EpiEMS
Forum Deputy Chief
- 3,845
- 1,164
- 113
Anybody looking into boosters? Would be curious to hear if anybody is in one of the trials.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Israel is reporting about a 39% effectiveness for Phizer against Delta infection. But nearly 100% prevention in hospitalization.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
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.Israel is reporting about a 39% effectiveness for Phizer against Delta infection. But nearly 100% prevention in hospitalization.
Meh...what's 2,000,000 deaths +/- ....as long as it is not you or yours, right?Why is a disease with a 99.5% survival rate being hailed as the next plague?
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.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?
Yes. I am against federal mandates of any kind, including (though definitely not limited to) every one that you mentioned here.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.
To what end, though? The poster makes a not so thinly veiled threat to commit homicide in order to resist a vaccine..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.
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%.Why is a disease with a 99.5% survival rate being hailed as the next plague?
To me, that's the scariest part of not getting vaccinated. Here are the most recent studies I've seen: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%.
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.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.
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.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.
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.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.