 6 percentage points every two months, starting as early as four months after the second dose -- e.g., from 96% to 84%. To me, that sounds like a booster should be offered.
3. It is unknown whether a third dose of the existing vaccine would be effective as a booster.


----------



## CarSevenFour (Jul 29, 2021)

silver said:


> Natural selection though. Higher numbers of unvaccinated individuals increase the number of available hosts. The more hosts, the faster a particular viral strain may become dominant and increase the risk of escape/lack of immune protect from the vaccine. Thus limit the number of available hosts by vaccinating.


I would think that natural selection would tend to mitigate Covid infections/symptoms as people begin to "armor up" their immune systems as time goes by, shouldn't the virus become, maybe more contagious, but more and more ineffective as a deadly strain over time? When variants or mutatations pop up, why would you use the same old vaccine that was effective against Covid-19? It certainly holds true for another corona virus, the seasonal flu, which requires a new annual vaccine rather than a booster. With the polio vaccine, for instance, we knew right off the bat that there would be a booster shot involved, and after reading my mother's nursing books, I wanted to be first in line even though I have a serious needle phobia.

The more I get into this, it looks more like a money making operation than a true vaccine. Dr. Fauci said we may need one, maybe even 2 Covid vaccine boosters. This long after research was "completed"? That just tells me that the science isn't so good, certainly not precise. My gut tells me they're not really confident regarding their knowledge the vaccine's efficacy. I feel like we're the lab animals. Bill Gates is on record as stating that the most effective use of vaccines is population control. Poison or birth control in a bottle? I don't know, but it's just another grain of salt. I am an EMT who took an 80 hour course with recerts as required, and, later a 125 hour EMT course with CEUs and academy requirements. I have specialized training as a dispatch/lead EMD but that's about it, I'm certainly not a medical researcher. I'm an artist who problem solves and loved to "dance with my gurney" on street calls. I have immense pride for the work I did and the people I helped, but I'm not a physician, and I certainly don't trust researchers who stand to profit from vaccine sales and develop public policy. There's a huge conflict there, of which Dr. Fauci is one of the worst offenders, so him I do not trust at all.

Just today Karen Kingston, ex-Pfizer vaccine researcher, is advocating for the immediate removal of Covid vaccines from the marketplace due to the ingredients they carry. https://fos-sa.org/2021/07/29/pfizer-whistleblower-karen-kingston-vaccine-ingredients/ the link is for a video, but there's also a story written about her assertions that came out today. As  near as I can tell, the job of the pharm researcher is to gather relevant scientific information and decypher ingredient codes that are not available to the public. One of those codes apparently identifies graphene oxide, according to Kingston. She is now employed by the medical appliance and pharmeceutical industries as a scientific researcher. Normally to find these stories, I absolutely need to find initial info from sites outside the mainstream because they report on issues that are merely poo-pooed by the legacy media. I've found as an ex-avid listener to the Art Bell radioshow, that today's conspiracy theory is tomorow's truth. And, no, I don't wear a tinfoil hat, it's a cloth booney hat, so don't insult me again, it only works once. BTW, just because her name is "Karen," I already see those jokes coming as well.

Perhaps this whole mess could have been avoided by having real lab trials instead of rushed drug assessments, and not trying to see what vaccine "sticks to the wall," and whether or not it's even effective-or enhances some politician's chances for election victory. It's what happens when you mix politics with medicine, a bragging ex-president shooting off his mouth once too often (I am a supporter of Donald Trump, but I can also see the pimples on his heine). I wonder about how fast he brought the vaccine to market (which is an entirely new mRNA vaccine that even it's inventor says is dangerous) Copy/paste this link: https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/history-how-mrna-vaccines-were-discovered-jill-glasspool-malone-phd . 

It looks like they came up with a vaccine, and kept the numbers of lab animals killed by it hidden from the public, instead of hiding the facts and honest risk assessments to inform the public about the new vaccine and its ingredients, while downplaying the effects of proven treatments. And now, strongly hinting that the unvaccinated will be forceably taken from their homes and given the vaccine against their will by yet another politico, (Mario Cuomo). 

So, yeah no vaccine for me. If I die, I see Heaven again like I did when as a teenager; I rammed my bike into a rock wall and suffered a massive head injury, even going through the "tunnel". That would be wonderful, to feel God's love warming me again, and hear again the multitudes of souls singing in perfect harmony, a single joyful song to the glory of the Universe. 

On the flip side, if you choose the vaccine go for it, I wouldn't want to criticize anyone doing what they think is best for themselves. Or as I tell my relatives, "Why should you care about or deride some lady driving alone around town in her car with a mask on?" I certainly wouldn't make fun of her either, her body her choice.


----------



## jgmedic (Jul 29, 2021)

Can you provide even one study from a source that isn't a self-published item, or from an obvious right-wing conspiracy site? You question why people don't take it seriously and then everything you post is like that.


----------



## CCCSD (Jul 29, 2021)

Gee. Ebola mutated variants. It isn’t any less lethal. It’s adapted.


----------



## Fezman92 (Jul 29, 2021)

CarSevenFour said:


> I'm certainly not a medical researcher.


You sure as hell seem to act like one.


----------



## CarSevenFour (Jul 29, 2021)

Fezman92 said:


> You sure as hell seem to act like one.


Oh, my, my feelings are so hurt by your assessment.


----------



## CarSevenFour (Jul 29, 2021)

jgmedic said:


> Can you provide even one study from a source that isn't a self-published item, or from an obvious right-wing conspiracy site? You question why people don't take it seriously and then everything you post is like that.


Read it again, I adequately stated my position.


----------



## jgmedic (Jul 29, 2021)

CarSevenFour said:


> Read it again, I adequately stated my position.











						Fact Check-Bill Gates quote about vaccines and population growth has been taken out of context again  
					

A comment from Bill Gates about vaccines and population growth has again been taken out of context.




					www.reuters.com
				











						False Bill Gates 'depopulate with vaccines' news a conspiracy theory classic - Australian Associated Press
					

An old edition of the 'Sovereign Independent' newspaper that carries the claim purportedly 'can't be found' any more.




					www.aap.com.au
				












						Did Bill Gates 'Admit' Vaccinations Are Designed So Governments Can 'Depopulate' the World?
					

The computer magnate believes that vaccines can be used to reduce childhood mortality and ultimately reduce population growth through associated social changes, not as an agent of death.




					www.snopes.com
				











						Fact Check-COVID-19 vaccines do not contain graphene oxide
					

Online reports that COVID-19 vaccines contain graphene oxide are unfounded.




					www.reuters.com
				











						Graphene Oxide In Pfizer Covid-19 Vaccines? Here Are The Latest Unsupported Claims
					

An Instagram post said, “There’s no other reason for this to be in here except to murder people.”




					www.forbes.com
				











						Pfizer vaccine does not contain graphene oxide
					

CLAIM: The Pfizer coronavirus vaccine is made up of 99.9% graphene oxide, a toxic compound.  AP’S ASSESSMENT: False. The Pfizer vaccine does not contain any graphene oxide, a Pfizer representative confirmed to The Associated Press.




					apnews.com
				



Stop pushing debunked conspiracy theories and passing them off as facts.


----------



## SandpitMedic (Jul 29, 2021)

Free speech and all. It’s a forum. On the internet. Let people say what they want, so long as they are not being intentionally disrespectful.

It’s up to the individual (the reader) to take a message and do their own research to draw their own conclusions. This is not a medical research forum; it’s EMTlife. No one is coming here for all the answers to medical mysteries, and quite frankly the COVID phenomenon is still a huge mystery that no one knows much about after a year and a half.

People here have said outlandish **** on a multitude of topics. I’m growing tired of the “if it goes against the narrative shut it down” type of policies and practices. Is dude nuts? Maybe, but it kind of bears itself out.


----------



## Summit (Jul 30, 2021)

Carlos Danger said:


> Huh? I'm quite sure that more than a few times folks have posted links to media write-ups that discussed research, and I don't remember you are anyone else ever having an issue with it.


He linked to a Federalist story written by a undergrad student. It hot linked to "research" but if you click on the link marked "research," it's actually just an Op Ed which the student rehashed into an story for the Federalist! No actual research posted! C'mon!

That is even more disingenuous that the implication of the story which was the only reason to vaccinate is to prevent death. Most childhood vaccinations are not just about preventing death, but disability and severe illness. Now, I'd love to read the research or a decent summary thereof that might discuss such things.

Let us not pretend that this was any kind of an attempt at scientific journalism. It was a shoddy politically motivated attack piece at best, yellow journalism at worst.


----------



## Bullets (Jul 30, 2021)

All i am saying is that after i got my second Pfizer, my phone started getting 5g signal within 14 days. Coincidence?


----------



## Fezman92 (Jul 30, 2021)

Causation doesn’t equal causation. Except in this case then it does.


----------



## Carlos Danger (Jul 30, 2021)

Summit said:


> He linked to a Federalist story written by a undergrad student. It hot linked to "research" but if you click on the link marked "research," it's actually just an Op Ed which the student rehashed into an story for the Federalist! No actual research posted! C'mon!
> 
> That is even more disingenuous that the implication of the story which was the only reason to vaccinate is to prevent death. Most childhood vaccinations are not just about preventing death, but disability and severe illness. Now, I'd love to read the research or a decent summary thereof that might discuss such things.
> 
> Let us not pretend that this was any kind of an attempt at scientific journalism. It was a shoddy politically motivated attack piece at best, yellow journalism at worst.


I wasn't defending the article itself. I didn't even click on the link. At the time that I made my comment, no one had said anything about the quality of the article or of the research that it ostensibly discussed.

I was making just that point that folks post articles all the time that discuss research (again, that's what this purportedly was) and no one has a problem with it, until it's a media source that offends the political sensibilities of one of the moderators.


----------



## Summit (Jul 30, 2021)

I think looking at the source and quality of scientific journalism are absolutely valid items to consider and criticize. Healthcare professionals, even EMS, shouldn't be getting their best information from opinion pieces or infotainment services.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Jul 30, 2021)

DesertMedic66 said:


> I’m real surprised that we have allowed so much posting about blatantly false and dangerous information on the forum…
> 
> since we are on the subject of crazy talk, I heard from a friend of a friend of an ex of a cousin of widow that they 100% saw an alien being experimented on at Area 51 just yesterday. I will now create a blog post and reference to that as my proof and also site multiple other people who have been caught in direct lies, mistruths, and other scandals. Also it wasn’t planes that hit the twin towers. It was in fact a pair of prototype flying Sea Orcas who were escaping from Sea World New York.


The best way to fight disinformation and falsity is with scientific facts, not remove them from view where they can fester and self perpetuate.    It's the same reason I've posted articles and asked questions...to foster a good, science based discussion that can be used against the arguments against getting vaccinated.

I've used some of the better supported posts as a basis to try and convince people to get vaccinated.  The arguments being made here against getting vaccinated are also being made out in the public space.  If EMS is to be involved in public health and convincing people to get vaccinated, it makes sense that we are better prepared to do it.

If you're dismissing the other side's arguments solely based on whose making them, then this becomes an echo chamber and not a discussion forum.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Jul 30, 2021)

This 900-person delta cluster in Mass. has CDC freaked out—74% are vaccinated [Updated]
					

CDC estimates 35K symptomatic infections in US per week among 162 million vaccinated.




					arstechnica.com
				




74% of the people in a delta variant cluster were vaccinated?  Scary


----------



## mgr22 (Jul 30, 2021)

ffemt8978 said:


> This 900-person delta cluster in Mass. has CDC freaked out—74% are vaccinated [Updated]
> 
> 
> CDC estimates 35K symptomatic infections in US per week among 162 million vaccinated.
> ...


Certainly worth looking into, which is why I just read most of the Facebook posts by Town Manager Alex Morse on which the article seems to be based.

What isn't clear is how Morse is defining "vaccinated" (one shot or two), at what location(s) people got their shots, how many vaccine manufacturers were involved, how many batches were used, how the doses were stored, who administered them, and how they were administered.

I'm asking questions, not drawing conclusions.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Jul 30, 2021)

mgr22 said:


> Certainly worth looking into, which is why I just read most of the Facebook posts by Town Manager Alex Morse on which the article seems to be based.
> 
> What isn't clear is how Morse is defining "vaccinated" (one shot or two), at what location(s) people got their shots, how many vaccine manufacturers were involved, how many batches were used, how the doses were stored, who administered them, and how they were administered.
> 
> I'm asking questions, not drawing conclusions.


All good points, but at least Morse is putting the data out there so that questions can be asked and answered.


----------



## SandpitMedic (Jul 30, 2021)

Questioning the research is great practice. It’s what makes science better, hence peer review. No argument here.


----------



## SandpitMedic (Jul 30, 2021)

39 years old. Dead.
Looking at his photo he did have at least one risk factor, but the article does not mention others. 









						'I should have gotten the damn vaccine,' Father of 5 who later died of COVID texts from hospital bed
					

A Las Vegas father who contracted COVID-19 while on vacation texted his fiancé from the hospital, “I should have gotten the damn vaccine,” she told 8 News Now.




					www.8newsnow.com


----------



## Akulahawk (Jul 31, 2021)

One of the more interesting things that I have noticed is that while we're here discussing the actual science, earlier this evening, when a patient asked a co-worker of mine about getting a vaccine to get rid of her Covid 19 infection, my co-worker replied "it's a bit late for that..." I also had a discussion with a patient, who ended up testing positive, about the the vaccine. This patient didn't want to get the vaccine but also seemed a bit surprised how effective the vaccines are against preventing severe disease and death, not necessarily preventing infection per se. 

Unfortunately this patient now gets to find out if the course is going to be mild or if it's going to be more moderate/severe and now knows that had the vaccine been administered, the high likelihood is that severe disease/hospitalization/death is very unlikely...


----------



## EpiEMS (Aug 1, 2021)

ffemt8978 said:


> This 900-person delta cluster in Mass. has CDC freaked out—74% are vaccinated [Updated]
> 
> 
> CDC estimates 35K symptomatic infections in US per week among 162 million vaccinated.
> ...



The MMWR article is pretty fascinating. https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7031e2.htm

469 patients, 5 hospitalized, of whom 4 were vaccinated. Of the 469 patients, 74% were *fully* vaccinated - meaning >=14 days from their final dose. 

Scary stuff - keep those masks on!


----------



## Fezman92 (Aug 1, 2021)

EpiEMS said:


> Of the 469 patients, 74% were *fully* vaccinated - meaning >=14 days from their final dose.



and so many people are latching onto this as ‘proof’ that the vaccine is useless or something sinister. Granted these people were super conspiracy theory anti-vaxers before.


----------



## FiremanMike (Aug 3, 2021)

I now know 3 people who were previously vaccinated who tested positive for COVID in the last week.  Mildish symptoms, no hospitalization.


----------



## EpiEMS (Aug 3, 2021)

FiremanMike said:


> I now know 3 people who were previously vaccinated who tested positive for COVID in the last week. Mildish symptoms, no hospitalization.



Pretty consistent with what the MMWR report on Provincetown showed. And the share of deaths due to COVID among the vaccinated is effectively 0. (See, for e.g., this KFF discussion - https://www.kff.org/policy-watch/covid-19-vaccine-breakthrough-cases-data-from-the-states/)


----------



## DrParasite (Aug 3, 2021)

FiremanMike said:


> I now know 3 people who were previously vaccinated who tested positive for COVID in the last week.  Mildish symptoms, no hospitalization.


to be honest, I don't care... I'm not all that worried about who tests positive; what I'm worried about is the hospitalizations and death rate, which have fallen significantly following the vaccinations.

in the grand scheme of things, is it cause for concern?  well, it's something the CDC/NIH/Public Health people should be monitoring.  but do rising positive tests, without the rising deaths or hospitalizations mean the pandemic is here to stay?  especially if they have mildish symptoms?  absolutely not, I think it's time for us to get back to some semblance of normalcy.


----------



## FiremanMike (Aug 3, 2021)

EpiEMS said:


> Pretty consistent with what the MMWR report on Provincetown showed. And the share of deaths due to COVID among the vaccinated is effectively 0. (See, for e.g., this KFF discussion - https://www.kff.org/policy-watch/covid-19-vaccine-breakthrough-cases-data-from-the-states/)


Agreed, everyone who tested positive had mild to moderate symptoms..  The only concerning part is that all 3 of these folks were at a wedding, two of whom I spent a good deal of time with in the groomsmen suite.. The other concerning thing is there were a handful of unvaccinated folks at the wedding. 



DrParasite said:


> to be honest, I don't care...


Is being abrasive just your online persona, or is this how you conduct yourself IRL?

Anyhow, I essentially agree with the rest of your post.  We simply cannot shut down again for delta.  As a matter of fact, I’m going on a cruise in a few weeks, and I’m not in the slightest bit worried.


----------



## DrParasite (Aug 3, 2021)

FiremanMike said:


> Is being abrasive just your online persona, or is this how you conduct yourself IRL?


a little from column A, and a little from column B, and then there is column c (tone is hard to pick up when read over the internet)... I'm just done with all of the panic and fear-mongering for everything related to COVID.  Between all of the misinformation, the politically slanted information, the conflicting information from various levels of government, the half-truths and mostly lies (from both sides of the aisle), and all the BS that is found on social media, I'm just over it all.   People will get sick (like happens all the time), so, while I do feel bad that you know three people that got sick, I don't the general public should be doing lifestyle changes as a result.  I am a very compassionate person when deal with people who get sick and injured; however, my level of compassion drops significantly when the reason I was called was avoidable, or when you try to make a huge mountain out of an email (not saying you were trying to do that)


FiremanMike said:


> Anyhow, I essentially agree with the rest of your post.  We simply cannot shut down again for delta.  As a matter of fact, I’m going on a cruise in a few weeks, and I’m not in the slightest bit worried.


Enjoy the cruise, and I hope everyone who is attending is vaccinated (and if they don't, then I have little sympathy if they get sick, because most of what they will experience could have been avoided).


----------



## GMCmedic (Aug 4, 2021)

Wild U.S. deer found with coronavirus antibodies
					

A new study detected coronavirus antibodies in 40 percent of deer tested this year. Here’s why that matters.




					api.nationalgeographic.com
				




Now they're gonna cancel deer season.


----------



## Akulahawk (Aug 4, 2021)

GMCmedic said:


> Wild U.S. deer found with coronavirus antibodies
> 
> 
> A new study detected coronavirus antibodies in 40 percent of deer tested this year. Here’s why that matters.
> ...


Nah... they'll just make the deer all wear masks...

On a more serious note, while I'm not surprised, it would be interesting to see if they could find actual CV in the wild, sequence it, and see what variant it is and perhaps figure out where/how CV spread to them or even if it's causing significant disease in the deer herd.


----------



## Fezman92 (Aug 4, 2021)

Hasn't it spread to other animals as well? I seem to recall hearing that dogs and lions can get it.


----------



## GMCmedic (Aug 4, 2021)

Fezman92 said:


> Hasn't it spread to other animals as well? I seem to recall hearing that dogs and lions can get it.


Yes but to this point we've only known of animals that have regular contact with humans (pets, captive zoo animals, farm animals). This is interesting because it's wild animals across multiple states.


----------



## PotatoMedic (Aug 4, 2021)

Denmark I think killed off all their mink because of it.


----------



## GMCmedic (Aug 4, 2021)

Akulahawk said:


> Nah... they'll just make the deer all wear masks...
> 
> On a more serious note, while I'm not surprised, it would be interesting to see if they could find actual CV in the wild, sequence it, and see what variant it is and perhaps figure out where/how CV spread to them or even if it's causing significant disease in the deer herd.


I gathered from the article that they didn't suspect serious illness. I know our state DNR does CWD sampling and investigates suspected EHD cases. I wonder if they'll take blood samples for covid testing now also. 

I think it certainly requires further investigating, this could potentially be very bad for wildlife.


----------



## EpiEMS (Aug 4, 2021)

PotatoMedic said:


> Denmark I think killed off all their mink because of it.



True: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-54890229
Multiple countries have had outbreaks of that nature apparently.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Aug 12, 2021)

MMiz said:


> Have there been any talks of medical providers receiving "booster" shots?


The FDA is expected to announce a booster shot for the those with compromised immune systems.









						FDA authorizes 3rd COVID vaccine dose for immunocompromised [Updated]
					

CDC advisers plan to meet Friday to set official guidance.




					arstechnica.com
				




A few interesting take aways from the article: it does not apply to J&J vaccine; it will be authorized by a change to the EUA (since the vaccines have not received full FDA approval), and the WHO has called for a moratorium on booster shots except those that are "necessary" for people with immune deficiencies.


----------



## Summit (Aug 12, 2021)

The WHO wants vaccine shipped to poor countries instead of used as boosters. Great, that is the job of the WHO to advocate for. But that isn't happening. I'd rather use the vaccines we have to boost higher risk folks here than see it expire.


----------



## GMCmedic (Aug 12, 2021)

We have by far provided the most funding for vaccine research that most of the world is now benefitting from. I'm going to take the selfish route and say we should do with it as we please before sending anymore off.


----------



## Summit (Aug 12, 2021)

GMCmedic said:


> We have by far provided the most funding for vaccine research that most of the world is now benefitting from. I'm going to take the selfish route and say we should do with it as we please before sending anymore off.


I don't disagree, however, as long as we first protect our hospital capacity and economy, whatever reduces total global infections the fastest will reduce opportunity for new variant creation.


----------



## FlorianFred (Aug 13, 2021)

I'm one of the vaccinated who ended up getting COVID.  You'll find my vaccination postings earlier in this thread -- 1st Moderna shot was late December and 2nd was late January.  I live in a state with a low vaccination rate, and my county has one of the lowest vaccination rates (34%).  It's a county with an all volunteer fire service, and the last numbers I saw were less than 10% of the firefighters were vaccinated (at least as of last month....it's probably gone up by now).  I run medical calls (although a paid service does the real work), and I'm never without my PPE (which includes my mask).  But I will admit that around June I stopped wearing my mask inside the fire station and during our meetings and trainings -- in retrospect it was foolish to do, but I got tired of being the only one with a mask....totally my fault and a dumb reason to put yourself at risk, I know. I never stopped wearing it on calls or when shopping, but my wife and I did start going out to eat (maybe once a week), and we started getting lax about wearing it in a restaurant while not eating.  In my neck of the woods, you rarely see a mask, even now.  It is very much considered a "political statement" around here, those who wear the mask believe the left-wing propaganda and liberal media.

In early July I caught some kind of vicious summer cold -- runny nose, sinus headache, lots of drainage, then after thinking it was gone (about a week after the symptoms), I caught it again (or it never left), by July 20th I felt like I had gotten over it and was "catching it" again.  I woke up in the middle of the night sweating, nauseous, and the room spinning.  After vomiting, I felt better, but I noticed that I couldn't smell anything....nothing.  All the other aforementioned symptoms resolved in about 4 hours, but the anosmia remained.  I tried smelling bleach, vinegar, fresh cut herbs....it was like a weird parlor game with my wife thrusting something overly fragrant items in my face and saying, "can you smell this?".  Had I not experienced that symptom, I really wouldn't have gotten tested....if I did have a fever it broke fast, I wasn't having respiratory symptoms, but COVID seemed to be the logical culprit of my anosmia.  I got tested and was positive.  Aside from one REALLY unpleasant night, and loss of smell, I'm feeling fortunate that this is a mild case.   I'm starting to get some sense of smell back -- it left quickly, but it returns slowly....or so I'm told.  I may have gotten a mild case prior to the vaccination, but I'm giving most of the credit to the vaccine. 

I'm back in the field, and given the low vaccination rates, we've seen a dramatic increase in our hospitalizations.  It's anecdotal, but I know 2 people on respirators -- one was vaccinated (same time as me, one of the few firefighters, albeit retired) and 1 who did not take the vaccine.  If there is a booster, I will take it.


----------



## Jim37F (Aug 13, 2021)

So the City&County just made an announcement that the vaccine is being made mandatory for all employees, get it, or go get tested weekly. Or be layed off. 

They announced that like not even two weeks before the deadline. And there's no pre arranged testing for employees beyond going and paying out of pocket for each test.

Needless to say basically every Union and other entity are filing lawsuits as fast as they can fill out the forms, and it's all a big kerfuffle.

Now me, I'm pro vaccine, got vaxxed back in December about as early as possible and think everyone whose at least healthcare/1st responder should be 100%.... and I have absolutely no support whatsoever for this mandate, especially the way its been implemented as an out of the blue "get it or get lost, now" type deal.

4 of the guys on my crew are vaccinated, the 5th guy is not. To paraphrase his own words, he's not anti-vaxx, but doesn't like that the vaccines are still experimental and not officially fully FDA approved. While based on the data available I'm fully convinced he should go, but I also support his right to not be forced to get what is still legally an experimental treatment or risk losing his job.

Supposedly the FDA is about to officially approve the vaccine, at least that's the word that's spreading here, but for the moment, it's not yet. And that I think is all the difference. 

If the mandate came out after full approval, I might easily be singing a different tune, especially if they had a proper grace period to get it (2 weeks to be fully vaccinated when you have to wait 3-4 weeks in between the two shots, then it's another 2 weeks for it to be fully effective?)

If the vaccine full approval is just waiting on admin issues, paperwork and what not, why not just wait for it to be done? Say "Hey, we fully expect the FDA to approve this soon, and once it's approved we will make it mandatory, so just heads up, should really start looking into getting your shots now"

Otherwise I do think mandates at this stage are too much of a government overreach (even though I am fully vaxxed and quite frankly feel a bit of relief about that)

Of course the people that are convinced it's poison will still be protesting once all approvals are done and finalized and I'll just say I'm so glad people weren't treating Polio or Smallpox vaccines like that....


----------



## Akulahawk (Aug 13, 2021)

I'm also someone that was fully vaccinated that got COVID. In a way, I'm just not all that surprised. The antibodies that my body developed as a result of the 2 shots did wane as expected. That being said, the cellular side of this did remain. This part is why most vaccinated people that do get COVID do not develop severe disease. It's because their bodies "remember" the antigen and begin producing antibodies again and also start working on clearing the virus from the body. 

My symptoms are pretty similar. I had a headache for a couple days (very minor headache), a runny nose, and a very mild sore throat. That's literally it as far as my initial symptoms are concerned. It was ever-so-slightly more than a nuisance that made me get tested on the 6th, and I was positive. I'm now about a week into it and my symptoms are nearly gone. I did develop anosmia about a day or so after the positive test but that's starting to return. 

Now then, I did follow the FDA-recommended schedule for vaccination. The Israelis have some data showing immunity does decrease pretty sharply about 4-5 months after that 2nd shot on that particular schedule. The UK ended up delaying their 2nd shot for several weeks (10 weeks or so) so they're showing a longer period of antibody activity. In either case, the vast majority of vaccinated people, regardless of which schedule they were on, are NOT being admitted to the hospital because their disease severity is quite mild... just like my case. My wife also has a very similar disease progression and she is now just about ready to go back to work, assuming she tests "negative" in the next day or so. 

At this point, aside from having a slightly stuffy nose and an improving anosmia, I actually feel pretty darned good!


----------



## Fezman92 (Aug 13, 2021)

Jim37F said:


> Of course the people that are convinced it's poison will still be protesting once all approvals are done and finalized and I'll just say I'm so glad people weren't treating Polio or Smallpox vaccines like that....


Actually they were: at least with smallpox


----------



## akflightmedic (Aug 13, 2021)

Yesterday, in my state (Maine), the Governor and State CDC have now mandated ALL Healthcare workers, Dental Workers, EMS workers, anyone in the medical field...MUST get the vaccine series by October 1st. No shot, no work. End of story.

There is NO religious exemption. They will entertain medical exemptions only...and as we know, there are actual very few reasons medically why one should not get the vaccine.

They expressed it clearly. Get the shot or do not work.

Also, as of yesterday, a very small EMS dept I work for now has 4 Covid+ employees...our department was 100% vaccinated (myself included). Their symptoms are mild, they are at home doing fine. I cannot say how they would be if they were not vaccinated, but science suggests they would be far worse.

In my ER patient population, covid is ripping through our area again. We had just started moving supplies back in the rooms and relaxing certain precautions. Now it is back to full caution...bleh.


----------



## DrParasite (Aug 14, 2021)

Jim37F said:


> Supposedly the FDA is about to officially approve the vaccine, at least that's the word that's spreading here, but for the moment, it's not yet. And that I think is all the difference.
> <snip>
> If the vaccine full approval is just waiting on admin issues, paperwork and what not, why not just wait for it to be done? Say "Hey, we fully expect the FDA to approve this soon, and once it's approved we will make it mandatory, so just heads up, should really start looking into getting your shots now"


is it just the FDA formal stamp of approval and he will get it?  because that sounds like a bureaucratic rubber stamp, and it won't change anything, other than allowing some people to get a warm and fuzzy feeling when they get the shot.  The EUA was given (and @Carlos Danger explained that testing had been done), and it's been administered to millions of people (myself included, back in Jan/Feb).... does anyone really think the FDA won't be giving its full blessing on the vaccine?  

While I understand the concern, I think using the whole "FDA hasn't approved it" is just an excuse, and once the FDA does approve it, they (those who don't want the vaccine) will find something else to say as the reason why they don't want it.


----------



## EpiEMS (Aug 14, 2021)

DrParasite said:


> is it just the FDA formal stamp of approval and he will get it? because that sounds like a bureaucratic rubber stamp, and it won't change anything, other than allowing some people to get a warm and fuzzy feeling when they get the shot. The EUA was given (and @Carlos Danger explained that testing had been done), and it's been administered to millions of people (myself included, back in Jan/Feb).... does anyone really think the FDA won't be giving its full blessing on the vaccine?
> 
> While I understand the concern, I think using the whole "FDA hasn't approved it" is just an excuse, and once the FDA does approve it, they (those who don't want the vaccine) will find something else to say as the reason why they don't want it.



It’s been a facile excuse from the beginning. That said, maybe for a subset of a portion of the people that don’t want the vaccine, it might make a difference - so the rubber stamp ought to be put to paper!


----------



## Summit (Aug 15, 2021)

Here is my solution to the vaccine hesitancy issue:
1. Fedgov stops paying for COVID-19 hospital costs in unvaccinated.
2. Insurance companies can charge based on vaccine status.
3. Employers are protected from liability related to vaccine mandates including against state or local government restriction.

Everyone will be vaccinated by the end of the year.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Aug 15, 2021)

Summit said:


> Here is my solution to the vaccine hesitancy issue:
> 1. Fedgov stops paying for COVID-19 hospital costs in unvaccinated.
> 2. Insurance companies can charge based on vaccine status.
> 3. Employers are protected from liability related to vaccine mandates including against state or local government restriction.
> ...


Be careful with overly simplistic solutions to problems...often times they can have unintended consequences because precedent will have been set.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Aug 15, 2021)

Time trends and factors related to COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy from January-May 2021 among US adults: Findings from a large-scale national survey
					

Objective To understand COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy.  Methods January 6 through May 31, 2021, 5,121,436 US adults completed an online COVID-19 survey. Weighted data was used to evaluate change in vaccine intent and correlates of May vaccine hesitancy.  Results COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy decreased...




					www.medrxiv.org
				




According to this study, people with PhD's are less likely to get the vaccine and less likely to change their minds about it.


----------



## Summit (Aug 15, 2021)

ffemt8978 said:


> Be careful with overly simplistic solutions to problems...often times they can have unintended consequences because precedent will have been set.


I think if you examine the situation you will find that the precedent is already very well-established but covid is the massive of exception. All I propose is that we removed the exception for covid and let the markets handle it.


----------



## Summit (Aug 15, 2021)

ffemt8978 said:


> Time trends and factors related to COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy from January-May 2021 among US adults: Findings from a large-scale national survey
> 
> 
> Objective To understand COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy.  Methods January 6 through May 31, 2021, 5,121,436 US adults completed an online COVID-19 survey. Weighted data was used to evaluate change in vaccine intent and correlates of May vaccine hesitancy.  Results COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy decreased...
> ...


Yes this unreviewed study shows that if you look at people with doctoral degrees in the United States and you exclude all of those with doctorates in healthcare practice, which is the vast majority of doctoral degrees, then you find out that the vaccine rate for English PhD is lower than the 96% for MDs. But what's the takeaway here again? 

It's just another damned statistic misused as a damned Lie by the antivaxxer blogs to imply that everyone would be on their side if they really know what's going on like apparently 25% of English PhDs do! What a bunch of BS.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Aug 15, 2021)

Summit said:


> I think if you examine the situation you will find that the precedent is already very well-established but covid is the massive of exception. All I propose is that we removed the exception for covid and let the markets handle it.


And what happens when next year's disease hits?  Covid is nasty, but it is by far the only disease people have screamed that exceptions must be made for...even in the past 20 years.


Summit said:


> I think if you examine the situation you will find that the precedent is already very well-established but covid is the massive of exception. All I propose is that we removed the exception for covid and let the markets handle it.


While Covid is nasty, it is not the only pandemic we've faced...even in this century.  Are you willing to apply those same rules to *every* pandemic?


----------



## Summit (Aug 15, 2021)

ffemt8978 said:


> And what happens when next year's disease hits?  Covid is nasty, but it is by far the only disease people have screamed that exceptions must be made for...even in the past 20 years.
> 
> While Covid is nasty, it is not the only pandemic we've faced...even in this century.  Are you willing to apply those same rules to *every* pandemic?


I think 🤔 you are missing my meaning. Employers schools etc can mandate and do for other vaccines. In all other diseases government is not picking up the bill for illness. Insurance companies can adjust your corporate rate based on your employee usage and risk factors. I'm proposing treating COVID like Hep B or Measles in those respects.

We've spent well over $75,000,000,000+ solely on COVID-19 hospital stays in the US (this is probably a gross underestimate and doesn't Include all the prep training PPE and lost rev).


----------



## ffemt8978 (Aug 15, 2021)

Summit said:


> I think 🤔 you are missing my meaning. Employers schools etc can mandate and do for other vaccines. In all other diseases government is not picking up the bill for illness. Insurance companies can adjust your corporate rate based on your employee usage and risk factors. I'm proposing treating COVID like Hep B or Measles in those respects.
> 
> We've spent well over $75,000,000,000+ solely on COVID-19 hospital stays in the US (this is probably a gross underestimate and doesn't Include all the prep training PPE and lost rev).


Not missing it at all, not even saying I disagree with it.  My question was are you willing to do the same for the next pandemic that you're willing to do for Covid because the next pandemic WILL come.  The question becomes where do you draw the line?


----------



## GMCmedic (Aug 16, 2021)

Summit said:


> Here is my solution to the vaccine hesitancy issue:
> 1. Fedgov stops paying for COVID-19 hospital costs in unvaccinated.
> 2. Insurance companies can charge based on vaccine status.
> 3. Employers are protected from liability related to vaccine mandates including against state or local government restriction.
> ...



I think this is a really good approach. Both sides of the political spectrum will be equally angered.


----------



## UtahEmt33 (Aug 16, 2021)

Summit said:


> Here is my solution to the vaccine hesitancy issue:
> 1. Fedgov stops paying for COVID-19 hospital costs in unvaccinated.
> 2. Insurance companies can charge based on vaccine status.
> 3. Employers are protected from liability related to vaccine mandates including against state or local government restriction.
> ...


I wont.


----------



## Summit (Aug 16, 2021)

UtahEmt33 said:


> I wont.


No, maybe not, but the ultimate result of that market based solution is that employers will mandate when insurance companies are able to mitigate risk by charging appropriately for higher medical costs in the unvaccinated. This passes the responsibility to the employer and then to the employee, rather than socializing the consequences of individual choices. So, if your employer offers health insurance, they will probably mandate, or they will pass on much higher health premiums. In that scenario, you'd pay extra, get a shot, or be fired/quit. However, the availability of non-mandated jobs or affordable plans for unvaccinated would get extremely thin. The free choice would be yours.


----------



## Fezman92 (Aug 17, 2021)

so my dad is going to get his booster shot today.


----------



## Carlos Danger (Aug 17, 2021)

Summit said:


> Here is my solution to the vaccine hesitancy issue:
> 1. Fedgov stops paying for COVID-19 hospital costs in unvaccinated.
> 2. Insurance companies can charge based on vaccine status.
> 3. Employers are protected from liability related to vaccine mandates including against state or local government restriction.
> ...





Summit said:


> I think if you examine the situation you will find that the precedent is already very well-established but covid is the massive of exception. All I propose is that we removed the exception for covid and let the markets handle it.


Not sure what exceptions you are referring to. It isn't as if state or federal governments refuse to pay for the consequences of personal choices in any other example, or do insurance companies charge higher rates for the same.

I'm not disputing that your solution would be effective. We could probably engineer all sort of modifications to individual health choices with this approach. But it certainly _would _be a radical departure from current practice and related laws and regulations.  So I don't know what you mean when you say "the precedent is well established but covid is a massive exception".

If you really want to "let the markets handle it" I am personally all for that, but that is a broad discussion and I guarantee that doing that for real will involve consequences that you are not at all fond of.


----------



## Summit (Aug 17, 2021)

Carlos Danger said:


> Not sure what exceptions you are referring to. It isn't as if state or federal governments refuse to pay for the consequences of personal choices in any other example, or do insurance companies charge higher rates for the same.
> 
> If you really want to "let the markets handle it" I am personally all for that, but that is a broad discussion and I guarantee that doing that for real will involve consequences that you are not at all fond of.


Not every market based solution requires a completely unregulated free hand with wild consequences as you seem to imply. 
I believe there is room for balance between limited regulation and free market based on the situation and subject. Interventions should be targeted based on a rationale approach that balances ideology against reality. I'd wager you generally agree me with on that while we might disagree on the specifics.


----------



## Bullets (Aug 18, 2021)

Carlos Danger said:


> do insurance companies charge higher rates for the same.


My health insurance gives a discount for nonsmokers. I dont see why they couldnt, or shouldnt, do the same for vaccinated people


----------



## ffemt8978 (Aug 18, 2021)

Bullets said:


> My health insurance gives a discount for nonsmokers. I dont see why they couldnt, or shouldnt, do the same for vaccinated people


When was the last time an insurance company made a decision based on the best interests of anything other than their profit margin?


----------



## akflightmedic (Aug 18, 2021)

I am unsure ANY insurance business of any type has ever acted in a way that was not directly related to their profit margin, which is why it is such a lucrative industry to be in. 

I am unclear how your statement/question relates to what Bullets said. Because what he wrote indicates the insurance company has already set the precedent of a discount for non-smokers, so yes, it is a good question...maybe they also offer a discount for those who are vaccinated. Since employer provided insurance costs are borne by both the employer and employee, this would be a significant savings nationwide. And in theory, the insurance company does well due to potentially paying out less in healthcare costs for the vaccinated.


----------



## Tigger (Aug 18, 2021)

ffemt8978 said:


> When was the last time an insurance company made a decision based on the best interests of anything other than their profit margin?


You mean that insurance companies might like the idea of not paying for a hospital admission that is almost entirely preventable?


----------



## EpiEMS (Aug 19, 2021)

ffemt8978 said:


> When was the last time an insurance company made a decision based on the best interests of anything other than their profit margin?



That’s how underwriting works. Your price is reflective of risk plus a margin. This is not without precedent.


----------



## Summit (Aug 19, 2021)

A healthcare system with a mandatory flu vaccine absolutely experiences a reduced group insurance rate.

Splitting it out? They can do that for tobacco and various other health factors.


----------



## akflightmedic (Aug 20, 2021)

I am going today to get my booster.


----------



## Jim37F (Aug 20, 2021)

Back in July, we were reporting an average of like 50 new cases each day Statewide, then last month we were 100-150 a day and thought that was crazy high. 

Except these last two or three weeks straight have jumped, 5,6, 800 new cases reporting daily. Today's count is 845.

Some 352 people are actively hospitalized. 
More than 90% of those are unvaccinated.

We are pretty much at ICU bed capacity. Some hospitals have zero available ICU beds, one is running 125% capacity in their ICU.
Virtually all the COVID ICU cases are unvaccinated.


----------



## GMCmedic (Aug 20, 2021)

Any word on if this is expected be yearly? I got mine in January, I'd much rather hold off on a booster and just do my yearly stuff if that's going to be the case?


----------



## Fezman92 (Aug 20, 2021)

Is the booster free or do you have to pay for it?


----------



## Akulahawk (Aug 20, 2021)

GMCmedic said:


> Any word on if this is expected be yearly? I got mine in January, I'd much rather hold off on a booster and just do my yearly stuff if that's going to be the case?


I haven't heard any word yet on this, but I would expect this to be an every 6 months to yearly thing for now because the booster brings your circulating antibody level back to a very high level. If I'd had a booster a month ago, I wouldn't have likely gotten infected. So, if your end-goal is to prevent _infection_ then boosters it must be. If the end goal is just to keep people from being hospitalized in large numbers, then just get the "usual" series. I wouldn't actually be opposed to a HepB-like series where you get vaccinated x3, with 2nd being at 1 month and 3rd being at 6 months. That would give you a full year's protection and hopefully help shorten the pandemic.


----------



## DesertMedic66 (Aug 20, 2021)

Fezman92 said:


> Is the booster free or do you have to pay for it?


Still free


----------



## ffemt8978 (Aug 20, 2021)

Report: Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine may get full FDA approval Monday
					

Regulators are reportedly working to finish approval Friday, but timeline could slip.




					arstechnica.com
				




Pfizer may get full approval in next few days.


----------



## EpiEMS (Aug 20, 2021)

akflightmedic said:


> I am going today to get my booster.



Looking forward to mine! Is yours through work?


----------



## akflightmedic (Aug 21, 2021)

Booster is free. No, I got my independently. I had my PCP write a prescription and turns out I did not even need it. When I got to the vaccination site, I requested the booster and they said "ok". After a little more small talk, they said we do not turn away anyone asking for a booster, as long as it has been 8 months since last shot.

I just did not want to wait until mid-Sept when it opens to all healthcare workers, especially since I leave for Las Vegas this week. Do not want to return from the trip with Covid if at all possible.


----------



## Bullets (Aug 21, 2021)

akflightmedic said:


> Booster is free. No, I got my independently. I had my PCP write a prescription and turns out I did not even need it. When I got to the vaccination site, I requested the booster and they said "ok". After a little more small talk, they said we do not turn away anyone asking for a booster, as long as it has been 8 months since last shot.
> 
> I just did not want to wait until mid-Sept when it opens to all healthcare workers, especially since I leave for Las Vegas this week. Do not want to return from the trip with Covid if at all possible.


Did you get the same as your first two or did you mix it up?


----------



## akflightmedic (Aug 21, 2021)

I got the same.


----------



## NomadicMedic (Aug 22, 2021)

I was told no on a booster. ”nope. Not yet”


----------



## Carlos Danger (Aug 22, 2021)

Jim37F said:


> Back in July, we were reporting an average of like 50 new cases each day Statewide, then last month we were 100-150 a day and thought that was crazy high.
> 
> Except these last two or three weeks straight have jumped, 5,6, 800 new cases reporting daily. Today's count is 845.
> 
> ...


Our small hospital has 24 inpatient beds and as of this morning, 18 of those were COVID+ and I think 8 were on vents. There's a patient who has been boarding in the ED on a nimbex drip for two days because they can't find a bed anywhere within a couple hundred miles. We've transferred a handful of patients out of state over the past week or so, but those resources are now completely full. There is literally nowhere to put any more critically people anywhere in my region.


----------



## akflightmedic (Aug 23, 2021)

NomadicMedic said:


> I was told no on a booster. ”nope. Not yet”


Shoot up to Maine real quick.....


----------



## PotatoMedic (Aug 23, 2021)

Pfizer receives full FDA approval.

FDA Approves Pfizer-BioNTech Covid-19 Vaccine for People 16 and Older https://www.wsj.com/articles/fda-ap...9-vaccine-for-people-16-and-older-11629726322


----------



## NomadicMedic (Aug 23, 2021)

akflightmedic said:


> Shoot up to Maine real quick.....



I have a call into my medical director to see if I can use some pull to make it happen. .


----------



## ffemt8978 (Aug 23, 2021)

PotatoMedic said:


> Pfizer receives full FDA approval.
> 
> FDA Approves Pfizer-BioNTech Covid-19 Vaccine for People 16 and Older https://www.wsj.com/articles/fda-ap...9-vaccine-for-people-16-and-older-11629726322


Non-paywall article








						US regulators give full approval to Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine
					

WASHINGTON (AP) — The U.S. gave full approval to Pfizer's COVID-19 vaccine Monday, potentially boosting public confidence in the shots and instantly opening the way for more universities, companies and local governments to make vaccinations mandatory.




					apnews.com


----------



## FiremanMike (Aug 25, 2021)

akflightmedic said:


> Shoot up to Maine real quick.....


How was the 24 hours after the shot?


----------



## akflightmedic (Aug 25, 2021)

I reported on my first two doses back in Dec/Jan when I got them. I was very mild, no issues.

This 3rd shot kicked my arse! Hard! Within 8 hours I was achy all over, extremely tired, and weak. I did get a low fever and I felt downright miserable. I started taking motrin and tylenol and just stay hydrated. Went to bed early, slept horribly, tossed, turned, and sweated.

Woke up, popped more tylenol, felt drained for first part of the day but kept improving. By that night I was out having dinner and drinks with friends.


----------



## Summit (Aug 25, 2021)

I would put my 3rd shot between #1 and #2 for side effects.

DAL will charge employees an extra $200 for health insurance per month if they choose to be unvaccinated:








						Delta Air Lines Is Going To Start Charging Unvaccinated Employees $200 Per Month
					

Delta will not mandate employees to be vaccinated against the coronavirus, but its CEO says the charge is necessary because the average hospital stay for the virus costs the airline $40,000.




					www.npr.org


----------



## DrParasite (Aug 25, 2021)

Summit said:


> DAL will charge employees an extra $200 for health insurance per month if they choose to be unvaccinated:


Now that's interesting.... they aren't mandating you get the vaccine, but there are individual financial consequences for not doing so.  furthermore, the cost is not arbitrary, but rather a direct result of the increased costs of the person's actions should they be hospitalized.  cause and effect.  I like it.


----------



## E tank (Aug 25, 2021)

DrParasite said:


> Now that's interesting.... they aren't mandating you get the vaccine, but there are individual financial consequences for not doing so.  furthermore, the cost is not arbitrary, but rather a direct result of the increased costs of the person's actions should they be hospitalized.  cause and effect.  I like it.


Gonna charge for women of child bearing years to go without artificial contraception? Prolly a lot more out lay for that on balance.  The cost of their employees covid hospitalization liabilities have to be disproportionally lower than maternal care/delivery, given the number  of those needing to be hospitalized in the first place and the number of women having children. 

Whatever reasons they could have given for this, the one they did was pretty dumb.


----------



## NomadicMedic (Aug 25, 2021)

In reading the NEMSMA email list, you're about to see more agencies start mandating vaccines.


----------



## PotatoMedic (Aug 25, 2021)

E tank said:


> Gonna charge for women of child bearing years to go without artificial contraception? Prolly a lot more out lay for that on balance.  The cost of their employees covid hospitalization liabilities have to be disproportionally lower than maternal care/delivery, given the number  of those needing to be hospitalized in the first place and the number of women having children.
> 
> Whatever reasons they could have given for this, the one they did was pretty dumb.


Those costs are already factored in to health insurance thanks to the ACA.


----------



## E tank (Aug 25, 2021)

PotatoMedic said:


> Those costs are already factored in to health insurance thanks to the ACA.


Why would covid admissions be any different?


----------



## FiremanMike (Aug 25, 2021)

Summit said:


> I would put my 3rd shot between #1 and #2 for side effects.
> 
> DAL will charge employees an extra $200 for health insurance per month if they choose to be unvaccinated:
> 
> ...


Did either of you have covid?

my first shot wasn’t bad, covid for me sucked for a few days, then my second shot was as bad as covid hit but only lasted about 12 hours..


----------



## PotatoMedic (Aug 25, 2021)

E tank said:


> Why would covid admissions be any different?


Because pregnancy is not a disease.  Yes there are healthcare costs associated with being pregnant and those have been already addressed in the cost of insurance. 

COVID is showing to be quite expensive to treat and manage and is new.  The costs of the disease we're not planned into the cost of insurance.  There is also a very obvious difference between the cost of treating a vaccinated population vs a non-vaccinated population.  (98% of the hospitalizations for covid being non vaccinated). So to be unvaccinated it is more expensive, so a 200 dollar increase in insurance costs monthly seems a fair assessment for people who chose to not be vaccinated as they are more likely to be a burden on the insurance company if they become ill.


----------



## E tank (Aug 26, 2021)

Not sure what you mean by "already addressed in the cost of insurance". Different insurers have different agreements with different hospital systems. My 60 year old colleagues have a greater risk for needing coronary artery stenting than my 30 year old ones do, but the 30 year old friends are more likely (but not necessarily) to have children. And cost of the PCI dwarfs delivery of a child from positive hcg to vaginal delivery. Everyone is distributing their potential financial liability across a broad beam of subscribers and possible medical costs. 

Besides, that isn't even my point. Singling out a particular patient group sets a terrible precedent and the unintentional consequences to a decision like this are troubling to me. An increase of $2400 a year to healthy patients? Because of something that not only has not happened but is unlikely to happened to them? I don't trust that, once that line had been crossed, the stage could be set for other ways to coerce behavior by powerful institutions...call me paranoid but I used to think China's "one child policy" was a far removed reality/ideology that was not relevant to me or my descendants, but this kind of mentality has me wondering....

If people aren't getting vaccinated, deal with the reasons why. That might be a difficult prospect,  but the perceived simplicity of going all totalitarian  on them will not go well.


----------



## EpiEMS (Aug 26, 2021)

E tank said:


> Besides, that isn't even my point. Singling out a particular patient group sets a terrible precedent and the unintentional consequences to a decision like this are troubling to me. An increase of $2400 a year to healthy patients? Because of something that not only has not happened but is unlikely to happened to them? I don't trust that, once that line had been crossed, the stage could be set for other ways to coerce behavior by powerful institutions...call me paranoid but I used to think China's "one child policy" was a far removed reality/ideology that was not relevant to me or my descendants, but this kind of mentality has me wondering....
> 
> If people aren't getting vaccinated, deal with the reasons why. That might be a difficult prospect, but the perceived simplicity of going all totalitarian on them will not go well.



How does that differ from the core concept of underwriting? What’s the difference between charging folks who refuse a vaccine and those who, say, use tobacco products?

I would argue charging people for preventable risks is the opposite of totalitarian - it is an incentive. Totalitarian would be forcing people to do something, this is a nudge.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Aug 26, 2021)

EpiEMS said:


> How does that differ from the core concept of underwriting? What’s the difference between charging folks who refuse a vaccine and those who, say, use tobacco products?
> 
> I would argue charging people for preventable risks is the opposite of totalitarian - it is an incentive. Totalitarian would be forcing people to do something, this is a nudge.


Seems like the difference between a nudge and totalitarian depends greatly on which end of it you're on.  Dismissing people's concerns about getting vaccinated by pressuring them in a variety of ways to get the vaccine does nothing to resolve the underlying issue of why they don't want the vaccine.  This method may work if the results are all that matter to you, but it often times lays the groundwork for problems down the road.


----------



## DrParasite (Aug 26, 2021)

E tank said:


> Besides, that isn't even my point. Singling out a particular patient group sets a terrible precedent and the unintentional consequences to a decision like this are troubling to me. An increase of $2400 a year to healthy patients? Because of something that not only has not happened but is unlikely to happened to them? I don't trust that, once that line had been crossed, the stage could be set for other ways to coerce behavior by powerful institutions...


Insurance companies are all about risk management.   we can discuss how health insurance isn't really insurance another time, but as it stands right now it's risk management.  Covid is a highly contagious illness that can be expensive to treat; the vaccine lowers the risk that the insurance company will need to pay for those expensive treatments.

Smokers often have higher insurance premiums, compared to non-smokers.  this isn't much different, and if anyone wants to get the lower rates, they just need to get vaccinated (which reduces the insurance company's risk).  and if they don't want the shot, no biggie, no one is being forced to get the shot; but there are consequences to their actions.  This happens to be one of them.

but it's not like you are being FORCED to get the vaccine; no one is holding a person down and injecting it into them against their will.  I'm 100% against that, but despite what people on social media are claiming, that isn't the case here.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Aug 26, 2021)

Apparently Japan has found some contamination in their Moderna vaccine and have suspended it's use for now.









						Japan suspends 1.63M doses of Moderna over contamination
					

TOKYO (AP) — Japan suspended use of about 1.63 million doses of Moderna vaccine Thursday after contamination was found in unused vials, raising concern of a supply shortage as the country tries to accelerate vaccinations amid a COVID-19 surge.




					apnews.com


----------



## DrParasite (Aug 26, 2021)

ffemt8978 said:


> Apparently Japan has found some contamination in their Moderna vaccine and have suspended it's use for now.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


how much contamination?  what type of contamination?  and what was the result to the patient of the contamination?  is the contamination from production, storage, or administration?  how was the contamination detected?  

there are 1.63 million vials; what is the "acceptable" level of contamination for production?  and I don't mean just for covid stuff, for all medications?  Because the reality is, the answer isn't 0; there is always an acceptable margin of error in all manufacturing.  if it's 1 vial out of 1.63 million, that means 1.62 million vials are perfectly fine... is that unacceptable?   

More information is needed before the anti-vaxxers use this as justification not to get any vaccines.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Aug 26, 2021)

DrParasite said:


> how much contamination?  what type of contamination?  and what was the result to the patient of the contamination?  is the contamination from production, storage, or administration?  how was the contamination detected?
> 
> there are 1.63 million vials; what is the "acceptable" level of contamination for production?  and I don't mean just for covid stuff, for all medications?  Because the reality is, the answer isn't 0; there is always an acceptable margin of error in all manufacturing.  if it's 1 vial out of 1.63 million, that means 1.62 million vials are perfectly fine... is that unacceptable?
> 
> More information is needed before the anti-vaxxers use this as justification not to get any vaccines.


Agreed, but Japan has not answered those questions yet.


----------



## Summit (Aug 26, 2021)

ffemt8978 said:


> Seems like the difference between a nudge and totalitarian depends greatly on which end of it you're on.  Dismissing people's concerns about quitting smoking by pressuring them in a variety of ways to quit smoking does nothing to resolve the underlying issue of why they don't want to quit smoking.  This method may work if the results are all that matter to you, but it often times lays the groundwork for problems down the road.


You could describe it as above too, but really this is more about "OK if you don't want to, you don't have to, but don't ask everyone else to pay for the risks you needlessly but voluntarily accept."

Remember there are other negatives for the employer as smokers need smoke breaks, may smell bad to customers and colleagues, be out sick, have higher health costs etc.

So too with unvaccinated, they may be out sick, have higher healthcare costs, and get other customers and colleagues sick.

Many employers offer discounts on health rates if you get checkups, have blood pressure or BMI in the right ranges, because people who do those things head off problems earlier and utilize less healthcare in the long run.

Employers incentivizing preventative care and health promotion shouldn't be construable as totalitarian!

It's going to be necessary to incentivize in the face of our new social media informed world with severe malactor amplified misinformation from parties with foreign divisive motivations, domestic profit motivations, tribal identarian ideologies, or pure unadulterated attention whoring. What is a business owner, insurance company, or health promotion leader to do?


----------



## EpiEMS (Aug 26, 2021)

ffemt8978 said:


> Seems like the difference between a nudge and totalitarian depends greatly on which end of it you're on. Dismissing people's concerns about getting vaccinated by pressuring them in a variety of ways to get the vaccine does nothing to resolve the underlying issue of why they don't want the vaccine. This method may work if the results are all that matter to you, but it often times lays the groundwork for problems down the road.



I hardly count a financial penalty as totalitarian - particularly when there is a free vaccine available. We’re not talking about jail time or being unable to work or even a life changing financial penalty.

While I prefer a carrot approach to a stick approach from an ethical perspective, imposing a cost is also fully valid, particularly given that there is a social cost being imposed by those who refuse to get vaccinated.


----------



## EpiEMS (Aug 26, 2021)

DrParasite said:


> there are 1.63 million vials; what is the "acceptable" level of contamination for production? and I don't mean just for covid stuff, for all medications? Because the reality is, the answer isn't 0; there is always an acceptable margin of error in all manufacturing. if it's 1 vial out of 1.63 million, that means 1.62 million vials are perfectly fine... is that unacceptable?



Could even be argued that, like with crime, there is an optimal level of error (from a marginal cost perspective).


----------



## mgr22 (Aug 26, 2021)

Here's my dictionary's definition of "totalitarian": "Of, relating to, being, or imposing a form of government in which the political authority exercises absolute and centralized control over all aspects of life..." From my perspective in rural Tennessee, we're pretty far from totalitarian, even with vaccine mandates.

Even if those mandates are more than a nudge, that doesn't put them at the opposite extreme.


----------



## E tank (Aug 26, 2021)

DrParasite said:


> Smokers often have higher insurance premiums, compared to non-smokers. this isn't much different, and if anyone wants to get the lower rates, they just need to get vaccinated (which reduces the insurance company's risk). and if they don't want the shot, no biggie, no one is being forced to get the shot; but there are consequences to their actions. This happens to be one of them.


You're describing pre-existing conditions/habits...things that exist. Coercing an action to be taken by healthy people is not that. 


Summit said:


> You could describe it as above too, but really this is more about "OK if you don't want to, you don't have to, but don't ask everyone else to pay for the risks you needlessly but voluntarily accept."


There is no end to the possible iterations of this thinking. For example, genetic testing is developed to indicate some type of devastating disease in your children. You decide to have children. Are you on the hook for every possible contingency now? As far as C 19 goes,
the odds of  hospitalization let alone critical illness are low per infection.


Summit said:


> Remember there are other negatives for the employer as smokers need smoke breaks, may smell bad to customers and colleagues, be out sick, have higher health costs etc.
> 
> So too with unvaccinated, they may be out sick, have higher healthcare costs, and get other customers and colleagues sick.
> 
> ...



 So you're making my argument for me. Why don't they incentivize it instead of using heavy handed, yes, totalitarian tactics?


----------



## E tank (Aug 26, 2021)

mgr22 said:


> Here's my dictionary's definition of "totalitarian": "Of, relating to, being, or imposing a form of government in which the political authority exercises absolute and centralized control over all aspects of life..." From my perspective in rural Tennessee, we're pretty far from totalitarian, even with vaccine mandates.
> 
> Even if those mandates are more than a nudge, that doesn't put them at the opposite extreme.


I'm totalitarian with my kids sometimes...doesn't make me Joseph Stalin.


----------



## Summit (Aug 26, 2021)

I don't grant that extra fees from an employer for unvaccinated health premium sharing, or if you wish to recast them properly, discounts for the vaccinated, is anything like totalitarianism. That is incentivization.

I also do not grant that mandates are totalitarian by definition. They may be classifiable as medically paternalistic but ethically so. The counterargument when it comes to communicable diseases is the decision of those beholden to misinformation to impose risks on society and decide for a society whether a disease will be a larger threat than it must be, or even whether a disease must exist vs be eradicated.


----------



## mgr22 (Aug 26, 2021)

E tank said:


> I'm totalitarian with my kids sometimes...doesn't make me Joseph Stalin.


Nah, you're too nice to be Joseph Stalin. As for being totalitarian, I think you'd have to form a government first.


----------



## E tank (Aug 26, 2021)

mgr22 said:


> Nah, you're too nice to be Joseph Stalin. As for being totalitarian, I think you'd have to form a government first.


Would you mind speaking with my 17 year old? He might have a few words for you....😁


----------



## ffemt8978 (Aug 26, 2021)

Summit said:


> You could describe it as above too, but really this is more about "OK if you don't want to, you don't have to, but don't ask everyone else to pay for the risks you needlessly but voluntarily accept."
> 
> Remember there are other negatives for the employer as smokers need smoke breaks, may smell bad to customers and colleagues, be out sick, have higher health costs etc.
> 
> ...


So you're okay with employers mandating that employees quit smoking or lose their job, that insurance companies require the people they cover to quit smoking all in the name of public health.  You're okay with those same groups requiring people give up drinking alcohol because of the increased health care costs.  You're okay with employers and insurance companies mandating where that you bo longer eat sugar or meat because they are unhealthy.  This is the slippery slope that you're okay with everyone going diwn.


----------



## Summit (Aug 26, 2021)

ffemt8978 said:


> So you're okay with employers mandating that employees quit smoking or lose their job, that insurance companies require the people they cover to quit smoking all in the name of public health.  You're okay with those same groups requiring people give up drinking alcohol because of the increased health care costs.  You're okay with employers and insurance companies mandating where that you bo longer eat sugar or meat because they are unhealthy.  This is the slippery slope that you're okay with everyone going diwn.


I don't grant your slippery slope validity, but I point out that many employers have banned tobacco use by employees or attached high cost to insurance premiums. I am OK with voluntary choices resulting in higher premiums.

Are you OK with life insurance not covering BASE jumping and requiring a supplemental policy?


----------



## ffemt8978 (Aug 26, 2021)

Summit said:


> I don't grant your slippery slope validity, but I point out that many employers have banned tobacco use by employees or attached high cost to insurance premiums. I am OK with voluntary choices resulting in higher premiums.
> 
> Are you OK with life insurance not covering BASE jumping and requiring a supplemental policy?


I'm not okay with something like insurance being mandatory and then using that as a method to change people's behaviors.  If buying insurance was optional and not mandated I'd probably have a different viewpoint.

And thank you proving my point about the slippery slope by dismissing it with nothing more than you don't grant it's validity.  It is that attitude of simply dismissing a different viewpoint because you don't agree with it that does more harm than good in convincing people to get vaccinated.


----------



## PotatoMedic (Aug 26, 2021)

E tank said:


> Not sure what you mean by "already addressed in the cost of insurance". Different insurers have different agreements with different hospital systems. My 60 year old colleagues have a greater risk for needing coronary artery stenting than my 30 year old ones do, but the 30 year old friends are more likely (but not necessarily) to have children. And cost of the PCI dwarfs delivery of a child from positive hcg to vaginal delivery. Everyone is distributing their potential financial liability across a broad beam of subscribers and possible medical costs.
> 
> Besides, that isn't even my point. Singling out a particular patient group sets a terrible precedent and the unintentional consequences to a decision like this are troubling to me. An increase of $2400 a year to healthy patients? Because of something that not only has not happened but is unlikely to happened to them? I don't trust that, once that line had been crossed, the stage could be set for other ways to coerce behavior by powerful institutions...call me paranoid but I used to think China's "one child policy" was a far removed reality/ideology that was not relevant to me or my descendants, but this kind of mentality has me wondering....
> 
> If people aren't getting vaccinated, deal with the reasons why. That might be a difficult prospect,  but the perceived simplicity of going all totalitarian  on them will not go well.


We single out smokers, people who use alcohol, when I signed up for insurance on the exchange when I was between work it asked about high risk activities.  

So your point about singling out a specific patient population moot as it is already done.  There is a very obvious cost for not being vaccinated, they are just paying the risk that they are to insurance.  Its simple insurance underwriting.  

Also my risk of having a child is absolutely zero, yet I still pay for it.  I also pay for my older coworkers who may need a cardiac cath.  Insurance costs are the expected cost of the group.  I'd you have unvaccinated employees the expected cost goes up, and the company is choosing to make the high risk pay for that increased liability instead of spreading it out.


----------



## PotatoMedic (Aug 26, 2021)

ffemt8978 said:


> So you're okay with employers mandating that employees quit smoking or lose their job, that insurance companies require the people they cover to quit smoking all in the name of public health.  You're okay with those same groups requiring people give up drinking alcohol because of the increased health care costs.  You're okay with employers and insurance companies mandating where that you bo longer eat sugar or meat because they are unhealthy.  This is the slippery slope that you're okay with everyone going diwn.


They already discount insurance costs based on healthy habits.  If you don't smoke you save x amount of money.  If you don't drink you save y.  If you have good blood work you save z.  And now if you have the covid vaccine you save abc.


And employers are allowed to set the terms of employment.  So yes I am.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Aug 26, 2021)

PotatoMedic said:


> They already discount insurance costs based on healthy habits.  If you don't smoke you save x amount of money.  If you don't drink you save y.  If you have good blood work you save z.  And now if you have the covid vaccine you save abc.
> 
> 
> And employers are allowed to set the terms of employment.  So yes I am.


Just to clarify, you're okay with an insurance company who you are required by law to be a customer of, dictating your lifestyle choices?


----------



## mgr22 (Aug 26, 2021)

ffemt8978 said:


> Just to clarify, you're okay with an insurance company who you are required by law to be a customer of, dictating your lifestyle choices?


Wouldn't you still have the option to choose a lifestyle, but perhaps at a higher cost? And how much does getting vaccinated have to do with lifestyle? Isn't the argument against mandating vaccines mostly about people being told to do something they don't want to do? If so, where should governments and employers draw the line against telling citizens or employees to do things they don't want to do?


----------



## ffemt8978 (Aug 26, 2021)

mgr22 said:


> Wouldn't you still have the option to choose a lifestyle, but perhaps at a higher cost? And how much does getting vaccinated have to do with lifestyle? Isn't the argument against mandating vaccines mostly about people being told to do something they don't want to do? If so, where should governments and employers draw the line against telling citizens or employees to do things they don't want to do?


One of the issues is with how these mandates are coming about.  The government doesn't have the legal basis to order everyone to get vaccinated yet, so they are resorting to "encouraging" employers and insurance comapnies to do what they can not.  If the government were to get the legal basis to make vaccines mandatory, then it would be constrained by certain limits.  Going this route removes those constraints.  The ends don't always justify the means.



			https://www.usnews.com/news/health-news/articles/2021-08-23/biden-urges-private-companies-to-implement-covid-19-vaccine-requirements-following-pfizers-fda-approval
		


Some of the reasons against people getting vaccinated have been addressed rather well in this thread...others have simply been dismissed.


----------



## E tank (Aug 26, 2021)

PotatoMedic said:


> We single out smokers, people who use alcohol, when I signed up for insurance on the exchange when I was between work it asked about high risk activities.
> 
> So your point about singling out a specific patient population moot as it is already done.  There is a very obvious cost for not being vaccinated, they are just paying the risk that they are to insurance.  Its simple insurance underwriting.
> 
> Also my risk of having a child is absolutely zero, yet I still pay for it.  I also pay for my older coworkers who may need a cardiac cath.  Insurance costs are the expected cost of the group.  I'd you have unvaccinated employees the expected cost goes up, and the company is choosing to make the high risk pay for that increased liability instead of spreading it out.


We single out people with conditions or who actively *do* something like smoke. We don't single out people that *don't do* something in a negative way firstly because the list is never ending and secondly because what to single someone out for because they *don't do* something would vary as much as there are opinions on what people should be doing. 

Some things are worth paying the money for. I get that that is a hard sell, but like I said, the alternative is worse, IMO.


----------



## PotatoMedic (Aug 26, 2021)

ffemt8978 said:


> Just to clarify, you're okay with an insurance company who you are required by law to be a customer of, dictating your lifestyle choices?


They already do.  By adjusting my premiums based on the risk I am to them and the pool I am joining.  You make it seem like this is something new.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Aug 26, 2021)

PotatoMedic said:


> They already do.  By adjusting my premiums based on the risk I am to them and the pool I am joining.  You make it seem like this is something new.


No it's not new..just not sure people have looked at it from that viewpoint.


----------



## NomadicMedic (Aug 26, 2021)

Shouldn’t people who practice risky behaviors while driving, like speeding or reckless driving, pay a higher insurance premium?

it’s the exact same thing. The insurance premium isn’t based on the fact that you broke the law, it’s based on the fact that you are more prone to an accident and the insurance company would be more prone to having to pay out on your behalf.


----------



## Summit (Aug 26, 2021)

E tank said:


> We single out people with conditions or who actively *do* something like smoke. We don't single out people that *don't do* something in a negative way firstly because the list is never ending and secondly because what to single someone out for because they *don't do* something would vary as much as there are opinions on what people should be doing.


We single out people who don't wear shoes and don't wash their hands with respect to entering and working in restaurants. We also single out people who don't get vaccinated for measles during measles outbreaks. When it comes communicable disease, no man is an island.


----------



## SandpitMedic (Aug 29, 2021)

initial study 






						Deaths in Children and Young People in England following SARS-CoV-2 infection during the first pandemic year: a national study using linked mandatory child death reporting data
					

BackgroundDeaths in children and young people (CYP) following SARS-CoV-2 infection are rare. Quantifying the risk of mortality is challenging because of high relative prevalence of asymptomatic and non-specific disease manifestations. Therefore, it is important to differentiate...




					www.researchsquare.com


----------



## SandpitMedic (Aug 29, 2021)

SandpitMedic said:


> initial study
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Study is out of the UK on incidence of deaths of children and young people. this data was collected from the 1st year of the Pandemic. 
99.995% survived.

Limitations to this study are it doesn’t cover delta or other variants, and (as many of you will argue) long term sequela.

Still, with data like this, I would be hesitant giving my child the vaccine. Lucky for me I don’t have to.


----------



## Summit (Aug 29, 2021)

SandpitMedic said:


> Study is out of the UK on incidence of deaths of children and young people. this data was collected from the 1st year of the Pandemic.
> 99.995% survived.
> 
> Limitations to this study are it doesn’t cover delta or other variants, and (as many of you will argue) long term sequela.
> ...


1 in 20K CYP died of COVID in their dataset. The vaccine death rate is <<1 in 1M. This tracks with other complications which are vastly more common in cases of COVID illness than from vaccination. This is before considering the apparent (see below) increased virulence of Delta.

The vaccine reduces risk of infection, transmission, illness, hospitalization, long term sequelae, and death from COVID and these beneficial reductions are much greater than the risk of the vaccine.

I'd note that preprint uses some very funny math for risk calculations based on incidence vs whole population instead of in affected population, note that is is the same BS math that COVID deniers were using early in the pandemic to say that "99.999% of people survive COVID" (because they took the whole population as the denominator and very few had gotten COVID).

*At face value this preprint study shows what I have been saying all through this thread: even in the lowest COVID risk group, the vaccine is still safer than the disease risk and the best bet for the individual as well as society.*

Here are some other studies to read:

_Largest Real-World Pfizer Safety Study to Date shows excellent safety and that complications rates in vaccinated group are lower than in unvaccinated who get COVID._








						Largest real-world study of COVID-19 vaccine safety published
					

The Clalit Research Institute, in collaboration with researchers from Harvard University, analyzed one of the world's largest integrated health record databases to examine the safety of the Pfizer/BioNTech BNT162B2 vaccine against COVID-19. The study provides the largest peer-reviewed evaluation...




					medicalxpress.com
				





			https://www.nejm.org/doi/10.1056/NEJMoa2110475
		


_MMWR a classroom Delta outbreak with a 50% attack rate on the students from an unvaxxed infected teacher:_








						Outbreak Associated with SARS-CoV-2 B.1.617.2 (Delta)...
					

COVID-19 outbreak associated with an unvaccinated infected teacher in an elementary school from May–June 2021 in Marin County, California.




					www.cdc.gov
				




_6mo post infection 1 in 6 COVID survivors have a new neuro/psych dx:_
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanpsy/article/PIIS2215-0366(21)00084-5/fulltext

_Delta appears to be more virulent (higher hospitalization risk):_
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3099(21)00475-8/fulltext


----------



## SandpitMedic (Aug 29, 2021)

Summit said:


> 1 in 20K CYP died of COVID in their dataset. The vaccine death rate is <<1 in 1M. This tracks with other complications which are vastly more common in cases of COVID illness than from vaccination. This is before considering the apparent (see below) increased virulence of Delta.
> 
> The vaccine reduces risk of infection, transmission, illness, hospitalization, long term sequelae, and death from COVID and these beneficial reductions are much greater than the risk of the vaccine.
> 
> ...


Good studies but the 1:20k CYP deaths appears to be incorrectly interpreted  
“The mortality rate in CYP who died of SARS-CoV-2 was 0·2 per 100,000”

It does also say 5:100k (or 1:20k as you said) but that was people dying with C19 as opposed to _of_ C19

Either way- delta is far more virulent and there is not much new data.

Also, you are set in “camp mandatory vaccine” for all, apparently including children once the gov gives the green light. That’s okay. You can have whatever opinion you want, I do not expect you to change your mind.

I am not in that camp. Even with my experiences with patients and having a vaccine. I am not yet convinced it is safe or even necessary in children. They are the absolute lowest risk category. We are always one mutation away from a virus wiping out the children and us, but we are not there yet. 
I would like to see more of a safety profile before giving the okay to vaccinate the CYP.


----------



## SandpitMedic (Aug 29, 2021)

Summit said:


> _Largest Real-World Pfizer Safety Study to Date shows excellent safety and that complications rates in vaccinated group are lower than in unvaccinated who get COVID._
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Good info there. Thanks


----------



## Summit (Aug 29, 2021)

SandpitMedic said:


> Good studies but the 1:20k CYP deaths appears to be incorrectly interpreted
> “The mortality rate in CYP who died of SARS-CoV-2 was 0·2 per 100,000”
> 
> It does also say 5:100k (or 1:20k as you said) but that was people dying with C19 as opposed to _of_ C19


The 0.2 per 100K is deaths (due TO COVID) vs total population (1 in 2M) the numerator (25) is the exact as the 5 per 100K stat. The denominator for 5 per 100K is dead d/t (not _with_) COVID over diagnosed. The 0.2 per 100K is dead over total population. That is the number I was calling out as meaningless at best because most people haven't had COVID-19 and their study time was Mar 2020-Feb 2021. 

*ETA *That being said, COVID prevalence in CYP mortality appears undersized vs total seroprevelenence by a factor of 2-3 to 1 which of course tracks our knowledge of COVID being less severe in CYP but also here that it is relatively less severe than other causes and you actually do need to wonder about "of vs with," which is why the authors examined this exact thing (there's an algorithm in the study that explains how they did this) and they came up with at least 41% of those who died with COVID (61), died of COVID (25), with the rate being higher the older the patient was.

That metric is how you would examine an endemic disease for comparison across time to determine risk. That works pretty well for disease (infectious or not) with minimally/slowly changing incidence, morbidity and mortality.

It is nonsense for a pandemic with a dynamic novel virus in a largely naïve population when the virus is changing its virulence and R0 over timeframes of months and thus frequently goes exponential with curves that look like any Reed Frost until mitigating factors kick in.

Knowing when to use what method of analysis is basic epidemiology which gives me pause in examining this preprint, although I shouldn't impart intent on the investigators as it may merely be a statistic of interest, but really relevance of statistical points is something of great importance.

With the high R0 of Delta the vast majority, probably 70% or much higher, of unvaccinated folks will get COVID if they have not already had it. Given the discussion about vaccine these days revolves almost entirely around the individual's personal decision of whether or not they should get vaccinated, the question is most obviously NOT what is my risk based on a retrospective snapshot of the whole population, but what is my personal risk going forward: risk from vaccine and risk from disease.

Let me put it a different way: if there was incredibly rare brain cancer with 100% mortality for those who got it but it only killed 330 people a year in the US, the rate is 1 in 1 million because it is rare in incidence. Both numbers are interesting. But COVID-19 is something that almost everyone who isn't vaccinate or already recovered is going to get. So for those people, looking at the mortality rate across the whole population in a given timeframe is not useful to inform risk decisions for an individual or subpopulation looking forward.

Nobody is giving vaccine AE rates based on total population 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





 They give those rates for the vaccinated population only. AE rates are lower than COVID complication rates, even in low risk groups like CYP.



SandpitMedic said:


> Also, you are set in “camp mandatory vaccine” for all, apparently including children once the gov gives the green light. That’s okay. You can have whatever opinion you want, I do not expect you to change your mind.


That is NOT what I said at all in my post. I made a risk-benefit argument that an individual could use to make a voluntary decision for themselves or their child who is low risk because the vaccine is low risk because the available data shows disease to be both inevitable and higher risk than vaccine. You counter that you don't think there is enough data to back my position. Thus I ask you what would be sufficient?


----------



## EpiEMS (Aug 29, 2021)

SandpitMedic said:


> Still, with data like this, I would be hesitant giving my child the vaccine. Lucky for me I don’t have to.


Is death the only outcome metric of relevance?
Hospitalization? Avoidance of morbidity?


----------



## SandpitMedic (Aug 29, 2021)

Great analysis @Summit. You are correct about the shifting dynamics and data capturing and aggregation.

As to what would be sufficient… I can’t answer that at this time. I just know that I wouldn’t vaccinate my toddler, even if the FDA said go ahead. So long as the CFR remains minuscule in CYP, and the vaccine does not _prevent _infection I just can’t see myself or many other parents I know going forward with it.

Just for perspective, if we all thought the vaccine/no-vaccine debates were hot with regard to adults… just wait until they try to start mandating the kids. Fauci is already starting to say it.

Even school mask mandates are creating a subculture of like minded folks hiring teachers who quit or disagree with mandates to teach neighboring kids in homes, with parents pooling money to pay their salary. Force vaccines for school, which is hypothetical at this point but definitely probable down the line, and you’re gonna see some fierce blowback.


----------



## SandpitMedic (Aug 29, 2021)

EpiEMS said:


> Is death the only outcome metric of relevance?
> Hospitalization? Avoidance of morbidity?


Yes. Nearly 100% of young children do just fine to date.
If we see a variant that changes that I would reconsider. Exactly as I did wrt my own vaccination.


----------



## SandpitMedic (Aug 29, 2021)

__





						Science | AAAS
					






					www.sciencemag.org
				




We have not touched on natural immunity. Should one be mandated who has had natural COVID?


----------



## Summit (Aug 29, 2021)

SandpitMedic said:


> __
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I don't think I'd agree with the article titular claim of "much greater" because it depends on a lot of variables (what vaccines on what schedule when) and seems to vary with variants (in play and original exposure). 

But I definitely think that the evidence is strong enough to consider documented previous infection as equal to being fully vaccinated. How could you not and still consider J&Jx1 fully vaccinated.

I think there is good evidence to support 1 dose of mRNA vaccine as a good booster for previous infections that are at least 90 days past.

We should never test people who have had a documented infection in the last 90 days, not even for screening, unless there is a very good reason to suspect reinfection like diagnostic symptoms and/or immunocompromise. Otherwise you are more likely to pick up remaining RNA fragments of the previous infection than a true reinfection.


----------



## SandpitMedic (Aug 29, 2021)

Summit said:


> I don't think I'd agree with the article titular claim of "much greater" because it depends on a lot of variables (what vaccines on what schedule when) and seems to vary with variants (in play and original exposure).
> 
> But I definitely think that the evidence is strong enough to consider documented previous infection as equal to being fully vaccinated. How could you not and still consider J&Jx1 fully vaccinated.
> 
> ...


We do not retest within 90 days per CDC. People will test positive up to that (and possibly over) due to viral particle remnants.

If I suspect reinfection within that window I am to consult with ID, especially in high risk patients.

I know you know that, but others reading may not be familiar with the guidelines.

I believe that natural immunity is far superior to vaccination. There are outliers among us, but for most wild type viral pathogens this is the case. For how long, well, there are in going studies to figure that out.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Aug 30, 2021)

Mother refuses to get COVID shot, so judge strips her of visitation rights [Updated]
					

Father did not raise the issue but supports judge's ruling.




					arstechnica.com
				




Are we to the point that your vaccination status determines if you can visit your child?


----------



## EpiEMS (Aug 30, 2021)

SandpitMedic said:


> Yes. Nearly 100% of young children do just fine to date.
> If we see a variant that changes that I would reconsider. Exactly as I did wrt my own vaccination.



With appreciation for that as a fact, I do worry about long COVID & probably more importantly that children can spread / contribute to variant generation. 

Shouldn’t children be vaccinated for broader public health benefits?


----------



## VentMonkey (Aug 30, 2021)

Our entire family had Covid last November. All but our two youngest have been vaccinated.

Our oldest (14) had her vaxx in July, her reaction was mild to moderate compared with her lack of symptoms from the actual virus last year.

If approved, and my wife and receive a blessing from the good doc (i.e., their pediatrician), we’re all in favor of vaccines for the little’s as well.

I do not disagree that natural immunity is absolutely important, however, far superior having seen 3 children suffer through multiple infections over the years?…well, I’d beg to differ.

I think what it boils down to for my wife and I, is why have them needlessly unvaccinated if proven equally effective and safe. It seems kind of selfish, IMHO.


----------



## DrParasite (Aug 30, 2021)

ffemt8978 said:


> Mother refuses to get COVID shot, so judge strips her of visitation rights [Updated]
> 
> 
> Father did not raise the issue but supports judge's ruling.
> ...


As much as I support the Judge attempting to protect the child, I think this is a massive overreach of the judge's authority, especially since the mothers doctor recommended that she not get the shot.  And it looks like the judge saw the error of his ways, and vacated his previous order... and I am very glad to see that he did









						Chicago judge reverses decision, will allow unvaccinated mom to see her son after all
					

Cook County Judge James Shapiro told Rebecca Firlit in early August she would not be allowed to see her 11-year-old son because she refuses to get vaccinated against COVID-19.




					www.fox32chicago.com


----------



## ffemt8978 (Aug 30, 2021)

DrParasite said:


> As much as I support the Judge attempting to protect the child, I think this is a massive overreach of the judge's authority, especially since the mothers doctor recommended that she not get the shot.  And it looks like the judge saw the error of his ways, and vacated his previous order... and I am very glad to see that he did
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Still concerns me that a judge decided to make vaccination status an issue all on his own, since the father did not bring up the issue first.


----------



## Summit (Aug 31, 2021)

SandpitMedic said:


> I believe that natural immunity is far superior to vaccination. There are outliers among us, but for most wild type viral pathogens this is the case. For how long, well, there are in going studies to figure that out.


Immunity from infection is not "far superior" to mRNA vaccination and there is ample evidence to show that natural infection is generally nonsuperior and likely inferior, and there are even studies demonstrating why (immune overfocus on poor epitopes like overgeneration of anti-N antibodies and undergeneration of anti-S over time). I believe that infection and recovery should be recognized as fully vaccinated immunity so long as we are continuing to counting non-mRNA and non-boostered individuals as fully vaccinated.

A new very large UK study with over 300K people including a randomization component involving regular testing to determine both vaccine immunity and natural immunity during Delta indicates vaccine immunity performs better than natural immunity. While this and other studies show a small reduction in vaccine efficacy against Delta compared to Alpha, the overall numbers are still good.

Note BNT162b2 is mRNA Pfizer. ChAdOx1 is Astrazeneca viral vector vaccine which is known to be less effective and not used in the US and many other countries.



			https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.08.18.21262237v1.full.pdf


----------



## Seirende (Sep 2, 2021)

On a positive note, my pretend grandma, who is very conservative and adamantly was not going to get the shot, just told me that tomorrow is two weeks since she had the J&J. Apparently her family was concerned so she finally gave in and did it for them. We're having coffee on Saturday and I'm finally going to be able to give her a big hug


----------



## Fezman92 (Sep 5, 2021)

So the guy I’m working with today is on the fence about the vaccine because of the mRNA stuff and he’s one of those always question everything guys. He does plan on getting it down the road. Also he thinks that everyone is mandating it which is taking away personal choice. He also claims that he’s had COVID twice and didn’t need to go to the hospital.


----------



## mgr22 (Sep 5, 2021)

Fezman92 said:


> So the guy I’m working with today is on the fence about the vaccine because of the mRNA stuff and he’s one of those always question everything guys. He does plan on getting it down the road. Also he thinks that everyone is mandating it which is taking away personal choice. He also claims that he’s had COVID twice and didn’t need to go to the hospital.


I've noticed two broad categories of people who haven't been vaccinated: those concerned with dangers or inadequate potency of the vaccine, and those who wish to emphasize their right not to be vaccinated. Of course, I don't know the guy you're working with, but from what you've said, it sounds to me like he's in the latter group. If I were riding with him and we had nothing better to talk about, I'd probably tell him that I think choosing when to exercise my rights is more important than having them.


----------



## E tank (Sep 5, 2021)

The time is approaching very quickly when the only folks sick enough to be hospitalized will be the unvaccinated. Then that's on them. I'll take care of them and I won't lay some trip on them either. But they'll be the only ones. 

And if where I am is any indication, we won't need to open any temporary ICU's for them either 'cause they won't need them or enough of them will die before we come too close to needing more CC beds. We do now, but we won't then. 

I really don't care if some healthy adult doesn't want the vaccine. They'll get sick or they won't. If they don't want to get sick, they'll get it.  Just wildcatting here but the resolution is relatively  near IMHO...


----------



## CCCSD (Sep 5, 2021)

ffemt8978 said:


> Still concerns me that a judge decided to make vaccination status an issue all on his own, since the father did not bring up the issue first.


The Family Court Judge must decide on the safety of the Child.


----------



## cruiseforever (Sep 13, 2021)

Tested positive today.  8 months to the date from my second shot.  Been having body aches, low grade temp, runny nose.   Hoping this is as bad as it gets.


----------



## mgr22 (Sep 13, 2021)

cruiseforever said:


> Tested positive today.  8 months to the date from my second shot.  Been having body aches, low grade temp, runny nose.   Hoping this is as bad as it gets.


I'm still seeing lots of debate among docs about the need for a booster. I wonder what the protocols will be for folks like you who had breakthrough infections. Booster or not, you could be one of the most immune people on the planet by the time you're feeling better.


----------



## DrParasite (Sep 14, 2021)

mgr22 said:


> I'm still seeing lots of debate among docs about the need for a booster. I wonder what the protocols will be for folks like you who had breakthrough infections. Booster or not, you could be one of the most immune people on the planet by the time you're feeling better.











						COVID-19 vaccine boosters not widely needed, top FDA and WHO scientists say
					

Additional COVID-19 vaccine booster shots are not needed for the general population, leading scientists including two departing senior U.S. Food and Drug Administration officials and several from the World Health Organization (WHO) said in an article published in a medical journal on Monday.




					www.reuters.com


----------



## StCEMT (Sep 15, 2021)

E tank said:


> The time is approaching very quickly when the only folks sick enough to be hospitalized will be the unvaccinated. Then that's on them. I'll take care of them and I won't lay some trip on them either. But they'll be the only ones.
> 
> And if where I am is any indication, we won't need to open any temporary ICU's for them either 'cause they won't need them or enough of them will die before we come too close to needing more CC beds. We do now, but we won't then.
> 
> I really don't care if some healthy adult doesn't want the vaccine. They'll get sick or they won't. If they don't want to get sick, they'll get it.  Just wildcatting here but the resolution is relatively  near IMHO...


I just wish the demands on the system and effects on everyone else weren't more wide spread. I'm all for letting people make stupid decisions that costs their own life if they're adamant. I don't like when they make stupid decisions that cost someone else's. The way hospital beds are going lately, it's getting to the point that non-COVID patients are definitely feeling the effects of the strain.


----------



## Aprz (Sep 15, 2021)

DrParasite said:


> COVID-19 vaccine boosters not widely needed, top FDA and WHO scientists say
> 
> 
> Additional COVID-19 vaccine booster shots are not needed for the general population, leading scientists including two departing senior U.S. Food and Drug Administration officials and several from the World Health Organization (WHO) said in an article published in a medical journal on Monday.
> ...


Isn't the reason the booster isn't supported is because they want a larger supply to be available for people around the world who haven't gotten their first shot yet? That the goal is now to protect against severe disease rather than protection from getting COVID 19 or breakthrough infection? Personally, I am confused about the supply issue. Are people not getting the shot around the world because of a supply issue or because they are choosing not to get the shot? Seems like even outside of the US people are not thrilled about the available vaccines.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Sep 16, 2021)

Hospital staff must swear off Tylenol, Tums to get religious vaccine exemption
					

Hospital CEO aims to educate staff on the full scope of what they're claiming.




					arstechnica.com
				




A hospital is now requiring employees to swear they will not use a list of OTC meds in order to qualify for religious vaccine exemption.

Is this the road we want employers to go down?


----------



## mgr22 (Sep 16, 2021)

ffemt8978 said:


> Hospital staff must swear off Tylenol, Tums to get religious vaccine exemption
> 
> 
> Hospital CEO aims to educate staff on the full scope of what they're claiming.
> ...


Sounds like bad faith on both sides.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Sep 16, 2021)

mgr22 said:


> Sounds like bad faith on both sides.


It does, but ia it really up to your employer to determine how strictly you follow your religious beliefs?


----------



## mgr22 (Sep 16, 2021)

ffemt8978 said:


> It does, but ia it really up to your employer to determine how strictly you follow your religious beliefs?


No, but I suspect some of the religious objections described in the piece are contrived; hence, the bad faith on both sides.

I've administered a few thousand optional vaccine doses (not COVID). Not once was I asked by a potential vaccine recipient how the vaccine was made; nor were there any concerns expressed about the possibility of religious conflicts. I'm just not convinced that 100% of the employees citing religious objections are sincere about that.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Sep 16, 2021)

mgr22 said:


> No, but I suspect some of the religious objections described in the piece are contrived; hence, the bad faith on both sides.
> 
> I've administered a few thousand optional vaccine doses (not COVID). Not once was I asked by a potential vaccine recipient how the vaccine was made; nor were there any concerns expressed about the possibility of religious conflicts. I'm just not convinced that 100% of the employees citing religious objections are sincere about that.


I'm not disagreeing with you about the bad faith part, I'm just questioning if we want the employers to make that determination.


----------



## mgr22 (Sep 16, 2021)

ffemt8978 said:


> I'm not disagreeing with you about the bad faith part, I'm just questioning if we want the employers to make that determination.


No, I'm not comfortable with employers testing the validity of employees' religious beliefs.


----------



## DrParasite (Sep 16, 2021)

mgr22 said:


> No, I'm not comfortable with employers testing the validity of employees' religious beliefs.


to plays devil's advocate on this topic alone...  why not?

if a person is claiming they can't take the vaccine based on religious grounds, shouldn't they have no issues swearing that they are refusing to take any other medications that would fall under the same category?  If it is a true religious issue, they might not even be aware that the other drugs are made the same way, and be grateful for their employer for advising them of this conflict, so they can understand how common it is, and how they should be avoiding other medication too.  

if it's truly a religious reason, then why would anyone have an issue standing up for their religious beliefs?

and, for the record, and for any who missed my first line, I do think that this is a huge overreach by the employer, and I would **** on the CEO's desk before I told my employer I was going to swear off anything as a condition of getting a religious exemption


----------



## mgr22 (Sep 16, 2021)

DrParasite said:


> to plays devil's advocate on this topic alone...  why not?
> 
> if a person is claiming they can't take the vaccine based on religious grounds, shouldn't they have no issues swearing that they are refusing to take any other medications that would fall under the same category?  If it is a true religious issue, they might not even be aware that the other drugs are made the same way, and be grateful for their employer for advising them of this conflict, so they can understand how common it is, and how they should be avoiding other medication too.
> 
> ...


The logic and consistency you're looking for would be nice to have. I just don't think religion lends itself to that. And even if COVID were not involved, I wouldn't be comfortable having my employer rule on the sincerity of my beliefs.

In my opinion, the debates over whether or not to get vaccinated and whether or not to require others to get vaccinated have less to do with religion than with people not wanting to be told what to do. I wish we could simply focus on the much greater probability of death or disability from COVID than from the vaccine, but that ship has sailed. Our society seems to be moving away from the shared concern for public health I grew up with. Perhaps the problem is marketing.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Sep 16, 2021)

DrParasite said:


> to plays devil's advocate on this topic alone...  why not?
> 
> if a person is claiming they can't take the vaccine based on religious grounds, shouldn't they have no issues swearing that they are refusing to take any other medications that would fall under the same category?  If it is a true religious issue, they might not even be aware that the other drugs are made the same way, and be grateful for their employer for advising them of this conflict, so they can understand how common it is, and how they should be avoiding other medication too.
> 
> ...


Continuing with the devil's advocate...

Each person's religious belief is a deeply personal and personalized viewpoint based upon the combination of the teachings of their religion, their own interpretation of those teachings, and how they implement and balance the two into their lives.  Some people may find it acceptable to take one of these meds orally but object to receiving them via injection. (As medical professionals we are aware of the similarities and differences between those two routes of administration, but that is beside the point when dealing with a person's personal religious beliefs).

As to the circumstances of this particular case, it is possible that some of these employees were willing to overlook the connection to the other drugs on the list, but felt being mandated to get a new vaccine was crossing the line.  Some may feel that the combination of fetal cell and mRNA is taboo.  Others may view it simply as a way to get out of getting vaccinated.

Unless the hospital is going to make every employee swear or affirm their viewpoints on the vaccine, there is the possibility of a religious discrimination case because a small group is being singled out for a separate, distinct action that others are not simply because of their religious beliefs.  Whether or not somebody will be willing to take it to court, much less win, is unknown.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Sep 16, 2021)

How to Handle an Employee's Request for a Medical or Religious Accommodation to a Vaccine Requirement
					

Understand how to evaluate and respond to an employee's request for reasonable accommodation to be exempt from vaccination requirements.




					www.shrm.org
				




Good primer on ADA and religious exemptions in the workplace

And here is the info from the EEOC:




__





						What You Should Know About COVID-19 and the ADA, the Rehabilitation Act, and Other EEO Laws
					

INTRODUCTION Technical Assistance Questions and Answers - Updated on July 12, 2022.




					www.eeoc.gov
				




Edit: reading through the EEOC guidelines, I can certainly see a case being made that by requiring an employee to swear off other meds: a) the employer does not have the reasonable objective criteria to doubt the "sincerely held belief" standard and is trying to create it instead; b) the employer is not addressing each individual concern as required and is instead responding with a group approach; c) the employer has not applied the reasonable accommodation standard on an individual basis as required.


----------



## Summit (Sep 16, 2021)

The expectation that a religious belief be sincerely held if it is being used as a justification for an exemption from rules of any kinds is a totally reasonable expectation.

Remember when the rules changed to "only unvaccinated need to wear masks" and the apparent vaccination rates based on mask usage suddenly rose to 99%? That is why employers are not trusting. Non-vaccinators as a group has already proven that they will not follow rules and so the choice is trust but verify, or give up all pretense of any expectation of sincere compliance.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Sep 16, 2021)

Summit said:


> The expectation that a religious belief be sincerely held if it is being used as a justification for an exemption from rules of any kinds is a totally reasonable expectation.
> 
> Remember when the rules changed to "only unvaccinated need to wear masks" and the apparent vaccination rates based on mask usage suddenly rose to 99%? That is why employers are not trusting. Non-vaccinators as a group has already proven that they will not follow rules and so the choice is trust but verify, or give up all pretense of any expectation of sincere compliance.


Curious how an employer could verify a religious belief without running afoul of Title VII.  Any ideas?


----------



## Carlos Danger (Sep 17, 2021)

Summit said:


> The expectation that a religious belief be sincerely held if it is being used as a justification for an exemption from rules of any kinds is a totally reasonable expectation.
> 
> Remember when the rules changed to "only unvaccinated need to wear masks" and the apparent vaccination rates based on mask usage suddenly rose to 99%? That is why employers are not trusting. Non-vaccinators as a group has already proven that they will not follow rules and so the choice is trust but verify, or give up all pretense of any expectation of sincere compliance.


If you want people to respect the rules, you have to make the rules respectable. Intrusions on the autonomy of individuals, especially in such a highly personal way as this, has probably never garnered a lot of cooperation.


----------



## StCEMT (Sep 17, 2021)

If you've got a long file full of other vaccines that someone has gotten though, it doesn't seem unreasonable as an employer to call out their claim. I know someone who is consistent and has had absolutely none. But if someone has a whole list and now it's against their beliefs, then that's pretty clearly them taking the easy way out.


----------



## mgr22 (Sep 17, 2021)

StCEMT said:


> If you've got a long file full of other vaccines that someone has gotten though, it doesn't seem unreasonable as an employer to call out their claim. I know someone who is consistent and has had absolutely none. But if someone has a whole list and now it's against their beliefs, then that's pretty clearly them taking the easy way out.


Or their beliefs have changed. Or they have new beliefs.

I agree it's a way to take advantage of the situation, but it would be hard to combat that with an algorithm.


----------



## Fezman92 (Sep 17, 2021)

What’s to prevent someone from lying? Saying that they won’t take those meds but take them anyway.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Sep 17, 2021)

Fezman92 said:


> What’s to prevent someone from lying? Saying that they won’t take those meds but take them anyway.


The possibility that the meds are caught on either an employment random drug screen or during a medical test, at which point the employer could fire them for breaking their promise?


----------



## ffemt8978 (Sep 18, 2021)

US panel backs COVID-19 boosters only for seniors, high-risk
					

WASHINGTON (AP) — Dealing the White House a stinging setback, a government advisory panel overwhelmingly rejected a plan Friday to give Pfizer COVID-19 booster shots across the board, and instead endorsed the extra vaccine dose only for those who are 65 or older or run a high risk of severe disease.




					apnews.com
				




So much for boosters for everyone...this plan seems like a more realistic approach.


----------



## Summit (Sep 18, 2021)

Not at all "so much for that idea" but much more of a "please provide sufficient safety evidence for the population in question..."
Certain groups: risk benefit confirmed
Whole population: needs more data

This is a reasonable approach IMHO: Boost high risk groups and do more studies.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Sep 18, 2021)

If this administration is going to defer to the experts like they said they would, then it will be pretty difficult to overcome this setback.


----------



## StCEMT (Sep 19, 2021)

Summit said:


> Not at all "so much for that idea" but much more of a "please provide sufficient safety evidence for the population in question..."
> Certain groups: risk benefit confirmed
> Whole population: needs more data
> 
> This is a reasonable approach IMHO: Boost high risk groups and do more studies.


Unfortunately this is still gonna be viewed as a "well if the vaccine works, why is this necessary?"


----------



## Summit (Sep 19, 2021)

StCEMT said:


> Unfortunately this is still gonna be viewed as a "well if the vaccine works, why is this necessary?"


One could observe that HepB or HPV vaccines need 3 doses, or tdap needs decadal boosts... But the hesitant are not interested in that and the government is poor at best when it comes to vaccine messaging.


----------



## Summit (Sep 19, 2021)

Summit said:


> One could observe that HepB or HPV vaccines need 3 doses, or tdap needs decadal boosts... But the hesitant are not interested in that and the government is poor at best when it comes to vaccine messaging.


Meant to add Hib and Polio to that list but the edit didn't save


----------



## Kavsuvb (Sep 20, 2021)

Here's why some people in the FED's are hesitant about the COVID Vaccine
PART 1: Federal Govt HHS Whistleblower Goes Public With Secret Recordings "Vaccine is Full of Sh*t"​


----------



## FiremanMike (Sep 21, 2021)

There's political and personal reasons have concerns or reservations, but at this point anyone who is holding onto the notion that "the vaccine is full of ****" or "covid isn't that dangerous" is really making a strenuous effort to be an idiot.

There's really no nicer way to say that.


----------



## DrParasite (Sep 21, 2021)

FiremanMike said:


> There's political and personal reasons have concerns or reservations, but at this point anyone who is holding onto the notion that "the vaccine is full of ****" or "covid isn't that dangerous" is really making a strenuous effort to be an idiot.
> 
> There's really no nicer way to say that.


hold on... no one is saying covid isn't dangerous; what many (including myself) are saying is covid isn't dangerous _to me_.

No one is disputing that covid is very dangerous to the elderly.  or the immunocompromised. or those with multiple comorbidities 

I, as a moderately healthy 30something, am at low risk of dying from covid.  my son, who is 4, is an even lower risk.  That doesn't mean it can't or won't happen (and I do hope it doesn't, and read in the news that kids and young people have died from the disease), but I refuse to live in fear and lock myself in my house for the next two years over something that, based on the numbers, isn't very dangerous (ie, life-threatening) to me.  You can imply that I'm an idiot all you, but that conclusion is in line with the scientific data as reported by the CDC.





__





						Provisional COVID-19 Deaths by Sex and Age | Data | Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
					






					data.cdc.gov
				












						COVID-19 deaths by age U.S. 2022 | Statista
					

Between the beginning of January 2020 and September 7, 2022, of the 1,044,760 deaths caused by COVID-19 in the United States, around 272,599 had occurred among those aged 85 years and older.




					www.statista.com
				




I have known several people who caught covid (healthcare workers pre-vaccination) and are now back to work.  Some were only mildly symptomatic, but most agreed that it sucked.  No one died, but I won't deny that many elderly people did die in nursing homes in NJ and NY (see my previous statement about who COVID is dangerous to).

Implying that a person is an idiot because of their personal or political beliefs is not a good way to persuade someone to agree with you, especially when their beliefs are more in line with the scientific data than yours are.

As for the anti-vaxxers, and those who think that the vaccine is just a way for bill gates to put a microchip in you... I can't help you there, they are crazy science deniers and are a form of natural selection.


----------



## FiremanMike (Sep 21, 2021)

DrParasite said:


> hold on... no one is saying covid isn't dangerous; what many (including myself) are saying is covid isn't dangerous _to me_.
> 
> No one is disputing that covid is very dangerous to the elderly.  or the immunocompromised. or those with multiple comorbidities
> 
> ...


I was referencing the post above mine, as well as about 10% of my Facebook feed..

Wasn’t attacking you..


----------



## DrParasite (Sep 21, 2021)

I understand that wasn't your intent, but if you re-read your post, you were attacking people who don't agree with you.

And while Project Veritas is one of the less reliable sources of information on the internet (similar to MSNBC and to a lesser extent CNN) due to their selective editing and manipulation of facts, they do have a following and are sometimes correct, just like all news sources of questionable reputation





Unfortunately, the news media and social media on both sides is manipulating the data, so much if what the public hears is half truths, fear mongered, and agenda driven, and not always based on factual evidence.  and the messaging from the federal government, and from the leaders of the federal health agencies, seems to change based on the whim of the administration, which isn't helping the situation.


----------



## FiremanMike (Sep 21, 2021)

DrParasite said:


> I understand that wasn't your intent, but if you re-read your post, you were attacking people who don't agree with you.
> 
> And while Project Veritas is one of the less reliable sources of information on the internet (similar to MSNBC and to a lesser extent CNN) due to their selective editing and manipulation of facts, they do have a following and are sometimes correct, just like all news sources of questionable reputation
> 
> ...


I actually started my statement off by saying reservations and questions are understandable, but I maintain that we're nearly 2 years in and anyone who continues to insist that this is essentially a hoax is an idiot.


----------



## Kevinf (Sep 21, 2021)

Maybe we should be implying that refusing a free, safe, effective vaccine to control an extremely virulent plague is idiotic. Vaccinations are required for many things, but for some reason this particular vaccine is a step too far versus the Measles, Mumps, Rubella, Varicella, Hepatitis, Tetanus, Diphtheria, Pertussis, and Influenza vaccines. Not to mention the Smallpox and Polio vaccines that we don't even need to worry about anymore.

Also that masking and social distancing turned out to be EXTREMELY effective at reducing the spread of diseases such as Covid and Influenza, so a vaccinated society that masks up has an excellent chance of returning to normal and not doing that is a statement that you are ok with the pandemic becoming endemic and threatening others in society that aren't as fortunate as you. I'd really prefer not to see Covid resurgences every year and for my older family members to have a chance.

But muh freedumb! They can't force me to get a free, safe, effective vaccine! This is AMERICA and I have RIGHTS!


----------



## ffemt8978 (Sep 21, 2021)

FiremanMike said:


> I actually started my statement off by saying reservations and questions are understandable, but I maintain that we're nearly 2 years in and anyone who continues to insist that this is essentially a hoax is an idiot.


Great tactic to convince people to get vaccinated...

Two years in of experts and governments constantly changing their messages about the severity of the disease, about flattening the curve, about herd immunity,  about how vaccines would mean the return to normal life.  Two years into everyone on the planet having their lives turned upside down.  

There are idiots on both sides of this issue.  Your opinion that anyone who thinks this is a hoax is an idiot is just as valid as those who think that everyone who believes every word from experts or governments is an idiot given the historical track record.   Calling them names, no matter how much you feel they deserve it, does nothing to resolve the problems.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Sep 21, 2021)

Kevinf said:


> Maybe we should be implying that refusing a free, safe, effective vaccine to control an extremely virulent plague is idiotic. Vaccinations are required for many things, but for some reason this particular vaccine is a step too far versus the Measles, Mumps, Rubella, Varicella, Hepatitis, Tetanus, Diphtheria, Pertussis, and Influenza vaccines. Not to mention the Smallpox and Polio vaccines that we don't even need to worry about anymore.
> 
> Also that masking and social distancing turned out to be EXTREMELY effective at reducing the spread of diseases such as Covid and Influenza, so a vaccinated society that masks up has an excellent chance of returning to normal and not doing that is a statement that you are ok with the pandemic becoming endemic and threatening others in society that aren't as fortunate as you. I'd really prefer not to see Covid resurgences every year and for my older family members to have a chance.
> 
> But muh freedumb! They can't force me to get a free, safe, effective vaccine! This is AMERICA and I have RIGHTS!


How many of those vaccines were developed and then mandated with two years?  Some people may be objecting to simply how fast this mandate came about.  The Influnlenza vaccine is not being mandated for everyone in the country, nor is my employer basing my continued employment on getting it.  That's what makes this vaccine different.  Never before has the government tried to tie continued employment to a vaccine by making employers mandate it.

So your definition of a 'normal' society is now one where everyone wears masks and keeps at least six feet away from each other from now on?

And it's not a feee vaccine by any means.  It is being paid for by tax money, which comes from somewhere.


----------



## StCEMT (Sep 21, 2021)

ffemt8978 said:


> Great tactic to convince people to get vaccinated...
> 
> Two years in of experts and governments constantly changing their messages about the severity of the disease, about flattening the curve, about herd immunity,  about how vaccines would mean the return to normal life.  Two years into everyone on the planet having their lives turned upside down.
> 
> There are idiots on both sides of this issue.  Your opinion that anyone who thinks this is a hoax is an idiot is just as valid as those who think that everyone who believes every word from experts or governments is an idiot given the historical track record.   Calling them names, no matter how much you feel they deserve it, does nothing to resolve the problems.


Is it realy reasonable to expect the CDC and related folks to be 100% right though? Part of the scientific process involves being wrong sometimes and adjusting course with the best info available. That's not unreasonable for a new virus. More information gives more accuracy, but it's easy to criticize that with hindsight.

And maybe it's not the best way to win over anyone, but it's foolish to think all opinions are equal. My opinion is not more valid than an Attending when it comes to basically anything medical. We aren't in the same level in the slightest. Just because I may have opinion doesn't mean it's even remotely equal, valid, or credible. People need to realize just because they think something, doesn't mean it's worth listening to.


----------



## FiremanMike (Sep 21, 2021)

ffemt8978 said:


> Great tactic to convince people to get vaccinated...
> 
> Two years in of experts and governments constantly changing their messages about the severity of the disease, about flattening the curve, about herd immunity,  about how vaccines would mean the return to normal life.  Two years into everyone on the planet having their lives turned upside down.
> 
> There are idiots on both sides of this issue.  Your opinion that anyone who thinks this is a hoax is an idiot is just as valid as those who think that everyone who believes every word from experts or governments is an idiot given the historical track record.   Calling them names, no matter how much you feel they deserve it, does nothing to resolve the problems.


My opinion is based in objective facts that we can see in front of us.  People are dying, people suffering from long term deficits, and most recently, that vaccinated people who do become infected have mild symptoms and that the overwhelming majority of the people who are becoming severely ill due to delta are unvaccinated.  

People who are choosing to ignore this are doing so intentionally at this point.  It is intellectual dishonesty to say this is a hoax.

As to your point regarding mandatory flu shots..

We need to stop trying to compare this virus and the response to the virus to the flu.  Influenza was first discovered in the 1400s with a significantly lower population density.  The human race has had 600 years of developing immune responses created by both live infection and a variety of vaccines developed over the course of history.  Our bodies have the ability to better fight off the flu because we have been exposed to it significantly more than covid.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Sep 21, 2021)

StCEMT said:


> Is it realy reasonable to expect the CDC and related folks to be 100% right though? Part of the scientific process involves being wrong sometimes and adjusting course with the best info available. That's not unreasonable for a new virus. More information gives more accuracy, but it's easy to criticize that with hindsight.
> 
> And maybe it's not the best way to win over anyone, but it's foolish to think all opinions are equal. My opinion is not more valid than an Attending when it comes to basically anything medical. We aren't in the same level in the slightest. Just because I may have opinion doesn't mean it's even remotely equal, valid, or credible. People need to realize just because they think something, doesn't mean it's worth listening to.


Your second paragraph is spot on, so let's turn to your first paragraph instead.

Given that the scientific process is ongoing as better info becomes available, wouldn't it then be reasonable to await further info before making globe changing decisions that affect billions of people so you don't have to repeatedly change your recommendations mid-stream?  Part of the problem we now face is the distrust of official sources because they lept to the nuclear option of global shutdown to flatten the curve, telling everyone it would only be a couple of weeks.  Those couple of weeks have lasted two years with no end in sight.


----------



## FiremanMike (Sep 21, 2021)




----------



## ffemt8978 (Sep 21, 2021)

FiremanMike said:


> My opinion is based in objective facts that we can see in front of us.  People are dying, people suffering from long term deficits, and most recently, that vaccinated people who do become infected have mild symptoms and that the overwhelming majority of the people who are becoming severely ill due to delta are unvaccinated.
> 
> People who are choosing to ignore this are doing so intentionally at this point.  It is intellectual dishonesty to say this is a hoax.
> 
> ...


You're the one that brought up the Influenza vaccine, I just responded to it.  If you're going to use it as a basis to support mandating Covid vaccinations, then others are allowed to use it to point out the differences.


----------



## FiremanMike (Sep 21, 2021)

ffemt8978 said:


> You're the one that brought up the Influenza vaccine, I just responded to it.  If you're going to use it as a basis to support mandating Covid vaccinations, then others are allowed to use it to point out the differences.


There may be a miscommunication here, I saw you bring up mandatory flu vaccines in your response to someone else.  I should have quoted that post for continuity.. my fault


----------



## ffemt8978 (Sep 21, 2021)

FiremanMike said:


> There may be a miscommunication here, I saw you bring up mandatory flu vaccines in your response to someone else.  I should have quoted that post for continuity.. my fault


Pretty sure I was responding to their use of the flu vaccine, but I may be wrong.

Edit: I was responding to their comment about the flu vaccine so my comment about it previously should not have been directed towards you.


----------



## DrParasite (Sep 21, 2021)

FiremanMike said:


> I actually started my statement off by saying reservations and questions are understandable, but I maintain that we're nearly 2 years in and anyone who continues to insist that this is essentially a hoax is an idiot.


no credible person ever called it a hoax... that was media spin to paint President Trump in a negative light, as per https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/trump-coronavirus-rally-remark/ where even snopes says "Trump did not call the coronavirus itself a hoax." and he was referencing the democrats' response and how it was the end of the world; information that is often selectively edited by many in the media

Do people think it's not as bad as some are making it out to be?  sure, esp on the right.  do people think it's the end of the world, and unless we do everything the government says without questions we are all going to die?  absolutely esp on the left. 

remember when the lockdowns first started, it was just for 2 weeks just to flatten the curve?  and then elected state leaders were ordering covid+ people to be sent back into nursing homes, causing how many deaths?  or how you couldn't get together in a restaurant, but it was totally acceptable to protest in the streets, shoulder to shoulder, (and riot and loot in some areas) and that was totally acceptable?


Kevinf said:


> Also that masking and social distancing turned out to be EXTREMELY effective at reducing the spread of diseases such as Covid and Influenza, so a vaccinated society that masks up has an excellent chance of returning to normal and not doing that is a statement that you are ok with the pandemic becoming endemic and threatening others in society that aren't as fortunate as you. I'd really prefer not to see Covid resurgences every year and for my older family members to have a chance.


I must have missed those studies... can you share the studies that show how masks are effective at preventing the spread of covid?  especially in schools, where some states aren't mandating mask use?  And the big part of social distancing, according to the CDC, doesn't prevent the spread, but "suggest that social distancing can provide crucial time to increase healthcare capacity" and allow us to flatten the curve.

I mean, studies show how ineffective masks are, so where are you getting your sources from?








						A rapid systematic review of the efficacy of face masks and respirators against coronaviruses and other respiratory transmissible viruses for the community, healthcare workers and sick patients - PubMed
					

The study suggests that community mask use by well people could be beneficial, particularly for COVID-19, where transmission may be pre-symptomatic. The studies of masks as source control also suggest a benefit, and may be important during the COVID-19 pandemic in universal community face mask...




					pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
				












						Do masks actually work? The best studies suggest they don't
					

Over at City Journal, Jeffrey Anderson has written a very interesting article that dives into many of the studies our public health officials have used to justify mask-wearing. Now that the mask debate is back in full swing as several cities and states reimplement mask mandates, it’s worth asking,…




					www.washingtonexaminer.com
				




also, did you know that 15,790 people in the US have been hospitalized or died of covid following being vaccinated?  and of the 3,000 who died, 87% were over 65?  So while I strongly support vaccination, considering many of our elected leaders told people not to get vaccinated when it was politically advantageous to them, can you see why there is so much vaccine hesitancy among people?


Kevinf said:


> But muh freedumb! They can't force me to get a free, safe, effective vaccine! This is AMERICA and I have RIGHTS!


Last I checked, you have the right to make stupid decisions involving your health.  and there are plenty of non-rednecks (who  you are implying are the only people not getting vaccinated) that aren't getting vaccinated.








						Vaccination rates lag in communities of color, but it's not only due to hesitancy, experts say
					

Experts say the narrative that communities of color more are vaccine hesitant isn't accurate.




					abcnews.go.com


----------



## StCEMT (Sep 21, 2021)

ffemt8978 said:


> Your second paragraph is spot on, so let's turn to your first paragraph instead.
> 
> Given that the scientific process is ongoing as better info becomes available, wouldn't it then be reasonable to await further info before making globe changing decisions that affect billions of people so you don't have to repeatedly change your recommendations mid-stream?  Part of the problem we now face is the distrust of official sources because they lept to the nuclear option of global shutdown to flatten the curve, telling everyone it would only be a couple of weeks.  Those couple of weeks have lasted two years with no end in sight.


In theory, yes. But inaction isn't something I can support either. I mean break it down to our level. I know I've had arrests where I make frequent, back to back adjustments in plans because A. Someone provides me with new info B. I get more hands on deck C. I catch something I missed D. Someone has a better idea than what I first started with. E. Whatever other relevant factors pop up. Sure, it's a lot of changing my mind, but I adapt my plan in effort to keep up with my best info I have at the time. So yea....in theory I agree with you, in practice I've done exactly what's been done on a large scale. Owning up to bad decisions would be nice to see, but is it really going to make people less entrenched in their beliefs?

Now I do think that even without hindsight, the communication could have been a lot better. It wouldn't satisfy everyone, but I think the "we don't have all the answers yet, but the most up to date research and data suggests that this is our most effective plan and moving forward this is what we are implementing. Its quite possible things will change again and we will make further adjustments as new data comes out." However, this kind of stuff is also dependent on the people who think they know anything not drowning it out and that's not very likely because people are people. Now I can't say I think the lock down we had was all that great of an idea, but on a larger scale than that, I don't realistically expect the right decision to be made every time. 

And we aren't 2 years into a global shutdown. I'm sure there are places that are much more restricted, but we as Americans are hardly shut down in many states. COVID hasn't affected my day to day in a very long time. Sure I wear a mask, but I am still in the gym most days, eat out on occasion, grocery shop weekly, travel somewhat regularly, and do whatever else I need to do.


----------



## FiremanMike (Sep 21, 2021)

DrParasite said:


> no credible person ever called it a hoax..


Plenty of people call it a hoax.  The poster right above my original diatribe posted a youtube video that said "the vaccine is full of ****" or something to that affect.

I didn't call them credible, I called them idiots.


----------



## DrParasite (Sep 21, 2021)

FiremanMike said:


> Plenty of people call it a hoax.  The poster right above my original diatribe posted a youtube video that said "the vaccine is full of ****" or something to that affect.


That's the vaccine, not the illness.  And that's often out of ignorance because people hear vaccines and think "if I get vaccinated, I won't get the disease" and this virus isn't following that traditional rule.  Or "If I get the vaccine, life can return to normal" which hasn't happened, especially since the people in charge want vaccinated people to wear masks to protect the unvaccinated.

There has been a lot of bad information shared from historically credible sources, and a lot of information has completely reversed over the past year and a half... is there any wonder why people are hesitant to believe a government that has changed their guidance, often with little to no scientific evidence supporting their positions?


----------



## Kevinf (Sep 21, 2021)

DrParasite said:


> Last I checked, you have the right to make stupid decisions involving your health. and there are plenty of non-rednecks (who you are implying are the only people not getting vaccinated) that aren't getting vaccinated.


I implied nothing, but it's interesting that's where you went. Since you brought up Trump in your post, the media doesn't need to spin anything. He was a conspiracy nut before the presidency, and the nonsense he spewed after failing to gain a second term surprised nobody and no one. Hey, did you know the recall election in CA was rigged too? Newsmax and Trump said so, before the first ballot was counted!

I just wish this political nonsense would stay out of vaccinations, but we've dragged even that into politics and made it a talking point. We've literally invented a safe, effective miracle cure for many horrible diseases and here we are, debating about whether or not to use them. I can't wait for a planet killer asteroid to become the next political talking point. Let's filibuster the response to that and listen to talk show hosts and Facebook instead of NASA.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Sep 21, 2021)

Kevinf said:


> I implied nothing, but it's interesting that's where you went. Since you brought up Trump in your post, the media doesn't need to spin anything. He was a conspiracy nut before the presidency, and the nonsense he spewed after failing to gain a second term surprised nobody and no one. Hey, did you know the recall election in CA was rigged too? Newsmax and Trump said so, before the first ballot was counted!
> 
> I just wish this political nonsense would stay out of vaccinations, but we've dragged even that into politics and made it a talking point. We've literally invented a safe, effective miracle cure for many horrible diseases and here we are, debating about whether or not to use them. I can't wait for a planet killer asteroid to become the next political talking point. Let's filibuster the response to that and listen to talk show hosts and Facebook instead of NASA.


The vaccine itself should not be political, but alas both sides have made it so.

What is political, and always has been, are some of the other steps to combat this disease such as shutting down the economy.  The government mandating the vaccine is also a political decision, even if it is based on the best science and reasons available.


----------



## Kevinf (Sep 21, 2021)

A political decision with precedent and case law to support it, along with science and reason. Refer to the 'Jacobsen v. Massachusetts' case from 1905.

Maybe I won't get a booster if it's available, I wouldn't want my testicles to swell up, per Dr. Minaj. /s


----------



## ffemt8978 (Sep 21, 2021)

Kevinf said:


> A political decision with precedent and case law to support it, along with science and reason. Refer to the 'Jacobsen v. Massachusetts' case from 1905.
> 
> Maybe I won't get a booster if it's available, I wouldn't want my testicles to swell up, per Dr. Minaj. /s


One major difference though...Jacobsen v Massachusetts dealt with a *law* mandating a vaccine, not an executive order.  This would be a different discussion if the Covid vaccine mandate was based upon an actual law, and not an executive order.


----------



## Kevinf (Sep 21, 2021)

The vaccine is also not mandated except for federal workers and contractors. OSHA requires vaccination OR weekly testing.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Sep 22, 2021)

Kevinf said:


> The vaccine is also not mandated except for federal workers and contractors. OSHA requires vaccination OR weekly testing.


OSHA doesn't require anything yet...they've been directed to implement a Federal Rule to do that but have yet to go through the actual rule making process.

If the government wants to mandate the vaccine, then pass a law.  Don't use an unelected federal agency to mandate by executive fiat.


----------



## Kevinf (Sep 22, 2021)

The vaccine isn't being mandated as you said, why are you concerned? Surely testing is a reasonable alternative.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Sep 22, 2021)

Kevinf said:


> The vaccine isn't being mandated as you said, why are you concerned? Surely testing is a reasonable alternative.


Because the time to have the discussion about the mandate is *before* it happens, not after.

The President has come out and said he intends to mandate the vaccine/testing for any company with over 100 employees via an OSHA rule.  What is special about the number 100 but not 99 employees that would concern OSHA?  If this "mandate" is so important, then why not make every emoloyer do it?  Does COVID not affect companies with less than 100 employees?

Or is this an end run around the lawmaking process, seeking to implement a rule using arbitrary cutoff numbers to determine who it affects?  (Assuming they even go through the formal rule making process and don't just churn out a "Dear Colleague 2.0" letter).


----------



## mgr22 (Sep 22, 2021)

ffemt8978 said:


> Because the time to have the discussion about the mandate is *before* it happens, not after.
> 
> The President has come out and said he intends to mandate the vaccine/testing for any company with over 100 employees via an OSHA rule.  What is special about the number 100 but not 99 employees that would concern OSHA?  If this "mandate" is so important, then why not make every emoloyer do it?  Does COVID not affect companies with less than 100 employees?
> 
> Or is this an end run around the lawmaking process, seeking to implement a rule using arbitrary cutoff numbers to determine who it affects?


I agree the number seems arbitrary -- sort of like drug doses -- but I don't think there's any bad intent. We're in the middle of a national health crisis that hasn't been resolved through public health imperatives. I'd rather the government think outside the box and try new ways of increasing participation in vaccination than to give in to the "Americans don't like to be told what to do" vibe and offer no direction. (Yes, I know the Fed's direction has been inconsistent. They're learning. They're also, I believe, largely trying to keep people healthy.)

Meanwhile, in my state, there's a movement to prohibit vaccinated folks from receiving monoclonal antibody treatment, regardless of the severity of breakthrough infections. No one claimed the vaccines were 100% effective. This feels like a form of punishment for trying to reduce the chances of needing advanced care. Kinda hard to wrap my head around this one.


----------



## Kevinf (Sep 22, 2021)

mgr22 said:


> ...monoclonal antibody treatment...


I find this to be a particularly funny twist. You have people refusing an inexpensive to produce vaccine that allows their own immune system to generate antibodies to help guard against getting deathly sick in the first place... but gladly welcome a ludicrously expensive lab-derived protein antibody-analog treatment after they begin suffering from (and likely spreading) the disease.

It boggles the mind.


----------



## mgr22 (Sep 22, 2021)

Kevinf said:


> It boggles the mind.


Yep. If I'm unlucky and end up in the "no monoclonal antibodies for you" group, I figure there's a chance my heirs will own Tennessee.


----------



## Summit (Sep 22, 2021)

Clarify they are trying to stop which peope from getting MaB? Vaccine or no vaccine?


----------



## mgr22 (Sep 22, 2021)

Summit said:


> Clarify they are trying to stop which peope from getting MaB? Vaccine or no vaccine?


Vaccine.


----------



## Summit (Sep 22, 2021)

mgr22 said:


> Vaccine.


Who is trying to restrict and why?


----------



## mgr22 (Sep 22, 2021)

Summit said:


> Who is trying to restrict and why?


There shouldn't be a pay wall for this source:









						Some States Limit Monoclonal Antibody Treatment
					

Last week, the Biden administration imposed new restrictions on state allocations for monoclonal antibody treatments. The move is meant to prevent shortages while the supplies are replenished.



					www.medscape.com


----------



## Kevinf (Sep 23, 2021)

Part of it may be that since a vaccinated person already has antibodies, the MaB treatment may not be as effective as on someone who wasn't vaccinated. That's pure speculation on my part. But if I were vaccinated and still needed this level of treatment, I sure would resent the fact that someone who chose not to get vaccinated gets a higher priority.

Also there's something else I hear that tickles me... "we don't know what's in the vaccine / we don't know the long term effects"... umm... we have over a century of data and experience with vaccines. We sure don't have over a century of data on monoclonal antibody treatments... or a century of data on Covid-19 infections. Get your head on straight and stop listening to facebook medical group and talking head who's vaccinated but still looks at you cross-eyed and questions whether YOU should get vaccinated.


----------



## Kavsuvb (Sep 23, 2021)

Here's part 2 of the video and this will make you question the FDA and the people who work for the FDA and what they think about the vaccine and your health.


----------



## Kevinf (Sep 23, 2021)

Can we not turn this forum into facebook 2.0? If you want to discuss something, maybe post your own thoughts instead of regurgitating clickbait videos.


----------



## Tigger (Sep 23, 2021)

Kavsuvb said:


> Here's part 2 of the video and this will make you question the FDA and the people who work for the FDA and what they think about the vaccine and your health.


No, I assure you this YouTube video from a dubious source will do absolutely nothing for me to question the FDA or public health community.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Sep 23, 2021)

Kevinf said:


> Also there's something else I hear that tickles me... "we don't know what's in the vaccine / we don't know the long term effects"... umm... we have over a century of data and experience with vaccines. We sure don't have over a century of data on monoclonal antibody treatments... or a century of data on Covid-19 infections. Get your head on straight and stop listening to facebook medical group and talking head who's vaccinated but still looks at you cross-eyed and questions whether YOU should get vaccinated.


We have over a century of data on mRNA vaccines?


----------



## StCEMT (Sep 23, 2021)

Kavsuvb said:


> Here's part 2 of the video and this will make you question the FDA and the people who work for the FDA and what they think about the vaccine and your health.


So you have a video of some (likely) ground level employee obsessed with blow darts? Big deal. Hell, I've said the same thing about Ketamine. Honestly, I think the public would be appalled if they heard the conversations that go on in the cab of an ambulance.


----------



## mgr22 (Sep 23, 2021)

Kavsuvb said:


> Here's part 2 of the video and this will make you question the FDA and the people who work for the FDA and what they think about the vaccine and your health.


It didn't make me question the FDA. It did make me question your source.


----------



## Summit (Sep 23, 2021)

Kavsuvb said:


> Here's part 2 of the video and this will make you question the FDA and the people who work for the FDA and what they think about the vaccine and your health.


What a bunch of crap.

1. Youtube
2. From a poorly regarded partisan source (Project Veritas is considered very questionable even within the conservative news space due to their reputation for disingenuous editing and misrepresentation in hit pieces)
3. The cover picture with a JUDE gold star that the Nazis made the Jews wear in comparison to choice like vaccination

You have told me everything about the lack of credibility of that source as well as your your inability to parse wheat from chaff.

We are supposed to be professionals here.


----------



## Kevinf (Sep 23, 2021)

ffemt8978 said:


> We have over a century of data on mRNA vaccines?


Something wrong with Johnson and Johnson if you don't like Moderna/Pfizer?


----------



## Summit (Sep 23, 2021)

We don't have a century of mRNA data, and we don't really need to because all it does is make a  protein to be the antigen thus over a century of vaccination data applies generally to COVID vaccines whether they use mRNA or not. However, we have more data on these COVID vaccines than all the other vaccines ever. Never in human history has vaccine deployment been so closely, thoroughly, and broadly studied and scrutinized because never have so much money, resources, technology, time and effort been put into a vaccine development and deployment effort.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Sep 24, 2021)

CDC leader adds people with risky jobs to COVID booster list
					

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention on Thursday endorsed booster shots for millions of older or otherwise vulnerable Americans, opening a major new phase in the U.S vaccination drive against COVID-19.




					apnews.com
				




The CDC has now approved the booster shot for high risk groups.  It is interesting to note the CDC director overruled the panel of experts about boosters for those 18-40 in high risk occupations.


----------



## Summit (Sep 24, 2021)

The discussion was interesting. Apparently there were no-voters on the panel that were voicing concerns about a booster recommendation hurting confidence among antivaxxers. CDC head probably thought "well if it is safe and effective and those folks are going to refuse anyway, then why would we not approve based on presumed further irrational fears? "

I think they missed an opportunity to make some statement about documented previous infection via reactive Ab or positive PCR test to indicate only one dose of mRNA vaccine to be considered fully vaccinated, but of course that was not the question before ACIP, nor was Moderna or JJ, it was only "who should boost with Pfizer."


----------



## GMCmedic (Sep 24, 2021)

Apparently I'm eligible for a booster due to occupation. 

Still on the fence, at this point im likely going to hold out till they figure out if this is going to be a yearly booster or a 3 and done. Just not on board with being poked every 6 months. 


Unless of course the definition of fully vaccinated is changed and I'm required to get it.


----------



## mgr22 (Sep 24, 2021)

GMCmedic said:


> Still on the fence, at this point im likely going to hold out till they figure out if this is going to be a yearly booster or a 3 and done. Just not on board with being poked every 6 months.


I feel differently. I'll go with the medical consensus now and not worry about how the recommendations may change. My goal is simply to minimize my chances of death and disability without incurring a financial burden or high risk of significant side effects. If the best way to achieve that turned out to be weekly shots, I'd take them.


----------



## Aprz (Sep 26, 2021)

I was able to schedule my booster shot for Tuesday. Finally gave me an option to select high risk of exposure due to occupation. Wouldn't let me earlier this week saying I was not eligible. Website needed updating. My first two shots, pfizer, I don't think I had any symptoms so I'm interested to know if I'll be symptom free.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Sep 27, 2021)

Correction: Virus Outbreak story
					

In a story published September 27, 2021, about vaccine mandates for health care workers, The Associated Press erroneously reported that Dr. Jeff Smith was the CEO of Cedars-Sinai Medical Center. He is the COO.




					apnews.com
				




Who didn't see this one coming?


----------



## CCCSD (Sep 27, 2021)

Apparently NYS is going to use US Military? The unions are going to SCREAM!

Im getting LOTS of popcorn 🍿 and beer 🍺.


----------



## EpiEMS (Sep 27, 2021)

CCCSD said:


> Apparently NYS is going to use US Military? The unions are going to SCREAM!
> 
> Im getting LOTS of popcorn 🍿 and beer 🍺.


National Guard "strikebreakers" (I can't think of another term, really), there's a throwback!


----------



## Fezman92 (Sep 28, 2021)

EpiEMS said:


> National Guard "strikebreakers" (I can't think of another term, really), there's a throwback!


Back then the National Guard was used as a tool of the companies.


----------



## FiremanMike (Sep 28, 2021)

Two anecdotes from my neck of the woods this week

1. One of our cops got the booster, said the side effects were absolutely miserable the next day with severe weakness and body aches, slept for about 16 hours and good

2. I now know someone who had covid in the first round, got vaccinated, and then just popped positive again this last week.  He’s totally fine, just the first I’ve heard of double infection plus vaccine..


----------



## mgr22 (Sep 28, 2021)

FiremanMike said:


> Two anecdotes from my neck of the woods this week
> 
> 1. One of our cops got the booster, said the side effects were absolutely miserable the next day with severe weakness and body aches, slept for about 16 hours and good
> 
> 2. I now know someone who had covid in the first round, got vaccinated, and then just popped positive again this last week.  He’s totally fine, just the first I’ve heard of double infection plus vaccine..


Just to complement your anecdotes with two of mine, especially for anyone on the fence about the third Pfizer shot, I got mine on Sunday and have had the same mild side effects as I did the first two times: low-grade fever resolved with APAP, plus a sore arm, neither of which prevented me from doing anything I'd normally do. My wife, who got her third vaccine on the same day, has been asymptomatic, as she was the first two times. We are both very happy to have minimized our chances of death or disability due to COVID.


----------



## EpiEMS (Sep 28, 2021)

Same experience for third moderna - though much more mild symptoms than for my first two


----------



## mgr22 (Sep 28, 2021)

EpiEMS said:


> Same experience for third moderna - though much more mild symptoms than for my first two


Do you know if the dose was the same?


----------



## EpiEMS (Sep 28, 2021)

mgr22 said:


> Do you know if the dose was the same?



I was curious about that myself. It is a .5mL dose that I got - believe that is the usual dose for the 1st two doses?


----------



## Aprz (Sep 28, 2021)

I just got my Pfizer booster shot.


----------



## akflightmedic (Sep 28, 2021)

Dose is the same...   0.5ml

Not sure if I posted or not earlier, been busy and cannot recall. I did my booster a few weeks ago. The 3rd Moderna kicked my *** for about 24 hours. After that I was fine. First 2 doses had very mild, very mild symptoms which went away within 12 hours. The 3rd one I felt like full on flu, had fever, body ached. Treated the symptoms with OTC meds, slept and hydrated a lot. It passed just as quickly as it hit me...and I am happy that I did it, as it definitely beats the alternative. People just do not see what is going on in the ERs of their own backyard! Disheartening.

I have been in Louisiana (again) for nearly 3 weeks now working in an ER. The amount of ignorance and excuses is mind blowing. The conspiracy theories run rampant here...and so does Covid. I am diagnosing covid cases every single day, far more than we should be at this point in time. I told a 9 year old boy and his mother, the kid has Covid...he immmediately started wailing and crying "I dont want to diiiiieeeeeee!!!!"

Sad, but thats how it is. And the kid had a headache and sniffles, thats all so I suspect he will be fine. But the mother was against quarantine...him or herself as she has other kids, they all go to school and she has to work...the cycle goes on.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Sep 30, 2021)

Biden vaccine mandate splits US on party lines: AP-NORC poll
					

A survey of Americans on President Joe Biden’s plan to require most workers to get either vaccinated or regularly tested for COVID-19 finds a deep and familiar divide: Democrats are overwhelmingly for it, while most Republicans are against it.




					apnews.com
				




Nothing really surprising in the results except the split between in place workforce and remote workforce.  That one kind of surprised me.


----------



## EpiEMS (Sep 30, 2021)

ffemt8978 said:


> Biden vaccine mandate splits US on party lines: AP-NORC poll
> 
> 
> A survey of Americans on President Joe Biden’s plan to require most workers to get either vaccinated or regularly tested for COVID-19 finds a deep and familiar divide: Democrats are overwhelmingly for it, while most Republicans are against it.
> ...


Big demographic divide between remote & in-place workers, I would imagine -- which would be correlated with educational attainment, party, income, all correlates of vaccine uptake.

For example, Pew found back last year that people with a bachelors degree and up were - the majority, anyway - remote working, and educational attainment is positively associated with COVID vaccine status.


----------



## Bullets (Sep 30, 2021)

Seems to be some disagreement among the CDC, FDA, White House and general Meddit/Medtwitter/scientific cognoscenti about the need for universal 3rd dose


----------



## akflightmedic (Sep 30, 2021)

Just another observation that boggles my brain. I sit next to medical professionals which for this discussion includes Docs, Medics, RNs and RTs....who talk for the entire shift about every conspiracy theory under the moon regarding vaccines. I legit sat thru hours last night listening to recaps of various "homeopathic OB doc" who is podcasting how those who get flu vaccine are now more susceptible to COVID. (In my head, I so wanted to throw down facts and argue logic, you know, like from whence did she collect this data?? since there was no real flu season last year).

And then the discussion of "end times" is upon us, mark of the beast (vaccine or the covid vaccine card), how this one nurse has a relative who is now magnetized post vaccine, and of course talk about Bill Gates patent which has the numbers 666 in it. And then onwards to Biden,Biden Biden and how this is actually a major ploy to get a female president too, but I dont want "her" as one (racial bias implied). Praise Trump and he will be back soon too mind you....

It just hurts my head, these are medical professionals who we are all treating covid side by side daily...and these are their thoughts.

And they wonder why their area is so hard hit by covid....because this became a political thing instead of a public health thing, sprinkled on top with the GOP's attempt to always be the more moral or religious entity.

And no, I do not participate in ANY of these chats...I am a traveler and when that is majority opinion, I can be bounced fast. 

Git dat stupid lib outta here now!


----------



## mgr22 (Sep 30, 2021)

akflightmedic said:


> Just another observation that boggles my brain. I sit next to medical professionals which for this discussion includes Docs, Medics, RNs and RTs....who talk for the entire shift about every conspiracy theory under the moon regarding vaccines. I legit sat thru hours last night listening to recaps of various "homeopathic OB doc" who is podcasting how those who get flu vaccine are now more susceptible to COVID. (In my head, I so wanted to throw down facts and argue logic, you know, like from whence did she collect this data?? since there was no real flu season last year).
> 
> And then the discussion of "end times" is upon us, mark of the beast (vaccine or the covid vaccine card), how this one nurse has a relative who is now magnetized post vaccine, and of course talk about Bill Gates patent which has the numbers 666 in it. And then onwards to Biden,Biden Biden and how this is actually a major ploy to get a female president too, but I dont want "her" as one (racial bias implied). Praise Trump and he will be back soon too mind you....
> 
> ...


Pretty freakin' scary, especially since you're talking about so many subsets of lunacy. I wouldn't know where to begin.


----------



## Fezman92 (Sep 30, 2021)




----------



## Kevinf (Sep 30, 2021)

It seems like conspiracy lunacy (my preferred term, as "theory" implies a backing of logical/scientific reasoning) used to be relegated to fairly lone individuals 20+ years ago, but with the widespread adoption and use of social media (that forms groups that reinforces and supports conspiracies instead of quashing them as they would have experienced in a less connected society) allows all the fringe folks that are susceptible to conspiracy theory mentality to find each other.

Normally those doctors and other medical folks would be fighting an uphill battle in their daily lives as soon as they start talking about magnetized microchips in vaccines at work, but they just go on their phones and find someone else employed in medicine on their favorite conspiracy group that supports them when they get that push-back and it gives them the social support to spread misinformation more broadly than they would otherwise feel socially permitted to do. If someone looks at you funny when you say the earth is flat and we never landed on the moon, then you can just hop onto your Facebook FlatMoon group and get positive reinforcement again instead of feeling like an outsider.

Which is bad for everyone when vaccines are part of the conspiracy theory circle. It wouldn't be a stretch to say that anti-vax conspiracy nonsense has cost tens or even hundreds of millions of lives over the past two decades. Diseases like measles are resurging in some areas, when they were just on the verge of going on the permanently no-longer-a-problem list with smallpox... which means that anti-vaxxers are causing routine vaccinations to become MORE necessary. If anti-vaxxers had a really good end-game, they'd be encouraging people to get vaccinated so that diseases die off and nobody needs vaccines anymore. That'd be a real win for anti-vaxxers!

That's just like, my opinion though.

edit: I don't want to oversimplify here however, as social support from interconnectedness has been a real win for some minority groups that well deserve it. But sometimes the bad comes with the good.


----------



## NomadicMedic (Sep 30, 2021)

EpiEMS said:


> Same experience for third moderna - though much more mild symptoms than for my first two


Third Moderna?


----------



## ffemt8978 (Oct 1, 2021)

Kevinf said:


> they'd be encouraging people to get vaccinated so that diseases die off and nobody needs vaccines anymore. That'd be a real win for anti-vaxxers!



The problem with that statement is that Covid will never die off.  It has a multi-species repository where it can continue to flourish and mutate, and it is impossible to vaccinate every animal that can carry the disease.  To date, as far as I'm aware of, we've never been able to eradicate a disease that can infect multiple species.  The best we've been able to do is to mitigate it's effects on people.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Oct 1, 2021)

Merck says COVID-19 pill cuts risk of death, hospitalization
					

WASHINGTON (AP) — In a potential leap forward in the global fight against the pandemic , drugmaker Merck said Friday that its experimental pill for people sick with COVID-19 reduced hospitalizations and deaths by half.




					apnews.com
				




I could see this new pill being used as a basis for people not to get vaccinated.  "Why should I get the vaccine if I can just take a pill once I start feeling sick?" will be the argument, and it stands a chance of being an effective counter to madating vaccination in legal challenges (assuming for the sake of discussion that it gets approval for use)


----------



## mgr22 (Oct 1, 2021)

ffemt8978 said:


> Merck says COVID-19 pill cuts risk of death, hospitalization
> 
> 
> WASHINGTON (AP) — In a potential leap forward in the global fight against the pandemic , drugmaker Merck said Friday that its experimental pill for people sick with COVID-19 reduced hospitalizations and deaths by half.
> ...


True, but I doubt having one more excuse not to get vaccinated will add greatly to the ranks of the vaccine-resistant. I suppose medical professionals unafraid of being magnetized could remind their patients that even if the drug cuts COVID deaths in half, it still sucks for the other half.


----------



## Summit (Oct 1, 2021)

ffemt8978 said:


> Merck says COVID-19 pill cuts risk of death, hospitalization
> 
> 
> WASHINGTON (AP) — In a potential leap forward in the global fight against the pandemic , drugmaker Merck said Friday that its experimental pill for people sick with COVID-19 reduced hospitalizations and deaths by half.
> ...


I think if you were going to to get vaccinated, this pill won't stop you... If you are rational. A 50% RR reduction in hospitalization and death is vastly less effective than the 90% of the mRNA vaccines which also prevents most infection and transmission, unlike a post-symptomatic drug. Of course, in the hands of information manipulators I'm always nervous and people are not rational about this. 

I'm impressed at the efficacy they are claiming for a PO post infection treatment in a hig risk population! But I'm also very leery of a single smaller trial that I haven't seen a peer review of design...


----------



## Kevinf (Oct 3, 2021)

ffemt8978 said:


> The problem with that statement is that Covid will never die off.  It has a multi-species repository where it can continue to flourish and mutate, and it is impossible to vaccinate every animal that can carry the disease.  To date, as far as I'm aware of, we've never been able to eradicate a disease that can infect multiple species.  The best we've been able to do is to mitigate it's effects on people.


----------



## Kavsuvb (Oct 11, 2021)

Pfizer Whistleblower Leaks Execs Emails: ‘We Want to Avoid Having Info on Fetal Cells Out There'​


----------



## Kevinf (Oct 11, 2021)

Another post without a shred of effort made. Video posts without accompanying thoughts should probably be considered spam.


----------



## Summit (Oct 11, 2021)

Yea, that's straight up trollin with antivax propos.


----------



## PotatoMedic (Oct 11, 2021)

And here I am signing up for my Pfizer booster shot.


----------



## jgmedic (Oct 11, 2021)

LOL. See that Project Veritas logo? Far-right propaganda group. That post should be removed. If you want to go full anti-vax, at least try to use a more reputable source.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Oct 11, 2021)

jgmedic said:


> LOL. See that Project Veritas logo? Far-right propaganda group. That post should be removed. If you want to go full anti-vax, at least try to use a more reputable source.


Removing a post like that would just feed the claims that their viewpoints are being censored, distracting from the real issues of what Covid presents.  The best way to deal with posts like that is to either ignore them or destroy them by pointing out what they've got wrong.  It is not to censor them.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Oct 11, 2021)

Moderna has no plans to share its COVID-19 vaccine recipe
					

ROME (AP) — Moderna has no plans to share the recipe for its COVID-19 vaccine because executives have concluded that scaling up the company's own production is the best way to increase the global supply, the company’s chairman said Monday.




					apnews.com
				




Moderna won't share its vaccine recipe in order to increase production world wide, instead opting to scale up its own production.

Given the problems J&J had with outsourcing production, I can see see their point but at the same time it means even more risk free profits for the company.


----------



## Summit (Oct 11, 2021)

ffemt8978 said:


> Removing a post like that would just feed the claims that their viewpoints are being censored, distracting from the real issues of what Covid presents.  The best way to deal with posts like that is to either ignore them or destroy them by pointing out what they've got wrong.  It is not to censor them.


I see your point, but it gets very tedious and exhausting if you repeatedly have to put for that level of effort to refute obvious propaganda. The advantage is to the person posting the BS video. It's easy to find more BS.


----------



## DrParasite (Oct 11, 2021)

Summit said:


> I see your point, but it gets very tedious and exhausting if you repeatedly have to put for that level of effort to refute obvious propaganda. The advantage is to the person posting the BS video. It's easy to find more BS.


Are you sure?  maybe they are right?  It's only propaganda because you don't like what they are claiming; that doesn't make it factually incorrect unless you can show why it's wrong.

I might call the CDC propaganda... how are they any more or less credible than project veritas?  After all, the CDC has put out conflicting information, flip-flopped on various topics, and our elected leaders have directly contributed to the vaccine hesitancy...

BTW, I am not a fan of Project Veritas's right wing propaganda, any more than I am a fan of MSNBC & CNN's left wing propaganda... but you shouldn't censor them just because you don't like what they claim: only if you have a credible source showing what they are saying is factually inaccurate


----------



## Summit (Oct 11, 2021)

Your devil's advocacy relies on endorsing specious reasoning.

When you deal with COVID all day, it gets exhausting. Conspiracy theorists have stamina and it is much easier to post a youtube video than a debunk. I need to ride my bike. So I'll let someone else put the effort in.


----------



## Kevinf (Oct 11, 2021)

ffemt8978 said:


> Removing a post like that would just feed the claims that their viewpoints are being censored, distracting from the real issues of what Covid presents.  The best way to deal with posts like that is to either ignore them or destroy them by pointing out what they've got wrong.  It is not to censor them.


But requiring that a poster actually be willing to comment* on their OWN post is not censorship. I could drop hundreds of single image and single video posts ALL DAY LONG and require that the rest of the forum spend time exhaustively refuting my garbage posts that took about 3 seconds to generate. This is a discussion forum, not an image board, facebook, or someone's personal blog. We shouldn't be encouraging low-value content if we want a high-quality discussion board. This poster has already trashed the last two pages of discussion by many forum members pointing out how low-value the post was. We can make the rest of this thread replies of "your source is garbage and why can't you post your own thoughts" if we really want to... but I'm not sure that raises the quality of the forum.

*I consider a post with nothing but a video in it the same as a post with nothing but an URL in it... basically spam. See my AMAZING contribution to the forum directly below (it's the same as Kavs)!*

_*Preferably commentary more substantial than "Hey look at this!" or "I COMPLETELY AGREE"._​


----------



## Kevinf (Oct 11, 2021)

https://yout.be/FUXGB5FzhPc


----------



## Kavsuvb (Oct 11, 2021)

Here's the link to the story 








						PFIZER LEAKS: Whistleblower Goes On Record, Reveals Internal Emails from Chief Scientific Officer & Senior Director of Worldwide Research Discussing COVID Vaccine ... ‘We Want to Avoid Having the Information on the Fetal Cells Floating Out There’
					

Investigating and exposing corruption in both public and private institutions.




					www.projectveritas.com


----------



## Kavsuvb (Oct 11, 2021)

Kevinf said:


> Another post without a shred of effort made. Video posts without accompanying thoughts should probably be considered spam.


So are you okay with Big Pharma using aborted fetus's and fetal cell lines


----------



## jgmedic (Oct 11, 2021)

Kavsuvb said:


> So are you okay with Big Pharma using aborted fetus's and fetal cell lines











						You asked, we answered: Do the COVID-19 vaccines contain aborted fetal cells?
					

Do the COVID-19 vaccines contain aborted fetal cells?




					www.nebraskamed.com
				






			https://www.uclahealth.org/webview.cfm?id=3680&cat=Addressing%20Concerns
		










						Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine does not contain fetal cells, contrary to online claims
					

CLAIM: Newly leaked emails among Pfizer employees show that the company’s COVID-19 vaccine contains fetal cells.  AP’S ASSESSMENT: False.




					apnews.com
				




Fetal cell lines from the 70s and 80s were used for testing not in the manufacture of the vaccine. So nice try , but next time maybe stop parroting this BS and say something that isn’t so easily disprovable. And as a practicing Catholic, I’m very okay with those cell lines being used to save thousands of lives. Thanks for playing. BTW at least one of the links above directly address that ridiculous video.


----------



## Kevinf (Oct 12, 2021)

Kavsuvb said:


> So are you okay with Big Pharma using aborted fetus's and fetal cell lines


Sure. Waste not, want not. You know there are medically necessary abortions right? And people actually sign up to be organ donors, or donate their body to science and research for the betterment of humanity. But that's a nice catchy headline to get a certain sect of folks RILED right up.

FYI, I'm an organ donor... it's right there on my drivers license.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Oct 12, 2021)

Vaccine mandate must prove COVID a 'grave danger' in the workplace
					

It's been two weeks since President Joe Biden announced a federal vaccine or testing mandate for employers with 100 or more workers and companies are anxiously awaiting details from the Labor Department. Once the rules take effect, more than 100 million Americans will be required to get the...




					katv.com
				




Interesting tidbit buried at the end.  The OSHA mandate will be an Emergency Temporary Standard and not a federal rule that goes through the actual approval process.



> It's less clear how courts could rule on a nationwide Labor Department mandate. Emergency temporary standards do not go through as rigorous an approval process as other federal rules and are subject to greater legal scrutiny.
> 
> OSHA has only issued 10 emergency temporary standards since 1971, six of them were challenged in court and only one was upheld. If the rule is not carefully tailored to address the risk to workplace safety from COVID-19, it could be overturned.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Oct 14, 2021)

Mix-and-match COVID boosters are as good as—if not better than—all the same shots
					

Trial was too small to definitively compare combinations, but Moderna may have an edge.




					arstechnica.com
				




According to this study, mixing vaccine types for boosters may be more effective than using the same vaccine, except in the case of the Moderna vaccine.

Link to non-peer reviewed preprint:








						Heterologous SARS-CoV-2 Booster Vaccinations – Preliminary Report
					

Background While Coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) vaccines are highly effective, breakthrough infections are occurring. Booster vaccinations have recently received emergency use authorization (EUA) for certain populations but are restricted to homologous mRNA vaccines. We evaluated homologous...




					www.medrxiv.org


----------



## VentMonkey (Oct 19, 2021)

I’m ready for my booster. I had the Moderna, I had the Rona, I choose the former. 

And yes, I am well aware of all political implications. Politics and medicine mix as well as politics and anything else. Blugh.

I’m also ready for the word “pandemic” to no longer be a thing. When will a common cold go back to being  a common effing cold already? 

This whole pariah feeling just for being stuffed up during, well, cold, flu, and allergies season is assanine already. 

I am speaking (venting) generally here, but my most recent test was negative so that’s good.


----------



## DesertMedic66 (Oct 19, 2021)

VentMonkey said:


> I’m ready for my booster. I had the Moderna, I had the Rona, I choose the former.
> 
> And yes, I am well aware of all political implications. Politics and medicine mix as well as politics and anything else. Blugh.
> 
> ...


Just got my booster yesterday. I’m feeling it today


----------



## VentMonkey (Oct 19, 2021)

DesertMedic66 said:


> Just got my booster yesterday. I’m feeling it today


The Moderna booster? Did you have Covid/ the initial vaxxes already as well?


----------



## DesertMedic66 (Oct 19, 2021)

VentMonkey said:


> The Moderna booster? Did you have Covid/ the initial vaxxes already as well?


Got the rona back in July of 2020 before any of the vaccines were available. Got Pfizer #1 in December. Got Pfizer #2 in January. Got the booster yesterday.


----------



## Summit (Oct 19, 2021)

VentMonkey said:


> I’m also ready for the word “pandemic” to no longer be a thing. When will a common cold go back to being  a common effing cold already?



Me too, but as long as its generating so many patients that I can't transfer my ICUs to and this one disease is 40% of my vents in use, we can't treat it as the common cold. After almost everyone has either been vaccinated or infected, then yea it will probably rightfully get treated like the flu. Right now we are waiting for the vaccine refusers to all get infected, but at a rate slow enough that we don't have to cancel even more surgeries and have subpar care etc. Fingers crossed soon!



VentMonkey said:


> This whole pariah feeling just for being stuffed up during, well, cold, flu, and allergies season is assanine already.
> 
> 
> I am speaking (venting) generally here, but my most recent test was negative so that’s good.


I for one hope we as a society don't go back to thinking it's _tots cool to, like, go to work sick_ and out to the restaurant while constantly having to wipe your infectious snot.  Why was that ever chill?


----------



## FiremanMike (Oct 19, 2021)

DesertMedic66 said:


> Just got my booster yesterday. I’m feeling it today


Did you have covid at any point?

I’m going to get my booster, had 3 local first responders die in the last two weeks..


----------



## DesertMedic66 (Oct 19, 2021)

FiremanMike said:


> Did you have covid at any point?
> 
> I’m going to get my booster, had 3 local first responders die in the last two weeks..


Back in July 2020 I had COVID


----------



## FiremanMike (Oct 19, 2021)

DesertMedic66 said:


> Back in July 2020 I had COVID


Yeah sorry I saw that reply on the next page when I quoted you..

My wife is getting her booster sometime this week, I'll see how she does.. We both had covid and the first round.. I had moderna, she had pfizer..


----------



## DesertMedic66 (Oct 19, 2021)

FiremanMike said:


> Yeah sorry I saw that reply on the next page when I quoted you..
> 
> My wife is getting her booster sometime this week, I'll see how she does.. We both had covid and the first round.. I had moderna, she had pfizer..


Oh no. She is team Pfizer and you are team Moderna. My condolences to your marriage haha


----------



## VentMonkey (Oct 19, 2021)

Summit said:


> I for one hope we as a society don't go back to thinking it's _tots cool to, like, go to work sick_ and out to the restaurant while constantly having to wipe your infectious snot.  Why was that ever chill?


I’m definitely not advocating for this, however sadly, this too will most likely never be the case.

While I by no means think this sort of mindset is “chill”, I (and my body) will typically draw the line at fever.

When I develop a fever with malaise along with any of the above accompanying symptoms it’s usually enough to keep me in bed for a day or two. 

I just don’t know when the CV-19 tests will no longer be required empirically, that’s my gripe.

Neither your nor my example’s wreak of common sense however.


----------



## Fezman92 (Oct 19, 2021)

Summit said:


> I for one hope we as a society don't go back to thinking it's _tots cool to, like, go to work sick_ and out to the restaurant while constantly having to wipe your infectious snot.  Why was that ever chill?


It’s more of a “I can’t afford to call out/not go to work sick” thing.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Oct 19, 2021)

DesertMedic66 said:


> Oh no. She is team Pfizer and you are team Moderna. My condolences to your marriage haha


Never fear...the FDA is expected to announce vaccine mixing in order to save his marriage.









						US expected to authorize mix-and-match COVID booster shots | AP News
					

WASHINGTON (AP) — Federal regulators are expected to authorize the mixing and matching of COVID-19 booster doses   this week in an effort to provide flexibility as the campaign for extra shots expands.




					apnews.com


----------



## mgr22 (Oct 19, 2021)

Fezman92 said:


> It’s more of a “I can’t afford to call out/not go to work sick” thing.


And in the corporate world, it's an "I don't want my boss to think I'm giving less than 100%" thing. It's ridiculous, but I never saw anyone get sent home for being infectious.


----------



## Fezman92 (Oct 19, 2021)

I never understood the “doctors note” rule. If you’re too sick to go to work, how are you healthy enough to go to the doctor? When I was at McDonald’s and I called out sick (via text because I did openings), I included a pic of the thermometer showing my 102.3 degree fever because I knew they might ask for a doctors note.


----------



## DrParasite (Oct 19, 2021)

mgr22 said:


> And in the corporate world, it's an "I don't want my boss to think I'm giving less than 100%" thing. It's ridiculous, but I never saw anyone get sent home for being infectious.


back when I was on the ambulance, I was assigned to work with a person who had full blown pink eye.  I was like, "go home sick" and he didn't want to... and the supervisor wasn't going to send him home when I mentioned this to her, so....


----------



## mgr22 (Oct 20, 2021)

DrParasite said:


> back when I was on the ambulance, I was assigned to work with a person who had full blown pink eye.  I was like, "go home sick" and he didn't want to... and the supervisor wasn't going to send him home when I mentioned this to her, so....


I think some supervisors focus on how inconvenient it would be for them to send a sick employee home -- having to get a replacement, or fill-in themselves.


----------



## DrParasite (Oct 20, 2021)

mgr22 said:


> I think some supervisors focus on how inconvenient it would be for them to send a sick employee home -- having to get a replacement, or fill-in themselves.


that is a very fair point... I was more worried about catching my coworker's conjunctivitis or having him pass it along to one of our elderly and possibly immunocompromised patients... I guess we all have different priorities


----------



## mgr22 (Oct 20, 2021)

DrParasite said:


> that is a very fair point... I was more worried about catching my coworker's conjunctivitis or having him pass it along to one of our elderly and possibly immunocompromised patients... I guess we all have different priorities


My priorities would be the same as yours.


----------



## GMCmedic (Oct 20, 2021)

The first step should be EMS employers providing actual sick days instead of making me burn PTO and get a doctor's note for the sniffles or face an occurrence.


----------



## Summit (Oct 20, 2021)

The HR "profession" and MBAs killed off separate sick and vacation banks in most all industries over the last two decades.


----------



## Fezman92 (Oct 20, 2021)

Not to mention how anti union people are.


----------



## EpiEMS (Oct 21, 2021)

Summit said:


> The HR "profession" and MBAs killed off separate sick and vacation banks in most all industries over the last two decades.



Ouch, feeling a little personally attacked here 
On the bright side, 77% of private sector workers do have some sick leave benefits (https://www.bls.gov/news.release/ebs2.nr0.htm).


----------



## E tank (Oct 21, 2021)

FiremanMike said:


> Yeah sorry I saw that reply on the next page when I quoted you..
> 
> My wife is getting her booster sometime this week, I'll see how she does.. We both had covid and the first round.. I had moderna, she had pfizer..


honest question...too lazy to look...is there any known benefit for a natural immunity + 2 shot vaccs rec'ing a booster?


----------



## mgr22 (Oct 21, 2021)

E tank said:


> honest question...too lazy to look...is there any known benefit for a natural immunity + 2 shot vaccs rec'ing a booster?


According to this source, no:









						To Boost or Not to Boost After COVID?
					

In those with 'hybrid immunity,' booster could be helpful but probably not necessary, experts say




					www.medpagetoday.com
				




I can't vouch for them, but the article doesn't sound one-sided to me.


----------



## FiremanMike (Oct 21, 2021)

E tank said:


> honest question...too lazy to look...is there any known benefit for a natural immunity + 2 shot vaccs rec'ing a booster?


I honestly don't know.. I will say my wife had her booster yesterday and she's miserable.. bad joint pain..


----------



## mgr22 (Oct 21, 2021)

FiremanMike said:


> I honestly don't know.. I will say my wife had her booster yesterday and she's miserable.. bad joint pain..


If you don't mind me asking, did she feel that way when she had her first two shots?


----------



## FiremanMike (Oct 21, 2021)

mgr22 said:


> If you don't mind me asking, did she feel that way when she had her first two shots?


Her and I both got our first shot, then got covid, then got our second shot (on schedule).  We both had a rough time with the second shot, she says this is much worse..


----------



## DesertMedic66 (Oct 21, 2021)

FiremanMike said:


> I honestly don't know.. I will say my wife had her booster yesterday and she's miserable.. bad joint pain..


That’s exactly where my pain was with the booster


----------



## ffemt8978 (Oct 21, 2021)

So if the vaccine becomes mandatory to be employed, will that mean the booster is mandatory for continued employment?


----------



## CCCSD (Oct 21, 2021)

ffemt8978 said:


> So if the vaccine becomes mandatory to be employed, will that mean the booster is mandatory for continued employment?


Same as a yearly flu shot I would think…


----------



## Tigger (Oct 21, 2021)

ffemt8978 said:


> So if the vaccine becomes mandatory to be employed, will that mean the booster is mandatory for continued employment?


I also had to get a Hep B booster as my work physical found no reactivity. We require Hep B vaccinations, so guess who got a booster.

Also, AMR announced today that all employees must be vaccinated by 11/24.

Their guidance also specifically states if you sustain a vaccine injury that this would be covered under workers comp insurance.


----------



## Fezman92 (Oct 21, 2021)

Tigger said:


> Also, AMR announced today that all employees must be vaccinated by 11/24.


I didn’t see that email.


----------



## GMCmedic (Oct 21, 2021)

ffemt8978 said:


> So if the vaccine becomes mandatory to be employed, will that mean the booster is mandatory for continued employment?


As of now, the hospital I contract for considers fully vaccinated to be 2 doses and nobody anticipates that changing until there is better guidance.


----------



## VentMonkey (Nov 1, 2021)

Got my Moderna booster. We’ll see if I feel like crap when I wake up tomorrow morning. To my recollection it seemed most opportunistic throughout the night for me.


----------



## FiremanMike (Nov 1, 2021)

VentMonkey said:


> Got my Moderna booster. We’ll see if I feel like crap when I wake up tomorrow morning. To my recollection it seemed most opportunistic throughout the night for me.


Definitely let me know.. had a deputy die in the last week, that makes 5 active cops/firemen in the last month..

It’s enough for me to want the booster..


----------



## mgr22 (Nov 1, 2021)

FiremanMike said:


> Definitely let me know.. had a deputy die in the last week, that makes 5 active cops/firemen in the last month..
> 
> It’s enough for me to want the booster..


Got the booster. No major issues. Definitely better than taking chances with a breakthrough infection, in my opinion.


----------



## VentMonkey (Nov 1, 2021)

FiremanMike said:


> Definitely let me know.. had a deputy die in the last week, that makes 5 active cops/firemen in the last month..
> 
> It’s enough for me to want the booster..


Sorry for your loss, I most definitely will.


----------



## FiremanMike (Nov 2, 2021)

mgr22 said:


> Got the booster. No major issues. Definitely better than taking chances with a breakthrough infection, in my opinion.


Moderna or Pfizer?  And did you ever have active covid?


----------



## VentMonkey (Nov 2, 2021)

@FiremanMike for me, the Moderna booster has just made me feel sore all over. No temp though, which is a vast improvement from both CV-19 and the first 2 doses.


----------



## mgr22 (Nov 2, 2021)

FiremanMike said:


> Moderna or Pfizer?  And did you ever have active covid?


Pfizer. I don't think I ever had COVID.


----------



## MEDicJohn (Nov 2, 2021)

San Diego is making Covid Vaccine mandatory for all renewal and initial county cert. I received phizer round of vaccinations mild side effects soreness and headache no fever, no plan on booster. Never got Covid as of yet definitely have seen a ton of cases though.


----------



## Bullets (Nov 2, 2021)

mgr22 said:


> Got the booster. No major issues. Definitely better than taking chances with a breakthrough infection, in my opinion.


What really gets me with all these protests is that COVID is the lading cause of LODD for the last 2 years. Project 100 is and should be a point of emphasis for LE yet COVID alone took 200 per year. I still have officers on every call not even wearing a simple mask, let alone an N95. 



As there isnt a ton of evidence for routine 3rd shots, my hospital system has yet to make any mention of requiring it, though it is available and you can mix if desired.


----------



## mgr22 (Nov 2, 2021)

Bullets said:


> What really gets me with all these protests is that COVID is the lading cause of LODD for the last 2 years. Project 100 is and should be a point of emphasis for LE yet COVID alone took 200 per year. I still have officers on every call not even wearing a simple mask, let alone an N95.
> 
> 
> 
> As there isnt a ton of evidence for routine 3rd shots, my hospital system has yet to make any mention of requiring it, though it is available and you can mix if desired.


It was easier for me to understand concerns about the vaccine before so many people survived their vaccinations. In the absence of data that indicate significant probabilities of vaccine-related death and disability, particularly when compared to COVID-related death and disability, I think mask and vaccine avoidance is driven mostly by a dislike of being told what to do.


----------



## DrParasite (Nov 2, 2021)

I'm probably not going to get the booster... at least not yet.  I'm not in a high risk category, I don't work full time in healthcare (anymore), and I'm not sure where the line will end (will this be an every 3 month requirement?  every 6 month?  annually, like the flu shot?  idk).  

And should I discuss my primary care provider, and they recommend that I get it, than that might change: but that's no one's business.  And lets not forget, even if you are vaccinated, you can still get covid, still need to wear a mask, still need to socially distance, etc, so the effectiveness of the vaccine is questionable (but I do acknowledge that it makes your infection time much less sucky and life threatening if you are vaccinated).

As I mentioned previously, whether or not a person is vaccinated in their business, and I don't agree with terminating someone's employment based on their medical decisions.  And if you contract covid, and chose not to get vaccinated... well, my sympathy levels decrease significantly.  But as a provider, I will still treat your medical complaints to the best of my abilities, regardless of vaccination status.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Nov 4, 2021)

US mandates vaccines or tests for big companies by Jan. 4
					

Tens of millions of Americans who work at companies with 100 or more employees will need to be fully vaccinated against COVID-19 by Jan. 4 or get tested for the virus weekly under government rules issued Thursday.




					apnews.com
				




Nothing like abusing emergency authority to implement a vaccine mandate.


----------



## Tigger (Nov 4, 2021)

ffemt8978 said:


> US mandates vaccines or tests for big companies by Jan. 4
> 
> 
> Tens of millions of Americans who work at companies with 100 or more employees will need to be fully vaccinated against COVID-19 by Jan. 4 or get tested for the virus weekly under government rules issued Thursday.
> ...


You’ll have to provide some specifics here.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Nov 4, 2021)

Tigger said:


> You’ll have to provide some specifics here.


Other than the fact this rule was implemented under the Emergency Temporary Standard instead of the actual rule making process detailed in the Administrative Procedures Act...or better yet passing an actual law?  We're over two years into Covid, and almost a year into this presidency...meaning there has been plenty of time to implement this mandate in a way that doesn't reek of abuse of executive branch power.


----------



## Tigger (Nov 4, 2021)

ffemt8978 said:


> Other than the fact this rule was implemented under the Emergency Temporary Standard instead of the actual rule making process detailed in the Administrative Procedures Act...or better yet passing an actual law?  We're over two years into Covid, and almost a year into this presidency...meaning there has been plenty of time to implement this mandate in a way that doesn't reek of abuse of executive branch power.


I do not agree with this assessment at all. There is still very much a crisis occurring, the situation in Colorado is worse than has been yet. 

I do medicine, not politics. God forbid we talk about how this might implicate medicine, or how it affects the providers that are still dealing with this nearly two years later. 

Many places are at a breaking point and yet where are the solutions from those that oppose such mandates? Provide a compelling solution and not just a denial.


----------



## Summit (Nov 4, 2021)

CO rural hospitals full of sick patients are transferring their additional ICU patients to even smaller rural hospitals because the tertiary care ICUs are full. And then when these transfers deteriorate they are crash intubating and cancelling the helicopter in flight because there is no destination bed for the helo to fly to. Tertiary hospitals are cancelling procedures and double bunking ICUs.  😓

84% of our COVID hospital patients are unvaccinated while only 21% of 12+ are fully unvaccinated in CO. We are literally waiting for those 21% to get a vaccine or get infected, but they are getting infected too quickly.

Transmission rates and severe susceptibility rates have to drop!

We can mandate vaccines
OR
We can go back to mandating masks and social distancing and business restrictions and cancelling elective procedures and other highly economic detrimental measures
OR
We can let people die because we don't have a bed for the stroke patient and the ER is on divert so keep driving with that STEMI or  have bad outcomes by rationing care

All choices suck. Mandating vaccines sucks the least.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Nov 4, 2021)

Tigger said:


> I do not agree with this assessment at all. There is still very much a crisis occurring, the situation in Colorado is worse than has been yet.
> 
> I do medicine, not politics. God forbid we talk about how this might implicate medicine, or how it affects the providers that are still dealing with this nearly two years later.
> 
> Many places are at a breaking point and yet where are the solutions from those that oppose such mandates? Provide a compelling solution and not just a denial.


Explain to me why this is an emergency that couldn't be handled by the normal rule making process anytime in the past two years.  It isn't necessarily the mandate I am opposed to, but the process by which it was implemented.  The means are just as important as the ends...or at least they're supposed to be in our society.


----------



## mgr22 (Nov 4, 2021)

ffemt8978 said:


> Explain to me why this is an emergency that couldn't be handled by the normal rule making process anytime in the past two years.  It isn't necessarily the mandate I am opposed to, but the process by which it was implemented.  The means are just as important as the ends...or at least they're supposed to be in our society.


I'm not so sure about your last sentence. I've never worked anywhere where the means were as important as the end. We didn't ignore the means, but results were pretty much always more important than how we got there. I'm talking about several industries, not just EMS.

If you're okay with the mandate to require vaccination during a public health emergency, why is it a problem for an executive order to be the way that happens? I mean, individuals in our society take unilateral action affecting others all the time. If the president makes a decision, and the decision makes sense to you, I don't see a critical issue.


----------



## Summit (Nov 4, 2021)

ffemt8978 said:


> Explain to me why this is an emergency that couldn't be handled by the normal rule making process anytime in the past two years.


2 Years? We have not been giving vaccine for even 1 year and uptake rates only started stagnating about 4 months ago while Delta prevalence took over only 3 months ago along with the start of the current wave that we hoped to avoid by having everyone get vaccinated. The intent for a vaccine mandate was announced 2 months ago.


----------



## Tigger (Nov 4, 2021)

ffemt8978 said:


> Explain to me why this is an emergency that couldn't be handled by the normal rule making process anytime in the past two years.  It isn't necessarily the mandate I am opposed to, but the process by which it was implemented.  The means are just as important as the ends...or at least they're supposed to be in our society.


This has been a rapidly evolving and difficult to quantify situation. Additionally, there is so much derision towards the scientific community from members of elected government at all levels that I don't see how any sort of "normal" process would work. Not everyone's opinion matters, nor are they valid. 

Also I could not disagree more with the last sentence. The means need to be accounted for to ensure that they do not cause undue and unnecessary harm, but insisting everyone be ok with them is akin to stalling.


----------



## VentMonkey (Nov 4, 2021)

Am i the only one curious to see @ffemt8978 and @Tigger offset each other’s ban hammer?…

…proceed.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Nov 5, 2021)

VentMonkey said:


> Am i the only one curious to see @ffemt8978 and @Tigger offset each other’s ban hammer?…
> 
> …proceed.


Never happen...this is a discussion, nothing more.


----------



## VentMonkey (Nov 5, 2021)

ffemt8978 said:


> Never happen...this is a discussion, nothing more.


Wow, you really are the forum VP, lol. 

Anyhow I agree with the comment @Tigger made, I don’t do politics, I do medicine. And I certainly don’t care to mix the two. Just my stance.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Nov 5, 2021)

VentMonkey said:


> Wow, you really are the forum VP, lol.
> 
> Anyhow I agree with the comment @Tigger made, I don’t do politics, I do medicine. And I certainly don’t care to mix the two. Just my stance.


Unfortunately, COVID is a political as well as medical issue.  It would be nice if it was strictly medical, but that is not the world we live in.


----------



## VentMonkey (Nov 5, 2021)

ffemt8978 said:


> Unfortunately, COVID is a political as well as medical issue.  It would be nice if it was strictly medical, but that is not the world we live in.


Agree to disagree. There’s always a choice to engage or disengage if nothing more than for one’s own simple sanity.

Am I saying that these issues aren’t very real and extremely visceral for some people? Absolutely not.

What I am saying is if I opt not to bring such matters into my own world (life), if you will, I cut out one more frivolous matter...to me.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Nov 6, 2021)

Appeals Court has issued a temporary stay on the vaccine mandate.









						Appeals court stays vaccine mandate on larger businesses
					

NEW ORLEANS (AP) — A federal appeals court on Saturday temporarily halted the Biden administration's vaccine requirement  for businesses with 100 or more workers.




					apnews.com


----------



## Tigger (Nov 9, 2021)

Got my Pfizer booster yesterday. Received the Moderna vaccine in December 2019 and the booster a breeze in comparison. A headache and lots of fatigue mostly. I have not had COVID to my knowledge. 

I was preparing for the worst so immediately went for a big mountain bike just to get some exercise in and also justify being a complete slug for the next 24 hours.


----------



## VentMonkey (Nov 9, 2021)

Tigger said:


> Got my Pfizer booster yesterday. Received the Moderna vaccine in December 2019 and the booster a breeze in comparison. A headache and lots of fatigue mostly. I have not had COVID to my knowledge.
> 
> I was preparing for the worst so immediately went for a big mountain bike just to get some exercise in and also justify being a complete slug for the next 24 hours.


If I’m reading right, you cross-pollinated. Which, if this the case, I’m interested to see how this works.

I’d thought about getting the J&J vaxx had the Moderna taken much longer. I have heard pros and cons of doing this.

Also, ditto on the SE being mild and timing my workouts for the same reasons.


----------



## Tigger (Nov 10, 2021)

VentMonkey said:


> If I’m reading right, you cross-pollinated. Which, if this the case, I’m interested to see how this works.
> 
> I’d thought about getting the J&J vaxx had the Moderna taken much longer. I have heard pros and cons of doing this.
> 
> Also, ditto on the SE being mild and timing my workouts for the same reasons.


Yes. As far as I could tell there isn't really much to say you should or should not stick with the same manufacturer. It was logistically easier to go to the grocery store and get Pfizer the day I got off work. The pharmacist said no issues, and he knows more than me I presume.


----------



## Summit (Nov 12, 2021)

HardKnocks said:


> 1) An associate of mine, SWAT Officer, 40 y/o Male, life long Athlete/Runner, in excellent shape died of a Thrombotic Event withing 15 hrs of receiving the Covid Vaccine;
> 
> 2) Some people, like myself have has serious reations to certain vaccines and are medically advised against the receiving Covid Vaccine;
> 
> ...


I put the response in the appropriate thread. You opinion wasn't about EMS, but it is controversially ignorant.

1. Sorry about your friend. I don't wish to appear callous, but anecdotal reports are not causal.

2. Reactions to vaccines that require avoiding vaccines are typically hypersensitivity to ingredients. Ingredients vary between vaccines. The COVID vaccines actually have very few ingredients. If it is the spike protein that you are afraid of, then you should be way more afraid of what will happen when you get COVID (you will eventually).

3. You don't even understand the terms you are using. "Herd immunity" is one way of regarding reproduction numbers driven by the dynamics of the infectious agent vs reducing the vulnerable fraction of the population through vaccination and also infection-recovery. Name me a respiratory virus that reached herd immunity through natural infection alone. You can't because that never happens. This isn't some new COVID concept. Those of us in epidemiology have long understood this.

We also understand that while vaccines reduce transmission rates, critical to controlling the impact, with Delta it became apparent that the current vaccines won't achieve herd immunity because of the infection dynamics of Delta combined with vaccine hesitancy.  However, the vaccines would control rates and reduce hospitalizations (and the overwhelming of the medical system) and deaths.

4. No vaccine is 100%. It is very rare for people to infected more than once, vaccinated or not. If you think the vaccines are fake and don't stimulate the body to produce antibodies and T/B cell memory, then you are programmed too well by your siloed misinformation sources and probably are beyond educating. Sorry if that seems rude, but the truth is harsh.

Get used to it? You come off as unintentionally callous because you don't work in the ICU and you don't work an EMS system that can't find an ED to accept their STEMI or stroke because everyone is on ED Divert. You haven't been a patient sent from their hospital of choice across the state, against their wishes, to some small rural hospital as part of a patient trade for capacity. Get used to that? We are not at steady state!

Nobody debates that this will be endemic, but endemic COVID will be different than flu (probably less bad than flu) just like it is different than flu now (much worse than flu). What we are waiting for is everyone currently unvaccinated to get their immunity either by infection or vaccination. The problem is that the unvaccinated are getting infected too fast.


----------



## RocketMedic (Nov 13, 2021)

I reckon the mortality rate for COVID without intervention of any sort is around 8-12%. Which is terrifying when you think about it.


----------



## FlorianFred (Nov 14, 2021)

Been a while for an update....I'm the guy who had his 1st Moderna end of December 2020, 2nd Moderna end of January, and breakthrough Covid (verified by testing) at the end of July.   My postings are in this Megathread.  Sometime ago (I'd estimate 3 or 4 weeks ago) I developed parosmia.  I did completely lose my sense of smell and taste with Covid, but both slowly returned -- and appeared to be coming back normally.  But then something strange happened, my sense of smell went haywire.  Some smells are as I remember, but some are vastly different then what they used to be, but are also producing the same fragrance.  Coffee, feces, the odor produced by my sweat glands, along with a whole host of other scents now smell like a combination of fermented onions and garlic (best descriptor I can come up with).  Citrus smells are fine, but it strikes me that about 60% of things I inhale produce that toxic scent.  Needless to say, my coffee leaves that taste in my mouth, and whereas I would deeply inhale and enjoy fresh ground coffee, I have to hold my breath while setting up the pot....it's strong enough and bad enough to make me nauseous.  I'm hoping this will pass, but the limited research I've done on this is really uncertain....maybe it corrects in 6 months, or maybe it never corrects.

I wasn't sure if this update belonged in this thread at all, but thought I'd post it as part of my ongoing Covid-saga.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Nov 14, 2021)

RocketMedic said:


> I reckon the mortality rate for COVID without intervention of any sort is around 8-12%. Which is terrifying when you think about it.


Source for this claim?









						CDC Now Reports COVID Cases and Deaths by Vax Status
					

New tool also reveals numeric differences between vaccines




					www.medpagetoday.com
				




That shows a 13.23 per 100,000 rate.


----------



## Summit (Nov 15, 2021)

ffemt8978 said:


> Source for this claim?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


You are correctly quoting a mortality rate (deaths in one week/100K in this case) which are not given as percentages.

Rocket Medic used the incorrect term. Case fatality rate (which are percentages) is probably the term intended (deaths/cases) with no treatment interventions, not even home O2. He might be a little high, but not be too far off. He is right that the concept is terrifying and the primary motivation for not overwhelming the healthcare system.

Epidemiology terms are easily confused. I think herd immunity is the hardest thing for people to get.


----------



## EpiEMS (Nov 15, 2021)

Summit said:


> You are correctly quoting a mortality rate (deaths in one week/100K in this case) which are not given as percentages.
> 
> Rocket Medic used the incorrect term. Case fatality rate (which are percentages) is probably the term intended (deaths/cases) with no treatment interventions, not even home O2. He might be a little high, but not be too far off. He is right that the concept is terrifying and the primary motivation for not overwhelming the healthcare system.
> 
> Epidemiology terms are easily confused. I think herd immunity is the hardest thing for people to get.



Lest we forget, CFR can vary hugely by demographic factors (age, gender, etc.)…

(CFR may or may not be the best measure since it is based on confirmed cases, thus could exclude the potential asymptomatic unconfirmed cases.)


----------



## ffemt8978 (Nov 15, 2021)

Summit said:


> You are correctly quoting a mortality rate (deaths in one week/100K in this case) which are not given as percentages.
> 
> Rocket Medic used the incorrect term. Case fatality rate (which are percentages) is probably the term intended (deaths/cases) with no treatment interventions, not even home O2. He might be a little high, but not be too far off. He is right that the concept is terrifying and the primary motivation for not overwhelming the healthcare system.
> 
> Epidemiology terms are easily confused. I think herd immunity is the hardest thing for people to get.


Which is why I asked for his source.


----------



## Fezman92 (Nov 15, 2021)

Summit said:


> You are correctly quoting a mortality rate (deaths in one week/100K in this case) which are not given as percentages.
> 
> Rocket Medic used the incorrect term. Case fatality rate (which are percentages) is probably the term intended (deaths/cases) with no treatment interventions, not even home O2. He might be a little high, but not be too far off. He is right that the concept is terrifying and the primary motivation for not overwhelming the healthcare system.
> 
> Epidemiology terms are easily confused. I think herd immunity is the hardest thing for people to get.


So is mortality rate in a combination people who die who did get treatment and those who didn’t get treatment?


----------



## Summit (Nov 15, 2021)

Fezman92 said:


> So is mortality rate in a combination people who die who did get treatment and those who didn’t get treatment?


You can get as specific as you want as long as you have the data, or you can stay general. IF you had the data, you could have a mortality rate for green eyed red haired left handed women between the ages on 35 and 39 over a 31 day period in May who were unvaccinated and received monoclonals, but I don't know what you'd learn from it 

Yes, in this case, it is the 13/100K mortality rate is for unvaccinated people in the US during the second week of August, treated or not. We don't have a lot of untreated in the US because that requires someone to not seek/refuse treatment not have anyone call an ambulance. I'm not sure the data exists to parse. Rural India during their surge and O2 shortage crisis had untreated people, but try to get good data out of that especially with local/regional government suppression of the data that was collected.

A fairer judgement of an untreated CFR is looking at what the severe/critical case rate (basically those requiring O2 or hospitalization) is in a population with good testing rates before effective treatments like monoclonal came into play... and assuming most of them will die.


----------



## DrParasite (Nov 16, 2021)

With the EUA being approved to administer the vaccine to kids 5 to 11, how many of you (who have kids) are going to vaccinate them?  I'll be honest, I'll put a lot of stuff into my body without a second thought, but I'm more hesitant to do the same for my 5 year old son... Do I think it's going to kill him?  absolutely not, but myocarditis is a known possibility (even though the actual cause is still unknown), and I don't know if there will be much of a benefit, and the long term research hasn't been completed yet.

And just to repeat, I got the two shots back in Jan/Feb, and I'm not anti-vax.... but my risk tolerance for myself is a lot higher than my risk tolerance for my family.


----------



## GMCmedic (Nov 16, 2021)

DrParasite said:


> With the EUA being approved to administer the vaccine to kids 5 to 11, how many of you (who have kids) are going to vaccinate them? I'll be honest, I'll put a lot of stuff into my body without a second thought, but I'm more hesitant to do the same for my 5 year old son... Do I think it's going to kill him? absolutely not, but myocarditis is a known possibility (even though the actual cause is still unknown), and I don't know if there will be much of a benefit, and the long term research hasn't been completed yet.
> 
> And just to repeat, I got the two shots back in Jan/Feb, and I'm not anti-vax.... but my risk tolerance for myself is a lot higher than my risk tolerance for my family.


We're going to reconsider it next fall when there is hopefully more data. Right now judging off local numbers, there doesn't seem to be much benefit in vaccinating our oldest (8).


----------



## EpiEMS (Nov 16, 2021)

In a school setting, I’d be inclined to vaccinate. Schools, prisons, hospitals, nursing homes - all incubators of infectious disease.


----------



## Summit (Nov 16, 2021)

What EpiEMS said and additionally the #1 cause of myocarditis is viral infection. COVID causes it. The risk from vaccine is less than the disease.


----------



## mgr22 (Nov 17, 2021)

DrParasite said:


> With the EUA being approved to administer the vaccine to kids 5 to 11, how many of you (who have kids) are going to vaccinate them?  I'll be honest, I'll put a lot of stuff into my body without a second thought, but I'm more hesitant to do the same for my 5 year old son... Do I think it's going to kill him?  absolutely not, but myocarditis is a known possibility (even though the actual cause is still unknown), and I don't know if there will be much of a benefit, and the long term research hasn't been completed yet.
> 
> And just to repeat, I got the two shots back in Jan/Feb, and I'm not anti-vax.... but my risk tolerance for myself is a lot higher than my risk tolerance for my family.


I have a 5-year-old grandson in kindergarten. I suggested that he be vaccinated because I believe the risk of the disease is greater than the risk of the vaccine. There was no disagreement between his mother and me on that, but he got COVID before he could get the shot. He's still in quarantine and seems to be doing ok. His parents had already been vaccinated x3.


----------



## DrParasite (Nov 17, 2021)

Summit said:


> What EpiEMS said and additionally the #1 cause of myocarditis is viral infection. COVID causes it. The risk from vaccine is less than the disease.


do you have a study or official source that shows this?  I'm in an argument with an idiot on FB (I know, I know, it never ends well) over this, but would love to be able to provide an actual source that says covid causes myocarditis, and it's occurs in greater numbers than from the vaccine.


GMCmedic said:


> We're going to reconsider it next fall when there is hopefully more data. Right now judging off local numbers, there doesn't seem to be much benefit in vaccinating our oldest (8).


I'll be honest, I'm leaning towards this position, but mom and grandma are disagreeing... there are a lot of unknown, and a I'm not seeing the benefit as of yet... not saying he shouldn't get it, but not right now, and not until I see more data.

and yes @EpiEMS, schools are known hotspots for all types of illnesses (kids are disgusting petri dishes, have been for generations), but, to my knowledge, there haven't been ANY major covid outbreaks in schools, despite many experts saying it was going to happen.  in fact, covid is more dangerous to the teachers than to the students, so if the teachers are vaxed, the risk declines greatly.  but hand/foot/mouth disease is currently spreading in schools, as is the common cold; covid, not so much.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Nov 17, 2021)

OSHA Suspends ETS Enforcement due to Fifth Circuit’s Latest Take on Vaccine Rule -- Occupational Health & Safety
					

The future of the Emergency Temporary Standard remains uncertain.




					ohsonline.com
				




OSHA suspends enforcement plans for vaccine mandate due to 5th Circuit stay and questions about its implementation.



> The opinion calls the ETS the rare government pronouncement that is both over-inclusive (applying to employers and employees in virtually all industries and workplaces in America, with little attempt to account for the obvious differences between the risks they face) and under-inclusive (claiming to save employees with 99 or more coworkers from a “grave danger” in the workplace, while making no attempt to help employees with 98 or fewer coworkers from the very same threat).


----------



## fm_emt (Nov 17, 2021)

I got both Pfizer vaccines earlier this year. But at this point, I am not seeing enough data that has me rushing out to get a booster. Case rates here are pretty low, even breakthrough infections are pretty mild, and it's kind of just fizzling out for now. I may probably get one in the future but for now, it is not high on my priority list.


----------



## EpiEMS (Nov 17, 2021)

DrParasite said:


> do you have a study or official source that shows this? I'm in an argument with an idiot on FB (I know, I know, it never ends well) over this, but would love to be able to provide an actual source that says covid causes myocarditis, and it's occurs in greater numbers than from the vaccine.
> 
> I'll be honest, I'm leaning towards this position, but mom and grandma are disagreeing... there are a lot of unknown, and a I'm not seeing the benefit as of yet... not saying he shouldn't get it, but not right now, and not until I see more data.
> 
> and yes @EpiEMS, schools are known hotspots for all types of illnesses (kids are disgusting petri dishes, have been for generations), but, to my knowledge, there haven't been ANY major covid outbreaks in schools, despite many experts saying it was going to happen. in fact, covid is more dangerous to the teachers than to the students, so if the teachers are vaxed, the risk declines greatly. but hand/foot/mouth disease is currently spreading in schools, as is the common cold; covid, not so much.



Perhaps the AAP precis here will be helpful? https://publications.aap.org/aapnews/news/16388?autologincheck=redirected

Re: school infections, depends on what you consider an outbreak. MMWR has a number of reports of index cases —> 30+ infected.


----------



## Summit (Nov 17, 2021)

DrParasite said:


> do you have a study or official source that shows this?  I'm in an argument with an idiot on FB (I know, I know, it never ends well) over this, but would love to be able to provide an actual source that says covid causes myocarditis, and it's occurs in greater numbers than from the vaccine.


It has long been known re the cause. Here is a simple cut and paste from UpToDate including some hot links to sources:

_"In resource-abundant countries, viral infection is the most frequently presumed cause of myocarditis. In the 1980s and 1990s, enteroviruses (Coxsackie B and others) were frequently associated with myocarditis and dilated cardiomyopathy. In the past 20 years, however, other viruses, including adenovirus, parvovirus B19, hepatitis C, and herpes virus 6, have emerged as significant pathogens [4]. In many resource-limited countries, rheumatic carditis, Chagas disease, and disorders associated with HIV infection are important causes of myocarditis.

Viral or "idiopathic" myocarditis — Viral infection is the most commonly identified cause of lymphocytic myocarditis [16,17]. In the 1960s, a link was suggested by seroepidemiologic studies between enteroviral infection, particularly coxsackievirus, and human myocarditis [18]. Since that time, approximately 20 viruses have been implicated in human myocarditis."_






And so to for Pericarditis:
_"in developed countries, most cases of acute pericarditis in immunocompetent patients are due to viral infection or are idiopathic; it is generally assumed that most cases of "idiopathic" pericarditis are viral in etiology. Because of the relatively benign course associated with the most common causes of pericarditis (>80 percent of cases), it is not necessary to search for the etiology in all patients. As such, most patients are treated for a presumptive viral cause with nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and colchicine."_


----------



## ffemt8978 (Nov 27, 2021)

It looks like the drug companies are planning on tweaking their vaccines for the omicron variant.  This could mean that those who've already gotten a booster could be required to get a fourth (or third) vaccination.  It will be interesting to see how effective the current vaccines are against this variant, or if they will drop below their relatively high efficiency.









						COVID variant spreads to more countries as world on alert
					

LONDON (AP) — The new potentially more contagious omicron variant of the coronavirus popped up in more European countries on Saturday, just days after being identified in South Africa, leaving governments around the world scrambling to stop the spread.




					apnews.com
				






> A number of pharmaceutical firms, including AstraZeneca, Moderna, Novavax and Pfizer, said they have plans in place to adapt their vaccines in light of the emergence of omicron.
> 
> Professor Andrew Pollard, the director of the Oxford Vaccine Group which developed the AstraZeneca vaccine, expressed cautious optimism that existing vaccines could be effective at preventing serious disease from the omicron variant.


----------



## Fezman92 (Nov 27, 2021)

Does this mean that I’ll finally get a working 5G implant? The first one I got from Pfizer doesn’t work.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Nov 29, 2021)

Biden vaccine rule for health workers blocked in 10 states
					

JEFFERSON CITY, Mo. (AP) — A federal judge on Monday blocked President Joe Biden’s administration  from enforcing a coronavirus vaccine mandate on thousands of health care workers in 10 states that had brought the first legal challenge against the requirement.




					apnews.com
				




Another preliminary injunction against the vaccine mandate, this time for healthcare workers in certain states.

This case looks like it's going to hinge on if the government had the authority from Congress to implement the mandate, and if it followed the required procedures to make the rule.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Dec 1, 2021)

ffemt8978 said:


> Biden vaccine rule for health workers blocked in 10 states
> 
> 
> JEFFERSON CITY, Mo. (AP) — A federal judge on Monday blocked President Joe Biden’s administration  from enforcing a coronavirus vaccine mandate on thousands of health care workers in 10 states that had brought the first legal challenge against the requirement.
> ...


And now the healthcare mandate has been blocked via a preliminary injunction in the other 40 states.









						Judge blocks Biden vaccine rule, citing “liberty interests of the unvaccinated”
					

Republican AGs win order blocking vaccine mandate for Medicare/Medicaid providers.




					arstechnica.com


----------



## Tigger (Dec 3, 2021)

I imagine that this won’t stop healthcare employers from mandating it, or states for that matter. At the end of the day employers are just not going to want to pay for the extra costs that unvaccinated workers have the potential to bring to them.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Dec 3, 2021)

Tigger said:


> I imagine that this won’t stop healthcare employers from mandating it, or states for that matter. At the end of the day employers are just not going to want to pay for the extra costs that unvaccinated workers have the potential to bring to them.


 Very possible, but they may face unwanted costs in other areas too (employee shortages leading to more overtime, lawsuits, etc)


----------



## Carlos Danger (Dec 3, 2021)

The hospital that I work for for is now owned by the largest health system in the country (HCA) and they told us early on that they would not mandate vaccinations unless forced to by the government. So they mandated them when the order first came out and then rescinded the mandate when it was stayed by the courts.


----------



## Summit (Dec 3, 2021)

In CO there is a state mandate in place by the state Board of Health placed Aug 30.

The vast majority of those who were still unvaccinated in healthcare got the vaccine after mandate, while a few sought exemptions. The health systems have lost <1% of employees. High vaccination rates have led to very few staff out based on exposure/iso, so a net benefit to staffing.

The real staffing issues are due to staff burnout and the large COVID patient load.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Dec 3, 2021)

Summit said:


> In CO there is a state mandate in place by the state Board of Health placed Aug 30.
> 
> The vast majority of those who were still unvaccinated in healthcare got the vaccine after mandate, while a few sought exemptions. The health systems have lost <1% of employees. High vaccination rates have led to very few staff out based on exposure/iso, so a net benefit to staffing.
> 
> The real staffing issues are due to staff burnout and the large COVID patient load.


At this point they've lost less than 1%, but what happens when the hundreds of religious exemption requests are processed and accepted or rejected by the DOH?  For those that get rejected, there will almost certainly be lost jobs and/or lawsuits.  For those that get accepted, it will only offer those seeking to avoid getting the vaccine more reasons to argue a mandate is not effective or necessary.


----------



## Summit (Dec 3, 2021)

ffemt8978 said:


> At this point they've lost less than 1%, but what happens when the hundreds of religious exemption requests are processed and accepted or rejected by the DOH?  For those that get rejected, there will almost certainly be lost jobs and/or lawsuits.  For those that get accepted, it will only offer those seeking to avoid getting the vaccine more reasons to argue a mandate is not effective or necessary.


You are contemplating a scenario that doesn't exist. The DOH isn't reviewing the exemptions. The employers are the ones reviewing medical or religious exemptions.

The mandate has been in effect for a while now. People either got vaccinated (most), had their exemptions approved by their employer (a few), or resigned/suspended (<1% of healthworkers). Health facilities have to report vaccine rates to CDPHE and the data is public. And going forward, having the vax is a requirement for students to rotate for their clinicals, as several other vaccines have been.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Dec 3, 2021)

Summit said:


> You are contemplating a scenario that doesn't exist. The DOH isn't reviewing the exemptions. The employers are the ones reviewing medical or religious exemptions.
> 
> The mandate has been in effect for a while now. People either got vaccinated (most), had their exemptions approved by their employer (a few), or resigned/suspended (<1% of healthworkers). Health facilities have to report vaccine rates to CDPHE and the data is public. And going forward, having the vax is a requirement for students to rotate for their clinicals, as several other vaccines have been.


I misspoke....what happens when the CDPHE rejects the employers request for waivers because every waiver granted means the facility is not in compliance with the 100% vaccination mandate.  The employer may grant an exemption on religious grounds only to see the CDPHE count the employer as not in compliance with the mandate.


----------



## Summit (Dec 3, 2021)

ffemt8978 said:


> I misspoke....what happens when the CDPHE rejects the employers request for waivers because every waiver granted means the facility is not in compliance with the 100% vaccination mandate.  The employer may grant an exemption on religious grounds only to see the CDPHE count the employer as not in compliance with the mandate.


That hasn't been the case, nor is there an indication of any change like that, it isn't really how it works. Health facilities submits a plan to CDPHE if they are not 100% vaccinated and the plan explains a good waiver process and how they will be handling non-vaccinated waivered staff (testing, remote work, etc). Some people went for waivers and found out that a brazen attitude of "I don't wanna and you can't make me" is not a recognized religion nor medical condition. Others got their waivers signed.

What really happened is a vocal minority flapped their jaw about how they were gonna resign instead of getting vaccinated, many posted about their worries that there would be staffing shortages based on the loud protestations, but in reality almost everyone got vaccinated, a few people got waivers, and only a tiny minority, mostly not bedside care providers, refused didn't get the waiver or the shot.


----------



## mgr22 (Dec 3, 2021)

Summit said:


> Some people went for waivers and found out that a brazen attitude of "I don't wanna and you can't make me" is not a recognized religion nor medical condition.


That covers almost every person who told me why they won't get vaccinated. It's a big change from the public health system I grew up with: cooperation, in general, between citizens and their government, and a shared belief that much less death and disability would result from vaccines than whatever we were being vaccinated against.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Dec 6, 2021)

NYC has now gone down the rabbit hole of issuing a vaccine mandate instead of passing an actual law.  The mandate goed into effect on Dec 27 but guidelines for exemptions won't be issued until Dec 15.









						NYC to impose vaccine mandate on private sector employers
					

NEW YORK (AP) — From big Wall Street banks to corner grocery stores, all private employers in New York City will have to require their workers to get vaccinated against COVID-19, the mayor announced Monday in the most sweeping vaccine mandate of any state or big city in the U.S.




					apnews.com


----------



## Seirende (Dec 6, 2021)

I'm so so grateful that my casually antivax 60 y.o. mother got this particular vaccine because yesterday she tested positive for COVID-19. With the track record of the vaccines at preventing serious outcomes, we're not too worried. Plus since everyone else in the household is also fully vaccinated, CDC says we don't need to quarantine as long as we wear masks (and are sensible, e.g. I'm not going out to the coffeeshop).

Bit of a bummer that the symptoms started the day after our Thanksgiving gathering, but again, given that everyone besides my three little niblings have been vaccinated, it's not a huge concern.


----------



## EpiEMS (Dec 6, 2021)

ffemt8978 said:


> NYC has now gone down the rabbit hole of issuing a vaccine mandate instead of passing an actual law. The mandate goed into effect on Dec 27 but guidelines for exemptions won't be issued until Dec 15.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



NYC has achieved high vaccination rates in large part through a de facto mandate - you can’t go out to eat, go to museums, go to shows, the gym, movies, etc. in the city unless you are vaccinated. It’s a soft mandate and this is just covering the last few holdouts.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Dec 6, 2021)

EpiEMS said:


> NYC has achieved high vaccination rates in large part through a de facto mandate - you can’t go out to eat, go to museums, go to shows, the gym, movies, etc. in the city unless you are vaccinated. It’s a soft mandate and this is just covering the last few holdouts.


My issue is with how the mandates are created.  There's been ample time to pass laws requiring them, instead of one elected individual issuing an executive order (especially, as in this case, it was issued by a lame duck mayor on his way out of office.), or an agency which is appointed and not elected.

In a society governed by the rule of law, the ends do not justify the means...no matter how important you view the end as being.


----------



## EpiEMS (Dec 6, 2021)

ffemt8978 said:


> My issue is with how the mandates are created. There's been ample time to pass laws requiring them, instead of one elected individual issuing an executive order (especially, as in this case, it was issued by a lame duck mayor on his way out of office.), or an agency which is appointed and not elected.
> 
> In a society governed by the rule of law, the ends do not justify the means...no matter how important you view the end as being.



I hear you, legislation is eminently preferable. It’s quite dysfunctional that we are getting (but I would argue we need) executive driven mandates at this point.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Dec 6, 2021)

EpiEMS said:


> I hear you, legislation is eminently preferable. It’s quite dysfunctional that we are getting (but I would argue we need) executive driven mandates at this point.


Hard to say we need executive driven mandates when there hasn't even been an attempt to go the legislative route yet.


----------



## EpiEMS (Dec 6, 2021)

ffemt8978 said:


> Hard to say we need executive driven mandates when there hasn't even been an attempt to go the legislative route yet.


I'd be surprised if any legislature could get much done, even in New York, particularly to do something narrowly focused & technical.


----------



## Carlos Danger (Dec 6, 2021)

EpiEMS said:


> I'd be surprised if any legislature could get much done, even in New York, particularly to do something narrowly focused & technical.


But isn’t that kind of the point of our system of government? If legislation can’t be passed, there is a reason for that.


----------



## EpiEMS (Dec 6, 2021)

Carlos Danger said:


> But isn’t that kind of the point of our system of government? If legislation can’t be passed, there is a reason for that.



I think I may have opened a can of worms here. 
Yes and no - the history of the presidency, for example, has been a story of expansion of unilateral executive authority, but of course there is constraint (in theory). If we use wars as a parallel, think of the last declared war - that was WWII. The post-9/11 era has led to huge executive power expansion, (debatably) necessarily so: legislatures debate when people are dying in the streets, somebody arguing for more executive power might argue.


----------



## Carlos Danger (Dec 6, 2021)

EpiEMS said:


> I think I may have opened a can of worms here.
> Yes and no - the history of the presidency, for example, has been a story of expansion of unilateral executive authority, but of course there is constraint (in theory). If we use wars as a parallel, think of the last declared war - that was WWII. The post-9/11 era has led to huge executive power expansion, (debatably) necessarily so: legislatures debate when people are dying in the streets, somebody arguing for more executive power might argue.


“A republic, ma’am……if you can keep it”.

One of the many problems with government by fiat is that the only limiting principle is whatever the executives can get away with. Something is broadly accepted as a reasonable idea now, and then when the other team is in charge they not only use the same precedent to justify actions that are perhaps (at least in the eyes of some) less good and honorable, but they expand that power even further, even if only incrementally.

We can debate whether this pandemic justifies such action (I would argue that it does not), but the  thing that needs to be kept in mind is that once authority is taken it is rarely ceded, and can easily in the future be used for something you disagree with. It seems to happen with more and more frequency.

Many people complain about Congress not getting things done. I would argue that is a feature of our form of government, not a bug. Lack of support for something by elected legislators is not inaction; it is a deliberate reflection of the will of the constituents. Yes things are very dysfunctional right now, but I would also argue that that is a result of a hyperpolarization that at least in part comes from not respecting the democratic processes.


----------



## EpiEMS (Dec 6, 2021)

Carlos Danger said:


> “A republic, ma’am……if you can keep it”.
> 
> One of the many problems with government by fiat is that the only limiting principle is whatever the executives can get away with. Something is broadly accepted as a reasonable idea now, and then when the other team is in charge they not only use the same precedent to justify actions that are perhaps (at least in the eyes of some) less good and honorable, but they expand that power even further, even if only incrementally.
> 
> ...



No qualms with your argument there, I think the precedent of greater executive is *generally* undesirable. However in a more technocratic society I think it is bordering on inevitable. One thought - local mandates give us more natural experiments!


----------



## Carlos Danger (Dec 7, 2021)

EpiEMS said:


> No qualms with your argument there, I think the precedent of greater executive is *generally* undesirable. However in a more technocratic society I think it is bordering on inevitable. *One thought - local mandates give us more natural experiments!*


I mean, you aren't wrong about that. Big difference between this type of thing being done locally vs. federally.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Dec 7, 2021)

2ND EDIT: this bill has been withdrawn because of reported threats against its writer









						Willfully unvaccinated should pay 100% of COVID hospital bills, lawmaker says
					

Rep. Carroll calls the legislation a starting point to hold unvaccinated responsible.




					arstechnica.com
				




That's a new one, but an inevitable one.

I'm actually okay with something like this.  It maintains personal choice while providing consequences if you make a bad decision.

Edit: and it's being done via the legislative process...finally


----------



## ffemt8978 (Dec 7, 2021)

Judge blocks Biden’s vaccine mandate for federal contractors
					

A federal judge on Tuesday blocked President Joe Biden’s administration from enforcing a COVID-19 vaccine mandate for employees of federal contractors, the latest in a string of victories for Republican-led states pushing back against Biden’s pandemic policies.




					apnews.com
				




And another nationwide preliminary injunction has been issued against the federal mandate, this time covering contractors.


----------



## Carlos Danger (Dec 7, 2021)

ffemt8978 said:


> Willfully unvaccinated should pay 100% of COVID hospital bills, lawmaker says
> 
> 
> Rep. Carroll calls the legislation a starting point to hold unvaccinated responsible.
> ...


Speaking strictly on principle (practically is another thing, of course), I agree 100%. People should be held responsible for the consequences of their choices. But why limit it to those who won't be vaccinated? Why not apply it to everyone with a BMI over 30? Who smokes cigarettes or drinks alcohol or test positive for any illicit substance? Who doesn't see a doctor regularly and submit to all the recommended screenings and medical management of chronic diseases? Who exceeds the speed limit or doesn't wear seat belts? Who can't plausibly attest to exercising at least 150 minutes per week and eating 35 servings of vegetables per week? 

On a timeline of a handful of decades, what it costs society to treat unvaccinated COVID patients is a drop in the bucket compared to what it costs society to treat dozens of other conditions that result from lifestyle choices, so I don't see how it makes any sense to hold the unvaccinated responsible for their decisions but no one else.


----------



## Summit (Dec 7, 2021)

@Carlos Danger 

Which one of those ailments that we might hold others responsible for is currently taking up 57% of Colorado's ICU beds? Oh... COVID.

Which one of those ailments is in pandemic state but can be almost entirely mitigated in terms of health system effects with two cheap shots? Ah... COVID.

You can't give obesity, smoking, or illicit substance based diseases to someone who sits next to you for 15 minutes.  But you can transmit COVID.

*Please stop comparing communicable disease to chronic nontransmissible conditions.* It is nonsense to say they of the same principle in honest debate.

I know you are a Libertarian. Well, at heart I am too. The Libertarian adage is: Your right to swing your arm ends before my nose.

So, society has always reasonably placed some requirements on behavior to be part of a free society.

Even the Founding Fathers understood the need for public health measures such as quarantine and immunization (variolation), and the right of society to command such things from unwilling members.

Do you have the right to be drunk? Yes. In Public? If you do not disturb others. While driving? That is hazarding others.

I equate choosing to be unvaccinated with being drunk while driving. Yea you might make it home from the bar without hitting anyone. Or you might cause a multicar pileup. You are hazarding others, society, and yourself much more than if sober and society has decided to restrict your liberty to behave in such a manner so that they can be free and safe from such unjustifiable danger.

No man is an island when it comes to communicable disease.


----------



## Carlos Danger (Dec 7, 2021)

Summit said:


> @Carlos Danger
> 
> Which one of those ailments that we might hold others responsible for is currently taking up 57% of Colorado's ICU beds? Oh... COVID.
> 
> ...


No man is an island when it comes to lots of things.....not just communicable diseases. That's the whole point here. It appears as though you didn't get that I was actually agreeing with the idea. I just took it a bit further and said that if we are going to be fair and logically consistent, then we can and should apply the same reasoning elsewhere.

The proposal in question wasn't just about physical safety......it was more about the economic costs involved, or at least that is what the article implied. Anyone who is vaccinated is pretty safe, physically, from those who choose not to be. In fact, if you are going to equate choosing to be unvaccinated to driving drunk - and I get that analogy - then a more appropriate penalty would be a criminal one, not simply being forced to bear the financial costs of your choice.

Again, on a timeline any longer than a handful of years, the costs borne by society as a result of the choices of those refusing to receive the COVID vaccine will be negligible as compared to the costs borne by society as a result of the many common chronic diseases that result from lifestyle choices. If we are arguing that people should bear the costs of their choices, then why does it matter that one choice relates to a communicable disease and the others do not? Externalities are externalities, are they not?


----------



## Summit (Dec 7, 2021)

@Carlos Danger

To say "well the Pandemic is only a few years long so I can amortize the impact over the next XX years to compare it with chronic problems that will be active of XX years" is dubious reasoning. The impact of the pandemic is HUGE over the 2-3 years where it occurs and the chance to mitigate by immunizing people is simple, sudden, cheap, and huge in impact. Mitigating chronic illnesses is difficult, slow, expensive, and of limited impact. I strenuously disagree that financial impact over different time scales makes them comparable.

As to your assertion that since being unvaccinated is tantamount to physical endangerment of others and thus potentially criminal, well the solution historically during epidemics was to command vaccination; for those who refused, the solution was to temporarily deny some liberty (reduce public participation/quarantine) or to issue a fine. There are SCOTUS cases supporting these measures.



Carlos Danger said:


> Many people complain about Congress not getting things done. I would argue that is a feature of our form of government, not a bug. Lack of support for something by elected legislators is not inaction; it is a deliberate reflection of the will of the constituents. Yes things are very dysfunctional right now, but I would also argue that that is a result of a hyperpolarization that at least in part comes from not respecting the democratic processes.


In general, I agree with everything you said, and also about the dangers of governing by fiat and the tendency of government not to give up powers once assumed. If a contentious issue cannot be addressed by normal lawmaking procedures, then that is a feature, not a bug. *Normally I agree!* 

I beg to differ when it comes to urgent issues and the stick-in-the-spokes of legislation is misinformation and narratives heavily pushed by foreign enemy disinformation operations. Such is the case with vaccines refusal vs mandates.

The issue of urgency is illustrated by the reasonable narrative pushed by seemingly reasonable vaccine hesitant folks when they say "I don't think we should have vaccines without 5-10 years of long term testing." Such a position means you can never vaccinate your way out of a pandemic. It is also a self-deceptive reasoning to take this position: "we really need to have a traditional legislative process that will take years or will be stymied by disinformation operations to solve time sensitive and newly emergent issues in an urgent situation like hospital systems being overwhelmed due to vaccine reluctance fueled by disinformation driven tribalism."

I too fear powers being given and not given up. But to say we can never take emergency actions in an emergency is throwing up a giant target. We invite information warfare to stymie our very vulnerable system. I do agree the standard must be very high for such things as emergency rulemaking.


----------



## Carlos Danger (Dec 7, 2021)

Summit said:


> @Carlos Danger
> 
> To say "well the Pandemic is only a few years long so I can amortize the impact over the next XX years to compare it with chronic problems that will be active of XX years" is dubious reasoning. The impact of the pandemic is HUGE over the 2-3 years where it occurs and the chance to mitigate by immunizing people is simple, sudden, cheap, and huge in impact. Mitigating chronic illnesses is difficult, slow, expensive, and of limited impact. I strenuously disagree that financial impact over different time scales makes them comparable.
> 
> ...


I am not amortizing anything. The impact of the COVID pandemic on society over a short period of time is huge. The impact of the diseases caused by obesity, etc over a long period of time is even more huge. Why force accountability for one but not the other?


----------



## ffemt8978 (Dec 8, 2021)

Summit said:


> @Carlos Danger
> 
> To say "well the Pandemic is only a few years long so I can amortize the impact over the next XX years to compare it with chronic problems that will be active of XX years" is dubious reasoning. The impact of the pandemic is HUGE over the 2-3 years where it occurs and the chance to mitigate by immunizing people is simple, sudden, cheap, and huge in impact. Mitigating chronic illnesses is difficult, slow, expensive, and of limited impact. I strenuously disagree that financial impact over different time scales makes them comparable.
> 
> ...


It's just as self deceptive to state that the legislative process takes years to pass a new law.  Yes it may in some cases, in others it takes much less time.  What takes years is the court battles resulting from mandates issued without proper legal authority or by using the proper process.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Dec 9, 2021)

The traditionallegislative process that takes years to respond to an urgent crisia has now responded...by voting agaisnt a federal mandate for private employers.  The US Senate just voted against the mandate.

https://apnews.com/article/coronavi...lth-congress-d48c96a241ea8922420a3866c6adda2d


----------



## mgr22 (Dec 9, 2021)

ffemt8978 said:


> The traditionallegislative process that takes years to respond to an urgent crisia has now responded...by voting agaisnt a federal mandate for private employers.  The US Senate just voted against the mandate.
> 
> https://apnews.com/article/coronavi...lth-congress-d48c96a241ea8922420a3866c6adda2d


Yes, they did. And this morning, I'm concerned about the latest obstacle to public health. I'd rather feel pride in our "traditional legislative process," but the 2021 version doesn't do it for me. Maybe I'll try again when we're not having a national health crisis.


----------



## Summit (Dec 9, 2021)

ffemt8978 said:


> The traditionallegislative process that takes years to respond to an urgent crisia has now responded...by voting agaisnt a federal mandate for private employers.  The US Senate just voted against the mandate.
> 
> https://apnews.com/article/coronavi...lth-congress-d48c96a241ea8922420a3866c6adda2d


I would not call that a response.

I'd call it a non-response.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Dec 9, 2021)

mgr22 said:


> Yes, they did. And this morning, I'm concerned about the latest obstacle to public health. I'd rather feel pride in our "traditional legislative process," but the 2021 version doesn't do it for me. Maybe I'll try again when we're not having a national health crisis.


My point was, and has been, that if vaccines are to mandatory, then it should be enacted via the legislative process and not one person deciding to do it on his own...no matter how much you support the outcome.

What is enacted by executive fiat can be removed by the next executive's fiat (as has been amply demonstrated by the past few administrations).

If you want it done, there is a right way and a wrong way to do it...and that is something thst is still supposed to matter in this country.  We've been dealing with this disease for ovet two years now, and vaccines have been available for about a year.  There has been more than enough time to pass a law, but nobody has bothered trying because they figure if they claim this requires an urgent response they get a free ride on having to do it the right way.  At some point, this disease is going to become a fact of everyday life because it's not going anywhere.  We're going to be stuck dealing with mutations for a long time to come, and at what point do we accept that and stop treating it as an emergency worthy of discarding our rights, freedoms and principles as a society?


----------



## mgr22 (Dec 9, 2021)

ffemt8978 said:


> My point was, and has been, that if vaccines are to mandatory, then it should be enacted via the legislative process and not one person deciding to do it on his own...no matter how much you support the outcome.
> 
> What is enacted by executive fiat can be removed by the next executive's fiat (as has been amply demonstrated by the past few administrations).
> 
> If you want it done, there is a right way and a wrong way to do it...and that is something thst is still supposed to matter in this country.  We've been dealing with this disease for ovet two years now, and vaccines have been available for about a year.  There has been more than enough time to pass a law, but nobody has bothered trying because they figure if they claim this requires an urgent response they get a free ride on having to do it the right way.  At some point, this disease is going to become a fact of everyday life because it's not going anywhere.  We're going to be stuck dealing with mutations for a long time to come, and at what point do we accept that and stop treating it as an emergency worthy of discarding our rights, freedoms and principles as a society?


Sometimes rights, freedoms, and principles are explicitly supported by laws; sometimes they have little basis other than imagination; and sometimes they are in between. In all of those cases, I believe a willingness _not_ to exercise rights is as important as having them. Otherwise, rights can become excuses for inaction or self-serving actions that benefit only a minority.

I understand the concern about exceptions to SOPs, but I think those exceptions are part of the governing process, and also an element of the trust we put in elected officials.


----------



## Summit (Dec 9, 2021)

The nice thing about executive fiat is that in appropriate urgent circumstances and within the confines of the constitution, it allows actions to be taken urgently.

The nice thing about executive fiat is that it can be undone by the next executive who deems the urgent need over or disagrees with the fiat.

Emergency legislation is a fraught and failure prone process, as all COVID legislation has demonstrated, including the Senate voting to sit on their hands.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Dec 9, 2021)

Summit said:


> The nice thing about executive fiat is that in appropriate urgent circumstances and within the confines of the constitution, it allows actions to be taken urgently.


Except in this case, at least three courts have found the federal mandate may have exceeded those limits.  

As fare as legislation goes, I'm only aware of two cases.  The one in Illinois covered earlier in thread, and the Senate vote.  I would posit that given the lack of any serious effort to go that route to date, there is no desire to do so.  Several in the executive branches of our various government levels seem to have decided they will rule by executive orders and mandates, because to them the ends justify the means.  That is not a society based on the rule of law, but one based upon the rule of the pen and how much they think they can get away with.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Dec 16, 2021)

CDC has come out and recommended Moderna or Pfizer vaccines over the J&J vaccine









						CDC recommends Pfizer, Moderna COVID-19 shots over J&J's
					

Most Americans should be given the Pfizer or Moderna vaccines instead of the Johnson & Johnson shot that can cause rare but serious blood clots, U.S. health officials said Thursday. The strange clotting problem has caused nine confirmed deaths after J&J vaccinations — while the Pfizer and...




					apnews.com


----------



## Summit (Dec 17, 2021)

J&J's crap efficacy is the issue more than rare adverse events.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Dec 17, 2021)

I missed this update at first, but the healthcare vaccine mandate is no longer on a court ordered stay in about half the states.









						Health worker vaccine mandate blocked in half the states
					

NEW ORLEANS (AP) — A federal appeals court panel on Wednesday lifted a nationwide ban against President Joe Biden’s vaccine mandate for health care workers, instead blocking the requirement in only certain states and creating the potential for patchwork enforcement across the country.




					apnews.com


----------



## ffemt8978 (Dec 18, 2021)

Court allows Biden employer vaccine mandate to take effect
					

A federal appeals court panel on Friday allowed President Joe Biden’s COVID-19 vaccine mandate for larger private employers to move ahead, reversing a previous decision on a requirement that could affect some 84 million U.S workers.




					apnews.com
				




And the employer vaccine mandate is back, but no info on when it will go into effect now.


----------



## FiremanMike (Dec 21, 2021)

Got my Moderna booster today.  I’ve been kinda stalling on it but decided to go ahead and do it.

I’m only 5 hours out and the aches are starting.. it’s going to be a long night..


----------



## Kevinf (Dec 22, 2021)

FiremanMike said:


> Got my Moderna booster today.  I’ve been kinda stalling on it but decided to go ahead and do it.
> 
> I’m only 5 hours out and the aches are starting.. it’s going to be a long night..


Did you take an NSAID beforehand? I popped 1 Aleve just before going for the booster and had zero symptoms.


----------



## CCCSD (Dec 22, 2021)

FiremanMike said:


> Got my Moderna booster today.  I’ve been kinda stalling on it but decided to go ahead and do it.
> 
> I’m only 5 hours out and the aches are starting.. it’s going to be a long night..


Enjoy your cytokine storm. Mine lasted two days.


----------



## FiremanMike (Dec 22, 2021)

Kevinf said:


> Did you take an NSAID beforehand? I popped 1 Aleve just before going for the booster and had zero symptoms.





CCCSD said:


> Enjoy your cytokine storm. Mine lasted two days.


I took some tylenol the moment I started getting aches and actually feel ok-ish..  my arm hurts and I feel kinda blah but overall not anywhere near as bad as shot #2


----------



## ffemt8978 (Dec 30, 2021)

Israel approves 4th vaccine dose for most vulnerable
					

TEL AVIV (AP) — Israel has approved a fourth vaccine dose for people most vulnerable to COVID-19, an official said Thursday, becoming one of the first countries to do so as it braces for a wave of infections fueled by the omicron variant.




					apnews.com
				




Isreal has now started recommending a 4th vaccine dose.  If this keeps up, we're going to need quartley vaccinations.


----------



## Summit (Dec 30, 2021)

ffemt8978 said:


> Israel approves 4th vaccine dose for most vulnerable
> 
> 
> TEL AVIV (AP) — Israel has approved a fourth vaccine dose for people most vulnerable to COVID-19, an official said Thursday, becoming one of the first countries to do so as it braces for a wave of infections fueled by the omicron variant.
> ...


Only for highest risk persons/immunocompromised... Israel doesn't like to accept casualties.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Dec 30, 2021)

Summit said:


> Only for highest risk persons/immunocompromised... Israel doesn't like to accept casualties.


That just means they're the first.  It won't be long before everyone is recommend to get another booster.


----------



## Kevinf (Dec 31, 2021)

ffemt8978 said:


> That just means they're the first.  It won't be long before everyone is recommend to get another booster.


You'd almost think there was a global pandemic going on.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Dec 31, 2021)

Kevinf said:


> You'd almost think there was a global pandemic going on.


You'd almost think there has never been a global pandemic before.

So far everything we've been told to do to combat this pandemic has been way less efficient then we were led to believe.  Two weeks to flatten the curve, social distancing, masks, vaccines and now boosters.  All have helped to some degree, but none have lived up to their hype.


----------



## Carlos Danger (Dec 31, 2021)

ffemt8978 said:


> You'd almost think there has never been a global pandemic before.
> 
> So far everything we've been told to do to combat this pandemic has been way less efficient then we were led to believe.  Two weeks to flatten the curve, social distancing, masks, vaccines and now boosters.  All have helped to some degree, but none have lived up to their hype.


And they'll tell us that it isn't a problem with the interventions or just the nature of a highly potent virus in the age of globalization, but its all the fault of the drooling, uneducated masses for being too stubborn and uncooperative to do exactly what they are told by "the officials" despite the fact that those officials have proven themselves time and again to be incompetent and dishonest.


----------



## CCCSD (Dec 31, 2021)

Thanks AGAIN, China.


----------



## DesertMedic66 (Dec 31, 2021)

ffemt8978 said:


> You'd almost think there has never been a global pandemic before.
> 
> So far everything we've been told to do to combat this pandemic has been way less efficient then we were led to believe.  Two weeks to flatten the curve, social distancing, masks, vaccines and now boosters.  All have helped to some degree, but none have lived up to their hype.


I think all of those things listed would have been much more effective if the entire population did them. Look at the countries that really clamped down on everything such as New Zealand and how they were to completely eliminate all COVID cases in their country for a long time and are really only getting hit now with it.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Dec 31, 2021)

DesertMedic66 said:


> I think all of those things listed would have been much more effective if the entire population did them. Look at the countries that really clamped down on everything such as New Zealand and how they were to completely eliminate all COVID cases in their country for a long time and are really only getting hit now with it.


Apples and oranges..

It is much easier to isolate an island nation with different laws and rights.


----------



## DesertMedic66 (Dec 31, 2021)

ffemt8978 said:


> Apples and oranges..
> 
> It is much easier to isolate an island nation with different laws and rights.


Sure it’s a different population but all of the actions they took were the same actions that we put in place. Everything was less effective because we were less effective at following it. Nations who strictly followed it were much more effective. 

They followed strong stay at home protocols, social distancing, mask wearing, staying home if you are sick, and also have around 80% of their entire population fully vaccinated. Those were all the same policies that the US attempted to use.


----------



## mgr22 (Dec 31, 2021)

ffemt8978 said:


> Apples and oranges..
> 
> It is much easier to isolate an island nation with different laws and rights.


I think DesertMedic66 is addressing compliance with public health measures. I don't think he's saying the U.S. is like New Zealand.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Dec 31, 2021)

DesertMedic66 said:


> Sure it’s a different population but all of the actions they took were the same actions that we put in place. Everything was less effective because we were less effective at following it. Nations who strictly followed it were much more effective.
> 
> They followed strong stay at home protocols, social distancing, mask wearing, staying home if you are sick, and also have around 80% of their entire population fully vaccinated. Those were all the same policies that the US attempted to use.





mgr22 said:


> I think DesertMedic66 is addressing compliance with public health measures. I don't think he's saying the U.S. is like New Zealand.


They also set up police checkpoints to enforce the quarantine.  Sure, some of the fundamental steps they took were similar, but public compliance is a lot different when it is being enforced at the end of a badge.


----------



## mgr22 (Dec 31, 2021)

ffemt8978 said:


> They also set up police checkpoints to enforce the quarantine.  Sure, some of the fundamental steps they took were similar, but public compliance is a lot different when it is being enforced at the end of a badge.


The issue, I believe, isn't New Zealand; it's compliance with public health initiatives in the U.S. I don't have the tools to measure it. All I have is pre-2020 memories of employer-mandated vaccinations treated as routine by me and my coworkers. We didn't over-think the premise that it's bad for healthcare workers to infect their patients. There was no option not to get vaccinated and remain employed. Were we wrong then? Should we have had rights to opt out of public health initiatives and remain members of our communities? What about now?


----------



## ffemt8978 (Dec 31, 2021)

mgr22 said:


> The issue, I believe, isn't New Zealand; it's compliance with public health initiatives in the U.S. I don't have the tools to measure it. All I have is pre-2020 memories of employer-mandated vaccinations treated as routine by me and my coworkers. We didn't over-think the premise that it's bad for healthcare workers to infect their patients. There was no option not to get vaccinated and remain employed. Were we wrong then? Should we have had rights to opt out of public health initiatives and remain members of our communities? What about now?


That's the question that remains to be answered.

I agree the issue is not about New Zealand, I was pointing out that comparing their compliance with ours is like comparing apples to oranges.

Also, I've never had to provide proof of vaccination for any job, hospital, ambulance or law enforcement included.


----------



## E tank (Dec 31, 2021)

mgr22 said:


> The issue, I believe, isn't New Zealand; it's compliance with public health initiatives in the U.S. I don't have the tools to measure it. All I have is pre-2020 memories of employer-mandated vaccinations treated as routine by me and my coworkers. We didn't over-think the premise that it's bad for healthcare workers to infect their patients. There was no option not to get vaccinated and remain employed. Were we wrong then? Should we have had rights to opt out of public health initiatives and remain members of our communities? What about now?


Employer/school mandated vaccines for stuff like MMR, polio etc. are not even in the same class as covid vaccines. Those have been utilized for decades and provide reliable, predictable and demonstrable long term immunity. The covid vaccines don't come even vaguely near to meeting any of those criteria yet have been hyped to be in the same category by some very dishonest people that have no trouble lying by omission.


----------



## E tank (Dec 31, 2021)

Summit said:


> @Carlos Danger
> 
> Which one of those ailments that we might hold others responsible for is currently taking up 57% of Colorado's ICU beds? Oh... COVID.
> 
> ...


Where will you stop the  healthcare 'do the crime, pay the time' mentality? 

 To suggest that Covid anywhere near approaches the consumption of resources than do say obesity and smoking (to name 2) just because there has been a very recent and visible (and temporary) spike in ICU admissions is absurd.  That kind of bill is retribution against a very specific group for having the temerity to question government policy that has yet to provide consistently reliable, demonstrable and repeatable results. 

 Covid will be long gone while these two entities will continue to need management. And most will never be admitted to the ICU.


----------



## mgr22 (Jan 1, 2022)

E tank said:


> Employer/school mandated vaccines for stuff like MMR, polio etc. are not even in the same class as covid vaccines. Those have been utilized for decades and provide reliable, predictable and demonstrable long term immunity. The covid vaccines don't come even vaguely near to meeting any of those criteria yet have been hyped to be in the same category by some very dishonest people that have no trouble lying by omission.


I don't think dishonesty about hyping the vaccine is as prevalent as dishonesty associated with (1) some hyped "cures" for COVID, (2) some risks of vaccination, (3) the existence of COVID, and (4) the consequences of COVID, including death and disability. But that's not what I was commenting about. I was questioning the value of public health initiatives without some sort of enforced compliance. 

The vaccines you mentioned wouldn't have been as effective if a third of the population had declined them because they didn't like being told what to do. I think regard for others and a willingness to compromise should be high priorities in any society. Part of that is to accept, as individuals, that we're not all qualified to make the best decisions for others, or even for ourselves. We have to trust some people based on criteria other than political party -- e.g., training and experience.

I think we've strayed pretty far from those principles, and I'm questioning whether we were wrong before or wrong now.


----------



## Carlos Danger (Jan 1, 2022)

mgr22 said:


> The vaccines you mentioned wouldn't have been as effective if a third of the population had declined them because they didn't like being told what to do. I think regard for others and a willingness to compromise should be high priorities in any society. Part of that is to accept, as individuals, that we're not all qualified to make the best decisions for others, or even for ourselves. We have to trust some people based on criteria other than political party -- e.g., training and experience.
> 
> I think we've strayed pretty far from those principles, and I'm questioning whether we were wrong before or wrong now.


The COVID vaccines have been widely available to the general public for less than a year, and in that time well over 60% of the population has become fully vaccinated and 75% has received at least one dose. Are you confident that there was not comparable skepticism when the polio vaccine was first rolled out and that similar penetrance was achieved as rapidly? Different time, different disease, different situation, I know, but I highly doubt that progress was as fast with public acceptance of the polio vaccine as it has been with the COVID vaccines. Right or wrong, skepticism about the necessity and safety of vaccines is not a new phenomenon.

Maybe read that first line again: in well under a year, 3/4 of the population has at least begun the process of becoming vaccinated, and for the most part done so completely voluntarily. Anyone who is at high risk of becoming seriously ill with COVID has been vaccinated already for many months already, if they choose. Yet here we are, acting as though we can't get anyone on the same page about this thing; acting as though we thought this would all happen overnight. 

It is easy to say that everyone ought to choose to become vaccinated for the greater good even if they don't want to or don't feel like it's necessary for their own protection. But with the possible / probable exception of health care workers and a few other occupational roles, I just don't see a successful argument that every individual has an ethical obligation to become vaccinated when others have access to relatively easy and convenient and very effective ways of protecting themselves.


----------



## Jim37F (Jan 1, 2022)

Wellp, especially since I was travelling, went and got my Moderna Booster (and had them do my Flu shot at the same time).

Kaiser kind of did a double take with me being out of region lol but wasn't a big deal


----------



## CCCSD (Jan 1, 2022)

“I just don't see a successful argument that every individual has an ethical obligation to become vaccinated when others have access to relatively easy and convenient and very effective ways of protecting themselves”

Except that if everyone thought that, no one would do it.


----------



## SandpitMedic (Jan 2, 2022)

If you get the vid are you going to get boosted/vaxxed?


----------



## Carlos Danger (Jan 2, 2022)

CCCSD said:


> “I just don't see a successful argument that every individual has an ethical obligation to become vaccinated when others have access to relatively easy and convenient and very effective ways of protecting themselves”
> 
> Except that if everyone thought that, no one would do it.


My guess is that the vast majority of people who get vaccinated do so to protect themselves, not others.

These newer variants are being contracted and transmitted by fully vaccinated people like crazy, so I don't think there's even much of an argument to be made right now that getting getting vaccinated to protect others even works. You get vaccinated so that when (not if) you are exposed to the virus, your illness is mild rather than requiring an ICU admission.


----------



## E tank (Jan 2, 2022)

SandpitMedic said:


> If you get the vid are you going to get boosted/vaxxed?


If there were reliable evidence to show that it was effective, sure.


----------



## Summit (Jan 2, 2022)

E tank said:


> Employer/school mandated vaccines for stuff like MMR, polio etc. are not even in the same class as covid vaccines. Those have been utilized for decades and provide reliable, predictable and demonstrable long term immunity. The covid vaccines don't come even vaguely near to meeting any of those criteria yet have been hyped to be in the same category by some very dishonest people that have no trouble lying by omission.


Yea just because you parrot a bunch of total BS doesn't make the false parts true or the true-but-irrelevant parts relevant.

This is the problem with smart people who are experts in their own subfield often have some preconceived concept that predispose them to believe inaccurate things about other fields without proper critical thinking.

The lack of long term is not really true (there is universal knowledge about long term effects of vaccination and no reason to believe this would be different) and given that is not relevant given short and medium term critical realities. You can not even apply a reductio to check your (il)logic: such thinking would prevent the application of vaccine in any pandemic by your reason.

You want to talk about lying by omission as you then omit the fact that there is apparent long term protection, well demonstrated so far, by the vaccines against severe illness, and against previous variants for infection, and some lower level of immunity against symptomatic infection with the new variant.

You have no real excuse to ignorance, real or feigned, to exclude the knowledge of all the previous discussions having been a long participant in this thread. I sincerely doubt you would vehemently espouse such opinions in care conference at hospital with others who you realize are actually knowledgeable in this subject. You should act with the same level of professionalism here despite the lack of face to face and first person familiarity. But I should not be surprised since you actually stated that you believe that vaccine refusers are merely bold objectors to dishonest government.


----------



## Summit (Jan 2, 2022)

Carlos Danger said:


> And they'll tell us that it isn't a problem with the interventions or just the nature of a highly potent virus in the age of globalization, but its all the fault of the drooling, uneducated masses for being too stubborn and uncooperative to do exactly what they are told by "the officials" despite the fact that those officials have proven themselves time and again to be incompetent and dishonest.


Oh it is a pandemic virus in the age of globalization that is the genesis of the problems difficulty. Solutions, imperfect, and are hard and based on evolving information. However, the fight is made all the harder when well crafted disinformation campaigns originating from various malactors: enemy states, the power hungry, and the ignorant combine in to a maelstrom that raises the confusion of even intelligent non-experts.

Casting public health have indeed acted with the best information available, but are then unfairly cast as incompetent and dishonest for it, despite also having more successes and many of their failures are failures in application due to groups of individuals acting "stupidly" driven by disinformation and human nature. Have there been some examples of individual officials who were consistently incompetent and/or dishonest, hell yes. Have there been incompetent and dishonest actions that are not characteristic of the whole? YES.

Do you get to characterize all public health officials as inherently incompetent and dishonest? ABSOLUTELY NOT and it is irresponsible to do so. 

We as health professionals should vigorously attack poor policies while vigorously supporting the good and sensible ones. Unfairly coloring all PH negative plays directly into the hands of the malactors. Be better  than that.


----------



## Summit (Jan 2, 2022)

Carlos Danger said:


> Are you confident that there was not comparable skepticism when the polio vaccine was first rolled out and that similar penetrance was achieved as rapidly? Different time, different disease, different situation, I know


You cannot identify the situations as apples vs snickers bars but then say the Polio situation is worth considering for relevant skepticism for today. Vaccine skepticism has always been present going back to Jenner! Modes of transmission and prevalence, case doubling times... I'll just leave with peak annual incidence of paralytic polio myelitis was "only" 20K. Flu kills more than Polio paralyzed at its peak! 6.7 million COVID hospitalizations in the USA. So, the level of skepticism should be scaled to the threat.



Carlos Danger said:


> Maybe read that first line again: in well under a year, 3/4 of the population has at least begun the process of becoming vaccinated, and for the most part done so completely voluntarily. Anyone who is at high risk of becoming seriously ill with COVID has been vaccinated already for many months already, if they choose. Yet here we are, acting as though we can't get anyone on the same page about this thing; acting as though we thought this would all happen overnight.


The problem is that simply saying "3/4" or "most" might _feel _good, but epidemiology tells us what is "enough." The problem with public health and extremely contagious disease is that it cannot be solely about free choice. Measles, smallpox, typhoid, the list of epidemics and pandemics is replete with examples of why pure voluntary compliance is not sufficient. You don't have to like that fact. In fact, I will join you in greatly disliking that fact. But I won't dismiss it. 



Carlos Danger said:


> It is easy to say that everyone ought to choose to become vaccinated for the greater good even if they don't want to or don't feel like it's necessary for their own protection. But with the possible / probable exception of health care workers and a few other occupational roles, I just don't see a successful argument that every individual has an ethical obligation to become vaccinated when others have access to relatively easy and convenient and very effective ways of protecting themselves.


In so many vaccine preventable illnesses, the protection of those who cannot be vaccinated or who don't seroconvert is the decisive argument for compelling vaccination above voluntary levels. So you ask, if you have a vaccine that is 0% effective in controlling transmission or mild disease? In other diseases, the compelling argument is not abrogated by incomplete effectiveness of vaccines, a known issue... in fact, it makes higher rates all the more necessary. The current vaccines, even with Omicron, are significantly better than 0% against transmission and mild illness... but there is no hope for herd immunity. So how do you argue for compelling levels beyond voluntary? As with influenza, and drastically more so than influenza, you must not ignore second and third order effects when thinking through your statements? The effects of inevitably overwhelmed healthcare due to the unvaccinated absolutely substantiates the ethical argument to protect others.


----------



## Summit (Jan 2, 2022)

Carlos Danger said:


> These newer variants are being contracted and transmitted by fully vaccinated people like crazy, so I don't think there's even much of an argument to be made right now that getting getting vaccinated to protect others even works. Y*ou get vaccinated so that when (not if) you are exposed to the virus, your illness is mild rather than requiring an ICU admission.*


Your latter sentence is the most correct, but doesn't fully capture the rationale: Again, being vaccinated to protect others is now about protecting others by ensuring hospitals are functioning, and also at this point we are literally considering the widespread sick staff issues disrupting the economy and society, so you are literally doing your part for society by having a milder course so the country can run. Maybe less important if you are a circus clown, maybe more important if you are a truck driver.

The first sentence, despite Omicron's partial immune escape against previous immunity from vaccination or previous infection, there are still markedly lower symptomatic rates in the previously vaccinated population. So some infections and thus transmission are prevented... and we have evidence of shorter shedding periods of replication competent virus in those with previous immunity.

We also have some studies suggesting that if you are infected after vaccination (or vice versa) appears to offer better cross-variant immunity for the future.


----------



## Summit (Jan 2, 2022)

SandpitMedic said:


> If you get the vid are you going to get boosted/vaxxed?


It makes sense to get at least one dose of mRNA vaccine some time after your infection if you were not vaccinated prior to infection. It is the same prime-boost model and there is evidence for increase cross variant protection. Further, we have evidence out of South Africa that the reinfection of previous COVID patients by Omicron is about 10x the rate of previous variants. In terms of personal goals, the risk is extremely low and the inconvenience is a day of your choosing feeling crummy vs the risk of an unplanned week of feeling crummy. In terms of societal goals, yea almost everyone who hasn't had infection or vaccine will get sick, many of those who just had vaccine will get it, and some who got boosted will still get it, but the goal right now is to not have everyone get it at the same time so that the hospitals stay staff, businesses stay open, and society functions more smoothly.


----------



## MackTheKnife (Jan 2, 2022)

Carlos Danger said:


> My guess is that the vast majority of people who get vaccinated do so to protect themselves, not others.
> 
> These newer variants are being contracted and transmitted by fully vaccinated people like crazy, so I don't think there's even much of an argument to be made right now that getting getting vaccinated to protect others even works. You get vaccinated so that when (not if) you are exposed to the virus, your illness is mild rather than requiring an ICU admission.


Bravo!


----------



## MackTheKnife (Jan 2, 2022)

mgr22 said:


> I think DesertMedic66 is addressing compliance with public health measures. I don't think he's saying the U.S. is like New Zealand.


I would hope that we are nothing like NZ. And here goes, #Tigger, straight up left-wing liberal society that issues edicts banning guns, issuing mandates, etc. I'm injecting a political response because COVID is totally political.


----------



## Summit (Jan 2, 2022)

NZ... What works in terms of disease prevention and control for NZ, a small 1st world population on extremely remote islands with a bit more communitarian attitude of society (than some other western nations, but far more individualist than many East Asian nations) doesn't necessarily work elsewhere. For them, "COVID Zero" made sense when it didn't in other nations... for a while... and let them function _within _their nation without most of the restrictions the rest of the non-island world imposed. That's because they could drop draconian measures once at COVID zero, except for border controls which are relatively easy to do. When they had an outbreak, they could tamp it down quickly: Being a smaller population bodes well for a more collectivist (thinking of good of your neighbor, your community). 

They could until the bug got to wild then no more COVID zero, then it's vaccinate into the endemic. 

(NZ would consider me ultra-conservative in my politics and I abhor their government rules on firearms, but I loved the country and folks I met there, I have friends there).


----------



## E tank (Jan 2, 2022)

Summit said:


> Yea just because you parrot a bunch of total BS doesn't make the false parts true or the true-but-irrelevant parts relevant.
> 
> This is the problem with smart people who are experts in their own subfield often have some preconceived concept that predispose them to believe inaccurate things about other fields without proper critical thinking.
> 
> ...


Weird...getting a toxic vibe...not looking to trade hostile jabs. If it's too intense, just tap out. Its cool. 

What is clear to me in this conversation (not just on this forum but everywhere) is that it has been reduced to an ideological one where folks take it personally when they are challenged on an element they consider to be dogma. I'm not saying your god doesn't exist...I am challenging the narrative that covid vaccines and the covid virus are in anyway nearly in the same category as other pathogens and their legitimately mandated vaccines. Studies are coming fast and furious and are almost as valuable in demonstrating bias confirmation error as guiding public health policy. 

Just to be clear...do I think adults should be vaccinated? Of course I do. It clearly reduces severity of disease in most people. I think that there are high risk groups and specific occupational exposure risk groups that are looking for trouble if they don't get vaccinated. I, like you, have witnessed their deaths first hand. 

Vaccinated people get covid. Boosted vaccinated people get covid. People that get covid, that have been vaccinated get covid again in less than one year. Now a fourth shot is being advocated for some groups.  Name another pathogen/vaccine that has that distinction. A vaccination by the commonly accepted definition produces immunity. What do you call a shot that reduces the severity of symptoms?

  Do I think it should be mandatory? No. For anyone, much less children. There are well intentioned bureaucrats that, in their earnestness to contain the disease, run their mouths with the rationale that even though what they're saying has no reliable evidence behind it, in an over abundance of caution, it won't hurt people to hear.  Should I have insinuated that they're lying? You got me. No. At least not all of them. 

But that is an undeniable and demonstrable phenomenon in this epidemic and it only serves to fuel dismissive attitudes once the statements are proven to be inaccurate. Claims about the effectiveness of the vaccine early on are just one example. 

I have healthy family members that have not been vaccinated and have not (as far as they know) been infected. Were they to be infected, they are extremely unlikely to require hospitalization let alone ICU admission as they are very fit with zero co-morbidities.  They continue to mask and distance when appropriate.

To your charge that I would not express these sentiments in a public forum at my hospital, you're unfortunately absolutely correct about that for the reasons I've stated above. This has become a pseudo-religious conversation and to suggest even in some isolated, extraordinary setting that it might be ok to not question the decision of some folks not to be vaccinated or that their medical insurance should be as good as anyone else's, is to risk being burned at the stake professionally. So, again, you got me. I feel safe here. Sue me. 

Peace.

ps...thanks for saying I'm smart (albeit illogical)! 😁


----------



## ffemt8978 (Jan 2, 2022)

Summit said:


> Yea just because you parrot a bunch of total BS doesn't make the false parts true or the true-but-irrelevant parts relevant.
> 
> This is the problem with smart people who are experts in their own subfield often have some preconceived concept that predispose them to believe inaccurate things about other fields without proper critical thinking.
> 
> ...


No reason to believe this vaccine would be any different than compared to other vaccines means two things:
1) there is no proof either way yet
2) just because you see no reason to question it does not mean everyone else must see no reason to question it


----------



## DrParasite (Jan 3, 2022)

Carlos Danger said:


> My guess is that the vast majority of people who get vaccinated do so to protect themselves, not others.


Without getting into any of the other discussions, the reason I got vaccinated (and last week got the booster too) was strictly for selfish reasons.  I did it so when (not if, when) I catch covid, it won't suck as much, and I won't have to go through what the unvaccinated went through when they got sick.  My desire to get the shot had 0 to do with anyone else.  To be perfectly honest, what risks others face had little to no impact on my decision to get vaccinated.


CCCSD said:


> “I just don't see a successful argument that every individual has an ethical obligation to become vaccinated when others have access to relatively easy and convenient and very effective ways of protecting themselves”
> 
> Except that if everyone thought that, no one would do it.


If you want to get vaccinated, get vaccinated.  If you don't, don't. It's not my responsibility to get vaccinated to protect YOU.  if you want to be protected, get vaccinated.  if you can't, well, wear an n95 24/7, and never leave your house and prevent infections.  We all need to make scarifies to ensure our own health, and you need to make the decision on what you are going to do.  I have 0 ethical obligation to do anything to do protect you; that obligation falls to you and you alone.  

Taking it to the extreme: if covid wiped out all of the unvaccinated (it won't, but lets pretend), then I guess there would be no further risk to you right?  That's their call, and their right to make stupid decisions about their health.


----------



## mgr22 (Jan 3, 2022)

Not everyone in our society is equally able to protect themselves from harm. Immunity varies among people with or without vaccines; so does strength, intelligence, general health, opportunities, wealth, etc. We have a history in this country of sharing resources to smooth out some of those differences. I see that as a plus, not a minus.

I get the part about self-determination, but I wouldn't want to live or work with people who gave zero f***s about the welfare of others.


----------



## DrParasite (Jan 3, 2022)

mgr22 said:


> I get the part about self-determination, but I wouldn't want to live or work with people who gave zero f***s about the welfare of others.


You are misunderstanding what I am saying: I do care about the welfare of others, which is why I encourage them to get vaccinated.  Get vaccinated, they are pretty much free, and it allows you to protect yourself.  Some places are even bribing people to get vaccinated.  Share the resources, anyone who wants a vaccine should get it.  I will also admit (again) that I got the vaccine out of selfishness, because I wanted to protect myself, and I think everyone should get the vaccine to protect themselves (again, looking out for #1) from the outside world that can put them into a world of hurt.

There is a saying: the lord helps those who help themselves.  Without deviating into the religious aspects, you can lead a horse to water, but you can't force it to drink.  What more do you want? Personal responsibility is often a lost concept in todays age, but it can't be ignored, and people should realize that their actions (or lack there of) have consequences.


mgr22 said:


> Immunity varies among people with or without vaccines; so does strength, intelligence, general health, opportunities, wealth, etc. We have a history in this country of sharing resources to smooth out some of those differences. I see that as a plus, not a minus.


If you don't want to get the shot, for whatever reason, I'm cool with that, because that's your decision.  But don't tell me that I need to get a shot, or wear a mask 24/7, or stop living my life, going out, seeing family, because of your decision.  If you have low strength, low intelligence, low health, low opportunities, low wealth, or anything else you can think of, than you need to take adequate precautions to protect yourself against COVID and any other pathogen out there (even though the shot is free, and available nationwide to almost anyone who wants it).

If you choose not to protect yourself, well, that's a decision you are making, and you need to deal with the consequences.  And I have little sympathy for you, especially if the consequences were preventable (that might be the 0 f***s you were referring to).  It's not up to the rest of the world to change because of your own decisions.  But the healthcare world should still treat you just the same, just like they would for any illness or injury you sustained.


----------



## Tigger (Jan 3, 2022)

DrParasite said:


> You are misunderstanding what I am saying: I do care about the welfare of others, which is why I encourage them to get vaccinated.  Get vaccinated, they are pretty much free, and it allows you to protect yourself.  Some places are even bribing people to get vaccinated.  Share the resources, anyone who wants a vaccine should get it.  I will also admit (again) that I got the vaccine out of selfishness, because I wanted to protect myself, and I think everyone should get the vaccine to protect themselves (again, looking out for #1) from the outside world that can put them into a world of hurt.
> 
> There is a saying: the lord helps those who help themselves.  Without deviating into the religious aspects, you can lead a horse to water, but you can't force it to drink.  What more do you want? Personal responsibility is often a lost concept in todays age, but it can't be ignored, and people should realize that their actions (or lack there of) have consequences.
> 
> ...


Failing to get vaccinated does have healthcare consequences for the vaccinated that they cannot control. If you are unvaccinated and end up in the hospital, your stay is statistically preventable. You are using resources that ostensibly were not needed, and could have been easily redirected to someone in need of non-COVID care. And sure, we could argue that if your diet sucks and you end up needing cardiac care that this was preventable too. But one comes in the form of a free shot and is a response to what has been a mostly unprecedented event. It's low hanging fruit.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Jan 4, 2022)

One correction...the vaccine is NOT free.  It is paid for by tax dollars rather than having to pay on site.  Make no mistake, the pharma companies would not have even thought about making a vaccine unless they knew they were going to be paid for it.


----------



## DrParasite (Jan 4, 2022)

Tigger said:


> Failing to get vaccinated does have healthcare consequences for the vaccinated that they cannot control. If you are unvaccinated and end up in the hospital, your stay is statistically preventable. You are using resources that ostensibly were not needed, and could have been easily redirected to someone in need of non-COVID care.


fair argument.  and valid, but there goes that slippery slope


Tigger said:


> And sure, we could argue that if your diet sucks and you end up needing cardiac care that this was preventable too.


Agreed.  and if you drive drunk and crash, that's preventable, yet I don't see any government mandates for breathalizers in every car.  or banning fast food (that wouldn't cost the government a penny).  

or abolishing cigarettes.  if you smoke, and end up with a respiratory ailment, many that will end up requiring hospital admission, you are "using resources that ostensibly were not needed, and could have been easily redirected to someone in need of [non-smoking related] care.  Your stay is "statistically preventable."

And we won't even go into those who end up hospitalized due to addition related issues, because the vast majority of those are preventable (no one forced you to take the first drug; I'll stipulate that after you are addicted, it's beyond your control).  don't forget, drugs wreck havok on your body, and require lots of resources, esp if you end up intubated.

See how that slippery slope of "preventable issues" can start to look really bad?


Tigger said:


> But one comes in the form of a free shot and is a response to what has been a mostly unprecedented event. It's low hanging fruit.


So get the shot.  keep yourself out of the hospital.  stop worrying about what I do, and protect yourself. if I get up in the hospital, that's my issue, not yours, and the healthcare system should treat me, as they treat every other "preventable" ailment.  If I take up resources that you need (for some non-covid related issue), that sucks; but we have a finite amount of resources in the hospital, and resources were limited pre-covid.


----------



## MonkeyArrow (Jan 4, 2022)

DrParasite said:


> So get the shot. keep yourself out of the hospital. stop worrying about what I do, and protect yourself. if I get up in the hospital, that's my issue, not yours, and the healthcare system should treat me, as they treat every other "preventable" ailment. If I take up resources that you need (for some non-covid related issue), that sucks; but we have a finite amount of resources in the hospital, and resources were limited pre-covid.


So this is something I’ve been musing about for a long time. If you take this line of reasoning, why shouldn’t I as an EM physician/intensivist/nurse/paramedic be able to choose not to treat you? If you end up in the hospital, as you state, it’s not only your problem but it’s also mine now. So you choose to not get the vaccine, and I choose not to treat you. Everyone makes their own choices as individuals; me choosing not to treat you (the hypothetical you, a person who is not vaccinated, not DrParasite specifically) is my own free will to use my medical education and training in whatever way I see fit.

I know someone is going to come along and say ‘well CMS rules require anyone accepting federal funds through medicare to not deny care’. Ok, in this hypothetical, I band together with a 1000 of my closest medical friends to work at a private hospital that doesn’t accept Medicare/aid patients.

But what about the investment the federal government has made in you by supporting your medical school with federally backed loans and subsidizing your residency training? Well, there’s already no expectation of being indebted to any kind of service for that. People leave medicine immediately after finishing training to go into industry or start a family, and you don’t see an outcry to stop that from happening.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Jan 4, 2022)

MonkeyArrow said:


> So this is something I’ve been musing about for a long time. If you take this line of reasoning, why shouldn’t I as an EM physician/intensivist/nurse/paramedic be able to choose not to treat you? If you end up in the hospital, as you state, it’s not only your problem but it’s also mine now. So you choose to not get the vaccine, and I choose not to treat you. Everyone makes their own choices as individuals; me choosing not to treat you (the hypothetical you, a person who is not vaccinated, not DrParasite specifically) is my own free will to use my medical education and training in whatever way I see fit.



Wouldn't that fall under the auspices of you agreed to those conditions in exchange for being allowed to perform medical procedures?  You knew what the expectations were before entering the field, unlike being mandated to get a new vaccine midway through your life.


MonkeyArrow said:


> I know someone is going to come along and say ‘well CMS rules require anyone accepting federal funds through medicare to not deny care’. Ok, in this hypothetical, I band together with a 1000 of my closest medical friends to work at a private hospital that doesn’t accept Medicare/aid patients.



Until the government comes along and says that any employer with more than 100 employess must treat anyone who shows up because we're in a global pandemic that requires emergency measures implemented by an unelected government agency.


MonkeyArrow said:


> But what about the investment the federal government has made in you by supporting your medical school with federally backed loans and subsidizing your residency training? Well, there’s already no expectation of being indebted to any kind of service for that. People leave medicine immediately after finishing training to go into industry or start a family, and you don’t see an outcry to stop that from happening.


Let's not even get into the whole student loan forgiveness issue in this thread please.


----------



## DrParasite (Jan 4, 2022)

MonkeyArrow said:


> So this is something I’ve been musing about for a long time. If you take this line of reasoning, why shouldn’t I as an EM physician/intensivist/nurse/paramedic be able to choose not to treat you? If you end up in the hospital, as you state, it’s not only your problem but it’s also mine now. So you choose to not get the vaccine, and I choose not to treat you. Everyone makes their own choices as individuals; me choosing not to treat you (the hypothetical you, a person who is not vaccinated, not DrParasite specifically) is my own free will to use my medical education and training in whatever way I see fit.


Honest answer?  you don't have to treat me.  Seriously.  You can take off your whitecoat, remove your ID, and walk out the door.  No one is gonna force you to do anything; you can always quit.  If I'm on the ambulance, dispatched to a diff breather, and when I pull up, the patient says they aren't vaccinated, should I be able to chose not to treat them?  should my employer be forced to keep me employed, even though I am refusing to do my job? 

One of the requirements of your JOB is to treat patients, whether you agree with their views or not.   Are you able to refuse to treat liberals?  Can you refuse to treat conservatives?  Why shouldn't you choose to treat a gang member or criminal who gets shot while committing a crime?  If you are a Black doctor, and I'm a tattooed White supremacist (both are hypothetical, and not real), should you be able to refuse treatment of my medical conditions?   If I die because you won't treat me, should my family be able to sue you for negligence?  

We are supposed to treat everyone equally, regardless of what they did prior to calling us for help. 


MonkeyArrow said:


> I know someone is going to come along and say ‘well CMS rules require anyone accepting federal funds through medicare to not deny care’. Ok, in this hypothetical, I band together with a 1000 of my closest medical friends to work at a private hospital that doesn’t accept Medicare/aid patients.


I mean, I guess... Do you have an emergency room?  do private hospital ER routinely refuse to treat people if they don't have insurance during life threatening instances?  If you are in private practice, you can chose who your patients are, so if you want to only accept patients who are vaccinated, you can.  If it's a private hospital, who can selectively chose who they want to treat (maybe they only want to treat rich White patients, idk), that's their prerogative... I guess?  I mean, it's not different than only treating those who are vaccinated.

or what happens if you have a non-vaxxed person, who gets into an MVA... are you going to refuse to treat them, even though the condition they present with has nothing to do with COVID?   or if the unvaxxed person was shot in a drive by shooting... are you doing to let them die from gross hemorrhage because they don't have an up to date vax card?  

I won't speak for you, but I am going to put my personal feelings aside, and do what I can to help the person in need... if you won't, than I think that says a lot more about you.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Jan 4, 2022)

I'm stocking up on popcorn for when "think of the children" gets brought up by Child Protective Services in a "if you're not vaccinated you can't visit your kids" mandate.






I sincerely hope this never happens, but I can see it being a waypoint on the slippery slope we seem to be cannonballing down.


----------



## DrParasite (Jan 4, 2022)

ffemt8978 said:


> I sincerely hope this never happens, but I can see it being a waypoint on the slippery slope we seem to be cannonballing down.


you mean like this?








						Chicago judge rules mom cannot see her 11-year-old son because she’s not vaccinated
					

A judge in Chicago barred the mother of an 11-year-old boy from partial parental custody of seeing her son because she is not vaccinated for COVID-19.



					www.usatoday.com
				




thankfully it was reversed








						In reversal, judge allows Chicago mother to see her son even if she doesn't have COVID-19 vaccine
					

A judge has reversed a ruling that revoked a Chicago mother’s visitation rights with her 11-year-old son until she gets vaccinated against COVID-19.




					www.marketwatch.com
				




but what about this?








						NYC judge suspends dad’s visits with kid over vaccination status
					

A Manhattan matrimonial judge has suspended a Long Island father’s visitation with his 3-year-old daughter unless he gets vaccinated or submits to weekly COVID-19 tests.




					nypost.com
				



or this








						No mask, no child custody. COVID-19 is a new factor in family law.
					

Judges in family court cases, already juggling the competing interests of feuding ex-spouses, now have to add the health risks of COVID-19 as part of their rulings.




					www.sun-sentinel.com


----------



## MonkeyArrow (Jan 4, 2022)

ffemt8978 said:


> Wouldn't that fall under the auspices of you agreed to those conditions in exchange for being allowed to perform medical procedures? You knew what the expectations were before entering the field, unlike being mandated to get a new vaccine midway through your life.


Is treating everyone a condition of retaining privileges to practice? Yes. Did anyone who trained before March of 2020 know that these were the expectations before entering the field? I would argue no. In fact, its funny that you mention being mandated to get a vaccine halfway through life, as I say that Covid is like being forced to radically change your job description in the middle of your career.


ffemt8978 said:


> Until the government comes along and says that any employer with more than 100 employess must treat anyone who shows up because we're in a global pandemic that requires emergency measures implemented by an unelected government agency.


That would only fly if they could also mandate that any employer with more than 100 employees mandate the vaccine. You seem against that mandate, so why are you pro a treatment mandate?


DrParasite said:


> One of the requirements of your JOB is to treat patients, whether you agree with their views or not. Are you able to refuse to treat liberals? Can you refuse to treat conservatives? Why shouldn't you choose to treat a gang member or criminal who gets shot while committing a crime? If you are a Black doctor, and I'm a tattooed White supremacist (both are hypothetical, and not real), should you be able to refuse treatment of my medical conditions? If I die because you won't treat me, should my family be able to sue you for negligence?


That's at the heart of my question. It's not a practical or legal question, but a moral or ideological one. It is my personal opinion that there is no good reason to discriminate between black/white, or liberal/conservative. Would you treat a gang member or criminal or who got shot while there is still active gunfire on scene? Or treat a patient who is punching and kicking and biting you in the back of an ambulance? There is little precedent that establishes a medical provider putting their safety on the line to treat others. Isn't someone who is unvaccinated, despite ample accessibility to vaccines, literature on their efficacy, and public promotion, putting my health and safety on the line by placing me at increased risk of contracting illness? I think it is natural to not want to help people who actively choose to make your life miserable. 


DrParasite said:


> or what happens if you have a non-vaxxed person, who gets into an MVA... are you going to refuse to treat them, even though the condition they present with has nothing to do with COVID? or if the unvaxxed person was shot in a drive by shooting... are you doing to let them die from gross hemorrhage because they don't have an up to date vax card?


These are strawmen.


DrParasite said:


> I won't speak for you, but I am going to put my personal feelings aside, and do what I can to help the person in need... if you won't, than I think that says a lot more about you.


I have for the past however many months and will continue to do so. I actually don't ask my patients' vaccination status; it isn't relevant to the care I deliver. (Personally, to be quite honest, I actually like taking care of the non-vaccinated more in a roundabout way; they're usually sicker, and require more extensive resuscitation and stabilization. I've come to the conclusion for a little while now that the Covid and the ongoing pandemic has made me a better clinician and researcher. The acuity and pathology I've seen caused by Covid in multi-organ system failure dwarfs what I had seen previously. Hell, I could probably count on one hand the number of times I'd seen (non-OD related) pure type I respiratory failure requiring intubation prior to Covid.)


----------



## ffemt8978 (Jan 5, 2022)

@MonkeyArrow I am against the way the mandate was implemented, not necessarily against the mandate itself.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Jan 5, 2022)

Judge blocks Navy vaccine rule: “No COVID-19 exception to the First Amendment”
					

Navy Seals argued mandate violates First Amendment and religious freedom law.




					arstechnica.com
				




Interesting to see federal judge say there is no Covid 19 exemption to the First Amendment when it comes to religious exemptions for military personnel getting vaccinated.



> "The COVID-19 pandemic provides the government no license to abrogate those freedoms. There is no COVID-19 exception to the First Amendment. There is no military exclusion from our Constitution."


----------



## DrParasite (Jan 5, 2022)

MonkeyArrow said:


> Is treating everyone a condition of retaining privileges to practice? Yes. Did anyone who trained before March of 2020 know that these were the expectations before entering the field? I would argue no. In fact, its funny that you mention being mandated to get a vaccine halfway through life, as I say that Covid is like being forced to radically change your job description in the middle of your career.


that's a strawman claim if I ever heard one... but, assuming it's correct (and that's a big assumption), do your job as it's expected of you, or change careers.  No one is forcing you to stay.  Or go into private practice. 


MonkeyArrow said:


> That's at the heart of my question. It's not a practical or legal question, but a moral or ideological one. It is my personal opinion that there is no good reason to discriminate between black/white, or liberal/conservative.


but there is a good reason to discriminate between vaccinated and unvaccinated?


MonkeyArrow said:


> Would you treat a gang member or criminal or who got shot while there is still active gunfire on scene? Or treat a patient who is punching and kicking and biting you in the back of an ambulance?


1) you (the medical provider) should wait for a scene to be secured before treating the GSW victim
2) if I'm on the scene of a shooting, and I hear gunfire, there is a very high probability I am leaving the scene.  likely with the GSW victims in my ambulance.
3) the "patient" who is punching and kicking me is not a patient.  there is a clear line between a patient and an attacker.   But don't take my word for it, listen to an expert:








						Video: Escaping Violent Encounters: Why a 'combative patient' is really an attacker
					

Watch Escaping Violent Encounters: Why a 'combative patient' is really an attacker and more Weekly EMS News Updates videos on EMS1




					www.ems1.com
				



3a) if the "patient" is attacking me due to a fixable medical condition, fine, but in that case, I am calling for additional resources to restrain the patient, and once it's safer for me to do my job, I will resume treatment.



MonkeyArrow said:


> There is little precedent that establishes a medical provider putting their safety on the line to treat others. Isn't someone who is unvaccinated, despite ample accessibility to vaccines, literature on their efficacy, and public promotion, putting my health and safety on the line by placing me at increased risk of contracting illness? I think it is natural to not want to help people who actively choose to make your life miserable.


I'm throwing the BS flag on this entire statement, because It's factually inaccurate in multiple ways

1) our job is risky.  medical providers have caught diseases from patients (this example comes out of NYC).  medical providers have been killed at MVAs.  as well as been shot, on medical calls. 
2) No, for several reasons.  The first reason is the vaccinated can still catch and spread covid.  that's not my opinion, that's a documented fact.  Secondly, do you remember back in EMT class where we were taught to treat everyone as infectious?  which was why we wear gloves for every patient?  So if someone has HIV/AIDS, that isn't a reason not to treat them, because you should treat everyone as infectious, and protect yourself appropriately?  Furthermore, if you want to protect yourself from those who "actively choose to make your life miserable," I'm not stopping you.  Wear an n95 your entire shift, as well as safety glasses.  wash your hands, and wear gloves.  Take the precaution you deem appropriate.  However, their personal decisions doesn't mean you can use it as an excuse not to do your job, regardless of what your thoughts are about said decisions.


MonkeyArrow said:


> These are strawmen.


no; you said


MonkeyArrow said:


> why shouldn’t I as an EM physician/intensivist/nurse/paramedic be able to choose not to treat you? If you end up in the hospital, as you state, it’s not only your problem but it’s also mine now. *So you choose to not get the vaccine, and I choose not to treat you*. Everyone makes their own choices as individuals; me choosing not to treat you (the hypothetical you, a person who is not vaccinated, not DrParasite specifically) is my own free will to use my medical education and training in whatever way I see fit.


That was your line in the sand.  I provided examples.  the "real subject" was you choose not to treat those who were unvaccinated.  Now, if you want to clarify that you won't treat covid+ patients who are unvaxxed, that might make it a strawman, but that wasn't what you said, and the EM treats all type of issues (and with the omicron variant being prevalent, it's likely your GSW vic will test covid+).


----------



## DrParasite (Jan 5, 2022)

ffemt8978 said:


> Judge blocks Navy vaccine rule: “No COVID-19 exception to the First Amendment”
> 
> 
> Navy Seals argued mandate violates First Amendment and religious freedom law.
> ...


The military is a little different, because once you join the military, you give up some rights, and become property of the military, and they do do whatever they want to you.  Deploy you, order you to do something that will get you killed, inject you with who knows what, order you to cut your hair/beard, etc, and discipline you if you refuse.  Plus, you willingly joined the army knowing this, and they don't let you leave unless it's on their terms.

I don't agree with the was the military does things, but it's not like this is all without precedent.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Jan 5, 2022)

DrParasite said:


> The military is a little different, because once you join the military, you give up some rights, and become property of the military, and they do do whatever they want to you.  Deploy you, order you to do something that will get you killed, inject you with who knows what, order you to cut your hair/beard, etc, and discipline you if you refuse.  Plus, you willingly joined the army knowing this, and they don't let you leave unless it's on their terms.
> 
> I don't agree with the was the military does things, but it's not like this is all without precedent.


That's what makes this decision interesting.  The military by necessity must be able to maintain discipline and effectiveness, and in order to do so it's members must give up some rights and get restrictions on others.


----------



## MackTheKnife (Jan 5, 2022)

E tank said:


> Weird...getting a toxic vibe...not looking to trade hostile jabs. If it's too intense, just tap out. Its cool.
> 
> What is clear to me in this conversation (not just on this forum but everywhere) is that it has been reduced to an ideological one where folks take it personally when they are challenged on an element they consider to be dogma. I'm not saying your god doesn't exist...I am challenging the narrative that covid vaccines and the covid virus are in anyway nearly in the same category as other pathogens and their legitimately mandated vaccines. Studies are coming fast and furious and are almost as valuable in demonstrating bias confirmation error as guiding public health policy.
> 
> ...


Great post/reply, especially your point about whether or not the vaccine is truly a vaccine if multiple boosters are required.


----------



## Carlos Danger (Jan 5, 2022)

Summit said:


> You cannot identify the situations as apples vs snickers bars but then say the Polio situation is worth considering for relevant skepticism for today. Vaccine skepticism has always been present going back to Jenner! Modes of transmission and prevalence, case doubling times... I'll just leave with peak annual incidence of paralytic polio myelitis was "only" 20K. Flu kills more than Polio paralyzed at its peak! 6.7 million COVID hospitalizations in the USA. So, the level of skepticism should be scaled to the threat.


Not sure what you are even talking about here. I didn't bring up polio or make the comparison. In fact, I indicated that it probably _wasn't_ a good comparison. The whole point was that vaccine skepticism isn't a new phenomenon.


Summit said:


> The problem is that simply saying "3/4" or "most" might _feel _good, but epidemiology tells us what is "enough."


Again, putting words in my mouth _and_ missing (or more likely, ignoring) my point. I said nothing about "feeling good" that we have a 75% vaccination rate, or about it being "enough". The discussion wasn't about herd immunity. I was disputing the general notion that Americans as a whole are largely resistant to vaccination. In many or most parts of the country the vaccines didn't become widely available to the general public until the early summer of 2021. That was only 7 or 8 months ago. Yet here we are with the large majority of the country already voluntarily vaccinated. That wouldn't be the case if Americans as a whole were as willfully negligent about this whole thing as we keep being portrayed.


Summit said:


> Oh it is a pandemic virus in the age of globalization that is the genesis of the problems difficulty. Solutions, imperfect, and are hard and based on evolving information. However, the fight is made all the harder when well crafted disinformation campaigns originating from various malactors: enemy states, the power hungry, and the ignorant combine in to a maelstrom that raises the confusion of even intelligent non-experts.


We were told very early on that the Wuhan Coronavirus was likely to quickly become a widespread epidemic in many parts of the world, if not the persistent global pandemic that it has. Admittedly, I and other skeptical types dismissed this is just another Chicken Little moment. Some experts came right out and said that it was probably inevitable that every human would be exposed to it at some point. Then the official messaging quickly took on a less desperate and resigned yet appropriately serious tone when they rolled out the campaign to "flatten the curve". Not necessarily to try to stop the spread, but to slow the spread enough that we could figure out ways to protect the most vulnerable and keep the healthcare system from being totally overwhelmed. Now, almost two years later, we are being told the opposite: It is still spreading _not _because that is the nature of a highly contagious virus that was rapidly scattered across the entire planet, but because of the actions of bad actors and because we citizens just don't do what we are told. This is exactly the type of messaging that makes folks not want to listen to another word that you have to say, especially when it is delivered with the condescension that it often is.



Summit said:


> Casting public health have indeed acted with the best information available, but are then unfairly cast as incompetent and dishonest for it, despite also having more successes and many of their failures are failures in application due to groups of individuals acting "stupidly" driven by disinformation and human nature. Have there been some examples of individual officials who were consistently incompetent and/or dishonest, hell yes. Have there been incompetent and dishonest actions that are not characteristic of the whole? YES.
> 
> Do you get to characterize all public health officials as inherently incompetent and dishonest? ABSOLUTELY NOT and it is irresponsible to do so.
> 
> We as health professionals should vigorously attack poor policies while vigorously supporting the good and sensible ones. Unfairly coloring all PH negative plays directly into the hands of the malactors. Be better  than that.


For the last time, please stop putting words into my mouth. Never have I ever characterized "all public health officials as inherently incompetent and dishonest".

What I have done is point out that while there are multiple factors that contribute to the lack of cooperation shown by a sizeable chunk of the American public. the bulk of the blame lies squarely on the shoulders of American public officials and politicians. The real problem has never been Russian bots or far-right conspiracy theorists on social media or Joe Rogan taking ivermectin or the fact that people are predominantly just dumb and stubborn. The real problem is that so many people just *do_not_trust* government officials and the mass media. From the early failures of WHO, CDC, and the FDA, to the hypersonic politicization of the issue by elected officials and bureaucrats on both sides of the aisle, to the apparent enthusiasm with which some governors and mayors enacted draconian and nonsensical emergency orders banning people from uncrowded outdoor spaces like parks and beaches, to the high-profile politicians caught breaking their own orders, to the many public school teacher's unions clear attempts to take advantage of the situation for their own gain, to the verifiable mistruths told the public by Fauci and others, to the constant condescension and finger wagging and "the science is settled - just do what you are told!!" messages from so many politicians, celebrities, and columnists, to the generally lousy messaging and seemingly contradictory guidelines and rules that have existed all along, the officials have given the public plenty of reason to just not believe what they are being told.

Like it or not, a noble lie is still a lie, people don't like being insulted and talked down to, and people often won't do things they don't understand or see the necessity of just because they are told to. It almost seems too late now, but maybe next time we should try a little less berating and politicization and little less blaming of "disinformation campaigns" and instead try a little more honesty, openness, explaining, and overall better messaging.


----------



## Tigger (Jan 5, 2022)

ffemt8978 said:


> One correction...the vaccine is NOT free.  It is paid for by tax dollars rather than having to pay on site.  Make no mistake, the pharma companies would not have even thought about making a vaccine unless they knew they were going to be paid for it.


Paid for with tax dollars, like a litany of other healthcare costs in this country. Also, innovation costs money so can't say I blame them for wanting to be paid.


----------



## MonkeyArrow (Jan 5, 2022)

DrParasite said:


> but there is a good reason to discriminate between vaccinated and unvaccinated?


Two, in my opinion. 1. Unvaccinated patients expose me to an infectious disease far more than would be otherwise required, both in terms of absolute cases and average associated viral load. 2. In a setting where suboptimal care is being delivered due to a lack of staff/resources/beds/whatever, I would like to prioritize those who actually want my help. If you didn't want my (more broadly medicine/science's help) with prophylaxis, why do you want it when you're actually sick? I see a perverse irony in refusing the vaccine on whatever grounds because of unknown composition/long term effects/whatever then coming to the hospital begging for monoclonal antibodies/remdesivir/etc. with arguably less data and a murkier safety profile than vaccines.


DrParasite said:


> 1) our job is risky. medical providers have caught diseases from patients (this example comes out of NYC). medical providers have been killed at MVAs. as well as been shot, on medical calls.
> 2) No, for several reasons. The first reason is the vaccinated can still catch and spread covid. that's not my opinion, that's a documented fact. Secondly, do you remember back in EMT class where we were taught to treat everyone as infectious? which was why we wear gloves for every patient? So if someone has HIV/AIDS, that isn't a reason not to treat them, because you should treat everyone as infectious, and protect yourself appropriately? Furthermore, if you want to protect yourself from those who "actively choose to make your life miserable," I'm not stopping you. Wear an n95 your entire shift, as well as safety glasses. wash your hands, and wear gloves. Take the precaution you deem appropriate. However, their personal decisions doesn't mean you can use it as an excuse not to do your job, regardless of what your thoughts are about said decisions.


1. Indeed. So shouldn't we take any necessary precaution to reduce risk? Like hi-vis vests at MVAs or some agencies push ballistic vests.
2. Yes, the vaccinated can still catch and spread covid. However, the vaccinated spread it a much lower rate than the unvaccinated. This is quite clear in Delta and preceding strains; omicron has somewhat negated this benefit, but preliminary data still suggests some benefit in vaccination to reducing transmissibility. You again go back to "use it as an excuse not to do your job". I have made it clear, and will again, that I am not raising these points in the context of my job. Obviously, my job requires me to treat everyone. However, I can do my job professionally while holding different personal ideological views. My question to you is: Is it morally/ideologically wrong to deny treatment on the basis of vaccination status? Not legally, or practically, or because you're bound by the condition of being employed, but ideologically.


DrParasite said:


> That was your line in the sand. I provided examples. the "real subject" was you choose not to treat those who were unvaccinated. Now, if you want to clarify that you won't treat covid+ patients who are unvaxxed, that might make it a strawman, but that wasn't what you said, and the EM treats all type of issues (and with the omicron variant being prevalent, it's likely your GSW vic will test covid+).


I think the intent of my message was clear, but if you want to be pedantic, sure, you're right. The guy with a GSW who happens to test positive for Covid on admission is not who I'm talking about, because Covid did not bring this patient to the hospital.


MackTheKnife said:


> Great post/reply, especially your point about whether or not the vaccine is truly a vaccine if multiple boosters are required.


You're describing the flu vaccine. You get a "booster" every year.


----------



## DrParasite (Jan 5, 2022)

MonkeyArrow said:


> If you didn't want my (more broadly medicine/science's help) with prophylaxis, why do you want it when you're actually sick? I see a perverse irony in refusing the vaccine on whatever grounds because of unknown composition/long term effects/whatever then coming to the hospital begging for monoclonal antibodies/remdesivir/etc. with arguably less data and a murkier safety profile than vaccines.


because they don't want a treatment when they aren't sick?  and when they are sick, they want treatment?  Not saying agree with their logic, but I see why they want a treatment when they get sick

On the topic of questionable treatments, isn't the Federal Gov't hoarding monoclonal antibodies, and rationing them out to the states, because of the positive outcome when administering to sick covid patients?   But I completely agree with the perverse irony (and I have had similar discussions with my coworkers using this line of thinking)


MonkeyArrow said:


> 1. Indeed. So shouldn't we take any necessary precaution to reduce risk? Like hi-vis vests at MVAs or some agencies push ballistic vests.


yes.... WE should... if someone is shot, should the provider put a ballistic vest on the patient before they treat them?  no, but WE should put on our PPE.  Ditto the hiviz vest... should the provider wear one?  sure.... but we don't put one on every patient, right?  So yes, we are in agreement that WE should take precautions to protect ourselves (such as wearing an n95/gloves/gown/etc), but that's a much different argument than denying treatment to a sick patient because they didn't take proactive precautions.


MonkeyArrow said:


> You again go back to "use it as an excuse not to do your job". I have made it clear, and will again, that I am not raising these points in the context of my job. Obviously, my job requires me to treat everyone. However, I can do my job professionally while holding different personal ideological views. My question to you is: Is it morally/ideologically wrong to deny treatment on the basis of vaccination status? Not legally, or practically, or because you're bound by the condition of being employed, but ideologically.


Well, when you break it down like that... the answer is yes, that is morally/ideologically wrong.


----------



## E tank (Jan 5, 2022)

MonkeyArrow said:


> You're describing the flu vaccine. You get a "booster" every year.


Are you saying that the flu shot we get each year is the same composition of vaccine we got the year prior?


----------



## MackTheKnife (Jan 6, 2022)

MonkeyArrow said:


> Two, in my opinion. 1. Unvaccinated patients expose me to an infectious disease far more than would be otherwise required, both in terms of absolute cases and average associated viral load. 2. In a setting where suboptimal care is being delivered due to a lack of staff/resources/beds/whatever, I would like to prioritize those who actually want my help. If you didn't want my (more broadly medicine/science's help) with prophylaxis, why do you want it when you're actually sick? I see a perverse irony in refusing the vaccine on whatever grounds because of unknown composition/long term effects/whatever then coming to the hospital begging for monoclonal antibodies/remdesivir/etc. with arguably less data and a murkier safety profile than vaccines.
> 
> 1. Indeed. So shouldn't we take any necessary precaution to reduce risk? Like hi-vis vests at MVAs or some agencies push ballistic vests.
> 2. Yes, the vaccinated can still catch and spread covid. However, the vaccinated spread it a much lower rate than the unvaccinated. This is quite clear in Delta and preceding strains; omicron has somewhat negated this benefit, but preliminary data still suggests some benefit in vaccination to reducing transmissibility. You again go back to "use it as an excuse not to do your job". I have made it clear, and will again, that I am not raising these points in the context of my job. Obviously, my job requires me to treat everyone. However, I can do my job professionally while holding different personal ideological views. My question to you is: Is it morally/ideologically wrong to deny treatment on the basis of vaccination status? Not legally, or practically, or because you're bound by the condition of being employed, but ideologically.
> ...


Wrong. Getting a booster after two doses and now it's heading in the direction of needing another, and possibly one after that ain't the same. Flu is once a year.


----------



## Kevinf (Jan 6, 2022)

It's also possible for the flu shot to be largely ineffective if the wrong strain is selected when they're prepping for flu season. Mutagenic diseases aren't easy to stay ahead of. A double whammy of flu and covid patients is a nightmare scenario for hospitals this year.

Remember that not long ago we weren't sure it was going to be possible to have a vaccine for Covid AT ALL. Now we're complaining that its effective duration isn't as long as we'd like? We are lucky to have a vaccine period! Get another booster if that's what's required and thank your lucky stars that it's even possible.


----------



## MackTheKnife (Jan 6, 2022)

Get another booster if that is required?  Are you serious?  The flu vaccine is admittedly a BEST GUESS every year ( 2 A's and 2 B'S in the quadrivalent).  However, no one is saying "we'll require boosters throughout the year" as is the case apparently with COVID. Get vaccinated and no need for a mask.  Get vaccinated and you're protected/immune/blah, blah, blah.  I raise the BS flag on this.


----------



## Carlos Danger (Jan 7, 2022)

MackTheKnife said:


> Get another booster if that is required?  Are you serious?  The flu vaccine is admittedly a BEST GUESS every year ( 2 A's and 2 B'S in the quadrivalent).  However, no one is saying "we'll require boosters throughout the year" as is the case apparently with COVID. Get vaccinated and no need for a mask.  Get vaccinated and you're protected/immune/blah, blah, blah.  I raise the BS flag on this.


"Get vaccinated for the fourth time in a year even though you'll still need to wear a mask and get tested whenever you aren't feeling well, because even being 'fully' vaccinated you'll still be able to contract and spread the virus".

And we keep wondering where the confusion and skepticism comes from, lol.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Jan 7, 2022)

The Supreme Court will hear arguments in two of the vaccine mandate cases today; the OSHA vaccinate or test mandate for companies with 100 or more employees and the HHS mandate pertaining to healthcare workers.









						Supreme Court skeptical of Biden's workplace vaccine rule
					

WASHINGTON (AP) — Fully vaccinated and mostly masked, the Supreme Court’s conservative majority appeared skeptical Friday of the Biden administration's authority to impose a vaccine-or-testing requirement on the nation's large employers.




					apnews.com
				












						Biden vaccine policies face Supreme Court test amid nationwide COVID-19 surge - SCOTUSblog
					

With over 100,000 Americans hospitalized for COVID-19 as a result of the highly contagious Omicron variant, the Supreme Court will hear oral argument Friday in two sets of challenges to the Biden administration’s authority to take action to combat the pandemic. In the first case, National Federation




					www.scotusblog.com


----------



## Tigger (Jan 7, 2022)

Mostly I guess I am shocked at the lack of grace many people have through this. This is a completely unprecedented event and complications should be expected. It’s messy. Not sure what everyone expected, I’m frankly surprised that a vaccine effective enough to keep me out of the hospital even exists?


----------



## ffemt8978 (Jan 7, 2022)

Tigger said:


> Mostly I guess I am shocked at the lack of grace many people have through this. This is a completely unprecedented event and complications should be expected. It’s messy. Not sure what everyone expected, I’m frankly surprised that a vaccine effective enough to keep me out of the hospital even exists?


The vaccine *may* keep you out of the hospital, or it may not.  That is one of the issues those against the vaccine have.

Everything is unprecedented until it is not.  This is not the first global pandemic we've faced, but it is the first one in a truly global world.  The speed and severity of this disease have warranted some truly extreme responses.

Often times, actions taken in the immediate aftermath of an event have far reaching and unintended consequences.  While those actions appeared to be fully justified and appropriate at the time, when we look back on them our viewpoint often changes.

Just to be clear, I am not against this vaccine or any vaccine in general.  I think everyone who can be vaccinated should be vaccinated.


----------



## E tank (Jan 8, 2022)

Tigger said:


> Mostly I guess I am shocked at the lack of grace many people have through this. This is a completely unprecedented event and complications should be expected. It’s messy. Not sure what everyone expected, I’m frankly surprised that a vaccine effective enough to keep me out of the hospital even exists?


I wish I was shocked at the lack of grace. It didn't take this pandemic to manifest it either. This bitter ideological divide began in earnest a couple of decades ago and has just worsened. Situations like the one in which we find ourselves just makes it harder for the camps to conceal themselves  and the rest of the world gets caught up in it. Grace? If only....


----------



## mgr22 (Jan 8, 2022)

E tank said:


> I wish I was shocked at the lack of grace. It didn't take this pandemic to manifest it either. This bitter ideological divide began in earnest a couple of decades ago and has just worsened. Situations like the one in which we find ourselves just makes it harder for the camps to conceal themselves  and the rest of the world gets caught up in it. Grace? If only....


Not sure how it'll end, but a good start would be for people on both sides to accept non-zero probabilities of being wrong.


----------



## E tank (Jan 8, 2022)

mgr22 said:


> Not sure how it'll end, but a good start would be for people on both sides to accept non-zero probabilities of being wrong.


Ha...when you figure out that little problem, let us know....It's been a problem since before we figured out how to make a camp fire.


----------



## Carlos Danger (Jan 8, 2022)

I think folks are a lot less polarized in reality than they appear on the surface. Media outlets intentionally focus on problems rather than the many major advancements that have occurred over the decades; this is done for both political reasons and as an attempt to remain relevant. Social media algorithms do the same thing and make people feel safe being an ******* to others in ways that most would never do in person. Then, politicians leverage it all to intentionally stoke fear and division and then tell us that they'll fix everything if they are elected.

If all social media and most news media was shut down for 6 months, the country would seem a lot more civilized to most of us.


----------



## EpiEMS (Jan 8, 2022)

Carlos Danger said:


> I think folks are a lot less polarized in reality than they appear on the surface. Media outlets intentionally focus on problems rather than the many major advancements that have occurred over the decades; this is done for both political reasons and as an attempt to remain relevant. Social media algorithms do the same thing and make people feel safe being an ******* to others in ways that most would never do in person. Then, politicians leverage it all to intentionally stoke fear and division and then tell us that they'll fix everything if they are elected.
> 
> If all social media and most news media was shut down for 6 months, the country would seem a lot more civilized to most of us.



Agreed. People are more alike than not and if everybody would just be able to sit down and talk with folks across the aisle like they used to, it would be a better place.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Jan 13, 2022)

Supreme Court halts COVID-19 vaccine rule for US businesses
					

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court has stopped a major push by the Biden administration to boost the nation's COVID-19 vaccination rate, a requirement that employees at large businesses get a vaccine or test regularly and wear a mask on the job.




					apnews.com
				




Supreme Court shoots down OSHA vaccine mandate for employers with over 100 employees while allowing the healthcare worker vaccine mandate to remain.

Got to admit, this was kind of what I was expecting to see happen, since the OSHA employer mandate jumped so far past their established regulatory limits.


----------



## RocketMedic (Jan 15, 2022)

that SEAL case ain’t gonna stand for long. And this whole kerfluffle makes me shudder for what happens when a disease with double-digit mortality rates rears its head.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Jan 15, 2022)

RocketMedic said:


> that SEAL case ain’t gonna stand for long. And this whole kerfluffle makes me shudder for what happens when a disease with double-digit mortality rates rears its head.


Of all the groups that have a legitimate argument against a vaccine mandate, the military is by far and away the least persuasive.  The military has every right to mandate it's members get vaccinated against a whole host of diseases and this is no different.


----------



## EpiEMS (Jan 15, 2022)

ffemt8978 said:


> Of all the groups that have a legitimate argument against a vaccine mandate, the military is by far and away the least persuasive.  The military has every right to mandate it's members get vaccinated against a whole host of diseases and this is no different.


Not to mention longstanding precedent for it going back to the Revolution!


----------



## ffemt8978 (Jan 16, 2022)

Pregnant people are still not getting vaccinated against COVID
					

Misinformation and muddled public health messaging have failed expectant parents.




					arstechnica.com
				




Interesting read on covid vaccinations vs pregnancy.


----------



## MackTheKnife (Jan 16, 2022)

ffemt8978 said:


> Of all the groups that have a legitimate argument against a vaccine mandate, the military is by far and away the least persuasive. The military has every right to mandate it's members get vaccinated against a whole host of diseases and this is no different.


As a retired naval veteran (31 years), I have to agree. The military is not a democracy. As for waivers, the only one that should be granted is medical, i.e., allergies. I AGREE with Christians who refuse because of the origin of the vaccine, but I also agree with them being discharged as well. I was offered the anthrax vaccine prior to deployment and it was voluntary. I refused. A few years later it was mandatory. Thankfully I was in the states when it happened and didn't need it. However, if so required, I would have taken it.
"We're here to preserve democracy, not practice it". Gene Hackman, Crimson Tide


----------



## ffemt8978 (Jan 17, 2022)

Israel study: 4th vaccine shows limited results with omicron
					

JERUSALEM (AP) — An Israeli hospital on Monday said preliminary research indicates a fourth dose of the coronavirus vaccine provides only limited defense against the omicron variant that is raging around the world.




					apnews.com
				




Preliminary data now suggests a 4th vaccine dose has limited effectiveness against omicron.  So now what are we to do?  Get monthly vaccine boosters with each dose tweaked to a different variant?


----------



## EpiEMS (Jan 17, 2022)

MackTheKnife said:


> I AGREE with Christians who refuse because of the origin of the vaccine


Fruit of a poisoned tree-type logic? That kind of breaks down when there's (1) no other option, (2) the vaccines contain no aborted cells, and (3) no new abortions are performed as a consequence.



ffemt8978 said:


> Israel study: 4th vaccine shows limited results with omicron
> 
> 
> JERUSALEM (AP) — An Israeli hospital on Monday said preliminary research indicates a fourth dose of the coronavirus vaccine provides only limited defense against the omicron variant that is raging around the world.
> ...


I don't see that as a likely proposal. More realistic would be additional vaccinations for new variants of high risk, no? It wouldn't be operationally feasible to do much more than that.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Jan 17, 2022)

EpiEMS said:


> I don't see that as a likely proposal. More realistic would be additional vaccinations for new variants of high risk, no? It wouldn't be operationally feasible to do much more than that.


For arguments sake then, wouldn't that be a sign we need to rethink our response to this pandemic?  It isn't going anywhere, we can't cure it, and now our vaccines may be less effective against it.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Jan 17, 2022)

EpiEMS said:


> Fruit of a poisoned tree-type logic? That kind of breaks down when there's (1) no other option, (2) the vaccines contain no aborted cells, and (3) no new abortions are performed as a consequence.


If it is the fruit of the poisonous tree logic, then the fact there is no other option has nothing to do with it.  It is still the fruit of the poisonous tree.

The vaccines do not contain aborted cells or caused abortions to be performed, but they were developed and tested using stem cell research.  Yes, those cells were lab grown, but a truly held religious belief about stem cells does not differentiate between lab and natural grown.  They are still stem cells.


----------



## mgr22 (Jan 17, 2022)

ffemt8978 said:


> If it is the fruit of the poisonous tree logic, then the fact there is no other option has nothing to do with it.  It is still the fruit of the poisonous tree.
> 
> The vaccines do not contain aborted cells or caused abnorttions to be performed, but they were developed and tested using stem cell research.  Yes, those cells were lab grown, but a truly held religious belief about stem cells does not differentiate between lab and natural grown.  They are still stem cells.


Maybe I was absent the day they covered this in Sunday school, but why would lab-grown cells be a religious issue?


----------



## ffemt8978 (Jan 17, 2022)

mgr22 said:


> Maybe I was absent the day they covered this in Sunday school, but why would lab-grown cells be a religious issue?


Wouldn't that depend upon the person who has the religious belief?  I'm not saying I agree with the belief, but I am willing to accept that some people hold it as part of their religion.  So we can't simply dismiss away their concerns simply because we don't agree with them.


----------



## mgr22 (Jan 17, 2022)

ffemt8978 said:


> Wouldn't that depend upon the person who has the religious belief?  I'm not saying I agree with the belief, but I am willing to accept that some people hold it as part of their religion.  So we can't simply dismiss away their concerns simply because we don't agree with them.


Yes, people can believe anything, but that doesn't mean all beliefs are religious in nature. 

I'm looking for clarification. I've never heard of lab-grown cells being an issue. If it is, perhaps someone will enlighten me. If it isn't, perhaps we can strike one reason for not getting vaccinated off the list.


----------



## EpiEMS (Jan 17, 2022)

ffemt8978 said:


> For arguments sake then, wouldn't that be a sign we need to rethink our response to this pandemic?  It isn't going anywhere, we can't cure it, and now our vaccines may be less effective against it.


We vaccinate for influenza annually, so the difference here is just in degree not in kind, am I wrong? I'm not opposed to a rethink, but removing the vaccination and masking push seems to impose more cost than benefit.



ffemt8978 said:


> If it is the fruit of the poisonous tree logic, then the fact there is no other option has nothing to do with it.  It is still the fruit of the poisonous tree.
> 
> The vaccines do not contain aborted cells or caused abortions to be performed, but they were developed and tested using stem cell research.  Yes, those cells were lab grown, but a truly held religious belief about stem cells does not differentiate between lab and natural grown.  They are still stem cells.


In law, that would make sense, but not necessarily so here. If no incremental harm is caused, then the origins should be acknowledged and we move on -- indeed, the Vatican (for one) has come to this conclusion:

"[A]ll vaccinations recognized as clinically safe and effective can be used in good conscience with the certain knowledge that the use of such vaccines does not constitute formal cooperation with the abortion from which the cells used in production of the vaccines derive."



mgr22 said:


> I'm looking for clarification. I've never heard of lab-grown cells being an issue. If it is, perhaps someone will enlighten me. If it isn't, perhaps we can strike one reason for not getting vaccinated off the list.


There's some discussion in the anti-abortion community that fetal stem cells were in mRNA research. However, neither the Pfizer nor Moderna development (just some testing) required stem cells (J&J, interestingly, did). Not something that concerns me, but certainly might concern some people with strong preferences against abortion.


----------



## Summit (Jan 17, 2022)

There are boosters under testing that specifically target for Omicron. Those should be given first to high risk exposure (HCW) and high risk severe illness individuals when they come out, and offered as a booster to the public, but this likely won't be available until after March and by then the unbelievably fast moving Omicron wave is likely, hopefully, mostly over.

Otherwise, what do we rethink with our handling of the Pandemic? Nobody has been trying to stop it. All recent interventions are aimed at maintaining the healthcare system and the economy by ensuring hospitals aren't overwhelmed and workplaces keep functioning during the Omicron surge. 

There's no reason to think that Omicron patients will be reinfected with Omicron in the short term nor with a notable severe disease risk. So this wave will pass (by which I mean infect most people quickly) and then COVID will be considered endemic, not pandemic, barring the appearance of the Megatron variant in which case we'll need the Optimus Prime vaccine booster.


----------



## GMCmedic (Jan 21, 2022)

Test is still pending but if what I just had wasn't Rona then I don't want it. 

Started Tuesday with a weird tickle in my sinuses, the kind that tells you you're getting sick. Woke up Wednesday with the worst headache I've ever had a sever aches all over. I pretty much slept all day. 

Woke up yesterday with a headache, sore throat, and a cough, got tested around noon. Headache went away around 4. 

Woke up today with a runny nose and a cough. Wednesday was absolute hell. 

2 doses of pfizer completed January of 2021. I have not had my flu shot yet this year because frankly I've just been lazy but as soon as I'm cleared back to work I'm getting one. I didn't have the foresight to do a combined test.


----------



## Aprz (Jan 23, 2022)

GMCmedic said:


> Test is still pending but if what I just had wasn't Rona then I don't want it.
> 
> Started Tuesday with a weird tickle in my sinuses, the kind that tells you you're getting sick. Woke up Wednesday with the worst headache I've ever had a sever aches all over. I pretty much slept all day.
> 
> ...


Have a speedy recovery whatever it is.


----------



## GMCmedic (Jan 23, 2022)

Aprz said:


> Have a speedy recovery whatever it is.


Thanks. It was the Rona. Body aches lasted a day, headache for 2. All I have now is a runny nose.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Mar 15, 2022)

And now we're up to the point Pfizer is recommending a 4th shot for the BA2 variant.








						Fourth shot “is necessary” Pfizer CEO says as experts monitor BA.2
					

Experts warn of potential for bump in cases amid relaxed measures and rise in BA.2.




					arstechnica.com


----------



## ffemt8978 (May 5, 2022)

COVID-19 Vaccination—Becoming Part of the New Normal
					

In this Viewpoint, authors from the FDA discuss how COVID-19 vaccination is an integral part of establishing a new normal, now that SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, will likely circulate worldwide for the foreseeable future.




					jamanetwork.com
				




Looks like covud boosters are now going to become an annual thing.


----------



## akflightmedic (May 5, 2022)

I have no issue...shoot me up annually. Find a way to mix it with my flu shot! LOL


----------



## CCCSD (May 5, 2022)

akflightmedic said:


> I have no issue...shoot me up annually. Find a way to mix it with my flu shot! LOL


No kidding!


----------



## Summit (May 6, 2022)

Yep, and make it multi-valent (effective against multiple variants) like the flu shot (Moderna has this in testing)


----------



## ffemt8978 (May 7, 2022)

Coronavirus (COVID-19) Update: FDA Limits Use of Janssen COVID-19 Vaccine to Certain Individuals
					

The FDA has limited the authorized use of the Janssen COVID-19 Vaccine to individuals 18 older for whom other available COVID-19 vaccines are not accessible or clinically appropriate, and to individuals 18 and older who elect to receive it because they would otherwise not receive a COVID-19 vaccine.




					www.fda.gov
				




Turns out there may have been cause for worry


----------



## E tank (May 7, 2022)

Love the way they keep calling it a 'vaccine'....


----------



## Summit (May 7, 2022)

ffemt8978 said:


> Coronavirus (COVID-19) Update: FDA Limits Use of Janssen COVID-19 Vaccine to Certain Individuals
> 
> 
> The FDA has limited the authorized use of the Janssen COVID-19 Vaccine to individuals 18 older for whom other available COVID-19 vaccines are not accessible or clinically appropriate, and to individuals 18 and older who elect to receive it because they would otherwise not receive a COVID-19 vaccine.
> ...


Hardly.

"Our action reflects our updated analysis of the risk of TTS following administration of this vaccine and limits the use of the vaccine to certain individuals"

Basically, the benefit of the J&J vaccine has fallen DRASTICALLY with new variants. It already no longer recommended because of this. Its effectiveness has fallen to the point where it is now limited to people who literally can't or won't use one of the effective vaccines.

Why is this shocking or scandalous?



E tank said:


> Love the way they keep calling it a 'vaccine'....


What a bizarre post. It presents or generates antigen to "train" the immune system without causing the risk of infection/toxin exposure it is design to protect against. All the COVID vaccines fall under that definition. That meets the definition of vaccine in my book, much more so than the original concept of variolation. So what would you like to call it?


----------



## E tank (May 7, 2022)

Summit said:


> What a bizarre post. It presents or generates antigen to "train" the immune system without causing the risk of infection/toxin exposure it is design to protect against. All the COVID vaccines fall under that definition. That meets the definition of vaccine in my book, much more so than the original concept of variolation. So what would you like to call it?


Good question....quasi immune-therapy? Mechanism of action aside, when a fully immunized (and boosted) person can both become ill (as ill as some people that have not rec'd the shot) and transmit the infection, the traditional understanding of a vaccine is not that...this is the only 'vaccine' I'm aware of that is encouraged by the message, "this will reduce the severity of the infection should you get it." 

Splitting hairs? Maybe. But truth in advertising would go a long way in getting on top of the virus, not that natural immunity and getting the shot hasn't mostly already. We've gone from being told "you be able to stop wearing masks" to "we don't know how many shots you'll need, so everyone will need multiple." The confident, authoritative declarations of 'what we know' are becoming tiresome.


----------



## Summit (May 7, 2022)

E tank said:


> Good question....quasi immune-therapy?


Trying to split the hairs on the immunotherapy vs vaccine is first needlessly confusing and secondly I cannot categorize it as anything other than wrong.

While immunologists love to say "it's complicated," training the immune system to respond to an antigen is not the mechanism of immunotherapy, except when viral vectors are used to stimulate antigen presentation which is then referred to as "vaccination." That is the mechanism for vaccines whether you present the antigen directly by subunit, cellular, or killed virus, generate it through alternative pathogen exposure like live virus, variolation, or supplying ephemeral snippets of genetic code to get human ribosomes to temporarily generate the antigen.

The trope that these vaccines aren't actually vaccines has been presented almost exclusively by the antivaxxers who are typically peddling other falsehoods (usually they like to falsely call mRNA or viral vector vaccines "gene therapy"). Thus, I'm pretty shocked that you think that definition is so far off from correct that you'd trot it out in this thread. None of my colleagues in epidemiology, immunology nor infectious disease think that is an accurate or necessary distinction in common medical professional discourse, much less public discourse.


----------



## MonkeyArrow (May 7, 2022)

E tank said:


> Good question....quasi immune-therapy? Mechanism of action aside, when a fully immunized (and boosted) person can both become ill (as ill as some people that have not rec'd the shot) and transmit the infection, the traditional understanding of a vaccine is not that...*this is the only 'vaccine' I'm aware of* that is encouraged by the message, "this will reduce the severity of the infection should you get it."


Uh, the flu vaccine? It doesn't fully prevent infection, transmission, or death, and is likely far less effective than the Pfizer/Moderna vaccines at each of those things.


----------



## E tank (May 7, 2022)

Summit said:


> Trying to split the hairs on the immunotherapy vs vaccine is first needlessly confusing and secondly I cannot categorize it as anything other than wrong.
> 
> While immunologists love to say "it's complicated," training the immune system to respond to an antigen is not the mechanism of immunotherapy, except when viral vectors are used to stimulate antigen presentation which is then referred to as "vaccination." That is the mechanism for vaccines whether you present the antigen directly by subunit, cellular, or killed virus, generate it through alternative pathogen exposure like live virus, variolation, or supplying ephemeral snippets of genetic code to get human ribosomes to temporarily generate the antigen.
> 
> The trope that these vaccines aren't actually vaccines has been presented almost exclusively by the antivaxxers who are typically peddling other falsehoods (usually they like to falsely call mRNA or viral vector vaccines "gene therapy"). Thus, I'm pretty shocked that you think that definition is so far off from correct that you'd trot it out in this thread. None of my colleagues in epidemiology, immunology nor infectious disease think that is an accurate or necessary distinction in common medical professional discourse, much less public discourse.


Sorry the topic makes for so much angst. To be honest, I've never heard anyone 'trot' out the distinction before, just an observation of who still gets so sick despite being vaccinated. Sue me. There another 'vaccine'...uh, vaccine that has that distinction?

But, whatever... when I read terms like 'trope, antivaxxer, peddling and shocked', I get the sense there's more at stake for the poster than just disagreeing...


----------



## Summit (May 7, 2022)

E tank said:


> when a fully immunized (and boosted) person can both become ill (as ill as some people that have not rec'd the shot) and transmit the infection, the traditional understanding of a vaccine is not that...this is the only 'vaccine' I'm aware of that is encouraged by the message, "this will reduce the severity of the infection should you get it."


The effectiveness of every vaccine is less than 100%. Some are always left fully vulnerable and effectiveness falls to its lowest if you only measure VEi.

With respect to spread, the degree to which infection is seen in the vaccinated is dependent on their proportion of vulnerable population, VEi, prevalence, and base reproduction number of pathogen. Since current variants in this novel viral pandemic seem to have a R0 approaching or meeting that of Measles, the erstwhile most contagious non-vector borne disease known to mankind, we should hardly be shocked with what we are seeing: a lowered VEi due to antigenic drift because the vaccine against the undrifted wildtype virus hasn't been updated thus results in significant infection amongst the vaccinated. This happens with influenza each year! Nevertheless, the vaccinated are still protected at least somewhat against infection, moreso against  transmission, to a greater extent against severe illness, and even moreso against hospitalization and death. 

Risk is nonbinary so proper communication is absolutely that the vaccine is not proof against infection!

Even with one of the most effective vaccines known to humanity, MMR2, you get some wild effects. Remember the Disneyland measles outbreak about 8 years ago where the index case was an unvaccinated Californian returning form foreign travel in an endemic area? Over 300 measles cases resulted in over 3 countries. There were over 100 in CA and >50% of those cases were in VACCINATED persons despite the fact that the VEi is 97-99%. Is that not the same alarming situation that you are identifying present day? Now why did that happen? This is all Epi 101. 

I'll be blunt. I would imagine that you would know the above... not to the point where you would compose such off the top of your head, but conceptually it should be understood. As it apparently is not, I find disheartening the apparent strength in your conviction on your controversial points: that this is some novel situation for a vaccine and thus perhaps these vaccines are not actually vaccines. I encourage you to seek knowledge and hope I have helped.


----------



## Summit (May 7, 2022)

I guess I'd add to the above point about antigenic drift from the wild type virus on which the vaccines are based: that cellular immunity is most preserved against antigenic drift and is least prone to waning vs humoral immunity, and neither are going to be super effective against preventing _infection_ from an incredibly infectious RV that happily infects and replicates in the epithelium of the nasopharynx, the latter propensity along with the increased infectiousness are even more pronounced in the latest variants. You need mucosal immunity to prevent that infection, get some good IgA in the NELF. Remember "warp speed" was meant to stop the collapse of the healthcare system by deploying vaccine to reduce first and foremost the number of people who were getting severely ill, thus the types of vaccines pursued. 

So four points we see:
1. the utility of boosters for some to ensure sufficient immune response and to counter waning, 
2. the desirability of an updated multivalent vaccines (under testing) to tackle the newer antigenically drifted variants
3. the potential desirability of an intranasal vaccine (some are under study) to reduce infection through mucosal immunity
4. cellular immunity from vaccination and infection is what continues to prevent most of the severe disease which is why hospitals are fine and we don't need costly transmission controls.


----------



## Carlos Danger (May 7, 2022)

E tank said:


> But, whatever... when I read terms like 'trope, antivaxxer, peddling and shocked', I get the sense there's more at stake for the poster than just disagreeing...


Things get weird quickly when you start to question religion.

Remember "the population bomb" (1968), "the next ice age" (1975), "coastal cities will be underwater within a handful of years" (1994), "Saddam has weapons of mass destruction" (2002), "The Hunter Biden laptop doesn't exist / President Trump is a Russian agent" (2015 / 2019)? 

"Masks don't work". "Masks are the only thing that work". "You can't be outside on the beach even if you are the only person in a 100 meter radius". "Kids don't get sick with COVID". "Kids have to be vaccinated against COVID". "This stimulus won't cause inflation". 

We weren't allowed to question any of those things either. And of course that's just a sampling.


----------



## E tank (May 7, 2022)

Carlos Danger said:


> Things get weird quickly when you start to question religion.
> 
> Remember "the population bomb" (1968), "the next ice age" (1975), "coastal cities will be underwater within a handful of years" (1994), "Saddam has weapons of mass destruction" (2002), "The Hunter Biden laptop doesn't exist / President Trump is a Russian agent" (2015 / 2019)?
> 
> ...


Right...and I guess it has ever been thus...and neither right nor left is immune (tho I have my biased opinions on which is more prone to bias narratives  ) To wit: what is so wrong about admitting honestly that what we're facing is unprecedented and while what we've done so far is not unremarkable (Operation Warp Speed, DJT) it just isn't the same product as the MMR, flu or polio vaccines? There is just no equivalency and to suggest as much is at best, not accurate and at worst, dishonest.


----------



## Summit (May 7, 2022)

E tank said:


> Right...and I guess it has ever been thus...and neither right nor left is immune (tho I have my biased opinions on which is more prone to bias narratives  ) To wit: what is so wrong about admitting honestly that what we're facing is unprecedented and while what we've done so far is not unremarkable (Operation Warp Speed, DJT) it just isn't the same product as the MMR, flu or polio vaccines? There is just no equivalency and to suggest as much is at best, not accurate and at worst, dishonest.


The situation is unprecedented and has precedent. COVID isn't the first global pandemic. This won't be the last. If you know the history of pandemics most of what we faced, we as humans have faced before. It just isn't as much of the living memory nor in most professional knowledge spaces. But it is resident in the written history and specialty knowledge spaces. It was niche stuff, and in a lot of ways it still is. So much of what happened recently, including the mistakes made, all happened before, ALL OF IT, the fear and panic, the multiple waves, reinfections, debates about transmission, denialism, ****ty and misleading communication from authorities, civil liberties versus public health, just in time policies that were just too late, preliminary studies that didn't pan out, pseudoscience, sham cures, solid science that was shunned, and emotional reactions from all quarters... it happens almost every time. 

What is unprecedented is the science and technology of today. 

Warp Speed was an unprecedented mind boggling success thanks specifically to mRNA technology and entrepreneurship, a medical Manhattan Project or Apollo Program, but faster. From patient zero to deployment of vaccine in under 12 months, while a pandemic is only part way through, is an unprecedented triumph of medical science. The speed was only possible because of the shortened development cycle of vaccines based on supplying ephemeral snippets of genetic code to get human ribosomes to temporarily generate the antigen, that code sources by rapid sequencing, them distributing the pathogen's code to labs worldwide (once some scientists went around the delaying CCP government to share it). 

In a world wide competition of over 100 simultaneous vaccine development efforts, only two were the fastest and worked. The Chinese and other attenuated virus vaccines didn't work well even to begin with and all the protein subunit vaccines were slow to refine and produce. 

Nobody said that's the same as MMR. 

BUT This isn't politics, it is psychology. 

Remember the goal of Warp Speed: VE 50% reduction in hospitalizations. 

What we started with at the end of 2020 was so far beyond anyone's wildest dreams, VEi in the 90s, VE for reduction of death and hospitalizations of nearly 100%... it felt like a miracle. Well, the promise of panacea faded before the reality of viral evolution. And yet, despite all that, with a booster, the Warp Speed requirements are still vastly exceeded by these vaccines.

The issues you brought up that there is breakthrough and decreasing efficacy, particularly against infection, in the face of a rapidly changing pathogen is not shocking for all the reasons I described above. We have seen those before. We see them all the time. It happens in many pandemics, even when there is no vaccine. 1918 H1N1 variants caused the pandemic to come in multiple waves around the world due to antigenic drift and the pandemic lasted years (and then 1918 H1N1 variants persisted as the dominant H1N1 strain until 2009). That's not new. Vaccine breakthrough isn't new. Immune escape isn't new. But for most people, it is a new concept to them.


----------



## Summit (May 7, 2022)

BTW anyone looking for reading materials to reflect that past upon the present, I can recommend many, some exciting histories, some interesting ID, some extraordinarily dry epi. But if I was going to give two here, it would be:

The Great Influenza


			Amazon.com
		

I read this before the pandemic, and it was mind-blowing how history repeats itself.

The Psychology of Pandemics




__





						The Psychology of Pandemics: Preparing for the Next Global Outbreak of Infectious Disease - Kindle edition by Taylor, Steven. Reference Kindle eBooks @ Amazon.com.
					

The Psychology of Pandemics: Preparing for the Next Global Outbreak of Infectious Disease - Kindle edition by Taylor, Steven. Download it once and read it on your Kindle device, PC, phones or tablets. Use features like bookmarks, note taking and highlighting while reading The Psychology of...



					www.amazon.com
				



This was supposed to be a brief text for a small audience, in fact the publisher in 2019 wasn't really interested because they thought nobody would purchase such a boring niche topic. It is less gripping than Barry's compendium above, and at the same time mindblowing.


----------



## Summit (May 8, 2022)

And this thread needs some levity:






If you haven't watched Dr. Glaucomflecken, you are missing out!


----------



## ffemt8978 (May 8, 2022)

Summit said:


> Why is this shocking or scandalous?







__





						Frequently Asked Questions | HRSA
					

See FAQs for Individual Requesters/Recipients | Representatives | Administrators or Executors of Estates | Survivors How do I file for CICP benefits?




					www.hrsa.gov
				




Maybe because of the one year limitation on filing a claim for injuries due to the vaccine?  The same vaccine that went through abbreviated clinical trials and emergency use authorization and was then mandated (briefly).  The same vaccine that had its side effects downplayed with the argument that the disease was worse than the vaccine.  Of course that only happened after it was undeniable that the vaccines have side effects, which would have likely come out in full length clinical trials.

Yes, the statistical occurrences of these adverse effects are extremely minimal especially in light of the risks from COVID at the time they were rushed into approval and use.


----------



## Summit (May 8, 2022)

ffemt8978 said:


> __
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I think you've answered you own question.

Anyone denying the existence of side effects is living in an alternate reality. But as you point out, they are comparatively very rare versus the benefit... but once the benefit falls to drastic lows, miniscule but non-zero risks are no longer so well balanced. Decreased benefit is something that changed from time of approval to current time. So it makes sense to consider that updated risk v benefit. It seems to me like it is the right thing to do to restrict the EUA for the low benefit vaccine when there are vaccines with full approval, higher efficacy, and better safety profiles.

Personally I was never a fan of the J&J except for people who wouldn't/couldn't get Pfizer/Moderna. I always recommended the mRNAs over J&J. I only ever gave J&J once and that was for a patient who was explicit that they would never do two shots.

As far as the 1 year limit, I get it scientifically, as it is beyond extremely unlikely that a vaccine adverse reaction would present after a year, or really after a few weeks. I hope the year limit is for demonstrated onset of injury, not for filing the claim, because that seems draconian if it is a filing limit.


----------



## ffemt8978 (May 8, 2022)

Summit said:


> I think you've answered you own question.
> 
> Anyone denying the existence of side effects is living in an alternate reality. But as you point out, they are comparatively very rare versus the benefit... but once the benefit falls to drastic lows, miniscule but non-zero risks are no longer so well balanced. Decreased benefit is something that changed from time of approval to current time. So it makes sense to consider that updated risk v benefit. It seems to me like it is the right thing to do to restrict the EUA for the low benefit vaccine when there are vaccines with full approval, higher efficacy, and better safety profiles.
> 
> ...


The one year limit starts from the date of the vaccine administration.  Since the vaccine manufacturers are immune from lawsuit over the vaccines, that means the CICP and its one year limit is the only means of redress for affected individuals.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Jun 10, 2022)

US can’t afford fall boosters for all—even after cuts to test and PPE spending
					

"These were incredibly painful decisions."




					arstechnica.com
				




This was only a matter of time in coming.


----------



## DrParasite (Jun 14, 2022)

At my full-time job, we have taken down all of the plastic barriers.  I took my son to his swim lessons, and none of the instructors are wearing face shields in the water.  at the FD, we haven't worn masks in months, but do have them on the apparatus should the need arise.

I'm seeing reports on LinkedIn that people who went to the RSA conference (infosec conference) are testing positive for covid.  and my response is Duh; this happens every time people go to conferences.  people come home with colds, STDs, and all types of illnesses;  it happens any time you put a large number of people in a relatively small area, especially if you throw in alcohol.  It's happened like this for decades.

Get vaccinated if you want.  don't get vaccinated if you won't want to.  you're going to get covid; it's not a matterr of if, but when, even if you are triple vaxed and live in a level A hazmat suit, or if you refuse to ever leave your home.  

Lets all be adults, and go back to living our lives. I don't care if you want to wear an n95 for the rest of your life (that's your choice, and I support you), but I'm treating this pandemic as being over.  Is Covid gone?  nope, nor do I think it ever will be, but the pandemic is over, and this is now endemic, just like the common cold.  Move on with your lives, get back to work, and lets stop expecting the government to do everything for us


----------



## Summit (Jun 14, 2022)

I think for the general public it is mostly over: endemic. No transmission controls. People will suffer and die from it, but it won't be a million dead in 2 years as we experienced. Some industries will require vaccination/boosters just as they do with other vaccines.

Healthcare will have to deal with the disease as it does with others, annoying isolation and restriction from work issues, but is still more in the deceleration phase. There will be more variants and they may cause staffing disruptions. Right now many places we are dealing with staffing issues from ba.2.1.12.1, ba.4 and ba.5

I hope culturally more people are OK with the idea of don't go to work while sick. I hope more people will mask during flu season at busy places like airports and grocery stores, just as they do in Asia.


----------



## Tigger (Jun 15, 2022)

Where are folks at with masks at work? We’re still in surgical masks for all calls, and the ED requires everyone be in a mask. N95 for respiratory calls. 

Many of the crews are “done” with masks so we look kinda dumb sometimes. Having half the guys in surgical masks kind of defeats the point of reducing transmission by healthcare providers.


----------



## E tank (Jun 15, 2022)

Tigger said:


> Where are folks at with masks at work? We’re still in surgical masks for all calls, and the ED requires everyone be in a mask. N95 for respiratory calls.
> 
> Many of the crews are “done” with masks so we look kinda dumb sometimes. Having half the guys in surgical masks kind of defeats the point of reducing transmission by healthcare providers.


When you see an engine company on a scene with everyone wearing masks and then in the grocery store buying dinner with no one wearing masks it does beg the question....


----------



## FiremanMike (Jun 15, 2022)

Tigger said:


> Where are folks at with masks at work? We’re still in surgical masks for all calls, and the ED requires everyone be in a mask. N95 for respiratory calls.
> 
> Many of the crews are “done” with masks so we look kinda dumb sometimes. Having half the guys in surgical masks kind of defeats the point of reducing transmission by healthcare providers.


To be honest we’re hardly ever wearing masks.  All the local ERs still require them, but only 2 of them actually say anything if we don’t, so those are pretty much the only places we wear masks..


----------



## Jim37F (Jun 15, 2022)

Tigger said:


> Where are folks at with masks at work? We’re still in surgical masks for all calls, and the ED requires everyone be in a mask. N95 for respiratory calls.
> 
> Many of the crews are “done” with masks so we look kinda dumb sometimes. Having half the guys in surgical masks kind of defeats the point of reducing transmission by healthcare providers.


We're still wearing N95s or at keast surgical masks (mostly N95) to every medical call regardless.


E tank said:


> When you see an engine company on a scene with everyone wearing masks and then in the grocery store buying dinner with no one wearing masks it does beg the question....


I'm in this and don't like it^ 😅 I guess there's a perceived higher risk going to a sick person versus just out in a store, although we probably should since we're still a high risk state.


----------



## Tigger (Jun 15, 2022)

I think there is probably still an argument to be made that we are pretty excellent vectors for disease and frequently enter into high risk people's homes. How much of an argument there is to be made...well I have no idea and seek other's thoughts.

Department policy says we wear masks. Our medical director wants us to wear masks...forever. I doubt this will happen.

I do struggle with our crews that blatantly disregard our local facilities (SNF, urgent care, etc) that all have clear "masks required" signage and a basket of masks out front. Most people aren't going to speak up to us, we need to maintain the implicit trust placed in us, even if we don't like it.


----------



## Mike Hammer (Jun 27, 2022)

Summit said:


> The vast majority of all vaccine adverse reactions for any vaccine ever are seen immediately or short term. Pfizer and Moderna have immediate and short term data showing that adverse effects are almost entirely mild to moderate.



Couldn't this in part due to the fact that we haven't had time/don't continue to study a lot of things on a true long term (decades) basis?


----------



## Summit (Jun 27, 2022)

Mike Hammer said:


> Couldn't this in part due to the fact that we haven't had time/don't continue to study a lot of things on a true long term (decades) basis?


We have good data across many vaccines long-term studies and nothing had safety signal for development of complications long term. Same deal here. It's just the same as asking well if you took ibuprofen for a week might you develop some complication from that in twenty years? Bloody unlikely! These are short duration of action.


----------



## Kevinf (Jul 17, 2022)

FiremanMike said:


> Just for the sake of debate, I was vaccinated in January of 21, had Covid also in January of 21, boosted in December of 21, and last month caught Covid again.
> 
> This second time around with Covid has had a lingering nasty cough and generalized malaise and lack of energy for nearly a month now.





Martyn said:


> As the saying goes..."But did you die?"



I've also got all the booster shots and contracted Covid in April 2022. I felt a little under the weather and tested positive on a Friday, had a cough, runny nose, and congestion Saturday, and was recovering by Sunday, and pretty much felt fine on Monday. It wasn't any worse than any other cold I've had in the past. Studies seem to indicate that despite the vaccine resistance of the latest variants, they still help to reduce the severity and duration of the disease significantly.

For a disease that is this _absurdly _contagious and has a high potential to be life-threatening, getting vaccinated is the smart choice when you are both going to be routinely exposed to sick people and also be exposing yourself to sick or unhealthy people. People on this forum are out there acting like we have universal healthcare. I sure don't want to be budgeting a stay in the ICU thank you very much... or a funeral.


----------



## FiremanMike (Jul 18, 2022)

I will say that this round has been worse than the other.  The first time I was sick for 12 hours, this time I still go on coughing fits and it’s been 5 weeks.


----------

