I gots the Covid.

[Okhotnik]

Yeah, mutation is what is undermining herd immunity as we are seeing reinfections of those who previously had COViD and breakthrough infections among the fully immunized. On the flip side, that doesn’t diminish the value that immunization apparently still provides for protecting against severe disease and potentially future mutations.

Cant find any actual confirmed cases/documented studies of someone who has caught covid twice on the CDC web site. What testing measures did they use and how effective are these testing procedures?

 

[JDBAK]

My co-worker's mother is in a hospital in a rural small town. Not Covid related. They (her dr.'s) desprately want to move her to a larger ICU...no room in ANY of the hospitals within 200 miles. I know for a fact the biggest hospital in the region is almost completely full of non-vaxxed Covid long-haulers.
We tell you over, & over, & over again, not gettinv vaxxed DOES effect others. And a significant number just refuse to listen.
THIS is why a lot of places are short staffed. Healthcare workers have had enough. They can't take it anymore. They're walking away from taking care of covid patients. It's NOT because "hospitals are firing ALL those RN's who refuse to vaccinate." Around here, it wasn't the frontliners, it was the rehab, baby nurses, clinic workers who DIDN'T SEE the covid sh'tsh'ow that refused vaccinations.
It's very sad to see, & has made a whole lot of really good, caring people I know feel very resentful towards a certain subset of folks.

I liked this post because it appears to give honest insight as to where some people are coming from.

The resentment from "good, caring people" is understandable....and some of it misplaced, on the pro and anti mRNA sides. And it is dangerous when it leads to contempt.

"The line dividing good and evil cuts through the heart of every human being." - Alexander Solzhenitsyn

There are valid gripes above about the bad effect of high-risk, unvaccinated COVID patients on the medical system. Fair enough. I'm not nearly as pro-mRNA vaccine as some here, but it seems clear the mRNA injections offer valuable protection from severe illness for at least some people. That doesn't mean I think the risk-reward makes it worth it for everyone.
But, we can probably agree that there's a lot of high risk people out there, that should get a vaccine, who won't, because they don't trust the medical system. And that is tragic, and avoidable, and will lead to more unnecessary suffering and death.

But what's the cause? Is it just disinformation? Maybe, but the disinformation doesn't just run one way.
Folks have their reasons for their mistrust, such as: the vaccines have been way oversold, there's no nuance allowed, lockstep solidarity behind whatever the CDC tells us this week, and any inconvenient observations or dissent leads to censorship. People who offer dissent are treated as stupid, evil, ostracized, and discriminated against.

There's no better way to piss people off and harden them against your position than to treat them with contempt. It makes me wonder....just what is the game here? What are our authorities/elites really trying to accomplish? Is public health really the driving goal? Or is it just monomaniacal focus on forcing everyone to get vaccinated, with no other considerations? Because it doesn't seem to be interested in convincing people, but to try and shame them...which pisses them off and makes them more susceptible to extreme dissent and resistance.

When nuanced, reasonable dissenting voices are suppressed, then the unreasonable voices will come to dominate.

I've heard some of that here. FLCCC docs are just grifters and quacks. Really? There's room for criticism, sure. But consider these two FLCCC docs: Eric Osgood is proud of the work done there, thinks the therapeutics were beneficial, and, surprise, is also very pro-mRNA vaccine (he's since left the FLCCC, not because he's anti-therapeutic, and not because the actual doctors there were anti-vaccine, but because it's not viewed as pro-mRNA enough). FLCCC fonder Paul Merrik is not as high on mRNA vaccines, but he is vaccinated, would do it again, and recommends it for high risk people.
Huh. Heads explode. How many people bothered to hear what some of these guys actually have to say?
But no, we can't do that because all dissenting voices must be lumped in with "Alex Jones", and the vaccines are the devil's sperm

The concerns of Geert Vanden Bossche, Tom Malone, Bret Weinstein, the dissenting (former) voices at the FDA, the medical authorities of several northern European countries with nuanced positions about mass vaccination (non of whom are completely opposed to mRNA vaccines BTW)...there's room for criticism, but we're not supposed to even discuss their concerns. It's apparently too dangerous to let people think or speak.

We're not supposed to think in terms of nuance....it's either
1) you're 100% pro-vaccine, all the time, for every situation, there's no room for any doubt, we should absolutely trust U.S. authorities, whatever they say, whenever they say it (tomorrow expect the mandate to double mask and quadruple-vax the unborn, on penalty of aborting the mother), everyone is at extreme risk - and to comply means you're one of the "good people", of superior virtue, intelligence and breeding - and you get to travel, work, and have a life (until big brother changes his mind again).
Have any questions about any of this?...SHUT UP

OR, get lumped in with....

2) you're one of "those people" that think COVID is nothing, you'll consult you're astrologer, eat 3 tubes tube of horse dewormer at breakfast - and if you think anything doesn't add up then you're anti-science, evil, and deserve to be excommunicated from society

That's not a path to persuasion, or peace.


There's been some really good, convincing testimony about the value of mRNA vaccines here (I hate calling these injections that protect, but don't immunize, "vaccines", but whatever). The anecdotes here of health of care workers experience's matter, especially when told with some patience and understanding, and admission maybe things aren't perfect, and authorities aren't always right.

And there's also a some snobbish appeals to authority, masked under the mantle of "The Science", that are much less effective.
I'm not at all against science, but "Follow the Science, Inc. (YOU IDIOT!)" might as well take over the role of SPECTRE as the next James Bond movie villain.

There's room for understanding differing perspectives, admitting fault and dealing honestly with counter evidence. Honesty and reason won't convince everyone, but it would help convince the truly at risk/vaccine hesitant folks, that all things considered, the vaccines are probably worth it for them. Honest dialogue builds trust and reduces extremism.

And on the other side, just because you're justifiably resentful (or straight up pissed off) of the gov't, media, and medical institutions, and upset that your doctor doesn't speak up and acknowledge your concerns....that doesn't mean he's wrong about whether you should take a mRNA vaccine.

As bad as COVID is, I'm more worried about the downstream effects of resentment and contempt.

COVID is serious enough, but what happens when a truly deadly pathogen shows up? Public trust in institutions is shattered. Sweden and Japan look pretty good right now.

Anyway, FatCampzWife, thanks for posting this

 

[durangobrad]

I liked this post because it appears to give honest insight as to where some people are coming from.

The resentment from "good, caring people" is understandable....and some of it misplaced, on the pro and anti mRNA sides. And it is dangerous when it leads to contempt.

"The line dividing good and evil cuts through the heart of every human being." - Alexander Solzhenitsyn

There are valid gripes above about the bad effect of high-risk, unvaccinated COVID patients on the medical system. Fair enough. I'm not nearly as pro-mRNA vaccine as some here, but it seems clear the mRNA injections offer valuable protection from severe illness for at least some people. That doesn't mean I think the risk-reward makes it worth it for everyone.
But, we can probably agree that there's a lot of high risk people out there, that should get a vaccine, who won't, because they don't trust the medical system. And that is tragic, and avoidable, and will lead to more unnecessary suffering and death.

But what's the cause? Is it just disinformation? Maybe, but the disinformation doesn't just run one way.
Folks have their reasons for their mistrust, such as: the vaccines have been way oversold, there's no nuance allowed, lockstep solidarity behind whatever the CDC tells us this week, and any inconvenient observations or dissent leads to censorship. People who offer dissent are treated as stupid, evil, ostracized, and discriminated against.

There's no better way to piss people off and harden them against your position than to treat them with contempt. It makes me wonder....just what is the game here? What are our authorities/elites really trying to accomplish? Is public health really the driving goal? Or is it just monomaniacal focus on forcing everyone to get vaccinated, with no other considerations? Because it doesn't seem to be interested in convincing people, but to try and shame them...which pisses them off and makes them more susceptible to extreme dissent and resistance.

When nuanced, reasonable dissenting voices are suppressed, then the unreasonable voices will come to dominate.

I've heard some of that here. FLCCC docs are just grifters and quacks. Really? There's room for criticism, sure. But consider these two FLCCC docs: Eric Osgood is proud of the work done there, thinks the therapeutics were beneficial, and, surprise, is also very pro-mRNA vaccine (he's since left the FLCCC, not because he's anti-therapeutic, and not because the actual doctors there were anti-vaccine, but because it's not viewed as pro-mRNA enough). FLCCC fonder Paul Merrik is not as high on mRNA vaccines, but he is vaccinated, would do it again, and recommends it for high risk people.
Huh. Heads explode. How many people bothered to hear what some of these guys actually have to say?
But no, we can't do that because all dissenting voices must be lumped in with "Alex Jones", and the vaccines are the devil's sperm

The concerns of Geert Vanden Bossche, Tom Malone, Bret Weinstein, the dissenting (former) voices at the FDA, the medical authorities of several northern European countries with nuanced positions about mass vaccination (non of whom are completely opposed to mRNA vaccines BTW)...there's room for criticism, but we're not supposed to even discuss their concerns. It's apparently too dangerous to let people think or speak.

We're not supposed to think in terms of nuance....it's either
1) you're 100% pro-vaccine, all the time, for every situation, there's no room for any doubt, we should absolutely trust U.S. authorities, whatever they say, whenever they say it (tomorrow expect the mandate to double mask and quadruple-vax the unborn, on penalty of aborting the mother), everyone is at extreme risk - and to comply means you're one of the "good people", of superior virtue, intelligence and breeding - and you get to travel, work, and have a life (until big brother changes his mind again).
Have any questions about any of this?...SHUT UP

OR, get lumped in with....

2) you're one of "those people" that think COVID is nothing, you'll consult you're astrologer, eat 3 tubes tube of horse dewormer at breakfast - and if you think anything doesn't add up then you're anti-science, evil, and deserve to be excommunicated from society

That's not a path to persuasion, or peace.

There's been some really good, convincing testimony about the value of mRNA vaccines here (I hate calling these injections that protect, but don't immunize, "vaccines", but whatever). The anecdotes here of health of care workers experience's matter, especially when told with some patience and understanding, and admission maybe things aren't perfect, and authorities aren't always right.

And there's also a some snobbish appeals to authority, masked under the mantle of "The Science", that are much less effective.
I'm not at all against science, but "Follow the Science, Inc. (YOU IDIOT!)" might as well take over the role of SPECTRE as the next James Bond movie villain.

There's room for understanding differing perspectives, admitting fault and dealing honestly with counter evidence. Honesty and reason won't convince everyone, but it would help convince the truly at risk/vaccine hesitant folks, that all things considered, the vaccines are probably worth it for them. Honest dialogue builds trust and reduces extremism.

And on the other side, just because you're justifiably resentful (or straight up pissed off) of the gov't, media, and medical institutions, and upset that your doctor doesn't speak up and acknowledge your concerns....that doesn't mean he's wrong about whether you should take a mRNA vaccine.

As bad as COVID is, I'm more worried about the downstream effects of resentment and contempt.

COVID is serious enough, but what happens when a truly deadly pathogen shows up? Public trust in institutions is shattered. Sweden and Japan look pretty good right now.

Anyway, FatCampzWife, thanks for posting this

interesting opinion in the NY Times a few interesting take from it:

Opinion | Facts Alone Aren’t Going to Win Over the Unvaccinated. This Might. (Published 2021)

Methods to get people vaccinated without requiring them to change their beliefs are promising.

www.nytimes.com

Motivations behind vaccination decisions are complex; they vary from disease to disease and across time, social groups, culture and geography. But if personally having cervical cancer doesn’t seem to motivate mothers to vaccinate their children against HPV, we probably shouldn’t be surprised when hesitant Americans are not motivated to get vaccinated after a family member is hospitalized or even dies from Covid-19. Emergency room doctors sharing devastating stories from the hospital may, unfortunately, not meaningfully impact vaccination rates.

Information about Covid-19 will continue to be valuable for people who are interested in being vaccinated and just need more data. But that may be only a small portion of the unvaccinated population now. If disbelief in the importance of vaccinationn is the primary barrier to reaching the country’s vaccination goals, more information is unlikely to work.

Our past research has also shown that more information often isn’t enough to change behavior. A classic example is doctors who struggle to follow the same medical advice that they give to patients. Despite doctors’ extensive training and access to medical information, as a group, they are barely better than patients at sticking to recommendations for improving their health. This includes vaccinations. Rates of chickenpox vaccination among doctors’ children, for example, are not meaningfully different from the rates among children whose parents are not doctors. While most parents vaccinate their children against chickenpox, you would expect the rates among doctors’ families to be especially high.

What interventions might work? Behavioral science research suggests that one of the best ways to motivate behavior is through incentives, either positive or negative. Incentives work because they do not force people to change their beliefs. A customer might switch cellphone providers not because he believes the new provider is better, but because the new provider is offering a free iPhone to switch (a positive incentive). A teenager might come home before curfew on a Saturday night not because she believes it’s dangerous to be out late, but because she knows her parents will take away her car keys if she stays out past midnight (a negative incentive).

 

[5MilesBack]

If you have to offer incentives for people to take a shot (or never ending series of shots), or mandate them, or coerce people into it.........then it's very obvious that the shots aren't as good as they're claimed to be. If they were.......there would be no need for any of that.

CO even did several different one million dollar lotteries for those people that got vaccinated the week before. Did that even work? No. Nor should it have. Anyone offering millions of dollars just to get people vaccinated is obviously not selling anything good.

It really is a simple concept.......don't try to force people into their healthcare choices, and don't try to incentivize the choice that the government WANTS the sheep (I mean the people) to make. Then it's real easy at that point.......those that choose the vaccine will get it, and those that refuse it......don't get it. It can't get more clear than that. But the more they push, the more commercials we see, and the more idiocy we see from the so-called experts and leaders......the less chance that people will ever get this vaccine. They've already gone way too far over the line to expect anything different.

 

[Crghss]

If you have to offer incentives for people to take a shot (or never ending series of shots), or mandate them, or coerce people into it.........then it's very obvious that the shots aren't as good as they're claimed to be. If they were.......there would be no need for any of that.

CO even did several different one million dollar lotteries for those people that got vaccinated the week before. Did that even work? No. Nor should it have. Anyone offering millions of dollars just to get people vaccinated is obviously not selling anything good.

It really is a simple concept.......don't try to force people into their healthcare choices, and don't try to incentivize the choice that the government WANTS the sheep (I mean the people) to make. Then it's real easy at that point.......those that choose the vaccine will get it, and those that refuse it......don't get it. It can't get more clear than that. But the more they push, the more commercials we see, and the more idiocy we see from the so-called experts and leaders......the less chance that people will ever get this vaccine. They've already gone way too far over the line to expect anything different.

Your choice? Fine. When you go to hospital for Covid and didn’t get the shot you should be at the back of the line for treatment. If your in ICU and someone needs a bed, cancer or heart attack, you need move out and wait.

 

[5MilesBack]

Your choice? Fine. When you go to hospital for Covid and didn’t get the shot you should be at the back of the line for treatment. If your in ICU and someone needs a bed, cancer or heart attack, you need move out and wait.

You're several months late on that recommendation. We keep hearing that all the time..........fine, I'll concede that just to make all that incessant whining go away.........next.

On a positive note, my taste and smell has returned 100% over the last two weeks after a year of it being completely gone or mostly gone. Lungs are still not normal......but whatever......keep pressing on.

 

[KurtR]

Your choice? Fine. When you go to hospital for Covid and didn’t get the shot you should be at the back of the line for treatment. If your in ICU and someone needs a bed, cancer or heart attack, you need move out and wait.

Why is a fat person who has control of it get helped with his heart attack

 

[5MilesBack]

Why is a fat person who has control of it get helped with his heart attack

Because they haven't fully thought all this through. It's easier to just point fingers at one group that meets their agenda. Applying logic doesn't meet their agenda.

 

[Crghss]

Because they haven't fully thought all this through. It's easier to just point fingers at one group that meets their agenda. Applying logic doesn't meet their agenda.

If the fat person had a vaccine to prevent his heart attack think they’d take it? Or he‘d whine about his “Freedom”?

People think its only fat people & smokers filling the ICU‘s? I‘d think there are lot car accident or home injuries in the ICU. Or maybe just some old people who may need medical treatment because, I don’t know, they’re old? But to the anti-vaxx’er screw ‘em right? Until it their families & friends that can’t get into the ICU when its full. Then it turns to the Gov’t screwed ‘em.

What agenda? Someone please explain this mystical agenda. To me it just seems like simple math. Maybe that’s the problem?

 

[ODB]

If the fat person had a vaccine to prevent his heart attack think they’d take it? Or he‘d whine about his “Freedom”?

People think its only fat people & smokers filling the ICU‘s? I‘d think there are lot car accident or home injuries in the ICU. Or maybe just some old people who may need medical treatment because, I don’t know, they’re old? But to the anti-vaxx’er screw ‘em right? Until it their families & friends that can’t get into the ICU when its full. Then it turns to the Gov’t screwed ‘em.

What agenda? Someone please explain this mystical agenda. To me it just seems like simple math. Maybe that’s the problem?

How does someone in the ER differentiate between an 'anti-vaxxer' and someone whose doctor recommended they not get the vax?

Would you feel the same way about an unvaxxed 5-year old?

Just curious where you draw these lines you seem to think are so clear.

For the record, I know for a fact there are people working in a Level 1 trauma center who discriminate on the basis of vax status (even those admitted for non-covid reasons). Should they? Oh, and this is without beds being full?

 

[Trr15]

If the fat person had a vaccine to prevent his heart attack think they’d take it? Or he‘d whine about his “Freedom”?

People think its only fat people & smokers filling the ICU‘s? I‘d think there are lot car accident or home injuries in the ICU. Or maybe just some old people who may need medical treatment because, I don’t know, they’re old? But to the anti-vaxx’er screw ‘em right? Until it their families & friends that can’t get into the ICU when its full. Then it turns to the Gov’t screwed ‘em.

What agenda? Someone please explain this mystical agenda. To me it just seems like simple math. Maybe that’s the problem?

As exhausting as all of this is, I can’t help but point out the fact that you’re pretending that fat people have no means of enabling them to not be fat and unhealthy? Anyway, carry on…

 

[Customweld]

Mass Psychosis, it's in the Johns Hopkins playbook. It's the only way to get folks to buy into mass vaccinations.

Next they'll be telling you if you get 4 jabs you get a free ride on Hale Bopp comet to the promis land.

Israel is ready for round 4. How bout a baker’s dozen?

 

[Crghss]

As exhausting as all of this is, I can’t help but point out the fact that you’re pretending that fat people have no means of enabling them to not be fat and unhealthy? Anyway, carry on…

So it’s only fat people in ICU? Not tornado victims? No injuries from wild fires? No shootings victims?

If we just get rid of fat people we don’t even need ICU? Brilliant!!! Think how much we‘ll save on health care cost!!! Why didn’t we think of this sooner?

 

[ODB]

Israel is ready for round 4. How bout a baker’s dozen?

Meanwhile South Africa doing pretty decent - not bad for a 25% vax rate...

from NPR:

So, while only about a quarter of South Africans had been vaccinated when omicron finally arrived, the vast majority of residents had likely already been infected with previous variants of SARS-CoV-2. (Scientists have predicted this based on the excess mortality rate observed in the country through the pandemic.) Given this history, scientists say most South Africans already probably had some level of immune protection generated by these prior infections.

"Thus, omicron enters a South African population with considerably more immunity than any prior SARS-CoV-2 variant," concluded Dr. Roby Bhattacharyya, an infectious disease specialist, and epidemiologist William Hanage in a recent paper published online.

In other words, there are very few South Africans who have never been exposed to the coronavirus — either through a vaccine or a natural infection.

That means the omicron infections happening in South Africa aren't, for the most part, primary infections, but rather secondary infections, also known as reinfections.

Here's the thing about secondary infections from SARS-C0V-2: They tend, on average, to be milder, scientists have found. For example, a study published last month in the New England Journal of Medicine found that if you survive the first infection, it reduces the risk of severe illness from a second infection by about 90%.

 

[Trr15]

So it’s only fat people in ICU? Not tornado victims? No injuries from wild fires? No shootings victims?

If we just get rid of fat people we don’t even need ICU? Brilliant!!! Think how much we‘ll save on health care cost!!! Why didn’t we think of this sooner?

I didn’t say any of that. I simply pointed out the obvious flaw in your logic.

 

[Crghss]

I didn’t say any of that. I simply pointed out the obvious flaw in your logic.

Say what? Care to point out the “flaw in my logic”? This should good…….

 

[Trr15]

Say what? Care to point out the “flaw in my logic”? This should good…….

I already did. The vaccine for fatness is to not be fat. Period. You acted like there was nothing to be done since a vaccine for obesity didn’t exist.

 

[Crghss]

I already did. The vaccine fatness is to not be fat. Period.

OK? How does that relate to anything?

 

[Trr15]

OK? How does that relate to anything?

It directly relates to your post that I originally replied to.

 

[CoStick]

The Army is coming out with a vaccine.