CDC reversal on indoor masking prompts experts to ask, ‘Where’s the data?’ (msn. India solves mystery of fever outbreak claiming lives in the south New recommendations from federal health officials this week on when vaccinated Americans should don face masks came with a startling bolt of news: People who have had their shots and become infected with the delta variant of the coronavirus can harbor large amounts of virus just like unvaccinated people. That means they could become spreaders of the disease and should return to wearing masks indoors in certain situations, including when vulnerable people are present. “They’re making a claim that people with delta who are vaccinated and unvaccinated have similar levels of viral load, but nobody knows what that means,” said Gregg Gonsalves, an associate professor at the Yale School of Public Health. “It’s meaningless unless we see the data.”
What is your point of this 40 day old link? Yes we know that vaccinated can be infected with Delta, and initially have similar viral loads. However the vaccine kicks in before the virus spreads thoughout the body and causes serious sickness in most cases. The viral load reduces much faster in the vaccinated. As people learn more about new variants, etc, the recommendations may change. These people aren't psychic.
I would not be surprised if it winds up being true since some evidence points in that direction. FWIW, my main argument to flgator2's comment was that he can't validly claim that his natural immunity would perform better than vaccines. What happens in the aggregate may not apply to individual cases that are part of that aggregate (hence my Bill Phillips example). Yeah, I don't get why it's so important either. Seems a defense mechanism.
As people learn more about new variants, etc, the recommendations may change. These people aren't psychic.[/QUOTE] I was responding to his question coleg said: ↑ Since vaccine efficacy has resulted in less than 10% of patients in hospitals were vaccinated, then shows us where claims were made that exceeded that, as you claim. Your quote: "And you and others who have been vaccinated might be still hurting those around you." If vaxxed people "hurt" others more. then prove it.... or be honest and admit unvaccinted "hurt" considerably more. Give us links to you resarch. Hint... don't use Gateway Pundit, FB or Twitter sources anymore. I know he missed spelled some words and several of you normally get triggered by this, but just relax it's ok
Just like I don't get your rude comments about those who won't get the vaccine or why you constantly post someone dying from covid. Why keep post the same thing then
Abby Johnson: I Dared to Talk About My COVID Experience, And Then the Hate Poured In (westernjournal.com) This last month my entire family, all ten of us, contracted COVID-19. I got it from a vaccinated individual during a work event and well, when you have ten people living in the same house, sickness usually spreads fast. I was able to get a hold of America’s Frontline Doctors, who prescribed a combination of vitamins and medications, including ivermectin, which helped us immensely. None of us were sick long thanks to the regiment of medications, time outside in direct sunlight and IV fluids. This “sharing your truth” nonsense isn’t confined to COVID, although the censorship I’ve found around proven methods that lessen symptoms of the virus is unreal and suspect, to say the least. They said, “No, you need to shut up about your experience because you’re not talking about COVID the way we want you to talk about it. You’re not talking about vaccines. You’re talking about pseudoscience.”
Maybe it will wake some people up since it's obvious shaming, reasoning, and facts/evidence don't work against irrational thinking. So the only other option is showing the results that ill-informed thinking can lead to and the regret that comes from it when **** gets real and a *former* ant-masker,anti-vaxxer, anti-science type has a giant tube stuck down their throat and on the cusp of dying.
Any chance that we can move the bickering to the other Covid thread and return to just posting news on vaccines, treatments, etc....(yes, including Ivermectin if there is study data). Thanks.
Not according to the main messaging from the public health officials everyone sees out there. Get the shot. Had the virus…get the shot. Unvaccinated you are the problem. Get the shot. Surely the questionnaire will protect people before they get the shot that has less than two years of data on it. At what point do we discuss the fact that most are at little to no risk from the disease? College football may have answered that this weekend. Now the question is whether these people in leadership will stop leading with tunnel vision. And I agree with you completely that people should discuss with their doctor whether the should get the shot.
I wish your disdain for people and their health decisions was focused on smoking and eating. Far more lives could be saved. Even could save the “giant tube stuck down their throat” for many. And I am not trying to diminish this real virus.
I was responding to his question coleg said: ↑ Since vaccine efficacy has resulted in less than 10% of patients in hospitals were vaccinated, then shows us where claims were made that exceeded that, as you claim. Your quote: "And you and others who have been vaccinated might be still hurting those around you." If vaxxed people "hurt" others more. then prove it.... or be honest and admit unvaccinted "hurt" considerably more. Give us links to you resarch. Hint... don't use Gateway Pundit, FB or Twitter sources anymore. I know he missed spelled some words and several of you normally get triggered by this, but just relax it's ok[/QUOTE] Again, you imply that vaccinated spread as nonvaxed do. Then post an old link onAnd you and others who have been vaccinated might be still hurting those around you. masks. Since we know breakthrough occurs at vastly lower rates than regular covid transmission to unvaccinated, please justify your assertion about the vaccinated "hurting others more" PS linking "Western Journal" doesn't really instill confidence. lol
Q, when you go get your shot there is an entire questionnaire that you have to answer and sign. There are several questions that if you answer in the affirmative will be used to withhold the shot. You will then be referred back to a doctor. If you mislead them by falsifying your answers, it is on you...but the system is in place to catch potential risks before the injection occurs.
Was this your second covid contraction? EDIT: Nevermind. I see it was the article and not your personal experience.
I posted as such. “Surely the questionnaire will protect people…” End of the day. This should be a personal decision.
@QGator2414 , Why the "creative" rating? I assumed you were unaware of this fact. The point being that Public Health officials may indeed be doing as you say, but before you actually get the shot, most issues that may arise from the vax can be removed by a honest assessment of the health survey taken before the shot. In other words, answer the questions honestly and then proceed as directed. Walgreens (for instance) doesn't want the lawsuit if the administer to someone that documents a prior issue that may be harmful. Most of that is on the patient to be open and honest.
Johnson and Johnson possibly conducting a second trial in South Africa to explore a 2nd (booster) shot of its adenovirus vectored based vaccine. COVID-19 tracker: Gates Foundation, Exscientia invest $70M in antiviral program; Moderna taps Resilience for production help
The creative rating was just the creative swipe of the phone apparently. Could have happened when I dropped it today and cracked my screen. I have a new record for not cracking my screen with this phone. But it ended today about two years in now I think… Did not mean to give a rating.
