Coronavirus in the United States - news and thoughts

Not taking a safe vaccine to help protect your fellow citizens is evil.

Risk of long term effects of getting covid > risk of long term effects of taking a safe vaccine to not get covid

 

The covid control end game is coming to a quick head. This is what governments ultimately want, despite the howling typical tin foil hat accusations.

 

What is the risk to those who are up to date on their vaccines? Calling it "evil" seems a bit much.

One way that would encourage more vaccines is to generate scarcity and help the rest of the world out at the same time:

https://www.doctorswithoutborders.o...t-stop-hoarding-excess-covid-19-vaccine-doses

Go GATORS!
,WESGATORS

 

The vaccines work so well that in the UK they are recommending people get a booster shot every 3 months. I see the vaccines work better than Natural Immunity crowd has grown smaller and smaller. Only a few left to die on that hill LOL.

UK’s minimum gap for Covid booster jabs to be halved to three months

 

So apparently your objective is protecting hypocrisy.

 

Booster Up!

This madness has to end sooner rather than later. You would think at least.

 

No my argument is straightforward. The vaccines are terrible at stopping the spread unless you plan to booster every 6 months. I have never claimed it's not good at keeping people from dying though that data is starting to look weaker unless again, you get your 6-month booster.
Forcing people to get something that they claim stops the spread is ridiculous. It clearly doesn't last long enough. Even by FDA standards before this crap, it had to maintain above 50% which it doesn't.

 

And once again, your argument isn't against mandates, it is against the efficacy of vaccines. You are certainly acting anti-vaccine by pure definition. You are now arguing that they are "terrible at stopping the spread" and that while you aren't claiming that they keep people from dying, the data is weak that they keep people from dying. Unless you get boosters. Which for some reason, people can't get? Regardless, your argument is anti-vaccine, not anti-mandate. And like most anti-vaccine arguments, when you dig into the data at all, it tends to fall apart (again, the highest spread areas are the lowest vaccinated areas in each of the states that are large and have been home to a Delta surge).

 

There's risk in everything. Risks get weighed against each other, as do the benefits. You might have a point if this weren't an uncontrolled pandemic spread of disease. But to call a key public health strategy evil is to have bought into the worst of anti-science propaganda.

It's preventing you from thinking clearly about covid. At the very least, if you understand anything about infectious disease it's that there's no guarantee about anything such as it ending. That's the danger which eludes your thinking.

 

Mandating people take a new drug for a disease that is not that dangerous to most and not push it for those that need it is wrong and evil. Especially considering we are seeing how poor it works. The data does not support the decisions being made. Instead of owning that…we now see it being suggested to get a booster every three months in England. Here in the US we continue to ignore the most basic of science in natural immunity. If people want to take a potential therapeutic if they happen to get the disease they should. But at this point…the public health officials have been so disastrous that mandating people take one of these drugs is wrong and evil.

Every single person that continues to ignore natural immunity that is in a leadership position or position to affect policy needs to be fired. I have to assume they are evil as it is hard to believe they are stupid or ignorant. The most damage done to the cause of these new drugs has been by those who have ignored this most basic reality of science. The data and lack of performance and a long term safety record would be next.

 

The point that you consistently ignore in your rants about natural immunity is that the data shows vaccines are a dominant strategy. If you have had Covid, the data shows that getting a vaccine provides an increase in protection. If you haven't had Covid, vaccines provide an increase in protection. Under no conditions does the vaccine not increase protection. As such, in economic terms, it is the dominant strategy. Nobody is seriously arguing that people should be intentionally infecting to gain natural immunity, as such natural immunity is a condition, not a strategy.

 

The problem with natural immunity is you have to get infected in the first place. Anything and everything you can do to prevent getting infected should be the dominant strategy. And although not perfect, and never assumed it would be, short of being a hermit and never going out, the vaccine is the best strategy, bar none. If you have already had COVID, the vaccine will act as a booster. If you are vaccinated, you cut your chances of catching COVID significantly, and increase your chances of staying of the hospital, or wore, the morgue by even greater numbers.

So what if you have to get a booster every 6 months. Who among us doesn't visit a Walgreens at least that often? My booster took 10 minutes at Walgreens, and since I had no reaction to the first two shots, I didn't even need to wait the 15 minutes to ensure I was ok. And 5 minutes of my time was waiting in line!

Also, now with Omicron, if the early data returns are true, it is more contagious and duplicates itself faster than Delta. But it also looks like the vaccine works just as well in protecting from more severe cases against Omicron just like other variants. Which is good, because if Omicron is as fast as been reported in replicating itself, then the monoclonal antibodies may not be as effective. The antibody treatment works best in the early onset of infection. If Omicron causes people to get sicker quicker, there will be more people who don't seek antibody treatment fast enough to be effective.

Last, the vaccine is about what's best for the community. If I'm looking out for just me, I also have to consider the community I'm a member of. The more people vaccinated, the less spread of COVID, less people in the hospital, and less people dead. And that's a benefit to me and my family.

 

First, I have provided plenty of data (that is no secret) that the vaccines are not working as hoped to percent spread. If a mandate by a government to force people with these vaccines is to stop the spread then it's a ridiculous mandate. I will never be for forcing people to inject something into their bodies against their will.
I don't go around telling people they shouldn't get the shot. I have told many people they should seriously do it since they are in higher-risk groups. Tell me how that is anti-vax??

My point against protection against death, some countries are in Europe are showing a spike in deaths (in the typical pattern after cases spike) even though they have 70+ percent of their adults vaccinated. With that said, I am still a believer they are the best option. I also think anyone that ends up with a breakthrough case should still get treatment right away.

You can keep saying the highest spreads are in lower-vaccinated areas but it's just not true. For every county you want to point out, ill easily find another county with very high vaccine rates that have a very high infection rate.

 

Why would you go around telling people to get a shot that doesn't prevent spread and which you are arguing doesn't stop people from dying either (well, you aren't arguing that, but then arguing that)? That seems very inconsistent. Why should high risk people get the vaccine? Your argument is that it doesn't slow the spread or stop deaths, but they are the best option? How exactly are they the best option?

Yeah, you can carefully curate examples, which is an old anti-vaccine technique (go find the highest rate amongst high vaccination counties and the lowest rate amongst low vaccination counties and then use that to claim something not supported by the rest of the data). But if you look at the entirety of data, it does not back you. For example, here is published data from New York:

Relationship Between COVID-19 Cases and Vaccination Rates in New York State Counties

Still confirmed by the fact that the highest vaccinated areas, which are generally around New York City, are not experiencing anywhere near the outbreak as the rural areas of upstate, which are less vaccinated.

 

Look at this! It's almost an admission you were wrong on natural immunity. So close! You can do it. Come on! Just say it. I know you want to.

 

I've stated there is too much conflicting data out there to make any statement one is better than the other. We should be focusing not on which is better, natural or vaccine, but why different studies have produced different results. There's still so much we don't know about the virus. But what we do know is the vaccine is our best weapon against the spread, and against the development of another variant of concern.

 

Bad effort there. We have plenty of data showing natural immunity is superior to vaccines. Not complicated unless you have your head in the sand. Vax everyone else in the world over 18 who hasn't had covid yet. That should be the goal of all. No kids need it unless they have underlying conditions. This is all readily available data unless your head is buried in the sand. The best part is I know you know that natural immunity is vastly superior to the vaccine. Just jump on board and we will move on.

 

Interesting take on the omicron variant

The Omicron virus has created ripples across the world, but Dr Reddy says it could have something to do with the pandemic tapering off. When a pandemic tapers off, the virus becomes more infectious but less dangerous. “This was observed with the Spanish Flu. This is a natural evolutionary process for an organism to survive. Else, it gets killed,” he explains, adding that the current scientific evidence indicates that Omicron is more infectious than the Delta variant, but it seems to be mild in terms of disease with atypical symptoms such as muscle ache and running nose.

https://www.thehindu.com/news/natio...omicron-to-be-put-to-test/article37779415.ece

 

Until we can explain why there are studies like this one that show vaccine immunity to be more effective than natural, then making absolute claims that natural is better is premature. Yes, there are plenty of studies that show natural better. But for everyone of those, there's one of that show the vaccine to be better. How can you explain multiple studies that show your hypothesis to be completely wrong?

You can ignore all those competing studies, which would be silly, and exactly what you are doing. Or, you can be scientific about it and try and understand the conditions that in some cases, make natural immunity better, whereas in others, the vaccine seems to be more effective.

Too much literature to just make a claim one is better, and bury your head in the sand to all the data that shows the opposite to be true. Science is rarely that cut and dry. Especially when it comes to viruses. Let's figure out why results are different, and we'll know more about the virus, and will be better armed to protect ourselves against it.

Meanwhile, all eligible should get vaccinated. It's the best way to slow the spread, and best way to slow the next variant from emerging. Kids, in general, may not get very sick with COVID, but they can sure spread it. And the virus in a kid has just as much chance at mutating as it does in an adult.

 

At some point the people living in fear will have to realize what the authoritarians are doing.